Politically-Incorrect.net

“What Valerie Jarrett, and the president, did not know is that Leon Panetta had already initiated a program that reported to him –and only him, involving a covert on the ground attack against the compound.”

Note: This update came some 24 hours after our longtime Washington D.C. Insider first outlined shocking details of an Obama administration having been “overruled” by senior military and intelligence officials leading up to the successful attack against terrorist Osama Bin Laden.  What follows is further clarification of Insider’s insights surrounding that event.
_______

Q: You stated that President Obama was “overruled” by military/intelligence officials regarding the decision to send in military specialists into the Osama Bin Laden compound.  Was that accurate?

A: I was told – in these exact terms, “we overruled him.” (Obama)  I have since followed up and received further details on exactly what that meant, as well as the specifics of how Leon Panetta worked around the president’s “persistent hesitation to act.”  There appears NOT to have been an outright overruling of any specific position by President Obama, simply because there was no specific position from the president to do so.  President Obama was, in this case, as in all others, working as an absentee president.

I was correct in stating there had been a push to invade the compound for several weeks if not months, primarily led by Leon Panetta, Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates, David Petraeus, and Jim Clapper.  The primary opposition to this plan originated from Valerie Jarrett, and it was her opposition that was enough to create uncertainty within President Obama.  Obama would meet with various components of the pro-invasion faction, almost always with Jarrett present, and then often fail to indicate his position.  This situation continued for some time, though the division between Jarrett/Obama and the rest intensified more recently, most notably from Hillary Clinton.  She was livid over the president’s failure to act, and her office began a campaign of anonymous leaks to the media indicating such.  As for Jarrett, her concern rested on two primary fronts.  One, that the military action could fail and harm the president’s already weakened standing with both the American public and the world.  Second, that the attack would be viewed as an act of aggression against Muslims, and further destabilize conditions in the Middle East.

Q: What changed the president’s position and enabled the attack against Osama Bin Laden to proceed?

A:  Nothing changed with the president’s opinion – he continued to avoid having one.  Every time military and intelligence officials appeared to make progress in forming a position, Jarrett would intervene and the stalling would begin again.  Hillary started the ball really rolling as far as pressuring Obama began, but it was Panetta and Petraeus who ultimately pushed Obama to finally act – sort of.  Panetta was receiving significant reports from both his direct CIA sources, as well as Petraeus-originating Intel.  Petraeus was threatening to act on his own via a bombing attack.  Panetta reported back to the president that a bombing of the compound would result in successful killing of Osama Bin Laden, and little risk to American lives.  Initially, as he had done before, the president indicated a willingness to act.  But once again, Jarrett intervened, convincing the president that innocent Pakistani lives could be lost in such a bombing attack, and Obama would be left attempting to explain Panetta’s failed policy.  Again Obama hesitated – this time openly delaying further meetings to discuss the issue with Panetta.  A brief meeting was held at this time with other officials, including Secretary Gates and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but Gates, like Panetta, was unable to push the president to act.  It was at this time that Gates indicated to certain Pentagon officials that he may resign earlier than originally indicated – he was that frustrated.  Both Panetta and Clinton convinced him to stay on and see the operation through.

What happened from there is what was described by me as a “masterful manipulation” by Leon Panetta.  Panetta indicated to Obama that leaks regarding knowledge of Osama Bin Laden’s location were certain to get out sooner rather than later, and action must be taken by the administration or the public backlash to the president’s inaction would be “…significant to the point of political debilitation.”  It was at that time that Obama stated an on-ground campaign would be far more acceptable to him than a bombing raid.  This was intended as a stalling tactic, and it had originated from Jarrett.  Such a campaign would take both time, and present a far greater risk of failure. 

The president had been instructed by Jarrett to inform Mr., Panetta that he would have sole discretion to act against the Osama Bin Laden compound.  Jarrett believed this would further delay Panetta from acting, as the responsibility for failure would then fall almost entirely on him.  What Valerie Jarrett, and the president, did not know is that Leon Panetta had already initiated a program that reported to him –and only him, involving a covert on the ground attack against the compound.  Basically, the whole damn operation was already ready to go – including the specific team support Intel necessary to engage the enemy within hours of being given notice.  Panetta then made plans to proceed with an on-ground assault. This information reached either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates first (likely via military contacts directly associated with the impending mission) who then informed the other.  Those two then met with Panetta, who informed each of them he had been given the authority by the president to proceed with a mission if the opportunity presented itself.  Both Gates and Clinton warned Panetta of the implications of that authority – namely he was possibly being made into a scapegoat. 

Panetta admitted that possibility, but felt the opportunity to get Bin Laden outweighed that risk.  During that meeting, Hillary Clinton was first to pledge her full support for Panetta, indicating she would defend him if necessary.  Similar support was then followed by Gates.  The following day, and with Panetta’s permission, Clinton met in private with Bill Daley and urged him to get the president’s full and open approval of the Panetta plan.  Daley agreed such approval would be of great benefit to the action, and instructed Clinton to delay proceeding until he had secured that approval.  Daley contacted Clinton within hours of their meeting indicating Jarrett refused to allow the president to give that approval.  Daley then informed Clinton that he too would fully support Panetta in his actions, even if it meant disclosing the president’s indecision to the American public should that action fail to produce a successful conclusion.  Clinton took that message back to Panetta and the CIA director initiated the 48 hour engagement order.  At this point, the President of the United States was not informed of the engagement order – it did not originate from him, and for several hours after the order had been given and the special ops forces were preparing for action into Pakistan from their position in Afghanistan, Daley successfully kept Obama and Jarrett insulated from that order.

This is pretty amazing … I was surprised how this worked. Be honest and don’t look at the movie list till you have done the math!Try this test and find out what movie is your favorite. This amazing math quiz can likely predict which of the following films you would enjoy the most. Don’t ask me how, but it really works!

Movie Test:

Pick a number from 1-9.

Multiply by 3.

Add 3.

Multiply by 3 again.

Now add the two digits together to find your predicted favorite movie in the list of movies below.

Movie List:

1. Gone With The Wind
2. E.T.
3. Beverly Hills Cop
4. Star Wars
5. Forrest Gump
6. The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly
7. Jaws
8. Grease
9. The Defeat of Obama in 2012
10. Casablanca
11. Jurassic Park
12. Shrek
13. Pirates of the Caribbean
14. Titanic
15. Raiders Of The Lost Ark
16. Home Alone
17. Mrs. Doubtfire
18. Toy Story

The Washington Post babbled again today about Obama inheriting a huge deficit from Bush. Amazingly, a lot of people swallow this nonsense. So once more, a short civics lesson:

Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress. And guess what? The party that has controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party. Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for FY 2008 and FY 2009 as well as FY 2010 and FY 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For FY 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. They then of course passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the FY 2009 budgets..

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Senate that con tributed to all of these massive spending bills. Additionally, he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete FY 2009. Let’s remember what the deficits looked like during that period …

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the FY 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets. If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.

In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is “I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th”.

Barack OBAMA, during his Cairo speech,  said:  
“I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of  America ’s story.”

AN AMERICAN CITIZEN’S RESPONSE:

Dear Mr. Obama:

Were those Muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed?  Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.

Were those Muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day?  Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.

Can you show me one Muslim signature on the United States Constitution?

Declaration of Independence?   Bill of Rights?

Didn’t think so.

Did Muslims fight for this country’s freedom from England ?  No.

Did Muslims fight during the Civil War?  No, they did not. 

In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human slavery.  Your own half brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as “pug nosed slaves.”  Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family’s “rich Islamic heritage,” doesn’t it Mr. Obama?

Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country?  Not present.

There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.

Where were Muslims during this country’s Woman’s Suffrage era?  Again, not present.  In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture.  So much so, that often they are beaten for not wearing the ‘hajib’ or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their husband. Yep, the Muslims are all for women’s rights, aren’t they?

Where were Muslims during World War II?  They were aligned with Adolf Hitler.  The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi’s in killing Jews.

Finally, Mr. Obama, where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001?  If they weren’t flying planes into the World Trade Center , the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the Middle East.  No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news networks that day. 

Strangely, the very “moderate” Muslims who’s asses you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo, Egypt on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11.  To many Americans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.

And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the “rich heritage” Muslims have here in America.

Oh, I’m sorry, I forgot to mention the Barbary Pirates. They were Muslim.

And now we can add November 5, 2009 - the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was supposed to be counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That, Mr. Obama is the “Muslim heritage” in America 

Muslim heritage, my ass.

Barack OBAMA, during his Cairo speech, said: “I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America ’s story.”

AN AMERICAN CITIZEN’S RESPONSE:

Dear Mr. Obama:

Were those Muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed? Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.

Were those Muslims that celebrated the first Thanksgiving day? Sorry again, those were Pilgrims and Native American Indians.

Can you show me one Muslim signature on the United States Constitution?

Declaration of Independence ?

Bill of Rights?

Didn’t think so.

Did Muslims fight for this country’s freedom from England ? No.

Did Muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America ? No, they did not. In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human slavery. Your own half brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as “pug nosed slaves.” Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family’s “rich Islamic heritage,” doesn’t it Mr. Obama?

Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country? Not present.

There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.

Where were Muslims during this country’s Woman’s Suffrage era? Again, not present. In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture. So much so, that often they are beaten for not wearing the ‘hajib’ or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their husband. Yep, the Muslims are all for women’s rights, aren’t they?

Where were Muslims during World War II? They were aligned with Adolf Hitler. The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi’s in killing Jews.

Finally, Mr. Obama, where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001? If they weren’t flying planes into the World Trade Center , the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the Middle East … No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news networks that day. Strangely, the very “moderate” Muslims who’s asses you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo , Egypt on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11. To many Americans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.

Oh, and don’t forget the Barbary Pirates. They were Muslim.

And now we can add November 5, 2009 - the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was supposed to be counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan .

And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the “rich heritage” that Muslims have contributed to America.

Dr. David Barton - on Obama

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Respect the Office?  Yes. Respect the Man in the Office?  No, I am sorry to say. I have noted that many elected officials, both Democrats and Republicans, called upon America to unite behind Obama. Well, I want to make it clear to all who will listen that I AM NOT uniting behind Obama!
 
I will respect the Office which he holds, and I will acknowledge his abilities as an orator and wordsmith and pray for him, BUT that is it. I have begun today to see what I can do to make sure that he is a one-term President!
 
Why am I doing this ?

It is because:

- I do not share Obama’s vision or value system for America ;
- I do not share his Abortion beliefs;
- I do not share his radical Marxist’s concept of re-distributing wealth;
- I do not share his stated views on raising taxes on those who make $150,000+ (the ceiling has been changed three times since August);
- I do not share his view that America is Arrogant;
- I do not share his view that America is not a Christian Nation;
- I do not share his view that the military should be reduced by 25%;
- I do not share his view of amnesty and giving more to illegals than our American Citizens who need help;
- I do not share his views on homosexuality and his definition of marriage;
- I do not share his views that Radical Islam is our friend and Israel is our enemy who should give up any land;
- I do not share his spiritual beliefs (at least the ones he has made public);
- I do not share his beliefs on how to re-work the healthcare system in America ;
- I do not share his Strategic views of the Middle East ; and
- I certainly do not share his plan to sit down with terrorist regimes such as Iran …

Bottom line: my America is vastly different from Obama’s, and I have a higher obligation to my Country and my GOD to do what is right!
For eight (8) years, the Liberals in our Society, led by numerous entertainers who would have no platform and no real credibility but for their celebrity status, have attacked President Bush, his family, and his spiritual beliefs !
 
They have not moved toward the center in their beliefs and their philosophies, and they never came together nor compromised their personal beliefs for the betterment of our Country!

They have portrayed my America as a land where everything is tolerated except being intolerant!

They have been a vocal and irreverent minority for years!

They have mocked and attacked the very core values so important to the founding and growth of our Country!

They have made every effort to remove the name of GOD or Jesus Christ from our Society!

They have challenged capital punishment, the right to bear firearms, and the most basic principles of our criminal code!

  
They have attacked one of the most fundamental of all Freedoms, the right of free speech!

Unite behind Obama?  Never ! ! !

I am sure many of you who read this think that I am going overboard, but I refuse to retreat one more inch in favor of those whom I believe are the embodiment of Evil!
PRESIDENT BUSH made many mistakes during his Presidency, and I am not sure how history will judge him.  However, I believe that he weighed his decisions in light of the long established Judeo-Christian principles of our Founding Fathers!!! 

Majority rules in America , and I will honor the concept; however, I will fight with all of my power to be a voice in opposition to Obama and his “goals for America .”
I am going to be a thorn in the side of those who, if left unchecked, will destroy our Country ! !  Any more compromise is more defeat!

I pray that the results of this election will wake up many who have sat on the sidelines and allowed the Socialist-Marxist anti-GOD crowd to slowly change so much of what has been good in America !

“Error of Opinion may be tolerated where Reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson

GOD bless you and GOD bless our Country ! ! !

Thanks for your time, be safe.  “In GOD We Trust”

“If we ever forget that we’re one nation under GOD, then we will be a nation gone under.” - Ronald Reagan

In GOD We Trust……..

Dr. David Barton is more of a historian than a Biblical speaker, but very famous for his knowledge of historical facts as well as Biblical truths.

Culled out

Obama administration will accept no more public input for federal fishery strategy

 

By Robert Montgomery
ESPNOutdoors.com

 

The Obama administration will accept no more public input for a federal strategy that could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.

This announcement comes at the time when the situation supposedly still is “fluid” and the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force still hasn’t issued its final report on zoning uses of these waters.

That’s a disappointment, but not really a surprise for fishing industry insiders who have negotiated for months with officials at the Council on Environmental Quality and bureaucrats on the task force. These angling advocates have come to suspect that public input into the process was a charade from the beginning.

“When the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) completed their successful campaign to convince the Ontario government to end one of the best scientifically managed big game hunts in North America (spring bear), the results of their agenda had severe economic impacts on small family businesses and the tourism economy of communities across northern and central Ontario,” said Phil Morlock, director of environmental affairs for Shimano.

“Now we see NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) and the administration planning the future of recreational fishing access in America based on a similar agenda of these same groups and other Big Green anti-use organizations, through an Executive Order by the President. The current U.S. direction with fishing is a direct parallel to what happened in Canada with hunting: The negative economic impacts on hard working American families and small businesses are being ignored.

“In spite of what we hear daily in the press about the President’s concern for jobs and the economy and contrary to what he stated in the June order creating this process, we have seen no evidence from NOAA or the task force that recreational fishing and related jobs are receiving any priority.”

Consequently, unless anglers speak up and convince their Congressional representatives to stop this bureaucratic freight train, it appears that the task force will issue a final report for “marine spatial planning” by late March, with President Barack Obama then issuing an Executive Order to implement its recommendations — whatever they may be.

Led by NOAA’s Jane Lubchenco, the task force has shown no overt dislike of recreational angling, but its indifference to the economic, social and biological value of the sport has been deafening.

Additionally, Lubchenco and others in the administration have close ties to environmental groups who would like nothing better than to ban recreational angling. And evidence suggests that these organizations have been the engine behind the task force since before Obama issued a memo creating it last June.

AP/Luis M. AlvarezOne sign at the rally of recreational and commercial fishermen summed up the feelings.

As ESPN previously reported, WWF, Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife, Pew Environment Group and others produced a document entitled “Transition Green” shortly after Obama was elected in 2008. What has happened since suggests that the task force has been in lockstep with that position paper.

Then in late summer, just after he created the task force, these groups produced “Recommendations for the Adoption and Implementation of an Oceans, Coasts, and Great Lakes National Policy.” This document makes repeated references to “overfishing,” but doesn’t once reference recreational angling, its importance, and its benefits, both to participants and the resource.

Additionally, some of these same organizations have revealed their anti-fishing bias by playing fast and loose with “facts,” in attempts to ban tackle containing lead in the United States and Canada.

That same tunnel vision, in which recreational angling and commercial fishing are indiscriminately lumped together as harmful to the resource, has persisted with the task force, despite protests by the angling industry.

As more evidence of collusion, the green groups began clamoring for an Executive Order to implement the task force’s recommendations even before the public comment period ended in February. Fishing advocates had no idea that this was coming.

Perhaps not so coincidentally, the New York Times reported on Feb. 12 that “President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities.”

Morlock fears that “what we’re seeing coming at us is an attempted dismantling of the science-based fish and wildlife model that has served us so well. There’s no basis in science for the agendas of these groups who are trying to push the public out of being able to fish and recreate.

“Conflicts (user) are overstated and problems are manufactured. It’s all just an excuse to put us off the water.”

In the wake of the task force’s framework document, the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF) and its partners in the U.S. Recreational Fishing & Boating Coalition against voiced their concerns to the administration.

“Some of the potential policy implications of this interim framework have the potential to be a real threat to recreational anglers who not only contribute billions of dollars to the economy and millions of dollars in tax revenues to support fisheries conservation, but who are also the backbone of the American fish and wildlife conservation ethic,” said CSF President Jeff Crane.

Morlock, a member of the CSF board, added, “There are over one million jobs in America supported coast to coast by recreational fishing. The task force has not included any accountability requirements in their reports for evaluating or mitigating how the new policies they are drafting will impact the fishing industry or related economies.

“Given that the scope of this process appears to include a new set of policies for all coastal and inland waters of the United States, the omission of economic considerations is inexcusable.”

This is not the only access issue threatening the public’s right to fish, but it definitely is the most serious, according to Chris Horton, national conservation director for BASS.

“With what’s being created, the same principles could apply inland as apply to the oceans,” he said. “Under the guise of ‘marine spatial planning’ entire watersheds could be shut down, even 2,000 miles up a river drainage from the ocean.

“Every angler needs to be aware because if it’s not happening in your backyard today or tomorrow, it will be eventually.

“We have one of the largest voting blocks in the country and we need to use it. We must not sit idly by.”

The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.”        – Author Unknown

Obama and the Fat Cats

Now, I’m Really Getting Pissed Off

By DAVID MICHAEL GREEN

Hey did you hear about the iconic African-American guy who plays golf, and whose relationship with the public is in a free-fall lately? 

 

No, as a matter of fact - I’m not talking about Tiger Woods.

 You know, I’ve really been trying not to write an article every other week about all the things I don’t like about Barack Obama.

But the little prick is making it very hard.

Like any good progressive, I’ve gone from admiration to hope to disappointment to anger when it comes to this president.  Now I’m fast getting to rage.

How much rage?  I find myself thinking that the thing I want most from the 2010 elections is for his party to get absolutely clobbered, even if that means a repeat of 1994.  And that what I most want from 2012 is for him to be utterly humiliated, even if that means President Palin at the helm.  That much rage.

Did this clown really say on national television that “I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of you know, fat cat bankers on Wall Street”?

Really, Barack?  So, like, my question is:  Then why the hell did you help out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street?  Why the hell did you surround yourself with nothing but Robert Rubin proteges in all the key economic positions in your government?  Why did you allow them to open a Washington branch of Goldman Sachs in the West Wing?  Why have your policies been tailored to helping Wall Street bankers, rather than the other 300 million of us, who just happen to be suffering badly right now?

Are you freakin’ kidding me? What’s up with the passive president routine, anyhow, Fool?  You hold the most powerful position in the world.  Or maybe Rahm forgot to mention that to you.  Or maybe the fat cat bankers don’t actually let  you  do that whole decision-making thing often enough that it would actually matter…

But, really, are you going to spend the next three interminable years perfecting your whiney victim persona?  I don’t really think I could bear that.  Hearing you complain about how rough it all is, when you have vastly more power than any of us to fix it?  Please.  Not that.

Are you going to tell us that “I did not run for office to be shovel-feeding the military-industrial complex”?  But what - they’re just so darned pushy?

“…I did not run for office to continue George Bush’s valiant effort at shredding the Bill of Rights.  It’s just that those government-limiting rules are so darned pesky.”

“…I did not run for office to dump a ton of taxpayer money into the coffers of health insurance companies.  It’s just that they asked so nicely.”

“…I did not run for office to block equality for gay Americans.  I just never got around to doing anything about it.”

“…I did not run for office to turn Afghanistan into Vietnam.  I just didn’t want to say no to all the nice generals asking for more troops.”

Here’s a guy who was supposed to actually do something with his presidency, and he’s turned into the skinny little geek on Cell Block D who gets passed around like a rag doll for the pleasure of all the fellas with the tattoos there.  He’s being punked by John Boehner, for chrisakes.  He’s being rolled by the likes of Joe Lieberman.  He calls a come-to-Jesus meeting with Wall Street bank CEOs, and half of them literally phone it in.  Everyone from Bibi Netanyahu to the Japanese prime minister to sundry Iranian mullahs is stomping all over Mr. Happy.

And he doesn’t even seem to realize it.

Did you see him tell Oprah that he gave himself “a good solid B+” for his first year in office?  And that it will be an A, if he gets his healthcare legislation passed?

Somebody please pick me up and set me back on my chair, wouldya?

I am seriously beginning to worry that this cat is delusional.  He has lopped off twenty full points from his job approval rating in less than a year’s time, falling now below fifty percent.  His party, once dominant in generic congressional election poll questions, is today almost even with hated Republicans in the public mind.  Last month, Obama’s inverted coattails (don’t even ask where those go) got two Democrats clobbered running for governor in New Jersey and Virginia.  The otherwise obnoxious George F. Will (very) rightly points out that in Kentucky, “a Republican candidate succeeded in nationalizing a state Senate race.  Hugely outspent in a district in which Democrats have a lopsided registration advantage, the Republican won by 12 points a seat in Frankfort by running against Washington”.  Wow.  Obama is now wrecking state senate races!  What’s next?  Will local Republican candidates for sheriff win office just by opposing the embarrassment in the White House who chooses abysmal policies and then refuses to fight for them, lest he should ruffle any feathers?

“For Democrats, the red flags are flying at full mast,” said Democratic pollster Peter Hart in a recent AP article. “What we don’t know for certain is: Have we reached a bottoming-out point?” 

Au contraire, Peter.  Au contraire.  I think anyone more sentient than a newborn amoeba can answer that question.  The first thing to note is that the economy is not coming back anytime soon, if it comes back at all.  Unless, of course, you’re a fat cat Wall Street banker.  Then you’re just fine, because the Bush-Obama administration took care of you quite nicely, thanks very much.  The rest of us poor slobs out here in real-world land, on the other hand, got a “jobs summit”.

I can’t even begin to describe how insulting Obama conducting a “jobs summit” is to me, or what an unbelievably ham-fisted piece of public relations that was for the White House, which is increasingly showing itself not just to be sickeningly regressive, but also fully inept.  I think I speak for a whole lot of Americans when I say that, one year into his stewardship over a destroyed economy that was actually atomizing for at least six months before inauguration day, I don’t want my president sitting around a table, running a dog-and-pony show, pretending to kick around ideas on how to generate jobs.  I wanted him to have those ideas, himself, before he was inaugurated.  I wanted those to be real ideas, that produce real jobs for real Americans who are really hurting.  I wanted that to be, and still be, the be-all and end-all of his presidency, not some distant fourth-place priority, behind healthcare and the White House dog selection process.  And, especially not some fourth-place priority behind jive healthcare reform.

Which brings us to the second answer to Mr. Hart’s question.  If Democrats think they’ll be screwed next November because of unemployment, wait till Congress passes this healthcare monstrosity.  Or doesn’t.  At this point, either way they’re gonna get slammed for it, and rightly so.

If they don’t pass anything, they will be seen as unable to govern.  This perception will be quite true because they will have failed to pass a major piece of legislation, despite having 60-40 majorities in both houses of Congress and control of the presidency.  It doesn’t get much better than that for a governing party in the American system.  But it will be true in an even more profound sense, because the whole priority structure of the Democratic agenda is wrong.  Sure, people want healthcare reform right now (especially if it were to miraculously also have the virtue of being authentic healthcare reform), but what they really want, overwhelmingly, is jobs.  This choice of priorities is the equivalent of, say, invading Iraq when you’ve been attacked by people in Afghanistan.  Surely no president would be that stupid, right?  Surely any political party would realize the costs of having priorities so divorced from those of the voters, right?

On the other hand, the Democrats and their hapless president are probably in worse shape if they actually pass this legislation.  Especially now that it’s been stripped of nearly every real progressive reform imaginable, it has become an incredibly stupid bill, from the political perspective.  It will force people who can’t afford it to spend a giant amount of money on lousy insurance, without any real choice to hold down costs, and it will fund this by hacking away at the Medicare budget.  No wonder an insurance industry lobbyist broadcast an email last week declaring:  “We WIN.  Administered by private insurance companies.  No government funding.  No government insurance competitor.”

But here’s a little riddle that any sixth-grader can easily figure out, although it seems to have eluded the brain trust at the White House:  If insurance companies are winning big-time, then who is doing the losing?  Something tells me that if Democrats are dumb enough to pass their own legislation, voters will provide them the answer to that puzzle in November of 2010, and then again two years later.  What could be stupider than saddling thirty-five million Americans with a new monthly bill that will probably represent the second or third biggest item in their budget, in exchange for crappy private sector health insurance that is unlikely to pay out when needed, and wastes a third of the dollars paid in premiums on bureaucracy and profits anyhow?  Slapping big fines on them if they don’t pony up for the insurance, perhaps?  Yep, that’s in there too. 

 

This bill alone could mobilize legions of people to go to the polls and vote for whichever party didn’t do it, and I’m pretty sure the GOP won’t be shy about reminding Americans who that is.  I mean, if Democrats were searching for legislation less likely to win them votes, why didn’t they just bring back slavery or the debtor’s prison?  Why not come out for pedophilia?  It would have been so much more efficient.  At least they wouldn’t have spent the last year looking like idiotic bunglers who, in addition to sponsoring really unpopular ideas, also inadvertently left their testicles at the coat check and have spent the last thirty years trying to find their way back to the gala. 

 

Ah, but wait!  If you order now, there’s more!

As I understand it, the bill doesn’t even actually force insurance companies to cover people, at least in the sense that they can charge prohibitive amounts to those with whatever they define as pre-existing conditions.  You know, like the young woman who had a policy but died when she was denied cancer treatment because she had a bad case of acne as a teenager.

This will be a total train wreck for the Democratic Party.  Already, the public opposes the plan by a ratio of 47 to 32 percent.  And they haven’t even been handed the bill for it yet.  And they haven’t even had their premiums skyrocket yet.  And they haven’t even seen insurance corporation executives buy small countries for use as second homes with the increased compensation they will be floating in.  And they haven’t even found out what this does to their Medicare yet.  And they haven’t even seen the impact on the national debt yet.  And they haven’t even realized that the ‘good’ parts of the bill don’t go into effect until FOUR YEARS from now.

You know, elite Republicans may be sociopaths, and they may be lower on the moral totem pole than your basic cannibal, but they’re not stupid.  I bet they’re salivating at the idea that this thing passes.  I bet they’d even have Olympia Snowe vote for it if necessary, just to put it over the top.  They must be laughing their asses off at this gift.  All they have to do is oppose it right down the line, then say “Told ya so!” at the next election, squashing the pathetic Demognats, one after the next.  Hey, even if worse comes to worse and the thing eventually becomes popular, they can always wait a decade or two and become champions of the new publically beloved healthcare system - just like they did for Medicare, Social Security, civil rights, etc. 

This is President Nothingburger’s great gift to America, along with doing nothing about jobs, doing nothing about the Middle East, nothing about civil liberties, nothing about civil rights, and now doing nothing at Copenhagen.  Regarding the latter, the world is literally on fire, and he jets in, gives a speech haranguing the delegates that “Now is not the time for talk, now is the time for action”, then splits even before the vote in order to beat the snowstorm headed to the east coast that might delay him getting home to his comfy bed.  I’m not kidding.  You can’t make this shit up, man.

This guy is killing me, though at the same time I still can’t quite figure him out.

Here’s what I get:  This president is a corporate hack.  Like Bush or Clinton, he has constituents, alright - but you and I are not on that particular list.

Here’s what I don’t get:  He is radically tanking, at a moment when people no longer have patience for those kind of politics anymore.

Here’s what I get:  This president has his fingers in many pies, as he needs to, ranging from global warming to economic implosion to two wars abroad to massive federal debt.

Here’s what I don’t get:  Why does he bother to do these things in a way that pleases no one, and only dramatically undercuts his own political standing?  Why does he refuse to make anyone his enemy, thus making everyone his enemy?

Is he just massively deluded?  I wouldn’t have thought so, but watching the guy give himself a very good grade for 2009 - straight face and all - during the same year he’s lost twenty points off his job approval rating, and at a moment when even blacks and gays are deserting him, you know, you have to wonder.

Is he happy just to be a one-term president - just to say he’s been there and done that, and then sell some more books - even if he is reviled as one of the worst in history?

Maybe.  But what about the rest of us?

The rest of us, indeed.  It’s been quite some time since anyone in the White House ever cared about that sorry pack of rabble.

Obama looked like he could’ve been something different.  He ain’t.

So this is it, folks.

Change you can believe in?

More like B.S. you can take a bath in, if you ask me.

David Michael Green is a professor of political science at Hofstra University in New York.  He is delighted to receive readers’ reactions to his articles (dmg@regressiveantidote.net), but regrets that time constraints do not always allow him to respond.  More of his work can be found at his website, www.regressiveantidote.net. 

Posted by Lowell J Mix on October 25, 2009 at 3:13pm in Patriots for America - Oklahoma

Back to Patriots for America - Oklahoma Discussions

 

Below are thirty of Obama’s appointed Czars, listed aphabetically by title, except for the last one. Note their respective credentials to serve with the authority and responsiblity of the position to which they were appointed. Remember, these people carry more influence over our government operations than cabinet members do, according to my understanding. If you think policies and actions coming our of Washington DC are radical, it does not take a genius to see why. Even worse, Congress is turning a blind eye and allowing these people to run our government under their noses. Any one of these czars is bad news; put them altogether, and we have a nuclear powder keg hanging by a tread above our country. Does BHO feels so insecure that he has to surround himself with the likes of these? Or is this part of an accelerated plot to destroy the America we know and love? Or is he simply trying to destory all respect for government authority? The handwriting is on the wall, my friends. But I ask, are these czars legal? Is this constitutional? Can these peole be removed from the offices they are holding before 2012? Any ideas how short of revolt? Can we wait that long? These appointments certainly generate myriads of questions about our president.

The Czar List

CZAR - Czar Position - Summary

Richard Holbrooke - Afghanistan Czar - Ultra liberal anti gun former Gov. of New Mexico. Pro Abortion and legal drug use.

Ed Montgomery - Auto recovery Czar - Black radical anti business activist. Affirmative Action and Job Preference for blacks. Univ of Maryland Business School Dean teaches US business has caused world poverty. ACORN board member. Communist DuBois Club member.

Jeffrey Crowley - AIDS Czar - Homosexual. A Gay Rights activist. Believes in Gay Marriage and Special Status, including free health care for gays.

Alan Bersin - Border Czar - Former failed superintendent of San Diego . Ultra Liberal friend of Hilary Clinton. Served as Border Czar under Janet Reno – to keep borders open to illegal’s

David J. Hayes - California Water Czar, Sr- Fellow of radical environmentalist group, “Progress Policy”. No training or experience in water management.

Ron Bloom - Car Czar - Auto Union worker. Anti business & anti nuclear. Has worked hard to force US auto makers out of business. Sits on the Board of Chrysler which is now Auto Union owned. How did this happen?

Dennis Ross - Central Region Czar - Believes US policy has caused Mid East wars. Obama apologist to the world. Anti gun and pro abortion.

Lynn Rosenthal - Domestic Violence Czar - Director of the National Network to End Domestic Violence. Vicious anti male feminist. Supported male castration.

Gil Kerlikowske - Drug Czar - Devoted lobbyist for every restrictive gun law proposal, Former Chief of Police in Liberal Seattle. Believes no American should own a firearm. Supports legalization of drugs

Carol Brower - Energy and Environment Czar - Political Radical Former head of EPA - known for anti-business activism. Strong anti-gun ownership. SOCIALIST on Commission for a Sustainable World Society, which calls for “global governance” and says rich countries must shrink their economies to address climate change.

Joshua DuBois - Faith Based Czar - Political Black activist-Degree in Black Nationalism—seek a separate black nation.. Anti gun ownership lobbyist.

Cameron Davis - Great Lakes Czar - Chicago radical anti business environmentalist. Blames George Bush for “Poisoning the water that minorities have to drink.” No experience or training in water management. Former ACORN Board member

Van Jones - Green Jobs Czar (since resigned) - Black activist Member of American communist Party and San Francisco Communist Party who said Geo Bush caused the 911 attack and wanted Bush investigated by the World Court for war crimes. MARXIST, said whites are poisoning blacks, said transformation from “suicidal gray capitalism to econ-capitalism to the complete redistribution of wealth.” Black activist with strong anti-white views.

Daniel Fried - Guantanamo Closure Czar - Rights activist for Foreign Terrorists. Believes America has caused the war on terrorism.

Nancy-Ann DeParle - Health Czar - Former head of Medicare / Medicaid. Strong Health Care Rationing proponent. She is married to a reporter for The New York Times.

Vivek Kundra - Information Czar - Born in New Delhi, India. Controls all public information, including labels and news releases. Monitors all private Internet emails.

Todd Stern - International Climate Czar - Anti business former White House chief of Staff- Strong supporter of the Kyoto Accord. Pushing hard for Cap and Trade. Blames US business for Global warming.

Dennis Blair - Intelligence Czar - Ret Navy. Stopped US guided missile program as “provocative”. Chair of ultra liberal “Council on Foreign Relations” which blames American organizations for regional wars.

George Mitchell - Mideast Peace Czar - Fmr. Sen. from Maine Left wing radical. Has said Israel should be split up into “2 or 3 “ smaller more manageable plots”. Anti-nuclear anti-gun & pro homosexual

Kenneth Feinberg - Pay Czar - Chief of Staff to TED KENNEDY. Lawyer who got rich off the 911 victims payoffs.

Cass Sunstein - Regulatory Czar - Liberal activist judge believes free speech needs to be limited for the “common good”. Rules against personal freedoms many times –like private gun ownership. Says animals should be able to sue people. Anti-hunting..

John Holdren - Science Czar - Fierce ideological environmentalist, Sierra Club, Anti business activist. Claims US business has caused world poverty. No Science training. OK to abort a child until the age of two. Thinks TREES should be able to sue humans.

Earl Devaney - Stimulus Accountability Czar - Spent career trying to take guns away from American citizens. Believes in Open Borders to Mexico . Author of statement blaming US gun stores for drug war in Mexico .

J. Scott Gration - Sudan Czar - Native of Democratic Republic of Congo. Believes US does little to help Third World countries. Council of foreign relations,asking for higher US taxes to support United Nations

Herb Allison - TARP Czar - Fannie May CEO responsible for the US recession by using real estate mortgages to back up the US stock market. Caused millions of people to lose their life savings.

John Brennan - Terrorism Czar - Anti CIA activist. No training in diplomatic or gov. affairs. Believes Open Borders to Mexico and a dialog with terrorists and has suggested Obama disband US military

Aneesh Chopra - Technology Czar - No Technology training. Worked for the Advisory Board Company, a health care think tank for hospitals. Anti doctor activist. Supports Obama Health care Rationing and salaried doctors working exclusively for the Gov. health care plan

Adolfo Carrion Jr. - Urban Affairs Czar - Puerto Rican. Anti American activist and leftist group member in Latin America . Millionaire “slum lord” of the Bronx , NY. Owns many lavish homes and condos which he got from “sweetheart” deals with labor unions. Wants higher taxes to pay for minority housing and health care

Ashton Carter - Weapons Czar - Leftist. Wants all private weapons in US destroyed. Supports UN ban on firearms ownership in America . No Other “policy”

Gary Samore - WMD Policy Czar - Former US Communist. Wants US to destroy all WMD unilaterally as a show of good faith. Has no other “policy”.

Kevin Jennings -Safe School Czar - As a teacher when a 15 year said he was having sex with an older man, instead of turning in the man—the law for a teacher, he asked how it was going and suggested they use condoms. Held a conference with the MAXIMUM age of 18 to teach homosexual issues like “fisting.” Wrote the intro to the book, “Queering Elementary Education.” Has repeatedly praised and claims to be inspired by Harry Hay, early supporter of NAMBLA, (North American Man Boy Love Association).