26 June 2009

Obama To Detain Terror Suspects . . . FOREVER

Remember the self-righteous indignation from the left as they tsk-tskedly waved their fingers at George W. Bush and his claim that some terror suspects, if given freedom, would once again treat innocent "infidels" the way Madonna treats the Puerto Rican flag? Well . . .

The Obama administration . . . is crafting language for an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely.

Such an order would embrace claims by former president George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war.

It seems self-righteous indignation doesn't have the staying power that it used to. Now if only Obama would change his stance on destroying America's economy.

25 June 2009

Farrah Fawcett (and michael jackson)

Every son of the seventies had the poster and requisite supply of Kleenex. She smiled at us from our bedroom wall, seeming so happy to be in our presence while she twirled he hair and . . . wait, wait, is that a nipple? What the ? ? ?

Farrah Fawcett died today after a three year battle with Cancer (8 years after her sister was taken by the dread disease). Charlie's favorite angel had her shares of ups and downs, but her iconic image and trend setting hair drove pop culture in a way that can only be remembered fondly by those who were there.

And I don't know about you, but I'm really getting tired of cancer and can't wait for the day we kick its ass.

In other news: Michael Jackson died today (in a move undoubted intended to upstage Farrah's death). This, of course, is assuming that he has been alive since Thriller.

Parents with young sons are breathing easier.

21 June 2009

JibJab's Latest: Obama Saves The Day

H/T: Fausta

20 June 2009

Obama's Disastrous Economy

Left wingers who claim that we are still suffering from the Bush economy remind me of children who claim the dog ate their little sister . . . or was that their homework? However the saying goes, you can leave Dubya out of the equation since it was Obama who made some promises about the immediate impact of his deranged economic plan. And what we are seeing is the opposite of his projections. Here are some grizzly revelations:

  • Obama vowed that by this time unemployment would be around 8%. Well, it's at 9.4% (the highest in more than 25 years) and floating upward toward double digits.
  • Obama promised that he would create 600,000 jobs by the end of summer. Of course now, with some wordplay that Vanna White would have trouble following, Obama has shifted his stance to say that he will create "or save" 600,000 jobs. Sounds like suddenly somebody is hoping that even his economic plan can only destroy so many jobs in one calendar year.
  • Since the stimulus package was signed in February, the country has lost 1.6 million jobs. That kinda makes the administration's back patting about creating 150,000 job seem a bit on the simpleminded side.
  • The government has been on an unprecedented (and unpresidential) spending spree, dropping $44 billion in stimulus money, not related to tax cuts, in only 4 months. No wonder Michelle Obama finds it normal to spend $540 on a pair of sneakers.
  • With Obama's plan the national debt is now at an unbelievable 60% of annual GDP (up from 40%), and some 10% of that increase can be credited to the stimulus bill alone.
  • And I'll bang out more about this in the near future, but I'm willing to bet my son's entire action figure collection (including the collectible Jeff Hardy) that if Obama's Health care plan is signed into effect, America will never be out of debt again (and possible never overcome deficit spending).

So carp as you will, my liberal friends. We are now in Obama's economy and it's about as pretty as Nancy Pelosi at 3:00 a.m., when you haven't the protection of a few stiff drinks.

19 June 2009

Obama Criticizes Fox News, But Not Ahmadinejad

When do you start doubting somebody's sanity? Is it when they claim to see dead people by saying, "on this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes – and I see many of them in the audience here today . . ."? Is it when they falsely claim that their father fought in WWII, obviously confusing their father with somebody else's dad? Or maybe it's when they insanely claim that Japanese cars average 45 miles per gallon? Perhaps we should take it as a sign when they refer to Matt Lauer as "Tim" 3 times during the same interview then call David Gregory "Matt." Could be it's when they fail to recognize their own handwriting while claiming that they actually didn't fill out a questionnaire in favor of banning all handguns. And what about if they spend more money then all previous presidents combined on policies that have already led to an increase in unemployment and corporate instability while money is funneled to administration supporters?

Or maybe, just maybe, it's when they vent with paranoid vigor against a news network that doesn't follow ABC's sycophantic lead during the same week they fail to criticize the Iranian government for falsifying an election and butchering those who stand up to protest in the name of freedom.

I'm not a shrink, but that's insane.

18 June 2009

Will North Korea Fire Missiles At America?

Japan's best-selling newspaper, Yomiuri Shimbun, is reporting that Japanese Intelligence believes North Korea may launch a missile toward Hawaii on or around the 4th of July. And this on the heels of their underground nuclear weapons test on Memorial Day.

Granted, the suspected missile (a Taepodong-2) has a maximum range about 500 miles short of Hawaii, but it's the thought that counts.

According to the report in Yomiuri Shimbun,

Both Japanese intelligence and U.S. reconnaissance satellites have collated information pointing to the launch . . . U.S. satellite intelligence has shown that a missile launch pad had been erected at Dongchang-ri on North Korea's north-west coast.

So, Obama believes a soft-handed, apologetic approach to handling dictators and terrorists will persuade them put down their weapons and love us. As Dr. Phil would say, "how's that working out for us*."

*The Khaki Elephant does not make a habit of quoting Dr. Phil

(Senator) Boxer Pesters General To Call Her "Senator"

Barbara Boxer is a senator and you'd better acknowledge it to the world (just in case somebody doesn't know) . . . even if you've shown such dedicated service to your country that you've achieved the rank of Brigadier General.

Oh, and this is just a guess but I suspect that Boxer is not aware that military protocol approves the terms "Ma'am" or "Sir."

I'm also guessing that Boxer couldn't wait and had to interrupt his answer to make her demand because . . . well, let's just say that she's not a big fan of the military.

And this is just another guess, but I don't think that is her natural hair color.

17 June 2009

Have The French Become Democracy's Beacon?

The President yesterday denounced the "extent of the fraud" and the "shocking" and "brutal" response of the Iranian regime to public demonstrations in Tehran these past four days.

"These elections are an atrocity," he said. "If Ahmadinejad had made such progress since the last elections, if he won two-thirds of the vote, why such violence?" The statement named the regime as the cause of the outrage in Iran and...stood up for Iranian democracy.

The President who spoke those words was France's Nicolas Sarkozy.
Meanwhile, in America:
Mr. Obama didn't call the vote fraudulent, though he did allow that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei "understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election." ... "How that plays out," Mr. Obama said, "is ultimately for the Iranian people to decide."
And if you're troubled by Obama's complicit response to the atrocities in Iran, you may want to stay clear of left-wing blogs for the next few days as they chatter about how the guy, who in their eyes makes all things possible, is the actual inspiration behind the protests in Iran.

Yes, that's right, they believe the guy who legitimized the current tyrannical rule in Iran by saying he would sit down with them without preconditions . . . the guy who has done nothing but hire ABC to push his health care plan while Iran announces they are closer to nukes and North Korea actually tests them on America's Memorial day . . . the guy who bows deeply to the Saudi king . . . the guy who has gone on a couple of apology tours to seek forgiveness for the way America has tried to "force" democracy on people . . . the guy who loves freedom so much that he seized public American automotive companies to fulfill his agenda while he drove them to bankruptcy . . . this is the guy the moonbats believe is inspiring Iran to dream of freedom.

Hamas Interferes In Iran

According to interviews with Iran protesters, "Palestinian Hamas members are helping the Iranian authorities crush street protests" after the suspect Iranian election. This news is about as shocking as Clay Aiken bounding out of the closet. As Bush pointed out when identifying Iran as a member of the axis of evil, Hamas receives arms, funding and even military (read: "terrorist") training from the current Iranian regime. And if Iran is able to develop nukes just imagine what will be under their Christmas tree this year . . . wait, I don't think they celebrate Christmas.

16 June 2009

Iraq Inspires Iran

George W. Bush had a lot wrong when it comes to Iraq, but he was right about one thing: freedom inspires freedom. The ink-stained fingers of Iraqi voters demonstrated once and for all that freedom can be won for a price. And unfortunately for the Iranian government, the students in their country have access to the internet. They've seen those fingers. They've read about the sacrifice. They've decided to act.

I can't help but wonder if those courageous protesters are looking for support from the United States. They know that they have a rogue government bent on nuclear armament. And I'm sure they are also aware the the real power in Iran is held by religious fundamentalists, but they are acting where they can -- and they are not doing it in a vacuum. The protesters are using cell phones to post their plight on YouTube and other sites across the net for the world to see . . . for America to see. What do they expect in the way of support?

Well, if they're looking for support from Obama I'm afraid they'll have a long wait. Yesterday, taking a few minutes away from his tour de farce concerning health care, Obama declared that he "cannot be silent" concerning what's happening in Iran (apparently drunk on self-love and forgetting that he has been silent for three days). Oh, and how did The Chosen One break his silence? Did he call for freedom? Did he decry oppression? Did he give so much as an ear wiggle of support for the protesters trying to disrupt one of the two remaining axis of evil?

Of course not. If he said that they may not like us.

News flash to the President: the extremists running that country will never like us. We are "The Great Satan" and it is through stirring hatred toward America that they maintain power. So, while the president (who can't seem to get his fill of bashing Israel over Gaza) weakly acknowledges the news in Iran, refusing to condemn the actions of their government, those with courage stand up at risk to their lives.

15 June 2009

New Look, Same Attitude

Inspired by all the talk of "Change," The Khaki Elephant has decided to launch a new look for the blog.

I'll admit it's a work in process aimed at a cleaner (one might say "greener") look. So please be patient with any jarring visual elements that may appear on this site over the next few days . . . or you might want to tune in to see what may prove some laughable attempts at aesthetics.
But while the appearance is currently under construction, that won't stop me from my usual rape of intellectual insight through political posts.
I hope you enjoy.

13 June 2009


Let's face it, the guy is an ass.

We know his politics and expect his continued cheap shots on conservative targets, while claiming that Obama just doesn't provide any material to make jokes about. Right, where's the humor in thinking there are 57 states, telling Austrians that you don't know how they say something in "Austrian," proclaiming to the world that America invented the automobile, mistaking an oval office window for a door, giving the British Prime Minister unusable DVDs after he'd given you priceless international mementos, bowing to the Saudi King but not to the Queen of England . . . and so on, and so on, and so on . . .

So it should surprise no one that Letterman's monologue regularly ignores the "Genius" in the White House while retreading "George Bush is dumb" takes and breaking out a good old boy reference to Sarah Palin dressing like a slut. But Letterman took it too far with his pedophile-inspired joke about Palin's 14-year-old daughter.

Letterman's "joke" came during his monologue:
“One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game, during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.” He then went on to say that the hardest part about the Palins’ trip to New York was “keeping [former New York Gov.] Eliot Spitzer away from her daughter.”
Later, after the fire started to flicker, Letterman and some of his fellow lefties (like Harpy Huffington) claimed that he was talking about Palin's older daughter, Bristol, who has already had a child. But Bristol wasn't in New York; that was Willow, Palin's 14-year-old child. Right on, Dave! Worse yet I heard one liberal buffoon claim that Palin should expect this when she trots her kids out in public. What? Would this moron feel the same if somebody made sex jokes about the ever-publicly displayed Obama girls? Would this dolt look at a rape victim and say, "it's her fault, look at the way she's dressed."

This morning, when metro Matt Lauer tried to defend Letterman while interviewing Palin, the Alaskan governor replied,
OK Matt I would say that you and anybody else are extremely naive to believe that very convenient excuse of David Letterman's. It took him a couple of days to think of that excuse and 'Uhhh... No, he wasn't talking about my daughter that was there with me at the game, the 14 year-old. He was talking about some other daughter.' Well I think it was a weak excuse and regardless it was a degrading comment about a young woman and I would hope that people would rise up and decide it's not acceptable. Why do young girls have such low self-esteem in America when we think it's funny for a so-called comedian to get away with making a similar remark as he did....
I couldn't agree more.

Don Imus was taken off the air for making a racially insensitive comment. Here we have a "comedian" making sex jokes about a minor and it's supposed to be funny and acceptable? Are so many jumping to his defence just because he's liberal?

Well, The Khaki Elephant is done with Letterman. The remote will never again click his Tele-address. And I urge you to do the same.

12 June 2009

Hundreds Protest Obama's Visit

According to Fox 11 in Green Bay, a crowd lined the streets protesting Obama's recent visit with boos, thumbs down and clever signs (missing were the burning effigies and chants for death that The Left charmed us with during the Bush years).

Apparently, unlike Minnesotans, the good folk of Wisconsin take umbrage with plans to strap our kids with trillions in debt for a health care system that Obama said will model "the Canadian system" . . . not to mention anger over the lost tourism revenue from Canadians who stop traveling to America for medical care.

Von Brunn: Right Wing, Left Wing, Or Just Plan Nuts?

Well, you knew it was going to happen. Politicizing tragedy is almost as American as Mom's apple pie and Dad's PBR. And it didn't take long for the left to identify Holocaust Memorial murderer, James Von Brunn, as a right-wing racist nut job. In fact, some went so far as to use this attack as a defense of the recent Obama administration's Homeland Security report identifying conservatives and war veterans as potential domestic terrorists.

The right has responded in kind, pointing out that Von Brunn was an anti-Christian evolutionist who berated Israel and supported the Nazi ideal of a state government -- all ideologies associated with the left.

Let's stop.

On this issue even the Khaki Elephant is not going to blame the left.

Von Brunn represented neither Democrats nor Republicans. He was neither left nor right as we define those leanings in America. He was a nut; a selfish man of self-loathing so consumed with evil that spilling innocent blood meant less to him than having somebody remember his name if only for a month or so.

09 June 2009

Media Coverage Of The Economy (Then & Now)

Here is a wonderful video by FrankStrategies exposing the media coverage of the American economy. It would be funny if it didn't make you want to drive a lightly used ice pick into your carotid artery.

H/T: Hot Air

08 June 2009

Digging Deeper Into Obama's Cairo Speech

The interesting thing about Barack Obama's self-indulgent, teleprompted speeches is that the more you dig into them the more they reveal his extremist ideology. Whether it's socialist nationalization within the public sector, radical partial birth and post birth abortion stances or an economic policy that makes Mike Tyson seem thrifty, the Chosen One's bizarre world view is hard to miss for anyone who cares to take look closely.

I found another example today as I read an article by Christopher Hitchens that made an observation about Obama's Cairo speech that I had completely missed . . . and as is often the case when you dig into the mind of Barack Obama, it's more frightening than Freddy Krueger at a narcoleptic slumber party.

Take the single case in which our president touched upon the best-known fact about the Islamic "world": its tendency to make women second-class citizens. He mentioned this only to say that "Western countries" were discriminating against Muslim women! And how is this discrimination imposed? By limiting the wearing of the head scarf or hijab (a word that Obama pronounced as hajib—imagine the uproar if George Bush had done that). The clear implication was an attack on the French law that prohibits the display of religious garb or symbols in state schools. Indeed, the following day in Paris, Obama made this point even more explicitly. I quote from an excellent commentary by an Algerian-American visiting professor at the University of Michigan Law School, Karima Bennoune, who says:

"I have just published research conducted among the many people of Muslim, Arab and North African descent in France who support that country's 2004 law banning religious symbols in public schools which they see as a necessary deployment of the "law of the republic" to counter the "law of the Brothers," an informal rule imposed undemocratically on many women and girls in neighborhoods and at home and by fundamentalists."

But to the women who are compelled to dress according to the requirements of others, Obama had nothing to say at all, as if the only "right" at stake were the right to obey an instruction that is, in fact—if it matters—not found in the Quran. In Turkey, too, head scarves for women are outlawed in some contexts. Is this, too, Islamophobia? Does the president think that the veil and the burqa are also freely chosen fashion statements? This sort of naiveté is worrying, and it means that among the global Muslim audience, the wrong sort of people were laughing at us, while the ones who ought to be our friends and allies were shedding a disappointed tear.

2 Democrats Jump To The GOP In New York

According to The New York Times two Democratic state senators, Pedro Espada Jr. of the Bronx and Hiram Monserrate of Queens, switched to the Republican party giving the GOP a 32-30 majority in the New York senate.

This should come as little surprise. If sharing a state with Chuck Schumer doesn't cure you of your liberal leanings than the disease may have already rendered you intellectually terminal.

07 June 2009

I Guess The Plan Really Is To Nationalize Healthcare

Ever since the presidential campaign Obama apologists have scoffed at GOP allegations that their sacrosanct saint wants to nationalize health care. His teleprompter soothed Americans with sweet sound bites insisting that it was just about "affordability." His political pimps promised everyone a healthy debate, but behind the scenes they've apparently been hustling their agenda like heroine hooked whores.

Remember how Barack Obama said that he had no intention of trying to run General Motors? Well, he lied.

Remember how Barack Obama said that his health care program was not about nationalization? Well, he lied.

According to The New York Times, the President has decided that it's time for him to take control of the nation's health care agenda "after months of insisting he would leave the details to Congress." Why not, I say. With his lack of experience in the auto industry he was able to drive GM to bankruptcy and lead them to shut down more dealerships and eliminate more jobs than even the worst projections expected to see. I'm sure his expertise as a community organizer will work equally well as he tampers with the most productive medical apparatus in the world -- the American health care industry.

Hugh Hewitt drops the straight scoop on what this really means for everybody:

President Obama is going to throw himself into the "debate" on the radical restructuring of American medicine underway on the Hill . . . Except that there hasn't been any "debate" to date, just a giant head-fake that kept the GOP, doctors, hospitals and insurance companies frozen while the Obama/Pelosi/Reid march towards a "government option" (which means single payer which means rationing and interference with a patent's choice of doctors and care) was positioned for a summer jam down.
Not to mention all of the additional "benefits" we've seen with everything else the government administers: higher cost, higher taxes, less efficiency and a political agenda behind every dollar spent.

And we can expect the same kind of "bipartisanship" with health care as the administration displayed during the development and delivery of their stimulus package, which is to say: the Democrats will bar all Republicans from the discussion as they rub against one another, stoking the Obamic embers that are waiting to blaze in the hearts of the main stream media.

The GM model did show us how Obama and his comrades function. If they can seize control they will do it. And the path of ruin becomes so wide that you will be able to drive a fleet of trucks through it . . . if automotive companies are allowed to build trucks anymore.

06 June 2009

D-Day Remembered

On June 6, 1944 history was made by those who's blood would dampened Omaha beach in a courageous confrontation with evil. In the words of fellow native Michiganian (or Michigander if you prefer) Ted Nugent :

"As you read this, 65 years ago almost to the exact day, tens of thousands of scared young American soldiers were crammed together on landing craft in the English Channel heading for the beaches of Normandy, France. Their mission: save the world. Though they surely didn't know it, these young men in all those landing craft would be forever known in American history as the Greatest Generation.

. . . As the gates of the landing crafts fell, the Nazis unleashed Hell upon the Greatest Generation. In mere minutes, hundreds had been killed or wounded. By day's end the American military would suffer 5,000 casualties, all in the name of freedom. Know it.

. . . The American dead and wounded was so severe that American commanders considered abandoning the beach. But what our commanders had not counted on was the tenacity and fighting spirit of the Greatest Generation. Just as the firemen on 9/11 kept rushing up the stairs of the burning Twin Towers into the hands of God, the landing craft full of American infantry kept coming.

. . . Those young Americans who stormed Omaha beach on that morning 65 years ago on June 6th accomplished their mission: they saved the world."
May we never forget the strength and sacrifice of those who decided to face evil that day. And may we live up to their example when evil needs to be faced in our day.

Sotomayor Revealed Pt 2: The Jurist Jests

Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, uses some the same communication techniques that we have seen from the President's teleprompter and one of he favorites is the use of jokes (warning: this is not a endorsement of her sense of humor . . . something as rare in liberal politicians as jobs in the public sector).

But I've always felt that you can tell a lot about a person by the jokes they tell. Some irreverent folk lean toward inappropriateness with offense, some crude creepers drop the horribly racist, and others are just plan dull and their punchline land like a flu shot on the nurse's first day.
With Sotomayor we see and interesting revelation as reported by The National Review. While speaking at Hofstra she dropped this little gem; and watch closely because the punchline comes before the end.

It involves three judges who go duck hunting. A duck flies overhead and the supreme court justice, before he picks up his shotgun, ponders about the policy implications of shooting the duck—how will the environment be affected, how will the duck hunting business be affected if he doesn’t shoot the duck, well by the time he finishes, the duck got away.

Another duck flies overhead, and the circuit judge goes through his five part test before pulling the trigger—1) he lifts the shotgun to his shoulder, 3) [sic] he sights the duck, 3) he measures the velocity of the duck’s flight, 4) he aims, and 5) he shoots—and, he misses.

Finally, another duck flies by, the district judge picks up the shotgun and shoots. The duck lands and the district judge picks it up, swings it over his shoulder and decides that he will let the other two judges explain what he did over dinner.

Read that description of the supreme court justice closely. With Sotomayor, the defining jest of the Supreme Court is their obligation in establishing policy. Apparently for Sotomayor the separation of powers is a jackass jape.

04 June 2009

Obama's Cairo Speech: What He Said and What He Didn't

I didn't see Obama's Cairo speech, so I missed the teleprompted grins and gambols, but I did get a chance to read the text posted by the LA Times. What I found was a mixed bag.

The President knows Americans are starting to lose confidence in his decision making. While his popularity remains high, polls consistently show that Americans do not like his policies, especially when it comes to national defense and the economy (leading me to once again wonder if they should pass out IQ tests at voter registrations). People may still like his charming scripts, but deeds eventually overcome words. Obama knew that the world was watching so he did throw mainstream America a few bones.
For one thing, Obama shot a hole in the radical denial of the Holocaust saying,
Denying that fact [the Holocaust] is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction – or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews – is deeply wrong.
The president also tried to be clear about 9/11:
I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody.
And, unlike Jimmy Carter, Obama refused to attack Israel as a terrorist state, instead acknowledging their relationship with America.
America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.
But as always is the case with Obama, his world view will not allow him to make the most obvious of observations concerning America and it's citizens. For most of us the bond with Israel is based less on cultural and historical ties than the fact that Israel is a democratic nation that shares of core value of freedom.

Obama also took some subtle shots at Israel. For example, when addressing Palestinian violence (aka, terrorism) he conjured a disconnected analogy.
“Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America’s founding."
In Barack Obama's world, Israel is the cruel slave owner and the terrorists who bomb their pizza parlors and intentionally fire missiles into their schools are simply the oppressed acting up and acting out. In fact, when Obama gave examples of antisemitism around the world he curiously avoided the primary group that regularly promises the elimination of all Jews: radical Islamic terrorist.

In an even more troubling passage, Obama claimed “for more than sixty years they [Palestinians] have endured the pain of dislocation.” But wait, Israel did not gain control of the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights until 1967, after the six-day war. Where did the extra 20 years come from? By claiming the the pain of dislocation began 60 years ago, Obama is pointing back to 1948 and the establishment of a Jewish state -- he is no longer talking about the Palestinian dilemma, but playing into the argument that the Arab world has claim to all of Israel.

And, of course, Obama's "history lesson" also fails to mention Jordan and Egypt's role in the Palestinian camps nor does he comment even in passing that more Jews were dislocated from Arab states in 1948 than Arabs from Israel.

It appears as though Barack Obama tried to play the middle road in this speech, taking shots at the most ludicrous accusations sputtered from our enemies. But there were also some disturbing revelations to the underpinnings of the administration's Middle East policy. I'm not so sure how well this will play with people who actually understood what was revealed and know the threats that haunt the world.

03 June 2009

Stimulus Scams

I admit that I've fallen for my share of scams. I've adopted a few Nigerians, purchased "green" cleaning products, and went on a blind date with "a really hot babe, Khaki, trust me." But even I'm starting to see through the swarm of snake oil salesmen that have swooped into our lives via the government stimulus package.

It seems that every day I get a call from some "mortgage company" that just doesn't know what to do with all the free stimulus money that the government has given them so they want to hand it over to me. Or I open a letter from a "financial institution" that wants to give me some of the bailout money that Washington piled into their pockets. Of course, all of these offers eventually have strings attached that will cost money.

Sadly, I never hear a word from the Nigerian children that I've adopted -- ungrateful kids.

Scam artists across the country are apparently sure of one thing: nobody understands the government stimulus package so they have a golden opportunity to make a perverse profit. Simply throw out some bait using the word "stimulus" and wait to reel in the hapless slugs in society who are looking for a handout.

Part of me wonders if momma government is going to step in to stop some of these fraudulent scams meant to take advantage of people who want to take advantage of Obama's promised redistribution of wealth. But then, since the actual pork-laden stimulus package put together by the current administration is little more than a fraudulent scam on the grandest scale . . . what's the point or prosecution?

01 June 2009

Can Anybody Doubt That Obama Is A Socialist? (Welcome To Animal Farm)


That's right, liberals, all those right wing nut jobs who claimed that Obama was a socialist were just a bunch of paranoid wackoes. It could could never happen in America.

Wait . . . what's this??????


"The prepackaged GM bankruptcy deal — crafted by the administration, the company, the United Auto Workers union and a group of bondholders — would give the U.S. government a 60 percent controlling stake in what was once the world's largest automaker. An additional 12.5 percent would be under Canadian government ownership."
The day you thought would never happen has arrived. The U.S. government now controls what was once one of the largest publicly owned companies in the world. First Obama authorized giving GM millions of dollars in bailout loans just before driving them into bankruptcy (and only a genius like Obama would give millions to a company before leading them to bankruptcy). Then Obama used his "Automotive Task Force," which is conveniently devoid of anybody who actually worked in the automotive industry, to take control.

Of course, blinded Obama supportors will follow their leader, believing every teleprompted word explaining that this is a short-term but necessary endeavor. Why is it that I myself paraphrasing George Orwell's Animal Farm:

"It had become usual to give Obama the credit for every successful achievement and every stroke of good fortune. You would often hear one hen remark to another, 'Under the guidance of our Leader, Comrade Obama, I have laid five eggs in six days'; or two cows, enjoying a drink at the pool, would exclaim, 'Thanks to the leadership of Comrade Obama, how excellent this water tastes!'"
As Barack Obama continues to feed them words they long to hear.

"What I have no interest in doing is running GM," Obama said. His only goal, he said, was to get GM back on its feet and then "to get out quickly."
But as White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said, "[Obama] has a strong obligation to ensure that there is a management structure in place that is making smart business decisions." So now the President of the United States (who has never managed a company) with the help of the Federal Government (who mismanage everything they touch) are going to decide what is a "smart business decision." Sounds to me like "running GM" is exactly what Obama and his minions intend to do. And they believe that they have the right to do so.

Or as my Orwell would write:

"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Obama that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"
Luckily if Obama should make a poor decision he will fall back on his tried and true defense: George Bush, the Republicans and those greedy CEOs are to blame! Or to go all Orwellian again:
"If a window was broken or a drain was blocked up, someone was certain to say that Bush had come in the night and done it, and when the key of the store-shed was lost, the whole farm was convinced that Bush had thrown it down the well. Curiously enough, they went on believing this even after the mislaid key was found under a sack of meal."
You see, we are being being told that this is not socialism; that the far-left wing of the Democratic Party that is now in power is simply doing what must be done because of the failures of their predoccessors (I guess ignoring the fact that most of them have been in Washington for a very long time). We are being told that market solutions are not the answer and that they are the only ones who can save us from ourselves. Because: