Saturday, July 31, 2010
Good luck Bobby...little Bobby now knows what he has to say, after the slap down he received a few weeks ago from Queen Pelosi.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs doubled down on Friday on his election prediction, saying Democrats would keep the House and the Senate.
Gibbs said that Democrats were running stronger campaigns right now than Republicans, and that, despite having previously said there was "no doubt" the GOP could win the majority, Democrats would maintain theirs.
"I think it's a fairly simple choice come November," Gibbs said on ABC's "Good Morning America." "I think Democrats will be successful, and we'll keep the House and the Senate."
Gibbs had previously backtracked off his words cautioning that Republicans could be successful in their midterm efforts, an admission that angered many Democratic leaders in Congress.
Blog author's comments - Robert Gibbs is of course using the Democrat party talking points. VP, Joe Biden has already said earlier in the week that "this is the Bush recession.” What else can the Obama regime use during their campaign for the midterm election? They certainly cannot tout their policies, agenda and out of control spending. They will continue to blame Bush.
Obama knows exactly what he is doing to the country. He is remaking it into what he feels and was taught it should be. If you disagree with what he is doing you are labeled a "racist." Well, I guess this includes me because I have never seen a president do so much damage in such a short time as Obama.
If you are a conservative, this November 2nd will be our last chance to take back the House and possibly the Senate. The GOP must get their act together.
Unfortunately, the Republican party has not proven, up to this point, that they have the leadership skills required to do what must be done. They have to explain to the public the serious problems we now have in our country. I am hopeful that within the past year the GOP has formulated a plan of action, should they regain some power, and are given a chance to stop what the Obama administration will continue to do.
We the voters have to help give them and ourselves that chance. We must take back the House of Representatives and some Senate seats. Go to the polls in November and rid this country of as many liberals and RINO's as possible. This will be the most important election you have faced in your lifetime, do not squander it.
Friday, July 30, 2010
REPUBLICANS SAY OBAMA'S DRILLING MORATORIUM COULD HAVE TAXPAYERS PICKING UP TAB FOR MORE UNEMPLOYED OIL WORKERS
REID AND ANGLE VIRTUALLY TIED IN NEVADA SENATE RACE
OBAMA'S MEAN STREAK
ANTHONY WEINER ERUPTS AT REPUBLICANS FOR REJECTING 9/11 RESPONDERS HEALTH BILL
MEMO OUTLINES BACKDOOR AMNESTY PLAN - IMMIGRATION STAFFERS CITE TOOLS AVAILABLE WITHOUT REFORM
MALLARD FILLMORE ASKS: WHAT IF GEORGE BUSH HAD BEEN PRESIDENT DURING THE GULF OIL SPILL?
OBAMA MOCKS POLLS BUT SPENDS MORE ON THEM ($4.4M) THAN BUSH DID
THE HILARIOUS ARIZONA RULING
SURVIVING THE OBAMA ASSAULT ON THE RULE OF LAW
GENERAL MOTORS ELECTRIC LEMON
Thursday, July 29, 2010
PHOENIX – A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona's immigration law from taking effect, delivering a last-minute victory to opponents of the crackdown.
The overall law will still take effect Thursday, but without the provisions that angered opponents — including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The judge also put on hold parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places. In addition, the judge blocked officers from making warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants.
"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled.
She ruled that the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigration statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m. - Entire column
Blog author's comments - This is no surprise. The elected representatives of the people of Arizona passed a law, and along comes a Clinton appointed judge who wipes it out.
The Department of Justice's suit says the federal government can't enforce the law because they don't have the resources. That's part of what the federal government argued. Yet they don't want the state to stop the illegals. So...who the hell is going to stop the them? Obama does not want them stopped. He is counting future Democrat party voters.
The judge, in order to rule as she did, had to ignore what Arizona was actually doing and instead she had to listen to what Obama's government told her and what the media has been reporting...that there will be racial profiling going on.
Whatever Obama wants them to say, the MSM will say it. We are dealing with liberals folks, what else should we have expected? We also knew - Judge Susan Bolton - would never rule against Obama.
I believe this will help bring down the Democrats in November. The majority of Americans believe the bill passed by Arizona was a fair law which was needed to protect not only Arizona but the rest of the country.
Key parts of Senate Bill 1070 that will not go into effect Thursday:
• The portion of the law that requires an officer make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there's reasonable suspicion they're in the country illegally.
• The portion that creates a crime of failure to apply for or carry "alien-registration papers."
• The portion that allows for a warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe they have committed a public offense that makes them removable from the United States.
• The portion that makes it a crime for illegal immigrants to solicit, apply for or perform work.
What else is left in the bill that actually helps the state of Arizona deal with their real problem?
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Just watch and listen. I don't know why it takes a Brit to put into words what every New Yorker, and every American should be saying but he is not joking here!
(See post on this blog of June 9, 2010 which covered the protest in New York by some Americans who are saying no to the plan to build the mosque.)
(Patrick Condell - is a British comedian, writer and Internet personality. In the past few years he began posting short monologues to a number of video sharing websites. Many have also been published to DVD.)
Blog author's comments - Many of us know what has happened over the past few years. This is more of the liberal, politically correct agenda, which has permeated so many of the people in this country.
Many of our citizens seem to have forgotten the lives of their fellow Americans that were ended because of the terrorist attack (September 11, 2001) on our soil. This attack was by a culture who believes they were justified in doing what they did in the name of Islam, and would do it again.
My wife and I visited and toured much of England years ago. It was a very enjoyable trip. This was before the Muslims had entered England in droves. The lawmakers there, for whatever reason, are not able to say stop - we do not want you here.
We have friends who were born in Britain and live outside of London. I called them a few days ago to wish him a Happy Birthday. During our conversation I asked "I read what is reported to be happening to your country with regard to the Muslim population. Are things as bad as what I see?" His answer was a simple "yes, they are, and it is growing worse."
Do we want this to happen to America? We have enough people in the United States making demands on us, we cannot stand more! Perhaps we should remember the above video.
I have used this before but will use it again - to quote an unknown U.S. Marine in Iraq who stated "America's not at war, the Marines are at war, America's at the mall."
Monday, July 26, 2010
Howard Dean...former DNC chairman
Howard Dean Calls Fox News Racist, Chris Wallace Strikes Back
Former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean on Sunday accused the Fox News Channel of being racist.
With the opening subject of "Fox News Sunday" being last week's controversial termination of Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod, Dean said, "I think Fox News did something that was absolutely racist. They took a, they had an obligation to find out what was really within the clip."
Dean continued, "They have been pushing a theme of black racism with this phony Black Panther crap and this, this business, and Sotomayor and all this other stuff...The Tea Party called out their racist fringe, and I think the Republican Party's got to stop appealing to its racist fringe."
That apparently was all host Chris Wallace could stand, for he struck back and struck back hard beginning with, "I know facts are inconvenient things, but let's try to deal with the facts."
The liberals plan to turn Shirley Sherrod into a martyr may have been given a slap down. See video below, January 2010.
Blog author's comments - The Democrats may have planned to milk the Shirley Sherrod story for months. That may not work now with the appearance of the video of her husband and his comments.
They will continue to label anyone who is involved in the Tea Party movement a racist. Also, the reason that those who do not agree with Obama is because he is a black man.
The failed economy will continue to be the "fault of George W. Bush." They will use anything they can to put a stop to what will hopefully be quite a lot of Democrat bleeding in November. Of course the Main Steam Media will continue to back everything the Democrats may say. They cannot honestly defend Obama's policies and agenda.
This is serious folks and may be our last chance to take back the House and win Senate seats. Now is the time for the Republican party to put it all on the line and inform the voters who do not yet know, that today's economy is Obama's.
They also need to explain to the voters what the Democrats have already done and how the bills they have passed and the money they have spent will affect their lives and our country. It has to happen now or it may never happen.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
So, I will not go into that...she was fired by the White House and chastised by the NAACP. Obama later called her to apologize - but he had to be the one to say "cut her loose."
Ann Coulter destroys Rick Sanchez of CNN in a heated debate over the Shirley Sherrod incident.
By Noel Sheppard - 07/24/2010
Conservative author Ann Coulter was Rick Sanchez's guest on the prime time edition of "Rick's List" Friday, and the sparks were flying.
After showing a clip of Coulter earlier in the week claiming that Andrew Breitbart was set up with that partial video of Shirley Sherrod speaking at an NAACP function in March, Sanchez asked, "Look, doesn't Breitbart deserve to lose his credibility for this?"
Coulter responded: This wasn't edited to make it look like she was discriminating against a white farmer. She was admitting that she was discriminating against a white farmer...It wasn't a doctored tape. It wasn't an edited tape. It was an excerpted tape.
When Sanchez replied, "You're playing games. You're playing semantics," the battle was on!
Maybe Sanchez should chat with his colleague Howard Kurtz who last Sunday claimed on CNN's "Reliable Sources," "Sound bites are compressed on television every day." If sound bite compression at CNN doesn't invalidate the point one host is making, another host shouldn't complain about a website using excerpts from videos to prove its point.
More importantly, what seems to be lost here is that all Breitbart did was publish a video at Big Government. He didn't call for anyone to be fired over what was posted. Instead, he published it as an example of a double standard as it pertains to racism, a point Coulter would echo:
COULTER: Well, then the NAACP and the White House are far more guilty than Breitbart because they didn't wait to see the full video, and, by the way, the NAACP had the full video. Breitbart didn't fire anyone. Breitbart didn't have the full video.
COULTER: And if we could get back to your claim that what you care about is the truth, why do you keep repeating the despicable lie that John Lewis was called the N-word 15 times on Capitol Hill at the anti-Obama protest?
That is a lie. And you have repeated that. All these -- all these -- this network repeats it. All these networks repeat it. That is a lie. At least Shirley Sherrod got her reputation back.
Blog author's comments - I would expect by next week Shirley Sherrod will be compared to Rosa Parks. I would not be surprised if Obama appoints Sherrod to his administration as his 'Czar on Racial Relations.'
Sherrod said concerning Andrew Breitbart who apparently was sent a tape and posted it on one of his websites. "I know I've gotten past black versus white. He's probably the person who's never gotten past it and never attempted to get past it."
"I think he would like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery. That's where I think he would like to see all black people end up again."
Did Sherrod chastise the President? Her initial firing came from the White House. Has she gone after the NAACP? They had the full version of the tape but did not check it out before they criticized her.
Has anyone else noticed that the division between the races seems to have grown wider rather than closer, since Barack Obama was elected President? You don't suppose his push against those that have vs. those that have not has added to this problem?
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Rewriting The Bill of Rights.
[Zoom - Click Image / Close - Back Button]
Don't blame me - I voted for the Old Grey
Headed Guy - and the Hottie From Alaska!
Friday, July 23, 2010
In the NY Times column of July 2010 below, the government argues that it is legally a tax.
If, after listening to Obama for 18 months, and you still believe that he is qualified to hold the office of President - there is nothing anyone can do to help you.
Changing Stance, Administration Now Defends Insurance Mandate as a Tax
By Robert Pear - July 16, 2010
WASHINGTON — When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s "power to lay and collect taxes."
And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.
Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.
Under the legislation signed by President Obama in March, most Americans will have to maintain "minimum essential coverage" starting in 2014. Many people will be eligible for federal subsidies to help them pay premiums.
In a brief defending the law, the Justice Department says the requirement for people to carry insurance or pay the penalty is "a valid exercise" of Congress’s power to impose taxes.
Congress can use its taxing power "even for purposes that would exceed its powers under other provisions" of the Constitution, the department said. For more than a century, it added, the Supreme Court has held that Congress can tax activities that it could not reach by using its power to regulate commerce.
While Congress was working on the health care legislation, Mr. Obama refused to accept the argument that a mandate to buy insurance, enforced by financial penalties, was equivalent to a tax.
"For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase," the president said last September, in a spirited exchange with George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program "This Week."
When Mr. Stephanopoulos said the penalty appeared to fit the dictionary definition of a tax, Mr. Obama replied, "I absolutely reject that notion." - Entire column
Blog author's comments - During Obama's campaign, I seem to remember him saying - on an almost daily basis - there will be no new taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year. In the above video he tells Stephanopoulos on the ABC News show, of September 20, 2009, "for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase."
Now, buried on page 18 of the NY Times on July 16, 2010, we read that the Obama administration is arguing that this is a tax, and that the government, under the Constitution has a right to tax us.
"When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s power to lay and collect taxes."
They had to admit it was a tax. This is because it's a crucial point of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul, being challenged by more than 20 states. The states have filed suits challenging Obama's government and disagreeing that he can force us to buy health insurance.
Let's do it folks, take back the House and seats in the Senate, with the mid-term elections in a little over three months.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Real Clear Politics
By Thomas Sowell - July 20, 2010
Credit card fraud is a serious problem. But race card fraud is an even bigger problem.
This year's target is the tea party movement. When leading Democrats, led by a smirking Nancy Pelosi, made their triumphant walk on Capitol Hill, celebrating their passage of a bill in defiance of public opinion, tea party members on the scene protested.
All this was captured on camera and the scene was played on television. What was not captured on any of the cameras and other recording devices on the scene was anybody using racist language, as has been charged by those playing the race card.
The latest attack on the tea party movement, by Ben Jealous of the NAACP, has once again played the race card. Like the proverbial lawyer who knows his case is weak, he shouts louder.
Some Obama supporters have long regarded any criticism of him as racism.
Among people who voted for Barack Obama in 2008, those who are likely to be most disappointed are those who thought that they were voting for a new post-racial era. There was absolutely nothing in Obama's past to lead to any such expectation, and much to suggest the exact opposite. But the man's rhetoric and demeanor during the election campaign enabled this and many other illusions to flourish.
On race, as on other issues, different people have radically different views of Barack Obama, depending on whether they judge him by what he says or by what he does. As Obama's own books point out, he has for years cultivated a talent for saying things that people will find congenial.
You want bipartisanship and an end to bickering in Washington? He will say that he wants bipartisanship and an end to bickering in Washington. Then he will shut Republicans out of the decision-making process and respond to their suggestions by reminding them that he won the election.
You want a government that is open instead of secretive? He will say that. He will promise to post proposed legislation on the Internet long enough for everyone to read it and know what is in it before there is a vote. In practice, however, he has rushed massive bills through Congress too fast for anybody-- even the members of Congress-- to know what was in those bills.
Racial issues are more of the same. You want a government where all citizens are treated alike, regardless of race or ethnicity? Obama will say that. Then he will advocate appointing judges with "empathy" for particular segments of the population, such as racial minorities. "Empathy" is just a pretty word for the ugly reality of bias.
Obama's first nomination of a Supreme Court justice was a classic example of someone with "empathy" for some racial groups, but not others. As a Circuit Court judge, Sonia Sotomayor voted to dismiss a case involving white firefighters who had been denied the promotions for which they qualified, because not enough blacks or Hispanics passed the same test that they did.
There is not now, nor has there ever been, anything post-racial about Barack Obama, except for the people who voted for him in the mistaken belief that he shared their desire to be post-racial. When he leaves office, especially if it is after one term, he will leave this country more racially polarized than before.
Hopefully, he may also leave the voters wiser, though sadder, after they learn from painful experience that you can't judge politicians by their rhetoric, or ignore their past because of your hopes for the future. Voters may even wise up to race card fraud. - Entire column
Blog author's comments - Barack Obama will often use race in his decision making, but he will at times, try to be discreet about it and have someone in his administration do his dirty work.
In less than two years in office, if you have being paying attention, you must know what he has done, what he has spent and what was accomplished - it should be quite obvious. Many Obama voters in 2008 should now know they made a mistake. If you happen to be one of the folks who believe that the government should take care of you, than you will continue to support Obama.
As every poll shows increasing disaffection among Obama 2008 voters, a desperate White House falls back on Alinsky 101. Mobilize your supporters with a campaign of racial and class division and demonize, divide, and demoralize the opposition.
Do congressional Democrats plan to run on their accomplishments in November? I don't think so. When President Barack Obama was elected, many voters - I was not one of them - saw it as a new moment which seemed to herald a new era for race relations in America. Has that promise been fulfilled? No! I suggest just the opposite - he has divided the races more than ever before.
Turning out those so-called "surge" voters who supported Obama in 2008 has become the Democrats' central pre-occupation for the midterm elections. I, of course, hope that they stay far away from the polling places in November.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree . . .
and think 25 to life would be appropriate.
America needs Obama-care like Nancy Pelosi needs a
Q: Have you heard about McDonald's' new Obama Value Meal?
A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you
has to pay for it.
Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?
A: A fund raiser.
Q: What's the difference between Obama's cabinet
and a penitentiary?
A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers, and threats to society. The other is for housing prisoners.
Q: If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and it started to sink, who would be saved?
A: America !
Q: What's the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?
A: Bo has papers.
Q: What was the most positive result of the "Cash for Clunkers" program?
A: It took 95% of the Obama bumper stickers off the road.
Blog author's comment - The above quotes were sent to me by a friend. There has been no verification of the quotes or authors. I found them amusing and a break from the more serious, political agenda, which occupies many of this blog's posts.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Reuters - For nervous Democrats, the big question now is: How bad will November's congressional elections be?
The answer: Pretty bad.
Battling a tough political climate fueled by economic fears and President Barack Obama's political difficulties, Democrats face an uphill struggle to retain control in the House of Representatives and avoid big losses in the Senate.
"We have always said this election is an uphill climb for Democrats. The question is the steepness of the climb," said Representative Chris Van Hollen, who heads the House Democratic Campaign Committee. But he was adamant Democrats could avoid a loss of the House that would likely slam the brakes on Obama's legislative agenda and reshape the battle lines for the president's 2012 re-election campaign. "We will maintain a majority in the Congress," he said.
All 435 House seats, 36 of 100 Senate seats and 37 governorships are at stake in November, with Republicans needing to gain 39 House seats and 10 Senate seats to reclaim majorities.Republican victories would be welcomed by the business community and put Obama's plans for climate change legislation and immigration reform in doubt.
The non-partisan Cook Political Report lists more than 70 House seats as highly competitive and predicts Republicans will pick up 30 to 40 seats in November -- putting them on the cusp of a majority.
"The House is in play," said David Wasserman, Cook's House analyst. "A couple of months ago our forecast for Republican pick-ups would have been 25 to 35 seats. We're at 30 to 40 now. I don't know where we will be in a few months."
In the Senate, Republicans would need to sweep nearly all of about 16 competitive races to reclaim the 51 seats needed for control. Poll averages compiled by the web site Real Clear Politics show the Democrats are likely to suffer big Senate losses but narrowly keep control.
"For the Senate to flip, you need a lot of things to happen -- Republicans will probably need a couple of surprises," said pollster Peter Brown of Quinnipiac University. "Clearly the Republicans are going to pick up seats, but they have a lot of seats they need to pick up."
TRENDS FAVOR REPUBLICANS.
Public concerns about the economy, a high jobless rate and Obama's performance have created a glum public mood and a strong desire for change that has already led to the ouster of several incumbents from both parties in early primaries.
Republicans are targeting many of those freshmen and sophomores, and when possible focusing on their votes for the healthcare overhaul, economic stimulus package and climate control bill. "If you're a Democrat who supported all three, it's going to be a real weight on your campaign," said Paul Lindsay, a spokesman for the Republican House campaign committee.
Democrats are spending $30 million to try to get Obama's 15 million first-time voters in 2008 -- many of them young, women, blacks and Hispanics -- back to the polls.
Republican strategist Karl Rove, architect of former President George W. Bush's two White House wins, said he thought Republicans could pick up 35 seats and possibly as many as 55.
But ultimate House control could be decided by a small number of close races, he said, noting the 15 closest House races in 2006 hinged on 27,000 votes out of 82 million cast.
"It will be settled by small numbers," Rove said . . . Entire column
Blog author's comment - Interesting column, but there are almost four months before the November election. A lot can happen which could turn this around.
For the Republicans to win a majority, they have to help themselves - show more leadership qualities.
We have to go to the polls and vote for the right candidates.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Now You Can Erase The Embarrassment! Watch the short video which shows how you can start enjoying life again.
Remove the sticker, remove the Stigma.
Every day, another sign that 52.9% of Americans are waking up from their 18-month long national nightmare.
You graduated Magn Cum Laude from your High School, maxed-out your SAT, went to an Ivy League college. But then...then you voted for Obama. And everything changed...Now everyone knows you're a chump, a loser, a rube, a dumbass.
Remember when this guy was considered by some, a mental giant? Remember when your buddy tried to convince you that running a campaign was the same as running the United States?
New hope for the stupid - the Obama bumper sticker removal kit.
Note from blog author - If by chance you are not 100% satisfied with the Obama Bumper Sticker Removal Kit, you have another option. We at the "Kirby Said" blog are here to help you through these difficult times which most of us face.
There is another sticker available which you can put over your existing Obama sticker. This should take care of the problem concerning your car. Now - if only it were that easy to remove Obama from office. See new sticker below.
If you stumbled onto this blog by mistake and happen to be a real liberal, there is no help for you. Liberalism is a mental disease - there is no cure.
Bumper sticker (price $2.99) order here: Obama Sucks!
Saturday, July 17, 2010
ANOTHER WEEK...AND YOU CAN'T FIND A JOB?
By Neal Boortz -July 16, 2010
Do the businesses out there have the money to expand? Yes, they do. The desire is there as well. What business doesn't want to grow? So ... what's the problem? Why did you or someone in your family spend the week spinning their wheels looking for a job? What's holding things up?
Major corporations are sitting on $2 trillion dollars in cash right now. Corporate profits are up.Banks have another $1trillion in excess reserves.
As National Review's economics editor Larry Kudlow points out, that's $3 trillion dollars being held in the private sector that could be financing the greatest job-creation and business growth. What's more .. this money could be financing growth in the private sector, not in government. So ... what's the problem?
Obama and the Democrats .. that's the problem.
Just a few things to consider:
This new so-called financial reform bill the Democrats have just passed calls for the creating of 243 new regulatory rule makings that will affect businesses across the country.
Tell me .. are you going to take that cash out of your reserves and start spending before you have a clear understanding of what those new rules are going to be and how they are going to affect your business? There is the law of unintended consequences out there to deal with.
Then there's ObamaCare. Tax hikes and new regulations. Businesses are still trying to figure out how this is going to affect their bottom line. For instance ... do they keep their employee health care benefits or let the government just do it all?
The fact is that businesses don't really understand what their relationship is going to be with the Imperial Federal Government in the years to come. Taxes going up? More regulations and bureaucrats to gum up the works? Will ObamaCare become the disaster that so many expect?
I don't care how much you love Barack Obama. You could think that he is just the most amazing and talented human being to ever walk the halls of the White House. The fact is that American business doesn't like this guy.
Corporate America, as a matter of fact, has just recently begun to acknowledge their dislike of the current administration. Private small business owners ... where 80% of the jobs are ... have been wary of this guy since day one.
Do you want to see these businesses start hiring? Well .. that's going to take a while. The effects of all of these new laws and regulations are going to have to make themselves known. That won't happen in weeks or months. One thing would help .. and that would be for the voters to wake up and chase as many of these left wing anti-capitalists power-hungry Democrat politicians out of office as possible in November.
In the meantime ... if you're unemployed, and if you aren't looking for a government job ... and you vote Democrat in November ... well, let's just say that the economy isn't your only problem. You may just flat-out be unemployable... Entire column
Blog author's comments - Some of the reasons for the sad shape of our economy cannot be explained much better than the Neal Boortz column. Many businesses are content to wait and see what the Obama regime does next.
They are not going to invest their cash and hope the current economic climate will change. This thinking began while Obama was campaigning prior to the election.
Obama's plans have not worked out so well have they? Unemployment is in double digits in most states. This will not improve in the near future. Boortz told us why.
Obama still wants to redistribute the wealth. He has been preaching this since he assumed office. The economy will not improve as long as the Obama administration retains their power. November is our chance to remove some of the Democrats.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Blog author's comments - Neil Cavuto...well said! I don't think there has ever been a President, along with most of his administration, that has been more arrogant than the Obama administration.
Obama believes he can do anything he chooses to do and his policies and agenda should never be challenged. His leftist followers will usually refer to anyone who questions or disagrees with Obama as a racist.
I did my homework concerning Mr. Obama. He is a divider not a uniter. I knew about his background, and who his friends were prior to the election.
Hopefully Obama's arrogance and that of his fellow Democrats, will come back to bite them hard in November. It is time to put a stop to this runaway train on track to a place most of us do not want to go.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
The 'Stimulus Bill' is not working, as many of us predicted. Due to the Obama administration's policies and agenda, it appears that some Democrat members of the House and Senate may be in trouble in November. (See column after video)
Obama enlists Bill Clinton's aid on economy
REUTERS WASHINGTON – U.S. President Barack Obama sought on Wednesday to lift sagging confidence in his economic stewardship by enlisting the help of predecessor Bill Clinton, as a leading business group issued a scathing critique of the administration's policies.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a leading business group, issued a rebuke of Obama's economic agenda, accusing him and his Democrats in Congress of neglecting job creation and hampering growth with burdensome regulatory and tax policies.
Four months before the November congressional elections, Republicans have tried to paint Obama and his Democrats as anti-business. And Obama on Tuesday named former Clinton administration veteran Jack Lew as the White House budget chief to help cut the huge deficit.
With unemployment stubbornly high, polls have reinforced Democrats' fears of big losses in November.
A survey by The Washington Post-ABC News showed 54 percent of Americans disapproved of Obama's leadership on the economy. In a CBS News poll, only 40 percent of Americans said they approved of Obama's handling of the economy.
A report, unveiled by CEA Chairwoman Christina Romer and Vice President Joseph Biden, estimated that Obama's $862 billion economic stimulus package had saved or created roughly 3 million jobs, and was on track to meet its goal of 3.5 million jobs by the end of this year.
Republicans disputed the numbers and said Obama was letting Americans down.
"No amount of Washington spin or fuzzy math can change the fact that the trillion-dollar 'stimulus' is failing by the Obama Administration's own standards," House of Representatives Republican Leader John Boehner said in a statement.
High budget deficits are among the complaints business groups have lodged against the Obama administration. A healthcare overhaul, financial regulatory reform and proposals to cap carbon emissions are cited by some corporate chieftains as examples of regulatory overreach. . . Entire column
Blog author's comments - If you read the above column it is clear that 'Captain Kickass' - having asked for the help of - Bill 'Slick Willie' Clinton, is now concentrating on damage control. If...we can believe the polls, the Democrats may soon be adding to the pool of the unemployed.
There is even talk that the Democrats could lose control of the House and some Senate seats. We can only vote and hope.
To see what the polls are predicting see post of Monday, July 12, 2010 on this blog.
I am surprised the above column did not mention the talking point Obama usually uses: "This is all the fault of the failed policies of George W. Bush."
Hope to see you at the polls for the mid-term elections this November. If you still believe Obama is leading the country in the correct direction there is no hope for you. Let's do our homework people and vote for the candidates who can begin to turn this country in the right direction.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
O'Reilly: "Mr. Shabazz means nothing to this country, he's a loon looking for attention, also his party is as fringe as it gets, nothing to be concerned about.
But that is no reason for Attorney General Eric Holder not to uphold the law, that's his sworn duty to uphold the law, Holder is getting away with this because the liberal print press and the network news pretty much ignoring the story, someone call Brian Williams."
"Once on this broadcast I called Janet Reno the worst Attorney General ever to serve, now I must apologize to Ms. Reno, Mr. Holder has taken the mantle"
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
Minister King Samir Shabazz, aka Maurice Heath "You want freedom? You're gonna have to kill some crackers! You're gonna have to kill some of their babies!"
Those were the words of Minister King Samir Shabazz, also known as Maurice Heath, the New Black Panther Party's Philadelphia leader.
Shabazz is the same man the Obama administration Department of Justice refused to prosecute after he was filmed on Election Day 2008 with Jerry Jackson wearing paramilitary uniforms, carrying a nightstick and blocking a doorway to a polling location to intimidate voters.
The following video shows his statements during a National Geographic special on the New Black Panthers:
Blog author's comments - Based upon what Holder has done since his appointment, I cannot disagree with O'Reilly. Holder is Obama's man and Obama and many of us knew the type of individual Eric Holder was before he was ever appointed.
This is precisely why Obama selected him to be the Attorney General. He has a reputation for twisting and bending the law to serve his purpose. In the case of the Obama regime, he will do whatever Obama asks or tells him to do.
For example: He dropped the charges against the New Black Panther Party. How many of you do not believe Obama told him to do so?
Monday, July 12, 2010
Pollster Frank Luntz tells Tucker Carlson that the Democrats are "In More Trouble" now than in 1994. (See Video)
Luntz and Carlson agree that Obama is trying to spin what he has done to the economy into something positive. Luntz does not believe it will work.
Blog author's comments - Let's believe pollster Frank Luntz is right. If the Republicans gain back some power, will they be ready to take advantage of it and do what is necessary? Do they have a plan?
They have to show the voters they are up to the challenge. The Republicans have to offer an agenda of growth and a stop to what the Obama administration has done and wants to do.
One major problem - If the Republicans can assume power - it will be at the same time that all of the higher taxes go into affect which the Obama administration has already put in place, beginning next January. They would be in power when everything starts to get worse. The Obama regime is setup to dump disaster on the GOP.
Obama will point fingers, "see what has happened when the Republicans are in charge." He will also have the MSM backing him on every thing he says. I hope the Republicans will be ready to show the voters who actually created the problems.
Now will be the time for the Republicans to show the voters that they are the party who can begin to move us out of the economic problems we now face. If they cannot do this, the voters will abandon them again.
The Democrats will be depending primarily on an ignorant electorate who still receive their news from the MSM. The Republicans must have a clear message and agenda. They have to make the voting public aware of it.
This may be our last chance to right much of what Obama has done in only 18 months. To halt what he has planned for the country for the remainder of his four year term.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Published July 11, 2010
Attorney General Eric Holder, just days after filing a federal lawsuit against Arizona's immigration law, on Sunday floated the possibility of filing another suit on racial profiling grounds.
The lawsuit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Arizona claimed the state was infringing on federal immigration responsibilities and urged the judge to prevent the law from going into effect at the end of July. Despite some officials' claims that the law could lead to racial profiling, that concern was not cited as grounds for the suit.
However, Holder said on CBS' "Face the Nation" that the federal government was leading with its "strongest" argument in the suit filed Tuesday and would not rule out a second suit months down the road -- if the law ends up going into effect.
"It doesn't mean that if the law for whatever reason happened to go into effect, that six months from now, a year from now, we might not look at the impact the law has had ... and see whether or not there has been that racial profiling impact," Holder said. "If that was the case, we would have the tools and we would bring suit on that basis."
Holder, reacting to the firestorm of criticism from Republicans and border-state lawmakers, said the Justice Department decided to file the suit because Arizona's immigration law is "inconsistent" with federal policy and the U.S. Constitution.
He said there's nothing to stop local jurisdictions and states from helping the government enforce immigration law, but described Arizona's law as contradictory to what the federal government is trying to accomplish. . . Entire column
Blog author's comments - Tell us Mr. Holder, just what does the Obama regime want to "accomplish"? This administration wants to make certain that Arizona cannot protect itself from an all out invasion of illegals.
Obama has no intention of enforcing the existing Federal laws against illegals and will not make a move to close the borders. There will be no help from Washington. Arizona passed their own law which is to take affect this month, but Obama is going to tie their hands so they can do little to help themselves.
If the new Arizona law is eventually allowed to function as written, Obama and Holder will file another lawsuit to halt any hope that Arizona has of doing what is needed to save their state. The Obama administration is pandering to the illegals.
He is showing them with his actions that he is on their side. So, when he gets around to passing an amnesty bill to let them become legal citizens of this country, the Democrat party will pickup millions of votes.
This is what this charade is really about. If the existing administration continues non-stop as they have the past eighteen months, it will take decades for the country to recover from Obama's four years in office.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
It seems as though each time Obama speaks to a group of voters, you will hear him utter at some time during his talk, two of his standard talking points. He must believe they exonerate him and his administration of any wrong doing with regard to the economy and high unemployment rate.
The economic and unemployment problems we now face are the direct result of the Bush administration and their failed policies.
Also - We inherited a broken economy which is the reason we have high unemployment. The 'stimulus bill' that we passed has worked, the economy is recovering, but we have much more to do to correct these problems. But, if we had not passed the 'stimulus bill' the 'great recession' we faced would now be much worse.
These are not actual quotes but this is essentially what he continues to tell the people. As most thinking folks know, the economy and unemployment are much worse since Obama and the Democrats assumed office. Businesses are not hiring because of his radical agenda which includes the Health Care bill. They also know that higher taxes are coming in 2011. They are not sure what he will do next.
Below is a chart of unemployment since 1995. The source for the unemployment figures: A spreadsheet taken from the Bureau of Labor Statistics website. Republican period: January 1995 - December 2006. Democrat period: January 2007 - June 2010.
Source for the unemployment figures: RS
Friday, July 9, 2010
by Amy Walter, July 7, 2010
For Congressional Dems, Time Is Almost Up - A Little Good News Won't Cut It, What They Need Is A Game-Changer
For months now, the alarm bells have been sounding for President Obama. First there was the drop in support among independents.
Then his precipitous drop in support among white voters. Now comes the predictable news that Wall Street donors, sick of being used as political punching bags, are no longer lavishing campaign funds on Democrats.
But while these developments should be worrisome to the White House, they should be downright terrifying to congressional Democrats. Obama has time to right himself. For congressional Democrats, time has almost run out.
Obama's struggle among white voters will be felt most acutely by House Democrats.
A series of focus groups in five states conducted last month for the conservative nonprofit group Resurgent Republic found that while independent voters have soured on Obama, they haven't abandoned him completely. The same can't be said of their feelings for congressional Democrats.
In analyzing one such group in Orlando, GOP pollster Jan van Lohuizen concluded that it was two issues, health care and BP's oil spill, that ultimately soured these independent voters on Obama.
On health care, van Lohuizen blames the process of the debate more than the substance for turning off independents. As for BP, voters are disappointed that they "don't see strong leadership" from the president.
While Obama could still win these voters back in 2012, van Lohuizen says, they are "pretty well lost" to Democrats this fall.
These voters aren't exactly sold on the GOP, either. If Republicans take control of Congress, they'll "have to deliver," said Resurgent director Ed Gillespie. If they don't, voters will be more than willing to throw them out too.
With just over four months left until Election Day, there's plenty of time for something big to happen that will change the current trajectory.
But the emphasis should be on the word "big." A simple change in tone or an uptick in trend lines ain't gonna do it. . . Entire column
Blog author's comments - Let's hope Amy Walter and her sources are correct with their predictions as stated in her column about the mid-term elections. I don't believe the Democrats are worried about campaign funds for the November election.
Because I know what "The Messiah" is capable of - this is what I think is going to happen concerning Democrat campaign funding. To bankroll the Dems campaigns, Obama will use money from the "Stimulus Bill." (only 43% of this money has been spent) He will also dip into the $20 Billion "slush fund" from BP, which is managed by his pay Czar.
If you don't believe Obama will use these funds to campaign for the Dems, you cannot be helped. I have said it before; he is capable of and will do anything he deems necessary to hold on to his power base.
If the Republicans do gain control of the House and pickup Senate seats, they have be ready to show the voters they will do what must be done to begin to reverse and try to stop what Obama has planned for our country. I am talking "leadership" folks. This is what has been severely lacking from the Republicans.
If this does not happen, they will be giving Obama a free pass in 2012. The voters will walk away from the Republicans again, as they did in 2006 and 2008.
The Republicans will have two years to 'man up' and show us they take this crisis as seriously as a many of us do. At this point in time, they have not given us that impression. If they have not learned how to "play politics" yet - from watching the Democrats in action these last 18 months - they never will. We shall see.
See additon to this post below - The Democrats do know how to play hard ball politics. This is something the Republicans must learn very soon.
The Obama-Pelosi Lame Duck Strategy
The Wall Street Journal , By John Fund, July 9, 2010
Democratic House members are so worried about the fall elections they're leaving Washington on July 30, a full week earlier than normal—and they won't return until mid-September. Members gulped when National Journal's Charlie Cook, the Beltway's leading political handicapper, predicted last month "the House is gone," meaning a GOP takeover. He thinks Democrats will hold the Senate, but with a significantly reduced majority.
The rush to recess gives Democrats little time to pass any major laws. That's why there have been signs in recent weeks that party leaders are planning an ambitious, lame-duck session to muscle through bills in December they don't want to defend before November. Retiring or defeated members of Congress would then be able to vote for sweeping legislation without any fear of voter retaliation. . . Entire column
Thursday, July 8, 2010
This man certainly showed a large amount of class and patriotism. This is a man who is in need of the basic necessities of life for himself and his feline family, and he could have easily ignored the fallen flag, but he did what he thought was right.
He showed us with his actions that there are still good, patriotic people in this country. To bad that most of the politicians in Washington don't display the same values.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
By Nicholas Johnston - Jul 7, 2010
President Barack Obama bypassed the U.S. Senate and appointed Donald Berwick as administrator of the Centers for Mecicare and Medicaid Services, the agency that administers the health programs for the elderly and low-income Americans.
Obama put Berwick in the job today using a recess appointment, a procedure that lets the president fill positions without Senate confirmation when Congress isn’t meeting. Lawmakers are on a week-long break for the Independence Day holiday.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell criticized Obama for trying to “sneak” Berwick’s nomination through the Senate without “public scrutiny.”
“Apparently the Obama administration intends to arrogantly circumvent the American people yet again,” McConnell, of Kentucky, said in a statement. . . Continue reading
Mark Levin exposes radical Obama Appointment Donald Berwick
Blog authors comments - Is anyone surprised by Obama's actions. He has appointed a radical like himself.
This man will be in charge of Medicare and Medicaid. He has stated in the past that the wealth in our country must be redistributed, he is an Obama clone. Obama knew his appointment would face an uphill battle during the Senate confirmation hearing, so he "snuck" Berwick in through the back door during the Senate recess.
He bypassed the hearing and made the appointment. More Chicago thug politics, nothing Obama does should surprise anyone. The time to stop what is now happening was the election of 2008.
Many of the Obama voters did not educate themselves as to who Obama was and what he was capable of doing to our country. Our next chance to try to put a stop to much of what he still has planned for us, is the November election of 2010.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is blocking certain websites from the federal agency's computers, including halting access by staffers to any Internet pages that contain a "controversial opinion," according to an internal email obtained by CBS News.
The email was sent to all TSA employees from the Office of Information Technology on Friday afternoon.
It states that as of July 1, TSA employees will no longer be allowed to access five categories of websites that have been deemed "inappropriate for government access."
The categories include:
- Controversial opinion
- Criminal activity
- Extreme violence (including cartoon violence) and gruesome content
The email does not specify how the TSA will determine if a website expresses a "controversial opinion."
There is also no explanation as to why controversial opinions are being blocked, although the email stated that some of the restricted websites violate the Employee Responsibilities and Conduct policy.
Blog author comment - The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano aka 'Big Sis' issued new censorship rules to the TSA late last Friday afternoon, hoping her edict would slip through unnoticed over the long holiday weekend.
How will they determine just what is "controversial opinion",hmm? I think that most of us know the answer to that question. Any site that is critical of the Obama administration will be "controversial". Napolitano was told to do this by 'The Master' of us all, Barack Hussein Obama.
Well, if any of the TSA employees would by chance, stumble onto this lowly site, it would be off limits to them, too "controversial".
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Associated Press By BOB CHRISTIE
PHOENIX – The U.S. Justice Department is filing a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Arizona's new law targeting illegal immigrants, setting the stage for a clash between the federal government and state over the nation's toughest immigration crackdown.
The planned lawsuit was confirmed to The Associated Press by a Justice Department official with knowledge of the plans. The official didn't want to be identified before a public announcement planned for later Tuesday by Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano, a former Arizona governor.
The lawsuit will argue that Arizona's law requiring state and local police to question and possibly arrest illegal immigrants during the enforcement of other laws such as traffic stops usurps federal authority.
The government will likely seek an injunction to delay the July 29 implementation of the law until the case is resolved.
The government contends that the Arizona law violates the supremacy clause of the Constitution, a legal theory that says federal laws override state laws. It is already illegal under federal law to be in the country illegally.
Tuesday's action has been expected for weeks. President Barack Obama has called the state law misguided. Supporters say it is a reasonable reaction to federal inaction on immigration.
Prior to seeing the lawsuit or receiving any official notification, Gov. Jan Brewer's spokesman called the reported decision to sue "a terribly bad decision."
"Arizona obviously has a terrible border security crisis that needs to be addressed, so Gov. Brewer has repeatedly said she would have preferred the resources and attention of the federal government would be focused on that crisis rather than this," spokesman Paul Senseman said.
Three of the five Democrats in Arizona's congressional delegation, who are facing tough re-election battles, had also urged Obama not to try to block the law from going into effect.
"This lawsuit is a sideshow, distracting us from the real task at hand," Democratic Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick said in a statement Tuesday. "A court battle between the federal government and Arizona will not move us closer to securing the border or fixing America's broken immigration system."
The law requires officers, while enforcing other laws, to question a person's immigration status if there's a reasonable suspicion that they are in the country illegally.
Arizona passed the law after years of frustration over problems associated with illegal immigration, including drug trafficking and violent kidnappings. The state is the biggest gateway into the U.S. for illegal immigrants, and is home to an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants. . . Continue reading
Blog author's opinion - Barack Obama is a totally pathetic little man and a Chicago thug. He knows that Arizona is trying to save their state, but Obama had to show his power. I believe he is committing political suicide.
Obama will not close the borders, he will not provide any help to stop the illegals from flooding the state of Arizona.
Barack Obama does not see an undocumented illegal who is breaking Federal law when they enter our country, he sees an 'undocumented Democrat'.
He will attempt to give the illegals amnesty knowing that his party will gain many more voters. Never have I seen our country in such total disarray as it is now.
The reason for this rests on the shoulders of President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats.
If this does not move the people to the polls in 2010 and 2012, I don't know what it will take.
Good move - Gov. Brewer launches food stamp fraud unit. Let's see if Obama tries to shut this down. Also Arizona Dems contest Obama assertions on border. They of course have gone into their CYA mode, they know they are toast in November.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Does this woman actually believe this or is someone else writing her talking points for her? Do the Democrats want people to wait for the government to take care of them? With the President we now have, it would seem so.
Nancy "Stretch" Pelosi quotes: Regarding the yet again extension of unemployment checks.
"This is one of the biggest stimulus's to our economy." "It injects demand into the economy." The Democrats are attempting to extend unemployment benefits beyond 99 weeks. How will this create incentive for someone to look for a job? How long and how far will they continue to extend the benefits for not working?
"It’s impossible to think of a situation where we would have a country without unemployment benefits." Lady, that is not the argument, it is whether they should keep extending the benefits beyond what they already have. Where will it end? When will the government finally say, "no more?"
Democrats have been trying for more than a month to pass a bill extending jobless benefits to more than 1 million people. Currently, jobless benefits last nearly two years - up to 26 weeks paid by state treasuries with federal help for up to an additional 73 weeks.
h/t: Fox News
Sunday, July 4, 2010
By Steve McCann, July 04, 2010
On this 4th of July, 2010, when the future of the United States appears to be in serious jeopardy, it should be noted that sometimes in the history of a nation, what appears to be an event that could lead to long-term disaster may, in fact, be its long-term salvation.
A case in point: the election of Barack Obama as president and the Democrats in full control of the Congress. To be sure, the far-left domination of government is not a situation to be wished for, but in a perverse way, it was necessary.
Over the past fifty years, regardless of who was in the White House or in charge of Congress, no one has been able to halt the incessant spread of Progressivism in our institutions and the concurrent uncontrolled spending and growth of government.
When a president as accomplished as Ronald Reagan was unable to do so, no future Republican president or Congress, short of a major national catastrophe, could ever fully turn back this tide, as they could not overcome the apathy of the people and the hostility of the media, academia, the entertainment establishment, and federal bureaucracies.
A long as the American people remained largely disengaged (the result of unprecedented prosperity), the damage done to the society as a whole and to the long-term financial health of the country was unknown to the vast majority.
This indifference has begun to undergo significant change as the reality of the nation's future comes into focus, but that reality has started to come to the fore only as the result of the policies being pursued by a far-left government.
Today, thanks to a confluence of two factors, the opportunity exists to reverse the course the United States has been on and change the political power structure in the country.
The first: the emergence of alternative news sources that has broken the stranglehold on the dissemination of news by the traditional outlets dominated by the left.
The second: The election of a president steeped in socialist/Marxist ideology and a Congress controlled by the Progressive element of the Democratic Party.
A trait common to those on the far left is an inability to have any humility; there is an intense conviction of superiority, both intellectually and in their capability to rule the masses. The true believers are incapable of hiding their philosophy and, once elected, are convinced that nearly everyone does or should share their dedication to the power of a central government.
Those who do not conform will be demonized. These extremists will move heaven and earth to achieve their ends, regardless of any long-term consequences, and they cannot avoid shouting from the rooftops what they are doing as tribute to themselves. . . Read entire column
Saturday, July 3, 2010
What is happening makes one wonder why? Especially the way the main stream media has been dancing to his tune for well over two years.
His administration was also going to be the most truthful and transparent, he told us so during his campaign. But than again, he told us a lot of things which it seems to me he was not telling the truth about, only to receive your vote.
Oh well, he still does not want the reporters and photographers showing us or saying anything with regard to the Gulf oil spill which may make him look worse than he already does. No news crews are allowed within 65 feet of the Gulf beach to show the spill.
You don't suppose the "Obama regime" is doing this because every day that passes and the damage that is being done to the beaches and wildlife makes him look as though he is not and has not done his job? The oil is still leaking with no end in sight.
MSM Wall Protecting Obama Gulf Oil Spill Response Cracks With Latest AP Report
By P.J. Gladnick Sat, 07/03/2010
Perhaps it is frustration, as expressed by Anderson Cooper, with the new White House rules inhibiting reports about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill that is now causing a big crack in the Mainstream Media wall which until recently mostly avoided direct criticism of the Obama administration response.
However that crack has now turned into a flood of surprising criticism coming from formerly friendly outlets such as the Associated Press. Read this amazing AP report and keep in mind that it is no longer just conservative sources that are harsh in their criticisms of the Obama Gulf oil containment efforts . . . Read entire column
h/t:NewsBusters.org & CNN