Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obama. Show all posts
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Like Webb, Warner Wants Us to Forget he Voted with Obama
This hypocrite thinks he is going to fool Virginians by pretending he's a blue dog democrat. Virginian's aren't stupid, and for those who are gullible, there are plenty of us who will remind them of Warners votes for Obamacare, Tarp and other dangerous bills that Obama Reid and Pelosi sent through the Senate.
Keep and eye on our two slim ball Senators as they move to the center in the next two years and the left wing blogs and journalists over at Wa Po are going to help them by pretending to be against them.
read the first installment of propaganda at the huffington post..
Monday, September 20, 2010
Well, Isn't That Special...
After they voted for the stimulus. After they voted for and rammed ObamaCare down our throats. After they called us Nazi's and Racists. After they refused to listen to "We the People"...
Now they want their INDEPENDENCE from Obama, Reid and Pelosi!
Democrats from a number of states, including Texas, Ohio and North Carolina, are running away from Pelosi in a harsh political climate. Distancing one's self from the speaker is nothing new for many Democrats, including Edwards, but the number of incumbents and the volume of their criticism of the party House leader is larger than it has been in past election cycles - and the volume of their criticism is louder
Well, good luck with that
Now they want their INDEPENDENCE from Obama, Reid and Pelosi!
Democrats from a number of states, including Texas, Ohio and North Carolina, are running away from Pelosi in a harsh political climate. Distancing one's self from the speaker is nothing new for many Democrats, including Edwards, but the number of incumbents and the volume of their criticism of the party House leader is larger than it has been in past election cycles - and the volume of their criticism is louder
Well, good luck with that
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Friday, July 16, 2010
Senators Webb and Warner voted Yea for another Obama Bill that will Destroy the Economy and buy off the Unions
Finance bill favors interests of unions, activists
The Price of a Vote " On the very day the Senate passes major bank reform, we learn dozens of senators or Senate employees received VIP loans from a company hip-deep in the subprime loan mess that the bank bill fails to address."
More on the bill here
The Price of a Vote " On the very day the Senate passes major bank reform, we learn dozens of senators or Senate employees received VIP loans from a company hip-deep in the subprime loan mess that the bank bill fails to address."
More on the bill here
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Does Obama want to Destroy America?
But in his mind he is not trying to destroy America simply because he wants utter destruction and devastation to be the only outcome. You see, mere destruction isn’t his end goal as those on the right fear. In his left-wing ideology, he thinks after America’s fall he and his left-wing comrades will be building a new and better U.S.A. Where real Americans see destruction and the end of everything, the leftists see a re-birth to a better and, in their eyes, more moral America. He and his left-wing friends see the U.S. as a Phoenix rising from the ashes of the bad old days..
read it all at BigGovernment
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Here we go again.. President Putz doesn't have the votes
Unclear As Of Now if Senate Will Have Votes to Ratify New Disarmament Treaty
Wrote the Republican Senators: "As you know, it is highly unlikely that the Senate would ratify a treaty that includes such a linkage, including a treaty that includes unilateral declarations that the Russian Federation could use as leverage against you or your successors when U.S. missile defense decisions are made."
The McConnell/Kyl letter to the president noted that a December 15 letter to the President from 41 senators reminded him that section 1251 of last year's defense authorization act "required that the Administration submit a 10 year plan for the modernization of the U.S. nuclear deterrent at the same time it submits the follow-on to the 1991 START Agreement to the Senate for its advice and consent."
McConnell said that "the Obama administration will need to meet three requirements if it expects favorable consideration of the START follow on treaty. The Senate will assess whether or not the agreement is verifiable, whether it reduces our Nation’s ability to defend itself and our allies from the threat of nuclear armed missiles, and whether or not this administration is committed to preserving our own nuclear triad."
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Obama Hates Black & Hispanic People
Jobless Numbers Show Minorities Crushed by Team Obama Policies
While the unemployment for white Americans averaged 9.3%, African Americans averaged 16.6%, just a little less than double the rate of white unemployment. Hispanic Americans reported 13.3% unemployment, while recent, young veterans are averaging 14.7%. Black men, over 20 years old, are showing 20.2% unemployment and teenaged, African Americans, ages 16-19, of both sexes, show a mind-boggling 39.3% unemployed. Hispanic teens also report a staggering 30.3% unemployment. The long-term repercussions of these unemployment numbers are troubling, yet the Administration is curiously silent.
Outrageous and slanderous for me to say Obama hates Blacks and Hispanics you say? the results of his policies says differently.. and if Liberals could say that Bush Hated blacks when the Levies broke in LA, which he had NOTHING to do with, then it's not a stretch for me to say Obama is a racist when HIS POLICIES are having a direct impact on people of color.
While the unemployment for white Americans averaged 9.3%, African Americans averaged 16.6%, just a little less than double the rate of white unemployment. Hispanic Americans reported 13.3% unemployment, while recent, young veterans are averaging 14.7%. Black men, over 20 years old, are showing 20.2% unemployment and teenaged, African Americans, ages 16-19, of both sexes, show a mind-boggling 39.3% unemployed. Hispanic teens also report a staggering 30.3% unemployment. The long-term repercussions of these unemployment numbers are troubling, yet the Administration is curiously silent.
Outrageous and slanderous for me to say Obama hates Blacks and Hispanics you say? the results of his policies says differently.. and if Liberals could say that Bush Hated blacks when the Levies broke in LA, which he had NOTHING to do with, then it's not a stretch for me to say Obama is a racist when HIS POLICIES are having a direct impact on people of color.
Monday, February 8, 2010
House GOP Lets Obama have it Between the Eyes!
House GOP Responds to Obama's Health Care Summit Invite
House GOP Leader John Boehner (R., Ohio) and Whip Eric Cantor (R., Va.) just sent White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel a letter regarding the upcoming health-care summit:
Mr. Emanuel:
We welcome President Obama’s announcement of forthcoming bipartisan health care talks. In fact, you may remember that last May, Republicans asked President Obama to hold bipartisan discussions on health care in an attempt to find common ground on health care, but he declined and instead chose to work with only Democrats. Since then, the President has given dozens of speeches on health care reform, operating under the premise that the more the American people learn about his plan, the more they will come to like it. Just the opposite has occurred: a majority of Americans oppose the House and Senate health care bills and want them scrapped so we can start over with a step-by-step approach focused on lowering costs for families and small businesses.
Just as important, scrapping the House and Senate health care bills would help end the uncertainty they are creating for workers and businesses and thus strengthen our shared commitment to focusing on creating jobs. Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward on health care in a bipartisan way, does that mean he will agree to start over so that we can develop a bill that is truly worthy of the support and confidence of the American people? Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said today that the President is “absolutely not” resetting the legislative process for health care.
If the starting point for this meeting is the job-killing bills the American people have already soundly rejected, Republicans would rightly be reluctant to participate. Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward in a bipartisan way, does that mean he has taken off the table the idea of relying solely on Democratic votes and jamming through health care reform by way of reconciliation? As the President has noted recently, Democrats continue to hold large majorities in the House and Senate, which means they can attempt to pass a health care bill at any time through the reconciliation process.
Eliminating the possibility of reconciliation would represent an important show of good faith to Republicans and the American people.If the President intends to present any kind of legislative proposal at this discussion, will he make it available to members of Congress and the American people at least 72 hours beforehand? Our ability to move forward in a bipartisan way through this discussion rests on openness and transparency. Will the President include in this discussion congressional Democrats who have opposed the House and Senate health care bills? This bipartisan discussion should reflect the bipartisan opposition to both the House bill and the kickbacks and sweetheart deals in the Senate bill. Will the President be inviting officials and lawmakers from the states to participate in this discussion?
As you may know, legislation has been introduced in at least 36 state legislatures, similar to the proposal just passed by the Democratic-controlled Virginia State Senate, providing that no individual may be compelled to purchase health insurance. Additionally, governors of both parties have raised concerns about the additional costs that will be passed along to states under both the House and Senate bills. The President has also mentioned his commitment to have “experts” participate in health care discussions.
Will the Feb. 25 discussion involve such "experts?" Will those experts include the actuaries at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), who have determined that the both the House and Senate health care bill raise costs – just the opposite of their intended effect – and jeopardize seniors’ access to high-quality care by imposing massive Medicare cuts? Will those experts include the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which has stated that the GOP alternative would reduce premiums by up to 10 percent? Also, will Republicans be permitted to invite health care experts to participate? Finally, as you know, this is the first televised White House health care meeting involving the President since last March.
Many health care meetings of the closed-door variety have been held at the White House since then, including one where a sweetheart deal was worked out with union leaders. Will the special interest groups that the Obama Administration has cut deals with be included in this televised discussion?Of course, Americans have been dismayed by the fact that the President has broken his own pledge to hold televised health care talks. We can only hope this televised discussion is the beginning, not the end, of attempting to correct that mistake. Will the President require that any and all future health care discussions, including those held on Capitol Hill, meet this common-sense standard of transparency and openness?
Your answers to these critical questions will help determine whether this will be a truly open, bipartisan discussion or merely an intramural exercise before Democrats attempt to jam through a job-killing health care bill that the American people can’t afford and don’t support. ‘Bipartisanship’ is not writing proposals of your own behind closed doors, then unveiling them and demanding Republican support. Bipartisan ends require bipartisan means.These questions are also designed to try and make sense of the widening gap between the President’s rhetoric on bipartisanship and the reality. We cannot help but notice that each of the President’s recent bipartisan overtures has been coupled with harsh, misleading partisan attacks. For instance, the President decries Republican ‘obstruction’ when it was Republicans who first proposed bipartisan health care talks last May.
The President says Republicans are ‘sitting on the sidelines’ just days after holding up our health care alternative and reading from it word for word. The President has every right to use his bully pulpit as he sees fit, but this is the kind of credibility gap that has the American people so fed up with business as usual in Washington.We look forward to receiving your answers and continuing to discuss ways we can move forward in a bipartisan manner to address the challenges facing the American people.
Sincerely,
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH)
House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA)
Fabulous!!
Allahpundit at Hotair has more..
Rush weighed in today..
And William A. Jacobson Nails it with...
Negotiations Without Preconditions for Iran, But Not Republicans
House GOP Leader John Boehner (R., Ohio) and Whip Eric Cantor (R., Va.) just sent White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel a letter regarding the upcoming health-care summit:
Mr. Emanuel:
We welcome President Obama’s announcement of forthcoming bipartisan health care talks. In fact, you may remember that last May, Republicans asked President Obama to hold bipartisan discussions on health care in an attempt to find common ground on health care, but he declined and instead chose to work with only Democrats. Since then, the President has given dozens of speeches on health care reform, operating under the premise that the more the American people learn about his plan, the more they will come to like it. Just the opposite has occurred: a majority of Americans oppose the House and Senate health care bills and want them scrapped so we can start over with a step-by-step approach focused on lowering costs for families and small businesses.
Just as important, scrapping the House and Senate health care bills would help end the uncertainty they are creating for workers and businesses and thus strengthen our shared commitment to focusing on creating jobs. Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward on health care in a bipartisan way, does that mean he will agree to start over so that we can develop a bill that is truly worthy of the support and confidence of the American people? Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said today that the President is “absolutely not” resetting the legislative process for health care.
If the starting point for this meeting is the job-killing bills the American people have already soundly rejected, Republicans would rightly be reluctant to participate. Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward in a bipartisan way, does that mean he has taken off the table the idea of relying solely on Democratic votes and jamming through health care reform by way of reconciliation? As the President has noted recently, Democrats continue to hold large majorities in the House and Senate, which means they can attempt to pass a health care bill at any time through the reconciliation process.
Eliminating the possibility of reconciliation would represent an important show of good faith to Republicans and the American people.If the President intends to present any kind of legislative proposal at this discussion, will he make it available to members of Congress and the American people at least 72 hours beforehand? Our ability to move forward in a bipartisan way through this discussion rests on openness and transparency. Will the President include in this discussion congressional Democrats who have opposed the House and Senate health care bills? This bipartisan discussion should reflect the bipartisan opposition to both the House bill and the kickbacks and sweetheart deals in the Senate bill. Will the President be inviting officials and lawmakers from the states to participate in this discussion?
As you may know, legislation has been introduced in at least 36 state legislatures, similar to the proposal just passed by the Democratic-controlled Virginia State Senate, providing that no individual may be compelled to purchase health insurance. Additionally, governors of both parties have raised concerns about the additional costs that will be passed along to states under both the House and Senate bills. The President has also mentioned his commitment to have “experts” participate in health care discussions.
Will the Feb. 25 discussion involve such "experts?" Will those experts include the actuaries at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), who have determined that the both the House and Senate health care bill raise costs – just the opposite of their intended effect – and jeopardize seniors’ access to high-quality care by imposing massive Medicare cuts? Will those experts include the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which has stated that the GOP alternative would reduce premiums by up to 10 percent? Also, will Republicans be permitted to invite health care experts to participate? Finally, as you know, this is the first televised White House health care meeting involving the President since last March.
Many health care meetings of the closed-door variety have been held at the White House since then, including one where a sweetheart deal was worked out with union leaders. Will the special interest groups that the Obama Administration has cut deals with be included in this televised discussion?Of course, Americans have been dismayed by the fact that the President has broken his own pledge to hold televised health care talks. We can only hope this televised discussion is the beginning, not the end, of attempting to correct that mistake. Will the President require that any and all future health care discussions, including those held on Capitol Hill, meet this common-sense standard of transparency and openness?
Your answers to these critical questions will help determine whether this will be a truly open, bipartisan discussion or merely an intramural exercise before Democrats attempt to jam through a job-killing health care bill that the American people can’t afford and don’t support. ‘Bipartisanship’ is not writing proposals of your own behind closed doors, then unveiling them and demanding Republican support. Bipartisan ends require bipartisan means.These questions are also designed to try and make sense of the widening gap between the President’s rhetoric on bipartisanship and the reality. We cannot help but notice that each of the President’s recent bipartisan overtures has been coupled with harsh, misleading partisan attacks. For instance, the President decries Republican ‘obstruction’ when it was Republicans who first proposed bipartisan health care talks last May.
The President says Republicans are ‘sitting on the sidelines’ just days after holding up our health care alternative and reading from it word for word. The President has every right to use his bully pulpit as he sees fit, but this is the kind of credibility gap that has the American people so fed up with business as usual in Washington.We look forward to receiving your answers and continuing to discuss ways we can move forward in a bipartisan manner to address the challenges facing the American people.
Sincerely,
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH)
House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA)
Fabulous!!
Allahpundit at Hotair has more..
Rush weighed in today..
And William A. Jacobson Nails it with...
Negotiations Without Preconditions for Iran, But Not Republicans
Monday, December 28, 2009
Obama Surrenders U.S. Sovereignty: His INTERPOL Executive Order
Obama’s order removes protections placed upon INTERPOL by President Reagan in 1983. Obama’s order gives the group the authority to avoid Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests — which means this foreign law enforcement organization can operate free of an important safeguard against governmental abuse. “Property and assets,” including the organization’s records, cannot be searched or seized. Their physical locations and records are now immune from U.S. legal or investigative authorities.
If the president of the United States has an aboveboard reason for making a foreign law enforcement agency exempt from American laws on American soil, it wasn’t shared by the White House.
Andy McCarthy, former assistant United States attorney for the Southern District of New York and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, notes at National Review that the limitations that Obama removed are “what prevents law-enforcement and its controlling government authority from becoming tyrannical.”
A paragraph later, McCarthy describes Obama’s actions in the starkest of terms:
This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States.
If President Obama and his radical allies in the Democratic leadership have their way, American soldiers could presumably be brought up on charges as war criminals by enemy nations and marked for arrest and deportation by an international police force on American soil. They would face charges in a foreign land without the constitutional protections they fought and bled to protect. The White House seems to be on the bewildering path of giving al-Qaeda terrorists who murder innocent women and children more legal protection than the very soldiers that risk their lives trying to bring terrorists to justice. The asinine court-martial charges being brought against three Navy SEALs based upon the word of a terrorist they captured suddenly make a sickening kind of sense.
Read it all
If the president of the United States has an aboveboard reason for making a foreign law enforcement agency exempt from American laws on American soil, it wasn’t shared by the White House.
Andy McCarthy, former assistant United States attorney for the Southern District of New York and senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, notes at National Review that the limitations that Obama removed are “what prevents law-enforcement and its controlling government authority from becoming tyrannical.”
A paragraph later, McCarthy describes Obama’s actions in the starkest of terms:
This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States.
If President Obama and his radical allies in the Democratic leadership have their way, American soldiers could presumably be brought up on charges as war criminals by enemy nations and marked for arrest and deportation by an international police force on American soil. They would face charges in a foreign land without the constitutional protections they fought and bled to protect. The White House seems to be on the bewildering path of giving al-Qaeda terrorists who murder innocent women and children more legal protection than the very soldiers that risk their lives trying to bring terrorists to justice. The asinine court-martial charges being brought against three Navy SEALs based upon the word of a terrorist they captured suddenly make a sickening kind of sense.
Read it all
Friday, December 18, 2009
Obama Gets Tough!
About Global Warming!
A visibly angry Barack Obama threw down the gauntlet at China and other developing nations Friday, declaring that the time has come to "not to talk but to act" on climate change.
Was that before of after he finished begging Hu Jintao to buy more Treasury bonds?
whahahahahahahahha
But Wait! There's More!!
Obama Snubbed by Chinese Premier at Climate Meeting
OY, the Putz BOWED AGAIN!
A visibly angry Barack Obama threw down the gauntlet at China and other developing nations Friday, declaring that the time has come to "not to talk but to act" on climate change.
Was that before of after he finished begging Hu Jintao to buy more Treasury bonds?
whahahahahahahahha
But Wait! There's More!!
Obama Snubbed by Chinese Premier at Climate Meeting
OY, the Putz BOWED AGAIN!
Monday, December 14, 2009
Obama Doesn't Like To Be Challenged
Then again no raging narcissist, dictator wanna be, does. He also can't stop Whining about how hard being President is.
be sure to watch the video at the link.
what a PUTZ
be sure to watch the video at the link.
what a PUTZ
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
HOPE
American voters give President Barack Obama a split 46 – 44 percent job approval, his lowest ever, and both the health care reform package that he wants Congress to pass and his personal rating on handling health care now win support from less than four in 10 Americans, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
Voters disapprove 52 – 38 percent of the health care reform proposal under consideration in Congress, and they disapprove 56 – 38 percent of President Obama’s handling of health care, down from 53 – 41 percent in a November 19 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh- pe-ack) University. …
“It’s a good thing for those pushing the health care overhaul in Congress that the American people don’t get a vote. At this time, supporters are down 14 percentage points,” said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
The lower Obama's approval rating goes the less likely Democrats will put their political careers at risk by voting for Obama, Pelosi and Reids agenda.
Our fight is not over yet. The Senate is still trying to pass some form of ObamaCare. Please keep calling Webb and Warner.
hat tip HOTAIR
Voters disapprove 52 – 38 percent of the health care reform proposal under consideration in Congress, and they disapprove 56 – 38 percent of President Obama’s handling of health care, down from 53 – 41 percent in a November 19 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh- pe-ack) University. …
“It’s a good thing for those pushing the health care overhaul in Congress that the American people don’t get a vote. At this time, supporters are down 14 percentage points,” said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
The lower Obama's approval rating goes the less likely Democrats will put their political careers at risk by voting for Obama, Pelosi and Reids agenda.
Our fight is not over yet. The Senate is still trying to pass some form of ObamaCare. Please keep calling Webb and Warner.
hat tip HOTAIR
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Obami's first State Dinner
It's interesting that he picked the week of Thanksgiving to hold it...
Michelle Obama still hasn't learned how to dress or smile.
Gayle King was there, but Oprah was not invited!!!
Kaplin Mondi was there, the actor who now works for Obama and was implicated in the NEA scandle
Some of Obama's very close friends were there...
General Electric (and NBC )CEO Jeffrey Immelt, Gen. Colin Powell, , Penny Pritzker, James and Paula Crown..
And whats a Obama party without Andy Stern of SEIU and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka
Mao's biggest fan, Anita Dunn
Susan "the US is bad" Rice
Mr. Newt Minow Former Chairman, The RAND Corporation and PBS
Mr. Judd Miner
and a few of his biggest fans..
ABC’s Robin Roberts
NBC’s Brian Williams
CNN’s Fareed Zakaria
CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta.
CBS’ Katie Couric
New York Times columnist Tom Friedman
no one from FOX News
Michelle Obama still hasn't learned how to dress or smile.
Gayle King was there, but Oprah was not invited!!!
Kaplin Mondi was there, the actor who now works for Obama and was implicated in the NEA scandle
Some of Obama's very close friends were there...
General Electric (and NBC )CEO Jeffrey Immelt, Gen. Colin Powell, , Penny Pritzker, James and Paula Crown..
And whats a Obama party without Andy Stern of SEIU and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka
Mao's biggest fan, Anita Dunn
Susan "the US is bad" Rice
Mr. Newt Minow Former Chairman, The RAND Corporation and PBS
Mr. Judd Miner
and a few of his biggest fans..
ABC’s Robin Roberts
NBC’s Brian Williams
CNN’s Fareed Zakaria
CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta.
CBS’ Katie Couric
New York Times columnist Tom Friedman
no one from FOX News
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Obama Approval now down to 45%
How Low will he go?
well, this is bad..
The enormous looming deficit
and this can't help..
The 'Real' Jobless Rate: 17.5% Of Workers Are Unemployed...
January US jobs lost: 598,000 jobs
February US jobs lost: 706,000 jobs
March US jobs lost: 742,000 jobs
April US jobs lost: 545,000 jobs
May US jobs lost: 345,000 jobs
June US jobs lost: 467,000 jobs
July US jobs lost: 247,000 jobs
August US jobs lost: 216,000 jobs
September US jobs lost: 263,000 jobs
October US jobs lost: 190,000 jobs
Total US jobs lost under Obama: 4,319,000 jobs
or this..
Gold Jumps to Record as Slumping Dollar Spurs Investment Demand
no one is happy about this..
And this doesn't help..
Obama has now played 25 rounds of golf, a sport he picked up about a decade ago when he was an Illinois state senator. That’s more golf than former President George W. Bush played in two terms
You know things are bad when ...
“Hope Is Fading Fast” Tee Shirts go on sale
BTW, have you noticed the price of gasoline lately and the lack of reporting on the increase?
well, this is bad..
The enormous looming deficit
and this can't help..
The 'Real' Jobless Rate: 17.5% Of Workers Are Unemployed...
January US jobs lost: 598,000 jobs
February US jobs lost: 706,000 jobs
March US jobs lost: 742,000 jobs
April US jobs lost: 545,000 jobs
May US jobs lost: 345,000 jobs
June US jobs lost: 467,000 jobs
July US jobs lost: 247,000 jobs
August US jobs lost: 216,000 jobs
September US jobs lost: 263,000 jobs
October US jobs lost: 190,000 jobs
Total US jobs lost under Obama: 4,319,000 jobs
or this..
Gold Jumps to Record as Slumping Dollar Spurs Investment Demand
no one is happy about this..
And this doesn't help..
Obama has now played 25 rounds of golf, a sport he picked up about a decade ago when he was an Illinois state senator. That’s more golf than former President George W. Bush played in two terms
You know things are bad when ...
“Hope Is Fading Fast” Tee Shirts go on sale
BTW, have you noticed the price of gasoline lately and the lack of reporting on the increase?
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Liberal Fascists Attack Tea Party Protesters
ANSWER is a group who promotes anti semitism, communism, anti Americanism. They were one of the groups responsible for organizing many of the anti war protests during Bush's presidency. Obviously they are back in force to stand up for their man Barack Hussein Obama MMM MMM MM. They showed up at a anti amnesty protest in Florida and demonstrated Liberal Tolerance by beating up people who disagree with them.
Supporters of President Obama’s Amnesty plans attacked Tea Party Against Amnesty & Illegal Immigration demonstrators in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida on Sat. November 14, 2009. One of the men attacked is 62 years old. Dave Caulkett of FLIMEN (Floridians for Immigration Enforcement) is assaulted and then kicked in the face while he is down. The other camera man from the Tea Party is hit with several signs.
Supporters of President Obama’s Amnesty plans attacked Tea Party Against Amnesty & Illegal Immigration demonstrators in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida on Sat. November 14, 2009. One of the men attacked is 62 years old. Dave Caulkett of FLIMEN (Floridians for Immigration Enforcement) is assaulted and then kicked in the face while he is down. The other camera man from the Tea Party is hit with several signs.
Monday, November 16, 2009
ATF and AWF want Andrew Stern, the head of SEIU Investigated!
They delivered a letter to Congress and the Attorney General asking for a investigation. It seems Andy Stern, head of SEIU has been lobbying elected and appointed officials without being registered as a lobbyist, and it just so happens that that is illegal!
HotAir has the exclusive
By this letter, we urge you to investigate the activities of Mr. Andy Stern, President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), regarding meetings and other lobbying contacts with administration, White House and Congress during 2009. Specifically, it is important to determine whether those and related activities could constitute unregistered “lobbying” by Mr. Stern in violation of the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA), 2 U.S.C. 1601, et seq. In fact, Mr. Stern was a registered lobbyist for SEIU until January of 2007 when he terminated his registration. For the reasons discussed below it appears that Mr. Stern continued to lobby extensively after he terminated his registered status, and in 2009 devoted so much time on lobbying and related activities that he should have re-registered as a lobbyist under LDA. …
Of course, the available public information does not reveal all of the days that Mr. Stern was meeting with or talking with covered government officials about legislation or programs. Nor does it reveal the additional amount of time Mr. Stern spent planning and preparing for his meetings, as well as the time he spent coordinating with others, except for Mayor Bloomberg. Such non-public communications and activity would significantly expand the amount of time that Mr. Stern spent on lobbying as defined by federal law.
Nevertheless, the limited public record that is available indicates that Mr. Stern appears to have met the LDA definition of being a lobbyist by spending at least 16 days during the second calendar quarter lobbying dozens of officials and being the White House’s most frequent visitor.
Finally, under the LDA, if Mr. Stern has violated federal lobbying disclosure laws at various points during this year, it does not adequately remedy the violation for him to simply register now. The fact that Mr. Stern affirmatively delisted himself as a lobbyist and then went on to conduct further extensive lobbying activity raises an issue of possible willful conduct that should be carefully investigated. We have provided the enclosed documents for your consideration and review.
Most neutral observers would probably rate Mr. Stern as the most visible power-player in Washington this year – personally advancing his legislative agenda on health care, labor law changes and a host of other issues in meetings with a huge number of top officials in the Administration and Congress. Any failure to fully and adequately enforce the nation’s lobbying disclosure laws as they apply to Mr. Stern’s high-profile lobbying presence would make a mockery of the law and invite public skepticism as to its efficacy.
HotAir has the exclusive
By this letter, we urge you to investigate the activities of Mr. Andy Stern, President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), regarding meetings and other lobbying contacts with administration, White House and Congress during 2009. Specifically, it is important to determine whether those and related activities could constitute unregistered “lobbying” by Mr. Stern in violation of the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA), 2 U.S.C. 1601, et seq. In fact, Mr. Stern was a registered lobbyist for SEIU until January of 2007 when he terminated his registration. For the reasons discussed below it appears that Mr. Stern continued to lobby extensively after he terminated his registered status, and in 2009 devoted so much time on lobbying and related activities that he should have re-registered as a lobbyist under LDA. …
Of course, the available public information does not reveal all of the days that Mr. Stern was meeting with or talking with covered government officials about legislation or programs. Nor does it reveal the additional amount of time Mr. Stern spent planning and preparing for his meetings, as well as the time he spent coordinating with others, except for Mayor Bloomberg. Such non-public communications and activity would significantly expand the amount of time that Mr. Stern spent on lobbying as defined by federal law.
Nevertheless, the limited public record that is available indicates that Mr. Stern appears to have met the LDA definition of being a lobbyist by spending at least 16 days during the second calendar quarter lobbying dozens of officials and being the White House’s most frequent visitor.
Finally, under the LDA, if Mr. Stern has violated federal lobbying disclosure laws at various points during this year, it does not adequately remedy the violation for him to simply register now. The fact that Mr. Stern affirmatively delisted himself as a lobbyist and then went on to conduct further extensive lobbying activity raises an issue of possible willful conduct that should be carefully investigated. We have provided the enclosed documents for your consideration and review.
Most neutral observers would probably rate Mr. Stern as the most visible power-player in Washington this year – personally advancing his legislative agenda on health care, labor law changes and a host of other issues in meetings with a huge number of top officials in the Administration and Congress. Any failure to fully and adequately enforce the nation’s lobbying disclosure laws as they apply to Mr. Stern’s high-profile lobbying presence would make a mockery of the law and invite public skepticism as to its efficacy.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Obama Hurt Deeds in Virginia
Shhh — Don’t Tell Anyone
Concern about his policies overreaching permeated to a gubernatorial campaign and helped widen the size of McDonnell’s win. It allowed the campaign to focus on issues that hadn’t been working in recent years for Republican candidates. Concern about Obama’s policies on spending, taxes, and jobs allowed McDonnell to thoroughly dominate those issues. The checks and balances message is a key one, but the bigger lesson about Obama’s impact on Virginia is that his policies have put fiscal and economic messages back into play for Republicans.
Concern about his policies overreaching permeated to a gubernatorial campaign and helped widen the size of McDonnell’s win. It allowed the campaign to focus on issues that hadn’t been working in recent years for Republican candidates. Concern about Obama’s policies on spending, taxes, and jobs allowed McDonnell to thoroughly dominate those issues. The checks and balances message is a key one, but the bigger lesson about Obama’s impact on Virginia is that his policies have put fiscal and economic messages back into play for Republicans.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Bush Visits wounded at Fort Hood
Obama goes to Camp David
Our current president is too focused on himself and his GD takeover of our health care to care much about a terrorist attack on our troops.
Our current president is too focused on himself and his GD takeover of our health care to care much about a terrorist attack on our troops.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
