Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Barack Obama has displayed a disturbing pattern of work ethics: shirking work; claiming success when he was not entitled to do so; hiding his failures; and claiming the work of others as his own -- when it was successful

You'll be shocked at this list!

How President Obama tries to fool the public

This has been the president's theme: His so-called stimulus package, bailouts for politically connected banks and industries, ludicrously wasteful programs like Cash for Clunkers, etc. have saved America from the greatest disaster since the Great Depression.

But this theme runs up against some rather unfortunate facts...
Success No Matter What

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Will you still buy organic food???

perspective
Reasons you should buy regular goods
By Jackie Avner
Posted: 07/29/2007 01:00:00 AM MDT

I don't like to buy organic food products, and avoid them at all cost. It is a principled decision reached through careful consideration of effects of organic production practices on animal welfare and the environment. I buy regular food, rather than organic, for the benefit of my family.

I care deeply about food being plentiful, affordable and safe. I grew up on a dairy farm, where my chores included caring for the calves and scrubbing the milking facilities. As a teenager, I was active in Future Farmers of America, and after college I took a job in Washington, D.C., on the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee staff.

But America no longer has an agrarian economy, and now it is rare for people to have firsthand experience with agricultural production and regulation. This makes the general public highly susceptible to rumors and myths about food, and vulnerable to misleading marketing tactics designed not to improve the safety of the food supply, but to increase retail profits. Companies marketing organic products, and your local grocery chain, want you to think organic food is safer and healthier, because their profit margins are vastly higher on organic foods.

The USDA Organic label does not mean that there is any difference between organic and regular food products. Organic farms simply employ different methods of food production. For example, organic dairy farms are not permitted to administer antibiotics to their sick or injured cows, and do not give them milk-stimulating hormone supplements (also known as rbGH or rBST). The end product is exactly the same - all milk, regular and organic, is completely antibiotic-free, and all milk, regular and organic, has the same trace amounts of rbGH (since rbGH is a protein naturally present in all cows, including organic herds). Try as they may, proponents of organic foods have not been able to produce evidence that the food produced by conventional farms is anything but safe.

Do organic production practices benefit animals? Dr. Chuck Guard, professor of veterinary medicine at Cornell University, told me that it pains him that many technological advancements in animal medicine are prohibited for use on organic farms. He described how organic farms don't use drugs to control parasites, worms, infections and illness in their herds. "Drugs take away pain and suffering," he said. "Proponents of organic food production have thrown away these medical tools, and the result is unnecessary pain and suffering for the animals."

In order for milk and meat to qualify as USDA Organic, the animals must never be given antibiotics when they are sick or injured. On organic farms, animals with treatable illnesses such as infections and pneumonia are left to suffer, or given ineffective homeopathic treatments, in the hope that they will eventually get better on their own. If recovery without medication seems unlikely, a dairy cow with a simple respiratory infection will be slaughtered for its meat, or sold to a traditional farm where she can get the medicine she needs. I don't buy organic milk because this system is cruel to animals, and I know that every load of regular milk is tested for antibiotics to ensure that it is antibiotic-free.

Organic milk certainly is not fresher than regular milk. Regular milk is pasteurized and has a shelf life of about 20 days. Organic milk is ultrapasteurized, a process that is more forgiving of poor quality milk, and that increases the shelf life of milk to about 90 days. Some of the Horizon organic milk boxes I've seen at Costco have expiration dates in 2008! There is a powerful incentive for retailers to put the ultrapasteurized organic milk on the shelf just before the expiration date, so consumers will think the organic milk is as fresh as the regular milk. After all, consumers are paying twice as much for the organic product.

Do organic production practices benefit the environment? In many cases, they do the opposite. Recently, Starbucks proudly informed their customers that they would no longer be buying milk from farms that use rbGH, the supplemental hormone administered to cows to increase milk production (even though the extra hormones stay in the cow, and the resulting milk is the same). The problem with this policy is that Starbucks will now be buying milk from farms that are far less efficient at making milk. Without the use of the latest technology for making milk, many more cows must be milked to produce the same number of café lattes for Starbucks' customers. More cows being milked means more cows to feed, and therefore more land must be cultivated with fossil-fuel-burning tractors. More cows means many more tons of manure produced, and more methane, a greenhouse gas, released into the atmosphere.

I see Starbucks' policy as environmentally irresponsible. When a farmer gives a cow a shot of rbGH, the only environmental cost is the disposal of the small plastic container it came in. But the environmental benefits of using this technology are enormous.

Attention all shoppers: Safeway is adopting the same misdirected policy as Starbucks, judging from the prominent labeling of milk at my local Safeway store: "Milk from cows not treated with rBST." When I'm feeling particularly green, I drive past Safeway and shop at another grocery store in protest.

Consumers assume that organic crops are environmentally friendly. However, organic production methods are far less efficient than the modern methods used by conventional farmers, so organic farmers must consume more natural and man-made resources (such as land and fuel) to produce their crops.

Cornell Professor Guard told me about neighboring wheat farms he observed during a visit to Alberta, Canada: one organic and one conventional. The organic farm consumes six times as much diesel fuel per bushel of wheat produced.

Socially conscious consumers have a right to know that "organic" doesn't mean what it did 20 years ago. According to the Oct. 16, 2006, cover story in Business Week, when you eat Stonyfield Farms yogurt, you are often consuming dried organic milk flown all the way from New Zealand and reconstituted here in the U.S. The apple puree used to sweeten the yogurt sometimes comes from Turkey, and the strawberries from China. Importation of organic products raises troubling questions about food safety, labor standards, and the fossil fuels burned in the transportation of these foods.

Does buying organic really benefit your family? Remember, there is no real difference in the food itself. At my local Safeway store, organic milk is 85 percent more expensive, eggs 138 percent higher, yogurt 50 percent, chicken thighs 80 percent, and broccoli 20 percent. If the only organic product you buy for your family is milk, then you are spending an extra $200 on milk each year. If you buy 5-10 other organic products each week, such as fruits, vegetables, eggs, yogurt and meat, then you could easily approach $1,000 in extra food costs per year. Families would receive a more direct health benefit from spending that money on a gym membership, a treadmill, or new bikes.

When I share this information with friends who buy organic, I get one of two responses: they either stop buying it, or they continue to buy organic based on a strong gut feeling that food grown without the assistance of man-made technology has to be healthier.

I don't push it, but I wonder: Why do people apply that logic to agricultural products, but not to every other product we use in our daily lives? There are either no chemicals, or the minutest trace of chemicals in some of our foods. But other everyday products are full of chemical ingredients. Read the label on your artificial sweetener, antiperspirant, sun lotion, toothpaste, household cleaning products, soda, shampoo, and disposable diapers, for example. The medicines we administer to our children when they are sick are man-made substances. Chemicals aren't just used to make these products; they are still in these products in significant amounts. It just doesn't make sense to focus fear of technology on milk and fresh produce.

I say, bypass the expensive organic products in the grocery store. Buy the regular milk, meat and fresh produce. It is the right choice for the family, animal welfare and the environment.

Jackie Avner [jackie.avner @ gmail.com] lives in Highlands Ranch.

[This is why I've been a customer of Melaleuca.com since 10/19/2001 --lgstarr]

Risky business

The White House is a risky place for on-the-job training, as Barack Obama and the rest of us are learning...Mr. Obama imagined last year that he was auditioning to replace Martin Sheen on the television serial "West Wing." He's learning better now.
PRUDEN: Reality bites Obama's 'West Wing'

Ain't this the truth

If a conservative doesn’t like guns, he doesn`t buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he feels that no one should have one.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn`t eat meat..
If a liberal is, he wants to ban all meat products for everyone.

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexua l, he loudly demands legislated respect.

If a black man or Hispanic are conservative, they see themselves as independently successful.
Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God or religion silenced.

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.

Cheryl Baxter talks about the national healthcare horror she lived through in Canada

Canadian Cheryl Baxter talks about the horror she lived through under the nationalized health care system. The brave Canadian finally had to come to America to get the surgery she needed. It cost her family tens of thousands of dollars. (So much for free health care!) It was either that or live with excruciating pain. Today Cheryl says her government let her down.
Watch this powerful video

I'm not really the President, I just play one on TV

Finally, the MSM gets wise: Richard Cohen, Washington Post: Time To Act Like A President

Fistgate: How Obama is endagering your children

CZAR WARS: 'Safe schools' chief encouraged child sex with older man

Kevin Jennings -- Unsafe for America's Schools

OBAMA APPOINTEE KEVIN JENNINGS: FISTING AND “[F–k] ‘em” to the “Religious Right”

Where there's smoke there's fire: Praying to the Anti-Christ





Monday, September 28, 2009

WARNING: Democrats are trying to 'make history' on our backs!

An Exercise in Ego Gratification

U.S. demand that Mr. Zelaya be returned to power before a vote is destructive

The Obama administration's position on the Honduran election is embarrassing. Can anyone imagine that if Fidel Castro declared tomorrow that he would hold free elections and invite the whole world to come as observers, the U.S. would reject the idea because Cuba is a military dictatorship? It would be absurd...A transparent election is the path to political stability endorsed by the Free World. It is unseemly and churlish for the U.S. to threaten that process. Does Mr. Obama treasure kind words from Hugo Chávez that much? If so, we're all in trouble.
Honduras Just Wants An Election

Sunday, September 27, 2009

The Limits of Charisma: Mr. President, please stay off TV!

Unless Obama learns to rely less on charm, rhetoric, and good intentions and more on picking his spots and winning in political combat, he's not going to be reelected, let alone enshrined in South Dakota.

A Secret White House Power Grab Is In Full Swing

Driving the push for this massive power grab and circumvention of the elected branches is a key White House official who avoided Senate confirmation by being installed not as EPA director, but instead as White House Climate Czar: Carol Browner.

Long before the Supreme Court ruled in a highly questionable 2007 case, Massachusetts v. EPA, that the EPA has the legal authority to justify its proposed 18,000 pages of greenhouse gas regulation under the Clean Air Act, Browner (then EPA director under President Bill Clinton) had her general counsel, Jonathan Cannon, prepare a now-infamous memorandum arguing—for the first time—that the EPA possessed such a power. At the time it was dismissed as a wild-eyed overreach that Congress would never allow. Now it’s happening, and Browner is right at the center of it.

Mary Nichols, the chair of the California Air Resources Board, has confirmed that Browner was the lead White House negotiator in establishing new automobile emissions standards, which for the first time rely on EPA’s presumed authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the 1970 Clean Air Act. Nichols told The New York Times that Browner quietly orchestrated private discussions from the White House with auto industry officials. “We put nothing in writing, ever,” Nichols said.

Left unchecked, Browner will move beyond automobiles to EPA’s entire staggering 18,000-page blueprint for regulating the U.S. economy. It will eventually regulate everything that moves (light-duty trucks, heavy-duty trucks, buses, motorcycles, planes, trains, ships, boats, tractors, mining equipment, RVs, lawn mowers, fork lifts, and just about every other piece of equipment that has a motor) and lots of things that don’t (any building over 100,000 square feet could be pulled in, along with smaller carbon dioxide emitters, like restaurants, schools, and hospitals that have commercial kitchens with gas burners).
Read the whole thing!

Friday, September 25, 2009

OBAMATOONS

The Obama Gallery - A Collection of Cartoons

Here's to the new leader of the free world (it's not who you think)!

Benjamin Netanyahu is the new leader of the free world. Obama abdicated that position with his appeasement to despotism and tyranny the day before at the UN. Actually, he abdicated on Jan. 20th 2009, when he declared that he would close Gitmo. It has been downhill for the United States ever since.

Listen now, to how a serious man talks when confronting tyranny:
Benjamin Netanyahu UN Speech Full Text & Videos, Sept. 24, 2009

God, it's so good to listen to a REAL man with principles and with moral clarity! Now THAT's what strength is, not suppressing the masses in order to build your ego and indulge in obscene control fantasies.

ACORN DOCUMENTARY

CONFIRMED: BUY HEALTH INSURANCE OR GO TO JAIL!!!

FROM POLITICO
September 25, 2009
Categories: Senate

Ensign receives handwritten confirmation

This doesn't happen often enough.

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) received a handwritten note Thursday from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold confirming the penalty for failing to pay the up to $1,900 fee for not buying health insurance.

Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and could face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty, Barthold wrote on JCT letterhead. He signed it "Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold."

The note was a follow-up to Ensign's questioning at the markup.

By Carrie Budoff Brown 11:40 AM

Thursday, September 24, 2009

"Every time the state assumes an additional function such as health insurance, child care or benefits for the aged, the need for close family ties becomes weaker."

...the national health insurance movement rose alongside a larger transfer of responsibility from the family to the state: "Every time the state assumes an additional function such as health insurance, child care or benefits for the aged, the need for close family ties becomes weaker."

More provocatively he [Victor Fuchs] says: "It may be that one of the most effective ways of increasing allegiance to the state is through national health insurance."
From Bismarck to Obama

The beginning of the end of ridicule

TerriK INVESTIGATION – PART 1: Hawaii Department of Health Directors Fukino and Okubo Are Guilty of Misdirection

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Our $2 Trillion Bridge to Nowhere

Over the last decade, the federal government has become bloated and inefficient. Voters are on to the scam. Mr. Obama keeps calling federal spending an "investment," but Americans apparently feel this is the worst investment they've ever made. They've come to regard Washington as a $2 trillion Bridge to Nowhere. They are right.
Read the whole thing

Alice in Obamaland

What we have here is an inadvertent homage to Lewis Carroll:
We are going to cancel a defense that takes five years to mount, because the threat will not materialize for five years. And we will not deploy land-based interceptors in Europe, because our new plan is to deploy land-based interceptors in Europe.
Stalin tested Truman with the Berlin Blockade, and Truman held fast. Khrushchev tested Kennedy, and in the Cuban Missile Crisis Kennedy refused to blink. In 1983, Andropov took the measure of Reagan, and, defying millions in the street (who are now the Obama base), Reagan did not blink. Last week, the Iranian president and the Russian prime minister put Mr. Obama to the test, and he blinked not once but twice. The price of such infirmity has always proven immensely high, even if, as is the custom these days, the bill has yet to come.
Obama and the Politics of Concession

MY HEROES


Hannah Giles, ACORN Chainsaw Killer




Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Uh Oh: Budget chief contradicts Obama on Medicare costs

“Congress’ chief budget officer is contradicting President Barack Obama’s oft-stated claim that seniors wouldn’t see their Medicare benefits cut under a health care overhaul. The head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf, told senators Tuesday that seniors in Medicare’s managed care plans would see reduced benefits under a bill in the Finance Committee.”
OOPS!

Important health care resources

Jeanette Nordstrom from the National Center for Policy Analysis has provided the following resources:

NATIONAL CENTER FOR POLICY ANALYSIS provides Health Care Solutions and Five Steps to a Better Health Care System

JOHN GOODMAN'S Health Policy Blog
(He is the father of Health Savings Accounts)

THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE'S Health Care Solutions

Health Alert: Senator Baucus Declares War on the Middle Class

Remember what Barack Obama said about Hillary Clinton’s health plan? “Hillary’s health care plan forces everyone to buy insurance, even if you can’t afford it...and you pay a penalty if you don’t.” Well, that idea is back...
Unlike the other bills, this bill has two particularly harsh features for the middle class

Another day, another lie

The President can say “I didn’t even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money,” but a review of Ms. Lewis’s contacts list suggests that is not the case.

Undercover sting operation exposes "Cash for Clunkers" fiasco

'Milk it, baby – It's free money': You won't believe what happens inside Cash for Clunkers operation
Aside from the overflowing toilets, vomit on the floor, and getting paid for doing nothing (your taxpayer money at work though):
She said the vouchers are "rife with idiotic mistakes by Level 1 reviewers who are rejecting them for no reason at all, mostly because they are not paying attention."

"I am amazed at the number of vouchers that have been rejected in the last six weeks," Willey said. "Many have been rejected and returned to dealers three to seven times! And for no good reason. What is happening here is that the Level 1 examiners are so inept and lazy that, rather than take the time to closely examine and review these vouchers the way that they should, they just hit the reject or approve button without a second thought. That, of course, slows down the whole process and the dealers aren't getting paid by the Department of Transportation. The dealers are frustrated and irate, and make no bones about it when they return their documents that are correct and don't need to be revised. When their documents are returned for revision, they have no number to call or person to e-mail."

Willey told WND that auto dealers were often very good about submitting the eight documents required to receive a rebate, but some vouchers were being sent back because Level 1 examiners failed to hit the "next" button to go to the following page of documents.

She said, "I saw that time and time again. Then the dealers would write back and say, 'It's on Page 2.'"

Willey said a single voucher would be passed around to as many as a dozen workers without being processed.
Stung! Undercover celeb exposes Obama fiasco

WSJ: Taxes, Depression, and Our Current Troubles

This is an extremely important article. I wish everyone would read it all!

Here are three excerpts:
While Fed policy was undoubtedly important, it was not the primary cause of the Great Depression or the economy's relapse in 1937. The Smoot-Hawley tariff of June 1930 was the catalyst that got the whole process going. It was the largest single increase in taxes on trade during peacetime and precipitated massive retaliation by foreign governments on U.S. products. Huge federal and state tax increases in 1932 followed the initial decline in the economy thus doubling down on the impact of Smoot-Hawley. There were additional large tax increases in 1936 and 1937 that were the proximate cause of the economy's relapse in 1937.
Further down in the article:
The damage caused by high taxation during the Great Depression is the real lesson we should learn. A government simply cannot tax a country into prosperity. If there were one warning I'd give to all who will listen, it is that U.S. federal and state tax policies are on an economic crash trajectory today just as they were in the 1930s. Net legislated state-tax increases as a percentage of previous year tax receipts are at 3.1%, their highest level since 1991; the Bush tax cuts are set to expire in 2011; and additional taxes to pay for health-care and the proposed cap-and-trade scheme are on the horizon.
And a summary (I haven't included his discussion of the gold standard and how that figures into our current situation):
The lessons here are pretty straightforward. Inflation can and did occur during a depression, and that inflation was strictly a monetary phenomenon.

My hope is that the people who are running our economy do look to the Great Depression as an object lesson. My fear is that they will misinterpret the evidence and attribute high unemployment and the initial decline in prices to tight money, while increasing taxes to combat budget deficits.
Please read the whole thing!

The challenge now for Obama is to get up off of his lazy ass and make a decision. The time for waffling is over.

Yes. Short answer. The leak to the Washington Post of the assessment by General McChrystal, the officer in charge of the war in Afghanistan, is quintessential Washington power politics and a major “go screw yourself Barack” by the person or persons who passed the paper to Bob Woodward. You do not get leaks when there is a policy consensus on an issue. There are several reasons classified or sensitive information is leaked–a policy disagreement, a desire to embarrass a principle official or a whistleblower.

Here’s how Woodward started his story:
Will Obama Surrender Afghanistan to the Mullahs?

For the love of God, there are people in comas that are more aware of world affairs than Barack Obama!

The Audacity of Unawareness
April 15th, 2009 5:03 pm

Barack Obama, through his spokesman, claimed today that he was unaware of the tax day tea parties. Granted, the MSM has done a good job in suppressing any sort of coverage ahead of time (and the little coverage they did provide was derisive at best)… but how out of touch is the Community Organizer in Chief, really?

This much.

- He was unaware that he was attending a church (for 20 years) with a racist pastor who hates America.

- He was unaware that he was family friends with, and started his political career in the living room of, a domestic terrorist.

- He was unaware that he had invested in two speculative companies backed by some of his top donors right after taking office in 2005.

- He was unaware that his own aunt was living in the US illegally.

- He was unaware that his own brother lives on pennies a day in a hut in Kenya.

- He was unaware of the AIG bonuses that he and his administration approved and signed into a bill.

- He was unaware that the man he nominated to be his Secretary of Commerce was under investigation in a bribery scandal.

- He was unaware that the man he nominated to be his Secretary of Health and Human Services was a tax cheat.

- He was unaware that the man he nominated to be his Secretary of the Treasury was a tax cheat.

- He was unaware that the man he nominated to be the U.S. Trade Representative was a tax cheat.

- He was unaware that the woman he nominated to be his Chief Performance Officer was a tax cheat.

- He was unaware that the man he nominated to be #2 at the Environmental Protection Agency was under investigation for mismanaging $25 million in EPA grants.

For the love of God, there are people in comas that are more aware of world affairs than this guy!

Monday, September 21, 2009

As many as one in six patients treated in NHS hospitals and GPs’ surgeries is being misdiagnosed, experts have warned

Do you really want the United States to have a system like the UK? Unless we fight back, that's exactly what we'll end up with here! One in six NHS patients 'misdiagnosed'

How Islamic Sharia Law controls the United Nations

By Andrew G. Bostom

The 1990 Cairo Declaration, or so-called "Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Islam", was drafted and subsequently ratified by all the Muslim member nations of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Now a 57 state collective which includes every Islamic nation on earth, the OIC, currently headed by Turkey's Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, thus represents the entire Muslim umma (or global community of individual Muslims), and is the largest single voting bloc in the United Nations (UN).

Both the preamble and concluding articles (24 and 25) make plain that the OIC's Cairo Declaration is designed to supersede Western conceptions of human rights as enunciated, for example, in the US Bill of Rights, and the UN's 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Please read the rest of this article:
Apostasy and the Islamic Nations

MANDATORY INSURANCE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Federal legislation requiring that every American have health insurance is part of all the major health-care reform plans now being considered in Washington. Such a mandate, however, would expand the federal government’s authority over individual Americans to an unprecedented degree. It is also profoundly unconstitutional.
Read more

Senator Evan Bayh warns President Barack Obama

America is on an unsustainable fiscal path that threatens our future. Changing course is imperative, and Democrats should lead the way.
Specifics:
Any serious effort to control the deficit must begin with spending restraint. Efficiency and frugality, common virtues in the private sector, must be incorporated into government. Congress should enact health-care reform that actually lowers the deficit. For the next fiscal year, assuming the economy has gathered sufficient momentum, we should freeze domestic discretionary spending, limit increases in defense spending to the rate of inflation, forgo pay raises for federal workers, and institute a federal hiring freeze.
The danger:
...if we wait for the markets to force corrective action, the danger to our economy will be greater and the correction more painful.

Spending restraint will not come easily to the Democratic Party. Pent-up demand for investment in education, health care and the environment is understandable after the Bush years. But long-term progressive government can't be built on a foundation of debt and deficits. We cannot indefinitely share with the less-fortunate resources we do not possess. Ultimately, a growing economy with increased revenues and a stable national balance sheet are the best guarantors of social progress.
The solution:
The choice is clear. We can take the path of least resistance and ignore the impending day of reckoning. Or we can do what is necessary to right the fiscal ship of state and lay a foundation for prudent, progressive government for a generation.

I believe Barack Obama will choose the responsible course. If he does, he will find kindred spirits in our party prepared to help.
Implied: Or Else.

Why Democrats Must Restrain Spending

U.S. is trying to force Honduras to violate its own constitution

What does it say about Mr. Obama's respect for the separation of powers that he would instruct Mrs. Clinton to punish an independent court because it did not issue the ruling he wanted?
How many of you, like me, are feeling this way:
Thousands of readers have written to me asking how all this can happen in the U.S., where democratic principles have been recognized since the nation's founding. Many readers have written that they are "ashamed" of the U.S. and have asked, in effect, "How can I help Honduras?" A more pertinent question may turn out to be, how can they help their own country?

In its actions toward Honduras, the Obama administration is demonstrating contempt for the fundamentals of democracy. Legal scholars are clear on this...
Hillary's Honduras Obsession

This anti-freedom behavior of the new administration in Washington is not an isolated incident:
President Obama promised he would win America friends where, under George W. Bush, it had antagonists. The reality is that the U.S. is working hard to create antagonists where it previously had friends...The U.S. decision [to scrap a missile-defense agreement the Bush Administration negotiated with Poland and the Czech Republic] also undermines the credibility of the U.S. nuclear defense umbrella. The Bush Administration sought to develop a global defense posture in part to reassure allies that they don't need their own nuclear deterrent, even as rogue regimes seek nuclear arms and the missiles to deliver them. America's Europe reversal tells other countries that they can't rely on the U.S. so it's best to follow the Israeli path and develop their own weapon and defenses. For that matter, this also makes the U.S. East Coast less safe; the ground-based system in Alaska and California covers the East, but barely. The Polish and Czech sites were to provide added protection.

The European switcheroo continues Mr. Obama's trend of courting adversaries while smacking allies. His Administration has sought warmer ties with Iran, Burma, North Korea, Russia and even Venezuela. But it has picked trade fights with Canada and Mexico, sat on trade treaties with Colombia and South Korea, battled Israel over West Bank settlements, ignored Japan in deciding to talk with North Korea, and sanctioned Honduras for its sin of resisting the encroachments of Venezuela's Hugo Chávez.
Obama's Missile Offense

$50,000.00 REWARD

...to anybody in the media who can answer this question about Obama...

Merriam Webster's Dictionary: Tax -- "a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes."

In the most contentious exchange of President Barack Obama’s marathon of five Sunday shows, he said it is “not true” that a requirement for individuals to get health insurance under a key reform plan now being debated amounts to a tax increase.

But he could look it up — in the bill.
Health bill says 'tax' when President Obama said 'not'

Saturday, September 19, 2009

WSJ: THE STIMULUS DIDN'T WORK

The data show government transfers and rebates have not increased consumption at all

Dear President Obama: I'm moving to Mexico...

Dear Mr. President:

I'm planning to move my family and extended family to Mexico for my health (after you pass your version of healthcare, there won't be any reason to stay in the United States), and I would like to ask you to assist me.

We're planning to simply walk across the border from the U.S. into Mexico, and we'll need your help to make a few arrangements.

We plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws.

I'm sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Calderon, that I'm on my way over?

Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:

1. Free medical care for my entire family.

2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.

3. Please print all Mexican government forms in English.

4. I want my grandkids to be taught Spanish by English-speaking (bilingual) teachers.

5. Tell their schools they need to include classes on American culture and history.

6. I want my grandkids to see the American flag on one of the flag poles at their school.

7. Please plan to feed my grandkids at school for both breakfast and lunch.

8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy access to government services.

9. I do plan to get a car and drive in Mexico, but, I don't plan to purchase car insurance, and I probably won't make any special effort to learn local traffic laws.

10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from their president to leave me alone, please be sure that every patrol car has at least one English-speaking officer.

11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my house top, put U. S. flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.

12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, or have any labor or tax laws enforced on any business I may start.

13. Please have the president tell all the Mexican people to be extremely nice and never say a critical things about me or my family, or about the strain we might place on their economy.

14. I want to receive free food stamps.

15. Naturally, I'll expect free rent subsidies.

16. I'll need Income tax credits so although I don't pay Mexican taxes, I'll receive money from the government.

17. Please arrange it so that the Mexican government pays $4,500 to help me buy a new car.

18. Oh yes, I almost forgot, please enroll me free into the Mexican Social Security program so that I'll get a monthly income in retirement.

I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things for all his people who come to the U.S. from Mexico...I am sure that President Calderon won't mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely.

Thank you so much for your kind help. You're the man!!!

HEALTHCARE - In summary, the president has had to change his arguments, abandon his statistics, and repudiate his anecdotes

Stopping Obamacare's Government Option Via The Blue Dogs: The List and Contact Information
The president has abandoned his "guarantees" that the currently covered can keep their insurance and their doctors. He has dramatically lowered his estimate of the number of uninsured. He has been embarrassed by the fact that he used a false story of insurance denial leading to death in his big speech to Congress last week.

In summary, the president has had to change his arguments, abandon his statistics, and repudiate his anecdotes. Why would anyone believe his assurances, his estimates or his projections, especially about Medicare, given this record of shifting stories and stats?

The collapse of the president's credibility on Obamacare has been accelerated by the ongoing and exploding scandal about ACORN, a group with which he is and will remain closely identified. The president of course is not responsible for the individuals whose criminality has been captured on tape these past two weeks, but if this is the sort of organization he has represented in the past and which is part of his core alliance of activists. What does that tell voters about the reliability of the rest of the president's core coalition?

At a minimum this all adds up to red lights and sirens for the nation's seniors, who know or should know that they are the big target for Obamacare "savings" --which means huge hikes in the cost of Medicare Advantage or huge cuts in available benefits, or both. Seniors especially have to hit the phones to the Blue Dog Democrats --their numbers are listed here and below-- and dial again and again and warn these Democrats that they will be retired in 14 months if they push through Obamacare.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Obama admin: Cap-and-trade will cost families $1761 per year

The Obama administration used arguments that they knew weren’t accurate in order to push this legislation through the House. Obama himself made these arguments, while analysts in the government had already shown them to be false. In other words, Obama lied, and so did his administration and allies in Congress.

And they didn’t just lie on the costs to American households for energy-production disincentives...
Read the whole thing!

Obama advisor: Hey, let's give away all our money 'cause we caused global warming!

Cass Sunstein wants to spread America's wealth
Echoes Van Jones on using 'environmental justice' to redistribute money

Posted: September 16, 2009
8:25 pm Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

JERUSALEM – It is "desirable" to redistribute America's wealth to poorer nations, argued President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein.

According to Sunstein, global climate change is primarily the fault of U.S. environmental behavior and can, therefore, be used as a mechanism to redistribute the country's wealth.

The argument bears striking resemblance to comments made by Obama's former environmental adviser, Van Jones. WND reported Jones used a major environmental convention to argue for spreading America's wealth.

Now WND has learned Sunstein made similar, more extensive arguments.
Read more

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Monday, September 14, 2009

Obama: The Incredible Shrinking President

Obama’s Anger Weakens Him, and Us

The end of freedom: The Truth About the Health Care Bills

Michael Connelly
Retired attorney,
Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton, Texas
Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the 3rd and 4th Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have healthcare insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The 9th Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The 10th Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article 6 of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.
Read the rest

Sunday, September 13, 2009

About 9/11 (this is important)

Two men, one idea:
Two kinds of peoples lose wars. Those who lack the physical resources to defeat their enemies and those who lack the cultural resources to defeat them. We do not lack the physical resources, but our culture is the culture of the ostrich, a head stuck inside a television set and a body left vulnerable to whoever will have it. We have come to believe that compassion is more important than justice, sensitivity is more important than truth, and that if we fight for ourselves, then we are always wrong. Our moral high ground has becoming a sinking island topped by a white flag.

There is one thing and only one thing alone that we can do to survive. Turn the corner. For G-d's sake, turn the corner. The ostrich is an endangered bird in the Middle East where sticking your head in the sand is no defense against those who would chop it off. Soon it will be an endangered bird everywhere else. There is no escape from those who would kill us, but that we kill them first. The failure to understand that is the failure to survive.

It is now 8:46 AM on September 11, 2009. Eight years to the minute when the inescapable choice was put before every single American. Turn the corner before it is too late.
9/11, Just Another Day

And the father of Daniel Pearl who wrote an open letter to the Attorney General (too bad Eric Holder is corrupt)
By crafting the Geneva Conventions at the end of World War II, the international community demonstrated the necessity of creating new legal frameworks to deal with new realities. That same need should now compel the international community to embrace a legal category to deal with the new phenomena of a war with no foreseen ending; an army with no honor and no respect for human life; an army with no uniform, no country and no government; and an army that does not reciprocate agreements...Our son was murdered—and his beheading videotaped—to satisfy this craving for publicity. Your recommendations must make it clear to every would-be terrorist that, if captured, he will go down the path of total oblivion to the extent allowed by law.
We Need a New Legal Regime to Fight the War on Terror

Conservative Woodstock Rocks the Capitol

GREAT STUFF FROM LookingAtTheLeft.com

Below are a some of my favorites...but all the pics (and vids) are great!

















Amazing, but there's an excellent picture gallery at The Washing Post too: Lashing Out at the Capitol

Let’s Finish Off Socialism

Dick McDonald, Ownership Society Institute
www.riseupamerica.us

Over 200 million Americans marched in spirit along with the 20 million Tea Party participants today all over America. They marched today against socialism, the President, the Administration, the media, academe, ACORN thugs, SEIU goons and a Democrat-controlled Congress that has been passing anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-free market laws and regulations that Americans violently oppose.

Americans have never tolerated anyone much less a President of the country that calls them names and says he is going to change America to his idea of what it should be. That is not what America is all about. The people say what will be.

Over the last several months Americans have come to realize their Great November Mistake. They elected a man who plans to take property from the productive and redistribute it to the unproductive in concert with principles of Karl Marx and the communists except in cases where his financial supporters are concerned – he is mainlining taxpayer’s hard earned money and property directly to them in a corrupt and criminal way.

President Obama, their old lawyer, allocated ACORN, a criminal conspiracy that is up on voter fraud in over ten states, over $8 billion of stimulus money because they helped elect him. Well this week 20 year old Hannah Giles ripped that $8 billion from the hands of those criminals by playing a prostitute and pulling off the greatest sting operation in American history. ACORN was immediately dropped by the Census Bureau and if any Federal funds ever go to ACORN again the people will punish Obama and his party unmercifully at the polls in 2010. They may even try to impeach him if he tries to pull that stunt again.

The President made a speech on Wednesday where he told so many lies Congressman Joe Wilson lost it and shouted out that the President lies. Magically the loophole that would allow aliens to get free health care under the proposed bill the Congressman was referring to was immediately closed by amendment the next day.

If nothing else the Democrats are on the run. The American people will not tolerate having their freedom, liberty and most importantly their property confiscated by radical Marxists socialist communist leftists. It just isn’t going to happen any more. They have had enough of even the semi-socialist nonsense.

The question we at the Institute pose now is why not rid ourselves of socialism and socialist practices once and for all. Let’s strike while the iron is hot. Republicans, Democrats and Independents who are opposed to socialism should adopt the Institute’s Rise Up America plan and return the control of the government back to the people along with half of the taxes we presently pay.

The plan while destroying socialism will simultaneously revive the stock market and the economy, extinguish the $59 trillion in entitlement debt, deliver the American Dream of financial independence to ordinary Americans and trigger the greatest period of wealth creation the planet has every known.

The people need a banner to fly under. The tea parties lack a unifying cause to champion. I suggest the Rise Up America plan and the “USA” the Universal Savings Account where the future millions of all Americans will be accumulated.

If activist Hannah Giles can save us $8 billion just posing as a prostitute and Joe Wilson can save us literally hundreds of billions in health care costs by publically calling the President a liar then why do we shrink from taking down socialism, communism and other collectivist practices. It only seems like the rational thing to do at this moment in history.

Think of all the people we will rid ourselves of in Congress – Reid, Pelosi, Waxman, Dodd, Frank, Durbin, Conyers, Sharpton, Watson, Waters and 200 other losers.

Why not attack and take them down now? If not now, when?

Please go to our site and help out!

www.riseupamerica.us

UP TO TWO MILLION PEOPLE MARCH ON U.S. CAPITOL TO PROTEST BIG GOVERNMENT





Obama witnesses dead

Christopher Kelly, who recently plead guilty to kickback schemes, with strong ties to Rod Blagojevich, Tony Rezko and ultimately back to Barack Obama, is dead...

Isn't that a coincidence...AND the key witness in the Obama passport fraud case was fatally shot...

Saturday, September 12, 2009

CONSPIRACY: What does Pelosi know about Obama's eligibility?

Online images for certification of nomination raise questions
"The DNC drafted, signed and notarized TWO slightly different versions of their Official Certification of Nomination documents, not one," he wrote. "One of those documents had complete legal language, and one of them was missing the text concerning the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama.

"The version which is absent any certification of constitutional standing for the office of president is the version that was filed with every state in the country, and the one used by the DNC to elect Barack Obama president," he wrote.

WND contacted the Democratic National Committee multiple times over three days to request an explanation of the two images, including whether one might be a forgery. A spokeswoman in the press office confirmed, "We are aware of it," but declined to elaborate.

Likewise, WND contacted the office of Pelosi, but got no response over several days. And the White House declined to respond to multiple e-mails asking for a comment.
Read the whole thing!

White House Admits to Slow Gov’t Takeover of Health Care!

The result will be that everyone will wind up with no other “choice” than the so-called public option, just as the Administration has planned all along. It took Wilson “calling out” the president’s “misinformation” and “lies” to finally get the Administration to admit it.

Friday, September 11, 2009

Fight back against Obama's stealth gun control treaty

Obama's found a work-around our 2nd Amendment but Republican Senator John Barrasso from Wyoming is fighting back: International treaty gives foreign troops identity of American gun owners

Get ready for Detroit-style labor relations in our hospitals

In the heated debates on health-care reform, not enough attention is being paid to the huge financial windfalls ObamaCare will dole out to unions—or to the provisions in the various bills in Congress that will help bring about the forced unionization of the health-care industry.

Tucked away in thousands of pages of complex new rules, regulations and mandates are special privileges and giveaways that could have devastating consequences for the health-care sector and the American economy at large.
Read the Union Health-Care Label

The Mistake, The Evidence, Obama is NOT a constitutional president!

The text certifying that Barack Hussein Obama was “legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution” had been removed from the document sent to the states.
The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don’t Lie

But, Obama IS a liar

...and Joe Wilson told the truth!
The Democrats killed all bills that would provide for reinforcement: They do not want to identify illegals. Obama says “Illegal will not get coverage.” Easy to say, and he has made it impossible to carry through. This is a new video
From the brilliant African-American economist Thomas Sowell:

Listening to a Liar

Listening to a Liar: Part II

And from Frances Rice, a retired Army Lieutenant Colonel, a lawyer and chairman of the National Black Republican Association:

Obama - A Charming Liar?

"Media must expose Obama’s calculated lying, scare tactics"
Bozell Challenges Media on Obama's Health Care Reform Speech

Selected 9/11 prayers and readings from various faiths to help you commemorate the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks

Commemorating September 11 with Prayer

Why Are Jews Liberals?

Most American Jews sincerely believe that their liberalism, together with their commitment to the Democratic Party as its main political vehicle, stems from the teachings of Judaism and reflects the heritage of "Jewish values." But if this theory were valid, the Orthodox would be the most liberal sector of the Jewish community. After all, it is they who are most familiar with the Jewish religious tradition and who shape their lives around its commandments.

Yet the Orthodox enclaves are the only Jewish neighborhoods where Republican candidates get any votes to speak of. Even more telling is that on every single cultural issue, the Orthodox oppose the politically correct liberal positions taken by most other American Jews precisely because these positions conflict with Jewish law. To cite just a few examples: Jewish law permits abortion only to protect the life of the mother; it forbids sex between men; and it prohibits suicide (except when the only alternatives are forced conversion or incest).

The upshot is that in virtually every instance of a clash between Jewish law and contemporary liberalism, it is the liberal creed that prevails for most American Jews. Which is to say that for them, liberalism has become more than a political outlook. It has for all practical purposes superseded Judaism and become a religion in its own right. And to the dogmas and commandments of this religion they give the kind of steadfast devotion their forefathers gave to the religion of the Hebrew Bible. For many, moving to the right is invested with much the same horror their forefathers felt about conversion to Christianity.

All this applies most fully to Jews who are Jewish only in an ethnic sense. Indeed, many such secular Jews, when asked how they would define "a good Jew," reply that it is equivalent to being a good liberal.

But avowed secularists are not the only Jews who confuse Judaism with liberalism; so do many non-Orthodox Jews who practice this or that traditional observance. It is not for nothing that a cruel wag has described the Reform movement—the largest of the religious denominations within the American Jewish community—as "the Democratic Party with holidays thrown in," and the services in a Reform temple as "the Democratic Party at prayer."
Read the whole thing

The most important video you will see this year

Produced by ACT! for America, it is 6:42 in length: please watch the whole thing: Shariah Islamic Law in America and Europe: What the West Needs To Know

An short, unusual and very beautiful 9/11 tribute

Someone told me this only aired one time...

Driving Down the Depression Road

by Dick McDonald
Ownership Society Institute

The Wall Street Journal article posted today, The Keynesians Were Wrong Again, confirms the painful reality that Barack Obama is trying to solve our severe recession with outdated and discredited fiscal policies that led to the severity of the Great Depression of the 1930’s.

More importantly the writer alerts us to the fact that until our government passes incentives for job-creating investment we will likely be headed for continued negative growth and possibly a depression.

When government takes money from taxpayers and borrows from their grandchildren to spend today to create temporary demand it always fails to create growth or jobs. Obama is making the same mistake FDR made to prolong the Great Depression. He is also tripling the mistakes Jimmy Carter made.

Our economy languished until Ronald Reagan passed the Kemp-Roth bill in the early 1980’s that was the incentive the economy needed to free capital to be used for job creating investment. Marginal income tax rates were dropped from 70% to 28% and that triggered the greatest 25-year period of prosperity any country has ever experienced.

Today America can experience an even greater and more dynamic period of prosperity if it can reverse the direction of the Obama Administration and pass incentives for job-creating investment. That would entail defeating the Obama Administration’s many spending proposals and passing a massive tax cut that freed capital for job-creating investment.

This time around cutting income taxes is not necessary. Fifty (50%) of the people don’t pay any and the rich pay only 15% on capital investments. Therefore the pool of capital that could be tapped is payroll taxes. The government taxes 15.3% of a worker’s lifetime income in return for no nest egg whatsoever. They deliver a paltry monthly retirement check one-twentieth (1/2oth) of what would have gotten if the taxpayer had been able to invest those taxes in the market during his working life.

Dumping over $100 billion a month of payroll taxes into the stock market would be the incentive the market needs to recapture the market losses in 401(k)s and create new jobs, prosperity and growth. It also would be the wealth creating policy that delivers the American Dream of financial to ordinary citizens. See here for how we can do this.

Defeating the current spending proposals will not solve our financial crisis. We still have find capital to invest in job-creating enterprises. The quickest and most accessible source is the pool of payroll taxes waiting to be employed.

Cass Sunstein part of effort to change interpretation of Constitution by 2020

In 2004, Sunstein penned a book, "The Second Bill of Rights: FDR'S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever," in which he advanced the radical notion that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state. His inspiration for a new bill of rights came from President Roosevelt's 1944 proposal of a different, new set of bill of rights.

WND has learned that in April 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at Yale Law School entitled "The Constitution in 2020," which sought to change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year.
Obama's regulatory chief pushes new 'bill of rights'

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Obama's permanent perfection: The speech to nowhere

Obama actually began by suggesting that there was not a health care crisis in America...Obama did not seem to be advancing a very detailed plan, but rather championing some vague generalities. And when you line these generalities up, they form a very peculiar and implausible picture...Obama concluded with a painfully inappropriate abuse of the memory of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy.
A Telling but Not Moving Speech

Scandal: ACORN Baltimore prostitution investigation

Chaos for Glory: My Time With ACORN

ACORN Officials Could Face Criminal Charges for Trying to Help 'Pimp' and 'Prostitute'

ACORN 101: prostitution tax evasion illegal immigration child sex trade

ACORN Exposed: Stealing Democracy

Obama's Health Care Pitch

President Obama's speech to Congress last night can be summed up rather easily. It was 40 minutes of boilerplate followed by a socko, emotional finish exploiting the death of Senator Teddy Kennedy. Which leads to this question: was Obama's finishing kick sufficient to achieve his goal of "reframing" the national debate on health care that hasn't been going his way? I don't think so.

Obama didn't come close to offering a persuasive explanation of how he'd pay for ObamaCare. And that remains his biggest problem. He promises much, much more in guaranteed health benefits and says it will cost less. Even Obama himself couldn't really believe that. No one else who can add and subtract does. Cut "waste, fraud, and abuse?" Not a chance.

There was one mild surprise. Instead of scaling back his plan to comply with public sentiment, Obama stuck to every promise and provision on which he's dwelled in more than two dozen speeches. There was nothing new, except the size of his audience.

From this, it's clear he's decided to push a partisan bill through Congress with Democratic votes alone. We could tell this from the pleased expression House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had on her face throughout the speech. She's belongs to the no-compromise school.

But unless Obama has suddenly transformed public opinion, Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid won't be able to find enough Democrats, even among the usually malleable Blue Dogs,

President Obama's speech to Congress last night can be summed up rather easily. It was 40 minutes of boilerplate followed by a socko, emotional finish exploiting the death of Senator Teddy Kennedy. Which leads to this question: was Obama's finishing kick sufficient to achieve his goal of "reframing" the national debate on health care that hasn't been going his way? I don't think so.

Obama didn't come close to offering a persuasive explanation of how he'd pay for ObamaCare. And that remains his biggest problem. He promises much, much more in guaranteed health benefits and says it will cost less. Even Obama himself couldn't really believe that. No one else who can add and subtract does. Cut "waste, fraud, and abuse?" Not a chance.

There was one mild surprise. Instead of scaling back his plan to comply with public sentiment, Obama stuck to every promise and provision on which he's dwelled in more than two dozen speeches. There was nothing new, except the size of his audience.

From this, it's clear he's decided to push a partisan bill through Congress with Democratic votes alone. We could tell this from the pleased expression House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had on her face throughout the speech. She's belongs to the no-compromise school.

But unless Obama has suddenly transformed public opinion, Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid won't be able to find enough Democrats, even among the usually malleable Blue Dogs, willing to vote for ObamaCare. Defy the public to bail out a president in trouble? Only Democrats in safe seats are likely to do that.

I had five questions that I looked for Obama to answer in his address. I wanted to see if he was serious about achieving moderate, bipartisan health care. It turns out he's not. Here are the questions:
Read more

Wednesday, September 09, 2009

Be a part of history: Thousands of taxpayers plan to storm Washington, D.C., in a three-day event

Just one day after President Obama plans tries to recapture the initiative in the health-care debate with a speech to a joint session of Congress, thousands of taxpayers plan to storm Washington, D.C., in a three-day event to take their fight against excessive spending, bailouts, growth of big government and soaring deficits to the front door of the U.S. Capitol.

In a major movement unaffiliated with – but inspired by – Fox News' Glenn Beck's 9-12 Project, called the National Taxpayer Protest, thousands of Americans are answering the call and traveling to make their voices heard at Capitol Hill. Sept. 10 marks the kickoff of the three-day march on Washington.
Read more

Michael Savage interview with Dr. Orly Taitz

Recorded on August 3rd, 2009:

MICHAEL SAVAGE INTERVIEWS ORLY TAITZ - PART I

MICHAEL SAVAGE INTERVIEWS ORLY TAITZ - PART II

Just how many communists are there holed up in the Obama White House anyway?

Hmmm?

Tuesday, September 08, 2009

More healthcare tragedies!

UPDATE - TRAGEDY: 'Doctors told me it was against the rules to save my premature baby'

TRAGEDY: The daughter of a stroke victim claims that her father is to be wrongly placed on an NHS scheme for the terminally ill which experts say is causing some patients to die too soon.

TRAGEDY: Twice Katie asked for a smear test, but was told she was 'too young' to need one. Now 24, she is dying from cervical cancer, one of many young women who have fallen victim to a scandalous change in health policy.

TRAGEDY: Brian Faughnan over at RedState posted this today:
As the debate on health care continues, liberals in Washington continue to try to convince Americans that we need government-run health care. Rather than tell the truth about long waits, denied treatments, lack of trained professionals, and bureaucratic mistakes, they try to convince listeners that the problems of the current system can only be solved by more government.

With that in mind, I will present one case study of government-run care per day - either for 100 days, or until the debate in Washington is over. These stories are drawn from the book Shattered Lives, by the National Center for Public Policy Research.
This is story number one:

TRAGEDY:Race-baiter Democrat Rep. Diane Watson praises Cuban health system, Castro & Guevara who “kicked out the wealthy”
THIS IS THE FAMOUS 'GREAT AND FREE HEALTHCARE' THAT REGULAR CUBANS RECEIVE
As a reader pointed out on Michelle Malkin's blog in 2007:
If the lauded Cuban healthcare system is so wonderful, perhaps someone can explain to me the following:
  • Why some patients are taken to the hospital in wheelbarrows instead of ambulances?

  • Why patients must bring their own linens for the hospital bed and often, a fan, to combat the stifling heat and lack of air-conditioning?

  • Why cockroaches and other vermin are present in what is supposed to be “sanitary” health facilities? Why many common medicines are not available? If Cuba can export cutting-edge biotechnological products to other countries, surely the US embargo cannot be blamed for not allowing medicine to enter Cuba.

  • Why, in a 185-bed cancer center in Santiago where some 6,000 people are treated MONTHLY, there is a shortage of basics such as codeine, anti-nausea drugs, anti-inflammatory drugs, antibiotics, antacids, laxatives, high blood pressure medicine, antihistamines, anti-depressants, contraceptives, vitamins and minerals? This particular hospital, sadly, is the norm, not the exception

  • Why 41% of patients in Cuban hospitals are undernourished, particularly after surgery. Malnutrition risks increase with extended stays in the hospital, according to the U.S. National Institute of Health.
Was any of this mentioned in “Sicko?” Of course not!
Gateway Pundit also warned us in 2007:
A Cuban toilet...in a Cuban hospital
Washbasin in the orthopedic room

Barack Obama accused of making 'Depression' mistakes

Barack Obama is committing the same mistakes made by policymakers during the Great Depression, according to a new study endorsed by Nobel laureate James Buchanan.

A Doctor's Plan for Legal Industry Reform

My modest proposal to rearrange how lawyers do business.

By RICHARD B. RAFAL

Since we are moving toward socialism with ObamaCare, the time has come to do the same with other professions—especially lawyers. Physician committees can decide whether lawyers are necessary in any given situation.

At a town-hall meeting in Portsmouth, N.H., last month, our uninformed lawyer in chief suggested that we physicians would rather chop off a foot than manage diabetes since we would make more money doing surgery. Then President Obama compounded his attack by claiming a doctor's reimbursement is between "$30,000" and "$50,000" for such amputations! (Actually, such surgery costs only about $1,500.)

Physicians have never been so insulted. Because of these affronts, I will gladly volunteer for the important duty of controlling and regulating lawyers. Since most of what lawyers do is repetitive boilerplate or pushing paper, physicians would have no problem dictating what is appropriate for attorneys. We physicians know much more about legal practice than lawyers do about medicine.

Following are highlights of a proposed bill authorizing the dismantling of the current framework of law practice and instituting socialized legal care:

Just in from the White House....Cash for Codgers

Democrats, realizing the big success of the President's "Cash For Clunkers" rebate program, have revamped a major portion of the Obama Nationalization Health Care Plan.

President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and Sen. Reid are expected to make this major announcement at a joint news conference later this week. I have obtained an advanced copy of the proposal which is named "CASH FOR CODGERS" and it works like this:

Couples wishing to access health care funds in order to pay for the delivery of a child will be required to turn in one old person on the day of delivery. The amount the government grants them will be fixed according to a sliding scale. Older and more prescription dependent codgers will garner the highest amounts.

Special "Bonuses" will be paid for those submitting codgers in targeted groups, such as smokers, alcohol drinkers, persons 10 pounds over their government prescribed weight and any member of the Republican Party.

Smaller bonuses will be given for codgers who consume beef, soda, fried foods, potato chips, lattes, whole milk, dairy products, bacon, Brussels sprouts, cheese, or Girl Scout Cookies.

All codgers will be rendered totally useless via a toxic injection, similar to that given to the engines of the 'clunker' trade ins. This will insure that they, like the vehicle 'clunkers', are not secretly resold, (traded in) or their body parts harvested to keep other codgers in repair and among society.

Judging by this I should be gone soon. I'll miss you guys...

Sunday, September 06, 2009

Plain and simple: the public has been repeatedly told the most outrageous and unbelievable things (as in they do not believe them when they hear them)

Did you know that Obama knew about the Lockerbie bomber every step of the way?

Or that
1. Cutting $500 billion from Medicare will not hurt care or cut benefits for seniors.

2. Spending $1 Trillion will save money.

3. Spending $1 Trillion will not increase the deficit.

4. If you like your plan you can keep it, except in five years every insurance plan design for everyone will be dictated by the federal government design requirements.

5. You can buy any insurance plan from any insurer you want. But you can only buy the government designed, government approved plans — its like saying you can buy the same house from any builder, but the builders all have the same set of plans and can only sell that house.

6. This is not a government take-over of the health care sector.

7. There will not be any rationing.

8. Campaign promises made explicitly by the President that he would not cut any deals with “the drug companies” only to do exactly that in return for Phrma spending million in ads to prop up the sagging ObamaCare this summer.

9. Abortion is not a covered benefit (despite the fact that the Democratic House pro-life leaders say it covers abortion, and more than 20 Democrats have told their leadership in writing that they will not vote for any bill that covers abortion.)

10. Seniors will not be steered in the direction of dying to save money — but most of the public knows that the most expense in health care is in the last six months of life — making seniors think Obama’s promises sound hollow. Seniors, it turns out, do not want the government to make the decision about when that last six months starts.

11. The President is against a single payer system and ending employer provided health care. All those videos of the President saying that he is for a single payer system and for ending employer provided health care, well, they are “misleading.”

12. Except that your employer may decide to put you in a government designed plan, so your employers will be taxed less than it costs to give you your insurance. Your employer will save money by putting you in the government-run Health Information Exchange — and you can never leave!

13. This bill’s purpose is insure the uninsured and do “insurance reform.”

14. President Obama promised no mandate in his health plan, but it has an individual mandate and an employer mandate.

15. If you don’t buy health insurance and you earn more than $19,000, you will be taxed 2.5 percent of your total income. The no tax increase pledge for families earning $250,000 or less does not apply, of course, to ObamaCare.
Read the whole thing

And I could have sworn I heard that Obama didn't know anything about Van Jones...or William Ayers...or Jeremiah Wright...