Posts Tagged ‘promised’

Obama Lied About ObamaCare. He Lied About EVERYTHING ABOUT ObamaCare.

November 14, 2013

A lot of people in the media are fixated on Obama’s lie – repeated at least thirty-six times on camera! – that:

“No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what.”

Every single one of the millions of Americans who lost their health coverage because of your evil health care takeover ought to be able to give you a good hard kick in the ass and leave you with your tail bone permanently sticking out of your ear.  Period.  And no one should be able to take that tail bone away from there.  No matter what.

Of course the above link takes you to a LIBERAL Washington Post fact check that gives Obama the maximum number of Pinocchio (i.e., “LIAR”) points.  But WaPo also has this gem compiling an assemblage of Obama in flat-out liar-liar-pants-on-fire mode.

For the official record, Republicans knew that Obama was a liar on this promise more than three years ago:

In 2010, Republican Senator Mike Enzi (WY) said on the Senate floor that the Obama administration had broken its promise that “if you like your health care plan, you can keep it.”

Sen. Enzi also correctly predicted that employers will be less likely to hire workers and may even lay off employees. He was accused of fear-mongering by his Democratic counterparts back then.

Tonight on The Kelly File, the senator told Megyn Kelly, “I couldn’t believe what some of my colleagues were saying even though the federal register […] predicted millions were going to lose their insurance.”

He criticized President Obama for making changes to the law, referring to the delay of the employer mandate, while telling Republicans that the law can’t be changed.

Sen. Enzi wrote a bill that would have guaranteed that people could keep their health plans according to Obama’s promise.  EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT – including Hillary Clinton and especially including the fifteen Democrats who are now panicking about their precious re-elections – voted against it.  Which is to say they voted to screw America twice by voting for ObamaCare to begin with and then voting for the hell of uninsuring the insured it would cause that is coming to pass right now.  Because they don’t give a flying DAMN about the American people.

Now, here’s the thing: the fecal matter is smacking the rotary oscillator now as 5 million independently insured Americans lose their health care with a total of 15 million expected to lose their similar coverage.  Those people are losing their coverage that they were happy with even as they are unable to buy coverage because Obama is so criminally incompetent that he took three years to piss away $634 million to build a website that doesn’t work as well as any one of about a million porn sites.  That ought to tell you why Obama decided to suspend his law for employer-based health plans.  But when that kicks in next year, you will see 129 million Americans have their health plans either cancelled or cost substantially more (while many of them will get substantially less in benefits).

That’s when things will really start hitting the fan.

It only took the mainstream media five years to start being accountable to the truth.  You know, whereas the same media would have already been blasting a Republican president before he took his oath of office.

But that Obama lie is just the tip of the Obama lie iceberg.

How about this Obama lie:

In an Obama administration, we’ll lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year….. We’ll do it by the end of my first term as President of the United States.

Obama promised that his socialist takeover of health care would “bend the cost curve down,” but in actual FACT it will bend it UP with an arc of a rocket ship blasting into space.  Obama said it would lower a family’s cost by $2,500 a year; try raising it by $7,450 a year instead.

Don’t believe me because I disagree with Obama and am therefore “racist”???  Time to smell some reality, you drones.

As I write this, I noted that even the Los Angeles Times is beginning to expose this Satanic lie from Obama:

Obama supporter miffed at botched healthcare rollout: Margaret Davis favors wider access to insurance, but under the Affordable Care Act she’d see her premiums rise 88% for inferior coverage. By Steve Lopez November 12, 2013, 7:58 p.m.

Margaret Davis of West L.A. voted for President Obama and appreciates the ideas behind the Affordable Care Act. She agrees that everyone should have access to healthcare and no one should be denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions.

But here’s the problem:

She knows firsthand, as the new law of the land rolls clumsily into being, that it’s not working out to everyone’s advantage.

“I’m a 55-year-old woman in excellent health and have a catastrophic health plan,” she wrote recently to Obama and California Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer. “I am completely happy with my plan. I received notice that the plan is being canceled and that to stay with a “comparable” plan my premiums would increase 88%, or $200 extra per month. To add insult to injury, the plan is INFERIOR to my existing plan.”

If you guessed that she got no response from any of those elected officials, you win a box of cough drops.

But public officials didn’t throw a complete shutout at Davis. She wrote to U.S. Rep. Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) when she didn’t hear from the others, and one of Bass’ staffers called Davis to say she’ll be looking into the specifics of her case.

“Any time you do a huge policy change like healthcare, there’s going to be all sorts of problems and glitches that need to be worked out,” Bass told me Tuesday from Washington, where she said there were new calls for allowing people to keep the policies they have, as President Obama had repeatedly promised they’d be able to do.

President Clinton has urged such a move, and Feinstein’s office backed the idea Tuesday. She noted in a statement that her office had received 30,832 contacts from Californians, “many of whom are very distressed by cancellations of their insurance policies and who are facing increased out-of-pocket expenses.”

“The Affordable Care Act is a good law, but it’s not perfect,” the Feinstein statement said.

No, not by a longshot, beginning with the federal website debacle and highlighted by Obama’s now-laughable promises of a smooth transition. But Bass worries that the problems will further embolden critics who were determined from the beginning to do a grave dance on healthcare reform.

Hundreds of people attended a town hall conference hosted by Bass on Sunday in West L.A. She said some attendees were in the same situation as Davis and not very happy about it; others were confused by their options. Bass said many were assisted as they enrolled in new plans through the state exchange, Covered California.

“But overall, people were like Margaret,” said Bass, who called Davis on Tuesday to discuss her case. “They really want this to work, and they’re just trying to figure it out.”

Which hasn’t been all that easy for Davis, an accountant and software consultant who couldn’t believe “how botched up” the healthcare.gov website was, among other problems.

And would anyone be shocked if insurance companies were trying to take advantage of all the confusion?

Davis lives with her husband and two teenage sons but chose not to be covered by her husband’s healthcare plan, which would have added $600 per month to the cost. All she wanted from her own plan was the peace of mind that came with knowing she wouldn’t go broke if she were seriously ill or injured.

She paid Kaiser $224 a month with a $5,000 deductible.

Under the new Kaiser plan, her premium would rise to $420.46 a month. The plan carries a lower deductible, of $4,500, after which she would then pay 40% of the cost of care up to a cap of $6,350.

Though Davis appreciates the goal that all policies must meet minimal standards of coverage, she doesn’t anticipate needing either the maternity or mental health care that would be part of her new plan.

“I had a feeling my cost would go up,” said Davis, who makes just enough money to be ineligible for a government subsidy, “but I was floored when I saw that it was an 87.7% increase.”

That massive increase in your health care cost BECAUSE of ObamaCare ought to be a hell of a lot more believable to you now given the fiasco you are seeing unfold right in front of your eyes.

Now, the story of woe of Margaret Davis of West L.A. and tens of millions of other Americans sets us up for yet another massive Obama (and ObamaCare) lie from hell:

Example 1:

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.

Example 2:

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.

Well, of course, we know that when this law was passed, Obama promised that it wouldn’t be a “tax,” but a “penalty.”  But the Supreme Court in its upholding ObamaCare said a “penalty” would be unconstitutional.  They let ObamaCare stand by declaring that Barack Hussein Obama was merely a lying weasel who had called a “tax” a “penalty” because a “tax” would have sent his “signature legislative accomplishment” down in flames.  And we found that ObamaCare was in fact a “tax,” and it was OBAMA who was the “penalty.”

The simple fact is that Obama promised that if you made less than $100,000 a year or if you were a member of a family making less than $250,000 a year, your taxes wouldn’t go up “one dime.” “Not one single dime.”

When you get your new health insurance premiums, please realize that every single dime of increase in the money your paying right out of your hind end is a TAX to OBAMA.

It is a “Lying Tyrant Tax.”  To again quote Obama: Period.  End of story.

Now, back in 2009, a cynical, dishonest, lying Obama scolded George Stephanopoulos on national television for suggesting that his ObamaCare mandate was a tax increase.  Obama said it “is absolutely not a tax increase.”  Reading that now knowing what a total liar Obama was is actually kind of funny now.  But this same lying weasel who said his mandate was “absolutely not a tax increase” sent his lying lawyer shills out to the Supreme Court to argue that yes it was too a tax increase (right after arguing that not it wasn’t).  And being a pathologically dishonest weasel, Obama had pathologically dishonest weasels do his lawyering for him, too.  Samuel Alito pointed out the transparent dishonesty of the Obama regime when he said, “General Verrilli, today you are arguing that the penalty is not a tax. Tomorrow you are going to be back and you will be arguing that the penalty is a tax.”

That’s the kind of president we’ve got.  Which is why we’ve got the kind of crisis we’ve got.  Because a dishonest man started lying and just wouldn’t stop.  Period.

Amazingly, Obama has spent $684 million to promote a $634 million utterly failed and glitch-ridden website that IT people say they could have had running for a tiny fraction of that ridiculous price.  And Obama is going to make your health care cheaper???

Has the government proven to you that it can do things better, faster and for less money yet, you morally idiotic Democrat???

How about this Obama lie:

I’ve told this story before — I will never forget watching my own mother, as she fought cancer in her final days, worrying about whether her insurer would claim her illness was a preexisting condition so they could wiggle out of paying for her coverage. How many of you have worried about the same thing? (Applause.) A lot of people have gone through this. Many of you have been denied insurance or heard of someone who was denied insurance because they got — had a preexisting condition. That will no longer be allowed with reform. (Applause.) We won’t allow that. (Applause.) We won’t allow that.

Now, please keep in mind that Barack Obama is a man who is so evil and so dishonest that he literally lied about his own mother and demonized the insurance company that kept her alive.

Quote: “Barack Obama’s Mother,” [Stanley Ann] Dunham had an employer-provided health insurance policy  that paid her hospital bills directly. Her insurer, Cigna, never denied payment  for her cancer treatment.

But that lie is merely an example of a man with a truly wicked and vile personal character.  We’re focusing on ObamaCare lies.  So let’s consider whether people with pre-existing conditions are getting cancelled or not.  And the answer is, contrary to the most documented liar in all human history, yes, people with pre-existing conditions are being cancelled.  Eddie Littlefield Sundby begins her Wall Street Journal op-ed with these words:

You Also Can’t Keep Your Doctor: I had great cancer doctors and health insurance. My plan was cancelled. Now I worry how long I’ll live. By Edie Littlefield Sundby Nov. 3, 2013 6:37 p.m. ET

Everyone now is clamoring about Affordable Care Act winners and losers. I am one of the losers.

My grievance is not political; all my energies are directed to enjoying life and staying alive, and I have no time for politics. For almost seven years I have fought and survived stage-4 gallbladder cancer, with a five-year survival rate of less than 2% after diagnosis. I am a determined fighter and extremely lucky. But this luck may have just run out: My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31.

My choice is to get coverage through the government health exchange and lose access to my cancer doctors, or pay much more for insurance outside the exchange (the quotes average 40% to 50% more) for the privilege of starting over with an unfamiliar insurance company and impaired benefits.

Countless hours searching for non-exchange plans have uncovered nothing that compares well with my existing coverage. But the greatest source of frustration is Covered California, the state’s Affordable Care Act health-insurance exchange and, by some reports, one of the best such exchanges in the country. After four weeks of researching plans on the website, talking directly to government exchange counselors, insurance companies and medical providers, my insurance broker and I are as confused as ever. Time is running out and we still don’t have a clue how to best proceed.

That woman who just lost her insurance with her life-threatening pre-existing condition is probably going to die because that’s what tends to happen to stage 4 cancer patients when Obama decides their actually quite excellent health care is somehow “sub-par” and that he should be trusted to do better than her doctors.  Barack Obama murdered her with his lies.

Or how about this Obama lie:

“And let me tell you exactly what Obamacare did. Number one, if you’ve got health insurance it doesn’t mean a Government takeover. You keep your own insurance. You keep your own doctor. But it does say insurance companies can’t jerk you around. They can’t impose arbitrary lifetime limits. They have to let you keep your kid on their insurance—your insurance plan until you’re 26 years old.” — – President Obama during the first presidential debate in 2012

Like with every other Obama promise, it was a lie for a critical group of Americans: our military veterans and their families:

One of the most touted benefits of President Obama’s health care overhaul law is the provision allows parents to keep their adult children on their health insurance until age 26.

However, Trace Gallagher reported on “The Kelly File” Monday, this benefit is not being extended to a significant group of Americans: members of the U.S. military.

TRICARE, the Department of Defense program that provides health coverage to active duty and retired military members and their families, only covers young adult dependents up until age 21, or age 23 if they are enrolled full-time in college.

TRICARE recipients can then purchase a plan for their young adult dependents, according to their website.

Air Force veteran Eddie Grooms said he was disappointed to learn he could not add his 21-year-old daughter to his insurance provided by the military, as he thought he had been promised under the health care overhaul.

“It’d be nice if they leveled with everybody and let them know so that people could make plans, because this is going to hit all, I mean it’s going to hit thousands of retirees over time,” Grooms said.

So maybe your kid can stay on your policy until he or she is 26.  Unless you’re one of the heroes who defended American freedom.  Then Obama screwed you but good.

Not that Obama ever liked our nation’s veterans.  Apparently he figures that people who fought for America would be more inclined to fight him when he tries to impose his tyranny over America.

The thing is that I could go on.  And probably on and on.  Suffice it to say that absolutely every single thing Obama said about his health care hijack was a lie.

I’ve said it over and over again: Barack Obama is not merely a liar; he is a truly evil man.  He is a man devoid of character, or honesty, or integrity, or virtue.  He is nothing short of the Antichrist’s useful idiot.

The horror story is yet to come.  Obama set up one of his promises thusly:

“First of all, nobody is talking about some government takeover of healthcare,” Obama told the crowd in Raleigh. “I’m tired of hearing that…. Under the reform I’ve proposed, if you like your doctor, you keep your doctor. If you like your healthcare plan, you keep your healthcare plan. These folks need to stop scaring everybody.”

Given that Obama lied about being able to keep your doctor, being that Obama lied about being able to keep your healthcare plan, you need to realize that “the folks who were scaring everybody” were the only ones who were telling the truth.  Which means that YES, OBAMACARE IS A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTHCARE.  And things are going to get ugly in this “fundamentally transformed” people’s socialist republic.

If you’ve got any sense in your head at all, you are now listening to the people Obama demonized as “scaring everybody.”  Because everything we said would happen is happening right in front of your fool eyes.

I have stated my view that Barack Hussein Obama is demon-possessed.  When you get your health care bill and as you start watching your costs spiral as we encounter the nightmare scenario of an actuarial death spiral (and see here) as the young people ObamaCare needed to enroll refuse to do so while the sickest and least healthy Americans overload the system (and you pay their tab), tell me I’m wrong.

I predict that the actuarial death spiral is THE most likely outcome as young people refuse to pay double the premiums they would have had to pay (and even THEN refused to pay) for insurance they don’t feel they need in order to pay the costs for he older and sicker population.  And rates will systematically skyrocket as a result.  (I also predict that Democrats will demonize the insurance companies for their sin of trying to remain in business rather than going bankrupt trying to carry out Democrats’ insane delusional socialist fantasies).

I can’t resist one more.  Allow me to end with a lie you can already see in the making:

Obama Administration Promises Health Care Site Will Be Fixed By End of November
By Kate Pickert @katepickertOct. 25, 2013

The Obama administration says the problem-plagued healthcare.gov website will  be working properly by the end of November and that the government has appointed  a new contractor to head up repairs for the troubled health insurance  exchange.

“Each week, the experience will get better and better,” Jeff Zients, a  management consultant and former administration budget official recently hired  to oversee fixes to the website, told reporters on a conference call Friday. “We are confident that by the end of  November, healthcare.gov will operate smoothly for the majority of users.”

If that deadline is met, it would come two months after the site was launched  with major technical failures, prompting widespread criticism and giving  ammunition to Republican opponents of President Barack Obama’s signature  domestic achievement.

Oh, really, lying Obama administration???

Troubled HealthCare.gov unlikely to work fully by end of November
By Amy Goldstein, Juliet Eilperin and Lena H. Sun

Software problems with the federal online health insurance marketplace, especially in handling high volumes, are proving so stubborn that the system is unlikely to work fully by the end of the month as the White House has promised, according to an official with knowledge of the project.

The insurance exchange is balking when more than 20,000 to 30,000 people attempt to use it at the same time — about half its intended capacity, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to disclose internal information. And CGI Federal, the main contractor that built the site, has succeeded in repairing only about six of every 10 of the defects it has addressed so far.

Government workers and tech­nical contractors racing to repair the Web site have concluded, the official said, that the only way for large numbers of Americans to enroll in the health-care plans soon is by using other means so that the online system isn’t overburdened.

This inside view of the halting nature of HealthCare.gov repairs is emerging as the insurance industry is working behind the scenes on contingency plans, in case the site continues to have problems. And it calls into question the repeated assurances by the White House and other top officials that the insurance exchange will work smoothly for the vast majority of Americans by Nov. 30. Speaking in Dallas a week ago, President Obama said that the “Web site is already better than it was at the beginning of October, and by the end of this month, we anticipate that it is going to be working the way it is supposed to, all right?”

Just another lie from a serial liar.  But we’ve already let him get away with so many thousand lies it’s beyond unreal.  Let’s just chew our cuds like herd animals and let him lie American into oblivion.

Advertisements

So Much For ‘Moderation’: The Radical Leftist Obama Democrat Party Lied To And Then Betrayed Moderate Senator Arlen Specter

March 13, 2012

The way the mainstream media propaganda constantly frames it, the only “good” Republicans are the moderates like Arlen Specter – who proved his “moderateness” by actually becoming a Democrat.

Sadly for Arlen Specter, he discovered that Democrats are lying backstabbing little weasels who aren’t “moderate” in any way, shape or form:

Specter Feels Betrayed After Betrayal
By W. James Antle, III on 3.12.12 @ 4:26PM

The Hill is reporting on some tibdits from Arlen Specter’s forthcoming new memoir, Life Among the Cannibals. Specter feels that Democrats used him to pass health care reform and then didn’t follow through on their promises to help him win his primary.

“I realized that the president and his advisers were gun-shy about supporting my candidacy after being stung by Obama’s failed rescue attempts for New Jersey governor Jon Corzine and Massachusetts attorney general Martha Coakley. They were reluctant to become victims of a trifecta,” he writes.

The snub was made all the more painful by Obama flying over Philadelphia en route to New York City a few days before the election and then on primary day jetting over Pittsburgh to visit a factory in Youngstown, Ohio, 22 miles from the Pennsylvania border, to promote the 2009 economic stimulus law. The painful irony for Specter is that his vote for the stimulus legislation, which was instrumental to its passage, hastened his departure from the Republican Party.

Specter was also abandoned by Harry Reid, who had promised to protect the party-switcher’s seniority.

Instead, Reid stripped Specter of all his seniority by passing a short resolution by unanimous consent in a nearly-empty chamber, burying him at the bottom of the Democrats’ seniority list.

Specter found out about it after his press secretary emailed him a press account of the switch. Specter was floored that Reid had “violated a fundamental Senate practice to give personal notice to a senator directly affected by the substance of a unanimous consent agreement.”

Specter was left simmering after Reid’s spokesman at the time told the AP that Specter had known about the resolution and even joined in a deal to draft it, which Specter characterizes as a “falsification.”

If Reid had kept his word, Specter would have run for reelection as chairman of the Senate Labor, Health, and Human Services Committee and would have been next in line to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee (where he presumably would have promised to support all of Obama’s nominees, the pledge he made with regard to Bush in order to keep the gavel as a Republican).

I review Life Among the Cannibals in the March issue of The American Spectator.

Now, a conservative such as myself can easily point out that Arlen Specter got exactly what he deserved. But for those pathetic little weasels who praise “moderate” politicians or who uphold Democrats as being capable of even a scintilla of honor or trustworthiness, this story proves how pathetically wrong you people are.

You Call It ‘Obamanomics,’ I Call It ‘The Jobs Holocaust’

July 12, 2011

Quote:

The total number of people who were truly unemployed in June was 25.3  million.

And man that sucks (with “sucks” meaning, “swallowing everything in its path,” like a black hole of doom).

Real Unemployment Rises to 16.2% in June — 25.3 Million People
Friday, July 08, 2011
By Matt Cover

(CNSNews.com) – The real unemployment rate rose to 16.2 percent in June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported on Friday, marking a return to levels not seen since January 2011.

The “real” unemployment rate is technically a combination of three measures of unemployment: the unemployment rate, the number of people working part-time who want full-time work, and the number of people “marginally attached” to the workforce.

Those who have left the workforce but would still like to be employed are considered marginally attached.

This figure is considered a more complete measure of unemployment because it captures a broader spectrum of those affected by the weak economy. Merely counting those who apply for unemployment benefits as “unemployed” does not fully account for everyone who is out of work or underemployed.

This real unemployment rate – known as the U6 rate – has been climbing since February 2011 when it was at 15.9 percent. Real unemployment peaked in October of 2009 at 17.4 percent, before falling into the 16 percent range for much of 2010.

It now appears that the real unemployment rate is returning to its 2010 levels, trending upward after staying slightly below 16 percent from February to May.

The total number of people who were truly unemployed in June was 25.3 million — the 14.1 million who were unemployed, the 2.7 million who were marginally attached to the workforce and the 8.6 million who were underemployed.

Here’s an official statistic from the BLS for all of you “Bush-blamers”:

 

Oh, yeah, that Bush was a real job murderer, he was.  Good thing we’ve got Obama now righting all those Bush wrongs.

The problem is that Obama isn’t “right” about ANYTHING.  Which leaves the American people pretty much screwed.

Understand something: the Obama administration assurred us that his $3.27 TRILLION stimulus boondoggle would have unemployment down to 6.5% by now.  But rather than acknowledging that Keynesian economics just dug its own grave, hopped in, and covered itself up with dirt where it should remain for all eternity, we are instead met with statements of fanatic religious faith that “the stimulus saved us from a depression.”

This from the same bunch of geniuses who damn Bush for his overall 5.26% unemployment rate and absolving Obama for his 9.3% unemployment average during his three years to date.

5.26%.  Bill Clinton paved the streets with gold, we are all told.  And HIS unemployment rate average was 5.2% (i.e., pretty much the same as Bush’s).  And then consider the fact that George Bush also had to deal with the Dotcom bubble collapse that began under Bill Clinton (which wiped out 78% of the Nasdaq stock exchange and vaporized $7.1 TRILLION in wealth) to go along with the 9/11 attacks and the two wars they necessitated.

Bush really doesn’t look bad at all, in hindsight to the failure Obama has brought America.  But a failed demagogue Big Brother needs to have an Emmanuel Goldstein to bear the blame.  That trick has been around since failed leaders have been around.

This is God damn America.  And I suppose you can think of it this way: in God damn America, you DO have a job.  In God damn America the only job you really need is the one you’ve got bearing the wrath of God for voting for the most evil president in American history.

Just Asking: How Much Credit For Getting Osama Bin Laden Does Obama Truly Deserve?

May 7, 2011

When I first heard about the assault on the compound in Pakistan that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden, I was happy and proud as an American.  And willing to give Obama credit where credit was due.

It seemed like a gutsy move – which the mainstream media narrative quickly seized upon: the political consequences for Obama would have been quite negative if the mission had failed.  It would have reminded everyone yet again that Obama is a reincarnation of Jimmy Carter.  And the whole “Desert One” fiasco would have surely been remembered.

But take just a second and look at it from the opposite perspective; you know, the one that the mainstream media has never once considered for even a nanosecond.  What would have happened had Barack Obama decided NOT to try to take out bin Laden?  What would have happened – more to the point – when the American people were informed that Barack Obama had known for certain where Osama bin Laden was, and refused to try to get him?

Wouldn’t that have had even MORE DISASTEROUS consequences???

And, the thing is, it is a near certainty that that information would have gotten out.  There would have been sufficient disgust in both the CIA and in the Pentagon that somebody would have made sure that the news got out that Barack Obama – who had PROMISED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE that he would go into Pakistan to get bin Laden – had cowardly refused to keep yet another promise.

Imagine for just a second the abundant campaign ads: slow-moving video of Osama bin Laden, followed by footage of the twin towars collapsing, followed by Barack Obama giving his word to get bin Laden, followed by the evidence that Obama knew for at least half a year where bin Laden was hiding, and refused to even try to get him.

It would have been just as “bold” for Obama to decide that an operation to get bin Laden was too risky, and jeopardized critical U.S.-Pakistani relations to too high a degree.

Barack Obama was forced into a position where he had to rely on the U.S. military to save his political hide.  And the U.S. military came through for him.

And how does Obama repay that military?  By literally gutting their budget, that’s how:

President Obama has targeted the Department of Defense to absorb more than 80 percent of the cuts he has proposed in next year’s budget for discretionary programs.

Does Obama deserve credit for that?  Really?  Is he out right now campaigning as the guy who just gutted the military he commands, or is he out campaigning as the commander-in-chief of a glorious military?

People should hear that RIGHT NOW Barack Obama is taking an axe and gutting the Navy SEALs, and the Nightstalkers who brought them in and out of that compound, and the Screaming Eagles he visited yesterday, and the entire rest of the military.

People should know that Barack Obama demonized the primary means of interrogation that got us Osama bin Laden.  And there is no question that waterboarding and other “enhanced interrogation” methods led us to the breakthroughs we needed to get bin Laden:

Ex-CIA Counterterror Chief: ‘Enhanced Interrogation’ Led U.S. to bin Laden
By Massimo Calabresi Wednesday, May 4, 2011

A former head of counterterrorism at the CIA, who was investigated last year by the Justice Department for the destruction of videos showing senior al-Qaeda officials being interrogated, says the harsh questioning of terrorism suspects produced the information that eventually led to Osama bin Laden’s death.

Jose Rodriguez ran the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center from 2002 to 2005, the period when top al-Qaeda leaders Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) and Abu Faraj al-Libbi were taken into custody and subjected to “enhanced interrogation techniques” (EITs) at secret prisons overseas. KSM was subjected to waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other techniques. Al-Libbi was not waterboarded, but other EITs were used on him.

“Information provided by KSM and Abu Faraj al-Libbi about bin Laden’s courier was the lead information that eventually led to the location of [bin Laden’s] compound and the operation that led to his death,” Rodriguez tells TIME in his first public interview. Rodriguez was cleared of charges in the video-destruction investigation last year.

Even career Democrat and Obama appointee for Director of Central Intelligence Leon Panetta has openly acknowledged that waterboarding was an instrumental part of this intelligence effort:

Asked by NBC-TV’s Brian Williams about the information obtained from detainees that led to the bin Laden takedown, Panetta replied:  ‘We had multiple series of sources that provided information with regards to this situation.  … Clearly some of it came from detainees [and] they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of those detainees.”

When Williams asked whether “waterboarding” was one of those techniques, Panetta replied:  “That’s correct.”

We have the following from the CIA analysts and the CIA director at the time, describing how essential the enhanced interrogations were to the knowledge that the CIA learned:

CATHERINE HERRIDGE, FOX NEWS NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): March 2003, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured and according to U.S. officials, the self-described architect of 9/11 was immediately taken into the CIA enhanced interrogation program and waterboarded. It was three to four months later, according to U.S. officials, that KSM was asked about the courier who was known only by an Al Qaeda alias. He downplayed the courier’s importance. The top Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee says the implications of the CIA’s early leads are clear. […]

A former senior intelligence official says the waterboarding of KSM, quote, “took his spirited defiance into a zone of cooperation,” adding that the harsh interrogation tactic critics described as torture was not used to elicit information but rather to alter the detainee’s mindset. Philip Mudd is a former CIA analyst.

PHILIP MUDD, FORMER CIA ANALYST: Having seen this stuff on the inside, that’s not a debate. That is a done deal. The information we got was invaluable. So debate the cultural side and the political side, but please don’t debate the intelligence side.

HERRIDGE: In a radio interview with FOX, former CIA Director Michael Hayden said there is no question the CIA program including waterboarding laid the foundation for bin Laden’s capture.

MICHAEL HAYDEN, FMR CIA DIRECTOR ON FOX NEWS RADIO (via telephone): That database was kind of like the home depot of intelligence analysis. You know, it was incredibly detailed stuff.

HERRIDGE: As for its role in identifying this compound in Pakistan —

HAYDEN: It would be very difficult for me to conceive of an operation like the one that took place on Sunday that did not include in its preparation information that came out of the CIA detention program.

HERRIDGE: 2004 and 2005 are described as turning points. Both Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Faraj al-Libi, a gatekeeper for Osama bin Laden, were both in the CIA secret prisons. U.S. officials say for a second time, KSM downplayed the courier significance and al-Libi denied knowing him. The men’s adamant denials appeared to be an effort to protect the courier and U.S. officials say it, quote, “sent up red flags for the CIA” because other detainees consistently claims the courier maintained bin Laden’s trust.

And if you don’t believe EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE KEY PEOPLE INVOLVED, just accept that Bush and HIS gutsy decision to approve waterboarding led us to the knowledge that Osama bin Laden (UBL) was using couriers, the pseudo-names of those couriers that led to intelligence ultiamtely finding their actual names, and even the very city where Osama bin Laden was hiding:

Which is to say that the entire Obama presidency was spent mining information from waterboarding that Obama personally demonized and from a program that Obama shut down.

And we now know that Osama bin Laden was in this compound that we learned about from waterboarding for at least five years.

Every single major fact that we learned we learned from waterboarding and from enhanced interrogation techniques.  And the rest of it was simply a matter of confirming what we knew from waterboarding and from enhanced interrogation techniques.

People should KNOW that Barack Obama demands that the United States of America should be nearly blind.

People should also know that on his second day in office Barack Obama shut down and terminated the CIA intelligence program that actually developed the information that got bin Laden.  They should know that America no longer has that capability, and that thanks to Barack Obama we could never even begin to do that again – likely for years to come, given the difficulty of developing such intensive programs.

And people should know that RIGHT NOW Barack Obama is continuing to try to criminally prosecute the incredible men and women who gave us the intelligence breakthroughs that got Osama bin Laden:

In normal times, the officials who uncovered the intelligence that led us to Osama bin Laden would get a medal. In the Obama administration, they have been given subpoenas.

On his second day in office, President Barack Obama shut down the CIA’s high-value interrogation program. His Justice Department then reopened criminal investigations into the conduct of CIA interrogators — inquiries that had been closed years before by career prosecutors who concluded that there were no crimes to prosecute. In a speech at the National Archives in May 2009, Mr. Obama accused the men and women of the CIA of “torture,” declaring that their work “did not advance our war and counterterrorism efforts — they undermined them.”

Now, it turns out that those CIA interrogators played a critical role in the killing of Osama bin Laden, which the president has rightly called “the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al-Qaida.”

Even NOW Obama is refusing to do anything to stop the prosecution of the men and women who gave us bin Laden, even as he flies around taking credit for getting bin Laden.  Should we be giving Obama credit for that???

This nation should be grateful to George W. Bush, and for his courage and foresight to develop the programs and to create the capabilities that ultimately won us this victory against Osama bin Laden.  It was the courage of George Bush that resulted in waterboarding – which Bush and his key advisors KNEW would be used by vile cowards like Barack Obama to demonize them.  But they knew it had to be done, and they did it.

In the same way, Bush created the Guantanamo Bay (“Gitmo”) detention facility.  Bush expanded the rendition program that had been used by Bill Clinton.  Bush created the Patriot Act.  Bush approved of domestic surveillance.  Bush set up the military tribunals that had been used by Democrats like FDR in previous time of war.  Bush established the indefinite detentions of the most hardened terrorists.

Barack Obama personally demonized and vilified all of these things.  But he is using them to this day because they had to be done.

I would argue that the hero of this is George Bush; and that Barack Obama is a self-aggrandizing coward who was forced to use virtually all of the programs that he self-righteously demagogued for political advantage in a way that is frankly treasonous.

Right now we have a treasure trove of intelligence that is likewise nearly entirely the result of the work of George W. Bush.  But be advised: if we don’t shut down al Qaeda now, we probably never will due to the massive failures of the man who sits in the Oval Office as we speak.

In terms of Mr. bin Laden himself, we’ll get him running. We’ll smoke him out of his cave and we’ll get him eventually.” — George W. Bush, October 11, 2001

It was always just a matter of time.  And the time came during the misrule of a hypocritical fool.

Rabid Arizona Boycotters Continue To Be Boycotted – Blame Obama For The Whole Mess

May 22, 2010

Remember how Obama promised to transcend the political divide and reach out to “move beyond the divisive politics”?

Well, he lied.

Instead we have the most divisive and polarizing president in American history, a man who fearmongers, demagogues, and demonizes without regard for the truth.

Obama deceitfully and maliciously told a story of fathers being deported just for taking their children to get ice cream.  The fact of the matter is that there is absolutely nothing whatsoever in the Arizona immigration law that would produce anything like the fearmongering scenarios our Demagogue-in-chief claims.  And I defy anyone to actually cite the bills as proof of any such argument.

If you really want to go after a bigoted racist on immigration policy, why don’t you go after Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the Democrat Congress?  Because they’re running the federal government, and it is simply a fact that the federal law is FAR more “racist” than the Arizona law.

And, of course, Democrats gave a standing ovation to the President of Mexico, whose immigration laws protecting Mexico from Central American illegal immigrants are about as hard-core as it gets.

But none of that matters.  Not to Obama, and not to Demon-crats.  They’re liars and demagogues, and what else do you expect liars and demagogues to do if not lie and demagogue???

So, in the bipartisan, non-ideological, and transcendent world of Barack Obama, American cities boycott one another in a move to start an economic war that will bring the country crashing down.

The silver lining to it – if there IS one – is that the boycott appears to be hurting the cities of the rabid little liberal rodents even more than it’s hurting Arizona:

Boycott Backlash: Some stay out of city
Growing number vow not to do business in Austin
Friday, 21 May 2010

AUSTIN (KXAN) – The city council’s decision to boycott travel to Arizona is resulting in organizations and individuals boycotting the city of Austin in protest.

A growing number of political organizations, including the Odessa and Burleson Tea Parties, have decided not to do business with the city of Austin until the council rescinds the Arizona boycott they passed a few weeks ago.

“We will try to minimize what the city gets from our stay there,” said Hood county Republican Party Chairman Randy Shelton. “We will not stay in hotels inside the city of Austin and we will not ride the city transit.”

Shelton says they will continue to support Austin businesses but try to prevent any dollars from going towards city revenue. Other boycotts are more extreme.

A search online showed many more individuals vowing not to do business in Austin, including one poster who says they will cancel hotel reservations and a Leander resident who says they will skip having lunch inside Austin city limits.

The boycott apparently is already being felt according to the Austin Hotel and Lodging Association who sent KXAN this statement:

“The AHLA is not a political association and does not in any way support travel boycotts of any kind. Hotels in Austin are now beginning to experience concrete evidence from the many visitors now canceling their leisure or business plans to Austin.”

KXAN was told some of the cancellations include riders who normally take part in the Republic of Texas Rally.

All I can say, residents of Austin, is that you should have thought about this before you elected a bunch of leftwing ideologue loons to your city council.

I wrote an earlier article about San Diego reeling from counter-boycotts by pissed-off Arizonans.  Let San Diego’s tourism industry blow up in flames because Democrats are vile and intolerant people who just have to spread their hate around with boycotts against innocent and decent Arizonans who are just trying to deal with an impossible wave of illegal immigration and the crises created by illegal immigration.

And I frankly hope that Los Angeles is honest enough to cut off a full 25% of their electricity which is produced by Arizona.  And Arizona may help Los Angeles find their missing integrity by cutting off the electricity it supplies.  You want a boycott?  Let’s have at it.  Wonder how many Los Angelinos will die sweltering in the heat without air conditioning this summer as a result of their own city council’s stupid and immoral boycott?

This is all Barack Obama’s fault.  He’s the demagogue who started this.  He’s the one who has set us at one anothers’ throats with his fearmongering and his lies.  Thanks to him, we don’t have to worry about al Qaeda, or Iran, or North Korea; now we’ve got to worry about Los Angeles and Austin and a whole bunch of other cities starting an endless war of mutually assured economic destruction with the people of Arizona.

Maybe one of Obama’s top officials will finally actually bother to read the ten page law they’ve been demonizing.  None of them have so far.  The reason none of them have is because they don’t want to have to be held accountable to the truth.

Tiger Woods, Barack Obama, And Really Lousy ‘Change’

April 14, 2010

I didn’t link Tiger Woods and Barack Obama together.  Golf Digest did that for me:

In any event, another similarity between these two is that both promised “change” – and neither seem to be very good at keeping their promises.

An article about Tiger Wood’s repeated vulgar outbursts – in diametric contrast to his promises of “change”:

Jim Nantz criticizes Tiger Woods’ vocal tantrums
By Shane Bacon

Before the Masters started, Tiger Woods told us that he had changed. His outbursts would be quieted, his club tossing would be softened and he was going to be a different guy on the golf course.

No matter if you bought that or not, it’s true that the weekend brought out some of the old Tiger. He screamed “Tiger, you suck!,” only to follow that up with a profanity unlike any other in the third round. On Sunday on the 13th hole, Woods screamed “Jesus Christ!” after a tee shot and he wasn’t complimenting the man upstairs.

It wasn’t something new with Tiger, but it is something he told us would be avoiding in the future. Jim Nantz, the voice of CBS at the Masters, had a chance to talk with Mike Francesa of WFAN on Monday, and let it be known that he wasn’t happy with the way Woods acted.

“If I said what he said on the air, I would be fired. I read in the USA Today and it was called “mild language.” Someone on my broadcast dismissed it as him having a camera in his face. Well, guess what? Phil Mickelson had a camera in his face all week and did you even hear him come close to approaching that? He didn’t hit every shot the way he wanted. Have you ever heard Arnold Palmer or Jack Nicklaus use that kind of language? What are the parameters between what’s right or wrong?”

Nantz then admitted that this isn’t something that has disturbed him in the past, but the fact that Tiger promised us a change is why it rubbed him the wrong way. He mentioned that he doesn’t speak perfectly, but when the red light is on, he has things he cannot say.

[Video: See spoof of Phil’s feud with Tiger, featuring Elin.]

He also said that there are people watching the telecast that shouldn’t be subjected to such profanities.

“How about the father and son who are standing right there by the tee? How about the hundreds of people who are around that tee who hear that? How about the hundreds of letters I’ve gotten through the years from people who have been outraged at the language they’ve heard there and have written me and said, ‘Why don’t you guys ever say something about that?’ “

Nantz obviously has some great points here. If you’re going to cuss when the cameras are rolling over a live broadcast, that is one thing, but when you tell us you won’t and still do it, it sure makes you look bad. Especially for a guy trying to bulldoze his past image.

I’m reminded of someone else who promised us “change.”

Barack Obama has told many lies that simply fundamentally put to the lie Obama’s entire case for his presidency.  But here is his very worst lie of all, as summarized by the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — At the core of Senator Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is a promise that he can transcend the starkly red-and-blue politics of the last 15 years, end the partisan and ideological wars and build a new governing majority.

To achieve the change the country wants, he says, “we need a leader who can finally move beyond the divisive politics of Washington and bring Democrats, independents and Republicans together to get things done.”

But this promise leads, inevitably, to a question: Can such a majority be built and led by Mr. Obama, whose voting record was, by one ranking, the most liberal in the Senate last year?

I’ve got to say it: if Tiger’s wife, Elin Nordegren, actually believes Woods’ promises that “I’ve changed,” she will single-handedly do more to harm the image of blond women as intelligent than every single blond joke ever told.

I pointed out what a total lie Barack Obama’s core promise to the American people truly was.  Obama began to fearmonger, demagogue, and demonize from day one of his administration.  And a Pew Research poll underscored that fact: we find that Barack Obama is the most polarizing president in history.

There are many other major, massive lies from Obama.  His promise of game-changing transparency, for example, couldn’t have been a more dishonest lie.  Only yesterday, Obama offered yet another massive proof of just what a lie his claim about “transparency” is when he totally shut the press out of what was supposed to be a major global political event in a way that left much of the world’s press stunned.  Even the Chinese president was more open with the press than Obama.

Another fundamentally dishonest lie on the part of Barack Obama was his push for the use of the cynical and partisan political tactic of reconciliation to shove through his ObamaCare bill when he had specifically promised he would NOT do that.

Neither one of these men is credible.  Neither one of them deserve a scintilla of our respect.

The thing is that as bad as Tiger Woods was, as dishonest, and as cynical and manipulative as he proved himself to be, he doesn’t even hold a candle to the dishonesty of Barack Obama.