Of the sons of Issachar, men who understood the times, with knowledge of what Israel should do, their chiefs were two hundred; and all their kinsmen were at their command — 1 Chronicles 12:32
This should make you angry. Mind you, a LOT of things the media has basically refused to report – such as the increasingly scandal and cover-up in the terrorist attack on the US compound in Libya that resulted in the murder of a US ambassador and several other Americans – that should make you angry.
Obama is raking in close to a billion dollars for his campaign. While incredibly deceitfully presenting himself as the poor oppressed candidate fighting against the obscenely greedy corporate stooge Romney. But when we find out that terrorist murderers such as Nidal Hasan can make contributions – no questions asked and all safeguards removed UNLIKE THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN– people ought to start getting pissed off:
As Katie Pavlich posted on October 5, the Obama campaign is about to get rocked by a fundraising scandal involving “taxes and foreign donors.” Pavlich wrote that since “billionaires like George Soros support him and considering Hollywood is partially controlled by European money, naturally Obama has foreign support. Obama’s economic philosophy is also similar to European style resdistribution of wealth, which is why French President Francois Hollande supports him.”
This development comes after Obama raised $181 million dollars for the month of September. As Allapundit noted yesterday, that’s a lot of donors. If there wasn’t anything to hide then why is the campaign trying to put a kibosh on the story.
Back in April, I stumbled upon a video that recorded an anomaly with respect to donating to Obama’s campaign online. As the man in the video donates online, he notices that “the Obama campaign does not have the universal 3-digit security code feature for credit card transactions on their website. It appears that anyone, anywhere can donate to President Obama’s re-election campaign, all you need is a credit card number.”
He tried the same thing with the Romney campaign, but the donation was denied since it wasn’t verified.
According to the sources, a taxpayer watchdog group conducted a nine-month investigation into presidential and congressional fundraising and has uncovered thousands of cases of credit card solicitations and donations to Obama and Capitol Hill, allegedly from unsecure accounts, and many from overseas. That might be a violation of federal election laws.
The Obama campaign has received hundreds of millions in small dollar donations, many via credit card donations through their website. On Thursday, the campaign announced a record September donor haul of $150 million. [$181 million]
At the end of the 2008 presidential campaign, the Obama-Biden effort was hit with a similar scandal. At the time, the Washington Post reported that the Obama campaign let donors use “largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity.”
The bottom line is this: a foreign donor can give to the Obama campaign without the full disclosure that is required on any HONEST OR LEGITIMATE CAMPAIGN SUCH AS MITT ROMNEY’S. If you want to buy an Obama IS America flag at the Obama store, you’ve got to enter the security code on your credit card; if you are a foreign terrorist who just got through murdering Americans and you want to help make sure that Obama gets reelected so you won’t pay for your terrorism, you DON’T have to enter that security code.
The Obama campaign is specifically asking for donations for $190 in order to avoid the $200 threshold that involves more inspection.
In an explosive report set to send shockwaves through official Washington, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) released a 108-page GAI investigation into the threat of foreign and fraudulent Internet campaign donations in U.S. federal elections (visit campaignfundingrisks.com to download the full report).
Breitbart News obtained an advance copy of the bombshell report which reveals that the Obama.com website is not owned by the president’s campaign but rather by Obama bundler Robert Roche, a U.S. citizen living in Shanghai, China. Roche is the chairman of a Chinese infomercial company, Acorn International, with ties to state-controlled banks that allow it to “gain revenue through credit card transactions with Chinese banks.”
There’s more.
The unusual Obama.com website redirects traffic directly to a donation page on the Obama campaign’s official website, my.barackobama.com, which does not require donors to enter their credit card security code (known as the CVV code), thereby increasing the likelihood of foreign or fraudulent donations. The website is managed by a small web development firm, Wicked Global, in Maine. One of Wicked Global’s employees, Greg Dorr, lists on his LinkedIn page his additional employment with Peace Action Maine and Maine Voices for Palestinian Rights. According to the GAI report, 68 percent of all Internet traffic to Obama.com comes from foreign visitors.
And still more.
In 2011, Mr. Roche obtained one of the most sought-after pieces of real estate in Washington, DC: a seat at the head table for President Obama’s State Dinner for Chinese President Hu Jintao. How Roche—a man whose infomercial company hawks fitness equipment, cell phones, and breast enhancement products—landed a seat alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former President Bill Clinton, Sen. John Kerry, former President Jimmy Carter, and Chinese President Hu Jintao remains unclear.
Since 2009, White House Visitor Logs list the name Robert Roche at least 19 times, despite the fact Mr. Roche’s primary residence is in China.
Mr. Roche, who is originally from Chicago, is a co-chair of the Technology Initiative for the Obama campaign.
According to Acorn International’s prospectus, the success of Mr. Roche’s company hinges on maintaining access to state-run media and “preferential tax treatments and subsidies” doled out by the People’s Republic of China (PRC):
Our business depends on our access to TV media time to market our products and services in China….PRC law is vague and is subject to discretionary interpretation and enforcement by PRC authorities…Loss of these preferential tax treatments and subsidies could have material and adverse effects on our results of operations and financial conditions.
I’ve said it again and again on this blog: the Democrat Party is the official party of dishonesty in America. Liberals are determined to cheat in absolutely every way imaginable in order to gain more and more power and control over the American people in the guise of giving us a socialist nanny state.
(CNN) – Both presidential campaigns are citing fund-raising spikes following the Supreme Court’s decision upholding President Barack Obama’s health care law.
Mitt Romney’s organization said Friday morning it had raised $4.6 million online, and Obama’s operation, while not revealing specific numbers, said they had surpassed Team Romney’s announced total.
The Romney fund-raising figure included money from more than 47,000 contributions in the first 24 hours, the candidate’s spokeswoman Andrea Saul said.
Obama’s campaign wouldn’t reveal specific fund-raising numbers when asked, saying Friday their opponent’s hour-by-hour updates were “perverse.” They did assert, however, that their donations surpassed the Romney effort.
Do you want to know what is “peverse”??? Barack Obama in the White House.
The lying weasel was caught on tape pleading for money because an avalanche of doom is falling on this lying narcissist. The ObamaCare verdict came out on June 28. Within 24 hours – that’s by 10 AM Eastern time June 29, Romney said he had raised $4.6 million from 47,000 new donors.
President Obama sounded weary and maybe a tad worried late Friday during a rambling conference call with campaign donors whom he repeatedly begged to send money—and send it now.
“The majority on this call maxed out to my campaign last time. I really need you to do the same this time,” the president said in a highly unusual (and presumably legal) fundraising pitch from Air Force One on his way back to Washington from Colorado Springs, where he’d been assessing the terrible damage caused by uncontained wildfires. A special phone on the government aircraft is dedicated to political calls that are paid for by the campaign.
“I’m asking you to meet or exceed what you did in 2008,” the presidential pitchman continued, speaking to donors who were invited to dial in based on their contributions during the last election. “Because we’re going to have to deal with these super PACs in a serious way. And if we don’t, frankly I think the political [scene] is going to be changed permanently. Because the special interests that are financing my opponent’s campaign are just going to consolidate themselves. They’re gonna run Congress and the White House.”
The president’s 18-minute pleading—a recording of which was provided to The Daily Beast by an Obama contributor—hardly sounded like a man doing a victory lap after Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling upholding Obamacare, as the Affordable Care Act has come to be known. Or, for that matter, like a candidate who has been beating his Republican opponent in recent polls of key battleground states.
Rather, Obama sounded like a dog-tired idealist forced to grapple painfully with hard reality. “In 2008 everything was new and exciting about our campaign,” Obama said. “And now I’m the incumbent president. I’ve got gray hair. People have seen disappointment because folks had a vision of change happening immediately. And it turns out change is hard, especially when you’ve got an obstructionist Republican Congress.”
But lest any of his donors believe the president sounded depressed, Obama quickly added: “Nevertheless, we’ve gotten more done in the last three years than most presidents do in eight years … I just hope you guys haven’t become disillusioned. I hope all of you still understand what’s at stake and why this is so important … I still believe in you guys, and I hope you still believe in me and the possibilities of this campaign.”
“The special interests that are financing my opponent’s campaign are just going to consolidate themselves. They’re gonna run Congressand the White House.”
In his most detailed assessment of the race so far, Obama lamented the cash advantage of Republican nominee-designate Mitt Romney, but offered hope that he could win reelection with a superior ground game and a more popular message. “We don’t have to match these guys dollar for dollar because we’ve got a better grassroots operation and we’ve got a better message,” he said. “The American people—the nice thing is they agree with our message when they hear it. We just can’t be drowned out … A few billionaires can’t drown out millions of voices.”
Obama noted that campaign-finance law requires both him and Romney to release monthly reports on fundraising—“and that could be a double-edged sword,” he said. “The downside is that the media hear these numbers and hyperventilate over it, and there’s a tendency to blow them out of proportion. But it does make the process more transparent. We see where we stand. And right now on a month-to-month basis, we’ve fallen behind.”
The president added: “Last month the Romney campaign raised $76 million. We raised $60 million.” That determines “our planning for whether or not we are gonna go on the air in Florida or Ohio or any of these battleground states, how much advertising we buy, what we spend when it comes to organizing teams.”
He added: “The truth is that early money is always more valuable than late money. And what we don’t want to do is be in a situation where, because everybody thinks that somehow we’re gonna win or people will just think Mr. Romney doesn’t know what he’s talking about—and then suddenly we get surprised later because it turns out that a couple of billionaires wrote $20 million checks and have bought all the TV time and we find ourselves flat-footed in September or October … We’ve got to make sure that we purchase advertising through August and September before the conventions,” he went on. “I think it’s fair to say that if we wait till the last minute we could be in for a pretty rude surprise, and that’s part of what we’re trying to avoid.”
The president warned: “I can’t do this by myself, and the progress we’ve made could unravel pretty quickly.” He urged his listeners on the conference call to contribute “today or as soon as possible” because “we’ve got to have the resources to make the choice crystal clear for the American people both in the air and on the ground.” Obama’s solicitation was followed up by an urgent email from campaign manager Jim Messina asking recipients to write a check immediately.
“The good news is we’re spending a lot more money on our ground game and grassroots organizing and voter registration,” the president said. “We just can’t be outspent 10 to 1. That’s what happened in Wisconsin recently. The Koch brothers and their allies,” he said, referring to billionaire conservative super-PAC funders David and Charles Koch, “spent more than the other side’s entire campaign—our side’s entire campaign.”
Obama contrasted the former Massachusetts governor unfavorably with Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the Republican nominee last time around. “We’re facing a much different opponent than last time,” the president warned. “I don’t mean just the candidate—although last time we were running against somebody who at least believed in climate change, believed in campaign-finance reform, believed in immigration reform.”
“It’s also because the landscape’s changed because of the Supreme Court ruling Citizens United,” continued Obama. “We are going to see more money spent on negative ads through these super PACs and anonymous outside groups than ever before. And if things continue as they have so far, I’ll be the first sitting president in modern history to be outspent in his reelection campaign.”
Every single thing this turd liar-in-chief and his dishonest staff of campaign cockroaches says is pure dishonest lie. It’s really quite remarkable.
The Obama campaign is asserting that they took in even more. The fact that they refused to produce any of their numbers to back those assertions up is evidence enough to refute their bogus claims.
It is of course nice to be vindicated with the TRUTH. If you have anything to do with Obama, you never get TRUTH.
I also pointed out the map of the historic ass-kicking that the enraged American people hit the genuinely evil Democrat Party with to punish it for the ObamaCare fiasco:
In 2008, Obama’s record haul was made possible by the fact that he broke a campaign pledge and opted out of the public financing system. He was the first candidate ever to take that step, and he justified it with the prospect of hostile outside spending.
BARACK OBAMA: And I can make a firm pledge: under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase – not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.
But let me perfectly clear, because I know you’ll hear the same old claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people: if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.
I will cut taxes – cut taxes – for 95% of all working families. Because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class.
STEPHANOPOULOS: I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.
OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but…
STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it’s a tax increase?
STEPHANOPOULOS: “Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don’t. How is that not a tax?”
PRESIDENT OBAMA: “No. That’s not true, George. The — for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.
But Obama lied to you. It IS a tax increase. It is THE largest tax increase EVERon the middle class.
And it is time to get this lying weasel out of our lives.
Obama’s campaign bully brigade rides again
by Michelle Malkin Creators Syndicate Copyright 2012
They’re baaaaaaack. Barack Obama’s election-year goon squad kicked into high gear this week by kicking the president’s fiercest opponents in the teeth and targeting their pocketbooks. Returning to bully business as usual, the Obama campaign launched a brazen salvo against two prominent conservative critics and their legions of private citizen donors.
Let’s be clear (to use Obama’s favorite phrase): This is not just the politics of personal destruction. It’s a vendetta of campaign finance destruction. Under the guise of “disclosure,” Team Obama is exploiting the power of high government office to intimidate lawful, peaceful contributors who support limited-government causes.
In a scathing fundraising e-mail appeal, Obama campaign manager Jim Messina name-checked wealthy free-market philanthropists Charles and David Koch — along with a growing movement of grassroots conservatives who have freely, voluntarily and legally given money to the Koch-founded nonprofit activist group Americans for Prosperity and its sister foundation. As a speaker at several AFP events over the past three years, I’ve met thousands of like-minded, hardworking Americans who support their work at the local, state and federal levels.
The Koches’ sins are to 1. follow tax law and protect the identities of donors to their charitable organizations, and 2. exercise their free speech by funding advocacy ads informing the public about the Obama administration’s jobs toll destruction and failed green energy “investments.” (Their most recent TV spot zeroed in on the taxpayer-funded Solyndra bankruptcy.)
“When you attempt to drown out (Americans’) voices through unlimited, secret contributions to pursue a special-interest agenda that conflicts with what’s best for our nation, you must expect some scrutiny of your actions,” Messina railed. The threat of scrutiny was backed by Obama himself, whose official campaign Twitter account directed 12 million-plus followers this week to “add your name to demand that the Koch brothers make their donors public.”
But Obama’s own former top officials run a so-called super PAC (Priorities USA) that also maintains nonprofit status and subsidizes advocacy ads while protecting its donor base. The White House, of course, is mum on the unlimited, secret contributions that Obama is now encouraging wealthy liberals and lobbyists to make in pursuit of his own special-interest agenda — i.e., re-election.
The president’s flapping lips are also sealed when it comes to applying his disclosure standards to the shadowy, George Soros-backed Center for American Progress, which has supplied the Obama administration with countless top policy staffers, including special Department of Health and Human Services assistant Michael Halle and HHS Director Jeanne Lambrew, a former senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. CAP founder John Podesta was Obama’s transition chief, overseeing the backroom process of rewarding friends and allies with plum positions. CAP flacks shrugged off conflict-of-interest questions: “We respect the privacy of supporters who have chosen not to make their donations public,” CAP spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri said.
As for respecting the privacy rights of Obama’s foes? Not so much.
It seems to me no small coincidence that this disclosure charade comes just as numerous tea party organizations are reporting that the Internal Revenue Service has targeted them for audits. According to Colleen Owens of the Richmond (Va.) Tea Party, several fiscal-conservative activist groups in Virginia, Hawaii, Ohio and Texas have received a spate of IRS letters. The missives demand extensive requests to identity volunteers, board members and … donors.
This is B.O.’s M.O. His bully brigade did the same to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its donors during the November 2010 midterms as payback for the organization’s ads opposing the federal health care takeover. And in 2008, Obama’s allies at a Soros-tied outfit sent out “warning” letters to 10,000 top GOP givers “hoping to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions.” Witch hunt leader Tom Matzzie, formerly of Soros-funded MoveOn.org, bragged of “going for the jugular” and said the warning letter was just the first step, “alerting donors who might be considering giving to right-wing groups to a variety of potential dangers, including legal trouble, public exposure and watchdog groups digging through their lives.”
Matzzie also advertised a $100,000 bounty for dirt on conservative political groups “to create a sense of scandal around the groups” and dissuade donors from giving money. The effort was cheered by Accountable America adviser Judd Legum, founder of Think Progress — the same group that led the attack on the Chamber of Commerce and is run by Podesta’s Center for American Progress. Just as with the Obama super PAC led by former White House officials, Matzzie’s group “Accountable America” was a 501(c)(4) nonprofit entity that shielded the identity of its donors.
Oh, and remember this? In 2008, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, both Obama promoters, threatened to bring criminal libel charges against anyone who spread what they considered “false criticisms” of their Dear Leader.
It is no small exaggeration to conclude that Team Obama’s dead aim is to chill conservative speech and criminalize conservative dissent. All Americans for prosperity must push back with one voice:
No, you can’t.
But keep reading to find out about how pathologically secretive Obama’s own supporters are:
“This Is Our DC” activists hold “We are the 99%” and mix with “Occupy DC” protesters during a protest outside the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. (Reason TV)
This is the first in a Daily Caller investigative series.
The politically aggressive Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has quietly created a national network of at least eight community-organizing groups, some of which function alongside the Occupy Wall Street movement, a Daily Caller investigation shows.
Incorporated by the SEIU as local non-profits, the groups are waging concerted local political campaigns to publicly attack conservative political figures, banks, energy companies and other corporations.
Each local group has portrayed itself as an independent community organization not tied to any special interest. But they were founded, incorporated, and led by SEIU personnel.
In reality, they are creations of the wealthy and influential labor union, amounting to a secret network of new SEIU front groups.
On two occasions in 2011, approximately 30 Our DC protesters descended on the congressional office of Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. The first of those two December efforts was part of a “Take Back the Capital” campaign orchestrated by union officials and coinciding with an Occupy DC rally.
A source told the Daily Caller that while African-American and Hispanic protesters sat in McConnell’s office, two Caucasian women from Our DC directed the protesters from the hallway. The staffers called reporters, operated laptops and posted messages to Twitter.
That event was promoted through a “99% in DC” website, which Internet Web server records indicate was managed by the union. But Our DC activists were quick to advise local media outlets not to confuse them with the Occupy movement.
Still, Washington activists themselves reported on an “Occupy K Street” rally later that same weekend in which Occupy DC and Our DC groups marched side by side.
Other protest events organized by Our DC have targeted House Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Virginia Republican Rep. Frank Wolf.
In the months since Occupy DC began growing in numbers and influence, Our DC has cooperated with that movement at several protest rallies.
Another was the series of demonstrations against the Conservative Political Action Conference in February. At that event, Our DC members wearing the group’s t-shirts carried “We are the 99%” signs alongside Occupy DC protesters.
A YouTube video titled “Occupy CPAC” shows an “Our DC member speak[ing]” through a megaphone in front of several “99%” signs.
Another video, shot at the same location and published by The Huffington Post, shows a giant “Occupy United” banner in front of protesters waving identical “99%” signs.
It’s just weird how Obama is capable of demonizing his opponents for acting like Obama’s supporters – especially given the fact that Obama’s opponents are FAR more ethical than Obama’s supporters.
As we contemplate the fact that former Goldman Sachs, CEO, former Democrat U.S. Senator, former Democrat New Jersey Governor and now former MF Global CEO somehow “misplaced” $1.2 billion of Other People’s Money –
and I must here remind you of Margaret Thatcher’s famous dictim: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of Other People’s Money”
• “You’ve had an honorable man, a decent man, an honest man, at the helm of this state. … He’s fought for what matters to ordinary folks.”
• “People…say, ‘You know, I was saving up all my life. …. Suddenly, because of this financial crisis, I may have to go back to work.’ “
• “Jon knows these are challenging times. This is why he got into public service. He didn’t do it for the paycheck.”
• “This crisis…came about because of the same theories, the same lax regulation, the same trickle-down economics that the other guy’s party has been peddling for years.”
• “Jon’s got the mop and he’s cleaning up after somebody else’s mess.”
• “One of the things you’ve got in Jon Corzine is somebody who tells it to you straight,” Mr Obama said.
Do you notice how Obama – that vile weasel – used Jon Corzine to demonize Republicans? Obama was actually dishonestly saying that Republicans created a mess, and that this quivering piece of slime Jon Corzine was the guy cleaning up that mess.
Let me just digress for a moment and state that Barack Obama is the most divisive, most dishonest, most hateful, most demonizing, fearmongering LIAR in American history.
“Jon’s a leader who’s been called to govern in some extraordinary times,” Obama said while campaigning for Corzine in 2009. “Jon Corzine wasn’t just the first governor to pass an economic recovery plan for his state. He was an ally with the Obama administration in helping us develop a national recovery plan.”
“I literally picked up the phone and called Jon Corzine and said Jon, what do you think we should do,” Biden said. “The reason we called Jon is that we knew that he knew about the economy, about world markets, how we had to respond, unlike almost anyone we knew. It was because he had been in the pit — because he had been in the furnace. And we trusted his judgment.”
“Way back in the transition period, before we were sworn in, when Barack Obama and I were literally sitting at a desk in a high rise in Chicago, beginning the plan on how we would try to get this economy out of a ditch, literally, the first guy I called was Jon Corzine. It’s not a joke. It’s not a joke. First of all, he’s the smartest guy I know in terms of the economy and on finance, and I really mean that.”
That’s right, Jon Corzine was a trusted adviser to Obama and Biden. That’s why our economy is in such great shape now. And the guy who helped Obama put together the massively failed stimulus also just put together the fourth largest bankruptcy in American history as he put his liberalism to work at MF (which stands for “Managed Futures”) Global and helped himself to other people’s money.
Now the smartest guy Obama and Biden know is saying, “I don’t know where the money went.” You know, even though that was pretty much his whole JOB to know.
Why we are wondering where the $1.2 billion that Jon Corzine “redistributed,” we should also be asking ourselves, “And while we’re at it, where the hell is the $862 billion in Other People’s Money that Barry Hussein squandered? And it’s actually $3.27 TRILLION that Obama “lost,” if you believe the Congressional Budget Office.
Where’s the money, Jon?
Where’s the money, Barry Hussein?
Just as Jon Corzine pissed away MF Global and everyone who was invested in MF Global, Barack Obama is pissing away the United States of America and everyone who counts on it.
God damn America is going down the drain, and our only hope is to get rid of these vile Democrats before they wipe us out.
By the way, you know how Goldman Sachs was and is a bunch of corrupt and dishonest slimebags, right? Guess which candidate for president got more money from that very same corrupt and dishonest bunch of slimebags than ANYONE? You guessed it, Barry Hussein. And those corrupt and dishonest slimebags were similarly the second highest donors to the Obama campaign in 2007 and again in 2008.
It was Democrats who wrecked America. And it will be Democrats who put America in its grave.
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Testing a re-election theme, President Barack Obama is telling donors during a fundraising rich tour of three western states that the country is suffering from an economic crisis and from a political crisis. “People are crying out for action,” he says.
Pointing to elements of his $447 billion jobs plan rejected by Republican lawmakers, Obama said they would likely linger as campaign issues in 2012.
“This is the fight that we’re going to have right now, and I suspect this is the fight that we’re going to have to have over the next year,” Obama told about 240 donors at a fundraising event Monday at the Bellagio hotel and casino in Las Vegas. “The Republicans in Congress and the Republican candidates for president have made their agenda very clear.”
In Los Angeles on Monday evening, Obama mingled with Hollywood’s royalty. At an intimate dinner with top donors in the Hancock Park home of producer James Lassiter, Obama chatted with movie star Will Smith and former Los Angeles Lakers standout Earvin “Magic” Johnson.
“Sometimes I think people forget how much has gotten done,” Obama said, and he urged his supporters to rally once again, at the same time joking, as he often does, that he is older and grayer now. “This election won’t be as sexy as the first one.”
The Las Vegas fundraiser attracted about 240 people who paid from $1,000 to $35,800 toward Obama’s re-election campaign and to the Democratic National Committee. The bigger donors met the president personally.
The dinner at the Lassiter home was cozier, with fewer than 40 donors who paid $35,800 each. Among the sponsors were Troy Carter, the manager of Grammy award winner Lady Gaga. The singer herself was a guest at a fundraiser last month at the Atherton, Calif., home of Facebook chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg.
Obama was to raise money at the home of movie stars Melanie Griffith and Antonio Banderas, an event aimed at Latino donors that was also expected to feature actress Eva Longoria and mayors Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles and Julian Castro of San Antonio.
While in Las Vegas, Obama spelled out a plan to help homeowners refinance their homes even if their home values had dropped dramatically below what they owed on their mortgages. Obama ventured into a working class development in the Las Vegas suburbs that benefitted from a community revitalization program like one he is pushing Congress to approve now.
But the president displayed campaign-style vigor, wading into the neighborhood crowd to shake hands and even lift a baby. His handlers reminded him it was time to leave, but Obama strode to yet another group of residents for one last hand shake, autograph and photograph.
Upon arriving in Los Angeles, Obama headed to a diverse neighborhood near Lassiter’s home south of Hollywood and stopped at Roscoe’s, a chicken restaurant, where he greeted customers and ordered chicken wings for his staff.
Most of his remaining time during this three-day swing through Nevada, California and Colorado is being spent raising money. On Tuesday he will tape an appearance on “The Tonight show with Jay Leno,” his second as president and fourth appearance overall. He will also attend fundraisers in San Francisco and Denver.
Why is the country suffering from a political crisis and an economic crisis three years into the Obama presidency? Why is it that three years into the Obama’s regime the people are crying out for action?
“Yesterday, President Barack Obama announced his plans to run for reelection in 2012, 582 days before Election Day and before most major Republican opponents officially announced that they’d be entering the race. This is the earliest any incumbent president has officially signed up to run again.”
The day that he announced, he himself ended his ability to move things legislatively. He went into full-time candidate mode and every single thing he is doing is merely another campaign tactic.
You add up all his golf, and he isn’t doing much else BUT campaign. Particularly given the fact that most of the crap the man is doing is nothing but incredibly poorly disguised campaigning (which he’s cynically making taxpayers pay for). From CNN:
But at times, the event also took on a touch of the political rally Obama’s political opponents said it was.
“I’m not just here to enjoy the nice weather, I’m here to enlist you in a fight,” he said to the cheering Cannon Falls crowd.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Preibus derided the event — the first stop on Obama’s three-state trip — as nothing more than a campaign event disguised as a public one.
“He’s spending taxpayers’ dollars on a bus tour disguised as some kind of economic event for the country when we all know that it’s a campaign event paid for by the taxpayers,” he said.
Earlier, the Republican National Committee issued a “briefing book” on the trip made to resemble one produced by the administration in which it mockingly described the trip as “a totally non-political taxpayer-funded administration event that just happens to criss-cross several battleground states critical to the president’s reelection.”
Add to that the fact that this Marxist-in-Chief has been out hypocritically playing communist class warfare in public even as he has been sucking up to the filthy rich – oh, about every three days or so – in private.
Let’s just call Obama what he is: totally dishonest (or read what Steve Wynn had to say here).
Obama came out demanding a debt ceiling hike with no strings attached, no spending cuts, lots of taxes and one that would go beyond November 2012 to keep his presidency safe.
At this point, he is going to get none of those things.
Over the last 40 years, there have been 37 separate debt limit increases that last 6 months or less, and never once has the federal government ultimately defaulted on its debt. Meanwhile, the $2.4 trillion increase President Obama is seeking represents the largest single debt hike in history, and, quite conveniently, it kicks the can down the road past both his and Senator Nelson’s re-election bids next year.
“President Reagan did it [i.e. raised the debt ceiling] 18 times.”
Well, do the math yourself. What is 8 years divided by 18? That’s 96 months divided by 18, or about once every five months.
As I already pointed out, Democrats forced Ronald Reagan to come to them an average of every five months and nine days to plead for another debt ceiling extension. And the Obama argument that not giving him a long-term extension now is simply factually untrue. Every single president has done it over and over and over again without catastrophe; how is Obama’s presidency so weak and so incompetent that he now absolutely must have what they did not need???
The answer comes down to one simple thing: Obama’s presidency has been an unmitigated disaster. He has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER positive to run on. He certainly has nothing positive to say about himself in this debt ceiling fiasco, having never ONCE come out with any kind of plan or demonstrated any kind of leadership whatsoever. While the nation has sunk into this debt ceiling crisis, Obama has been doing an average of a campaign event every three days. So you can see where his priorities are.
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure,” he said. “It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”
Obama needs to resign from office as a completely failed leader. Why should Republicans treat him one iota better than the vindictive way he treated Bush over the same issue???
Every single Democrat who is “outraged and appalled” by the Republicans’ behavior is a hypocrite who ought to be ashamed of himself or herself.
History is on Republicans’ side in every part of this debate.
As for a short-term extension – which Obama selfishly refuses because he doesn’t want this issue to derail his political campaign next year – realize that DEBT EXTENSIONS HAVE BEEN SHORT TERM AFFAIRS FOR THE LAST 40 YEARS. And why should it be any different for Obama now?
As for the amount Obama seeks “the biggest debt-limit increase in history” whether it is in sheer dollar amount or expressed as a percentage of GDP. And combined with the long-term extension he is demanding, why the hell SHOULDN’T the Republicans – who ran on cutting spending – not make HUGE demands if it is going to give up such a debt-ceiling increase???
If Democrats want to demagogue Republicans by claiming that they are “holding America hostage” (or whatever their shrill attack is), remind yourself that Barack Obama PERSONALLY used the debt ceiling to demonize George Bush, and that not a single Democrat on the Senate voted for Bush’s debt ceiling increase request in 2006. How on earth are Republicans not more than justified in holding Obama’s feet to the fire as they seek to stop the fiscal insanity and save our country and our children now???
Finally, how DARE Barack Obama bother to try to run for president again when our nation is in crisis RIGHT NOW and he is AWOL. Even The New York Times– hardly a source friendly to conservatives – has attacked Barack Obama for “being on the sidelines.” That article begins with this picture of a White House press corps wondering where the hell their president is while our country faces a crisis:
WASHINGTON — For an hour on Wednesday the White House press secretary, Jay Carney, fielded questions about what, if anything, President Obama was doing to help end the impasse in Congress over the imminent need to raise the nation’s borrowing limit.
The New York Times article proceeds to state that “Mr. Obama is in danger of seeming a spectator at one of the most critical moments of his presidency.” But he’s not in danger of seeming a spectator; HE IS A SPECTATOR AND THE COUNTRY IS IN DANGER OF HAVING ITS CREDIT RATING YANKED – the effects of which will be devastating across the economy due to higher interest rates for everything.
Obama needs to get a deal done. And all he’s doing is giving demagogic speeches that further divide a nation that – cynical and deceitful promises to the contary – he has already divided enough.
That’s good for Obama, given that Obama promised the American people that if his $3.27 TRILLION stimulus porker was passed, unemployment would go down to 7.1% by now, and instead it just rose to 9.2%.
Earlier this week David Plouffe, one of Obama’s senior advisers and an architect of his 2008 campaign, was panned for saying “the average American does not view the economy through the prism of GDP or unemployment rates or even monthly jobs numbers.”
In a condescending way, White House press secretary Jay Carney basically told the press corps the same thing. Carney told ABC News’ Jake Tapper that Americans talk to each other about their feelings of the economic situation rather than “analyze the numbers.”
“I don’t know where, you know, the voters that some other folks might be talking to — but — or — but most people do not sit around their kitchen table and analyze GDP and unemployment numbers,” Carney said. “They do not sit around analyzing The Wall Street Journal or other — or Bloomberg to look at the — you know, analyze the numbers.”
It’s too darn bad we don’t know how to read, analyze or think, or we’d know what a total abject failure Jay Carney’s boss truly is. If we could just learn to read or count, we’d fix Barry Hussein good in 2012.
Carney began this dissertation on the ignorance of the American people by first saying,
“Well, I understand that we’re engaged in the – or rather, the Republicans are engaged in a primary campaign, trying to get some media attention.”
As though that should somehow insulate Obama to whatever they say (we know that Obama has NEVERcampaigned, and transcends politics the way the gods transcend humanity, after all).
You’re a just bunch of dullards who don’t care about unemployment, or the deplorable state of the U.S. economy, or the out of control spending by a socialist kleptocracy.
Here’s the numbers:
The GDP is the measure of a country’s output at any given time. The nation’s $14 trillion+ debt now equals the TOTAL U.S. GDP, and exceeds the world’s economic output.
The official unemployment estimate is 9.2%, but when you figure in all of the people who simply stopped looking for work or have run out of unemployment benefits that percentage increases.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics: Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, now stands at 16.2%.
I analyze Obama’s abject, deliberate destruction of America’s economy, everyday. Jobs, along with businesses are leaving America thanks to the idiotic regulations, high taxes, the trade deficit, government spending, and unions that price their people and jobs right out of the country. Tens of thousands of jobs have moved to communist China, which means we’re propping up an enemy of the United States with capitalist dollars.
But the American people are too damn stupid to understand all of that. How can the ignorant dirty masses possibly understand? It is better that Obama TELL THEM what to think, is it not? And no one should listen to Republicans, after all; they’re campaigning, you know. And Obama would never do anything so crass as that.
Still, Carney’s hand-waving dismissal of the Republicans’ points make it somewhat interesting to find out what those points actually ARE:
Tim Pawlenty pointed out that Obama is “dangerously detached.” That whole “I feel your pain” thing is simply absent from Obama. He stands far too far above us to feel or understand our mortal pain. Our duty is to worship our messiah and have faith in him and in his Marxist ideology come what may.
“Today’s abysmal jobs report confirms what we all know – that President Obama has failed to get this economy moving again. Just this week, President Obama’s closest White House adviser said that ‘unemployment rates or even monthly jobs numbers’ do not matter to the average American.
“If David Plouffe were working for me, I would fire him and then he could experience firsthand the pain of unemployment. His comments are an insult to the more than 20 million people who are out of work, underemployed or who have simply stopped looking for jobs. With their cavalier attitude about the economy, the White House has turned the audacity of hope into the audacity of indifference.”
That opens the door to another thing Obama assumes you are: too selfish to care about other people.
If you have a job, or are getting your welfare check from the government that the government has redistributed from someone who IS lucky enough to have a job, you clearly don’t give a damn about how much millions of Americans are suffering. That was at the heart of both David Plouffe’s and Jay Carney’s point. Let me provide the full David Plouffe (did I mention he’s Obama’s TOP political advisor?) statement:
“The average American does not view the economy through the prism of GDP or unemployment rates or even monthly jobs numbers,” Mr. Plouffe said. “People won’t vote based on the unemployment rate; they’re going to vote based on: ‘How do I feel about my own situation? Do I believe the president makes decisions based on me and my family?’
That’s right: if I’m doing okay, or at least if my family’s getting enough of the welfare pie, screw America. Who gives a damn if everybody’s out of work? I’m a DEMOCRAT; I’m getting MINE. Barry Hussein took somebody else’s money and gave it to me so I’d vote for him. Screw America, screw the American people and screw the unemployment rate.
Obama assumes that a majority of American voters are as selfish and self-centered as he himself has proven to be in his personal life before running for president. Did you know, for instance, this about Barack Obama?
Prior to his run for President, Barack and Michelle Obama were in the top 2% of income earners, but actually gave less than the average American in charitable giving.
Obama gave .4% of his income. In spite of being rich, and being in the top richest 2% of Americans, Obama gave only $1,050 to charity. When the average American household (that’s mostly us in the bottom 98%) gave $1,872, which was 2.2% of their incomes.
And then you find that as cheap and chintzy and stingy and selfish as the redistribution of wealth president (a.k.a. Barry Hussein) was before he decided to run for president, his vice president was even STINGIER. Because Joe Biden gave less than one-eighth of one percent of his wealth to charity.
And, of course, Democrats who lecture us on “paying our fair share” while they either welch on their debts, refuse to contribute to charity, cheat on their taxes, or all damn three are a dime a dozen. Let’s have a few prominent examples: Bill and Hillary Clinton, who have largely welched on Hillary’s campaign debts. There’s Charlie Rangel, the man who chaired the committee that wrote the tax laws while not bothering to pay his own damn taxes. There’s “Turbo Tax” Timothy Geithner, the man in charge of the Treasury and I.R.S. who didn’t bother to pay his own taxes. There’s former Democrat candidate for president John Kerry, a millionaire, who tried to wriggle away like the worm he is from paying the taxes he should have paid on his yacht. There’s Kerry’s wife and fellow Democrat Teresa Heinz-Kerry, who in spite of inheriting the Heinz fortune actually pays less in taxes than the median American family. And then there’s a bunch of more garden variety cockroach Democrats such as Eric Holder, Tom Daschle, Bill Richardson, and Claire McCaskill. And the vile putrid bunch of Democrats running Bell, California.
And let me throw in “San Fran Nan” Nancy Pelosi into the mix. Here’s an already filthy rich woman who increased her wealth by 62% last year while millions of Americans are suffering. She’d certainly be one who would say, “Screw America, screw the American people and screw the unemployment rate; I’m getting MINE.
These are the hypocrite vermin who constantly lecture us about how “the rich should pay their fair share.” And these slime certainly should. But of course, while they screech the Marxist screed of class warfare, they know that they’ve written the tax laws to benefit themselves and their supporters – to the extent they even bother to follow those tax laws that they demand everybody else follow to begin with.
“The audacity of indifference.”
Barack Obama and the Democrat Party don’t care if millions of Americans are out of work and suffering as the result of their policies. All they frankly cynically care about is whether they can exploit that suffering to their own political advantage. And whether the American people are ignorant enough and selfish enough to fall for their lies.
We’re all familiar with the quote attributed to Marie Antoinette: “Let them eat cake.” The phrase represents one who is at once out of touch and uncaring about the plight of the lower classes.
Well, Michelle Obama is every bit as out of touch as Marie Antoinette ever was. But she’s a wily out-of-touch elitist, she is.
So she’s not going to make the same mistake as her famous French predecessor. No, she’s going to make the exact opposite mistake.
So it’s “Don’t LET them eat cake.”
You stupid, moronic proletariat. You are ontologically so far below Michelle Obama and her ilk that you don’t even qualify to call yourselves the same species. How DARE you think that you have either the right or the ability to make eating decisions for yourself and your family???
How DARE you believe that you should have any right whatsoever to make your own life choices, you “nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents,” you. So please insert the scalpel and disconnect your frontal lobes so that Mrs. “America is just downright mean!” make your basic life choices for you.
And whatever else you do, stop being proud of your vile, evil, greedy country. Not only should you not get to eat, but you should be ashamed of yourselves for eating the few crumbs Dear Leader allows your family to stuff their faces with.
Perhaps it’s time for ATR to start asking First Ladies to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.
Michelle Obama has embarked upon a well-documented campaign to tackle childhood obesity in America. As with similar social initiatives, it begins with the noblest of intentions only to morph into another big government program funded by new taxes aimed at behavior modification.
The task force also sees a potential pocketbook approach to keep people from buying unhealthy foods. It calls for analyzing the effect of imposing state and local sales taxes on less healthy products.
This is becoming an unwelcome refrain within the Obama Administration. The stimulus package signed into law in February contained hundreds of millions of dollars in spending to expressly advocated for tax increases. It’s also an established trend for left-of-center causes like the Campaign for Tobacoo Free Kids: Start with a good purpose, but slowly evolve into a platform for command-and-control economic policies.
I can agree that underage smoking and childhood obesity are problematic and should be curtailed. But government intervention into our lives, via high taxes and excessive regulation, is certainly not the answer. Rather than allowing people to make their own choices with regards to diet and exercise, the First Lady’s anti-obesity effort seems to be predicated on a reliable staple of the liberal playbook: government coercion.
As someone who was once on the very poor side, I can tell Michelle Obama and her fellow band of disconnected liberal whackjobs something that they don’t know: one of the reasons that poor people buy unhealthy foods is that they are a LOT cheaper than the healthy foods. Go look at the fresh healthy nutritious foods and then compare them to the sugary and high-calorie foods.
It is expensive to eat fresh fruits and vegetables. And boy is it ever expensive to eat fresh fish, as compared with regular ground beef. From my experience, eating “healthy” costs at least double eating “unhealthy.”
Michelle Obama’s braindead solution to our problems is to raise the taxes on the only foods a lot of poor families can barely afford.
She’s not as bad as Marie Antoinette was, she’s in fact much WORSE. Marie just said something stupid that didn’t actually hurt anyone. Michelle Obama is seeking to implement policies that will directly hurt people.
The point is that Michelle Obama is ostensibly saying the exact opposite thing that Marie Antoinette infamously said when she now says, “Don’t LET them eat cake.” But it is the same warped, disconnected, out-of-touch and uncaring statement from the same sort of elitist.
And just to add to the hypocrisy and chutzpah, even as Michelle is talking about taxing the hell out of anything she deems unhealthy, Barack Obama is in Buffalo porking out on a dozen buffalo wings, french fries, and onion rings. And did I mention that they Hypocrite-in-Chief still smokes? Because, again, you see, only THESE people get to decide what is healthy and what isn’t, and what they should be allowed to have, and what they shouldn’t.
Let’s see, the definition of “hypocrite“: a person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives.
Yep. That’s pretty much Barry Hussein – our hypocrite in chief – in a nutshell.
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel met with Wall Street investors Sunday, the night before his boss, President Obama, criticized such meetings with Wall Street investors.
In Los Angeles trying to help Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) boost her sagging senatorial campaign that is in serious trouble, Obama Monday called such Wall Street meetings “shocking.”
“The Senate Republican leader, he paid a visit to Wall Street a week or two ago,” Obama said. “He took along the chairman of their campaign committee. He met with some of the movers and shakers up there. I don’t know exactly what was discussed. All I can tell you is when he came back, he promptly announced he would oppose the financial regulatory reform. He would oppose it. Shocking.”
Just one day before, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was meeting with Wall Street “movers and shakers” working out the finer details of the Democrats’ Wall Street reform that sets up a permanent taxpayer-funded bailout structure for “too big to fail” companies.
How is that NOT hypocrisy? “How DARE you do the same thing my guy just did! How DAREYOU!!!”
So what is really “shocking” is just what a loathsome, lying, hypocrite demagogue our president is.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell had absolutely every right and reason to meet with the Wall Street figures, given the fact that he had been blasting the $50 billion in “too big to fail” bailout money that the Democrat legislation had stuffed in it. That was so heinous that even Obama was trying to strip out the uber-obvious unpopular bailout cash for Wall Street big boys. Obama said he would onlyonly sign a bill if it passed the test of putting an end to bailouts; this bill contains a gigantic bailout slush fund – and promises many more bailouts to come. And there is other bad news in that power-grab Obama calls a bill.
Hey, Barry Hussein, how about if we ask one of your Democrats how he feels about that fifty billion bucks that McConnell had been outraged about. Ask your fellow Democrat how HE feels about your turd of a bill:
(As Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), a Democrat member of the House Financial Services Committee, told the Politico yesterday that even if the $50 billion bailout slush fund currently in the bill were stripped out, “The Dodd bill has unlimited executive bailout authority. … The bill contains permanent, unlimited bailout authority.”)
“As President Obama prepares to deliver a speech in New York later this week that will attempt to align his administration squarely on the side of American taxpayers furious with Wall Street, his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, met privately on Sunday night with some of the city’s top investors,” The Washington Post’s Jason Horowitz and Michael Shear report. “At a private cocktail reception at the Park Avenue home of investors Jane Hartley and Ralph Schlosstein, Emanuel joked about how each of the 60 guests should take a work of art home before speaking seriously about the administration’s commitment to regulation reform.”
Perhaps Obama didn’t get the Rahmbo memo?
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) blasted Democrats for their support of the $50 billion Wall Street bailout fund from the Senate floor today:
“It is important for the country and taxpayer that we get this right, that we put them before politics. That’s why I was disappointed to read that Senate Democrats are refusing to drop the $50 billion bailout fund — a fund that the Treasury Secretary himself opposes— unless Republicans pay a price for taking it out. This is exactly what Americans don’t like about Washington: when one side tries to ‘get’ something for doing what they should have done in the first place. If everyone agrees it should be dropped, then it should be dropped. And if Senate Democrats think it should stay, then they should explain why they think the Treasury Secretary was wrong when he said that this bailout fund ‘would create expectations that the government would step in to protect shareholders and creditors from losses.’
“Both sides have expressed a willingness to make the changes needed to ensure without any doubt that this bill won’t put taxpayers on the hook for future bailouts of Wall Street banks. Let’s just do that.”
Apparently Mitch McConnell is suffering from something slightly worse than Stockholm Syndrome, given the fact that he seems to think the depraved demagogues across the aisle actually have a “willingness” to make “changes needed.” That just isn’t the way Democrats roll, Mitch: rather, they try to shove through one hard-core partisan bill after another, and then demonize and demagogue anybody who points out what’s wrong with the crap they’re pushing.
You should really KNOW that, Mitch. After all, Barry Hussein just literally got through doing that very thing to you.
The often-way-too-infuriatingly moderate Susan Collins explained what was wrong with the Democrats’ thrust-into-our-face financial overhaul bill this way:
SEN. SUSAN COLLINS, R-ME.: I don’t think you do it by creating a moral hazard, by putting a big fat fund out there in the first place that tells financial institutions don’t worry, you can engage in risky practices, high-risk products, there is going to be a fund, there it is, $50 billion all ready to bail you out.
Charles Krauthammer points out the fundamental power-grab that this bill truly is:
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: I think what is so interesting about the bill that is now proposed is that it is Congress once again voluntarily emasculating itself.
The bailout as proposed in the bill would allow the executive branch on its own, without appropriation from Congress, any approval from Congress, to seize, essentially seize a firm it designates again unilaterally as systematically risky, take it over, have the treasury back all of the bad loans, and then have the Fed print the money to pay them off.
Now, when we did the Chrysler bailout, or the bailout of TARP, which we had in 2008, we had to get the Congress along. This is an interesting and I think a disturbing trend where so much arbitrary power is not only in Washington, but not only in the executive, there is no checks, no balance.
That means you get a few powerful people in Washington, secretary of the treasury, head of the FDIC. You walk into a large institution and say we might designate you systematically risky. We want you to do “x,” “y” and “z.” I can assure you they will do “x,” “y” and “z.”
And that’s what happens in Putin’s Russia when he takes over oil. That’s not the way it should be. Congress ought to stay engaged, and that it’s willingly giving up its prerogative is remarkable.
As usual, Democrats are counting upon outright lies and demagoguery to sell a truly terrible bill. They present the facade that they are against Wall Street – even though Wall Street has been lining Democrats’ pockets with millions and millions in contributions, and even though Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel came out of Goldman Sachs – and that Republicans are somehow opposing everything that is good and right by standing against Obama’s next Washington power-grab.
The new bank bill would institutionalize more bailouts. No longer would congressmen vote on bailouts, they would be run by bureaucrats and flow automatically from the pockets of taxpayers to the pockets of banks that contribute enough to the Chicago political machine to make the list.
Do you actually want that? You are literally enabling Obama and Democrats to receive millions and millions of dollars in campaign contributions to help them win reelection even as they give huge Wall Street firms billions and billions in future rewards courtesy of taxpayers.
Please don’t believe the constant stream of lies that spew out of the mouth of your hypocrite-in-chief.
It is said that people in desperate circumstances often say out loud what they plan to do, but are ignored until it is too late. We all have friends we wish we had listened to closer in their hour of need. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is down in the polls against both of his likely Republican challengers: by 6% against Sue Lowden and 8% against Danny Tarkanian. Recently, the distraught Reid made this startling admission about the future trajectory of his life:
“Men when they’re out of work tend to become abusive. I met with some people while I was home dealing with domestic abuse. It has gotten out of hand. Why? Men don’t have jobs. . . Men, when they’re out of work, tend to become abusive.”
Although this would eventually lead to an entertaining episode of Cops: Las Vegas, I think it is important for Reid to take a step back, and count to ten. Senator Reid, you are despondent. I get that. Many men are going through difficult times right now. Many are searching for work and struggling to find the help that the stimulus plan was supposed to provide, but failed to. Understand this: no matter how your election goes in November, there is absolutely no excuse for you to hit your wife.
You run, Mrs. Reid. You get yourself to safety where that bitter, hateful, unemployed man can’t hurt you.
Mind you, looking at Harry Reid’s puny physique, I would be willing to put my money down on the wife in a knock-down, drag-out, sight unseen. My biggest fear is that the dethroned Senate Majority Leader would cheat.
Spousal abuse is clearly a serious and real problem. But any liberal who wants to excoriate me for politicizing it had better first excoriate his or her Senate Majority Leader for pimping it to push his political agenda.
Barack Obama
Start Thinking Right 