Never be deceived into thinking the liberals ever stop lying. It’s in their very nature to spew untruths in order to make their agenda stick. For more evidence of this, look no further than the racist propaganda they disseminate in Common Core. Here is the latest, in which any and all opposition to Barak Obama is portrayed as racist…
With the introduction of Common Core ‘standards’, schools around the nation have witnessed not only a decline in the academic standards expected of children under the guise of improving problem solving skills, but we have seen numerous examples of children being exposed to very disturbing and dangerous lessons.
Much has been made of the nonsensical Math lessons courtesy of Common Core and the elimination of the great classics of literature in favor of informative, progressive pieces. However, one lesson that should concern Americans comes courtesy of Barack Obama himself. His biography has been, not surprisingly, designated as an approved piece of Common Core literature. As a result, 4th graders in some parts of America are being taught a narrative as reality that we have witnessed the President and his lackey media push over the last 5 years. Our children are being taught that America is, at its core, a racist nation.
Once again, we see that any resistance to Obama is racist. But, at the same time, horrible insults to Allen West, Herman Cain, and other Conservatives are not considered racist, even when the party of slavery, Jim Crow, and Planned Parenthood are those saying them. And, Common Core is just another vehicle in which to pump racism into the minds of children.
When Obama came into office, he faced the bursting of the housing bubble and a big recession. His answer was to respond with a stimulus package, mostly full of spending, but with some minor tax cuts thrown in for lip service. But his predecessor also came into office faced with a big recession and he also responded with his own stimulus package. Let’s take a look at the way both men handled the problems facing each.
As I said above, let us remember why the Bush tax cuts even took place. When Bush & Cheney took office, they faced a recession that began at the end of Clinton’s tenure in the Oval Office. The 2001 Economic Growth and Recovery Tax Act was Bush’s version of Obama’s stimulus plan. But instead of subsidizing a vast expansion of government and creating a lot of temporary government jobs, it cut tax rates increased the standard deduction for married folks, increased the child tax credit and increased contribution caps for a bunch of different savings programs.
And what did that do?
According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, the recession ended in November ’01. Of course 9/11 hit and the economy slowed way down again and it was coming back at a very anemic rate. So enter the Jobs Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. It bolstered the ’01 tax cuts by focusing on dividends and capital gains.
What was the result this time?
Those “tax cuts for the rich” enabled the rich to pay MORE taxes in 2005 than they did any time in the previous two decades. You read that right, more than in the prior 20 years. In fact, the Wall Street Journal reported that those Bush tax cuts showed the richest of the rich – that famed “1%,” went from paying 25% of all income taxes in 1990 to 39% in 2005. The wealthiest 5% went from paying 44% of all income taxes in ’90, to paying a staggering 60% of them in 2005.
Isn’t the left always repeating that they wish the rich would just pay what they’re supposed to? Seems to me, they’d be a big fan of the Bush tax cuts, then. In fact, if you go back farther to 1980 and look at the numbers, with the top marginal tax rate at 70%, the wealthiest 1% paid 19% of all income taxes. Under Bush with the top marginal at 35%, they pay more than double that 19%.
The economy went from being near a standstill at 0.3% growth in 2001 to 2.5% just the next year, and by ’04 GDP was growing at its highest rate in 20 years. Correspondign to this, the unemployment fell to the lowest levels since WWII.
Did you catch that? The Bush tax cuts created the lowest unemployment levels – ever.
But you’ll never hear that in the main stream media, they’re too busy bashing Bush and covering for their ideological leader.
Speaking of President Obama, what exactly are the results of his economic approach?
Well, in November of 2011 the Congressional Budget Office downgraded its estimate of the benefits of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, or the ’09 stimulus spending package. The CBO says that it MIGHT have sustained 700,000 to 3.5 million jobs during it’s peak in 2010, but over the long haul, it is going to be a net drag on the economy.
Then in 2012, the CBO revised that estimate to between a paltry 200,000 and 1.2 million jobs. If we take the very optimistic number of 1.2 million jobs created by the stimulus, then each job cost the taxpayers $692,500.
Fast forward to 2014, and gues what? Looks like the CBO was correct. But what else did they say?
They said that it DID positively affect the economy in the short run, but adding all that extra debt is keeping out private investment and “will reduce output slightly in the long run…”
The Congressinal Budget Office continued to re-evaluate the stimulus every three months, so its estimates for the cost of Obama’s stimulus have varied from 787$ billion to a high of $862 billion. And the CBO has changed its model for the stimulus’ spending’s direct impact on the economy, showing that ARRA did less than first estimated.
Basically, the CBO states that for every dollar of federal spending, it “crowds out” about a third of a dollar of private spending. And this tells us what we all already knew, the best thing that government can do to put Americans back to work and get the economy pumping is to just plain get out of the way.
Greta Van Susteren, a cable television personality since 1991, has spent her 14 year TV career building her reputation as a hard hitting, unbiased arbiter of the truth. She started working for CNN in 1991 as a legal analyst. She came into prominence during the OJ Simpson trial and after 11 years at CNN, she went to FOX News.
Greta is known for asking hard questions, but being respectful in the process. She garners respect from not only her colleagues, but also the folks that she has interviewed.
That is why it’s no surprise that Van Susteren is pulling no punches and reporting the latest attempt by the Obama administration to exert influence over and control the news. She says that someone within the Obama administration, someone that she knows personally, told her to tell Fox reporter, Jennifer Griffin to back off and stop investigating and reporting on the terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi on 9/11/2012.
I remembered a disturbing phone call from a good friend in the Obama Administration. I have known this friend for years. The call was a short time after 9/11 (maybe Oct. 2012?) In the call, my friend told me that my colleague Jennifer Griffin, who was aggressively reporting on Benghazi, was wrong and that, as a favor to me, my friend in the Administration was telling me so that I could tell Jennifer so that she did not ruin her career. My friend was telling me to tell Jennifer to stop her reporting. Ruin her career?
In 20 plus years, I have never received a call to try and shut down a colleague – not that I even could – this was a first. Here is what I know: Jennifer is a class act…experienced…and a very responsible journalist. One of the absolute best in the business – no axe to grind, she just wants the facts.
I told my friend before I go to Jennifer telling her she is wrong, I need proof she is wrong, strong proof and you need to be specific – what are you saying she is getting wrong? We went around and around — including the statement again that this was just a call as a favor to Jennifer and me to save Jennifer’s career from reporting incorrect information. I got no proof. Zero. I smelled a rat. Favor to me? Hardly. My friend was trying to use me. I feel bad that a friend did that to me, tried to use me for a dirty reason. I knew then — and it is now confirmed by BIPARTISAN Senate Intelligence Committee — Jennifer was getting her facts right. I think it is really low for the Administration to stoop this low.
On her website, Gretawire, she posted that in the days following the attack, Fox was left out of the conference call hosted by the State Department press. Fox received no invitation to that call, while all other major news outlets were included. But it got worse, for a later briefing by the CIA followed the same MO by excluding Fox News.
“Our friends in other media outlets were scandalized that Fox was not included and told us all about it. They were suspicious of State Department forgetting us/Fox and courageous to tip us off. The State Department claimed it was [an] accident and not intentional,” Van Susteren writes.
And there were many times in the months and years since September 2012 when Obama Administration officials would make comments to suggest that Fox was just doing the Benghazi reporting for political reasons. The Administration was doing what it could to deter and demean the Fox News Channel investigation. They did not want to give us the facts — so their strategy was to attempt to belittle and demean our reporting.
It turns out Fox News wasn’t alone in being the subject of the Obama administration’s bullying tactics. CBS News’ Sharyl Attkisson scared the administration so bad that not only was her very own network taking a dim view of her reporting, but she began to get stonewalled, having trouble getting her Benghazi stories on the air. But the veteran reporter persisted, even after her computer got hacked. CBS confirmed this, but stopped short of placing blame. Atkisson said:
I find [that] improper,” she said. “You could say suspicious.” Suspicious? “We don’t know what we don’t know,” she says. “There could be political reasons or valid national security reasons [for not replying]. I just don’t know. I know they haven’t made a good argument” for why public disclosure of the material would harm national security.
Breitbart would later report that the survivors, which were debriefed by the State Department immediately following the attacks have been kept out of the public eye, and that they in all likelihood they were forced to sign non-disclosure agreements.
It was reported that Nixon had an enemies’ list and he used similar thug tactics to control the message. The only difference being that the MSM was outraged by it and publicly took him to task. Today’s MSM and some of the cable news outlets may be just as outraged, but you’d never know it by listening to the evening news.
I got this email today and it is amazing. It was written back in 2008, when he was still just a candidate. Dr. Wheeler pulled no partisan punches, during that election cycle, when he described candidate John McCain as “clinically nuts.”
Anyway, this description of President Obama nails the man to the wall. It is direct, to the point and is guaranteed to piss the liberals off to no end. I only wish the American electorate would have heeded his warnings.
Jack Wheeler is a brilliant man who was the author of Reagan’s strategy to break the back of the Soviet Union with the star wars race and expose their inner weakness. For years he wrote a weekly intelligence update that was extremely interesting and well structured and informative. He consults(ed) with several mega corporations on global trends and the future, etc. He is in semi-retirement now. He is a true patriot with a no-nonsense approach to everything. He is also a somewhat well-known mountain climber and adventurer.
Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler
The O-man, Barack Hussein Obama, is an eloquently tailored empty suit. No resume, no accomplishments, no experience, no original ideas, no understanding of how the economy works, no understanding of how the world works, no balls, nothing but abstract, empty rhetoric devoid of real substance.
He has no real identity. He is half-white, which he rejects. The rest of him is mostly Arab, which he hides but is disclosed by his non-African Arabic surname and his Arabic first and middle names as a way to triply proclaim his Arabic parentage to people in Kenya . Only a small part of him is African Black from his Luo grandmother, which he pretends he is exclusively.
What he isn’t, not a genetic drop of, is ‘African-American,’ the descendant of enslaved Africans brought to America chained in slave ships. He hasn’t a single ancestor who was a slave. Instead, his Arab ancestors were slave owners. Slave-trading was the main Arab business in East Africa for centuries until the British ended it.
Let that sink in: Obama is not the descendant of slaves, he is the descendant of slave owners. Thus he makes the perfect Liberal Messiah.
It’s something Hillary doesn’t understand – how some complete neophyte came out of the blue and stole the Dem nomination from her. Obamamania is beyond politics and reason. It is a true religious cult, whose adherents reject Christianity yet still believe in Original Sin, transferring it from the evil of being human to the evil of being white.
Thus Obama has become the white liberals’ Christ, offering absolution from the Sin of Being White. There is no reason or logic behind it, no faults or flaws of his can diminish it, no arguments Hillary could make of any kind can be effective against it. The absurdity of Hypocrisy Clothed In Human Flesh being their Savior is all the more cause for liberals to worship him: Credo quia absurdum, I believe it because it is absurd.
Thank heavens that the voting majority of Americans remain Christian and are in no desperate need of a phony savior.
He is ridiculous and should not be taken seriously by any thinking American.
Often times we hear that we’re too close to something to be able to be objective enough to evaluate it rationally. Now before I go much further, lets make sure that we all know who I’m speaking of.
I’m not talking about our main stream media, MSNBC, CNN or the plethora of far left websites, such as DailyKOS, HuffPo, etc… No, I’m talking about those that are closer to the center of the political spectrum. The folks that possibly bought into Hope & Change in ’08 and maybe sat home in ’12.
Back in ’08, candidate Obama sounded pretty centrist. He certainly talked a good game, and sounded to the run of the mill voter, or as Rush says, the low information voter, like he was the breath of fresh air they were looking for. Somebody who was charismatic enough to get people together and smart enough to surround himself with good advisers.
Unfortunately, we all know that was just smoke and mirrors by a narcissitic, America-loathing, socialist (I’m being generous on that label, btw) intent on residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. However, there are still folks out there who just can’t see the real Obama.
Enter Sir Hew Strachan, a prominent war historian and his credentials are, to say the least, impressive.
He is Chichele Professor of the History of War at All Souls College, Oxford. He was Professor of Modern History at the University of Glasgow from 1992 to 2000. Additionally, he is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and the Royal Historical Society. He holds an honorary D.Univ from the University of Paisley. He was appointed a deputy lieutenant of Tweeddale in 2006. He is a member of the Academic Advisory Panel of the Royal Air Force Centre for Air Power Studies. In addition, he is on the Chief of the Defence Staff’s strategic advisory panel, the UK Defence Academy Advisory Board, and is an advisory fellow of the Barsanti Military History Center at the University of North Texas. He was on the council of the National Army Museum and is currently a trustee of the Imperial War Museum. He is a visiting professor of the Royal Norwegian Air Force Academy in Trondheim and in 2009 was the Sir Howard Kippenberger Professor at Victoria University Wellington.
So to say that he knows military strategy is quite the understatement.
In an interview with The Daily Beast, he said that President Obama’s strategic failures in Afghanistan and Syria have crippled America’s position on the world stage.
Sir Hew Strachan, an advisor to the Chief of the Defense Staff, told The Daily Beast that the United States and Britain were guilty of total strategic failure in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Obama’s attempts to intervene on behalf of the Syrian rebels “has left them in a far worse position than they were before.”
The extraordinary critique by a leading advisor to the United States’ closest military ally comes days after Obama was undermined by the former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who questioned the President’s foreign policy decisions and claimed he was deeply suspicious of the military.
He went on to say that Obama is “chronically incapable” of military strategy and falls far short of George W. Bush in that area. Strachan also cited President Obama’s “crazy” handling (or bumbling) of the Syrian crisis as the most egregious example of a fundamental collapse in military strategy and planning since 9/11.
“If anything it’s gone backwards instead of forwards, Obama seems to be almost chronically incapable of doing this. Bush may have had totally fanciful political objectives in terms of trying to fight a global War on Terror, which was inherently astrategic, but at least he had a clear sense of what he wanted to do in the world. Obama has no sense of what he wants to do in the world,” he said.
Strachan also spoke of President Obama’s “dithering” over intervention against Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, saying it has empowered the Syrian ruler and simultaneously undermined America’s military reputation while destabilizing the Middle East.
“What he’s done in talking about Red Lines in relation to Syria has actually devalued the deterrent effect of American military capability and it seems to me that creates an unstable situation, because if he were act it would surprise everybody,” he said. “I think the other issue is that in starting and stopping with Assad, he’s left those who might be his natural allies in Syria with nowhere to go. He’s increased the likelihood that if there is a change of regime in Syria that it will be an Islamic fundamentalist one.”
Sir Strachan has a book coming out next month which examines the failure of modern politicians to use strategy to determine the proper course of military action. He states that the lessons learned at the end of the 20th century hurt us going into the 21st century.
“Using war did deliver. The wars were pretty short, the Falklands, First Gulf War, Kosovo, so people lulled themselves into an expectation that war was simply a continuation of policy and that it was successful. But it hasn’t been since 9/11,” he said.
But Strachan says that a good start at fixing this problem would be to allow military leaders to speak their minds. He was critical of how General McChrystal was forced to resign after that Rolling Stone interview, which revealed his and his staff’s comments about the politicians who were their bosses.
“The concern about the military speaking out shows a lack of democratic and political maturity. We’re not facing the danger of a military coup. The professional experts, who deal with war all the time, should be able to express their views all the time, openly and coherently, just as you would expect a doctor or a teacher to express their views coherently about how you run medical policy or teaching policy,” he said.
In fact, he can point to precedent on this. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill held daily strategy meeting with his chairman of the Chiefs of Staff back in World War II.
“The Churchill-Allan Brooke relationship was fraught at times but it worked because both were pretty frank with each other,” Strachan said. “Soldiers have a duty here as well—if they just say, ‘yes Mr. Prime Minister or Mr. President, we can give you exactly what you want,’ then they’re probably not being very honest.”
Now I know this isn’t any groundbreaking news to those of us who have delved into Obama’s past and had him pegged for a radical since way back in 2007. But the fact remains that it is heartening to hear somebody on the world stage who is forthright enough to be honestly critical of our president.
“And by peace he means let Iran have nuclear weapons…” (Weasel Zippers)
Well, we knew Barack Obama was a Leninist, but it appears we had the wrong Lenin. What’s next, a Bed-In with the Mooch taking Yoko’s place while Barry fiddles with his granny glasses and channels the shade of Tim Leary? Hardly. Obama’s antipathy for radical Islam has always been less than skin deep, and his idea of peace seems to be buying the mullahs enough time to go comfortably nuclear. If recycling inanities from the Sixties helps the cause, then Obama will gladly break out the bongs, turn on the black lights, and dole out the hash brownies.
Barack Obama’s inexplicable and increasingly dangerous tilt toward Iran is getting harder to hide. Whether his administration is consciously shifting policy or simply making ad hoc, unrelated (even incoherent) decisions is unclear. But the cumulative effect is indisputable — a declining America in the Middle East inevitably means a stronger Iran, portending grave risks for Washington and its appalled friends and allies. (TribLive)
You’d have to be as stoned as a Furry Freak Brother or a Persian philandress to believe that Obama’s Geneva agreement will suffer a better fate than a fat chicken in Colonel Sander’s kitchen. Not even the squishiest of Congressional Democrats believes that, judging, at least, by the numbers of them desirous of reimposing sanctions on the regime. Rouhani and the gloating Iranians certainly don’t think so:
“Do you know what the Geneva agreement means? It means the surrender of the big powers before the great Iranian nation.” – Hassan Rouhani, President of Iran
“No facility will be closed; enrichment will continue, and qualitative and nuclear research will be expanded. All research into a new generation of centrifuges will continue.” – Abbas Araqchi, Chief Iranian Negotiator
“Had the enemy been able to confront us militarily, it would have already taken action. Given their weakness in the military dimension, they have opted for the political arena and we will certainly succeed in this area too.” — Iranian Army Commander Major General Ataollah Salehi
Salehi’s probably right, considering the left wing Islamophile America has twice thoughtlessly installed as Commander-In-Chief.
- Obama urges Congress to avoid new sanctions on Iran (trust.org)
- Inside the White House War on Dems (Daily Beast)
- Democrats at war — bailing on Obama (Washington Times)
- Harry Reid Blocks Iran Sanctions Vote (weeklystandard.com)
- White House suggests Iran sanctions bill could draw US into war (stripes.com)
- Rouhani: We Won’t Dismantle Our Nuclear Facilities (israelnationalnews.com)
- Barack Obama and Iran: How safe is our world? (telegraph.co.uk)
- Iran to get US $ 4.2 billion of blocked funds in phases (Economic Times)
- Another Obama Success Story… Iran to Develop New Nuclear Centrifuges After Signing Nuke Agreement Last Month (thegatewaypundit.com)
- Secret Deals With Our Enemies: Just Give Peace A Chance (Noisy Room)
Original Post: Be Sure You Are Right, Then Go Ahead
Bridgegate threatens the Chris Christie presidency.
The political world was shaken to its foundations this past week when the presumptive 2016 Republican nominee Chris Christie (shown here second from left with some aides)
Governor Christie (second from left) with aides
was accused of closing lanes at the George Washington bridge and causing massive traffic jams just to punish a political adversary.
With my responsibility as a member of the MSM to investigate any story that would embarrass a Republican (even a RINO such as Christie) always on my mind I asked the governor for an interview which he was gracious enough to accept.
MI: Thank you for meeting with me Governor Christie. When did you first hear of the bridge lane closings, and did you authorize them to punish your political enemies?
CC: No. Definitely not. I’ve come out here today to apologize to the citizens of New Jersey. I apologize to the people of Fort Lee. I apologize to the members of the New Jersey state legislature and I apologize to Tattaglia for calling him a pimp who could never have outfoxed Santino. I am embarrassed and humiliated by the conduct of some of the members of my team.
MI: So you deny any knowledge of the bridge lane closures. You deny that you wanted to punish the Mayor of Ft. Lee, who supported your opponent in the last gubernatorial election?
CC: Of course! I would never do this to the people. I would never close a bridge just to punish a political enemy. This bridge business has caused me nothing but headaches.
[Ted Kennedy enters]
The neck brace will drum up sympathy. I know what I’m talking about!
TK: Hold on. Hold on. Chris, I’m an expert when it comes to bridge scandals. Let me give you some advice. You need an alibi. Go on television and say you had a concussion and were afraid of drowning. Wear a neck brace for a few days to try and drum up sympathy.
CC: A neck brace. Do you really think that’ll work?
TK: Of course it did. The neck brace kept me out of jail. No jury was going to convict me of vehicular homicide after seeing me looking so forlorn.
CC: Okay. Thanks. I’ll have to try it. By the way Ted, what’s hell like?
TK: It’s a lot like Florida, only not as many Jews. Anyway I have to get back before the demons miss me. It’s almost time for my 5 pm flaying.
[Ted Kennedy leaves]
MI: Well that was odd. Now back to my questions. Governor Christie, do you think it was fair to make the people of Ft. Lee suffer with the lane closures and slowdowns? President Obama tried that last fall when he made clear that the government shutdown must be made a painful as possible for Americans so that the Republican party would be blamed.
[President Obama enters]
Just let me finish my waffle!
BO: Now hold on there Manhattan Infidel. I heard that. I know what you are trying to do.
MI: I’m just using the facts.
BO: Hold on. Hold on. Just let me finish. Why can’t you just let me finish this waffle?
MI: But you did tell people to make the shutdown as painful as possible.
BO: Why can’t I just finish my waffle?
[President Obama leaves]
CC: He’s gone? Did he leave his waffle?
MI: No. I think he took it with him.
CC: Damn. I like waffles.
MI: But back to the lane closing. You deny ever ordering them closed?
CC: I can’t stress this enough. I had nothing to do with it.
MI: Okay. Well that about –
[Joe Namath enters]
I must kiss Suzy Kolber
JN: Hey, any of you guys seen Suzy Kolber?
MI: No Joe, I’m sorry we haven’t.
JN: Damn. I’ve been trying to kiss her for years but she keeps avoiding me.
[Joe Namath leaves]
MI: Well that about wraps things up. I thank you for coming to Manhattan to answer my questions. Will you have any trouble getting back to New Jersey?
CC: Nah, I’ll just reroute traffic so my limo can past everybody.
My readers will have to decide for themselves. Will Bridgegate harm the political career of Chris Christie? And if so, who will the RINOs nominate in 2016?
Original Post: Manhattan Infidel
To the American Left, please answer a few questions about Obamacare. How can the ACA be so good when it is going to drive tens of millions of Americans out of their existing coverage when the employer mandate kicks in?
What about the mandate forcing folks to act against their faith? Their 1st Amendment rights are violated under the ACA by making contraceptives, sterilization and aborto-facient drugs are mandatory for employers to provide.
What about the over 20 new taxes that are hitting the American people for a half a trillion dollars? These are levied against medical innovators, health insurance companies and there’s even a tax on the sale of your home.
What about the IPAB(Independent Payment Advisory Board) that is built into the ACA? Sarah Palin was reviled by the left for stating that there are death panels in Obamacare. Turns out, she was correct. Howard Dean, an MD, former head of the Democratic National Committee and former Presidential candidate had a lot to say about the IPAB. “The IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them,” Dean wrote in The Wall Street Journal. “Getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on.”
What about Obamacare taking a whopping $716 billion out of the Medicare budget? Please don’t tell me that it’s only ending waste, fraud and abuse because as a disabled American, and a heart transplant candidate, I can personally attest to the fact that I have been denied services previously authorized by Medicare. Literally, the summer after the law passed, I felt the first denial of service by Medicare.
What about that $2500 in savings that American families were going to enjoy under Obamacare? Turns out, it was his advisors’ “best guess” on possible savings by the ACA. I wrote an article that was picked up by Free Republic and The Hill. I Promise!! Barack Obama’s Great Deception on Obamacare Premiums. In it, I report how three Harvard professors that were unpaid advisers to the Obama campaign wrote a memo that cites their “best guess” of annual savings of $200 billion. They then divided that by the U.S. population, multiplied out to represent a family of four, then they rounded down to get to the $2500 figure.
What about the ACA fundamentally changing the relationhsip between you and your Doctor? Built into Obamacare are government control over doctor decisions. Value-based payments, quality reporting requirements, and government comparative-effectiveness boards will dictate how doctors practice medicine. Nearly half of all physicians are seriously considering leaving practice, leading to a severe doctor shortage.
What about this promise by Obama? “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits — either now or in the future. I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period,” Obama told a joint-session of Congress in September 2009. However, the Congressional Budget Office. Realistic projections suggested by reports from not only the CBO, but the CMS trustees (the entity that controls Medicare and Medicaid) and their chief Medicare actuary is very, very dire. They state that the “primary deficit” will increase exponentially each year. The Democratically controlled Senate Budget Committee and the GAO have confirmed that this will add $6.2 trillion to our ever expanding federal deficit.
And finally, what do you say to the 159 new boards, agencies and programs the ACA creates? How much more government do you want?
As we head into the new year, with an eye on the upcoming, all-important mid-term elections, let’s take a look back at how two different presidents handled a crisis, shall we? These events are separate; each having their own hurdles and problems, but both tied to the same geographic area.
On one hand, we have President George W. Bush and one of the major crises of his administration – that would be Hurricane Katrina. And on the other, we have President Barack H. Obama and his response to the Gulf Oil Spill.
On April 20, 2010 the deep water oil platform, Deepwater Horizon suffers an explosion so intense that the 11 rig workers bodies were never recovered. For two days the platform burns and on the 22nd, another explosion sends the platform to the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. At this point, thousands of gallons of crude oil are spilling into the gulf each day. President Obama waits nine days from the first explosion to even make a public statement about the disaster. He pledges “every single available resource” to respond to this emergency. In total, he waits an astonishing 12 days to even tour the affected areas. He won’t see the area again until over a month after the original explosion, when he visits again on May 28, 2010.
Backtrack to 2007 and then candidate Obama said, of the Bush administration’s response to Katrina: “Part of the problem, I’ll be honest with you, I just don’t think there is a sense of urgency in the White House, where the president is cracking the whip, day in, day out, and saying, ‘Why is it that we’re not getting this done?'” Obama said.
Continuing on with President Obama’s response to the Gulf Oil Spill, President Obama denied the offered help from the Dutch government who made available the latest in oil skimming technology, citing the Jones Act. It is interesting to note that President Bush issued a temporary waiver of the Jones Act following Katrina – despite having received campaign donations from the Seafarer’s International Union in 2000 and 2004.
In little more than one month since the first explosion, President Obama engaged in a week of vacation, several fundraisers, several campaign events, attended 7 sporting events and played over a half dozen rounds of golf. Let’s just remind President Obama of candidate Obama’s words, “I’ll be honest with you, I just don’t think there is a sense of urgency in the White House, where the president is cracking the whip, day in, day out, and saying, ‘Why is it that we’re not getting this done?”
Almost 45 days into the Gulf Oil Spill, President Obama sends Attorney General Eric Holder and a team of Justice Department lawyers down to the gulf area. On day 58 of the disaster, President Obama assigns a “Blue Ribbon” panel to investigate the causes of the BP Gulf Oil Spill. He also tells the Today Show that he wants to know, “…whose ass to kick.”
By July 15, 2010 BP announces that it has capped the well and the oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico has been stopped.
Now let’s shift our focus back to August of 2005 when Hurricane Katrina tore into the gulf region of the United States, leaving death and destruction in its’ wake.
President Bush was already on a working vacation at his ranch in Texas. He flew over the area ravaged by Katrina, deciding that landing Air Force One, which would necessitate shutting down the New Orleans or Baton Rouge airports, would hamper rescue efforts. He actually cut his “vacation” short to fly back to DC to coordinate the federal response.
It is worth noting that Bush faced tough opposition from New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin and then Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco. Both were contacted by the National Hurricane Center and urged to put evacuation plans into motion. Both Nagin and Blanco decided not to. In fact, President Bush declared the areas affected by Katrina a national disaster area BEFORE Blanco did on a state level. He did this to facilitate advanced preparations.
Donna Brazile, a pundit that works for CNN and is a former Vice Chairwoman for voter registration for the Democratic National Committee, has been known to be a harsh critic of President Bush. However, she wrote an article titled, “Brazile: Bush Came Through on Katrina,” about her experience with President Bush during her work on the Lousiana State Commission overseeing the long-term recovery from Hurricane Katrina.
She wrote, “George W. Bush was good as his word. He visited the Gulf States 17 times; went 13 times to New Orleans. Laura Bush made 24 trips. Bush saw that $126 billion in aid was sent to the Gulf’s residents, as some members of his own party in Congress balked. Bush put a special emphasis on rebuilding schools and universities. He didn’t forget African-Americans: Bush provided $400 million to the historically black colleges, now integrated, that remain a pride, and magnet for African-American students. Laura Bush, a librarian, saw to it that thousands of books ruined by the floods were replaced. To this day, there are many local libraries with tributes devoted to her efforts.”
And speaking of Bush being as good as his word, as it relates to the Katrina recovery, President Bush signed the following seven acts into law:
* Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act to Meet Immediate Needs Arising From the Consequences of Hurricane Katrina
* Second Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act to Meet Immediate Needs Arising From the Consequences of Hurricane Katrina
* 2005 Flexibility for Displaced Workers Act
* Katrina Emergency Tax Relief Act of 2005
* QI, TMA, and Abstinence Programs Extension
* the Hurricane Katrina Unemployment Relief Act of 2005
* the Gulf Opportunity Zone Act of 2005
Oh, and the number of acts President Obama has signed into law as relates to the BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico?
Well, it seems that Barak Obama’s Syrian allies Al Qaeda, are racking up impressive numbers of dead civilians, even if they have to behead them after the fighting is done. Here is some video…
I wonder if they get more aid if they kill more civilians, or does that only count when the civilians are Christians?
It seems that in this government shutdown, the Park Police some how has the money to have more police to keep people out than they ever had to let them in. Funny, isn’t it? Well, some Americans decided to ignore the democrat shutdown by going over, or through, the “barrycades” around the Lincoln Memorial. Here is some news footage…
It is said that the Park Service amassed a “small army,” and ran off the intruders. That, of course, begs the question, if the have that many park police on duty, why aren’t the monuments open in the first place?
The answer is obvious. Barak Obama is a petulant narcissist who is unworthy of his office, and is a laughing stock all over the planet.
H/T: Weasel Zippers
In our ongoing series exploring how Obama’s ineptitude and malfeasance has made Vladimir Putin look more American than his (un)American counterpart, we move on to Christian Persecution. The Washington Times has more…
DALLAS, August 2, 2013 — Vladimir Putin said last week that he observes “with alarm” that “in many of the world’s regions, especially in the Middle East and in North Africa, inter-confessional tensions are mounting, and the rights of religious minorities are infringed, including Christians and Orthodox Christians.”
The meeting was held with the leaders of all 15 Orthodox Churches to celebrate the 1,025th anniversary of the official adoption of Christianity by Prince Vladimir in 988 A.D. Orthodox leaders spoke out against what they consider the growing secularist suppression of Christian freedoms in Western nations like the U.K. and France, where same-sex marriage has just been legalized, and Christian business owners have been threatened with jail time and forced to pay fines for refusing to participate in homosexual wedding ceremonies.
Now contrast this with Obama:
1. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood slaughters Christians, burns churches, orphanages, businesses, and the homes of ordinary Christians-Obama demands that they be returned to power.
Syrian Rebels Al Qaeda, kills Christians, cleanses Christian villages of their Christian residents, executes children, and eats the internal organs of their victims-and Obama sends them guns, and wants to bomb their enemies for them.
3. Here in the US, Obama refuses to protect Christian Rights of Conscience-forcing them to take part in abortions, gay marriages, and the like.
Sad to even have to ask this, but at least on the surface, who appears to be more in favor of religious freedom; the President of the former Soviet Union, or the President of the United States?
That’s irony folks, and not the fun kind.
It’s for the children!
Since Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize many have wondered how he could top it.
“We were worried that he would become Orson Welles” said a White House reporter.
What did Welles do after Citizen Kane? Absolutely nothing. Well, except for sleeping with Rita Hayworth. Rita’s dead so President Obama can’t sleep with her. So we were concerned. But this new war is a way out.
Indeed the Nobel Peace Prize winner has seemed to falter recently, with Edward Snowden granted asylum in Russia, the NSA and IRS scandals and the delaying of Obamacare.
But with news that the Navy is preparing to launch strikes against Syria hope has again returned to the White House and the press corps.
There are even reports that Hollywood is preparing a movie based on the upcoming Syrian war.
“Drone strikes are good. But they lack drama” according to one Hollywood executive.
If you absolutely must level a criticism at President Obama it is that all the wars he has engaged in throughout the world during his presidency were faceless. We in Hollywood want to help the president. Hell, whenever America goes to war we want to help. Assuming the president is a Democrat of course.
Hollywood is more than ready to assist the war. Directors and actors have already headed out to the middle east and set up shop aboard Navy ships. When the first planes take off to bomb Syrian civilian targets A-list actors will be in the cockpits.
“The actors are excited. They have memorized their lines. They look forward to helping Obama win his second Nobel Prize” said Steven Spielberg.
We even plan to have a few actors shot down. Already crews are in the Syrian countryside ready to document the brave struggle of our men to survive as they eat vegetables and fall in love with Syrian women, who will return the love and bind up their wounds, eventually making the painful decision to abandon their country and come to America. It’s all right there in the script.
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has announced that President Obama is the front-runner to win the next Nobel Peace Prize. But only if their is an actual war. Thorbjørn Jagland, President of the committee had this to say:
President Obama has been the greatest force of peace the world has ever known. And we will give him the prize but there has to be a war first.
Billy Crystal has been chosen to emcee the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize ceremony.
Tickets are already on sale for the much anticipated war, with prices ranging from $3,000 for luxury seats to 14 dollars for the bleachers.
“As with any war, the key is to have fun and be safe” said Ban Ki-moon, the Secretary General of the United Nations. “So watch out for fast approaching objects. It’ll be like going to a baseball game but without as many relief pitchers.”
Original Post: Manhattan Infidel
WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT
Barak Obama sent weapons. John McCain favors the
Syrian Rebels Al Qaeda. And, they execute children!
according to the Islamic state youtube channel, these 2 guys are from the town of nobol and the town of alzaharaa in Aleppo(these 2 towns are known by their support to the regime)..according to them,.they got kidnapped so the regime can release some of their “brothers” but the regime didn’t respond to their demands..so they execute them
Remember that Barak Obama and John McCain support this.
I know we are supposed to pray for our would be Marxist overlords, and I do, believe it on not. I pray that they will develop wisdom, and embrace life and freedom. I don’t expect much, but hey, the man upstairs wants us to do it, so who am I to argue? However, to pray to Barak Obama?
Words escape me.
It looks like Mr. Spock is going to have a busy week at the CH 2.0.
As it was covered extensively late last week, the city of Detroit finally succumbed to decades of liberal policies, and declared bankruptcy. But, it seems that a judge has intervened with some curious commentary…
On Friday, a Michigan Circuit Judge Rosemarie Aquilina ruled Detroit bankruptcy is unconstitutional.
On Friday, a circuit court judge in Ingham County ruled that Detroit’s federal bankruptcy filing violated a part of Michigan’s constitution that protects union pensions. She ordered it withdrawn, a day after Detroit became the largest U.S. city in history to file for chapter nine bankruptcy.
Judge Rosemary Aquilina also said the filing did not honor President Barack Obama’s work for the city, who she said “took [Detroit’s auto companies] out of bankruptcy.” Aquilina said she would send a copy of her order to Obama.
“It’s cheating, sir, and it’s cheating good people who work,” the judge told assistant Attorney General Brian Devlin. “It’s also not honoring the (United States) president, who took (Detroit’s auto companies) out of bankruptcy.”
The Detroit News reported “attorneys representing the pension boards hurried into Aquilina’s court to ask for a restraining order” on July 18, but Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R) and Detroit’s emergency manager Kevin Orr “beat them by a few minutes” in filing for bankruptcy. The filing did not deter lawyers for union pension boards, who can use “court maneuvers to slow down federal bankruptcy proceedings.”
I get that the judge can rule on the state’s Constitution. That would be a valid function, however, what in the you know what does it have to do with the application of the law that the President might look bad?
I know, I said I was going to step back but I just can’t help myself. Anyway I found this interesting video on You Tube. Please take a few minutes to check it out.
Source: The Corbett Report
It’s shocking to see how quickly we have transformed as a society. Principles that were commonplace only 50 years ago are now gone. The narrator ask how do we snap people out of this state of affairs; or as I see it this apathetic mindset? What needs to happen to wake the people up? In my opinion waking people up will be a monumental task. It will take a massive effort on the part of liberty loving citizens to deprogram a citizenry that has been conditioned to accept these blatant violations of our constitution and their rights in the name of security. After all people want to feel safe. And because they want to feel safe they’re ok with surrendering their individual liberties to the government.
Our founders could have done the same. They could have surrendered their liberties to England in exchange for security. Thank goodness they didn’t. They chose liberty and the right for each person to be master of their own destiny. Why today do we reject this? Why do we reject the founders? Maybe it’s because we feel that the dangers we face today are far greater than the dangers the founding generation faced. I mean all the founding generation had to worry about was keeping a union of 13 states together, defending their homes from Indian raids, creating a system of government that all states would agree to, and worrying about an invasion from another country after seven years of war with their mother country. Not to mention disease and the various outbreaks that came with it. And yet they still believed that individual liberty was the answer. Why don’t we? Is it because we want to feel safe? I want to be master of my own security and I’ll live with the risk that comes with a free society.
Liberty forever, freedom for all!
Original Post: The Sentry Journal