BTW: Florida voter errors cost Al Gore the 2000 presidential election

For all my foreign readers and readers who don't know or don't remember, our 2000 presidential election is the reason why politics in the United States turned as horribly bitter and divided as it continues to be today!

There is a two-part TV documentary which premiered in Britain and America on February 20, 2012 that reveals how friends and colleagues around Bill Clinton around, speaking publicly for the first time, tell of their disbelief and sense of betrayal about Monica Lewinsky affair. This made Al Gore's victory all the more important for the Democrats to be vindicated and redeemed.

Today, disappointed and angry Democrats will continue to go to their graves believing that George W. Bush "stole" the election from Al Gore and NOTHING will dissuade them from this virulent grudge.

Because our country got rich and fat and FORGOT OUR ROOTS, and also because we have become a nation of celebrity and charisma junkies, we will ALL lose our freedom and the window to turn things around has almost closed as Mark Levin has so well and passionately documented.

Please keep this story handy if you, like I did today, run into someone who still hangs onto that myth:

USA TODAY:

George W. Bush would have won a hand recount of all disputed ballots in Florida's presidential election if the most widely accepted standard for judging votes had been applied, the first comprehensive examination of the ballots shows. However, the review of 171,908 ballots also reveals that voting mistakes by thousands of Democratic voters — errors that legally disqualified their ballots — probably cost former vice president Al Gore 15,000 to 25,000 votes. That's enough to have decisively won Florida and the White House. Gore's best chance to win was lost before the ballots were counted, the study shows. Voters' confusion with ballot instruction and design and voting machines appears to have changed the course of U.S. history.

READ MORE

In 2011, oil production on federally-controlled lands -- lands under presidential control -- decreased by 275,000 barrels per day.

While President Obama's claim that domestic oil production has increased during each of the four years he has been in office is correct, both the CRS report U.S. Oil Imports and Exports and data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) show that domestic oil production increased at a similar rate during 2004 to 2008, the last four years of the George W. Bush administration. In other words, the increase in domestic oil production under President Obama is, in reality, a continuation of a trend which began under President Bush.

In addition, the President of the United States - any President of the United States - can only control oil and gas exploration and production on lands and offshore areas owned and controlled by the federal government. According to U.S. Oil Imports and Exports, 96% of the increase in domestic oil production since 2007 has taken place on privately owned, nonfederal lands, thus making it oil and gas production in which Presidents Obama and Bush had little or no role.

According to the EIA report Fossil Fuels Produced from Federal and Indian Lands, 2003-2011, only 31.8% of all domestic oil produced in 2011 came from federal lands under the president's control. The 31.8% of oil and gas produced on federal lands in 2011 was actually below the nine-year average of 33.4%, the EIA report shows.

In reality, reports the EIA, 68.2% of the increase in U.S. oil and gas production in 2011 came from state and privately-owned lands not under the president's control. While oil production on state and privately-owned lands increased by almost 150 million barrels from 2010 to 2011, production on federally-owned lands during 2011 actually decreased by 14% or 83 million barrels from a nine-year high reached in 2010.

The CRS report U.S. Oil Imports and Export, confirms that in 2011, oil production on federally-controlled lands -- lands under presidential control -- decreased by 275,000 barrels per day.

READ MORE

“Barack Obama has gone from blaming George W. Bush to plagiarizing George W. Bush.”

Mark Thiessen, lead speechwriter for George W. Bush's 2007 SOTU address, tells Megyn Kelly he recognized parts of Obama's speech tonight that he had written!

Saving The Republic has the video here.

Through the looking glass...

...are we there yet?

THE BLAZE: CONGRESSMEN MOVE TO DECLASSIFY KEY PART OF 9/11 REPORT THAT THEY SAY COULD INDICATE HIJACKERS HAD OUTSIDE HELP

NEW YORK POST via Pamela Geller: THE 9/11 COVER-UP: MORE EVIDENCE OF STATE-SPONSORED WAR IN THE CAUSE OF ISLAM

10/30/11: A GREAT DAY IN AMERICA

President Bush's Opening Pitch at Yankee Stadium After 9-11

History of the Muslim Brotherhood Penetration of the U.S. Government

Clare M. Lopez, a strategic policy and intelligence expert, is a senior fellow at the Center for Security Policy and the Clarion Fund. She was formerly a career operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency.

4/15/13: Gatestone Insitute: International Policy Council

As we can see, as early as the George W. Bush administration period, the Muslim Brotherhood already had achieved an information dominance that, in coming years, would only intensify. Not only did figures associated and identified with the Muslim Brotherhood achieve broad penetration at senior levels of U.S. policymaking, but voices that warned of their true agenda (such as Stephen Coughlin's) were actively excluded. That information dominance has contributed to startling consequences, most evident in the U.S. policy towards the al-Qa'eda and Muslim Brotherhood-dominated revolutions that many call the "Arab Spring," but which in fact are more accurately termed an "Islamic Awakening." Under the Muslim Brotherhood-influenced Obama administration, U.S. policy has undergone such a drastic shift in the direction of outright support for these jihadist movements — from al-Qa'eda militias in Libya, to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and both al-Qa'eda and Muslim Brotherhood-linked rebels in Syria — that it is scarcely recognizable as American any more. The infiltration of individuals such as Magid, Hussain, and Abedin, to name just a few, with such close Muslim Brotherhood identifications, to positions of influence at the highest levels of U.S. policymaking must be considered, at a minimum, a contributing factor.

The lunatic fringe

Why have fringe kooks like this — who raged against Bush when all the cool kids were doing it — not been placated by Obama’s policies? For the same reason that Oswald, who embraced Marxism during the Eisenhower era, was not placated by John F. Kennedy’s liberalism: It’s not really about politics for these kooks.

Squeaky Fromme, Sara Jane Moore, Lee Harvey Oswald and the Radical Impulse

The last nail

I used to think that liberals would wake up eventually, but from what I can see they're still stuck on these sorts of things:

(1) Every criticsm of Obama has to be because he is black, so they (conveniently) allow themselves to ignore the sheer volume of his illicit actions.

(2) They're still talking about George W. Bush! (But they'll never mention this.)

(3) Use names like "Teapublicans" to mock those who believe in the founding fathers and the founding documents, limited government (the bigger the better for them), or who just simply disagree with them.

You can either jump on their bandwagon or get mowed down by it, your choice:

Once again, there is certainly nothing wrong with helping the poor, and there will always be people that need a helping hand.

But what we have in America today is far beyond that. What we have in America today is a situation where economic independence is being systematically eradicated and the government is increasingly being expected to provide our daily bread and to take care of all of us from the cradle to the grave.

And once you are dependent on the system, at least part of you is going to become resistant to anyone or anything that threatens to bring meaningful change to the system because your survival depends on the system.

They Are Systematically Destroying Our Independence And Making Us All Serfs Of The State

Glenn Beck pointed out last week that we, as a nation, are being ruled by 535 people in the Congress – 535 politicians are forcing 350 million into accepting Amnesty and the majority don’t want it. Why are we letting this happen?

Will this be the final nail in our coffin?

Isn't that sweet?

Bill Clinton jokes about wanting George W Bush to paint him naked as former president discusses his artistic flair...

Mystery solved

Saddam Hussein had WMD after all!

Obama's little soldiers

BIG NEWS: Obama Waives Bush Law Banning Child Soldiers

Over the weekend, while most Americans were too busy spending time with their children and keeping up with the latest sporting events to worry about executive orders, President Obama removed the teeth from this law; effectively making it void in the nations most guilty. The result - thousands of children throughout the Middle East and Africa may be drafted into foreign militaries, with the full blessings of the United States.

READ MORE

The Crazy Texan vs. The Smart Kenyan

Obama had gained attention as a critic of the Iraq War, squawking about necessary wars to small crowds of wealthy elderly Marxists from Chicago's upper crust champions of the red working class, but no sooner had he gotten out of Iraq than he was jumping up and down on the diving board and splashing down into Libya to show how much smarter and better he was at fighting unnecessary wars than that ignorant Texan who shot first and nuanced later.

George W. had told the American people that there was a vital American interest in stopping Saddam, from getting his hands on WMDs. Barack H. told the American people that "it was not in our national interest" to let Gaddafi capture Benghazi. What national interest was at stake in keeping Benghazi run by homicidal Islamist militias tied to Al Qaeda will be a lot harder to find than Iraqi WMDs.

Bush had told the United Nations that he wanted regime change in Iraq. Obama lied to the UN and told them that he was only looking for a No-Fly-Zone and then used that zone as an excuse to keep bombing Libya long after its air force had run out crop dusters and bottle rockets, until a drone pinned down Gaddafi's convoy long enough for a mob to gather around and sodomize him to death.

The crazy Texan had built a fortified Green Zone for the American diplomatic presence. The smart Kenyan stuck them in an exposed mansion patrolled by terrorist militias and waited longer to rescue them than he did to send out another email offering a chance to win a free dinner with him, proving that there really is such a thing as a free lunch.

READ MORE

There are things here that would have gotten Bush lynched in the press if they had happened during Katrina.

From SULTAN KNISH

"I asked, ‘Why haven’t you been sent out?’” he says. “Then he just lays the story on me, tells me about all the personnel they have out there, more than 100 ambulances, two paramedics per ambulance, everybody waiting for marching orders.”

Horrified, the logistical worker offered to help transport them to a place where they could be useful.

“He said they couldn’t do it because FEMA had them all under contract, and they couldn’t go out without FEMA’s say-so.

FRONT PAGE: How Obama’s FEMA Criminally Botched the Hurricane Recovery Effort

5 Dirty Little Secrets About the Bush Tax Cuts

Investor's Businss Daily

...not to say that the Bush tax cuts weren't flawed. They were phased in over time — limiting their effectiveness — and they came with an expiration date.

As a result, taxes will automatically go up unless Congress votes to extend the Bush tax rates.

That alone is the reason for the fierce political debates today over which parts to extend and which to let expire.

Reagan's tax cuts, in contrast, were permanent, so the only way Congress could increase taxes on anyone was to actually vote for a tax hike.

DEFINITELY worth re-posting!

The one thing about George W. Bush that the media refuses, to this day, to write about--in fact, in a video (conveniently since removed from YouTube) of the 2004/2005 hearings on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae--is this...(and the Congressional Black Caucus called it a would-be "economic lynching")!

Why was Bush so bad?

This tells the story, why Bush was so bad at the end of his term.

The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.

The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.

For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:

January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time:

The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77

The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%

The Unemployment rate was 4.6%

George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH

Remember the day...

January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.

The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?

BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!

Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!

Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.

And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA

And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?

OBAMA and the Democrat Congress

So when someone tries to blame Bush...

REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"

Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 &2011.

In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.

If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.
 

A history lesson

How the truth terrifies the Left. Proof Bush Is Not To Blame!

Syrian Fredom Fighters miss Bush, say: Vote Republican!

GatewayPundit

The video that was banned in the United States

Congress refused to listen, along with the arrogant Congressman Barney Frank (and also Sen. Chuck Schumer). This video says it all. The liberal media reportedly did not want this video on YouTube and it was taken off.

This link is of the same video, but is routed through Canada. Everyone in America needs to see this before it is yanked off the Internet again!

Let's see how far we can spread it before it's pulled off the Canadian site.

VIDEO

George W. Bush: Flight 93 Memorial Speech, September 10, 2011