Recognizing the unpopularity of the 2009 [stimulus] package, however, Democratic leaders have revised their message with less loaded language–“job creation” instead of “[CENSORED]” and “Make it in America” in lieu of “Recovery Act”–in hopes of tackling the jobs crisis. James Taranto/WSJ
The “[CENSORED]” word is stimulus. Do read the whole column. It’s very interesting and in fact, email it to friends and family. They need to read exactly what the Obama regime and his minions in Congress are trying to do to us, because we are obviously too stupid to really know what they are up to.
Just like it is no longer TAX, it’s now REVENUE, Pelosi and company have changed the words, to hide the meaning. Just change the word(ing) and they can pull the wool over our eyes.
It is far more difficult to find a Democrat position that actually helps the poor and middle class than it is to point out how their policies in every area hurt the poor and middle class. This message has to get out. If a presidential contender was able to get this message across, it would be the end of the Democrats. Read more at Conservatives on Fire
Questioning with Boldness ”Days of Rage coming to Wall Street this September” has done an outstanding piece on what is headed our way. Recall Al Gore and his call to arms? That we needed our own Arab Spring? I had done a number of posts earlier on the names and faces of those who were behind the unrest in the Middle East. Read more at Bunkerville
Obama has not only diminished the nation in the eyes of the world but he’s diminished the office of president in the eyes of the American people. It’s a shame when Americans have lost all pride in the POTUS and the first family. It’s sad that he’s such a bumbling fool, which reflects on all of us.
From bowing to foreign leaders:
to denying American exceptionalism to escorting the Dalai Lama past the garbage and out of the White House via the back door,
Obama has weakened our position on the world stage.
So, when the president is selling $5 raffle tickets from his living room in the White House for a dinner with him or Joe Biden, it’s obvious to all that the prestige of the office is in the basement. It’s on par with the sleaziness of selling the Lincoln bedroom.
Let’s hope a dinner with a common American goes better than this one did:
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: The Obamas are totally out of their element as the First Family of America.
Obama has the Alinsky community organizer job down very well: give the idea and incentive and then delegate so if (or when) it doesn’t work out, he has clean hands. It’s really nothing more than a continuation of voting “present” by just Being There.
Just Being There (in the White House) is all he really wants anyway: the perks and the private concerts with super stars, the private jet and personal chef. Honestly, after reading Michael Barone in the National Review today, I can see why BO wants to be president again. Being There is just so easy.
Which past leader does Barack Obama most closely resemble? His admirers, not all of them liberals, used to compare him to Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt.
But there is another comparison I think more appropriate for a president who, according to one of his foreign-policy staffers, prefers to “lead from behind.” The man I have in mind is Chauncey Gardiner, the character played by Peter Sellers in the 1979 movie Being There.
Peter Sellers as Chauncey Gardiner in Being There. And many believe that just like Chauncey, Obama walks on water, too.
As you may remember, Gardiner is a clueless gardener who is mistaken for a Washington eminence and becomes a presidential adviser. Asked if you can stimulate growth through temporary incentives, Gardiner says, “As long as the roots are not severed, all is well, and all will be well in the garden.”
“First comes the spring and summer,” he explains, “but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.” The president is awed as Gardiner sums up, “There will be growth in the spring.”
Kind of reminds you of Barack Obama’s approach to the federal budget, doesn’t it?
On all these issues, Obama seems oddly disengaged, aloof from the hard work of government, hesitant about making choices.
That doesn’t sound like Lincoln. Or Roosevelt. Or even Jimmy Carter. More like “then we have fall and winter.”
I went looking for the blog that my good friend AFVET mentioned in another post regarding our START treaty with Russia and stumbled on this one. Everyone should read it.
Although I’ve waffled on this topic and can see both sides of the issue, mostly I’ve believed that this whole birth certificate thing is a red herring. It’s being used to set up the right as the nutwings the progressives believe we are. This is an issue that the left wants in the news, daily. And this Abercrombie in Hawaii is as stupid as a fox by using it to whip up more and more headlines in order to make conservatives look more and more nutty.
Did you know, for instance that this birth certificate thing all started with the Hillary movement, in 2008? Or that Orly Taitz (the lead attorney in this whole thing) is a democrat donor? And that a lot of this hoopla about the certificate has been fowarded by 9-11 truthers?
Well, I for one, had no idea of these things. But the author of this blog seems to have evidence to those assertions. And I find no reason to doubt his statements. And I admit to pretty much ignoring this BC topic because I believe, in the end, that it’s going to be a hammer used to beat us up and win this election for Obama.
When I read that this governor was going to “settle this birth certificate thing once and for all,” I smelled a rat. There is no way that this was going to happen without the imprimatur of the White House. Abercrombie, the self avowed socialist, was not working unilaterally. Obama’s people had to be involved in this. If the gov’s goal was to settle this, then why didn’t the WH just produce the thing and settle it?
I think it’s clear why they didn’t. They want to use the birthers to beat up on the right during this next election. Of course, the beating up will not OFFICIALLY come out of the Obama campaign. It will be a whisper campaign that will then be carried and screeched by all MSM.
The birthers want the same thing that the all conservatives want: a one term president. They need to quiet down this whole thing and let it ride until we vote him out. Otherwise this is going to be used to beat the right – all of the right – over the head. This could change some independents minds come November 2012, who were likely NOT to vote to reelect him.
If the birthers turn out to be right, this can all be settled after we vote him out of office.
But who knows – maybe in the eleventh hour of this election, like a Hail Mary pass, someone will produce the real birth certificate, make the birthers look like wingnuts and a little thing like that could swing the election for Obama.
[T[he American system, we learn again, is intolerant of only one thing: intolerance. Whether its hammer comes from left or right, it always wakes the spirit of revolution. Freedom of speech, to dissent, to oppose, to fight back, is not just the literal content of the First Amendment. It is the essence of who we are as a people.
Obama, of course, infamously discounted American Exceptionalism when he was asked about it, suggesting he does not view our national character as unique. His mistake. ~ Michael Goodwin/FoxNews
Regarding the financial outpouring from the LDS church on Prop 8 in California: “He [Reid] said that he thought it was a waste of church resources and good will,” said Derek Washington, a Nevadan who worked as the outreach director for the march. “He said he didn’t think it was appropriate.”
Reid spokesman Jon Summers would not discuss the private meeting, but he didn’t deny the conversation took place.
“While Senator Reid agrees with his church that marriage is between a man and a woman,” Summers said, “he also believes that the resources that went into the Proposition 8 effort could have been put to better use.”
Reid… what an embarrassment and a joke. And the Mormons have to shoulder this burden! Too bad for them. How soon before this guy makes it against the law for churches to advance social and moral causes that run contrary to his (or other socialists) political agenda?