GUNS: O pulls pilot’s guns “silently”!

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/17/guns-on-a-plane-obama-secretly-ends-program-that-l/

Obama secretly ends program that lets pilots carry guns
- The Washington Times

*** begin quote ***

After the September 11 attacks, commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry guns if they completed a federal safety program. No longer would unarmed pilots be defenseless as remorseless hijackers seized control of aircraft and rammed them into buildings. Now President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti gun ideology.

*** end quote ***

So much for “openness” and “trasparency”!

# # # # #


RANT: The White House. New one the same as the old one! Tyrants!!

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

FROM SLASHDOT

*** begin quote ***

“With the White House claiming national security grounds for failing to release ACTA related information, including negotiating documents and even the list of participants, the spotlight is now on just who does have access. Turns out, according to James Love, hundreds of advisers, many of them corporate lobbyists, are considered ‘cleared advisers.’ The list looks a who’s who of captains of industry.”

*** end quote ***

Yeah, “national security”!


POLITICAL: How to stop the drug wars?

Sunday, March 15, 2009

http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13237193  

Failed states and failed policies
How to stop the drug wars
Mar 5th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Prohibition has failed; legalisation is the least bad solution

*** begin quote ***

A calculated gamble, or another century of failure?
This newspaper first argued for legalisation 20 years ago (see article). Reviewing the evidence again (see article), prohibition seems even more harmful, especially for the poor and weak of the world. Legalisation would not drive gangsters completely out of drugs; as with alcohol and cigarettes, there would be taxes to avoid and rules to subvert. Nor would it automatically cure failed states like Afghanistan. Our solution is a messy one; but a century of manifest failure argues for trying it.
*** end quote ***

If I was President O, after releasing my birth certificate, I’d declare that we had “won” the drug war. Consistent with other victories, I’d:
(1) pardon all non-violent drug offenders;
(2) direct all federal prosecutors to stop prosecuting the same;
(3) direct the Congress that they would be in session until they pass a decriminalization of all drug prohibition (the President can summon Congress back into session!);
(4) direct the DEA, FDA, and all federal agencies that they are no out of the “prohibition business”; and
(5) convene WalMart and the major drug companies to a conference at the White House and ask them how they are going to supply the nation with it’s previously illegal drugs.
(Expecting that the drug gangs will now have a FORMIDABLE competitor. Hard to run a gang when WalMart drives your “product’s” price to that of aspirin! And, makes it USP pure.)
Like this is EVER going to happen!
# # # # #


GOVEROTRAGEOUS: Obama’s birth certificate

Saturday, March 14, 2009

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91283

BORN IN THE USA?
What congressmen say about eligibility
Lawmakers’ letters insist ‘president was born in Hawaii’
Posted: March 10, 2009 9:29 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh

*** begin quote ***

Hawaiian officials have confirmed they have a birth certificate on file for Obama, but it cannot be released without his permission. He has refused that permission. And Hawaiian officials have not revealed what information the certificate contains.

*** end quote ***

Well, adjust my tin foil hat and call me kooky.

I guess that makes me a “birthist”.

See the first thing that the media does is give you a label and then they can dismiss you.

My fear is that I guess, like FDR and Pearl Harbor, we’ll have to wait 50 years to find out that O was NOT a US citizen!

Just because they label you, doesn’t make you wrong.

All to often today, they denigrate people who ask, often too politely, WTF!

“Quo Warranto”

Or in my parlance, “sez who!”
See the essence of the argument is the prima facie case, “What are you hiding Mister Obama?”
Until that is answered, it is not moot. It’s a scandal!
So much for “running the most open and transparent government”!
# # # # #


LIBERTY: Hold the ‘Catastrophe’: Obama Says He’s ‘Highly Optimistic’ About Economy

Friday, March 13, 2009

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96SP30G5&show_article=1

Obama: Economic crisis ‘not as bad as we think’
Mar 12 05:49 PM US/Eastern
By JIM KUHNHENN
Associated Press Writer

Hold the ‘Catastrophe’: Obama Says He’s ‘Highly Optimistic’ About Economy

*** begin quote ***

WASHINGTON (AP) – Confronting misgivings, even in his own party, President Barack Obama mounted a stout defense of his blueprint to overhaul the economy Thursday, declaring the national crisis is “not as bad as we think” and his plans will speed recovery.

Challenged to provide encouragement as the nation’s “confidence builder in chief,” Obama said Americans shouldn’t be whipsawed by bursts of either bad or good news and he was “highly optimistic” about the long term.

The president’s proposals for major health care, energy and education changes in the midst of economic hard times faced skepticism from both Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill, as senators questioned his budget outlook and the deficits it envisions in the middle of the next decade.

But Obama, speaking to top executives of the Business Roundtable, expressed an optimistic vision and called for patience.

*** end quote ***

Well, “they” have passed the PORKULOUS bill and the various versions of TARP.

Guess they have always stampeded us into giving up more of our money and our liberty.

So much for “change”. Guess I’ll just have to “hope”.

So what are they going to repeal and cut.

# # # # #


POLITICAL: Obama signs huge spending bill and uses “signing statements” too

Thursday, March 12, 2009

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/obama_spending

Obama backs pet projects and signs spending bill
By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Philip Elliott, Associated Press Writer – Thu Mar 12, 1:41 am ET

*** begin quote ***

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama, sounding weary of criticism over federal earmarks, defended Congress’ pet projects Wednesday as he signed an “imperfect” $410 billion measure with thousands of examples. But he said the spending does need tighter restraint and listed guidelines to do it. Obama, accused of hypocrisy by Republicans for embracing billions of dollars of earmarks in the legislation, said they can be useful and noted that he has promised to curb, not eliminate them.

On another potentially controversial matter, the president also issued a “signing statement” with the bill, saying several of its provisions raised constitutional concerns and would be taken merely as suggestions. He has criticized President George W. Bush for often using such statements to claim the right to ignore portions of new laws, and on Monday he said his administration wouldn’t follow those issued by Bush unless authorized by the new attorney general.

White House officials have accused Bush of using the statements to get around Congress in pursuing anti-terror tactics.

Obama signed the bill in private, unlike a number of recent signings that took place with fanfare, but he raised the issue of earmarks in public remarks playing down their scope and possible harm in the measure.

{Extraneous Deleted}

*** end quote ***

So let me see, all those campaign promises were just hot air.

And, we hide away from the cameras to sign it.

And, you sheeple think things were going to “CHANGE”? All you can do is “HOPE” it gets better.

He’s a Chicago hack that said anything to get elected. He’s 100% Socialist.

We can only hope that the American Electorate wakes up in the mid-term election and returns us to gridlock.

Argh!

# # # # #


GOVEROTRAGEOUS: Cramer (a leftist) points out how O doesn’t get it!

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

http://www.mainstreet.com/article/moneyinvesting/news/cramer-takes-white-house-frank-rich-and-jon-stewart?page=6

Posted March 09, 2009
Cramer Takes on the White House, Frank Rich and Jon Stewart
By Jim Cramer

*** begin quote ***

Suddenly, bloggers, opinion people, columnists and, yes, pundits who haven’t paid attention to anything I have been saying or writing for the past 18 months are all over me. Suddenly, I find myself in the center of a firestorm over Obama’s economic policies, taking enfilading fire from the “liberal” media (from serious columnist Frank Rich to entertainer Jon Stewart) while being defended by Rush Limbaugh, the standard-bearer for the Republicans.

*** and ***

The answer lies in the way the two administrations handled criticism.

The Bush administration, I believed, simply chose to ignore my warnings, perhaps because of a brutal combination of ideology, fecklessness and complacency.

*** and ***

President Obama’s team, unlike Bush’s team, demonstrates a thinness of skin that shocks me. When I somewhat obviously and empirically judged that the populist Obama administration is exacerbating the crisis with its budget and policies, as evidenced by the incredible decline in the averages since his inauguration, I was met immediately with condescension and ridicule rather than constructive debate or even just benign dismissal.

*** and ***

The markets thought he could stop it; hence the giant relief rally when he was elected. But in fewer than 50 days of his ascendancy, the markets’ hopes were totally dashed and the averages are now forecasting the worst decline since the Great Depression. As someone who listens to what the averages are screaming, I think they are accurately predicting the future.

I welcome any serious exchange with the administration on the issues that are not beyond my ken: fixing house price depreciation, stopping the destruction of wealth as demonstrated by the stock market’s plunge, and solving the banking crisis before we nationalize every bank.

*** and ***

It’s time to get serious. It’s time to take the issue from the pundits and from the left and right, and put it where it belongs: serious non-ideological debate to put out the real firestorm, the collapse of the economy from Wall Street to Main Street and the ensuing Great Wealth Destruction for all.

But if it stays ad hominem, we will all be betrayed and the train wreck will become inevitable.

*** end quote ***

The inept politicians from both sides of the aisle have destroyed the investments of most people. And, all we get from them is “spend more” and “borrow more”.

STOP!

You’re putting future generations in a hole they will never get out of.

Let the failures go bankrupt. Tough medicine.

We are training future generations NOT to invest.

I’ve had two conversations that are noteworthy.

A young woman has pulled out of her 401k because the losses have eaten into her employer’s contribution and hers. A doctor is moving from equities to bonds and his “financial advisor” at the brokerage house thought it was a good idea (i.e., he gets a commission on trades; not results).

The Market’s P/E ratio is either in or going into the single digits. (Last time that happened the market doubled in a year!) The “natural recovery” from a downturn has already begun. See the uptick in home sales as the “affordability” measure is it’s lowest in decades.

Note to O: (1) Reinstate the uptick rule. (2) Aim the corporate beggars to the bankruptcy courts. (3) Grab your various regulators and ask them to resign. (4) Eliminate Federal guarantees of ARMs, Interest only, and any mortgage that’s not 20% down 30 year fixed “conforming”. (4) Tell the FBI anf your Federal Prosecutors you want some FRAUD convictions for all the bad paper. (5) Tell the SBA that you want a plan to stimulate small business by the end of the day.

Cut the spending, cut the debt, cut the waste.

Argh!

Like that’s ever going to happen!

# # # # #


GOVEROTRAGEOUS: “Never waste a good crisis”

Sunday, March 8, 2009

http://in.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idINTRE5251VN20090306

Never waste a good crisis, Clinton says on climate

Sat Mar 7, 2009 1:44am IST

By Pete Harrison

*** begin quote ***

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told an audience Friday “never waste a good crisis,” and highlighted the opportunity of rebuilding economies in a greener, less energy-intensive way.

*** end quote ***

The socialists, who want to boss us around, are rubbing our nose in it.

They think it’s good policy.

The sheeple don’t even notice it.

Time for a tax revolt.

“Never waste a good crisis” to force some of the slugs out of office.

# # # # #


GOVEROUTRAGEOUS: Ron Paul 03/04 “The end of the war in Iraq is not near!”

Friday, March 6, 2009

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/025672.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmCquxzz3-M&eurl=http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/025672.html&feature=player_embedded

Ron Paul 03/04: The end of the war in Iraq is not near!

# – # – #

It’s outrageous that the government would lie so blatantly. Obama ran as the “anti-war” candidate. That allowed him to slip in on Hillary’s left flank. THe American people outraged at the Republicans whisked him into office. Only to find, he IS that 100% liberal they were warned about, NOT REALLY anti-war at all, and a typical Chicago crook appointing all the same old same old crooks.

Outrageous!

# # # # #  


MONEY: Inflation on the horizon!

Thursday, March 5, 2009

http://www.lewrockwell.com/buchanan/buchanan105.html

Pitchfork Time by Patrick J. Buchanan

*** end quote ***

Where the U.S. government usually consumes 21 percent of gross domestic product, this Obama budget spends 28 percent in 2009 and runs a deficit of $1.75 trillion, or 12.7 percent of GDP. That is four times the largest deficit of George W. Bush and twice as large a share of the economy as any deficit run since World War II.

Add that 28 percent of GDP spent by the U.S. government to the 12 percent spent by states, counties and cities, and government will consume 40 percent of the economy in 2009.

We are not “headed down the road to socialism.” We are there.

Since the budget was released, word has come that the U.S. economy did not shrink by 3.8 percent in the fourth quarter, but 6.2 percent. All the assumptions in Obama’s budget about growth in 2009 and 2010 need to be revised downward, and the deficits revised upward.

Look for the deficit for 2009 to cross $2 trillion.

*** end quote ***

I don’t know about anyone else, but I can’t afford the Obama budget!

# # # # #


RANT: Gun quote send me on my Drug War rant. It’s all connected.

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

http://www.lewrockwell.com/gaddy/gaddy49.html

Another Bright Shining Lie
by Michael Gaddy

*** begin quote ***

The state has many weapons in its arsenal to keep Boobus ignorant of their illegal, unconstitutional activities and in compliance with its confiscatory tax and slavery system. In all likelihood, the two most often used of these weapons are fear and prevarication.

Our new US Attorney General/Race Agitator, Eric Holder, last week used a bright shining lie in his advocating the introduction of a new Assault Weapons Ban. (AWB) He stated:

“Putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border. I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum.”

What a crock; believing the fantastically wealthy drug cartels actually secure their weapons from America is analogous to taking a hamburger to a steak dinner. The drug cartels use their millions, if not billions, to purchase some of the finest weaponry that can be had, far exceeding the firepower of their state-armed opponents in both Mexico and the US.

*** end quote ***

I agree that Holder is peddling “barbara streisand”!

We could pacify the Mexico, Columbia, and Afgan drug lords with one stroke of a pen.

End the psuedo-Drug War now!

What does a Drug Kingpin do when WalMart becomes your competitor? Drive a cab.

All we have to do is recognize that people make bad choices. We just don’t have to use the guns or government to inflict more pain on everyone.

I’ve read estimates that there is a “residual addiction rate”. Some people you will just be unable to keep from being addicted; no matter what you do.

I’ve seen estimates that ending the drug prohibition will actually reduce the addiction rate to the residual since there will no longer be the allure of “doing something illegal” to the young people.

I’ve read estimates that the cost of “illegal” drugs will drop to the cost of aspirin and that the marketplace’s (i.e., WalMart, RiteAid, Walgreen, CVS) “drugs” will be USP grade. (No more deadly overdoses from too strong street drugs or side effects of it being cut with rat poison.)

And, what does the gooferment have to do to accomplish this. Absolutely nothing but pass a law decriminalizing drugs. Closing the DEA, BATF, and FDA would also be a good idea.

Why won’t they? Money, power, and a scary “issue”.

President Obama could pardon ALL non-violent drug offenders.

And a cow could jump over the moon!

It’s all “barbara streisand”!

The powers that be like it this way so this is the way it will stay.

We have to end this nonsense the same way “We, The People” ended alcohol prohibition. In the jury box.

When you’re in the jury room hearing a drug case, and no one got killed, vote “NOT GUILTY”. Don’t discuss it. Don’t preach. Don’t say anything but “The State didn’t prove their case!”

The Drug War will be over in a heartbeat. The Gun Violence will follow soon after that.

WalMart will be selling drugs. Think they will sell to children? Think they won’t offer help? THink that they will have gun battle with the near by WalGreens?

Over stuff that has the profit margin of aspirin?

It’s all “barbara streisand”! And, we put up with it!!

Argh!

# # # # #


POLITICAL: Calling the Democratic budget and tax policy “socialistic”? Yes!

Sunday, March 1, 2009

http://pbsmonitor.blogspot.com/2009/03/bankrupt-republicans-call-obama.html

ROBERTO ANTONIO HUSSEIN
A critical look and commentary on the news as found on TV, radio and in the newspapers.

Sunday, March 1, 2009BANKRUPT REPUBLICANS CALL OBAMA DEMOCRATS “SOCIALISTS”
*** begin quote ***

Larry Kudlow, that Republican ideologue on CNBC, calls the Democratic budget and tax policy “socialistic.”

*** end quote ***

As a little L libertarian, I’m not pleased with EITHER “party”. At least the “conservatives” are closer the “truth” of freedom and liberty that the “Rockefeller Republicans” or any “Democrat”. I think that “socialism” is fair criticism from FDR onward. Probably even since 1913 and the various wars of colonizations (i.e., Spanish American and WW1). Unfortunately, we’ve lost the “American Revolutionary Dream” after the “Civil” War. Which more properly should be called the War of Northern Aggression or the Second American Revolution. Stealing the wealth of the productive class to “redistribute” it to the unproductive class is the hallmark of socialism’s promise. Like most gooferment efforts, it fails at that too. Funny how the benefits seem to accrue to the politicians, their friends, the bureaucrats, and the elite. Stuck on their way to the rest of us no doubt. National Socialism, Communism, European Socialism, Italian Fascism, or just Mercantilism. Call it what you want but it is NOT freedom and liberty. When we get back to the American Dream, we can take the plastic garbage off the Statue of Liberty and welcome everyone who want to work hard again. End welfare and all the gooferment intrusions and the people will thrive and provide. There ain’t no such thing as free lunch. No matter what politicians promise you; they can’t deliver it!

# # # # #


POLITICAL: Tax increases in a recession?

Sunday, February 22, 2009

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/21/AR2009022100911_pf.html

Obama’s First Budget Seeks To Trim Deficit
Plan Would Cut War Spending, Increase Taxes on the Wealthy
By Lori Montgomery and Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, February 22, 2009; A01

*** begin quote ***

President Obama is putting the finishing touches on an ambitious first budget that seeks to cut the federal deficit in half over the next four years, primarily by raising taxes on businesses and the wealthy and by slashing spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, administration officials said.

*** end quote ***

Companies don’t pay taxes; people do. So raising the corporate tax is essentially a tax increase for everyone; poor included.

Rich folks have the ability to defer income and shit it and even “coast”. Watch how revenues “fail to appear”!

Stupidity!

Ignores the lessons of Kennedy and Regan.

# # # # #


POLITICAL: Is Obama “foreign born”?

Friday, February 13, 2009

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88746  

*** begin quote ***

With Kreep out of town for a business trip, he did not respond immediately and the motion eventually was filed. It states that the records, which could reveal on what name Obama attended classes at Occidental and whether he attended on scholarship money intended for foreign students, “are of no relevance to this moot litigation.”

*** end quote ***

What’s to hide, Mister President?

We will not be “shocked” if this comes out eventually that he was “foreign born”. As in, “I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!” Captain Renault in Casablanca.

Inquiring minds want to know!

# # # # #


POLITICS: The Drinking Age

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/131173.html

And Instapundit’s Glenn Reynolds suggests inculcating respect for disparate ideological points of view and comes up with a specific idea that’s not only right, but do-able:

*** begin quote ***

   I will make one policy proposal. Some of my fellow libertarians hope that the Obama administration will put an end to the drug war. I hope so too, but I’m not too optimistic. Instead, I propose a smaller step toward freedom—eliminating the federally mandated drinking age of 21. This mandate was a creature of Elizabeth Dole (who is no longer in the Senate to complain at its abolition), and it has unnecessarily limited the freedom of legal adults, old enough to fight for their country, to drink adult beverages.

*** end quote ***

# – # – #

I find the logic of prohibition incredulous. Even if we skip over the lack of a Constitutional basis for any Prohibition and the argument about who owns your body, it is unbelievable that a man can go to fight and die for a country that won’t let them drink.

At the very least, a military id card should trump ANY age restriction.

Argh!

# # # # #


MONEY: What is a dollar?

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rajiva/rajiva12.html

Fiat Law and Fiat Currencies – the Relic of Barbarians
by Lila Rajiva

*** begin quote ***

The free market arose wherever there were laws and systems like that – whether in Europe or Africa or Asia. One way to think about this difference would be to see it as the difference between a fiat money, like paper, and a real store of value, like gold. You can print all the money you want, but if there’s nothing to back it up, then you’re in a bit of trouble. Your creditors are unlikely to put much store in you as a credit risk, just as the world’s wringing its hands today over the dollar. Pretty soon, they come calling for their loans with cudgels and pitchforks.

Gold does not have the same problem, because there’s a limited supply of it. It has to occur in nature. It has to be found somewhere underground and then mined and refined. It’s an expensive business – that takes risk, time, and money. There are costs attached to it that someone has to pay. Paper money, on the other hand, can be printed any time you want. Just ask Ben Bernanke. He’s dropping it by the helicopter load from the clouds.

*** end quote ***

They are “counterfeiting value” by printing more money electronically. It’s slight of hand. To understand, you have to understand the answer to the question: “What is a dollar?” and proceed from there.

The answer is it’s NOW an imaginary unit, backed by the belief that you can exchange a green peice of paper for something. A Keynesian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian) will never talk about what the definition of money is. An Austrian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School) will insist that the pricing mechanism in the economy have commodity money. It USED to be tied to gold.

Sadly, as an Austrian, I think you are in for hard times. O is going to “finance” 2T$ in current spending. By monetizing it. A fancy word for counterfeiting. And, the value of the dollar is going down even further.

To understand, you have to go to Robinson Crusoe’s island, that economist’s use to simplify ideas. A fisherman, egg gatherer, and a fruit gatherer are on the island. (Magic; don’t ask questions yet!) They barter between themselves. After a while, 1 fish = 2 eggs = 4 coconuts. Due to the relative difficulty of effort. But the fisherman and fruit gatherer don’t deal directly. The egg gather is the middle man. Then a banker arrives. He creates money so that the Fisherman can deal directly with the Egg guy. He uses seashells. Then the value equation is 1 fish = 2 eggs = 4 coconuts = 8 seashells. The evil banker after a while introduces more seashells into circulation by spending them. So he get more stuff. Similarly through out the ages, the King (Government) seeks to enrich itself that way. When the currency is gold coins, it’s much harder. (I first learned this when I saw an exhibit at the Smithsonian of French Francs over time. The French Franc of Louis I was a gold hockey puck; Louis XIV’s was a very thin button. Inflation!) When the currency is pretty green pieces of paper, it’s much easier.

So there you have how O44 is goign to spend 2T$ that we don’t have.

Basically, it’s a “tax” on anyone who has a dollar or dollar denominated assets. By adding a “seashell”, the value of all the other seashells is adulterated. Watered down.

So who get’s screwed?

The Chinese have 5T$. There’s a lot of dollars out there. The poor and people on fixed incomes (i.e., the purchasing power of their few dollars goes down) get less for their money.

Who makes out?

The US Government mostly. People who have “valuable stuff”. Commodities, commodity producers, land owners, people who produce stuff that others want.

So that’s how O will spend what he ain’t got.

He’s betting that before the inflation comes, the economy will “restart” and we won’t notice. (Think LBJ and Carter!) It worked for Kennedy because he lowered taxes on the productive class and everyone was motivated to get to work. His quote was: “A rising tide raise all boats!”

Sadly, I don’t see O or his staff being that smart.

# # # # #


INTERESTING: Bush’s RENDITION OK to Obama?

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/02/obama_to_keep_renditions.html

February 01, 2009
Obama to keep Renditions
Rick Moran

*** begin quote ***

Rhetoric notwithstanding, Barack Obama does not want a terrorist attack on his watch. Since he and the Democrats decided to politicize the entire war on terror by making it a virtual crime for the president to do much of anything to protect us, he has suddenly woken up to the fact that much of what Bush initiated might not be such a bad idea if you’re a president who doesn’t want to be blamed for a mass casualty assault on America.

Hence, his hedging on keeping the Terrorist Surveillance Program and other programs that, while being controversial, nevertheless were effective at keeping America safe.

{Extraneous Deleted}

It also underscores the idea that Obama is a two faced hypocrite who pandered to his far left base during the campaign by savaging Bush and calling him a criminal but now that the responsibility is his, things take on a different light altogether and what Bush was doing is fine with him.

# – # – #

Interesting how politicians can say one thing and do another?
# # # # #


VETERANS: Get snubbed. No surprise there.

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2009/01/little-unfinished-inaugural-business.html

Friday, January 23, 2009
A Little Unfinished Inaugural Business

*** begin quote ***

Among all the inaugural hoopla this week, there were a few incidents that we found disturbing–if not down-right offensive–because they took a direct shot at the nation’s military heroes, and the out-going commander-in-chief.

And we’re not referring to the smattering of boos and the refrain of “nah-nah-nah-nah, hey, hey…goodbye” that greeted George Bush as he arrived at the inauguration on Tuesday morning. These events occurred after Mr. Bush left town, at galas that commemorated the swearing-in of Barack Obama.

*** and ***

By comparison, the quadrennial “Salute to Heroes Ball” went on as planned, just as it has on every Inauguration Night since 1953. But this year’s event was noteworthy for its most prominent no-show: the new commander-in-chief. Barack Obama was the first president to skip the event, breaking a tradition that began with Dwight D. Eisenhower.
To his credit, Mr. Obama did attend the Commander-in-Chief’s ball, but the Heroes gala is no ordinary event. It’s been a staple of the inauguration for six decades and it’s chief sponsor is a powerful organization (the American Legion) that has been courted by every recent president and presidential candidate. Among those honored at the Heroes ball are the nation’s Medal of Honor recipients. This year, 47 of the 99 living MOH winners were at this year’s ball, where they were honored by Vice-President Joe Biden and other dignitaries.
Obviously, the president can’t make it to every inaugural event, but nine commanders-in-chief found time to attend. As for President Obama, he found time to attend something called the “Neighborhood Inaugural Ball,” aimed at D.C. residents. Apparently, living inside the federal district puts you higher on the social register than winning the nation’s highest decoration for military valor.
*** end quote ***

Sorry to hear this. Not surprised. Just sorry.
As a vet and an American Legion member, Liberals don’t value the military. Sometimes their disrespect is palpable. In this case, it’s subtle.
Argh!
# # # # #


RANT: “Birth Control” is stimulus.

Monday, January 26, 2009

FROM THE DRUDGE REPORT

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashpbc.htm

PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY
Sun Jan 25 2009 22:13:43 ET

*** begin quote ***

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi boldly defended a move to add birth control funding to the new economic “stimulus” package, claiming “contraception will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.”

*** and ***

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those – one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

*** end quote ***

# – # – #

SOOOOOooooooo….

The “stimulus package” covers any social engineering that they want to do!

Get ready for more nonsense under that “cover”.

Here’s an insight into their “liberal” philosophy: “Humans are an expense”. Wonder when abortion, eugenics, and killing off the elderly come in? After all one way to control Medicare “costs” is to get rid of those expensive old “senior citizens”. But, oh year, they can vote. We need to pick on those that can’t!

Argh!

# # # # #


RANT: possibility some GITMO prisoners might be set free in America

Friday, January 23, 2009

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17841_Page2.html

Why the Gitmo policies may not change
By JOSH GERSTEIN | 1/23/09 4:28 AM EST

*** begin quote ***

5. The orders downplay the possibility that some prisoners might be set free in America.

Obama ordered that when Guantanamo closes, any remaining inmates “be returned to their home country, released, transferred to a third country, or transferred to another United States detention facility in a manner consistent with law and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.” But Obama’s wordsmiths seem to have deliberately trimmed out any explicit mention of the explosive possibility of freeing prisoners on American soil.

While Obama’s aides seem to prefer trying prisoners in civil courts or freeing them abroad, there are no obvious charges to be filed against some of the detainees. Once Guantanamo closes, letting them loose in the U.S. may be the only option if other countries won’t take them.

Craig said he was “hopeful” that other governments will take many of the detainees, but some nations may not step up until the U.S. does. “One question a lot of countries keep asking is, ‘How many are you going to take?” Waxman said. “There may be some countries that want to earn some credit [with the] new administration…but I don’t expect this problem to go away.”

*** end quote ***

I’m speechless!

# # # # #


RANT: O’s inauguration and private jets

Friday, January 23, 2009

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_012009/content/01125104.guest.html

Story #8: Six Hundred Private Jets Land in DC for Inaugural

*** begin quote ***

RUSH: Now, while this is happening, while the balls for the average guy are being cancelled, from the Wall Street Journal: A record number of private jets landed in the Washington area for the inaugural. “At a time of financial crisis and Green correctness, many of the wealthy are choosing to arrive by private jet. According to an article in Bloomberg, as many as 600 private jets were expected to touch down in D.C. for the inauguration. The runway at Washington Dulles was closed Saturday to allow as many as 100 small planes to park. And the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority said it expected a total of 500 small jets to land from Jan. 16 through Jan 21. ‘That would set a record, topping the 300 the airport accommodated for President George W. Bush’s 2004 inaugural,’ an Airports Authority says in the article.

Of course, flying private to a celebration of a populist, pro-environment President is a bit like the Detroit execs jetting to Washington for bailout money,” is it not?

*** end quote ***

I like that last line.

# # # # #


SERVICE: The Obameter — Tracking Obama’s Campaign Promises

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

The Obameter: Tracking Obama’s Campaign Promises

Tracking Obama’s promises

   * Promise Kept 2

   * Compromise 0

   * Promise Broken 0

   * Stalled 1

   * In the Works 9

   * No Action 498

PolitiFact has compiled about 500 promises that Barack Obama made during the campaign and is tracking their progress on our Obameter. We rate their status as No Action, In the Works or Stalled. Once we find action is completed, we rate them Promise Kept, Compromise or Promise Broken.

# – # – #

Be interesting to see how this shapes up.

# # # # #


POLITICAL: Lincoln may not have approved of O, but Lincoln wasn’t so great imho

Monday, January 19, 2009

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/338/story/59958.html

Pitts: Lincoln might not have welcomed Obama’s election

*** begin quote ***

Actually, Lincoln likely would have been appalled. How could he not? He was a 19th century white man who famously said in 1858 that “there is a physical difference between the white and black races, which . . . will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of social and political equality.”

How do you reconcile that with all those cartoons of Lincoln congratulating Obama? You don’t. You simply recognize it for what it is: yet another illustration of how shallow our comprehension of history is, yet another instance where myth supersedes reality.

*** and ***

Of course, Lincoln freed no slaves. That’s the myth. His Emancipation Proclamation was a military measure to demoralize and destabilize the rebellious South; it covered states he did not govern but did not apply in slaveholding states that remained under his jurisdiction.

None of which is to deny or diminish the greatness of the 16th president. His greatness stands unquestioned, unquestionable. We would be a very different nation, a lesser nation, without his political genius, his dogged faith in the unsundered Union, his refusal to accept less than Union, even when haunted by reversals and setbacks that would have broken anyone else.

No, the argument is not about Lincoln’s greatness.

*** end quote ***

But, it should be!

Lincoln is up there on my list of “Worst American Presidents”.

As a corrupt Illinois politician who was in bed with more than the railroads, one has to take not of the following:

(1) The War of Northern Aggression. What you call the Civil War. What some call the Second American Revolution. The is no Constitutional, legal, or moral justification for this war. That alone would rocket him too the top of the list.

(2) Income tax to pay for that war. Government debt too.

(3) Freedom of Press savaged when editors dared to criticism him.

(4) Atrocities against civilian populations like Sherman’s “March to the Sea”.

(5) Single handedly destroying the concept of a Union of Equals amd morphing into the USA as the tyrant state.

And, don’t forget, he want to send all the “Negros” back to Africa. A racist among his other “endearing” qualities.

Those are just my uneducated points. There are much smarted folks than I who can give you “Chapter and Verse” about Lincoln.

But, don’t disturb the sheeple.

One of these days I should codify my “worst list”!

But that’s hard on the old BP.

# # # # #


RANT: Officials at Occidental College challenged on Obama

Sunday, January 18, 2009

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=86325

OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
Eligibility battle rages on 3 fronts
Court, Congress and college challenged on constitutionality
Posted: January 18, 2009
12:05 am Eastern
By Bob Unruh

*** begin quote ***

Officials at Occidental College in Los Angeles, Calif., have been served with a demand to produce records concerning Barack Obama’s attendance there during the 1980s because they could document whether he was attending as a foreign national – in one of three fronts now established by those contesting the president-elect’s constitutional eligibility for the Oval Office.

The Supreme Court and Congress also both are being challenged to address the worries that Obama doesn’t meet the requirements of the U.S. Constitution that the president be a “natural born” citizen.

WND has reported on a long list of legal cases raising questions over the issue, and several of those have reached the U.S. Supreme Court already. Justices have so far declined to give any of the cases full hearings on their merits, but another conference remains on the Supreme Court docket for Jan. 23 on the issue.

“If Obama is sworn in as president, we will file a Petition for Writ of ‘Quo Warranto,’ a case that will challenge Obama as being ineligible to serve as president because he is ‘not qualified,’” said Philip J. Berg, a lawyer who has brought several cases to court. Berg, whose information is on his ObamaCrimes.com website, indicated the issue isn’t going away.

Orly Taitz, a California lawyer whose dispute remains pending before the high court, agreed, noting that one of the hearings already is scheduled for the days following Obama’s inaugural on Tuesday.

Taitz said her arguments rest on precedents from both the California Supreme Court, which years ago removed a candidate for president from the ballot because he was only 34, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s affirmation of that ruling. The Constitution requires a president to be 35.

*** and ***

The biggest question was why, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, Obama hasn’t simply ordered it made available to settle the rumors.

*** end quote ***

Why indeed? What’s to hide? Why not?

On Tuesday, do we have the final nail in the Constitution?

If at some point down the road, like all the other Presidential “dirty linen” it comes out that he was not a US citizen, it will proove Spponer correct about the Constitution.

Fascinating stuff!

# # # # #


POLITICAL: Is this the end of “public financing”?

Friday, December 12, 2008

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=abPrh.QKY5Tk

Obama Spent Four Times as Much as McCain at Race End
By Jonathan D. Salant and Kristin Jensen

*** begin quote ***

Dec. 5 (Bloomberg) — Barack Obama’s record-breaking fundraising gave him four times as much cash to spend as rival John McCain in the final months of the presidential campaign.

*** end quote ***

So much for his “public financing” pledge. Now can we finally bury the McCain – Feingold Unconstitutional attack on Free Speech?

Funny that McCain was knifed by his own law.

And, maybe he would not have made a good President since he was deceived by Obama’s renege.

# # # # #


POLITICAL: Think badly about O and get a visit from the Secret Service?

Thursday, December 4, 2008

http://ncc-1776.org/tle2008/tle495-20081130-03.html

THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 495, November 30, 2008
“The Thought Police have arrived.”

Entering the Age of O-ppression? by William Warren

Special to The Libertarian Enterprise

*** begin quote ***

“I certainly feel like they were trying to make me be quiet and trying to intimidate me and take away my free speech… That’s what really enraged me is that I thought ‘there’s a lot of people out there that if [the secret service] showed up on their porch, that’s exactly what they’d do—they’d be quiet’… I wasn’t going to be the one.”—Jessica Hughes, in an exclusive interview with ALG News, November 20th, 2008.

In the face of insurmountable intimidation and bullying from armed Obama lieutenants, Jessica Hughes of Lufkin Texas has remained defiant—like any good American who values free speech and views dissent as a patriotic duty.

*** end quote ***

Obviously, things are not going to improve with the “POLITICAL CORRECTNESS” when one doesn’t agree with the Obama “true believers”.

# # # # #


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,031 other followers

%d bloggers like this: