Obama: King of Excuses


Obama on August 15, 2011:

“We had reversed the recession, avoided a depression, got the economy moving  again. … But over the last six months, we’ve had a run of bad luck.”

George Washington:

“Ninety-nine percent of the failures come from people who have the habit of making excuses.”

Obama is full of excuses.  And empty of any self-accountability whatsoever…..As only Krauthammer can elaborate:

A troubled nation wonders: How did we get mired in 9.1 percent unemployment,  0.9 percent growth and any economic outlook so bad that the Federal Reserve  pledges to keep interest rates at zero through mid-2013 — an admission that it  sees little hope on the horizon?

Bad luck, explains our president. Out of nowhere came Japan and its supply-chain disruptions, Europe and its debt problems, the Arab Spring and  those oil spikes. Kicked off, presumably, by various acts of God (should He not  be held accountable too?): earthquake and tsunami. (Tomorrow: pestilence and  famine. Maybe frogs.)……

…A plague of bad luck and bad faith — a recalcitrant providence and an  unpatriotic opposition. Our president wrestles with angels. Monsters of mythic  proportions.

A comforting fantasy. But a sorry excuse for a failing economy and a flailing  presidency.

Obama is a miserable failure at leading this great country.  However, Obama likely considers his promotion of class warfare, socialism, government/business alliances, and record welfare state as success.

Obama’s success = America’s failure.  Gee where have I heard something like that before?

Look, what he’s talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care.  I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don’t want this to work. ……

…… We want to promote failure, we want to promote incompetence, we want to stand by and not object to what he’s doing simply because of the color of his skin?  Sorry.  I got past the historical nature of this months ago.  He is the president of the United States, he’s my president, he’s a human being, and his ideas and policies are what count for me, not his skin color, not his past, not whatever ties he doesn’t have to being down with the struggle, all of that’s irrelevant to me.  We’re talking about my country, the United States of America, my nieces, my nephews, your kids, your grandkids.  Why in the world do we want to saddle them with more liberalism and socialism?  Why would I want to do that?  So I can answer it, four words, “I hope he fails.”  And that would be the most outrageous thing anybody in this climate could say.  Shows you just how far gone we are.

Obama has failed this country (perhaps purposefully, in my opinion) but has succeeded in much of his anti-American, anti-capitalist agenda.  That agenda means America fails.  It it not too late to turn back the tide but it must be done in 2012.

Obama must be ousted in 2012…..that’s all there is to it.

Funny of the Day: Archie Bunker is not happy with Obama


From Moonbattery:

After all these years, Archie Bunker still makes more sense than the moonbats who created him.

 

Oh…Awwwrrchie! That’s funny!

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time


U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time.

Little Miss “We have a right to disagree with any administration” now asks Obama administration critics “Whose side are you on”?


GAWD…this woman just disgusts me….I have never understood how a so-called lawyer who rode the coattails of her husband’s Presidency, then carpetbagged to become Senator of New York…has any qualifications for the position of Secretary of State.   Fact is, she doesn’t.

She is just another partisan posing as “smart power” while nearly everything she says and does falls squarely on the side of “dumb“, much like her boss, Obama.  Those who call her qualified and the “smartest woman in the room” confuse brains for an “I’m no Tammy Wynette” uber-liberal-feminist-corruptocrat-opportunist portraying a man.

Hillary Clinton has now asked those who oppose President Obama’s actions in Libya — “Whose side are you on“?

But the bottom line is, whose side are you on? Are you on Qadhafi’s side or are you on the side of the aspirations of the Libyan people and the international coalition that has been created to support them? For the Obama Administration, the answer to that question is very easy.

Whose side are we on?  Well, how about the side of the rule of law?

From HotAir.com:

This is really just the cherry on top of the sundae that is our Libya mission, isn’t it? First, the guy who became famous for opposing “dumb wars” launches a new mission in Libya.  Then he fights tooth and nail to avoid getting congressional approval, going so far as to ignore his own lawyers as to whether operations there are legal.  Then his own secretary of state — who spent years trying to make amends to the anti-war crowd for voting to invade Iraq — turns around and kinda sorta questions the loyalty of administration critics.

Never mind that this Libya war kinetic military action was begun with NO  Congressional approval (unlike the Iraq war) and Obama has declared that he does not need to follow the War Powers Act in Libya which is the law of the land.   BTW – President Bush had Congressional approval and many in this country and outside of this country who believe that Saddam had WMD.  All legitimate basis to go to war.  And the result has been a country that has been saved from the grips of its tyrant and, while still somewhat vulnerable, is a fledgling democracy.

But, apparently, Miss Whitewater thought it patriotic to offer dissent on legal wars, just not the illegal ones that she supports.

Well, here is Miss Testosterone’s words in 2003 when she wished to disagree with the actions of then President Bush (Warning: SCREECH alert!)

 “I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you’re not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration.”

Hypocritical Screeching….a Hillary Clinton staple.

Background on Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, Jr. – Part I


This is a very interesting video done by Bill Whittle.  As stated over at HotAir.com, he sticks to the facts, but makes clear where it is that Obama came from and what shaped him.  Video is called The Enigma – Strange Bedfellows Part I.

It is 12 minutes long, but worth the watch.  You come away completely understanding why Obama appears to hate this country, capitalism, and “the rich”.  It is clear, watching the video, from where his Marxist ideology was developed.

Now as you watch, just imagine if a similar video was put together on any Republican candidate or President.  And just, for grins, assume for the Republican, you can exchange the words in the video:  evangelical Christian for atheist, the words student of big business and capitalism with “student of Marx or Marxist”, and a “father who believed in taking land from blacks and giving it to whites” with the reference of Obama’s father writing a paper on “communism and the taking of land from citizens and giving them to blacks.”

If the tables were turned, that Republican would be ousted from the Presidential race (by the media) faster than you can say “fellow traveller” or “Karl Marx”.

Obama has a dangerous anti-American, anti-Constitutional, Marxist ideology, just like his parents and his grandparents.  But you wouldn’t know it from the mainstream press…..and many of his supporters still shudder when he’s called a Marxist.  Amazing.

The video:

Two Points for Walker on his take-down of hypocrite Obama


Obama had the gall today to lecture America on not “vilifying” and “denigrating” union workers lest we  infringe upon their made-up rights or something…..  Here’s Obama’s disingenuous words:

From Fox Nation via Cubachi:

Public servants will agree with that. Democrats and republicans agree with that. In fact many public employees in your respective states have already agreed to cuts. But let me also say this, I don’t think it does anybody any good when public employees are denigrated or vilified, or their rights are infringed upon. We need to attract the best and the brightest to public service. These times demand it.

We’re not gonna attract the best teachers for our kids, for example, if they only make a fraction of what other professionals make. We’re not gonna convince the bravest Americans to put their lives on the line as police officers or firefighters if we don’t properly reward that bravery. So yes we need a conversation about pensions and Medicare and Medicaid and other promises that we’ve made as a nation and those will be tough conversations but necessary conversations.

As we make these decisions about our budget, going forward though, I believe that everyone should be at the table and that the concept of shared sacrifice should prevail. If all the pain’s borne by only one group, whether its workers or seniors or the poor, while the wealthiest among us get to keep or get more tax breaks, we’re not doing the right thing. I think that’s something the democrats and the republicans should be able to agree on.

Blah. Blah. Blah…..teachers not paid enough, tax cuts for the rich, everyone at table (if they are his side of the table..heh)…..broken lying record.

Walker is having none of it and lays the wood to Obama:

“I’m sure the President knows that most federal employees do not have collective bargaining for wages and benefits while our plan allows it for base pay. And I’m sure the President knows that the average federal worker pays twice as much for health insurance as what we are asking for in Wisconsin. At least I would hope he knows these facts.

“Furthermore, I’m sure the President knows that we have repeatedly praised the more than 300,000 government workers who come to work every day in Wisconsin.

“I’m sure that President Obama simply misunderstands the issues in Wisconsin, and isn’t acting like the union bosses in saying one thing and doing another.”

Oh my…..That is great. I like Scott Walker’s style.

Where does Obama get off talking about “vilifying and denigrating” workers, anyway?
Obama himself called the Tea Party “teabaggers”, a sexually derogatory term, among other denigrating names.  Obama “not vilifying” Tea Partiers from the New York Times back in 2009:

“Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.”

…..and he insisted that the Tea Party should be “thanking him” instead of being against him.

And very early on, he called those who disagree with him “bitter clingers” with their guns, religion, and racism.

Walker and those against the public sector union gravy train are heads above in the behavior department.  Otherwise, as Obama has similarly done, Walker would insist that the union members “thank him” for not firing them or he would be calling them sexually degrading names..

And Obama would be denouncing the violence, the Capitol squatters, the union-funded AWOL Wisconsin Democrats, the vile language, and the “incivility” of the signs and the union astroturf protests.

Obama is a hypocrite deluxe…. His motto is “do as i say and not as I do”….”oh, and don’t touch my campaign gravy train…the unions!”

Obama is the one who said ” “Everyone must sacrifice for the greater good… Everyone must have some skin in the game.”

And how’s this for “shared sacrifice” and skin in the game? or this?

Everyone must have “skin in the game”, it seems, except the Obama’s and the public sector unions.

Fleebaggers now leave Indiana


Empty seats reside where the Democrats normally sit as Republicans filled their seats inside the House chambers at the Indiana Statehouse on Tuesday. / MATT DETRICH / The Star

First it was Wisconsin….Now the Democrat fleebaggers have left Indiana.

Seats on one side of the Indiana House were nearly empty today as House Democrats departed the the state rather than vote on anti-union legislation.

A source tells the Indianapolis Star that Democrats are headed to Illinois, though it was possible some also might go to Kentucky. They need to go to a state with a Democratic governor to avoid being taken into police custody and returned to Indiana.

The House was came into session twice this morning, with only three of the 40 Democrats present. Those were needed to make a motion, and a seconding motion, for any procedural steps Democrats would want to take to ensure Republicans don’t do anything official without quorum.

 With only 58 legislators present, there was no quorum present to do business. The House needs 67 of its members to be present.

 House Speaker Brian Bosma said he did not know yet whether he would ask the Indiana State Police to compel the lawmakers to attend, if they can be found.

Speaker Bosma…. I say we take them and those who fled Wisconsin to a tiny island and leave them there ….so the adults can continue the Democratic process.

Geez…Democrats shove all kinds of crap sandwiches down our throats against our will, but when the going gets tough for the Dems and their union campaign cash flow…they flee.  Grow up.

Thoughts on Wisconsin, collective bargaining, and “rights”


Source: TownHall.com

Ever since Governor Walker has made his stand in addressing the public worker benefits in Wisconsin, the Left has been apoplectic resulting in spin, lies, and an inability to see the writing on the wall.

I’ve had some online debates with those who view the happenings in Wisconsin as bad and somehow as a “power grab”.  What?

I’ve also heard the argument that collective bargaining is “right” and that the representation of union management to its members is akin to our representative Republic.  Again, what?

Anyway, I’ve spent much time putting thoughts down in those debates, so I decided to copy them over here on my blog.  I welcome debate on the thoughts and, hopefully, you can use the same thoughts in your debates with those who support the existence of public sector unions and their, often, exorbitant demands on the taxpayer, not to mention their corruption and huge money flow to Democratic coffers.

 Here goes:

I have not figured out yet why if this is just about “representing the rights of the workers” and not about union power….well then make the dues voluntary and let “the workers” be represented if they feel the need. As Gov. Walker has proposed, let the unions collect dues (not the govt) on a voluntary (not forced) basis. Aren’t unions supposed to be in line with the needs and wants of those they represent?

We all know the answer to that….this is not about the so-called “rights” of workers, but about money, power, and the Democrat party coffers.

The detractors of Governor Walker try to compare union dues to union management with taxes to the government.  Forcing union members to pay dues is a far cry from taxpayers paying taxes. We have something called a representative government. Unions are not the government, no matter how much control they currently have over politicians and how much more they’d like to have. Where is that representative framework between a union and its members?
In unions there is one “Party”–the union bosses— and you must give to it. They decide where the cash goes….oh…and they pay themselves exorbitantly. If I am a teacher’s union member, I can’t get out and I can’t stop that union boss from donating to Democrats nor stop the boss from paying himself upwards of $500K to $750K in annual compensation. No recourse.
I should have the choice to be a part of that…or not..and if you are a teacher in Wisconsin….YOU DO NOT have a choice.
I am happy to say it is not the same in our Constitutional Representative Republic.

Besides, there is a large percentage of teachers who would not choose to be in a union if they were not forced to join. In Wisconsin, teachers pay in the range of $700 to $1100 per year to unions–by force. Wouldn’t that money go a long way towards the Gov’s meager request to fund their healthcare at a fraction of its cost and part of their pension?

In addition…. many union members do not support having their hard-earned dollars shoved into Democratic campaigns each election season. That is exactly what is happening. For instance: Between 1990 and 2004, 94 percent of donations made by National Education Association political action committees and individual officers went to Democrats, according to OpenSecrets.org. According to the NEA’s own “Status of the American Public School Teacher 2000-2001,” only 45 percent of public school teachers are Democrats. 

And even more informative, the #1 source of “donor cash” in the state of Wisconsin in 2007-2008 was the NEA…3rd was the NFT.

Talk about big money…In the top 11 of campaign donors NATIONALLY in 2007/08 were 3 unions with the NEA at the top of the list. Out of those 11, NOT ONE, is a large corporation.
Who is using the most money to influence Washington and the states? (hint: it’s not the evil capitalists)
Worse, much of that cash that a Republican teacher is forced to pay goes to a Democratic politician 99% of the time!

Opponents of Governor Walker and proponents of public sector collective bargaining maintain it as “right”.  They don’t see the connection between the budget and the collective bargaining arrangements.  As far as the budget, getting public sector benefits in line with private ones is a very smart way to fill the budget hole. As far as collective bargaining….Walker is only halting the bargaining on benefits. Salaries may still be bargained but must be in line with the Consumer Price Index. The benefits side is where the rising costs are…limiting that rise is prudent and in the best interest of ALL taxpayers, especially when those benefits already far surpass the private sector.

There is no “right” to collective bargaining. And in the public sector, one could argue it is not even smart.
Even FDR realized that. Today’s unions give outrageously to politicians to get them elected. Then, in “bargaining”, those same politicians that are beholden to the unions for getting them elected are supposed to represent the taxpayers on the other side of the table.
This is exactly how the public sector benefits have risen above the private sector in Wisconsin ( and many other places)….the public sector unions have a pseudo-monopoly on the bargaining process.

As far as comparing the “right” to collective bargaining with Constitutional rights (which some have done)….There is a difference between a Constitutional right and a so-called union “contract”. Our Constitution mentions nothing of a “right” to collective bargaining as it does for free speech, free assembly and our other Constitutional rights.
And in our Constitutional rights, the government specifically can not intervene with those rights and, in most instances, if not all, no other parties have diminished rights by others exerting these rights.

This is simply not the case with Collective Bargaining and the unions as a whole. In most union arrangements, an employer is FORCED to deal with the union and is overseen by a government agency (ie government intervention). In the case of bargaining, the employer MUST listen to the demands of the union even if the demands are not good for the health of the business or state. In addition, if the union is arguing terms for employees, but the business/state could easily hire another person who IS happy with the terms, the unions and the government oversight prevent it. And should I even mention, that in most cases, the employers are powerless to keep the unions away. If the union agitates (and that is what it is…I’ve seen it) a specific set of employees long enough, they can vote the union in and the company is powerless to stop it.

Again the right of the business to conduct as it sees fit within the law and market pressures, is stymied by the “rights” of the unions.

So when did we decide that the “rights” of the union and its members trumps the rights of business and taxpayers?

The so-called “rights” touted to collective bargaining amount to suppression of rights of the business, and in the case of Wisconsin, the taxpayers. Our Constitutional rights do not suppress the Constitutional rights of others.

In addition, it has been argued that if a union member (specifically a teacher, in the case of Wisconsin) can’t make change within thee union they are FORCED to join, well then, they can just move elsewhere.  Gosh, isn’t that called “choice”?  Well, if that is the case, and choice is good, then why can’t we do away with public sector unions, allow teachers to work where they wish and move elsewhere if a particular locality/school doesn’t meet their career needs. It’s called free market and it cuts out the middle man – unions.

I am not saying that members don’t have a say in the unions. They do have a say at some level. What I am saying is that forced unionization is the antithesis to real choice and freedom. So is the push for card check and the elimination of the secret ballot. It is beyond me how that is in the best interest of the employee. I am also saying that the union management is corrupt and, in many cases, spend far fewer of the member dollars on the needs of members and far more on the political donations, management salaries, and other questionable practices (ie 5-star resorts). As much as 70% of union dues go to political donations, exorbitant management salaries and the like with the remainder being spent on the needs of union members.

Is that what you call representative and a portrait of what a stellar union should be? 

Others have argued that Governor Walker is executing a “power grab.”  When the residents of Washington voted in this governor and state body, they gave them the power to govern as they said when they campaigned. That is exactly what they are doing and it is not a power grab.
If anything the power grab is represented in the Democrats leaving their jobs because they don’t want to vote on something where they will lose. The Democrats are trying to rule by minority and outside the bounds of democracy.Too bad, so sad….that is how it is when officials are elected and the majority party has the votes.

Union supporters and activists will many times, when placed in a corner during debate, will tout how corporations can’t be trusted and that they throw big money into the political arena, too.  Granted, there are some bad apples in the corporate/business world.  But through free markets and consumer choice, those bad apples eventually lose in the market.  Even if a corporation has broken the law to get ahead, they are usually tried and punished by law.  But union supporters only see bad in corporations, of which the vast majority are respectable, but have blinders that block the corruption and greed present in the very union structure. 

Most unions today do not operate in the best interest of their members, but in the best interest of power and money.  
Wisconsin is a great example…..if this bill is defeated in Wisconsin, the Governor faces laying off thousands of workers. The union leaders and their bussed-in astroturf forces would rather have the power that comes with collective bargaining and forced union membership than to save the jobs of thousands of employees who would still have jobs and have benefits closer to public sector numbers.
How is that in the best interest of the employees those unions represent?

Krauthammer: Obama’s budget lies and gimmicks


How do you know when Obama is lying? When his mouth is open.

Obama’s rhetoric on his budget is chock full of lies and gimmicks.  Charles Krauthammer calls him on it.

And for you Bush-bashers, who accuse Bush of running up the debt (even though his highest deficits occurred on the watch of Democratically-controlled Congress and were nothing compared to Obama’s deficits so far)….all of you please check out the part where Obama’s budget, at the end of this decade. leaves us in debt in an amount THREE times of the total when Obama took office.

Yet for all its gimmicks, this budget leaves the country at decade’s end saddled with publicly held debt triple what Obama inherited.

A more cynical budget is hard to imagine. This one ignores the looming debt crisis, shifts all responsibility for serious budget-cutting to the Republicans - for which Democrats are ready with a two-year, full-artillery demagogic assault – and sets Obama up perfectly for reelection in 2012.

Obama fancies his happy talk, debt-denial optimism to be Reaganesque. It’s more Louis XV. Reagan begat a quarter-century of prosperity; Louis, the deluge.

Moreover, unlike Obama, Louis had the decency to admit he was forfeiting the future. He never pretended to be winning it.

Reagan he is not…and the comparison is absolutely absurd.   Obama is leaving the hard, but absolutely necessary, cuts to entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, etc) to the Republicans.  What a coward.  Obama wishes to make Republicans do the dirty work so he can hammer them for it….never mind that Obama has stated serious cuts are necessary.  His words never match his actions….ALWAYS remember that.

 Read all of Krauthammer’s piece to get a summary of Obama’s lies and gimmicks on his budget.

New Terms of the Day: Fleebaggers and Electile Dysfunction


While Twittering today, I ran across two new terms that have been generated because of the hypocritical fleeing teachers from their classrooms and the fleeing Democrats from the voting chamber in Wisconsin…..

FLEEbaggers - those who flee their jobs in the name of “rights” and Democracy to fight against those who pay for their jobs.

Electile Dysfunction – the newfound disease of cowardly Democrats who flee their jobs when the voting gets tough. 

( I don’t remember who first used these terms on Twitter so I apologize for no reference, but something tells me these terms may be used regularly in the future!)

Oh, and PS…remember the calls for civility from Obama and the left?  Where’s the love now?  I don’t know about the love, but here’s the hypocrisy.  But, then again, the climate of hate is sometimes useful for those on the left….so it is OK?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 252 other followers