Recent polling shows that far more Americans believe their country is heading in the wrong direction under Obama than at any time under Bush. Currently, 23% say America is heading in the “right” direction, and 71.2% believe we are going the wrong way – a 49 point gap. The widest negative spread under Bush was 34 points in November 2007.
The U.S. House has passed a budget containing language that would strip President Obama of his stable of unelected, unconfirmed “czars.” The $1 trillion budget also contains a provision forcing Obama to make a decision on the Keystone pipeline within 60 days.
Although the measure is expected to pass the Senate, President Obama may resort to his bag of tricks and pull a signing statement overriding the bill’s language. As the left liked to point out about George W. Bush’s use of the maneuver, the practice is widely considered to be unconstitutional.
Weasel Zippers relays:
The U.S. House approved a $1 trillion spending bill on a 296-121 vote to fund the federal government’s operations through Sept. 30. As part of a compromise struck late Thursday, the funding bill specifically prohibits “czars” related to health care, climate change, the auto industry and urban affairs.
The Senate is expected to pass the measure on Saturday.
This is what the Republicans should have been doing since they took over the House. Try to force Obama to veto otherwise popular legislation or popular provisions of legislation. This puts Obama on the record as adverse to real job creation and economic growth.
Talk show host Adam Carolla and comedian Larry Miller discuss the Chicago Way of corruption in the Obama administration. Carolla’s contention is that today’s politicians are still living in a 1940s world, not fully understanding the nature of modern media.
A thought-provoking idea by Carolla is to start paying politicians more to “go straight,” as his sidekick Allison commented. My proposition is that all Americans in a district contribute one dollar to politicians to remain faithful and not take bribes and kickbacks from corporations, unions, and other special interests. An honest president could retire after four years as a billionaire.
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, the looking skankwhore who runs the DNC, was sighted on FoxNews spouting off about the alternate dimension she lives in where Obama the Magnificent has single-handedly created billions of jobs and the subjects of Americatopia are sated and grateful.
“Fact check”: The country has lost over two million jobs since Obama took office, while more than three million have sought to enter the work force. Millions have given up looking for work due to Obama’s magic touch, leaving six million more people not in the labor force than when Obama got to work. Maybe they no want the money?
President Obama is doing an outstanding job fighting the war on terror, at least from the point of view of Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. While the Commander-in-Chief is busy whacking dictators and terrorist leaders like remote-controlled wack-a-mole, Islamosocialists are waiting in the wings to surge into the power vacuum. Such is the folly of Obama’s read on the Big Bang theory, which denudes the ‘liberal’ qualifier of democracy in his reckless drive to democratize the Middle East.
Such an amoral and rudderless foreign policy leads to anarchy and chaos, and a perfect opportunity for global redistributionist patrons to pick up a new clientele on the sandy outskirts of the civilized world.
When Barack Obama cheers Islamists being democratically elected in Tunisia, or Mubarak deposed in Egypt and the resulting rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, or the sick and savage execution and violation of Libya’s Moammar Gaddafi and the rebels’ declaration of an Islamist state, or his administration’s refusal to punish the democratically elected Hamas leadership of Syria we find ample grounds to question whether the president understands that democracy is but a means to an end, and can empower undesirable groups as well as desirable ones.
Democracy is not an ethos, it is a process. And while we Americans do value the democratic process in resolving our internal disputes and attempting to hold our elected leaders accountable, it can be a destabilizing force in countries whose people are not used to peacably resolving disputes. Until social trust is developed, democracy is a placeholder, and its imprimatur is likely to be abused by those who come to power in countries without a classically liberal heritage. Without shared morality and a common sense of identity among the populace, democracy can be a cynical excuse for a group to build its power base at the expense of other groups. Majority rule is not necessarily civil rule.
Thus what may have started out as an initiative by George W. Bush to build a bridge of democratic accountability across the Muslim crescent, hopefully coaxing local peoples to restrain rogue regimes that may be tempted to irrationally use nuclear weapons and other wmds, is turning into President Obama’s drive to bring social justice to a region by toppling dictators and executing meddlesome conservative Islamic terrorists.
In President Obama’s unwar on terror, the enemy of his enemy is his friend, and if verified reports that the Libyan rebels have al Qaeda ties surface, so be it. If the rebels are in common cause to remove impediments to the global redistributionist order, they should be used to remove culturally conservative and autarkik rulers. If Islamic revisionists motivated by social justice are to come to power, they should be tacitly supported. And if a stubborn autocrat like Mahmoud Ahmadenijad should prove reticent to throw in lot with the globalists, then he should be threatened, if not forcibly removed.
While America’s brave soldiers are holding down the fort in treacherous Afghanistan under hamstringing rules of engagement, and Obama has conveniently called for a removal of troops from Iraq by the end of the year, potentially allowing radical Islamic groups to enter the fray and capitalize on the U.S.’ removal of the Ba’athist strongman Sadaam Hussein, we should note that America is ceasing to fight the war on terror and has shifted its goals to a new objective: Democratization (sans the “Liberal” part). That this drive will will lead to the ascendancy of more ethically pliable ruling groups is not in doubt. Whether or not this will lead to less terrorism domestically and abroad very much is.
Judging by the track record of authoritarian Iran and its sponsorship of Hezbollah and that of democratically elected Hamas, democratization per se has very little to do with fighting the war on terror. If radical elements use democracy as a means to gain more power and then to terrorize their populations or those of foreign countries like Israel and the United States, then Obama’s presumed successes killing “bad guys” will soon become foreign policy disasters.
As posted on Political Crush.
Gallup’s Presidential Job Approval Rating for October 17, 2011 shows a familiar but unfavorable trend for President Obama. Though a drastic decline in approval ratings happens to most, if not all presidents, Obama dipping under the 40% approval threshold before his first term is up indicates that his re-election bid is entering danger territory.
In the WSJ archives, one finds the history of presidential job approval ratings going back to Harry S. Truman. Let us examine Obama’s present approval ratings versus past presidents in the third year of their first term.
Those presidents who have dipped under the 40% approval rating and have not jumped sharply up, do not recover. This includes Truman (whose approval ratings were high before his first election), Johnson, Ford, Nixon (before he resigned), and George H.W. Bush. Kennedy was assassinated before his second election, but enjoyed high approval ratings. Full two term presidents include Eisenhower, Reagan, and Clinton, who all had near 60% approval ratings before they were re-elected. Two termer George W. Bush was around 50%. Obama is not even close to that mark.
Smile, you’re on candid camera! And by “candid camera,” I mean, there goes your attempt to appear “mainstream” and representative of the “99%.” Why? Because only the lunatic one-fifth column wants to destroy the American economy and rebuild it as the left sees fit. That would be a true “globalrevolution,” wouldn’t it, fellas?
This video is pretty representative of the movement:
Since there’s no music, I recommend looping this track.
I want to thank AdBusters for monitoring my site – repeatedly – and allowing me to make more connections between the OccupyWallStreet crowd and the commie left. We conservative tea party rubes appreciate it
The foreign, the alien, the unfamiliar is held out by the American left as one of the main causes of social conflict. Those citizens who stubbornly believe in their own particular ideology or creed are thus held out as particularistic, selfish, dogmatic, bigoted, chauvinist, jingoistic, and xenophobic.
But most Americans are not opposed to changing their system of government and moral code because they are afraid of the foreign because it is foreign.
They are not opposed to illegal immigration because they are xenophobes, but because those who immigrate without assimilating bring their un-American cultures with them and impose them on the country.
The reason many Americans are against illegal immigration is not because they don’t have a heart, as Republican candidate Rick Perry alleged, but because they believe in their national values and don’t want to see them culturally and thus electorally eroded.
Americans, believe it or not, enjoy prosperity, domestic tranquility, and their Constitutional rights. They do not want to see the country become like numerous countries around the world: despotic, Islamist, or “compassionately” socialist, that is to say, economically unsustainable and insolvent.
One consequence of the constant lectures on the need for diversity and tolerance is the arising of three kinds of Americans. The first is comprised of the multiculturalists themselves, who can be understood in some senses as oikophobic, as Bill Whittle explains. The second is made up of loyal and patriotic Americans, who are seen by the oikophobes as chauvinist, jingoisitic, and xenophobic. And the third is formed by illegal immigrants who feel very little for their new country, since they don’t discern any unified culture at all. On the contrary, they see anti-American movies, elites who apologize for the country and seek to “fundamentally transform it,” and swelling ranks of citizens who oppose the elites, best represented by the tea party.
One paradox of the multicultists is that they are dogmatically anti-dogmatic, and intolerant of intolerance. A consequence of the left’s value of diversity, which is actually a trojan horse for cultural and moral relativism, is that it assumes that the foreign is superior to one’s own culture and morality. Or else, why would diversity be an ethic?
Another consequence of the left’s point of view on diversity is that people are not always praised for what they do, but rather some are praised for having a certain skin color or ethnic background. Supposed minorities did nothing to earn such intrinsicist praise, just like welfare recipients did nothing to earn their payouts from the confiscate-and-redistribute state by merit of simply being the “underclass.” And with President Obama in office, race relations are worsening further, as modern liberals insist that white Americans are so poisoned by racism they need government to permanently set things aright in the name of “social justice.”
The reason diversity, tolerance, and multiculturalism are advanced as values is precisely because they wear down resistance to state control. But in many leftists’ minds, they are building a better world by breaking down all values and traditions so that no one has anything left to fight over. As Evan Sayet points out, it is the left’s utopian vision to demoralize the world.
Of course, no one can understand this warped point of view except for modern liberals. Normal people do not, as Ayn Rand put it, “hate the good for being the good.”
We’re all becoming xenophobes: the intellectual elites, who are increasingly foreign to normal people; the majority of people, who are seen by elites as bigoted xenophobes for disliking values foreign and hostile to American ideals; and illegal immigrants, who moved to a new, better nation to find prosperity and relative tranquility, but instead find a self-deprecating culture, and a supposed intelligentsia that wants to change America to be more like the countries they fled from.
The consortium of Islamists, socialists and assorted despots intends to buy up a lot reserved for Robert Moses Playground, a perfect place for the American left to try to set up their one-world daycare state.
Is this the sandbox where we’re all going to learn to share our GM trucks, like Obama chided us to do?
According to the DailyCaller, the building is estimated to cost around $400 million, and that’s about as accurate as an IPCC climate forecast. Last estimate for the UN’s facelift was $600 million, and currently the project is running at $2 billion, much of it on American taxpayer dime.
What does the U.S. get from the UN? Direct assaults on our Constitutional freedoms, like the small arms weapons ban, convention on the rights of the child, and the infamous and all-too-real Agenda 21.
What does the world get from the UN? Failed “peacekeeping” missions, even one that Russia used as cover to invade Georgia; huge scandals like Oil-for-Food, with rarely discussed ties to Barack Obama; and numerous petty scandals like humanitarian workers literally raping Africans.
This is not to mention the disgustingly inhumane environmentalist policies, such as the ban on DDT, which has killed millions, and rubrics for global poverty redistribution like “sustainable development.”
Let’s get the UN out of the US, and the US out of the UN, as the popular adage goes. Playtime is over.
America’s first post-racial president has a challenge for black voters: How many whites can you scapegoat before election day?
Unofficially referred to as “Operation: Get the Crackerz,” Barack Obama’s initiative focuses on a two-pronged program: One, shut up about rampant black unemployment. Two, blame whites for your problems, not me.
“I need your help,” the president said.
“So many people are still hurting. So many people are barely hanging on,” he continued, then added: “And so many people in this city are fighting us every step of the way.”
After several shouts of, “Let’s get those whities!” President Obama smiled and waved for them to calm themselves. One woman fainted, and he obviously had to instruct the paramedics to get her some air and some water. When the crowd was adequately soothed, he proceeded with his instructions.
“Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes,” he said, his voice rising as applause and cheers mounted. “Shake it off. Stop complainin’. Stop grumblin’. Stop cryin’. We are going to press on. We have work to do.”
Later in the day, the president was compelled to deliver a follow-up address to nutrition activists who misunderstood Mr. Obama’s message and had marched on a Ritz-Nabisco factory. The activists were just about to burn down the plant, chanting, “Let’s toast some crackers!” when word came of the mix-up.
“Settle down now,” Obama said with a smirk. “Not those kinda crackers.”
The black community instantly responded to Obama’s challenge, as officially represented by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
“We’re ready to cut some teabaggers’ nuts out,” said Jackson on live network TV.
“We are ready to follow Obama’s drive to push back and build a movement of resistance,” Al Sharpton added. “Resist we much, we must, and we will much, about that, be committed.”
When reached for comment, Obama grimaced, wiped his sweating brow, and nodded his head painfully.
“Resist we much,” was all he could mutter.
Obama’s poll numbers have hit the skids. Disapproval is up, employment is down, and the president is going nowhere fast.
What’s changed? Hope-and-change sizzle has turned to fizzle. This president was supposed to be above the fray, a refreshing breath of fresh air after the dark days of 5% unemployment, Haliburton no-bid contracts, and “girls gone wild” like misadventures at Abu Ghraib.
In the context of the nefarious Bush administration, Obama floated above it all. The ignorant masses projected their hopes onto the present-voting messiah, who was a tabula rasa whose race was an ablation for past national sins. The candidate was so pristine he couldn’t even sully his hands with voting half the time. And when he did vote, he was unimpeachably socialist – a true humanitarian (if supporting an ideology that at the very least impoverishes peoples counts as humane).
Now a trifecta of scandals threatens to tarnish President Obama and the Democrats in much the same way as the “culture of corruption” narrative smeared Republicans before the 2006 elections – as if the entire GOP was as corrupt as Tom DeLay. And coming from a Democrat party that at the time was receiving Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac campaign contributions on behalf of prominent party members, particularly Obama, the allegations were a very bad joke. But half the country didn’t get it.
The fools who saw Barack Obama descending from the heavens should have been keen to his Chicago politics roots, his street thug shakedown artist credentials, and his admitted associations with Alinskyite ends-justify-the-means-radicals. His affiliation with the sawed-off bully Rahm Emanuel, who is still highly suspected of partaking in a pay-to-play arrangement for Obama’s old Senate seat, should have been another clue. But for the clueless, there are no clues; not even puzzles.
Another hint that Obama was actually very corrupt was his connection to bagman Tony Rezko, who the state senate candidate admitted raised $250,000 for him. Adding to the obscurity of Obama’s shady receipt of an estate from Rezko, was an oil-for-food connection, rarely reported in the American media.
Turnabout is fair play, and the Democrats are about to play tilt-a-whirl fending off a flurry of scandals, as citizen journalists and the blogosphere get hip to what the Democrats have been doing with the misappropriated trillions of our taxpayer dollars.
Fast and Furious is the bloodiest of the three scandals, and the one that should most likely see administration heads roll. The facts surrounding the case are disturbing, and involve the ATF allowing gun show weapons to be channeled to Mexican drug cartels, which subsequently and unsurprisingly committed violent crimes with them. The manner in which the crimes were committed is enough to provide ample grist for the mill for black helicopter conspiracy theorists everywhere:
Quite a few of the guns have since turned up — at crime scenes. Authorities in Mexico say they have linked 200 crimes to Fast and Furious guns, and three guns have turned up at murder scenes here in the US — including the killing of US Border Patrol Officer Brian Terry. And it must be noted that these are all cases where the guns were recovered at the crime scene — a very rare occurrence. Most criminals don’t just leave their guns behind; they either keep them or dispose of them in some way that would make it difficult to link it to either the criminal or the crime. So for the guns to be simply left behind at a crime scene is extremely rare — and, to me, indicative that quite a few more guns were involved in crimes, but not left behind.
The scandal that has the clearest administration fingerprints on it is Light Squared. In this Capitol Hill drama, powerful witnesses, including General William Shelton, claim that the White House influenced them to award a contract to big Democrat Party donor Light Squared, who was a broadband service provider in Virginia petitioning for a license to go nationwide. Apparently, LS got face time with administration big shots in exchange for five figure campaign donations days before the alleged meetings.
Last but not least of the big three is Solyndra, which looks to be a half-billion dollar green energy boondoggle on the taxpayer dime. Loan guarantees for the Democrat donor and solar panel producer came directly out of the $859 billion non-stimulus package. The plant shut down suspiciously quickly, bringing a quick close to a government-funded fly-by-night operation.
But wait, there’s more. As the Washington Examiner reports in the process of unwrapping the Solyndra story:
Ultimately, Solyndra may prove to be the only Energy Department loan guarantee that explodes into a scandal rivaling Teapot Dome or Credit Mobilier for venality and abuse of the public trust. However, there are at least 16 more such loan guarantees worth in excess of $10 billion, all approved by the same cast of characters at the White House and the U.S. Department of Energy responsible for the current mess. And many other federal departments and agencies have provided billions of dollars’ worth of loan guarantees, so nobody should be surprised if Solyndra is only the first of many similar outrages under the Obama economic stimulus regime.
And if the Obama campaign re-election team didn’t think the wind was in their face enough, there comes a potential fourth blow to their image. President Obama is slated to fundraise with a big Democrat campaign donor that benefited from a $107 million tax credit to build a windpower facility in the state of Missouri.
If the president thinks he will be able to get away with this kind of corruption and still have a decent chance at re-election, he truly is tilting at windmills. The American people have had enough of the quixotic boy-king, who has been literally untouchable in the mainstream media. But that’s okay. If left-wing journalists won’t keep the heat on the administration for these scandals, citizen journalists and the blogosphere will.
Finally! YouTube accepted my video. They had blocked it before.
Rogue had the pleasure of chatting with the lovely Dana Loesch about various topics that happened to pop into his ADHD-addled mind the minute he engaged the tea party’s talk radio goddess.
Among the topics on the table was….mmm, bacon! With bacon prices being driven through the rafters by ethanol subsidies, Rogue suggests we just literally go for broke and subsidize baconol – a deliciously potent form of energy that you can either drink by the canister or pour into your baconol-converted hybrid.
Baconol – put a little pork in your petroleum.
The best thing about baconol subsidies is you fight global warming two ways: by not burning fossil fuels, and by taking methane-gas emitting swine out of existence. You make the warminists happy, the vegans happy, and the air quality freaks happy. Win-win-win.
Which brings us to Obama‘s claim that the uncertainty about the debt limit ceiling is hurting job creation. I wager that 90% of Americans who even know about the debt ceiling never even heard of it until a few months ago. So what was hurting job creation all those months before?
I swear, this administration lives off of statements that are what I would call “resistant to analysis.” No concept of causation, no way to prove or disprove them. (See “jobs saved or created”…)
Sweet dreams of bacon weaves and Obamaless tomorrows.
Obama has labeled this hour our “Sputnik moment.” When someone loyal to America calls something a “Sputnik” moment, it means its time to wake up to reality and face our enemies. When a leftist calls something a “Sputnik” moment, it means “Hey, I really love the Soviets. Let’s build a command economy based on central planning and the whims of the intelligentsia and the apparatchiki.”
The lesson of Sputnik is not that building a vast military industrial complex that preens and postures with irrelevant shows of technological superiority leads to economic prosperity, but that such frivolous wastes of people’s resources impoverishes and demoralizes a nation. The salient economic difference between the Soviets, whose central command economy went bankrupt, and America, whose market-oriented system led to vast amounts of wealth and an improved standard of living for the great majority of its citizens, is the latter’s ethos of freedom, market-competitiveness, and individualism.
Americans will be no better off than the Soviet peoples without a semblance of free market capitalism and liberty. As the central government in Washington grows, the economy’s linchpin of individual effort will become increasingly stifled and stymied by self-serving politicians and bureaucrats.
Funding security is one thing; funding yet more unsustainable welfare programs and chimeric shovel-ready jobs is quite another. The government knows how to use force, it does not know how to produce the wealth on which its supposedly altruistic programs rely. Kill the engine of wealth that is free market capitalism with more intrusive and controlling government action, and the entire infrastructure of entitlements that the left values so much will come crashing down.
Obama has labeled this hour our “Sputnik moment,” only our challenges aren’t being brought upon us by a presumably vanquished enemy, but by the resurgence of a socialist ideology that is causing our country great self-inflicted wounds. If the enemy truly is us, then our nation’s greatest triumph would be a revitalization of the founding ideals that led it to become the last best hope for mankind.
The Democrats have pursued their agenda in heavy-handed fashion since Obama took office in the false belief that they received a mandate from the American people to fundamentally transform this country. The flaw in the Democrats’ reasoning is that they merely defeated the Republicans, they did not defeat the American people.
Let us be clear. The Republicans are not standing in the way of the Democrats’ agenda. The Republicans couldn’t organize an ice cream social let alone a nationwide resistance movement. The taxpayers are simply tired of being taken for a ride by Democrats who cannot fulfill their promises of the past, let alone their grandiose promises of the future.
The New Deal, The War on Poverty, The Great Society, all cast in utopian language, have driven our nation further into debt and the poor further into indignity and dependency. If the progressives would only give the market a chance to operate, with true competition for insurance companies extending across state lines, they would see costs go down. If the government would cut taxes across the board, including taxes on health insurance, employment would go up, and the twelve million or so who want insurance but can’t afford it would have a better chance to obtain it.
But it is so obvious that you cannot miss it that progressives have never cared about costs; they only care about their utopian vision and the means of reaching it of complete control of government, economy, and society. The Democrats’ progressive constituents do not see how they are playing right into the statists’ hands, and trading one of the best economic and political systems in the world for a fabricated dream inculcated in their minds since the earliest days of their youth.
Progressives simply do not understand why all Americans do not share their beautiful vision of the future, and why everyone will not unite with them to achieve it. Anyone who wants to work for himself (or herself) and only to support his family must be evil, selfish and greedy. Anyone who does not want to participate must be lazy, ignorant, and apathetic. Anyone who actually opposes them must be an extremist, filled with hate, and indoctrinated by corporate-controlled talk radio hosts.
The progressive base needs to come out of denial and recognize that the ones who are out in full force against the statists are the same ones who have foot the bill for the government’s false promises of the past. Those opposed to them are people who work real jobs and want simply to keep nearly all their money and to be left alone by the state. But unfortunately many progressives cannot remove themselves from their deep-seated illusions and thus will not leave their fellow Americans alone; and for that they are now going to see how “astro-turfed” the anger of the American people really is.
With the Congress and the White House controlled by radicals, and the Supreme Court silent on our rights’ daily usurpation, the American people are now the final check on statism. Let there be no doubt; without our opposition the government would fully and unquestionably opt for a totalitarian government that controls every aspect of our lives. The years under Obama will thus be our last stand against totalitarian government. The future of our nation and our children is in our hands.