Saturday, February 28, 2009

Obama: Forgotten Men, Forgotten Women

Barack Obama shortly after delivering State of the Union Address

If they ever build a monument to political cynicism, the shining face on it should be that of Barack Hussein Obama. In Amity Shlaes brilliant historical study of the Depression era (The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression), she talks about the people who got left out of FDR's effort to rescue the American economy.

Who were the people who didn't get help? Basically, those in the middle class. The poor got help. The unions got help. Even the lawyers busily helping people sue one another got assistance. The government bureaucrats and political poohbahs made out well. Who got left out? The people who went to work everyday and struggled to feed their families. They didn't demand help. They didn't even ask for it. They were -- and are -- the Forgotten Americans.

[Note: One my other blog, I compare Sarah Palin to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I noted that "Barack Obama being Commander-in-Chief is about the same as Madonna being Mother Superior at a nunnery."]

In the following William Sumner quote (in italics), assume that "A" is the President, "B" is another politically powerful individual (Pelosi?), and X is the person who would benefit from government bailouts.

"As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then proposed to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X . . . What I want to do is to look up C. I want to show what manner of man [or woman in our time] he [or she] is. I call him the Forgotten Man. Perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. He is the man who never is thought of . . . . He works, he votes, generally he prays -- but he always pays . . . . (William Graham Sumner, Yale University, 1883)

I have a friend in Illinois who is an emergency room physician. He went to school for many years in order to develop the skills he needs for his important profession. He works many hours of overtime in an area that has more than its share of emergencies. His wife also has a good job.

In the view of Obama and many other left-wing Democrats, my wife and his are Public Enemies Number 1? Why? Because their net income exceeds $250,000 annually. Obama and his allies ("B," which in this case means Pelosi, Reid, and their cohorts) want to increase their taxes sharply.
Oh, and Obama also wants to reduce the deduction for mortgage interest on their home. Since they do own equities, he also wants to increase their tax on capital gains.

My friend and his wife certainly qualify as "C" in Sumner's analysis. Obama has decreed that it is their duty (Joe Biden would call it their "patriotic duty") to bail out X. In their case, "X" would be the hospital employee (unionized, unlike my friend) armed wtih a mop-and-pail. Obama's (and our "B" category, Reid's and Pelosi's) view is that X needs the money more than A (the emergency room physician) and his wife (call her "A1").

Does the fact that there are a lot more Xs than Cs -- that is, a lot more voters -- have anything to do with Obama's policies? Silly question. It has everything to do with it.

My emergency room friend likes his job, but the hours (he mostly works through the night) can be crushing. He calculates that the increased federal tax rates, the increased capital gains tax, the reduced mortgage interest deduction, along with high state income taxes and hefty sales taxes in Illinois would be a problem. For every additional dollar he and wife earn, they'd get to keep perhaps 40 cents (if they're lucky).

Does he really want to spend a lot more time with sick, injured, and dying people for that additional 40 cents? Does he want, as a doctor in a high-risk area, to pay ever-skyroceting premiums for malpractice insurance? Should he ignore the fact that America has five-six times as many trial lawyers grasping for big settlements as any other industrialized nation?

The question is: how much does Barack Obama care about C, my friend? Alas, my friend is the one Sumner talks about as "the man who never is thought of . . ." He is a strong wage-earner and a vital component of civilized society. But he has only limited political power. As the pollsters can tell us, there are a lot more "mop-and-pail" people than there are first-rate emergency physicians.

My friend is the the Forgotten Man. His wife is the Forgotten woman. We generally forget about him also -- that is, until we unexpectedly end up in the emergency room. Then, we hope -- and pray -- he is working those additional hours. And when he saves our life -- or those of a friend or family member -- we don't begrudge him a nickel of his earnings.

Friday, February 27, 2009

Obama: America's Road to Serfdom

I found the following section (bold-faced paragraphs below) of Marnie Delano's PumaTruthisGold piece on blogspot to be fascinating. The goal of the Obama administration, in case you haven't noticed, is to throw the American economy -- along with the political system -- into chaos. The redistribution of wealth is, of course, generally from McCain voters to . . . Obama voters, and from the most productive to . . . the least productive.

To that end, a major emphasis on fear/panic (driven by a constant drumbeat of words such as crisis, catastrophe, and cataclysm) is a key element. Marnie focuses on Robert Rubin, a key architect of the collapse of Citigroup, and Robert Orszag, a protege of Rubin's and Obama's head of the Office of Management and Budget:

[Note] . . . Christopher Bollyn's work on Obama’s new budget director Peter R. Orszag.Oddly, Orszag’s background has received virtually no attention in the media. At this critical moment, however, it would be foolish to ignore the troubling background of Obama’s budget director, which deserves to be looked at very carefully.

Orszag, for example, could start by explaining exactly what happened to the Icelandic economy. Orszag was, after all, the founder and president of the economic consultancy firm which advised the Central Bank of Iceland - before it went bankrupt. How did Icelandic banks become so indebted? Ask Peter Orszag.

Orszag is an economist who served six years in the Clinton administration (1993-8) under Robert E. Rubin, the former treasury secretary who recently resigned from his senior position at the woefully mismanaged and nearly bankrupt Citigroup. The fact that Orszag was a protégé of the now disgraced Rubin certainly does not bode well for the Obama administration.

Rubin strongly opposed the regulation of derivatives when such regulation was proposed in 1997. Credit derivatives of mortgage-backed securities were the key reason for the recent failure of a number of large financial institutions, including AIG and Citigroup.

In 1999, Rubin joined Citigroup as a board member and a participant "in strategic managerial and operational matters of the Company.” The Wall Street Journal noted that Citigroup shareholders suffered losses of more than 70 percent since Rubin joined the firm and that he encouraged changes that led the firm to the brink of collapse.

In December 2008, investors filed a lawsuit contending that Citigroup executives, including Rubin, sold shares at inflated prices while concealing the firm’s risks.

(Note: Today, the U.S. government's share of Citibank grew from 8% to 36%. No comments yet from Robert Rubin.)

Sneak Peek at Tomorrow's Column: "But What Do You Really Think About Obama, Steve?"

Obama's Administration is more like fascism than Communism. The big bloated corporation remain, but now they're run by your friendly overseer from the government -- not by the Board of Directors or the CEO.

Ancient Robert Byrd questioned why all these guys -- the various czars and advisers -- were being named to powerful positions that didn't require Senate confirmation and oversight.

Because they don't want any oversight. They're Obama's version of the Mafia leg-breakers. They are responsible to no one but Emperor Bozo ("Don Barack" and "Don Rahm")

The main thing that bothers me is the fact that they don't have anyone who has a clue about terrorism, or any idea about how to prevent another 9/11. I don't think sending around bags of cash is going to impress al Qaeda. Putting Panetta at the head of the CIA is like making Richard Simmons commissioner of major league baseball. They excluded anybody who had any post 9/11-experience.

Somebody on my Facebook wall was singing Obama's praises, a young guy, and a friend of mine wrote, "I hope you're ready to spend your entire life in a soup line."

Okay, Obama's way to solve the housing crisis is to cut the mortgage interest deduction for houses. I give up. The only good thing is that a lot of big contributors to Democratic congresspeople are going to start howling soon -- housing construction people and the like.

Obama's way to create jobs is to do away with E-verification that keeps illegals from getting the jobs. I give up again.

One big construction project in Pittsburgh that's way over budget (up in the $600 million category) wants another $160 stimulus payment. Gov. Rendell calld THE WHOLE PROJECT "a tragic mistake." (I'm laughing.) Your stimulus money in action.

This is worse than we thought, and we didn't expect much to begin with.

Dallas Tea Party Blasts Obama

Protestors in Dallas (see below) and across the country "Just Say No" to Obama-Pelosi-Reid effort to demolish a society based on freedom, tolerance, and opportunity. Is this beginning of "The Second American Revolution" (Thanks to Dallas-area resident Ken Emanuelson for the great photos.)

In Dallas (see above) and many other American cities -- particularly Chicago -- Americans turned out to protest Barack Obama's efforts to toss the country into the abyss of socialism. Their message to Obama? "We're mad as h--l, and we're not going to take it anymore." The "Tea Party" concept originated with CNBC's Rick Santelli, who challenged traders at the Chicago Board of Trade to reject Obama's power grab.

This weekend (Saturday and Sunday), I'll be posting important material on practical actions you can take to defeat legislators who support Obama's left-wing policies. Organizing to defeat Obama in 2012 should be an emphasis of every patriotic American.

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Obama: Bad News for Blacks

Star Parker's essay on Barack Obama's new, larger welfare state is devastating. No, the words this heroic Black woman writes do not reflect her "opinion." Instead, they reflect her experience as an American. She rejects the handout mentality which is the only way Obama knows how to govern. Why aren't Black people able to grab their share of the American Dream, one of opportunity and freedom? Read on, and you'll see why America's first Black President is bad news for Black people.

There's a hot debate on cable TV about whether Obama is a socialist. In fact, a socialist is someone who seeks to punish the most productive members of society and "reward" the least productive. That's exactly what Obama is doing, all in some absurd effort to get America back on its feet. When half or more of a nation's people become dependent on government, the notion of a free society becomes a pipe dream.

As Star Parker points out, liberals have destroyed Black families. Obama, with typical left-wing mindlessness, apparently wants to finish the job.

"Back on Uncle Sam's Plantation"

Star Parker

Monday, February 09, 2009

Six years ago I wrote a book called "Uncle Sam's Plantation." I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.

I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas. A poor America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.

I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.

A vast sea of perhaps well intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960's, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.

A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"

Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems. The kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.

The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.

Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.

I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996, passed by a Republican congress and signed into law by a Democrat president. A few years after enactment, welfare roles were down fifty percent.

I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with wealth producing American capitalism.

But, incredibly, we are going in the opposite direction.

Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism

Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."
Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.

There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.

Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.

In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus

"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending-it's a strategy for America's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, health care, and education."

Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."

Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the Synfuels Corporation, and the Department of Education.

Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty."

Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single parent homes and out of wedlock births. [Triple? Yes, she's right, three times as many single parent homes and out of wedlock births as before the government decided to "help" Black Americans.]

It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.

Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Defeat Obama Week in America

I've discussed the need for us to use powerful images and symbols in the crusade to defeat Barack H. Obama. The image below is one of the most powerful I've ever seen. I hope Gov. Palin visits Israel soon to show her solidarity with the Jewish people.

"It's better to light one little candle than to curse the darkness." (Farther Keller of "The Christophers," in the 1960s and 1970s). In the face of the Obama juggernaut, some people may feel helpless. In fact, we're only helpless if we succumb to emotional and spiritual paralysis.

Much is going on in our nation -- and not all of it is bad (believe it or not). I'll be writing more about positive developments in the days and weeks ahead. We will defeat Obama, his congressional supporters, and their media minions by taking creative -- but relatively simple -- actions.

I'd like to ask you to do two things that can help turn out country in the right direction.

First, please go to Jim Tedisco's web page. He's the New York assemblyman running for the open seat in New York's 20th congressional district (Albany/Hudson Valley area). He's seeking the seat recently vacated by the woman (Kirsten Gillibrand) who took Hillary's old Senate seat.

This is a race Jim can win -- and must win if we're to start the long journey back to competitiveness in Congress. If you can make a small contribution to Jim's campaign (say, $10-$20), it will be much appreciated. (Tedisco led the fight against former Gov. Spitzer's bizarre plan to grant drivers licenses to illegal aliens.)

Second, please participate in the 8:30 p.m. ET teleconference call held tomorrow (Thursday) by one of the best activist groups in the country: WAMToday (Wake Up America). The group is leading the fight against the Obama-Pelosi-Reid "plan" to bankrupt the country in an orgy of government spending.

To get the information necessary to participate in the call, click on the joinwam@wamtoday link below. "If not now, when? If not us, who?"

For anyone not yet signed in to WAKE UP AMERICA MOVEMENT:RSVP by reply EMAIL: to joinwam@wamtoday - for your confidential Call in Code. Include your name and state with your RSVP.

Information about WAM below:



Come to this special TeleEvent for CRITICAL new FACTS that have now come to light!Americans need to wake up fast from Mass Media misrepresentation of current and planned legislation. It is up to US to watchdog the new Administration, research the real facts and spread the Truth. Current chaos and confusion about what's really happening in Washington garbles facts with rumors. This Thursday's TeleEvent will sort out the real issues the Obama Regime doesn't want you to notice.

WAM TeleEvents offer free access to up-to-the-minute (and astonishing) facts on what's really happening on Capitol Hill and On the Air - along with networking strategies to INFORM the public and ACT on Washington. In our current crises - on multiple fronts - AMERICA can only rely on active engagement at a grass roots level to defeat Obama's agenda for "Change". MoveOn is now moving into fast forward to mislead and propagandize the public via ads, Mass Media and the internet.

YOUR HELP is needed to Wake Up America at this critical juncture. To GET INFORMED AND GET INVOLVED be part of this Thursday's Truth in Information WAM TeleEvent! TOGETHER WE CAN SHIFT the Balance of Power back to the American People where itBelongs!

Get on the inside track of what our "leadership" is up to - and get in on the ground floor of URGENT new ACTIONS to stem the tide of even more dangerous legislation! Please POST this INVITATION on your blogs, forums and forward to your email list.For any not yet signed in to WAKE UP AMERICA MOVEMENT:

RSVP by reply EMAIL: to joinwam@wamtoday - for your confidential Call in Code. Include your name and state with your RSVP.

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Obama: Anatomy of Failed Presidency

Barack H. Obama, disconnected perpetually from America and Americans (that is, from the kind of Americans who would actually fight for their nation).

If Barack Obama and his cohort in economic crime, Nancy Pelosi, would each wear a bell, taxpayers would know when they're coming.

Obama, listen up: "Hopelessness is not a strategy. And terrifying people is a recipe not for recovery, but rather for national paralysis."

"We cannot continue to spend as we please." (Barack Obama)

"He's [Obama's] amplifying this [national] fear." (Jeffrey Rosenzweig, Associate Professor, Emory University)

Obama needs to present "some hope, some vision for the future." (Rosenzweig)

If Obama continues as he has since January 20, his presidency will be a monumental failure. His constant fear mongering is not only decimating financial markets, but also depressing the spirits of the American people, where consumer confidence is in the toilet. Scaring people is not a manifestation of leadership, although it might in the short-term be "good politics."

As you see in the quotes above, Obama recently said, "We cannot continue to spend as we please." Unfortunately, the "we" seems to apply both to individuals and Congress. Frankly, individuals in a free society exercise their liberty through making economic choices, either spending or saving. It's none of Barack Obama's concern what you do -- legally and reflectively -- with your money. He is the President (sadly), not the dictator of economic decisions.

In Congress, their has been wild overspending, plunging the nation into huge deficits and enabling huge trade deficits. Who's responsible for the profligate spending? Why, the most liberal members of Congress, since "liberal" is a synonym for "spend more."

And who are the extreme liberals? According to the non-partisan National Journal, the most liberal Senator was. . . Barack Obama. The second most liberal is Obama's Illinois colleague Dick Durbin. The third most liberal is avowed socialist Bernie Sanders of Vermont. The fourth most liberal is . . . Joe Biden.

In a few short years in Congress, Obama was responsible for nearly a billion in "earmarks," pet projects that are a hallmark of wasteful spending. The purpose of most earmarks has nothing to do with advancing national interests, but rather buying votes from a legislator's constituents.

Barack Obama's entire career consists not of solving problems, but rather at ensuring he's always on the government payroll. He has almost no real accomplishments either as an Illinois Senator or U.S. Senator. Why? Because he spent most of his time -- years -- positioning himself and running for higher office. What's next? Emperor of the Western Hemisphere?

Most people will grant that Obama is an excellent public speaker. By that, they apparently mean he has a nice baritone voice. In fact, his speeches are dreadful, devoid of any intellectual content. In one recent speech, he used the word "crisis" 26 times. Unfortunately, the "solution" to the "crisis" was to do more of what generated it -- over-spending and devaluing the worth of a dollar.

With his fear obsession, Obama reminds us of a famous statement by humorist Woody Allen. He said, "We are at a crossroad. On one side lie insoluble problems. On the other side lies the abyss and utter destruction. God grant us the wisdom to choose wisely."

Hopelessness is not a strategy. And terrifying people is recipe not for recovery, but rather for national paralysis.

As Emory University's professor Rosenzweig pointed out today on CNN, Obama's main oratorical accomplishment seems to be engendering panic. In short, Obama is a very scary man. He never misses an opportunity to evoke gloom and suggest darkly that we're on our way to doom. If his favor word is "crisis," it's followed closely by "catastrophe."

In another difficult time, Ronald Reagan offered a vision of "a shining city upon a hill." In Obama's case, his calls for "hope" and "change" didn't survive the presidential campaign. If he sees a city on hill, it apparently lies in ruins. If it shines at all, it does so in the manner of a dead mackerel.

The U.S. will survive the presidency of Barack Obama, the man who, with a straight face, can have U.S. governors attend a "Summit on Fiscal Responsibility. Obama lacks the rhetorical skills, experience, and vision to offer this country the kind of leadership it so desperately needs. Yes, we will survive the reign of Barack H. Obama . . . but just barely.

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Obama: Sky is Falling In!"


Here's what Obama (falsely) promised the American people:
"I'll make our government open and transparent . . . as President I'm going to make it impossible for Congressmen or lobbyists to slip pork barrel projects or corporate welfare into laws when no one is looking, because, when I'm President, meetings where laws are written are going to be more open to the public, no more secrecy! That's a commitment I make to you as President. . . When there's a bill then ends up on my desk as president, you the public will have five days to look online and find out what's in it before I sign it, so that you know what your government is doing." Did he really do that?


Who needs the Bill of Rights when we can have instead a big-screen TV?

Obama blows nose and receives standing ovation from adoring admirers . . . Are there even 10 people who believe anymore in his kind of "change?"

Scroll down to read my analysis of Obama's fear-mongering, as well the protest signs that increasingly greet Obama as he lurches around the country.

Yes, we do face terrible challenges with Obama and the Far-Left trying to buy votes, but if we keep at it we can turn them into ex-politicians. Tomorrow, Obama is going to tell us how he is going to "cut the deficit," right after he signed legislation that will produce the largest deficit in history. He's fooling fewer and fewer people every time he opens his mouth.

(On Monday a.m., I'll put up material about one falsehood after another that Obama has uttered. It's shocking, but it's par for the course with that self-absorbed windbag. Remember when Obama told his uncle "liberated" Auschwitz? It never happened unless his uncle was a member of Russia's Red Army. Is he a liar? Well, his pants may be on fire . . . )

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Obama's Economics: An American Disaster

Below, one of the growing number of protestors greeting Obama as he flies around the country on Air Force One . . . preaching the gospel of energy conservation.

As the signs in the columns below show, Americans are rising up en masse to tell Obama, "Yes, we're mad at h-ll, and we're not going to take it any more." Put a sign in your front yard, and bring it to protest Obama whenever he's in your neck of the woods. Let him know he can't destroy the American Way of Life.

On Monday a.m., I'll be writing more about why Obama, as President, is an idiot.

In his speech on the housing "crisis" (yes, Barack, we know it's bad), a frightened and flustered Obama used one word 26 times. That word was "crisis." After the first and second use of word, every time someone repeats it in a presentation, it loses its capacity to register in a listener's mind. By the 20th or so usage, a "crisis" had become nothing special. It's the equivalent of the little boy crying "wolf" 20 times. (His speecwriter gets this advice free-of-charge.)

Known (wrongly) as a great speaker, Obama is in fact a terrible one. When he doesn't have a TelePrompter, he's as articulate as a drunk at closing time. Now that he can't sell "hope" and "change" anymore -- and no longer has George Bush to kick around -- he has almost nothing to say.

If the man has ever uttered one memorable line, we must have missed it.

Beyond that, although he's very bad at defining problems, he's even worse at presenting solutions. A hint for Barack: The solution to a problem where the federal government, the states, companies, and individuals have been wildly over-borrowing is not to intensify the borrowing. When the nation and its people are over-spending, the last thing we need is a stimulus (spending) bill.

Here are suggested lines for Obama's future speeches: "Spend your money wisely. Don't borrow money you can't pay back. And don't ever try to borrow and spend your way to prosperity."

Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) said the Stimulus Bill means "America's best days are behind it."

Last night (Friday) on "The Lou Dobbs Show" Kitty Pilgrim interviewed a remarkable young woman, Amity Shlaes, who writes for the Wall Street Journal and is the author of a great book (critical of FDR) called "The Forgotten Man." I'm hoping somebody can find the link, because Amity was praising Rick Santelli and calling him (hopefully and prospectively) "(U.S.) Senator Santelli."

Today on FOX, Ben Stein talked about the Stimulus Bill as little more than an effort to pay off Democratic voters -- and to buy the votes of new ones. Failed institutions, like GM and Chrysler, get paid off endlessly because the unions supported Obama. However, the bailouts do great damage to the productive members of society, essentially punishing them for BEING productive. They -- we -- don't get "bailed out."

To our credit, we don't want to be bailed out. We don't want to engage in what McCain called "generational warfare," where our children and grandchildren pay the bill so that we can pretend we're better off than in fact we are.

By all means, let's help people who -- through no fault of their own -- are in trouble. But let's not help those who have no intention of helping themselves. Remember, our country's motto is "In God we trust" -- and not "gimme, gimme, gimme." A society where no one is allowed to fail eventually becomes one where no one is able to succeed.

We sometimes hear how "complicated" the economic situation is, but that is just plain false. As people like Bobby Jindal and Sarah Palin know, life and economics are fairly simple.
For example, you don't buy a house -- or have a lifestyle -- that you can't afford. You make sacrifices. You don't assume that the economy will never take a nosedive. You don't expect that someone else is going to pay your bills. You don't spend every last cent you have coming in. You don't have children and then assume that "society" (i.e., the taxpayers) is going to pay for their upbringing.

Does Obama understand such basic facts of life? Why should he? He's "The Affirmative Action Kid." Yes, he talks about his "student loans," but he went to an expensive prep school in Hawaii and then to three of the costliest schools in America -- Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard.

What percentage of his educational costs did Barack Obama pay? Of course, he hasn't released such facts -- nor will he ever. A good assumption is that he paid a relatively small amount.
From all the evidence, other people financed Barack Obama's education. He got mostly a free ride. It was an early version of his economic policy, where Other People's Money is made available to help out Obama and his chosen few.

It all fits the definition of socialism, which is not so much an economic policy as a vote-buying scheme. What happens when the productive members of society get tired of financing the unproductive? Unfortunately, it looks as if we're all going to find out the answer to that question . . . in the form of diminished economic growth, reduced opportunities, and skyrocketing inflation.

Friday, February 20, 2009


In 20 American states there are movements underway to secede from Barack Obama's version of the Union. Wasn't he the one who was supposed to "bring us together?" The picture below are from the massive protest rally that greeted Barack Obama when he traveled to Mesa, Arizona.

Young many disappointed by the fact that Obama apparently is NOT the Messiah

A beach front condo would be nice and would certainly stimulate one American's economic status

One lady is requesting from Barack Obama a baby grand piano, while a gentleman would like a trip to Disneyland
Here's the message I received today from Laureen in Scranton, PA:

Hey is the video showing TWENTY STATES looking for Sovereignty ... wonder why we aren't hearing about this in the news? (Laureen )

My comment: About the movements in many states to secede from Obama's "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme" Union: Everyone needs to recognize that this is a government "of, by, and for the people." If the people want to opt out of Obama's America, they do in fact have that right. If the government is taking away people's rights and their "property" (including their money), it has lost its legitimacy.

We do not "belong" to the government. It does not own us. We are not subservient to it. Our rights derive not from government, but rather, as the Declaration of Independence tells us, from the Creator.
One of my PA allies, Judy Brown of Mt. Lebanon, PA, made that exact point face-to-face with Arlen Specter. Her exchange appeared last night on KDKA-TV.

On my blogs yesterday and today, I'm reprinting the protest signs that greeted Obama in Mesa, Arizona. The signs condemn Barack Obama's "Gimme" state. I obtained the photos through super-blogger Michelle Malkin and others.

Let's all start making signs! Let's acquaint Barack Obama with the real America.

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Protest Obama Everywhere He Goes!

Obama and the Obama Democrats advocate a "gimme, gimme, gimme" society, one that has no real future. He should be protested everywhere he goes. More photos on Friday.

Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are not going to cause the U.S. to descend into socialism and unfreedom without a fight. The signs above (and I'll have more up tomorrow) are from the protest that greeted Obama in Mesa, Arizona. As a great man said, "It's time to stand up and fight for America. Fight for what's right!"

Palin-Obama: Winning Images, Symbols


Sarah Palin has many "secret weapons," especially her beautiful family that will enable her to upset Barack Obama.

One friend recently spoke about the need to use word "you" in making financial appeals for Sarah, Ron is absolutely right. Make our messages about what you (the reader) can do to make this a better, safer country . . . about what "you" can do to exert a great deal on influence on where our country (key phrase itself) can go in the future, and about how our children and our grandchildren can have as good or better lives than we (another key word) did.

Recently, some Republican types have been talking about "moral hazard," which basically means taking money from productive types and giving it to unproductive types. AVOID phrases like "moral hazard," which are business school and Beltway jargon. Also avoid any references to "fiscal responsibility" and other traditional GOP nonsense. Anything that has a hint of pomposity should not be used -- ever.

Make your message very personal and very simple. Sen. McCain's "generational warfare" is another bad phrase, frankly. Why didn't he say we're spending too much and sending the bill to our children and grandchildren?

One reason Tom Brokaw was so successful was that he used Reaganesque language. He read the news as if he were our next-door neighbor talking in colloquial American language. Everything was pegged in terms of what it meant to the viewer. He made it seem he was talking directly to each one of us. That should be our goal in communications about Sarah.

I've suggested as Sarah's campaign slogan: "Sarah . . . She's One of Us." The keys: it's very short; it uses three pronouns. Maybe it might go better as: "Sarah . . . one of us." Or a graphic of Sarah and the words "One of Us!" Clearly, we need to link Sarah to us, the American people. (The implication is that if she's one of us, Obama is somehow NOT one of us.)

As Ron D. suggested, we really have to focus on what is going to produce emotional responses and reinforce the notion that we aren't helpless in the face of the Obama juggernaut.

We also have to decide which are the powerful images and symbols that are going to evoke emotions and attract people to Sarah. Two of my favorite images are below. They're powerful becaues they speak to our deepest feelings as parents and pro-family people. (Note: I want every mother and father that doesn't vote for Sarah to feel guilty.)

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Comparing Sarah Palin, Barack Obama


Barack Obama, the quintessence of dorkiness on receiving "The Steve Erkel Medal"

Note: Tomorrow (Thursday, Feb. 19), I'll have another column about Barack Obama, continuing my focus on his supposed "intelligence," which I find to be questionable. In the presidential campaign, Gov. Sarah Palin was criticized for not having a strong grasp of economics or foreign policy. Hmmm, Gov. Palin had led a state with most of the complex economic structures in the nation, one based mainly on oil and gas, commercial fishing, and tourism. Gov. Palin engineered a $40 billion international deal for a natural gas pipeline ("TransCanada"). She had spent years as a Mayor and a governor preparing -- and balancing -- budgets for her town and state.

Barack Obama has no economic experience whatsoever. He was a community organizer, a State Senator, and a U.S. Senator who spent most of his time campaigning for the presidency. His experience dealing with private enterprise was almost nonexistent. If he ever prepared a budget, it was for his own household. The MSM gave him a pass on his lack of experience because they appreciated his glibness and his (highly suspect) Harvard Law degree. How he performed at Harvard (or, for that matter, at Columbia) is material he's never released, presumably for good reason.

Sunday, February 15, 2009


Barack H. Obama: The Invisible Man
LORENZO BENET'S NEW BOOK ON SARAH PALIN (TRAIL BLAZER) REMINDS OF US AN INTRIGUING REALITY: WE KNOW MUCH MORE ABOUT PALIN, THE GOV. OF A SPARSELY POPULATED STATE, THAN WE DO ABOUT OBAMA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE U.S. SARAH'S FRIENDS FROM HER CHILDHOOD AND EARLY ADULTHOOD HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT HER STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES. YET WE KNOW ALMOST NOTHING ABOUT OBAMA'S FIRST 35 YEARS ON EARTH, ASIDE FROM WHAT HE'S SAID ABOUT HIMSELF. WHY? I'LL EXPLORE THESE ISSUES ON THIS BLOG THROUGHOUT THIS WEEK. One of Obama's former law professors (Lawrence Tribe) called BHO "brilliant." Is there any evidence of that? There's a lot of evidence to the contrary, including many states Obama has made that are wildly at variance with the facts. Remember, he's the one who thought there were "57 states" and that "10,000 people" had died in Kansas tornadoes that actually killed 12 individuals.

As many of you know, I'm writing a book about Sarah Palin and "The Election of 2012," in which year she and Barack Obama may face off for the presidency. If she wins, she will be the 45th President of the U.S. -- and, of course, the first female President. Recently, on my other blog, which I hope you'll visit (, I'm writing about Sarah Palin's life, especially the early years before her family moved to Wasilla. In this column, I'll be writing mainly about Barack Obama, his positive and his negatives. I'll emphasize how much his life experience differ from that of Sarah. In many ways, Obama is the "affirmative action guy," because he's had so much handed to him. In Sarah's case, she scrapped and clawed for everything she got. Obama has a kind of eerie ("creepy," as a Newsweek editor called it) calmness about him. Sarah is the quintessence of toughness and resolve. Right now, Obama probably underestimates Sarah, something many others have done to their ultimate regret. In any case, the following is material from my other blog.

"There is an old photo of young Sarah as a mere toddler, standing in a blue jumper in Skagway yard dangling two shrimp from her tiny hands. Her clothes are soaked, and her pearl skin is filthy, her brown hair tousled. 'That was Sarah for you, [neighbor] Moore said, 'She wasn't your typical little girly-girl.'" (Lorenzo Benet, Trail Blazer: An Intimate Biography of Sarah Palin) I can't recommend the book highly enough.
(Where, we might ask, are the pictures from Obama's early years, aside from the one of him on a tricycle? Whom did he know and play with as a child?)

In fact , this volume is teaching me many new things about the nature of life, and that's rare when someone has been on the earth as long as I. As a young child, Sarah, her parents (Chuck, Sr, and Sally Heath), her brother Chuck, Jr., and her older sister Heather and younger sister Molly grew up in Skagway, Alaska, one hundred miles north of the capital city of Juneau. What was life like there?

A friend and neighbor of Sarah's family puts it this way: "Skagway had no beauty parlor, no barber shop, and if your car broke, you fixed it yourself; if your washer broke, you fixed it.. . . You wore many hats: carpenter, plumber, electrician, and boat mechanic; you did all your own stuff. We had just two grocery stores in town -- there was no fresh milk, and the produce ship came twice a month. Banana skins were yellow, but our kids grew up thinking they were black, so we ate a lot of banana bread."

The Benet book on Sarah is really good because she and her family were in Alaska in the 1960s and early 1970s when it was still America's "wild frontier." The early years in Skagway when Sarah was 4-5 years old were extreme by our standards, but Alaska still has a lifestyle that was pretty standard for much the world into the 20th century.

If people survived, they had to do it pretty much on their own. There was no "going down the mall," because there was no mall. If you wanted meat, you had to go out and shoot something.

Some of the suburban liberals who criticize Sarah believe she's "not like them." In a way, they're right. She's tougher and much closer to life on a fundamental level, one where family and community are very close to one another -- and dependent on neighbors not just for company but for survival.

A lot of modern people -- I'd include myself -- don't have great survival skills. If the grocery closed down and there was no one to repair the washer, dryer, and computer, we would be largely helpless. We wouldn't have learned the basic skills that were almost second-nature to our ancestors. Instead, we live on top of a support system whose existence is one of which we're hardly aware. We're a lot less self-reliant than Sarah and many of the people around her.

Friday, February 13, 2009

Defeat Obama, Don't Blow Smoke

My fellow conservatives, I am going to ask (beg?) people to focus on issues that are winnable -- and to ignore issues, no matter how much emotion they generate, that are not. We need to reject the concept of "moral victories," which are a synonym for losses.

The Stimulus was (past tense is correct) potentially winnable if we could have gotten one or two more Republicans. We didn't. Why did we fail in persuading Senators Snow, Specter, and Collins to side with us? If we regard those three individuals as somehow beneath contempt, why did we bother to try to affect how they voted? If we don't ask ourselves hard questions, we'll eventually end up in the political version of the Land of Oz.

I want to plead with people to concentrate on communicating with their own Senators (2 of them) and their own Representative (1 of them). If I send a fax to a Senator in Wyoming or Rhode Island or to Barbara Boxer or Diane Feinstein, it will get ignored. Senators in CA could care less what people in PA or NJ or TX think about them. No one in Congress is going to spend 24 hours a day actually reading e-mails. My own guess is that the "delete" button works overtime.

Also, if I send a communication that expresses extreme hostility to a Senator (say, Specter) it will get discarded by a staffer. Do we want to blow off steam, or do we want to have some real influence on people who make public policy decisions? We don't want some junior staffer to look at our e-mail and say, "Here's another one from a right-wing nutcase."

We don't have a moment of time, a dollar of money, or an ounce of energy that we can afford to waste. Even more important than "fighting the Stimulus" is growing our numbers. If we don't do that, we will never win anything.

It bothers me greatly that some "conservatives" (and this does NOT include you any effective members of our group) are making a great deal of money out of the mailings and out of issues that we have zero practical chance of winning. People who are charging $50 for a relative handful of faxes are never going to go hungry.

I am deeply suspicious of "birth-certificate" people like Phil Berg and Alan Keyes, both of whom are full-time self-promoters. (I do realize that many people are supporting them in good faith, but it has become the world's worst cause.)

The most important issue coming up now is the attempt to restore the fairness doctrine and suppress conservative talk radio (and TV?). Which Senators and Representatives can we reasonably expect to influence? And which ones are lost causes? Of most importance, how can we get to join us in reaching out to fair-minded legislators?

After today, the Stimulus issue apparently is a loss for our side. What can we do better the next time?

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Palin Character, Values Hillary Emptiness

Scroll down to previous columns on NY congressional candidate Jim Tedisco, Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton TOMORROW: WHY SARAH PALIN IS RIGHT ON ABORTION -- AND HER CRITICS ARE DEAD WRONG.

For his book, “A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (and Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media,” author Bernard Goldberg interviewed Rush Limbaugh.Goldberg asked Rush, among other things, what he thought about Palin Derangement Syndrome. “Why such hatred, especially from liberal feminists? Was it simply her politics or was something else at play?”

Here’s what Limbaugh has to say: “Something else. She was the only effective Republican candidate anywhere in this entire campaign – among all candidates, for all offices. Sarah Palin is what militant feminists have been suggesting all women can become. But she had the gall to have a Down Syndrome child and be opposed to abortion, which is the sacrament to feminist liberalism. She was the Clarence Thomas of the Anita Hill hearings. Her electoral future had to be destroyed.”

Steve Says: When I went to a (wonderful) Catholic elementary school, the nuns told us, "You never mistread girls. GOD will be very angry if you do." They got our attention. Bill Clinton never went to that school. His abuse of women, especially middle-class women (Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinsky, and many others) in vulnerable positions, has been the bad habit of a lifetime.

Okay, when she was at Wellesley, Hillary wrote her senior thesis on labor organizer Saul Alinsky (a better man than many people think), and he offered her a job with his community development organization. His total budget for a year was $100,000 (including his salary). He labored almost exclusively with the working poor, including Blacks and first generation immigrants. He hated the "welfare state."

Hillary's response to the job offer? She said, No thanks and went off to Yale Law School, one of those places that usually leads to whole truckloads of money and power. Yes, Hillary "loves" the poor, but only at a distance.

As for Bill, I am not against people making money, even though I don't. He parlayed the presidency into a fortune of $100 million. ONE HUNDRED MILLION. He sold out to everyone, especially rich foreigners, who had a large bag full of cash.

Okay, during the end of the primary season, there was a guy who told a group I was in that he had been unemployed for 17 months (yikes). But he had scraped together $25 that he was sending in "to help pay off Hillary's debt." One problem, the money was being re-directed to her 2012 Senate re-election campaign. The whole thing disgusted me.

I told the group, "Bill should write a check" (I think it was $9 million they owed). That $9 million would have been the same for him as us kicking in ten bucks. The Clintons are one of the wealthiest families in America -- and trust me, they will get a while lot wealthier.

Sarah Palin will never be Hillary's intellectual equal, but unlike HRC, she knows the basic difference between right and wrong. And in life that matters more than anything else.

When Hillary and Bill started slobbering over Obama, it made me physically ill. As one of Shakespeare's cynical lines has it, "Nothing lost save honor." Yes, as Bill said, "Obama played the race card [against them]." But in a world where nothing aside from self-promotion matters, why should racial politics count?

Susan Rice, named ambassador to the U.N. the same day as HRC got the State job, was the person in the Obama Campaign in charge of smearing Hillary. I kept waiting for the two to embrace.

What did Obama promise HRC for endorsing and campaigning for him? Guess. I know what Susan Rice got for her misdeeds.

A Sarah Palin is a person whose life is suffused with character and values. She would not feel comfortable with a Suan Rice or a Hillary Clinton. Sarah does not regard politics as a nasty game whose only purpose is self-advancement. It matters deeply to Sarah that someone like Barack Obama is not dedicated to national security, freedom, tolerance, and opportunity. Those factors matter not at all to someone like Hillary. They don't show up in a bank account or on a resume.

Yes, Hillary Clinton is a trivial human being, but that doesn't make her any less dangerous. She has spent a lifetime putting her own interests ahead of those of the nation. Right now, she's too old to learn new tricks.

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Hillary Morally Weak, Sarah Strong

"I have a lifetime of experience. Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience. Barack Obama has a speech [against the Iraq War] he delivered in 2002." (Hillary Rodham Clinton) I'll keep adding to this column on Wednesday and finish the "Hillary comments" on Thursday. I'd very much like to get your comments on a deeply flawed human being, Hillary R. Clinton.

I have many friends who were Hillary Supporters. One former friend, Robin, listened to my positive comments on Sarah Palin after she was named McCain's running mate. Robin then said, "Steve, I don't like all the praise of Palin because it makes Hillary sound bad by comparison." That's when Robin, a woman incapable of taking a clear-eyed look at HRC, became a former friend. "Yes, Robin, HRC is no Sarah Palin -- not by a longshot."

My sad impression is that most Hillary Supporters don't want to discuss the woman's actions in any serious way. Apparently, they feel that if they look deeply into this woman's heart and soul, they'll end up like the madman in Conrad's Heart of Darkness, who finally recognizes the evil of what he's done and blurts out, "The horror! The horror!" Horror and Hillary are more than alliterative.

John Edwards, another mindless left-wing Democrat, limply said of his affair that he had become "egotistic" and "narcissistic." John Edwards, meet Hillary Clinton, a card-carrying narcissist.

Hillary Clinton has spent a lifetime accepting, rationalizing, and even defending (yikes) her husband's chronic adultery and abusive behavior toward women, including Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, and Kathryn Willey. Of course, that didn't stop the gentle ladies of NOW and NARAL from endorsing Bill . . . or Hillary. Abuse of women is apparently okay as long as you're "right on the issues." Of course, without a demand for basic decency all the "issues" become practically irrelevant.

Many Hillary Supporters are now spending their lives defending HRC's decision to value her career over her country. In fact, what do you call a woman who values career more than the nation? Why, for services rendered, you call her "Madame Secretary of State," that is Secretary of . . . the Country.

As a member of Alaska's Oil and Gas Commission, Sarah Palin cited the head of the Alaska Republican Party (Randy Ruedrich) for an ethics violation. Such acts continue to make her enemies in the state, one long synonymous with political corruption. .

Hillary Clinton has NEVER done anything remotely comparable in her long career. The sad reality is that most of Hillary's supporters have much higher standards for themselves than they do for their tinsel candidate. I fear that if Mrs. Clinton appeared without clothes, such supporters would be marveling over how good she looks in a pants suit.

In the election, Clinton was a major factor in helping Obama carry Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. To say that she must have had a good (but of course, unstated) reason for doing so is to give her credit she in no way deserves. Over a lifetime, she has always done what is best for Hillary. Period.

During and after the election, I regularly asked people why HRC had supported her tormentor -- her abuser -- Obama. Perhaps for the same reason she'd always supporter her marital abuser, Bill, "the Big Dog?" No one ever gave an answer that made Mrs. Clinton seem like anything other than a moral weakling.

More than one Hillary backer told me, "Well, she had to. They [unnamed] threatened her. They threatened her MOTHER. They threatened CHELSEA." There is not one scrap of evidence any such thing ever happened. Moreover, anyone who would cave into threats has no business aspiring to the presidency.

People like Hillary Clinton are despicable. The fact that she's a woman is not exculpatory. Anyone who's so easily intimidated should not be occupying a high position of any kind.

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Defeating Obama, Electing Jim Tedisco

TOMORROW (WEDNESDAY) I'LL HAVE A COLUMN TITLED "HILLARY IS NO SARAH PALIN." Hillary Clinton has spent a lifetime accepting, rationalizing, and even defending (yikes) her husband's chronic adultery and abusive behavior toward women. Many Hillary Supporters are now spending their lives defending HRC's decision to value her career over her country. Sarah Palin is a woman who turned in her own Party's state chairman for ethics violations. Hillary Clinton has never done anything comparable in her career. The sad thing is that most of Hillary's Supporters have much higher standards for themselves than they do for their tinsel heroine.

"It's better to light one little candle than to curse the darkness" (Father Keller, "The Christophers," in radio addresses during the 1970s). PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING AND THEN GO TO JIM TEDISCO'S WEB SITE.

Dear Fellow Bloggers and Online Activists: One of the most important political contests of our time is unfolding in New York's Hudson Valley area (Albany, Saratoga Springs areas). It pits Republican State Assembly leader Jim Tedisco against a super-wealthy liberal Democrat who can't wait to get to Washington to support the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda. The race is in New York's 20th congressional district, and it's for the seat formerly held by Kirsten Gillibrand, recently appointed to fill Hillary Clinton's U.S. Senate seat.

The election of Jim Tedisco will send a powerful message to Obama and his congressional allies. It will demonstrate that the American people are no longer content to have a left-wing government borrow trillions of dollars, use the money mainly to pay off their political supporters, go hat in hand to Communist China for financing, and send the bill to our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Jim Tedisco led the fight against disgraced former Gov. Eliot Spitzer's cynical plan to grant drivers licenses to illegal aliens. He represents the classic American values we all grew up believing were synonymous with our country.

What can you do to help? You can go to Jim's outstanding web site and learn more about him. Also, you can participate in the "$20 for the 20th [District]" effort by donating $20. If you can't afford that much, give what you can -- even a dollar would be much appreciated.

Moreover, you can help Jim's message "go viral" by quickly disseminating either this e-mail or a message of your own to friends, family, and political allies. Those of you with blogs or group web sites can post the information -- as soon as possible -- for your visitors to see and share with their own contacts.

Significantly, the leader of Jim's online effort is Ali Akbar, whom many of you will recall from the effort to elect John McCain and Sarah Palin. Ali is a young GOP activist with an unusual name, but most of all, he's one of us. He's among the hundreds of veterans of the last campaign who are helping us begin dominate the Web . . . and turn this country back in the right direction.

The primary reason I back Ali so strongly in his efforts is that he knows how to win. He fights fair, but he fights hard. If you need to contact Ali, If you need to contact Ali, you can do so at: . Let's make history . . . rather than waiting for others to do so.

Go to Jim's web site, sign up, and contribute either $20 or as much as you can afford -- and remember, even a dollar will be appreciated. Then, put up on your blog or web site the links and banners I'll make available in the next 24 hours. (I'll be putting them up today on my sites, including: and

Finally, if you want to opt-out of the effort to elect Jim Tedisco, you can do so by hitting reply and putting one word -- "Remove" -- in the subject area.

Note; The following statements by Jim Tedisco demonstrate exactly what this good man stands for. God bless America!

Tedisco says, “I am running for Congress to bring the same passion, energy and proven record of public service I have demonstrated as an Assemblyman to residents of the 20th Congressional District. As Republican Leader of the State Assembly, I led the fight for tax relief, a real property tax cap, a stronger economy, more jobs and fiscal responsibility. I opposed Eliot Spitzer when he tried to steamroll New Yorkers with higher taxes and more wasteful spending. I also led the fight against his unlawful plan to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens and worked to keep the Schenectady Free Health Clinic open and operating when he tried to take political retribution against me for opposing his plan."

My friends, this guy -- Jim Tedisco -- is the real deal. Let's light thousands of candles on his behalf. Please do everything you can to help him.

Monday, February 9, 2009

Barack Obama's "Nameless, Unreasoning Fear"

The motto of the woman pictured below is "Serve the people." To find out what Obama's motto could be, scroll down

Most Americans remember a part of Franklin Roosevelt's Depression-era remarks about fear. Yes, he did say in his 1st Inaugural, "The only thing we have to fear is . . . fear itself," but that's not the whole statement. It went this way, "The only thing we have to fear is . . . fear itself . . . nameless, unreasoning fear." The final three words, starting with "nameless," are extremely important.

Granted, there are situations in which fear is appropriate -- for example, if you wake up and see a hungry grizzly bear climbing through your bedroom window. In a case like that, there's nothing unreasonable about fear. (After the initial surge of terror, of course, the most important thing you can do is to calm down and decide -- reason -- quickly about how you're going to get out of the situation. In other words, act like Captain "Sully," not like Nervous Nellie.

Barack Obama has told us that, without his (potentially catastrophic) Stimulus Bill, we will face a financial "catastrophe." How he knows that -- the reasoning part -- remains unclear. So, why did he appeal to one of our primal instincts? Because he knows -- or at least his speech guru Aexlrod knows -- that fear sells. Scare people half to death and many of them will do your bidding.

The last thing Obama wants his audiences to do is have reasoned responses to his rhetoric. When he tells us, for example, that "95% of the American people are going to get a tax cut," he is lying to us. He knows that nearly 50% of American wage earners (and their immediate dependents) don't pay federal income taxes.

When they get their $500 or $1000 "tax cut" from the Treasury -- and yes, Tim Geithner and Tom Daschle who didn't pay their taxes, will get one -- it will not be a tax refund. Instead, it will be a welfare check. In other words, Obama will be putting half the population on what our grandparents used to call the "dole," welfare. As Obama told Joe the Plumber, it's not about stimulus, but rather about "redistribution of wealth."

Why do such a damaging thing? Because Axelrod/Obama know that dependent people are reliable providers of votes in future elections. When the government basically "owns" someone, he or she expresses gratitude by voting for bigger and bigger government. Sadly, though, he or she is no longer a free, independent citizen.

Thus, we have FDR, along with all other great American leaders, arguing against reliance on "nameless, unreasoning fear." In contrast, we have Obama and his minions relying completely on fear because reason isn't on their side. As every tyrant knows, fear is his most powerful ally.

Gov. Sarah Palin's motto is "Serve the people." In contrast, Obama's seems to be: "Scare the people."

In today's difficult times, we will still sing "God bless America." Yet the more appropriate phrase might be "God help America." In fact, God generally blesses our land most abundantly when the vast majority of Americans do everything in their power to help themselves, their families, and their communities.

Sunday, February 8, 2009

Obama's Stimulus: More "Chicago Politics"

This is a guest column by Sammy Benoit "Yid with a lid," who works tirelessly to bring the truth about Obama to the American people.

Spend-a-porkulus-->Designed to Keep the Democrats in Power for GENERATIONS

If you listen to the conservative pundits, Obama's Spend-a-porkulus, is all about transfer of the economy from the private sector to the public sector and they are correct. But there is another reason for the bill, one that makes it worthwhile to the liberals to pass a bill which, if it doesn't work, will drive their party out of power as quickly as they took over.

However, if this plan does work, it will keep the most liberal of Democrats in power for generations to come.

This plan represents the "best" of Chicago liberal politics as taught by the first Mayor Daley. Daley's chief means of attaining electoral success was his reliance on local precinct captains, who marshaled and delivered votes on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis.

Many of these precinct captains held patronage jobs with the city, mostly minor posts at low pay. Their job was to dole out favors in the name of the Mayor.

President Obama's Spend-a-porkulus bill which stands before congress will translate Mayor Daley's strategies to a national plane.

Allow me to point out two provisions:"Tax Cuts" Here Obama goes around the middle man the local precinct captains and straight to the new votes. With these tax cuts Obama will be courting favor with the poor by developing a tax cut plan which is essentially welfare. US citizens who do not pay taxes will still be receiving money back from the government.

But guess what, it goes way beyond that because ILLEGAL ALIENS will also be getting this "tax cut" rebate from the government.


Remember Obama's favorite community activist group ACORN? They are the ones who helped the future president "get out the votes" registering Obama voters in two or three counties, or registering fictional and/or dead people.

ACORN is under indictment in 12 states.This spending bill provides them with up to $5.2 billion dollars for their housing oriented activities. At the same time, it empowers the organization to act as President Obama's grass roots precinct captains.

Tying it together.

Now consider the above with some other administration policies. Don't forget that the Democrat's policy on immigration is to grant amnesty to the 12.5 million illegal immigrants. Those are 12.5 million new voters who just received a nice "tax break" and put on the fast track for citizenship by the Democratic Party.

Consider also that the White House will now be extra "involved" with the Census. Lets face it. Behind that announcement was to make sure that the Democratic oriented minority and low income cities/states get counted even if it is at the expense of other areas.

What you are really looking an attempt at shifting congressional seats and electoral votes to areas that may be more likely to vote Democratic. And that was before they got all of that "Free Money" from the stimulus bill.

Folks that is why you need to call your Senators and your Congressional Representative (they will have to vote on it again if it passes the Senate) to tell them to vote no on the Spend-a-porkulus. Not only will it bankrupt the country, but it will help the Democrats maintain power for generations.

Saturday, February 7, 2009

Sarah's Contemptible Critics: Judd, Buchwald

Sarah Palin's critics hate pictures like this one, because it reminds them of the relative emptiness of their own lives. (Sarah's chief of staff is seated next to Todd.) Sarah calls trig her "little Michelin man."

The recent criticisms of Sarah Palin by celebrity Ashley Judd and District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald were as predictable as they were malicious. In fact, most of those that take such pot-shots at Gov. Palin are thoroughly contemptible. They're almost invariably offended by the fact she's a Christian, a faith that's incomprehensible to Judd and Buchwald, a faithful spouse, and an dedicated mother who involves her chilren in her life.

Buchwald and Judd are both Democrats, of course. Thus, they recognize Sarah as a threat to their political scams.

Judd reflects a Hollywood culture that celebrates immorality, materialism, and substance abuse. It's a world where money counts -- and ordinary people don't. As far as children go, they're beings who, shortly after birth, are handed off to a collection of nannies -- and told to return when they're 18. It's the world of David Letterman, where sluttish creatures like Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, and Ashley Judd are welcomed nightly as "honored guests."

Judge Buchwald lives in a world characterized by endless lawsuits, high-priced lawyers, and moral depravity. Her husband "represented" -- served as a lawyer for -- Ashley Dupre, the prostitute in the Elliott Spitzer case. What Judge Reice thinks of Miss Dupre and of former Governor and fellow Democrat Spitzer is not clear, but one can imagine.

As for Ms. Judd, what she knows about "wildlife management," an issue for which she's a fundraising shill, could be written on the head of a pin. To someone like her, vicious wolves are cuddly little creatures that she once saw in a Disney movie. The fact that the wolves slaughter caribous and moose -- especially the young and infirm -- never crossed her pea-sized brain.

What are we to make of Sarah's perfervid critics? Most of them are hostile to normal Americans, including Gov. Palin and her family. If they became pregnant with a Down Syndrome child, they would abort it immediately. They place no value on such a child. They certainly wouldn't say that "Got had blessed" them, as Todd and Sarah did when Trig was born.

Sarah Palin is a woman well on her way to making history in America and the world. As for the Judds and Buchwalds of the world, the world will little note -- nor long remember -- them. Sarah should swat them like mosquitos carrying the West Nile virus.