It wasn't a message, it was a repudiation

People in California, Delaware and New York? You deserve everything you get. As for Nevada, what can I say except that Sharon Angle was fighting against the machine.

With still more votes to count, we may see more seats changing hands to Republicans. With a 59 seat pick up, this wasn't a message to Obama and the democrats, it was a repudiation of his agenda. Senate races in Alaska and Washington are still too close to call and still may count towards Republican gains.

And the apparatchik bloggers and the left wing media crowd are already spinning this repudiation of the anointed one's agenda as being ready to "compromise", or "reaching across the aisle" and "bipartisanship".

Not quite.

Where was this compromise and reaching across the aisle when the democrats were running things since 2006? They shoved health care down our throats. They passed Cap and Trade in the House. They passed a number of other legislation under the radar and all without compromise or reaching across the aisle.

If there was a message in last night's elections, it was one of no compromise. What's good for the goose...

Obama has two directions he can go, as I see it.

A. ) He can continue to go full steam ahead and fight the Republican led House, in which case he'll try to pin the blame of not compromising on the GOP and try to use it against them during the next election cycle in 2012.

B.) He can move towards the center, as Bill Clinton did. In this case, he'll alienate his far left base even more and dashing all hopes of a second term.

As for those incumbent senators who narrowly won, it certainly sent a message for those who will be up for re-election in 2012. When legislation is passed in the House and moves to the Senate, those senators will be thinking twice before they vote. After witnessing what happened last night, they are not about to rubber stamp Obama's agenda as they did for the last four years, knowing that they may be next for retirement.

What about those democrat senators that vote so close to the Republican line that it's hard to tell what party they are in? My guess is that they will be courted to flip sides. Then there are those two independents. They may caucus with democrats, but, Lieberman is known for voting along Republican lines quite often.

What we need to hope for in this Congressional split is gridlock. In this case, nobody can get things done, thus preventing any of Obama's agenda from getting anywhere. Gridlock is good.

What concerns me at this point are those establishment Republicans who would try to co-opt the fresh faces in the House and the Senate, such as Trent Lott. This cannot be allowed to happen. If it does, then we'll back to where we were that ultimately led to GOP defeat in 2006 when we couldn't tell who the Republicans were.

In closing, I have a message for Karl Rove. Christine O'Donnell may have been defeated, but, if she had not defeated Castle, he would most likely have lost to Coons anyway. What Christine O'Donnell did was galvanize conservatives in Delaware and proved that sticking to those principles can work wonders. Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman lost, because they were willing to compromise and that's not what Americans were wanting when they went to the polls last night.

When liberty is threatened, the American people will fix it

"Whenever our affairs go obviously wrong, the good sense of the people will interpose and set them to rights."

- Thomas Jefferson to David Humphreys, 1789

Isn't it interesting what happens when Americans feel that their liberty is being threatened. In 1994, it was nothing more than a shift of power. If the GOP gain 55 seats or more in the House, it's a clarion call to our government that the American people has had enough. And if miracles do happen and the GOP takes over both houses of Congress, what kind of message will that be?

But, I issue this warning to the GOP. Screw it up this time and the Republican party is done for...permanently.

And if you think the Tea Party movement didn't have anything to do with it, then you are living in La La Land. Before Obama was anointed, the American people were pissed off at Bush and the Republican party and wanted change; they got it, but it wasn't the change they were looking for. Yes, this mess started during Bush's watch, but, the democrats were in complete control of both houses since 2006. When Obama was anointed, he stated that, "We are five days away from fundamentally transforming this great country..."

Yet, those who wanted change didn't ask the obvious question: "If this is a great country, why does it need to be transformed and transformed into what?" It didn't take long for the answer to that question to be fully realized and then Rick Santelli said the words that started a movement.

A great awakening.

And don't kid yourself into thinking that Obama's people will go away quietly. During early voting, the SEIU were already up to their old tricks and will do anything to ensure that they don't lose this year; they have A LOT at stake and they know they will lose it all if their puppets lose.

I'll echo the words of Mark Steyn, "It will be a victory by the margin of lawyer."

Big Sis breaks the deportation record. The silence is deafening in the White House

According to Janet Napolitano (aka. Big Sis), she has broken the record of deporting illegal aliens this year.

She claims that the Obama administration deported 393,000 illegal aliens, breaking the 2009 record of 389,000 and half of the them were criminal arrests. If these numbers are accurate, then she broke Bush's record by 81,000 in his last complete year in office. Not only did she break the deportation record, she claims an audit of 2,200 businesses resulting in 180 criminal charges.

These numbers and results are impressive. But, it begs the question as to why the White House has been silent on these record breaking results. The New York Times had buried the success story so deep, you could only find it by accident.

Could it be that the White House doesn't want to jeopardize the Hispanic vote?

Read the full story at CNS News

Rats on a sinking ship. Dems distance themselves from The Anointed One

Ever since the midterm election campaigns started, I have yet to hear one single democrat incumbent air an ad that says they voted for Obamacare, TARP or Cap and Trade. Now, there are some democrats that are doing their best to distance themselves from Obama. Governor Joe Manchin (D-W.VA) is well behind Republican John Raese. In a FoxNews interview, Manchin says he's open to repealing Obamacare and in one campaign ad, it shows him shooting holes in the Cap and Trade bill.

"The president's plan — 'Obamacare,' as it's been called — is far too reaching. It's overreaching. It needs to have a lot of it repealed," Manchin. "If you can't fix that, repeal the whole thing."

So, he was for Obamacare before he was against it? He also claims that he's against Cap and Trade,

"The bottom line is cap-and-trade is dead wrong and President Obama is dead wrong on cap-and-trade."

Apparently, nobody could tell what his position on the jobs killing bill he was on. According to a Hunnington News article, he seems to try and have it both ways,

That's why Governor Joe Manchin's position on one of the most important economic issues facing West Virginia--Cap-and-Trade--is so perplexing. President Obama is a staunch supporter of this effort to cap the amount of carbons used by power plants and other coal-burning facilities, all based on the questionable science of climate change.

Certainly Governor Manchin appeared to be in support of Obama's Cap-and-Trade agenda when he appeared on "Power Lunch," a CNBC talk show, just one day before the 2008 elections.

Sounds like desperation. It also appears that President Obama has all but lost his mojo.

Hypocrite in Chief? Remember the untraceable, prepaid debit cards in 2008?

The Obama administration has recently made allegations that the Chamber of Commerce has been using foreign money for campaign ads. Despite the fact that this against the law, you will recall that during the 2008 presidential campaign it was discovered that team Obama was accepting untraceable prepaid debit card contributions.

Washington Post - Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor's identity, campaign officials confirmed.

Then there's an article that describes Obama using a bogus blog post to make these allegations against the Chamber of Commerce. Of course, when it was pointed out that the blog post was baseless, he seemingly throttled back on the rhetoric.

The Daily Caller - President Obama on Sunday stepped back from categorical charges he made earlier this week that foreign money was funding conservative TV campaign ads, telling a rally in Philadelphia only that such a scenario was possible. The softening of Obama’s language reflects the impact of a Saturday report on the issue by the New York Times, which concluded that charges originally made by a blog run by a Democratic-aligned think tank were baseless.

Yet, speaking to thousands at a rally in Philadelphia Sunday, he had the gall to say, “You don’t know because they don’t have to disclose.”

Why Obama returned the bust of Winston Churchill

This article from the Mail Online in the UK, seems to show why President Obama has a contemptuous relationship with our strongest ally in Europe.

Below is a brief excerpt from the article:

'I narrated the whole story to Barack one evening to help him understand our family's past. He wasn't amused at all. He expressed quite a lot of concern about why the British had to punish his grandfather "on his own soil".

'He said the whole act sounded barbaric. He wondered why the British never respected African culture. The arrest, he said, was outrageous.' Shockingly, she adds: 'Generally, my grandson has never believed the British do anything for a common good, rather than their selfish interests.'

Did British soldiers really torture President Obama's grandfather? As we will see, some elements of this highly emotive story have been twisted through the passage of time.

Read more

Oh, what a tangled web...Obama's Watergate?

Deep Throat: You let Haldeman slip away.

Woodward: Yes.

Deep Throat: You've done worse than let Haldeman slip away, you've got people feeling sorry for him. I didn't think that was possible. In a conspiracy like this, you build from the outer edges and go step by step. If you shoot too high and miss, everybody feels more secure. You've put the investigation back months.

Woodward: Yes, we know that. And if we're wrong, we're resigning. Were we wrong?

Fast forward to 2010

Clinton: Joe. Obama has already endorsed Specter. If you drop out of the race against Specter, we can get you a cush job in the regime.

Joe Sestak: No.

Clinton: We know that Obama isn't going to get a second term. We need you to drop out of the primary so Arlen can hold his seat and we can keep a majority in Congress.

Joe Sestak: No.

Clinton: Look, Joe. Rahm has promised me that he can get you a top level job in the regime. We need you to stay in the House of Representatives because of your military background.

Joe Sestak: No. If I'm wrong, then they won't vote me into the Senate during the election.

It's almost as if the above scenario between Bill Clinton and Joe Sestak was taken right out of All the President's Men. Of course, it's my own opinion based on current news reports, but, probably close to the truth.

And the usual round table discussions and Monday quarterbacking are already asking who knew what and when did they know it. Then comes the obligatory circling of the wagons by the state run media in defense of Obama and his administration, echoing their master that nothing improper happened.

And it's all irrelevant. A crime was committed the moment Bill Clinton asked Sestak to drop out of the race against Arlen Specter and in return, he would get a top level position in the administration. It's called bribery.

According to 18 U.S.C. § 201 : US Code - Section 201: Bribery of public officials and witnesses

(b) Whoever -
(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises
anything of value to any public official or person who has been
selected to be a public official, or offers or promises any
public official or any person who has been selected to be a
public official to give anything of value to any other person or
entity, with intent -
(A) to influence any official act

You can read the rest at FindLaw

Up to now it's nothing more than a "He said/He said" situation. But, it is a serious one. Here we have a government official that is making the allegation that the Obama administration made him a job offer if he dropped out of the Pennsylvania primary against Arlen Specter, whom the President had already endorsed. To say that such an allegation is a serious one is an understatement, because if true, then it's an impeachable offense.

For Obama to say that nothing improper happened is already a lie, because it is now running across the news wires that Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel had asked Bill Clinton to do his bidding. This is a crime.

So. (A) Either Sestak is lying, (B) He's covering for the White House (C) Obama, Rahm Emmanuel and Clinton are lying, or (D) All the above.

Will this be Obama's Watergate? It damn well should be. If this were to occur during the Bush administration, we would never hear the end of it.

Obama, Twitterer and Radical MoveOn.org Connection

Obama's Twitterer, which your tax dollars pay for, is connected to the radical progressive organization MoveOn.org. Last Friday the Wallstreet Journal revealed the identity of Obama's current Twitterer as Mia Cambronero. Sweetness & Light discovered that she is a senior fellow at the NOI (New Organizing Institute), described by Discover the Networks.

Established by MoveOn.org in November 2005
Grassroots program that trains young political organizers to work for progressive campaigns and organizations

On November 22, 2005, MoveOn.org Executive Director Eli Pariser announced that his group had created the New Organizing Institute (NOI), "a unique grassroots program that trains young, technology-enabled political organizers to work for progressive campaigns and organizations." Victory in the 2006 midterm elections was NOI's immediate priority. Said Pariser: "The Internet has made huge changes in politics ... Now, our [MoveOn's] former Organizing Director Zack Exley is working on cultivating the next generation of ‘online organizers' at the New Organizing Institute. The first step: find 50 talented up-and-coming organizers, put them through an all-expenses-paid training week, and place them on 2006 campaigns where they can really make a difference."

The importance of this is the organizations director, Zack Exley. Who is this person? Simply put, he is a radical who has ties to the domestic terrorist group, Ruckus Society. However, many may recall him as the guy who created a "phishing" site which spoofed (pretended) to be George W. Bush's.

Sources

Sweetness & Light

Newsbusters

Habledash

Wallstreet Journal

Massachusetts Upset Not A GOP Victory

The Massachusetts upset, or I what I refer to as the second shot heard around the world, was indeed a victory. However, it was not a victory for the GOP. During the 2008 campaigns, President Obama talked a centrist game and independent voters said, "Ok. You convinced us and we will give you a chance." and pushed Obama over the edge. Once in office, it didn't take long to realize that Obama wasn't going to "walk the walk" and went hard left, it was bad enough that Bush was spending like a drunken sailor on shore leave, that Obama decided to accelerate the spending and cause even a bigger economic mess to the tune of 10% unemployment (17% if you count those that just gave up and not counted in the pool). Of course, many of the more experienced voters knew what was coming. All you had to do was be truthful to yourself and then you would have realized that the people he surrounded himself with for years were some pretty unsavory characters; after all, how can one claim to be in the greatest country in the world and then claim that it needs to be fundamentally transformed? Independents, Republicans and some democrats in Massachusetts cast their vote for change, the change they got between 2009 and 2010 wasn't the change that Obama campaigned for. But, it was the indies that played the music for the Obama administration and the democrat majority in Congress to the tune of St. Vitus' dance. Polls taken after the upset indicate that both local and national issues were the driving force behind Scott Brown's win. So, for those of you who are of the opinion that health care being pushed through Congress, behind closed doors and bribery of senators and state representatives wasn't part of the reason, then you are deluding yourself. Then there is Obama himself. He went to Virginia and New Jersey for the gubernatorial races and failed to pull it off, then he went to Massachusetts and failed there as well. If you were paying even a modicum of attention during the Massachusetts election, then you would have noticed that the young voters that made up a large chunk of his voters in 2008 were AWOL. Oh. A message to Sean Hannity, "Shut up. Scott Brown's win is not a win for the GOP."

Can It Be Pulled Off?

Martha Coakley commanded a 30 point spread in the beginning stages of the senate race in Massachusetts, then out of nowhere Scott Brown closed that gap only to pull ahead in the polls and sending the Democrat party into a tizzy. With the fear of losing a critical seat in the Senate, President Obama campaigned for Attorney General Martha Coakley to drum up support for the embattled candidate.

But, was it enough?

If Coakley loses, then this will mark the third time that Obama has campaigned for a democrat contender and lost. First was the governor races in Virginia and New Jersey, now it may be in Massachusetts and it may well leave no doubt that these losses are a reflection of his policies.

Polling data indicates that Obama's health care plan and backroom dealings with union bosses has caused his approval ratings to drop significantly in his first full year in office.

If Scott Brown wins, could this be an indication of things to come? Who knows.

CSPAN Calls On Obama To Make Good On His Promise

The head of C-SPAN has implored Congress to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public, as top Democrats lay plans to hash out the final product among themselves. The head of C-SPAN has implored Congress to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public, as top Democrats lay plans to hash out the final product among themselves. C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb wrote to leaders in the House and Senate Dec. 30 urging them to open "all important negotiations, including any conference committee meetings," to televised coverage on his network. Read the rest at FoxNews

Hoax and Change - The Biggest Joke Since Carter

Campaigning on a centrist platform from one side of his mouth to the opposition and campaigning on a platform of fundamentally transforming a great country to his supporters on the other side of his mouth, President Obama has shown us nothing but arrogance and narcissism. After all, how does one claim we are a great country on the one hand and then states that it needs to be fundamentally transformed. A bit oxymoronic, isn't it?

At any rate, let's take a stroll back in time and we only need go back a year.

- New Hampshire, June 22, 2007

"Sunlight before signing". "When there is a bill that ends up on my desk as the president, you the public will have five days to look online and find out what's in it before I sign it."






Repeating it on his website he said, "Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days."

Shortly after his inauguration, he signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act only 2 days after it was passed.

On February 17, 2009 he signed a 1,000 page $787 billion "stimulus" package, just one day after it was passed.

- Elimination of the capital gains tax

According to The Barack Obama's Comprehensive Tax Plan, he promised to "eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses." To drive the promise home, two of Obama's advisers, Austan Goolsbee and Jason Furman notified the Wall Street Journal just weeks prior to the elections that the tax cuts included "the elimination of capital gains taxes for small businesses and start-ups." In reality, small business investors were only allowed to exclude 50% of gains while Obama's "stimulus" package reduces the liability, thus raising the exclusion to 75%.

- Postponed 401(k) penalties

Remember the IRA and 410(k), $10,000 no penalty withdrawal promise?

"Since so many Americans will be struggling to pay the bills over the next year, I propose that we allow every family to withdraw up to 15% from their IRA or 401(k) – up to a maximum of $10,000 – without any fine or penalty throughout 2009. "This will help families get through this crisis without being forced to make painful choices like selling their homes or not sending their kids to college."

It was never included in the $787 billion "stimulus" package.

- No jobs for lobbyists

November 10, 2007. Des Moines, Iowa

"I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists — and won. They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president"

Or how about this: "I have done more to take on lobbyists than any other candidate in this race. I don't take a dime of their money, and when I am president, they won't find a job in my White House."

Yet, Obama is of the opinion that his own rules don't apply to him.

- No more pork barrel spending. Earmark reform

Oxford, Mississipi. "We need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."

When the $787 billion "stimulus" bill was signed into law, remember this, "Now, I'm proud that we passed a recovery plan free of earmarks." US News and World Report found eight earmarks in it.

The $410 billion omnibus bill had 9,000 earmarks that totaled an estimated 7.5 billion. Congresses excuse? It was "unfinished business" from the year before.

- Homecoming for the troops in 16 months

Remember this campaign promise? "I will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months." This would have put a withdrawal date of May, 2010.

In February 2009, he stated, "Let me say this as plainly as I can: By Aug. 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end."

- Lip service to pro choice advocates. FCA

July 17, 2007. Planned Parenthood Action Fund, "The first thing I'd do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do." To date, it has never been mentioned and this is good news for pro life advocates.

- The $4,000 college credit

Obama promised to make college "affordable for all Americans" when he announced his American Opportunity Tax Credit.

"This universal and fully refundable credit will ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is completely free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition at the average public college or university and make community college tuition completely free for most students. Recipients of the credit will be required to conduct 100 hours of community service."

In reality, the $4,000 AOTC only offers $2,500 for up to two years an doesn't require any community service.

And my all time favorite:

- Transparency

Remember this lie?

"My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government. Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing."

Do I really need to go down this road? Now, this doesn't leave President Bush off the hook, however, he's not president now is he?

Recently and in true narcissistic fashion, he told Oprah that he gives himself a B+ so far as president. So, accelerating Bush's spending, doubling unemployment, taking over lending corporations and banks in true Marxist style and waiting on government run health care to pass, I guess that would be a B+...if you're a Marxist.

However, if you are a free market, get out of the way government capitalist, then he would merit an F - to the tenth power.

Oh, yeah. If you're out of a job, lost your home and had your hand out during the 2008 presidential campaigns, I have one question for you:

How's that hope and change workin' out for ya? Before you find yourself at a ballot box come 2012 and you voted for Obama, you may want to let your intelligence guide your hand, rather than your emotions.

Presidential Approval At A New Low

Daily Presidential Tracking PollThe Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 24% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -18. Read the rest at Rasmussen

Der Spiegal Unloads On Obama West Point Speech

By Gabor Steingart Never before has a speech by President Barack Obama felt as false as his Tuesday address announcing America's new strategy for Afghanistan. It seemed like a campaign speech combined with Bush rhetoric -- and left both dreamers and realists feeling distraught. One can hardly blame the West Point leadership. The academy commanders did their best to ensure that Commander-in-Chief Barack Obama's speech would be well-received. Just minutes before the president took the stage inside Eisenhower Hall, the gathered cadets were asked to respond "enthusiastically" to the speech. But it didn't help: The soldiers' reception was cool. One didn't have to be a cadet on Tuesday to feel a bit of nausea upon hearing Obama's speech. It was the least truthful address that he has ever held. He spoke of responsibility, but almost every sentence smelled of party tactics. He demanded sacrifice, but he was unable to say what it was for exactly. Read the rest at Spiegal Online International

Obama Popularity At New Low

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 27% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -15. This is the lowest Approval Index rating yet measured for President Obama. Read the rest at Rasmussen

First A King, Now An Emporer

President Obama's deep bow to Japanese Emperor Akihito on Saturday may not have violated any official protocol, but critics of the presidential act of deference nevertheless say he's guilty of bad form. The incident followed Obama's dip to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in April, which the White House said was not a bow despite the criticism that followed. But in Japan, the White House could not argue with a photograph that showed him bent at a nearly 90-degree angle while shaking the hand of the emperor, as Empress Michiko smiled faintly next to him. Read the rest at FoxNews

When The Truth Hurts

Joe Klein's piece at Real Clear Politics just goes to show that when the truth hurts, you sling ad hominems and vitriolic claptrap at the source. Let me be precise here: Fox News peddles a fair amount of hateful crap. Some of it borders on sedition. Much of it is flat out untrue. Yet, nowhere does he point to any examples or instances. Though, I can point out several from the likes of Contessa Brewer, Keith Olberman and Chris Matthews, et al. Since when does asking questions or forming an opinion rate as "hateful crap" or sedition? CNN, MSNBC, NBC peddle it on a daily basis, or does this pass as news for Mr. Klein? When I see a news organization fact check an SNL skit, I have to wonder why FoxNews hammers them in the ratings on a daily basis. But I don't understand why the White House would give such poisonous helium balloons as Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity the opportunity for still greater spasms of self-inflation by declaring war on Fox. I wouldn't expect him to when he is just as much in the tank for Obama as the fringe media is. So, I'll explain it for him. Obama has thin skin and can't take criticism and he is deflecting people away from the real issues to slide something under the rug. "Nuff said. If the problem is that stories bloated far beyond their actual importance--ACORN's corruption, Van Jones's radical past--are in danger of leaching out of the Fox hothouse into the general media, then perhaps the Administration should be a bit more diligent about whom it hires and whom it funds. And this is precisely why the MSM is now referred to as the fringe and state run media. When someone, like Joe Klein, considers topics like ACORN and Van Jones's radical past as bloated stories, then I have to question what makes an issue important enough to "bloat". But, he does make one valid point in that Obama's administration should be more diligent about whom they hire. That, however, is not likely to happen when Obama is trying to fundamentally transform this country; you can't do that without radical, Marxist revolutionaries. If the problem is broader--that Fox News spreads seditious lies to its demographic sliver of an audience--the Administration should probably be stoic: the wingnuts will always be with us. The best antidote to their garbage is elegant, intelligent governance. The next-best antidote is occasional engagement: I thought Obama came away from his O'Reilly and Chris Wallace interviews much the better for it. (Though you don't want to sit down with a thug like Hannity or a weirdo like Beck.) And here is where Joe Klein pulls back the curtains. This hate filled paragraph speaks volumes about where the hate and lies come from; maybe Mr. Klein should look at the man in the mirror. The problem with war is that it diverts attention from the actual news. Hey, maybe Mr. Klein does get it! The Administration has tried to pursue a sophisticated, difficult domestic and foreign policy. It doesn't offer the quick-fix irresponsibility of a tax cut or an invasion. It needs space, time and patience to explain. This is an enervating, midstream moment. Whoops. Spoke too soon. Maybe Obama has absolutely no experience, whatsoever, about decision making. Considering that he was in a legislative body before he was anointed, he didn't have to make decisions that has the propensity to affect an entire world. The "I inherited it" rhetoric has been regurgitated ad nauseum and it's no longer working. He didn't inherit anything, rather, he wanted it and exacerbated it by accelerating Bush's idiotic spending. If he hadn't suspended his campaign to sign on to the first ridiculous "stimulus", I may have given Obama a bit more leeway. It's not certain that the President's efforts from health care to Afghanistan will succeed. We'll know a lot more in a month, but I really hope the White House hasn't launched this attack to fill the public space while the other issues are being sorted out. The long-term costs of stooping to Fox's level are not just bad posture; they are a diminution of the office and its primary occupant. Nothing is certain about this administration, other than it's Hell bent on this countries destruction. The long term costs, Mr. Klein, is going to be Obama's demise if he continues down the path he is going. Have you ever heard of the saying that you should never pick a fight with someone who has A LOT of ink?

AoD - The Obamas Violated First Three Rules of Selling

C. Edmund Wright gives a one - two punch on why the Obama's failed to win the 2016 bid for the Olympics for Chicago.

Excerpt:

Of course Barack and Michelle Obama failed in Copenhagen.  Their strategy could not possibly succeed.  In their academic arrogance, they thought they could sell a product they clearly do not believe in (the United States) and moreover, they could do so by stressing the benefits to the seller (Chicago) and not the buyer (the IOC).  And to top it off, they committed the faux pas of talking too much about the sales force (themselves) and not about the product or the buyer.

Not believing in the product? You mean America? Say it ain't so?

Buying the product from Chicago? You mean the most corrupt city in the US? You mean the city that has equated the phrase, "Trust me..." to "Screw you."?

Trying to sell the Obama name, instead of apologizing to the world?

Nah! That couldn't be the reason why Chicago got knocked out of the first round.

Read the rest at American Thinker

How's That Hope and Change Working For Ya?

Wasting taxpayer's money and emitting tons of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (how do those bus tires feel, Al?), our dear leader has failed to charm the IOC into playing the 2016 Olympics in Chicago.

Ouch Mayor Daley and his millionaire slum lord bff, Valerie Jarrett. But, I guess, it's better to waste our money by making the fruitless trip than to put us on the hook for what could have been worse if Chicago would have won the bid to host the Olympics.

First it was Chicagoans that would NOT be on the hook if they won at the IOC, nope, just other Americans. Then later they would somewhat be on the hook. Then Chicagoans would be...well, you know the rest.

But all was for not. Never mind that the countries economy is in tatters and his top general was waiting for a response to an August 30 memo requesting more troops, those issues can be put on the back burner. No, dear leader felt it was a priority to use two jets to fly over the pond and play pitchman to the IOC only to be knocked out of the running in the first round.

Now both jets need to fly back. Hey, Al! You can come out of the corner when dear leader gets back. Valerie, you can find another excuse to demolish your slums at Grove Parc to make more millions. And Mayor Daley? You can just go pound sand.

How's that hope and change workin' out for ya, America?

Rio de Janeiro wins 2016 Olympic Games in landslide over Madrid

COPENHAGEN — Rio de Janeiro rode a wave of International Olympic Committee sentiment to award the Olympics to South America for the first time, winning the right to host the 2016 Summer Games on Friday in a victory over surprising finalist Madrid.

The result of the final ballot was Rio: 66, Madrid: 32.

"I honestly believe it is Brazil's time," Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva told the IOC voters. "For the others it will be just one more Games. For us it will be an unparalleled opportunity."

This is how you waste tax payer's money to fill the coffers of Mayor Daley and Valerie Jarrett. I suppose that Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and FoxNews minions will be blamed.

Read the rest at USAToday