Archive for April, 2009

Obama’s Stance On Hamas Worries Israel

April 29, 2009

This story was filed by CBS Radio News’ Robert Berger in Jerusalem.

Israel is concerned that the U.S. may be planning to approve funding for a future Palestinian unity government that would include the Islamic militant group Hamas. 

Israeli officials say the Obama administration has asked Congress to change a U.S. law to allow such indirect funding for Hamas, even though the group is on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations. 

According to a report in the Los Angeles Times, the Obama administration requested the changes this month as part of an $83-billion emergency spending bill that also includes funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

The bill would provide $840 million for the Palestinian Authority and for the reconstruction of Gaza following the Israeli assault on the territory in January. 

Gaza is ruled by Hamas, while the more moderate Palestinian Authority, led by U.S.-backed President Mahmoud Abbas of the Fatah party, controls the West Bank. The rival factions have been holding reconciliation talks in Cairo with the goal of forming a national unity government. 

“Every step that strengthens Hamas only distances peace,” an unnamed Israeli political official in Jerusalem told the nation’sHaaretz newspaper. “In the event that the report is true, it is painful and worrying.” 

Israel believes Hamas should be boycotted until it meets requirements set down by the Quartet of world powers involved in Mideast peace negotiations — the U.S., European Union, United Nations and Russia. 

The Quartet has said Hamas must renounce violence and recognize the Jewish state. Officials in Jerusalem say Hamas is a terrorist group that should be isolated, and any U.S. funding for the group would weaken Palestinian moderates and harm the peace process.

So, if i read this article right, President Barack H. Obama of the United States of America is putting into place a system that would, effectively, make himself a “sponsor of terrorism”? Is he having flashbacks to the madrassas? Is his “muslim training” kicking in? Or, is he just a blithering idiot? Either this, again, shows lack of forethought or is he really this “maniacal”? 


Arlen Spector–A History of Betrayal and Lies…..

April 29, 2009

AP reports……

HARRISBURG, Pa. — Sen. Arlen Specter’s surprise defection to the Democratic Party scrambled the political calculus for both parties in next year’s Pennsylvania Senate race.

One Democrat quickly decided against seeking the nomination against Specter, the deep-pocketed incumbent who immediately won the backing of the national and state party. Another who has never held elective office said he would stick it out.

“We are thrilled to welcome Sen. Specter into the Democratic fold and he can count on our full support,” Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine said in a statement.

In a matter of hours, Arlen Specter went from a Republican for nearly three decades to Democratic incumbent. The party switcher has raised about $6 million for his campaign and President Obama has offered to campaign and raise funds for him. In Pennsylvania, Democrats also have a significant registration edge, 4.4 million to the GOP’s 3.2 million.

Republican former Rep. Pat Toomey, the conservative who almost defeated Specter in the 2004 primary, geared up for a path to the Republican nomination that will no longer be the rematch he hoped for.

State Democratic Chairman T.J. Rooney said Specter’s decision to run for a sixth term as a Democrat “speaks volumes about where the two parties are, not only in America but particularly in our state.”

The GOP requires a “litmus test” to determine whether prospective candidates are conservative enough, Rooney said. “If they’re not pure enough, they’re not welcome.”

Specter, who had been one of a handful of Republican moderates in the Senate, characterized his decision as a response to growing conservatism within the GOP that he said has left him more aligned with the Democratic Party. He also acknowledged that his chances of winning the Republican nomination for his seat next year are slim.

Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell, who openly acknowledged trying to persuade Specter to switch parties, remained uncharacteristically silent Tuesday. An aide said he did not plan to comment on the latest developments until Wednesday.

Specter, 79, has been a Democrat before. He switched his registration to Republican in 1965 to run for Philadelphia district attorney. He was first elected to the Senate in 1980.

For Republicans and Democrats, Specter’s switch changed the equation for next year’s Senate campaign.

For the GOP, it wiped out expectations of a high-profile rematch between Specter and Toomey, who headed the Washington-based Club for Growth before announcing his candidacy. For Democrats, it thrust a nationally prominent incumbent with a long record of independent voting into what had been a sparse field of prospective candidates.

“It’s unsettling to both parties,” said Terry Madonna, a professor and pollster at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster.

State Rep. Josh Shapiro, who had considered seeking the nomination for Specter’s seat when it belonged to the GOP, said shortly after Specter’s announcement that he will not run “under these circumstances.”

“Sen. Specter is the incumbent Democratic senator,” the Democrat from Montgomery County in suburban Philadelphia said.

The only declared Democratic candidate for Specter’s seat, Joe Torsella, reaffirmed his plans to seek the Democratic nomination in a primary still more than a year away.

“I believe we need new leadership, new ideas and new approaches in Washington … Nothing about today’s news regarding Senator Specter changes that,” said Torsella, another suburban Philadelphia resident.

Torsella is the chairman of the state Board of Education and a former president of Philadelphia’s National Constitution Center, but has not previously held elective office.

    Since the early 60’s, Arlen spector spent his career as the least trustworthy member of Congress. He, in 1964, formulated, the “cover story” of the, now infamous, “magic bullet theory”. He did this on his own when nobody else was thinking along these lines. He, then, in 1980, saw the “Reagan Revolution” coming and, like every good political slime-ball, jumped ship and became a Republican. While in the party,  Spector was never well liked. He  did not seem to share any of the philosophies of the Republican Party. He rode the coattails of the Republican Party until he realized that he, very well, might lose the Republican nomination in Pennsylvania. Lets hope the people of Pennsylvania see this lowlife for what he truly is and put this, quite old–age 79, weaselly epitome of all that is wrong with American politics, into permanent retirement. 

‘Air Force One’ causes panic at Goldman Sachs in Jersey City

April 28, 2009

It was a secret mission, set up by the Department of Defense and coordinated with the Federal Aviation Administration. Federal, state and local law enforcement agencies throughout the region were notified last week, with the strict warning not to share the information with anyone but those “with a need to know.”

Today, the carefully choreographed flight of the presidential aircraft, accompanied by a single Air Force F-16, set off a panic on both sides of New York Harbor, as thousands of workers — still haunted by the memories of 9/11 — fled their high-rise office buildings at the unexpected sight of the huge, low-flying passenger jet over the Hudson River. Trailed closely by a military fighter, the plane could be seen turning tightly over the Statue of Liberty for what was later described as a “photo op.”

An Obama administration official told the Associated Press late today the flyover was done because the White House Military Office wanted to update its file photo of the president’s plane near the Statue of Liberty.

The official said the military office told the Federal Aviation Administration it periodically updates file photos of Air Force One near national landmarks, like the statute in New York harbor and the Grand Canyon.

The call sign of the special flight was “Venus 1.”

The president was not on board the signature blue-and-white jet, which many on the ground never associated with the iconic Boeing 747 called Air Force One when he flies it.

An FAA spokesman said the fly-over “was approved and coordinated with everyone,” with notifications made to the New York City Police Department, the mayor’s office, the New Jersey State Police, and other agencies.

However, a confidential security memo that went out last week by the FAA’s Air Traffic System Operations Security office — while acknowledging “the possibility of public concern regarding Department of Defense aircraft flying at low levels,” instructed that all information about the flight be kept confidential, and not to be released to the public or media.

“The information in this document is considered FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY, and should only be shared with persons with a need to know,” the memo declared.

Late today, Louis Caldera, director of the White House Military Office, expressed regret for the flight.

“Last week, I approved a mission over New York. I take responsibility for that decision,” he said in a statement released by the White House. “While federal authorities took the proper steps to notify state and local authorities in New York and New Jersey, it’s clear that the mission created confusion and disruption. I apologize and take responsibility for any distress that flight caused.”

Both jets left Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland at about 9:30 a.m., where the specially fitted 747s — are maintained by the Presidential Airlift Group. The aircraft were to make at least two, and possibly three fly-by passes over the Statue of Liberty, and then return to Andrews.

A Department of Transportation official said the FAA was told it was “a classified operation” and not to be publicly divulged.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, meanwhile, sharply criticized the flight, saying the photo-op showed “poor judgment” and was insensitive. The planes appeared to follow the same flight path as the hijacked airliners that crashed into the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

A spokesman for Gov. Jon Corzine said it was a federal matter and had no comment.

Office workers in Jersey City’s financial district said the eerie sight of the two planes rekindled nerves still raw from the memories of Ground Zero, and immediately set off panic. One witness said it was not immediately clear the presidential plane was anything more than a wayward civilian 747, and thought the fighter jet that accompanied it looked less like an escort and than a flight of pursuit.

Outside the Grove Street PATH station in Jersey City, about three dozen nervous office workers stood outside, some looking up at the blue sky. Others could be seen on the rooftops of nearby residential buildings, also gazing upward. One woman talked on her cell phone, assuring the person on the other end of the line she was all right. When she hung up, she declared, “I’m not going back in there,” then hustled away.

Marc Vitoulis, who escaped his office in the North Tower on the day of the World Trade Center attacks, said he grew uneasy when he started hearing the loud drone of the two aircraft around 10 a.m.

“People said, ‘Get out.’ They were just saying, ‘Get the heck out,'” said Vitoulis, an engineer at Barclays Capital on Hudson Street in Jersey City. Vitoulis said he grabbed his bag, rushed down eight flights of stairs and exited the building, where he joined hundreds of other people on the promenade.

When he found out later the flyby was part of a photo shoot, Vitoulis said he was angry.

“The insanity of not telling the people about what was happening before a flyby — just a simple warning –who are the boneheads?” he asked.

Several doors down, at the offices of Lord Abbett, a mutual fund, Scott McNeil was just relieved to be alive. McNeil said he panicked as soon as he heard on the radio that there was plane circling over the Hudson. He grabbed his radio and Blackberry –leaving his laptop at his desk –and ran for the stairwell.

“I looked out the window, and I was out instantly,” said McNeil, 35, of Long Hill Township. “I didn’t waste any time whatsoever.”

Carol Pancaldo, 40, who from her 28th floor office had watched the World Trade towers tumble nearly eight years ago, said she just saw the tail of a plane and ran for the stairwell.

“You’re thinking,” Oh God, don’t crash into my building,” said Pancaldo, from Elmwood Park, an analyst for Kuehne & Nagel, also in Jersey City.

The walk down the 28 flights of stairs with about 150 of her colleagues seemed to take “forever,” Pancaldo said, because nobody knew what was happening outside.

She expressed outrage when she learned of the planes were there for a photo shoot.

“Really, though. After 9/11?” she said.

Staff writers Alexi Friedman and Brian Whitley contributed to this report. 

See Video Here:

This arrogant, insensitive, SOB will stoop to any level! HOW DARE YOU not anounce you were doing this! If your press releases were to be believed, they were not to be buzzing any buildings in Jersey City, only flying near the Statue of Liberty. I am from Jersey City and I know the area where Goldman Sachs is, well. There was NO reason for Air Force One to be flying over Jersey City if they were doing what those releases say. The Hudson River drains out to the ocean and all you needded to do was fly due south to get to Andrews Air Force Base. There is no reason to fly low over Jersey City—NONE!!! 

Unleashing the “dogs of war”

April 28, 2009

By: Jim Meyers

Former Senator, TV star and presidential candidate Fred Thompson tells Newsmax that President Barack Obama is revealing his “naivete, ineptitude and arrogance” as he deals with matters of national security.

The Tennessee Republican, who now hosts a radio show on Westwood One along with his wife Jeri, also said the “dogs of war have been loosed” over left-wing attempts to single out Bush-era officials for prosecution relating to the treatment of detainees.

Newsmax.TV’s Ashley Martella cited the announcement that the Defense Department is going to release many pictures showing alleged abuse by U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and asked Thompson what purpose that might serve.

“None, other than to serve as propaganda tools for our worst enemies,” Thompson said.

See Video: Fred Thompson Slams Obama’s National Security Debacle –Click Here Now


“This was set in motion when the president first decided to release” CIA memos on interrogation techniques used on terrorist suspects, Thompson told Newsmax.

“There was no purpose in doing that except to make him look good internationally and to the left wing here at home,” he said. “It did a lot of damage.

“In one stroke of a pen he declassified top-secret documents that people would otherwise go to jail for releasing. It gave al-Qaida and the Taliban a blueprint as to the outer limits of our interrogation techniques.

“We have to remember that [the techniques were used] in the aftermath of 9/11. Congress was briefed on these techniques. Some of them asked if they were really going far enough to get what they needed to get, and it was approved at high levels in the administration.

“They carefully crafted them as best they could to not go too far, and to provide safeguards when they were carrying out these admittedly rough techniques on these people who had this vital information.

“So now we’re really talking about a war crimes tribunal, which this country has never done. We’ve never brought to criminal court prior administrations in this country.

“Harry Truman could have been accused of war crimes, I suppose, for dropping the bombs. President Obama authorized the killing of those three [pirates] in the Indian Ocean not too long ago. Prosecuting these people under these circumstances is something you hear about in banana republics and third-world countries, not the United States of America.

“The president’s opened up a terrible Pandora’s Box and there’s going to be a price to pay before this thing is ended.”

Martella asked if the Obama administration was acquiescing to its far-left base when it released the CIA memos on interrogation techniques.

“I think in this case, in all probability, they thought that they could cater to their left wing, appease their demands, by releasing these memos and then it might not go any further,” Thompson said.

“Because surely they were able to see that this was bad for them the way it’s going to be bad for the country.

“This is going to have ramifications that are far-reaching. They thought they could put the genie back in the bottle after they opened it, and of course appeasement never works that way.

“There was a firestorm. The attorney general’s received 250 names in a petition to urge the appointment of a special prosecutor for this. The left-wing blogs went nuts. They started running television ads and so forth.

“And then after promising that there would be no prosecutions, [Obama] acquiesced and now opened the door for that. So I think it’s a case of naivete, ineptitude and unbelievable arrogance and lack of experience.

“We elected someone who didn’t have two minutes’ worth of experience with regard to matters concerning national security. Now he’s cast in this position and he’s making decisions that are going to have far-reaching ramifications not only abroad, and not only with our enemies, but in dividing our country even further here at home in ways I don’t think we’ve ever been divided before.

“We’re going to have members of Congress testifying against each other if they go down this road.”

Martella noted that Rep. Peter King of New York has said that if Democrats do go ahead and attempt to prosecute Bush administration CIA interrogation lawyers, the Republicans should “go to war” with them.

“That just gives you an example of the atmosphere on Capitol Hill today,” Thompson observed.

“People are angry. People are upset. You’ve got people on the left, you’ve got the Democrats talking about truth commissions, talking about investigations and Congressional hearings and urging prosecution. They’re fighting among each other on the Democratic side as to just how they should go and how far they should go.”

Some of these Democrats are “the same people who were briefed on these techniques back in 2002,” Thompson said, “including Nancy Pelosi, who’s not telling the truth now, who’s trying to parse words and trying to get around the fact that she knew what was going on, as others did back when this happened.

“That creates a new level of animosity like I’ve never seen before, and I served in the Senate for eight years. The dogs of war have been loosed in this country and I don’t know what is going to happen before we see the end of it. But none of it’s going to be good.”

Thompson’s radio show is heard on weekdays from noon to 2 p.m.

© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Sen. Thompson’s take on our Presidents recent actions are very interesting. However, the most interesting part is how he mentions that the CIA tactics were known in Congress prior to their use and how some Senators, like Pelosi are being  disingenuous. This comes as no surprise. This just shows just how low politicians can go.

PETER ROFF — THE FIRST 100 DAYS: An Administration Filled With Far-Left Extremists

April 27, 2009

By Peter Roff

Fellow, Institue for Liberty/Former Senior Political Writer, United Press International

 Longtime conservative leader Morton Blackwell, a Reagan administration alumni and once the youngest Goldwater delegate at the GOP convention, is perhaps best know as the originator of the phrase “Personnel is policy.”

Blackwell’s observation speaks a great truth about American government. Since no one man or woman can do it all, alone, we have followed the French in the development of bureaucratic systems that allow for power and authority to be delegated to subordinates who are responsible, on a daily basis, for the administration of public policy. It is these people, even more than the president, who directly impact the way policies are developed and carried out.

 The people chosen to fill positions within an administration, no matter how minor those positions might be, matter; they matter because they are being handed the tools with which to make real decisions that have an effect on the American people, the American economy, our legal system, our national defense and just about any other issue you can name on a day-to-day basis.

Throughout the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama presented himself to the American people as a change-oriented centrist, slightly to the left of the middle of the road. The way he has governed over his first 100 days, however, shows him to be anything but the image he projected, particularly where many of his appointments are concerned. And it is these appointments that will determine the direction of policy in his administration over the next four years.

Some of the names and some of the circumstances are already familiar. Obama may have a Cabinet that, to borrow a phrase from Bill Clinton, “looks like America.” But they certainly don’t pay taxes like the rest of us. Several of his most high level appointees, chief among them Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, have been exposed as having failed to pay the taxes they owed at the time these should have paid them.

Then there is Attorney General Eric Holder, who prior to his appointment may have been best known for helping fugitive financier Marc Rich obtain a pardon in the waning days of the Clinton administration. Since coming into office, however, he shocked the nation when, during a presentation to mark Black History month, he called America a “nation of cowards” on the issue of race. Writer Joe Klein, who is generally sympathetic to the liberal point of view, denounced Holder for his remarks, saying they provided “absolutely no acknowledgement of the incredible progress that has been made over the last 40 or 50 years.”

Janet Napolitano, who leads the Department of Homeland Security, similarly came under fire after her department released a report on so-called rise of right-wing extremism in America that lumped returning veterans and anti-abortion activists into the same group as white power organizations and Timothy McVeigh, who helped mastermind the 1995 bombing of the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City. Embarrassed, she met with veterans groups in Washington on Friday and gave what an American Legion representative characterized as a “heartfelt” apology.

But it’s not just the apples at the top of the barrel that are reason to be suspicious that a leftward drift is underway. There are plenty of secondary appointments, not all of which are subject to the Senate’s advice and consent, which make up the new administration’s gallery of liberal rogues.

White House Science Advisor Dr. John P. Holdren is a noted alarmist where the idea of global catastrophes is concerned. In 1971, he predicted that “some form of eco-catastrophe, if not thermonuclear war, seems almost certain to overtake us before the end of the century.” That same year Holdren also claimed that “population control, the redirection of technology, the transition from open to closed resource cycles, the equitable distribution of opportunity, and the ingredients of prosperity must all be accomplished if there is to be a future worth living.”

More recently, in 2006, Holdren suggested that global sea levels could rise by 13 feet by the end of this century. The 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fourth Assessment Report suggests a potential sea level rise of just 13 inches.

Another Obama appointee clearly outside the mainstream of American thought and values is Harold Koh, the Yale Law School dean whom Obama tapped be the State Department’s legal adviser.

Koh is, as columnist Andy McCarthy has written, “a radical trans-nationalist.” His view is that the United States is not, in essence, an independent nation with a natural right to govern its own national security. Rather Koh’s view is this country should be governed by a “trans-national jurisprudence” that “assumes America’s political and economic interdependence with other nations operating within the international legal system.” In Koh’s world, U.S. law should be subordinate to some kind of international code.

Then there is Rosa Brooks, who has been tapped to be a key adviser to the undersecretary of defense for policy. A former columnist with The Los Angeles Times, Brooks once compared the work product of Bush’s Office of Legal Counsel to “the so-called Big Lie theory of political propaganda, articulated most infamously by Adolf Hitler.” In 2007, according to various sources, she characterized Al Qaeda as “little more than an obscure group of extremist thugs, well financed and intermittently lethal but relatively limited in their global and regional political pull.” And she once wrote “George W. Bush and Dick Cheney shouldn’t be treated like criminals who deserve punishment. They should be treated like psychotics who need treatment…. Because they’ve clearly gone mad.”

Hardly the calm, rational and reasoned approach one has every right to expect from a senior Pentagon adviser.

Almost everywhere you look in the Obama administration you can find appointees whose beliefs are clearly outside the mainstream, who are, in a word, extremists. David Ogden, the nominee for the No. 2 job at the U.S. Department of Justice, who, according to once filed a brief on behalf of a group of library directors arguing against the Children’s Internet Protection Act. The act ordered libraries and schools receiving funding for the Internet to restrict access to obscene sites. But Ogden’s brief argued that the act impaired the ability of librarians to do their jobs. He called it “unconstitutional,” though the Supreme Court later disagreed with him and upheld the act.” He also “argued, on behalf of several media groups, against a child pornography law that required publishers of all kinds to verify and document the age of their models (which would ensure the models are at least 18). The provisions were struck down. — Ogden was quoted at the time saying the potential reach of the law was ‘mind-boggling’ and even ‘terrifying.’”

And then there’s Dawn Johnson, who was nominated to be assistant attorney general and head of DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel, who has written that “abortion restrictions reduce pregnant women to no more than fetal containers” and who has opposed the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a ban on partial birth abortion.

Rather than an administration of centrists, the Obama presidency is shaping up to be one in which the dominant voice is that of the American far-left. Right before our eyes, based on the appointments thus far, we are seeing “Changing we can believe in” being transformed into “Change we can’t believe.”

    Is it any wonder that Obama’s “true colors” are exposed? Lets face facts. Senator Obama’s voting record is extremely liberal. The true failure of McCain’s candidacy is that he did not hammer home that Obama was lying during the campaign. From the get go, in Congress, Obama voted, virtually, socialist. To see him governing from that standpoint now, comes as no surprise to anybody who was watching. The only thing that we can hope for, is that it does not get much worse between here and the 2010 congressional elections. That way, if the Republicans can take back either the House or the Senate, they can slow down this runnaway train the Obama has got us on.

The Audacity Of Obama’s First 100 Days

April 24, 2009

By Jon Kraushar Communications Consultant

By Jon Kraushar

Communications Consultant


Audacity—boldness—defines Barack Obama. As the president approaches his 100th day in office on April 29, expect his audacity to be on full display in several key ways:

The Audacity of Hope


The hope invested in Obama to remedy the economic crisis at home has granted him audacious latitude to push through budgets or proposals to spend, tax, regulate and indebt the country like never before. His agenda has been to enlarge Big Government’s control of health care, energy, education and the private sector while skimping on national security.

Because of people’s fixation on fixing the economy, Obama is backed, for now, by a diminishing but still significant majority of the electorate (mostly those on the extreme left to folks in the center). His cheering squad also comprises many in the mainstream media, they have already announced big plans to mark Obama’s 100th day in office with saturation coverage — a great deal of which will no doubt be laudatory.


But like so much about Obama, the audacity of hope has been subject to shape-shifting since he assumed the presidency. The hope he preaches to different audiences at different times at home in the U.S. turned into expressions of remorse and blame for America when he traveled to Europe and Latin America. In France, Obama told an audience of mostly students that, “…there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”

The president’s toughest critics accuse him of naïveté and (borrowing a phrase used by Hillary Clinton when she slandered the brilliant General David Petraeus when he was Commander of Multi-National Forces in Iraq) a “willing suspension of disbelief” when it comes to America’s true enemies and inconstant friends.

Thus we have Obama (literally) bowing to the Saudi king, smiling and handshaking with Venezuelan socialist dictator Hugo Chavez and (figuratively) scraping to the Russians, the North Koreans, the Iranians, the Palestinians, the Cubans and the Europeans. For all his apologizing, appeasing and sermonizing, Obama has not won any major cooperation or compliance from either adversaries or supposed allies. As Obama talks about disarming, sharing financial burdens, and dreams about a “green” world, other countries laugh up their sleeves.


The Audacity of Change

When it comes to change, Obama is a paradox. He has honored many of his campaign promises but they remain infected with explicit or implicit bashing of his predecessor: George W. Bush. It’s as  if Obama’s presidential campaign never ended.

First, Robert Gibbs, Obama’s press secretary, said the president wanted to look forward and not support war crimes trials for Bush administration officials who allegedly approved harsh interrogation techniques that now are being characterized as torture. But then, pressured by far-left groups like, Obama reversed that course and has opened the door to possible future prosecutions by the Justice Department.

Obama alternately praises and then constrains the Central Intelligence Agency in the fight against terrorism, leading The Wall Street Journal to say in an editorial that, “A President can’t placate the left and keep America safe.” At a certain point, blaming Bush for everything won’t cut it for Obama.


The Audacity of Responsibility

President Obama’s inaugural address contained a call for “a new era of responsibility,” a phrase repeated as the title of his $3.55-trillion budget for fiscal year 2010.

Obama’s budget would raise taxes by $1.4-trillion over ten years and would double the national debt to over $15-trillion. His budget also provides for a $250-billion “placeholder” for additional bailouts, based on the rosy assumption that the government would be able to recover $500-billion from toxic assets it buys.

When it comes to his taxing and spending plans, President Obama attempts to paper over what is reallyirresponsibility with his own version of Orwellian (or Clintonian) “newspeak.”

According to Obama taxpayer funds aren’t “spent” they are “invested.” A $650 billion health care “reserve fund” is a “down payment.”  We’re not living through a “recession,” it’s a “recovery.” An “earmark” isn’t a pet pork project favored by a member of Congress if it’s already been “reviewed” (i.e.: it’s in the bill). And a government Web site that lacks real detail about how all the bailout money is being spent is a model of  “transparency.”


Audacity Has Its Limits

Obama’s audacity is on probation with the American people — who are, at bottom, both smart and pragmatic. The majority of Americans say they want to give Obama a chance to make good on his boundless self-confidence. His first 100 days remain a honeymoon.

But eventually, should his bailouts (Obama calls them “rescue plans”) continue to be flameouts; should his tax hikes (Obama calls them “tax fairness”) turn into job killers; should his mandates (Obama calls them “reforms”) become bureaucratic nightmares; and should a terrorist attack at home (in Obamaspeak it’s a “man-caused disaster”) be a “government-caused disaster,” we will see a different kind of audacity in 2010.

Voters will send a message to Obama in the elections that will make previous protests look like, well, tea parties.

Communications consultant Jon Kraushar is at

The longer the recession, the shorter will be Obama’s Presidency. As much as we have become a nation of “kool-aid” drinkers, we still have the patience of a hungry lion. “The Audacity” would be if he thinks he can b.s. his way through 8 years. The “blame Bush for everything” strategy can only last so long. Eventually, its “put up or shut up”!


Sen. Bond: Obama Actions Turning Country into ‘Banana Republic’

April 23, 2009

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: The top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee today blasted President Obama for his willingness to consider prosecuting the architects of interrogation policies, likening the notion to the actions of a “banana republic” and saying that the discussion over interrogation tactics is “making our country less safe.”

Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., said on’s “Top Line”Wednesday that the policies now being scrutinized have been and will continue to be reviewed by the appropriate congressional committees, and shouldn’t be probed anew by the Justice Department.

“We have been monitoring this. The leaders of the House and Senate and the intelligence committees at the time were briefed on these techniques. Now, to go back and start penalizing or punishing a previous administration is what a banana republic does,” Bond said. “Our country has never done that, and I think this is a terrible step in the wrong direction.”

Asked whether Obama administration policies are harming national security, Bond said:  “I think the whole operation is making our country less safe.  When it comes to national security, the difference between President Obama’s campaign rhetoric and campaign security could not be more stark.  I think it was a very bad idea to release the memos.  The flip-flops now on whether he’s going to prosecute people create further chaos and uncertainty in the intelligence community and the other national security areas.”

Releasing the memos describing the interrogation practices, he said, “cuts the feet out from our interrogators. Number two, it tells Al Qaeda and other terrorists that you have absolutely nothing to worry about from enhanced interrogation techniques. So, we are much less likely to get information.”

The feeling is growing! Or,  should I say, the “uneasiness”? Something is amiss and more and more are seeing it. As we slide from the United States of America to “Obamastan”. Our “Mullahs” are the Barbara Boxers’ and the Harry Reids’. Sadly, they are as dangerous to our society as Mullah Omar was in Afghanistan. Wake up before our “Taliban” does to our country what the original one did Afghanistan and is, now, trying to do in Pakistan. They both seem to worship a “god” that would have to “ascend” rather then “descend” to get here.

Death of our Freedoms–a prelude to the Obama dictatorship?

April 23, 2009

Meowww. The claws are coming out.

The Miss USA contestants from the four states that allow same-sex marriage say Miss California should have been more politically correct and socially aware when she was asked for her thoughts on the issue during the nationally televised pageant on Sunday.

Miss Massachusetts Alison Cronin told she was “shocked” when Carrie Prejean, 21, told Miss USA judge and celebrity gossip blogger Perez Hilton that she believes marriage should be “between a man and a woman.”

Hilton’s question — “Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?” — was considered appropriate for the telecast. Prejean, a student at San Diego Christian College, replied that she personally opposes gay marriage — a response that some, including Hilton, said cost her the Miss USA title.

“It’s really hard to think that people still think that way,” Cronin said. “But at the same time, there’s a lot of girls in pageants who wear their religion on their sleeve. If that’s what she thinks, I give her credit for expressing that, but that’s not how I feel.”

Cronin, 22, said she supports gay marriage.

“I’m for it,” she said. “If two people are in a loving relationship, regardless of their sexual orientation, I think they should have equal rights.”

Miss Connecticut Monica Mary Pietzrak, called Prejean a “wonderful girl” but said she should have been more conscious of the national audience.

“In general, when you’re answering a question like that, you have to be politically correct about it,” Pietzrak told “I would’ve answered differently to help accommodate all beliefs. It’s a decision between two individuals, and not just a man and a woman.”

Pietzrak said she doesn’t share Prejean’s view that marriage should be limited to opposite-sex couples. “I don’t personally agree with that, but people have a choice to do whatever they want.”

Miss Iowa Chelsea Lynn Gauger, 20, said her state, whose Supreme Court just this month declared a legislative ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, is ahead of the country.

“Being from Iowa, I’m proud to say that our state has interpreted the Constitution to say that gays have the right to marry,” Gauger said. “Whether you agree with [Prejean] or not, to be on national television and say exactly how you feel, it does take strength and faith.”

“People have blown it out of proportion,” Gauger added. “I don’t think people are thinking what it would be like to be up there like she was. It’s sad that people can’t just keep their feelings to themselves.”

Miss Vermont Brooke Werner, who said she was shocked by Prejean’s statement, acknowledged the high-pressure situation that many, including Miss California herself, thought cost her the crown.

“Everyone has a right to their own actions,” Werner said. “But I totally disagree with Carrie. I have a very different perspective on gay marriage and I would have never said what she said.”

Cronin said if Prejean had answered differently, she might be taking promotional tours this week instead of defending her comments.

“Had she gone the other way with the question, she might have won,” Miss Massachusetts said. “I’m surprised that she would say it, knowing the demographic she was speaking to.”

But Prejean’s decision not to compromise her beliefs was admirable, Cronin said.

“She would’ve made herself look more like an idiot if she changed her mind,” she said. “You got to be able to back up your opinion and not become wishy-washy. Good for her for standing by it.”

Prejean has called her experience a “blessing in disguise” and noted that the majority of Californians share her views, citing the passage of Proposition 8 in November that reversed a state Supreme Court ruling and made gay marriage illegal again in the Golden State.

“I am so blessed that I was able to speak my mind, my thoughts, my convictions,” Prejean told FOX News’ Neil Cavuto Tuesday. “What I said is the way I feel. It’s my belief and I’m entitled to my own opinion, just as [Hilton] is.”

Prejean said she feels “sorry” for Hilton and vowed to pray for him.

She also said that she’d “love to know” how the winner, 22-year-old Miss North Carolina Kristen Dalton, would have answered the question.

On Thursday, Prejean found out. During an interview with, Dalton said: “In short, I would say everyone should be able to enter into a civil union, where they’re legally recognized as a couple and earn the same rights as a married couple.”

Asked if she supports gay marriage, Miss USA replied, “I’m not going to say whether or not I think it should be defined as marriage because that’s up to our politicans and our elected officials.”

The touchstone for liberty, the basic, most essential freedom, is always the freedom of speech. All other freedoms depend on it and are derived from it.–Hans Vogel reporting in………..PRAVDA!

The Russians learn the lesson but now WE HAVE FORGOTTEN??? We are “through the looking glass”.

Freedom of Speech NOT ALLOWED in the ObamaNation….

April 21, 2009

LAS VEGAS, Nev. — Miss North Carolina Kristen Dalton may have been crowned Miss USA 2009 on Sunday, but on Monday, it was Miss California Carrie Prejean’s answer to a question about same-sex marriage from celebrity blogger and pageant judge Perez Hilton that was the night’s biggest story.

During the show, Perez asked Carrie, “Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?”

Well I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. Um, we live in a land that you can choose same sex marriage or opposite marriage and, you know what, in my country and in, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman,” Carrie said to a mix of boos and applause. “No offense to anybody out there. But that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think that it should be between a man and a woman.”

Carrie’s answer to the hot button question cost her the crown – at least according to Perez.

“The way miss California answered her question lost her the crown, without a doubt!” Perez told Access Hollywood after the pageant. “Never before that I’m aware of has a contestant been booed at Miss USA.”

Keith Lewis, Co-Executive Director of the Miss California USA and Miss California Teen USA said in statement to Access Hollywood that he respects Carrie’s opinion, even if it differs with his.

“I am proud of Carrie Prejean’s beauty and placement at the 2009 Miss USA pageant. I support Carrie’s right to express her personal beliefs even if they do not coincide with my own,” Keith told Access. “I believe the subject of gay marriage deserves a great deal more conversation in order to heal the divide it has created.”

If there was any of you who doubted it,  when those of us tried to warn you, that the ObamaNation–the New World Disorder-would infringe on your rights, WELCOME TO THE RUDE AWAKENING!  Yes, it is NO LONGER PERMITTED to express an opinon that usn’t “Ultra-Left Wing.” If you are one of those individuals who believe such things as, abortion and gay marriage are wrong, you MUST BE SILENCED PROCLAMITH THE OBAMA-PHILES! 

                        RISE UP AMERICA BEFORE ITS TOO LATE!

Our way of life is under threat. Don’t sit there with your mouth shut. Because, if you do, you won’t be allowed to speak again. Yes, the “price of freedom IS eternal vigilance”. But, part of that vigilance, means to”

FIGHT for that freedom.

FIGHT for you right to speak.

FIGHT for your right to think.

FIGHT for your right to believe

FIGHT against thought supression

FIGHT before that is taken from you too.

Iran to Obama: Don’t Talk About Jailed U.S. Reporter

April 20, 2009

TEHRAN, Iran —  Iran has urged President Barack Obama not to comment on the case of a U.S. journalist convicted for spying and sentenced to prison before learning the details.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Hasan Qashqavi says Obama’s training as a lawyer does not mean he should comment on Roxana Saberi’s case without the proper context. He spoke to reporters during his weekly press briefing Monday.

Obama said Sunday he was “gravely concerned” about the safety and well-being of Saberi and was confident she wasn’t involved in espionage

Iran announced Saturday that Saberi, a 31-year-old dual American-Iranian citizen, was sentenced to eight years in prison for spying for the United States. Tehran has not released many details of the case.

Now, lets see if the President’s response will be “Yes, sir”.