Sunday, July 29, 2012

George Will and Dana Loesch School Donna Brazile and Ruth Marcus on Obama's 'You Didn't Build That' ^ | July 29, 2012 | Noel Shepperd

For the past two weeks Barack Obama's media minions have been working overtime trying to convince the American people the President was taken out of context during his now infamous "You Didn't Build That" speech in Roanoke, Virginia.

CNN's Donna Brazile and the Washington Post's Ruth Marcus tried making that pathetic claim on ABC's This Week Sunday only to receive a much-needed education from George Will and's Dana Loesch (video follows with transcript and commentary):
George Will and Dana Loesch School Donna Brazile and Ruth Marcus on Obama's 'You Didn't Build That'

DANA LOESCH, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR BREITBART.COM: And -- and you want to talk about gaffes. Here we have 41 straight months of unemployment that's been over 8 percent, which was -- the stimulus was supposed to have fixed. In terms of gaffes, it's not good to have the president get up in front of people during an election cycle and say, well, if you have a small business, you didn't built that, or as some have tried to say, oh, he took -- the Republicans took something out of context. He was talking about the Clinton tax plan, which really actually in context it's even worse, because he really was referring to his own plan, and the Clinton tax plan, we could -- we could get into... (CROSSTALK)
LOESCH: ... the '97 tax cuts and everything else.
LOESCH: Yes, I did...
DONNA BRAZILE, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: As a small-business person, what he was saying...
LOESCH: Oh, I know...
BRAZILE: ... is that if you have a -- if you rely on roads and bridges and skilled workforce...
LOESCH: ... don't build businesses. It's the other way around, though.
BRAZILE: ... public education, that we are together, business and government, we have to have a partnership.
BRAZILE: That was the context.
RUTH MARCUS, WASHINGTON POST: It was completely taken out of context.
LOESCH: It was not taken out of context.
MARCUS: It was completely taken out of context...
BRAZILE: It was.
MARCUS: ... but it matters because it falls into this pre-existing narrative, which is very powerful among people, that the president doesn't get business in general, and small business in particular. And that's why...
LOESCH: It was in context completely.
GEORGE WILL: I have a question for my friend, Donna. This president is...
BRAZILE: ... when you say that, my friend.
MARCUS: ... need to be nervous.

WILL: We're told that the president is the brightest president since Madison, the best educated president since John Quincy Adams, and the most articulate president -- politician since Pericles. Why does he spend so much time explaining what he actually meant?
LOESCH: Right. When you're explaining, you're losing.
Game, set, match Will and Loesch.
Bravo and brava!

White House admits it did return Winston Churchill bust to Britain ^

Barack Obama's White House has been forced to admit that it did return a bust of Sir Winston Churchill to British diplomats, after describing such claims as "100 per cent false".

Aides to Mr Obama were furious after The Daily Telegraph disclosed last week that Mitt Romney planned to restore the Jacob Epstein sculpture to its home under George W Bush from 2001 to 2009.
"I'm looking forward to the bust of Winston Churchill being in the Oval Office again," the Republican challenger confirmed at a fund-raiser at London's Mandarin Oriental hotel.

Dan Pfeiffer, the President's communications director, said in a statement that widespread reports of the bust being returned to Britain's embassy in Washington as Mr Obama took office were untrue.
"This is 100 per cent false," Mr Pfeiffer said. "The bust is still in the White House. In the Residence. Outside the Treaty Room". Illustrating his statement with a photograph of Mr Obama inspecting it with David Cameron in 2010, he added: "Hopefully this clears things up a bit and prevents folks from making this ridiculous claim again".

British officials were surprised by Mr Pfeiffer's statement and photograph, however, because the bust now resides in the residence of Sir Peter Westmacott, Britain's ambassador to the US. Further inquiries led to the discovery that there are, in fact, two matching Churchill busts by Epstein.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Billy Graham Says His Heart Aches for 'Deceived' America

Christian Post ^ | 07/29/2012 | By Stoyan Zaimov

The Rev. Billy Graham has posted a new prayer letter on his website where he addresses the people of the nation and tells them he is very much afraid of the damage that the American lifestyle is doing in the eyes of the Lord.

The 93-year-old evangelist begins his letter by recalling an incident a few years ago when his wife, Ruth, who has since passed away, remarked that "If God doesn't punish America, He'll have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah," referring to the cities in the Old Testament destroyed for the sinful nature of their residents.

"I wonder what Ruth would think of America if she were alive today. In the years since she made that remark, millions of babies have been aborted and our nation seems largely unconcerned. Self-centered indulgence, pride, and a lack of shame over sin are now emblems of the American lifestyle," Graham remarks.
The pastor then goes on to refer to several other incidents in recent times where he sees the American government and American society as a whole coming down on Christians – including instances where chaplains who serve the police department have been told to no longer say the name of Jesus during prayer.
"Our society strives to avoid any possibility of offending anyone – except God," Graham says. "Yet the farther we get from God, the more the world spirals out of control."
"My heart aches for America and its deceived people," Graham continues. "The wonderful news is that our Lord is a God of mercy, and He responds to repentance. In Jonah's day, Nineveh was the lone world superpower – wealthy, unconcerned, and self-centered. When the Prophet Jonah finally traveled to Nineveh and proclaimed God's warning, people heard and repented."
Despite the critical condition he sees America in today, Graham shared that he still sees hope in the future, and believes that the people still have a chance to repent and change their ways. Sharing of future plans for his ministry, he described a project his son Franklin Graham will be working on – launching an outreach called "My Hope with Billy Graham," which has the mission to bring the Gospel into every neighborhood in America next year. The outreach effort has already reached more than 50 countries around the world.
"We've worked in close partnership with local churches across each country, and those churches have reported millions of life-changing decisions for Christ. Carrying out a nationwide American version of this evangelistic outreach will be an enormous undertaking, but in my spirit I know God has called us to do this, and I pray He will stir your heart to join us in prayer and support," Graham explained.
Sharing of his summer activities, the preacher noted that he is enjoying visits from his family and grandchildren, but that he is also working hard on a new book that outlines the path toward eternal salvation so that the world can wake up to what the Bible says.
"Although age and health restrict my mobility and my stamina, not to mention my eyesight and hearing, I am thankful for the days God has given me, and I am humbled by His continued hand of favor on the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. The Lord draws people to Himself daily through BGEA's various evangelistic ministries, and I am so deeply grateful," Graham concluded.

Obama Defends Siccing Auditors on Political Opponents!

Semi-News/Semi-Satire ^ | 28 July 2012 | John Semmens

Reports that Romney donors may be subject to special audits by federal agencies were brushed off as “no big deal” by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner this past week. One targeted businessman, Frank VanderSloot, says that since donating a million dollars to presidential candidate Mitt Romney he has been notified by both the IRS and the Department of Labor that they will be looking into his records.

“I don’t know what VanderSloot is so worked up about,” Geithner said. “Using federal agencies to put some heat on those opposing the President has a long tradition in American politics. FDR did it. LBJ did it. Nixon did it. You can’t blame President Obama for exploiting every asset he has to protect himself from his enemies.”

VanderSloot’s confidence that his company will pass the audits didn’t faze Geithner. “Either way, he still has to endure the burdens of compliance,” Geithner observed. “That’s extra time and money coming out of his pocket. It also serves as an example to others who might be contemplating aligning themselves with those trying to oust the President from office.”

if you missed any of this week's other semi-news posts you can find them at...

The 14th Victim at Fort Hood

American Thinker ^ | July 29, 2012 | Ken Blackwell

I have written recently of President Obama's "covert zeal" for the spread of abortion. I took that phrase from Abraham Lincoln's description of how President Franklin Pierce and Sen. Stephen A. Douglas sought -- covertly -- to spread slavery in the 1850s. In that column, I noted specific actions of this president to advance abortion-on-demand and to force us all to pay for it.

Now, I want to focus on something Mr. Obama is not doing. He is not charging Nidal Hasan, the accused Fort Hood killer, with violation of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (UVVA). This law was passed and signed in 2004. After the highly publicized conviction of Scott Peterson in California for the murder of his wife and her unborn child, the law was named the Laci and Conner Peterson Unborn Victims of Violence Act.
There would seem to be no possibility of controversy in charging Hasan with violating the UVVA. After all, it is indisputable that one of those killed was pregnant at the time of her death. Nor did the mother, Army Private Francheska Velez, contemplate an abortion. There would be no question of her exercising "choice" in this matter. In fact, her last words, most poignantly reported, were: "My baby! my baby!"
It was for just such heinous crimes that the UVVA was passed. It covers only those instances where a crime of violence is committed on federal property, or where other crimes covered by the federal code are being committed.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Rasmussen: Romney has same lead, same day that Obama had in '08! ^ | July 28, 2012 | Patrick Hobin

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama led his Republican rival John McCain by 49 percent to 44 in a Rasmussen Reports daily tracking poll released on July 27, 2008.

Fast forward four years and the GOP's Mitt Romney is holding the exact same lead on the exact same day in the exact same poll, Business Insider points out.

Romney’s five-point lead is the largest by either candidate in just over a month and the numbers closely mirror the 49 to 43 percent advantage Romney has on who voters trust more to handle the economy.
Just 31 percent of likely voters think Obama is doing a good or excellent job handling economic issues, with 48 percent saying he’s doing a poor job on the economy. This comes as consumer confidence fell to a 2012 low this week and the government reported slowing GDP growth.
For June, Obama’s job approval rating was at 47 percent, down two points from May and staying in the narrow range of 47 to 49 percent since the beginning of 2012, according to the Rasmussen poll. In January 2009, 62 percent of voters approved of Obama’s job performance.
Rasmussen said that for Obama to win, “he will need to improve his own job approval rating between now and Election Day. For that to happen, perceptions of the economy will have to reverse their current downward trend.”
The Rasmussen poll also showed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remains the most liked member of Obama’s Cabinet, with 53 percent of likely voters having a favorable opinion of her.
Attorney General Eric Holder is the least-liked Cabinet member, with 47 percent of voters who have an unfavorable opinion of him.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Race Card Cometh Yet Again ^ | July 29, 2012 | Derek Hunter

Political pundits often refer to the time we’re in now – a few weeks out from an election – as the “silly season.”

It’s a time for obsessing over gaffes real and perceived, faux outrage over harmless statements and a general sense of desperation on the part of one candidate or perhaps both. This cycle’s silly season started early, which is to be expected when the challenging party picks its nominee early and the incumbent party has no record of success to promote. But that early start means we sometimes run out of “silly” early and head straight to desperate – and absurd.

Virginia State Sen. Louise Lucas, a Democrat from Portsmouth, already has run out of silly. An official representative of the Obama 2012 campaign, a member of its “Truth Team,” no less, Sen. Lucas went on the John Fredericks Show in Virginia to discuss the presidential election and went off the rails. If you support Mitt Romney, she said on the air, you’re a racist.

Usually, leftists play the race card a little closer to the vest. They slip it into the game subtly, through hints and occasional one-liners. But not Sen. Lucas. She pulled it right out … early … and tossed it into the middle of the table.

“What I am saying to you is Mitt Romney, he's speaking to a segment of the population, who does not like to see people other than a White man in a White House or any other elected position,” she said.

But she wasn’t done. She continued, “Let's be real clear about it... let's be real clear Mitt Romney is speaking to a group of people out there who don't like folks like Barack Obama in any elected or leadership position. We know what's going on here, and some people may be afraid to say it but I am not. I am not afraid to say it.”

She was “real clear,” all right … but only about her own bigotry and ignorance.

Lovely, right? The Obama “Truth Team” has yet to condemn this statement from an officially sanctioned campaign spokesman.

In 2003, then-Sen. Hillary Clinton said, “I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration.” Aside from the fact no one had suggested she couldn’t debate or disagree with the administration, she was absolutely right. But don’t tell that to Sen. Lucas.

According to Sen. Lucas, “All the folks who are saying 'We don't like Barack Obama' they can't tell you any reason they don't…”

No reason? None at all? How about three years of unemployment above 8 percent every month and growth below 3 percent every quarter? Or the $5 trillion in new debt, ObamaCare or recess appointments when Congress wasn’t in recess? I could go on, but to Sen. Lucas, I’ve already gone too far. I’m a racist. I wonder if my opposing President Clinton makes me a redneck-ist. Or my opposition to President Bush’s Medicare prescription drug program makes me a…actually, there isn’t a word for people who oppose things Republicans propose because the people with the hair-trigger to name-call all oppose Republicans. Weird.

Senator Lucas is mad – about what or at whom I have no idea. But she’s happy about one thing – she’s managed to pollute her children’s minds with her sickness. She told Fredericks, “I absolutely believe it's all about race, and for the first time I've convinced my children finally that racism is alive and well.”

Great mom, eh?

When asked “Even in Virginia?” she replied, “In Virginia? How about all across this nation. And especially in Virginia!”

I guess she, a black woman, was elected by a bunch of racists. And I guess President Obama carried Virginia in 2008 because all the racists there forgot they were racists for a while.

Or maybe, just maybe, this country isn’t a racist country. This is where I add the caveat that racism still exists, in people of all colors, but in smaller numbers all the time. Progressives would like people to believe we’re a nation full of Mississippi Democrats from the 1950s, but we’re not.

Criticism of – and dislike for – the policies of a president who happens to be black does not a Klansman make.

Nor does judging the President by the standard he set for himself when he said in 2009, “I will be held accountable. I’ve got four years….A year from now, I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress, but there’s still going to be some pain out there. If I don’t have this done in three years, then this is going to be a one-term proposition.”

It’s not “done” in any sense – not even close. Every piece of economic data suggests it hasn’t even started in the direction of being “done.” But don’t tell that to Sen Lucas, lest she call Barack Obama a racist.

Athletes Yes, Business Owners No! ^ | July 29, 2012 | Austin Hill

Why is it okay to be a successful athlete, but not a successful business owner?

It’s been nearly two weeks since President Obama delivered his now famous “Roanoke rant,” wherein he noted to entrepreneurs that, among other things, “if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

Apparently the president’s spiteand vitriol for business owners isn’t playing so well with voters. By the middle of last week, the Obama campaign was doing damage control with a new video advertisement explaining that the President had just been “taken out of context,” and he actually loves business owners.
But watch the “full context” of the Roanoke speech, and it becomes even clearer that the President was once again speaking the language of collectivist economics. While assuming the absolute worst about the motives of business owners, President Obama was again suggesting that wealth creation and material success are neither to be attributed to, nor enjoyed by individuals – only the collective masses can take credit for such successes, and we should all collectively share in the blessings of one-another’s wealth.
Call it socialism, call it Marxism, call it what you like. The president has made it clear throughout his professional life that he loathes the economic success of individual companies and business owners (unless, of course, such business owners are donating to his campaign), and regards their financial achievements as ill-gotten gain.
But would you ever expect the President of the United States – even President Barack Obama – to apply this kind of thinking to athletes? And after the U.S. Olympic Athletes return home from London, will the President invite them to the White House and lecture them on how “somebody else made it happen?”
It’s unlikely that President Obama would treat the Olympic competitors with the disdain that he shows to business owners. And if his recent treatment of a certain women’s college basketball team is any indication, then the U.S. Olympic athletes may be in for a real treat.
Two days after his “you didn’t do that” speech about business owners, the Baylor University women’s basketball team was welcomed to the White House for some time with President Obama. Speaking before the media, with the “Lady Bears of Baylor” standing on a platform behind him, the President recognized the achievements of the coaching staff, and then stated that “If there’s one thing to describe this team…it was dominant. Last season, the Lady Bears scored more points than any team in women’s college basketball history…”
Never did the President suggest that being “dominant” was problematic for the basketball team members. Likewise the President didn’t suggest that being the scoring leader was a selfish or greedy type of pursuit, or that the points were accrued by some sort of corrupt means. The President made it clear that the Lady Bears were number one, and they deserved to be recognized as such.
And might there have been some government-sponsored underpinning to the ladies’ success that the President could have noted? No doubt some of the Lady Bears are attending Baylor University with scholarship funds, some of which are probably generated from private donors and others provided by government agencies.
Yet President Obama didn’t single-out any financial aid recipients and tell them “you didn’t get here on your own,” nor did he bother to remind the players that they didn’t build the courts that they play on. Instead, President Obama chose not to malign the basketball players and coaches at all, but rather gave them high praise for their success.
In America we recognized the value of challenge – not just on the court or playing field, but in business as well. When everyone plays by the same rules, competition can develop human character, produce great products and services – and put lots of points on the scoreboard.
After the London games, our U.S. Olympic Athletes will likely get the “Lady Bear” treatment at the White House. But it is a disgrace that the President of the United States can’t understand the virtues of market competition, the way he understands the benefits of sports.

NAACP leader sent to prison for ten counts of voter fraud! (NAACP against voter ID!)

The Daily Caller ^ | 29 July 2012 | Matthew Vadum

While NAACP President Benjamin Jealous lashed out at new state laws requiring photo ID for voting, an NAACP executive sits in prison, sentenced for carrying out a massive voter fraud scheme.

In a story ignored by the national media, in April a Tunica County, Miss., jury convicted NAACP official Lessadolla Sowers on 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots. Sowers is identified on an NAACP website as a member of the Tunica County NAACP Executive Committee.

Sowers received a five-year prison term for each of the 10 counts, but Circuit Court Judge Charles Webster permitted Sowers to serve those terms concurrently, according to the Tunica Times, the only media outlet to cover the sentencing.
“This crime cuts against the fabric of our free society,” Judge Webster said.
Sowers was found guilty of voting in the names of Carrie Collins, Walter Howard, Sheena Shelton, Alberta Pickett, Draper Cotton and Eddie Davis. She was also convicted of voting in the names of four dead persons: James L. Young, Dora Price, Dorothy Harris, and David Ross.
In the trial, forensic scientist Bo Scales testified that Sowers’s DNA was found on the inner seals of five envelopes containing absentee ballots.
This wasn’t Sowers’s first run-in with the law. Sowers previously had her probation revoked for disturbing the peace at a junior high school library, the Commercial Appeal of Memphis reported in 1990. During a hearing at that time, Sowers played the race card. She claimed to be the victim of “an attempt by powerful whites to silence” her, the newspaper reported. It didn’t work. She was ordered back to prison to complete the remaining two years of a three-year sentence she received for check forgery.
The NAACP has had other problems with voter fraud. The NAACP National Voter Fund registered a dead man to vote in Lake County, Ohio, in 2004. That same year, out of 325 voter registration cards filed by the NAACP in Cleveland, 48 were flagged as fraudulent.
But the NAACP’s voter fraud record doesn’t approach that of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. At least 54 individuals employed by or associated with ACORN have been convicted of voter fraud.
Voter fraud, sometimes called electoral fraud, is a blanket term used by lawyers that encompasses a host of election-related improprieties including fraudulent voting, voter registration fraud, perjury, forgery, counterfeiting, impersonation, intimidation, and identity fraud.
And ACORN, which filed for bankruptcy last November, was itself convicted of voter fraud in Nevada in April. Sentencing is scheduled for Aug. 10 in Las Vegas. ACORN was also banished from Ohio in 2010 when it settled a state racketeering filed against it by the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law, a project of the Buckeye Institute. Under the settlement ACORN, which is now reorganizing its state chapters under different names, agreed never to return to the state.
Election experts say voter fraud is fairly common, but progressive activists typically insist that the crime is virtually nonexistent. Republicans, they say, routinely exaggerate claims of voter fraud in order to whip their political base into a frenzy and push for voter ID laws. Liberals say such laws are unfair, and claim that they discourage minorities and the poor from voting.
The NAACP’s Jealous said Monday at the group’s 102nd annual convention in Los Angeles that photo ID laws are part of an attempt to disenfranchise minorities through some “of the last existing legal pillars of Jim Crow.” Such laws stem from “the worst and most racist elements” in conservative Tea Party groups, he said.
Stephen Colbert, the liberal comedian who portrays an overbearing conservative Republican on his cable TV show “The Colbert Report,” broadcast a segment this week ridiculing Republicans for treating voter fraud as a serious problem.
Some Democrats, however, aren’t laughing. The office of District Attorney Brenda F. Mitchell, a registered Democrat who serves Mississippi’s 11th Circuit Court District, successfully prosecuted Sowers. Mitchell was appointed to the post by Republican Gov. Haley Barbour in January 2010 after the previous DA resigned. She’s now seeking the Democratic nomination for the office in a primary election scheduled for Aug. 2.
Mitchell doesn’t appear to be a conservative. She served as a legal consultant to the far-left, New York-based public interest law firm the Center for Constitutional Rights. That firm represented ACORN in an ultimately unsuccessful lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a federal law defunding the activist group. Mitchell didn’t return calls seeking comment for this article.
U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota Democrat, is also no conservative. But she won a conviction against Joshua Reed for voter registration fraud in 2004 when she was the Hennepin County, Minn. Prosecutor.
“It was very important for the public integrity of our electoral system that somebody, if they do something like this, gets charged, gets convicted and gets consequences,” Klobuchar said at the time.
Democrats, including Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto, Pittsburgh District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr., and Miami, Fla., State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle, have all vigorously prosecuted voter fraud cases.
Matthew Vadum is a senior editor at Capital Research Center, a Washington, D.C. think tank. Vadum’s book, Subversion Inc., was published in 2011.
Read more:

Stop Worrying About “Peak Oil”

Principles & Policy ^ | July 28th, 2012

For decades, the threat of “peak oil” has hung over policymakers of the developed world. The basic premise of peak oil is simple and difficult to argue with: At a certain point, we’ll extract as much petroleum as possible, and after that “peak,” our rate of extraction will inevitably decline. Since it takes so long for petroleum to develop naturally, there’s for all intents and purposes a finite amount of it on Earth. So, our rate of extraction can’t possibly continue rising forever. At some point, we will hit peak oil.
Of course, that’s not the whole theory. Nearly all peak oil theorists argue that following peak oil, chaos will erupt. As so many of our energy needs and products in the developed world rely on the energy produced from petroleum, an inexorable decline in its supply will wreak havoc on our society. This declining supply combined with the rising demand for oil will lead to higher and higher prices. Now, they’re not arguing that the exact moment we hit peak oil will immediately devastate our society or something along those lines. In fact, many don’t consider the actual timing of peak oil to be very important.
However, most do believe that the negative consequences of declining oil production associated with peak oil will rapidly become severe, as the rising price of oil will impact every sector of the economy. Modern peak oil theorists grant that the rising price of oil may occasionally dip as new discoveries are found and more efficient technologies are invented, but they don’t consider either of these periodic drops in the price of oil very important in the long-run. Finally, they argue that peak oil is right around the corner. Are they correct?
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obama gave tax money to campaign donors, then falsely claimed it was for "green energy"! ^

Number 25 on a very long list of Obama's misdeeds:

The Obama administration gave $535 million to Solyndra, claiming that it would create 4,000 new jobs. However, instead of creating those 4,000 new jobs, the company went bankrupt. It was later revealed that the company’s shareholders and executives had made substantial donations to Obama’s campaign, and that the company had also spent a large sum of money on lobbying. In April 2012, CBS News reported that Solyndra had left a substantial amount of toxic waste at its abandoned facility in Milpitas, California. After Obama gave Raser Technologies $33 million to build a power plant, the company declared bankruptcy, and owed $1.5 million in back taxes. After Obama gave Abound Solar, Inc. a $400 million loan guarantee to build photovoltaic panel factories, the company halted production and laid off 180 employees. After Obama gave Beacon Power a $43 million loan guarantee to build green energy storage, the company filed for bankruptcy. After Obama approved $2.1 billion in loan guarantees for Solar Trust of America so it could build solar power plants, the company filed for bankruptcy. Although Obama stated that all of the green energy companies that received taxpayer money were chosen “based solely on their merits,” the truth is that 71% of these grants and loans went to Obama donors and fundraisers, who raised $457,834 for his campaign, and were later approved for grants and loans totaling more than $11 billion. By November 2011, the Energy Department’s inspector general had begun more than 100 criminal investigations related to Obama’s stimulus.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

"Obama Pivots to Jobs -and DARES GOP to Follow"

Say WHAT...?

America's African-American community
(16.7% unemployment)
reacts to the president's speech

'Follow' where, pray tell... a shining path towards the workers' paradise Barry dreamt-up between those way-too-many (Reagan era) bong hits in Hawaii? No thanks.

After a dubious debate performance as (attack dog) "moderator" at the Reagan Library on Wednesday night, looks like Editor John F. Harris has got the Politico spin-machine humming right along, doing what it can to prop-up the most radical, incompetent,
and damaging president in US history... that's some headline.

But why would anyone else need to listen to a discredited economic screw-up like Barack Obama... an arrogant fool who blew almost a trillion dollars or our money (more than the entire Iraq War!) on so-called economic "stimulus" that promised to keep unemployment below 8%... if we'd only fork over the money to him and his ossified gun moll Pelosi. Hey, isn't that fraud?
And now he wants more, of course.

At this point, Obama pledging to 'create jobs' is like me promising to whip-up a batch of Plutonium in my kitchen

With no ability -nor in his case credibility- who cares what Obama says. And what an eye-watering bore, are there still people who can actually stomach that insincere, condescending voice and faux-preacher tone anymore? -not anybody I know.

Unless he wants to step-up and cancel ObamaCare, there's surely nothing worth hearing from this job-icidal maniac...
all you get these days is formulated, poll-driven jive geared towards saving face in 2012 anyway.


Note that Obama has been chanting "jobs are my #1 concern" for over two years- but somehow a focus on jobs is a 'pivot', now-- huh?

It's not difficult to imagine what the proposals might entail... more blank-check spending ($300B this time) and another panel of unqualified lackeys to chew the fat about it, in all likelihood.

That's why I played Yahtzee instead... something to sharpen the mind, rather than The One's ceaseless droning, which not only drones on-and-on endlessly but -as we saw in 2008- can turn most anyone's head to mush.

One line Obama used last night was
"These (economic) problems where made by man"

To which gifted professional snarkist Dick Morris
quipped " You da man! "...

The Kiss

North Korea Food



Supporting Chic-Fil A

Who's Your Daddy?



Lee Harvey Tea Party

GOP members double down on Muslim Brotherhood comments (Huma Abedin a covert agent?)

The Hill ^ | 7/29/12 | Julie Ershadi, Julian Pecquet

Republican lawmakers who demanded an investigation into whether Hillary Clinton's deputy chief of staff is a covert agent for the Muslim Brotherhood said this week they have no regrets.

Former presidential candidate Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and four other House members sent several letters over the past few weeks to government agencies asking them to make sure they were properly vetting federal workers.

Their letter to the State Department's deputy inspector general, however, ignited controversy for singling out Huma Abedin, a longtime Clinton aide and former Rep. Anthony Weiner’s (D-N.Y.) wife, who they said had family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) told The Hill that the media's focus on Abedin was a “deliberate effort to change the subject.”

“The focus in the media has been on one sentence in one of those letters, and ... they have the right to do that,” Franks said. “But it certainly doesn't serve the American people when they overlook the central focus of the letters to try to take out of context one element of it that seems to be the only thing the left can aim at.”

Rep. Tom Rooney (R-Fla.) made the same point in an emailed statement to The Hill.

“As a member of the House Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, my top priority is ensuring the security of our nation,” Rooney said. “The tragic events at Fort Hood in 2009 [when 12 service members and a civilian were killed by a Palestinian-American with ties to radical Islam] proved that our enemies will go to great lengths, including infiltrating and recruiting members of our military, to commit acts of terror against American citizens. I regret that Mrs. Abedin has become the media focus of this story, because the intention of the letters was to bring greater attention to a legitimate national security risk.”

Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.), when asked if he would consider apologizing, unequivocally said, “No.”

“I think the letter speaks for itself,” he told The Hill. “We didn’t accuse anybody or anything else.”

The debate has erupted as the United States is forced to reassess its relationship with long-time allies in the Middle East, especially Egypt where Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Morsi won the presidency last month. The brotherhood, the Arab world's most influential Islamist movement, officially condemns violence but believes that Islam should be the guiding principle behind government.

The other two letter signers have also doubled down.

"I hope and pray that the mainstream media will get past the enjoyment of vilifying and trying to destroy the messenger and look at the message," Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said on the House floor on Thursday.

Bachmann has not only stood by the letter but told conservative talk show host Glenn Beck on Thursday that Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the first Muslim elected to Congress, has a “long record of being associated with ... the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Ellison has denied the allegation, saying Bachmann just “wanted attention.”

Some Republicans have ripped the effort by the handful of House legislators, most notably Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a friend of Abedin's, who called them “ugly” and “sinister.”

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said the accusations were “dangerous.”

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee launched an online petition on Friday demanding Bachmann and her colleagues retract the letter. And the pro-Obama People for the American Way has a sign-on letter to Boehner asking him to remove Bachmann, Rooney and Westmoreland from the House Intelligence Committee, whose chairman has rejected the allegations.

"That kind of assertion certainly doesn't comport with the Intelligence Committee, and I can say that on the record," Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) told USA Today. "I have no information in my committee that would indicate that Huma is anything other than an American patriot."

Others have refrained from criticizing Bachmann and the other members.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told CBS on Friday that Bachmann's “concern was about the security of the country” when asked if the letter was “out of line.”

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said he was “mystified” by the criticism.

“What is wrong with raising the question? Why isn’t even asking whether we’re living up to our standards a legitimate level of congressional oversight?” Bolton asked on the Frank Gaffney radio show. “Why has that generated so much criticism? I’m just mystified by it.”

Westmoreland told The Hill there's been some blowback in his district, though nothing out of the ordinary.

“We haven’t really gotten that much reaction from our district,” he said. “First of all, you don’t know where the calls come from. But I mean, really, not any different from any other issue — whether you’re voting on horse slaughter or right to life, you’re going to get a certain number of phone calls…”

Franks said the criticism from some in the GOP is nothing out of the ordinary.

“I think that that is a routine reality,” he said. “There are always going to be differences even within the party. In this case, I'm finding that the more people actually read the letters, the more support we can be coming to see.”

Asked to elaborate, he told The Hill that “we've seen a lot of shift here recently, and that's just the simple truth.”

Still, he acknowledged, the situation could have been handled a little better.

“There are things that I would certainly do differently if I had it to do over again,” Franks said. “There were certainly no accusations in the letter and there were no inaccuracies in the letter. That said, you can tell the truth in ways that are awkward — in which there are better ways to say it.

“There was never an attempt on my part to cast any negative aspersions toward an individual,” he said. “It was all aimed at the Muslim Brotherhood, which I am convinced remains a major national security concern for this country.”