Why Obama’s Secret Service Has Failed So Miserably

We have seen over these last several years a complete meltdown in the Secret Service in the reign of Pharaoh god-king Obama.  The details are simply astonishing.

On September 19 a fence-jumper made it all the way to the East Room.  And then the Secret Service actually lied about how far the intruder got and how massively they screwed up.

In any other country that man would have been a terrorist with a bomb instead of a knife and he would have blown up our White House.

Shortly before that, the Secret Service allowed an armed felon to ride on an elevator with the Pharaoh god-king.

Before that, we had seven bullets that struck the window of Barack Obama’s private residence but went unnoticed for days.  Obama’s youngest daughter was inside at the time of the shooting.  It wasn’t even the Secret Service who noticed the bullet holes; it was a cleaning lady who observed broken glass.  It turns out that agents reported the gunfire but were told by their superiors to stand down.

Before that, eleven agents on Obama’s security detail were sent home after a week of drinking and sleeping with prostitutes while on duty.

After that, despite promises to get their act together and reform the agency, we had an agent on duty in Amsterdam become so drunk he was passed out in a hallway while on duty in a hotel.

That is nowhere near the full list of scandals, for what it’s worth.

They talk about “a pervasive culture of cover-up.”  Agents were told over and over, “Do not file any written report.”

Which is the exact same thing that is going on in all of Obama’s other scandals.

You look at the history of Secret Service screw ups and you tell me that the president of the United States has ever been placed in so much danger in any other administration.  I mean, the Secret Service has had a few issues, but nothing like this.  NOTHING like this.

The question is why this meltdown has happened during the rule of our Pharaoh god-king.

There are two reasons, with one being unique to the Secret Serve and the other being endemic to the cancer that is Obama’s presidency.

As to the former, imagine you are a Secret Service agent.  You have trained your entire professional career to be the absolute best at security and you have risen to the apex of your profession.  You have a rare level of pride in yourself, your professionalism and the renowned agency you serve.

Then you get to your assignment.  You are handed a bag of fecal matter and instructed to guard that bag with your life.

Do you think you’d feel at least slightly deflated?

THAT is a major part of the reason the Secret Service has so miserably collapsed during the Obama regime.  These professionals know what a sack of foulness Obama is.  We’re not talking about his race, of course, in spite of whatever blatant lies liberals want to spew because they are the spewers of lies; we’re talking about his loathsome personal character, his utter lack of integrity, his malignant narcissism.

What the Secret Service now have to protect is a disgrace.  And these professionals know it.

Do you know what the difference between the sack of fecal matter and Obama?  The sack of fecal matter draws flies and Obama tells lies.

Oh wait, never mind…

Lord of the flies

So if I’m a Secret Service agent and I’m told I have to either protect Obama or protect the sack of fecal matter, I would sigh, shrug my shoulders, resign myself to despair and ask for the sack.

And if I was then told that all the more senior agents had already chosen to guard the sack and I’d have to serve on the Obama detail instead, that’s when they’d hand me the bottle of booze to help get me through the shame of the next hours.  Which explains all the Secret Service agents drunk on the job.

It has always been the highest and most prestigious honor for a Secret Service agent to be chosen to serve on the security detail of the president of the United States of America.  Until now.

They are trying to do their best at guarding Obama, but you have to imagine the poor morale of guarding a truly dishonorable man.

The second reason is much more endemic and also serves to explain why ALL of Obama’s regime is failing, from his ObamaCare to his IRS to his intelligence community.

Let’s take the Secret Service.  A big hullabaloo was made over the fact that Obama had selected the first female Secret Service director ever.  I mean, wasn’t that just so wonderful?

You know what I would have preferred?  The best Secret Service Director ever.

It is simply an appalling fact that the very worst and most basic security lapses have occurred with Julia Pierson running the show.

I’m not in any way trying to claim that a woman couldn’t be the best director; I’m claiming that in being determined to find a woman Obama ignored the vast majority of the candidates who should have been considered for that job.

That’s always the problem with race or gender preferences; you end up with the most PC candidate rather than the best candidate.

Do you know what Obama is looking for whenever he appoints a senior-level bureaucrat for an important federal position?  The same damn thing Hitler did: personal fealty to the Führer.

That is why we’ve had massive screw up after massive screw up and nobody ever gets fired.  Because these bureaucrats weren’t put in their jobs because they were competent; they were put in their jobs because they would lie and cheat for Obama.

Why wasn’t Kathleen Sabelius fired when the ObamaCare rollout was so miserably screwed up it literally became a joke?  Why wasn’t Hillary Clinton destroyed over the Benghazi fiasco?  Why wasn’t Eric Holder fired when guns that HE put into Mexican drug cartel members’ hands were used to murder a US Border Patrol agent and then Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress for refusing to allow them the materials necessary for congressional oversight?  Who was fired and criminally prosecuted for the political targeting of conservatives by the IRS?  Obama just threw his whole intelligence community under the bus and claimed “they” screwed up; so who the hell has been FIRED?

In Julia Pierson, in Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sabelius, in Attorney General Eric Holder, in IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, in Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki, in Director of Central Intelligence John Brennan, you have people who are willing to lie for their messiah and cover up his crimes that would otherwise have gotten him impeached years ago.

That’s all that matters to Obama.  Because while real leaders try to fix the problems, Obama only cares about fixing the blame.  While real leaders always accept responsibility and never claim credit, Obama always claims credit and NEVER accepts responsibility.  And that cancer has affected the entire government and all of its agencies and all of its personnel.

That’s why the Secret Service is so completely screwed up.  The same reason our health care system is completely screwed up and the same reason our intelligence community is so screwed up and the same reason the whole country is so screwed up.

Only the Secret Service is cursed with the responsibility to guard the turd who has done all the screwing up.  And that distasteful burden is eating away at their souls.

So please, everyone, please give the men and women who risk their lives the dignity and honor they deserve and render your very best latte salute to your Secret Service…

.

Fwiw, I’m sure those Marines would readily choose to salute the aforementioned sack rather than Obama, too.

‘They’ Underestimated The Threat Of ISIS: Our Liar-in-Chief’s Avoidance Of Personal Responsibility Is Pathological. And Demonic.

You voted for this meltdown in the Middle East, and now you’re going to get it.

It’s coming here, of course.  Just this week, an African-American criminal who decided to convert to Islam when he learned that he could be every bit as wicked as he’d ever been AND be “religious” beheaded a woman and attempted to kill and behead another woman.  Alton Nolan had changed his name to Jah’Keem Yisrael, had a Facebook page that screamed jihad and the beheading of infidels, and was fired from his job “after he repeatedly threatened to kill female co-workers if they did not ‘conform to his version of Islam.’”  Oh, and he had a picture on his Facebook page of himself standing in front of a mosque giving the ISIS hand signal.  You know, all before initiating the very first beheading of an American on U.S. soil in the name of Islam in our nation’s history.  But what the hey, nothin’ to see here, folks.  And Obama and his thugracracy is going to call it “workplace violence” much the same way they did when a Muslim Major who had been in contact with al Qaeda murdered 13 soldiers and one unborn baby and wounded thirty others while screaming “Allahu Akbar” and carrying his “soldier of Allah” business cards.

We find that the FBI did exactly the political will of their messiah Obama.  Just like they’re doing with the IRS now and just like what they did with Benghazi.  After Major Hasan did his “Allahu Akbar” shoot-em-up terrorist trick, we learned that the FBI had ALL KINDS of warnings about this terrorist murderer.  But in their political correctness they utterly failed to understand the role of Islam in terrorism and failed to act on the evidence they had when they had a chance to do so.  Because that’s the damn way Obama wants it and if you belong to a union – i.e. if you work for the damn federal government – you do your thug chief’s thug bidding.

In reality, we have had TWENTY domestic terrorist attacks since Obama took office.  I don’t believe ANY of them have been acknowledged by our liar-in-chief for what they have been.

Get used to getting beheaded, America: because there’s already been a different man arrested in a different “beheading” incident just in Oklahoma.

Liberals will be thrilled: because the people that the rabid terrorists most want to murder are the ones that liberals also most want to murder: Christians and people who believe in Judeo-Christian morality.

My God, we ought to redefine the 9/11/2001 terror attack as an act of workplace violence.  I mean, after all, all the 3,000 people who died were at their workplace, right?  And it was violent, wasn’t it?  I mean, just like what we always called the terrorist bombing at the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma back in 1995.  The victims were at THEIR workplace and it was violent too.  So we’ve never actually HAD a terrorist attack in America.

All we need is Obama’s lies and we can completely redefine the whole damn universe if we want to.  And all you have to be is a pathologically dishonest fool and “truth” is a rubber thing that can be bended and twisted into any shape you like.

The Benghazi attack exposed Obama’s lie that he had decimated al Qaeda and basically won the war on terror.  So what did our pathological liar-in-chief do?  He falsely claimed a video was responsible.  Because who could possibly have known that terrorists would choose “9/11” as the date for a terrorist attack?  And how could months of specific warnings and pleading after pleading after pleading by the soon-to-be-murdered ambassador for more security be adequate to either get our Americans out of there or at least give them some security???

So Obama was re-elected for manufacturing a completely false and dishonest story about a “spontaneous mob protest” over a youtube video getting out of control rather than the pre-planned, carefully coordinated and expertly conducted terrorist attack that it was.

Re-elect Obama.  He won the war on terror.  He said so.  He promised if you like your national security, you can keep your national security.  And we all know Obama would never lie to you.

The dishonesty of this administration, the willingness to put the lives of the American people at risk for no other reason than Obama’s political expediency, is mindboggling.

The man is utterly and appallingly wicked.  he has no decency, integrity, or virtue whatsoever.  He brazenly lies without shame or honor.

Obama is doing the same deceitful thing yet again as he dishonestly references “the Khorosan Group,” which for the official record is CORE AL QAEDA.  Obama lied to you, America.  He claimed as his ploy to get re-elected that he had won a war that in fact he had surrendered from and walked away from and abandoned.

And everything and everyone that exposes the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is a liar and the worst kind of cynical, posturing political opportunist just has to get thrown under the bus.

Obama: “They” Underestimated ISIS
Doug Mataconis   ·   Monday, September 29, 2014

Last night on 60 Minutes President Obama said that the United States had “underestimated” the threat posted by ISIS/ISIL in the past and that the full scope of the threat the organization poses until very recently when it became to overrun the Iraqi Army and establish something resembling a state:

WASHINGTON — President Obama acknowledged in an interview broadcast on Sunday that the United States had underestimated the rise of the Islamic State militant group, which has seized control of a broad swath of territory in the Middle East, and had placed too much trust in the Iraqi military, allowing the region to become “ground zero for jihadists around the world.”

Reflecting on how a president who wanted to disentangle the United States from wars in the Middle East ended up redeploying to Iraq and last week expanding air operations into Syria, Mr. Obama pointed to assessments by the intelligence agencies that said they were surprised by the rapid advances made in both countries by the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL.

“Our head of the intelligence community, Jim Clapper, has acknowledged that, I think, they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria,” Mr. Obama said on “60 Minutes,” the CBS News program, referring to James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence. Mr. Obama added that the agencies had overestimated the ability and will of the Iraqi Army to fight such Sunni extremists. “That’s true. That’s absolutely true,” he said.

In citing Mr. Clapper, Mr. Obama made no mention of any misjudgment he may have made himself. Critics have repeatedly pointed to his comment last winter characterizing groups like the Islamic State as a “JV team” compared with the original Al Qaeda.

But he rebutted critics who say his refusal to intervene more directly in the Syrian civil war and his decision to pull all American troops out of Iraq in 2011 had created conditions that allowed the rise of the Islamic State. Instead, he pointed a finger at Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, until recently the prime minister of Iraq. “When we left, we had left them a democracy that was intact, a military that was well equipped and the ability then to chart their own course,” Mr. Obama said. “And that opportunity was squandered over the course of five years or so because the prime minister, Maliki, was much more interested in consolidating his Shia base.”

By contrast, he praised Mr. Maliki’s newly installed successor, Haider al-Abadi, whom he met in New York last week, for assembling a more inclusive government that may undercut Sunni support for the Islamic State. Mr. Abadi “so far at least has sent all the right signals,” Mr. Obama said. “We can’t do this for them.”

But he was measured in that assessment, saying there had been “some progress” by the new Baghdad government. “I wouldn’t say great yet,” he said.

Mr. Obama conceded that his strategy would be less likely to succeed in Syria, where he is working at odds with the government rather than in tandem. Mr. Obama has called for President Bashar al-Assad of Syria to step down, but now the two share an enemy in the Islamic State. The United States’ plan relies on trying to build up a separate rebel force that can take on both Mr. Assad’s government and the Islamic State, but Mr. Obama dismissed as “mythology” the notion that he should have done that two years ago.

The President’s comments are being perceived by made observers and analysts as an effort shift blame in the argument over who may have been responsible for not being on top of the situation in the Middle East, and in some sense to the through the intelligence community under the bus, specifically by referencing statements by Director National Intelligence James Clapper from last week. In those statements, Clapper did say that he had underestimated the fighting ability of ISIS fighters and, in tern, overestimated the will to fight of the Iraqi Army. That, however, is a far way from saying that the intelligence community didn’t properly assess what was going on in Syria and Iraq before this summer, and Eli Lake reports that the President’s remarks are already receiving some push back:

Reached by The Daily Beast after Obama’s interview aired, one former senior Pentagon official who worked closely on the threat posed by Sunni jihadists in Syria and Iraq was flabbergasted. “Either the president doesn’t read the intelligence he’s getting or he’s bullshitting,” the former official said.

(…)

Still, other senior intelligence officials have been warning about ISIS for months. In prepared testimony before the annual House and Senate intelligence committees’ threat hearings in January and February, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the recently departed director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said the group would likely make a grab for land before the end of the year. ISIS “probably will attempt to take territory in Iraq and Syria to exhibit its strength in 2014.” Of course, the prediction wasn’t exactly hard to make. By then, Flynn noted, ISIS had taken the cities of Ramadi and Fallujah, and the demonstrated an “ability to concurrently maintain multiple safe havens in Syria.”

The ability of ISIS to hold that territory will depend on its “resources, local support, as well as the responses of [Iraqi security forces] and other opposition groups in Syria,” Flynn added. He noted that while many Sunnis likely opposed ISIS, “some Sunni tribes and insurgent groups appear willing to work tactically with [ISIS] as they share common anti-government goals.”

Flynn was not alone. Clapper himself in that hearing warned that the three most effective jihadist groups in Syria—one of which he said was ISIS—presented a threat as a magnet for attracting foreign fighters. John Brennan, Obama’s CIA director, said he thought both ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, al Qaeda’s formal franchise in Syria, presented a threat to launch external operations against the West.

It’s worth noting that January was when President Obama was referring to ISIS and other groups that had spun off from “core” al Qaeda as the “jayvee” team in what seemed at the time as a way of saying that they didn’t pose nearly the threat to the United States that they would like to think, or that al Qaeda did in the time before September 11th. I’m not sure how much I’d read into those January comments, though. To some degree, it seemed to me at the time that they were part of an Administration strategy to diminish the importance of ISIS/ISIL internationally. It may not have been a wise strategy, but I’m not sure that, in and of themselves, the President’s remarks in January were an indication that he didn’t take see the group as a potential threat. As Lake notes, if that’s what he actually believed then he apparently wasn’t paying attention to his own intelligence briefings.

That being said, the President deserves criticism for attempting to pawn off responsibility for missing the ISIS threat on the intelligence community. This is especially true given the fact that “they” appear to have been well aware of ISIS long before the summer and, presumably, were briefing the President on the matter as warranted. At the very least, it is a marked difference from the idea expressed in Harry Truman’s famous maxim that “the buck stops here,” meaning that the President is ultimately responsible for everything that happens under his watch. Even if it were true that the intelligence community dropped the ball here, which is most certainly what the President was implying in his interview last night, the President is the one who should take public responsibility when something goes wrong. If it turns out down the road that personnel changes are warranted because of what happened, then that’s a different issue. As a broad matter, the President, any President, owes it to the American people to take responsibility for what his Administration does and what it fails to do. Instead of that, however, the President is asking us to believe that if something went wrong with regard to our response to the supposed ISIS threat, it wasn’t his fault. That’s not leadership.

Our soldiers and our generals and our intelligence professionals have no confidence in their commander-in-chief’s leadership.  Period.

When I served in the military, I heard a formula about leadership that is common in today’s business world: real leaders always take responsibility; they never take credit.  Obama has turned that formula on its head.  He is an antileader.  The way he is an antichrist.

Real leaders try to fix the problem; Barack Obama tries to fix the blame.

Our military and our intelligence professionals know that Obama will send them to die.  And then blame them for their own deaths.  Just like he did in Benghazi.

Obama is still appallingly trying to tell the same lie that he has been telling since Iraq went to hell under his watch.  Note that Obama BOASTED that he had removed the US military from Iraq prior to Iraq going to hell; note that Obama took credit for ending the war.  You know, when he was telling the same lies I document above about winning the war on terror and decimating al Qaeda.  Mind you, it is a documented historical FACT that Obama had a strategy to pull out all American troops over his generals’ objections from the moment he took office.  It is a documented historical FACT that Obama specifically denied ever wanting to have the “status of forces agreement” that he now deceitfully claims was the reason he pulled all of our troops out of Iraq and exposed that region to invasion by ISIS.  It is a documented historical FACT that generals correctly predicted that Obama’s policy of abandonment would end in “absolute disaster” back in 2011 when Obama was treasonously doing the very thing they said would end in disaster and which in fact led to disaster as we know now.  And it is a documented historical FACT that George Bush had predicted this very disaster back in 2007 if the American people were stupid enough and depraved enough to elect a fool and disgrace like Obama:

“I know some in Washington would like us to start leaving Iraq now. To begin withdrawing before our commanders tell us we are ready would be dangerous for Iraq, for the region and for the United States. It would mean surrendering the future of Iraq to al Qaeda. It would mean that we’d be risking mass killings on a horrific scale. It would mean we’d allow the terrorists to establish a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they lost in Afghanistan. It would mean increasing the probability that American troops would have to return at some later date to confront an enemy that is even more dangerous.” — George W. Bush, 2007

Obama appoints people at the top who will lie for him.  Period.

James Clapper is already a documented liar:

Wyden: “…give me a yes or no answer to the question: Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions, or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

Clapper: “No, sir.”

Wyden: “It does not?”

Clapper: “Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not wittingly.”

We of course now know that James Clapper, Obama’s Director of Central Intelligence, lied.  We know that the NSA was in actual fact collecting and storing bulk metadata on millions of American’s phone records, and had established methods for capturing a vast amount of email and Internet data from innocent Americans, as well.

As an aside, even the ACLU has acknowledged that Obama has been FAR more of a fascist than the hated George Bush ever was on usurping and abrogating civil liberties.  But “Democrat” stands for “Demon possessed bureaucrat” and to be a Democrat means to be a complete and unmitigated HYPOCRITE who demonized and still demonizes Bush when your own Führer is and has been so much worse than Bush ever was it’s unreal.

James Clapper is still on the job in this administration for one reason and one reason only.  He has lost all credibility and forfeited any legitimacy, yes.  But he is a man who is willing to lie for his boss and cover up his boss’ crimes.  And THAT is what Obama values, rather than the trust of the American people or rather than a competent executive.

Obama can literally say or do anything and have an “expert” to back up his impossibly deceitful version of reality.

On the other side of that equation of personal and professional dishonor is  Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.  Unlike James Clapper, he put the security of the United States of America before Obama.  Which means he had to go.  Which is why he was one out of more than nine senior generals purged by Obama.

By the way, given the fact that the United States under Obama clearly had absolutely no idea that the ISIS threat was coming, according to Obama, how the hell is it that Obama believes he has complete and certain intelligence that he can know precisely what is going on in Iran as he negotiates that nation into a nuclear state???

Barack Obama is the sort of pure demagogue who shrilly claims that there is a “war on women” when the fool won’t even say that there is a war on ISIS.

Steve Kroft: Are you saying that this is not really a war?

President Obama: Well, what I’m saying is that we are assisting Iraq in a very real battle that’s taking place on their soil, with their troops. But we are providing air support. And it is in our interest to do that because ISIL represents sort of a hybrid of not just the terrorist network, but one with territorial ambitions, and some of the strategy and tactics of an army. This is not America against ISIL. This is America leading the international community to assist a country with whom we have a security partnership with. To make sure that they are able to take care of their business.

I mean, holy crap, why doesn’t the Republican Party just start using drones to blow up women and fighter aircraft to bomb women all the damn while denying there’s a freaking war on women???  Then they could be like the Nazi we’ve got in our White House right now.

It’s interesting that Obama actually dragged CBS’ 60 Minutes ratings by 57 percent from what I heard.  The prior week the show had over 18 million; with Obama they got 9 million.  People are understanding that they’ve heard this blathering liar’s blathering lies before and they’ve heard the sweetheart interviews where nobody asks Obama the questions that they would have been rabidly demanding if a Republican were president.

If Obama can manufacture a name like “the Khorosan Group” to conceal the truth that we are still dealing with a very alive and well core al Qaeda, I have just as much right to come up with a name that exposes the reality of the Obama presidency: now it’s “the Hussein Terror Network.”

Problems Won’t Be Solved ‘Overnight’: Obama White House Says It’s Unfair To Hold Obama Responsible For His ENTIRE FIRST TERM

The pathological inability to accept responsibility on the part of this administration has crossed over to the point of clear mental illness:

White House on disastrous jobs report: Problems in the labor market won’t be solved “overnight,” you know
posted at 4:01 pm on June 1, 2012 by Allahpundit

Anyone want to try defining “overnight” for me, just so that we have a rule of thumb going forward? On Inauguration Day, I would have accepted “2009″ or even “his first two years in office” as plausible answers. Instead, five months out from election day, somehow dawn still has yet to break. His braintrust is now actually on the cusp of arguing, in all seriousness, that it’s unfair to judge him on what’s happened in the jobs market over the course of his entire first term.

What do you do when America’s just taken an economic gut punch, with a vicious European uppercut soon to follow? You hold six fundraisers, naturally:

With Republicans steamrollering ahead with a group of well-fed Super Pacs and an increasingly successful money effort by Mitt Romney, President Obama Friday will attend six fundraisers, a possible sign of budding desperation for a campaign that is lagging far behind its initial fundraising expectations.

Obama will travel to Minneapolis, where he will ensconce himself at the Bachelor Farmer Restaurant for three successive fundraising events. Afterward, he moves on to Chicago for a fundraiser at the Chicago Cultural Center and then two events at what appear to be separate private residences.

Have a look at who’ll be at his Chicago fundraiser. It must be a comfort to him, with so much going wrong, to spend time with old friends.

Incidentally, here’s what today’s atom-bomb jobs report did to his reelection odds on InTrade. A surprisingly small dip, all things considered, but I think they’re in the ballpark of what his actual chances are right now. If next month’s report is a stinker too, though, expect Romney to surge past him and become the new favorite in November:

His new Plan B on the economy? The thingamajig stimulus.

I’m sorry, maybe I’ve got a Rip Van Winkle thing going.  Apparently I went to sleep last night AND WOKE UP THREE AND A HALF YEARS LATER.

Speaking of fundraisers, it’s actually amazing: not only has Obama raised more campaign money from Wall Street “fat cats” than any politician in American history, but in fact Obama has plainly and simply pimped more money than any policitian in the history of the entire human race.  Which is to say that when Obama just keeps going from fundraiser to fundraiser to fundraiser (having attended more of them than the last five previous presidents COMBINED), he’s just obeying his weasel nature.

I know, I know: it’s BUSH’S fault Obama is to fundraisers what Barry Bonds was to home runs (especially given the fact that both cheat as much as necessary to get what they want).

If you want four more years of miserable excuses for abject failure, please vote for Barack Obama in November.

Obama On Downgrade, Market Plunge: ‘The Buck Stops With (Anyone BUT) Me’

A quote from Fox News Special Report on Obama’s remarks today:

“He didn’t offer much new or take responsibility for the exploding debt. …  The White House doesn’t seem to want to admit it’s been adding to that debt handily.”

Turbo Tax Timothy Geithner (that’s the guy who wasn’t smart enough or honest enough to pay his own taxes before taking a job making him responsible for everyone else paying their taxes) was asked if the White House accepted any responsibility for this disaster.  And nope (see also here for video):

Harwood: Do you feel that you or the administration’s policies are in any way responsible for this downgrade?

GEITHNER: Absolutely not. You’ve seen the president work incredibly hard and make really amazing progress trying to heal the damage caused by this terrible crisis. And you saw him work his heart out to try and bring both parties together to reach agreement on a long-term fiscal deal. Made some progress, didn’t solve it all, but a very good down payment.

Mind you, this is the same utterly clueless idiot – who represents the arrogance and stupidity of the Obama administration – who said there was “No risk” that the U.S. would be downgraded to begin with.

Nothing to see here folks.  The White House had nothing to do with any of this.  Don’t look to us for any answers.  Go talk to President Bush and blame HIM three years into the Obama administration. 

At the White House press conference, Jay Carney repeated the party line that no one should look to the White House to be responsible for anything.

On the TV circuit, Democrats repeatedly trotted (or is that “Trotsky’d”???) out the poll-tested talking point that this is the “Tea Party downgrade” because the Tea Party wanted to reduce America’s debt which is clearly stupid in any debt crisis, right?  I mean, so what if America’s debt just crossed the tipping point threshold of being more than its ENTIRE gross domestic product?!?!?

Democrats are crawling out to any mainstream media venue that allows cockroaches (that’s pretty much any mainstream media venue, mind you) and calls the Tea Party “terrorists.”  But the vote on the debt ceiling extension combined with the fact that Democrats never bothered to offer any plan of their own on top of the fact that they still haven’t come up with an F-ING BUDGET after 832 days really ought to point out that when they point a finger at us and call us “terrorists” three fingers are pointing back at themselves.

Democrats would have to quadruple in maturity to even qualify as “infantile.”

Sadly, Bush is the only president who is responsible for anything these days.  Did I mention we’re well into the third year of the failed Obama presidency?

Here are a few write-ups in the blog world that I found interesting:

50 Minutes Late Obama FINALLY Speaks About S&P,He Takes NO Responsibility More Lecturing and Blames Congress!

Barack Obama says the U.S. always is and always has been a triple-A country, despite its rating agency downgrade.

He said also the U.S. didn’t need a rating agency to tell it that it’s political system was having trouble functioning.

Speaking at the White House on the Standard & Poor’s downgrade, Obama renewed a plea to Congress to take action in September of help create jobs and cushion Americans from a still weak economy.

Obama said financial markets around the world “still believe our credit is triple-A.  I and the world’s investor’s agree.”

Well, if “agree” means “panic-selling that puts us into bear-market territory” with a 635 point smackdown that constitutes the sixth largest loss on the Dow in history, then Obama ISN’T completely out-of-touch with reality.

Obama offered no solutions whatsoever.  That after not bothering to speak at ALL for the entire weekened after the downgrade was announced on Friday, and apparently after showing up fifty minutes late to his own pony show.  The markets were down when Obama started speaking, and after he reasurred the world the markets pretty much said, “That’s it; we’re outa here.”

Obama’s Address to the Nation: Draws line in sand, there must be no lines in sand other than the ones I draw
Posted by William A. Jacobson   Monday, August 8, 2011 at 2:03pm

Barack Obama read a statement today, my paraphrases and quick transcription:
 
Disputes downgrade. Quotes Warren Buffett that U.S. should have AAAA rating.
 Need “balanced long term approach” — needed “day I took office.” Blames “prolonged debate over debt ceiling” for downgrade, and string of economic disruptions in Japan, Europe and the Middle East.
 
Solution is simple: “Tax reform that will ask those who can afford it to pay their fair share.” And “modest adjustments” to entitlements.
 
Not a lack of plans, “insistence on drawing lines in the sand.”
 
Most immediate concern of Americans is slow pace of recovery coming out of “worst recession” in our lifetimes. Extend payroll tax cut as soon as possible, and extend unemployment insurance payments. One million fewer jobs if don’t do this. Plus, more infrastructure spending.
 
These are proposals Republicans had agreed to in the past and should agree to now.
 
“This is the United States of America, no matter what some ratings agency says, we will always be a AAA country.”

So put on your make-believe pirate hats, boys and girls.  Because we’re going to live in a fun pretend world where we AREN’T downgraded and all of Obama’s utterly failed policies are just working swell.

I like the way the headline brings out that only Obama’s line in the sand demanding tax hikes will be accepted.  If you have your own ideas, you’re responsible for the crisis because OBAMA IS HE WHO MUST NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE.

Obama set this crisis up in two ways: 1) he demanded the largest debt ceiling increase in history which in turn forced Republicans to demand concessionsn (see here for the historic asininity of that demand).  Just so he could get through the 2012 election for his own political ambition at the expense of the country; and 2) He NEVER offered his own plan and took any personal leadership whatsoever; and 3) he repeatedly used the horrific spectre of a “default” which forced Standard & Poors to take his idiot fool warning seriously.  Republicans repeatedly tried to assure the nation that we were never in any risk of default; on top of the fact that we had enough revenue coming in to pay all of our fundamental obligations, we could simply print more money if we truly had to.  But Obama chose to fearmonger and demonize us into this credit downgrade.

Mind you, I am asking the question that if “making the people who are already paying ALL the taxes pay their ‘fair’ share” is the answer, THEN WHY THE HELL IS SOCIALIST TAX-HELL EUROPE going down the toilet and out into the stinky sea?

Barack Obama NEVER bothered to offer a plan so that anybody could have any idea where he was at any point to actually intelligently negotiate with him.  His budget was such a sick, pathetic DISGRACE that it got voted down 97-0 in his own Democrat-controlled Senate.  And did I mention that Democrats STILL HAVEN’T BOTHERED TO SUBMIT A BUDGET AFTER 832 DAYS?!?!?

This downgrade is a national disgrace.  And the man with whom the buck stops whether he’ll ever actually accept any responsibility or not is the FIRST DOWNGRADED PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY.  What I said remains true: this entire fiasco proves that Obama is dishonest, polarizing and in over his head.  And at no time has Obama ever once demonstrated ANY leadership whatsoever.

Let me ask you something.  I’ve said repeatedly that Barack Obama – the president of God damn America and the symbol of God’s wrath on this nation until this disgrace leaves office IN disgrace – would lead us into a Great Depression with his reckless and depraved spending.  Meanwhile, Obama, the Democrat Party and the left said that Obama would lead us unto a glorious recovery.

I’ve been pointing out since December 2008 right after Obama was elected that we would be staring into the abyss of a Great Depression due to this evil man’s failed policies.  I pointed out in that article that the Great Depression began with a market tank, followed by a series of failed liberal-progressive policies that were like sugar for a diabetic; at first things seemed to get better, and then we had the real crash.  You look at what I wrote in that article and tell me that we aren’t right on schedule. 

We have the worst economy since the LAST time a failed socialist ran it into the ground in the 1930s.  Surprise, surprise.

Let me point out that as early as October of 2008 I was pointing out the FACTS that CEOs “went as far as to say that “some of his programs would bankrupt the country within three years, if implemented.”  Let me point out that I pointed out that same fact again in February 2009 after Obama’s foolish and wicked policies started taking shape.

Who was right?  And who has been totally full of CRAP from the getgo?

Conservatives have been right again and again and again and Democrats have continued to demonize us even as their own failed policies have kept failing just like we said they would.

Oil Spill Panel: Obama Incompetence Destroyed Public Trust

Only one thing truly mattered to Barack Obama as millions of gallons of oil spewed out of the ocean floor to contaminate the Gulf Coast: that Barack Obama not be blamed:

President Obama may have decried finger-pointing today, but he also did a fair amount of it himself. Not only at the three companies, but at previous administrations.

Here’s what he said today when he turned the finger at the federal government:

“For too long, for a decade or more, there has been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. It seems as if permits were too often issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil companies. That cannot and will not happen anymore.””A decade or more” clearly encompasses the Bush Administration, and may include the Clinton years too. But Mr. Obama’s been president for nearly 16 months. Does he get at least a little piece of the blame?

Not a bit, he made clear. He portrayed his administration as valiantly fighting the good fight against the oil companies from day one […]

None of the following things that Barack Obama did were Barack Obama’s fault:

Barack Obama took more money from British Petroleum than any politician over a twenty year period.  In spite of the fact that he had only been in national politics for less than three years.  Barack Obama’s administration approved the project and granted the permit for the doomed BP drilling site.  Barack Obama’s administration helped quash environmental problems and issued an environmental waiver to BP at said doomed site only days before the disaster.  Barack Obama failed to take the disaster seriously and delayed serious action for weeks, fiddling with fundraisers, golf outings, and vacations while the Gulf went to hell.  The Obama administration has continued to delay and waste time pursuing the dotting of the i’s and the crossing of the t’s regarding mindless bureaucratic inanities.

It was also not Barack Obama’s fault that Barack Obama turned down virtually every international offer to help help him clean up his mess while he was clearly not up to the job.

It was not Barack Obama’s fault that Barack Obama seemed to have absolutely no clue whatsoever what to do – as testified by even his own fellow liberals.

Nor was it Barack Obama’s fault that Barack Obama’s deceit-based moratorium on drilling has cost the Gulf thousands of jobs in what can only be seen as a double-whammy-smackdown on a region that had already experienced disaster.

And so, clearly, it is not Barack Obama’s fault that the public lost trust in Barack Obama’s government due to Barack Obama’s incompetence:

Spill panel: Federal confusion lost public trust
By SETH BORENSTEIN and DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writers Seth Borenstein And Dina Cappiello, Associated Press Writers  – September 27, 2010

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration’s repeated low estimates of the huge BP oil spill undermined public confidence in the government’s entire cleanup effort, leaders of a White House-appointed commission declared at an investigatory hearing Monday.  One likened the mistakes to Custer’s disastrous decisions at Little Big Horn.

Federal officials botched the government’s response, a local official and government and university scientists contended as the commission focused on the questions of who was in charge and how much oil spewed out of the well into the Gulf of Mexico.

Eventually, U.S. officials said the spill was about 60 times bigger than originally estimated. Instead of 42,000 gallons a day, the volume of leaking oil was closer to 2.4 million gallons a day.

“It’s a lot like Custer,” said panel co-chairman Bob Graham, a former Florida senator and governor, referring to the battle that killed George Armstrong Custer and wiped out most of the Army’s 7th Calvary in 1876. “He underestimated the number of Indians on the other side of the hill and paid the ultimate price.”

And who was in charge? Billy Nungesser, president of Plaquemines Parish, one of the coastal areas most affected by the spill, referred to another famous leader, this one fictional.

“It became a joke,” he told the commission. “The Houma command was the Wizard of Oz, some guy behind the curtain.”

Mistakes in the information that was being given out sapped confidence in the government on the issue, Graham and co-chairman William Reilly said at a news conference. Reilly described “repeated wrong numbers” on the amount of oil that was spilling.

I know who was supposed to be in charge: Barack Obama.  But he’s a total incompetent failure, who is skilled only in reading aloud whatever a teleprompter screen prompts him to say, and demagoguing.  And that’s why a crisis became such a pathetic and costly joke on every American citizen.

Harry Reid Continues Race-Baiting Racist Democrat Tradition

Harry Reid was speaking before a group of liberal Hispanics when he said the following:

“I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican, OK? Do I need to say more?”

Why did Harry Reid say that?  Well, as a progressive Democrat, Harry Reid understands the “white man’s burden.”

Harry Reid understands that blacks and Hispanics are little more than animals – millions of years’ worth of Darwinism from attaining the humanity of the white man.  And therefore it is the duty of the white man to guide his less evolved evolutionary cousins toward a course  that will enable them to survive.  I mean, we have programs to protect turtles and frogs; it is the least we can do to protect blacks and Hispanics, too.

Most every progressive Democrat knows all that.

Second, Harry Reid, again as a progressive Democrat, understands the equivalent of “they all look alike”; namely that “those kind of people all think the same.”  I mean, blacks’ and Hispanics’ minds are clearly far too feeble to enable them to think for themselves, right?  I mean, that’s a big part of why we’ve got the “white man’s burden thing” above.

One day, millions of years from now if we’re lucky (you know how Darwinism takes eons of time), blacks and Hispanics will finally be fully human, and then we’ll be able to hold them responsible as human beings just like the white man.  But Harry Reid knows that we’re far from that day in the here-and-now.

Now, of course, I put both ideas in over-the-top language.  But they nevertheless do accurately reflect the incredibly racists underlying assumptions on the part of progressive Democrats today.

First, they lump people into groups on the basis of race and gender.  And then they essentially point out that some of these groups are not able to take care of themselves, and therefore we must redistribute the wealth of the more successful groups in order to help the racial categories who are unable to help themselves (and of course to punish the successful groups, who are assumed to have acquired everything they obtained illegitimately or through greed).

Interestingly, in spite of my being white – or according to progressive Democrats BECAUSE of my white race – I am able to think for my self.  I don’t “vote my race”; I vote my values.  I vote my ideas.  I vote my conscience.  It is beyond a shame that blacks and Hispanics – according to the Democrat Senate Majority Leader – either don’t have or shouldn’t have that capacity.

Stop and think, liberals.  What if a Republican had met a group of white people and said:

“I don’t know how anyone of Caucasian heritage could vote Democrat, OK?  Do I  need to say more?”

That Republican would have been hounded out of office in shame.  And he would be gone.

But if the Democrat Party exists to advance the cause of blacks and Hispanics, then wouldn’t it be just as true that the Grand Old Party exists to advance the cause of some other racial group?  And what group would that be if not whites?

Hey, every single one of you white, dirty cracker whores (at least, that’s what the New Black Panthers consider white women) out there: vote Republican, or be branded a traitor to your own race.

Now, of course, you run into the irony that it was that Grand Old Party that freed the slaves, and fought a bitter war to free the slaves against the Democrat Party that was fighting just as bitterly to keep black people in the chains of human bondage.  But that’s beside the point in the Democrat narrative.

Harry Reid is also on the record admiring Obama as a:

‘light-skinned’ African American ‘with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.’

Maybe it’s because Obama was half white, but Harry Reid nevertheless praises Obama for overcoming that stupid negro dialect.  And being light-skinned is a huge bonus for Harry Reid.  “Whiter is better” when you’re in the party of “the White Man’s Burden.”

Bill Clinton wasn’t quite as happy with the man who was stealing his white wife’s rightful place as leader of the free world.

Bill snidely told Ted Kennedy,

“A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”

I know, William Jefferson.  That’s back when southern Democrats like you had a different way of keeping black boys in their proper place.

Senator Robert Byrd, a distinguished “Exalted Cyclops” and “Kleagle” of the famous Democrat-created Ku Klux Klan, was on the record as once saying:

“I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side … Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”

Ah.  There’s that depiction of blacks as being in that long-way-from-being-human I earlier mentioned.

And:

“The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia and in every state in the nation.”

When Bill Clinton honored fellow Democrat Robert “Exalted Cyclops” Byrd, Clinton said:

“He was a country boy from the hills and hollows of West Virginia. He was trying to get elected. And maybe he did something he shouldn’t have done…”

Well, as long as he was just a Democrat trying to get elected, then ANY racism or racism is fine, isn’t it, Hill Billy?

Maybe he did something he shouldn’t have done.  And then again, maybe he didn’t.  After all, Byrd was a Democrat, and therefore can get away with the most shocking acts of racist filth imaginable, right, Hill Billy?

Democrats love to call Republicans “racist.”  And what a racist thing of them to say (if not being “race traitorous,” if the Democrats are white – to throw Harry Reid’s standard back at them).

I pointed this out once before (and we could also point out that the Confederacy voted exclusively Democrat, and that the KKK was created by Democrats as a terrorist arm to target black people and white Republicans).

The first Klan was founded in 1865 in Pulaski, Tennessee by veterans of the Confederate Army. Although it never had an organizational structure above the local level, similar groups across the South adopted the name and methods. Klan groups spread throughout the South as an insurgent movement after the war. As a secret vigilante group, the Klan reacted against Radical Republican control of Reconstruction by attempting to restore white supremacy by threats and violence, including murder, against black and white Republicans.  In 1870 and 1871 the federal government passed the Force Acts, which were used to prosecute Klan crimes. Prosecution of Klan crimes and enforcement of the Force Acts suppressed Klan activity. In 1874 and later, however, newly organized and openly active paramilitary organizations, such as the White League and the Red Shirts, started a fresh round of violence aimed at suppressing Republican voting and running Republicans out of office. These contributed to white conservative Democrats‘ regaining political power in all the Southern states by 1877.

But let me quote myself regarding other parts of the despicable record of the Democrat Party as the party of official racism in America:

I mean, maybe you can go back to President Andrew Jackson and his vicious genocidal Trail of Tears.  But Andrew Jackson was a Democrat, too.  Or you could go back to President Woodrow Wilson who literally fired all the blacks in federal government and RE-segregated the military.  But you guessed it – Democrat.  We can go back to January 26, 1922, when Democrat Senators filibustered a Republican bill that had passed in the GOP-controlled House to make lynching a federal crime.  Or we could mention the vile and evil political party that had a national convention in 1924 that was so dominated by the Ku Klux Klan that it is today known as “Klanbake.”  But, oops.  That was the 1924 DEMOCRAT PARTY CONVENTION.  Or we could consider that President Franklin Delanor Roosevelt was a bigger racist for put American Japanese citizens in camps for nothing beyond racism.  Or for allowing the infamous Tuskegee experiment to begin under his presidency.  Or allowing his New Deal program to be used to help Democrat-supporting labor unions hurt black people and shut them out of economic success.  But, well, you know…So when you hear Democrats today like Patrick Kennedy comparing the Arizona with the Trail of Tears, note that they’re merely trying to pass the buck for their own Democrat historic racism to innocent Republicans.  I mean, what Patrick Kennedy did was analogous to Osama bin Laden saying, “You Americans are the terrorists, just like the murderers who attacked and destroyed the World Trade Center!”  But wait a minute, Osama – YOU’RE THE ONE WHO DID THAT!!!

The Democrat Party is the historic proponent of racism in this country (see also my comment here).  Oh, they changed their tactics from threats to bribes, but they never abandoned their racist “progressive” values.

The Democrats that once deliberately targeted racial minorities for exclusion and even violence as a means of advancing their political power ultimately realized that their strategy wasn’t working beginning in the 1960s.  That was when they realized, “If you can’t beat ’em, co-opt them.”  And they began to buy the votes of the very racial minorities they used to savagely oppress by offering racial quotas (opposed by great civil rights leaders such as Frederic Douglas and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.) and welfare benefits for life.

So why was it that Democrat Senator Robert Byrd was “MAYBE” wrong for being a member of the Klan? The answer is as simple as it is frightening: because it’s always been okay for the Democrat Party to use racism and race-baiting and racial segregation in order to drive their agenda home.  And that is just as true today when the Democrats buy off blacks through welfare so they will act as the human shields of the Democrat Party as it was when the Democrat-created Ku Klux Klan was riding around with torches.

Let us not forget that both the famous Martin Luther King, Sr. and his even more famous son were both registered Republicans. It’s a shame that the pseudo civil rights leaders of today – and particularly one Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid – frankly aren’t fit to carry Martin Luther King’s shoes, much less criticize his party affiliation.

Martin Luther King, Jr. and Frederick Douglas BOTH fundamentally opposed the quotas and preferential treatment that Democrats have employed to create the equivalent of the “house negro.” Jack Greenberg of the NAACP said in the 1950s that “The chief problem with quotas is that they introduce a potentially retrogressive concept into the cherished notion of individual equality.”

Let’s listen to Frederick Douglas, escaped slave and greatest of all champions of civil rights, has to say:

Frederick Douglass ridiculed the idea of racial quotas, as suggested by Martin Delany, as “absurd as a matter of practice,” noting that it implied blacks “should constitute one-eighth of the poets, statesmen, scholars, authors and philosophers.” Douglass emphasized that “natural equality is a very different thing from practical equality; and…though men may be potentially equal, circumstances may for a time cause the most striking inequalities.”  On another occasion, in opposing “special efforts” for the black freedmen, Douglass argued that they “might ‘serve to keep up very prejudices, which it is so desirable to banish’ by promoting an image of blacks as privileged wards of the state.”

So now conservatives are suddenly racists for agreeing with Frederick Douglas and Martin Luther King, Jr. and against liberals and the vile pseudo values that the greatest civil rights leaders in history condemned?

Richard Nixon, whom Democrats love to make the poster boy for Republican racism, was the first president to introduce the racial quotas that Democrats have been trying to implement and expand ever since.  To whatever extent Nixon was a racist, Democrats have been swimming in Nixon’s racism ever since.

Harry Reid should have resigned in disgrace two vile comments ago.  He should certainly resign now.

Obama Takes The Blame, Then Immediately Blames Bush

The Obama blameologists are working around the clock to constantly find new and creative ways to keep blaming He-Who-Must-Be-Blamed, aka George Bush.  Here’s the latest iteration via the Associated Press:

Obama: ‘The buck stops with me’
Josh Gerstein, Laura Rozen Josh Gerstein, Laura Rozen

Taking a decidedly different tack from his predecessor in the face of a government failure, President Barack Obama on Thursday took the blame for shortcomings that led to a failed Christmas Day bombing plot, saying “the buck stops with me.”

Aides to Obama signaled that he was consciously seeking to be the anti-Bush, airing the administration’s dirty laundry and stepping up to take his share of the responsibility.

“The president also wanted to do something, I think, unusual today,” National Security Council Chief of Staff Denis McDonough said during a web chat after Obama’s speech. “Not only was this a very quick accounting, not only did the president accept responsibility for it, but the president also wanted to do this as transparently as possible.”Quick, transparent, willing to take the blame – all things Obama has said President George W. Bush was not.

It was a distillation of everything Obama has criticized Bush for over the years — whether about intelligence in the war in Iraq, about diverting resources away from Afghanistan, about opening a terror prison in Cuba.

This is actually so pathetic it’s kind of funny.  “Look at me, I’m taking the blame, even though that George Bush really deserves it more.   Have I ever mentioned my theory that Bush is really to blame for everything?”

To the extent that the article opens by appearing to clearly embrace the Obama “Bush sucks” position, you can chock it up largely to the fact that these Associated Press writers legs were tingling with shivers as they thought about Obama.  There was never a single mention of a single specific time when George Bush refused to accept blame in the article, and in fact the article ended with the words –

While Bush did resist the creation of the 9/11 Commission and his administration clashed repeatedly with the panel and Congress about access to executive branch officials and information, he did accept blame for some mistakes on his watch, such as the botched response to Hurricane Katrina.

“To the extent the federal government didn’t fully do its job right, I take responsibility,” Bush said on September 13, 2005, 18 days after the storm first came ashore. “I want to know what went right and what went wrong.”

– Which is another way of saying that the opening line of “Taking a decidedly different tack from his predecessor in the face of a government failure” was a giant load of crock from paid purveyors of propaganda.

But the fact remains, that Obama simply cannot and will not accept blame no matter how obvious it is that the blame is his alone without making sure that George Bush is blamed.  And even when he pretends he is accepting blame, he dishonestly blames Bush.

If Obama knew anything about genuine leadership whatsoever, he would instruct his administration to never mention George Bush and actually take responsibility for dealing with the nations problems rather than demonizing.  But he doesn’t, so he won’t.

Obama gives speech after televised speech, with the message of one being completely different than the last.  Yesterday he talked about how we would fix the disastrous failure of security; today he’s talking about how he’s going to create green jobs.  Tomorrow it will be something else.  It is as though, in the words of Mike Huckabee, Obama has political attention deficit disorder.  And again, the country is going to drift given that it is in a leadership vacuum as a result.

Finally, the president who is so paranoid that he declared executive privilege to keep his freaking SOCIAL SECRETARY from talking has no right whatsoever to talk disparagingly about Bush’s secrecy.

Or to put it in these terms:

“I’d completely fall out of my chair if they invoked Executive privilege with regards to a social secretary arranging a party,” said Mark J. Rozell, a public-policy professor at George Mason who recently wrote a book on Executive privilege.

But that was exactly what Obama did.

If Obama wants to be “transparent,” he might actually consider fulfilling a promise he made on at least eight separate occassions to be transparent, and put the health care negotiations on C-SPAN.

Until then should do a lot less talking, and a lot more shutting the hell up.

The Truth About Health Care For Illegal Immigrants

Ask Obama about health care for illegal immigrants and he says this:

When a caller asked about illegal immigrants under health care reform, Obama said the topic is one of many where misinformation has taken root. “This has been an example of just pure misinformation out there. None of the bills that have been voted on in Congress, and none of the proposals coming out of the White House propose giving coverage to illegal immigrants — none of them,” he said. “That has never been on the table; nobody has discussed it. So everybody who is listening out there, when you start hearing that somehow this is all designed to provide health insurance to illegal immigrants, that is simply not true and has never been the case.”

Okay.  Then what about this:

Roughly half of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. don’t have health insurance, according to the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group. Like others who can’t afford medical care, illegal immigrants tend to flock to hospital emergency rooms, which, under a 1986 law, can’t turn people away, even if they can’t pay. Emergency-room visits, where treatment costs are much higher than in clinics, jumped 32% nationally between 1996 and 2006, the latest data available.

Does the Democrats’ health care bill overturn this 1986 law?  Does the Democrat’s health care bill specifically rule out illegal immigrants from qualifying for health care?

No.  In fact Obama tacitly acknowledges that, at the very least, nothing will change and illegal immigrants will continue to be able to flock to emergency rooms for their health care.  And since the basic law now says illegal immigrants are basically entitled to health care, they have to be specifically ruled out in order to be ineligible for benefits under a future health care bill.

But the Democrats aren’t allowing any exception preventing illegal immigrants from receiving health care under the Democrats’ plan, as this Newsmax article, entitled, “Obama Health Plan to Cover 12 Million Illegals,” proves:

On Friday, Democrats moved one step closer to giving free health insurance to the nation’s estimated 12 million illegal aliens when they successfully defeated a Republican-backed amendment, offered by Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., that would have prevented illegal aliens from receiving government-subsidized health care under the proposed plan backed by House Democrats and President Barack Obama.

The House Ways and Means Committee nixed the Heller amendment by a 26-to-15 vote along straight party lines, and followed this action by passing the 1,018-page bill early Friday morning by a 23-to-18 margin, with three Democrats voting against the plan.

The Democratic plan will embrace Obama’s vision of bringing free government medical care to more than 45 million uninsured people in America – a significant portion of whom are illegal aliens.

If the Democrats have no intention of covering illegal immigrants in their health plan, why did every single Democrat vote against an amendment that would have prevented illegal immigrants from receiving government subsidized health care? I mean, if I had no intention of doing something, I wouldn’t have a problem voting for an amendment that makes sure the thing I don’t want anyway doesn’t happen.  Is that just me?

These Democrats are worse than the worst caricatures of used car salesmen.  They will promise you whatever the heck you want to hear; they just won’t put it in writing or stand behind it.  They are the worse kind of liars.  Don’t trust what they say when what they do directly contradicts what they say.

If Democrats want to claim that their bill won’t provide coverage to illegal immigrants, then demand they put it in writing, and codify it into law.  Don’t just blithely trust these weasels, or the propagandist mainstream media that is out to justify liberalism and vilify conservatism.

Obama has repeatedly promised that he will help “the 47 million Americans who have no health insurance.”  But the claim itself demonstrates that Obama is lying now when he says none of the bills give coverage to illegal immigrants.  Because the “47 million” figure includes millions of illegal immigrants.

This Census [Bureau] report says that within the borders of the United States as of 2007 there were 45.65 people without health insurance. But this number, according to the Census Bureau, included 9.73 million foreigners, leaving only 35.92 Americans who were uninsured.

Another article:

President Barack Obama claimed during his Wednesday night press conference that there are 47 million Americans without health insurance.

A simple check with the U.S. Census Bureau would have told him otherwise.

Obama said: “This is not just about the 47 million Americans who have no health insurance.”

That assertion conflicts with data in the Census Bureau report “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007.” The report was issued in August 2008 and contains the most up-to-date official data on the number of uninsured in the U.S.

The report discloses that there were 45.65 million people in the U.S. who did not have health insurance in 2007.

However, it also reveals that there were 9.73 million foreigners — foreign-born non-citizens who were in the country in 2007 — included in that number. So the number of uninsured Americans was actually 35.92 million.

And of those, “there were also 9.1 million people making more than $75,000 per year who did not choose to purchase health insurance,” CNSNews stated in a report based on the Census Bureau data.

That brings the number of Americans who lack health insurance presumably for financial reasons down less than 27 million.

The Census Bureau report also shows that the number of people without insurance actually went down in 2007 compared to the previous year — from 47 million to 45.65 million — while the number with insurance rose from 249.8 million to 253.4 million.

So I say tomato, you say tomahto.  I say Obama is going to cover illegal immigrants, and Obama says he’s going to cover all Americans – and the fact that he considers illegal immigrants as “Americans” is completely beside the point.  That’s the fine print, and who needs to waste time consider the fine print?

The point is that there is a massive disinformation campaign going on.  Democrats and their mainline media propagandists baldly assert up one side and down the other that the bill doesn’t “give coverage to illegal immigrants.”  And in the most rote, literalistic, never-mind-the-fine-print-just-sign-here mindset, it’s true: there isn’t a page that says, “We hereby grant illegal immigrants health care coverage because that’s just the kind of globalist-Marxist anti-American rat-bastards we are.”

But please don’t be so absolutely stupid that you don’t read the fine print.

During the presidential campaign Tom Brokaw asked Barack Obama and John McCain a fundamental question: “Is health care in America a privilege, a right, or a responsibility?”  John McCain answered that it was a responsibility; Barack Obama said – and I quote – “Well, I think it should be a right for every American” (as in all 47 million Americans).

If health care is a basic right, how do you restrict it?  How do you deny it?  How do you say something is a “right,” and then keep people from having it?

Based on Obama’s own moral logic, he MUST provide health care for illegal immigrants.  All you have to do is listen to Barack Obama between lies to know what he’s going to do.

The 2010 census under Barack Obama will count everyone present as “Americans” and will not separate out illegal immigrants.  You can take that infamous Newsweek Cover that proclaims, “We Are ALL Socialists Now” and change it to say, “We are ALL Americans Now.”  As far as Obama is concerned, if you happen to be in America now, you are an American.  And it doesn’t matter where you were born, or how you got here.

And neither will his health care plan.  They have intended to cover “47 million Americans” all along – and they WILL cover illegal immigrants unless they are defeated.