Satire by John W. Lillpop
While conservatives obsess endlessly about keeping the American people secure by maintaining a strong national defense, liberals obsess non-stop about using the tax code to take money rightfully belonging to those whom have achieved prosperity and success and transferring said assets to those who are less capable, less motivated (lazy), unlucky or just plain stupid.
Being less capable, less motivated, unlucky or just plain stupid is, by the by, an excellent definition of the word Democrat!
Use it as you wish, attribution is neither expected nor desired.
Digging deeper into the liberal mindset, one cannot help but wonder WHY? Why do liberals universally support higher taxes?
To begin with, liberals are notoriously incapable of earning income outside of cushy, meaningless positions in government bureaucracies, or private jobs involving voter fraud and other felonies.
Even though liberals lack the DNA that produces the ability to secure gainful employment, they love to spend money. Unfortunately, that always turns out to be other people's money.
There is a second, more atrocious, reason why liberals are always for higher taxes: They do not pay taxes themselves!
In yet another case of an Obama tax cheat groveling for forgiveness while vying for an important cabinet post, Health and Human Services nominee Kathleen Sebelius recently paid more than $7,000 in back taxes after finding "unintentional errors."
Unintentional errors? Just where in the hell do you come up with these sleaze ball wackos, President Obama?
Think of the ugly trail of shame: Tim Geithner, Tom Daschle, Bill Richardson, Hilda Solis, and now Sebelius.
Are all of these Democrats bald-faced liars and or incredibly stupid?
And just why does America need such people to serve in high places in these troubled times?
31.3.09
With Neighbors Like Mexico, Who Needs Enemies?
By John W. Lillpop
As we speak, Mexico is falling further and further into anarchy and civil war born of drugs, violence and chaos.
Unfortunately, rather than reforming the political and economic policies that make our southern neighbor a failed state, the dim wit socialists that govern Mexico choose to blame America for their problems.
In a stark reminder of just how foolish Mexican leaders can be, President Felipe Calderon made the following inane statements as reported, in part, at Reuters:
"Mexico will cooperate with the United States in sharing intelligence to fight drug trafficking but does not plan joint patrols with U.S. forces, President Felipe Calderon said Monday.
'We do have to work together but that does not imply the joint participation in military operations or even a joint participation of law enforcement agents," Calderon said at a press conference during a state visit to London.
The Mexican president said forces from both sides of the border should share information to try to stem the flow of illegal drugs and tackle the gangs who supply them.
The United States has stepped up security on the border with Mexico after new President Barack Obama put Mexico's drug war high on his agenda.
Crushing the drug cartels, who arm themselves with smuggled U.S. weapons and leave slain rivals in public streets, has become the biggest test of Calderon's presidency as the bloodshed rattles investors and tourists.
Calderon noted that the U.S. demand for drugs and the availability of guns there were fueling the violence.
'Violence and organized crime is not only a problem for Mexico, and it has been acknowledged by President Obama, this is a common problem,' he said.
'It has to do with the fact that our border is the border with the largest drug market in the world and with the main producer and seller of guns in the world,' he added."
The obvious question to Calderon would be: Mexico's problems have NOTHING to do with the fact that Mexico is a third-world, socialist nation, which because of corruption, greed, and incompetence, is unable to feed, educate, and provide health care to its own citizens?
Boiled down to plain English, Calderon was telling America, "Send us your money, but don't bother crossing our borders to help."
How about that? Sovereignty really does matter, but only when Mexican sovereignty is at stake.
When it comes to enforcing America's borders, immigration laws, and sovereignty, the immediate conclusion is that racism and bigotry are at work!
What will it take to convince the incompetent, corrupt, and greedy American politicians that Mexico is an enemy of America, and that immediate action must be taken to protect the American people from the undeclared war being waged against our interests by Mexico?
The single greatest priority in defending America is to secure our borders. If that means positioning 100,000 or so troops at the border, then so be it.
America must defend its borders against foreign invasion, including use of force if necessary.
Some immigration reform proposals now in congress entertain the notion of "amnesty," called guest worker in Washington.
All such proposals are unacceptable because they would simply encourage even more illegal aliens to invade America.
We must not reward criminal behavior with foolish amnesty programs!
If illegal aliens are uncomfortable about living in the shadows as second-class citizens, THAT IS NOT THE CONCERN OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!
Illegals are here illegally, and should not be made to feel good about themselves---they are criminals!
Illegal aliens have the option---make that obligation--- to go back to Mexico.
Bottom line: Secure our borders NOW, deport those here illegally NOW, and enforce all immigration laws NOW.
Do it for the children.
30.3.09
Obama Dumps General Motors CEO: What About UAW President?
By John W. Lillpop
In his Marxist zeal to squeeze the last vestige of private enterprise out of the U.S. automobile industry, President Obama has unilaterally appointed himself America's Human Resources czar, in charge of CHANGE.
In this new role, President Obama will personally decide whom is, and whom is not, qualified to run General Motors which, until fairly recently, has been one of the largest and most successful private corporations in the world.
Mind you, we are talking about a president who has been unable to recruit a small number of people to serve in his cabinet without dredging up tax cheats, play for pay con artists, and other scalawag Democrats.
Yet, he considers himself qualified to run a major corporation? Even with no management experience and no business background to his credit?
Obama's first act as fascist in charge was to force GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner out the door.
As reported, in part, at online.wsj.com:
"Time and time again, General Motors Corp. board of directors reaffirmed its support for Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner, even as the company piled up billions of dollars in losses and begged for government loans to stay alive.
But Wagoner is now a high-profile casualty of government intervention, forced out as part of the Obama administration's sweeping last-ditch effort to save the century-old auto giant.
Wagoner, 56, who spent 32 years with GM working all over the world, stepped down effective immediately, the company said in a statement early Monday. He was replaced as CEO by Fritz Henderson, the company's vice chairman and chief operating officer."
Although he was quick to wield an ax to the neck of Rick Wagoner, Obama overlooked the fact that the United Auto Workers (UAW) and union President Ron Gettelfinger are at least as responsible for the demise of General Motors, perhaps even more so.
Obama's well publicized outrage over greed and abuse has been aimed solely at those in corporate management. But what of the greed, abuse, and fraud within labor unions?
Where is presidential outrage over the fact that some autoworkers receive the equivalent of $75 per hour in salary and benefits? Why is labor's greed unimportant, especially when that greed is a key factor in destroying the competitiveness of American auto firms?
Might the answer have to do with donations made by labor to the Democrat party and labor's overwhelming support for the Obama candidacy?
If you really care about saving the automobile industry President Obama, why not fire Ron Gettelfinger?
In his Marxist zeal to squeeze the last vestige of private enterprise out of the U.S. automobile industry, President Obama has unilaterally appointed himself America's Human Resources czar, in charge of CHANGE.
In this new role, President Obama will personally decide whom is, and whom is not, qualified to run General Motors which, until fairly recently, has been one of the largest and most successful private corporations in the world.
Mind you, we are talking about a president who has been unable to recruit a small number of people to serve in his cabinet without dredging up tax cheats, play for pay con artists, and other scalawag Democrats.
Yet, he considers himself qualified to run a major corporation? Even with no management experience and no business background to his credit?
Obama's first act as fascist in charge was to force GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner out the door.
As reported, in part, at online.wsj.com:
"Time and time again, General Motors Corp. board of directors reaffirmed its support for Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner, even as the company piled up billions of dollars in losses and begged for government loans to stay alive.
But Wagoner is now a high-profile casualty of government intervention, forced out as part of the Obama administration's sweeping last-ditch effort to save the century-old auto giant.
Wagoner, 56, who spent 32 years with GM working all over the world, stepped down effective immediately, the company said in a statement early Monday. He was replaced as CEO by Fritz Henderson, the company's vice chairman and chief operating officer."
Although he was quick to wield an ax to the neck of Rick Wagoner, Obama overlooked the fact that the United Auto Workers (UAW) and union President Ron Gettelfinger are at least as responsible for the demise of General Motors, perhaps even more so.
Obama's well publicized outrage over greed and abuse has been aimed solely at those in corporate management. But what of the greed, abuse, and fraud within labor unions?
Where is presidential outrage over the fact that some autoworkers receive the equivalent of $75 per hour in salary and benefits? Why is labor's greed unimportant, especially when that greed is a key factor in destroying the competitiveness of American auto firms?
Might the answer have to do with donations made by labor to the Democrat party and labor's overwhelming support for the Obama candidacy?
If you really care about saving the automobile industry President Obama, why not fire Ron Gettelfinger?
California Should Celebrate March 31 as Dr. Michael Savage Day!
By John W. Lillpop
California is world renowned for goofy politics and politicians, leftist lunacy, and just plain craziness. That insanity obviously spills over to the manner by which priorities are established here in the Golden State.
For example, radio superstar Dr. Michael Savage hosts a nationally syndicated radio talk show from San Francisco that is carried by about 410 stations, reaches 10-14 million listeners every week, and is one of the last vestiges of hope for free speech and pro-American sentiment in the media.
Dr. Savage is truly an extraordinary citizen and man of distinction. Consider a partial list of his accomplishments:
* Holds two Masters Degrees and a Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley;
* Authored 24 books, including four New York Times Best Sellers;
* Hugely popular talk show host in the same league as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity;
* Introduced term "compassionate conservative" to properly describe conservatives who favor smaller, less intrusive government;
* Staunch defender of American sovereignty, rule of law, preservation of American borders, language, and culture.
With these credentials to his credit, one would expect California to be rightfully proud of this favorite son. Perhaps even set aside a day to commemorate the contributions made by this extremely talented man?
Say, March 31, for instance? That particular date just happens to be the birthday of Dr. Michael Savage!
Why not designate March 31 as "Michael Savage Day" throughout the length and breadth of our great state?
Close the schools, shut down the state and local bureaucracies and dedicate the entire day to celebrating the birth and life of Dr. Michael Savage?
What is that, you say? March 31 is already a state holiday in California to commemorate the birthday of the late Cesar Chavez?
Can you imagine? A brilliant author, educator, radio broadcaster, and advocate for America is all but ignored, while the entire state shuts down to remember the birthday of a grape picker and union organizer?
Only in California!
Can America Survive 19 More Months of Liberal Tyranny?
By John W. Lillpop
With nearly 70 days of hard evidence to rely on, it is clear to most thinking adults, and even to some over-achieving Democrats, that the American version of the Bolshevik Revolution, orchestrated by Barack Obama, ACORN, the DNC, and other liberal extremists, is a dreary flop in every regard.
From diminished national defense and homeland security, to foolhardy, wasteful spending, to fascist takeovers of private enterprise, to unwarranted intrusion of government into the lives and affairs of private citizens, to the forced feeding of radical socialism down the throats of the American people, the Obama Era is already one of the greatest failures in American history.
At a time when this nation desperately needs a competent and responsible leader in the White House, we have instead installed an inexperienced radical whose commitment to special interests and the global socialist agenda is given precedent over the well being of America and her citizens.
Unfortunately, the tragic lack of competent leadership in the Executive Branch has been replicated and aggravated by the conquest of both chambers of the Legislative Branch by liberal radicals, thereby leaving the United States government in the unsteady hands of a gaggle of anti-capitalist socialists lead by Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid, and supported by the likes of Barney Frank, Charles Schumer, John Murtha, Charles Rangel, Chris Dodd, and far too many others of their kind.
Still, there is hope!
The tragic misfortune that America was smitten with on November 4, 2008 may be redeemable in as few as nineteen months, when mid-term elections will be held.
Jot down November 2, 2010 as the date on which American patriots WILL take back America by booting the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid out of office and by installing a conservative Congress to halt the socialist agenda of Barack Obama.
Optimism for a quick and definitive end to the Obama Era is based on the fact that liberals actually believe that the American people have a hunger for liberal fascism. That miscalculation will cause the left to significantly overreach, thereby alienating the electorate in time for the 2010 elections.
As the early weeks of the Obama presidency are proving, the American people are not blindly supping of the Marxist Kool-aid that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are serving up.
Indeed:
Americans are not clamoring for a kinder, gentler approach to dealing with terrorists. We continue to demand that the government protect and defend our nation in order to prevent a recurrence of 9/11. We wonder why the tools that have kept America safe for seven plus years are being scrapped with such reckless abandon and, in some instances, glee.
Americans are not clamoring for extensive "talks" with Islamofascist terrorists like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. We want a government that will be open to diplomacy, without encouraging terrorists or retreating from any of the core values that make America the most powerful and prosperous Democracy on earth.
Americans are not clamoring for trillion dollar "stimulus" packages loaded with pork to fund unneeded liberal pet projects. We demand that the administration implement a responsible and fiscally sound approach to dealing with the economic meltdown, and do so without imposing huge burdens on future generations of American taxpayers.
Americans are not clamoring for an administration staffed with people of questionable ethics, competency, and integrity. We continue to demand that the president seek and appoint honest, capable, and highly ethical professionals who abide by the law.
Americans are not clamoring for governmental bailouts of private firms that cost taxpayers trillions of dollars. Welfare abuse by private citizens was reformed years ago; we do not wish to replace it with corporate welfare that rewards greed and willful disregard for sound business practices.
Americans are not clamoring for amnesty for 12-38 million illegal aliens who have invaded our nation and whom cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars each year. We continue to demand adherence to the rule of law, enforcement of existing laws, securing our borders and deportation of those here illegally.
All in all, the prospects for taking America back in 2010 are looking good. The only concern is can America survive another 19 months of liberal tyranny?
29.3.09
Hillary's "Blame America" Rant Validated by Biden's Daughter?
Satire by John W. Lillpop
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (Still sounds AWFUL, but not as ungodly as President Hillary Clinton!), took time away from her busy schedule long enough to meander south of the border to comfort leaders of the failed state of Mexico by blaming America for the violence and carnage that has all but brought this third-world nation to its knees.
As reported, in part, by Reuters (Reference 1):
"MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - An 'insatiable' appetite in the United States for illegal drugs is to blame for much of the violence ripping through Mexico, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday.
Clinton acknowledged the U.S. role in Mexico's vicious drug war as she arrived in Mexico for a two-day visit where she discussed U.S. plans to ramp up security on the border with President Felipe Calderon."
Without saying so specifically, Clinton intimated that Mexico's drug war is a direct result of eight years of mindless Republicanism dumped on the American people and Mexico by President George W. Bush.
Perish the thought that the administration of Bill Clinton, Hillary's non-inhaling spouse, would share even the slightest blame for the ugliness in Mexico.
According to Hillary, Cocaine, Heroine, and Amphetamines did not even exist until the afternoon of January 20, 2001, when W. assumed office, and all hell broke loose and immediately headed due north.
Crafty conservatives were not fooled in the least by Hillary's sneaky mea culpa for the misdeeds of George W. Bush. She was roundly criticized by right wingers for damning America while on foreign soil.
However, recent events may have proven Hillary partially correct, at least when it comes to the snorting habits of Democrat officials and their families.
As reported, in part, at Radaronline.com, Reference 2:
"An explosive video being shopped to media outlets has plunged the White House and Vice President Joe Biden into a cocaine scandal, RadarOnline.com has learned exclusively.
The video shows a woman, who is represented by the seller and his attorneys to be Biden’s daughter Ashley, snorting several lines of cocaine. The tape has been viewed by a RadarOnline.com freelance reporter who confirms the woman looks identical to Ashley Biden.
The woman on the tape clearly resembles Ashley Biden, 27, who is a social worker employed with the Delaware Department of Children, Youth and Families. She is also a board member of the Delaware YWCA organization.
On the tape a man cuts up five lines of what is said to be cocaine. The woman who the seller says is Ashley then jokes with the man that the lines aren’t big enough.
The man hands her a rolled-up dollar bill and she proceeds to walk a few steps to a table where the cocaine is cut. She pulls her hair back, bends down and snorts a line.
Four lines of white powdery substance are clearly visible on the table, which is in front of a computer.
After she snorts the first line, the woman said to be Ashley lifts her head and wipes her nose. She then snorts a second and third line before the tape cuts off.
The tape was made without her knowledge. It is being shopped for $250,000. "
Should these reports be substantiated and confirmed, the vast right wing conspiracy will be forced to admit that Hillary finally got one right.
A brief, but pointed, public declaration should be issued to clear the air.
Suggested wording: Although we condemn Hillary Clinton for blaming American citizens for Mexico's problems while she was in Mexico, given the facts surrounding Ashley Biden we believe that the truth is that liberals and their families have an 'insatiable' appetite for power, sex, and money AND illegal drugs!
Knock if off, liberals!
Ref 1
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52O5RF20090325?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true
Ref 2:
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/03/world-exclusive-vice-president-biden’s-daughter-caught-cocaine-scandal
28.3.09
California Needs to Drop Cesar Chavez Holiday
By John W. Lillpop
With each passing day, the state of California continues to decline into the abyss of financial ruin. Just one month ago, politicians in Sacramento reached agreement on a budget that will raise taxes and cut services. The new legislation faces approval by the people of California in a special election on May 19; approval is still very questionable.
The so-called "stop gap" agreement has already failed miserably and the state is once again facing a huge deficit just weeks after the "fix" was approved.
Despite all of the financial chaos in our state, next Tuesday, March 31, will be a paid state holiday to commemorate the birthday of Cesar Chavez, a famed Hispanic labor organizer and farm worker.
With state coffers filling with red ink at any alarming rate, one must ask what purpose is possibly served by shutting down California's huge bureaucracy for an entire day, at a cost of tens of millions of dollars to taxpayers?
There is no question that Chavez is an icon and role model to Hispanics. However, California can no longer afford to pander to racial minorities at the expense of all Californians.
With each passing day, the state of California continues to decline into the abyss of financial ruin. Just one month ago, politicians in Sacramento reached agreement on a budget that will raise taxes and cut services. The new legislation faces approval by the people of California in a special election on May 19; approval is still very questionable.
The so-called "stop gap" agreement has already failed miserably and the state is once again facing a huge deficit just weeks after the "fix" was approved.
Despite all of the financial chaos in our state, next Tuesday, March 31, will be a paid state holiday to commemorate the birthday of Cesar Chavez, a famed Hispanic labor organizer and farm worker.
With state coffers filling with red ink at any alarming rate, one must ask what purpose is possibly served by shutting down California's huge bureaucracy for an entire day, at a cost of tens of millions of dollars to taxpayers?
There is no question that Chavez is an icon and role model to Hispanics. However, California can no longer afford to pander to racial minorities at the expense of all Californians.
In the Dark About Energy Independence
By John W. Lillpop
Surprised that the lunatic left wants everyone to turn off their lights in order to celebrate the newly- minted "Earth Hour" on Saturday night?
It should come as no great surprise.
Think about it: Liberal foolishness, like the farcical global warming crisis, which is really a product of Al Gore's mid-life crisis and Tipper's hot flashes, simply cannot survive the light of day.
Sober thought and intelligent debate are possible only when the light of truth and wisdom is encouraged. Escaping truth means avoiding light at all costs, even if for only an hour to begin with.
After sixty plus days of the Obama Transparency non-show, the left is betting that the American people are growing accustomed to being taken advantage of in the dark. Some particularly vulnerable sheep are even starting to enjoy the experience, according to merchants of the dark side operating out of the White House.
Besides being so wrong-minded, the "Earth Hour" mania is a colossal waste of time especially in these difficult times.
Patriotic Americans who really care about the nation would be well advised to spend that hour engaged in genuinely productive efforts.
For example, citizens should form political action groups to demand that nuclear power, the cleanest and most economical source of energy known to man, be revitalized.
Rather than wasting hundreds of billions of dollars on planned parenthood and other dim wit projects fancied by Nancy Pelosi, let us use stimulus funds to activate at least 30 nuclear power stations in America over the next fifteen years.
Nuclear power can provide safe, dependable, and economic energy that would reduce America's dependent on foreign oil AND move the nation in a green-ward direction.
Instead of turning off the lights and cowering in ignorance and fear, let's turn the lights on America's greatest unused resource: Nuclear power!
Surprised that the lunatic left wants everyone to turn off their lights in order to celebrate the newly- minted "Earth Hour" on Saturday night?
It should come as no great surprise.
Think about it: Liberal foolishness, like the farcical global warming crisis, which is really a product of Al Gore's mid-life crisis and Tipper's hot flashes, simply cannot survive the light of day.
Sober thought and intelligent debate are possible only when the light of truth and wisdom is encouraged. Escaping truth means avoiding light at all costs, even if for only an hour to begin with.
After sixty plus days of the Obama Transparency non-show, the left is betting that the American people are growing accustomed to being taken advantage of in the dark. Some particularly vulnerable sheep are even starting to enjoy the experience, according to merchants of the dark side operating out of the White House.
Besides being so wrong-minded, the "Earth Hour" mania is a colossal waste of time especially in these difficult times.
Patriotic Americans who really care about the nation would be well advised to spend that hour engaged in genuinely productive efforts.
For example, citizens should form political action groups to demand that nuclear power, the cleanest and most economical source of energy known to man, be revitalized.
Rather than wasting hundreds of billions of dollars on planned parenthood and other dim wit projects fancied by Nancy Pelosi, let us use stimulus funds to activate at least 30 nuclear power stations in America over the next fifteen years.
Nuclear power can provide safe, dependable, and economic energy that would reduce America's dependent on foreign oil AND move the nation in a green-ward direction.
Instead of turning off the lights and cowering in ignorance and fear, let's turn the lights on America's greatest unused resource: Nuclear power!
26.3.09
Michelle Obama's "Victory" Garden
Satire by John W. Lillpop
Millions of American families are losing their jobs, 401(k) savings, and homes; major financial institutions are on the verge of being reduced to purveyors of Monopoly play money; the entire American auto industry is headed the way of Ford Edsel; mad men in North Korea and Iran defiantly reject global cries to abandon their diabolical schemes for dangerous missiles and nuclear programs; violence and chaos in the failed state of Mexico are spilling onto U.S. soil; real estate holdings once worth millions are now dirt cheap; reckless liberal politicians are piling trillions upon trillions of debt on the backs of taxpayers and their children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren; and the liberties and freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution are under assault as never before.
Given that dreary prognosis, why would anyone but an out-of-touch elitist decide to disrupt the beautiful landscape of the White House lawn in order to plant a "victory" garden?
What victory for heaven's sake? America's Bolshevik Revolution as of November 4, 2008?
Yet that is exactly what America's First Lady, Michelle Obama, has in mind.
As reported by Yahoo Finance, in part:
"PITTSBURG, Kan.---First Lady Michelle Obama
broke ground last week on the South Lawn in preparation for the White House's first vegetable garden since First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt's 1943 Victory Garden. Coined a 'Recession Garden' by the media, the First Family's Reggie garden is meant to teach American families about the health benefits and economic impact associated with eating locally grown fruits and vegetables.
The First Lady told O Magazine in its April issue that the garden will be used 'as a point of education, to talk about health…how delicious it is to eat fresh food, and how you can take that food and make it part of a healthy diet.'
Considered a symbolic 'groundbreaking' for the nation, the White House garden is expected to inspire millions of American families to grow by example. According to the Associated Press, a recent survey conducted by the National Gardening Association predicts a 19 percent increase in home gardening in 2009."
But what of those who have lost their homes to foreclosure and have no property on which to plant "Victory" seeds? What about apartment dwellers and those who live in the projects where the only available soil is too toxic to grow weeds, much less broccoli and cauliflower?
Just how "inspirational" will it be for these folks to see America's recession proof First Lady pose with a shovel and bag of tomato seeds in front of cameras, before retreating to the palatial trappings of the White House where she will be pampered by her $200,000 a year chef and staff of dozens?
Lady Obama's quote in O Magazine means she has been in touch with Oprah Winfrey, perhaps she even ran the idea past the TV superstar.
A word of caution, Michelle: Keep a close eye on what Oprah plants in your garden. Left on her own, Oprah is likely to turn that veggie garden into a fat haven where chocolate milkshakes and 4,000 calorie monster burgers drive out onions and green beans.
With Oprah in charge, the only victory will be in keeping one's waistline under forty five, and the number of chins down to a robust three.
One last tip: Save speeches delivered by America's Karl Marx on steroids--that would be President Obama--for shredding and spreading on that garden.
There be no more potent fertilizer, madam!
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/First-Familys-Garden-bw-14739575.html
Millions of American families are losing their jobs, 401(k) savings, and homes; major financial institutions are on the verge of being reduced to purveyors of Monopoly play money; the entire American auto industry is headed the way of Ford Edsel; mad men in North Korea and Iran defiantly reject global cries to abandon their diabolical schemes for dangerous missiles and nuclear programs; violence and chaos in the failed state of Mexico are spilling onto U.S. soil; real estate holdings once worth millions are now dirt cheap; reckless liberal politicians are piling trillions upon trillions of debt on the backs of taxpayers and their children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren; and the liberties and freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution are under assault as never before.
Given that dreary prognosis, why would anyone but an out-of-touch elitist decide to disrupt the beautiful landscape of the White House lawn in order to plant a "victory" garden?
What victory for heaven's sake? America's Bolshevik Revolution as of November 4, 2008?
Yet that is exactly what America's First Lady, Michelle Obama, has in mind.
As reported by Yahoo Finance, in part:
"PITTSBURG, Kan.---First Lady Michelle Obama
broke ground last week on the South Lawn in preparation for the White House's first vegetable garden since First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt's 1943 Victory Garden. Coined a 'Recession Garden' by the media, the First Family's Reggie garden is meant to teach American families about the health benefits and economic impact associated with eating locally grown fruits and vegetables.
The First Lady told O Magazine in its April issue that the garden will be used 'as a point of education, to talk about health…how delicious it is to eat fresh food, and how you can take that food and make it part of a healthy diet.'
Considered a symbolic 'groundbreaking' for the nation, the White House garden is expected to inspire millions of American families to grow by example. According to the Associated Press, a recent survey conducted by the National Gardening Association predicts a 19 percent increase in home gardening in 2009."
But what of those who have lost their homes to foreclosure and have no property on which to plant "Victory" seeds? What about apartment dwellers and those who live in the projects where the only available soil is too toxic to grow weeds, much less broccoli and cauliflower?
Just how "inspirational" will it be for these folks to see America's recession proof First Lady pose with a shovel and bag of tomato seeds in front of cameras, before retreating to the palatial trappings of the White House where she will be pampered by her $200,000 a year chef and staff of dozens?
Lady Obama's quote in O Magazine means she has been in touch with Oprah Winfrey, perhaps she even ran the idea past the TV superstar.
A word of caution, Michelle: Keep a close eye on what Oprah plants in your garden. Left on her own, Oprah is likely to turn that veggie garden into a fat haven where chocolate milkshakes and 4,000 calorie monster burgers drive out onions and green beans.
With Oprah in charge, the only victory will be in keeping one's waistline under forty five, and the number of chins down to a robust three.
One last tip: Save speeches delivered by America's Karl Marx on steroids--that would be President Obama--for shredding and spreading on that garden.
There be no more potent fertilizer, madam!
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/First-Familys-Garden-bw-14739575.html
25.3.09
Whither the "Bail Out" for Unemployed Ex-Felons?
By John W. Lillpop
Lovelle Mixon was an ex-con who was in violation of his parole and whom was also suspected of raping a 12-year-old girl who was dragged off the street at gun point in the Oakland neighborhood where Mixon's sister lived.
Four murders were added to Mixon's "rap sheet" on Saturday last when the 26-year-old black man shot and killed four members of the Oakland, California Police Department. The killer was (thankfully) slain by police that same dreary afternoon.
Reactions to the Mixon slaughter in some parts of the Bay Area were all too predictable.
For example, calls for new, more restrictive gun control laws were immediate.
The fact that laws already on the books forbid ex-felons like Mixon from buying weapons of any sort must have been overlooked by politicians and other public servants bent on repealing the second amendment.
Mixon's family tried to "explain" the killer's action by pointing out that he was very anxious about going back to prison, and was unhappy with his parole officer.
Being anxious about another term in prison is understandable, especially if one has, in fact, violated parole and raped a 12-year old since being released. Likewise, unhappiness over one's parole officer can cause sleepless nights, diarrhea, and a host of discomforts,
However, killing four police officers is not an acceptable response to anxiety, sleepless nights, or diarrhea, regardless of how pernicious.
From the March 25 edition of the San Francisco Chronicle, a letter writer offered, in part, this "solution":
"Until we dedicate more resources to education and decent employment for the poor, these young men will continue to turn to guns, drugs and violence. Dehumanizing them makes it easy for us to write them off."
So, society is at fault for failing to provide "education and decent employment" for the likes of Lovelle Mixon?
We, not he, are responsible for the ghastly slaughter of four on-duty police officers?
In a more literate treatment, Earl Ofari Hutchinson, author and political analyst, wrote a lengthy column (reference 1) in which he cited discrimination against ex-convicts as a major cause of murderous rampages like the one by Lovelle Mixon last Saturday.
According to Hutchinson, businesses that refuse to hire ex-felons are veritable incubators for the likes of Mixon. Hutchinson also believes that passage of the "Second Chance Act" by Congress could solve many of the problems faced by ex-felons.
Which begs the obvious question: Whither the bailout for ex-felons?
With dedicated Marxists running the federal government, why is there no urgent drive to plop down a trillion dollars (two trillion would be even better!) of taxpayer treasury to bail out ex-felons?
To avoid the stigma of looking soft on crime, why not use a euphemism to describe this bail out?
How about "reparations"?
Reference 1
http://www.insidesocal.com/friendlyfire/2009/03/oakland-police-massacre-casts.html
Lovelle Mixon was an ex-con who was in violation of his parole and whom was also suspected of raping a 12-year-old girl who was dragged off the street at gun point in the Oakland neighborhood where Mixon's sister lived.
Four murders were added to Mixon's "rap sheet" on Saturday last when the 26-year-old black man shot and killed four members of the Oakland, California Police Department. The killer was (thankfully) slain by police that same dreary afternoon.
Reactions to the Mixon slaughter in some parts of the Bay Area were all too predictable.
For example, calls for new, more restrictive gun control laws were immediate.
The fact that laws already on the books forbid ex-felons like Mixon from buying weapons of any sort must have been overlooked by politicians and other public servants bent on repealing the second amendment.
Mixon's family tried to "explain" the killer's action by pointing out that he was very anxious about going back to prison, and was unhappy with his parole officer.
Being anxious about another term in prison is understandable, especially if one has, in fact, violated parole and raped a 12-year old since being released. Likewise, unhappiness over one's parole officer can cause sleepless nights, diarrhea, and a host of discomforts,
However, killing four police officers is not an acceptable response to anxiety, sleepless nights, or diarrhea, regardless of how pernicious.
From the March 25 edition of the San Francisco Chronicle, a letter writer offered, in part, this "solution":
"Until we dedicate more resources to education and decent employment for the poor, these young men will continue to turn to guns, drugs and violence. Dehumanizing them makes it easy for us to write them off."
So, society is at fault for failing to provide "education and decent employment" for the likes of Lovelle Mixon?
We, not he, are responsible for the ghastly slaughter of four on-duty police officers?
In a more literate treatment, Earl Ofari Hutchinson, author and political analyst, wrote a lengthy column (reference 1) in which he cited discrimination against ex-convicts as a major cause of murderous rampages like the one by Lovelle Mixon last Saturday.
According to Hutchinson, businesses that refuse to hire ex-felons are veritable incubators for the likes of Mixon. Hutchinson also believes that passage of the "Second Chance Act" by Congress could solve many of the problems faced by ex-felons.
Which begs the obvious question: Whither the bailout for ex-felons?
With dedicated Marxists running the federal government, why is there no urgent drive to plop down a trillion dollars (two trillion would be even better!) of taxpayer treasury to bail out ex-felons?
To avoid the stigma of looking soft on crime, why not use a euphemism to describe this bail out?
How about "reparations"?
Reference 1
http://www.insidesocal.com/friendlyfire/2009/03/oakland-police-massacre-casts.html
23.3.09
Sanctuary Cities: Safe Havens for Carriers of Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis!
John W. Lillpop
According to the Associated Press, migrants from nations like Mexico, India, and China often bring with them drug-resistant strains of tuberculosis.
As reported, in part, in an AP report by Juliana Barbassa:
"Even as tuberculosis rates decline in the United States, drug-resistant strains of the disease (are) showing up in states with large immigrant populations and are becoming increasingly hard to treat.
Immigrant communities in states such as California are particularly vulnerable because many people are foreign born or travel frequently to countries where TB is a greater risk, such as Mexico, India and China."
Although not mentioned in the AP story, the fact is that those who enter America illegally aggravate the problem even further by deliberately avoiding medical screening procedures designed to protect U.S. citizens from diseases that have been all but eradicated here.
In addition, the idiotic policy of shielding those at high-risk of being TB carriers (illegal aliens from Mexico), imposes dangerous health risks on American citizens.
Rather than encouraging illegal aliens by telling them that enforcing legitimate immigration law is "un-American," Nancy Pelosi and others of her ilk should be calling for tighter border security, identification of illegal aliens in our midst, and deportation of such people immediately.
Why would any reasonably competent politician refuse to live up to his or her sworn oath to uphold the Constitution when it comes to enforcing the law, especially when to do so could expose American citizens to drug resistant diseases?
According to the Associated Press, migrants from nations like Mexico, India, and China often bring with them drug-resistant strains of tuberculosis.
As reported, in part, in an AP report by Juliana Barbassa:
"Even as tuberculosis rates decline in the United States, drug-resistant strains of the disease (are) showing up in states with large immigrant populations and are becoming increasingly hard to treat.
Immigrant communities in states such as California are particularly vulnerable because many people are foreign born or travel frequently to countries where TB is a greater risk, such as Mexico, India and China."
Although not mentioned in the AP story, the fact is that those who enter America illegally aggravate the problem even further by deliberately avoiding medical screening procedures designed to protect U.S. citizens from diseases that have been all but eradicated here.
In addition, the idiotic policy of shielding those at high-risk of being TB carriers (illegal aliens from Mexico), imposes dangerous health risks on American citizens.
Rather than encouraging illegal aliens by telling them that enforcing legitimate immigration law is "un-American," Nancy Pelosi and others of her ilk should be calling for tighter border security, identification of illegal aliens in our midst, and deportation of such people immediately.
Why would any reasonably competent politician refuse to live up to his or her sworn oath to uphold the Constitution when it comes to enforcing the law, especially when to do so could expose American citizens to drug resistant diseases?
22.3.09
Will Historians Remember that George W. Bush Never Ridiculed the Disabled?
By John W. Lillpop
Like many Americans, from both the right and the left, I am not a big fan of former President George W. Bush. His failure to control spending was nothing short of scandalous, and his wanton disregard for the rule of law and American sovereignty when it came to illegal aliens is unforgivable, especially from a president purporting to be conservative.
In addition to his liberal tendencies, Bush had other flaws as well, including his notorious inability to string two cogent sentences together at the same time. Even when President Bush was right on a particular issue, his mangled delivery often sabotaged the message.
When George W. Bush spoke, the messenger rightfully deserved the blame for the chaos and confusion that inevitably followed.
However, when President Obama took over 60 plus days ago,
the American people were led to believe that fathomable English was making a comeback in the White House.
According to the liberal media, Obama's arrival meant that one could once again watch the president speak without dreading a slew of mispronunciations, fabricated words, long periods of stuttering and stammering, and other cringe-worthy moments that dominated most of Bush's public appearances.
What the media overlooked, however, is Obama's complete inability to speak intelligently without a TelePrompTer and prepared script. Unless this president is told exactly what to say, and when, the message itself becomes the villain.
Which is exactly what happened when Obama appeared on The Tonight Show and used that venue to ridicule the disabled.
The big question: When historians rank U.S. presidents thirty years from now, will they remember that, during his eight years as president, not once did George W. Bush make fun of the disabled on national television?
Like many Americans, from both the right and the left, I am not a big fan of former President George W. Bush. His failure to control spending was nothing short of scandalous, and his wanton disregard for the rule of law and American sovereignty when it came to illegal aliens is unforgivable, especially from a president purporting to be conservative.
In addition to his liberal tendencies, Bush had other flaws as well, including his notorious inability to string two cogent sentences together at the same time. Even when President Bush was right on a particular issue, his mangled delivery often sabotaged the message.
When George W. Bush spoke, the messenger rightfully deserved the blame for the chaos and confusion that inevitably followed.
However, when President Obama took over 60 plus days ago,
the American people were led to believe that fathomable English was making a comeback in the White House.
According to the liberal media, Obama's arrival meant that one could once again watch the president speak without dreading a slew of mispronunciations, fabricated words, long periods of stuttering and stammering, and other cringe-worthy moments that dominated most of Bush's public appearances.
What the media overlooked, however, is Obama's complete inability to speak intelligently without a TelePrompTer and prepared script. Unless this president is told exactly what to say, and when, the message itself becomes the villain.
Which is exactly what happened when Obama appeared on The Tonight Show and used that venue to ridicule the disabled.
The big question: When historians rank U.S. presidents thirty years from now, will they remember that, during his eight years as president, not once did George W. Bush make fun of the disabled on national television?
21.3.09
Obama Lack of Tolerance "Hurts Millions of People"
By John W. Lillpop
President Obama's credentials as a caring and compassionate "progressive" have been shattered by a series of pratfalls that are making his commitment to CHANGE more of a threat than a promise.
Recent examples include a callous disregard for the families of 9/11 victims in his rush to disassemble anti-terrorist policies which have kept America safe for 7 plus years, his disdain for Great Britain, America's most loyal and powerful American in the world, and his clumsy attempt to upbraid disabled veterans in order to fund medical care for illegal aliens among others.
However, Obama's lack of tolerance scaled new heights this week when he turned what should have been a "feel good" appearance on The Tonight Show into a firestorm of controversy involving wretchedly poor judgment and ugly remarks about millions of mentally disabled people.
Worst of all, Obama's insensitivity alienated a prominent member of the very "progressive" Kennedy clan in California, the second most liberal-infested state in America.
As reported, in part, at Breitbart:
"Maria Shriver says Obama's joke comparing his poor bowling score to that of a Special Olympics athlete was hurtful, although she is sure he didn't mean it that way.
California's first lady issued a statement Friday, a day after the president made the gaffe on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.
Obama later called Maria's brother, Special Olympics Chairman Tim Shriver, to apologize.
The siblings' mother, Eunice Kennedy-Shriver, founded the Special Olympics and has championed the rights of the mentally disabled.
Maria Shriver says the reaction to Obama's joke shows there is still more work to do. She says laughing at such comments 'hurts millions of people throughout the world.'
The president's latest antic adds credibility to a growing perception among friends and foes alike: Without a script and TelePrompTer to dictate his every utterance, Barack Obama's verbal skills are more akin to those of George W. Bush than John F. Kennedy.
Perhaps the president should be required to attend Diversity and Sensitivity training in order to contain this communications nightmare?
President Obama's credentials as a caring and compassionate "progressive" have been shattered by a series of pratfalls that are making his commitment to CHANGE more of a threat than a promise.
Recent examples include a callous disregard for the families of 9/11 victims in his rush to disassemble anti-terrorist policies which have kept America safe for 7 plus years, his disdain for Great Britain, America's most loyal and powerful American in the world, and his clumsy attempt to upbraid disabled veterans in order to fund medical care for illegal aliens among others.
However, Obama's lack of tolerance scaled new heights this week when he turned what should have been a "feel good" appearance on The Tonight Show into a firestorm of controversy involving wretchedly poor judgment and ugly remarks about millions of mentally disabled people.
Worst of all, Obama's insensitivity alienated a prominent member of the very "progressive" Kennedy clan in California, the second most liberal-infested state in America.
As reported, in part, at Breitbart:
"Maria Shriver says Obama's joke comparing his poor bowling score to that of a Special Olympics athlete was hurtful, although she is sure he didn't mean it that way.
California's first lady issued a statement Friday, a day after the president made the gaffe on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.
Obama later called Maria's brother, Special Olympics Chairman Tim Shriver, to apologize.
The siblings' mother, Eunice Kennedy-Shriver, founded the Special Olympics and has championed the rights of the mentally disabled.
Maria Shriver says the reaction to Obama's joke shows there is still more work to do. She says laughing at such comments 'hurts millions of people throughout the world.'
The president's latest antic adds credibility to a growing perception among friends and foes alike: Without a script and TelePrompTer to dictate his every utterance, Barack Obama's verbal skills are more akin to those of George W. Bush than John F. Kennedy.
Perhaps the president should be required to attend Diversity and Sensitivity training in order to contain this communications nightmare?
20.3.09
CBO to Obama-- "Reboot" Your Wonky Deficit Calculator!
Satire by John W. Lillpop
Seems like only yesterday that America's ambitious young president promised to deliver America from the clutches of evil capitalism and into the comforting arms of a socialist nanny where government would do all things for all people.
In Obama's Utopia, Uncle Sam would take care of everyone's health care, mortgage payments, disappearing home equity, college education, car payments, and all other basic living necessities like lower cable television fees, affordable high-speed Internet connectivity, and late fees for DVD rentals.
Obama's plan would apply to everyone, be they illegal, legal, or unknown. The only exceptions would be the filthy rich and disabled veterans in need of medical care.
Best of all, Obama's Utopian state would half of the deficit (most of which was inherited from the Bush administration) by the end of Obama's first term.
Everything for everyone, with zero tolerance for deficits to boot!
Without bothering to check the veracity of Obama's math or assumptions, the mainstream media bought into his pitch, hook, line, and sinker.
Like manna from heaven! declared the media as they announced with glee that misery, poverty, and Republicanism had been vanquished by the new age Messiah from South Chicago!
Miracles on Maxwell Street were his specialty, said they.
Unfortunately for the Messiah, the Democrat party, and dunces in the mainstream media who pretend to be objective and unbiased, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has actually studied the issues in depth and has reached conclusions significantly less rosy than those offered by Obama.
As reported, in part, in Bret Bart:
"President Barack Obama's budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year over the next decade, according to the latest congressional estimates, significantly worse than predicted by the White House just last month.
The Congressional Budget Office figures, obtained by The Associated Press Friday, predict Obama's budget will produce $9.3 trillion worth of red ink over 2010-2019. That's $2.3 trillion worse than the White House predicted in its budget.
Worst of all, CBO says the deficit under Obama's policies would never go below 4 percent of the size of the economy, figures that economists agree are unsustainable. By the end of the decade, the deficit would exceed 5 percent of gross domestic product, a dangerously high level.
The latest figures, even worse than expected by top Democrats, throw a major monkey wrench into efforts to enact Obama's budget, which promises universal health care for all and higher spending for domestic programs like education and research into renewable energy.
The dismal deficit figures, if they prove to be accurate, inevitably raise the prospect that Obama and his allies controlling Congress would have to consider raising taxes after the recession ends or paring back his agenda.
But without referencing the figures, Obama insisted on Friday that his agenda is still on track.
'What we will not cut are investments that will lead to real growth and prosperity over the long term,' Obama said. 'That's why our budget makes a historic commitment to comprehensive health care reform. That's why it enhances America's competitiveness by reducing our dependence on foreign oil and building a clean energy economy.'
Many Democrats were already uncomfortable with Obama's budget, which promises to cut the deficit to $533 billion in five years. The CBO says the red ink for that year will total $672 billion."
Clearly, Barack Obama has no interest in facts or logic. However, he is still a power-mad politician.
Which means that it is time for leaders in the Democrat party to visit the Oval Office and deliver a message that President Obama can easily understand, such as:
"Reboot" Your Wonky Deficit Calculator, Mr. President!
Seems like only yesterday that America's ambitious young president promised to deliver America from the clutches of evil capitalism and into the comforting arms of a socialist nanny where government would do all things for all people.
In Obama's Utopia, Uncle Sam would take care of everyone's health care, mortgage payments, disappearing home equity, college education, car payments, and all other basic living necessities like lower cable television fees, affordable high-speed Internet connectivity, and late fees for DVD rentals.
Obama's plan would apply to everyone, be they illegal, legal, or unknown. The only exceptions would be the filthy rich and disabled veterans in need of medical care.
Best of all, Obama's Utopian state would half of the deficit (most of which was inherited from the Bush administration) by the end of Obama's first term.
Everything for everyone, with zero tolerance for deficits to boot!
Without bothering to check the veracity of Obama's math or assumptions, the mainstream media bought into his pitch, hook, line, and sinker.
Like manna from heaven! declared the media as they announced with glee that misery, poverty, and Republicanism had been vanquished by the new age Messiah from South Chicago!
Miracles on Maxwell Street were his specialty, said they.
Unfortunately for the Messiah, the Democrat party, and dunces in the mainstream media who pretend to be objective and unbiased, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has actually studied the issues in depth and has reached conclusions significantly less rosy than those offered by Obama.
As reported, in part, in Bret Bart:
"President Barack Obama's budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year over the next decade, according to the latest congressional estimates, significantly worse than predicted by the White House just last month.
The Congressional Budget Office figures, obtained by The Associated Press Friday, predict Obama's budget will produce $9.3 trillion worth of red ink over 2010-2019. That's $2.3 trillion worse than the White House predicted in its budget.
Worst of all, CBO says the deficit under Obama's policies would never go below 4 percent of the size of the economy, figures that economists agree are unsustainable. By the end of the decade, the deficit would exceed 5 percent of gross domestic product, a dangerously high level.
The latest figures, even worse than expected by top Democrats, throw a major monkey wrench into efforts to enact Obama's budget, which promises universal health care for all and higher spending for domestic programs like education and research into renewable energy.
The dismal deficit figures, if they prove to be accurate, inevitably raise the prospect that Obama and his allies controlling Congress would have to consider raising taxes after the recession ends or paring back his agenda.
But without referencing the figures, Obama insisted on Friday that his agenda is still on track.
'What we will not cut are investments that will lead to real growth and prosperity over the long term,' Obama said. 'That's why our budget makes a historic commitment to comprehensive health care reform. That's why it enhances America's competitiveness by reducing our dependence on foreign oil and building a clean energy economy.'
Many Democrats were already uncomfortable with Obama's budget, which promises to cut the deficit to $533 billion in five years. The CBO says the red ink for that year will total $672 billion."
Clearly, Barack Obama has no interest in facts or logic. However, he is still a power-mad politician.
Which means that it is time for leaders in the Democrat party to visit the Oval Office and deliver a message that President Obama can easily understand, such as:
"Reboot" Your Wonky Deficit Calculator, Mr. President!
19.3.09
President Obama Assaults the Disabled--Again!
By John W. Lillpop
For two years now, the American people have been led to believe that Barack Obama possesses an intellect seldom bestowed upon mere mortals.
His IQ, it has been alleged, is simply too high for science to measure with any degree of accuracy. Which helps to explain, at least partially, why Obama is regarded as the Messiah, or higher, in "Progressive" circles.
However, based on events of the past several days, it appears that Obama's highly touted intellectual prowess has vacated the president's cranium for a much-needed respite. A spring vacation, perhaps?
To begin with, the president came out in support of a proposal that would have forced disabled veterans to fend for themselves in paying for treatment of conditions suffered while fighting in harm's way for America.
That stroke of genius was immediately seized upon for what it was: An inelegant attempt by the president to shirk the government's responsibility with regard to America's most noble heroes.
The outrage from across the nation was palpable, and in short order, Obama had retreated to Southern California to escape the blistering heat of Washington, D.C., all of 36 degrees as the low on Thursday.
An appearance on The Tonight Show and a few minutes of frivolity with Jay Leno promised to provide the president with a terrific opportunity to over come the adversities of a week gone bad, and to return to the good graces of his adoring public.
Alas, the Obama mystique suffered another brutal pounding on The Tonight Show as the president took another shot at the disabled.
As reported at ABC News, in part:
"The first appearance by a sitting president on "The Tonight Show" may well end up being the last.
President Obama, in his taping with Jay Leno Thursday afternoon, attempted to yuk it up with the funnyman, and ended up insulting the disabled.
Towards the end of his approximately 40-minute appearance, the president talked about how he's gotten better at bowling and has been practicing in the White House bowling alley.
He bowled a 129, the president said.
'That's very good, Mr. President,' Leno said sarcastically.
It's 'like the Special Olympics or something,' the president said.
When asked about the remark, the White House said the president did not intend to offend.
'The president made an off-hand remark making fun of his own bowling that was in no way intended to disparage the Special Olympics,' White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton said. 'He thinks the Special Olympics is a wonderful program that gives an opportunity for people with disabilities from around the world.' "
Which leads to a pertinent question: Is there a Special Olympics program for former community administrators who find themselves overwhelmed by the demands of big league politics?
For two years now, the American people have been led to believe that Barack Obama possesses an intellect seldom bestowed upon mere mortals.
His IQ, it has been alleged, is simply too high for science to measure with any degree of accuracy. Which helps to explain, at least partially, why Obama is regarded as the Messiah, or higher, in "Progressive" circles.
However, based on events of the past several days, it appears that Obama's highly touted intellectual prowess has vacated the president's cranium for a much-needed respite. A spring vacation, perhaps?
To begin with, the president came out in support of a proposal that would have forced disabled veterans to fend for themselves in paying for treatment of conditions suffered while fighting in harm's way for America.
That stroke of genius was immediately seized upon for what it was: An inelegant attempt by the president to shirk the government's responsibility with regard to America's most noble heroes.
The outrage from across the nation was palpable, and in short order, Obama had retreated to Southern California to escape the blistering heat of Washington, D.C., all of 36 degrees as the low on Thursday.
An appearance on The Tonight Show and a few minutes of frivolity with Jay Leno promised to provide the president with a terrific opportunity to over come the adversities of a week gone bad, and to return to the good graces of his adoring public.
Alas, the Obama mystique suffered another brutal pounding on The Tonight Show as the president took another shot at the disabled.
As reported at ABC News, in part:
"The first appearance by a sitting president on "The Tonight Show" may well end up being the last.
President Obama, in his taping with Jay Leno Thursday afternoon, attempted to yuk it up with the funnyman, and ended up insulting the disabled.
Towards the end of his approximately 40-minute appearance, the president talked about how he's gotten better at bowling and has been practicing in the White House bowling alley.
He bowled a 129, the president said.
'That's very good, Mr. President,' Leno said sarcastically.
It's 'like the Special Olympics or something,' the president said.
When asked about the remark, the White House said the president did not intend to offend.
'The president made an off-hand remark making fun of his own bowling that was in no way intended to disparage the Special Olympics,' White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton said. 'He thinks the Special Olympics is a wonderful program that gives an opportunity for people with disabilities from around the world.' "
Which leads to a pertinent question: Is there a Special Olympics program for former community administrators who find themselves overwhelmed by the demands of big league politics?
Hoops Coach to Obama: Forget March Madness, Duke It out With Economy!
Satire by John W. Lillpop
Advisers to President Obama probably figured that the young president could score a solid "connect" with average Americans by getting publicly involved in the annual NCAA basketball championships.
No doubt those same folks calculated that Obama could defect attention from his tawdry cabinet picks by wowing the nation with his clever picks for the Final Four in what is known in sports talk as March Madness.
Besides, with those ungodly AIG bonuses and other administration disasters exploding in his face on an almost daily basis, Obama needed an escape into college basketball, a venue with which he is far more familiar than the rigors of actually being responsible for something.
A brief respite from the fishbowl that is the White House might even slow the premature graying of precious Obama's hair, or so his experts thought.
Which is why the president took time away from hiring tax cheats, bankrupting the economy, and making life easy for Islam terrorists long enough to select his basketball picks for all the world to see.
But the old saying, "When you're hot, you're hot, and when you're not, you're not!" came back to haunt Obama, who is definitely NOT HOT, at least not at the moment.
As reported, in part, at Fox News:
"Barack Obama picked North Carolina to defeat Louisville for the NCAA championship, a relatively safe selection for a trailblazing president.
Obama spent part of Tuesday making his tournament picks for ESPN, which posted his completed bracket online Wednesday and showed the First Fan filling it out with Andy Katz on the noon edition of "Sportscenter."
Of course, the president's choice drew a reaction from the Tar Heels' most intense rival.
'Somebody said that we're not in President Obama's Final Four, and as much as I respect what he's doing, really, the economy is something that he should focus on, probably more than the brackets,' Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski said from the Blue Devils' first-round site in Greensboro, N.C."
Well said, Coach Krzyzewski!
And mega-dittos concerning Obama's obsession with Rush Limbaugh and other matters that have absolutely nothing to do with upholding the Constitution of the United States, or defending America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
However, one factor might cause one to pause:
Having Obama preoccupied with NCAA basketball hoops through April 6, rather on his duties as president, would limit his ability to do irreparable harm to America for at least three weeks.
And THAT would be a good thing!
18.3.09
OK for Bank Robbers to Return Just Half of Stolen Loot?
By John W. Lillpop
Edward M. Liddy, CEO of AIG, apparently thinks that all Americans are uninformed dim wits whom could care less about how taxpayer money is handled and accounted for.
In Liddy's mind, fiduciary is just another F word to be avoided in mixed company, and especially while attempting to BS Congress on national television.
Although Liddy is justified in regarding Congressional liberals as fiduciary-challenged terrorists, the fact is that "Bonusgate" has turned into a wild fire that even liberal spin-doctors cannot contain.
As reported, in part, at iht.com, Ref. 1:
"As the lucrative bonuses paid to employees of the American International Group fueled fresh outrage at the White House and on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, the embattled chief executive of A.I.G. said that he had asked some recipients to give at least half the money back.
The chief executive, Edward M. Liddy, made the announcement during his testimony on Wednesday afternoon before a congressional committee investigating the problems at the company.
'I have asked the employees of AIG Financial Products to step up and do the right thing,' Mr. Liddy told lawmakers. 'Specifically, I have asked those who received retention payments of $100,000 or more to return at least half of those payments.' "
Let's see if Liddy's presentation passes the all-important bail out smell test for common sense and credibility.
To begin with, Mr. Liddy, why did you ask your employees to return only 50 percent of the amount in excess of $100,000? Why not ask for at least 90 percent back?
If your 50 percent gambit is indicative of your negotiating skills, the complete failure of AIG suddenly makes perfect sense.
In addition, it seems obvious that doing the "right thing" would mean that every nickel of those ill-begotten bonuses should be returned. Every last nickel, plus usury!
Good heavens, Mr. Liddy, your bonus-eligible employees have managed to turn a once respectable, profitable firm into an involuntary non-profit that must feed on the public trough to survive.
Why in the hell should anyone associated with AIG be rewarded AT ALL for Arrogance, Ineptness, and Greed (AIG)?
To Congress Critters investigating this insanity, if you sign off on 50 percent of the "right thing," will you also rewrite the tax code so that the unwashed masses can satisfy IRS by paying 50 percent of taxes owed?
Can bank robbers be forgiven of all felonies if they simply return 50 percent of the stolen loot?
Can someone please order greedy mortgage lenders to drop foreclosure proceedings if the borrower comes up with 50 percent of the mortgage balance?
Will Citigroup and other credit card gangsters accept 50 percent of the "minimum amount due" in these tough times?
One last thought: Republican Senator Grassley from Iowa suggested that AIG employees should consider suicide as a means for gaining redemption in this sordid mess.
Terrific thought, with one caveat: Do the offing only AFTER all taxes have been paid in full!
Ref 1
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/18/business/19webaig2.php
Edward M. Liddy, CEO of AIG, apparently thinks that all Americans are uninformed dim wits whom could care less about how taxpayer money is handled and accounted for.
In Liddy's mind, fiduciary is just another F word to be avoided in mixed company, and especially while attempting to BS Congress on national television.
Although Liddy is justified in regarding Congressional liberals as fiduciary-challenged terrorists, the fact is that "Bonusgate" has turned into a wild fire that even liberal spin-doctors cannot contain.
As reported, in part, at iht.com, Ref. 1:
"As the lucrative bonuses paid to employees of the American International Group fueled fresh outrage at the White House and on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, the embattled chief executive of A.I.G. said that he had asked some recipients to give at least half the money back.
The chief executive, Edward M. Liddy, made the announcement during his testimony on Wednesday afternoon before a congressional committee investigating the problems at the company.
'I have asked the employees of AIG Financial Products to step up and do the right thing,' Mr. Liddy told lawmakers. 'Specifically, I have asked those who received retention payments of $100,000 or more to return at least half of those payments.' "
Let's see if Liddy's presentation passes the all-important bail out smell test for common sense and credibility.
To begin with, Mr. Liddy, why did you ask your employees to return only 50 percent of the amount in excess of $100,000? Why not ask for at least 90 percent back?
If your 50 percent gambit is indicative of your negotiating skills, the complete failure of AIG suddenly makes perfect sense.
In addition, it seems obvious that doing the "right thing" would mean that every nickel of those ill-begotten bonuses should be returned. Every last nickel, plus usury!
Good heavens, Mr. Liddy, your bonus-eligible employees have managed to turn a once respectable, profitable firm into an involuntary non-profit that must feed on the public trough to survive.
Why in the hell should anyone associated with AIG be rewarded AT ALL for Arrogance, Ineptness, and Greed (AIG)?
To Congress Critters investigating this insanity, if you sign off on 50 percent of the "right thing," will you also rewrite the tax code so that the unwashed masses can satisfy IRS by paying 50 percent of taxes owed?
Can bank robbers be forgiven of all felonies if they simply return 50 percent of the stolen loot?
Can someone please order greedy mortgage lenders to drop foreclosure proceedings if the borrower comes up with 50 percent of the mortgage balance?
Will Citigroup and other credit card gangsters accept 50 percent of the "minimum amount due" in these tough times?
One last thought: Republican Senator Grassley from Iowa suggested that AIG employees should consider suicide as a means for gaining redemption in this sordid mess.
Terrific thought, with one caveat: Do the offing only AFTER all taxes have been paid in full!
Ref 1
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/18/business/19webaig2.php
Nancy Pelosi's Solution to Illegal Immigration-- Deport ICE Agents!
By John W. Lillpop
Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Shreeker of the U.S. House, vehemently objects to use of the term "illegal aliens" to describe--well, illegal aliens.
Like most smitten-by-dumb liberals, Pelosi prefers the term "undocumented."
As in "undocumented Democrats."
As reported, in part, at Fox News.com, Reference 1:
"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently told a group of both legal and illegal immigrants and their families that enforcement of existing immigration laws, as currently practiced, is 'un-American.'
The speaker, condemning raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, referred to the immigrants she was addressing as 'very, very patriotic.'
'Who in this country would not want to change a policy of kicking in doors in the middle of the night and sending a parent away from their families?' Pelosi told a mostly Hispanic gathering at St. Anthony's Church in San Francisco."
Pelosi's tirade is typical of the leftist nonsense for which she is renown. Calling illegal aliens "very, very patriotic" begs two obvious questions:
1. Because they come here illegally and are not subjected to the background, criminal, financial, and medical examinations required of people who obey the law, no one, Pelosi included, knows a damn thing about these people, except that they have no business being in America and are a huge drain on taxpayers.
How in the world can invaders be described as "very, very patriotic" by anyone with even the slightest grip on reality?
2. "Patriotic" to whom, Speaker Pelosi? Illegal aliens refuse to learn English, do not accept American culture, and remain loyal to Mexico, their third world, failed state.
As to her idiotic question, "'Who in this country would not want to change a policy of kicking in doors in the middle of the night and sending a parent away from their families?" the answer is a resounding: All who give a damn about rule of law and American sovereignty and culture!
Not counting Hispanic racists and Marxists like Pelosi, that adds up to a majority of American citizens!
The next time Pelosi haunts the premises of St. Anthony's Church in San Francisco, she should address a more appropriate subject, like the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion.
In doing so, Pelosi should ask, "Who in this room would not want to change the Church's policy of thwarting a woman's Constitutional right to kill an unwelcome baby in her belly?"
Other than her own wrinkled hand, Pelosi might find scant few hands risen in support of child infanticide, even among invading criminals from Mexico!
Reference 1:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/18/pelosi-tells-illegal-immigrants-work-site-raids-american/
Based on First 60 Days, Why Should Anyone Trust Obama With Health Care?
By John W. Lillpop
In less than 60 days, Barack Obama has gone from world savior/Messiah to inept schlock and, in the process, has shown beyond any doubt that government is not the solution, but is, in fact, the problem!
Reaction to the AIG "BonusGate" scandal is just the latest arrow to disturb the media-created Halo resting on Obama's tender shoulders.
As reported at the Examiner.com, in part, Obama's delayed "anger" at AIG's use of taxpayer money to reward inept employees may have deeper roots than heretofore-revealed (Reference 1):
"Senator Barack Obama received a $101,332 bonus from American International Group in the form of political contributions according to Opensecrets.org. The two biggest congressional recipients of bonuses from the A.I.G. are - Senators Chris Dodd and Senator Barack Obama.
The A.I.G. Financial Products affiliate of A.I.G. gave out $136,928, the most of any AIG affiliate, in the 2008 cycle. I would note that A.I.G.’s financial products division is the unit that wrote trillions of dollars’ worth of credit-default swaps and "misjudged" the risk.
The Washington Post reports a "mob effect" at A.I.G financial products division:
A tidal wave of public outrage over bonus payments swamped American International Group yesterday. Hired guards stood watch outside the suburban Connecticut offices of AIG Financial Products, the division whose exotic derivatives brought the insurance giant to the brink of collapse last year. Inside, death threats and angry letters flooded e-mail inboxes. Irate callers lit up the phone lines. Senior managers submitted their resignations. Some employees didn't show up at all."
*******
This, of course, is the same Barack Obama who promised change, transparency, and goodness and light while running for office.
The same Barack Obama whose administration has refused to name the recipients of $2 trillion in bailouts from the U.S. Treasury.
The same Barack Obama who would like to force insurance carriers of disabled war veterans to pay for medical care the government has promised to provide.
Given this record, what would cause any rational person turn his or her health care over to a government run by Barack Obama?
Reference 1
http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-Side-Politics-Examiner~y2009m3d17-Obama-Received-a-101332-Bonus-from-AIG
In less than 60 days, Barack Obama has gone from world savior/Messiah to inept schlock and, in the process, has shown beyond any doubt that government is not the solution, but is, in fact, the problem!
Reaction to the AIG "BonusGate" scandal is just the latest arrow to disturb the media-created Halo resting on Obama's tender shoulders.
As reported at the Examiner.com, in part, Obama's delayed "anger" at AIG's use of taxpayer money to reward inept employees may have deeper roots than heretofore-revealed (Reference 1):
"Senator Barack Obama received a $101,332 bonus from American International Group in the form of political contributions according to Opensecrets.org. The two biggest congressional recipients of bonuses from the A.I.G. are - Senators Chris Dodd and Senator Barack Obama.
The A.I.G. Financial Products affiliate of A.I.G. gave out $136,928, the most of any AIG affiliate, in the 2008 cycle. I would note that A.I.G.’s financial products division is the unit that wrote trillions of dollars’ worth of credit-default swaps and "misjudged" the risk.
The Washington Post reports a "mob effect" at A.I.G financial products division:
A tidal wave of public outrage over bonus payments swamped American International Group yesterday. Hired guards stood watch outside the suburban Connecticut offices of AIG Financial Products, the division whose exotic derivatives brought the insurance giant to the brink of collapse last year. Inside, death threats and angry letters flooded e-mail inboxes. Irate callers lit up the phone lines. Senior managers submitted their resignations. Some employees didn't show up at all."
*******
This, of course, is the same Barack Obama who promised change, transparency, and goodness and light while running for office.
The same Barack Obama whose administration has refused to name the recipients of $2 trillion in bailouts from the U.S. Treasury.
The same Barack Obama who would like to force insurance carriers of disabled war veterans to pay for medical care the government has promised to provide.
Given this record, what would cause any rational person turn his or her health care over to a government run by Barack Obama?
Reference 1
http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-Side-Politics-Examiner~y2009m3d17-Obama-Received-a-101332-Bonus-from-AIG
17.3.09
How Should America Respond to Mexico's Tariff War?
By John W. Lillpop
Given the fact that Mexico is almost entirely dependent on the United States for its economic viability, one would expect authorities in that nation to avoid confrontations with America the great.
However, Mexico is governed by a gaggle of corrupt, inept, and greedy elitists who simply cannot accept American dominance over their failed state.
That fact was made clear recently when Mexico decided to increase tariffs against U.S. products in retaliation for a common sense decision to keep unsafe, dangerous Mexican trucks out of America.
As reported at World Net Daily, in part:
"Mexico has announced a decision to increase tariffs on 90 U.S. products in retaliation for a congressional decision last week to remove the funds for the Department of Transportation's Mexican truck demonstration project, making it clear the NAFTA trucking is by no means finished.
WND reported one day after signing the $410 billion omnibus funding bill into law, along with its provisions ending the DOT Mexican truck demonstration projects, President Obama instructed the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to work with Congress, the DOT, the state department and Mexican officials to come up with legislation to create 'a new trucking project that will meet the legitimate concerns' of Congress under the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA.
Then the Mexican Economy Department told a news conference in Mexico City that the new tariffs will affect about $2.4 billion in trade, impacting 90 agricultural and industrial products exported to Mexico from some 40 U.S. cities, according to the Associated Press.
Teamster President Jim Hoffa characterized the Mexican government's threat as an 'absurd overreaction.'
'The right response from Mexico would be to make sure its drivers and trucks are safe enough to use our highways without endangering our drivers," Hoffa said. 'The border must stay closed until Mexico upholds its end of the bargain.' "
What a novel concept. Welcome to America, Mr. Hoffa!
Unfortunately, with Barack Obama in charge, America is likely to concern itself more with the needs of Mexico than America and her citizens.
If the president were a genuine patriot and committed to America First!, a number of responses could be made to Mexico's "absurd overreaction," including the following:
* Immediately cut off all U.S. aid to Mexico
* Terminate funding for the Merida Project handout
* Secure US-Mexican border with armed force
* Round up and deport the 12-38 million illegal aliens currently in America
* Intercept the $30-50 billion sent to Mexico by illegal aliens each year and use said funds to pay for stolen public services, and
* Bill the government of Mexico for the hundreds of billions of taxpayer money wasted on services for illegal aliens.
With America in a serious economic decline, much of which is the result of providing public services to illegal aliens from Mexico, it is past time to take bold steps to protect the interests of the American people above those of that failed state to our south!
Given the fact that Mexico is almost entirely dependent on the United States for its economic viability, one would expect authorities in that nation to avoid confrontations with America the great.
However, Mexico is governed by a gaggle of corrupt, inept, and greedy elitists who simply cannot accept American dominance over their failed state.
That fact was made clear recently when Mexico decided to increase tariffs against U.S. products in retaliation for a common sense decision to keep unsafe, dangerous Mexican trucks out of America.
As reported at World Net Daily, in part:
"Mexico has announced a decision to increase tariffs on 90 U.S. products in retaliation for a congressional decision last week to remove the funds for the Department of Transportation's Mexican truck demonstration project, making it clear the NAFTA trucking is by no means finished.
WND reported one day after signing the $410 billion omnibus funding bill into law, along with its provisions ending the DOT Mexican truck demonstration projects, President Obama instructed the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to work with Congress, the DOT, the state department and Mexican officials to come up with legislation to create 'a new trucking project that will meet the legitimate concerns' of Congress under the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA.
Then the Mexican Economy Department told a news conference in Mexico City that the new tariffs will affect about $2.4 billion in trade, impacting 90 agricultural and industrial products exported to Mexico from some 40 U.S. cities, according to the Associated Press.
Teamster President Jim Hoffa characterized the Mexican government's threat as an 'absurd overreaction.'
'The right response from Mexico would be to make sure its drivers and trucks are safe enough to use our highways without endangering our drivers," Hoffa said. 'The border must stay closed until Mexico upholds its end of the bargain.' "
What a novel concept. Welcome to America, Mr. Hoffa!
Unfortunately, with Barack Obama in charge, America is likely to concern itself more with the needs of Mexico than America and her citizens.
If the president were a genuine patriot and committed to America First!, a number of responses could be made to Mexico's "absurd overreaction," including the following:
* Immediately cut off all U.S. aid to Mexico
* Terminate funding for the Merida Project handout
* Secure US-Mexican border with armed force
* Round up and deport the 12-38 million illegal aliens currently in America
* Intercept the $30-50 billion sent to Mexico by illegal aliens each year and use said funds to pay for stolen public services, and
* Bill the government of Mexico for the hundreds of billions of taxpayer money wasted on services for illegal aliens.
With America in a serious economic decline, much of which is the result of providing public services to illegal aliens from Mexico, it is past time to take bold steps to protect the interests of the American people above those of that failed state to our south!
When It Comes to AIG Outrage, Obama Needs Mirror Not pointer!
By John W. Lillpop
Watching caged liberals fight and snarl to avoid and evade truth may replace baseball as America's favorite pastime if Barack Obama's first 50 plus days in office are any indication.
An excellent example is the AIG scandal raging across America these days. AIG has Congress and we the people in a bona fide snit because that goofy company is shelling out bonuses to executives who were instrumental in converting the insurance giant into the equivalent of hobos and welfare bums.
Although his administration worked hand-in-hand with AIG to facilitate the latest $30 billion bail out, the president is full of self-righteous indignation and anger over the entire mess.
As reported at Huffingtonpost, in part:
"Faced with a growing chorus of national outrage, the Obama administration has changed its position regarding the $165 million in bonuses that AIG is distributing to the small group of employees whose risky trades brought the company to the brink of collapse. President Obama today excoriated AIG, saying the company was in its present position because of 'recklessness and greed':
'It's hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less $165 million in extra pay,' Obama said at the outset of an appearance to announce help for small businesses hurt by the deep recession.
'How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat,' the president said.
Obama stated that Treasury Secretary would 'pursue every legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayer whole,' and a White House official told the Wall Street Journal that the Treasury will use a planned $30-billion infusion as a lever to force AIG to replay the bonuses."
Perhaps the president might have a better chance at getting AIG to do the right thing if his own Treasury cop, unlovable Timothy Geithner, was not a known tax cheat?
Or is Obama using the "send a thief to catch a thief" ploy to snag AIG?
Regardless, Obama needs to be consulting a mirror rather than a pointing stick when trying to assess blame for the AIG mess!
Watching caged liberals fight and snarl to avoid and evade truth may replace baseball as America's favorite pastime if Barack Obama's first 50 plus days in office are any indication.
An excellent example is the AIG scandal raging across America these days. AIG has Congress and we the people in a bona fide snit because that goofy company is shelling out bonuses to executives who were instrumental in converting the insurance giant into the equivalent of hobos and welfare bums.
Although his administration worked hand-in-hand with AIG to facilitate the latest $30 billion bail out, the president is full of self-righteous indignation and anger over the entire mess.
As reported at Huffingtonpost, in part:
"Faced with a growing chorus of national outrage, the Obama administration has changed its position regarding the $165 million in bonuses that AIG is distributing to the small group of employees whose risky trades brought the company to the brink of collapse. President Obama today excoriated AIG, saying the company was in its present position because of 'recklessness and greed':
'It's hard to understand how derivative traders at AIG warranted any bonuses, much less $165 million in extra pay,' Obama said at the outset of an appearance to announce help for small businesses hurt by the deep recession.
'How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat,' the president said.
Obama stated that Treasury Secretary would 'pursue every legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayer whole,' and a White House official told the Wall Street Journal that the Treasury will use a planned $30-billion infusion as a lever to force AIG to replay the bonuses."
Perhaps the president might have a better chance at getting AIG to do the right thing if his own Treasury cop, unlovable Timothy Geithner, was not a known tax cheat?
Or is Obama using the "send a thief to catch a thief" ploy to snag AIG?
Regardless, Obama needs to be consulting a mirror rather than a pointing stick when trying to assess blame for the AIG mess!
16.3.09
More Worthy of Health Care: Disabled War Vets or Illegal Aliens?
By John W. Lillpop
President Obama continues to provide a "shock and awe" assault on everyday common sense with his seemingly endless stream of proposals that advance incredibly arrogant, illogical and foolish ideas.
The latest shock concerns the proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for treating disabled veterans.
As reported, in part, at Yahoonews:
"The leader of the nation's largest veterans organization says he is 'deeply disappointed and concerned' after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.
'It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan,'said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. 'He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it.' "
With this sort of insanity making news on an almost daily basis, reasonable leaders of the Democrat party, if there are any, need to visit the Oval Office and remind Obama that disabled veterans are American heroes, and the very essence of patriotism and sacrifice.
Without contributions made by war veterans, America's freedom and liberty would be very much in doubt.
President Obama needs to know that the very last thing that he should advocate is a policy that would pile additional burden on the backs of the men and women whom have served in harm's way to defend our great nation.
Everyone realizes that difficult choices must be made in perilous times. Pain will be necessary, but why in the hell would the president go after the most noble and worthy citizens in our midst?
Rather than punishing stalwart citizens who have defended America during time of war, Obama should "go after" the hundreds of billions of taxpayers dollars that are wasted on providing public services to invading illegal aliens who have no business even being in America.
Even lifelong liberals should be capable of seeing the wrong in dumping disabled war veterans while embracing illegal aliens!
President Obama continues to provide a "shock and awe" assault on everyday common sense with his seemingly endless stream of proposals that advance incredibly arrogant, illogical and foolish ideas.
The latest shock concerns the proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for treating disabled veterans.
As reported, in part, at Yahoonews:
"The leader of the nation's largest veterans organization says he is 'deeply disappointed and concerned' after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.
'It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan,'said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. 'He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it.' "
With this sort of insanity making news on an almost daily basis, reasonable leaders of the Democrat party, if there are any, need to visit the Oval Office and remind Obama that disabled veterans are American heroes, and the very essence of patriotism and sacrifice.
Without contributions made by war veterans, America's freedom and liberty would be very much in doubt.
President Obama needs to know that the very last thing that he should advocate is a policy that would pile additional burden on the backs of the men and women whom have served in harm's way to defend our great nation.
Everyone realizes that difficult choices must be made in perilous times. Pain will be necessary, but why in the hell would the president go after the most noble and worthy citizens in our midst?
Rather than punishing stalwart citizens who have defended America during time of war, Obama should "go after" the hundreds of billions of taxpayers dollars that are wasted on providing public services to invading illegal aliens who have no business even being in America.
Even lifelong liberals should be capable of seeing the wrong in dumping disabled war veterans while embracing illegal aliens!
Two TRILLION Holes In Obama's "Transparency" Fluff
By John W. Lillpop
In one of the most agitating instances of bureaucratic arrogance and malfeasance in memory, the United States government has used $2.2 trillion dollars of taxpayer treasure to bail out private firms, but now refuses to identify to whom the funds were sent.
As reported at piglipstick.blogspot.com, in part:
"In a testy exchange at a hearing before the Senate Budget Committee, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who usually votes with the Democrats, said he found it 'unacceptable' that the central bank risked taxpayer money without detailing where the funds went.
'My question to you is, will you tell the American people to whom you lent $2.2 trillion of their dollars?' Sanders asked, referring to the size of the Fed's balance sheet.
Bernanke responded that the Fed explains the various lending programs on its website, and details the terms and collateral requirements.
When Sanders pressed on whether Bernanke would name the firms that borrowed from the Fed, the central bank chairman replied, 'No,' and started to say that doing so risked stigmatizing banks and discouraging them from borrowing from the central bank.
'Isn't that too bad,' Sanders interrupted, cutting him off. 'They took the money but they don't want to be public about the fact that they received it.' "
Yes, it is true that all of this began under the watch of George W. Bush.
But the American people believed Barack Obama when he promised to bring change, including transparency, to government.
George W. Bush is no longer relevant, the ball is now completely in the court of President Obama; Ben Bernanke now works for President Obama.
President Obama needs to get his mind off Rush Limbaugh and onto the business of the American people. The president should tell Bernanke to provide detailed information as requested to account for every penny of taxpayer money.
Failure to do so makes a mockery of the very concept of transparency!
15.3.09
BREAKING NEWS: White House Water May Not Be Potable!
By John W. Lillpop
Is it possible that the White House water supply has been attacked and contaminated with IQ-lowering steroids and chemicals?
That concept is plausible if one considers the erratic behavior of the new president, Barack Obama.
America's first African-American CEO has been generally regarded as a rolled- into- one intellectual giant and Messianic figure, at least to millions of worshippers and supporters, which includes most of the main stream media.
However, since the afternoon of January 20, 2009, when President Obama moved into the White House, a number of extraordinary decisions and actions have been forthcoming.
To begin with, with the war on terror still being fought, the new president decided to announce his decision to close Gitmo and to stop torturing terrorists, and suspected terrorists.
By disassembling other Bush anti-terror initiatives, Obama has deliberately set about to make the world a kinder, gentler place for the very people that would gladly slit your throat from ear-to-ear, in the name of Allah.
Obama has also shown an incredible lack of professionalism and discernment in efforts to staff his cabinet.
Indeed, the president has all but converted the White House into a halfway house/career center for tax cheats, "pay to play" con artists, and other unemployable Democrats.
Quality, excellence, and pride have all gone missing from this president's human resources vocabulary.
The question: How can such an allegedly bright young man be so incompetent when it comes to recruiting qualified men and women of integrity to serve the president of the United States?
Although Obama has been eager to show his willingness to deal diplomatically and in good faith with terrorist states like Iran and other enemies of the United States, he has been outrageously abrupt and rude with allies and friends.
Obama's first victim was Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of America's most loyal and powerful ally whom the president snubbed and humiliated in the international press. Obama's wussy/idiotic excuse about being too "tired" to be presidential was nearly as bad as the infraction of civilized protocol itself.
In addition, the nation of Israel is quite unsettled about how American support will proceed under Obama given the confusing signals sent by the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Other embarrassing "Obama Moments" include the revelation that the Obama administration may support a tax on health care benefits, and may even endorse plans to force American veterans to pay for their own health insurance.
In terms of transparency, the Obama administration has trashed the very concept by refusing to reveal the recipients of $2 trillion dollars of taxpayer money disbursed as part of the bail out mania.
Two hundred and thirty three years ago, that sort of arrogance
led directly to a tea party in Boston followed by a revolution. To
date, Obama policies have inspired tea parties hither and
yonder, but not much serious talk of a repeat of the American
revolution.
However, it is still early.
The most outrageous Obama behavior involves his naive spin concerning the economy. From his first moments as president-elect, Obama has repeatedly called the economic meltdown a catastrophic disaster caused by Republicans, and insisted that it would take years and trillions of dollars in liberal spending to fix.
Now, however, with pressure mounting on the new president to bring about positive CHANGE, Obama has decided that the fundamentals of the economy are actually quite sound, and not nearly as bad as imagined.
Sounds amazingly like something Obama's predecessor would have said, right?
The bottom line question about Barack Obama: What would cause a clean and articulate elitist to trip and stumble about so awkwardly?
Might it be the water?
14.3.09
Addiction to Reckless Spending Leads to Deficit Relapse in California
By John W. Lillpop
Just three weeks after Democrats and their partner in crime, RINO Governor Schwarzenegger, "recovered" from a massive hole in the state budget with a massive tax increase, state coffers are once again out of balance, this time to the tune of 8 billion dollars.
And counting!
As reported in part at sfgate.com:
"California's 3-week-old state budget is already out of balance, according to a report Friday by the nonpartisan legislative analyst, who said the state's revenue will fall $8 billion short of projections in the fiscal year that begins July 1.
And the shortfall could be billions worse if voters reject at least three of the six ballot measures in the May 19 special election that are tied directly to the state budget's bottom line, Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor said."
Savvy Californians know that the situation WILL get worse. Guaranteed, no question about it.
That is because Sacramento politics are dominated by reckless liberals who simply refuse to cut spending, especially when the alternative is to raise taxes even higher.
Addiction to deficit spending is rampant among Democrats, the complicit governor, and a couple of derelicts posing as Republicans.
Among the politically elite in California, there is nothing but contempt and disrespect for taxpayers, a position made tenable by the fact that there so damn many freeloaders and leeches who feed at the public trough, but whom pay little or nothing in taxes.
Example: In California, illegal aliens cost the state $10 billion a year for public services to which they are not entitled. Unfortunately, illegals are a constituency of the Democrat Party.
To the typical liberal-infested mind, raising taxes on the rich is far more practical than kicking illegal aliens out. After all, there are far more illegals (future Democrats) than there are rich people.
The ONLY solution is to reduce the number of liberals in power by at least fifty percent, higher if possible.
That and the automatic jolt of common sense that would result can save California, if the people act prudently.
However, will they?
Just three weeks after Democrats and their partner in crime, RINO Governor Schwarzenegger, "recovered" from a massive hole in the state budget with a massive tax increase, state coffers are once again out of balance, this time to the tune of 8 billion dollars.
And counting!
As reported in part at sfgate.com:
"California's 3-week-old state budget is already out of balance, according to a report Friday by the nonpartisan legislative analyst, who said the state's revenue will fall $8 billion short of projections in the fiscal year that begins July 1.
And the shortfall could be billions worse if voters reject at least three of the six ballot measures in the May 19 special election that are tied directly to the state budget's bottom line, Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor said."
Savvy Californians know that the situation WILL get worse. Guaranteed, no question about it.
That is because Sacramento politics are dominated by reckless liberals who simply refuse to cut spending, especially when the alternative is to raise taxes even higher.
Addiction to deficit spending is rampant among Democrats, the complicit governor, and a couple of derelicts posing as Republicans.
Among the politically elite in California, there is nothing but contempt and disrespect for taxpayers, a position made tenable by the fact that there so damn many freeloaders and leeches who feed at the public trough, but whom pay little or nothing in taxes.
Example: In California, illegal aliens cost the state $10 billion a year for public services to which they are not entitled. Unfortunately, illegals are a constituency of the Democrat Party.
To the typical liberal-infested mind, raising taxes on the rich is far more practical than kicking illegal aliens out. After all, there are far more illegals (future Democrats) than there are rich people.
The ONLY solution is to reduce the number of liberals in power by at least fifty percent, higher if possible.
That and the automatic jolt of common sense that would result can save California, if the people act prudently.
However, will they?
13.3.09
Is Mexico a Failed State?
By John W. Lillpop
U.S. authorities responsible for the well being of Americans as they travel to and from foreign nations have been rather blunt in recent warnings and alerts about traveling to Mexico.
As reported at counton2.com, in part:
"The U.S. government says Mexico’s bloody drug war is a growing threat to tourists. Now, as college students start planning their spring breaks, the U.S. State Department has a new warning about traveling to Mexico.
This is the image Mexico wants American tourists to see: beautiful beaches, party time!
But recently, this is more the reality: a drug war that is spiraling out of control."
***********************************************************
Students Warned About Spring Break in Mexico
***********************************************************
In addition, university and college administrations are cautioning American students against taking spring vacations south of the border, owing to the carnage and violence.
As reported at ajc.com, in part:
"The U.S. State Department and universities around the country are warning college students headed for Mexico for some spring-break partying of a surge in drug-related murder and mayhem south of the border.
'We’re not necessarily telling students not to go, but we’re going to certainly alert them,' said Tom Dougan, vice president for student affairs at the University of Rhode Island. 'There have been Americans kidnapped, and if you go you need to be very aware and very alert to this fact.'
***********************************************************
Potential for Collapse Likened To Pakistan
***********************************************************
Mexico's overall stability and ability to function has also come into serious question. As reported recently in the El Paso times, in part:
"Mexico is one of two countries that 'bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse,' according to a report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats.
The command's 'Joint Operating Environment (JOE 2008)' report, which contains projections of global threats and potential next wars, puts Pakistan on the same level as Mexico.
In terms of worse-case scenarios for the Joint Force and indeed the world, two large and important states bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse: Pakistan and Mexico.
In the foreword, Marine Gen. J.N. Mattis, the USJFC commander, said 'Predictions about the future are always risky ... Regardless, if we do not try to forecast the future, there is no doubt that we will be caught off guard as we strive to protect this experiment in democracy that we call America.'
The report is one in a series focusing on Mexico's internal security problems, mostly stemming from drug violence and drug corruption. In recent weeks, the Department of Homeland Security and former U.S. drug czar Barry McCaffrey issued similar alerts about Mexico."
***************************************
Human Rights Record Assailed
***************************************
In more bad news for the third-world nation, Mexico's human rights efforts are falling short of its good intentions, says a report by Amnesty International.
As reported at thestar.com, in part:
"There is ingrained impunity for human rights violations," said Rupert Knox, a Mexico researcher with the London-based organization. The government talks about rights in general terms. But what's lacking is a dynamic commitment that has some impact on the ground.'
Arbitrary detention, torture, sexual violence and unlawful killings by security officials have escalated during government security operations to combat violent criminal gangs, said the report, tabled this week as the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva reviews Mexico's human rights performance.
Although the government's list of 'positive initiatives and reforms is good news,' there was no information about how to end the rights violations, and the impunity that goes with them, it said.
Mexico has not commented on the report, but it has taken steps to reform its police forces by creating new procedures for training and screening police recruits.
Human rights organizations have been critical of Mexico's escalating violence, as the country battles warring drug cartels that have caused the death of some 6,000 people in the past year.
Mexico's own National Human Rights Commission has documented rights violations – including torture and arbitrary arrest by the armed forces – but without any resulting drop in reported incidents. Critics have called for investigations and prosecution of perpetrators of abuses.
Meanwhile, ongoing bloodshed and a fraying economy have undermined support for President Felipe Calderon's conservative government, and a recent poll shows public confidence sliding ahead of mid-term elections in July. "
*****************************************************
Do Not Drink The Water Or Eat The Pozole!
*****************************************************
Pozole is the name of a very popular Mexican stew, which includes a rich variety of meats, vegetables and seasonings.
However, hungry amigos in Mexico are thinking twice before ordering the spicy delicacy after it was disclosed that Santiago Meza López, known as “el Pozolero” in the Mexican news media, has confessed to dissolving the remains of 300 people in acid while working for a top drug trafficker.
In English, "el Pozolero" means "The Stew Maker."
As reported by Reuters, in part:
"A Mexican drug suspect has confessed to dissolving the bodies of 300 rivals with corrosive chemicals near the U.S. border, in a claim highlighting the brutality of Mexico`s drug war.
Santiago Meza, known as "The Stew Maker," told journalists he did away with bodies in industrial drums on the outskirts of the violent city of Tijuana.
More than 700 people died in Tijuana last year as rival gangs battled for control of the city`s lucrative drug trade. Many others are missing and believed dead after being abducted.
The suspect, who was paraded before journalists by the army on Friday, said he was paid $600 a week by a breakaway faction of the Arellano Felix cartel to dispose of slain rivals with caustic soda, a highly corrosive substance.
'They brought me the bodies and I just got rid of them,' Meza said at a construction site where he said he dissolved 300 corpses last year. 'I didn`t feel anything.'
'The bodies took 24 hours to dissolve but left some remains that were dumped in a nearby pit,' Meza said.
A high-ranking army officer told Reuters he believed Meza, who was arrested with three other people on Thursday, was telling the truth.
Police have previously recovered human remains burned with acid in and around the city.
Meza, 45, said he had been getting rid of bodies for 10 years.
'May they forgive me,' he said, surrounded by heavily armed soldiers.
The spiraling violence of Mexico`s drug war has cast a pall over the country and presents a huge challenge to President Felipe Calderon, who has deployed thousands of troops to crush the cartels.
The drug war claimed 5,700 lives across Mexico last year, more than double the number of victims in 2007. "
*************************************
President Calderon: Not So!
*************************************
Despite all evidence to the contrary AND the fact that Mexico is unable to feed, house, educate, and provide medical care for it's own citizens, President Felipe Calderon is adamant in denying that Mexico is a "failed state."
As reported at Huffingtonpost.com, in part:
"President Felipe Calderon hopes to quell Mexico's rampant drug violence by the end of his term in 2012, and disputes U.S. fears that Mexico is losing control of its territory.
In interviews with The Associated Press on Thursday, Calderon and his top prosecutor said the violence that killed 6,290 people last year _ and more than 1,000 in the first eight weeks of 2009 _ is a sign that the cartels are under pressure from military and police operations nationwide, as well as turf wars among themselves.
'To say that Mexico is a failed state is absolutely false,' Calderon said."
*********************************
Absolutely false, Mr. President?
*********************************
Then please make immediate arrangements to take the 12-40 million illegal aliens now free loading in America back to Mexico where your non-failed state can be responsible for feeding, educating, housing, and providing health care for said invaders!
U.S. authorities responsible for the well being of Americans as they travel to and from foreign nations have been rather blunt in recent warnings and alerts about traveling to Mexico.
As reported at counton2.com, in part:
"The U.S. government says Mexico’s bloody drug war is a growing threat to tourists. Now, as college students start planning their spring breaks, the U.S. State Department has a new warning about traveling to Mexico.
This is the image Mexico wants American tourists to see: beautiful beaches, party time!
But recently, this is more the reality: a drug war that is spiraling out of control."
***********************************************************
Students Warned About Spring Break in Mexico
***********************************************************
In addition, university and college administrations are cautioning American students against taking spring vacations south of the border, owing to the carnage and violence.
As reported at ajc.com, in part:
"The U.S. State Department and universities around the country are warning college students headed for Mexico for some spring-break partying of a surge in drug-related murder and mayhem south of the border.
'We’re not necessarily telling students not to go, but we’re going to certainly alert them,' said Tom Dougan, vice president for student affairs at the University of Rhode Island. 'There have been Americans kidnapped, and if you go you need to be very aware and very alert to this fact.'
***********************************************************
Potential for Collapse Likened To Pakistan
***********************************************************
Mexico's overall stability and ability to function has also come into serious question. As reported recently in the El Paso times, in part:
"Mexico is one of two countries that 'bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse,' according to a report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats.
The command's 'Joint Operating Environment (JOE 2008)' report, which contains projections of global threats and potential next wars, puts Pakistan on the same level as Mexico.
In terms of worse-case scenarios for the Joint Force and indeed the world, two large and important states bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse: Pakistan and Mexico.
In the foreword, Marine Gen. J.N. Mattis, the USJFC commander, said 'Predictions about the future are always risky ... Regardless, if we do not try to forecast the future, there is no doubt that we will be caught off guard as we strive to protect this experiment in democracy that we call America.'
The report is one in a series focusing on Mexico's internal security problems, mostly stemming from drug violence and drug corruption. In recent weeks, the Department of Homeland Security and former U.S. drug czar Barry McCaffrey issued similar alerts about Mexico."
***************************************
Human Rights Record Assailed
***************************************
In more bad news for the third-world nation, Mexico's human rights efforts are falling short of its good intentions, says a report by Amnesty International.
As reported at thestar.com, in part:
"There is ingrained impunity for human rights violations," said Rupert Knox, a Mexico researcher with the London-based organization. The government talks about rights in general terms. But what's lacking is a dynamic commitment that has some impact on the ground.'
Arbitrary detention, torture, sexual violence and unlawful killings by security officials have escalated during government security operations to combat violent criminal gangs, said the report, tabled this week as the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva reviews Mexico's human rights performance.
Although the government's list of 'positive initiatives and reforms is good news,' there was no information about how to end the rights violations, and the impunity that goes with them, it said.
Mexico has not commented on the report, but it has taken steps to reform its police forces by creating new procedures for training and screening police recruits.
Human rights organizations have been critical of Mexico's escalating violence, as the country battles warring drug cartels that have caused the death of some 6,000 people in the past year.
Mexico's own National Human Rights Commission has documented rights violations – including torture and arbitrary arrest by the armed forces – but without any resulting drop in reported incidents. Critics have called for investigations and prosecution of perpetrators of abuses.
Meanwhile, ongoing bloodshed and a fraying economy have undermined support for President Felipe Calderon's conservative government, and a recent poll shows public confidence sliding ahead of mid-term elections in July. "
*****************************************************
Do Not Drink The Water Or Eat The Pozole!
*****************************************************
Pozole is the name of a very popular Mexican stew, which includes a rich variety of meats, vegetables and seasonings.
However, hungry amigos in Mexico are thinking twice before ordering the spicy delicacy after it was disclosed that Santiago Meza López, known as “el Pozolero” in the Mexican news media, has confessed to dissolving the remains of 300 people in acid while working for a top drug trafficker.
In English, "el Pozolero" means "The Stew Maker."
As reported by Reuters, in part:
"A Mexican drug suspect has confessed to dissolving the bodies of 300 rivals with corrosive chemicals near the U.S. border, in a claim highlighting the brutality of Mexico`s drug war.
Santiago Meza, known as "The Stew Maker," told journalists he did away with bodies in industrial drums on the outskirts of the violent city of Tijuana.
More than 700 people died in Tijuana last year as rival gangs battled for control of the city`s lucrative drug trade. Many others are missing and believed dead after being abducted.
The suspect, who was paraded before journalists by the army on Friday, said he was paid $600 a week by a breakaway faction of the Arellano Felix cartel to dispose of slain rivals with caustic soda, a highly corrosive substance.
'They brought me the bodies and I just got rid of them,' Meza said at a construction site where he said he dissolved 300 corpses last year. 'I didn`t feel anything.'
'The bodies took 24 hours to dissolve but left some remains that were dumped in a nearby pit,' Meza said.
A high-ranking army officer told Reuters he believed Meza, who was arrested with three other people on Thursday, was telling the truth.
Police have previously recovered human remains burned with acid in and around the city.
Meza, 45, said he had been getting rid of bodies for 10 years.
'May they forgive me,' he said, surrounded by heavily armed soldiers.
The spiraling violence of Mexico`s drug war has cast a pall over the country and presents a huge challenge to President Felipe Calderon, who has deployed thousands of troops to crush the cartels.
The drug war claimed 5,700 lives across Mexico last year, more than double the number of victims in 2007. "
*************************************
President Calderon: Not So!
*************************************
Despite all evidence to the contrary AND the fact that Mexico is unable to feed, house, educate, and provide medical care for it's own citizens, President Felipe Calderon is adamant in denying that Mexico is a "failed state."
As reported at Huffingtonpost.com, in part:
"President Felipe Calderon hopes to quell Mexico's rampant drug violence by the end of his term in 2012, and disputes U.S. fears that Mexico is losing control of its territory.
In interviews with The Associated Press on Thursday, Calderon and his top prosecutor said the violence that killed 6,290 people last year _ and more than 1,000 in the first eight weeks of 2009 _ is a sign that the cartels are under pressure from military and police operations nationwide, as well as turf wars among themselves.
'To say that Mexico is a failed state is absolutely false,' Calderon said."
*********************************
Absolutely false, Mr. President?
*********************************
Then please make immediate arrangements to take the 12-40 million illegal aliens now free loading in America back to Mexico where your non-failed state can be responsible for feeding, educating, housing, and providing health care for said invaders!
Want to Be a Billionaire? Move to Mexico & Sell Drugs!
By John W. Lillpop
Americans are taught that success can be achieved by getting a good education, keeping one's nose clean (from Cocaine, among other things) and working hard.
Turns out that the American Way is "old school," at least when compared to how entrepreneurs get rich in that third-world failed state directly to the south of our border.
Example: Mexican Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman recently cracked the Forbes Magazine list of billionaires. However, Guzman's inclusion as Forbes' billionaire number 701 is not stoking a great deal of national pride among Mexican government officials.
That is because Guzman is Mexico's most-wanted fugitive and reputed to be leader of a violent drug cartel.
As reported at Yahoo News, in part,
"MEXICO CITY – Mexico is decrying Forbes Magazine's decision to include the reputed leader of one of the country's most violent drug cartels on its list of billionaires.
Forbes ranks Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, with an estimated $1 billion fortune, at No. 701 — between a Swiss oil-trading tycoon and an American chemical heir.
Guzman, Mexico's most-wanted fugitive, is believed to head the Sinaloa cartel.
President Felipe Calderon said Thursday that 'magazines are not only attacking and lying about the situation in Mexico but are also praising criminals.'
Mexico's Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora said Forbes is defending crime by 'comparing the deplorable activity of a criminal wanted in Mexico and abroad with that of honest businessmen.'"
Honest businessmen In Mexico? Surely you jest, Mr. Attorney General.
What next? Incorruptible Mexican law enforcement and government officials?
Now that is loco!
Americans are taught that success can be achieved by getting a good education, keeping one's nose clean (from Cocaine, among other things) and working hard.
Turns out that the American Way is "old school," at least when compared to how entrepreneurs get rich in that third-world failed state directly to the south of our border.
Example: Mexican Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman recently cracked the Forbes Magazine list of billionaires. However, Guzman's inclusion as Forbes' billionaire number 701 is not stoking a great deal of national pride among Mexican government officials.
That is because Guzman is Mexico's most-wanted fugitive and reputed to be leader of a violent drug cartel.
As reported at Yahoo News, in part,
"MEXICO CITY – Mexico is decrying Forbes Magazine's decision to include the reputed leader of one of the country's most violent drug cartels on its list of billionaires.
Forbes ranks Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, with an estimated $1 billion fortune, at No. 701 — between a Swiss oil-trading tycoon and an American chemical heir.
Guzman, Mexico's most-wanted fugitive, is believed to head the Sinaloa cartel.
President Felipe Calderon said Thursday that 'magazines are not only attacking and lying about the situation in Mexico but are also praising criminals.'
Mexico's Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora said Forbes is defending crime by 'comparing the deplorable activity of a criminal wanted in Mexico and abroad with that of honest businessmen.'"
Honest businessmen In Mexico? Surely you jest, Mr. Attorney General.
What next? Incorruptible Mexican law enforcement and government officials?
Now that is loco!
12.3.09
Where Is Osama bin Laden?
Satire by John W. Lillpop
Just what, in the name of all that is good and Holy, has President Obama been doing for nigh unto 60 days?
Everyone knows that the man has been unable, or unwilling, to keep his word on integrity (ear marks, signing statements, transparency, etc.) and ethics.
Everyone also knows that the president has made a wretched economy even worse by permitting clue less liberals like Nancy Pelosi to pile massive debt onto the backs of American taxpayers, their grandchildren, and their great grandchildren, ad infinitum.
Still, in the interest of being fair, one should consider some of Obama's more notable achievements to date.
Since 12:01 PM, EST, on January 20, 2009, Obama can claim credit for the following highlights from his presidential resume:
* Made headlines with his much ballyhooed plan to close Gitmo and relocate terrorists, and suspected terrorists, in states and cities run and or occupied by Republicans.
* Enhanced his image with the sleeper cell voting demographic, and other Islamofascist lunatics, by working to improve the lot of middle class American-based terrorists in their epic struggle against infidels, mostly Caucasian Christian Republicans.
* Promoted child infanticide (abortion) as a means for combating climate change based on new age science which shows, conclusively, that baby poop emits noxious C02 emissions, which can lead to global warming.
* Pissed off America's most loyal and powerful ally, the good people of Britain, with a wussy argument about being too "tired" to greet Prime Minister Gordon Brown in accord with proper protocol and decency.
* Made feminazism a respectable White House diversion by signing an Executive Order to resurrect the White House Council on Women and Girls. (Note: The Council was originally formed as a top secret, classified therapy group (12 Steps to Overcoming Sexual Addiction) by Bill Clinton in 1996, but was banished when Hillary read about Monica Lewinsky and Kathleen Wiley on Drudge.
* Converted the White House Cabinet into a halfway house/career center for tax cheats, "pay to play" con artists, and other unemployed Democrats generally considered unemployable.
* Assaulted the "Don't ask, Don't Tell" military policy that discriminates against girlie men, and promised to make the military a "Big Tent" of the sort that would cause Barney Frank's heart rate to soar!
* Relegated concerns about the economy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran's march toward nuclear weapons, North Korea's missile mania, and the spread of Mexico's drug war onto American soil to the bank burner long enough to counsel needy Republicans on their untoward radio listening habits.
Obama performed this good deed by warning the GOP of the toxicity spewing across the airwaves from 12-3p EST each afternoon, said venom originating with the hate-filled, fake larynx of Rush Limbaugh, on loan from God.
Despite Obama's many achievements, this reporter remains unbowed and will not let up until the "big question" is answered:
Where is Osama bin Laden, Mr. President?
Just what, in the name of all that is good and Holy, has President Obama been doing for nigh unto 60 days?
Everyone knows that the man has been unable, or unwilling, to keep his word on integrity (ear marks, signing statements, transparency, etc.) and ethics.
Everyone also knows that the president has made a wretched economy even worse by permitting clue less liberals like Nancy Pelosi to pile massive debt onto the backs of American taxpayers, their grandchildren, and their great grandchildren, ad infinitum.
Still, in the interest of being fair, one should consider some of Obama's more notable achievements to date.
Since 12:01 PM, EST, on January 20, 2009, Obama can claim credit for the following highlights from his presidential resume:
* Made headlines with his much ballyhooed plan to close Gitmo and relocate terrorists, and suspected terrorists, in states and cities run and or occupied by Republicans.
* Enhanced his image with the sleeper cell voting demographic, and other Islamofascist lunatics, by working to improve the lot of middle class American-based terrorists in their epic struggle against infidels, mostly Caucasian Christian Republicans.
* Promoted child infanticide (abortion) as a means for combating climate change based on new age science which shows, conclusively, that baby poop emits noxious C02 emissions, which can lead to global warming.
* Pissed off America's most loyal and powerful ally, the good people of Britain, with a wussy argument about being too "tired" to greet Prime Minister Gordon Brown in accord with proper protocol and decency.
* Made feminazism a respectable White House diversion by signing an Executive Order to resurrect the White House Council on Women and Girls. (Note: The Council was originally formed as a top secret, classified therapy group (12 Steps to Overcoming Sexual Addiction) by Bill Clinton in 1996, but was banished when Hillary read about Monica Lewinsky and Kathleen Wiley on Drudge.
* Converted the White House Cabinet into a halfway house/career center for tax cheats, "pay to play" con artists, and other unemployed Democrats generally considered unemployable.
* Assaulted the "Don't ask, Don't Tell" military policy that discriminates against girlie men, and promised to make the military a "Big Tent" of the sort that would cause Barney Frank's heart rate to soar!
* Relegated concerns about the economy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran's march toward nuclear weapons, North Korea's missile mania, and the spread of Mexico's drug war onto American soil to the bank burner long enough to counsel needy Republicans on their untoward radio listening habits.
Obama performed this good deed by warning the GOP of the toxicity spewing across the airwaves from 12-3p EST each afternoon, said venom originating with the hate-filled, fake larynx of Rush Limbaugh, on loan from God.
Despite Obama's many achievements, this reporter remains unbowed and will not let up until the "big question" is answered:
Where is Osama bin Laden, Mr. President?
11.3.09
Our "Imperfect" President Signs Ominous Omnibus
By John W. Lillpop
Everyone who can recall that presidential candidate Barack Obama promised to bring profound CHANGE to America if entrusted with the U.S. presidency, please raise your left hand.
How many also recall that Obama was relentless in promising to clean up issues involving earmarks, transparency, lobbyists, and signing statements?
Notwithstanding the lofty promises made by the darling of the leftist media, with just over 50 days in the pressure-packed Fish Bowl that is the White House, the greatest change that President Obama has delivered so far is to change his mind on some of that high- minded double talk that got him elected to begin with.
For instance, with respect to earmarks, candidate Obama said the following, in part, to John McCain during one of the presidential debates:
"And, absolutely, we need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."
Fast forward to March 10, 2009.
On this date, President Obama signed a $410 Omnibus spending monster, which included thousands of "ear marks."
As reported in Yahoo News, in part:
"President Barack Obama, sounding weary of criticism over federal earmarks, defended Congress' pet projects Wednesday as he signed an 'imperfect' $410 billion measure with thousands of examples. But he said the spending does need tighter restraint and listed guidelines to do it."
So, earmarks are a major no-no, unless a Democrat president decides they are necessary as part of an "imperfect" bill passed by a spend-crazy Democrat- majority Congress?
Sounds fair and balanced, right? In nations like Venezuela and Cuba, perhaps, where dictators are all the rage.
Note, please, that President Obama signed the ominous Omnibus bill in closed door privacy.
This is in sharp contrast to other Obama signings, which have been widely and wildly promoted throughout all communications media as evidence of the fact that this president has not abandoned his responsibilities as commander-in-chief in order to play PORK on the White House basketball hoops.
Perhaps in the case of the ominous Omnibus, the president panicked about having his blatant hypocrisy exposed openly, and decided to forego the handshakes, champagne, and roses customary when a gang of corrupt liberals has succeeded in ripping off the American public?
******
Which takes us to candidate Obama's roaring oratory about transparency. The notion that any politician, especially one from South Chicago, would actually promote openness and transparency is truly mind-boggling.
As reported at Fox News, President Obama's commitment to transparency should be put under the microscope in light of how the administration has thus far handled the issue:
"Transparency was a watchword of President Obama's campaign.
But 50 days into his administration, the new president is still struggling to live up to his pledge to hold himself to what he called 'a new standard of openness.'
Already, the administration has violated a campaign promise to post bills ready for Obama's signature online for five full days before they become law.
In three cases, Obama signed legislation well within that window -- with a fair-pay law, an expansion of health insurance for children and the $787 billion economic stimulus package.
Melanie Sloan, director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said it's too early to give Obama a clear grade on transparency.
'Have they done it right on every occasion? Clearly, no,' she said. 'They seem to be making an effort.'
The White House argues it's opened up serious policy discussions to the public, holding recent summits on fiscal responsibility and health care reform. The White House even posted streaming video on its Web site and created a separate site to track stimulus spending.
But there have been other transparency misfires.
After saying that lobbyists would be mostly barred from working in the Obama White House, the administration hadn't disclosed how many lobbyists made their way into top posts until now. The administration identified three officials Tuesday night who received waivers for their lobbying work. They are Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn; Jocelyn Frye, senior official for first lady Michelle Obama, and Cecilia Munoz, director of governmental affairs.
Then there was the do-over swearing-in ceremony, which only a few reporters were allowed to attend.
Chief Justice John Roberts administered the second oath the day after Inauguration Day, following some complaints that he flubbed the oath the day before. The White House allowed just four print reporters to attend and released a picture by the official White House photographer.
Reporters complained to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who defended the decision to limit their numbers by arguing that there was no need for a big formal event, since the second oath was done out of an 'abundance of caution' and nothing more.
Gibbs said at the time the oath was handled in a way that was 'up front and transparent.'
But the biggest question over transparency is yet to be answered -- whether the public will ever learn which banks received bailout billions, and how much the government paid for certain assets.
Recently, Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders demanded Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke lift the veil on that issue.
'Tell us who they are,' the senator told Bernanke.
'No, because the reason that it's counterproductive and will destroy the value of the program is that banks will not come,' Bernanke said.
'Well isn't that too bad,' Sanders said.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has promised to open up the bailout process. But like the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department does not want to name banks.
Sloan said this is a litmus test for Obama's commitment to transparency.
'It's taxpayer dollars, and we as taxpayers then have a right to know where that money is going,' she said. 'And I just can't understand why there should be any secrecy about that.'
A top treasury official recently told Congress that the department couldn't adequately price the assets it bought in the first phase of the bailout. Republicans, though, say the software exists to do it and that taxpayers deserve to know.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., plans to press the Treasury Department to use available software to track asset prices and the flow of bailout dollars. He and other lawmakers say the issue is not just a test of transparency but also a potential key to reviving economic confidence."
******
Candidate Obama's self-righteous remarks about signing statements sent thrills running up and down the legs of dim wit liberals everywhere when he said the following, in part, during the campaign:
" 'The problem with this administration is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation,' Obama answered. But, he added: 'No one doubts that it is appropriate to use signing statements to protect a president's constitutional prerogatives.' "
Nonetheless, President Obama resorted to a signing statement himself as reported by Google News, in part:
"Two days after criticizing his predecessor for issuing guidelines on how to put legislation into practice, President Barack Obama issued such a directive himself.
Out of public view Wednesday, Obama signed a $410 billion spending bill that includes billions for items known as earmarks, the targeted spending that lawmakers direct to projects in their districts. Obama promised during the presidential campaign to curb such spending.
He also issued a 'signing statement' in which he objected to provisions of the bill that he said the Justice Department had advised 'raise constitutional concerns.' Among them are provisions that Obama said would 'unduly interfere' with his authority in the foreign affairs arena by directing him how to proceed, or not to, in negotiations and discussions with international organizations and foreign governments.
Another provision, Obama said, would limit his discretion to choose who performs specific functions in military missions."
Once again, a policy matter executed by a Republican president is evil, or worse, and a perfect candidate for CHANGE, but is perfectly fine when a Democrat president does the same!
jwl
3-11
Everyone who can recall that presidential candidate Barack Obama promised to bring profound CHANGE to America if entrusted with the U.S. presidency, please raise your left hand.
How many also recall that Obama was relentless in promising to clean up issues involving earmarks, transparency, lobbyists, and signing statements?
Notwithstanding the lofty promises made by the darling of the leftist media, with just over 50 days in the pressure-packed Fish Bowl that is the White House, the greatest change that President Obama has delivered so far is to change his mind on some of that high- minded double talk that got him elected to begin with.
For instance, with respect to earmarks, candidate Obama said the following, in part, to John McCain during one of the presidential debates:
"And, absolutely, we need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."
Fast forward to March 10, 2009.
On this date, President Obama signed a $410 Omnibus spending monster, which included thousands of "ear marks."
As reported in Yahoo News, in part:
"President Barack Obama, sounding weary of criticism over federal earmarks, defended Congress' pet projects Wednesday as he signed an 'imperfect' $410 billion measure with thousands of examples. But he said the spending does need tighter restraint and listed guidelines to do it."
So, earmarks are a major no-no, unless a Democrat president decides they are necessary as part of an "imperfect" bill passed by a spend-crazy Democrat- majority Congress?
Sounds fair and balanced, right? In nations like Venezuela and Cuba, perhaps, where dictators are all the rage.
Note, please, that President Obama signed the ominous Omnibus bill in closed door privacy.
This is in sharp contrast to other Obama signings, which have been widely and wildly promoted throughout all communications media as evidence of the fact that this president has not abandoned his responsibilities as commander-in-chief in order to play PORK on the White House basketball hoops.
Perhaps in the case of the ominous Omnibus, the president panicked about having his blatant hypocrisy exposed openly, and decided to forego the handshakes, champagne, and roses customary when a gang of corrupt liberals has succeeded in ripping off the American public?
******
Which takes us to candidate Obama's roaring oratory about transparency. The notion that any politician, especially one from South Chicago, would actually promote openness and transparency is truly mind-boggling.
As reported at Fox News, President Obama's commitment to transparency should be put under the microscope in light of how the administration has thus far handled the issue:
"Transparency was a watchword of President Obama's campaign.
But 50 days into his administration, the new president is still struggling to live up to his pledge to hold himself to what he called 'a new standard of openness.'
Already, the administration has violated a campaign promise to post bills ready for Obama's signature online for five full days before they become law.
In three cases, Obama signed legislation well within that window -- with a fair-pay law, an expansion of health insurance for children and the $787 billion economic stimulus package.
Melanie Sloan, director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said it's too early to give Obama a clear grade on transparency.
'Have they done it right on every occasion? Clearly, no,' she said. 'They seem to be making an effort.'
The White House argues it's opened up serious policy discussions to the public, holding recent summits on fiscal responsibility and health care reform. The White House even posted streaming video on its Web site and created a separate site to track stimulus spending.
But there have been other transparency misfires.
After saying that lobbyists would be mostly barred from working in the Obama White House, the administration hadn't disclosed how many lobbyists made their way into top posts until now. The administration identified three officials Tuesday night who received waivers for their lobbying work. They are Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn; Jocelyn Frye, senior official for first lady Michelle Obama, and Cecilia Munoz, director of governmental affairs.
Then there was the do-over swearing-in ceremony, which only a few reporters were allowed to attend.
Chief Justice John Roberts administered the second oath the day after Inauguration Day, following some complaints that he flubbed the oath the day before. The White House allowed just four print reporters to attend and released a picture by the official White House photographer.
Reporters complained to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who defended the decision to limit their numbers by arguing that there was no need for a big formal event, since the second oath was done out of an 'abundance of caution' and nothing more.
Gibbs said at the time the oath was handled in a way that was 'up front and transparent.'
But the biggest question over transparency is yet to be answered -- whether the public will ever learn which banks received bailout billions, and how much the government paid for certain assets.
Recently, Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders demanded Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke lift the veil on that issue.
'Tell us who they are,' the senator told Bernanke.
'No, because the reason that it's counterproductive and will destroy the value of the program is that banks will not come,' Bernanke said.
'Well isn't that too bad,' Sanders said.
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has promised to open up the bailout process. But like the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department does not want to name banks.
Sloan said this is a litmus test for Obama's commitment to transparency.
'It's taxpayer dollars, and we as taxpayers then have a right to know where that money is going,' she said. 'And I just can't understand why there should be any secrecy about that.'
A top treasury official recently told Congress that the department couldn't adequately price the assets it bought in the first phase of the bailout. Republicans, though, say the software exists to do it and that taxpayers deserve to know.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., plans to press the Treasury Department to use available software to track asset prices and the flow of bailout dollars. He and other lawmakers say the issue is not just a test of transparency but also a potential key to reviving economic confidence."
******
Candidate Obama's self-righteous remarks about signing statements sent thrills running up and down the legs of dim wit liberals everywhere when he said the following, in part, during the campaign:
" 'The problem with this administration is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation,' Obama answered. But, he added: 'No one doubts that it is appropriate to use signing statements to protect a president's constitutional prerogatives.' "
Nonetheless, President Obama resorted to a signing statement himself as reported by Google News, in part:
"Two days after criticizing his predecessor for issuing guidelines on how to put legislation into practice, President Barack Obama issued such a directive himself.
Out of public view Wednesday, Obama signed a $410 billion spending bill that includes billions for items known as earmarks, the targeted spending that lawmakers direct to projects in their districts. Obama promised during the presidential campaign to curb such spending.
He also issued a 'signing statement' in which he objected to provisions of the bill that he said the Justice Department had advised 'raise constitutional concerns.' Among them are provisions that Obama said would 'unduly interfere' with his authority in the foreign affairs arena by directing him how to proceed, or not to, in negotiations and discussions with international organizations and foreign governments.
Another provision, Obama said, would limit his discretion to choose who performs specific functions in military missions."
Once again, a policy matter executed by a Republican president is evil, or worse, and a perfect candidate for CHANGE, but is perfectly fine when a Democrat president does the same!
jwl
3-11
Economic Meltdown: "Great Opportunity" To Fix Illegal Alien Mess!
By John W. Lillpop
In their rush to dole out a trillion dollars to fund liberal pet projects in the name of stimulating the battered economy, the Democrat-controlled Congress and President Obama failed to address a major domestic crisis that threatens America's homeland security, social order, and cultural heritage, and which costs taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars each year.
The issue is the unchecked invasion of our sovereign land by scores of millions of illegal aliens, mostly from the failed state of Mexico.
Ironically, many of the concerns voiced by liberals could be mitigated, at least partially, by aggressively working to solve the illegal aliens mess.
Concerned about education and overcrowded class rooms?
Removing 12-38 million invaders would reduce class sizes dramatically, and improve the quality of instruction by weeding out illegals unable to keep up because of language and cultural barriers.
Concerned about overcrowded prisons and jails and the need to spend hundreds of billions to erect even more?
Approximately 30 percent of all inmates are illegal aliens, people who should not even be here to begin with.
Concerned about run away health care costs and the tens of millions whom are uninsured?
A disproportionate percentage of illegal aliens are uninsured and do not otherwise pay for their heath care, although they somehow manage to send approximately $30 billion a year back to Mexico. Medical services not paid for by illegals are dumped on the backs of Americans who belong here.
Concerned about violent crime, drugs, gangs and the general deterioration of the rule of law?
In addition to the crime of being in America unlawfully, illegal aliens exacerbate crime in this nation.
Concerned about the loss of jobs and reduced standard of living for working Americans?
Illegal aliens undercut American citizens by working for lower wages and without benefits. In effect, they steal jobs from real Americans.
******************
President Obama has encouraged Americans to see that the horrendous economic meltdown also includes a "great opportunity" for the future.
Perhaps the president and his colleagues in the Democrat party should set the example by taking advantage of this unique opportunity to end, and reverse, illegal immigration, a crisis that plagues the nation's economic, social, cultural, and educational systems?
For instance, unemployed American citizens should be used to complete the border fence between America and Mexico, and be trained to work with law enforcement authorities to ferret out illegals for deportation.
That would put needy Americans to work on a rule of law issue vital to our sovereignty and homeland security, and would make jobs held by illegal aliens available to citizens.
With Democrats committed to spending trillions of dollars of taxpayer money to revive the economy, why not fix the illegal alien mess, once and for all, by building a viable border fence and by sending those who have no business being here back to their nations of origin?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)