Dishonest Obama Administration Lies Re: People’s Demand To Harness America’s Oil Resources

From Big Government.com

Drillgate: Internal Emails Shows Obama Team Lying to Public
by Vince Haley

If you’re the President of the United States or one of his political appointees and you’re ideologically opposed to new oil and natural gas development offshore, what do you do when the public registers its overwhelming support for new drilling in public opinion polls?

You dance, delay, and deceive. You speak melodious words about seeking the wisdom of the public in making these decisions and then ignore evidence of the public will when you get it, or worse, you hide it.

First came the dance.  In August 2008, after soaring gas prices and a dramatic shift in public opinion caused President Bush, Florida Governor Charlie Crist, and Republican presidential candidate John McCain to reverse their positions on offshore drilling, then-Senator Obama also changed. The Democratic presidential nominee reversed his own position and that of his party, saying he was open to offshore drilling as part of an overall energy plan.  The Democratic Congress followed a month later by quietly dropping the 25-year Congressional ban on offshore drilling.

Then came the delay. In January 2009, President Obama inherited a draft five year offshore drilling plan prepared by the outgoing Bush administration.  The plan was already receiving public comment as part of the elaborate rule making process followed by federal agencies.  Ken Salazar, Obama’s new Secretary of Interior, determined the decision about new offshore drilling was so important that he ordered a six-month extension to the comment period.

Third comes the dishonesty.

In April of 2009, during a discussion about offshore exploration in San Francisco, Salazar said that President Obama directed him to “to make sure that we have an open and transparent government” and that “these are not decisions that are going to be made behind closed doors.” Salazar went on to say that President Obama wanted to make sure that DOI was “maximizing the opportunity for the public to give us guidance on what it is that they want to do.”

Yet, more than four months after the comment period ended, the Department of the Interior has failed to make any public announcement about the results, even though sources have told American Solutions for months the comments show a 2-1 advantage in support of offshore drilling.

It took American Solutions almost four months and the power of the Freedom of Information Act to finally uncover indirect confirmation that, out of over 530,000 comments submitted, pro-drilling comments outnumbered anti-drilling comments by a 2-1 margin.

In an email dated October 27, 2009, Liz Birnbaum, director of the Minerals Management Service, informs other Interior officials that a preliminary tabulation of the results of the comment period had not yet gone to Secretary Salazar, adding “[s]o the Secretary can honestly say in response to any questions that he’s [SIC] has not yet seen the analysis of the comments – staff is still working on it. I did, however, confirm to him the 2-1 split that these guys [at American Solutions] are emphasizing.”

When a public employee is on record condoning purposeful deception of the American people, the taxpayer should no longer have to fund his or her job.  Secretary Salazar should immediately fire Liz Birnbaum for purposefully deceiving him, and in turn, the American people.  It’s not possible for the Secretary to honor pledges of openness, honestly, and transparency in government if his staff is going to deliberately undermine such pledges.

Public opinion polls already measure near 70% support for offshore drilling, so the results from a public comment period that reflect the same public sentiment should not be surprising.  But after all this talk of wanting the public’s input, Secretary Salazar and his team must find it a real stumbling block to have to explain all their anti-energy development actions in light of the comment period results to which they previously attached such great importance.

This newly gained insight into the anti-energy exploration mindset within the Department of the Interior allows a new perspective of President Obama’s mention of offshore development in his recent State of the Union address.  Here is the one paragraph in which the President described offshore development:

But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. And that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country.  It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development. It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies.  And, yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America.

To the passive listener, it sounded like President Obama expressed at least rhetorical support for offshore drilling.

But the President only says we must make “tough decisions” on offshore drilling, deliberately refusing to apply that standard to other decisions on energy.

But tough for whom? Certainly not for the public that overwhelmingly supports more offshore drilling.

Indeed, the only person facing a tough decision is the President since an important part of his political base is opposed to new American energy development.

Bucking public opinion would indeed be a tough decision for this President, but he has shown himself quite comfortable with bucking public opinion to pursue stunningly unpopular policies on health care and cap and trade.

In short, it’s a fair conclusion that the tough decisions the President identified in his State of the Union was his intended decision not to pursue any new offshore oil and gas development. The actions by Salazar and his team are entirely consistent with that conclusion.

What makes all of this dispiriting, especially this month, is that with 15 million Americans out of work and with the President’s recently submitted budget projecting trillion dollar annual deficits for the next ten years and a near tripling of the national debt by 2020, the President is throwing away a golden opportunity over the next three decades to create millions of new jobs and generate more than $270 billion in annual economic growth from new oil and gas development, including $54 billion annually in federal tax receipts that could help lower the federal deficit and the national debt.

These extraordinary benefits of job creation and economic growth – all without requiring any federal spending – are, sadly, not on President Obama’s agenda, notwithstanding all the phony rhetoric to the contrary.

Indeed, we can look forward to the President’s continued strategy of dance, delay, and deceive.

In contrast to opening up our vital oil fields, which would have a huge positive impact in terms of both jobs, the economy, and our national security, it is interesting to compare Obama’s energy policy.

In Obama’s own words:

“You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.”

You had a chance to decide which policy you wanted 16 months ago – and you chose national bankruptcy.

We voted for this foolish clown.  I guess we deserve to suffer until he’s finally, mercifully gone.

Maybe Democrats Should Change Their Symbol To An Ostrich

I had a very brief conversation with my Democrat neighbor (a retired professor emeritus in education).  I asked him what he thought about Obama.  He said he liked him, and I left it there: no point arguing with a fool – especially if that fool happens to be your neighbor.

But I was pretty shocked that an otherwise intelligent man would be unable to see that the president he likes so much is utterly laying waste to the party he likes so much.

There is more and more evidence coming out that even DEMOCRATS are recognizing that Barack Obama is a total failure as a president.  And I recently wrote a piece that quoted from a number of Democrat-written articles lamenting the complete failure that their failure-in-chief has turned out to be.

Obama’s polls have gone from the stratosphere right into the toilet bowl as Americans have finally begun to comprehend what this radical leftist is trying to do.

Republicans have won every single statewide election since Obama took office – with every victory occurring in states that voted heavily for Obama.  Obama actually managed to transform Camelot into a Republican state – something nobody would have dreamed possible only a short time ago.

But Democrats – and apparently the “smartest” Democrats in particular – continue to keep their heads shoved into the ground (or their rear ends).

Republicans certainly had their fair share of self-delusion in 2006 when the Democrats took control of both the House and the Senate.  But as bad as it was, it wasn’t even close to this Obama-as-Messiah-worshiping disregard for reality.

But more and more and more news keeps coming out:

Americans Losing Hope, Looking For Change By Ed Carson

Tue., Feb. 09, ‘10    10:00 AM ET

(IBD)Voters are souring on the economy and the government’s remedies, according to February’s IBD/TIPP Economic Optimism Index. It fell 4.1% to 46.8, matching December’s level and the weakest since July. “Persisting high unemployment and a wobbly stock market dampened January’s optimism,” said Raghavan Mayur, president of TIPP, IBD’s polling partner. Readings below 50 signal pessimism. Confidence in federal economic politics dived 7% to 38.3, the lowest since President Obama took office. That’s consistent with other polls showing a strong shift by Americans away from big government over the past year. The $787 billion stimulus failed to keep unemployment from soaring to double digits, now 9.7%. But it helped the deficit explode to $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2009, with $1.6 trillion seen in 2010. Obama has tried to stress economic issues since Scott Brown’s stunning Massachusetts election victory derailed health care legislation. He’s railed against fat-cat bankers while proposing new taxes and further curbs on the biggest banks. That populism can win easy political points, but it can also backfire. Stocks have sold off since Obama began his anti-Wall Street rhetoric. He’s also proposed a jobs bill that includes a hiring credit for employers. But some Democratic lawmakers question that idea while many experts say the latest stimulus plans are too modest to make much of an impact. And any government boost will add to the gusher of red ink. The new emphasis on jobs and the economy also is an implicit admission that for much of the past year Obama’s focus has been on health care. That was a mistake in the eyes of independents. Their view of federal economic policies tumbled 12.7% vs. January and 30.3% since September. Independents disapprove of Obama’s handling of economic issues by a 2-1 ratio (50%-25%). Just 3% think he’s doing an excellent job while 29% say it’s unacceptable. This extends a recent trend. Swing voters’ view of Obama’s overall job performance sank 7.9% in February to 40.8, a new low for him. A year earlier, the rating was 72.9. The IBD/TIPP Presidential Leadership Index dipped 0.6 point to 50.2, holding just above the neutral 50 mark thanks to continued strong support from his liberal base. But the White House and congressional leaders fear most voters will soon lock in their negative views of the economy for the rest of the year, even if conditions improve in the summer. That may already be happening. Three-fourths of independents have a favorable view of the tea party movement and say one-party control of the White House and Congress has been bad. As today’s IBD story notes, independents were a key part of Obama’s coalition in 2008. But no longer: “They truly believed in his campaign message of hope and change, but Obama’s performance has disappointed them,” Mayur said. Independents are increasingly anxious about the economy as well as soaring government spending and deficits. Obama may be tempted to keep playing to his solid liberal base, but that could further alienate moderates. Then again, maybe Obama can’t take his base for granted. His health care agenda is comatose, though Obama hasn’t issued a DNR order yet. Meanwhile, cap and trade is going nowhere, the Gitmo prison is still open and unions’ hoped-for card check bill never had much momentum. And while independents took the sharpest downturn in February, Democrats’ were less enchanted with federal economic policies and the six-month economic outlook. What’s going to motivate left-liberals, greens and labor to turn out in the midterm elections? On the upside, Americans’ view of their own finances edged up 0.1 point to 53.5, holding in a tight range of modest optimism. But that’s well below the pre-recession reading of 60.8 in February 2007. IBD/TIPP conducted the national poll of 902 adults from Feb. 1-7. The margin of error is +/-3.3 percentage points.

It wasn’t all that long ago before the way-too-left-leaning media pundits were smarmily predicting the permanent demise of the Republican Party and the permanent ascendancy of the Democrat Party.  They virtually ignored the Tea Party movement that now dominates the current political picture – and the coverage the movement has since received has been both incredibly condescending and incredibly biased.

No matter.  The mainstream media is merely another exemplification of the nation repudiating the left: now Fox News – the very Fox News that Obama repeatedly attempted to demonize - is the most trusted name in news.  And it is dominating the ratings as people increasingly abandon leftwing propaganda and embrace reality.

The Democrat-mainstream media industrial complex broadcasts the narrative that it’s the other way around – with quintessentially racist fearmongers hatefully attacking the Obama administration agenda and spreading a viral spirit of fear and obstructionism – but their narrative couldn’t be more wrong.  In reality, the American people gave Obama and the total Democrat majority a fair chance: and they recognize that Obama and the Democrats have utterly failed.

Obama’s polls nosedived to an all-time low yesterday, with the Marris-College survey revealing that Independents now oppose Obama by a 2-1 margin, and his approval has plunged to 44%.

And a whopping 75% of Americans are angry at the policies of the Obama and Democrat-controlled government.

CNN – which led off every single hour with Bush’s poll numbers when they hit their lowest point – did not bother to mention Obama’s poll numbers even ONCE last night.  Instead, they gleefully mocked the fact that Sarah Palin had written a total of four points on her palm.

A complete addiction to the Teleprompter of the United States of America is fine, as is referring to the highly-trained Navy medical personnel who save the lives of Marines on the battlefields as “corpse men“; writing seven words on one’s palm is apparently just beyond the pale.

CNN and the rest of the mainstream media are as dishonest as they think they can possibly get away with.

Independents are leaving Obama and the Democrat Party the way rats must have left the Titanic.  And it is quite possible that Democrats will abandon the Democrat Party before long, as Obama, Pelosi, and Reid continue to attempt to impose contemptible policies upon an American people who have done everything imaginable to scream that they do not want them.

If a few elitist Democrats want to continue to serenely play their violins while their party literally sinks around them, it will only make their going down all the sweeter.

Democrats Beginning To Recognize That Obama Is A Total Failure As A Leader

If Democrats weren’t loathsome, self-righteous hypocrites and demagogues, I’d actually feel sorry for them, given the entirely  self-created and well-deserved state they are in due to the pathetic non-leadership of their failure-in-chief.  But they are, so I’m not.

Democrats chafe as White House wavers on health care bill
By CARRIE BUDOFF BROWN | 2/6/10 6:40 AM EST

President Barack Obama has left Democrats as confused as ever about how the White House plans to deliver a health care reform bill this year, after two weeks of inconsistent statements, negligible hands-on involvement and a sudden shift to a jobs-first message.

Democrats on Capitol Hill and beyond say they have no clear understanding of the White House strategy — or even whether there is one — and are growing impatient with Obama’s reluctance to guide them toward a legislative solution.

At a White House meeting Thursday with Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi expressed frustration with the slow pace of the negotiations and the president’s decision not to weigh in publicly on a path forward, according to a Democratic source familiar with the meeting.

And some Democrats feel that every time they look to White House for clarity, they hear something different, as though the strategy is whatever the president or his top advisers said that day.

In the past two weeks, since Democrats lost the Massachusetts Senate race, Obama or his top advisers have suggested all of the following: breaking the bill into smaller parts, keeping it together in one comprehensive package, putting it at the back of legislative line and needing to “punch it through” Congress, as Obama himself said Tuesday.

The latest comment came during a Thursday fundraiser when Obama described the “next step” as sitting down with Republicans, Democrats and health care experts. “Let’s just go through these bills — their ideas, our ideas — let’s walk through them in a methodical way so that the American people can see and compare what makes the most sense,” Obama said, describing a process that could take weeks, if not longer.

He first floated the idea during his State of the Union speech almost three weeks ago, but top congressional aides in both parties said Friday that they still have no idea what the president was talking about.

Even the White House struggled to explain what Obama had in mind. On Friday, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said there was no meeting on the schedule.

At the same fundraiser, Obama seemed to acknowledge for the first time that Congress may well decide to scrap health care altogether — an admission that blunted his repeated and emphatic vows to finish the job.

“I’m not sure where the White House is right now,” said Ralph G. Neas, a longtime progressive activist who is now the head of the National Coalition on Health Care. “But I do believe that given everything that has happened, the time has come for more forceful presidential leadership. That is the only way to close the deal. That kind of leadership involves providing more precise guidance to Congress and a clear case to the American people on how this benefits families. The president must step up and wield the power of his office.”

So maybe electing a community organizer with 143 days of experience in the Senate isn’t such a great idea, after all.  Maybe electing THE most liberal U.S. Senator under the incredibly cynical and deceitful promise that he would be “post-partisan” (and is now recognized to be the most polarizing president in history) wasn’t such a great idea.

I mean, who could have possibly known, except maybe every single conservative on the planet?

No leadership, you say?  You mean electing a guy who never actually led anything in his life – not so much as a frigging LEMONADE STAND – might somehow translate into a political party and an entire nation drifting rudderless in an increasingly stormy sea?

For the record, Obama’s “next step” of meeting with both Republicans and Democrats is nothing more than a photo op and a fabricated pretension of bipartisan cooperation.  And the reason that even Democrats don’t have a clue as to what such a staged event would accomplish is that they understand that it would accomplish nothing.

Obama is trying to turn his ObamaCare boondoggle into a rhetorical campaign event rather than trying to actually produce health care legislation.

But let’s get back to the Democrats attacking Obama over his totally failed leadership:

Al Franken lays into David Axelrod over health care bill
By MANU RAJU & ANDY BARR | 2/4/10 7:47 PM EST

Sen. Al Franken ripped into White House senior adviser David Axelrod this week during a tense, closed-door session with Senate Democrats.

Five sources who were in the room tell POLITICO that Franken criticized Axelrod for the administration’s failure to provide clarity or direction on health care and the other big bills it wants Congress to enact.

The sources said Franken was the most outspoken senator in the meeting, which followed President Barack Obama’s question-and-answer session with Senate Democrats at the Newseum on Wednesday. But they also said the Minnesotan wasn’t the only angry Democrat in the room.

“There was a lot of frustration in there,” said a Democratic senator who declined to be identified.

“People were hot,” another Democratic senator said.

Democratic senators are frustrated that the White House hasn’t done more to win over the public on health care reform and other aspects of its ambitious agenda — and angry that, in the wake of Scott Brown’s win in the Massachusetts Senate race, the White House hasn’t done more to chart a course for getting a health care bill to the president’s desk.

In his public session with the senators Wednesday, Obama urged them to “finish the job” on health care but did not lay out a path for doing so. That uncertainty appeared to trigger Franken’s anger, and the sources in the room said he laid out his concerns much more directly than any senator did in the earlier public session.

For what it’s worth, this is yet another of the billions and billions of reasons to conclude the liberal mainstream media is utterly useless for truth.  They characterized the Republicans in the House as being hostile to Obama because “hostile Republicans” suited their narrative.  But Republicans were tail-wagging face-licking puppy dogs compared to what the Democrats had for Obama.

Guess that wasn’t part of the mainstream narrative, though.  The media wouldn’t want anyone to realize that Barack Obama being a gigantic colossal failure as a president isn’t a “Republican talking point,” but a now bipartisan-recognized reality.

Obama’s failure in leadership is not just in health care (where it couldn’t be more grossly apparent).  It’s anything and everything Obama has tried to do.

On issue after issue – demonstrating that he didn’t even have the power or leadership to win the Olympic games; taking months to dither over Afghanistan; issuing a completely irrational promise to close Gitmo; moving the terrorist trials to New York and treating terrorists like American citizens; mirandizing terrorist rather than water-boarding them until they grow gills; backing a completely idiotic approach to destroy our energy system and our economy along with it known as “cap-and-trade”; failing to influence the UN global warming debate at Copenhagen or push his agenda in any way; presiding over what even Obama himself called a “systematic breakdown” in the intelligence system; Iran making a mockery of American foreign policy while it boldly advances toward both nuclear weapons and the ballistic missile capability to launch warheads; presiding over more jobs lost than any president has lost in any year since records started being kept in 1940; you can just go on and on and on (the above was just off the top of my head) – Obama has shown a profound lack of leadership.

This is serious.  It is no laughing matter.  We are the Titanic hurtling through the icebergs, and we have no functioning captain who is able to steer us.

Most Snow Since 1886: Blame It On Global Warming

Just one of those little nuggets of reality that illustrate the sheer lunacy of liberalism and the religion of global warming.

We’ve had most snow since 1886
REGISTER STAFF REPORT • January 26, 2010

The National Weather Service says snowfall in Des Moines in December and January is now second on the list of snowiest for the period.

With 6.4 inches of new snow measured Monday at the Des Moines Airport, the total snowfall since Dec. 1, 2009 is now 41.4 inches. That tops 37.2 inches of snowfall in Des Moines during the period in 1897-1898.

The record remains 50.2 inches in 1885-1886.

Driving conditions are slowly improving as snowplow operators open roads and winds diminish, the Iowa Department of Transportation is reporting. The sun is beginning to warm the pavement.

Towing bans remain in effect where travel is not advised.

The Iowa Department of Transportation and Iowa State Patrol announced at 8:20 a.m. that the northbound and southbound lanes of Interstate 35 have reopened to traffic from Ames to Albert Lea, Minn.

Iowa officials advised Iowans with a vehicle that needs towing to first check the www.511ia.org website or call 511 to make sure there are no towing restrictions in the area.

If there is not a towing restriction, vehicle owners must call a towing company of their choice to be placed on the list for removal.

What might be even funnier than this is the liberal decision to take something that was revealed to be a complete and utter fraud (‘global warming’), change the name of that fraud (to ‘climate change’), and then believe in the nonsensical fairy tale all over again.

You could paint string yellow and sell it to these people as gold chain.

Leftist Mainstream Media Shows Typical Blatant Bias Over Sarah Palin’s Palm

There’s a saying that when you point at someone, three fingers are pointing back at you.  That pretty much sums up what happens when the left attacks Sarah Palin.

Palin’s Palm Holds the Answers
by Mike Krumboltz

Remember those quizzes you had on the state capitals back in junior high? Oh, the pressure! The temptation to write “Pierre, Olympia, Dover, Albany” on the inside of your hand was overwhelming, wasn’t it? But you resisted. Maybe Sarah Palin should have done the same.

The former vice presidential candidate seems to have been caught using curious crib notes during an interview this past weekend at the high-profile Tea Party Convention in Nashville. While speaking about her top political priorities, Ms. Palin gazed at her hand in a rather suspicious manner.

Later, Web researchers zoomed in on her left palm and found the following words scrawled in black ink: “Energy, Budget cuts (with “budget” crossed out), Tax, Lift American Spirits.” In an ironic twist during the speech, Ms. Palin worked in a jab against President Obama’s often-mocked use of TelePrompTers. You can watch the clip below or check out a close-up here.

Following the flap, the Web went wild. Andrea Mitchell of MSNBC mocked Ms. Palin by relying on her own crib notes to recap highlights from Palin’s appearance. Her keynote speech, it should be noted, had the crowd on its feet. “Run, Sarah, run,” the crowd chanted (as in “please run for president in 2012″).

But palm-gate wasn’t the only bit of news sparked by Palin. Her defense of Rush Limbaugh’s use of the word “retards” raised eyebrows, as well. On Fox News Sunday, the anti “r-word” crusader contended that Limbaugh had used the word in the context of political humor and satire. Earlier in the week, the difference between her angry reaction to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s use of the “slur” and a more restrained response to Limbaugh’s made from some awkward fallout. Web searches on “sarah palin on fox news” and “palin limbaugh” have both surged as the controversy swirled.

Let’s start with Rahm Emanuel, Rush Limbaugh, and the expression “f-ing retarded.”  The mainstream liberal media is every bit as brain dead idiot stupid as Rahm Emanuel said as the ranks of the liberal activists that today’s journalists are largely drawn from.  Otherwise they would understand that Rush Limbaugh used the phrase the day after the Emanuel usage came out to derisively direct attention to what Obama’s chief of staff had said.

They couldn’t be more profoundly stupid to think that Rush Limbaugh just happened to use the same phrase – all the while repeatedly invoking Rahm Emanuel’s name – on his own to express the same sort of bias Emanuel had exhibited.

The mainstream media are not merely partisan ideological propagandists; they are dumbass partisan ideological propagandists.

By this idiotic logic, we should arrest all the female police officers who pose as prostitutes to bust johns for prostitution.

And it’s this unbelievable stupidity that made Rush essentially say, “Maybe Rahm Emanuel was right in using the phrase to refer to leftists.”  Because if ANYBODY is “f-ing retarded,” it is the left.

And for all the derision of being as dumb as a box of rocks, Sarah Palin demonstrates again that she is still smarter than every single member of the mainstream media combined.  Because she understands the difference between Rahm Emanuel using a disparaging term to mock the diminished intellects of the far left, and Rush Limbaugh’s using the same term to mock Rahm Emanuel and the galling self-righteous hypocrisy of the left.

And now let us regard the 4 words/phrases that Sarah Palin wrote on her palm.

I mean, really?

The moron-in-chief we elected as president is such a babbling idiot without his teleprompter -

- that he is forced to bring his teleprompters with him WHEREVER he goes lest he sounds like, well, what Rahm Emanuel said.

And “WHEREVER” includes sixth grade classrooms, folks:

Sarah Palin had a couple of words on her palm to help her remember a few ideas she wanted to make sure she covered.  Barack Obama has to have every single word scripted to ensure he doesn’t drool while he babbles incoherently.

So you go ahead and mock Sarah Palin for having a few words on her palm, liberals.

Just realize that you are implicitly acknowledging that your Obama Messiah is 50,000 times more stupid than Sarah Palin is by the very standard you are attacking her over.

Obama Calls For Tolerance And Civility While His Rabid Rodents Throw Hate Bombs

I hate Obama’s Marxist policies, certainly enough.  But the thing I despise most about Barack Obama is his galling personal hypocrisy.

He is a man who makes a false promise that he never keeps, and then continually congratulates himself about those very same promises.  He promised transparency that he never delivered, but keeps talking it up as though he really DIDN’T have  his meetings on “transparency” closed to the public and the media; and as though he really DID put the health care negotiations on C-SPAN like he promised at least 8 times on video; as though his ObamaCare WEREN’T so secretive that even senior Democrats admitted they were completely in the dark; and as though Obama really WEREN’T denying the media of access far worse than his predecessors had ever done.  He patted himself on the back for getting lobbyists out of Washington as if his administration DIDN’T have at least30 of them on the payroll; and attacked lobbyists at his state of the union as if he DIDN’T have a schmoochy meeting scheduled with them for the very next day.  He promised to end earmarks, then signed a bill that had nearly 9,000 of them – and just instructed Democrats to submit their earmark requests for the upcoming budget even as he told the country that he was “calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark reform.”  And all I can say when Obama talks about reforming earmarks now is that it is too damn bad we didn’t elect John McCain.

The left is angry at Obama’s failed promises (a failed promise = a lie, by the way) as well.  Obama promised to close Gitmo.  He lied.  Obama promised to have had the troops home from Iraq by now.  He lied.  Obama promised to resolve the conflict in Afghanistan with his own personal magnificence.  And more than TWICE as many American soldiers gave their lives under Obama in Afghanistan in 2009 than during Bush’s last year in office.

Is it any wonder that he is the most polarizing president we have ever seen?

But Obama’s signature lie was his cynical promise from the most radically leftist Senator in Congress to transcend the political divide and bring the parties together.  Democrats, of course, blame Republicans; but it wasn’t the Republicans who promised to do it, was it?  The president who mockingly told Republicans “I won” when they tried to talk to him, and who repeatedly demonized Republicans for their “failed policies of the past,” is now actually upset that Republicans would take anything approaching the same attitude with him that he took with them.

We’re not supposed to be able to talk about HIS failed policies after he attacked us about a hundred million times with the very same claim?

Is it any wonder that his polls are now even LOWER than they were before he gave that deceitful state of the union?

Obama wants conservatives to lay down their arms even as his cockroach minions continue to shrilly attack them.  Apparently he truly thinks people are that stupid.

Here were Obama’s words at the national prayer breakfast (which he ultimately politicized, because the man just can’t help himself):

Obama at “national prayer breakfast”: The President calls for tolerance and civility

At the event of the “national prayer breakfast” in Washington on Thursday, U.S. President Barack Obama has urged his fellow countrymen to adhere to the ‘spirit of civility’, affirming that “civility is not a sign of weakness”.

The event which attracts leading political, religious and business leaders was witness to the famous oratorical power of the US president.

“Too often that spirit (of civility) is missing without the spectacular tragedy,” Mr. Obama said. “We become numb to the day-to-day crises. We become absorbed with our abstract arguments, our ideological disputes, and our contests for power. And in this tower of babble, we lose the sound of God’s voice.”

He remarked that we should be open to differing views and make a concerted effort to abandon the cynicism and skepticism that have done enough harm to American politics already.

Obama has repeatedly dishonestly demonized Republicans as obstructionists and hatemongers – which, for the record, is a very obstructionistic and hatemongering thing for him to do.

In his Q and A session with House Republicans, Obama said:

I mean, the fact of the matter is is that many of you, if you voted with the administration on something, are politically vulnerable in your own base, in your own party. You’ve given yourselves very little room to work in a bipartisan fashion because what you’ve been telling your constituents is, “This guy’s doing all kinds of crazy stuff that’s going to destroy America.”

And how are Democrats supposed to embrace Republican ideas in a bipartisan fashion when Democrats just like YOU repeatedly demonize George Bush and demagogue Republicans for “the failed ideas of the past,” Mr. Hussein?

There’s a joke that Obama finally honored George Bush by naming the tectonic region beneath Haiti as “Bush’s Fault.”  It’s not far from the truth.

Does Barry Husein seriously not realize that every single Democrat in the Senate voted for ObamaCare (not withstanding the outright bribes such as the Louisiana Purchase and the Nebraska Purchase)?  Since when is it that every single Democrat voting for a Democrat bill is good, but every single Republican voting against a Democrat bill is bad?  Wouldn’t both Republicans AND Democrats be voting both for and against a bipartisan bill?

Since Democrats love to claim about how “bipartisan” they have been, I would love to see a Democrat offer me a list reciting 100 specific instances in which Obama or Democrats have said, “We’ll do this your way” on significant elements of any and all legislation.

It would be nice if Obama and Democrats paid attention to the giant log in their own eyes.  Just for once in their lives.

Meanwhile, Obama’s supporters are like frothing-mouth rabid vermin:

New York Slimes I mean Times columnist Frank Rich:

New York Times columnist Frank Rich would have rebelled against the notion that opposing President Bush’s policies was unpatriotic. But he can shamelessly declare that opposing Obama’s agenda is unpatriotic – even if you’re John McCain. Rich wrote on Sunday:

If [Harry] Reid can serve as the face of Democratic fecklessness in the Senate, then John McCain epitomizes the unpatriotic opposition. On Wednesday night he could be seen sneering when Obama pointed out that most of the debt vilified by Republicans happened on the watch of a Republican president and Congress that never paid for “two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program.”

Rich wasn’t going to find it ridiculous that Obama was blaming Bush for an “expensive” Medicare entitlement that Democrats voted for and/or felt wasn’t expensive enough – just as Obama blames Bush for the deficit effects of TARP, which he voted for.

It should be remembered that John McCain spent something like six years in the hellhole of the Hanoi Hilton in Vietnam and suffered terribly physically as a result.  To accuse him of being “unpatriotic” after what he went through for his country is a disgrace from a disgrace of a newspaper.

Not to be outdone as a moral disgrace, Chris Matthews basically compared the Republican Party to the leftist communist regime that murdered well over a million people:

Chris Matthews: Far Right Republicans Like Cambodian Regime (VIDEO)

Huffington Post   |  Danny Shea First Posted: 02- 1-10 05:36 PM   |   Updated: 02- 1-10 05:59 PM

Chris Matthews compared the far right wing of the Republican Party to the Khmer Rouge, the genocidal Cambodian communist party led by Pol Pot, in MSNBC’s coverage of President Obama’s Q&A with House Republicans Friday night.

“The Republican Party is under assault from its far right,” Matthews said. “I don’t think I can remember either party being under assault by its extremes. I mean, there seems to be a new sort of purity test that unless you’re far right, you’re not a Republican, and this sort of tea party testing they’re doing now.”

Matthews called the party’s pull from the far right “frightening” in comparing it to the Cambodian regime.

“So what’s going on out there in the Republican Party is kind of frightening,” he said, “almost Cambodia reeducation camp going on in that party, where they’re going around to people, sort of switching their minds around saying, ‘If you’re not far right, you’re not right enough.’ And I think that it’s really – there’s going to be a lot of extreme language on the Republican side. And maybe, it will be a circular firing squad when this is all over.”

Just two days prior, Matthews came under fire for saying that he forgot President Obama was black for an hour while watching his State of the Union, a post-racial comment he would later clarify.

So let’s understand, this closet bigoted turd who is continuously aware of Obama’s blackness (light-skinned blackness with no Negro dialect only, mind you!) says that there’s a lot of extreme language coming from the Republican side — but only AFTER comparing those same Republicans to a communist regime that systematically murdered 1.7 million of their own people.

And speaking of bigoted turds….

Rachel Maddog I mean Maddow:

Maddow: Tea Party Conventioneers Are Racists In White Hoods
By Noel Sheppard
Sat, 02/06/2010

Rachel Maddow on Friday referred to attendees of the National Tea Party convention in Nashville, Tennessee, as white-hooded racists.

Continuing MSNBC’s sad tradition, Maddow first attacked one of the convention’s speakers: “The opening speech last night was given by failed presidential candidate, ex-congressman and professional anti-immigrant, Tom Tancredo who started the event off with a bang, a big loud racist bang.”

From there, she went after the audience (video embedded below the fold with transcript).

What a bigoted, vicious, racist thing of you to say, Rachel.  But according to Obama, who only attacks Fox News for being biased, Barry Hussein tacitly approves of every single word.

And we can get back to Barack Obama and pretty much the entire Democrat Party as repeatedly demagoguing the Republican Party as “the party of no” when it is now an openly acknowledged fact that they were never any such thing.

Cited from a recently written article:

For another thing, it isn’t true that Republicans have ever been “the party of no” and offered no ideas:

Despite the “lecture” by the commander-in-chief, as one member described it, Republicans had the opportunity to articulate the proposals they’ve sent to the president over the past year.

And for the first time, Obama acknowledged that House Republicans had crafted measures to stimulate the economy, reduce the budget deficit and reduce health insurance costs.

At a number of times during the rare, televised, question and answer session with members, the president said that he had read many of their proposals.

“I’ve actually read your bills,” the president said to a packed banquet room at Baltimore’s Marriott Renaissance hotel.

In other words, it is now a matter of public record that Democrats have been intentionally lying, misrepresenting, slandering, and demagoguing Republicans all along.  Why on earth should Republicans have cooperated with these vile people?

So Democrats can just shut the hell up with their accusations of Republicans saying or doing ANYTHING until they clean up the thousands of cockroach nests that constitute their political wing, and start being HONEST for once in their lives.

Personally, I am quite willing to cease fire on the rhetoric wars; all I need to see is for Barack Obama to denounce the mainline media for their lies rather than continually attacking Fox News; all I need to see is the Maddows and the Olbermanns and the Mathews of the news to be fired; all I need to see is for the left to quit demonizing and demagoguing.  And I will happily practice all the “tolerance” and “civility” Obama wants.

The problem is that that will never happen, because the left is demagogic and hypocritical to their very cores of their dried-out, shriveled little souls.

And the fact that Barack Obama is out in front of the cameras beseeching for “tolerance” and “civility” while his minions are viciously and hatefully attacking day after day without any rebuke from the president just proves my point.

Bye Bye, ‘Bama Bounce

It was widely recognized prior to Obama’s state of the union speech that he would get a bounce from it.  EVERY president gets a temporary bounce in the polls following the state of the union.

Which was why it was so nauseating to hear Democrats joyfully and even mockingly praising Obama’s new “highs” that took him to the soaring heights of 50%.  You’d have thought that we’d just had another election — and Obama won in a landslide.

Well, back to reality.

It’s not enough to say that Obama lost every nanometer of his bounce; he is now significantly lower in the polls than before his speech.

Here’s the rodent-hole approval that Obama now “enjoys”:

Sunday, February 07, 2010

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 26% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-three percent (43%) Strongly Disapprove which gives Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17 (see trends). [...]

Overall, 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. That matches the lowest level of overall approval yet measured for this president. Fifty-six percent (56%) now disapprove.

And prior to Obama’s speech, he was here:

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 27% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -15 (see trends). [...]

Overall, 46% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. Fifty-three percent (53%) disapprove.

Geez, Barry Hussein.  It’s almost like you gave a big speech, and even more people recognized that you were nothing but a liar and a fraud than before.

Get it through your head, Jeremiah Wright protegee; we no likey your Marxism.

ABC Reporter Wonders When Obama And Democrats Will ‘Man Up’

So here’s the deal:

ABC’s Tapper Waiting for the Pres to ‘Man Up’

By Don  |  February 4, 2010

ABC White House correspondent Jake Tapper irked Robert Gibbs when he questioned whether the president is going to ‘man up’ and make the tough decisions.

Youtube:

A couple of comments from a Free Republic posting put things pretty well.  One said:

I like Jake’s choice of wording around that “Man Up” bit too. The Democrats own all of Congress and the White House and they continue to use George Bush and the Republicans as the reasons things aren’t getting “better.”

Let the Democrats do the unpopular things, as Jake said, and be willing to show the world your real colors so that your party gets voted out in the Fall.

That’s my takeaway.

And the other said:

Surely they don’t expect the guy who voted mostly ‘present’ to make tough decisions.

I’m sure that Barack Obama, Robert Gibbs, and the Democrat Party don’t understand why the Republicans won’t play ball with them.  After all, all they’ve done is demonized Republicans, repeatedly attack them for their “failed policies,” shut them out and marginalized them, refuse to consider their ideas, lie about them, and then demonize them some more.  And all the while they have demanded that Republicans abandon their core principles and embrace “failed policies” that the American people have clearly rejected.

For one thing, Democrats did everything they could to stall Republican progress without bothering to offer ideas of their own – and then attacked Republicans for not making progress:

Likewise, Mr. Press complained that opponents hadn’t put their own reform plans on the table. “The people who are there to protest–what are they for? Are they for the status quo? The Republicans haven’t put any other plan on the table.” But did congressional Democrats offer their own alternative to President Bush’s 2005 Social Security plan? When a fellow Democrat asked Rep. Nancy Pelosi when their party would offer its own Social Security plan, her answer was “Never. Is that soon enough for you?” Democrats would not even negotiate until personal retirement accounts were taken off the table. Why should Republicans act differently today, regarding the “public option”?

For another thing, it isn’t true that Republicans have ever been “the party of no” and offered no ideas:

Despite the “lecture” by the commander-in-chief, as one member described it, Republicans had the opportunity to articulate the proposals they’ve sent to the president over the past year.

And for the first time, Obama acknowledged that House Republicans had crafted measures to stimulate the economy, reduce the budget deficit and reduce health insurance costs.

At a number of times during the rare, televised, question and answer session with members, the president said that he had read many of their proposals.

“I’ve actually read your bills,” the president said to a packed banquet room at Baltimore’s Marriott Renaissance hotel.

In other words, it is now a matter of public record that Democrats have been intentionally lying, misrepresenting, slandering, and demagoguing Republicans all along.  Why on earth should Republicans have cooperated with these vile people?

For all the constant whining of the Democrats there’s a saying that applies: “Let them hang on their own petard.”  These damn Democrats undermined the Republican majority and George Bush for years.  And now all of a sudden it’s immoral for Republicans to make their own stand?

As for Barack Obama, all he has done is constantly blame his massive failure on George Bush.  It has become beyond ridiculous: even the election of Republican Scott Brown and the transformation of Camelot into a Red State was Bush’s fault! It is almost as if it has been George Bush, and not Barack Obama, who has been president all along, while poor Barry Hussein has been some powerless, pathetic pawn.  At some point Obama will either stop blaming Bush and take responsibility for his own situation, or else he will be the worst president this country has ever seen – and take the whole country right down the toilet bowl with him.

‘Corpse Man’: Commander-in-Chief Reveals Shocking Ignorance Of Military

Today the President of the United States – and the Commander-in-chief of our armed forces – betrayed a shocking ignorance of the military he ostensibly commands:

There is not a single Sailor, Marine, or soldier who does not know what a “corpsman” is – or how to pronounce the title.  Certainly, any wounded Sailor or Marine – who would yell “Corpsman!” if wounded – knows how to pronounce the title of the guy he’d call to come over and save his life.

When George Bush showed his West Texas side in his pronunciation of the word “nuclear,” you would have thought that automatically categorized him (to quote Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel) as “f-ing retarded.”

Liberals constantly pointed out that George Bush was just such an imbecile.

You want to see the imbecile we’ve got now?

With no respect due, Barack Obama makes George Bush look like Einstein’s smarter brother.

Just the other day Barack Obonehead attacked Las Vegas for the second time after the first attack cost the city and the people who live there a couple of hundred million dollars.  Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman summed it up well when he said that “This president is a real slow learner.”

A real slow learner as in, “Fell out of the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down.”  As in, “An intellect rivaled only by garden tools.”  As in, “Has an IQ of room temperature.”  As in, “Any dumber and he’d have to be watered twice a week.”  As in, “The wheel is turning but the hamster is definitely dead.”

But Obama’s error in pronunciation isn’t just an indication that he’s every bit as stupid as liberals constantly said George Bush was.  It goes deeper.

Barack Obama just got a grade from the bipartisan Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Proliferation and Terrorism: and they gave him a flat ‘F’ in the field of keeping the country safe.

The military is confused as to how to carry out Obama’s contradictory policies.  For some incomprehensible reason, they want to actually have rules of engagement that allow them to kill the enemy and survive themselves.  Which is to say we either need to replace our 1.4 million member military with smarter soldiers or else replace our failure-in-chief.

For the record, I say we keep the soldiers and dump the failure-in-chief.

Obama’s total failure to comprehend the military – or its terminology – rather flies in the face of an Associated Press article that gushed over Obama’s diligence in pronouncing the names of foreign leaders and places to show respect.

From the AP article, “Obama, a stickler for pronunciation.”

The audience laughed, but Obama takes pronunciations quite seriously.His aides know that this is an area where the president wants to be right. In Obama’s view, pronouncing someone’s name or hometown correctly is a simple way of showing respect, they say. It’s a sort of baseline diplomacy. That’s particularly so in foreign relations, where aides say the president will privately practice pronouncing a leader’s name a number times before saying it publicly.

Alas that Obama doesn’t bother to show that same respect for the trained courageous professionals who save Sailors’ and Marines’ lives on the battlefields that Obama sends them to fight and die on.

The difference between “corpsman” and “corpse man” is the difference between life and death.

Shame on you for your demonstration of ignorance and disrespect, Barry Hussein.

Democrat Points Out Fact That No One In The Obama Administration Knows Anything About Actually Running A Business

This is coming from Senator Blanche Lincoln, who basically is just beginning to realize that she doomed her re-election bid by helping Democrats try to jam ObamaCare down her constinuency’s throats.  But a Democrat is a Democrat, and using the Democrat logic that a single Republican voting for one of their bills makes it “bipartisan,” it is therefore a “bipartisan” recognition that Obama’s White House is completely business illiterate:

Lincoln presses Obama on party ‘extremes’ at Q and A
By Jordan Fabian – 02/03/10 12:00 PM ET

Centrist Sen. Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) on Wednesday asked arguably the most contentious question during a discussion between Senate Democrats and President Barack Obama, hitting at conservatives and liberals.

Lincoln, who faces a tough reelection fight, asked Obama to push back against “people at the extremes” of both parties, especially against Democrats “who want extremes.”

She also took a swipe at Obama’s White House, referencing a constituent who “fears that there’s no one in your administration that understands what it means to go to work on Monday and make a payroll on Friday.”

Lincoln faces a steep reelection bid in 2010. She trails the likely Republican nominee, Rep. John Boozman, by 23 points and has only a 27 percent approval rating in a recent poll.

Obama responded by defending steps his administration has taken to right the economy and said “Moving forward, Blanche, what you’re going to hear from some folks…[is that] the only way to provide stability is to go back and do what we did before the crisis.”

The president reiterated that he would not return to past policies.

“If the price of certainty is for us to adopt the exact same proposals that were in place for eight years leading up to the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression…the result is going to be the same.”

But Obama conceded that “Blanche is right that we sometimes get bogged down in ideology.”

Obama’s last statement immediately above reveals the mockery of his core promise as a candidate for president that he would be post-partisan and would reach across the divide.  He has done absolutely nothing of the sort, and has instead created the most poisonous partisan environment ever recorded in a president’s first year.

But I want to return to Blanche Lincoln’s “fears that there’s no one in your administration that understands what it means to go to work on Monday and make a payroll on Friday.”

Ouch.  The truth hurts when you stink on steroids.

It’s significant that this is a bipartisan statement which Democrats now share with Republicans.  Democrats were shrilly running every campaign against George Bush.  Oh, everything was about “Bush’s failed policies.”

Now Democrats are running away from Barack Hussein just as frantically.  And now all of a sudden everything is about Obama’s failed policies.

A full year into his presidency, Obama has lost more jobs in a single year than ANY president ever lost in a ANY year since records started being kept in 1940.

And at the very same time he’s destroying jobs while offering the most pathetic assertions to the contrary, he is presiding over the most insane deficit-laden government spending spree in the history of the human race.

Businesses understand that in the real world, you can’t avoid disaster by printing your own money.

And so you’ve got the DemocRATS jumping off the sinking ship.

You’ve just GOT to love the poetic justice.

Blanche Lincoln also has the virtue of being completely correct: the most “anti-business” administration in our nation’s history has the least actual real world business experience of any administration in history.

From National Journal Magazine:

Critics say that one area where the Obama team lacks luster and diversity is in the realm of business. Few of his key people can point to significant business experience. In 2001, Bush had four former CEOs (including his vice president) in the Cabinet: career Texas oil man Donald Evans at Commerce; Treasury’s O’Neill, who had run Alcoa for almost 15 years; and Defense’s Rumsfeld, who had spent some 15 years at the helm of three businesses, including the international pharmaceutical firm G.D. Searle. Cheney had been CEO of the oil-services and construction giant Halliburton from 1995 to 2000. Even Bill Clinton recruited from business: Thomas (Mack) McLarty, CEO of the natural-gas company Arkla, became his chief of staff, and Hazel O’Leary, an executive vice president of a Minnesota utility firm, was his Energy secretary. (They failed to distinguish themselves in those posts, however.)

It’s actually far, far worse than that.

You want to see how the Obama administration compares to others in having people with actual business experience making decisions and running things?

Here are the percentages of people with private sector business experience serving in previous administrations:

T. Roosevelt…….. 38%
Taft………………….40%
Wilson …………….. 52%
Harding…………….49%
Coolidge………….. 48%
Hoover…………….. 42%
F. Roosevelt……… 50%
Truman……………..50%
Eisenhower………. 57%
Kennedy………….. 30%
Johnson…………….47%
Nixon………………. 53%
Ford………………… 42%
Carter………………. 32%
Reagan……………..56%
GH Bush………….. 51%
Clinton …………….. 39%
GW Bush…………. 55%

And the winner of the Chicken Dinner is…………..

Obama……………. 8% !!!

Yep! Thats right! Only Eight Percent!!!..the least by far of the last 19 presidents!! And these people are trying to tell our big corporations how to run their business? They know what’s best for GM…Chrysler… Wall Street… and you and me?

How can the president of a major nation and society…the one with the most successful economic system in world history… stand and talk about business when he’s never worked for one?.. or about jobs when he has never really had one??!

And neither has 92% of his senior staff and closest advisers.! They’ve spent most of their time in academia, government and/or non-profit jobs….or as “community organizers” ..when they should have been in an employment line.

So when Blanche Lincoln points out that nobody in the Obama administration has any idea what it’s like to actually make a payroll, she’s completely correct.

What we have is a bunch of people who have either worked for egghead academia or the government their entire lives frantically pushing the buttons and pulling the levers of government to somehow stimulate businesses that none of them know anything whatsoever about.