Democrats, voter fraud and the great state of Colorado.

Today, March 31, The Hill reported this election scandal:

Republicans on the House Administration Committee want to shore up voter registration rules in the wake of a Colorado study that found as many as 5,000 non-citizens in the state took part in last year’s election. Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.), the panel’s chairman, called the study “a disturbing wake-up call” that should cause every state to review its safeguards to prevent illegal voting. “We simply cannot have an electoral system that allows thousands of non-citizens to violate the law and vote in our elections. We must do more to protect the integrity of our electoral processes,” Harper added. . . . “We know we have a problem here. We don’t know the size of it,” Gessler said in testimony to Administration’s Elections subcommittee.

This is directly related to the Democrat immigration policy. What policy, you say ? And we answer with, "Exactly." Understand that the current Democrat leadership believes in a borderless world . . . . . beginning with our southern border. The plan? To "smuggle" in as many Democrat voters as possible. Look, the world outside of the United States of America is not conservative. Not a shock. American conservatives are very different for even "conservatives" in the rest of the world. Understand that American conservatives are driven by respect for God (at some level) and the Founding Principles recorded in our country's first documents.

This is why Democrats will never push for an immigration policy that does not allow illegals to vote. They know that the great majority of people coming into this country know nothing of the American historical experience and will chose a more politically liberal agenda if tempted by entitlements of some kind at some level. American conservatives had better figure out how to play the game [without compromise, of course] or they will not be a political force a 100 years from now -- if not sooner. This is why the event of each election has its tens of thousands of registration and voter problems. You see, cheating for justifiable reasons is Democrat election strategy.

You cannot make this stuff up: Obama accepts Transparency Award in secret, closed door meeting.

Follow me on this one:

(3/16/11 AP)
According to his public schedule, Obama has four behind-closed-doors meetings from 10 a.m. to 3:05 p.m.: his daily briefing, a talk with the USAID administrator, a session with senior advisers, and a huddle with his defense secretary. All of the meets are in the Oval Office, and all of them are “closed press,” the White House says. But at 2:55 p.m., Obama will emerge to “accept an award from a coalition of good government groups and transparency advocates to recognize ‘his deep commitment to an open and transparent government—of, by, and for the people’ in conjunction with Sunshine Week,” the White House said in guidance to reporters.

Turns out that Obama canceled this meeting and awards presentation. No reason was given. Two weeks later, we have this rather surprising news:

(3/30/11 AP) Obama met secretly in the Oval Office with Gary Bass of OMB Watch, Tom Blanton of the National Security Archive, Danielle Brian of the Project on Government Oversight, Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Patrice McDermott of, without disclosing the meeting on his public schedule or letting photographers or print reporters into the room. On of the participants issued this comment: “Our understanding going into the meeting was that it would have a pool photographer and a print reporter, and it turned out to be a private meeting.”

I am wondering if he will hang this award on the wall next to his Nobel Peace Prize? and I agree on something . . . . passionately agree.

Dear MoveOn member,

According to The New York Times, last year General Electric (GE) made over $14.2 billion in profit, but paid NO federal tax.1 None.

In fact, thanks to the millions GE spent lobbying Congress, we American taxpayers actually owed GE $3.2 billion in tax credits.2

Now GE is slashing health benefits and retirement benefits for new employees among non-union workers and is expected to push unions to accept similar cutbacks3, while its CEO, Jeff Immelt, gets a 100% pay raise.4

What's worse? Immelt now sits as chair of the President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness (Jobs Council), representing corporate America to the President on matters like job creation and corporate taxation. That's a slap in the face to every hardworking, tax-paying American—especially GE employees.

That's why we're teaming up with Russ Feingold and his new group Progressives United today to call for Immelt to go. Will you join the call?

Sign the petition calling for GE CEO Jeff Immelt to step down as chair of the President's Jobs Council.

Turns out that Obama signed off on putting "boots on the ground" in Libya - THREE WEEKS AGO

The headline is not a criticism. Obama has to have people on the ground, in Libya, to guide the air strikes, but, it was never true that our military would not be in Libya. All we ask, is that Obama not pretend otherwise. He does not have to tell us they are there, but he certainly does not have to lie to us, especially after ignoring our congress in making his decision to get involved in the Libyan civil war.

It is always good to save people's lives. It is never good to save the lives of our mortal enemies - and right now, no one can tell us with a straight face that the rebels are only pretending to like America. Next to Iran, Libya has supplied more terrorist into Iraq than any other Arab country.

I don't get it. He goes into Libya without knowing who he is defending. He claims "no boots on the ground" three weeks after authorizing secret ops into the country. Understand that I do not believe the secret ops is just about target guidance. There may very well be "kill teams" on the ground, looking for Gadafi. Know this: if Gadafi survives this military incursion, Obama will be the rest of the year defending himself.

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, but they will probably get the idiot (Gadafi).

He can't do anything right and his approval numbers are confirming his ineptness.


American voters disapprove 48 - 42 percent of the job President Barack Obama is doing and say 50 - 41 percent he does not deserve to be re-elected in 2012, both all-time lows, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to a 46 - 46 percent job approval rating and a 45 - 47 percent split on the President's re-election in a March 3 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University. In a hypothetical 2012 matchup, President Obama gets 36 percent of the vote to 37 percent for an unnamed Republican challenger.

Democrats approve 80 - 13 percent of the job Obama is doing, but disapproval is 81 - 9 percent among Republicans and 50 - 39 percent among independent voters. Men disapprove 52 - 41 percent while women split 44 - 44 percent.

Voters oppose 47 - 41 percent America's involvement in Libya. In the survey concluded Monday evening as President Obama was addressing the nation about Libya, voters say 58 - 29 percent that he has not clearly stated U.S. goals for Libya.

Gallup shows that the public thinks Obama is something of a wimp:

Americans have grown increasingly less likely to view President Obama as a strong and decisive leader since he took office. Roughly half now believe this aptly describes, him compared with 60% a year ago and 73% in April 2009.

The decline in Obama's leadership rating stands in contrast to the stability in the trend for two other personal dimensions. Fifty-seven percent of Americans believe the president understand the problems Americans face in their daily lives, essentially unchanged from 56% in March 2010. And 51% of respondents believe Obama shares their values, similar to 48% last year. Both ratings are down from early 2009.

Altogether, Obama's ratings on being a strong and decisive leader are down a total of 21 percentage points since taking office, compared with a 15-point decline on understanding Americans' daily problems and a 9-point decline in sharing their values. Obama's overall job approval rating declined 16 points over the same time period.

Rasmussen . . .

. . . is in full agreement with Gallup and Quinnipiac showing Obama's number at 43% for the
second consecutive day. More than a year ago, I set "42%" as the new zero in polling for Obama. What I meant by that designation is this: I believe that Obama could not beat his mother-in-law to the post office if he approval number goes below 42%. Seriously, below 42% means that Obama cannot beat any of the Republican hopefuls.

Everything he does complicates his "recovery." Most recently, he is losing on the Libya issue. The fact that he cannot answer any of the policy questions put to him is the current drag on his approval numbers. And if this military effort goes south, well, he is in big trouble.

Let me define "going south." If Qadafi remains in power, the mission will have "gone south.. " If the rebels begin killing , murdering, Qadafi supporters, big problems for the Administration. If the rebels turn out to be controlled and allied with al Qaeda, Obama will be seen as losing two wars, not just Afghanistan. If the message of an Obama acting outside congressional approval, sticks, his numbers will not show any recovery.

It is clear to me, that Obama has reacted to a specific circumstance in Libya, hoping against hope that this effort works out in his favor. He is depending upon L . U. C. K. and nothing more. He has taken an incredible risk (to his presidency); only time will tell us how this will work out.

One thing for certain, if this Libyan business takes months and not days, as Obama promised and/or if we wind up with "boots on the ground," he may not recover not matter what the justification for this idiocy.

Chris Wallace takes on Obama

Turns out that only Fox News asks the tough questions. What does Fox get in return for its bi-partisan hard hitting interview policy? Ignored.


Marco Rubio explains why he will not vote to raise the national debt limit --- a must read.

Americans have built the single greatest nation in all of human history. But America's exceptionalism was not preordained. Every generation has had to confront and solve serious challenges and, because they did, each has left the next better off. Until now.

Our generation's greatest challenge is an economy that isn't growing, alongside a national debt that is. If we fail to confront this, our children will be the first Americans ever to inherit a country worse off than the one their parents were given.

Current federal policies make it harder for job creators to start and grow businesses. Taxes on individuals are complicated and set to rise in less than two years. Corporate taxes will soon be the highest in the industrialized world. Federal agencies torment job creators with an endless string of rules and regulations.

On top of all this, we have an unsustainable national debt. Leaders of both parties have grown our government for decades by spending money we didn't have. To pay for it, they borrowed $4 billion a day, leaving us with today's $14 trillion debt. Half of that debt is held by foreign investors, mostly China. And there is no plan to stop. In fact, President Obama's latest budget request spends more than $46 trillion over the next decade. Under this plan, public debt will equal 87% of our economy in less than 10 years. This will scare away job creators and lead to higher taxes, higher interest rates and greater inflation.

Betting on America used to be a sure thing, but job creators see the warning signs that our leaders ignore. Even the world's largest bond fund, PIMCO, recently dumped its holdings of U.S. debt.

We're therefore at a defining moment in American history. In a few weeks, we will once again reach our legal limit for borrowing, the so-called debt ceiling. The president and others want to raise this limit. They say it is the mature, responsible thing to do.

In fact, it's nothing more than putting off the tough decisions until after the next election. We cannot afford to continue waiting. This may be our last chance to force Washington to tackle the central economic issue of our time.

"Raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure." So said then-Sen. Obama in 2006, when he voted against raising the debt ceiling by less than $800 billion to a new limit of $8.965 trillion. As America's debt now approaches its current $14.29 trillion limit, we are witnessing leadership failure of epic proportions.

I will vote to defeat an increase in the debt limit unless it is the last one we ever authorize and is accompanied by a plan for fundamental tax reform, an overhaul of our regulatory structure, a cut to discretionary spending, a balanced-budget amendment, and reforms to save Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

There is still time to accomplish all this. Rep. Dave Camp has already introduced proposals to lower and simplify our tax rates, close loopholes, and make permanent low rates on capital gains and dividends. Even Mr. Obama has endorsed the idea of lowering our corporate tax rate. Sen. Rand Paul, meanwhile, has a bill that would require an up-or-down vote on "major" regulations, those that cost the economy $100 million or more. And the House has already passed a spending plan this year that lowered discretionary spending by $862 billion over 10 years.

Such reductions are important, but nondefense discretionary spending is a mere 19% of the budget. Focusing on this alone would lead to draconian cuts to essential and legitimate programs. To get our debt under control, we must reform and save our entitlement programs.

No changes should be made to Medicare and Social Security for people who are currently in the system, like my mother. But people decades away from retirement, like me, must accept that reforms are necessary if we want Social Security and Medicare to exist at all by the time we are eligible for them.

Finally, instead of simply raising the debt limit, we should reassure job creators by setting a firm statutory cap on our public debt-to-GDP ratio. A comprehensive plan would wind down our debt to sustainable levels of approximately 60% within a decade and no more than half of the economy shortly thereafter. If Congress fails to meet these debt targets, automatic across-the-board spending reductions should be triggered to close the gap. These public debt caps could go in tandem with a Constitutional balanced budget amendment.

Some say we will go into default if we don't increase the debt limit. But if we simply raise it once again, without a real plan to bring spending under control and get our economy growing, America faces the very real danger of a catastrophic economic crisis.

I know that by writing this, I am inviting political attack. When I proposed reforms to Social Security during my campaign, my opponent spent millions on attack ads designed to frighten seniors. But demagoguery is the last refuge of the spineless politician willing to do anything to win the next election.

Whether they admit it or not, everyone in Washington knows how to solve these problems. What is missing is the political will to do it. I ran for the U.S. Senate because I want my children to inherit what I inherited: the greatest nation in human history. It's not too late. The 21st century can also be the American Century. Our people are ready. Now it's time for their leaders to join them.

Mr. Rubio, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Florida.

Two questions for which we will never hear an answer.

Obama Says ‘Days Are Numbered’ for Qaddafi's Regime to Keep Power in Libya

Tough talk from the former community organizer. Two quetions: first, what in the world did this guy accomplish as a community organizer, anyway?

And, two, since Obama is not targeting Gadafi in this Libyan Intervention, who cares what the morning headline says?

Schumer caught in the act.

Here is the audio of Senator Schumer plotting with other Dems as they, the Dems, pretend to care about the national debt. Of course, Barbara Boxer is one of these phonies. Geeeeesh !!

Scroll down for more on this subject, but, before you do, add this headlined comment to our claim that the Democrats are only pretending to care about cutting spending: Howard Dean: Democrats Should Be ‘Quietly Rooting’ for Shutdown

About Palin's most recent gaff - maybe it is not as important as the Marxist on the Left would have us believe.

Last night on Fox News, Greta van Susteren hosted former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) to discuss what Palin termed the “squirmish” in Libya. True to form, the former governor was reckless with basic facts and casually septupled the cost of U.S. intervention. According to figures released by the Pentagon, the intervention cost $600 million in the first seven days. Palin, however, claimed that the no-fly zone — which, for the record, she called for — cost that amount daily:

PALIN: Yes, that’s — that’s a good question. And that’s the $600 million dollar-a-day question that is being asked now because that’s the cost incurred by Americans as we support the no-fly zone, which, of course, the no-fly zone, the intervention or enactment is turning into more than that.


This comes for the morons at Think Progress. The current talk has the daily cost of the Libyan intervention at $100 million a day. And where does that information come from? Answer: an
Administration bent on proving its war-time value over both the Clinton and Bush Administrations. We all know the tendency of this Administration to lie about such information, but "only if the end game is justified. "

The donut eater at Think Progress has no idea as to the cost of the Libya excursion, but it is safe to say it is more than the current revelations on the subject. Understand that the folks who are figuring the cost in Libya are the same anti-war freaks who inflated the death totals in Iraq and continue to ignore the fact that we have won that war.

Is Palin correct or was that a misstatement? Apparently the Left thinks this is more important an issue than the fact that Obama's coalition is half the number of Bush's, that Obama completely ignored Congress when Bush took 14 months to debate the issue and secure Congressional approval, and, finally, that he (Obama) claimed his authority for the Libyan War from United Nation edict and a One World conscience.

I could not care less for a "Palin mistake," when this country is being seduced from its foundational roots. Palin is right on virtually every issue that I can think of and that is all I care about, with regard to the woman. Let's not forget that Obama doesn't even know how many states on in the United States . . . is it 57 or 58 states, not counting Alaska and Hawaii??

See for yourselves. He went to 57 states "or was it 58" not counting Alaska and Hawaii -- so this Harvard genius apparently thinks there are 60 or is it 61 states in the Union. (Still think he is an American????)


Democrat strategy is exposed in a Schumer conference call. Turns out they never planned on cutting expenses.

Understand that we are in a non-violent (so far) first offerings of the second American civil war. That is clear to me. What comes as some sort of a surprise is the fact that the enemy has been in collusion with others (socialist unions such as SEIU and THE AFL-CIO, the Communist Party, the "major" national media (NBC,CBS, ABC, NY Times, the Washington Post the 400 to 1000 journalist and academics we now call the JournoList, folks such as Bill Ayers, Frances Pivens, Richard Cloward, whoever runs the Democrat Caucus, Senate Democrat leadership such as Charles Schumer and that Rockefeller . . . fella, the Columbia University School of Social Work, the folks behind the Federal Exchange, George Soros and last but not least, Barack Hussein Obama - not to mention hundreds of others) for longer than I have been alive. Anyone remember Joe McCarthy, back in the 50's? Kind of an over the top nutcase who was more right, than wrong, in that "everyone is communist" thing he had going on. Turns out , he was looking in the wrong direction. The enemy was not in Hollywood but in our banks educational/political institutions - far more deeply embedded that McCarthy suspected.

Anywho, this collusion manifested itself just yesterday. In a phone conversation, Senator Chuckie Schumer's conference call is summarized in these words:

After thanking his colleagues — Barbara Boxer of California, Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, Thomas R. Carper of Delaware and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut — for doing the budget bidding for the Senate Democrats, who are facing off against the House Republicans over how to cut spending for the rest of the fiscal year, Mr. Schumer told them to portray John A. Boehner of Ohio, the speaker of the House, as painted into a box by the Tea Party, and to decry the spending cuts that he wants as extreme. “I always use the word extreme,” Mr. Schumer said. “That is what the caucus instructed me to use this week.” (Our source? Understand that we never use right wing sources although we are proud of those sources. It is better, for the sake of argument, if we convict the enemy with its own words, from its own mouth: refer to the NY Times for the source of the above revelation).

What does this mean? It means that the Democrats have no intentions of working out a deal with the GOP. They have conspired to set up the Republicans, hoping to turn the American people against the GOP as it, the GOP, takes seriously the assignment of cutting expenses and moving us away from increasing and crippling debt. "The caucus" told Schumer what to say and how to frame the conservative agenda of cutting expenses. And, we know this , because we have a copy of Schumer talking on the phone. Another interesting source of information on the broad based and long time Left Wing Marxist conspiracy is this site. The author is far from being 100% correct in his suspicions, but he is more right than many want to admit. It is a good place to start your research on the Left Wing one world conspiracy. Begin your search here:

Point of post? To remind the folks that the Democrat Party of today has decided to divide and conquer rather deal with the issues threatening the economy of our country. Understand that rebellion induced by hard times is exactly what this bunch of commies want.

Here is a description of the struggle and violent rebellion we are referencing in the immediate above: taken from Wikipedia:

Marxism is an economic and socio-political worldview that contains within it a political ideology for how to change and improve society by implementing socialism. Originally developed in the early to mid 19th century by two German émigrés living in Britain, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Marxism is based upon a materialist interpretation of history. Taking the idea that social change occurs because of the struggle between different classes within society who are under contradiction one against the other, the Marxist analysis leads to the conclusion that capitalism, the currently dominant form of economic management, leads to the oppression of the proletariat, who not only make up the majority of the world's populace but who also spend their lives working for the benefit of the bourgeoisie, or the wealthy ruling class in society.

To correct this inequality between the bourgeoisie, who are the wealthy minority, and the proletariat, who are the poorer majority, Marxism advocates, and believes in the historical inevitability of, a proletarian revolution, when the proletariat take control of government, and then implement reforms to benefit their class, namely the confiscation of private property which is then taken under state control and run for the benefit of the people rather than for the interests of private profit. Such a system is socialism, although Marxists believe that eventually a socialist society would develop into an entirely classless system, which is known as communism in Marxist thought.

In other words, if I am correct, the Schumers of the world do not care if the US goes into violent revolt, ala what is going on in Wisconsin. They do not care because such conflicts, if allowed to end in victory for the socialists, will result in the death of this country, our United States of America.

If you disagree, it is for one of two reasons: you are either green or mean. You either have not done your homework or you know I am right but you enjoy the lie. That last reality makes you an enemy of the state as a matter of fact. The former reality makes you an enemy of the state by reason of ignorance. In either case, you are either working for the destruction of this country (also known as 'transformation') or you are allowing for its defeat.

You may want to take a look at our page, "Enemies of the State" located at the top of our main page.

Finally, this video of a recent gathering of socialist demonstrators, calling for open rebellion, plays into this post's theme, perfectly. You may not want to believe that people who call themselves "American," would actually favor violent rebellion (ala Wisconsin) as depicted in this video, but there it is and the movement is gaining force.


Midknight Review prints op-ed by Scott Walker the NY Times refused to print. We are adding the NYT to our page, "Enemies of the State."

(March 29,2011): In nearly every state across America, Governors are facing major budget deficits. Many, Democrat and Republican alike, are cutting state aid to schools and other local governments – which will force massive layoffs, massive property tax increases or both.

In Wisconsin, we are doing something progressive in the best sense of the word. We are implementing reforms to protect middle class jobs and middle class taxpayers. While our idea may be a bold political move it is a very modest request of our employees.

We are reforming the bargaining system so our state and local governments can ask employees to contribute 5.8% for pension and 12.6% for health insurance premiums. These reforms will help them balance their budgets. In total, our reforms save local governments more than $700 million each year.

Most workers outside of government would love our proposal. Over the past several months, I have visited numerous factories and small businesses across Wisconsin. On these tours, workers tell me that they pay anywhere from 15% to 50% of their health insurance premium costs. The average middle class worker is paying more than 20% of his or her premium.

Even federal employees pay more than twice what we are asking state and local government workers to pay and most of them don’t have collective bargaining for wages or benefits. These facts beg the question as to why the protesters are in Wisconsin and not in Washington, D.C. By nearly any measure, our requests are quite reasonable.

Beyond helping to balance current and future budgets, our reforms will improve the quality of our governments. No longer will hiring and firing be done solely based on seniority and union contracts. Instead, schools – as well as state and local governments – will be able to make decisions based on merit and performance.

This concept works well in Indiana. In 2005, Governor Mitch Daniels reformed collective bargaining. In turn, the government got more efficient, more effective and more accountable to the public. Governor Daniels even encouraged employees to come forward with ways to save taxpayer dollars and they responded. Eventually, the state was able to reward top performing employees. This is true reform — making government work for the people.

A recent columnist on these pages opined that “common problems deserve common solutions” suggesting that Republicans and Democrats work together. In principle, that is a good idea.

Since January 3rd, we passed some of the most aggressive economic development legislation in the country. And on nearly every measure, many Democrats joined with all of the Republicans and an Independent to vote in favor of the various pieces of legislation. The Wisconsin legislature recognized that we are growing, not Republican or Democratic jobs, but Wisconsin jobs. Together, we worked to show that Wisconsin is open for business.

But sometimes, bi-partisanship is not so good. During several of the past budgets, members of both political parties raided segregated funds, used questionable accounting principles and deferred tough decisions. This, along with the use of billions of dollars worth of one-time federal stimulus money for the budget two years ago, left Wisconsin with the current $3.6 billion deficit.

Our reforms allow us to take a new and better approach. Instead of avoiding the hard decisions and searching for short-term solutions, we make a commitment to the future. The choices we are making now in Wisconsin will make sure our children are not left picking up the pieces of the broken state budget left behind. Our reforms create the lowest structural deficit in recent history ensuring our budget is stable for decades to come. These changes will give businesses the confidence they need to grow and invest in our state.

We live in the greatest nation on earth because for more than 200 years we’ve had leaders who cared more about their children and grandchildren than themselves. Having the courage to make decisions in the best interest of the next generation — despite external pressures — is a concept that America has always admired, but is forgetting today. My hope is that Wisconsin will remind the nation what makes our country great. -- Scott Walker.

Note to fellow conservatives and bloggers: get this op-ed "out there."

Government "shut down" is just around the corner and this time, the people will blame the Democrats who could have passed a budget but did not.

Understand that a CR (Continuing Resolution) is a stop gap measure used, in this case, to open up temporary funding for the government when no budget consideration is available.

In the most inane act of irresponsibility in American history, the 111th Congress, wholly controlled by the Socialist Democrat Party, refused to entertain a budget of any kine -- not even an outline of a 2011 fiscal year budget.

Here is what I say to the GOP: Go for it !! Make the cuts and let the budget "crisis" shutdown the government. After all, we are having this debate, now, because of the irresponsibility of the Dems. The budget should have been past into law six months ago (October 1 of 2010) -- before the midterm elections

This is all -- and I repeat "all" -- the fault of the Dems. They could have passed a budget WITHOUT ANY OPPOSITION from the GOP, before the November midterms.

I firmly do not believe the 2012 election will be lost over this budget crisis. Not at all. But you will hear nothing else but this prediction, at least for next two or three months. As soon as seniors realize their checks will continue to be written; as long as the medicare recipient continues to receive their benefits; as soon as the unemployed see their unemployment checks each month, the folks will not be so harsh on the GOP.

And what remains? Well, first you have the jobs crisis - improving but not nearly what it needs to be. Real unemployment is around 16 %. You have this evolving mess in Libya, complicated by the fact that we do not not know who we are helping to victory. Sure, they are the "rebels," but no one in the Obama Administration thought to ask who these Arab rebels are.
We know al Qaeda is helping the rebels but we do not know to what extent? And then, there is that pesky birther thingy. No one knows where the darn certificate is -- and Democrat pundits have tried to find it, make no mistake. And what if GM fails? Obama has been supporting the company with money taken from who knows where (Fannie Mae?). In the first quarter of 2010, GM announced that it had paid back 6.6 billion dollars "5 years early." Turns out, that is impossible because GM make no money in 2010 or 2009 or 2008, for that matter.

Here is one aspect of the Obama story that is not getting any press: Obama's Administration gets much of its intel on foreign matters from reading the newspaper . . . . seriously. It is a little scary. In Libya, it is more than scary, it is expensive and if "luck" does not roll in Obama's favor, it may cost him his presidency regardless of the budget crisis. He went into Libya with his eyes completely closed - "blind," if you will. And if the budget crisis blows up in the Democrats' face, their chances of winning in 2012 are virtually none existent.

We are turning the Libyan war over to NATO. Guess what?? WE are NATO

Read our headline, again. Don't believe it? Here is the story from those right wing nuts at the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- There may be less than meets the eye to President Barack Obama's statements Monday night that NATO is taking over from the U.S. in Libya and that U.S. action is limited to defending people under attack there by Moammar Gadhafi's forces. In transferring command and control to NATO, the U.S. is turning the reins over to an organization dominated by the U.S., both militarily and politically. In essence, the U.S. runs the show that is taking over running the show.

With Obama, it is nothing but misinformation and outright lies. Here is Obama trying to "have it both ways."

We are every bit as involved in Libya today as we will be at the end of the week - after NATO has "taken over" the command of that war.

And why are we in Libya and not Yemen (where more than a 100 citizens have been killed by their ruler) or in Syria, where thousands have been killed by that countries leadership over the years? Why? Because we are losing the Afghan War and Obama needs a victory.

Obama's popularity as a world leader has shot downward in just 12 months He is bouncing around on the bottom, folks and does not appear to know it.

Remember back in 2008? Obama appeared to be running for President of the World. The Marxist papers, knowing nothing about this angry black man for where ever, hyped his value and even lied about his intellectual credentials (i.e. Editor of the Harvard Law Review - never true; a Constitutional authority but without having written a single paper on the subject, etc.) , all in the hope that Obama would be what he appeared to be. Turns out that nothing of what we saw in this young man was true. He is a fake and fraud and each passing week, proves the point.
And now, this latest report out of the University of Maryland, showing Obama's approval numbers at 16% , down from 51% just 12 months ago. Understand that he has prayed with these people, in their mosques, g them tons of money (1.3 billion to Hamas in Gaza), worked against Jesus Christ, the Christian God (covering the name "Jesus" at the U of Georgetown, before agreeing to deliver a commencement address) , is fighting a war on their behalf (Libya) and refuses to prosecute the New Black Panthers or the Ft Hood murdering Muslim doctor (He killed13 people and wounded 32 others a year ago last November. The case is a slam dunk, what with the fact that he taken down while committing the killings and has 32 first hand witnesses against him. )

Even at home, his numbers are consistently in the 45 - 50 percent range and have been there since August of 2009 . . . pathetic .

Understand that I am thinking the numbers are where they are because most people have already made up their minds concerning this stranger in our White House. I personally believe this will mirror itself in the 2012 election results. Don't forget that he won election by only 7% of the vote , when his approval numbers were 65 to 68 percent. Today, they average 47.5%. Surely that has predictive influences concerning 2012.

We told you so: ACORN is alive and well and everywhere, no thanks to our conservative "watch dog" politicians

ACORN did not go out of existence in 2009, despite claims of conservatives to the contrary. No, indeed. In the midst of the national angst against ACORN and all that talk of defunding ACORN, Obama was busy funding the organization via Fannie/Freddie. On Dec. 24 of 2009, Obama gave carte blanche with regards to Fannie/Freddie funding sources. The two GSE's can borrow as much money as they need and without having to account for the expense of that money. Of course ACORN received a big pay out from the Fannie/Freddie funds, under the housing wing of its organization. That is why we have not heard a word from ACORN about their need for money for well over a year, now. They have no financial needs that we, the taxpayers, are not funding. It is criminal and there is nothing we can do about because the GOP is doing nothing about.

ACORN International (Community Organizations International) is a federation of community based non-profit organizations working in countries around the world. ACORN has affiliate offices in Argentina, Peru, Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Canada, Kenya, Honduras, India and now Egypt and South Korea, working on campaigns as diverse as: affordable housing, living wages, provision of water and sanitation, education, and health care reform.

Understand that ACORN will be used by Obama in the coming 2012 election. It is busy stuffing its coffers with money, in preparation of 2012, bringing in untold amounts of cash from its overseas offices.

Related articles:

No inflation? Sure, if you don't count energy prices or food costs.

Sounds a little crazy, right? Obama tells the nation's senior citizens that they will get no increase in Social Security for the third year in a row, because "costs have not increased."

Really. Energy prices have increased 70% at the pump and 30% in home heating costs, since Obama became Top Dog (emphasis on "dog"). Food costs have also sky-rocketed during the past 12 months due to transportation costs and corn prices. Understand that corn ethanol confiscates 40% of the nation;'s corn crop, each year, driving prices through the roof.

Neither of these cost factors (food and fuel) are figured into official governmental inflation statistics. What an incredible game is being played on the American people.

Obama's domestic policy includes this bit of nonsense: close your eyes to reality and, BAM !!, things are peachy creamy.

Point of post: the dishonesty and opaque tendencies of this Administration are almost overwhelming, boarding on pure fraud. And where is the counter leadership? What in the world is the GOP doing about any of this ? Guess it is time for another election.

Media Matters primary function violates law - pure and simple

Media Matters, the George Soros-backed Marxist protest group, may be function in violation of the law. In fact, I believe that this is the case.

David Brock, MM's founder, has made it clear over the past the two weeks, that his organization is mounting "guerrila warfare and sabotage." Brock, who obviously knows nothing of the conservative grassroots movement, claims that Gox News "is not a news organization. It is the de facto leader of the GOP, and it is long past time that it is treated as such by the media, elected officials and the public.”

To that end, Brock told Politico that MM will “focus on [News Corp. CEO Rupert] Murdoch and trying to disrupt his commercial interests ..." Murdoch is the founder of Fox News and a media titan with newspaper, broadcast, Internet and other media countries around the world.

Understand that Media Matters is registered with the IRS a 501(C)(3) tax-exempt educational foundation. Such status prohibits MM from organizing against any political party or political concern.

MM defends itself by claiming that all they are doing is educating the public as to the true nature of Fox News. But, as is the case with liberal front organizations, this is really a lie. The fact of the matter is found in Media Matter's effort to drive various commercial interests away from Fox News. There is a section in the IRS tax code, defining 501 (c) (3) organizations, that asks, "Do you support or oppose candidates in political campaigns in any way" (section 8, question #1).

In tax documents, MM describes its function as an effort to "notify activists, journalists, pundits and the general public about instances of misinformation, providing them with the resources to rebut false claims and take direct action against offending media institutions." Know this: there is a difference in between offering counter points to conservative opinion and working to drive commercial interests away from whoever. Understand that this bunch of Marxist Misfits is trying to destroy Fox News, as an entity, not just offer opposing educational materials to the supposed Fox propaganda.

You might read the excellent article at Hot Air.

As a side note, this fantasy of "Fox News as the defacto leaders of the GOP," is simply ridiculous. Take it from a true conservative, one of millions and millions, Fox News employs as many libs and moderates as it does conservatives. For example, it paid Geraldine Ferraro as an analysist, Mondale's VP candidate as well as Bob Beckle, Mondale's campaign manager. Then, there is the insufferable Alan Colmes, Kirsten Powers (a well spoken liberal pundit) , Joe Trippi (Howard Dean's campaign manager), Shepard Smith (the Burbon filled know-it-all newscaster with anti-right agenda - two one hour shows per week day for this boob), Juan WIlliams - recently fired from NPR for being a Fox contributor, Mara Liasson (currently employed at NPR and lesbian Lefty with a great reputation for being fair in the expression of her views), Geraldo (with his own weekend show and a flaming liberal commentator) and, most recently, Evan Bayh. Bill O'Reilly is conservative but non-partisan as is Greta van Susteren, each with an hour show during weekday prime-time. Glenn Beck fits into this last category, as well - conservative but not partisan.

Of course, there are conservative pundits - Hannity, Huckabee, Varney, Judge Napolotano, and Sarah Palin to name a few. But that is not the point of this post.

Point of post: to expose Media Matter's illegal activities as a 501 C-3 organization and settle the question as to the fantasy that Fox News is a conservative out-post. It is not and we have proven that point.

Libya - The rebel forces just might come out as victors.

Although we have no clue as to the political leanings of the rebels we are supporting, I personally believe they (the rebels) outnumber government forces and those numbers are growing.

Of course Obama will claim the victory in Libya. After all, that is exactly why he is in that country and not in Syria, or Yemen or North Korea. What might work against Obama is the increasing concern many have for the involvement of Al Qaeda in this civil war. Understand, also, that all involved in this war are Muslims. 70% see America as evil, despite current press releases. In the final analysis, the full story of this military action will not be known for [perhaps] a year or so -- unless, of course, Gadafi comes out on top.

What single factor benefits SUV auto sales? Kids. Yes, "kids." Here is why.

If you are planning on 3 kids or more, you either have to buy two small energy efficient cars or one, larger and safer, truck or SUV. It is that simple.

One of my boys has four kids. They own a Toyota economy car, but have to borrow "grandpa's" car if they want to take the whole family anywhere.

I work with the 5th and 6th grade kids at church. If it weren't for members who own those big, nasty SUVs, we would not be able to take our church kids anywhere.

I used to own a Chevy Silverado. I had to turn off the safety devise on the passenger side of the truck (also known as an "air bag' -- not to be confused with my first wife). Imagine, I had to turn off that safety devised because children have actually been behead by these air bags. Geeeeeesh.

Obama didn't write "Dreams of my Father." We have not academic papers authored by this guy. Heck, we don't even have one of his students . . . . .

Updated text
Ayers affirms he wrote Dreams from my Father

So, he didn't write that book. More than this, he never published any academic papers. There are no lecture notes nor any witness from his students, bragging about his work as a professor. Think about it: why has no one come forward to celebrate the fact they sat in Obama's classes, listened to his wonderful legal analysis and thrilled at his grasp of the founding principles relating to the issues of social justice and redistributive requisites? No one. Not a single student. Why??

His birth certificate? Forget about that !! We don't have anything he wrote in college as a student or a professor. In fact, there was the idea that Obama was Editor of the Harvard Law Review. That floated around for several years until early 2009. Midknight Review was one of several blogs to expose this lie. Not only was Obama never the President of the Review, he never wrote an article for that publication. We have been told that he was teaching professor. Turns out that he taught 3 summer classes for a couple of years. That's it. No papers on Constitutional law, yet he is a billed as a expert on that document.

He is a fake and an impostor. Don't agree? Fine. Prove me wrong. I have already proven my thesis. Time for you to make the counter point.

George Soros plans an all out assualt on FoxNews

Updated version
Here is the headline: SOROS GROUP PLOTS 'GUERILLA WAR', 'SABOTAGE' ON FOXNEWS... What this story fails to mention is that Soros has been at war with Fox News for nearly a decade and is losing ground each and every year.

I am a member of one of Soros's "grassroots" neighborhood functions -- but they think I am a raving liberal. All I had to do to get "in" with this bunch of misfits was to lie about how many women "I have had since being married." I became an instant hero. Sweet.

While I am kidding just a bit about the "lie," I am not kidding about my involvement in the neighborhood meetings. All conservative readers of this blog should sing-up for Media Matters information. They will take it from there. They will help you find a group near you. We conservatives need to use many of the same tactics this bunch of misfits use against us. They infiltrate our functions, but whine when we reverse strategies. In California, these Marxist clowns have even voted in our [conservative - GOP] primaries.

Understand that with the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, millions of dollars can be spent by Big Business to counter the millions of dollars spent by Big Labor. We have listened to Obama and the Dems whine and cry about this decision. What we have not heard is an admission from these folks as to the fact that they collected and spent twice as much money as did the McCain camp. That is not going to be the case in the 2012 election cycle, which begins just nine months from now.

FYI: No more Intervention.

If you have not been paying attention, here is the skinny on the Middle East:

They are not trying to kill Gadafi. If he survives this invasion, the humanitarian war effort will have been a waste of time.

Al Qaeda has joined with the rebels in Libya, at least on some fronts.

The Muslim Brotherhood, responsible for killing Anwar Sadat many years ago (the President of Egypt) , is reportedly "energized" as they participate in the political reorganization that is going on in Egypt.

Gaza has increased its terrorist attacks on Israel and Israel, is threatening a heavy retaliation.

Oil has increased to $106 per 42 gallon barrel of sweet crude, threatening the weak recovery that is going on in our country.

35% of homes are "up-side down" as relates to their equity status with 11% of all homes in this country sitting vacant.

Unemployment remains at 8.9% according to the Department of Labor; 10.2% according to Gallup.

Other than that, things are going pretty darn good.

Here is a preview of what Obama will and will not say tomorrow night

Updated 9:15 am Monday Morning
This video was found at White and seems to be a review of what Obama will present to the nation, tomorrow night. He will underscore the fact that our involvement will be minimal, despite the fact that we have borne the burden of NATO 's financial burden and military might in all other joint military ventures.

He will talk about the UN mandated action in Libya, not understanding that a UN mandate apart from Congressional involvement, is a violation of US law. Understand that we are, first, the United States of America and, then, a member of the UN. The Obama War Doctrine makes Congressional approval unimportant.

It never ceases to amaze me as to the total contempt Obama holds for the people's representative government, circumventing it on every occasion. You would think congressional figures would be at least embarrassed by the fact that, under Obama, congress no longer counts for much of anything but a wiping boy.

Tomorrow night, Obama will not explain "Why Libya and not Yemen or Syria or North Korea."

He will not explain why there is no exit strategy.

To date, there is no defined statement as to the "ultimate success" in the Libyan intervention. Will Obama give us the several military goals embedded in the Obama Libyan civil war intervention?

He will not explain why he promised "Days, not weeks," when, in fact, his generals are talking in terms of months.

He will not explain why he gets to make all the decisions for the United States of America. In other parts of the world , one man rule is called a "dictatorship." Personally, I have never referred to the man as "President" with a capital "P." He has spent the last two years making fun of plumbers, our views on guns and religion and hard working middle class Americans, in general. I see no reason to force him to be my president. He does not want me and "my kind" in the political equation; he wants us to take a back seat to his will and has said so.

And now, we have this video; Obama telling us all why he made this decision, on his own, and in violation of the wars powers act. The Left, recently, is full of the lie that Bush did the same, that he acted unilaterally in Iraq. He "acted alone" if you do not count the 14 month congressional debate we had in this country before going into Iraq. Her acted alone if you do not count overwhelming Congressional approval for the invasion. He acted alone if you do not include the 30 member allied force that participated at various levels in the invasion.

Oh !! , let's not forget that Bush won the Iraq war. Obama has already failed in Afghanistan. THAT is why we are doing Libya. He needs a war-time victory to offset the mess he has made in Afghanistan. Heck, he has already told anyone who bother to listen that he is leaving Afghanistan in four months --- July of 2011 !! Another lie, or is he serious? If he is serious, the war is lost.

Again, Obama needs a win in Libya as cover for the defeat in Afghanistan.

Now, before you listen to the following rhetorical nonsense, let this headline soak in: GATES: Libya Posed No Threat to USA, Was Not 'Vital National Interest' to Intervene... Gates is Barack's Secretary of Defense.

What he is saying is this: there was no other reason for attacking Libya except for humanitarian reasons. That is underscored with the fact that Obama has repeatedly said, "We are not after Gadafi." The problem in this is obvious: if humanitarian concerns were the only expressed reasons for our intervention in Libya's civil war, what about Syria, or Yemen or Darfur? What about North Korea where that idiot kills off his people with regularity?

Anyway, here is your president failing to justify his suspension of Constitutional protocol, talking like the dictator he has become, hoping that he scores some major points with those who no longer care about the foundational principles of this great nation.

I listened to 60 seconds of it before I fell asleep. You might do better.


Wisconsin headline news and alternative news statements

Out of Wisconsin, here is an interesting headline: Collective bargaining law published despite restraining order . It should stand with Wisconsin Legislator's Leave Town In Violation of Wisconsin Law, or Teachers Attend Illegal Strike in Madison.

Or how about this: "The measure sparked protests at the Capitol and lawsuits by opponents because it would eliminate the ability of most public workers to bargain over anything but wages, " and its more accurate rewrite: " The measure sparked protests at the Capitol and lawsuits by opponents because it would eliminate the ability of most public workers to bargain over anything but wages -- similar to the agreement between Federal workers who have no bargaining rights as to benefits, either. "

Point of post: to demonstrate the blatant hypocrisy of the Left when it comes to the Law and their illegal activities. Understand that the posting of the Wisconsin law is . . . . . the law; it has to be posted within 10 days of passage.

The unions involved in the Wisconsin controversy believe it best to require the unwilling workforce to be forced to "join" their unions or sit at home doing nothing; they believe it is reasonable to steal taxpayer money in the name of "union dues" and spend it on causes many taxpayers do not support; they believe it is reasonable to live off the taxpayers of Wisconsin, taking the taxpayer's money and using those funds to buy votes that force the taxpayer to pay more and more into the union coffers.

After adjusting for out of state emails, those for and against the Wisconsin law number 44% for the law and 33% against. In an election, this would be called a landslide victory for Scott Walker and the GOP. The unions are on the wrong side of this issue and don't know it.

Obama announces that Gadafi will survive, if he (Obama) has his way.

Out of the Politico, we have this: President Barack Obama told congressional leaders there are no plans to use the U.S. military to assassinate Libyan strongman Muammar Qadhafi — despite the administration’s policy of seeking regime change in the North African country — according to sources familiar with a Friday White House Situation Room briefing.

Read more:

And with that bit of information, we now have proof that no one really knows what we are doing in Libya except for this: we have dedicated millions of dollars to stopping an announced slaughter in one of Libya's largest cities, only to hope that the rebels, whoever they are, will kill Gadafi for us.

Understand that if we leave Libya without having killed Gadafi or run him out that country, we have only postponed the slaughter. Millions spent for the sake of a postponement. Sweet.

Of course, Obama and the NATO libs running this war may luck out and get what they want, but is that the way of war for the future?

And why are we not talking about having Gadafi arrested and tried as a murderer here, in the United States? He is personally responsible for the killing of hundreds of Americans, yet, Obama and Company apparently find prosecution of those crimes, distasteful.

A Federal tax on the miles you drive each day?

That is what FoxNews is reporting this morning: Fed Looks To Auto Mileage as Source of New Revenue.

Look, years ago, we joked about congress taxing the air we breathe or the miles we drive. We were only kidding. Now, they are pursuing "Cap and Trade" (the air we breathe) and a Federal tax on personal transportation.

Apparently, the current crop of legislators, on both the state and federal levels, believe their job is to come up with new and novel ways of stealing our money. What's next? Well, if we do not put a stop to this idiocy, your 401k will be next. Your home represents another large pool of money (we call it 'equity'). Many Democrats believe that once you are dead, ALL your money should go to the government. The medical industry may become an arm of the Federal government as it is in Canada, charging what it will, ordering the limitation doctor pay and hospital allowances prescribed levels and keeping the remainder for government coffers.

Establishment legislators exist in mass in all political parties. The Democrat Party knows nothing but big spending, but there are plenty of big spenders in the GOP. Here is a fact of life that is undeniable: if you spend more that you make, sasaaay 40% more, you DO NOT HAVE A BUDGET PROBLEM because you don't have a budget. All you have is a wish list and the ability (for a time) to get people to buy into it. Then, folks decide that you are only borrowing more and more money and stop loaning you money.

Understand that making interest payments is not reducing debt.

Take Costa Mesa, California. They have an unionized public workforce of more than 400 workers. And they have a 15 million dollar deficit, this year alone. Much of that debt is the result of union legacy demands. And the union has refused to allow for cuts in their benefit package. Because of this circumstance, the City of Costa Mesa has given 200 pink slips to the city's workforce. Half of these union workers face layoffs because of the kind of selfishness we have seen across the nation, beginning in Wisconsin.

Solution? quantify as many "pools of cash" as you can, and figure out a way of confiscating a portion of those pools.

Or you can actually solve the problem by bring spending in line with total income and go from there.

Of course there is a birth certificate. That's why no one can find it. And now, The Donald would like to see the thing.

Day before yesterday, on the View, The Donald made a point of asking to see Obama's birth certificate. His position is the same as ours, namely, if Obama is a citizen of this country, and we do not claim otherwise, why not present the certificate? The rest of the population has had to present their individual birth certificates from time to time. No big deal, right?

But, for some reason, with Obama it is a big deal.

Chris Matthews, over at the Idiots Station (MSNBC) has asked for the birth certificated, as well.

What these two people have done is to make asking, permissible. Trump and Matthews are hardly "wingnuts" as some count nuts. They would like to see the thing. In fact, they do not understand why Obama will not show the certificate.

Governor Abercrombie, Hawaii, made a big deal of putting the issue to rest when Obama vacationed in Hawaii this past winter. He could not find the document. What got lost in all the hype was the fact that Obama was right there, in Hawaii, while Abercrombie was looking. Sooooo, why in the world didn't Obama go down to the country recorders office and make the revelation, himself ?? And why didn't anyone there, at the time, think this would have been a good idea?

I am 65 and have been lied to by the stinking government so many times, I have lost count . . . and that is just during the past two years. There was JFK and the Feds protecting the mob in that killing. There was that syphilis experiment on some black people back in the 50's. And what about the nuclear testing on several unsuspecting military folks, so many years ago.?

Click on the image to enlarge. This is the document that Obama present to whoever. Guess what? It is laser printed -- back in the 1960's ??

But what about those two newspaper articles announcing his birth? What !! You think they could not have been manufactured? Look, all I know is that when the matter became a question during the 2008 campaign, Obama took time off the campaign trail to visit his sick grandmother, in Hawaii. He took no one in the press corp. There are no pictures of him after he got off the plane. Oh, he went to visit his grandmother. She was quite ill and died soon afterwards. But what about the time between visits? Where was he? And why do we not have any documentation as to his Hawaiian itinerary? Nothing, Not a photo nor a notation. Nothing.

And when he came back, walla, there was this redacted "short form" Obama attempted to pass off as the birth certificate. The number of the document was redacted !!! By whom? The Obama folks. Why would you cover over the number of your birth certificate -- unless that document was fake and the number, if traced, would prove the fakery to be just that, a fake??

Call me crazy but this whole matter stinks to high heaven. Wouldn't it be a pisser if he was a Jamaican, his wife was from England and the two girls belonged to Sarah Palin??

By jove, I think I am onto something.

OOOOPs. At the bottom of the redacted short form it says, "Any alteration invalidates this certificate." Apparently, the document is not even a valid fake.

Re: Libya and the misdirection that is the Obama foreign policy

Here is what we do not know about the Libya Intervention and Obama's foreign policy:

First, we do not know how the decision was made and who, if anyone, advised the Commander in Chief regarding the Libyan intervention.

Is it still regarded as an "intervention?"

We do not know which country is actually directing the air campaign. We are told that this responsibility falls into the hands of the United States, but we have nothing in terms of a specific and detailed explanation on this question. Who is in charge?

How many civilians have been killed as a result of collateral "damage?' We have no clue on this matter, nor do we have pictures showing these casualties. Of course there are such casualties, which raises a question as to the openness of Obama concerning this mission.

Is it, now, an aspect of the Obama Doctrine that international collusion usurps the need for the independent and sovereign will of the United States of America? I have often claimed that Obama is a One Worlder. Why is this intervention not an example of the Obama Doctrine as relates to One World governance?

Why has the Administration singled out Libya to the exclusion of Yemen, Saudia Arabia, Syria, and Bahrain , and the reported inhumanitarian treatment of the citizens of those countries, especially Yemen and Syria? What is our policy as regards "civil rights violations" in foreign lands?

If we are not "regime building" in Libya, what are we doing. specifically?

One would think that after nearly two and half years in office, Obama would have a coherent foreign policy in place, giving us a degree of confidence as to what he might do next. Understand that a specified "doctrine" would serve as a guide line for Obama, himself, a point of reference he could use as he deals with the next crisis and the one following. Without such a document, Obama has to make things up as he goes from one international disaster to another. Not good.

I maintain that we have no such policy because golf (61 trips to the links is more than a months worth of playing that game - a full month of playing games), night time parties at the White House (more than 500 to date), personal appearances and interviews ( more than one thousand, eight hundred or some 16 months of such activity . . . . 16 months of time spent talking out of 26 months in office), and world travels have combined to allow Obama only 9 months of dedicated time to serve as president since January 20th of 2009.

Some will object to the above analysis, arguing that "Obama can walk and chew gum at the same time." But, seriously, are these folks arguing that Obama is on the job, working, while playing golf, playing basketball, attending hundreds of White House parties, while making all those personal appearances?

Look, he has staff that can make those personal appearances. His presidency is one of the most tumultuous in recent history. While much of this is not "his fault," he certainly is the man in charge. The national economic crisis is a full time job, in and of itself. Add to this, the growing threat to this country in the Middle East (or should we say "the Muddled East?") , the threat to our national economy at several levels, and the national debt and you have described a job (the presidency) that is an 18 hour a day effort. There is no way this stranger in our White House averages 3 hours a day of serious, dedicated, focused effort on the above issues.

I should have mentioned this earlier in the post , but I must ask this question, as well. If Saudia Arabia becomes involved in the current Middle East rebellion, gas at the pump could rise to more than $10 per gallon. Likely ?? Not really . . . but there is a chance that this could happen. What is Obama doing about this possibility? I included this specific question because of the grave concern this eventuality poses. Look, should Obama be doing more than crossing fingers and hoping that we never have to face this particular problem? I think so. This single event would bring the economy of our country to a complete stand still. I can think of no greater disaster including a full on war, than this event. And if it were to happen, we would be wholly unprepared while some idiot would be blaming George Bush.

I could go on. The point of this post being the lack of professionalism seen in the present Administration. Obama is the CEO of the largest economic machine in the world, today. It is time for him to move from community organizer to Chief Executive Officer. Can he make that transition?

It is beginning to look as if he cannot. The Peter Principle is at play here, with no better example, I fear, than Barack Obama.

Jim DeMint Is Asking For Our Help

Dear Fellow Conservative:

Over the past couple months in the Senate, I have been asking conservatives across the country to help defeat several vulnerable Democrats, including Kent Conrad (D-ND), Ben Nelson (NE), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Jon Tester (D-MT), and Jim Webb (D-VA). Now, Senators Conrad and Webb have already called it quits.

They're dropping like flies.

These Democrats are retiring because they know there is an army of freedom-loving Americans waiting to do whatever it takes to defeat them at the ballot box. The odds are not in their favor, and they know it.

We've made significant progress, but we have a long way to go if we're going to build a conservative majority in the Senate. We need to keep these Democrats on the run and we need to recruit and fund conservative candidates to replace them.

It's not enough to elect just any Republican. We need courageous leaders who are willing to fight for the principles of freedom that are the backbone of our nation. We need rock-solid, citizen legislators who aren't afraid of the Washington establishment.

Senate Republicans may retake the majority in 2012, but what good will it be if that majority doesn't include the kind of people who will help us take our country back from the career politicians who love to spend other people's money?

I founded the Senate Conservatives Fund to support grassroots, underdog candidates who will stand up to the big spenders in both political parties. It hasn't made me popular in the halls of the Senate, but thanks to the support of thousands of conservative patriots, it's proven to be extremely effective.

Support the Senate Conservatives Fund
Among all leadership PACs, the Senate Conservatives Fund was ranked #1 for raising the most money in the 2010 election cycle. We raised over $9 million and used it to elect Senators Pat Toomey (R-PA), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Lee (R-UT), and Ron Johnson (R-WI).

The Washington establishment said these leaders could not win because they were too conservative. Yet, they won anyway and are now working every day in the Senate to stop President Obama's radical agenda.

We proved the naysayers wrong last year and we can do it again with your help.

That's why I'm writing to ask you to make a contribution to the Senate Conservatives Fund today. We want to force even more Democrats into early retirement and replace them with the strongest conservative leaders in the nation.

To do this, we need your help to raise $500,000 by the end of March. This will help us deliver the knock-out punch to the liberals in the Senate who are destroying our country. Here's exactly what we need to reach our goal:
  • 2,000 people to contribute $50
  • 1,000 people to contribute $100
  • 500 people to contribute $250
  • 250 people to contribute $500
  • 50 people to contribute $1,000
Support the Senate Conservatives Fund
I know this is a lot to ask and if you're not in a place to contribute, please sign up for our email updates so you can stay informed and keep us in your prayers. But if you can contribute, I'm confident it will have a major impact on the direction of country for generations to come.

You see, the Senate Conservatives Fund only supports proven conservatives. We don't endorse incumbents and we don't support wishy-washy politicians who are Republicans in name only (RINOs). We work to elect new leaders who are committed to join the fight, not the Senate club. In order to win our support, candidates have to pledge to:
  • Support the Balanced Budget Amendment
  • Oppose all earmarks
  • Repeal ObamaCare
  • Stop all tax increases
  • Oppose amnesty and secure our borders
  • Defend the 2nd Amendment
  • Protect the unborn
  • Support term limits for Congressmen and Senators
The Senate Conservatives Fund is not affiliated with the Republican Party or any of its campaign committees. It's an independent organization that puts principle ahead of party.

Our nation is at a breaking point and we absolutely must win more conservative victories in the Senate if we're going to save the country we know and love. And I'm confident there is no better way to achieve those victories than by supporting the Senate Conservatives Fund.

Thank you for considering my request. Together, we can take our country back.


Jim DeMint
United States Senator
Chairman, Senate Conservatives Fund

P.S. SCF was recently ranked #1 in the nation among all leadership PACs. We raised more money than anyone else and invested it in electing true conservative leaders. We did it because of thousands of freedom-loving Americans like you were willing to sacrifice to save their country. Please help us continue our fight for the principles of freedom by making a contribution to SCF today.

Obama needs Indpendents to win in 2012. They hate the Libyan Intervension

Gallup tells us that the overall approval for the Libya War, at 47%, is the lowest rating favoring a military action, since and including 1983 and the Grenada incursion under Reagan.

What is even worse news for Obama is the fact that Independents hate the idea. Understand that the coming election will be won or lost within the Independent voting block.

Maybe it is the strategy they hate . . . . . . as in "what strategy." To argue for "humane intervention," protecting Libyans from their leader, and, then, to leave after 10 days (or so) without taking that despot out of existence, is as convoluted as a policy can get. In other words, maybe Independents do not care for the lack of definition as to the Libyan mission, its exit strategy, its standard for determining success and Obama's run-around Congress.

Turns out that Obama had made his decision to intervene in Libya at least three days before calling 18 members of Congress to the White House to inform them of same. No conference. No asking for advice. Just a meeting to inform. After his announcement, we are told that Obama excused himself from the meeting in order to finish preparing for his trip to Brazil. It is my understanding that this infuriated Congressional leadership.

The Marxist Libs make Gingrich "the confused one," rather than their own president.

In response to a Marxist blogger bent on finding someone who flip-flops more than Obama, Newt Gingrich finds it necessary to set the record straight. The blogger, a donut eater named George Zornick at ThinkProgress: , made the charge yesterday. After Newt's response, Zornick called the response "incoherent and contradictory," you know, kind of like Obama's stated policy on Libya. Understand that Zornick, not to be confused with the Great Carnack, is desperate to make his president appear resolved and predetermined. It is not Gingrich who is confused. It is Obama.

In short, Gingrich's position is/was that he would not have gotten involved, militarily, in Libya. But after the leader of the free world made a public announcement that "Gadafi must go," the military option became the only option.

According to Obama, we are done with the event come this weekend. And if Gadafi is still in power, well, he wins. It is that simple. Bill O'Reilly, Fox News, defended Obama yesterday by arguing that Obama had stopped a certain slaughter of innocents with the intervention. But, if we leave off the intervention, and Gadafi continues to murder his own people, what is the sense in that? O'Reilly might see an ultimate upside, I don't.

In fact, Obama has announced the end of the mission. Its this weekend. If that holds out to be true, Gadafi needs only to hunker down and wait for the Great Black Hope to vacate the region, and (again), he wins.

On his facebook, Newt writes:

. . . . . . I made this point on The Today Show this morning, saying “I would not have intervened…there were a lot of other ways to affect Gaddafi…I would not have used American and European forces.”

The president, however, took those options off the table with his public statement. From the moment of the president’s declaration, he put the prestige and authority of the United States on the line. After March 3, anything short of a successful, public campaign for regime change would have been seen as a defeat for the United States.

That’s why during a March 7th Greta van Susteren interview, I asserted that the president should establish a no-fly zone "this evening.” After March 3rd, the President should have moved immediately to consult with Congress to implement a no-fly zone, while also making it clear the US would welcome involvement from other nations.

Instead, he did the opposite. The President wasted weeks trying to get approval from the United Nations instead of Congress, the result of which was a weak mandate from the UN that changed the mission to one of humanitarian intervention.

Yet, by that standard we should also be using US forces in the Sudan, Syria, Zimbabwe, Yemen and more countries. . . . . .

Now that we have US forces engaged, any result less than the removal of Gadaffi from power will be considered a defeat.

For that reason, I believe we must support the mission and see it through.

Nothing confusing about any of this from Gingrich. Nothing but confusion from Obama.

Dems fear Supreme Court rejection of ObamaCAre. Here's proof:

Here is part of a report from TPM.

>>This is more in the spirit of partypooping than of celebration. But on the first anniversary of the Affordable Care Act, one of the law's most dogged defenders, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), admitted he thinks the Supreme Court will strike down the individual mandate. It's not that he thinks the mandate is unconstitutional, but that the court has become so partisan, that its conservative justices will rule against President Obama in a 5-4 decision. He wasn't glum about it, though -- if the mandate goes he said it will pave the way for Congress to pass the public option. <<

And with that, we have a perfect example of the degree of brain damage one can have and remain rhetorically lucent. Apparently Weiner has not been paying any attention at all, since his party took a historic and monumental butt kicking, last November. There will be no "public option" in his lifetime. The Obama agenda, whatever that is, is dead, even if he wins in 2012.

What is important, here, is the admission by Weiner that the Democrat feeling concerning the future of ObamaCare is bleak and discouraged.

This is why Obama has decided to stall the Supreme Court's decision for as long as he can. Rather than truly caring about the financial health of this great nation, Obama is willing to sell it down the river for the sake of partisan gain and the trivialities of an empty suit. He grows more disgusting with the simple consequence of the passing of time.

Can't we just ask him to quit?

Obama thinking about appointing another proven Incompetent. We have Annita Dunn, Eric Holder, Van Jones, Cass Sunstein and now . . . . .

Obama is now considering appointing Jamie Gorelick as head of the FBI.

Gorelick served as vice chairman of the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) when the government-sponsored enterprise began bundling subprime loans into securitized financial instruments. Prior to that, she served as deputy attorney general in the Clinton Justice Department under then-Attorney General Janet Reno from 1994 to 1997. Understand that she played a role in the sub-prime scandal and worked under one of the incompetent Attorney Generals of all time.

Here is the real problem: Gorelick is perhaps best known for her 1995 memo, written when she was deputy attorney general, that later became known as “Gorelick’s Wall,” a policy prescription limiting the flow of information between intelligence gatherers and criminal investigators that some believe helped allow the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center to go unchallenged. In fact, if an American can be accused of sharing a degree of blame for 9/11, it is this woman. Information was intercepted by different intelligent agencies about the pending 9/11 strike. It was her idiot policy, one that has since been taken down, that prevented this flow of critical information. She is an idealist Marxist style Liberal and needs to be run out of the intelligence community all together. She is dangerous to this country and that is a proven fact.

If she becomes FBI director, we will be less safe as a nation as a result of Gorelick's idealism. It amazes me as to the scope of Obama's incompetence. It is shocking and thoroughly disconcerting. Source of some of the text in this report: :

End notes:

1. Here is a report regarding Gorelick written by Andrew McCarthy, the man who prosecuted the blind shiek in 1995.

2. This 2004 article is a telling summary of a stubborn Gorelick, unwilling to accept responsibility for her contribution to 9/11 - something that makes her a dangerous addition to the Obama Administration.