If you thought Bush was dumber than a box of rocks, maybe you should look into what Obama does in DC after the lights go down. I'm not one to believe tabloid trash, but this is getting interesting. This President has slipped up more than Bush ever did. You just don't have the press saying so every five minutes because they'd lose access to The Messiah. If this is as true as what this tabloid did to John Edwards, the fat lady is warming up right now.
I have to tell yah, I have zero problem with what Arizona and its governor are doing. The people there are through with illegal immigration and the 436,000 undocumented law breakers they have put up with. I would be too. All this new law does is make officials enforce existing laws, which federal boarder patrol agents won’t do. We don’t need reform, or new laws, or congress to act. Barack Obama is standing up for these leaches and drug mules and even the few Mexican citizens. Ranchers are being shot on their own land and Obama says Arizona is overreacting. He says Arizona is profiling: My favorite catch phrase of the year. With over 70% of the people of Arizona favoring the move, Obama is not just in the minority, he’s a racist. He has a problem with white Americans standing up against unlawful entry into our country. Obama doesn’t like the law: Never has. You run with that Mr. President. You start right at the four corners and run for the boarder, my money’s on the people winning. You keep up doing what people tell you not to do. Let me know how that works for yah. Tell you what, if we could oust the 30-40 million illegal’s here now, we just might be able to end the unemployment problem. But then again, Obama wants people to depend on government for a paycheck and healthcare and retirement money and mortgage bailouts and corporate welfare and…. Well…you get the idea.
Ask yourself one question: If Obama doesn’t like what Arizona is doing, why is he not in Arizona telling the people of Arizona they’re wrong?
"On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." --Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 1823
How do I loath thee… Let me count the ways. Well, some would say I can’t count that high, but I digress. As if another example was needed to demonstrate the utter poverty of honesty and transparency of this atrocious administration, Obama now finds himself on the wrong side of the law…again. He will be subpoenaed to give testimony in the Rod Blogojvcich case. Here we have a case of a Brittany Spears “Ooops I did it again.”
1. Obama may have lied about conversations with convicted fraudster Tony Rezko
Blagojevich's lawyers allege that Rezko admitted breaking the law by contributing "a large sum of cash" to a public official. Blagojevich's attorneys say that public official is Obama. Obama said that Rezko never relayed a request from a lobbyist to hold a fundraiser in favor of favorable legislative action. But the point may be moot: regardless of Obama talking/not talking to Rezko, Blagojevich's attorneys say that Obama refused the request regardless.
Redacted portion: However, the defense has a good faith belief that Mr. Rezko, President Obama’s former friend, fund-raiser, and neighbor told the FBI and the United States Attorneys a different story about President Obama. In a recent in camera proceeding, the government tendered a three paragraph letter indicating that Rezko “has stated in interviews with the government that he engaged in election law violations by personally contributing a large sum of cash to the campaign of a public official who is not Rod Blagojevich. … Further, the public official denies being aware of cash contributions to his campaign by Rezko or others and denies having conversations with Rezko related to cash contributions. … Rezko has also stated in interviews with the government that he believed he transmitted a quid pro quo offer from a lobbyist to the public official, whereby the lobbyist would hold a fundraiser for the official in exchange for favorable official action, but that the public official rejected the offer. The public official denies any such conversation. In addition, Rezko has stated to the government that he and the public official had certain conversations about gaming legislation and administration, which the public official denies having had.
Redacted footnote: The defense has a good faith belief that this public official is Barack Obama.
2. Obama may have overtly recommended Valerie Jarret for his Senate seat
Blagojevich's defense team basically alleges that Obama told a certain labor union official that he (Obama) would support Valerie Jarrett's candidacy for the Senate seat. Jarrett, referred to as "Senate Candidate B", is now a senior advisor to the president.
Redacted portion: Yet, despite President Obama stating that no representatives of his had any part of any deals, labor union president told the FBI and the United States Attorneys that he spoke to labor union official on November 3, 2008 who received a phone message from Obama that evening. After labor union official listened to the message labor union official told labor union president “I’m the one”. Labor union president took that to mean that labor union official was to be the one to deliver the message on behalf of Obama that Senate Candidate B was his pick. (Labor union president 302, February 2, 2009, p. 7).
Labor union official told the FBI and the United States Attorneys “Obama expressed his belief that [Senate Candidate B] would be a good Senator for the people of Illinois and would be a candidate who could win re-election. [Labor union official] advised Obama that [labor union official] would reach out to Governor Blagojevich and advocate for [Senate Candidate B] ... [Labor union official] called [labor union president] and told [labor union president] that Obama was aware that [labor union official] would be reaching out to Blagojevich.” (Labor union official 302, February 3, 2009 p. 3).
3. A supporter of President Obama may have offered quid pro quo on a Jarrett senate appointment
Redacted portion: Supporter of Presidential Candidate Obama is mentioned in a phone call on November 3, 2008, having offered “fundraising” in exchange for Senate Candidate B for senator (Blagojevich Home Phone Call # 149).
4. Obama maintained a list of good Senate candidates
Redacted portion: President-elect Obama also suggested Senate Candidate A to Governor Blagojevich. John Harris told the FBI and the United States Attorneys that he spoke to President’s Chief of Staff on November 12, 2008. Harris took notes of the conversation and wrote that President’s Chief had previously worked as Blagojevich's press secretary. Obama agreed of Staff told Harris that Senate Candidate A was acceptable to Obama as a senate pick. (Harris handwritten notes, OOG1004463) President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI that “he could not say where but somewhere it was communicated to him that” Senate Candidate A was a suggested candidate viewed as one of the four “right” candidates “by the Obama transition team.”
5. Rahm Emanuel allegedly floated Cheryl Jackson's name for the Senate seat
Redacted portion: President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI that he had a conversation discussing the Senate seat with Obama on December 7, 2008 in Obama’s car. President’s Chief of Staff told the FBI “Obama expressed concern about Senate Candidate D being appointed as Senator.
[President’s Chief of Staff] suggested they might need an expanded list to possibly include names of African Americans that came out of the business world. [President’s Chief of Staff] thought he suggested Senate Candidate E who was the head of the Urban League and with President’s Chief of Staff’s suggestion.
6. Obama had a secret phone call with Blagojevich
Redacted portion: President-elect Obama also spoke to Governor Blagojevich on December 1, 2008 in Philadelphia. On Harris Cell Phone Call # 139, John Harris and Governor’s legal counsel discuss a conversation Blagojevich had with President-elect Obama. The government claims a conspiracy existed from October 22, 2008 continuing through December 9, 2008.6 That conversation is relevant to the defense of the government’s theory of an ongoing conspiracy. Only Rod Blagojevich and President Obama can testify to the contents of that conversation. The defense is allowed to present evidence that corroborates the defendant’s testimony.
Can we smell any worse? Can we be more like Clinton then this? He comes from the "Windy City" and I got to tell y'all, This not only blows, but it sucks, and that sucking sound coming from just south of me has become a roar no one can ignore anymore.
I know what liberalism looks like. I know what conservatism looks like. Need help knowing the difference? Allow me to assist you…
"It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower, and when conflicts break out, one way or another we get pulled into them, and that ends up costing us significantly in terms of both blood and treasure."
This man is political GARBAGE!! And whether he likes it or not, he will soon lose his job… or worse… Because the America I know and love will not put up with his trash much longer.
I have taken issue with all sorts of people on the left and on the right. I don’t agree with most everything the left does but if there is an idea that has promise, I have said so and acknowledge it. I never was in “lock step” with Bush or his administration. I have criticized Rush, Savage, and local talk show hosts such as Mark Belling. So, hard as it is for me to say this, I want to go on record here that I have to agree today with Bill Minnich. Bill often takes issue with talkers on the right, including me, and the feud we share is fun if not furious. But today, I need to take issue with one of those talkers, Glenn Beck, whom Bill holds in contempt, and the reason is three fold.
Number one is that Beck is wrong. This week Beck took issue with Paul Ryan, my congressman from the great state of Wisconsin, and the issue revolves around a speech Paul Ryan made recently. First, lets see what Glenn said to get some perspective:
To pick out lines of a speech, the substance of which is subject to perspective of a personal nature, and to call this great congressman an equal to John McCain, is truly a reach and in my opinion, so counterproductive to the cause of the republic, it needs to be said emphatically that Glenn Beck is wrong. Glenn may be right about the origins of progressivism, but he is pure wrong about Ryan and I know Paul Ryan personally. I have met him, shook his hand and talked with him over the years about many things. He is no McCain. He is Conservative, and he is entitled to make mistakes just as Glenn Beck is. This time however, it is Beck who is on the wrong side of the issue and here is why: Paul Ryan's record is firmly ensconced in conservative patterns. Yes, he made a mistake on Tarp reform and he acknowledges this but many were fooled by this bill. But looking over the record of Ryan can only bring one to say he is consistent and he is a man of principle and conscience. The thing I love about him is he will admit his wrongs, though they are few, and he will tell you why and how he came to those wrong conclusions articulately and with accountability, and that, my friends, is clarity. Refreshingly and wonderfully clear. Paul stood up to Obama, McCain, Bush and others when it was the right thing to do and he helped me get my daughter home when the Navy could not find the orders they had sent to medically and honorably discharge her after becoming ill in the aftermath of Iraqi invasion which lead to the capture of Saddam. Even if he had not done that for my family, my feelings for him would be the same. I have never met a more honest and principled man in elected office, and I know a few…Quite a few. Wisconsin is the birthplace of the Republican Party. That happened because Wisconsin was also a hotbed for socialism. Milwaukee had socialist mayors for decades upon decades and has never elected a Republican to the office.
I stand with Paul Ryan, and as long as he stands by the principles I hold near and dear to my heart, I will stand with him and fight for him and help him to attain any office, should he desire to go higher in his quest for leadership.
Today’s headlines tell the story we on the conservative right have been saying for months, if not years. Newt Gingrich says Obama is the most radical president in the history of America. Rush Limbaugh says this President is “inflicting untold damage on this country.” Mark Leven states “Obama is the closest thing America has seen to a dictator.” “America is on a path to decline” says Liz Cheney. “Obama is a socialist” says Sean Hannity. Michael Savage calls the President “Obama the destroyer!”
Today Bart Stupak, who caved on the health bill, says he won’t run again. Oh he says he could win, but he just does not want to run again. Yeahrite…
Also rumored is Barney Frank may not seek re-election. This has to break Bill Minnich’s heart.
The Tea Party movement is now made of 30% democratic voters. Sarah Palin wonders where Obama got the idea that telling the world we won’t us nukes even if they are used against us was a good idea. Who would even think to say such a thing? I mean that’s fine if you want it to be your policy, but for God’s sake don’t tell the world about it!!
The real question is very simple: Is Obama qualified to “run” anything?
This administration supports terrorist organizations, tells the Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel to sign a piece of paper to hand parts of Jerusalem over to Palestine or he won’t even meet with him. Obama has cut the defense budget while stopping the deployment of a missile shield for our allies in Europe.
The list of “screw ups” are huge:
Where to try terrorists Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
Being tougher on Israel than Iran
Walking out on Israel's President last week
Apologizing to the Muslim world… For what?
Sending 90 hardened terrorists to Yemen
An executive order giving Interpol immunity from American law
Taking CIA assets and spy satellites away from the war on terror and diverting them to “assess the hidden complexities of Global Warming”
Categorizing terror attacks as “crimes”
Paralyzing the CIA by prosecuting agents
Turned his back on Iranians protesting a rigged election and refusing to defend freedom
Abandoning the U.S. missile defense system in Europe
Allowing Iran and North Korea to “Nuke Up” without consequence.
Offering senators and house members bribes with tax payer money in exchange for their votes on healthcare
Reneging on his pledge (given 8 times) to televise the healthcare debate
Creation of a two trillion dollar slush fund, calling it TARP and “stimulus”
Taking over the American Auto Industry
This list goes on and on… I find I cannot compare Obama to anyone: He's one of a kind. The press was complicit in misinforming the public about this man and his Chicago friends who now rule with an iron fist, circumvent the constitution, and blame Bush for everything from Katrina to economic calamity. If all you’re going to do is whine and not lead, I guess you didn’t want the job in the first place. He has the look of a man who believes he made a huge mistake, identical to what I see in the faces of many Americans driving around in cars with Obama /Biden bumper stickers.
Even America is entitled to make a mistake, but this mistake is going to cost us, and not just a little. We will be paying for this brain burp for many years to come.
Hello and thank you for your thoughts, prayers and patience. I’m home, I’m on the mend, and I am so blessed by a great and wonderful God who is the giver of all good things. Suffice to say what we thought was a problem with my heart turns out to be a very persistent bout with pleurisy complicated by food poisoning and a virus. To those who mean so much to me, which would be all of you who commented and prayed, I give my heartfelt thanks and I give you this:
