Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Hussein Obama and GM – Lying Again

Is GM lying to the American people?

Some in Congress are wondering:

A handful of lawmakers are accusing General Motors of misleading the public by continuing to claim as part of its advertising blitz that the auto giant has repaid its government loans "in full."

General Motors has been running ads on all the major networks claiming the company repaid its $6.7 billion U.S. government loan "with interest five years ahead of the original schedule." General Motors Company CEO Ed Whitacre can be seen in the ad walking through an auto plant as he touts the company's progress.

But lawmakers, and even the inspector general for the bailout fund GM borrowed from, point out that General Motors only repaid the bailout money by dipping into a separate pot of bailout money. They say the company did not actually use its own earnings to make the early payment and are questioning why executives are making such a big deal out of it.

"The hype is not the reality," Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote in a column on FoxNews.com over the weekend. "It is far from clear how GM and the Obama administration could honestly say, much less trumpet in prime time television ads, that GM repaid its TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) loans in any meaningful way."

Grassley wrote a letter last week to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner expressing his concerns and asking for more information about why the company was allowed to use bailout money to repay bailout money.

I have a reason. 

It's because Obama is, by proxy, now running GM and Obama is all about fooling the people all of the time. It's in Obama's best interest, not GM's, that GM look as if it's turned the corner whether it's true or not.

When you think Obama, you should be thinking shenanigans... and this whole GM ad thing is beginning to reek of the man.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Obama the Racist

Obama speaks with unusual demographic frankness about his coalition in his appeal to "young people, African-Americans, Latinos, and women who powered our victory in 2008 [to] stand together once again."

So if you belong not to any of those demographics, the President apparently cares little about you or your interests.

The Race-Transcender-In-Chief doing his level best to divide the American people.  It's one of his programs that's actually working.

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Profiling and Muslim Extremist

(Date Posted:04/17/2010 2:50 PM)

PM)

#12 is interesting

Absolutely no profiling! Pause a moment, reflect back, and take the following multiple choice test.
These events are actual events from history - they really happened! Do you remember?
HERE'S THE TEST

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by:
a. Superman
b. Jay Leno
c. Harry Potter
d. A Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40

2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by:
a. Olga Corbett
b. Sitting Bull
c. Arnold Schwarzenegger
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 to 40

3. In 1979, the US Embassy in Iran was taken over by:
a. Lost Norwegians
b. Elvis
c. A tour bus full of 80 year old women
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 to 40

4. During the 1980's, a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:
a. John Dillinger
b. The King of Sweden
c. The Boy Scouts
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:
a. pizza delivery boy
b. Pee Wee Herman
c. Geraldo Rivera
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

6. In 1985, the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered
and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:
a. The Smurfs
b. Davey Jones
c. The Little Mermaid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

7. In 1985, TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:
a. Captain Kidd
b. Charles Lindberg
c. Mother Teresa
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

8. In 1988, Pan Am flight 103 was bombed by:
a. Scooby Doo
b. The tooth fairy
c. The Sundance Kid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

9. In 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
a. Richard Simmons
b. Grandma Moses
c. Michael Jordan
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:
a. Mr. Rogers
b. Hillary Clinton, to distract Wild Bill's women problems
c. The World Wrestling Federation
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

11. On September 11, 2001, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade
Centers; one crashed into the Pentagon; and one was diverted and crashed by passengers. Thousands of
People were killed by:
a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
b. The Supreme Court of Florida
c. Mr. Bean
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

12. In 2002, the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:
a. Enron
b. The Lutheran Church
c. The NFL
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40

13. In 2002, reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
a. Bonnie and Clyde
b. Captain Kangaroo
c. Billy Graham
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
No, I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you? So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone,
particularly fanatics intent on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people.
They must conduct random searches of 80 year old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification secret agents,
who are members of the President's security detail, 85 year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor
winner and former Governor Joe Foss, but leave Muslim Males between the ages of 17 and 40 alone lest they be
guilty of profiling.


Let's send this to as many people as we can.


Foot note: Fort Hood Texas - another Muslim 39 years old killed 13 and wounded 30 others. Does this fit the profile?


NOW, we are being told that the young Muslim that attempted to blow up Northwest/ Delta jet on Christmas Day was "an isolated incident". YOU HAVE GOT TO BE #$%#@* KIDDING ME

Friday, April 23, 2010

Barack Hussein Obama’s Dishonest Census Form

Barack Obama’s Dishonest Census Form

April 23, 2010 by Chip Wood

Barack Obama’s Dishonest Census Form

The White House couldn’t wait to trumpet the news: When President Barack Obama completed his official form for this year’s census he declared that he was… are you ready for this?… black.

For the next 24 hours, the announcement led the news in the national media. It was the top story on CNN.com, the network news shows, cable television and just about everywhere else I looked. For nearly a week, you couldn’t escape it: “The President of the United States says that he is black!”

Give me a break, please. Obama has been trumpeting his blackness for decades. Appearing on Late Show with David Letterman back in 2009, Obama brought the house down when he said, “First of all, I think it’s important to realize that I was actually black before the election.” Harty-har-har. When the laughter died down, Letterman played the perfect stooge by asking, “How long have you been a black man?”

Lost in all the chortling are two very important points. First of all, Obama isn’t really black; he is a person of mixed race. In the olden days, he would have been called a mulatto.

Second, the president had every opportunity to recognize this on the census form. It is no longer necessary to select between black and white (or Asian or American Indian, for that matter). If it is more accurate to say so, you can check two or three or even four boxes.

To the best of my knowledge, Tiger Woods has not disclosed what he said on his census form. But in the past he has identified himself as a “Cablinasian”—that is, a combination of Caucasian, black, Indian and Asian. It’s not only a more honest declaration than our president made; it also suggests that Tiger doesn’t take the matter of race as seriously as Obama does.

Then again, it’s his talent at golf, not his color that has made Tiger Woods one of the wealthiest and most famous athletes in history. While Obama obviously believes that it is his blackness that enabled him to become our president—not to mention a multimillionaire—thanks to the sales of his best-selling book, Dreams of My Father, which chronicled his search for his black identity.

His fixation with his black identity also helps explain why he and his wife Michelle could be members of Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Trinity Church for so many years, without uttering a word of protest over his preacher’s overt racism. Obama remained a member in good standing of the church (which described itself as “an instrument of Black self-determination”) until it began to cost him votes.

But what about Obama’s white heritage? In declaring on the census form that he was black, the president in effect disowned his own mother; not to mention her parents—his maternal grandparents—who raised him for most of his childhood. All three were unquestionably white. The only black in the family was the father who abandoned him in childhood. I can appreciate how traumatic that abandonment must have been. But does that justify ignoring the white half of your heritage? Doesn’t that strike you as a tiny bit ungrateful?

By the way, there’s an interesting footnote here. While the changes to the census form were being debated 10 years ago, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and other civil-rights groups fiercely opposed allowing people to select multiple races to designate their heritage. At the time, they were concerned that too many “blacks” would check other boxes as well, with the result that “black” numbers would drop dramatically—thus reducing how much aid and other federal favoritism would continue to be bestowed on them.

It turns out that there was no basis for this concern: To the relief of everyone campaigning for more government benefits, any person who identified himself or herself as even partially black is included in the “black” total.

Does anyone besides me detect something incredibly racist in this whole issue? I keep thinking of the plot of “Show Boat,” one of the greatest musicals in the history of U.S. theatre. I’m sure most of you remember the 1951 movie starring Kathryn Grayson and Howard Keel. If you don’t, rent it sometime soon. It is absolutely enchanting.

In case you’ve forgotten, the plot turns on a bitterly racist fact of the times. Pete, the thuggish engineer on board the Cotton Blossom show boat, makes a play for Julie La Verne, the leading lady. Julie’s husband Steve, the leading man, beats him off. Swearing revenge, Pete tells the local sheriff that Julie is a mulatto and that she and Steve are guilty of miscegenation, which was a crime in Natchez, Miss., at the time.

Before the sheriff arrives, Steve takes a knife, cuts Julie’s hand, and swallows some of her blood. He then tells the law and the crew that he, too, is black—because he has “one drop of Negro blood in him.” Witnesses confirm that this is, in fact, true, and the sheriff drops the charges. Of course Steve and Julie have to leave the show and the ship.

In much of America at the time (the story takes place in the 1880s, when the scars of the Civil War still ran deep), one drop of Negro blood was all it took to be considered black.

I would like to believe that we in this country have come much further since then. I’d like to believe that the majestic words spoken by Obama at the 2004 Democratic National Convention are true, when he proclaimed, “There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America.”

I’d like to believe it. But by his racist response to the U.S. Census, Obama has shown he doesn’t. In fact, his actions have delayed the day when they will be true. Shame on him for what he did… for denying his heritage and for helping make old wounds bleed anew.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

—Chip Wood

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Obama and his policies

It would be comforting to say that President Obama is a victim of his own naivete and ego. There's no doubt he loves hearing from human refuse like Medvedev that he is "a thinker," unlike "other people" (read: George W. Bush). But there's more to it than simple ego appeasement. There is a disturbing anti-Americanism that animates Obama and his policies. Rev. Jeremiah Wright famously said, "God damn America." God doesn't have to. Obama's doing it for him.

Tea Parties vs Obama’s National Media

Brent Bozell :: Townhall.com Columnist

Tea Parties vs. Hard-Left Protests

by Brent Bozell

In the mind's eye of the conservative movement, the Tea Party phenomenon right now is maybe the crucial factor in slowing socialism in Washington, on everything from the federal health care takeover to the hidden taxes of cap-and-trade legislation.

It's also a fascinating visual. When was the last time you saw such a spontaneous eruption of conservative grassroots anger, coast to coast? On both counts, the Tea Party movement should be cause for massive television coverage. Except for one thing. It's a conservative uprising, so it gets different treatment.

It's ignored as long as possible, and when it's no longer possible to be ignored, it's savaged.

The movement was launched in February 2009, when CNBC's Rick Santelli suggested throwing a "tea party" to protest government takeovers. A new study by Rich Noyes of the Media Research Center found only 19 news stories on the Tea Party movement for the entire year on ABC, CBS and NBC. The Obama family dog received more attention.

How anemic is this? Compare those 19 stories in all of 2009 with 41 stories the networks gave the "Million Mom March" against gun rights in 2000 -- and all before the math-challenged protest even happened. Consider racist and anti-Semitic Rev. Louis Farrakhan's "Million Man March." On Oct. 16, 1995, ABC, CBS and NBC together aired 21 stories just on one night.

The difference in tone was just as dramatic. Amazingly, the Tea Parties were assumed to be racist, but Farrakhan's event was not. ABC anchor Peter Jennings devoted all but 75 seconds of his newscast to promotional goo for the Nation of Islam.

Jennings sanitized the gathering. "For most of the hundreds of thousands who came here today, the event far overshadowed the man who organized it," Jennings claimed. He concluded the show on Farrakhan's behalf, that "it would be a terrible mistake not to recognize that here today he inspired many people, and in a broader sense, as one participant here after another has reaffirmed, this day, at this time and at this place, really did mean unity over division."

Jennings defied logic, and his own ears. The event meant "unity over division" even as speakers angrily attacked whites for "rolling toxic waste" into black communities, and screamed about the "growing racism and incipient fascism of white America." A young poet called blacks "God's divine race."

Compare that to the Tea Party stories. The victory of Sen. Scott Brown in Massachusetts spurred heavier network TV attention, another 42 stories in 2010. But now that they had to cover the Tea Party, the tone turned negative: Overall, 27 of 61 stories (44 percent) openly suggested the movement was fringy or extremist.

Contrast ABC's Peter Jennings then with ABC's Dan Harris now. Farrakhan was somehow a uniter, not a divider. But Harris warned Tea Party protesters "waved signs likening Obama to Hitler and the devil. ... Some prominent Obama supporters are now saying that it paints a picture of an opposition driven, in part, by a refusal to accept a black president."

And with that, everyone associated with the Tea Party movement, and everyone in sympathy with the Tea Party movement, had just been neatly tarred with the racism brush. What dramatic selectivity of "news judgment"! At left-wing rallies, reporters consistently and easily ignored hateful and extremist podium speeches from protest organizers. They paid no attention to objectionable signs. "Bush Lied, Thousands Died!" Big deal!

But at a conservative event, they go searching high and low for the kookiest, fringiest protester in a crowd of tens of thousands, so they can smear the entire crowd as a racist gathering.

The sanitize-the-left pattern happened at antiwar marches before the Iraq war in 2003. Signs at one January protest included "Bush Is a Terrorist," "USA Is #1 Terrorist" and "The NYPD Are Terrorists Too." Hateful? Objectionable? Not on your life!

ABC's Bill Blakemore ignored them, lauding the diversity of the marchers, "Democrats and Republicans, many middle-aged, from all walks of life." As one ABC producer admitted during the George H.W. Bush years, "We were looking for mainstream demonstrators."

The other networks echoed that approach. Take the issue of violence. On Feb. 15, 2003, "peace" demonstrators in New York injured eight police officers, and several protesters were arrested. But CBS reporter Jim Acosta still referred to the event as peaceful: "Despite some arrests and clashes with police, it was, for the most part, a peaceful reminder to the powerful that there is a divide over whether the nation should go to war."

Just weeks ago, when the Tea Party crowd came to Capitol Hill against ObamaCare, no one was arrested. But network anchors like NBC's Brian Williams were still lamenting that the health care debate had "veered into threats of violence."

This isn't "news" coverage. It's carpet-bombing.

Obama’s Media Lackeys

In the mind's eye of the conservative movement, the Tea Party phenomenon right now is maybe the crucial factor in slowing socialism in Washington, on everything from the federal health care takeover to the hidden taxes of cap-and-trade legislation.

It's also a fascinating visual. When was the last time you saw such a spontaneous eruption of conservative grassroots anger, coast to coast? On both counts, the Tea Party movement should be cause for massive television coverage. Except for one thing. It's a conservative uprising, so it gets different treatment.

It's ignored as long as possible, and when it's no longer possible to be ignored, it's savaged.

Monday, April 12, 2010

Tea Party Movement

April 12, 2010 by Bob Livingston

Tea Parties vs. Socialist Redistributionists

Although President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and their elite socialistic foot soldiers cast it in pleasant, humanitarian terms as a means of providing healthcare to those who couldn’t otherwise afford it, the majority of Americans recognized Obamacare for what it was: a transfer of wealth to Big Pharma, trial lawyers, unions and other special interests and a power grab over society’s producers.

Hence, the growth of the Tea Party movement across the United States.

-------- >

Read the whole article here:

Tea Parties vs. Socialist Redistributionists

Thursday, April 08, 2010

Obama and National Security

Blog Entry that is right on the money. 

Obama strikes "Islamic extremism" and "jihad" from National Security strategy documents

No word yet if he's replacing those terms with references to Christian militias:

President Barack Obama's advisers will remove religious terms such as "Islamic extremism" from the central document outlining the U.S. national security strategy and will use the rewritten document to emphasize that the United States does not view Muslim nations through the lens of terror, counterterrorism officials said.

The change is a significant shift in the National Security Strategy, a document that previously outlined the Bush Doctrine of preventative war and currently states: "The struggle against militant Islamic radicalism is the great ideological conflict of the early years of the 21st century."

The officials described the changes on condition of anonymity because the document still was being written, and the White House would not discuss it. But rewriting the strategy document will be the latest example of Obama putting his stamp on U.S. foreign policy, like his promises to dismantle nuclear weapons and limit the situations in which they can be used.

At what point, and I'm serious as I've ever been in asking, at what point will we see that the internal threats to our National Security are exceeding our external threats as to the degree of risk to the country?

Anyone?

Sunday, April 04, 2010

America Under ObamaCare

America Under ObamaCare, Day 9: The CBO says Obama's student loan overhaul could add $52 billion to the deficit by 2020. Sallie Mae says the legislation will force the company to reduce its 8,600-person workforce by 2,500. Oh, and ObamaCare will cost Texas $27 billion. A wonderful economic recovery plan, wouldn't you say?


Guest David Byrd says ObamaCare could jack up your ski lift ticket prices. Small businesses are going to suffer and go under because of the mandates and fines in this law.