Combining the two terms that Bush was in office, the total number of military fatalities in Afghanistan was 630. From 2001 to 2006, the total was 358.
If you included 2007, that number would be 475. Or 7 more deaths then there currently are in 2010.
Let's put this in perspective: 2009 317 2010 468
During the 7 years of the Bush presidency, 630 of our brave soldiers died in Afghanistan. During the past two years of the Obama presidency, 785 soldiers died in Afghanistan.
Now don't get me wrong. I want our soldiers fighting these battles. However, why is it that Barack, who complained about the deaths of American soldiers, is being given such a clear free pass on this?
Let me put it another way: What would be the response if a McCain/Palin team lost more soldiers in the first two years of their presidency then Bush did in the previous 7?
Truth be told, though, for the most part conservatives haven't actually been using the words in such a way as to lend themselves to double entendre. With one or two exceptions, almost all of it has actually been coming from the left, which seems to have adopted the joke en masse during an earlier round of these protests back in February. After many hours of investigative journalism -- the kind that makes you wish you'd just gone to law school instead -- I think I've traced the meme's birth back to February 27th, when blogs like Instaputz and Wonkette started using it independently of one another. They were inspired by a photo that the Washington Independent's David Weigel shot of one protester carrying a sign that was, if you knew that second meaning, pretty funny: "Tea bag the liberal Dems before they tea bag you !!" (sic).
Since then, the left has used it so often, that Oxford added it to their dictionary. Here's how various lefty websites covered this event. The Huffington Post:
Keith Olbermann took credit for popularizing the word on MSNBC Tuesday night. But the word "teabagger" actually started to spread after the Washington Independent's David Weigel photographed a protester at the first D.C. Tea Party Protest in February holding the sign, "Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You!!"
It actually wasn't Keith, but Rachel. Although you have to give Keith credit for copping to it. What Mediaite wrote:
Their definition doesn’t touch upon any of the raunchier, more testicular connotations of the word, which Keith OlbermannandAnderson Cooper had a lot of fun with in April. Cooper can take a lot of credit for the popularization of the phrase: in response to David Gergen’s questions about the Republican Party’s abilities to organize and articulate a message, Cooper infamously quipped, “It’s hard to talk when you’re teabagging.”‘
And, just to make sure you can read the original Oxford posting, click on it for the details.
It turns out, if you want to get technical in a way that makes late-night college dormitory arguments go on forever, O'Donnell was correct. In fact, it is a well-worn talking point on the religious right, in particular, that the phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution.
By now, everyone has seen this video of MoveOn member Lauren Valle being taken down by Rand Paul supporters.
What you probably haven't seen is the event leading up to it:
So Lauren shoved her sign into the window of a moving car, and in response, Rand Paul supporters were keeping tabs on her. That's why in the first video you can literally hear Rand Paul supporters calling for the police as they take down Lauren.
There are a few issues that I want to address with this. The first one being the assertion that Lauren's head was stomped on. That's just not true. I have still frames from the video to prove it. In the middle image, I copied the shape and size of her head from the 3rd frame, and overlapped it with center image. That's why it appears white. So point #1 was that she had rushed his car earlier, trying to put a sign through it. Point #2 is that she wasn't 'stomped' on the head. As this series of images show, he was stepping on her shoulder when she rotated her shoulder forward. His foot stays on her shoulder, but doesn't hit her head.
Reports from news outlets say that she received a concussion from this. I'm not sure how. But I digress.
My final point is about how members of the left have said that this is 'typical' of Tea Party behavior, and how the Tea Party is made of thugs. Which pisses me off, considering the make up of these videos.
This one is from the Town Hall meetings on health care. You remember those? The ones where democrats felt that if you disagreed, you should be ejected from the 'open' meetings, and slapped around. As in this case:
Then there was the guy who cold cocked a Tea Party protestor...
But by far, my worst example of violence against the Tea Party movement is this one. Please watch.
Kenneth Gladney was supposed to get his day in court with his attackers on October 27th. I can't find any news of it, anywhere... but I'll keep looking.
In the meantime, Lauren is being supported by everyone from Media Matters to Think Progress as a useless victim who just happened to be wandering through a crowd of thugs when she was attacked. I beg of you, for the sake of context, to share the video of Lauren pushing her sign through the window of that moving car. She's an idiot. Not a victim.
MTV, BET and CMT are casting the audience for town hall meeting with President Obama. Shooting Oct. 14, 4 p.m. in Washington, D.C.
Seeking—Audience Members: males & females, 18+.
To apply, email townhallaudience@mtvnmix.com and put “Town Hall” in the subject line. To ensure that the audience represents diverse interests and political views, include your name, phone number, hometown, school attending, your job and what issues, if any, you are interested in or passionate about. Also, provide a recent photo and short description of your political views. Submission deadline: Oct. 14. No pay.
According to Politico's report:
"We’re just trying to get the broadest, most diverse audience possible," she said, denying that either Republicans or ugly people would be screened out.
Whew. If they screened out both Republicans and the ugly people, there wouldn't be any one left.
This really is riveting. I'm not kidding. Please watch this.
Please watch it. Christopher Coates was under pressure from the DOJ not to testify. He did anyway, as someone who worked for the Voter Rights division. Coates testimony is that there were people inside of the DOJ who felt that Voter Intimidation cases should not be pursued if the victim is white. Furthermore, when the Obama administration took over the DOJ, they promoted those people into positions of power. Coates was then told that he should only pursue 'traditional' Voter Rights intimidation cases, which he understood as being where a non-white person was the victim.
I used to be a big Bill Maher fan. I mean a huge one. I loved watching his show as he went on to challenge the bloated whales of the world, and poke fun at everyone with an equal amount of spite. Somewhere along the way, Bill became extremely hateful of Christians. In this interview, he says that what he likes about the president is that he doesn't seem to rely on his faith too much. Yet, that's kinda what the president has been saying for a while, as in this example.
This leads me to why I don't like Bill Maher anymore. He's failing to question authority. In fact, he's protecting it... all the while making fun of the underdogs. In this case, the Tea Party. In this interview, Maher actually accuses 'almost all' of the opposition to Barack to be based in racism. Bill, you are an asshat.
I say that with all sincerity. I cannot stand people who cannot just think critically and listen. Its not like conservatives have a reason to suddenly be interested in a liberal president or his policies. I get that Bill is a little bitter at conservative women who were on his panel, and who wouldn't sleep with him, and why he's pursuing them with all of his bitter glee. I don't like it, but I've seen guys like that before. I get why Bill doesn't trust religious people for the same reason. Bill travels with the Playboy set, and I imagine that crosses really are one of the biggest turn-offs for him, since Christian women tend to say 'no' more often. But I'll never get why he's fallen into playing the race card. Its a real easy way to make people like me actually disrespect him more. Its proof that he is just angry at conservatives, and can't open his mind long enough to listen to what we are saying. That's a damn shame.
I'll never understand why it is that when a conservative talks about Christ, he's obviously nutters. Yet, when a Democratic president talks about Christ... well, isn't that special? From the New York Times:
“I’m a Christian by choice,” the president said. “My family, frankly, they weren’t folks who went to church every week. My mother was one of the most spiritual people I knew but she didn’t raise me in the church, so I came to my Christian faith later in life and it was because the precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life that I would want to lead. Being my brothers and sisters’ keeper, treating others as they would treat me, and I think also understanding that Jesus Christ dying for my sins spoke to the humility we all have to have as human beings, that we’re sinful and we’re flawed and we make mistakes and we achieve salvation through the grace of God.”
Now don't get me wrong. I believe that everyone should be able to worship the God of their choice. I just don't get why, when a Republican talks about God, they are crazy people who believe in a fairy-tale. But when a Democrat says something about their faith? Well, you know...
Apparently, it doesn't matter because they don't actually believe it.
I want to work for Andrew Brietbart. He seems to be the only one in the US willing to stand up to anyone and just ask the right questions. I love, love, love this video:
If you have a friend who is on the left, ask them to watch this video, and get their reaction. If they tell you that it doesn't matter, because the source of the video seems to be on the right... then ask them why they believe the videos that portray Tea Party activists as ignorant. Thanks to Founding Bloggers for the video.
Keep in mind: New York is one of the most liberal cities in the US. The state is pretty blue.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in the state finds that 57% are angry at the government’s current policies, including 36% who are Very Angry. These findings are slightly lower than those found nationally. Thirty-eight percent (38%) are not angry at these policies.
Roughly half (52%) of voters in the state say neither party’s political leaders have a good understanding of what is needed today. Thirty-seven percent (37%) disagree, while 12% are not sure. These findings, too, are lower than those measured nationwide.
Only 28% of voters in the Empire State feel that most members of Congress care what their constituents think. Fifty-seven percent (57%) don’t believe this to be true, and another 15% are undecided.
In the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5260 trillion, which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan.
Read the article. Its a pretty good explanation of our debt. ABC News explains more... even though it contains our president explaining away how he's trying to cut our debt.
Over the past year alone, the amount the U.S. government owes its lenders has grown to more than half the country's entire economic output, or gross domestic product.
Even more alarming, experts say, is that those figures will climb to an unprecedented 200 percent of GDP by 2038 without a dramatic shift in course.
You don't need to wait until 2038 to panic. In the meantime, the poverty rate is rising? AP calls the timing 'unfortunate' for the administration:
The number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on President Barack Obama's watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty.
It is unnerving to wake up and learn that you have a mortgage on your home that exceeds the value of the property. Or, and too often both, you have a credit card line that you cannot repay and the issuer has you on the rack for ever bigger compound interest on the debt. The lesson has been well and truly learned that debt catches up with you. Millions understand that they are just going to have to find a way to live within their means—and then still eke out some savings to pay down debt. And there are well over 14 million Americans without a paying job, so the level of discontent is very high. Just how are they going to regain control of their lives?
So say economists... Of course, they also say that our economy is rebounding, so wtf do they know? From CNN Money:
The recovery is picking up steam as employers boost payrolls, but economists think the government's stimulus package and jobs bill had little to do with the rebound, according to a survey released Monday.
About 71 percent of Missouri voters backed a ballot measure, Proposition C, that would prohibit the government from requiring people to have health insurance or from penalizing them for not having it.
This is just the first step, but its important. It will force the federal government into a position where they will have to assert that insurance is a federal concern. Furthermore, they'll have to back laws that give the federal government a superseding right to fine you if you do not have insurance.
As we all know, government spending is up. Not just on the federal level, but on the state level too. So its worth knowing what your debt is, in the state that you are in, for the state that you are in. CNN Money has provided this handy chart.
From Real Clear Politics, the breakdown. I had read that all but five Republicans had voted against her, and that one Democrat voted for her. So I wanted to know who those people were.
The Democrat was Nebraskan Ben Nelson, who was already targeted by the left. The Republicans who voted against the grain of their party are: Lugar from Indiana, Collins and Snowe from Maine, Gregg from New Hampshire, and Graham from South Carolina.
From 538, who got it from the WH. For anyone who thought that it wasn't right that Fox was chosen for one of the front seats, note that they were the only cable news station that didn't have a seat up front. Despite being #1 in the ratings.
Yet another thing that drives me crazy is when I find out that we've paid for ads to run on television telling people how to take advantage of an entitlement.
One such case is now running on cable, using Andy Griffith as a pitchman for medicare. Of everything that I find distasteful in my government, this is among the worst. I do not want to pay taxes so that the government can buy commercials to tell me all of the great things I'm getting in return for paying taxes. In theory, my representatives can do that themselves.
Yet another one of the White Houses' stage props have turned on them. This time, its not a teleprompter, but Leslie Macko. The president was using her as an example of someone who kept sending out resumes, but who could not get a job.
The only problem with this? Uhm.. it might be that she had two criminal convictions on her record. That might be why Leslie was having trouble becoming employed again.
I debate politics. A lot. Lately, there is one argument that keeps coming up that is about as lame as it comes. Its a variation on blaming Republicans for everything.
On any topic, from cap & trade to running unprecedented deficits, the newest spin is to suggest that Republicans wanted to do it first.
Jill Lawrence dances this theme in her post on Politics Daily.
So many Republicans have changed their ideas on so many major issues that it's hard to keep up.
Jill then plays a very dangerous game of suggesting that some Republicans represent all of them.
Some examples of how Jill is distorting the truth:
1. Financial disclosure...."Republicans are in favor of disclosure," Sen. Mitch McConnell said on NBC's "Meet the Press" in 2000. Seven years later, on the same program, House GOP leader John Boehner declared: "Sunlight is the best disinfectant." But Boehner voted no last month on the DISCLOSE Act, which requires corporations, unions and some other groups to disclose more information about their campaign activities.
WALLACE: But you have indicated — in fact, at one point, you used and then took back the word "childish" to describe this idea of all these bans on gifts and travel. Do you feel, in fact, that bans make less sense than just more disclosure of what happens?
BOEHNER: I think that some of the proposals that were out there — and there have been a lot of proposals offered by members, by outside groups. And I thought some of the proposals were outright childish, treating members like kids.
I think that what we need to do is we need to deal with the underlying problems that we have today. And I believe that disclosure of the relationship between those who lobby us, whether they be paid lobbyists here in Washington, those from agencies, or others — disclosure of those relationships — and let the American people take a look at how this relationship works.
Sunlight's the best disinfectant. I think it will help.
Interesting. So Boehner didn't favor laws that "require[s] corporations, unions and some other groups to disclose more information about their campaign activities." Rather, Boehner favored disclosure of lobbyists and who they work for.
If you google the phrase "Sunlight is the best disinfectant", you'd swear that Boehner endorsed every and any type of financial disclosure. That's how strong this narrative has become. More on this later.
But make no mistake, Jill Lawrence is trying to muddy the waters of real debate.
Fox had this story about the president and the auto industry. The president is going on a victory tour to discuss how great everything is now after he bailed them out.
While watching the video, I noted that part of the video seemed to be kinda cut in, by a guy named David Cole from the Center for Automobile Research. Watch it, and note how David comes in to defend the auto industry.
Now I know that sometimes, special interest groups will supply television studios with pre-cut footage of them commenting on an issue. And this certainly seemed to be the case. But I googled to find out if it was. That's how I found this, by the NYTPicker:
The center has been cited in 137 different Times stories since 2001, most of them quoting David Cole -- who has been variously identified by Times reporters as its "director," "executive director," "president," "chairman" and "head." (CAR's website give his title as "chairman.")
Clearly, its a special interest group that does a great job of feeding quotes the the NY Times. I think they have outsourced their influence.
Its started with Color Of Change, and then moved to Media Matters.
Go to Media Matters and punch in the search term "Goldline". You'll get 9 pages of hits.
Most of them are labeled "So, who's still advertising on Beck?" This is one of the first pages where they did this, back in August of 2009. They've been doing it nonstop for a year.
Media Matters for America has compiled a list of companies that did run ads on Glenn Beck this evening (August 26) in the order they appeared:
Eighty advertisers have reportedly dropped their ads from Beck's Fox News program since he called President Obama a "racist" who has a "deep-seated hatred of white people." The gold companies are among the last ones that still want to be associated with Beck. Today, they got their reward.
Never let it be said that Media Matters holds back on the greedy people narrative. To their credit, Media Matters did not say anything about Shekels.
This narrative has continued for a year now.
Another page I've found along the way is from SEIU. SEIU is one of Beck's favorite targets. Who woulda guessed that they'd start aiming at his show too?
Let's be clear about what the attack on Goldline is really about: the far left trying to shut Beck up. Remember what Media Matters wrote a while back:
The gold companies are among the last ones that still want to be associated with Beck.
The recession was deeper than the government previously thought.
The Commerce Department, in revisions issued Friday, estimates the economy shrank 2.6 percent last year -- the steepest drop since 1946. That's worse than the 2.4 percent decline originally estimated.
uh huh.
Blogger Brian Steltzer chastised Fox News for its low viewership among African Americans. HuffPo, being HuffPo, followed suit.
This irony is clear when you find out that Brian Steltzer has the lowest readership of any media blog:
Interestingly, though, the media site where Stelter primarily blogs (New York Times' Media Decoder) suffers from the lowest percentage of African-American readers (4.6%) when compared to comparable media sites like Mediaite (5.8%), Gawker (6.4%), Mediabistro (9.2%), etc., according to Nielsen Media Research.
Every once in a while, this administration does something that makes paranoid conspiracy theorists look like geniuses.
I recently ran across a special on PBS called Inside Islam. Its a pretty ham-handed attempt to portray Islam as just any other religion. One that respects women, abhors violence, but just wishes that America would never, ever, ever allow themselves to influence other cultures.
According to "Inside Islam", they do not hate us for who we are. Heck, the show spends half of the show telling us how much Islam admires the democracy of America. Its just like any other religion, it keeps telling us. When the topic of suicide bombers comes up, the show tries to tell us that it has nothing to do with religion. They try to explain that Kamakaze pilots killed themselves too, but not in the name of religion. (Epic fail. Kamakaze pilots believed highly that they would be rewarded spiritually.)
Anyway, I decided to Google to find out more about the intention of the film. I figured out that maybe I was missing their greater point. That's when I ran across this link. Its America.gov. That's us, by the way.
Okay. So why is America.gov running a promo for Inside Islam? The program was not sponsored by the US (as far as I know) and is not about the US.
Unity Productions Foundation (UPF) is now approved and enrolled in the Combined Federal Campaign. Our CFC Code #30916! As a federal employee, your donation will be deducted directly from your paycheck and is tax deductible.
Founded by Michael Wolfe (ABC News Nightline Hajj Coverage) and Alex Kronemer (CNN Hajj Coverage), UPF produces films, Hollywood engagement and dialogue campaigns aimed to increase understanding and foster dialogue among the world’s spiritual traditions with a focus on American – Muslim relations.
The page includes the tagline:
Reminder: Campaign Season is September 1 to December 15.
The mission of the CFC is to promote and support philanthropy through a program that is employee focused, cost-efficient, and effective in providing all federal employees the opportunity to improve the quality of life for all.
Once again, I'd like to ignore conspiracy theorists. I think its healthy to. But my government is making the conspiracy theorists look rationale.
As the US goes full bore into heatlh care socialization, England is backing away from that train wreck. From the NY Times of all places:
Practical details of the plan are still sketchy. But its aim is clear: to shift control of England’s $160 billion annual health budget from a centralized bureaucracy to doctors at the local level. Under the plan, $100 billion to $125 billion a year would be meted out to general practitioners, who would use the money to buy services from hospitals and other health care providers. Huh. I wonder why that is?
Okay, we all know why it is. Because as soon as the government becomes involved, things get dumb expensive.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, seeking to console liberal activists who were disappointed by the final version of the national health care law, assured them that there would eventually be a public option.
Yep. We all knew that... right? We knew it was coming? Look, the word Boondoggle will have to be redefined if this ever goes into full effect. Please, not for my sake. Not even for your sake. For your children's sake, stop this dumb thing.
To me, this whole argument about health care is like two people arguing over whether a house is properly painted. One person jumps to the conclusion that the house is horribly ruined, and sets a torch to it. That's what's about to happen to our health care system.
The Wall Street Journal recently wrote an article covering the new things that the IRS can do connected with health care:
Ms. Olson also exposed a damaging provision that she estimates will hit some 30 million sole proprietorships and subchapter S corporations, two million farms and one million charities and other tax-exempt organizations. Prior to ObamaCare, businesses only had to tell the IRS the value of services they purchase. But starting in 2013 they will also have to report the value of goods they buy from a single vendor that total more than $600 annually—including office supplies and the like.
But... I thought that was debunked by the left, when they said that the IRS would not be involved...?
Adam Serwer is a blogger on the American Prospect website. As someone who blogs about Civil Rights, Adam decided to throw himself headfirst into the whole Black Panther controversy.
Of course, instead of focusing on the Civil Rights case, the one that the Obama administration won and subsequently decided to reduce the charges on, Adam instead decided to focus on the criminal charges:
This means that the case was downgraded to a civil case 11 days before Obama was inaugurated, 26 days before Eric Holder became attorney general, and about nine months before Thomas Perez was confirmed as head of the Civil Rights Division
Go read the article. Then read the update:
So, I just wanted to clear something up: I wrote my post yesterday about the Justice Department's decision not to pursue criminal charges against the NBPP during the Bush administration because I had seen conservatives arguing that it was made by the Obama administration. It wasn't. I did not mean to suggest that the civil case, which the DoJ dropped in May of last year after receiving a preliminary injunction against the only NBPP member in Philadelphia who was walking around with a baton, was dismissed during the Bush administration. I apologize if any of my writing has been unclear on this point or any confusion has resulted because I misstated the accusation of who wanted the criminal case dismissed.
I haven't seen one conservative arguing about the criminal complaints, so I followed the links above to the Media Matter's article. Media Matters has O'Reilly talking to two legal analysts who both complain that they have no idea why criminal complaints were not pursued.
But the bulk of the story is why the civil suit was dropped after they won.
Getting back to Adam; The comments pretty much say it all, but Adam had to 'update' his blog several times. It finally got to the point where he had to issue this blog. Now I have to give Adam partial credit. In his original post, he does talk about the civil case. However, its clear to me that he was trying to muddy the waters by talking about the criminal case. As I mentioned before, O'Reilly was the only one I heard talking about the criminal case, and only in that clip that Media Matters focused on.
The tagline of the American Prospect is "Liberal Intelligence". Skipping past the obvious oxymoron, I wish that the Prospect and Adam would adhere to their tagline.
Media Matters has, on previous occasions, left me dumbfounded in their dishonesty.
But today, they deserve a special award for duping their own people.
Currently, this timeline is being used by liberals to argue that Fox News was instrumental in the firing of Sherrod by airing the edited video. There's only one problem with that. Media Matters own timeline shows that Fox did not air the video until after Sherrod resigned.
So why is their confusion? Well, its like this: Media Matters is using the FoxNation website (an electronic BBS) and making it the equivalent of Fox News coverage.
You don't have to believe me. Go visit the timeline for yourself. See what impression you are left with. Then delve into the details of it.
Two lies came out during the health care debate that I want to make sure are addressed, regarding our health care: 1) We have a rapidly declining life expectancy 2) Our infant mortality rate is horrible compared to other countries
1) We do not have a rapidly declining life expectancy. That was an outright lie produced during the health care debate by those who wanted universal health care. Don't believe me? Here is a chart.
The argument has been, for a while now, that the US is 'lagging' behind other countries in life expectancy... which is party true: other countries don't kill each other as much as we do in the US. We have a much higher rate of homicide then other countries. The irony is that we also have much more self-destructive habits then most other countries. The more prosperous a country, the more ways we come up with to kill ourselves. For instance, drugs. Cars. Not to mention skateboarding down a railing. The point is that sometimes, people become so prosperous that they actually do bad things to themselves. We're at that point.
2) Our rates of infant mortality can be found here, and the chart allows you to compare it to other countries.
Now I know you've heard (again) that we lag behind other countries... and that is also true. However, again, it doesn't tell you why: Differing definitions of infant mortality, fertility treatments, drug use, and young women having babies.
I found this out after a long search on the web. The first problem is that not every country defines infant mortality the same. Some countries describe a child who is stillborn as an infant mortality, while others don't describe the child as being born at all. The second problem is that it turns out that premature babies tend not to live long. That leads me to the other three reasons... Fertility Treatments: We literally create babies that would normally not make it to term. They get born prematurely, and thus (unfortunately) have a high infant mortality rate. Drug use: creates babies with harmed immunity systems Young women: have premature babies at a much higher rate. See above.
I understand that these are hard things to look up. Honest, it took me a while. But I hate that there were people in charge, who knew better, who used these as arguments to why our health care was 'inferior'. It had nothing to do with our health care. Those were dishonest arguments from the start.
I just did some simple research to find out the debt, Bush vs. Obama.
When Bush came into office on 1/20/01, the debt was 5.7 Trillion. The debt when the democrats took over congress on 1/3/2007 was 8.5 Trillion.
That makes Bush responsible for approximately 2.8 Trillion of debt.
The democratic-run congress then ballooned that debt in only 2 year's time to 10.6 Trillion on January 20th, 2009, the day Barack took over.
Bush & the Republican led congress added 2.8 trillion of debt for the 6 years that they were in power, or approximately 460 billion a year.
Congress spent 2.1 Trillion over two years, or roughly 1.05 Trillion a year with the Democrats in charge and Bush as a lame duck president.
But that's nothing to what happened once Obama took office. On January 20th of the next year, our debt was 12.3 trillion. In one year, the Democrat-run congress with Barack at the helm gave us 1.7 Trillion of debt in one year... more then triple what the Republican led congress was racking up under Bush.
In one of those "that explains a lot" statements, Mort Zuckerman (US News & World Report Editor in Chief) admitted that he helped write one of President Obama's speeches.
This, in itself, is pretty damning. More damning still is the yawn it produced in the media that covers the president.
Shouldn't someone in the media be outraged to find out that one of the EIC's of a major news organization was helping write the president's speech? Presumably before his magazine covered it?
On Jan 3rd, 2007, the DJI was at 12,800.18 That's when it started plunging downward. On November 4th, 2008, the day that Barack was elected, the DJI was at: 9,625.28 The DJI was at 8,228 when Obama took office.
I've been reading a lot of praise by those on the left for the Obama administration regarding their push for financial reform.
Its ironic for me to hear them blaming George Bush for 'not doing' anything. Particularly when he was the force that tried to get something done.
The New York Times was the first one to give the Bush administration credit for trying to oversee Freddie and Fannie. They did so way back on September 11, of 2003.
The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
Most of us know what happened during that attempt to regulate the industry. But in case you don't, here's a short video lesson:
The Wall Street Journal was kind enough to sum up the whole sordid saga in a commentary provided by Karl Rove. Some highlights: Because of this, the Bush administration warned in the budget it issued in April 2001 that Fannie and Freddie were too large and overleveraged. Their failure "could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting federally insured entities and economic activity" well beyond housing. I like to fact check, so I looked it up. After all, if you're going to quote Karl Rove, someone isn't going to believe you. This is what the 2002 FY budget of George Bush said, in his first year in office [my emphasis in red, added]:
Uncertainties about the Federal Government’s liability have increased in some areas. Consolidation has increased bank size, and deregulation has allowed banks to engage in many risky activities. Thus, the loss to the deposit insurance funds can turn out to be unusually large in some bad years. The potential loss needs to be limited by large insurance reserves and effective regulation. The large size of some GSEs is also a potential problem. Financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.
Interesting, huh? Its almost like... Republicans were on top of this the entire time. Not convinced yet? Read this quote:
There is some evidence that the mortgage industry has seen an increase in the number of predatory loans. Predatory loans, which carry excessive fees or other unfair pricing structure, harm unsuspecting buyers. Predatory loans are more prevalent in the subprime market where conventional loans are made to higher risk borrowers. The Government can improve mortgage market efficiency by squeezing out predatory practices through increased regulation and disclosure. In addition to predatory lending, the mortgage industry also has seen increased incidences of fraud.
There's been a lot of rewriting of history regarding Obama's control of GM. So I thought I'd remind people what happened.
Steve Rattner was a man without any experience in the car industry. According to New York magazine, he worked as a journalist, an investment banker, and then the head of a private equity fund. His primary qualification for becoming the car czar was that he raised a lot of money for democrats.
This is what New York magazine said of his handling of the task force:
Six months after taking the job, Rattner (who declined to comment for this story) had helped to perform a seeming magic trick, rewriting the understanding between the car companies and the unions while bending the companies’ financiers—his friends and peers—to his will. With what seemed a cool, almost arrogant confidence—his casual dismissal of GM CEO Rick Wagoner reflected this quality—he had played a large role in restructuring the American car industry, accomplishing what few had thought possible a few months earlier, and in record time.
Still not convinced? This was Politico at the time that it happened:
The White House confirmed Wagoner was leaving at the government's behest after The Associated Press reported his immediate departure, without giving a reason.
The next time that someone challenges that the administration is in charge of the auto industry, ask them what Steve Rattner's job was.
Its too late to call this progress. It should have been labeled a tax before the health care bill was passed. But its more honest then it was before. From the NY Times:
When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”
What it comes down to is that the health care takeover is being challenged in court. Barack's administration can't defend taking money from the public unless they actually call it a tax. Personally, I hope that when it goes to court, the plaintiffs will detail how the administration tried not to call it a tax, and how it was pitched to congress as something that was not a tax.
You may wonder how insurance companies are going to make money. Well, I am at least. There is an ever-widening array of things that they are supposed to provide, without raising their premiums.
The White House on Wednesday issued new rules requiring health insurance companies to provide free coverage for dozens of screenings, laboratory tests and other types of preventive care.
Who was the person in charge of this? HHS director Katleen Sebelius. Welcome to the new fascism where companies have no control over what they do, or what they offer. Moreover, where they can't charge for services that they are required to provide.
Now that we're on the path to government run insurance, stories are coming out about how its not working in other governments. Let's talk about Germany, where they are raising taxes and cutting drug benifits to balance their health care program:
The measure is part of an overhaul of health care intended to plug an 11-billion euro ($13.8 billion) deficit in the public health-insurance system in 2011. It follows Cabinet agreement on June 29 to cuts in spending on drugs to reduce soaring costs to public health-insurance funds.
Neat. Keep in mind, Germany was supposed to be one of the places where government run health care 'works'.
From a transcript of the second debate between McCain & Barack. October 2008:
...I believe that part of the reason we have a difficult situation is because we made a bad judgment going into Iraq in the first place when we hadn't finished the job of hunting down bin Laden and crushing al Qaeda. So what happened was we got distracted, we diverted resources, and ultimately bin Laden escaped, set up base camps in the mountains of Pakistan in the northwest provinces there. They are now raiding our troops in Afghanistan, destabilizing the situation. They're stronger now than at any time since 2001. And that's why I think it's so important for us to reverse course, because that's the central front on terrorism. They are plotting to kill Americans right now. As Secretary Gates, the defense secretary, said, the war against terrorism began in that region and that's where it will end. So part of the reason I think it's so important for us to end the war in Iraq is to be able to get more troops into Afghanistan, put more pressure on the Afghan government to do what it needs to do, eliminate some of the drug trafficking that's funding terrorism....And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act and we will take them out. We will kill bin Laden; we will crush Al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority.
Uh huh. Please remember that he said that... our biggest national security priority. He repeated that theme in November 12, of 2008:
President-elect Barack Obama wants to renew the U.S. commitment to finding al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, according to his national security advisers.
One way to describe Obama is that underneath the inspirational leader who wants to change politics—and upon whom desperate Democrats, Independents, and not a few Republicans are projecting their hopes—is an ambitious, prickly, and occasionally ruthless politician. But underneath that guy is another one, an Obama who's keenly aware that presidential politics is about timing, and that at this extremely low moment in American political life, there is a need for someone—and he firmly believes that someone is him—to lift up the nation in a way no politician has in nearly half a century.
There are other areas of the interview that are downright damning
One of the riddles of the Obama campaign is, to what extent does a candidate who preaches a gospel of changing politics need to run a revolutionarily different kind of campaign? The question has gnawed at Obama since he entered the race. At his very first press conference as a candidate, a reporter asked Obama why he was employing a team of opposition researchers—aides who spend their days and nights digging up dirt on other candidates and often leaking that info, "anonymously," to the media.
But what I really thought was interesting is what he said about Iraq at the time:
"The fact of the matter is, I have the most specific plan in terms of how to get out of Iraq of any candidate," he lectured us.
The next time you read about Democrats who are upset about Republicans raising money in shady ways for their campaigns, remember this story.
The Democrats went to Canada. Why? Because if you're not actually physically in the US, you aren't constrained by US election financing laws.
Sounds ridiculous, but its true. Uber reporter Lynn Sweet has the story:
The Giannoulias Democratic Illinois Senate campaign confirmed Monday--after prodding from the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee--that Alexi Giannoulias was in Canada on Sunday attending a fund-raiser at a trial lawyer convention in Vancouver that would benefit his Senate campaign.
It kinda makes sense that trial lawyers would figure out a way to escape restrictions on their fund raising.
I don't want to quote it too much, because I don't want to spoil it. However, this line is genius:
This misplaced griping stems not from Obama's failure to "think big" but from a misreading of the political climate: Liberals thought they'd be popular.
Exactly. The left is still trying to figure out why, even though they took over, they still aren't popular.
Its pretty funny to watch the left try to figure out who Palin is. In the latest New Republic, the latest spin is that she's a media genius. Check out these two lines:
In the midst of this aggressive visibility, however, Palin keeps a tight grip on her time in the public eye.
Uh huh. She's so smart, that she keeps out of the public eye in her aggressive visibility.
Every once in a while, I run across something that I need to archive. Like this article:
In his weekly radio address today, [the president] once again framed the war in Iraq as a battle against al-Qaeda and urged the American people to give his troop surge strategy more time to be successful. The president started off this week by giving listeners a preview of his speech at the American Legion national convention this week.
I thought it was interesting to hear the president urge for more time. Especially considering that at the time the president was asking for more time, Senator Obama was criticizing the war.
You see, this was President Bush, in August of 2007.
To be fair to Obama, I have to quote him at length:
It is time to turn the page. When I am President, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world's most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland.
The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
I introduced a plan in January that would have already started bringing our troops out of Iraq, with a goal of removing all combat brigades by March 31, 2008. If the President continues to veto this plan, then ending this war will be my first priority when I take office.
There is no military solution in Iraq. Only Iraq's leaders can settle the grievances at the heart of Iraq's civil war. We must apply pressure on them to act, and our best leverage is reducing our troop presence. And we must also do the hard and sustained diplomatic work in the region on behalf of peace and stability.
That's not all he said. Please read the complete speech. Its also important to note that this was not a one time position of the president. A month later, in September 12, 2007, he said:
I opposed this war from the beginning. I opposed the war in 2002. I opposed it in 2003. I opposed it in 2004. I opposed it in 2005. I opposed it in 2006. I introduced a plan in January to remove all of our combat brigades by next March. And I am here to say that we have to begin to end this war now.
My plan for ending the war would turn the page in Iraq by removing our combat troops from Iraq's civil war; by taking a new approach to press for a new accord on reconciliation within Iraq; by talking to all of Iraq's neighbors to press for a compact in the region; and by confronting the human costs of this war.
First, we need to immediately begin the responsible removal of our troops from Iraq's civil war. Our troops have performed brilliantly. They brought Saddam Hussein to justice. They have fought for over four years to give Iraqis a chance for a better future. But they cannot - and should not - bear the responsibility for resolving the grievances at the heart of Iraq's civil war.
It is now July of 2010. As Barack said, "...I opposed the war in 2002. I opposed it in 2003. I opposed it in 2004. I opposed it in 2005. I opposed it in 2006." He basically opposed it until he was in office. Now I wouldn't blame him if he actually turned around and said, "You know what? President Bush was right to stay in Iraq" But Barack won't do that. Its not that he isn't smart enough to realize that Bush was right. Clearly, he does. Its either that his ego is too big for him to realize it, or he drowned himself in his own pronouncements that Bush was wrong that he made people believe him. And now, he can't admit it, or Bush looks smarter then he is.
There are a lot of people that I do not want as my leader. The very first category is the one who cannot admit when they were clearly wrong.
Whenever I speak to people about the upcoming health care takeover, I bring up the United States Post Office. I don't think that you can get a greater idea of what we're in for with government health care then the post office.
Think about it. You wait in line, usually for 15 minutes, just to send a package. The person behind the desk usually has an attitude that normally runs the gamut between indifference and incompetence. They move at a snails pace because they can never get fired. We've all had this experience. Yet, some people defend the USPS as an example of efficiency.
CBS has an article about the current crisis in the USPS. Despite government oversight (or more likely, from it) the USPS:
Kearney said the agency is facing a $7 billion loss in 2011. The rate increase will bring in an extra $2.5 billion, meaning it still faces a $4.7 billion loss.
This is a government run agency that has the worst customer service of any organization that I've ever run into. In my opinion, its just a peek of what we should expect out of government run health care in the future.
The way I look at it: if you are wearing Kevlar as part of your normal everyday job of representing my country, you are entitled to occasionally blow off steam.
Some of our troops in Afghanistan, performing Lady GaGa's Telephone.
The rumor is that these men are now receiving some criticism for this. I hope that isn't true.
I also hope that Lady GaGa goes over there and performs in person for them. They have a great sense of humor. Stay safe guys.
When the Blagojevich scandal broke, the White House went into full spin mode about how they were 'investigating' everything, and that they'd let us know right away what they came up with.
Of course, they never found any evidence that the WH did anything wrong. Go figure. From Time magazine:
This all seemed rather open and shut. Since the press had no information suggesting otherwise, President Obama was allowed to move on from the scandal. But recent testimony in the Blagojevich trial suggests that Craig's report and Obama's effort at transparency failed to tell the entire story.
On Tuesday, an Illinois union leader, Thomas Balanoff, testified that he received a phone call the day before the election from President Obama to discuss Valerie Jarrett and the Senate seat. Balanoff would serve as a go-between, connecting the Obama inner circle to the Blagojevich inner circle.
Remember how there was no one at all, according to the WH, that had any knowledge of any deal? Well, that's if you don't include the president's attempt to get a friend into a senate seat.
This is typical Chicago politics. Which means that its corrupt, for those of you who are not from Chicago.
Thus, another fallacy of the health care bill falls to pieces. From USA Today:
People without insurance aren't the ones filling up the nation's emergency rooms. Far from it. The uninsured are no more likely to use ERs than people with private insurance, perhaps because they're wary of huge bills.
The big question for me is: Why didn't any of the press say this BEFORE the health care bill was passed? This was a huge fallacy that was presented by the president to sell health care. Shouldn't someone have called bullshit on him?
No, the health care bill will not make things cheaper for everyone. In fact, we'll be putting our grandchildren in debt. Yes, you will be taxed if you do not buy insurance. Its a government mandate. It will not promote cost savings. Nothing that is mandatory will create savings.
This is a giant boondoggle, and the quicker its killed, the better.
I love how many things the president criticized before he became president. CBS caught him in this big double standard. Barack established a new financial commission in February. He did this after complaining about the many commissions during the campaign:
"Folks, we don't need a commission to spend a few years and a lot of taxpayer money to tell us what's going on in our economy," he continued. "We don't need a commission to tell us gas prices are high or that you can't pay your bills. We don't need a commission to tell us you're losing your jobs. We don't need a commission to study this crisis, we need a President who will solve it - and that's the kind of President I intend to be."
Congrats to NPR for being the first one to notice this, and CBS for picking it up. That's actual journalism, folks. Research and stuff. Holding politicians accountable for their promises.
From a HotAir report on what Barack said back then. Barack calling Iraq a disaster, and saying that we are not kicking ass in Iraq. He said there was a modest decline, and that it was unsustainable.
Okay, maybe not politely. But he's saying what I've been screaming for about 2 years now, ever since a Democratic congress passed the first TARP:
Thank you, Santelli, for not being polite about it anymore. Since the dumb idiots in office won't listen anymore, maybe you can get the point through.
Barack spent $787 Billion dollars, and then said that he couldn't cut the budget. He passed a health care bill that cost roughly a trillion, and then said that he was going to be a deficit hawk. C'mon man. The debt is now 2.5 Trillion more then it was when he came into office. Stop spending.
Recently, someone was telling me about what a lightweight they thought Sarah Palin was. Of course, I challenged them to bring up examples, and of course, they blanked.
So I decided to give them examples of what a lightweight might say.
With that in mind, here are my favorite Obama gaffes of all time.
Number 6 - Isn't that special: Barack, on Jay Leno, says that his bowling was like the Special Olympics.
Number 5 - Time to add some stars to that flag
"It is wonderful to be back in Oregon," Obama said. "Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it." Number 4 - A Tribute to the movie "Sixth Sense"
"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today — our sense of patriotism is particularly strong."
Numger 3 - The tragedy that dwarfed 9/11 in Kansas Of course, we all missed out on hearing about it, but Barack updated us:
“In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed.”
Number 2 - The main problem with the Middle East is, eh, the Middle East?
"The Middle East Is Obviously An Issue That Has Plagued The Region For Centuries"
A US Senate committee has approved a wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that some critics have suggested would give the US president the authority to shut down parts of the Internet during a cyberattack.
Barack, telling us that "people should learn that lesson about me", that he's actually going to 'call the bluff' of people who want to reduce the deficit.
Not gulf. Golf. Sometimes when I read something about the president, I want to believe its not true. Like this:
When U.S. President Barack Obama stepped off his helicopter in Huntsville on Friday, the first thing he said was, “You’ve got a lot of golf courses here, don’t you?” Industry Minister Tony Clement told the National Post in an exclusive interview.
I'd like to believe that he's not that dense when it comes to his current image. But I demur.
"The president understands that the governor would be willing to make the appointment of Valerie Jarrett as long as he gets what he's asked for. . . . The governor gets the Cabinet appointment he's asked for," Harris said, explaining a recorded call.
You see, Obama wanted Valerie Jarret to have that seat. He even passed along a list of 4 senate candidates that he wanted in. Which means, at the very least, that Obama knew that a crime was being committed. Of course.
Email correspondence from the Pentagon document dump reveals Gen. David Petraeus was “happy to” participate in its “puppet” TV military analyst program in 2005. The “talented” military officer was promoted by President Bush to lieutenant general in 2004, with the public mission of training Iraqi military forces.
MoveOn (via Weasel Zippers) had their ad that portrayed him as General Betray us.
Without honor, he is not a soldier but a fraud, a scandal, a dishonest civil servant with a gun. His medals are lies - particularly and especially any medal for "valor".
I invite you to find the way that your favorite liberal website portrayed Patraeus Before June 23rd. You know, before Barack decided that Patraeus was great.
Oh man. They are already naming highways after him.
It’s official: An 800-foot stretch of Orlando road is now named “President Barack Obama Parkway.”
The City Council voted Monday to rename a short section of Mission Road between Cason Cove Drive and Conroy Road in Obama’s honor.
This, according to the Orlando Sentinal. The saddest part? Its being paid for with stimulus money, so that some day, some grandfather can tell his grandkid: "You paid for this with money that you haven't even made yet."
But... I thought that health care was going to be cheaper? Oh boy. From AP:
Companies that offer employee health insurance expect another steep jump in medical costs next year, and more will ask workers to share a bigger chunk of the expense, according to a new PricewaterhouseCoopers report.
Strange... that's what all of us Tea Party folks were saying. Huh.
No, not that she read them. But that she's actually worked on them with the WH??? I'm hoping that at some time, someone comes forward to clarify this. I hope that at that time, it turns out to be much more innocent then it sounds:
What??? Oh yeah, we all kinda knew that. From the Sun Times:
Immigration agents and local police departments this week arrested 26 people in eight area communities in a sweep targeting illegal aliens with ties to street gangs.
Hmmm. So some of the people who want to enforce immigration laws may want to do so because of street gangs? Who would have guessed.
According to the public policy center, Bush wins. Our new Louisiana poll has a lot of data points to show how unhappy voters in the state are with
Barack Obama's handling of the oil spill but one perhaps sums it up better than anything else- a majority of voters there think George W. Bush did a better job with Katrina than Obama's done dealing with the spill.
Oh, hilarious.
50% of voters in the state, even including 31% of Democrats, give Bush higher marks on that question compared to 35% who pick Obama.
Thank you Democrats for at least some consistency.
.png)
The