Newsbusters has a discussion of Time magazine's reference of obama as having "self-made intellectuality."

The article compared Sarah Palin's "lack of knowledge" against the overflowing genius of the obamessiah.

Sarah Palin aside, Time was not joking when it claimed  obama's "self-made intellectuality"

Face it... obama is just a street hustler (i.e, cleaned up, as a 'community organizer') who was hurriedly elected president by people who now have a lot of buyer's remorse.

The "intellectuality" of obama consists, among other things, of...

Not knowing the proper pronunciation of "corps" as in the "Marine Corps", or as in the term for the "medic". Dan Quayle was pilloried by the LWP for much less (tomato - tomatoe; or was it potato?)

Slipping up and believing that the USA consists of 57 states instead of the correct 50. That was no accident since pro-islamic obama apparently thinks a lot more of the 57 member states of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference) than he does of the United States of America.

Thinking that war criminals should be treated as US citizens and put on trial in the US legal system- rather than doing what all presidents before him have done; namely, use the military tribunals for war criminals.

Do I really need to go on (e.g., the healthcare fiasco ) ?  No... you get the idea.

Yes... obama is a lightweight. He has only a fraction of the proven leadership ability of Sarah Palin. Palin has at least governed a state (AK) which is responsible for a huge contribution of the energy needs to the nation as a whole. Obama?  Well, he was just a street organizer-rabble rauser.

That is why we do not take seriously the caricatures and parodies and distortions of Sarah Palin. Democrats are afraid of her since she is well liked by the masses, and has that Conservative message so abhorrent to the libero-socialists who infest this nation.




 

Well it had to happen, I guess. The Jamaican bobsled team has failed to qualify for the upcoming winter Olympics.

Darn... we were all starting to get used to the screams of horror from that team as their bobsled hurled itself down the track, apparently approaching the speed of light while fully out of control.

Oh well... better luck next time.

By the way... the pakistani, iraqi, and afghani Olympic Hockey teams have packed up & left before the qualifying round was over- apparently when they found out that explosives were not going to be allowed as part of the game.

That title apeared today in a story over at NewsMax.com.

While 5 American soldiers died in that ambush (and three Afghani's), there were 150 terrorists killed in their own ambush.

The high command in the US, is blaming the lower level command of US troops for this ambush, because the soldiers were apparently supposed to be given the order to pack up and leave that area- well before the attack.

The US high command however, shouldn't be so quick to pounce on the lower level US leaders. They should first check with the foreign commanders in the chain who were between the high command and the US lower level command. Often, it seems that in NATO exercises, things don't get done because of  language communications problems as orders are passed down the circuitous chain... kind of like the building of the Tower of Babel. Also, the foreign commanders are much less trained... and have much less information with which to work... and are often jealous of the leadership relationship among US military leaders.

If an admixture of leadership was involved, then the US should require that US soldiers be given orders only from US personnel.

I sometimes listen in on liberal talk radio, to see how they are currently twisting and otherwise contorting truth.

Today, on one such show, I came across a caller who is opposed to obama's new policy on gays in the military (obama's plan to abrogate 'Don't Ask, Don't tell' ).

The caller expressed his belief based on the Bible, that homosexuality is a perversion, and an abomination before God. The liberal talk host indicated that he (the host) had a master's degree in religious studies. He went on, to demand that the caller identify any location in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John- wherein Jesus himself expressed any opposition to homosexuality.

The caller could not, of course, because there is no such declaration by Jesus, in the four Gospels. The libHost then indicated that since Jesus did not consider it important enough to talk about it, then it must not be important.

This libHost with his masters degree in religion is a great example of someone having been (mis)-educated... or indoctrinated in a belief system that runs contrary to the Word of God. What a waste of time and energy.

The libHost does not understand that Jesus' purpose here, was to die for the sins of man. Jesus left the details of life on earth... esp. the Church, to his Apostles as they spread out after the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. It is in those details in the rest of the New Testament where the Apostles declare Jesus' view that homosexuality is abominable.

Where did the Apostles get their information that God hates the sinful practices of gays? The Apostles  explicitly got it from Jesus Christ himself. Here's how the Apostle Paul put it :

Galatians 1:11-12 
" I want you to know brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ. "

Definitely, then, the Apostles wrote the whole New Testament under the Authority of Jesus Christ. Since there are unequivocal expressions against homosexuality in the New Testament (e.g., I Cor. 6:9 and Rom 1:26-27), we do indeed have Jesus' declarations against the perversions of the gay lifestyle.

The libHost's argument is indeed a fallacious one... a distortion of God's Word.

 

The federal budget under obama will become his declared, $3.8 trillion.

Every once in a while, it helps to put that number into perspective. To simplify it here, let's say it is $4 trillion.

Thinking in terms of paper money, lets say we have a single "billion dollar bill" in our hands. Well obama wants to spend 4000 of those "billion dollar bills". Further, lets say you went to the store to get change for that single "billion dollar bill." Your change would consist of 1000 "one-million dollar bills".

Where's obama going to get that money? Interviews of US Blacks on the street, indicate they think he'll get it from his "stash" or they simply say, "I don't know... but he's gonna pay my morgage."

Well, he thinks he's going to get the money by rescinding the GWB tax cuts "for the rich." The "rich" are those who actualy pay in excess of 90% of all tax revenue already... and whose wealth creates jobs. Those jobs are long term, of the permanent type- as opposed to government make-work jobs  which are always temporary. Rescinding the GWB tax cut will be a tax hike for the "rich." Obama thinks that will raise revenue to the treasury. In the very short term, it will do just that. But then the "rich" will become de-incentivized, and stop producing that wealth with the sweat of their brow... and the intermediate-long term result will be a reduction of revenue to the treasury because of the tax hike. This phenomenon has been proven to be valid unser several presidential administrations... among them, Kennedy, Reagan, and GW Bush.

The economy will take a nose-dive under obama's budget.

In the State of the Union speech, b. Hussein obama verbally accosted the members of the Supreme Court for their decision that corporations have been and will continue to be made up of people, and can continue to be treated as an entity, a person.

obama is apparently twisting AG eric holder's arm, telling him to reconsider the location for the trial of KSM in New York City.

News outlets, including Fox News, is touting this as a major reversal in the way terrorists are treated by the Justice Department.

But this is no reversal. It is merely a reconsideration of where they will put KSM on trial for planning the destruction of the World Trade Center and killing 3000 US citizens.

This is no reversal because obama continues to insist that KSM be treated as a common criminal, with a boatload of "rights" instead of treating him as a terrorist- and giving his a trial by military tribunal.

While it is clear that the LWP can get this all wrong, it isn't clear why the much more analytical Fox News misinterprets the relocation as a policy reversal.

This is supposed to be an Iranian shahab-3 long range missile test.



But it looks suspiciously like the two "Mythbuster" guys foolin' around with a big firecracker... you be the judge.

Tonight, obama gives his first "State of the Union" speech.

What will he say?

Well he's going to announce a spending freeze. That is, he will fix the amount of spending the government does. This however, is a phoney attempt to pacify a very  irritated electorate.

When analyzed, obama's spending freeze has less than a trivial effect on the US Budget. He spent the last 12 months increasing spending like the proverbial drunken sailor. The increase in spending over GWB's administration was about 24%... and now, obama wants us to believe he is fiscally responsible, by using the term "spending freeze" in his speech.

The supposedly non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says that obama's spending currently in place (the budget he's freezing) will give deficits of $600 Billion each year, for at least the next 10 years.

Yeah... that's real fiscal responsibility.

According to the CBO, obama's spending freeze will affect only 17% of the total budget.

The deception continues...

They say obama will talk about increasing the number of jobs. Single-handedly, obama has raised the un -employment rate to double digits ( in excess of 10%). Despite his preaching however, jobs will not increase until obama realizes he must maintain GWB's tax cuts instead of the continual threat to discontinue GWB's engine that brought prosperity to the US economy.

Socialists like obama just cannot fathom the verifiable fact that the US economy (and the US Treasury) both increase in value when the tax rates are cut... and therefore no matter what he says tonight, the rate of employment will not consequently increase.

Even though the congress has not yet given up on passing that healthcare bill, obama has apparently given up. He's instead turned to the problem of double-digit un-employment.

Actually, obama hasn't given up. He's just backed away while congressional leaders pelosi and reid do their dirty tricks to maneuver the bill through the congress... his hands will be seen as remaining 'clean.'

When asked just why the people of ultra-liberal Massachusetts elected Senator Brown instead of ms. coakley, obama's spokesmen are blaming GWB.  Yes, that's right... GWB. Their (lack of) logic is so distorted and convoluted that even they cannot clearly make sense of just why GWB is responsible- he just is.

But don't despair. obama has promised to fight for the American people. He said he'll take his 'lumps' but he'll continue to fight on, for the American people.

The question, is just whom is he fighting?

Republicans are not responsible for the defeat of the obamacare bill. Republicans do not have enough votes to stop that obamination. So.... he must be fighting against the very people he claims he is trying to help. The real problem, is that democrats are their own worst enemy.

Republicans continue to demand the Constitutional approach to healthcare. That is, let the individual states decide the extent to which they will deal with the healthcare issues within their states. The federal government can come in to ensure fairness across state lines, and to ensure consistency in tort reform. That way, if you live in a state that is going to the extreme (socialism), then you still have the right to pack up and move to a state that is more consistent with your lifestyle.

Concerning jobs... obama will continue to have double-digit un-employment as long as he creates uncertainty in the way he will tax businesses, and otherwise control them. Employers are uncertain about what is next and so they are holding back on their employment needs.

Evenso, obama will continue to fight (someone).

John McCain is up for re-election this November.

But J.D. Hayworth is going to run against McCain in a Republican Primary.

The complication, is Sarah Palin...

J.D. is well known among Conservatives. He is well-liked too, because of his conservative stand on major issues like small government, illegal immigration, and low taxes for those who pay them.

Most Conservatives however, consider McCain as  nothing more than a RINO. Conservatives are puzzled as to why Palin would even consider supporting McCain- not to mention her plan to actively support his campaign.

The only consolation is the fact that if Hayworth can beat McCain in the AZ primary, then Palin would undoubteldy support and campaign for Hayworth in the autumn.

Don't count McCain out, though. He might run as an independent. If he does, he will lose. Illegal immigration is out of control in Arizona, and McCain is quite liberal on that issue. Pragmatism will prevail among Arizona voters, and Hayworth will win on that issue, alone.

The Tea Party conservative candidate won the open MA senate seat, defeating the libero-socialist (Martha Coakley) who was supported by obama. The marxist obama needed that senate seat to push through his obamacare takeover of the US health industry.

It took a couple of days, but obama and his socialist cohorts in congress got the message from the people, that they wanted the private system kept in place. The people are not averse to reforming the system to make it leaner and cheaper. However, the people do not want the extermist liberal solution costing more than a thousand billion (trillion) dollars.

Besides that, the obamacare was un-Constitutional. According to the Consititution, matters like healthcare belongs to the attention of the individual states. That is why MA maintains its own version of "universal" helathcare... and if someone there doesn't like it, (s)he can go and live in another state.

Strange though, how the obama sycophants have just dropped the issue like a hot rock. They have now turned their attention immediately to "jobs." They have chosen to stop the bleating about a healthcare "crisis" and will now try to get jobs for the people... jobs that they lost in the wake of their economic reforms instituted this past year by obama.

The Independent Tea Partier, Scott Brown (52%) beat the libero-socialist Martha Coakley (47%) for the senate seat in liberal Massachusetts.

Whether or not the Brown victory means the defeat of obamacare remains to be seen.

Perhaps of even greater concern, is the fact that in any state of the USA, there could be as many as 47% of the people who... think that it is OK to put terrorists on trial within the homeland ... who think that muslim terrorists are not at war with the citizens of the USA... who think that terrorists should have lawyers so that they can remain silent instead of permitting interrogators to find out all possible details of future terrorist attacks... who think that obama's tripling of the national debt is a good thing... who think that government takeover of the automobile industry is good government... who think that GWB is at fault for the current recession instead of barney frank and christopher dodd- who manipulated banks, forcing the current financial problems within the nation... who... well, you get the idea.

Hopefully the Brown victory is the tip of a political iceberg floating into the nation's capital just in time for the November elections.

That was said to be a prominent sign among the people protesting Arizona Sheriff Arpaio's arresting illegal aliens (and turning them over to federal authorities for deportation).

Well, it's "WHOM" not "WHO" would Jesus deport... and therein lies the crux of the problem. People break into the US and demand their "rights" to food, clothing, shelter, education, and healthcare- for starters. These illegal aliens are the un-educated, and under-educated masses from mexico.

Jesus would deport them all.

Jesus would tell them to go, and sin no more. He would tell them to apply their energies to protesting the government of mexico for its gross mis-management of its people, and for its corruption and for its lack of concern for the education of its people.

Jesus would tell them that "forced altruism" is oxymoronic.  He would tell them that the US is already the most unselfish nation to ever exist on the face of the earth. He would tell them to stop whining about their state in life, and do something about it... to get educated... start businesses... employ people... compete with America instead of continually begging of them.

Sure, He would be angry with some in the USA who are heartless when it comes to giving- with sincerity. They are easy to find in a nation of more than 300 million people. Jesus would expect Christians to continue to give to organizations that help people in foreign lands- with the necessities of life, and with the education of their people. Such American organizations are numerous... dnd quite effective.

The Sheriff has the right idea. A law is a law- whether it is local or federal. He should continue to sweep his streets of people who have disobeyed the law instead of attempting to enter the USA legally.

The fact that obama doesn't like local enforcement of federal immigration law, is one of the greatest indicators of liberalism gone amok.

It's Brown v. Coakley.

You know that Brown has caught up with coakley, and the race is virtually even, as of this moment.
But that doesn't mean that Brown has a fair chance to win. The demoncrats will unleash acorn to do its dirt in that state... and even if Brown gets more votes than coakley, the democrats will suddenly find bags of uncounted ballots that materialize out of thin air- just as they did in the Minnesota race that seated the socialist comedian, al francken.

And then, don't discount obama making a last minute appearance to help coakley so that he can win the healthcare battle- you know, the battle over the health bill that excludes tort reform, and that precludes interstate competition among insurance companies for your business.

We'll need to ask Senate leader harry reid if, when obama comes to Massachusetts, he will "choose to use his Negro Dialect", as reid put it. 

The worst thing you can do to help the people of earthquake-stricken Haiti is to send them money.

Too many people with good intentions (e.g., Wyclef Jean, danny glover... etc.) want you to text them money from your accounts.

Perhaps the best way to actually help the Haitians, is to send money to the Red Cross. That organization has some semblance of common sense. They will purchase here, the materials that are most needed, and distribute them among Haitians under the umbrella of protection of the 82nd Airborne.

Even small groups (e.g. religious organizations) flying into that country and driving on their own, through the streets of Port au Prince, for example, will help at best only a minute number of victims... In the process though, they subject themselves and the victims to possible riots as starving people amass around them making their altruistic efforts.

The US government (whether Right or left) seems to think that giving needy nations $money$, is the best solution to the problems they face. Buit where has this gotten us? Nowhere. Nations (with the exception of Israel) do not benefit from the billion$ the US sends them. Instead, that money invariably goes into the bank accounts of the leaders of those countries/regions. The people are not helped at all by well-intended American compassion and unselfishness, when it turns out to be wasted through the proverbial "fraud and abuse".

The Red Cross has the right idea. Buy tents and blankets and food and water and materiel here, from vendors in the USA as much as possible- and then, just as important, get assistance from the US Military establishment in dispersing that aid.

The obama Misery Index for the most current month (2009 November) is 11.84.

That's an 18% increase over the obama administration's previous available month (2009 October).

That's a whopping 62% increase over GWB's index for his last month in office.

Well, I have to say that I am most miserable because I'm sitting by my mailbox, waiting for the check from obama-  to pay my mortgage... and my electric bill... and not to forget my car note.

If that check doesn't show up soon, I'll have to abscond into Mexico- and re-enter the US illegally... then maybe I can get my "free" money from obama.

harry reid, the Senate Majority Leader, has apologized to every black leader he could find, for having said of obama, that he was  " a gifted candidate who was a light-skinned African-American with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

All the usual black political whores from obama & holder to jesse jackson & al sharpton have accepted his apology, and don't find anything inherently racist in Reid's comment.

US blacks were not so willing to look the other way when Trent Lott (ex- Senate Majority Leader from Mississippi) was praising Senator Strom Thurman who was at the end of his senate career, and near the end of his life. Lott was just trying to make the old guy feel good at the celebration, when he said something about wishing that Thurman could have been president. Lott's "wish" was viciously condemned by obama and the other black political whores- and the pressure forced Lott's resignation from his leadership post.

This situation is once again, an indicator that libero-socialists cannot be taken at their word... they cannot be trusted to be politically honest, or they would have also insisted that reid also resign.

Also...

There has been too much emphasis on the phrase "Negro dialect" and too little attention to the phrase "unless he wanted to have one."

obama said that reid was praising him... but far from it. Reid was saying that obama could turn his blackness on and off, according to the color of his audience. That is not only an insult, but it is at least as racist as anything Trent Lott had said.

Why the double standard? Simple. 

The political left, including the US black monolith are much more strongly libero-socialists, before all other things. It's the same reason why US Jews support adamantly strong pro-islamic obama at the expense of damage to Israel. 

Gitmo is a propaganda tool... so says obama, to justify his closing of that facility.

According to obama, al qaeda tells its moronic students that Gitmo is a hell-hole of torture and of hatred to anything islamic. That doesn't sound like an incentive to join up with their fellow terrorists- since if caught, they could have ended up at Gitmo.

The real propaganda tool for al qaeda, is obama's decision to take captured terorists on an excursion through the US legal system. Terrorist prospects are most likely told that they are presumed innocent until the evidence proves them guilty. They are told that they get almost unlimited appeals of any adverse decision, and that some juries are sympathetic to their causes and might free them to walk the streets of the US.

And to put icing on the cake, al qaeda is surely thankful that obama will not use aggressive interrogation techniques (e.g., like waterboarding); in fact they are more than pleased to know that they can demand a lawyer, and absolutely refuse to answer any questions. Instead, they'll be given three meals a day, get free cable TV, and can worship their (false) allah as much as they want. They can get paroled or re-patriated to their homeland where they can use what they learned from hardened criminals during their stay in American prisons.

The friend of all muslims, obama, needs to re-think which is the real propaganda tool.

While obama has conceded that it would be stupid to send those yemeni detainees back to yemen, he is still intent on closing the Gitmo Holding Center.

Obama continues to feel that Gitmo is a propaganda tool for the terrorists. He feels they use Gitmo as a recruiting tool... which shows how wickedly the West treats muslim prisoners.

Well, obama really doesn't believe that hogwash. Gitmo is not an incentive for muslims to hate the USA. They hate the USA because they consider us to be the infidels... and infidels must be destroyed to further the cause of their false god, allah. Their "holy" book, the koran, is all the incentive they need.

Obama called a meeting of his leftist administrators, to figure out how that panty bomber almost killed a minimum of 300 people. Obama concluded that the failure was systemic- within the halls of his government. More specifically, he means the failure was the CIA's. There were enough "dots" to connect, but obama feels that the danger of the situation did not reveal itself to them.

One should expect no less from obama. He took the investigative teeth out of the CIA. He installed a wimpy leftist politician (Leon Panetta.... jeepers !!) as the head of the CIA. He then sent them out on  their general mission- to protect the USA. And then, he blames them (instead of himself) for this so-called systemic failure.

He was really cool as he stood there at his news conference blaming his underlings for their failures and making it appear that he is above reproach in the matter.

...and you thought Hillary was as cold as ice.