“WE NOTICED”

admin on December 23rd, 2009

This was written by Sherry Hackett, Buddy Hackett’s widow……..

 

“WE NOTICED”

President Obama:

Today I read of your administration ‘ s plan to re-define September 11 th as a National Service Day.

Sir, it’s time we had a talk………

During your campaign, Americans watched as you made mockery of our tradition of standing and crossing your heart when the Pledge of Allegiance was spoken.   You, out of four people on the stage, were the only one not honoring our tradition.

YES, “We noticed.”

During one of your many speeches, Americans heard you say you intended to visit all 57 states.

We all know that Islam, not America , has 57 states.

YES, “We noticed.”

When President Bush leaned over at Ground Zero and gently placed a flower on the memorial, while you nonchalantly tossed your flower onto the pile without leaning over.

YES, “We noticed.”

Every time you apologized to other countries for America ’s position on an issue we have wondered why you don’t share our pride in this great country.   When you have heard foreign leaders berate our country and our beliefs, you have not defended us .   In fact, you insulted the British Crown beyond belief.

YES, “We noticed.”

When your pastor of 20 years, “God-damned America , ” and said that 9/11 was ” America ’s chickens coming home to roost , “ and you denied having heard recriminations of that nature, we wondered how that could be.   You later disassociated yourself  from that church and Pastor Wright because it was politically expedient to do so.  (Since the inauguration, Jeremiah Wright has been your guest at the White House at least six times.)

YES, “We noticed.”

When you announced that you would transform America , we wondered why.  With all her faults, America is the greatest country on earth.   Sir, KEEP THIS IN MIND, “if not for America and the people who built her, you wouldn’t be sitting in the White House now.”   Prior to your election to the highest office in this Country, you were a senator from Illinois and from what we can glean from the records available, not a very remarkable one.

YES, “We noticed.”

All through your campaign and even now, you have surrounded yourself with individuals who are basically unqualified for the positions for which you appointed them.   Worse than that, the majority of them are people who, like you, bear no special allegiance, respect, or affection for this country and her traditions

YES, “We noticed.”

You are 9 months into your term and every morning millions of Americans wake up to a new horror heaped on us by you.  You seek to saddle working Americans with a health care / insurance ”reform” package that, along with cap and trade, will bankrupt this nation.

YES, “We noticed.”

We seek, by protesting, to let our representatives know that we are not in favor of these crippling expenditures and we are labeled “un-American”, “racist”, “mob . ”   We wonder how we are supposed to let you know how frustrated we are.   You have attempted to make our protests seem isolated and insignificant.   Until your inauguration, Americans always had the right to speak out.

YES, “We noticed.”

On September 11, 2001 there were no Republicans or Democrats, only Americans.   And we all grieved together and helped each other in whatever way we could.   The attack on 9/11 was carried out because we are Americans.

And YES, “We noticed.”

There were many of us who prayed that as a black president you could help unite this nation.  In six months you have done more to destroy this nation than the attack on 9/11.   You have failed us.

YES, “We noticed.”

September 11 th is a day of remembrance for all Americans.   You propose to make 9/11 a “National Service Day . ”  While we know that you don’t share our reverence for 9/11, we pray that history will report your proposal as what it is … a disgrace.

YES, “We noticed.”

You have made a mockery of our Constitution and the office that you hold.   You have embarrassed and slighted us in foreign visits and policy.

YES, “We noticed.”

We have noticed all these things.   We will deal with you.   When Americans come together again, it will be to remove you from office.

Take notice.

Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed

Senior Health Care Solution

admin on December 18th, 2009

So you’re a senior citizen and the OBAMA government health plan says there will be no health care for you,

What do you do?

Our plan gives anyone 65 years or older a gun and 4 bullets.

Your are allowed to shoot 2 senators and 2 representatives.

Of Course, this means you will be sent to prison

where you will get 3 meals a day,

a roof over your head,

and all the health care you need!

New teeth, no problem.

Need glasses, great.

New hip, knees, kidney, lungs, heart?

All covered.

And who will be paying for all of this?  The same government that just told
you that you are too old for health care.  Plus, because you are a
prisoner, you don’t have to pay any income taxes anymore.

IS THIS A GREAT COUNTRY OR WHAT?!

Kanye West interrupts Taylor Swift’s speech.
kayne

Kanye West stirred quite a controversy when he interrupted Taylor Swift at the MTV Video Music Awards.



twit quote

Now, an ABC spokesperson explains to POLITICO what happened:

“In the process of reporting on remarks by President Obama that were made during a CNBC interview, ABC News employees prematurely tweeted a portion of those remarks that turned out to be from an off-the-record portion of the interview. This was done before our editorial process had been completed. That was wrong. We apologize to the White House and CNBC and are taking steps to ensure that it will not happen again.”

The White House had no immediate comment.

— Josh Gerstein contributed to this report

Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.

They’re not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.

The new version would allow the president to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” relating to “non-governmental” computer networks and do what’s necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for “cybersecurity professionals,” and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.

“I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness,” said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. “It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill.”

Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller’s aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.

A spokesman for Rockefeller also declined to comment on the record Thursday, saying that many people were unavailable because of the summer recess. A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president’s power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001. The source said that one primary concern was the electrical grid, and what would happen if it were attacked from a broadband connection.

When Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the original bill in April, they claimed it was vital to protect national cybersecurity. “We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs–from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records,” Rockefeller said.

The Rockefeller proposal plays out against a broader concern in Washington, D.C., about the government’s role in cybersecurity. In May, President Obama acknowledged that the government is “not as prepared” as it should be to respond to disruptions and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff. Three months later, that post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and some wags have begun to wonder why a government that receives failing marks on cybersecurity should be trusted to instruct the private sector what to do.

Rockefeller’s revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a “cybersecurity workforce plan” from every federal agency, a “dashboard” pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a “comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy” in six months–even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete.

The privacy implications of sweeping changes implemented before the legal review is finished worry Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. “As soon as you’re saying that the federal government is going to be exercising this kind of power over private networks, it’s going to be a really big issue,” he says.

Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to “direct the national response to the cyber threat” if necessary for “the national defense and security.” The White House is supposed to engage in “periodic mapping” of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies “shall share” requested information with the federal government. (“Cyber” is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks.)

“The language has changed but it doesn’t contain any real additional limits,” EFF’s Tien says. “It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)…The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There’s no provision for any administrative process or review. That’s where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it.”

Translation: If your company is deemed “critical,” a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.

The Internet Security Alliance’s Clinton adds that his group is “supportive of increased federal involvement to enhance cyber security, but we believe that the wrong approach, as embodied in this bill as introduced, will be counterproductive both from an national economic and national secuity perspective.”

Update at 3:14 p.m. PDT: I just talked to Jena Longo, deputy communications director for the Senate Commerce committee, on the phone. She sent me e-mail with this statement:

The president of the United States has always had the constitutional authority, and duty, to protect the American people and direct the national response to any emergency that threatens the security and safety of the United States. The Rockefeller-Snowe Cybersecurity bill makes it clear that the president’s authority includes securing our national cyber infrastructure from attack. The section of the bill that addresses this issue, applies specifically to the national response to a severe attack or natural disaster. This particular legislative language is based on longstanding statutory authorities for wartime use of communications networks. To be very clear, the Rockefeller-Snowe bill will not empower a “government shutdown or takeover of the Internet” and any suggestion otherwise is misleading and false. The purpose of this language is to clarify how the president directs the public-private response to a crisis, secure our economy and safeguard our financial networks, protect the American people, their privacy and civil liberties, and coordinate the government’s response.

Unfortunately, I’m still waiting for an on-the-record answer to these four questions that I asked her colleague on Wednesday. I’ll let you know if and when I get a response.

Written by: Declan McCullagh is a contributor to CNET News and a correspondent for CBSNews.com who has covered the intersection of politics and technology for over a decade. Declan writes a regular feature called Taking Liberties, focused on individual and economic rights

So the president ordered the termination of the inspector general who provides oversight for AmeriCorps, and he apparently did it in a hasty manner and without providing any sort of reason. Even stranger yet is that in doing so quickly and without stated cause, Obama runs afoul of the Inspectors General Reform Act, a bill introduced last year which requires the president to provide 30 days prior notice and stated reason before firing an inspector general, needed protection for an official charged with independently investigating corruption, waste and fraud.

Obama himself, then the junior senator from Illinois, co-sponsored the legislation.

According to a report from Fox News, the inspector general in question was likely looking into a controversy surrounding AmeriCorps and Sacramento, CA mayor Kevin Johnson, a former NBA All-Star turned politician. Johnson had apparently arranged for AmeriCorps volunteers to run personal errands, wash his car, and more — all essentially on the federal dime.

I don’t know nearly enough about the underlying facts, but from where I’m sitting this looks like one of two possible scenarios: Either Barack Obama has ignored the legislation he co-sponsored in order to assist a troubled African-American mayor with a decent jump shot, or he used the controversy surrounding this inspector general and Kevin Johnson to remove the George W. Bush-appointed oversight official and replace a possibly adverse watchdog with one of his own.

Either way, it’s more than shady. The way I look at it, the only possible way that the Obama administration can come out of this smelling like roses is if the inspector general in question, Gerald Walpin, was somehow involved in something about which we have not yet learned.

On its face, this situation looks like an inspector general was fired for simply doing his job. Or, he was rightly terminated for being involved in something he shouldn’t. With this administration’s propensity for looking to grab power where it can, combined with its plans for AmeriCorps and the talked-about “civil defense force,” I cannot help but raise an eyebrow and wait for the other shoe to drop.

PSALM 2008-2012: FIRST BOOK OF DEMOCRAT

admin on June 6th, 2009

OBAMA IS MY SHEPHERD,

I SHALL NOT WANT.

HE LEADETH ME BESIDE STILL FACTORIES.

HE RESTORETH MY FAITH IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

HE GUIDETH ME IN THE PATH OF UNEMPLOYMENT.

YEA, THOUGH I WALK THROUGH THE VALLEY OF THE  BREAD LINE, I SHALL NOT GO HUNGRY.

OBAMA HAS ANOINTED MY INCOME WITH TAXES, MY EXPENSES RUNNETH OVER MY INCOME, SURELY, POVERTY AND HARD LIVING WILL FOLLOW ME ALL THE DAYS OF MY LIFE.

THE DEMOCRATS AND I WILL LIVE FOREVER

IN A  RENTED HOME.

BUT  I AM GLAD I AM AN AMERICAN,

I AM GLAD THAT I AM FREE.

BUT I WISH I WAS A DOG

AND OBAMA WAS A TREE.

Who is Barack Hussein Obama?

1. Occidental College records — Not released
2. Columbia College records — Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper — “Not available”
4. Harvard College records — Not released
5. Selective Service Registration — Not released
6. Medical records — Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule — Not available
8. Your Illinois State Senate records — Not available
9. Law practice client list — Not released
10. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate — Not released
11. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth — Not released
12. Record of your baptism — Not available

Oh and one more thing, I can’t seem to find any articles you published as editor of the Harvard Law Review, or as a Professor at the University of Chicago.

Can you explain that to me, Sir?

Sure Mr. Obama, let’s sit down and talk!

admin on April 21st, 2009

Thankfully, U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon condemned Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his tirade against Israel. Ban says the Iranian leader used his speech “to accuse, divide and even incite,” directly opposing the aim of the conference on racism.

I sure do wish Ahmadinejad would be condemned in the involvement of seizing the U.S. embassy in Tehran back in 1979.

Lessons from 1934

admin on April 12th, 2009
PLAN OF ACTION FOR U.S.
SPEND! SPEND! SPEND!
UNDER THE GUISE OF RECOVERY
BUST THE GOVERNMENT
BLAME THE CAPITALISTS FOR THE FAILURE
JUNK THE CONSTITUTION AND DECLARE A DICTATORSHIP

And that’s what the power-drunk “young pinkies from Harvard and Columbia” are doing in this political cartoon, originally published in the Chicago Tribune on April 21, 1934. (Click on the image to enlarge it.)

Ten months before that, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed legislation which would artificially inflate prices and wages. It was fear of decreasing prices and wages, blame for which was placed squarely on the shoulders of capitalism and the free market, which facilitated Roosevelt’s New Deal policies which, according to UCLA Econonics Department Vice Chair Lee Ohanian, “short-circuited the market’s self-correcting forces.”

In other words, said Ohanian and University of Pennsylvania economist Harold Cole, Roosevelt’s leadership at a time of economic crisis actually may have extended the Great Depression by seven years, an assessment which has since been clouded by the left’s revisionist history.

“Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump,” said Ohanian back in August 2004. “We found that a relapse isn’t likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies.”

The legislation signed by FDR in June of 1933, just ten months before the Chicago Tribune cartoon was run, was called the National Industrial Recovery Act. Fast-forward to 2009 and we have the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — essentially the same name, save for the word “industrial,” likely missing because it brings up the blood pressure of the global socialists masquerading as environmentalists on the left. Since Obama’s own ill-conceived stimulus policy was signed into law, we’ve seen the young pinkos in today’s federal government almost use the “Plan of Action for U.S.” in that Chicago Tribune cartoon as a checklist.


Spend! Spend! Spend! Despite decrying the $1.2 trillion deficit inherited from the similarly free market-averse Bush administration, President Obama and his Democrats spent at a rate of approximately $1 billion per hour for every hour of his first 50 days in office. At first, it was $787 for a so-called stimulus package. Then, it was $410 billion for an appropriations bill. Somewhere after that, I lost count; last I checked, we’re hovering at about $2.5 trillion, and that’s not even including the budget.

Bust the Government! It’s a record budget this year, right in there at about $3.65 trillion, accounting for a yearly $1.75 trillion budget deficit. Some are estimating that Barack Obama will add to the national debt more than has been added by every president from George Washington to George W. Bush . . . combined.

Blame the Capitalists for the Failure! My goodness, where to even begin? We’ve seen protesters load into chartered buses so as to protest in front of houses owned by AIG executives, and heard about how those same executives and their families have received death threats. We watched as the Obama administration instituted salary caps for executives whose companies accept federal bailout funds, and shook our heads as Barney Frank lobbied to extend those salary caps to all employees of such companies. And the list goes on and on.

Junk the Constitution and Declare a Dictatorship! Well, the dictatorship has not necessarily been declared yet, but we’ve certainly turned a blind eye to our Constitution. Among other examples of blatant disregard: Congress violated Article 1, Section 9 by passing ex post facto legislation which would apply a 90 percent punitive tax on executive bonuses such as those previously provided for specifically by Congress to AIG executives. And, of course, there’s Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner lobbying for unprecedented power and control over private organizations, allowing the federal government to buy and sell assets, a clear violation of the Takings Clause. At this point, hang up your fake parchment reproduction of our Constitution, close your eyes, and throw a dart — you’re likely to hit a clause or provision which has been, or will be, brushed aside by our president and his administration.

History, we’re seeing, is repeating itself.

“The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes,” Cole, the Penn economist, said in 2004. “Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened.”

Today’s Capitol Hill is the very definition of government intervention, which oddly enough even Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin warned us about at the World Economic Forum in January.

“Excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state’s omnipotence is another possible mistake,” Putin said. “True, the state’s increased role in times of crisis is a natural reaction to market setbacks. Instead of streamlining market mechanisms, some are tempted to expand state economic intervention to the greatest possible extent.”

Greatest possible extent? A fortnight ago, the president of the United States essentially constructively terminated a private sector CEO, General Motors’ Rick Wagoner. I’d say our government is intervening a little bit.

Unfortunately, this administration and the Democrats currently holding power in our nation’s capital are ensuring that each and every American man, woman and child bear the consequences and burdens of leadership unable to learn the lessons from history which should have been learned long ago. This Chicago Tribune cartoon, in plain black-and-white, should make that fact painfully obvious. Spread the word.

Obama’s Doo-Doo Economics

admin on March 25th, 2009

By Rick Saunders
America’s Right

The time has come to tell it like it is.

That which the Axis Powers in World War II, the Soviet Union in the Cold War, Islamist jihadists since the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut and al-Qaeda terrorists since September 11, 2001 have been so far unable to accomplish–the destruction of the United States of America–is now well under way in the fewer than 100 days that have passed since January 20, 2009.

On that day, with the inauguration of President Barack Obama to the highest office in the land, 69,456,897 Americans who voted to install this specimen became accessories to the triggering of events that have now led to the real potential for the outright bankruptcy and failure of the nation as we have known it, ushering in a country which will be unrecognizable as the United States of America. In its place, the Balkanized Tribes of Obamaland will emerge under a regime with characteristics that would do Mao Zedong and Joseph Stalin proud.

Harsh words? Read on.

Make no mistake — the economic policies and radical, collectivist agendas being rammed down America’s throat by Obama and his cadre of apparatchiks–all dedicated to the destruction of capitalism here as well as where it still survives worldwide–are taking a horrific toll upon all within the expanding fireball. Even others are beginning to take note.

Forget, for the moment, the stunning incompetence of his appointees, his embarrassing personal gaffes and serial social faux pas tendencies, his narcissistic/messianic complex and the hilarious fact that “TOTUS,” his beloved teleprompter, doesn’t get better billing and credit despite upstaging him. Focus instead on what the Congressional Budget Office–the agency charged with providing to Congress objective, nonpartisan, and timely analysis to aid in economic and budgetary decisions on the wide array of programs covered by the federal budget–now predicts will happen if his budget proposals are adopted.

Under President Obama’s recipe for disaster (concocted presumably with the assistance of Secretary of the Treasury Timothy “Turbo Tax” Geithner), deficits will rise over the next ten years to a truly cosmic 9.3 trillion dollars. That’s $9,300,000,000,000.00, or approximately $4.9 trillion more than the projected deficits if there were no changes in current laws and policies, that which the CBO refers to as its “baseline assumption.” That’s a “missed it by that much” of over 50 percent. And all of this doesn’t even touch on that other bogeyman no one yet dares to discuss — inflation, which is the deficit’s kissing cousin living just down the road.

Obama’s budget director, Peter Orszag, conceded in a news briefing last Friday that annual deficits of 4 to 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), as estimated in the CBO report, are “ultimately not sustainable.” The phrase “ultimately not sustainable,” apart from being woefully understated, is administration Orwellian doublespeak for “we will all be in deep doo-doo if we adopt this approach.” But adopt it they seem intent upon doing.

George H.W. Bush derided Ronald Reagan’s budgetary policies as “voodoo economics,” yet the country prospered. On the other hand, Obama’s Doo-Doo Economics will ensure that the country will not only fail to prosper, it will eventually morph into a Western Hemisphere Zimbabwe where, last month, you could pick up a pair of men’s slacks for a mere 2,765,000,000.00 Zim dollars . . . and the price is higher today. Now THAT, Virginia, is inflation.

(Don’t let Rick’s tone here fool you. The Cato Institute report he cites is absolutely mind-blowing. A quote: “As of 14 November 2008, Zimbabwe’s annual inflation rate was 89.7 Sextillion percent.” Now, I’m no mathematician, but a “sextillion,” with regard to inflation at least, is likely not as fun as it sounds. — Jeff)

Under the Obama/Geithner cyanide capsule, were it to be enacted into law, the CBO report estimates that the annual deficit for 2009 would run at 13 percent of GDP; for 2010 it would drop to “only” 10 percent of GDP; and for 2011 through 2019–assuming that nothing more “bad” happens to us and that all the capitalists and their capital stay put (wink, wink) in the worker’s paradise germinating on Obama’s drawing board–the annual deficits would level off at between four and six percent of GDP.

Between four and six percent of GDP . . . eventually leveling off? That’s the very same percentage billed as “not sustainable” by Messiah Central’s budget emissary, St. Peter of Orszag. Look for an administration Orwellian Memory Hole intervention in the near future. Like Jim Cramer, Orszag apparently did not get The Memo.

Typifying the feckless responses of the Obama administration to virtually every other problem that has cropped up since January 20, Orszag sought to find a pony in the pile, claiming that administration officials “remain confident” in what he called “the four key principles” of The Chosen One’s budget outline: health care reform, improvements in education, energy efficiency, and reducing the annual deficit in half by the end of the president’s first term. Right. In the middle of the worst recession the country has seen since 1929, let’s make matters exponentially worse by trying to borrow our way out of debt and by printing of a bunch of new Federal Reserve notes.

Long story short — no matter how you look at it or try to put a favorable spin on it, the CBO report confirms that the Obama/Geithner kamikaze mission will ultimately not only destroy the nation’s economy–as has Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe succeeded in doing to the former Rhodesia–but it will do so without the promise of 72 virgins at the end of the attack.

So why, pray tell, are we continuing to listen to this gang of pied pipers and economic ingénues? If the Supreme Court won’t intervene here, then the only remaining check on this “exercise” of power–other, more earthy and graphic terms also come to mind–is a Congress that needs to open its collective eyes, on both sides of the aisle, and acknowledge that the time has indeed arrived to come to the aid of the country. Today, more than ever, we need far more statesmen, and far fewer politicians. And time is running out.

—————
Rick Saunders is a freelance writer who splits his time between endeavors in southern California and the American southwest. He began writing for America’s Right in December 2008.