Tag Archives: Obama

President Obama's Terrible, Awful, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day.

There’s no doubt it’s been a rough day (well, week) over at the White House. Let’s recap.

The oil spill in the Gulf has rightly been coined “Obama’s Katrina.” They haven’t done anything, trying to walk the line of making BP pay for their mistakes without actually doing anything yourself. From Jason Meath at BigGovernment.com:

The White House answer to the disaster in the Gulf: ‘let BP handle it.’ Put the oil company in charge of the epic disaster they created. Every day, the tendrils of the slick reach further into currents that will carry the sludge to new shores, killing everything in its path. To disperse the oil, BP is dumping hundreds of thousands of gallons of chemicals into the Gulf — to the alarm of the EPA. Increasingly, independent scientific estimates place the amount of oil at 14 times the amount stated by BP. So, what is President Obama’s position on all this? He doesn’t have one.

In addition, Rep. Joe Sestak confirmed that he’d been offered a job by the White House as incentive to drop out of the Pennsylvania Senate race… in which he beat Arlen Specter for the Democratic nod. Press Secretary Gibbs can’t seem to find any words to address it. They’re simply stonewalling… three months out now.

Continue reading

Nashville Drowning: Obama’s silent, HOPE crumbles like a Coke can

UPDATE: Obama has acknowledged that he is aware of Tennessee’s existence… to Gov. Bredesen at least. Point stands – he has said nothing publicly. And the crumbling HOPE house is still a good metaphor.

This weekend, Nashville received around 10 inches of rain – a record breaking rain fall that has caused an astounding amount of flooding. The surrounding rivers swelled and as of this afternoon have yet to crest, so water continues to rush through the streets and into buildings. Thousands have lost their homes. The Opryland Hotel is holding 8-10 feet of water. Businesses have lost everything.

President Obama has yet to acknowledge that anything has even happened in Middle Tennessee… most likely because he’s in damage control mode, trying to salvage a response to the LAST disaster. Time is reporting that Gibbs addressed the emergency in today’s briefing. From George Scoville at IntelligencePlease.com:

TIME.com is reporting that White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs addressed the flood situation in Middle Tennessee and Southern Kentucky in his briefing this morning, and that “[the] FEMA Director [is] headed to the region today.” I’m not sure if this means Administrator Craig Fugate, or Associate Administrator for Response and Recovery Bill Carwile, or even Director Ted Monette from the Office of Federal Coordinating Officer Operations, under A/A Carwile’s office.

Obama himself still had nothing to say regarding the catastrophe. “It’s embarrassing that caring either depends on your electoral prospects or has to wait for the news cycle,” says Scoville.

To quote The One himself, let me be clear: Tennessee seems to be handling this disaster quite well. This is not a call for Federal aid to rush in and start to screw things up – it’s the symbolism attached to knowing the President of your country is aware of what your state is going through.

This footage below the fold is from Antioch,  just southeast of Nashville. Continue reading

Obama: Raising the debt ceiling is a sign of leadership failure. I'm still a good, solid B+ though.

Sweet, sweet irony. Right on the heels of Some pretty big Democratic upsets, Obama announced his plans to place a three year spending freeze on all non-defense, discretionary spending.

Jim Hoft found an inconvenient speech our President gave on the Senate floor in 2006…

Via Gateway Pundit:

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.

Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion.That is “trillion” with a “T.” That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President’s budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion.

Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we’ll spend on Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America.

And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on.

Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America’s priorities.

Senator Barack Obama
Senate Floor Speech on Public Debt
March 16, 2006

So, uh, how’s your leadership Obama? Good, solid B+. For sure.

Obama seriously needs a lesson in humility.

Did you know that Obama has restored our position in the world? The polls say so, so it’s true. Everyone loves us!

“No. 1, I think that we’ve restored America’s standing in the world,” Obama said, citing polls about public confidence in the United States around the world.

“We’ve seen very specific areas of cooperation around the nuclear issue,” he said. “At the time of my inauguration, the world community was still divided on what Iran’s intentions were… We mobilized the international community… You now have validators like the International Atomic Energy Agency, you’ve got the P-5 plus one, which includes Russia and China, all saying to Iran, you’re on the wrong side of history here.”

“There is no doubt that, in the same way that on domestic policy our first job was to stabilize the situation and prevent disaster, on the international stage our first job was to stabilize the situation to allow us to move forward,. A lot of our initiatives have not borne fruit… The question is, are we moving in the right direction. There is no doubt we are.”

Well of COURSE they like us, they now feel like they can kick our ass and we’ll have no recourse. How arrogant do you have to be to think that you have the ability to make friends with everyone in the world less than a year? The only think you’ve done is WEAKEN us, and other countries now feel empowered.

Are we moving in the right direction? Obama says he has no doubt that we are.

I wish I had a fraction of that confidence.

(H/T Pamela Geller)

Palin on Oprah: No tears or jumping on couches.

For those of you that live under a rock, Palin ventured behind enemy lines, so to speak, and made a long awaited appearance on Oprah, designed to coincide with the release of her highly anticipated memoir, Going Rogue: An American Life. What better place to catapult a book that is already a best-seller into another stratosphere?

Overall, I thought the interview went well. Was it a game changer? Probably not. The people that loathe her will continue to do so. Those that tuned in to be impressed by Palin were happy. Oprah was fair. While I have my issues with the Queen of Talk, I don’t believe that I’ve ever seen her behave in a way that I would consider unprofessional, so I didn’t expect a knock down drag out or unwarranted attack. It was most definitely an Oprah episode – minus the tears.

Palin was clearly on the defense, which she probably should have been – she has been torn apart mercilessly since last August, and she was heading in to what was clearly unfriendly media territory. As Oprah reminded us in her interview, Barack Obama was the first candidate that she had ever publicly endorsed, and Palin was quite obviously aware of that fact. Her guard was up, and predictable questions revealed Palin’s preparation for all the “Oprah” conversation about Levi Johnston, marriage, kids, and the like. The answers were thought out and rehearsed – something you could hardly blame her for. The scars from the brutal media attacks are undoubtedly still fresh.   No one will deny that she took a beating in the past year, and getting beneath the surface proved a challenge to even Oprah.

In the end, she came off just fine. Those that generally look to tear her apart grudgingly acknowledged the lack of a complete meltdown. From the Daily Beast (h/t Hot Air):

Never has Sarah Palin appeared so comfortable in her own skin on national television as she did Monday afternoon on The Oprah Winfrey Show. She spoke in clear, easily diagrammable sentences—none of those weird locutions about Putin rearing his head somewhere in the stratosphere over the Aleutian Islands. She was approachable and full of pep. And even with that percussive laugh—the raucous call of an exotic plumed bird during mating season, perhaps—she displayed an appealingly mordant sense of humor.

The bottom line is that conservatives want to like her. Even those of us who remain unconvinced that she should run for national office feel compelled to cheer her on. Sarah Palin appeals to many conservatives because, simply put, she represents an ideal. She is someone who is successful but grounded, ambitious but prioritized, and smart but approachable.

She has single handedly generated more excitement from conservatives – particularly women – than anyone else has been able to in recent years. Organizations such as Smart Girl Politics have seen incredible momentum… a lot of which can be attributed to the energy brought to the table by an Alaskan governor who made it okay for women to be successful, pretty, intelligent… and conservative.

By letting us see him sweat every time she updates her Facebook page, President Obama has inadvertently elevated Sarah Palin’s status. The fact that he needs to take her on publicly – over and over and over again – is a clear illustration of the power that she still has, whether she likes it or not. A housewife with a Facebook page has become almost as terrifying to our President as Fox News is. Should Rush, Palin and Fox join forces, the entire administration may begin to crumble.

Here’s what I’d like to see from Palin: She has shown that her biggest asset is in her fundraising capability. People listen to her, and people watch her – if only in hopes that she falls on her face. There is no sugar daddy on the right funding the conservative groundswell of the past year. If she were to use her platform to support solid candidates and bring in the funds, she could become a powerhouse.

In order to do so, she needs to own her position in American politics. She will always be a whipping post for the Left. They loathe her and everything she stands for. For some of us, that’s just a bonus. The point is that she can’t continue to cater to the failing media establishment or hide behind a contrived shell of herself.

In addition, we cannot, as a movement, allow her to be the iconic figure that Barack Obama is to the Left. Cults of personality are always dangerous – even if they’re on our side. Regardless of her assets, she can do wrong, and she will make mistakes. She already has. If we lose the ability to view our own leaders through a critical lens, we are not helping anyone.

There is a lot of potential for Sarah Palin. I just hope that she harnesses it instead of letting herself get swallowed by the “Oprah” questions and blame games.

KSM, cowardly conservatives, and Obama the Punisher

The Khalid Shaikh Mohammed backlash has been quite the spectacle. From Holder’s hearing today to Obama predetermining the outcome, this has been really unbelievable. Pulling the trial out military tribunes and moving to civilian courts is a fundamental change in how we deal with criminals. The options, as I see it, are this:

1. They don’t believe we are at war.

2. They don’t care we are at war, politics are more important.

Rudy Guiliani pointed out this morning on a conference call that those that bombed Pearl Harbor would never have been tried in civilian courts. Have we really shifted our views so much that we’re willing to make these changes? Apparently.

Even more distressing is the weird contrast from our President on the issue. From Ace of Spades:

“I don’t think it will be offensive at all when he’s convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him,” Obama told NBC’s Chuck Todd.

When Todd asked Obama if he was interfering in the trial process by declaring that Mohammed will be executed, Obama, a former constitutional law professor, insisted that he wasn’t trying to dictate the result.

Not that I have a problem with him being convicted. I mean, the man committed a heinous crime, and changed our world forever. He confessed. But predetermining the outcome is so very, well, not American. Does he not think that his public assumption that KSM will receive the death penalty will have any impact on the outcome of the proceedings? Because if that’s the case, he’s so very wrong.

Meanwhile, the rest of the Lefties have decided that we’re “cowards”. Sister Toldjah nails it:

Let’s see. You’ve got one side desiring to protect sensitive intelligence information from the eyes of Islamofascist thugs who want to kill Americans abroad – including our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan – and both military officers and civilians here at home, a side hungry for justice to be carried out against admitted terrorist brutes like KSM, and you’ve got some on another side that is operating under the shameless pretense of “wanting justice” for 9-11 victims but who in realilty apparently have no problem with the possibility that sensitive national security information will be revealed in the process – and in fact wishes for such information to be revealed in order to put the evil Bush admin on trial, a side where not many are particularly interested in justice for the 9-11 victims but are apparently more interested in being pro-”justice” against their political opposition – a position that presents a clear danger to both Americans and their interests both at home and stateside. This isn’t about “justice” for the left – it’s about “revenge.” Interesting, when you think about it, because they’ve been telling us for years that the courtroom is not supposed to be about “revenge” but about “fairness and justice under the law.” Um, just who are the “cowards” again?

Preach it , Sister.

I love The Onion.

No seriously. The sad part is that I have a hard time distinguishing it from reality.


Obama’s Home Teleprompter Malfunctions During Family Dinner

The Degradation of Decorum and Odd Role Reversals

In case you missed it, teabagging is now an acceptable term from Presidents.

Here’s the thing. I’m younger than a lot of my readers. I was 11 when I learned what a “Lewinsky” was from my President. Classy, right? That’s a huge problem. It brought something that was not even on my radar into every day conversation, and made it not only acceptable, but entertainment. If I was older, I probably would have been humiliated. However, it was just novel and funny to a middle schooler, and our President made it okay.

Unfortunately, in the past few days both President Obama and President Clinton have referred to us as teabaggers. I wish I was making this stuff up. Say what you will about Bush, but he was faithful to his wife, and he never would have called the opposition “teabaggers”. As Melissa Clouthier pointed out on twitter yesterday, “Do we really want the President of the United States using a term that describes one person sucking another person’s testicles ?” We can’t be PC about this.

Our silver tongued President referred to us as “those tea bag people” while among Democrats, and it was caught by a reporter. That’s all we are, right y’all? Tea baggers who show up with guns and rant about how Obama is a Kenyan Muslim?

Um, no.

I had a fascinating conversation with a self-professed liberal author this week. She was working on an article and seeking to understand the Right. After an hour long conversation in which we discussed my stance on war, education, free markets, freedom, capital punishment, drug legalization, and everything else we could cover, she closed with “well, you’re not a bad person, and you’re not crazy.” Um, thanks?

She acknowledged that the media had made a “caricature” of us. She was stunned to find out I’m not a birther. I was like, no, honestly a lot of us cringe when we see those signs at events. That’s not what we’re about. In short, “It’s the economy, stupid!” It’s not about Obama, or abortion or anything but freedom and the desire for the government to get off our collective back.

However, I can’t fault her for expecting a rabid, gun toting, illiterate degenerate. As a California liberal, her coverage comes from the main stream media. I was grateful for the chance to give her some insight to the idea of personal accountability and liberty. Did I make a convert? No. I know she didn’t mean her closing comment as an insult. But it’s sad that it took an hour long conversation for her to reach that conclusion… and that she felt it necessary to qualify that I wasn’t a racist nut job at the end.

What else can we expect? We have been reduced to a caricature of what we really are. We are portrayed as a racist, fringe minority by Republicans, the media, and the President… can we really expect people who don’t know us to take us seriously? I don’t have an answer. I’d like to think that people would understand freedom and therefore see the motivation. That hope is dimming.

The short story is that we’re NOT insane. I have to look at it this way: it’s indicative of our culture on a larger level. We demonize what we don’t understand, and we demonize the things that are a perceived threat. The idea that people are threatened by freedom is an article unto itself. There was an article a short time ago that referred to conservatism as “brain-dead” and lamented the loss of our great thinkers. This is all part of the same cultural shift. That’s our world. The sound-bite media and the fear of the opposition is not a problem confined to conservatism. I suppose, though, that when conservatism in the past has relied so heavily on it’s scholars, it’s more of a loss. The Left, at least for the past 40 years or so, has relied on activism. It has a history of social change, protests, and revolts. The Right, not so much.

Isn’t it odd to see the roles reversed? The conservatives are the ones protesting and revolting. We’re the ones showing up in force, because we have no other choice. Meanwhile, we have our Glenn Becks and Keith Olbermanns in a talking points war, doing their best to mock and discredit one another. I don’t think things have been so polarized in our country in a really long time.

So where are we headed? When there is no decorum from the highest elected office in the nation, when we are simply reduced to caricatures of ourselves, do we have power? Do we actually have a voice?

Yes. We do. We saw it last week at the polls, and we will continue to see a swing. I believe we’re at a breaking point, and in America, I believe we will break on the side of freedom.

Those dirty rotten insurance companies…

From Reuters:

NEW YORK (Reuters) – The Connecticut attorney general is seeking information about what the state’s five largest health insurers may have sent policyholders over legislation that would reform the Medicare program for the elderly.

The information requests announced on Friday follow a U.S. government probe announced last month into a letter sent from Humana Inc (HUM.N) to its Medicare members that caused a stir on Capitol Hill.

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal wants information from Aetna Inc (AET.N), UnitedHealth Group Inc (UNH.N), Health Net (HNT.N), WellPoint Inc’s (WLP.N) Anthem Health Plans unit and ConnectiCare Inc.

Let me summarize: The Attorney General of Connecticut was irritated that Humana had the audacity to inform its members of relevant legislative changes, and wants to ensure that the other insurance companies are staying in line.

To quote the President – let’s be clear about this… it’s purely a way for the state to monitor private industry. It’s part of the game. They’re finding ways to demonize the companies and shut them down. It’s a way to limit your options, Connecticut.

Eliminating options seems to be a pattern. There is a HuffPo piece (yes, click at your own risk)  that refers to the battle between public and private insurers “political extortion”.  Seriously?

The fiscal truth of the matter is Medicare cannot afford to continue to give away $169 billion dollars of taxpayer funds to America’s insurance industry. The industry is quick to highlight extra benefits provided to MA beneficiaries (such as eyeglasses, dental coverage, and gym memberships) but why shouldn’t these benefits be provided to all seniors, not just those in private plans?

First of all, this begs the obvious: we can’t afford to subsidize… but we can afford to provide a public option that gives everyone those benefits? Um…

Second – it shouldn’t be provided to all seniors because some people pay more. All health care is not created equal. Medicare Advantage is a higher level of care. If seniors want to pay more and have more benefits, they should have that choice.

Ed Morrissey asks:

Do you recall the many occasions when Barack Obama said, “If you like your current plan, you can keep it”? Why doesn’t that apply to Medicare Advantage consumers?

Because it’s not true, Ed. That’s why. It’s another step in systematically eliminating options. Everyone gets care… the same sub-par care. Even when they’re willing to pay for better.

Awesome.

The Chicago Smackdown

So the Olympics won’t be in Chicago. Excuse me while I recover from my heartbreak.

Here’s the thing: our mission is not to bring down Obama. Our mission is to support free markets, personal liberty, and accountability. This movement isn’t about Barack Obama the man. This is about what he stands for, which is big government, higher taxes, and less personal responsibility. We can’t look at one specific incident and rejoice that the world has “seen the light”.

No matter how much fun it may be… because it is fun.

The bigger issue here is what it could mean in terms of our place in  the rest of the world. His Presidency was touted as a new era in foreign policy. We saw images of people rejoicing around the world when he was elected and subsequently inaugurated. He was supposed to be the new face of the United States, and win back all the enemies that Bush made. He’s not doing that.

He was the first President to ever go make a plea of this kind regarding the Olympics. In my opinion, it was inappropriate, but whatever, I could have overlooked it. As Ed Morrissey said earlier today, it was surprising that he even went without having it locked down. It seems he was setting himself up. Which doesn’t make sense, until you look at it this way: Losing the Olympics was good for Obama.

The ever brilliant Melissa Clouthier hypothesized in an earlier conversation that it was a win-win situation. Obviously, if it went to Chicago, all of his cronies win. The US gets the Olympics. Everyone’s happy.

However, even if he lost, Obama’s goal has never been to strengthen our country’s place in the world. America is  no better than anyone else. Now that we’ve lost the event, he can save face and have us not look like the imperialist, self important bastards he thinks we are.

Smooth.