Lying ,covering up incompetency, culpability and dereliction of presidential responsibility begins to register and how does it feel to be thrown under the bus? (See 1b and 1c below.)
---
Sudan not happy with Israel's alleged destruction of their missile factory. (See 2 below.)
---
Purposely beating a dead horse. See 3 below.)
---
A rational viewpoint of a Tybee Republican who sees a fork in the road which must be taken.. (See 4 below.)
---
Yes a recession could happen or the sequester could be overturned and Europe could begin a modest stabilization followed by a recovery.
I suspect the former, am less sanguine about the latter but in any event believe our economy will just limp along at a less than robust 2% unless Romney wins and then things could quicken their pace. (See 5 below)
---
Go and negotiate! You decide. (See 6 below.)
---
A targeted Allen West deserves a second term. Why? Because he tells it like it is, is a threat to Liberals who can't stand "uncle Toms" who stand on their own feet and are independent of the party line that has enslaved black voters who are simply being used as pawns.
I sent him a modest contribution and perhaps you will as well? (See 7 below.)
---
Dick
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1)Liberals Find out Women Aren’t Amused
Soon will come the finger-pointing.
Liberals will gnash their teeth, pull their hair and recriminate.
Yes; true, this is normal behavior on the part of liberals. But this time the behavior will be uproarious and hilarious.
Because this time, the folks who brought us Occupy Wall Street won’t be in a drum circle, but in a circular firing squad facing their comrades, their righteous fingers loaded and looking for blame.
“Oh, Chicago!” they’ll say. “Bang, bang.”
Sure, there will be the typical liberal shots at the “racists” on the right who denied Obama a second term.
But the delicious irony lost on them will be found in their final chant of “It’s all Bush’s fault.” But that irony won’t be lost on history.
Count me amongst those laughing hardest.
Because Obama’s term can best be described as a Harold Ramis movie.
Remember when Obama had to redefine his stimulus program that was supposed to create millions of jobs, to only “saving” millions of government jobs?
“We spent a trillion dollars on what?” Ha, ha.
As Jimmy Kimmel explained at the 2012 White House Correspondents Dinner:
“Mr. President, remember when the country rallied around you in the hopes of a better tomorrow? That was hilarious. That was your best one yet.”
Well not quite.
There was that time that Obama got roughly $90 billion for green energy jobs, or green energy “investments,” as he calls them, which were touted to save us billions of dollars in imported oil and create 5 million green energy jobs.
“The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 set aside $90 billion in renewable energy grants and loans for a grab bag of thousands of projects—wind farms, solar installations, natural gas fueling stations, biofuel research, and a $5 billion weatherization project for low-income homes,” reportsBusinessWeek.com. “Digging into the public records of the $21 billion spent so far through 19 U.S. Department of Energy programs reveals 3,960 projects that employ 28,854 people.”
Only 4,971,146 jobs left to go!
Four more years? No, at that rate it would take 693 years for Obama to create 5 million green energy jobs at the rate he created them over the first four years. And at the current cost, Obama would have to spend $3.6 trillion just to create those jobs.
That’s 25 percent of our GDP dedicated to creating about 3.5 percent of our jobs, if it ever happened.
You can not find a better punch line that knocks the water out of Obamanomics so completely. Forget about Obama’s 1 percent. At $727,000 per job, the 3.5 percent who would have green jobs would have it pretty good.
Thankfully economics, and by that I mean real-life market forces, not wishful theories by central bank and Ivy League economists, have prevented Obamanomics from working.
So as a healthy alternative to providing actual money to families during the recession, Obama created the bumper sticker war that liberals call: The Republican War on Women (R-WoW).
R-WoW’s not doing so hot though. It’s based on the faulty assumption that Republican men want to control women’s brains and their uteruses. And it's way too transparent an attempt to distract from Obama's record of failure.
I’ll admit that as a man I don’t always understand women. They are girly and often smell powdery. That and the insides of their purses intimidate me. But I know that they have a healthy respect for money. This I understand.
If you gave them a choice between a job that pays money and free birth control, the ones I know would pick a job.
They aren’t buying into the R-WoW credo that the GOP is somehow hostile to women. And it’s not just the girls I know. According to the latest AP survey the vaunted gender gap that Obama counted on to get re-elected has disappeared. The seven-point advantage that Obama had with women in 2008 has vaporized in 2012.
“Less than two weeks out from Election Day,” reports CBSNews “Republican Mitt Romney has erased President Obama's 16-point advantage among women, a new Associated Press-GfK poll shows.”
Just a month ago, says CBS, “women favored Mr. Obama over Romney on the economy 56 percent to 40 percent. Now, the split has shifted to 49 percent for Romney and 45 percent for Mr. Obama.”
And the irony here is that the harder the administration tried to push R-WoW, the more they alienated women. It was just about a month ago that Obama’s disastrous debate performance forced liberals to cue up the War on Women once more as an alternative to…policy, results, progress, or a real president?
And yes, I find the irony of this hilarious.
Obama has been done in by his own campaign device, done in by women who wouldn't buy his R-WoW BS. Ha! It could all make a wonderful Will Farrell comedy.
Women, however, it seems, are not amused. 1a)Obama’s War on Women…and Intelligence
When President Obama started talking about “shovel-ready jobs,” who knew he was talking about the shovels needed to dig a hole deep enough to lower the bar to a level his campaign could clear. As if his campaign of “Romnesia,” Big Bird and “binders” wasn’t desperate enough, the stench of desperation was turned up to 11 yesterday.
To Democrats it seems women are nothing more than hyper-fertile vaginas on a constant quest for sex, contraception and abortions. What else has the president’s campaign addressed? No appeals to women on jobs, even as they suffer an obscenely high unemployment rate. Despite all the talk of equal pay, no accountability or attempt to rectify or explain the Obama administration paying women 18 percent less than men.
They think women don’t care the administration ignored both pleas for more security before the attacks that killed four Americans in Libya and cries for help during the attack. They don’t think women care about Obama’s unwillingness to answer a direct question about it, or that he ordered an investigation into it while the seven-hour attack what happening. And they really don’t think women will find it odd he demanded those attacking Americans be brought “to justice” after the attack rather than bombing them beforehand when he had the chance.
Nope, for women it’s been, “Here’s some free birth control, now shut up and vote for me.” And “There’s a war on women, and Republicans are responsible.” Disgusting.
And now we have the latest salvo in the Democrats’ real war on women.
The Obama campaign released a new ad featuring actress Lena Dunham talking about her “first time.” For those of you who don’t know, Dunham is in HBO’s mildly amusing show “Girls,” which is set in Brooklyn and has been widely criticized for managing to not have any minority characters in the heart of America’s melting pot.
Her “first time” refers to her first time voting, and voting for Barack Obama. But it’s done in a double-entendre way that is beneath the office of the president.
I love a good double-entendre joke as much as anyone. But this is just trashy and exposes even further the lack of respect Democrats show women.
Dunham says your first time should be with “A great guy.” So what to her and the Obama campaign constitutes “a great guy”? It seems it’s “A guy who cares whether you get health insurance and specifically whether you get birth control.”
The use of the word “specifically” is what’s most telling. The ad is absurd and sickening, but that line takes the cake. Honestly, that’s what constitutes “a great guy” to liberals? “I know you don’t have a job, but I’m paying for your birth control, and we all know that’s what really matters to you. Here’s the pill, now let’s get it on.”
It’s like Democrats want women in the bedroom – barefoot but not pregnant. Women, real, intelligent women, want more from life.
So who does this ad target? Allahpundit at HotAir.com asks the question of a campaign that produces an ad like this, “Do they think women are too stupid to appreciate a straightforward pitch on the issues?”
They must.
Dunham also lists Obama’s support for gay marriage as a reason why he should be your “first.” But the joke is on her, because the President told MTV, after raising millions off his support, that he’ll do exactly zero about it, that gay marriage is a state issue.
Ace over at the Ace of Spades website points out how this sort of superficial pap appeals to the president’s base. He writes, “It underlines the essential triviality of Obama and his Government Client & Upper Upper Class White Voter agenda. There is nothing to his campaign except very small social-progressive appeals to people who are simply not affected by the economy, whether they are too poor to notice a bad economy, immunized from the economy by being a government worker, or so rich they have nothing at all to fear from a bad economy.”
Most Americans, of course, don’t fit into those categories. Most are suffering in Obama’s economy.
But in an election when turning out the base could be everything, making an appeal to that group, particularly young people, makes sense. And considering the un-and-under-employment of recent college graduates is about 50 percent, an appeal on policy or accomplishment is out of the question. So you end up with something incredibly stupid and un-presidential like this ad that harkens back to a panned and quickly retracted campaign picture that implored women to “Vote like your lady parts depend on it.” Because, to Democrats, that’s all you are.
Come to think of it, considering the unemployment rate for the targeted group is 50 percent and the incredible, crushing debt they’ll inherit from this president, maybe birth control and contraception should be a priority for every young person. After all, if Barack Obama wins a second term and it’s anything like his “first,” we’re all getting completely screwed.
1b)Gallup: Obama's Job Approval Drops 7 Points in 3 Days
CNSNews.com) - In the most precipitous decline it has seen in more than a year, President Barack Obama's job approval rating has dropped 7 points in three days,according to Gallup.
In the three-day period ending on Oct. 23, says Gallup, 53 percent said they approved of the job Obama was doing and 42 percent said they did not.
On Oct. 24, that dropped to 51 percent who said they approved and 44 percent who said they do not.
On Oct. 25, it dropped again to 48 percent who said they approved and 47 percent who said they do not.
On Oct. 26, it dropped yet again to 46 percent who said they approved and 49 percent who said they did not.
In May 2011, Obama's approval dropped 7 points in four days, sliding from 53 percent on May 24 to 46 percent on May 28.
1c)Petraeus Throws Obama Under the Bus
Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ”
So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.
It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2)Khartoum threatens Israel after Iranian generals examine missile factory rubble
Sudan claims Israeli ordnance found at bomb site
Sudanese President Omar Bashir pledged decisive steps against “Israeli interests which are now legitimate targets.” He spoke Saturday, Oct. 27 after a team of Iranian generals completed a secret examination of the rubble left of the Khartoum Shehab ballistic missile factory after an air attack on Oct. 24.
Israeli officials have refused to comment on the attack. However, Sudanese Information Minister Ahmed Belal Othman said “military experts" who surveyed what was left of the Yarmouk Industrial Complex had determined that it was destroyed by Israel-made missiles.
The minister added that no country in the region besides Israel owns the sophisticated weapons used in the attack.
He also confirmed that Khartoum international airport’s radar system was disabled during the raid, confirming the claim made by Iranian sources the next day.
Othman did not identity the “military experts” who examined the residue at the bomb site or explain how they were able to identify the weapons used. However, military sources disclose that those experts were Iranian military chiefs of the highest ranks: Iranian Air Force Chief Brig. Gen. Hassan Shah-Safi; Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Aerospace Forces Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh; Deputy Air Force Commander Brig. Gen. Aziz Nasirzadeh; and Commander of Iran's Khatam al-Anbiya Air Defense Base Brig. Gen. Farzad Esmaili.
The exalted ranks of these officers, sent secretly and post haste to Khartoum after the incident, attested to the extreme consternation caused in Tehran by the missile factory’s destruction and its importance to Iran’s regional military organization for a potential US or Israeli attack.
The generals were instructed to conduct a professional and detailed analysis to determine the capabilities of the air force which sent the four bombers to level the Shehab factory and how those capabilities were applicable to a potential long-distance Israeli aerial strike against Iran.
The team of investigators, which arrived in Khartoum by an Iranian military plane hours after the attack, was collected and escorted by the Sudanese chief of staff, Gen. Ismat Abdel Rahman in a tightly-secured convoy of armored vehicles with helicopter cover straight to the wrecked factory for their inquiry.
The team of investigators, which arrived in Khartoum by an Iranian military plane hours after the attack, was collected and escorted by the Sudanese chief of staff, Gen. Ismat Abdel Rahman in a tightly-secured convoy of armored vehicles with helicopter cover straight to the wrecked factory for their inquiry.
They also examined Sudan’s radar system to find out how it was jammed.
Our military sources add: This was the second time in three weeks that Iranian air force, air defense and cyber war experts have had the chance to study Israel’s air force and electronic capabilities - while also exposing many facets of their own. Just three weeks ago, on Oct. 6, an Iranian stealth drone penetrated Israeli air space. Iranian cyber exports, operating from Hizballah’s security service bunkers in South Beirut, conducted cyber duel with Israeli experts before the IAF downed the interloper.
Our military sources add: This was the second time in three weeks that Iranian air force, air defense and cyber war experts have had the chance to study Israel’s air force and electronic capabilities - while also exposing many facets of their own. Just three weeks ago, on Oct. 6, an Iranian stealth drone penetrated Israeli air space. Iranian cyber exports, operating from Hizballah’s security service bunkers in South Beirut, conducted cyber duel with Israeli experts before the IAF downed the interloper.
In Sudan, the Iranian generals tried to learn what they could about the methods and equipment Israel used to jam Sudan’s radar systems which, like those in Iranian use, are made in Russia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3)
Why would Obama and Biden do such a thing? Because to launch a military operation against an al-Qaeda affiliate on the anniversary of 9/11 would have exposed the hollowness of their boast through convention week and the days thereafter — that Osama was dead and al-Qaeda was finished. And so Ty Woods, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Chris Stevens were left to die, and a decision taken to blame an entirely irrelevant video and, as Secretary Clinton threatened, “have that person arrested.” And, in the weeks that followed, the government of the United States lied to its own citizens as thoroughly and energetically as any totalitarian state, complete with the midnight knock on the door from not-so-secret policemen sent to haul the designated fall-guy into custody.
This goes far beyond the instinctive secretiveness to which even democratic governments are prone. The Obama administration created a wholly fictional story line, and devoted its full resources to maintaining it. I understand why Mitt Romney chose not to pursue this line of argument in the final debate. The voters who will determine this election are those who voted for Obama four years ago and this time round either switch to the other fellow or sit on their hands. In electoral terms, it’s probably prudent of Mitt not to rub their faces in their 2008 votes. Nevertheless, when the president and other prominent officials stand by as four Americans die and then abuse their sacrifice as contemptuously as this administration did, decency requires that they be voted out of office as an act of urgent political hygiene.
At the photo-op staged for the returning caskets, Obama et al. seem to have been too focused on their campaign needs to observe even the minimal courtesies. Charles Woods says that at the ceremony Joe Biden strolled over to him and by way of condolence said in a “loud and boisterous” voice, “Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?” One assumes charitably that the vice president is acknowledging in his own inept and blundering way the remarkable courage of a man called upon to die for his country on some worthless sod halfway across the planet. But the near-parodic locker-room coarseness is grotesque both in its inaptness and in its lack of basic human feeling for a bereaved family forced to grieve in public and as crowd-scene extras to the political bigshot. Just about the only formal responsibility a vice president has is to attend funerals without embarrassing his country. And this preening buffoon of pseudo-blue-collar faux-machismo couldn’t even manage that.
This goes far beyond the instinctive secretiveness to which even democratic governments are prone. The Obama administration created a wholly fictional story line, and devoted its full resources to maintaining it. I understand why Mitt Romney chose not to pursue this line of argument in the final debate. The voters who will determine this election are those who voted for Obama four years ago and this time round either switch to the other fellow or sit on their hands. In electoral terms, it’s probably prudent of Mitt not to rub their faces in their 2008 votes. Nevertheless, when the president and other prominent officials stand by as four Americans die and then abuse their sacrifice as contemptuously as this administration did, decency requires that they be voted out of office as an act of urgent political hygiene.
At the photo-op staged for the returning caskets, Obama et al. seem to have been too focused on their campaign needs to observe even the minimal courtesies. Charles Woods says that at the ceremony Joe Biden strolled over to him and by way of condolence said in a “loud and boisterous” voice, “Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?” One assumes charitably that the vice president is acknowledging in his own inept and blundering way the remarkable courage of a man called upon to die for his country on some worthless sod halfway across the planet. But the near-parodic locker-room coarseness is grotesque both in its inaptness and in its lack of basic human feeling for a bereaved family forced to grieve in public and as crowd-scene extras to the political bigshot. Just about the only formal responsibility a vice president has is to attend funerals without embarrassing his country. And this preening buffoon of pseudo-blue-collar faux-machismo couldn’t even manage that.
But a funny thing happened over the next six weeks: Obama’s own cue balls shriveled. Biden had offered up a deft campaign slogan encompassing both domestic and foreign policy: “Osama’s dead and General Motors is alive.” But, as the al-Qaeda connections to Benghazi dribbled out leak by leak, the “Osama’s dead” became a problematic boast and, left to stand alone, the General Motors line was even less credible. Avoiding the economy and foreign affairs, Obama fell back on Big Bird, and binders, and bayonets, just to name the “B”s in his bonnet. At the second presidential debate, he name-checked Planned Parenthood, the General Motors of the American abortion industry, half a dozen times, desperate to preserve his so-called gender gap.
Yet oddly enough, the more furiously Obama and Biden have waved their binders and talked up Sandra Fluke, the more his supposed lead among women has withered away. So now he needs to enthuse the young, who turned out in such numbers for him last time. Hence, the official campaign video (plagiarized from Vladimir Putin of all people) explaining that voting for Obama is like having sex. The saddest thing about that claim is that, for liberals, it may well be true.
Both videos — the one faking Obamagasm and the one faking a Benghazi pretext — exemplify the wretched shrinkage that befalls those unable to conceive of anything except in the most self-servingly political terms. Both, in different ways, exemplify why Obama and Biden are unfit for office. One video testifies to a horrible murderous lie at the heart of a head of state’s most solemn responsibility, the other to the glib shallow narcissism of a pop-culture presidency, right down to the numbing relentless peer pressure: C’mon, all the cool kids are doing it; why be the last hold-out?
If voting for Obama is like the first time you have sex, it’s very difficult to lose your virginity twice. A flailing, pitiful campaign has now adopted Queen Victoria’s supposed wedding advice to her daughter: “Lie back and think of England.” Lie back and think of America. And then get up and get dressed. Who wants to sleep with a $16 trillion broke loser twice?
Why would Obama and Biden do such a thing? Because to launch a military operation against an al-Qaeda affiliate on the anniversary of 9/11 would have exposed the hollowness of their boast through convention week and the days thereafter — that Osama was dead and al-Qaeda was finished. And so Ty Woods, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Chris Stevens were left to die, and a decision taken to blame an entirely irrelevant video and, as Secretary Clinton threatened, “have that person arrested.” And, in the weeks that followed, the government of the United States lied to its own citizens as thoroughly and energetically as any totalitarian state, complete with the midnight knock on the door from not-so-secret policemen sent to haul the designated fall-guy into custody.
This goes far beyond the instinctive secretiveness to which even democratic governments are prone. The Obama administration created a wholly fictional story line, and devoted its full resources to maintaining it. I understand why Mitt Romney chose not to pursue this line of argument in the final debate. The voters who will determine this election are those who voted for Obama four years ago and this time round either switch to the other fellow or sit on their hands. In electoral terms, it’s probably prudent of Mitt not to rub their faces in their 2008 votes. Nevertheless, when the president and other prominent officials stand by as four Americans die and then abuse their sacrifice as contemptuously as this administration did, decency requires that they be voted out of office as an act of urgent political hygiene.
At the photo-op staged for the returning caskets, Obama et al. seem to have been too focused on their campaign needs to observe even the minimal courtesies. Charles Woods says that at the ceremony Joe Biden strolled over to him and by way of condolence said in a “loud and boisterous” voice, “Did your son always have balls the size of cue balls?” One assumes charitably that the vice president is acknowledging in his own inept and blundering way the remarkable courage of a man called upon to die for his country on some worthless sod halfway across the planet. But the near-parodic locker-room coarseness is grotesque both in its inaptness and in its lack of basic human feeling for a bereaved family forced to grieve in public and as crowd-scene extras to the political bigshot. Just about the only formal responsibility a vice president has is to attend funerals without embarrassing his country. And this preening buffoon of pseudo-blue-collar faux-machismo couldn’t even manage that.
But a funny thing happened over the next six weeks: Obama’s own cue balls shriveled. Biden had offered up a deft campaign slogan encompassing both domestic and foreign policy: “Osama’s dead and General Motors is alive.” But, as the al-Qaeda connections to Benghazi dribbled out leak by leak, the “Osama’s dead” became a problematic boast and, left to stand alone, the General Motors line was even less credible. Avoiding the economy and foreign affairs, Obama fell back on Big Bird, and binders, and bayonets, just to name the “B”s in his bonnet. At the second presidential debate, he name-checked Planned Parenthood, the General Motors of the American abortion industry, half a dozen times, desperate to preserve his so-called gender gap. Yet oddly enough, the more furiously Obama and Biden have waved their binders and talked up Sandra Fluke, the more his supposed lead among women has withered away. So now he needs to enthuse the young, who turned out in such numbers for him last time. Hence, the official campaign video (plagiarized from Vladimir Putin of all people) explaining that voting for Obama is like having sex. The saddest thing about that claim is that, for liberals, it may well be true.
Both videos — the one faking Obamagasm and the one faking a Benghazi pretext — exemplify the wretched shrinkage that befalls those unable to conceive of anything except in the most self-servingly political terms. Both, in different ways, exemplify why Obama and Biden are unfit for office. One video testifies to a horrible murderous lie at the heart of a head of state’s most solemn responsibility, the other to the glib shallow narcissism of a pop-culture presidency, right down to the numbing relentless peer pressure: C’mon, all the cool kids are doing it; why be the last hold-out?
If voting for Obama is like the first time you have sex, it’s very difficult to lose your virginity twice. A flailing, pitiful campaign has now adopted Queen Victoria’s supposed wedding advice to her daughter: “Lie back and think of England.” Lie back and think of America. And then get up and get dressed. Who wants to sleep with a $16 trillion broke loser twice?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4)Subject: THE FORK IN THE ROAD
In a matter of days, voters will make one of the most important decisions in American history regarding the future path of our country. The eloquent columnist, George Will, has proclaimed this Presidential election as "the last exit ramp on the road to substantial government domination of your personal life and business." I think of it as the giant fork in the road and the American people have to decide which road to take.
By now, I'm hoping that most people have begun to suspect that Barack Obama is not your basic, traditional liberal Democrat in the mold of a Bill Clinton, or a Bill Richardson. These are quite intelligent and reasonable politicians who are capable of adapting their governing philosophy to changing circumstances. Despite some disagreements, I would never view them as a danger to our Republic.
Forget the deceptive, soaring rhetoric from 2008 that preached conciliation and transparency. Barack Obama is the most rigidly partisan President of our lifetime. Never before has such a monumental piece of legislation as Obamacare, which will profoundly affect every American, been rammed through Congress without a single supporting vote from the opposition party and with so many corrupt backroom deals that were not publicly debated.
For every dollar that the Federal Government spends on anything, 40 cents is now borrowed. Imagine what would happen to your family finances if you adopted that type of economic policy. This kind of financial insanity has resulted in four consecutive trillion dollar plus annual Obama deficits, with more trillion dollar deficits lurking ominously in the future. He has no serious budget reform plan to prevent an inevitable debt collapse as we are beginning to witness in Greece andSpain.
The Obama Administration has also imposed a new regulatory choke hold on American business which discourages job creation. At the same time they are encouraging a new culture of dependency on free government benefits that is starkly illustrated by the fact that since 2008 there has been an increase of 15,000,000 Americans on food stamps and almost 2,000,000 on Social Security Disability. I am pessimistic that the country I grew up in will be recognizable after four more years of Obama policies.
It is quite troubling, and certainly can't be an accident, that the 2012 Obama campaign haschosen as their campaign slogan the word "Forward". The slogan "Forward" has a long and rich association with European communists such as Marx and Lenin. You don't need to be a genius to figure out who they are indirectly honoring by cleverly selecting a word that is just dripping with far left political nostalgia.
It was no accident that Obama chose to hang out with political radicals and violent revolutionaries for several decades after he graduated from college. He became a perfect fit for the ruthless and demagogic style Chicago politics where smearing your opponents and distorting issues are naturally acquired traits, employed mercilessly while preaching civility.
I truly think that Obama has nothing but a rudimentary knowledge of economics, business, and foreign affairs. He has a law degree, but his undergraduate concentration focused on hard core leftist ideology. This explains why he is unable to accomplish anything significant in a bi-partisan manner.
Obama's father was a Kenyan socialist which seems to have influenced his political thinking. He also inherited his father's animosity toward the British because of their history of colonialism. Obviously, this explains his brazen insult of the Brits (our closest allies) by sending the White House bust of Winston Churchill back to London after only a few months in office. Obama also is a reflection of his father's distrust of American power and pursuit of American interests. The Obama "leading from behind" strategy is a natural consequence of this uneasiness, and in recent days has violently and deceptively unraveled in the Islamic world. The noble history of "American Exceptionalism" and liberation of oppressed peoples is an alien concept to Obama.
We now have the opportunity to take the fork in the road that leads back to personal responsibility and initiative, the solid values that gave us the most prosperous society in human history. Or, we can continue with Obama on the road to more dependency on a growing, debt sustained government as we "spread the wealth" and seek "social justice". The decision is yours.
--Eric Hogan
Tybee Island, GA
By now, I'm hoping that most people have begun to suspect that Barack Obama is not your basic, traditional liberal Democrat in the mold of a Bill Clinton, or a Bill Richardson. These are quite intelligent and reasonable politicians who are capable of adapting their governing philosophy to changing circumstances. Despite some disagreements, I would never view them as a danger to our Republic.
Forget the deceptive, soaring rhetoric from 2008 that preached conciliation and transparency. Barack Obama is the most rigidly partisan President of our lifetime. Never before has such a monumental piece of legislation as Obamacare, which will profoundly affect every American, been rammed through Congress without a single supporting vote from the opposition party and with so many corrupt backroom deals that were not publicly debated.
For every dollar that the Federal Government spends on anything, 40 cents is now borrowed. Imagine what would happen to your family finances if you adopted that type of economic policy. This kind of financial insanity has resulted in four consecutive trillion dollar plus annual Obama deficits, with more trillion dollar deficits lurking ominously in the future. He has no serious budget reform plan to prevent an inevitable debt collapse as we are beginning to witness in Greece andSpain.
The Obama Administration has also imposed a new regulatory choke hold on American business which discourages job creation. At the same time they are encouraging a new culture of dependency on free government benefits that is starkly illustrated by the fact that since 2008 there has been an increase of 15,000,000 Americans on food stamps and almost 2,000,000 on Social Security Disability. I am pessimistic that the country I grew up in will be recognizable after four more years of Obama policies.
It is quite troubling, and certainly can't be an accident, that the 2012 Obama campaign haschosen as their campaign slogan the word "Forward". The slogan "Forward" has a long and rich association with European communists such as Marx and Lenin. You don't need to be a genius to figure out who they are indirectly honoring by cleverly selecting a word that is just dripping with far left political nostalgia.
It was no accident that Obama chose to hang out with political radicals and violent revolutionaries for several decades after he graduated from college. He became a perfect fit for the ruthless and demagogic style Chicago politics where smearing your opponents and distorting issues are naturally acquired traits, employed mercilessly while preaching civility.
I truly think that Obama has nothing but a rudimentary knowledge of economics, business, and foreign affairs. He has a law degree, but his undergraduate concentration focused on hard core leftist ideology. This explains why he is unable to accomplish anything significant in a bi-partisan manner.
Obama's father was a Kenyan socialist which seems to have influenced his political thinking. He also inherited his father's animosity toward the British because of their history of colonialism. Obviously, this explains his brazen insult of the Brits (our closest allies) by sending the White House bust of Winston Churchill back to London after only a few months in office. Obama also is a reflection of his father's distrust of American power and pursuit of American interests. The Obama "leading from behind" strategy is a natural consequence of this uneasiness, and in recent days has violently and deceptively unraveled in the Islamic world. The noble history of "American Exceptionalism" and liberation of oppressed peoples is an alien concept to Obama.
We now have the opportunity to take the fork in the road that leads back to personal responsibility and initiative, the solid values that gave us the most prosperous society in human history. Or, we can continue with Obama on the road to more dependency on a growing, debt sustained government as we "spread the wealth" and seek "social justice". The decision is yours.
--Eric Hogan
Tybee Island, GA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5)BlackRock’s Fink: Fiscal Cliff, Euro Uncertainty to Push US Into Recession
A combination of rising taxes and cuts to government spending coupled with continued murkiness out of Europe could send the U.S. economy into a recession in the first quarter of next year, said Laurence Fink, CEO of asset management giant BlackRock.
At the end of this year, the Bush-era tax cuts and other tax breaks are scheduled to expire at the same time public-spending cuts kick in, a combination known as a fiscal cliff that could send the country into a recession next year if left unchecked by Congress, according to estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
Meanwhile, the world remains unclear if Spain will seek a bailout from its European neighbors, which could require austerity measures.
Requesting financial assistance would allow Spain to tap the European Central Bank’s sovereign bond-buying program, which would lower yields in Spanish government debt auctions and ease credit conditions in the country, bringing a wave of relief across Europe and elsewhere.
Such uncertainty out of Europe coupled with a lack of political will to avoid fiscal disaster in the United States could mean a recession here early in just a matter of months.
“If it’s resolved in a broad sense, in a quick manner, then the market’s going to resume its rally, and if it’s another kick the can down the road, it’s another small attempt to reducing our deficits, then I think we’re going to have a recession in the first quarter and markets are going to be quite unsettled,” Fink told CNBC.
In the meantime, U.S. business owners will continue to put off expanding and hiring until uncertainty ends, especially when it comes to the fiscal cliff, as businesses don’t know what they will be paying in taxes next year.
“CEOs today are pensive about what to do next. They’re just sitting back, they’re not hiring as much, they’re probably not spending as much and so there’s a deceleration in the economy and we all start feeling it,” Fink told the network.
“In addition, we expected to have a little more resolution in Europe. We’re waiting for Spain to ask for help and accept conditionality and that’s been probably delayed by a couple weeks. So, you’ll have a little more uncertainty than we would have liked to have seen in Europe.”
Even if policymakers in the United States and Europe do avert disaster, market downturns are possible in the meantime.
“I think there are reasons to take some profits in the short term, and we have to look now and see how these things are going to be resolved,” Fink said.
Lawmakers have generally been unwilling to address tax and spending issues in an election year but have suggested they can convene after elections or even early in 2013 and steer the country away from the fiscal cliff then.
Should they put political differences aside and strike a deal, the economy and stock markets could enjoy a much brighter 2013 when compared with recent years, other experts point out, including Deutsche Bank chief economist Peter Hooper, who pegs growth at 3 percent if disaster is avoided.
“This is an economy that has been laying the foundation for a considerably stronger performance,” Hooper told Bloomberg.
“What has the potential to drive it a good deal more rapidly is a lot of pent-up demand that’s been built up by a period of very sluggish, by historical standards, recovery from a very deep recession.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) Subject: Hamas Leader Haniyeh - Hamas rejects existence
of Israel on any piece of land
Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh underlined his nation's irrevocable stance against Israel, stressing that Palestinians will
never ignore even a single span of their land."We (Palestinians) will never overlook even one span of Palestine's soil because Palestine is an endowed land and no person, leader, organization or group is entitled to the right to ignore this land," Haniyeh said in a meeting on Saturday with the members of 'Miles of Smiles 17' aid convoy and an Indonesian delegation visiting Gaza.
"Israel has no future in the Palestinian lands and our motto is that we will never recognize the Zionist regime," he said.
Pointing to the visit of 'Miles of Smiles' aid convoy to Gaza, Haniyeh said
that visit to Gaza by any person or group supporting the Palestinian cause
and ideals gladdens Gazans and other Palestinians.
"Anyone who leaves his land to stay on the side of the Palestinian nation
during Eid al-Adha ceremonies shows that the Palestinian cause is rooted in
beliefs," the Palestinian prime minister said, and added, "The issue of
Palestine is an essential issue of the Muslim Ummah (nation) and there is an
unbreakable bond between the Muslim Ummah and this cause."
'Miles of Smiles 17'aid convoy arrived in Gaza on Wednesday carrying 23 cars
modified for handicapped people.
Over 80 solidarity activists are traveling with the convoy from Jordan, Indonesia, Turkey, Algeria, Qatar, Egypt, Kuwait, Holland, and the UK.
In early October, Egyptian authorities coordinated the entry of around 51
modified cars and dozens of activists to Gaza through the Rafah crossing.
The siege of Gaza started in June 2007 when Israel imposed a blockade on the Gaza Strip. This was supported by the governments of Egypt and the US.
The blockade consists of a land blockade along Gaza's borders with Egypt and
Israel and a sea blockade. It immediately followed the 2006-2007 economic
sanctions against the Palestinian National Authority following the election of Hamas to the Palestinian government.
Hamas officials, including its former Politburo Chief Khalid Mashaal, have on many occasions stressed that the Israeli siege of Gaza can never make the Palestinians give up their cause and resistance.
--------------------------------------------------------------
7)Allen West in Close, Down and Dirty Florida Race
By Andra Varin
A conservative firebrand, West has made national headlines for his controversial comments, but Murphy contends he is so extreme he is an embarrassment. The Democrat’s ads have highlighted comments in which West referred to Social Security as “a form of modern, 21st-century slavery,” castigated Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz as "vile" and "not a lady,” and complained that progressive women were “neutering American men.”
 |
| Allen West (AP Photo) |
"When you're spending your time calling people communists or comparing them to Nazis or Marxists, that's no way to get things done," the Democrat said during a debate last week.
"I got into this race in large part because I'm tired of the extremism of the tea party," added Murphy, a former Republican.
West shot back in typical fashion. "I thought we lived in America, where we have freedom of speech and freedom of expression," he said. "I'm not going to be afraid of people just because they get upset at some of the things that are said."
West makes it clear that he believes he is fighting for the future of the country. He told one interviewer, "It’s about two different ideologies going forward. It’s the opportunity society against the dependency society. It’s the constitutional republic against a socialist egalitarian nanny state. Is it going to be are we empowering the entrepreneurial sense of the American people or are we going to be enslaved to a federal government?"
The television ads and rhetoric have become so nasty that the South Florida Sun Sentinel said voters in the district "might need a toxic clean-up of the same order" as Murphy's family firm provided in the Gulf after last year's BP oil blowout.
The paper called the race, "one of the nastiest, costliest and most crucial Congressional battles in the country."
 |
| Patrick Murphy (AP Photo) |
But not all the attacks have come from the Democrat’s supporters. A West add points out that Murphy was arrested following a bar brawl – although the incident happened when Murphy was just 19.
A lot of money is being poured into this campaign. West has raised $15 million this election season, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, compared to $3.3 million for Murphy. But both sides have gotten a lot of support from outside groups, which have spent millions of dollars on the contest.
One ad that many found offensive was produced by the American Sunrise, a pro-Democrat super PAC. It depicted the African-American Republican punching an elderly white woman, then laughing as he steals money from a black family.
Some polls have shown West with as much as a nine-point lead, while others have found Murphy closing in on the incumbent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment