TheJOTUS

The Jim of the United States

Archive for the ‘Politically Speaking’ Category

« Previous Entries

A Top 10 List Of Corrupt Bastards In Politics

Posted by TheJOTUS on February 20, 2010

Judicial Watch names and explains their selections of the top ten most corrupt politicians inside the Beltway.  Unfortunately it is in alphabetical order:

Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT): This marks two years in a row for Senator Dodd, who made the 2008 “Ten Most Corrupt” list for his corrupt relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and for accepting preferential treatment and loan terms from Countrywide Financial, a scandal which still dogs him. In 2009, the scandals kept coming for the Connecticut Democrat. In 2009, Judicial Watch filed a Senate ethics complaint against Dodd for undervaluing a property he owns in Ireland on his Senate Financial Disclosure forms. Judicial Watch’s complaint forced Dodd to amend the forms. However, press reports suggest the property to this day remains undervalued. Judicial Watch also alleges in the complaint that Dodd obtained a sweetheart deal for the property in exchange for his assistance in obtaining a presidential pardon (during the Clinton administration) and other favors for a long-time friend and business associate. The false financial disclosure forms were part of the cover-up. Dodd remains the head the Senate Banking Committee.

Senator John Ensign (R-NV): A number of scandals popped up in 2009 involving public officials who conducted illicit affairs, and then attempted to cover them up with hush payments and favors, an obvious abuse of power. The year’s worst offender might just be Nevada Republican Senator John Ensign. Ensign admitted in June to an extramarital affair with the wife of one of his staff members, who then allegedly obtained special favors from the Nevada Republican in exchange for his silence. According to The New York Times: “The Justice Department and the Senate Ethics Committee are expected to conduct preliminary inquiries into whether Senator John Ensign violated federal law or ethics rules as part of an effort to conceal an affair with the wife of an aide…” The former staffer, Douglas Hampton, began to lobby Mr. Ensign’s office immediately upon leaving his congressional job, despite the fact that he was subject to a one-year lobbying ban. Ensign seems to have ignored the law and allowed Hampton lobbying access to his office as a payment for his silence about the affair. (These are potentially criminal offenses.) It looks as if Ensign misused hisPresident Barack Obama: During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration. However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House. Consider just a few Obama administration “lowlights” from year one: Even before President Obama was sworn into office, he was interviewed by the FBI for a criminal investigation of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s scheme to sell the President’s former Senate seat to the highest bidder. (Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and slumlord Valerie Jarrett, both from Chicago, are also tangled up in the Blagojevich scandal.) Moreover, the Obama administration made the startling claim that the Privacy Act does not apply to the White House. The Obama White House believes it can violate the privacy rights of American citizens without any legal consequences or accountability. President Obama boldly proclaimed that “transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency,” but his administration is addicted to secrecy, stonewalling far too many of Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act requests and is refusing to make public White House visitor logs as federal law requires. The Obama administration turned the National Endowment of the Arts (as well as the agency that runs the AmeriCorps program) into propaganda machines, using tax dollars to persuade “artists” to promote the Obama agenda. According to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, the idea emerged as a direct result of the Obama campaign and enjoyed White House approval and participation. President Obama has installed a record number of “czars” in positions of power. Too many of these individuals are leftist radicals who answer to no one but the president. And too many of the czars are not subject to Senate confirmation (which raises serious constitutional questions). Under the President’s bailout schemes, the federal government continues to appropriate or control — through fiat and threats — large sectors of the private economy, prompting conservative columnist George Will to write: “The administration’s central activity — the political allocation of wealth and opportunity — is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.” Government-run healthcare and car companies, White House coercion, uninvestigated ACORN corruption, debasing his office to help Chicago cronies, attacks on conservative media and the private sector, unprecedented and dangerous new rights for terrorists, perks for campaign donors — this is Obama’s “ethics” record — and we haven’t even gotten through the first year of his presidency. public office (and taxpayer resources) to cover up his sexual shenanigans.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): Judicial Watch is investigating a $12 million TARP cash injection provided to the Boston-based OneUnited Bank at the urging of Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank. As reported in the January 22, 2009, edition of the Wall Street Journal, the Treasury Department indicated it would only provide funds to healthy banks to jump-start lending. Not only was OneUnited Bank in massive financial turmoil, but it was also “under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses, including owning a Porsche for its executives’ use.” Rep. Frank admitted he spoke to a “federal regulator,” and Treasury granted the funds. (The bank continues to flounder despite Frank’s intervention for federal dollars.) Moreover, Judicial Watch uncovered documents in 2009 that showed that members of Congress for years were aware that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were playing fast and loose with accounting issues, risk assessment issues and executive compensation issues, even as liberals led by Rep. Frank continued to block attempts to rein in the two Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs). For example, during a hearing on September 10, 2003, before the House Committee on Financial Services considering a Bush administration proposal to further regulate Fannie and Freddie, Rep. Frank stated: “I want to begin by saying that I am glad to consider the legislation, but I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis. That is, in my view, the two Government Sponsored Enterprises we are talking about here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not in a crisis. We have recently had an accounting problem with Freddie Mac that has led to people being dismissed, as appears to be appropriate. I do not think at this point there is a problem with a threat to the Treasury.” Frank received $42,350 in campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac between 1989 and 2008. Frank also engaged in a relationship with a Fannie Mae Executive while serving on the House Banking Committee, which has jurisdiction over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Ensign is the only Republican on the list, and really it isn’t much of a surprise.  I mean Republicans don’t hold any power in Washington at the moment, so why buy a politician who can’t sell out on anything important?

And yes, our president made the list:

President Barack Obama: During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration. However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House. Consider just a few Obama administration “lowlights” from year one: Even before President Obama was sworn into office, he was interviewed by the FBI for a criminal investigation of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s scheme to sell the President’s former Senate seat to the highest bidder. (Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and slumlord Valerie Jarrett, both from Chicago, are also tangled up in the Blagojevich scandal.) Moreover, the Obama administration made the startling claim that the Privacy Act does not apply to the White House. The Obama White House believes it can violate the privacy rights of American citizens without any legal consequences or accountability. President Obama boldly proclaimed that “transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency,” but his administration is addicted to secrecy, stonewalling far too many of Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act requests and is refusing to make public White House visitor logs as federal law requires. The Obama administration turned the National Endowment of the Arts (as well as the agency that runs the AmeriCorps program) into propaganda machines, using tax dollars to persuade “artists” to promote the Obama agenda. According to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, the idea emerged as a direct result of the Obama campaign and enjoyed White House approval and participation. President Obama has installed a record number of “czars” in positions of power. Too many of these individuals are leftist radicals who answer to no one but the president. And too many of the czars are not subject to Senate confirmation (which raises serious constitutional questions). Under the President’s bailout schemes, the federal government continues to appropriate or control — through fiat and threats — large sectors of the private economy, prompting conservative columnist George Will to write: “The administration’s central activity — the political allocation of wealth and opportunity — is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.” Government-run healthcare and car companies, White House coercion, uninvestigated ACORN corruption, debasing his office to help Chicago cronies, attacks on conservative media and the private sector, unprecedented and dangerous new rights for terrorists, perks for campaign donors — this is Obama’s “ethics” record — and we haven’t even gotten through the first year of his presidency.

Corruption in the legislative branch is bad enough, but it’s worse when it occurs in the executive branch, especially when one party controls both. The law-enforcement mechanisms report eventually to the President, and a Congress controlled by Democrats is not likely to investigate executive corruption when a Democrat is President.

Rounding out the list:

Secretary of Treasury Tim “Turbo Tax” Geither
Attorney General Eric Holder
Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (Like father, like son)
Rep. Nancy “stretch” Pelosi
Rep. John “dead” Murtha
Rep. Charles “I don’t pay my taxes” Rangel

Plus, why isn’t Harry Reid on this list?  That guy is the dirtiest bastard there is, especially after his buying spree of ObamaCare votes.  He should be way ahead of Eric Holder, who  made the list, but really his actions are probably more incompetent than actually corrupt. 

But in the end, it is an impressive list.

Posted in Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

Associated Press: You Lie!!

Posted by TheJOTUS on January 28, 2010

The AP does a nice job notating that Obama’s kind of a liar.  They composed a list of 10 fails in last night’s SOTU.  Only 10 you might ask?  They must have gotten tired of his rambling and just plained tuned out.  Like my wife did about 3 minutes into the speech:

OBAMA: The president issued a populist broadside against lobbyists, saying they have “outsized influence” over the government. He said his administration has “excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs.” He also said it’s time to “require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my administration or Congress” and “to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office.”

THE FACTS: Obama has limited the hiring of lobbyists for administration jobs, but the ban isn’t absolute; seven waivers from the ban have been granted to White House officials alone. Getting lobbyists to report every contact they make with the federal government would be difficult at best; Congress would have to change the law, and that’s unlikely to happen. And lobbyists already are subject to strict limits on political giving. Just like every other American, they’re limited to giving $2,400 per election to federal candidates, with an overall ceiling of $115,500 every two years.

They note seven of these waivers were for White House posisitions, however Obama has hired over a dozen.  He called for restrictions on lobbyist contributions, but as the AP notes, those already exist.  But hey, details scmeetails right?

OBAMA: “I’ve called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad. This can’t be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem. The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. Yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission. So I will issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans.”

THE FACTS: Any commission that Obama creates would be a weak substitute for what he really wanted — a commission created by Congress that could force lawmakers to consider unpopular remedies to reduce the debt, including curbing politically sensitive entitlements like Social Security and Medicare. That idea crashed in the Senate this week, defeated by equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans. Any commission set up by Obama alone would lack authority to force its recommendations before Congress, and would stand almost no chance of success.

Note to Obama:  We already have a bipartisan committee dickbag.  It’s called the 535 members of Congress.  The voters elected them to solve budget problems and they meet every two years to address that very issue.  In fact, Mr. Constitutional Professor, Congress’ first task under the Constitution, Article I Section 8, is to approve a budget for the federal government.  We elect Representatives and Senators to do this with full accountability to their constituents.  Take a high school civics class Barry.

Moving forward with that, Obama keeps repeating over and over how he inherited huge budgetary problems from Bush.  But again, the worst Con Law professor evaaaah might want to brush up on his skilz.  The President doesn’t pass budgets, Congress does.  And the last three budgets came from the democrats.

In the six years Republicans held congress under George Bush, they increased federal spending $800 billion.  Yet in just three years, democrats have increased spending $900 billion.  Hello???  And during those last three years before becoming President, Obama served in the Senate.  And guess who voted for every single democratic budget?

Moreover, from the day Obama took office to the end of the current fiscal year, the debt held by the public will grow to $3.3 trillion. So in 20 months, Obama will add as much debt than what Bush did in 8 years.

What does this mean?  You. Lie.

Posted in B. Hussein Obama, Economy, Politically Speaking | 1 Comment »

Obama: Worst Constitutional Law Professor Evaaaah

Posted by TheJOTUS on January 27, 2010

The President–who clearly was the worst constitutional law professor ever–has ordered his lawyers, and tonight demanded congress, to find a way to legislate away the Supreme Court’s constitutional determination of Citizens United v FEC that people in groups have just as much a right to political participation as individuals alone.

That’s the core of Citizens United: you have a right to speech, you have a right to associate with others, and you don’t give up your right to speech when you choose to associate.  The Constitution does not give to Congress the power to pick favored speakers and disfavored speakers.  In fact, the First Amendment specifically prohibits such anti-democratic laws.

So tonight, president constitution has no idea what he is talking about when he decides to hammer on the Supreme Court about the first amendment.  Let’s see what someone a tad smarter than Obama had to say about it:

In case you are wondering, he (Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito) was shaking his head and mouthed the words “not true”.

Democrats place more importance on speech bans than countering speech they don’t like.

Posted in B. Hussein Obama, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

Scott Brown Wins In A Landslide, Ted Kennedy, Libtards Hardest Hit

Posted by TheJOTUS on January 20, 2010

Last August I had a post on the death of Ted Kennedy along with his efforts to subvert Massachusetts law.  When Kennedy died, the law required the state to hold a special election to fill the opening he left in the US Senate.  That law was put in place by the state legislature in 2004 when John Kerry ran for President, and it was a law Ted Kennedy whole heartedly backed.  Why might you ask?  Well, the governor at the time was Mitt Romney — and Kennedy didn’t want some Republican appointing an interim replacement that wasn’t a democrat.

So we move forward five years, when Kennedy was on his death bed.  The Kennedy family released a letter written by the Senator demanding that the law he championed in 2004 get repealed in 2009 in order to allow Governor Deval Patrick to appoint his successor.  Again, why might you ask?  You see Patrick is a democrat and a reliable little liberal who will stand in line and do what he is told.  And of course the state legislature responded by acceding to Kennedy’s dying wish.  Patrick appointed Paul Kirk to fill the seat temporarily, until the special election could be held.

I don’t know what is sweeter, the irony or the karma of being a douchebag.

These shenanigans were played so that Obama and the democrats could get their 60 votes needed to cram government healthcare down our throats.  And what did this get them?  A walking buzzsaw in Scott Brown, whose main message was to be the 41st vote against Obamacare in the senate.

Scott Brown absolutely waxed Marsha..err..Melissa..err..Martha whatever the hell her name is, Coakley, winning by 5 points in the bluest of blue states, and becoming the first Republican senator in Massachusetts in 38 years.  And he did it with a platform of lower taxes, reduced spending, less government, tax money for defense from terrorists, not for the defense of terrorists, and most importantly, he opposed Obamacare.

Almost a year to the day Barack Obama was sworn in and as he completes his first year in office, Massachusetts voters let him know they reject this runaway congress and his hard left policies.  Brown was able to tap into the anger in Massachusetts in a way that appealed not only to independents but conservatives as well.  If you listened to that speech last night there was plenty of nods to the center, but there was also a lot for hard core conservatives to agree with.  It’s a powerful combination and one that, with the right candidates, can be duplicated in just about any state.

“I’m Scott Brown,

“I’m from Wrentham,

“I drive a truck, and I am nobody’s senator but yours”

Classic.  The message of last night’s election is impossible to spin.

Posted in At The Polls, B. Hussein Obama, Healthcare, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

In A Time Of Crisis, America Shows Her Compassion

Posted by TheJOTUS on January 14, 2010

As I am sure everybody has heard by now, the tiny island of Haiti was all but crushed by an earthquake measuring 7.0.  A truly horrific and tragic event.  They went from essentially nothing to, well, absolutely nothing.

Some of the first responders were our Special Forces and churches.  What is striking is how quickly we Americans responded.  But this really shouldn’t be surprising.  This is what we do, this is what we are.  We do it from the heart and we do it because we have soul.  We do it because we are Americans and we care about our fellow human beings.

This is why I resent, from the bottom of my soul and the very core of my being, when Barack Obama goes overseas and puts down this country.  I resent it when he goes overseas and uses code words like American Imperialism to put down our people.  I resent how he lectures to us while cheering to others how the Americans have done so many things to other people. It is a level of douchebaggery that no one has really achieved before.

It’s really hard to rally a nation when you have a president that has spent the past twelve months in office bashing the people.

We are a magnificent country with compassionate people and we try to do what’s right.  We aren’t always right, but most of the time we do the right thing.  Our contributions to mankind are infinite.  Not just with money, food or medical care when people are suffering.  But with our inventions, technological advances, products and our entire way of governing. Not only are we extremely generous to other nations, but we are especially generous to our own people.  We go to great lengths with charities, donations and even taxes to ensure poor people are fed and the elderly are tended to.  America is the very definition of compassion.

We conservatives understand this.  It’s not so much that we are different in any fundamental way than other people.  We’re not.  It’s that our society is different and it nurtures the individual human being.  This is the message conservatives need to get out.

There are times when our attention doesn’t need to focus on what Obama, Pelosi, Reid or any other libtard is doing.  There comes a time when you just need to stop, take a step back and take it all in.  A time to ask: Who are we?  What are we?  What do we stand for?  It is times like right now, where we have this horrible tragedy in Haiti, when it can be crystallized.  A time to show what we, the American people, are about.

Posted in Nuggets of Potpourri, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

Hate Crime Redundancy?

Posted by TheJOTUS on November 2, 2009

Last week Obama signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Although to ensure its passage, it had to be attached onto the Defense appropriation. Naturally.

Yet another hate crime law designed to protect a specific group under federal law. It is a shining example of the statist’s disdain for the principle of equal justice under the law. Just like other hate crimes laws, it criminalizes the wrong thought rather than the wrong conduct.

And it’s completely redundant at that.

The two who committed the heinous acts against Shepard are currently each serving two consecutive life sentences. Never again will they breathe free air. But not only that, Shepard wasn’t murdered for being gay. He was murdered for drug money after he left a bar with a couple of meth heads he was hoping to have a three-way slap and tickle with. In a sane society, he would be a cautionary example, not a celebrated martyr.

Meanwhile, two of Byrd’s murderers are awaiting execution while the third is serving a life sentence.

But with all that said, there is one thing that is overlooked. The punishments of these five douchbags are symbols of how the justice system worked without the need for a hate crimes law.

The statist relishes in the division of Americans into groups and giving special treatment for one over the other. It’s despicable.

Posted in Politically Speaking, Race | Leave a Comment »

Recession Review: In Tonight’s Performance, The Role Of Roman Polanski Will Be Played By Barack H. Obama, And The Role Of 13-Year-Old Girl Will Be Played By the U.S. Economy

Posted by TheJOTUS on October 1, 2009

Hey, I thought it was clever and so I ran with it.

Yesterday it was announced that the economy hasn’t contracted as much as expected.  Yet, for the year, we are still in a record decline. 

Is .07% contraction better than the 1% previously estimated?  Yes, I suppose.  Although, this is like comparing your slightly swollen testicle with your much larger swollen testicle.  It’s still bad.

But is it really winding down?  Elsewhere, analysts claim:

“The downturn appears to have concluded this summer, and the economy is on track to grow for the first time in more than year in the third quarter. The initial phase of growth is being driven by rapid recoveries in housing and manufacturing, diminishing drags from equipment spending and nonresidential construction, and government support.”

I don’t get how we can lose a quarter of a million jobs this last go around,  and still claim the downturn has concluded.  Doesn’t it stand to reason that a recovery includes the notion of an actual recovery?  The economy is still contracting.  Admittedly, the data suggests it’s contracting at a slower pace, but still contracting.

Meanwhile, initial jobless claims rose to 551,000.  12,000 more than “analysts” predicted.  So, we have that going for us.

Posted in Economy, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

Mitch McConnell To Obama Administration: Stop Being A Dick

Posted by TheJOTUS on September 23, 2009

Or something like that…

Maybe it was a scolding, or perhaps just a talkin’ to.  At any rate, Mitch McConnell had issues with the administration’s attempt to infringe on free speech:

“I would remind my colleagues that I have spent my career defending the First Amendment rights of people to criticize their elected officials, including me. I would make the same argument if this were a company based in San Francisco or Helena or Chicago.

“The right to free speech is at the core of our democracy. Free citizens have a First Amendment right to petition their government for a redress of grievances. This gag order on companies like Humana and those in all our states, in my view, is a clear violation of that right. It’s wrong.

“Employers that warn their customers about the effects of legislation aren’t the ones who should be getting warnings here. Senators who threaten Americans’ First Amendment rights are.”

And in between, he makes this comparison:

“Is this how citizens and companies can expect to be treated if health reform passes? That any health provider that disagrees with a powerful Senator will be subject to an investigation and a gag order?

“How is this any different than what the Washington Post and New York Times have done in lobbying for a reporter shield law? Would we stand by if the Judiciary Committee asked the FBI to investigate the media for taking positions on pending legislation we don’t agree with? Of course not.”

If newspapers and other media outlets can comment or communicate to their customers/clients on political issues, why wouldn’t Humana have that same right?  Oh yeah, they do.  And there is no difference.

You know, during the Bush administration it was the left who screamed “free speech” at every turn.  Now, when challenged, it seems they are the ones who want to infringe on it.

Posted in B. Hussein Obama, Healthcare, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

A Joe Wilson Victory And The Left Attacks?

Posted by TheJOTUS on September 12, 2009

I mentioned the other day Rep. Joe Wilson’s “You Lie” outburst during Obama’s speech.  In the past few days, lefty commentators and democrats have spent nearly zero time explaining the Presidents “new” and “improved” healthcare plan.    Instead, they have been busy talking about his lack of decorum and attacking him personally.

At issue, as I wrote earlier, is HR3200 the House version of Obamacare.  It mandates that all individuals in the United States—including illegal aliens—be covered by health insurance. Although it does not provide subsidies for illegal aliens, it does allow them to participate in the “healthcare exchanges.” It also contains a provision which prevents anyone from checking on the citizenship status of any person seeking healthcare.

As you now know, Obama lied and said illegals weren’t covered and Joe called him out on it.  Well low and behold, guess what?  Because of Joe Wilson’s startling lack of decorum, the Senate is close to shoring up the ObamaCare loophole for illegal immigrants the media or the left claimed didn’t exist.  Shocking, I know:

The controversy over Republican Rep. Joe Wilson’s shouting out “You Lie!” at the President over his claim that illegal immigrants wouldn’t benefit from health-care reform apparently sparked some reconsideration of the relevant language. “We really thought we’d resolved this question of people who are here illegally, but as we reflected on the President’s speech last night we wanted to go back and drill down again,” said Senator Kent Conrad, one of the Democrats in the talks after a meeting Thursday morning. Baucus later that afternoon said the group would put in a proof of citizenship requirement to participate in the new health exchange…

Those silly forgetful democrats.  They thought it was in there, so no lie!

And then there are the personal attacks.  Nothing surprising, but incredibly weak.  First up is this doucher, notating that Mr. Wilson and his sons receive free healthcare from their employer.  Of course their employer is the United States Armed Forces, which yeah, they get free healthcare.  You know, for anybody not a complete moron, this is laughable:

But it’s patently absurd to argue that, because your employer is providing benefits to you in exchange for your labor — let alone the very real danger of being sent to war for years on end, risking life and limb — that you’re a hypocrite if you oppose having the taxpayer provide them to everybody. Let alone to people who aren’t even citizens!

I’m only slightly less annoyed by the related trope that Congressmen who won’t vote to extend free health care to all citizens should give up their own taxpayer-provided benefits. Our health care system has evolved as one where employers provide benefits for their workers. For government workers — be they military personnel, file clerks at the Commerce Department, or Members of Congress — their employer is the United States taxpayer. It simply doesn’t follow that taking the benefits agreed to as a condition of employment requires extending said benefits to non-employees.

And then finally, you get The Hill bringing to light that Wilson has been taking NoDoz since college.  NoDoz.  A caffeine pill.  Meanwhile, we have the President who is an admitted cokehead but the media never really bothered to discuss that.

Yeah, come to think of it, I remember that Intervention episode.   Thank God they got there early, because, you know, it’s a gateway drug and all.  For the harder stuff like… well, like coke, which our President used to snort.

What it comes down to is Rep. Joe Wilson stood up and called a lie a lie.  And the left is in no hurry to change it.

Posted in B. Hussein Obama, Healthcare, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

Obama: Hey School Kids, Listen Up, I Got Something To Say

Posted by TheJOTUS on September 3, 2009

fearmongerPresident Stutteringschmuck is going to deliver an address to all American students Tuesday, September 8th.  Admittedly, I was rather perturbed about this at first.  I wrote back in January about how important Inauguration Day was, regardless of who was in the White House.  So, it was justified schools were allowing students to watch the event.  But this is absurd.

In response to this news, I sent an email to my boy’s school asking if they were going to show President Teleflubber’s propaganda piece.  As I waited for a response, I drafted up a letter informing the school on why the kid wouldn’t be attending class that day.  But then I started thinking a bit more rationally—-sort of.

What I really objected to was a portion of a school day is being devoted to the President, for no reason other than he seems to think it should be. There is no national emergency; this isn’t an inauguration or a joint address to Congress.  It is the President deciding, for reasons entirely his own, to take over the public school system for twenty minutes or an hour or however long it takes.

My boy doesn’t need to participate in any efforts “to help engage students and stimulate discussion on the importance of education in their lives” or any “student video contest on education” activities. (Quotes are from Secretary Arne Duncan’s letter to School Principals).  Challenging my child to work hard and to take responsibility for my child’s learning is my responsibility as a parent.  I refuse to concede this responsibility to President dickbag, or anyone else for that matter.

Does anyone find it ironic that Obama wants to waste the school children’s valuable time to basically tell them school is important?   I can almost hear the speech now “Thank you for taking time out of your school day for me to tell you how important your school day is.  When I finish telling you just how important your school day is, you may return to your school day with a new sense of purpose and determination knowing how important your school day is.  But for now, screw the school day and the school’s valuable time and listen to me.” 

It is easy to understand why some would be upset or take issue with this little event.  It’s unprecedented for a President demanding to speak to all of the nation’s students during school hours.  It is almost totalitarian and really highlights the cult of personality going on with this jagoff:

* Speeches in stadiums filled with mesmerized, adoring audiences – Check
* An uninspiring background before meteoric rise – Check
* Creates his own new symbols of power – Check
* Associates with racists, hatemongers and violent radicals – Check
* A propaganda machine willing to show him only in the best possible light – Check
* Uses, “glorious leader” style posters common in totalitarian nations – Check
* Inspires adoration art – Check
* Appropriates symbols of past German glory – Check
* A narcissistic megalomaniac – Check
* Wants to build “youth” movement through Universal National State service – Check
* Worshiped and aided greatly by the media – Check
* Has thuggish supporters intimidating political opponents and voters – Check

But I digress…

In the end, I expect the speech to be basically a stay-in-school-learning’s-cool speech.  I’m also guessing Obama will take the opportunity to boost learning generally, which is always an important message, especially among the inner city kids.  And that is a good thing.

Yet, a  part of me expects some sort liberalism or environmental crap tucked into the speech as well.  And if he does, then he will have crossed yet another line that all other presidents have refrained from crossing.

Posted in B. Hussein Obama, Politically Speaking | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries