Ft. Hood: Obama's Crotch Salute

This man is a walking human disgrace. Barack Obama is the President of the US, so why can't he, at least occasionally, act like one? You'll notice that his TelePrompter is blocking the faces of the other military figures who are saluting at the Ft. Hood Memorial Service. Obama is neither saluting nor putting his hand over his heart. I guess his question would be, "Why should I?" As a man who's been anti-military since his teen years, he is mystified by American soldiers, people who are ready to give their lives for their country.

Palin Blocks Obama's "Death Panel"

Breaking News: Sarah Palin is back on Twitter, and you can sign up as a follower. Her new handle is: SarahPalinUSA.

Bulletin: Gov. Sarah Palin has won a fierce battle to eliminate Barack Obama's "death panel"provision in the House Energy and Commerce Committee legislation. The so-called "end-of-life" counseling mandates will be eliminated. Read the full story at Pamela Geller 's Atlas Shrugs. (Click link below.) Read the previous column on why the characterization of Obama's panel as one dedicated to death was a good one.

Palin Wins! Death Panels/End of Life Provision to Go

Obama Makes Us Miss Bush

The notion that the robotic, self-absorbed, TelePromputer aided Barack Hussein Obama is "brilliant" is comical. Read on for sayings from Chairman B-O.

If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVD's, when Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?

If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?

If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to “Cinco de Cuatro” in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?

If George W. Bush had miss-spelled the word advice would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as “proof” of what a dunce he is?

If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on “Earth Day”, would you have concluded he’s a hypocrite?If George W. Bush’s administration had okayed Air Force One flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually “get” what happened on 9-11?

If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how he is inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?

If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan’s holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in Chrysler, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?

So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can't think of anything?

Don't worry. He's done all this in 6 months -- so you'll have three years and six months to come up with an answer.

How are Hope and Change going for you today?

Pamela Geller: Obama Behaved Despicably

Pamela Geller on Atlas Shrugs has a remarkable column on the often bizarre behavior of Barack H. Obama. I urge you to read it. (I'll comment more on Sunday about Pamela's revelations.)

Here's the link:http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/08/cnn-tells-sells-more-lies-about-palin-its-time-to-expose-the-truth-about-obama.html

Like Pamela, I've determined that the stream of baseless rumors about Gov. Sarah Palin come directly from Obama's political gurus David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel. (More about this in coming days.)

You got it: "Our" president is a scumbag. No Mt. Rushmore for him.

Obama Continues Endless "Apology Tour"

I will be writing the rest of this week about Barack Obama's visit to Germany and, especially, about his trip to Egypt, where he doubtlessly will slobber all over his fellow Muslims. The absolute last thing Obama wants to do is to confront Muslims with their religious intolerance, their support for Jihad (mass murder), and their disgraceful treatment of women.

Who knows, perhaps he'll finally admit that he is a Muslim. In the campaign he used to talk about his "Christian faith." And then we found said "Christian faith" was based on Rev. Wright's hatred of America, white people, and women (mainly Hillary Clinton).

Pray for the USA, my friends. (Note: The previous columns regarding Dr. George Tiller are available if you scroll down.)

Hope, Change Become Grope, Harangue

The best characterization of Obama's speech today: "Hope and Change Become Grope and Harangue." Only Barack Obama could create a situation where, by contrast, Dick Cheney starts sounding like Abraham Lincoln. Michelle Obama once famously said, "America is a downright mean country." From the evidence of her husband's remarks, he clearly agrees with her.

There was much to dislike about the substance of Obama's ridiculous speech on "national security" (national insecurity?), but the worst part of it was his incredibly pompous tone. We often hear what a "great speaker" Obama is. In fact, he's a terrible speaker, and his speechwriter isn't any better.

He's in love with phrases like "on a daily basis." What that really means is "daily." The other words -- on, a, and basis -- are unnecessary. A good, straightforward speaker would know that.

He also uses uses phrases like "categorically reject" whenever he's talking about anything done by George W. Bush. What's the difference between "categorically reject" and just plain "reject?" There is no difference.

My friend Jill in Hawaii notes some more obnoxious Obamaisms: he also likes to use the phrases "fundamentally disagree" and "let me clearly state." All his minions use the same phrases (I just saw one on Fox News).

"Fundamentally disagree" means nothing more than "disagree." As for his "let me clearly state," the words are all unnecessary. Just state it, Barack. Don't tell us that you're about to state something.

Barack also tells us he's against "fear-mongering." Gee, is there anyone in America advocating it? The Obama Administration seems to believe that anyone with a justifiable fear of terrorism belongs on Napolitano's long list of supposed extremists.

In his speech today Barack talked of the "hateful ideology" of the people who used to be called, in a previous administration, terrorists. Alas, Obama didn't tell us anything about that ideology or who holds it. To do so might have offended some Muslims, the source of the aforesaid hateful ideology. Of course, a man who could sit through Rev. Wright's sermons for 20 years may have a strange definition of what's hateful.

Obama is NOT a great speaker. He's a guy with a baritone voice who reads a TelePrompter filled up with some inept speechwriter's words. Obama has too many words and too little substance. In short, he's a windbag.

Meditation: Obama's Trashing of America

Let's see: Obama's crowd trashing the National Mall area, Obama's trashing the Cabinet by appointing tax cheats and other lowlifes, and Obama trashing Sarah Palin (by calling her a "pig" -- see the column below.) Was the crowd that left the mess below the same one roaring its approval of Obam's stirring words about the need for environmental protection?

The "shining city up on a hill" turning rapidly into Obama-Land

Obama looks out at middle-America, such as those of us in western Pennsylvania (who voted for McCain-Palin), and he doesn't like what he sees. We're the ones he described as "clinging" to our guns, our religion, and our ethnocentrism. We're the ones Obama's ally, Jack Murtha, described as "racists" and "rednecks." When it comes to people like us, no amount of verbal trashing is seen as excessive.

Talk-show-hostess Tammy Bruce got an inbox-full of hate mail for calling Obama "trash." Tammy has a bad habit of telling the truth -- about the murderous O. J. Simpson, about the woman-hating Democratic Party, and about the "Garbage Man in Chief," Barack Hussein Obama. FDR gave us the New Deal; JFK gave us the New Frontier; apparently, Obama is giving us the New Landfill.

As a guest ("Eric") said this morning on FOX, "You can't pour perfume on a skunk." Yes, the poet was right when he said, "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet," but as the poet didn't observe, "A bag of trash by any other name would smell as foul."

Of course, Obama and his "lovely" wife don't see themselves as trash. Instead, they look in the mirror (a lot) and see "beautiful people," the attractive, the rich, and the powerful. The gaze out at American and see "The Great Unwashed," the people to whom they'll throw scraps in the form of the Stimulus Package. As for the individuals they see as particularly unbeautiful, such as the people in Special Olympics, they're little more than the butt of jokes. The unborn? Cast them out with the rest of the . . . trash.

If Obama continues as he has, "America the Beautiful" will turn into "America, the Kingdom of Garbage," the place you see above in the graphic. Change? Yes. But change we will experience with disbelief . . . and a growing sense of hopelessness.

OBAMA'S CONTEMPT FOR FELLOW AMERICANS

"I swear The One [Obama] knew what he was saying [about Special Olympics] and that it was a slam on Palin." (My friend Cindy's "take")

We need to recognize -- and to communicate to others -- that Obama and those around him are slimeballs, whose endless gaffes and smears are part of their nature. Many of you might remember his offensive statement about Nancy Reagan -- after which, as with the Special Olympics people -- he called to "apologize." In the campaign, he clearly referred to Gov. Palin as a "pig" -- and didn't apologize.

How do elitists like Obama look at the children and young adults in Special Olympics? With contempt, of course. The chances of Michelle Obama ever giving birth to a Down Syndrome child are something less than zero. The embryo would have been aborted without question and thrown out with hospital garbage. To the Obamas and their admirers children who are less than perfect have no right to intrude on their lives.

The Obamas are what the media call "beautiful people." Anybody who is unbeautiful is someone they avoid. People who are handicapped -- or have handicapped children -- are butts of jokes and derision..

Frankly, someone like Sarah Palin and her family -- or like the people reading this -- are incomprehensible to the Obamas. They hate the Palins because they stand for something -- rather than self-absorption. Sarah talks about the need for leaders to have a "servant's heart." To the Obamas, a servant is someone who takes care of their dirty laundry.

How should we react to the narcissistic Obama and his malicious? Give them no quarter. By doing what they do and being who they are they diminish the value of life. Like their admirer John Edwards, they suffer from chronic narcissism and egotism.

[Note: On Sunday, I'll write about solutions to America's education -- and explain why Obama will do no better on education than Bill Clinton did.]

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.

Palin, Obama: Psychology of Victory

"I want hip-hop Republicans. I want Frank Sinatra Republicans." (Michael Steele, new head of the Republican National Committee). Sarah Palin, with one foot in the hip-hop world and another in the Sinatra-era would nod in vigorous approval at Steele's statement.

Do the vast majority of Americans really understand what's going on in politics? No, they do not.

That's the view proposed by Lee Atwater, the greatest political strategist of modern times -- yes, he was better than Karl Rove, better even that Obama's campaign guru, David Axelrod. He helped engineer Reagan's landslide reelection in 1984 and was George H. W. Bush's campaign manager in the winning effort against Dukakis in 1988.

This week on both of my blogs (http://draftpalin2012.blogspot.com/ and http:stevemaloneygop.blogspot.com) I'll be writing about Atwater's insights -- and suggesting how they're similar to Gov. Sarah Palin's approach to political success. The emphasis will be on the psychology of winning.

Regarding Atwater, he's the subject of perhaps the most intriguing political biography of recent decades. It's John Brady, Bad Boy: The Life and Politics of Lee Atwater, Addison-Wesley, 1997 It's beautifully written and profoundly substantial. Brady, a journalist and a consultant to magazine publishers, is a former editor of Boston and Writer's Digest. He wrote The Craft of Interviewing, a classic how-to book for journalists, and The Craft of the Screenwriter.

The material below has several quotes from Brady's Atwater book. As you read the excerpts, consider the two most remarkable politics events of this decade: (1) Barack Obama's election as America's first African-American President; (2) Sarah Palin's victories in 2006 over incumbent Republican Governor (and former U.S. Senator) Frank Murkowski and then over popular former Democratic Governor Tony Knowles.

How did Obama and Palin accomplish these feats? You'll never find out from the MSM, which presents a simple-minded view of what happens in big-time electoral politics.

In fact, Palin and Obama, both master politicians, plugged into a powerful attitudinal current: a yearning for CHANGE. They both offered HOPE to people who had become so exasperated by politics-as-usual that they had veered to the edge of hopelessness.

Lee Atwater died of cancer at a young age in 1991. However, as you'll see below, he would have understood why people like Barack Obama and Sarah Palin won. It had little to do with "issues" -- and even less to do with stated "opinions." It had everything to do with deeply held --and mainly emotional -- attitudes.

Brady describes Atwater's key insights this way: "[In life generally and politics specifically], It's not what happens to us that matters - it's how we interpret what happens to us. The interpretation establishes an attitude, which can then be catered to emotionally - [a form of] mental crowd control. When we want your opinion, we'll give it to you."

(In other words, attitudes drive opinions -- not vice versa. Concentrate on attidues, and the opinions will follow.)

In Atwater's words, "attitudes are deeply ingrained. You can't even necessarily verbalize them."
In other words, attitudes are so powerful that they override even what we believe are our opinions. They are deep within us -- visceral and largely subconscious.

Brady adds, "Before going negative on an opponent . . . he [Atwater] cultivated strong positive attitudes among the electorate. He used impressionistic images and symbols to depict his candidate in such a way that perception 'can't be busted up even with opinion changes on specific issues that my opponent might accomplish.'"

(By the way, Sarah Palin is even better at using images and symbols -- especially ones related to her husband and children -- than Obama. Everything Palin does reinforces her most powerful theme: "She's one of us." She's a mother, a wife, a middle-class woman whose life closely resembles ours. And, wonder of wonders, she's HONEST!)

Brady observes, "The average voter was kind of slow, actually . . . . The average voter could absorb only a limited amount of information about his candidate, Lee thought, and should never be bewildered with specifics"

Brady goes on, "Lee realized that in order to get swing votes, [George H.W.] Bush had to tap voters' emotions instead of their brains. It was Lee's job [as a campaign guru] to find the specific example, the outrageous abuse, the easy-to-digest tale that made listeners feel - usually, repulsion - rather than think. Like the old carnival barker, he needed a hook to get them into the tent."

In future blog columns , I'll discuss more of Atwater's insights -- and how they can help a Sarah Palin get voters "into the tent."

Obama-Axelrod: Deceit, Information Grabs

Note: Until Jan. 1, 2009, I'll be cross-posting here and on http://camp2008victorya.blogspot.com. I'll have fresh columns 5-6 times per week on http://draftpalin2012.blogspot.com.

Dear Friends: Please read the following (in italics) from Janet of the ReadMyLipstickNetwork. "I expect all of you would check out a website before adding it as a link or making it part of your blogroll, and you may already be familiar with this one, however, just to be on the safe side wanted to let you know that www.electpalin.com redirects straight to a donation page for Obama / Biden. Someone just sent it to us wanting to join the network. Ha ha. We've also had one titled 'when pigs can fly palin' want to join..." -- Janet


The Obama Campaign does something people like Janet and I, as well as other Palin backers, will NEVER do: it participates in "information grabs," an especially sleazy practice.

What is an "information grab?" Let me give you an example: if you remember back to August, Axelrod/Obama announced that people who gave them their cell phone numbers would get an early heads-up on The Chosen One's vice-presidential choice.In fact, the text message about the Biden selection went out 3-4 hours AFTER the news announcement appeared on TV.

So, the people who provided the cell numbers got nothing of value. On the other hand, what did the Obama Campaign get? It received valuable information: more than 500,000 cell phone numbers. Thus, it was able to use those numbers to solicit donations and other forms of support. It was underhanded and cynical.

Sadly, it was helpful to a campaign willing to do anything to win the election. Axelrod/Obama had no interest in providing real information to its supporters. It had great interest in stealing their cell phone numbers.

Obama and his personal Svengali, the odious David Axelrod, will do any to undermine Gov. Palin, their most feared opponent. One of my favorite quotes -- a masterpiece of alliteration -- from early in the presidential campaign was a headline in the Black Conservatives Group, which read, "Democrats Desperate to Dig Up Dirt to Destroy Palin.' Famously, Obama dispatched 30 lawyers to Alaska to find out -- and to make up -- information harmful to the Governor.

What dirt did they find? Basically, they discovered none. Thus, it largely fell to Obama supporters, such as "Markos," the founder of Daily Kos, to invent preposterous stories aimed at harming the Governor.

One of those was the Kos story that Bristol Palin was the mother of baby Trig. Of course, it turned out that when Trig was born, Bristol was newly pregnant with her own unborn child, whose name will not be "Trig." In short, the Kos story was despicable, an outright lie.

Did the many lies hurt Gov. Palin? Sadly, they did. People are gullible. If they hear something on CNN or MSNBC, two of the main media culprits, the tendency is to believe it. I avoid such a temptation by never watching CNN or MSNBC.

"Information" from the Obama Campaign -- and, trust me, it continues -- is invariably false or misleading. With them, mendacity is a way of life. In their world, "spin" is reality. Thus, Obama and friends delight in grabbing information from unwitting individuals. However, they don't PROVIDE information -- factual, verifiable truths.

I've taken a few days off, but I'll be writing again on my main blogs, including this one and http://draftpalin2012.blogspot.com) My emphasis will be on simple, practical steps Gov. Palin should take to build up support to defeat Obama in 2012.

If you've been watching Sarah Palin on TV recently, you may note that she's doing everything necessary to take such a step -- aside, perhaps from wearing a "Palin for President" button.Mainly because of his embrace of deceit, cynicism, and voter fraud, Obama is not going to be easy to beat. However, defeating him is not a hopeless task. In fact, if John McCain had received a million more votes in the right states he would now be President-elect.

There's no reason Sarah Palin couldn't get those million votes -- and then some. Remember, it's not necessary to win the popular vote, which skews in the favor of the Democratic candidate (mainly because he gets huge majorities in CA, NY, and IL). Prevailing in the electoral college is lot easier than winning a "paper" majority in the popular vote.

NOTE: I'd be very interested in your own thoughts on any of the subjects covered here, particularly steps you believe the Gov. should take. Thanks.

And Happy Thanksgiving to all! Let's continue to take the actions necessary to make Thanksgiving, 2012 the happiest one of all.

Economics, Obama, Stupid Voters

"The number of ignorant people in America is growing much faster than the number of intelligent ones." (Chris H, paraphrase)

The Saturday morning business segment on FOX News has its moments of silliness and posturing. But if you listen carefully, you'll learn more about jobs and the economy in one morning than the average Obama Supporter has learned in a lifetime.

For example, "the top 10% of wage-earners [Joe the Plumber is smiling] pay 80% of federal income taxes." Barack Obama knows this startling fact, but you'll never hear him or and other left-wing Democrats admit it. The average American, according to various surveys, knows nothing about the huge "patriotic" (?) "contributions" (?) made by high wage earners. Our typical American apparently believes -- falsely, absurdly -- that high wage-earners pay little or nothing in taxes.

People like Obama and Biden make lucrative careers out of fostering such illusions. Alas, when its comes to economic knowledge, the average American is relentlessly . . . average. As such, he or she is the custodian of a vast horde of misinformation.

Another FOX insight: since the stock market crash in 1987, how much has the "tech-heavy" NASDAQ index declined? In fact, since that sharp market decline two decades ago, the NASDAQ has gone UP by 486%. That number takes into account the the recent decline.

If you focus on that time period (1987 until now), it would have been wise to put ALL your money in NASDAQ equities. Your investment then to now would have skyrocketed. Oh, and if you'd been able to put a portion of your Socal Security contributions into the NASDAQ, as Bush and McCain proposed -- and Obama opposed -- you'd be looking at an affluent retirement. Of course, your involuntary "contributions" to the Social Security Trust Fund really didn't grow at all -- since the money went out as fast as it came in.

Again, we turn to FOX: What about Obama's plan to dole out $500 (or more) to all Americans earning less than $250,000 a year? Isn't that just what he calls it, a tax "rebate?" No, it isn't because the $500 would go both to most of the 60% of wage earners who DO pay taxes -- and to all the 40% who don't pay taxes.

In other words, for approximately 100 million Americans who don't pay federal income taxes, the $500 would be a welfare check. It would be especially welcomed by Obama's core demographic: the tens of million of non-income-tax payors who will be voting for the Illinois Senator.

There are just a few paragraphs in this piece. But they contain information that most American voters should know -- but don't. The smart Americans, those who are economically savvy, will not generally be voting for Obama. The stupid Americans -- those who know as much about economics as they do astrophysics -- will cast their ballots heavily for the Illinois Senator.

Why do left-wing Democrats like Obama continue humoring -- and deceiving -- ignorant people, uninformed voters? They do so because it's good politics. They may end up wrecking the economy, but -- unfortunately -- such demagogues will rarely lack for work themselves.

Putting Obama in charge of the economy is like making Rev. Wright president of a theology school.

Sarah Palin's motto is: "Serve the people." Her motto, unlike Obama's, is NOT "delude the people."



steve maloneyambridge, pa