Ace of Spades.mu.nu

 

Yesterday [April 15[ we watched this sac of vinegar and mons-cheese make a beeline to a guy holding an "Obama is a fascist" sign (ignoring hundreds of other people, by the way) and give him a piece of her mind about how "offensive" that was.

 

Apparently she was sick from work from January 2001 to January 2009, and failed to notice that Bush was called a "fascist" every single protest the MSM covered. Without any network scolding about it, either. In fact, "fascist" was one of the more charitable epithets applied to Bush; "murderer" was one of the stronger ones.

 

But what's this? Turns out she wasn't absent from work for eight straight years after all. Not only did she see that the left was offensively denigrating Bush as a fascist, she actually used their imagery to illustrate a story she was doing.

 

And not a story about how wrong it is to call the President a fascist, either. She used the imagery to make the same point the protesters intended, in fact. Read article.

Ralph Z. Hallow, Washington Times.com

 

Republican National Chairman Michael S. Steele has launched a direct attack on President Obama in a new mass mailing, accusing the president of being part of the "blame America first" crowd, The Washington Times has learned.

 

Criticized by some in the party for not taking on the Democratic president hard enough or often enough, Mr. Steele took the gloves off in a fund-raising letter sent out Monday to 12 million party supporters. Recipients included RNC donors as well as the mailing lists of two conservative organizations, Human Events and GOPUSA, according to RNC communications director Trevor Francis.

 

Mr. Steele wrote that Mr. Obama's comments criticizing the United States on his recent European tour showed "an absence of wisdom." Read article.

 

Philip Klein, Spectator.org

 

In 2003, then Illinois state senator Barack Obama described himself to an approving AFL-CIO audience as a "proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan." Single-payer, the health care panacea for progressives, is a more academic way of describing a socialized system in which government is the sole purchaser of medical care.

 

At the time, Obama cautioned, "we may not get there immediately, because first we've got to take back the White House, and we've got to take back the Senate, and we've got to take back the House."

 

Six years later, Democrats have taken over both chambers of Congress and Obama himself now resides in the White House. These days, he describes single-payer as the ideal model "if we were starting from scratch" but recognizes that too much is vested in the current system to scrap private insurance entirely. Read article.

 

Randall Hoven, American Thinker.com

 

Imagine you go to the doctor because you are having acute abdominal pain. He says you must go to the hospital immediately for emergency surgery or you will die within 24 hours. When you wake up, your tummy is now only slightly upset, but your legs have been amputated.

 

Welcome to Dr. Obama's clinic. It turns out you had a minor bout of diverticulitis and some antibiotics would have done the trick.

 

A short spell ago we had tummy pains called a banking crisis. Dr. Paulson ordered massive doses of antibiotics, $700B worth, just in case. After administering only $267B worth of antibiotics, Dr. Paulson said that was all we seemed to need. But since we were transferring doctors, he would let our new doctor, Dr. Obama, make the call on what to do with the remaining doses.

 

Dr. Obama ordered the full dose of $700B worth of antibiotics plus the $150B worth of stimulants that came with them. But that wasn't enough for Dr. Obama. He ordered $787B worth of more stimulants and $410B of surgery on top of that, just for starters. His chief surgeon, Dr. Geithner, said he might need another $500B or $1000B. Once the immediate surgery was finished, Dr. Obama would put you in his chronic care facility, administering multi-trillion dollar procedures for at least the next 10 years. Read article.

 

Bruce Bialosky, Townhall.com

 

There has been a lot of squawking from the right about Obama attacking the investor class of business; that his plans discourage investing by raising taxes on what the left like to call “The Rich.” It is not these folks that his plans financially demoralize. It is the Creators who his plans stifle. It is the Creators that will pull us out of this recession.

 

So who are these Creators? They are people like Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison. They are the local retailer. Yes, they could even be your boss. These people create jobs by the sheer force of their entrepreneurial ability. They create thousands of jobs for individuals who have not or cannot create their own opportunities.

 

Mr. Obama’s plan says to them that they have been too successful at the cost of others. He wants to level the playing field. But he is looking at the situation totally from the wrong point of view. He is, in fact, penalizing these people for their success in creating millions of new jobs – some 40 million over the last 25 years – by encouraging them to sit on the sidelines. Read article.

 

Vincent Gioia, Right Side News.com

 

The bill, HR 1388: The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, otherwise known as the "GIVE Act," was passed in the House by a vote of 321-105 and then the Senate voted closure on the motion to proceed by a margin of 74-14; making ultimate passage likely since Republicans have abandoned their role as a sensible "loyal opposition."

 

Let us not forget that President Obama while campaigning made the mistake of revealing his real intentions when he said in his Colorado Springs speech he wanted to create a "civilian national security force which, candidate Obama said "would be just as powerful and well-funded as the U.S. military."

 

The legislation also refers to "uniforms" that would be worn by the "volunteers" and the "need" for a "public service academy, a 4-year institution" to "focus on training" future "public sector leaders." The training, apparently, would occur at "campuses."

 

One writer said of the bill, "This is the equivalent of brown shirts," and who can disagree? Read article.

 

David N. Bass, Spectator.org

 

Our nation's leadership likes to compare recent economic declines to the Great Depression. So, just for kicks, here is another comparison.

 

Pundits and policymakers assure us that government will cede control back to the private sector once the crisis abates. Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan in February said it "may be necessary to temporarily nationalize some banks in order to facilitate a swift and orderly restructuring." In March, Peter Beinart, a senior fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations, similarly predicted that the inevitable nationalization of Citigroup would be temporary.

 

"Over time, when we come out of this, the natural free market instincts of the American people, which are in now abeyance, will return," Beinart said.

 

We can hope so, but history is replete with examples to the contrary. In the 1930s, politicians planned to sunset unprecedented government expansions (parts of Social Security, for example) at a later date. The Depression ended, and government kept and even expanded its power. Look for the same to happen today. Read article.

 

David Limbaugh.com

 

President Barack Obama's recent appointment of Harry Knox to his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships adds another redundant nail to the coffin of the irresponsible myth that he is a bipartisan unifier.

 

In light of the daily outpouring of evidence, one wonders whether our "moderate" Republican Obama apologists will ever admit their error in willingly suspending their disbelief in Obama's radical leftism all because of what Michael Gerson refers to as "his moderate instincts and conciliatory temperament."

 

Perhaps Obama's appointment of Harold Koh as legal adviser to the State Department despite Koh's unapologetic belief that American courts should sometimes refer to foreign law in interpreting our Constitution doesn't bother you. Or even his selection of Indiana law professor Dawn Johnsen to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel despite her taking such positions (in a Supreme Court brief, no less) that pregnancy can be comparable to involuntary servitude.

 

How many in-your-face radical leftist appointments must Obama make before some realize this apparently conciliatory man is indeed a polarizing radical? Read article.

 

Dave Weinbaum, JWR.com

 

Remember when Joe Biden, our VP Gaff Master said before the election that if Barack Obama were elected president there would be a tragedy within the first sixth months of his inauguration?

 

I think Joe underestimated.

 

This president has had more disasters in his first 80 days than Joe's hair-plugs.

 

Who woulda thunk?

 

Two thirds of the former US auto giants would be taken over by Government because they accepted bail-out billions.

 

Barack Obama would fire the CEO of GM and not touch the head of the automaker's union.

 

Banks were forced to take bailout cash or suffer five year audits. It's called extortion. Where are the indictments?

 

A man who can't figure out how to pay his personal taxes, Timothy Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury would become CEO of all financial institutions whether tarped-up or not?

 

Some banks were rebuffed when they tried to pay the bailout money back? Read article.

 

Lynn Stuter, NWV.com

 

Fifteen years ago when I tried to tell people where the transformation of America was heading, I either got this "deer in the headlights" look of "I don't care … don't bother me … I don't want to know" or people laughed and said, "that'll never happen because the American people won't let it!"

 

On November 4, 2008, sixty-six million Americans let it happen; they voted for a candidate they knew absolutely nothing about; they voted their feelings for a man who has great voice inflection and tone but who, in reality, said absolutely nothing of substance, and certainly nothing that would tell anyone who he was and is.

 

Today, the United States of America lays in shambles. In 77 days since usurping the Oval Office, the Also Known As (AKA) Obama Administration has done more damage to this nation than any president before him. Read article.

 

Clifford D. May, Foundation for Defense of Democracies

 

President Obama had warned Kim Jong Il that should he launch a long-range ballistic missile the U.S. would "take appropriate steps to let North Korea know that it can't threaten the safety and security of other countries with impunity."

 

Last weekend, Kim went ahead with the launch anyway. Obama took the matter to the United Nations where, as expected, nothing happened.

 

The lesson - not just for the Dear Leader but also for Tehran and other regimes that regard themselves as global revolutionaries - is clear: "Yes you can -- threaten the safety and security of other countries with impunity," warnings from the engaging, new American president notwithstanding.

 

Who is going to stop you? At the U.N., China, Russia and the Organization of the Islamic Conference now rule the roost. The Europeans -- whose "leading role in the world," Obama lamented, Americans too often "fail to appreciate" - have been feckless in one crisis after another. Think of Bosnia, Kuwait, Rwanda, Darfur and, of course, Europe's endless tango with Iran's ruling mullahs. Has there been even one exception?

 

Obama is the third president in a row to have adopted the same policy toward North Korea. That policy boils down to talking, bribing and finger-wagging -- and being shocked and disappointed when Pyongyang continues to menace its neighbors and proliferate nuclear technology to rogue regimes. Read article.

 

 

Print This E-mail This

Share It: