Category Archives: Executive Branch

Would Obama have Signed the Declaration of Independence?

Posted on by
4

During his 2008 campaign, Senator Obama claimed kinship with a number of very famous people, including actor Brad Pitt.[1] As we honor our nation on this July 4th, please take a few moments and read again, one of our greatest documents; written, signed, distributed and defended by some of our bravest citizens.  Could our current president claim kinship with any of these inspired Americans?  Interestingly, he does number six U.S. Presidents among his cousins – one of whom he has treated most shabbily:  George W. Bush. [2]

When President Obama  says America is not a Christian nation, perhaps he should read this Declaration as one of the best fact checking mechanisms available.  Does Obama  believe he derives his “…just powers from the consent of the governed…?”  If he did, perhaps he would be far more concerned about working with, rather than around our Congress.  Perhaps he would show greater respect to Americans who disagree with his policies, rather than attempting to publicly ridicule them.

We know it would be ridiculous to compare President Obama to a King.  Yet, how striking the  similarity between the following excerpt from the Declaration of Independence and the struggle that has played out between our own federal government and the state of Arizona.

“He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.”

To be sure, we are a very long way from experiencing the government abuses borne by our forefathers.  Still, an imaginative mind might find a few other startling similarities in this document.

Thank God for this Declaration  and for the long line of brave, committed Americans who, throughout our history,  have placed their “Lives,” their “Fortunes” and their “Sacred Honor” on the line to preserve it.  Thank God for a system in which we can place an end to political abuses at the polls, rather than through revolution.

God bless you and yours on this July 4th!

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.


He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:


For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:


For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:


For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:


For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:


For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:


For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences


For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:


For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:


For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.


He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.


He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.


He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

[1] Ebru News/AP, (March 28, 2008), Ebru News web-site, Barack Obama’s Famous Relatives, retrieved July 3, 2012, from http://news.ebru.tv/en/4355

[2] Ibid.

Rhetoric from Obama Campaign Hits New Low

Posted on by
Reply

July 2 turned out to be another big day for the Obama campaign – his surrogates demonstrating once again, the spirit of divisiveness that has been the hallmark of his presidency.

The first example came on the heels of the Supreme Court’s decision on the so-called Affordable Healthcare Act.  While the controversial government mandate survived the high court’s ruling, their ability to leverage Medicaid expansion by holding hostage other federal funds  to the states did not.  Accordingly, several states immediately telegraphed their intention not to expand Medicaid within their borders.  One of these states was Florida.  Florida Democratic Representative Debbie Wasserman-Shultz was quick to weigh in, giving her professional opinion of the decision by Governor Rick Scott. 

“I have to tell you,” said Wasserman Schults, “ I think he’s acting like a SPOILED BRAT.”[1]

Not to be outdone, Obama campaign surrogate Bill Burton constructed a strawman during a television interview, in which voters on the sidelines:

“…look at Mitt Romney and say, ‘Yeah, but is this CLOWN really going to beat President Obama?”[2]

All in all, another proud day for the Democrats – and they have so much reason to be proud.  Here are just a few other examples of their equally inspiring judgments on fellow Americans:

 “All those who wore sheets a long time ago have now lifted them off and started wearing [applause], uh, clothing, uh, with a name, say, I am part of the tea party.”[3] 

‘Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics,’ Ackerman wrote, ‘Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.’”[4]

“the ‘tea party’ can go straight to hell,”[5]

“Some of these folks in Congress right now would love to see us as second-class citizens…Some of them in Congress right now with this Tea Party movement would love to see you and me … hanging on a tree.”[6]

President Obama, an organizer and agitator by experience and training, continues to illustrate how his strong example has set the tone for both his administration and his campaign.
(Not an Excerpt from 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama)

[1] Tiffany Griffith quoting Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), (July 2, 2012), WOKV.Com, Democrat calls Gov. Scott a “spoiled brat,” retrieved July 2, 2012 from http://www.wokv.com/news/news/local/democrat-calls-gov-scott-spoiled-brat/nPkgX/

[2] Bill Burton, (July 2, 2012), Real Clear Politics web-site, Obama Super PAC Head Bill Burton: Romney A “Clown”, retrieved July 2, 2012 from http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/07/02/obama_super_pac_head_bill_burton_romney_a_clown.html

 

[3] Doug Powers, guest blogger, quoting Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), (July 16, 2010), Michelle Malkin website, A Sheila Jackson Lee Twofer, retrieved July 19, 2010 from http://michellemalkin.com/2010/07/16/a-sheila-jackson-lee/

[4] Jonathan Strong, (July 20, 2010), The Daily Caller website, Documents show Media Plotting to Kill Stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright, retrieved July 27, 2010 from http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/

[5] Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles), quoted by L.A. Times (Aug. 20, 2011), LA Times web-site, Rep. Maxine Waters: ‘The tea party can go straight to hell’, retrieved January 4, 2012, from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/08/tea-party-maxine-waters-hell.html

[6] Rep. Andre Carson (March 10, 2011), Story by Judson Berger, (Aug 31, 2011), FoxNews web-site, Rep. Andre Carson: Tea Party Wants to See Black Americans ‘Hanging on a Tree’, retrieved December 18, 2011 from http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/31/rep-carson-tea-party-wants-to-see-black-americans-hanging-on-tree/

[7]

Reason #45 – Obama’s Food Police

Posted on by
Reply

Only 129 Days Remaining!

Reason #45

Obama’s Food Police

On January 30, 2012, a North Carolina pre-schooler had her lunch replaced by an inspector from the Department of Health and Human Services’ “More at Four” program.  “More at Four,” a stimulus funded program operating at the state level, ensures that home packed lunches brought into the schools by children, conform to USDA guidelines.  Inspectors are periodically sent into the schools to check these homemade lunches.[i]

In this case, the inspector’s position was that a four year old child’s home packed turkey and cheese sandwich on whole wheat white bread, with a banana, potato chips and apple juice did not conform.  Instead, the child was given a school tray, from which she ate only three chicken nuggets…CHICKEN NUGGETS!  What a healthy alternative! [ii]

For those who do not think Obama’s Healthcare Reform program is about federal controls, here is a great example of this Administration’s belief that government trumps parents – even in areas as personal as food choices for our children.  It is fine, in Obama’s world, for a government inspector to tell, or imply to a child that there is something wrong with the lunch provided by his or her parents.  It is apparently also o.k., for the inspector to make a change in that lunch and for the providing school to charge the parent, as they did in this case.

While stimulus funds were marked for the hiring of police officers, it is fair to say that no rational American believed the Administration meant “Food Police.”

Is this the type of change we should believe in?

(Excerpt from 203 Reasons Not to Vote for Barack Obama)

[i] Sarah Burrows, (Feb. 14, 2012), Carolina Journal Online, Preschooler’s Homemade Lunch Replaced with Cafeteria “Nuggets”, retrieved February 19, 2012 from http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=8762 and PJ Tatler story posted by Bryan Preston, (Feb. 15, 2012), providing partial transcripts from Fox News’ Megyn Kelly’s interview with Reporter Sarah Burrows, Federal Stimulus Dollars Pay for the School Lunch Food Police, retrieved February 19, 2012, from http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/02/15/federal-stimulus-dollars-pay-for-the-school-lunch-food-police/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[ii] Ibid

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

Reason 32 – America Sought to Dictate Terms

Posted on by
Reply

Only 138 Days Remaining!

Reason #32

America Sought to Dictate Terms

In his first address to the Summit of the Americas, Obama affably responds to comments by Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega – a man responsible for death, destruction and the economic plunder of his own nation.  Obama notes that we should not be trapped by history and suggests the need for flexibility in dealing with places like Cuba.

“…All of us must now renew the common stake that we have in one another. I know that promises of partnership have gone unfulfilled in the past, and that trust has to be earned over time. While the United States has done much to promote peace and prosperity in the hemisphere, we have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms. But I pledge to you that we seek an equal partnership. (Applause.) There is no senior partner and junior partner in our relations; there is simply engagement based on mutual respect and common interests and shared values. So I’m here to launch a new chapter of engagement that will be sustained throughout my administration. (Applause.)

“To move forward, we cannot let ourselves be prisoners of past disagreements. I am very grateful that President Ortega — (applause) — I’m grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old. (Laughter.) Too often, an opportunity to build a fresh partnership of the Americas has been undermined by stale debates. And we’ve heard all these arguments before, these debates that would have us make a false choice between rigid, state-run economies or unbridled and unregulated capitalism; between blame for right-wing paramilitaries or left-wing insurgents; between sticking to inflexible policies with regard to Cuba or denying the full human rights that are owed to the Cuban people.[i]

Interestingly, while he strikes an apologetic tone by voicing his perception that the U.S. has, “at times been disengaged, and at times sought to dictate our terms,”(in Latin America),  he makes no similar apology for attempting to overrule the Honduran Constitutional process by demanding the return to power of their ousted President, Manuel  Zelaya.

[i] President Barack Obama, (April 17, 2009), White House web-site, Remarks by the President at the Summit of the Americas Opening Ceremony, retrieved December 7, 2011 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-summit-americas-opening-ceremony

Reason 24/25 – Obama Denies Parents’ Right to Know of Abortions/Abortion and Slavery

Posted on by
Reply

143 Days Remaining!

 Reason #24

Obama Denies Parents’ Right to Know of Abortions

Senator Obama voted against the 2006 Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act.  His was a vote to allow “…taking minors across State lines in circumvention of laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions.”  In other words, Obama believes that if you live in a state that requires parental consent for abortion, it’s o.k. for your 14 year old daughter to cross state lines, or to be taken across state lines by someone else, in order to have an abortion in a state with no such requirements.[i]

* * *

Reason #25

Abortion and Slavery

After more than a year of controversy and delays, Dawn Johnsen, President Obama’s early pick as the head of the Dept. of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, withdrew from consideration in April, 2010.[ii]

Johnsen’s nomination was apparently negatively affected by “her positions on torture and the investigation of previous administration actions.”[iii]  But, we can’t say that President Obama didn’t try.  And why did her nomination stay on the table for more than a year?  Could it have had anything to do with her position on abortion?

As the head of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) in 1989, Johnsen filed a brief with the Supreme Court, in which she asserted that “Any restriction that makes abortion less accessible is, in her view, tantamount to ‘involuntary servitude’ because it ‘requires a woman to provide continuous physical service to the fetus in order to further the state’s asserted interest [in the life of the unborn].’ In effect, a woman ‘is constantly aware for nine months that her body is not her own: the state has conscripted her body for its own ends.’ Such ‘forced pregnancy,’ she contends, violates the Thirteenth Amendment, which prohibits slavery.”[iv]

[i] On the Issues: Every Political Leader on Every Issue, Vote number 2006-216 notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions on Jul 25, 2006 regarding bill S.403 Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act – Results: Passed 65-34 – Democrats voting on 2006-216, retrieved January 9, 2012 from http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2006-216.htm

[iv] Andrew McCarthy, (undated), National Review Online, Lawyer’s Lawyer, Radical’s Radical: Meet Obama DOJ nominee Dawn Johnsen, retrieved March 9, 2011 from http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=YzcyODUwNjAwNzg3YTYyZjBiOWU3ZTQwZmYzOGIwOGQ=

Reason 23 – Obama Takes Credit for Comfortable Deaths

Posted on by
Reply

144 Days Remaining!

Reason #23

Obama Takes Credit for Comfortable Deaths

Nurse Jill Stanek, during her testimony before the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee in March, 2001, described a horrific scenario of aborted, but surviving babies being left in a hospital’s soiled utility closet – there to die alone and without medical assistance.  Then State Senator Barack Obama, was according to Nurse Stanek, “unfazed” by her testimony.  But, while he may have been “unfazed” by her graphic descriptions, he was apparently listening.  He proved this in 2002, when Ms. Stanek again testified before the same Committee.  Obama reportedly responded to her later testimony, noting:

“’Ms. Stanek, your initial testimony last year showed your dismay at the lack of regard for human life.” “I agreed with you last year, and we suggested that there be a Comfort Room or something of that nature be done.  The hospital acknowledged that and changes were made and you are still unimpressed.  It sounds to me like you are really not interested in how these fetuses are treated, but rather not providing absolutely any medical care or life to them.”[i]

In addition to his apparent callousness, Obama seems to be claiming personal credit for setting up the “Comfort Room” in response to Stanek’s 2001 testimony.  He apparently forgot to consider that the room was implemented four months before her first appearance before his Committee.

[i] Jill Stanek, (Jan. 18, 2008), WND Web-Site, WND Commentary, PLAY IT AGAIN, SAM: Barack Obama and the Comfort Room, retrieved January 19, 2012 from http://www.wnd.com/2008/06/67328/

Reason 18 – Obama: A Rank Amateur

Posted on by
Reply

149 Days Remaining!

Reason #18

Obama: A Rank Amateur

In her book, The Obama’s, author Jodi Kantor states that “…when it was time to order a swing set for the Obama girls, Rear Admiral Stephen Rochon, the chief usher, traveled to the factory in South Dakota where it was being made to inspect it.”[i]

According to media coverage at the time, the Obama’s paid for the swing set.  But, there is more than one kind of extravagance – and this is a particularly ugly and unnecessary one.  A Rear Admiral in the field would likely be in command of thousands of service members.  There are two levels of Rear Admirals, both of which are Flag Officers – a rank level attained by less than 1% of career military officers.[ii]

Sending a Rear Admiral across the country to inspect a child’s swing set – particularly, given current Defense cuts – is an insult and an embarrassment.  If the military was to have any role in this transaction, there are numerous enlisted skilled technicians in all branches who could have done a credible job.  Most probably, there was an Army base far closer to the South Dakota operation than Washington, DC.

How and why did this happen?  Who knows?  What we do know, is that President Obama seems more comfortable with high ranking titles.  The BP “Spill Commission” noted, for example that:

“During the Deepwater Horizon response…inter-agency groups [NRT and RRT] were activated but later marginalized when issues were taken out of their hands and decided by agency heads rather than through the established decision-making structure.  When the first National Response Team conference call was held, instead of the designated team members, the principals of the agencies were on the line and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano chaired the call.” [iii]

In fact, on day two of the BP spill crisis, the Deputy Secretary of Interior was dispatched to the Gulf, in order – not to guide our response, but to provide Washington officials hourly updates on our disaster response.[iv]  Does this sound like a job for the Deputy Interior Secretary?

Are these lessons in applied Elitism?  Or, are they merely the actions of a rank amateur?

[i] Jodi Kantor, The Obama’s, (New York, 2012, Little Brown and Company), Kindle Version, p48

[ii] Pamela Barnett, About.com US Military web-site, Navy Rear Admiral, retrieved February 24, 2012 from http://usmilitary.about.com/od/navy/a/navyradmiral.htm

[iii] Staff, (October 5, 2010*), National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, Staff Working Paper No. 2, Decision-Making Within the Unified Command, p7 – Available at http://www.oilspillcommission.gov/document/decision-making-within-unified-command

[iv] Posted by Heidi Avery, (May 5, 2010), White House Blog, The Ongoing Administration-Wide Response to the Deepwater BP Oil Spill, Retrieved September 23, 2010 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/05/05/ongoing-administration-wide-response-deepwater-bp-oil-spill

Reason 16/17 – Obama Reaching Out Again/Geithner: No Solutions – “We Just Don’t Like Yours!”

Posted on by
Reply

150 Days Remaining!

Reason #16

Obama – Reaching out Again – knife in hand!

The President who campaigned on hope and change, has steadfastly refused the opportunity to unify the country, to show respect for our heritage and our people, or to attempt to bridge the differences between Republicans and Democrats.  Instead, he has given us 2nd rate theater.

This comment was made before the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee:

“…we don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they got to sit in back. (Laughter.)”[i]

How can we doubt the unifying power of these words.  This is indeed, change we can believe in.

 * * *

Reason #17

No Solutions – We Just “Don’t Like Yours”

As Obama talks about intractable Republicans and his determination to work around, rather than with and through Congress in a bipartisan fashion, small debates continue to play out.  Some – like this one with Republican Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Democrat Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner seem to show a combination of serious effort, theater and condescension.

In the following exchange, Rep. Ryan and Secretary Geithner seemed in agreement on some issues, seemed to somehow acknowledge the expertise and savvy of the other, but while it appeared Ryan was actually looking for answers, Geithner seemed satisfied to blame the Bush Administration, lay out what they apparently see as an insurmountable problem, with 10,000 Americans retiring each day, and in a pretty cavalier fashion, admit that they have no solutions – they just don’t like the Ryan plan.

Paul Ryan:  “…Our Government is making promises to Americans, that it has no way of accounting for them.  And so you’re saying, yeah we’re stabilizing it, but we’re not fixing it in the long run.  That means we’re just going to keep lying to people.  We’re going to keep all these empty promises going.  So what we’re saying is – in order to avert a debt crisis – I mean, you’re the Treasury Secretary, of all p…  If we can’t make good on our bonds in the future, who’s going to invest in our Country?  We do not want to have a debt crisis and so it comes down to confidence and trajectory.  Do we have confidence that we’re getting our fiscal situation under control?  That we’re preventing the debt from getting at these catastrophic levels – and if you go back to the preceding chart – Number 13 –  you’re showing that you have no plan to get this debt under control…”

Timothy Geithner:  “…You were right to say we’re not coming before you today to say we have a definitive solution to that long term problem.  What we do know is we don’t like yours.[ii]

* * *

Your Turn

Do you know a Reason why Barack Obama should not be elected President? Can you tie that Reason to something specific and document it with a credible source?  If so, share it in the Reply box at the end of this page.  Working together, let’s set a goal of 10,000 Reasons – and when we have them, let’s share them with the GOP!!!  Make your voice heard.  Check our our “What do YOU Think” page.

 

[i] President Barack Obama, (Oct. 25, 2010), White House web-site, Speeches & Remarks, Remarks by the President at DCCC General Reception at the Rhode Island Convention Center, retrieved December 18, 2011, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/10/25/remarks-president-dccc-general-reception

[ii] Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Timothy Geithner, Treasury Secretary, broadcast on CSPAN 3 and downloaded to YouTube by “TGRRFG” (Feb. 17, 2012), Timothy Geithner: We don’t have a solution, we just don’t, retrieved March 8, 2012 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R27zXCHXK1s

Reason 14/15 – Obama “Inherited” – 16,300 Times!/President Won’t Share Keys

Posted on by
Reply

151 Days Remaining!

Reason #14

Obama “Inherited” – 16,300 Times

Even today, this President continues to try and distance himself from the economic problems faced by America.  Nothing is his fault.  He bears no responsibility.  He “Inherited” this mess.  In fact, if you had gone to the White House web-site at 10:45am EST, on March 21, 2012, and in the search box, entered the word “inherited.”  This would have been your result:

Results 1-10 of about 16,300 for ‘”inherited”[i]

In his remarks to a Joint Session of Congress on Feb 24, 2009, he used the word three times and those of us who have listened to him, have heard it on many other occasions.  To be fair, these were not all his own speeches, but they all came from the White House.  Since it would take far too long to search each of the 16,300 uses of the word “Inherited,” I’ll stipulate that he could have used the word in other contexts – but, even if we generously allow that this happened in 1,000 cases, that still leaves 15,300 times in which the word was used once or more to describe his plight as the 44th President of the U.S. and his absolute freedom from any responsibility for our current economic conditions.

Although he still uses “inherited,” to point the finger at others, he has also learned to mix it up – now using the equally stunning “…for the last eight years….” and then again, to “….over the last decade.”  Same message, but as he and Duval Patrick say; “Words Matter.”[ii]

* * *

Reason #15

President Won’t Share Keys – Demands others Compromise

Sticking to the same divisive, partisan rhetoric he consistently uses on the American people, President Obama addressed members of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee on May 13, 2010, telling them:

“So after they drove the car into the ditch, made it as difficult as possible for us to pull it back, now they want the keys back.  No!  You can’t drive!  We don’t want to have to go back into the ditch! We just got the car out! We just got the car out!”[iii]

And here at the wheel is the President of “hope and change,” “fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”  His inspirational words no doubt enhanced the spirit of bipartisan cooperation – and this was when Democrats controlled both Houses.  Does the President who was ready to meet with Ahmadinejad sound like he was ready to work cooperatively with Republicans?

* * *

[i] Search Results on WH web-site for the word “Inherited.”  Search made on Feb. 2, 2012 at http://search.whitehouse.gov/search?affiliate=wh&query=%22inherited%22&form_id=usasearch_box

[ii] Rachel Sklar,(February 19, 2008), The Huffington Post, Yes, You Can Borrow My Speech: Why Obama’s Lifted Words Matter, retrieved May 25, 2010 from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/19/yes-you-can-borrow-my-spe_n_87382.html

[iii] President Barack Obama, (May 13, 2010), White House web-site, Speeches & Remarks, Remarks by the President at DCCC Dinner, St. Regis Hotel, New York, retrieved December 18, 2011, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-dccc-dinner

* * *


Reason 7/8 – Timing is Everything/Disappearing Candidates

Posted on by
Reply

155 Days Remaining!

Obama’s run of good fortune, as previously discussed, did not stop when he got into elite Punahou in Hawaii, or, when he found himself a student at Columbia University, then Harvard; or even when he was elected President of the Harvard Law Review, or approached as an unknown, to write a book and receive a $150,000 advance.  His good luck didn’t even stop when his campaign knocked all opposing Democrats off the State Senate ballot on a technicality.  Money and good fortune seemed to seek him out as his wife’s salary tripled, as he met his current Senior Advisor; and as sealed secrets about his rivals for the U.S. Senate, were suddenly Unsealed and exposed to the voting public.  With all his own Sealed records hidden from public view, how ironic that he should call for an America where “everybody plays by the same rules.”

Reason #7

Timing is Everything

According to author Michelle Malkin, Mrs. Obama’s salary tripled from $122,000 in 2004, to $317,000 in 2005 – timed well with Mr. Obama’s election to the U.S. Senate.  And, although Michelle Obama joined her husband’s campaign in 2008, the hospital still continued to pay her a salary of more than $60,000.[i]

Valerie Jarrett, vice-chair of the Medical Center’s Board of Trustees when Mrs. Obama was named Executive Director of Community Affairs, moved on to become Obama’s Senior Advisor in 2009.  Meantime, Mrs. Obama’s position at the medical center – a position that did not exist before her appointment – was eliminated in 2009, when it was clear she would not be returning.[ii]  It appears that the hospital was able to continue functioning reasonably well without this $300,000 plus position.

Looks like this was a “Win” for Everyone!

 * * *

Reason #8

Disappearing Candidates

When Obama decided to run for the U.S. Senate, it was not as simple as knocking people off the ballot by finding errors in their petitions.  There was still however, a serendipitous confluence of events to help him along.

David Axelrod, who became Obama’s campaign manager, was reportedly very well known in Chicago’s political and media circles; and each year, would hold a party, inviting members of both worlds.  As a highly sought after advisor, he was contacted by Democrat candidate Blair Hull in 2002, to assist him with his upcoming campaign for the U.S. Senate.  Hull, a former Las Vegas gambler and Wall Street Securities Trader, was ready to spend millions in the coming race.  His possible Achilles Heel was a sealed divorce record.

During their conversations, Axelrod questioned the circumstances of the divorce.  Hull had been married three times; twice to the same woman.  He admitted the past use of cocaine, treatment for alcohol abuse and that his ex-wife had made allegations of abuse.  When Axelrod pushed to know whether or not the abuse allegations were true, Hull reportedly stonewalled.[iii]

Axelrod ultimately decided to represent Barack Obama and brought with him, a knowledge of Hull gained through his earlier conversations.  During the primary, as Hull continued to climb in the polls, two Chicago reporters – both attendees at Axelrod’s annual party – began pushing for the opening of Hull’s divorce records.

Ultimately “the Tribune and WLS-TV” filed suit and the divorce records were unsealed – not by court order but, incredibly, at the request of Hull and his ex-wife in an apparent attempt at damage control. The records revealed violent behavior on Hull’s part and subsequent interviews exposed his use of cocaine and abuse of alcohol. As Hull’s candidacy imploded, Obama’s political fortunes surged.[iv]  But, it didn’t stop there.

Once the primary had passed, the next obstacle for Obama was Jack Ryan – a Republican who, like Blair Hull, brought a sealed divorce file to the campaign.  Once again, the Tribune and WLS-TV sued to open the file.  When a California judge ordered the files open, they exposed a husband who attempted to coerce his wife “into having sex in front of strangers.”[v]

Ryan, who claimed to be the first politician forced to release sealed divorce records, finally withdrew from the campaign and once again, Obama’s fortunes soared.[vi]

Did Obama’s campaign have anything to do with the opening of Blair Hull’s and Jack Ryan’s divorce files?

What can be said is that there was an extraordinary attrition rate among candidates opposing Obama for the State and U.S. Senates.

* * *

Your Turn

Do you know a Reason why Barack Obama should not be elected President? Can you tie that Reason to something specific and document it with a credible source?  If so, share it in the Reply box at the end of this page.  Working together, let’s set a goal of 10,000 Reasons – and when we have them, let’s share them with the GOP!!!  Make your voice heard.  And while you’re at it, who do you think Mitt Romney will select as his running mate?  Vote here!!!

[i] Michelle Malkin, Culture of Corruption, (Washington, DC, 2009, Regnery), 52-53

[ii] Michelle Malkin, Culture of Corruption, (Washington, DC, 2009, Regnery), 52-53

[iii] Mendell, From Promise to Power, (New York, 2007, Harper) kindle book,167-171, 214

[iv] David Mendell, From Promise to Power, (New York, 2007, Harper) kindle book, 213-216, 235-236

[v] David Mendell, From Promise to Power, (New York, 2007, Harper) kindle book, 260-263

[vi] David Mendell, From Promise to Power, (New York, 2007, Harper) kindle book, 267