Tag Archives: president of the United States.

Daily Obama Outrage

Posted on by
Reply

We’re still experiencing fall out from the Obama inauguration. Move over, Dr. King, President Obama wants to make a new holiday on yours.

From Conservative Daily News comes this:

It appears as though there is a new National Holiday- “National Day of Hope and Resolve”. This is the White House Release on Obama’s Proclamation for yesterday, the day of his second inauguration. The pomp and circumstance isn’t enough, he needs to remind the entire country that it’s ALL about him.

Here’s his letter:

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION

Four years ago, the American people came together to chart a new course through an uncertain hour. We chose hope over fear and hard work during hardship, confident that the age-old values that had guided our Nation through even its darkest days would be sufficient to meet the trials of our time.

Together, we have brought a decade of war toward a responsible end. We have saved our economy from collapse and fought for a future where everyone has an equal chance at opportunity. Millions of men, women, and children have made service their mission, reaffirming that America’s greatest strength lies not in might or wealth, but in the bonds we share with one another.

Today, I have sworn an oath to preserve the fundamental freedoms and protections that are the lasting birthright of all who call this land home. I stand humbled by the responsibilities entrusted to me by our people, and I pray God’s grace will see us through the tests we will surely face in the days ahead. But even as I assume once more the solemn duty of this Presidency, let us also remember that the oath I spoke shares much in common with those taken by every service member and every immigrant, and with the pledge we make before our flag. These are the words of America’s citizens, and they represent our greatest hope.

On the opposite end of the National Mall from where I delivered my address, a preacher once told us “we cannot walk alone.” Empowered by our faith in each other and united by the purpose that binds our fates as one, let us learn again that most enduring lesson. Let us renew our resolve to meet the challenges of our age together. And when our grandchildren reflect on the history we leave, let them say we did what was required of us, that our words were true to our Founders’ dreams for a young Republic and our actions foretold the dawn of a new and brighter day.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 21, 2013, a National Day of Hope and Resolve. I call upon all Americans to join together in courage, in compassion, and in purpose to more fully realize the eternal promises of our founding and the more perfect Union that must remain ever within our reach.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-first day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.

Barack Obama

In case future generations forget his greatness, the president wants a reminder.

Who Talks Like This?

Posted on by
Reply

It’s almost hard to believe a president of the United States would urge voting as a means of revenge. But that’s what Obama does in this clip from a speech in Ohio today.


Revenge for what? Revenge against your fellow Americans? Revenge of the unsuccessful towards the successful? The poor vs. the affluent?

His rhetoric is scary. We’re very close to mob rule here.

Forward to Socialism

Posted on by
Reply

Sunday at a fundraiser in Chicago, one of the five he managed to squeeze into one day, the president of the United States made a pitch for a new, socialist/marxist America:

Shared prosperity. Let that sink in. How is that different from communism?

Obama’s obviously serious about this vision because here he is in a weekly radio address from April of last year. Notice he uses “shared prosperity” again but this time he throws in “shared responsibility.”

This comment is not some outlier. Nor was his “you didn’t build it remark.” He means to take us to a completely different economic and social system and it’s not one that was shared by the Founding Fathers.

Gotchas Avoided on 60 Minutes

Posted on by
Reply

Probably the most important part of the 60 Minutes interview last night with Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan was left on the cutting room floor.

Not by accident, either, in my opinion. Bob Schieffer discussed Medicare with Ryan who correctly targeted Obama as the one who will cut it and explained that his mother relies on Medicare. He did not want her or other old people to suffer from the drastic cuts coming to Medicare.

But that clip didn’t make it to the television audience. Maybe because it goes against the Democrat talking point of scaring seniors? Ya think?

The interview that did make air time showed a team on the ball for whatever Schieffer threw at them.

Romney and Ryan were completely at ease, the ease that comes with believing in your message and knowing it is the right one. Neither was mean spirited or desperate. Ryan summed up their campaign as focusing on “here’s how you get the country back on track.” They don’t plan on demonizing Obama, although his plan seems to be solely that towards them.

Schieffer did not press for details. He skirted any substantive policy plans and specifics about the economy. I guess he’ll leave that to the practiced Democrat slime machine.

It was a good first impression of the candidates. Schieffer brought up Romney’s introductory flub. He has introduced Ryan on Saturday as the next president of the United States. Romney acknowledged it with a laugh and recalled that then candidate Barack Obama had done the same thing in introducing Biden.

I guess I haven’t looked at 60 Minutes for a long time, but was that Morley Safer doing the intro? He looks like he’s barely hanging on. Sometimes it’s better to go out while you’re ahead.

The Odd Case of Commerce Sec. Bryson

Posted on by
Reply

When news broke of the Commerce Secretary being involved in a series of accidents over the weekend, most people reacted with “who IS the Commerce Secretary?”

During the Bush administration it was well known. First it was Bush Texas pal Don Evans, followed by former Kellogg executive Carlos Gutierrez. These men frequented television political talk shows – in an appropriate manner – neither hiding from the spotlight nor wallowing in it.

But Bryson? He’s been a stealth Commerce Secretary. Odd, when you consider that he’s tenth in line to the throne, so to speak. At an economic time of difficulty, you’d expect the CS to be a little more aggressive. Odd, too, that the White House didn’t have much to say about his accidents.

According to the Heritage Foundation’s Foundry site the president didn’t even give him a call til Tuesday morning. Can you imagine GWB being that disengaged? Rory Cooper reports:

Pressed for details, (White House Press Secretary Jay) Carney continually directed questions to the Commerce Department. As if this matter had nothing to do with the White House. On the fifth question, Carney was asked: “So as the matter stands right now, is the Secretary healthy and fit to serve?” Carney referred the question to the Commerce Department.

Later in the briefing, Carney said the White House was alerted on Sunday evening and the president was informed on Monday morning. Again, this strikes even the casual observer as odd. The Commerce Secretary is tenth in the presidential line of succession and there is a government-wide Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) that ensures that the executive branch leadership is accounted for and able to serve.

Did the President of the United States really find out at the same time as the general public that 36 hours beforehand his Commerce Secretary had been hospitalized? And if so, was his first concern the fact that his staff left him in the dark unnecessarily for so many hours?

Later that afternoon, the president did a series of local television interviews, in which he was asked about the situation. The president reiterated that he had still not spoken to Secretary Bryson and that he had “just found out about this today.”

Later that evening, at 10 pm, the White House issued a statement declaring that Secretary Bryson was taking a medical leave of absence and that Deputy Secretary Rebecca Blank would serve as Acting Secretary. While White House statements at 10 pm are not absolutely abnormal, they are rare. This fit the mold of the bizarre events of the day.

Let’s be clear, everyone hopes Secretary Bryson is well, recovering and getting the medical attention he needs. Bryson is in the prayers of countless Americans. But the reaction of the White House to this news has made a strange set of circumstances seem odder than likely necessary.

President Obama certainly has an estranged relationship with his cabinet, preferring to govern mostly out of the White House. But according to White House Visitor Logs, John Bryson actually visited more often than many of his colleagues–a total of 31 times (barring multiple John Brysons). Energy Secretary Steven Chu had visited 17 times and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has only swung by 13 times. To put that in context, Democratic consultant Hilary Rosen has visited the White House 33 times and union boss Richard Trumka has visited 69 times.

The White House has more questions to answer. These questions do not require them to divulge any private or health-related information if Bryson and his family choose to not share that information. But White House officials should explain why the president was left in the dark, why the president is still not in touch with his cabinet secretary and why they had such a hard time gathering facts over two days.

If the position of the Commerce Secretary does not merit that type of attention, than shouldn’t the focus be placed on the necessity of the position in the first place?

Everything surrounding Obama is cloaked in layers. His team seems unable to deliver the truth on events and people in his administration. This includes the president, about whom many questions have never been answered. Odd, indeed.

Money for Me, Not You

Posted on by
Reply

What do you do when terrible economic news comes in and you are president of the United States? Why, party, of course! Fund raising party to get $5 million, of course! And party with whom? Radicals from the 1960s involved in the SDS and Vietnam War protests and friends of Bill Ayers. Obama high tailed it to Chicago yesterday for one of several campaign money stops, according to Matt Lewis at the Daily Caller.

Why Johnny Can’t Think

Posted on by
Reply

From Breitbart’s Ben Shapiro comes this story:

A YouTube video “uploaded on Monday afternoon apparently shows a schoolteacher from the Rowan-Salisbury school district in North Carolina informing a student that failing to be respectful of President Obama is a criminal offense. Breitbart News has uncovered that the student is a high school junior, and that the teacher is apparently one Tanya Dixon-Neely.

The video shows a classroom discussion about the Washington Post hit piece about Mitt Romney bullying a kid some five decades ago. One student says, “Didn’t Obama bully someone though?” The teacher says: “Not to my knowledge.” The student then cites the fact that Obama, in Dreams from My Father, admits to shoving a little girl. “Stop, no, because there is no comparison,” screams the teacher. Romney is “running for president. Obama is the president.”

The student responds that both are “just men.”

The teacher yells — literally yells — that Obama is “due the respect that every other president is due … Listen,” she continues, “let me tell you something, you will not disrespect the president of the United States in this classroom.” She yells over the student repeatedly, and yells at him that it’s disrespect for him to even debate about Romney and Obama.

The student says that he can say what he wants.

“Not about him, you won’t,” says the teacher.

The teacher then tells the student – wrongly – that it is a criminal offense to say bad things about a president. “Do you realize that people were arrested for saying things bad about Bush? Do you realize you are not supposed to slander the president?”

The student says that it would violate First Amendment rights to jail someone for such sentiments. “You would have to say some pretty f’d up crap about him to be arrested,” says the student. “They cannot take away your right to have your opinion … They can’t take that away unless you threaten the president.”

Clearly, the student should be teaching the class, and the teacher should be reading the Constitution more often.

The school district classified the exchange – which is obviously just another case of a pro-Obama teacher shoveling her views down students’ throats – a “learning experience.” It isn’t. It’s political intimidation, and it’s just another example of how the American public school system has become an indoctrination tool for the left. This teacher should be suspended or fired forthwith, if only for incompetence.

UPDATE: Breitbart News has received information that the YouTube video was shot by a friend of the bullied student. According to our source, the student had asked his friend to record the discussion to “prove to his parents what he has been trying to tell them for some time. The teacher in this video has a long history of pushing a liberal agenda, by shouting down students. She is very intolerant of other points of view that she does not share. The atmosphere at this school is not very conducive to opposing views.”

The source continues, “The student’s parents have since taken him out of school and had him registered at another nearby school.”

Here’s the video:

Comedian-in-Chief

Posted on by
Reply

Have we forgotten what a president is? What he does? How he should comport himself as chief representative of the country?

Seems we have. You need look no further than the disgraceful performance of President Obama this week on Late Night With Jimmy Fallon. In case you missed it, here it is:

This is a campaign, ad and a sleazy one to boot. First off, “slow jam;” “slow jammin’ the news.” The Urban Dictionary defines slow jam as “the personal soundtrack for love making that every playa has for when he needs to do that thang.” Stay classy, Barack!

Isn’t this insulting to black people? Do they want to be characterized as shallow entertainers/rappers/ghetto talking/preacher men? How do you think Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas feel about this? And wouldn’t you be insulted to have a white man interpreting in a black way for a black president? Doesn’t it demean the office and the man?

Is this what the American people have come to? Do we need our president to be cool, to entertain us, to talk down to us? Seems this falls way short of the gravitas the same media demanded with George W. Bush. Contrast his language to Lincoln’s rhetoric. It’s trash talk, not serious engagement of a people.

Lots of commentators said Obama “jumped the shark” on this performance. Please! Does everything come down to a dated TV reference? We’re not talking about Fonzie; we’re talking about the president of the United States. He took the office to new lows.

Breitbart.com’s Ben Shapiro characterized it this way: “aside from the fact that this was possibly the worst “comedy” segment in the history of mankind: it violated campaign finance law.”

He points out that “The equal time rule states that if a licensee permits a person ‘who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office in the use of such broadcasting station.’

“There are exceptions to the rule: appearances on (1) a bona fide newscast, (2) a bona fide news interview, (3) a bona fide news documentary, or (4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events.

“Only the second provision could be construed as saving NBC from giving Mitt Romney equal time. But this was not a bona fide news interview. In fact, it wasn’t an interview at all – no questions were asked, no answers were given. It was literally Obama reading a campaign speech over a guitar, a horn, a keyboard, and some drums.

“Not only was this appearance in violation of equal time law, it was clearly an in-kind contribution by NBC to the Obama campaign. As the Federal Elections Commission states, “A donation of services is … considered an in-kind contribution.” Under applicable law, contribution of broadcast time is considered such a service. This was a campaign commercial for Obama, and the Obama campaign was not charged for it. A minute of network time can cost up to a couple million dollars; this segment ran a full five minutes. There is no doubt that Obama was given millions of dollars of free advertising time, and the Romney campaign should invoke all available law to make that clear.

“NBC should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Mitt Romney should be given equal time, and an equally sycophantic propaganda piece by Fallon. Obama should be ashamed of himself (though, of course, he has no capacity for shame).”

I hope the Romney campaign takes a look at this, as well as Republicans in the House and Senate.

As for the Obama campaign, they’ll do anything to get back the youth vote. Let’s hope the youth are smarter than that.

What Does Nancy Know?

Posted on by
Reply

Nancy Pelosi, former Speaker of the House, patriot and observant Catholic, says she knows something about Newt Gingrich. She was being interviewed by John King who asked this:

John King, CNN: “You make your case there passionately for President Obama. But also understand that this is a tough reelection climate for any president, Democrat or Republican in this economy. Because of your history with Speaker Gingrich, what goes through your mind when you think of the possibility, which is more real today than it was a week or a month ago, that he would be the Republican nominee and that you could come back here next January or next February with a President Gingrich?”

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: “Let me just say this. That will never happen.”

King: “Why?”

Pelosi: “He’s not going to be President of the United States. That’s not going to happen. Let me just make my prediction and stand by it, it isn’t going to happen.”

King: “Why are you so sure?”

Pelosi: “There is something I know. The Republicans, if they choose to nominate him that’s their prerogative. I don’t even think that’s going to happen.”

So what does Nancy know? What in her mind is so blockbuster that it would turn the public against him?

It’s hard to say, what with Nancy’s bizarre behavior and aging brain, but I have a few ideas.

Could she be a spurned woman? After all, she and Newt shared that couch in the global warming ad. Maybe what bugs her is that she made a pass at him and he didn’t bite. Maybe she figures he should have hit on her. Who wouldn’t
be attracted to the big busted grandma?

Maybe she’ll come out with something shocking like Newt and Osama Bin Laden are cousins. Maybe Newt’s even his evil twin. Osama had multiple wives, Newt had multiple wives. Just sayin’.

Maybe she and Newt have a love child. Maybe Hillary and Newt have a love child. Capitol Hill was a busy place during the Clinton years.

Now she can’t say he’s gay, transsexual, atheist or black because that would offend her own constituencies. Not that there’s anything wrong with that especially in her home district of San Francisco. So if Newt went around in his office dressed as Judy Garland, well that would be ho hum. She wouldn’t get the shock value.

As for using drugs, that would bring him the Ron Paul voters. No, it can’t be that either.

If it’s a money/bribery thing, our ace reporters will have that tracked down. With a Republican, they are as relentless as hounds at a British fox hunt. No matter how small it is, they will find any penny misspent or unaccounted for.

Could it be blackmail? Did Newt blackmail anyone? That would be bad. But wait a minute! Isn’t that what Nancy’s doing? I guess when you’re a Democrat it’s called something different like a kind, considerate warning.

Given Pelosi’s state of mind, I have to think she’s bluffing. She wants to get in his head – and ours – so to scare us off.

Whatever it is, isn’t it time for her to retire? Isn’t she being greedy by keeping her job when young people are looking for one?

I guess it’s different if you’re her.

Words Heard This Week

Posted on by
Reply

What’s in a name? A lot of anger when it comes to MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell. His “Rewrite” segment last night was as loopy as anything I’ve heard.

O’Donnell says, “I’ve always felt funny about guys who don’t want you to know their first names. What else don’t they want you to know? They are lying to you when the very first thing they say to you is ‘Hi, I’m Mitt Romney.’ No, you’re not! You’re Willard M. Romney…Then there’s Rick Perry and ‘I want your vote for president of the United States.’ How about telling me your real name which is actually James Richard Perry. The two frontrunners have rewritten their first names!”

He is outraged, but goes on to confess that he uses Jim as his “Starbucks name.”

OK. Isn’t that a lie? Romney and Perry aren’t lying. Those are their names. Is this any criteria for political criticism? Is this in the league with policies on terrorism and economic plans?

Funny, in 2008 liberal commentators (and even some centrists Republicans) wanted people to skip over Obama’s middle name. O’Donnell didn’t have a problem with that.

This next word choice is not so much new, just mispronounced. When President Obama delivered his speech on the anniversary of September 11, he had a bowing problem once again.

This time he didn’t bow to another leader, he said it that way rather than how the Bible means it. In speaking of the bow and spear (bow as in bow and arrow) as referenced in Psalm 46, he had a bow and error. Take a listen:

Commenting on the Solyndra scandal in which more than half a billion taxpayer dollars were lost, South Carolina Republican Senator Jim DeMint dubbed President Obama as a “venture socialist.”

“Solyndra proves President Obama’s investment strategy doesn’t work. Venture socialism never will…Venture Socialism will never produce the successes that free market capitalism has. Solyndra is proof,” DeMint said.

Painful proof, in fact.

Speaking of Solyndra, how does Solargate sound?

“Goonions” was a term birthed by Rush Limbaugh. That’s what he calls the offspring of goons sent out to beat up on people with the ever increasing angry unions.