by: The Jerseynut

So it wasn't bad enough that President Obama returned a bronze bust of Winston Churchill that had, since 9/11, been on loan as a sign of strength and friendship from our allies across the pond. And apparently Obama didn't show enough disdain for the British when he gave Prime Minister Brown a discount pack of DVDs as a gift, while Brown brought Obama a pen holder fashioned from the timber of HMS Gannet, a ship that served on anti-slavery missions off Africa. And no, he had no intention to disrespect the Queen of England by giving her an iPod filled with his speeches, while his churlish wife patted her condescendingly on the back.

No, for some reason the depths of Obama's hatred and disdain of the British have not yet been reached. Once again, yesterday, he found a way to slap our staunchest allies in the face:

Gordon Brown lurched from being hailed as a global statesman to intense embarrassment tonight, after it emerged US President Barack Obama had turned down no fewer than five requests from Downing Street to hold a bilateral meeting at the United Nations in New York or at the G20 summit starting in Pittsburgh today...

But Obama has held bilateral meetings in New York with the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, and the new Japanese prime minister, Yukio Hatoyama...

Some in the British press are not amused:

What are we to make of this? This country has proved, through the bravery of men like Acting Sgt Lockett, America’s staunchest ally in Afghanistan. In return, the American President treats the British Prime Minister with casual contempt. The President’s graceless behaviour is unforgivable.... Mr Obama owes this country a great deal for its unflinching commitment to the American-led war in Afghanistan but seems incapable of acknowledging the fact. You might have thought that after the shambles of Mr Brown’s first visit to the Obama White House - when there was no joint press conference and the President’s “gift” to the Prime Minister was a boxed DVD set - that lessons would have been learned. Apparently not... Mr Obama’s churlishness is fresh evidence that the US/UK special relationship is a one-way street.

This is a dangerous but legitimate sentiment from the Brits. I guess Obama feels that since he wasn't president before January 20th,2009, all favors done for this nation before The Days Of The One are no longer valid currency. Apparently, all alliances are now "off the table" and any future acts of friendship will be based on a "what have you done for me lately" basis, the "me" being not the United States of America but for Barack Obama.

Why would the Brits ever help us again, based on the treatment they have received from Obama? They won't, but that doesn't concern the president, who seems more anxious to pull us into an alliance with South American dictatorships than thriving European democracies. It's almost as if our foreign policy was being run by a college sophomore, just indoctrinated into Western Civilization by his tenured, socialist college professor, who still has pictures of himself in his office smoking weed at Woodstock.

Unless this is Michelle Obama's doing? From the British press, in March:

We may just LURVE Michelle's fashion sense. But Michelle doesn't reciprocate our affection, one bit. Her broad-brush view of history associates Brits with the wicked white global hegemony responsible for the slave trade. Never mind that a white, Tory Englishman - William Wilberforce - brought the slave trade to an end. Judging by her record, Michelle does not make room for such subtle nuance.

Sorry, our erstwhile friends. Our new president has 200 year-old scores to settle, and whatever you've think you have done for us lately, it's not enough to satisfy The One...

by Harrison Price

Lefties say Conservatives are making it sound like Nazi indoctrination and Righties are saying it is like Nazi indoctrination.  In case you haven’t heard, Obama is going to talk to K-6th graders.  Neither side is completely right or completely wrong but what this little speech does show is that the belief in the omnipotent “talking head” era has passed.

It used to be you read your morning (or afternoon) newspaper, read Life Magazine once a week, and watched a network news program.  If you were very interested you could watch a program on PBS like Crossfire to maybe get some more knowledge or, if you were a true “rebel” you read a free newspaper.  And that was how people learned how to think about topics.  The wise editor someplace would choose what you would learn.  And so it was for many, many years.

After the 60s we all learned about “deconstructionism” whereby nothing really had a set meaning.  Thus the Mona Lisa was not universally a great work and somebody who splashed some paint on the canvas could be mentioned in the same breath as a great, well known painter.  People came up with all sorts of “new meanings” for poetry and prose, and up became down and in became out and college students everywhere were able to cram as much BS into their papers as they could.

The talking head era was drawing to a close.  Its death knell happened when people could go onto a website and see a 50 year, well known writer’s work displayed next to somebody you’d never heard of.  Both, because they appeared next to one another, seemed to have equal authority.  It took the individual reader to determine if what was being presented to them was valid or not.

It is ironic, in this post-1984 1984 world (written in 1948 but ahead of its time) that Liberals, who often put down Conservatives for trying to enforce “universal” values (also called “family values”) would be shocked that the image of a U.S. President on a television monitor telling young children what he thinks is important in life would be objectionable.  After all, when the President of the United States says something, even if it sounds odd, he or she does speak with the authority of the office and most kids in that age group still believe in Santa Claus.

Democrats never believed George W. Bush when he talked about his core beliefs yet they think it is odd many Americans don’t want Barack Obama speaking about what he thinks are important in life.  The ironies are numerous.

Obama may have had good intentions (his “community organizer” history is coming out) but it just looks so nefarious to many who are part of a society that rejects the talking head.

Even if Obama plays it “safe” and says things like it’s good to help your neighbors, you should look both ways before crossing the street, and when you grow up pay your taxes, people will still be upset.

Had places been reversed and George W. Bush was the man on the television in schools across the nation, we’d be hearing the same things from Democrats that we hear now from Republicans.

France’s Charles de Gaulle once said:

“How can anyone govern a nation that has two hundred and forty-six different kinds of cheese?”

And so it has become in America, minus the cheese.

The following was sent to me via email.  Author unknown.

Dr. Krauthammer is on Fox News. He is an M.D. and he is paralyzed from the neck down. Be forewarned on what is happening. A friend went to hear Charles Krauthammer. He listened with 25 others in closed room. What he says here, is NOT 2nd-hand, but 1st. You would do well to read and pass this along to EVERYBODY that loves his country. This is VERY serious for the direction of our country. The ramifications are staggering for us and our children.

Last Monday was a profound evening, hearing Dr. Charles Krauthammer speak to the Center for the American Experiment. He is brilliant intellectual, seasoned and articulate. He is forthright and careful in his analysis, and never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fear monger nor an extremist in his comments and views. He is a fiscal conservative, and has a Pulitzer Prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News and writes weekly for the Washington Post. The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have shared this with many of you and several have asked me to summarize his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically and internationally.

Even 2 Dems at my table agreed with everything he said! If you feel like
forwarding this to those who are open minded and have not drunk the Kool-Aid, feel free. Summary of his comments:

1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be
underestimated. He is a cool customer who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's behind the mask. Taking down the Clinton dynasty from a political neophyte was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time.

2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan and Clinton. He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing with your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES!

3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. not come to Washington to make
something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can't be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand, and wants to level the playing field with income redistribution and punishment to the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain or Canada .

4. His three main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, AND NATIONAL HEALTH CARE by the Federal government. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is his healthcare program, because if you make it FREE and add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada. God forbid.

5. He has surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one around him has ever even run a candy store. But they are going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries. This obviously can't work in the long run. Obama is not a socialist; rather he's a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says.

6. Obama doesn't really see himself as President of the United States , but
more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to
orchestrate and coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America, as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies!

7. He is now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not
come due until after he is re-elected in 2012. He would like to blame all
problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego, and Mr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist.

8.. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong.
We're pining for another Reagan, but there will never be another like him.
Krauthammer believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty and Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in February) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and info if she is to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and states rights.

9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We are
spending trillions that we doen't have. This could lead to hyper-inflation,
depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bail outs didn't work, nor will the stimulus package. These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama's allies, unions and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above.

10. The election was over in mid-September when Lehman brothers failed, fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people are in pain, and the mantra of change caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won this election; it was surprising it was as close as it was.

11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it will be a dogfight. It will all be about the economy. I hope this gets you really thinking about what's happening in Washington and Congress. There is a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, and he encourages us to keep the faith and join the loyal resistance. The work will be hard, but we're right on most issues and can reclaim our country, before it's far too late.

by Jennifer Rubin

Candidate Barack Obama ran a brilliant campaign, convincing moderates and even some conservatives that he was no radical while keeping the netroot base fully engaged. But seven months after taking office, the list of disappointed voters (at least those willing to admit they were had) is growing.

Fiscal conservatives who bought the spiel that he’d go line by line through the budget have seen the most fiscally irresponsible president ever. After a $787B pork-filled stimulus, a supplemental spending measure with 9,000 earmarks, a $3.5 trillion budget, and a trillion dollar health care plan, Obama has managed to exceed the worst predictions of his critics. And now at least some of his advisors are letting on that his promise not to hike taxes on 95% of taxpayers is going to be cast aside. After all, the deficit is now so huge we must plug the gap, right? (Robert Gibbs said Obama would never raise taxes on the middle class – well, except for those cigarette and energy taxes.)

Then there are the good government types who fancied a new era of transparency and lobbyist-free government. Well, not quite. We have had the long list of tax cheats and the lobbyists who needed ethics waivers to squeeze through the revolving door. Again and again — whether on the stimulus plan or on cap and trade — gargantuan legislation has been rushed through without public scrutiny. Well, if the public figured out what was on some of those thousands of pages, they might have objected.

There were gay voters who felt certain this contemporary president understood their concerns. Unlike all the other liberal pols he would finally deliver on gay marriage, they hoped ( after all he came out against Proposition 8 in California) and repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Well, as James Kirchick explains, “Whatever he ‘really’ thinks, Obama’s stance on gay marriage is virtually indistinguishable from that of John McCain.” And re-examination of “don’t ask, don’t tell” remains far down on the priority list. (As Reason magazine’s Shikha Dalmia put it, “President Obama is pleading for time to push this issue until after, presumably, he has averted global warming, revived the economy, and implemented universal health coverage.”)

That’s nothing compared to the betrayal of American Jews and other pro-Israel voters. During the campaign he came on bended knee to AIPAC, made little if any mention of Israeli settlements, and sneered at those who might question his Zionist bona fides. After receiving the money and votes of gullible Jewish voters, as president he has now declared his intention to put “daylight” between the U.S. and Israel and has embarked on an openly hostile approach to the Jewish state. And if that wasn’t enough, he chooses to honor, with America’s highest civilian award, Mary Robinson, who presided over the anti-Israel hate-fest at Durban in 2001 when serving as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Then there are the poor benighted pro-life voters who listened to the likes of Doug Kmiec and believed Obama would be someone more pro-life than his prior political record had demonstrated. But sure enough, he repealed the restriction on funding international groups which provide abortion services, nominated a Supreme Court judge who his advisors assured pro-choice groups would be solidly in their corner, and has done nothing to alter the Democrats’ aversion to any restrictions on abortion. (Indeed, Democrats will almost surely insist that abortion services be provided under Obama’s universal health care proposal.)

Perhaps the pro-life voters should have compared notes with the libertarians who were convinced that Obama was somehow going to limit the reach of government. But instead, the nanny state reigns supreme, stronger than ever. Obama is regulating tobacco, cheering on a massive energy tax and regulatory scheme, and planning a massive new consumer protection agency. Not very free market friendly, is he?

When you tally the list it’s an impressive record. He’s managed to offend or disappoint a diverse array of voters — everyone from Jews, to libertarians, to green eyeshade conservatives. Then you add in seniors who are more wary of his health care plan than younger voters and pro-defense voters who were lulled into his promise to expand the military (and now find that the Department of Defense is on a strict diet while the rest of the federal government is gorging).

So it’s not hard to see why the winning coalition of voters who put Obama in the White House is slowly crumbling. Essentially, anyone who expected something other than an ultra-liberal intent on vastly expanding the power of the federal government and retreating from America’s position of leadership in the world was taken for a ride.

Whether Obama can recapture the support of these voters and get them to turn out to the same degree that they did in 2008 remains to be seen. But you can’t win elections with only the left sliver of the electorate. And it’s going to be hard to fool all the rest of the voters a second time.

by Harrison Price

Democrats, Obama specifically when he was running for presdient, thought the U.S. should have more of a touchy-feeling policy towards what President G.W. Bush called the “axis of evil” a scary term for Liberals because it brought up that whole good and evil thing.  Obama was going to change this entire tone thing and, in the process, make new friends with people like the leaders of Iran, North Korea, and Cuba:

On his first trip overseas, Mr. Obama referred to Mr. Bush’s foreign policy and said the United States has “shown arrogance” and been “dismissive, even derisive.” He said decisions of the past had “lowered our standing in the world.”

So Obama has tried to be more open, friendly, kind, nice, etc.  He invited Iranain officials to embassies on July 4th to enjoy our Independence Day until they suppressed the election results and shot and jailed protestors.  Whoops.  Just the other day a news ticker on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Havana, Cuba was shut off because the messages it displayed (you know things like you live in a dictatorship, etc.) were too upsetting for the poor Cuban government.  Since we don’t want to upset dictators it’s better that we keep that whole “freedom thing” under wraps.

Obama’s overtures with North Korea haven’t gone so well, either.  They shot off a couple of missiles, said they were working on new nukes, and basically told Obama to pound sand.  Mr. Obama also tried to become pals with Venezulan strongman Huge Chavez but unfortunately a new study by the Government Accountability Office shows that Chavez’s government is corrupt and fueled by drug money.  Whoops!

We're from the government we're here to help!

Now we have reports that the situation in Iran is much worse:

Some prisoners say they watched fellow detainees being beaten to death by guards in overcrowded, stinking holding pens. Others say they had their fingernails ripped off or were forced to lick filthy toilet bowls.

The accounts of prison abuse in Iran’s postelection crackdown — relayed by relatives and on opposition Web sites — have set off growing outrage among Iranians, including some prominent conservatives. More bruised corpses have been returned to families in recent days, and some hospital officials have told human rights workers that they have seen evidence that well over 100 protesters have died since the vote.

We shouldn’t be talking rocket science here (or even healthcare reform).  These are dictatorships run by corrupt strongmen who care only for furthering their agendas.  These people don’t care about the rule of law or what the people over whom they rule want… it’s about staying in power.  For President Obama to think about things any differently shows complete ignorance as to human nature and reality.

By criticizing the former administration and talking about his new tone Obama makes a big mistake… he hitches his success to what the dictators in other countries do…  If the dictators invite him for coffee and hamburgers he is vindicated… if they tell him to shove it and continue doing evil Obama looks foolish.  Now, which choice do you think a dictator who hates America will take?

The only way to stop a bully is to call him what he is to his face and not back down.  Making “friends” and playing nice hasn’t done anything positive for America.  Maybe it’s time for some of that “arrogance” Obama mocked?

by Harrison Price

Once more we wade into the stupidity that is the Democratic Cap and Trade bill, now put away until sometime in the Fall for lack of support.  Cap and Trade would tax everything based upon how “dirty” the energy it took to create it was (read CO2).  This bill, if it became law, would lay waste to the U.S. economy, cause Americans up to $1,400.00 per year in extra spending, kill jobs, and put the U.S. at a disadvantage when compared to our trade competitors.

India and China will have none of this foolish Liberal agenda:

India on Sunday night rebuffed an appeal by Hillary Clinton, US secretary of state, to embrace a low-carbon future in which the two countries would work together to devise new ways of consuming and producing energy.

Mrs Clinton, on a five-day visit to the country, said that low-carbon emissions would not jeopardise India’s high economic growth rates and its goal of lifting millions of people out of poverty. She offered a technological partnership to secure the fast growing nation’s energy supplies and help boost the livelihoods of its farmers.

China had the same reaction:

We are told that although China, India and others show no signs of joining in this dismal process, we will eventually induce their participation by “setting an example.” Watching the impending indigence of the Midwest, and the flow of jobs from our shores to theirs, our friends in Asia and the Third World are far more likely to choose any other path but ours.

What is even more absurd is that Obama’s own EPA admits Cap and Trade will do nothing:

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee began their hearings on the 1,500 page Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade legislation Tuesday, and ranking member Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) won a startling admission from Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa Jackson. Inhofe produced an EPA chart generated last year during the Senate’s debate of the Lieberman-Warner cap-and-trade legislation. The chart showed that the carbon reductions under that bill would not materially effect global carbon concentrations in the atmosphere. Inhofe then asked Jackson if she agreed with the chart’s conclusions. Jackson replied: “I believe that essential parts of the chart are that the U.S. action alone will not impact CO2 levels.”

Guess what?  The other countries won’t participate because it will destroy their economies!  Yet another foolish idea from the Democrats that will hurt our economy.

It is also troubling that, with so many issues in the world that Secretary of State Clinton would spend so much time discussing a non-starting idea with the Indians.  Shouldn’t her limited time be better spent working on issues relating to terrorism, Pakistan, Afghanistan, nuclear proliferation, and trade instead of lecturing them on ideas they will never buy into?

With the economy still in trouble, Obama’s support shrinking, and Cap and Trade shelved until the Fall surely there are more important things to be done instead of trying to kill our economy.

by Harrison Price

President Obama seems to be building on his record of bad judgement.  It all started with his comments regarding the bonuses contractually awarded to AIG executives.  His words helped to cause or inflame a sea of anger against those employees with some getting death threats.  Obama ended up backing away from his earlier statements.  Then we had another example after the presidential elections in Iran where Obama remained silent for the entire weekend before, after people in his administration began speaking out, he finally condemned the shooting and arrests of protesters.  Now we have the latest example: the arrest of a man for breaking into his own house (which was not known until after the police showed up).

Nobody is perfect and thus everyone is entitled to make mistakes or to have lapses in judgement.  However when you are President of the United States you shouldn’t open your mouth without carefully considering the effect those words can have (and to be smart enough to know this doubly applies to matters of “race”).

Originally Obama condemned the arrest of the black man by police:

Obama said Wednesday that Cambridge police “acted stupidly” during the disorderly conduct arrest of his friend, Henry Louis Gates Jr., in his own home near Harvard University.

 Obama backed off of his statements after a racial firestorm errupted:

President Barack Obama backed down on Friday from a statement that police had “acted stupidly” in arresting a black scholar in a racially charged case that was rapidly becoming a distraction for Obama.

“Because this has been ratcheting up and I obviously helped to contribute ratcheting it up, I wanted to make clear in my choice of words I think I unfortunately gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sgt. Crowley specifically,” Obama said. “And I could have calibrated those words differently.”

Well… duh!  What I found most shocking was that Obama seemed to think this reaction would be a surprise:

“The fact that it has garnered so much attention, I think, is a testimony to the fact that these are issues that are still very sensitive here in America,’’said Obama.

What this little incident shows is that President Obama does not seem to behave as if he is representing all Americans and that he should use caution when wading into a murky situation.  I am shocked that he would even say anything about this considering when a U.S. soldier was murdered in Arkansas by a Muslim claiming jihad he was virtually silent on the matter.  But jihad is not something Liberals like to address for what it is.  The issue for me has nothing to do with race but rather the stupid statements from someone who should know better and the 180 degree spin he put on when he was condemned by the police, the police unions, many blacks, and ordinary Americans.

So either he meant what he originally said but wouldn’t stand up for his remarks, he was playing the race card to score political points, or he just didn’t think before speaking.  Any of those possibilities don’t say much positive about him.

by Thomas Craig

It seems that the question of President Obama's citizenship will not go away.  I completely understand the anger and disappointment that Americans are feeling, however, perhaps it is time to put this one to rest.  The 14th Amendment clearly states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."  Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4th, 1961.  Hawaii became a state in 1959.  (Click on the above image to see his birth certificate.)  The question now remains if the government has altered or forged this document.  Is it possible?  Perhaps.  Is it likely?  No, it is not. 

We all have to accept that President Obama is fully eligible to hold the office.  We can snicker about it if we want but until proof is shown that there was a government conspiracy regarding this, we have to accept it.  Challenging the President's eligibility is not only a waste of time, but it demeans and deprives attention from the true arguments that the People have.  The Obama Administration, I believe, LOVES this type of drama.  They see the benefits of ridiculous distractions such as this debate.  While we are all paying attention to the debate about his citizenship, the administration is pushing bills through congress without any time for the bills to be read and understood.  We need to keep our eye on the ball.  Do not let the deluded theories of ignorant people distract you from the true issues of the day.  It is imperil that we keep our resolve and apply real pressure to our representatives on real issues.