Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Monday, July 20, 2009

Exlaining Obama's Rush to Pass ObamaCare

Barack Obama is rivaling the maturity of an adolescent when it comes to his insistence that his health care plan pass before the August recess. The question is, why? Some have speculated that he's concerned legislators will see how angry their constituents really are when they go back to their districts.

But what if it's more than that? What if it's another version of the check-cashing game? The AP is reporting that the Mid-Summer budget update, usually presented in mid-July is being put off until the middle of August. Why, that would be DURING the August recess, would it not? That would be another factor over and above constituent anger that could significantly influence the votes of legislators.

Quoting from the AP:
The release of the update — usually scheduled for mid-July — has been put off until the middle of next month, giving rise to speculation the White House is delaying the bad news at least until Congress leaves town Aug. 7 on its summer recess.
The response in opposition to the notion that Obama is trying to stave off bad news until his plan passes seems legitimate at first glance.....
White House budget office spokesman Tom Gavin disagreed, noting the delay was "really not something out of the norm" and is typical for a president's first year. Gavin noted that President George W. Bush's budget office did not release the mid-session review in his first year until August 22; in President Bill Clinton's first year, it did not come out until Sept. 1.
.....but on second glance, that stance raises even more questions. Among them is why is it ok to delay the mid-summer budget report but not ok to delay passage of the monstrosity of a Bill? Isn't that like buying a big luxury item before you assess your ability to pay for it? Isn't it like writing a check without balancing your check book?
Citing the CBO testimony, House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, on Monday accused Democrats of "burying this budget update until after Congress leaves town next month." He called the budget-update postponment "an attempt to hide a record-breaking deficit as Democratic leaders break arms to rush through a government takeover of health care."
There is simply no reason why the release of the budget can be delayed while this bill can't be.

Brian Williams: The Most Shameless Man in America

Folks, saying I cannot get excited about honoring Walter Cronkite would be an understatement. In fact, I'd be willing to give Michael Jackson more of my time. Walter Cronkite undermined our military and our war effort in Vietnam. There's no telling how many American soldiers died as a direct result of Cronkite's deceptive and manipulative reporting.

Now we have Brian Williams who is neck and neck with Chris Matthews for the "Most Shameless Man In America" Award. Williams appeared on Larry King and had this shameless message about his reverence for Cronkite:
I announced my intention to my family, apparently, at the age of 8, that he was the man I wanted to be. And this was the profession I wanted. And I have lived such a charmed life that I got the chance to explain that to Walter and tell him that and make it clear. And just was able to breathe the air he exhaled and know him a little bit, as friends.
Hey Brian, you breathed the air Cronkite exhaled? UGH. So how close did you really get to Walter? Was it closer than this?

Considering that Cronkite was a globalist, I was struck by how many times Williams referenced the words, "universe", "world", "air", "globe", and "space".
I did discover the globe behind him was just kind of a lime green and a wood model of the -- of the earth, and he sat at a mundane white Formica wrap-around desk. But to me, as a little kid, as a viewer who watched him narrate the cold war, the space program, the Vietnam War, it was the center of the universe from small-town America.
I personally find this glorification of another man to be more than just a little disturbing.

Williams simply couldn't help himself:
Again, just to have known him, to occupy this same space just means the world.
SNAP OUT OF IT, MAN! You're like a teenager ogling over Hannah Montana, who is actually more deserving.

Speaking of "earth" and worldly things, perhaps Williams should take the time to look at this despicable award being presented to Cronkite in 1999 along with his despicable acceptance speech.

Not only did Walter Cronkite attempt to deceive the American people during the Vietnam War but he was also a globalist. Check out this video (you will need to use external force to keep your jaw shut, especially when you see what Mr. Cronkite had to say about Satan). Watch all the way to the end and guess who honors him via satellite (you may or may not be shocked but it speaks volumes either way).

h/t to NewsBusters for the Williams story.

WSJ Critical of Obama on Honduras

Mary Anastasia O'Grady's piece in the Wall Street Journal today is very critical of Obama's stance on Honduras. With a title like, 'The U.S. Steers Left on Honduras', you know it has to be. Steering left on Honduras necessarily means aligning with Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega, and the Castro brothers.

Throw on top of that the fact that as the sitting government, led by Roberto Micheletti, continues to stand up to Zelaya and practically the rest of the entire world, it is looking more and more like Micheletti is with the good guys. Another benefit to Micheletti is that Zelaya's rhetoric has been so incendiary and caustic since his ouster, he appears to be unmasking himself by the minute.

For her part, O'Grady does a great job of zeroing in on the consequence of Obama's policy toward Honduras having the effect of aligning the United States government with Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.
The Venezuelan may feel that his aims have enough support from the U.S. and the Organization of American States (OAS) that he would be justified in forcing Mr. Zelaya on Honduras by supporting a violent overthrow of the current government. That he has reason to harbor such a view is yet another sign that the Obama administration is on the wrong side of history.
Mr. Obama on the wrong side of history? Naw.

Anyway, O'Grady cites none other than Miguel Estrada who quotes directly from the Honduras Constitution:
"Article 239," Mr. Estrada noted, "specifically states that any president who so much as proposes the permissibility of reelection 'shall cease forthwith' in his duties, and Article 4 provides that any 'infraction' of the succession rules constitutes treason."
So the United States is supporting a man whose own Constitution points to him committing treason to boot?

O'Grady then nails the reality of the current situation had Obama sided with Micheletti and against Chavez / Zelaya:
That might have been the end of it if the U.S. had supported the Honduran rule of law, or simply refrained from meddling. Instead President Obama and the State Department joined Mr. Chávez and his allies in demanding that Mr. Zelaya be restored to power. This has emboldened Venezuela.
But No.

Here's another lesson to be learned by what is happening. The courage shown by Micheletti and the sitting government appears to be concerning Chavez.
Mr. Chávez understands that Mr. Zelaya's star is fading, which is why he called Tom Shannon, the State Department's assistant secretary for the Western Hemisphere at home at 11:15 p.m on July 9. Mr. Shannon told me that Mr. Chávez "again made the case for the unconditional return of Mr. Zelaya, though he did so in a less bombastic manner than he has in the past."
Chavez the bully. We all know what bullies really are, right? Think Scut Farcus in "A Christmas Story". We all know what Ralphie did to him.

I urge and encourage you to read O'Grady's entire piece.

One last thing on Obama and Honduras... I know there's almost a reticence to pay much attention to what's going on with a country like Honduras but when you peel away the layers, we see much about Obama.

Whenever Obama's affiliations are brought up and he is forced to acknowledge them (Ayers and Wright), he attempts to distance himself by saying he doesn't agree with them. In the case of Ayers, he was on a Board with him but didn't share his views. In the case of Wright, he belonged to his church but didn't share his views.

Now, Mr. Obama finds himself in a situation where he cannot say he doesn't support the views of Hugo Chavez. Those views consist of installing a stooge of the latter as the president of Honduras. A stooge that was allegedly going to rig the results of a referendum that showed the country wanted him to illegally change the Constitution.

The group formerly known as ACORN is planning to be very involved in administering the census and we're all familiar with allegations of fraud relating to voter registration, right?

"An acorn doesn't fall far from the tree."
- Barack Obama, 2008


UPDATE: We have an update on HAM-GATE. Obviously the wording of the invoice was so over-the-top that Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack felt he had to clarify. His statement all but conceded that the wording of the invoice was poor. He reached out to the Drudge report to clear away the mayo
The references to "2 pound frozen ham sliced" are to the sizes of the packaging. Press reports suggesting that the Recovery Act spent $1.191 million to buy "2 pounds of ham" are wrong. In fact, the contract in question purchased 760,000 pounds of ham for $1.191 million, at a cost of approximately $1.50 per pound.
Gateway Pundit provides a link to Food Lion which sells sliced ham for $.79.

Note: if you can't see the price per pound on the Food Lion site, it mysteriously vanished after a link to it was posted on Drudge.

Yes, that's a difference of $.71 / lb. That Government machine is SO efficient, isn't it?


How much do you think it costs to slice two frozen hams? Before you answer, imagine them as frozen as they could possibly be. So frozen that if we catapulted them toward the sun, the earth would actually begin cooling not just because two of the most dangerously frozen hams would no longer be among us but because they'd cause the sun itself to cool. We're talkin' hams so frozen, you'd get frostbite just looking at them.

Have no fear, the Obama government took care of it and guess what? They were able to complete the daunting task of slicing two severely frozen hams in just over two months and just shy of $1.2 Million!

Don't believe me? Check out a copy of the invoice right here.

And you thought your tax dollars were being wasted. Shame on you.

h/t to Gateway Pundit
Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive