We've Figured Him Out

Osama and his ilk want to take our freedoms away, to obtain control over all of us. This is what all socialists, progressives, fascists, Nazi's and collectivists of all stripes have in common.

- They care not if global warming is taking place, you see, because their "remedy" (cap and trade) gives them control over the worlds economies.

- They know full well that single payer socialized medicine has failed everywhere it has been tried, but they don't care, because Osamacare will give them control over our lives, cradle to grave.

- They knew the porkulus bill ($787 billion ) would do nothing for the economy: They didn't intend for it to! These funds were massive bailouts for democrat interest groups, liberal state governments, unions, campaign contributors, and a peremptory bribe to the groups that had opposed Hillarycare in 1993...T

Why is President Barack Obama in such a hurry to get his socialized medicine bill passed?
Because he and his cunning circle realize some basic truths:

The American people in their unimaginable kindness and trust voted for a pig in a poke in 2008. They wanted so much to believe Barack Obama was somehow better and different from other ultra-leftists that they simply took him on faith.

They ignored his anti-white writings in his books. They ignored his quiet acceptance of hysterical anti-American diatribes by his minister, Jeremiah Wright.

They ignored his refusal to explain years at a time of his life as a student. They ignored his ultra-left record as a "community organizer," Illinois state legislator, and Senator.

The American people ignored his total zero of an academic record as a student and teacher, his complete lack of scholarship when he was being touted as a scholar.

Now, the American people are starting to wake up to the truth. Barack Obama is a super likeable super leftist, not a fan of this country, way, way too cozy with the terrorist leaders in the Middle East, way beyond naïveté, all the way into active destruction of our interests and our allies and our future.

The American people have already awakened to the truth that the stimulus bill -- a great idea in theory -- was really an immense bribe to Democrat interest groups, and in no way an effort to help all Americans.
Now, Americans are waking up to the truth that ObamaCare basically means that every time you are sick or injured, you will have a clerk from the Department of Motor Vehicles telling your doctor what he can and cannot do.

The American people already know that Mr. Obama's plan to lower health costs while expanding coverage and bureaucracy is a myth, a promise of something that never was and never will be -- a bureaucracy lowering costs in a free society. Either the costs go up or the free society goes away.

These are perilous times. Mrs. Hillary Clinton, our Secretary of State, has given Iran the go-ahead to have nuclear weapons, an unqualified betrayal of the nation. Now, we face a devastating loss of freedom at home in health care. It will be joined by controls on our lives to "protect us" from global warming, itself largely a fraud if believed to be caused by man.

Mr. Obama knows Americans are getting wise and will stop him if he delays at all in taking away our freedoms.

There is his urgency and our opportunity. Once freedom is lost, America is lost. Wake up, beloved America.
Full article in new window

Shock video: Professor Gates goes on N-word rant

To no one's surprise, this case of "racial profiling" has turned into another case of race baiting by this ultra leftist harvard professor, who it turns out, is a close friend of Osama's (but like William Ayers and Jeremiah Wright he never listened to anything they spewed!) and by president Osama himself, who is now demonstrably NOT the "post partisan" candidate he claimed to be.

No, he is a far left liberal ideologue, and the public at large is coming to this realization in breathtaking speed...T

A video has surfaced on YouTube of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. delivering a church speech in which he uses the N-word, rails against "racist historically white institutions in America" and accuses Newt Gingrich of attempting to block blacks from entering the middle class.

Gates became a lightning rod of racial controversy when President Obama defended the professor, who was handcuffed outside his home last week by police in Cambridge, Mass.

"We are trying to end what we call the one n-gger syndrome – you know, this place ain't big enough for more than one of us," said Gates in the video, filmed in 1996 in the All Souls Church in Washington, D.C.

"We in the academy have to know that our people, those of us who practice African-American studies, have to know that our people are under assault," Gates said.

He continued: "Newt Gingrich can come in, that Contract for America is serious. You know what those guys have said? 'Somehow, while we were asleep, all you white women and all you black people got into the middle class.'

"'We are not sure how it happened. But the first thing we are going to do is we are going to shake the tree and any of y'all who can't hold on, you're all going back. And the second thing, we are going to set up barriers so no more of you all can get in here.'"

Read for yourself what lies beneath Obama's well-polished image and slick oration in "The Audacity of Deceit" from WND's SuperStore!

Gates was speaking to the church about his book, "The Future of the Race," which he co-authored with radical black professor Cornel West. Gates was arguing for the continued employment of affirmative action.

"Without affirmative action we would have never been able to integrate racist historically white institutions in American society," Gates said.

"I was able to go to Yale University because they were trying to diversify themselves," he said. "Because of racism I never would have been allowed to compete on a more or less level terrain with white boys and white girls.

"What we're trying to do is end 'your mamma' and 'your daddy criticism,' which is what African-Americans quite frankly have mastered in for 250 years," he said.

In clearly racially divisive remarks, Gates blasted the state of North Carolina, drawing applause when he exclaimed, "I don't even like the airplane to fly over North Carolina."

One audience member pointed out American jazz icon John Coltrane was born in North Carolina.

"Oh, that's true. I'm sorry. I'm sorry," said Gates. "And they got good barbeque, too. So maybe it's OK."
Full article in new window

Related articles by Zemanta

• Three Stupid Acts (themoderatevoice.com)
• Harvard's Henry Louis Gates Jr., "A Black Man in America" (Continued) (themoderatevoice.com)

Gloomy Days for Obamacare, Silver Lining for America

As I watched Obama stumble, dissemble, and ramble through his prime time "State Media apparatchik public event" er, press conference, a powerful thought came to mind. OK, two thoughts: The 1st, of course, was the mental image of the Brezhnev era military parades featuring the Soviet Elite atop the Kremlin walls waving to the "adoring" masses. Ah yes, the power of a prescient double entendre!

The 2nd: Obama's poll numbers are falling faster than Jimmy Carters. Jimmy Carter. The democrats, the ones who still eat meat, are in open rebellion, rightly fearing an impending 1994 redux. This guy is a liar, like Bill Clinton was. Obama, though, unlike Mr. Lewinsky, is an ideologue. Obama has neither the political skills nor the inclinations of W.C. Clinton to sway with the prevailing political winds and put survival above ideology. He has, along with the most left-wing congress since 1917, shoved his progressive, fascistic agenda against the collective will of the American people, who have seen this scam before.

His presidency, to quote a real US president, is like "an Evil Empire, whose last pages are even now being written."

The Obama presidency is over. God bless America...T

Thursday is the day things tend to come to a boil on Capitol Hill. Members of Congress have been in town for three or four days; they're planning their exits on Friday to meet other commitments; they've had a chance to talk and meet with one another and sample the moods of their colleagues.

This month, Thursdays have been very bad days for the Obama administration's attempt to pass health care bills concocted by House and Senate committee chairmen.

On the first Thursday after Congress got back in session, July 9, 40 members of the Democratic Blue Dogs caucus sent House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a letter opposing any health care bill that would increase the federal deficit, fail to reform delivery systems, and not protect small businesses and rural health providers. Signers included two committee chairmen. The House bill, they wrote, "lacks a number of elements essential to preserving what works and fixing what is broken."

On the next Thursday, July 16, Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf addressed those concerns in testimony on the Hill. He reiterated the CBO's conclusion that the Democratic bills would increase the federal deficit, by something on the order of a trillion dollars over 10 years. And, no, the Democratic bills would not "bend the cost curve" -- i.e., would not reform the delivery systems in ways that would cut costs. Pelosi and Barack Obama insisted, in foot-stamping mode, that their bills would really, really cut costs.

That same day, freshman Rep. Jared Polis of Boulder, Colo., sent Pelosi a letter signed by 21 House freshmen and one sophomore opposing the increased taxes on high earners imposed by the two House committee bills. "Especially in a recession," the letter read, "we need to make sure not to kill the goose that will lay the golden eggs of our recovery."

There are 256 Democrats in the House, with one vacant Democratic seat. Only five Democrats signed both the Blue Dogs' and Polis' letters. That means that 57 Democrats signed one letter or the other, pledging to oppose central features of the Democratic health care bills. Few, if any, Republicans are expected to support either bill. You do the math. The Democratic leadership seems well short of the 218 votes needed for a majority on the floor. No wonder House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said it's time "to go back to the drawing board."

Obama and congressional Democratic leaders are blaming Republicans for their problem. Obama noted that Republican Sen. Jim DeMint and Weekly Standard Editor William Kristol want to "kill" the Democratic bills. But the Blue Dogs' and Polis' letters showed that the mortal threat comes from elected Democrats. Twenty-nine of the 57 letter signers defeated or replaced Republicans in 2006 or 2008. Thirty-three of them represent districts carried by John McCain in 2008.

What we're seeing is the people speaking through their politicians. Obama and many Democrats assumed that the financial crisis would predispose most Americans to favor a larger and much more expensive government than we ever have had before.

A plausible hope for change, perhaps, but polling shows it hasn't happened. The prospect of huge federal deficits extending out as far as the eye can see is not appealing to most voters. The prospect of having the health care sector of the economy designed by the people who gave us the $787 billion stimulus package is even less appetizing.

But we should not cynically underrate the importance of a strong argument, which may prevail despite the transcendent aura of a new president. Some of the Blue Dogs' concerns may be parochial (rural health care), but they make a strong case, buttressed by Elmendorf's expert testimony, that Congress should not rush to transform the health care sector at huge cost and with little cost-cutting effect. And the Polis letter signers' concern about the negative macroeconomic effects of higher taxation of high earners can find support in the writings of Democratic, as well as Republican, economists.

What will this Thursday bring? We'll wait and see what comes from the buzzing on Capitol Hill. In the meantime, as I read the text of the Blue Dogs' and Polis' letters, I suddenly heard the voice of the late Jack Kemp proclaiming at the 1984 Republican National Convention that if you subsidize something, you get more of it and that if you tax something, you get less of it.
Full article in new window

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama's Sinking Approval Ratings Are Even Worse Than They Look (usnews.com)
• Obama may have to wait for health care passage (ctv.ca)
• David Brooks: "Liberal Suicide March." (althouse.blogspot.com)

Remember When America had a Real President?

Obama;s 1st Pitch Breakdown

View more presentations from Ted Pethick.

Related articles by Zemanta

• President Obama Throws Out First Pitch at All-Star Game (shoppingblog.com)
• Obama's First Pitch at the All Star Game (video) (inquisitr.com)
• Rev. Jeremiah Wright Says Jews Are Preventing Obama From Talking to Him (usnews.com)
• Obama preps for the pitchers mound (cnn.com)
• DON SURBER: What kind of health care do lawmakers and Obama get? Related item here. And reader ... (pajamasmedia.com)
• Obama prepping for firs pitch (cbssports.com)

Second Stimulus Package Coming!

I wish I could take credit - but Drudge beat me to it. Nonetheless, an instant classic!...T

Liberal Fascism - A Conservative Slur no Longer

Separation of Powers - Federalism - Limited Government - The Rule of Law

These are the "Four Legs" upon which the pedestal of our liberties have stood these nearly 250 years. The rule of law is a concept dating all the way back to the edicts of the Roman Emperors, but enshrined in our modern world by English common law, informed and enlightened by natural law, and codified starting with the Magna Carta in 1215

The Constitution of the United States of America is the ultimate expression and synthesis of these four principles. It has indeed allowed for the sustenance of the greatest, most powerful, and freest nation in the history of this earth.

But what would happen if none cared any longer?

A good friend of mine opined today that Obama's health care proposals, among others, are fascist, and blatantly unconstitutional. Understanding fascism is complicated, but a lack of understanding the Constitution and our system of checks and balances is intellectual laziness, which I postulate is why we find ourselves in the situation of peril that exists today.

Constitution? Who the hell even cares that it exists anymore – certainly NOT when democrats are in power… Hell I wouldn't be surprised to see it “suspended” – after all, Woodrow Wilson did so! FDR did so!

Fascistic is exactly right: Jonah Goldberg (in "Liberal Fascism") explains, and I have added here that -

- Actually, the notion that fascism/Nazism and communism are polar opposites stems from the deeper truth that they are in fact kindred spirits. - Richard Pipes: “ Bolshevism and Fascism were heresies of socialism”. Both ideologies are reactionary in the sense that they try to recreate tribal (or feudal!) impulses. Communists champion class, Nazi’s race, Fascists the nation. All these ideologies, totalitarian impulses in the extreme, attract the same types of people! -

AND they are all of the same in another respect – they are all forms of IDENTITY politics. Get the rich, affirmative action, “save the planet” – all pseudonyms for fascistic, socialistic, Nazi, communist, totalitarian, Orwellian control

We are in deep trouble, and can only hope our founders were wiser even than we thought until now...T

The f-bomb of American politics is the word “fascist,” routinely hurled by the left at conservatives. Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater were smeared as incipient fascists, and George W. Bush now receives the honor, along with practically anyone to the right of Rosie O’Donnell on a college campus.

The operational meaning of the word “fascism” for most liberals who invoke it is usually “shut up.” It’s meant to bludgeon conservatives into silence. But many on the left also genuinely believe that there is something fascistic in the DNA of contemporary conservatism, as if Republican Party conventions would get their rightful treatment only if they were worshipfully filmed by Leni Riefenstahl.

In his brilliant new book Liberal Fascism, Jonah Goldberg (a colleague of mine) demonstrates how the opposite is the case, that fascism was a movement of the left and that liberal heroes like Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt were products of what Goldberg calls “the fascist moment” in America early in the 20th century. How we think of the ideological spectrum — socialism to the left, fascism to the right — should be forever changed.

Benito Mussolini was a socialist and earned the title “Il Duce” as the leader of the socialists in Italy. When he founded the fascist party, its program called for implementing a minimum wage, expropriating property from landowners, repealing titles of nobility, creating state-run secular schools and imposing a progressive tax rate. Mussolini took socialism and turned it in a more populist and militaristic direction, but remained a modernizing, secular man of the left.

The Nazis too were socialists, “enemies, deadly enemies, of today’s capitalist economic system,” in the words of the party’s ideologist Gregor Strasser. The party’s platform sounded a lot like that of the Italian fascists. The Nazis wanted to chase conventional Christianity from public life and overturn tradition, replacing them with an all-powerful state. Both Hitler and Mussolini were revolutionaries, bitterly opposed to “reactionary” forces in their societies.

By what standard, then, are they considered conservatives who took things to extremes? The left points to their anti-Semitism and militarism. But anti-Semitism isn’t an inherently right-wing phenomenon — Stalin’s Russia was anti-Semitic. As for militarism, these regimes looked to it as a way to mobilize and organize society, something deeply anathema to the anti-statist tradition of postwar American conservatism.

On the other hand, the progressive movement of the early 20th century looked to Mussolini as an inspiration and shared intellectual roots with European fascism, including an appreciation of the “top-down socialism” of Otto von Bismarck. Goldberg eviscerates Woodrow Wilson as the closest we have ever had to a fascist president. Wilson and his supporters welcomed World War I as an opportunity to expand the state, instituting “war socialism” and a far-reaching crackdown on dissent.

FDR picked up where Wilson left off. The crisis of the Great Depression was the occasion for reviving “war socialism.” The man who ran the National Recovery Administration was an open admirer of Mussolini, and the alphabet soup of New Deal agencies had their roots in World War I and the classic fascist impulse to mobilize society and put it on a war footing.

Goldberg sees the fascist exaltation of youth, glorification of violence, hatred of tradition and romance of “the street” in the New Left of the 1960s, still the subject of the fond memories for the liberal establishment in this country. Goldberg argues that “liberal fascism” — the phrase was coined by H. G. Wells, and he meant it positively — is a distant heir to European fascism. The liberal version is pacifist rather than militaristic and feminine rather than masculine in its orientation, but it also seeks to increase the power of the state and overcome tradition in sweeping crusades pursued with the moral fervor of war.

Goldberg’s keen intellectual history is, at bottom, a profound cautionary tale about the perils of state aggrandizement and of revolutionary movements. If nothing else, it should convince liberals that it’s time to find a new insult.
Full article in new window

A Little Bird Told Me

"It takes a village" - to shame a fascist...(oh, which one? both of them: Obama AND Ayatollah Khamenei )

Related articles by Zemanta

• Social Media Helps to Generate a Revolution in Iran (ricksrss.com)
• Iranian demonstrators ignore threats (michaeltotten.com)
• Stirrings In Iran And Lebanon (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)
• Ahmadinejad accused of lying on TV (guardian.co.uk)
• Ex-pats at Ottawa vigil fear bloodshed in Iran (cbc.ca)
• Moussavi Facebook page throws blame back on regime (cnn.com)

Osama 2012 Campaign Slogans Leaked to Press!

Wow, we are going to have a hard time beating this team! Obama looking good for re-election...T

GOP Should Run Against the Power of the Center

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

The argument has been frustrating.

We have the Colin Powell types demanding we draw and quarter the Rush Limbaugh's and abandon conservatism. It's just not fashionable, you see! We should just manage big government better than the democrooks.

Then there are the purists. Preferably start a new party, but at the very least, kick all the RINO's and McCain's to the curb! The republicans are worse than the democrats and must all lose, so that we can then win.

I've always thought both of these schools of thought were self defeating, for yes, we need to stand for limited government and constitutional jurisprudence, but there will never be enough of us to form a lasting majority. We must get better at teaching, explaining, and finding thoughtful, principled candidates, as well as finding some answer to the leftist, statist media monopoly that feeds the cancer of socialism that has befallen us. Reagan is the prototype. Idealistic, educated, dedicated to a purpose, not to a career, and yet appealing to centrists and democrats because he could explain conservatism in simple ways that people are instinctively drawn to and can't ignore.

Mr. Barone has hit on a perfect message to which we can only hope the GOP is listening!...T

"So I think Republicans today should be less interested in moving toward the center and more interested in running against the center. Here I mean a different "center" -- not a midpoint on an opinion spectrum, but rather the centralized government institutions being created and strengthened every day. This is a center that is taking over functions fulfilled in a decentralized way by private individuals, firms and markets.

...To govern is to choose, as John F. Kennedy said, and those in charge of these new centralized institutions are making choices that inevitably favor some and hurt others. Unsurprisingly, the politically well connected tend to get the favors. Banks forced to take government money are now blocked from paying it back and in the meantime must direct funds where the government wants them to go...when government gets this intertwined with the private sector, when it makes decisions not based on neutral economic criteria but by what is at best guesswork about the allocation and valuation of vast amounts of capital, bailout favoritism and crony capitalism are inevitable.

...It's arguably good policy as well as good politics to run against this over-powerful center. Bailout favoritism and crony capitalism not only misallocate economic resources, they also sap faith in the fairness of our institutions. After World War II, Democrats wanted to retain wartime high taxes, pro-union labor laws, and wage and price controls -- all manipulatable for political benefit by political insiders. Republicans ran in 1946 on the theme of "Had enough?" and won big enough majorities to lower taxes, revise labor laws and abolish controls.

The 1946 Republicans didn't move to the center. They ran against the power of the center and permanently redefined where the center of the political spectrum was. That's a path today's Republicans might want to consider.
Full article in new window

American Capitalism Gone with a Whimper

"The American descent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed."

Not my words, and no need to wonder how completely the drive-by MSM is covering comrade Obama's tracks anymore. Pravda is now more conservative than the New York Times. Yes, these are the printed words of Pravda. Pravda!

It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.

True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists...

Pravda summarizes our dire situation nicely in it's final sentences. Please be sure to access the full article in the post article link...T

...The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.

These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?

...The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.
Full article in new window

Whither Limited Government?

Obama speaks at Notre Dame. He is"Christ-like", "bipartisan", and non confrontational in the face of protests from "right wing extremists" while simply trying to convey that we should, well "C-C-Can we all get along?"

Horse patoot! This guy is a fanatic. He is destroying, in months, not years, the very remnants of our system of limited government, which the founders bequeathed to us, and which have kept us safe and prosperous for 250 years.

The very concept of limited government is grounded in the principles of
Natural Law, and enshrined in the declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness"

Then there are the words of C. S. Lewis:

" Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of it's victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"

...T

Waterboard MSNBC!

Is it just me? Am I the only one who would do almost anything for one night with Ann Coulter?! Oh well...

I see that the press - MSNBC in particular - and the fanatic leftists in congress are clamoring to put Bush and Cheney in jail for "torture" related war crimes. They use as their latest shallow justification that WWII Japanese war criminals were executed for "waterboarding" American POW's (execution is what the press and the left really want for Bush of course!).

Problem is, as is the case with most of what the MSM states as fact, and almost all of what the left claims, this case is patently false, and provably so.

In fact - the CIA just this very day released the transcript of the EIT congressional briefing, attended by Nancy Pelosi, which now proves not only that she knew and approved of the waterboarding EIT, but that she knew it had already taken place, and upon whom it specifically had been used (Abu Zubaydah). Again, she signalled her approval at this time.

- Hypocrite, thy name is liberal statist!..T

...Given what the Japanese did to prisoners, waterboarding would be a reward for good behavior.

...To claim that the Japanese – architects of the Bataan Death March – were prosecuted for "waterboarding" would be like saying Ted Bundy was executed for engaging in sexual harassment.

What the Japanese did to their POWs made even the Nazis blanch. The Japanese routinely beheaded and bayoneted prisoners; forced prisoners to dig their own graves and then buried them alive; amputated prisoners' healthy arms and legs, one by one, for sport; force-fed prisoners dry rice and then filled their stomachs with water until their bowels exploded; and injected them with chemical weapons in order to observe, time and record their death throes before dumping them in mass graves.

While only 4 percent of British and American troops captured by German or Italian forces died in captivity, 27 percent of British and American POWs captured by the Japanese died in captivity. Japanese war crimes were so atrocious that even rape was treated as only a secondary war crime in the Tokyo trial, similar to what happens during an R. Kelly trial.

The Japanese "water cure" was to "waterboarding" as practiced at Guantanamo what rape at knifepoint is to calling your secretary "honey."

The Japanese version of "waterboarding" was to fill the prisoner's stomach with water until his stomach was distended – and then pound on his stomach, causing the prisoner to vomit...
Full article in new window

Related articles by Zemanta

• What Nan knew (michellemalkin.com)

Presidential Poison - His invitation to indict Bush officials will haunt Obama's Presidency.

The most dangerous, radical extremist ever to occupy a position of high executive authority in the history of the United States of America. The man is a National Socialist in the arena of economics - we already knew that - Now if these show trials occur he will duplicate the excess's of Mussolini, Stalin and Hitler.

"Oh that's too far!" you say? What will stop the cycle once our 250 year tradition of not criminalizing policy differences ends? What is it, really, that separates us from tinpot Latin dictatorships? They do, after all, all have constitutions, do they not? Indeed it is our tradition of the rule of law which will be inevitably broken in the process of these NAZI show trials.

Pelosi, Reid, Leahy, Obama himself - they were all briefed on these methods - indeed, they all concurred and wished for even more strenuous techniques to be used. They are traitors to America ladies and gentlemen - nothing less.

The WSJ lays it out, excerpted below...T

Mark down the date. Tuesday, April 21, 2009, is the moment that any chance of a new era of bipartisan respect in Washington ended. By inviting the prosecution of Bush officials for their antiterror legal advice, President Obama has injected a poison into our politics that he and the country will live to regret...

...at least until now, the U.S. political system has avoided the spectacle of a new Administration prosecuting its predecessor for policy disagreements. This is what happens in Argentina, Malaysia or Peru, countries where the law is treated merely as an extension of political power.

If this analogy seems excessive, consider how Mr. Obama has framed the issue. He has absolved CIA operatives of any legal jeopardy, no doubt because his intelligence advisers told him how damaging that would be to CIA morale when Mr. Obama needs the agency to protect the country. But he has pointedly invited investigations against Republican legal advisers who offered their best advice at the request of CIA officials.

"Your intelligence indicates that there is currently a level of 'chatter' equal to that which preceded the September 11 attacks," wrote Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, in his August 1, 2002 memo. "In light of the information you believe [detainee Abu] Zubaydah has and the high level of threat you believe now exists, you wish to move the interrogations into what you have described as an 'increased pressure phase.'"

So the CIA requests a legal review at a moment of heightened danger, the Justice Department obliges with an exceedingly detailed analysis of the law and interrogation practices -- and, seven years later, Mr. Obama says only the legal advisers who are no longer in government should be investigated. The political convenience of this distinction for Mr. Obama betrays its basic injustice. And by the way, everyone agrees that senior officials, including President Bush, approved these interrogations. Is this President going to put his predecessor in the dock too?

...(the only thing that has) changed (since Obama's earlier hesitancy) is that Mr. Obama's decision last week to release the interrogation memos unleashed a revenge lust on the political left that he refuses to resist.

...Those officials won't be the only ones who suffer if all of this goes forward. Congress will face questions about what the Members knew and when, especially Nancy Pelosi when she was on the House Intelligence Committee in 2002. The Speaker now says she remembers hearing about waterboarding, though not that it would actually be used. Does anyone believe that? Porter Goss, her GOP counterpart at the time, says he knew exactly what he was hearing and that, if anything, Ms. Pelosi worried the CIA wasn't doing enough to stop another attack. By all means, put her under oath.

Mr. Obama may think he can soar above all of this, but he'll soon learn otherwise. The Beltway's political energy will focus more on the spectacle of revenge, and less on his agenda. The CIA will have its reputation smeared, and its agents second-guessing themselves. And if there is another terror attack against Americans, Mr. Obama will have set himself up for the argument that his campaign against the Bush policies is partly to blame...

...Mr. Obama is more popular than his policies, due in part to his personal charm and his seeming goodwill. By indulging his party's desire to criminalize policy advice, he has unleashed furies that will haunt his Presidency.
Full article in new window

Obamunism

New flag unveiled, along with the Department of Homeland Security as Osama's Gestapo, to hunt down all the dangerous right wing extremists (er, our military), and CNN nicely filling in for Joseph Goebbels as Reich Minister of Propaganda (exposing those fanatically dangerous middle aged moms caught tea partying last week).

Well at least he is nice to Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega and Hugo Chavez. Perhaps we will look more like their Gulags, er, countries now. Our president is doing his level best to see to it...T

Obama's recipe for change not my cup of tea

This author is so proud of his fellow countrymen today! At this rate, 2010 is going to make 1994 look like a minor electoral blip. As I was watching O'Reilly tonight he referred to sexual slander words being used on NBC to ridicule the tea parties - he wouldn't name the phrase. Well, I looked it up, and so did the author of this piece.

Watch out Osama, Pelosi and Reid. Watch out NBC. There's a distant thunder rumbling. You'll hear it clearly...soon...T

I had no idea how important this week's nationwide anti-tax tea parties were until hearing liberals denounce them with such ferocity. The New York Times' Paul Krugman wrote a column attacking the tea parties, apologizing for making fun of "crazy people." It's OK, Paul, you're allowed to do that for the same reason Jews can make fun of Jews.

On MSNBC, hosts Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow have been tittering over the similarity of the name "tea parties" to an obscure homosexual sexual practice known as "tea bagging." Night after night, they sneer at Republicans for being so stupid as to call their rallies "tea bagging."

Every host on Air America and every unbathed, basement-dwelling loser on the left-wing blogosphere has spent the last week making jokes about tea bagging, a practice they show a surprising degree of familiarity with.

Except no one is calling the tea parties "tea bagging" – except Olbermann and Maddow. Republicans call them "tea parties."

Show the world you're part of the movement to take America back with the "Time for Another Tea Party" magnetic bumper sticker

But if the Republicans were calling them "tea-bagging parties," the MSNBC hosts would have a fantastically hilarious segment for viewers in San Francisco and the West Village and not anyplace else in the rest of the country. On the other hand, they're not called "tea-bagging parties." (That, of course, refers to the cocktail hour at Barney Frank's condo in Georgetown.)

You know what else would be hilarious? It would be hilarious if Hillary Clinton's name were "Ima Douche." Unfortunately, it's not. It was just a dream. Most people would wake up, realize it was just a dream and scrap the joke. Not MSNBC hosts.

The point of the tea parties is to note the fact that the Democrats' modus operandi is to lead voters to believe they are no more likely to raise taxes than Republicans, get elected and immediately raise taxes.

Apparently, the people who actually pay taxes consider this a bad idea.

Obama's biggest shortcoming is that he believes the things believed by all Democrats, which have had devastating consequences every time they are put into effect. Among these is the Democrats' admiration for raising taxes on the productive.

All Democrats for the last 30 years have tried to stimulate the economy by giving "tax cuts" to people who don't pay taxes. Evidently, offering to expand welfare payments isn't a big vote-getter.

Even Bush had a "stimulus" bill that sent government checks to lots of people last year. Guess what happened? It didn't stimulate the economy. Obama's stimulus bill is the mother of all pork bills for friends of O and of Congressional Democrats. ("O" stands for Obama, not Oprah, but there's probably a lot of overlap.)

And all that government spending on the Democrats' constituents will be paid for by raising taxes on the productive.

Raise taxes and the productive will work less, adopt tax shelters, barter instead of sell, turn to an underground economy – and the government will get less money.

The perfect bar bet with a liberal would be to wager that massive government deficits in the '80s were not caused by Reagan's tax cuts. If you casually mentioned that you thought Reagan's tax cuts brought in more revenue to the government – which they did – you could get odds in Hollywood and Manhattan. (This became a less attractive wager in New York this week after Gov. David Paterson announced his new plan to tax bar bets.)

The lie at the heart of liberals' mantra on taxes – "tax increases only for the rich" – is the ineluctable fact that unless taxes are raised across the board, the government won't get its money to fund layers and layers of useless government bureaucrats, none of whom can possibly be laid off.

How much would you have to raise taxes before any of Obama's constituents noticed? They don't pay taxes, they engage in "tax-reduction" strategies, they work for the government, or they're too rich to care. (Or they have offshore tax shelters, like George Soros.)

California tried the Obama soak-the-productive "stimulus" plan years ago and was hailed as the perfect exemplar of Democratic governance.
In June 2002, the liberal American Prospect magazine called California a "laboratory" for Democratic policies, noting that "California is the only one of the nation's 10 largest states that is uniformly under Democratic control."

They said this, mind you, as if it were a good thing. In California, the article proclaimed, "the next new deal is in tryouts." As they say in show biz: "Thanks, we'll call you. Next!"

In just a few years, Democrats had turned California into a state – or as it's now known, a "job-free zone" – with a $41 billion deficit, a credit rating that was slashed to junk-bond status and a middle class now located in Arizona.

Democrats governed California the way Democrats always govern. They bought the votes of government workers with taxpayer-funded jobs, salaries and benefits – and then turned around and accused the productive class of "greed" for wanting not to have their taxes raised through the roof.

Having run out of things to tax, now the California Legislature is considering a tax on taxes. Seriously. The only way out now for California is a tax on Botox and steroids. Sure, the governor will protest, but it is the best solution ...
California was, in fact, a laboratory of Democratic policies. The rabbit died, so now Obama is trying it on a national level.

That's what the tea parties are about.
Full article in new window

An Open Letter to President Osama

An open letter to president Osama -

Mr. Barack Hussein O'Media sir:

You left wing, media created, slavery inducing, tax raising, illegal immigrant loving, quadrillion $ spending, communist idolizing, Castro loving, Arab misogynist genuflecting, European pussy emulating, "America is an evil nation" expounding, scare tactics to nationalize our health care using, economic crisis-is-excuse-for monetizing hyperinflation and socialism theorizing, global warming crisis lunatic fringe embracing, communist, or even National Socialism imposing empty suit.

Sir, kindly follow the advice of the prime minister of the Czech Republic, who lived under both communism and national socialism, and go straight to hell, leaving the United States of America behind, sir!

...T

Related articles by Zemanta

• GOP lawmakers blast Cuba visit by CBC members (cnn.com)
• U.S. lawmakers meet with Fidel Castro (cnn.com)
• In Cuba, Change Means More of the Same, With Control at the Top (nytimes.com)
• Will Obama Have to Mess w/ Mother Nature? (abcnews.go.com)

Team Obama Suggests Climate Engineering

Re posted via our friends at Chlorinated Liberty - an excellent piece on the CO2 driven global warming swindle and a warning shot across our collective (oops, don't say "collective" within earshot of this gang of fanatic socialists!) bow, as team Osama prepares to jettison pollutants into the upper atmosphere to cool the earth. Yes he really IS that ignorant, and that arrogant!

Remember, all communists ARE!...T

The president's new science adviser said Wednesday that global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing radical technologies to cool Earth's air.

Someone might want to share the news with Obama's brain trust that for the second straight year the Earth is, in fact cooling... not warming.

Yet even if the earth was warming, research continues to prove that there is little if anything we can do to control the supposed "anthropomorphic global warming."

As pointed out by the Heritage Foundation, of the entire atmospheric composition, only one to two percent is made up of greenhouse gases with the majority being nitrogen (about 78 percent) and oxygen (about 21 percent). Of that two percent, “planet-killing” carbon dioxide comprises only 3.62 percent while water vapor encompasses 95 percent. And of the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, humans cause only 3.4 percent of annual CO2 emissions. What does this all boil down to? As shown by the accompanying graph, not very much:

Let us not forget:

*Global sea ice levels are the same as 1979. In fact the rate of ice increase from September onward is the fastest rate of change on record, either upwards or downwards.

*Alaskan Sea Glaciers are advancing for the first time in 250 years.*Tropical Cyclone Activity Lowest in 30 Years.

* Many leading climatologists conclude that climate models aren’t accurate and even have different opinions (for instance whether it is the sun or oceanic changes causing temp fluctuations).

*It is likely that global warming would not exist as an issue without the left’s blind devotion to computer modeling. As such there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy.

Despite these realities, the global warming alarmists continue, promoting hysteria over reality. But as we know, this is the way of the Global Warming Cult and the Politics of Fear . They accept no challenges, demonize those who question their science, scoff at contradictory data (such as the fact that temperatures are lowering not rising), and insist on politicizing their science rather than work from facts.

Full article in new window

Random Thoughts

Two thoughts stuck me full force like a shot of espresso at 7AM while reading this piece - the 1st being the feeling of slowly having the wool pulled collectively over our eyes...and this one:

"Socialists believe in government ownership of the means of production. Fascists believed in government control of privately owned businesses, which is much more the style of this government. That way, politicians can intervene whenever they feel like it and then, when their interventions turn out badly, summon executives from the private sector before Congress and denounce them on nationwide television."

...T - Thanks to James/AKA CornetJim for this one!

Random thoughts on the passing scene:

I am so old that I can remember when music was musical.

Now that the federal government says that it will stand behind the warranties on General Motors' automobiles, does that make you more likely or less likely to buy a car from GM? If you were a rising young executive with a promising future, would you be more likely or less likely to go to work for a company where politicians can fire you?

We have become such suckers for words that politicians can spend our tax money like a drunken sailor, provided they call it "investment." At least the drunken sailor is spending his own money but people look down on him because he doesn't call it "investment."

Barack Obama seems determined to repeat every disastrous mistake of the 1930s, at home and abroad. He has already repeated Herbert Hoover's policy of raising taxes on high income earners, FDR's policy of trying to micro-manage the economy and Neville Chamberlain's policy of seeking dialogues with hostile nations while downplaying the dangers they represent.

We seem to be moving steadily in the direction of a society where no one is responsible for what he himself did but we are all responsible for what somebody else did, either in the present or in the past.

The famous editorial cartoonist Herblock could write as well as draw. In one of his books, he said something like: "You too can have the soothing feeling of nature's own baby-soft wool being pulled gently over your resting eyes." I think of that every time I see Barack Obama talking.

It has long been said that uncertainty is the hardest thing for a market to adjust to. No one can generate uncertainty as much as the government, which can change the rules in midstream or come out with some new bright idea at any time, as the current administration has already demonstrated.

We have now reached the truly dangerous point where we cannot even be warned about the lethal, fanatical and suicidal hatred of our society by Islamic extremists, because to do so would be politically incorrect and, in some European countries, would be a violation of the law against inciting hostility to groups.

Perhaps the scariest aspect of our times is how many people think in talking points, rather than in terms of real world consequences.

Barack Obama's favorable reception during his tour in Europe may be the most enthusiastic international acclaim for a democratic government leader since Neville Chamberlain returned from Munich in 1938, proclaiming "peace in our time."

How a man who holds the entire population of a country as his prisoners, and punishes the families of those who escape, can be admired by people who call themselves liberals is one of the many wonders of the human mind's ability to rationalize. Yet such is the case with Fidel Castro.
What does "economic justice" mean, except that you want something that someone else produced, without having to produce anything yourself in return?

Perhaps the way President Obama will reduce the deficit is by making more presidential appointments of people who will pay the back taxes they owe, in order to get confirmed by the Senate.

Liberals seem to think that they are doing lagging groups a favor by making excuses for counterproductive and self-destructive behavior. The poor do not need press agents. They need the truth. No one ever said, "Press agents will make you free."

If I were Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, I would not sign any long-term lease on a home in Washington.

Socialists believe in government ownership of the means of production. Fascists believed in government control of privately owned businesses, which is much more the style of this government. That way, politicians can intervene whenever they feel like it and then, when their interventions turn out badly, summon executives from the private sector before Congress and denounce them on nationwide television.

Full article in new window

Related articles by Zemanta

• How about if we get a second opinion before committing to Geithner's Goldman Sachs solution? (iflizwerequeen.com)
• New G.M. Chief Doesn't Rule Out Bankruptcy (nytimes.com)
• GM's Rick Wagoner Gone, but Carmaker's Problems Remain (abcnews.go.com)
• Diplomatic Memo: Parsing the G-20's $1 Trillion Pledge - So Far, Only on Paper (nytimes.com)

Cartoon Nazi Strikes Again...

Oh that Cartoon Nazi!...T

- It was foretold -

"America will be destroyed from within!" This was filmed in 1941. How did Hitler know?

Full article in new window