Tag Archive | "Obama"

Tags: , , ,

You Can’t Make This Stuff Up

Posted on 10 April 2011 by Editor

Originally posted 2010-05-25 22:12:11. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
May 24, 2010


As Congress labored furiously to ensure that women have equal access to federal bathrooms, insurgents in Afghanistan this month launched a series of bold strikes on U.S. and NATO bases in Afghanistan. The Potty Parity Act is proceeding apace.

The Obama administration’s response to the upsurge in violence in Afghanistan? They launched an investigation into allegations that a number of American soldiers were responsible for the "unlawful deaths" of at least three Afghan civilians. This, despite the recent unanimous acquittal of three heroic Navy SEALS who were swiftly exonerated by a jury after being accused of, gasp, slapping one of the most dangerous terrorist detainees in the world. Who, by the way, the SEALS heroically captured. Thank-you, Navy SEALS. No update yet on the terrorist’s hurt lip.

As our young men are fighting and dying in Afghanistan, our current elected officials remain hard at work. Their most recent work product includes a proposal for a new medal to reward our troops for "courageous restraint." You got that? A medal for not killing the enemy. Of course most of these medals would, of necessity, be awarded posthumously.

Maybe by the time the first new medal is awarded, the "enemy" will actually be defined. The only concrete message so far from Washington, via Attorney General Eric Holder, is that the enemy is NOT radical Islamic terrorists. Whew!

The month of May could very well be likened to a chapter out of Alice in Wonderland. As oil from the BP catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico continued gushing into the ocean (day 36 and counting), the Obama administration was otherwise occupied – holding a gala State dinner for Mexican President Calderone. A good time was had by all, although extensive media reports suggested that one of the guests had a dress quite similar to Michelle’s.

To be absolutely fair, Obama did appoint a commission to study how to deal with the BP catastrophe. Just because Obama is the largest recipient of BP campaign cash for the last twenty years doesn’t mean he’s in their pocket. No word yet on when or if the commission will release its expert findings.

Meanwhile, Obama blithely continued to side with foreign countries against the U.S., as he bravely spoke truth to power, teaming up with President Calderone to condemn the newly passed immigration law in Arizona. Although the Arizona law mirrors federal law, thanks to Obama’s TelePrompTer and a derelict media, millions of Americans now believe that upholding the Constitution is racist. And I guess its now OK for foreign leaders to criticize America from the White House lawn.

Also this month: Unfazed by the 368 point plunge in the stock market, which occurred the same day the Senate passed a financial regulation bill, Obama took to the airwaves to announce an executive mandate. Bypassing Congress, Obama unilaterally declared tougher, expanded fuel emission standards for cars and trucks. Damn the economy, Mother Earth is more important. Right?

As world stocks tumbled, Obama responded by granting unions expanded power, making it easier for airline and railroad workers to unionize. That unions are one of the reasons behind this year’s economic meltdown was left unreported.

As Bangkok was being burned by deadbeats protesting cuts in social spending, Congress remained totally focused on a slew of new and expanded social spending measures, costing a mere $200 billion. They hope to get it to Obama for his approval in the next three weeks, well before those pesky November elections.

Congress appeared unfazed by a new NATO report that identified Iran as a "Major Article 5 Threat." They were otherwise engaged crafting a formal apology to American Indian tribes for "ill conceived policies" and acts of violence committed by them."

As North Korea threatened war and sent 50,000 troops to the border, the House remained busy passing a beer resolution. House Resolution 1297 officially supports "the goals and ideals of American Beer Craft Week." North Korea and American alcoholics rejoiced.

As the new jobs numbers came out showing another "unexpected" increase in the jobless rate, the Democrats were busy crafting another $190 billion raid on taxpayers under the guise of a "jobs bill." That their last "jobs bill" exacerbated the jobless problem didn’t deter them.

As the world hurtles towards the edge of the cliff, the United States remains focused on the really important things. AG Andrew Cuomo was successful in forcing clothing retailers to hire transgenders. And Sen. Robert Menendez is busy urging the Major League Baseball Players Assoc.to boycott Arizona.

And let’s not forget the states. California, which is one step away from going bankrupt, was busy passing a bill that would require "diversity" in California pension plans. The very same pension plans that will soon put taxpayers on the hook for millions.

I could go on, but I’m starting to scare myself. This article is not fiction. Nor is it satire. It is a recap of the month of May in this, our United States.

Is it just me, or is something seriously out of whack in our country?



Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Article published with the author’s permission

Comments (0)

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Democrats Demand Sartorial Handicap in Health Care Reform Debate

Posted on 10 April 2011 by Editor

Originally posted 2009-08-11 21:21:37. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Scott-Spiegelby Scott Spiegel
August 8, 2009
ScottSpiegel.com

Senator Barbara Boxer recently declared that, before the current round of town hall meetings on health care reform, the last time she had seen such suspiciously well-dressed protestors was during the 2000 Florida election recount. Well, yes—until Obama’s presidency, that’s the last time Republicans showed up en masse to get really angry about something; screaming and chanting are political tactics more naturally suited to the left.

As for the couture angle—here’s a newsflash for Boxer: Republicans have higher standards than Democrats. A typical left-wing protest involves twenty-somethings in ratty T-shirts and shredded jeans breaking windows at a local Starbucks during the midmorning rush.

The typical right-wing protest—invariably held in the evening, since attendees have jobs in the daytime—involves adults who dress as though they would like to elevate community standards, not degrade them. Participants address their concerns directly to those in power, such as legislators, rather than assailing defenseless third parties, such as coffee franchise employees. The fact that most conservative protestors come directly from work may explain why they wear suits and skirts; but apparently Senate Democrats believe opinions are valid only if expressed by people sporting “Kill Bush” buttons and Birkenstocks.

When Boxer and other Congressional Democrats realized that Americans don’t view “well-dressed” as an epithet, they moved in the opposite direction: they claimed that the protestors were scruffy rabble-rousers after all. House Leader Nancy Pelosi insisted that she had seen demonstrators “carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on healthcare.” Translation: One protestor had a swastika with a slash through it, and others were displaying American flags and ‘Don’t Tread on Me’ banners—you know, symbols like swastikas.

Saddling protestors with the “brownshirt” label didn’t work, so Obama’s Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina warned Democrats who were planning town hall meetings, “If you get hit… punch back twice as hard.”

Evidently some representatives took this message literally: at a town hall meeting in Ohio, Representative Russ Carnahan hired union organizers to deny entry to citizens who looked as though they might oppose health care reform legislation, several of whom were promptly mauled by union thugs and sent to the hospital. Outside, black conservative Kenneth Gladney was racially slandered and physically attacked and sent to the emergency room by an unidentified opponent for handing out ‘Don’t Tread on Me’ flags. Protestors were also roughed up at a meeting held by Florida Representatives Kathy Castor and Betty Reed.

Naturally, Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid’s response to this onslaught of leftist violence and intimidation was… to blame Republicans for not minding their manners. Reid accused protesters of attempting to “sabotage” the process; he said, “These are nothing more than destructive efforts to interrupt a debate… They are doing this because they don’t have any better ideas.”

Well, yes, actually, we do have one or two, which you may not have heard, because we’ve only been ranting about them for the past, oh, two decades: malpractice tort reform, Medicare reform, health savings accounts, healthcare tax credits, vouchers for private insurance, and pay for performance. More generally, competition in the private market for health insurance, and individual autonomy regarding level and type of coverage and risk tolerance. Other than that, we’re flush out of ideas!

In an effort to quell dissatisfaction among constituents, Democrats in Congress finally decided to listen to town hall participants’ ideas and give thoughtful responses that address their concerns. Just kidding! The latest tactics being employed by congressmen across the nation are: (1) showing up at town hall meetings, reciting a few talking points, claiming the crowd is too boisterous when they open their mouths, and leaving; (2) announcing meetings at the last minute in the hope that no one will attend; and (3) holding “virtual” town hall meetings.

For example, Representative Kathy Castor’s spokeswoman defended Castor’s abbreviated appearance in Florida by stating, “We said all along our role was to come and give an update on the bill in Congress… [T]hat’s what we did.” And that’s what websites are for.

Michigan Representative John Dingell waited to announce last Thursday’s 6pm town hall meeting until Thursday morning. Word of mouth spread, however, and Dingell faced hundreds of constituents who were not impressed by his deceitful maneuver.

At least Castor and Dingell showed up in person; other congressmen, such as Representative Brian Baird of Washington, are planning virtual “meetings” with constituents. According to The Columbian, “If you happen to be sitting near a publicly listed Clark County telephone line on the right day at the right time, your phone will ring… [T]he exact date and time will be kept secret from the public… [A]n automated message will ask whether you have a question… Sitting at his own telephone at an as-yet-undisclosed location, Baird then will choose a name based on its location and the topic… After the call is over, the recording will be posted on his Web site.”

Baird helpfully notes that this system will allow for “a much better cross-section of the public”; by which he means “a cross-section of the public that is not knowledgeable or concerned enough to attend a town hall meeting.” Note to Baird: There’s a reason they’re called “town hall meetings,” not “prescreened anonymous secret one-way teleconference recordings.”

In the end, some congressmen have decided to simply give up on their constituents. New York Representative Tim Bishop chose to suspend town hall meetings in his district until late August—you know, when just everyone will be around—because he concluded that there was no point in facing an “unruly mob.” Senator Claire McCaskill similarly issued a last-minute cancellation of a scheduled event due to “safety” concerns.

In the same way that Democrats denigrate protestors who adhere to a “No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service” standard, they have sunk to a new low: projecting their own party’s historic propensity for mob rule and violent agitprop onto frail, elderly grandparents in bowties and cardigans.

 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Scott Spiegel is the editor of ScottSpiegel.com

Article has been published with permission

Comments (0)

Tags: , , ,

bin Laden is Laughing

Posted on 10 April 2011 by Editor

Originally posted 2010-07-19 16:41:02. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan
July 19, 2010


Terrorists the world over are laughing into their turbans and praising Allah five times a day for the naive Americans who were responsible for electing Barack Hussein Obama as president of the U.S. And they’re giving a special thanks to the American media, specifically, the Washington Post, for giving them all the information they need to target the security agencies created in response to 9-11.

bin Laden is laughing because America’s political and media elites are doing his job for him. The Washington Post just gave bin Laden all the intelligence he needs to effectively counter any remaining efforts to combat Islamic terrorism.

Of course, the media and the Obama administration don’t identify it as such. Islam has been removed from official documents so as not to offend Muslims adherents of "the religion of peace." Instead, the war on terror has been dubbed an "overseas contingency operation." Hey, that even makes me laugh.

The Washington Post article detailing the number and locations of the government organizations and private companies whose business it is to defeat terrorism is merely a blatant continuation of terrorist-friendly policies the Obama administration and a complaisant media have put in place since Obama’s ascension to the highest office in the world.

Increasingly bizarre policies are being implemented that favor the rights of terrorists over the security of American citizens and the lives of our brave soldiers. Case in point: The recent proposal to award medals to American soldiers for "courageous restraint."

This proposed medal send the clear message not to kill terrorists. Exercise restraint – even if it kills you. And by the way, make sure you don’t have a round in the chamber when you’re patrolling in Afghanistan. You just might end up shooting someone.

Ignoring reality, history and common sense, Obama and friends have decided that world peace is a possibility, if we can just convince those Islamic jihadists that we Americans are sensitive guys with good intentions. Feelings have replaced military might as the foundation of the war on terror. Oops, I meant the "overseas contingency plan."

Politicians are busy bestowing civil rights, including access to America’s court system, for enemy combatants (terrorists) – while at the same time, pushing for investigations into atrocities allegedly perpetrated by American soldiers. Meanwhile in Iraq, a suicide bomber targeting army soldiers and members of a government-backed militia lining up to receive their paychecks just yesterday killed at least 43 people and wounded 46.

In Afghanistan, Taliban guerrillas are outright ignoring America’s moral posturing and Obama’s sensitive outreach. They just staged a series of raids in western Afghanistan Sunday, blowing up the gate of a jail and freeing 23 insurgent prisoners. I bet that really hurt Obama’s feelings. Those jihadists must not have gotten the word that there is no more war on terror.

Another plank in our "overseas contingency plan" is a push to build the self esteem of terrorists. If only we can convince these murderers that they have worth, well, they’ll lay down their arms and join Obama in a rousing chorus of kumbaya. Once they’re done laughing.

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said last month NASA’s new priority is "to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering."

Here’s a newsflash. Arabs haven’t contributed anything of worth to the field of science since the seventh century. In fact, many devout Muslims view science and reason as diametrically at odds with their faith.

And in case you missed it, the self-esteem movement practiced for the last couple decades in America has bred two generations of idiots who think the world owes them a living. But Obama apparently believes that we can win the "overseas contingency plan" by bestowing self-esteem on our sworn enemies.

As Islamists breed generations of child warriors, versed in hatred, jihad and the killing of infidels, Americans raise their boys to be sensitive metrosexuals. As terrorists successfully recruit in our prisons, our officials are busy implementing bingo and "life-style" classes for the terrorists confined to Club Gitmo.

Now that our enemy has a roadmap, thank-you, Washington Post, to the locations of the main American infidels, all that remains is safe conduct to the target site. Not to worry, Obama and friends are busy making it easy for them. After tapping a supporter of "sanctuary cities" as immigration chief, Obama further enabled terrorists by deciding to sue Arizona for daring to enforce the law against illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants that include among their ranks un-politically correct killing machines, formerly known as Islamic terrorists.

Our current administration continues to believe that terrorists can be swayed by the word soup and mushy sentiments emanating from D.C. – completely ignoring the fact that Islamists, throughout history, view kindness, appeasement or "reaching out" as a sign of weakness.

Winston Churchill understood the true nature of Islam. "Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world." America, led by Obama, is ignoring the reality of Islamic terrorism, replacing it with an unrealistic version of how it should be. If only the world were a perfect place.

Writer Andrew McCarthy wrote in National Review, "In the U.S., political correctness has stifled inquiry into Muslim doctrine, we’ve conjured up a trendy, modern Islam: one fit for seamless assimilation into Western society." This wishful thinking has now become official policy.

Official American policy and a traitorous media have given bin Laden and friends free rein to continue and accelerate the war on terror. Inquiring minds are starting to ask "Just whose side are they on?"



Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina. Article posted with the author’s permission.

Comments (0)

Tags: , , ,

Liberal Syntax: A Noun, a Verb, and a Bush Smear

Posted on 10 April 2011 by Editor

Originally posted 2010-01-14 16:25:24. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Number of terrorist incidents for 2009 (Januar...
Image via Wikipedia

by Scott Spiegel
ScottSpiegel.com
January 9. 2009

When conservatives correctly pointed out that one disastrous terrorist attack and another catastrophic but thwarted attack both happened during President Obama’s first term in office, because his agencies overlooked the perpetrators’ jihadist intentions or failed to act on relevant intelligence, liberals responded with an argument that was discredited nearly a decade ago: “But 9/11 happened on George Bush’s watch!”

Obama supporters mocked Rudy Giuliani’s recent claim to George Stephanopolous “We had no domestic attacks under Bush,” stubbornly avoiding Giuliani’s obvious implication that he was speaking post-9/11.  Until last week, Democrats loved to excoriate Giuliani for making endless references to the terrorist attack that occurred while he was mayor of New York; now they claim he forgets it happened.  Which is it?

Conservatives’ point is that Obama has forgotten the lessons of 9/11, which Bush did not have available to him until, surprisingly—9/11.  The Ft. Hood and Flight 253 attacks happened in the first year of Obama’s administration, and 9/11 happened in the first year of Bush’s administration, but Obama had the example of 9/11 to learn from, and Bush did not.  (Even if you count the thwarted attack by the shoe bomber in December 2001, that bomber tried to strike just months after 9/11, when fully revamped security procedures were not running as smoothly as they are now; also, the bomber used the novel, unprecedented technique of wearing the bomb on his person so that it would not be detected by luggage screeners.)

Obama not only had the example of 9/11, he had seven years in which to witness and debate and vote on the implementation of the policies his predecessor devised that kept the country safe in the years after 9/11.  Obama denounced and campaigned against these tactics every chance he got.  He hasn’t revoked all of the Bush policies—upon assuming the Presidency, he must have received access to hair-raising intelligence that made him realize the suicidal folly of reversing Bush on everything—but he has slackened up enough, rhetorically and policy-wise, that our security standards have slipped and our enemies have become emboldened.

It is not enough to say that Obama has forgotten the lessons of 9/11.  He has actively rejected them.  He has argued that doing the opposite of what Bush did will keep us safer.  We are seeing how well the Obama Doctrine is working out in his first 11 months in office.

Another error in the “Bush-was-bad-so-Obama’s-off-the-hook” argument is that Bush did not do anything to actively facilitate the occurrence of 9/11.  In contrast, the Ft. Hood shootings were aided by the politically correct refusal of the U.S. Army—under Commander-in-Chief Obama—to recognize murderous jihadist sentiments expressed by Major Nidal Hasan openly and repeatedly while in medical school and residency, and the promotion Hasan received despite his poor performance reviews.  The Flight 253 near-attack was made possible by the Obama administration’s failure to act on numerous warnings available to it, such as Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s father having called the U.S. Embassy to report him, Abdulmutallab’s not having a passport or luggage, and his having bought a one-way ticket with cash.

But there’s an even more damning flaw to the contention that Bush should have been able to prevent 9/11, and is therefore as bad as or worse than Obama on national security.  Namely: just what would Bush opponents have preferred that he do in his first eight months in office to prevent terrorist acts, when they now scream bloody murder at the slightest suggestion of profiling at airports, accuse Bush of being Big Brother for trying to monitor terrorist communications, and express their clear disapproval of any war Bush started abroad to target Al-Qaeda?  Are liberals implying that they would have been fine with Bush doing all of these things in a pre-9/11 world?  They’re not even fine with The One doing these things in a post-9/11 world.

The left have been digging up examples of localized attacks carried out by truly isolated (not Abdulmutallab-style “isolated”) loonies—such as Bruce Ivins’ anthrax-laced letters to news broadcasters in September 2001, Hesham Hadayet’s shooting of two Israelis at LAX in July 2002, the Beltway sniper attacks in October 2002—as proof that Bush didn’t keep us safe.  Ignore for the moment that when each of these incidents happened, the same people criticized Bush for using these events to “hype” the threat of terrorism to justify extra security measures.  Instead ask: what level of government intervention into our lives would have been necessary to prevent every one of these attacks?  And how likely is it that liberals would have supported Bush’s carrying out such interventions at the time?


Scott Spiegel writes for the ScottSpiegel.com blog
Article published with the author’s permission.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Comments (0)

Tags: , ,

Color Me Happy

Posted on 10 April 2011 by Editor

Originally posted 2010-01-21 18:17:51. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Smiley
by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
January 20, 2010

————————————————————————-

I’m smiling. A grin that just won’t quit is plastered on my face because of the stunning upset last night when a, gasp, Republican won the bluest of all Senate seats, thus throwing sand in the gears of the Obama machine’s march towards socialism.

Republican Scott Brown whipping the pants off Coakley last night is cause for rejoice. As is the delicious schadenfreude of seeing the left in disarray, pointing fingers and laying blame for the historic repudiation of leftists, Obama and everything they have been trying to force down our throats for the last year. It appears America may survive Obama after all. And what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.

As Rush Limbaugh noted, many Democrats are headed for the tall grass. If a vote was held today on Obama’s health care bill, at least 5 formerly sure votes wouldn’t materialize. Last night’s wake-up call has the ‘less elite’ Democrats being brought face to face with the stark reality that they are accountable to ‘we the people’ instead of the Obama machine. And a vote for Obama could very well mean they will be enjoying their lucrative pensions much sooner than they thought.

Scott Brown’s historic upset doesn’t mean America is home free. I predict the Democrat leadership will continue ignoring the will of the American people and probably enact an unconstitutional health care bill. And I expect they will also continue taxing us to death as they redistribute our wealth to their union buddies and politically connected rent seekers. The good news is, the American people have shown that they will not stand for it.
Advertisement

Nancy, Harry and other political ‘elites’ have a terminal case of inside the beltway syndrome- also known as cognitive dissonance. They have bought into their own version of reality. A reality that doesn’t allow for the possibility that their own narrow world view isn’t the universally accepted view they believe it is. And any version that doesn’t comport with theirs is, well, invalid. And one election in Massachusetts isn’t going to change their minds.

Case in point: Noticeably absent from all talking points today, is any serious discussion by leftists of the fact that this election was a referendum on Obama. A stunning rebuke. A warning bell that Americans don’t want what he is selling.

Leftists, instead of learning from their mistakes, will continue doing what they do so well. They will ignore unpleasant realities in hopes they will go away. If that doesn’t work, they will re-define them, spin them, repackage them and trot out a new improved version of the same old same old. But their tactics are wearing thin, as is Obama’s charisma and ability to influence. As is the old media’s ability to control the discussion.

I know what Obama and crew still don’t know. That the American people have finally seen the light and they don’t like it one bit. And they are not going to sit back and let Obama turn this country into another failed socialist state. The people have spoken, but the Democrats still have waxy yellow build-up clogging their ears. Or something…

The left will continue their path towards assisted suicide due to their complete inability to allow for the possibility that the American people know better than than political elites what is best for America. And when Democrats are thoroughly repudiated again in the next election cycle, they’ll continue to blame Bush or race or sexism. They will not change. And they will lose again.

I must admit to a certain satisfaction in the fact that one of my truisms is coming true. I’ve always said ‘Give the left enough rope and they’ll end up hanging themselves.’ Nice to know some things never change.

————————————————————————-

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina

Article has been published with the authors permission

————————————————————————-

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Comments (2)

Free Subscription to Naked Liberty Articles
* indicates required
Advertise Here
Advertise Here

TradeTrakker


Our Twitter Followers

Friends: Followers:

Recommended









free counters

Contribute

Other Links

EasyHits4U.com - Your Free Traffic Exchange - 1:1 Exchange Ratio, 5-Tier Referral Program. FREE Advertising!

Yavrim.com - Link to a Random Site. Help Promote Free Traffic Exchange
Subscribe to updates

Get Adobe Flash player