Obama dangerously and swiftly consolidates his power while RNC’s Steele criticizes his own base

rush-silenced-picAs each day passes I think less and less about how Republicans will regain power in 2010 or 2012, but more and more about “HOW DO WE SAVE OUR COUNTRY?

I’ve said it to my family and friends many times over the course of the last month…..I don’t believe that we are in a fight to regain Republican power, but one to save America.   The Leftists in charge have  declared  war against freedom, liberty, the Constitution,  business, capitalism and more.  Each day they wreak more havoc and damage to our country, its citizens, and its traditions.

All the while, many in our party and many who don’t want to pay attention, believe that “this too shall pass” and it is “politics as usual”.  I don’t believe it…..I believe we are in a war to save this country!

And as I read the news today, my premise seems to be more and more accurate. 

We have a Marxist president hell-bent on transforming our country into something the Founding Fathers never intended….and who seems not to notice the stock market plummet  nor that 48% of us don’t want his brand of “change”!

dow-below-7000Obama is seemingly oblivious to the “Obama Administration Market Crash” since he began his “reign of fear” over America….why, one might being to wonder if this is exactly what Dr. Obama ordered.

Today, for example, the dow is at a level it hasn’t seen since 1997.  I was shaking my head in agreement at the words inThe Anchoress blog this morningin her reference to Obama and his lack of caring about what Americans are experiencing:

So, the Dow has now fallen, below 7,000 – declining to its lowest levels since 1997…..

My prediction: the Dow is going to go down to 6,000 and then gallop near to 5,000. Whether it crashes there or the markets and consumers will be able to pull the reins and prevent it is anyone’s guess.

The president seems wholly untroubled by any of this and is happily continuing on toward the creation of “one world” with a global “new deal” on his mind. The swiftness with which he is accruing and consolidating power is breathtaking, and most people don’t even realize he’s doing it.

That is one master of the game, America has elected. Bill Clinton wouldn’t be worthy to tie his sandals.

Oh. Reporters are staring to think it might be time to panic. Is this the narrative they really want? Get people panicking even more? Or maybe people will just laugh at the press and say, “now you’re figuring it out?”

Then you have the so-called party of conservatism and the Constitution (i.e. Republicans) continuing to shoot itself in the foot by offering Democrats more and more fodder against them.

michael-steeleContrast the fact that while “Rome is burning” the new face of the RNC, Michael Steele, is criticizing and demonizing one of his own party’s most beloved, most patriotic, and most Constitutional speakers, Rush Limbaugh.

Rush gave a FIERY speech at CPAC on Saturday afternoon…what a barn burner.   Rush expressed exactly what our RNC leaders should be espousing.   While Rush states the obvious, the RNC head is demeaning a leader who has millions of followers (more than Steele or the organized RNC at this point!). 

From CNN, here’s what Steele had to say about Rush’s CPAC speech:

“Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Rush Limbaugh’s whole thing is entertainment,” Steele said. “Yes, it is incendiary. Yes, it is ugly.”

Obama is on a mission to become dictator of American and all Michael Steele can do is criticize someone who has more respect and followers than he does at this point!

My husband sent a letter to the RNC regarding Steele’s comments….my husband is  ON TARGET here and the RNC had better take note:

Mr. Steele,

I initially welcomed your election as RNC Chairman, but now I’m not so sure.  Your recent comments, reported by CNN.com, regarding Rush Limbaugh demonstrate a surprising lack of sophistication and awareness.

You were quoted by CNN.com this morning as saying:

“Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Rush Limbaugh’s whole thing is entertainment,” Steele said. “Yes, it is incendiary. Yes, it is ugly.”

Well, Mr. Steel, Rush Limbaugh is certainly not the leader of the Republican Party, but he is more than just an “entertainer”.  He is a long-standing leading conservative with a far greater daily following than YOU currently enjoy.  Although I myself do not agree with everything Mr. Limbaugh says and does, his framing of the conservative argument is far more coherent than what has come out of the the RNC.  Regardless, it is unnecessary to throw public insults at him to retain your position of leadership.  However, by doing so, I guarantee you will tend to weaken that position. 

The Democrats, and even the President himself, view Mr. Limbaugh as a significant challenge to their agenda.  Why else would they expend so much effort in getting people like you to say things that can be reported by the media as criticism?  If you don’t realize that separating the current RNC leadership from the conservative base was and is their objective, then you are not the right person to lead the Republican Party.

The Republicans need leaders to UNIFY and expand the party while challenging the President and Congressional Democrats where appropriate.  The Republicans DO NOT need someone in a RNC leadership position delivering media quotes that tend to alienate MILLIONS of conservative Americans.  You don’t have to publicly identify yourself with Rush Limbaugh’s commentary, but you should adhere to the age old wisdom about keeping quiet if you don’t have something nice to say about people popular within your own group.

You’re new in the job and I still have hope, but you, sir, need to smarten up and NOT do the Democrat’s work.


(SharpRightTurn’s husband)

You know, Mr. Steele, instead of demeaning many of your supporters and their intelligence, maybe you could offer a few words of support for an effective member of the party (Rush) or even for those of us actively protesting the “war from within” against our country—-something, please!


10 Responses

  1. If my history is correct, the accusations you’ve made, in the very first paragraph, HAPPENED DURING BOTH BUSH administrations.
    If there is to be/remain/ become a U.S., ( that’s US without a stoppage.), these UNITED States must RID ourselves of the petty differences.. when we ALL are from ONE LABEL… Human-BEING.
    The social ENTROPY being encouraged is what WILL KILL this 233 year old experiment, just as it is getting out of the “TESTA”.
    And I suppose you cheer Monsanto’s ways of increasing “the bottom LINE”, ( BILLIONS by bullying. Watch the movie: the World According to Monsanto.) They have BAITED, and switched you.

  2. Where has it been shown that John McCain’s “tax cuts” (his only economic plan that I heard) would have helped the banking/mortgage/toxic loan industry recover from the unregulated mess they got themselves in? (I’m aware the deregulation _started with_ Clinton, so I’m not defending him or Cheney/Rove’s-puppet-for-the-first-six-years Bush.)

    I’m still willing to give Obama a chance to turn things around. I DO NOT think he has socialist intentions — that’s a Rush ploy to keep conservatives riled. Yes, I think the president is throwing a lot of money around, but tell me — what is YOUR suggestion to solve the mortgage crisis? Or do you just regurgitate what Rush tells you? I don’t read any great ideas to solve the crisis in your post.

  3. youjustdontgetit,

    If you want alternative suggestions, then read through the rest of the blog a bit. There are plenty.

    However, the absence of another suggested solution does NOT mean that one must blindly accept something with obvious and serious flaws. With most things, doing nothing is usually better than doing SOMETHING that may cause more harm.

    For someone reputed be a thoughtful and analytical person (Obama), his “solutions” appear hasitly arrived at with precious little analysis, debate, or linkage between action and intended effect. Assuming he’s NOT an idiot, it makes some wonder what his (unstated) intentions might be.

  4. The controversy about Michael Steele and Rush Limbaugh (who I don’t really particularly listen to anymore) is more than about Rush. When the liberal talk show host said that CPAC looked like a bunch of Nazis Michael Steele nodded in agreement.

    Some said his nodding wasn’t in agreement with that statement but still at the very least he was quiet and did not speak out against that outrageous statement.

    This is more than about Rush the person. This was about the speech he gave and if you listened to the speech and agree with it then it is not only Rush but you, and all other grassroots conservatives that Michael Steele has rebuked in the harshest of terms.

    Well, if that is the way the “leader” of the GOP feels about me then I say no, no, no, not God Bless the GOP, GOD DAMN the GOP. It isn’t the party I thought I knew!

  5. youjustdontgetit,
    First this post was not necessarily written to outline what should be done for the current crisis, but instead to contrast what Michael Steele is doing with the fact that we have a Socialist in office and “Rome is burning”.

    But since you ask….for the mortgage “crisis’–which was started by Clinton, pushed on by Franks and Dodd, exacerbated by (Obama’s friends) ACORN, and with roots in Fannie and Freddie—I say let the institutions fail and those consumers with mortgages they can’t pay should lose their homes and/or go bankrupt. (While I don’t agree with the first Bailout that Bush signed off on….don’t forget that George W. Bush warned the DEMOCRATIC-led Congress at least 15 times in 2008 about the impending crisis to no avail!)

    That is our system. If you are a player or consumer and ignored the accounting and financial realities, our free and capitalist system allows for you to fail and allows for you to claim bankruptcy.

    Will innocent consumers and financial industries feel that pain? Sure they will, but the only way to get back on our feet and, perhaps, learn a lesson for those who didn’t play by the rules is to pay the consequences for poor management.

    We all live in our market system knowing that sometimes our own economic situation is affected by the ups and downs of the economy/market and the people in it…..I could live with that kind of pain if it meant the free market prevails and the that those of us who played by the rules should not be artificially punished by paying for those who didn’t.

    In addition, while many banks and institutions didn’t play within the rules, many did…..and the leaders of those very companies likely knew that this would happen and had resources to “buy out” or take over the weak players. It happens all of the time and that is how free market business is run.
    Instead our government has stepped in, using money they don’t have, and usurped the power of free markets…….

    For the record, all funding to agencies like ACORN and other groups who fueled the flames of bad mortgages based on some “social injustice” would be COMPLETELY cut off from government funding…..

    As far as Obama being a Socialist….well if the biggest redistribution of wealth in our country’s history doesn’t clue you in to that fact, then you may be beyond helping.

    Obama’s associations and mentors through much of his adult life has been with Marxists, Socialists, Communists, Atheists, and anti-Americans…..Bill Ayers, Saul Alinsky, Bernardine Dohrn, his wife, Jeremiah Wright, his mother, and more—not to mention his political schooling in the Chicago corruption machine.
    But you don’t have to even list all of those people nor see what is happening before your eyes to know that Obama is a Socialist…listen to his own words….one example of many—-he said he would redistribute wealth during the campaign!

  6. My friends, family, and mentors throughout my entire life have consisted almost exclusively of Conservatives, Atheists, Agnostics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, and yet I have always been a devout and practicing Catholic with liberal leanings. Correlation does not imply causation.

    Furthermore, the guy was educated at Columbia and Harvard. There are no two better schools anywhere to attend for a law degree. As for Chicago, don’t delude yourself into believing Chicago is the only corrupt political scene. Furthermore, Chicago is far from exclusively “evil”, as your comment would imply; there have been plenty of pushes for reform over the years, the most recent of which is currently in power there.

    Finally, it would seem conservatives have Obama in a Catch-22. If he stops spending, as conservatives want, and lets the banks and insurance companies and homeowners everywhere fail (which, by the way, would take years, if not decades, to reverse itself), then he’s following the Republican agenda. But if he pumps money into the country’s infrastructure, he’s a Socialist? The only (significant) income the government has is taxpayer money; the only way I see that he could avoid the Socialist label is if he stuck all that taxpayer money under his mattress (or gave us all tax cut checks for us to stick under our mattresses, since nobody’s going to spend that money in this economy)! The fallacy is plainly visible here.

    Obama is not a socialist; he’s a proponent of spending money to make money. The government remains the single most stable financial institution left in the country, and therefore any money it spends will be viewed as financially sound dollars that can be utilized for investments and growth. No, it’s nowhere near perfect. If all the companies were simply allowed to fail, the economy would still turn around eventually. The difference is Obama’s trying to cut that turnaround time down to a minimum; left to its own devices, the economy would take years to recover. Hopefully, with this course of action, it will be significantly shorter. At which point I fully expect Obama to rein in spending and once again let the markets take over; I can assure you, he will lose a great deal of his voter support if he doesn’t.

  7. magsol,
    You must be kidding me. Your statements are well written, but about as naive as they come.

    I don’t believe that just “being around” or experiencing the cultures of others makes you necessarily one of “them”.
    But with your Atheist mentor,I bet you didn’t sit and listen to a God-hating atheist for 20 years and then deny you knew he was an atheist or that it had no effect on you.

    As one small example, of many….Obama sat in the pews of Wright’s church for 20 years listening to and, a reasonable person can conclude, agreeing with much of the racist, anti-American drivel that spewed from the lips of Wright.
    Naive is the word if you believe that Obama didn’t agree with the guy. I wouldn’t sit in a church pew for 20 years listening to something so anathema to my beliefs (unless, of course, it was politically expedient…which is also partially a reason why Obama sat there.)

    Republicans didn’t put Obama where he is….Obama did. During the campaign, he promised a vague “hope and change” from “evil” Republican” governance that he intended, and many believed, was the end-all for setting things straight.
    Obama set the expectations for his “followers” that life would be rosy and painless after January 20.
    If there was any pain to be felt, he certainly didn’t let them in on it.
    So it is not the Republicans who put Obama in this position that any pain during healing is a bad thing.
    And they certainly didn’t didn’t set him up to spend us into oblivion….he did that all on his own….
    Obama’s in power now….get over the blame directed at everyone else…he is responsible for the Socialist agenda he is touting.

    Obama’s spending is not just for infrastructure as you insinuate …two things you need to know….1) MOST Of the proposals in the last bailout were not “stimulative” and 2) infrastructure spending is not stimulative.
    It is disingenous or just naive to think his spending has just been for infrastructure….and that, therefore, we evil ones call him Socialist.

    Government collects our money but it is still OUR money. It is not, for example, Obama’s money to use to pay off those who helped him during the campaign, like ACORN and the Unions…both groups for which Obama is funneling big dollars through the bailout money.

    One way for Obama to avoid his Socialist label is quit tripling the deficit, doubling the debt, and squandering our money for his Leftist, big-Government nanny-state ideas.
    It is not government’s place to run healthcare, banks, or even education….funneling our money into those programs and expanding government exponentially is not what our Founders intended….nor what gives consumers confidence to risk their money in business or even to spend it.

    If you allow consumers to keep more of their money, it is proven in history, that the tax revenues increase, and the economy prospers through new business, new hires, more consumer spending, etc.

    Obama’s policies squash any trust consumers have in the economy to spend or risk their money…oh, and in the mean time, he is taking more of their money from them….

    Obama also includes in his policies to take more and more money from those who make the most money and hand it to those who don’t. That is Socialism no matter how you parse it.

    Obama is a Socialist. American business and investors have the role of spending money to make money…that is not the role of our government.
    Not to mention, when has Obama EVER run a business….does he know how to spend money to make money? NO, he knows how to spend money to transfer it to others in an effort to keep his power.

    Pardon me, but you are severely mistaken with your assumption that our government is the best run entity in the country. It is the worst manager of money I can think of…and it is currently run by a large contingent of people who have NEVER run a business in their life.
    If the government, that is proposing to double our debt, triple our deficit, and spend lavishly without transparency is the most stable financial institution in our country, then we are beyond hope.

    FDR did exactly what Obama is doing in terms of spending and expanding government in a recession and it has been determined by many, a lot smarter than I, that the depression was deepened and extended by it….not shortened as you propose.

    And a President that has already tripled the deficit is not a likely candidate to “rein in spending” any time soon…that is completely laughable. Surely you don’t believe your own words.

    Bottom line is this man’s agenda has to be stopped, or slowed down significantly, or we won’t, for a very long time, have the prosperous America back that we once had …or most likely, we never will.

  8. No, in fact, I’m not kidding you. Naive though I will accept being, I’d like to think my short 24 years have afforded me nuggets of wisdom here and there, one of them being that arguments without supporting evidence besides “if you don’t believe it you’re a lost cause” serve only to inflame and polarize. What is truly laughable is the prospect of achieving any sort of constructive end when so many people are singlemindedly all-or-nothing.

    I’ll accept that Rev Wright isn’t the brightest bulb in the batch. Not even close. But I’ll bet you’ve only watched the last (and most infamous) 30 seconds of his homily; watch the previous 10 minutes to see a classic example of one sentence taken out of context. Regardless, even if Obama bought into everything Rev Wright ever said, he’s lived by the separation of church and state by keeping his faith out of his political agendas.

    I never said Republicans put Obama where he is. I simply pointed out that by virtue of his party association, Republicans will never, ever approve of him, regardless of his actions. If we ever want the government to stop spending money on campaign donors, we need to elect someone who will reform the campaign donations. Nobody in recent memory has run on that platform; Bush was just as guilty of it as Obama is.

    I would argue that infrastructure spending is, in fact, “stimulative”. Funneling money for transportation, public works, renewable energy, new technologies, and other such investments provides new foundations for broader long-term economic growth. The only caveat is that it will take awhile.

    If tripling the deficit, squandering money, and expanding government are the definitions of a Socialist, then Bush would would have qualified as a Communist.

    One of the main causes of a recession or depression is the lack of money in circulation, largely due to a lack of consumer confidence. As such, people will simply stuff tax cut dollars away in an attempt to save whatever money they can. Which is precisely why tax cuts are ineffective.

    You’re absolutely right that the government is nowhere near the best-run entity in the country. What I actually said, though, was that government is the most solvent financial institution in the country. It’s a subtle but very important distinction – any economist will tell you that the reason government bonds are so stable is because investing in the government is the safest way to put one’s money away.

    FDR’s efforts were largely ineffective, yes. But it did put down an infrastructure for future growth, and it improved the morale of the country by putting people back to work. It was WWII that ultimately ended the depression, but much of the infrastructure that was put in place by FDR is still in use. I’ve mentioned before and I still agree that anyone advertising a quick fix to the current situation is delusional; Obama never advertised as much. There are many speeches of his where he mentions the fact that things will probably get worse before they get better.

    The whole point of the programs Obama is endorsing is to jumpstart the economy. They will take awhile to take effect, for certain. But once their effects have been felt, the goal is to phase the projects out, hence ending the spending increases. Of course, this will take years, and Obama will more than likely no longer be in power, so it will be up to the administration then to pull back the spending.

    I suppose my bottom line is that I truly do not see this man as the threat to America as we know it that so many conservatives do. It’s fine if you disagree, but labeling me as naive isn’t a legitimate reason, particularly since I could say the same about you with just as little (read: nonexistent) proof. I see this man as a panacea compared to the administration he replaced. Obama put forth lofty goals while campaigning, and my job is to vote him out in four years if he doesn’t follow through. Until then, I support him in what I agree with, and offer constructive criticism on what I disagree with. Anarchy and ad hominems never helped solve anything. It’s as simple as that.

  9. “I see this man as a panacea compared to the administration he replaced.”


    I agree with SRT that much of what you put forth is well written, but at times a bit naive. However, based on the above sentence from your most recent post, I’d like to introduce you to another word…fatuous.

    Even though I consider myself a conservative, I thought the rhetoric from the right was overdone in the days leading up to Obama’s inauguration. I felt reasonably sure that I was looking at a pragmatist who occasionally gave hints of centrist (& even conservative) thought. It took less than a month for our new President to prove me completely wrong with respect to domestic policy and the economy. He is most certainly not a pragmatist nor a centrist, but an ideologue bent on achieving his objectives regardless of the consequences.

    You’re only 24 years old. That certainly doesn’t make you stupid, but it does make you inexperienced. Since your teenage years, you’ve seen nothing but prosperity (up until a few months ago). My teenage years showed me a very substantial economic downturn that lasted some eight years, producing double digit unemployment and inflation, followed by Prime Rates approaching 20%. We are living on borrowed time as well as borrowed money. At the rate we’re spending money that we don’t have, substantial inflationary pressure AND some VERY steep interest rate increases are not only possible, but inevitable. It’s only a matter of when.

    Frankly, I’ll be relieved if the economy is no worse than what I saw in the late 70s and early 80s.

  10. magsol –
    I never said you were a lost cause and in fact I did say that you write very well. If I was too strong in my judgment of you, then I regret that….sometimes it is tough to know who you are dealing with unless you have bantered back and forth a couple of times. I did have an idea that you are fairly young, but I also gather that you have at least thought a bit about the things that matter.

    Now let me tell you where you are wrong.. 🙂

    You can’t believe everything you hear…especially from a politician. It seems you put a lot of faith in all that Obama says, but you haven’t really seen what he has actually done so far. I think it is true for anyone listening to a political leader…listen, but do your own homework.

    As an example, I listened to Bush tout the first stimulus bill last fall…but I did my homework…and I have been against these bailouts from day one…I believe Bush is a good man and I believe he led us through 9-11 and I agreed with his Iraq and Afghanistan invasions…even after some mistakes…and especially after the surge made us victorious in Iraq (something the current President will never admit because he was wrong about Iraq and the surge).

    But Bush’s economic policies, especially toward the end of his term, were less than stellar, and unfortunately, led us to the Socialist, big-government onslaught we are now getting with Obama and a Democratic Congress.

    You accuse me of being all-or-nothing, but your statements like “Obama is not a Socialist” are quite declarative…despite the facts that show he is a Socialist.

    As for Reverend Wright….you could be, and I have been, on YouTube for extended amounts of times watching the many diatribes on hatefule white people, how bad America is and other racist, America-hating drivel from the mouth of Wright. Jeremiah Wright is not famous for just one sound bite as you seem to believe…his rants were plentiful at the pulpit.

    As for Republicans, campaign donations and Obama…..Most Republicans are against the policies and ideas that Obama is carrying out. Why should Republicans leave their values at the door because Obama is now in office? My point was you can’t use Republican as the whipping boys for the backlash from the markets and citizens who disapprove of Obama’s plans…If Obama chooses to spend us further into recession that is his decision, but Republicans have every right to call him out on it…..Somehow I bet you didn’t use the “Catch 22” excuse when Democrats personally insulted and castigated Bush for every move he made, justified or not.

    On Campaign donations, it was Obama who early on said he would take public campaign financing if nominated. So did McCain.
    Well guess who went back on their word and chose to take the private financing route to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars? Obama.
    Now guess who has to pay back those IOU’s in the form of our tax dollars through government spending? Obama.
    The stimulus bill is a tribute to those who financed Obama’s campaign.
    Obama’s campaign was subsidized by Wall Street, Unions, and other special interests.
    Bush and McCain BOTH took public financing. As a matter of fact, no candidate has even turned down public financing, except Obama. Corruption? you bet.

    As far as infrastructure spending….perhaps some of it is well-intended and good, but should have been left for another bill at another time. This time of spending does nothing in the near term to save the Trillions of dollars of value that businesses, citizens and investors are hemorrhaging since Obama took office.
    Also, the government’s foray into the energy business, the healthcare business, bank buyouts and the like are all unconstitutional. It was never intended by our Founders that our industries be mostly funded and run by the government.
    Much of Obama’s infrastructure spending relies on increasing the number of government employees and investing OUR money into different industries with government “strings attached’.
    The bill even excludes any company that is non-union from participating in any government contracts….another blow to small businesses who actually stimulate the economy by producing 80% of the jobs in this country.

    On Socialism and Bush…I’ll grant you that Republicans, when in control of Congress, were spending like drunk Democrats….and Bush signed off on it. Bush did expand government which is largely why Obama won and Dems are in the majority now…Republicans acted like Democrats.
    But lets remember that for the last two years, the Dems had control of Congress. In those two years, the deficit doubled by the end of 2008. In 2009, the Democrats in full power have a plan that will MORE THAN TRIPLE the deficit in ONE YEAR up to 1.75 trillion dollars.
    Socialism isn’t just about the large debt and spending….it is about taking money from the producers and spreading it around…redistribution of wealth. Obama is redistributing in spades….read the stimulus bill, the $410B omnibus bill, and the proposed budget by Obama….Bush doesn’t hold a candle to Obama on Socialist spending.

    Obama did say things would get worse before they get better….but things are much worse than they need to be because Obama is the one who has NOT returned confidence to the markets. Investors and consumers don’t believe that that these excessive spending plans will work.
    Obama is completely ambivalent toward the current market plunge and even, one could argue, has declared capitalism and the markets as the enemy.
    This is why there is no confidence.

    Tax cuts ARE effective in turning around a recession…it has been proven time and again. The latest example is the recession that Bush inherited on top of the 9-11 attacks. Bush’s tax cuts saw results of positive economic output throughout most of Bush’s presidency.

    As for the government solvency….Government bonds may now be safe, but a government will not remain “solvent” with a decreasing revenue and increasing debt obligations…..both of which are the result of Obama’s plans. When the obligations become great than our government’s ability to pay…When the money printing presses get going, inflation will raise its ugly head in a big way.

    As for FDR, many economists have noted that his spending worsened and lengthened the depression. In addition, at the height of the depression in 1933 unemployment was at 24.9%. When FDR left office, however, unemployment was still rampant and hovering around 20%.
    Spending in a recession is not the answer. FDR created massive debt. Obama likening himself to FDR is not comforting.
    WWII was the primary catalyst that sparked job creation and economic upturn, not FDR’s big-government policies.

    Also, Obama’s speeches about “it will get worse before it gets better” all came AFTER he was elected. Before the election it was all skittles and rainbows.

    You mention that Obama is a panacea compared to the last administration, yet you earlier called Bush a Socialist/Communist…considering that some of Bush’s economic mistakes were similiar to Obama’s (only Obama is making the same mistakes “trillion-fold”) that is interesting.

    It is not an ad hominem attack to also note that Obama’s very own Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, has stated that you “should never waste a crisis”…..Obama is using the financial downturn on top of introducing a mind-boggling flurry of spending and programs in an effort to change the face of our economic system and government’s role.
    You may not see the threat yet, but if you don’t want government making your healthcare decisions, your government making cars at twice the cost, your government cutting spending at the expense of our country’s defense, or the government owning your local bank or if you ever intend to invest in a 401K….then, if Obama’s policies are implemented, you will feel the pain, trust me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: