Biden Never Thought Stimulus Would Work This Well

During a conference call with 55 governors, territorial officials or their designees, Vice President Joe Biden enthusiastically effused about Obama's stimulus plan: “In my wildest dreams, I never thought it would work this well.”

Really?

They promised this would prevent unemployment from reaching 8% and we are now pushing double digits. They vowed that it would not require another tax hike but we now know that was a lie. They claimed that the package would avoid special interest and pork spending, but the congressional pet projects in this spending orgy look like a sleazy Webkinz convention. They said it would not create deficit spending but the current projections calculate deficit spending over the next 10 years that is close to equalling the total deficit spending that was created over the past 200 years.

If Biden never thought the stimulus package "would work this well," I wonder what exactly they were planning for this country.

Mo' Zo: The Squirreliness of ACORN

I'm so glad that making the big time with Pajamas Media hasn't changed Zo. Here's his take on the latest ACORN debacle.

Barack Obama's Vapid UN Speech

It's amazing to hear the George Stephanopouloses . . .eses of the world still prattle on about the wisdom of Barack Obama as he dazzled at the UN. Of course, if you didn't hear Obama's vapid speech for yourself and want a clearer perspective, then I suggest you try the foreign press.

The United Kingdom's top circulating journal, The Telegraph, posed the only question a sane observer could have asked after listening to the speech: Barack at the UN: Was this Obama’s most naïve speech ever? According to journalist Nile Gardiner

It’s always a bad sign when a US president gets several rounds of heavy applause at the UN General Assembly, as Barack Obama did this morning in New York. Needless to say, the loudest cheers from the gathering of world leaders came when he condemned the actions of a close US ally, Israel, in continuing to build settlements in the West Bank. You can always rely on attacks on the Israelis to generate the biggest roars of approval at any meeting of the United Nations, and Obama dutifully obliged.

But Israel wasn't the only nation Obama attacked in his speech. I mean, no Obama speech to foreign dignitaries is complete without an attack on the good ol' U.S. of A. Of course, the president never impugns himself with these attacks. No, the Obama way is to talk about how horrible America was BEFORE he took control and led us through the darkness with his vision of light. Take this ember from the speech:

So for those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions that we have taken in just nine months. On my first day in office, I prohibited - without exception or equivocation - the use of torture by the United States of America. I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed, and we are doing the hard work of forging a framework to combat extremism within the rule of law.

All to the delight of those who hate us. Never mind that Obama's words were vapid utterances, he bathed in adoration.

But we owe it to ourselves to look at the facts. When Obama railed against "torture" he was, of course, talking about waterboarding. And how many terrorists were actually waterboarded by the pre-obama evil America? 3. That's right, only 3 all of whom where high level al Qaeda operatives, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed who couldn't tell us enough about his twisted organization by the time the intelligence officers were done. (and I've always found it amusing that some of those who think this butcher should be executed are so upset that the CIA got him wet). But what's more interesting is this actually happened 6 years ago, not "9 months" as Obama implies. Obama didn't stop waterboarding, Bush did.

Then Obama threw out the applause line of closing Guantanamo Bay, but what does that mean? Is he going to free all of those prisoners? Of course not, he's going to move them to facilities within the U.S. where they are sure to be treated worse than the were at Gitmo.

So once again Obama took cheap shots at his own country to elevate his self image. To bad Joe Wilson wasn't there.

And while Obama continued to take this naive approach to foreign relations, Iran continued to ignore UN regulations with the discovery of an secret nuclear facility that could only have been built to create weapons grade uranium.

9/12 Protest Pics

There were so many outstanding pics and prints from the 9/12 protest that I decided to post a few. It's nice to see the creativity of the right versus the hanging George Bushes (or Republican of your choice) and endless "Nazi" signs that tend to be the outer limit of liberal inventiveness.

H/T Thanks to:
geeeeeZ!
According to Nikki
American Princess

Hot Air

Looking at the Left

Michelle Malkin

Debonair Dude's World

Vodkapundit

Clean Republicans & Dirty Democrats

Here's a fun photographic essay from the Gateway Pundit comparing the recent trash aftermath of the recent 9/12 Rally to the Obama inauguration.

CLEAN Conservatives vs FILTHY Liberals-- A Photographic Essay

I just wonder who's going to clean up after 4 years of an Obama mess.

Massive 9/12 Rally To Limit Government Control

Tens of thousands gathered yesterday to protest Obama's full scale attack on capitalism and individual liberty but all the left wants to talk about is that the crowd didn't reach a million. According to The New York Times,

The demonstrators numbered well into the tens of thousands, though the police declined to estimate the size of the crowd. Many came on their own and were not part of an organization or group. But the magnitude of the rally took the authorities by surprise, with throngs of people streaming from the White House to Capitol Hill for more than three hours.

The protesters formed a massive sea of outrage flowing through the streets of D.C., singing patriot songs and displaying their commitment to an America born and bred on individual freedom and limited government intervention.

But rather than address the darkening waters of the Obamanic lust for power, the left wants to talk about how it was mistakenly reported that a million people were at the rally rather than the merely tens of thousands who were actually there. They would love nothing more than to portray this gathering as a backyard BBQ with a few yokels complaining about Uncle Sam over a six pack of PBR.

I'll admit that I never expected a million or even tens of thousands to attend. Historically Republicans have refrained from rallies of this sort because . . . well, we tend to work during the day. But the radical agenda of those currently controlling the democratic party have passionately changed the way Republicans respond, perhaps forever.

Michelle Malkin sums it for us:

Activists were derided as amateurs who couldn’t turn out a crowd. Then they were smeared as corporate shills. They were criticized for not having a coherent message. Then they were mocked for ideological single-mindedness. They are resented by professional strategists who accuse them of organizing empty protests that won’t translate into electoral gains. But the movement has given birth to a new generation of movers and shakers who have rejected establishment partisan politics for nimble, Internet-facilitated, issues-based advocacy.

Amen, sister. Whoa, did that make me part of the "Religious Right"?

The left has made their first predictable attempt to avoid the growing outrage over their policies by ignoring the message to talk about the "poor attendance." So, what's next on their game plan? Just how long before they call the rally racism?

Cass Sunstein: Another Radical Czar

And the freak parade of Obama wackoes continues. Guilt by association has become guilt by appointment as another of Barack Obama's endless stream of Czars is fished out of the radical left of the democratic party.

You are still probably wondering why Obama seems to appoint a Czar a week. I mean, don't we already have cabinet members and organizations to monitor some of these areas? The difference, of course, is that Czar do not have to go through the rigorous, high-profile confirmation process of a cabinet so the president can appoint bedlamites without fear of a damaging questions being posed on C-Span. But have no worry, Khaki is here to help spread the word.

Today's bizarre czar is Cass Sunstein, Barack Obama's administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (try to say that 3 times fast without throwing up in your mouth). But it his extreme view of animal rights that gives many of us paws. According to Cass, a dog or a horse is more rational than a human infant and should therefore be granted the same rights. OK. Beyond that, Cass equated animals to slaves, and he wasn't talking about the way Frederick Douglass kept his hair.

In truth, Sunstein extreme views are not very interesting to me in what they say about his affection for animals, though it has inspired me to have a word with my dog who tends to ignore my commands when she is apparently part of a slave culture. Heel. What interests me about Sunstein's beliefs is what they say about his view of people.

For Cass Sustein, it is his role to take care of animals because they are lower on the evolutionary scale and thus need his kind hand of wisdom for satisfactory survival and sustenance. For Cass Sustein, animals and people are in many ways the same. Can you see where I'm going with this?

The next time you wonder why the radical left is trying to addict those they consider "lower" than themselves to the nanny state, think of Cass Sustein. To him and people of his ilk, most Americans need him because they lack his insight and capabilities. He needs to save them from themselves. He needs to oversee the decisions they make and regulate the freedoms they have to ensure they don't do anything foolish. He masters their destiny for them and depends on a future where they will become dependant on him. And that is the definition of slavery.

9/11 . . . We Still Hear You

Commercial Break

For the best TV commercial ever made

Obama's School Speech vs. Bush's School Speech

The loving liberals seem mystified that some people would rather not have their children subjected to the benevolent word of their Chosen one. As Jason Linkins wrote:

Earlier this morning, President Barack Obama gave his planned address to the nation's schoolchildren. This caps off a ridiculous period of time in the life of our Republic, in which a number of people completely lost their minds at the prospect of Obama talking to children about the importance of education, and the media -- to its great discredit -- pointed cameras at them and treated them as if they were sane.

Why, who wouldn't want their children hear the President of the United States praise the power of education?

Rewind: October 1, 1991, Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington DC

Then President George H.W. Bush decided to give a speech to a group of junior high kids praising the power of education. Unlike Obama, he didn't send out study questions, he didn't push for universal broadcasting and he didn't try to assign writing projects on how the students could help the president. He simply gave a speech where he told the kids to "Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart," and "Don't let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams." And how did the left respond?

The Washington Post dropped the headline: "The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props," while House Majority Leader, Richard Gephardt, complained "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students."

But democrats being, well, democrats, decided not to stop at bellyaching.

Rep. William Ford, then chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate the cost and legality of Bush's appearance. On October 17, 1991, Ford summoned then-Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and other top Bush administration officials to testify at a hearing devoted to the speech.

That's right, the noble left who simply want our children to learn and think it was a wonderful idea for the President to address the nation's children actually launched an official congressional investigation when a Republican president did so . . . and Bush's speech was on a much smaller scale. Naturally the General Accounting Office concluded that the Bush administration had not acted improperly, but that didn't stop them from giving it the ol' liberal try.

Obama's Vetting Process Isn't Broken

The Washington Post has joined a list of media outlets questioning Barack Obama's vetting process.

The resignation of White House environmental adviser Van Jones has revealed a lapse in the administration's vetting procedures that, nearly eight months into his tenure, delivered President Obama with an unwelcome distraction as he begins an important week on behalf of his health-care reform initiative.

It seems that each time the Obama administration gets their hand caught in the commie jar their defenders in the media try to pass it off as a "vetting issue." Why, they had no idea that he had been involved in an activist organization with Marxist roots. Right, I believe that. Oh, and Obama also sat in Reverend Wright's church for 20 years and had no idea that his family's spiritual advisor was a batty bigot. So either the president is a functioning moron or an artful liar. So tell me, can he be that oblivious?

I don't believe there is an issue with the President's vetting process; I think he is selecting the same brand of radicals that he chose to hang with earlier in his career. Think for a moment, when he answered a plumber's question without the aid of a teleprompter he exposed that he supports the redistribution of wealth. He worked with Acorn, he's friends with William Ayers . . . is it shocking that he's tapping Marxists for his administration? Do you really believe that the most powerful man in the world didn't know about Jones' past? That he was unaware that Jones signed a petition that essentially asserted that America was behind the tragedy of 9/11?

Well, I suppose you might argue that he didn't know. After all, he was unaware the he signed a document supporting a ban on all handguns. Hmmm (he wrote thoughtfully) Can somebody be that oblivious?

The Van Jones Debacle Shows Americans Can Make A Difference

The radical left has seized control of the Democratic party and by virtue of current representation the executive and legislative branches of the country. But before you you cross your fingers and your heart in hopes that the 4 year reign of Obama will pass with minimal damage while you do nothing, let the case of Van Jones demonstrate that you can make a difference. Don't sit silent while the Chosen one fiddles away our future, step up and be heard. Make a difference.

Van Jones was exposed as a radical nutcase and was forced to resign, but the battle is far from over. The current administration has more extremists than a nihilist skateboarding cult. So stand up and be heard.

You will be criticized. People like the lily white writers of the Huffington Post will call you a racist and characterize any attack against Obama a "lynching," but press on. This is not about race, it is about ideology. This is not about personality, it is about perseverance. This is not about Obama's hype of Hope, it is about the real Hope found in individual freedom and the pursuit of happiness. This is about America.

And when it comes to America,

Americans can make a difference!

Van Jones: A 9/11 "Truther" Blessed By Obama

Those of you who voted for Barack Obama: Do you believe us yet?

When we voiced concerns about Barack Obama spending 20 years under a racist pastor who was his acknowledged spiritual advisor you thought is was just guilt by association. When we harangued about his friendship with unrepentant terrorist William Ayers you thought is was just guilt by association. When we were outraged by his praise the anti-Semitic terrorist Rashid Khalid you thought is was just guilt by association. When we identified the illegal and immoral practices of his favored affiliate ACORN you thought is was just guilt by association.

Well, do you believe us yet?

Now we are beginning to see that these were not simply associations, they are his people. They are the people he trusts. And now he is placing radicals who reflect his bizarre world view in positions of power.

Obama has appointed too many radical wackoes to list, but I'll try. Well, not here and now, you may never come back for more. But rest assured, like some of my Internet friends I will continue the public service of revelation that the main stream media seems to have forgotten is their responsibility.

The latest Obama nut to crack is Van Jones of "Republicans are Assholes" fame. Yesterday the news broke that Obama's Green Jobs Czar was part of the "9/11 Truther movement" that essentially blamed George Bush for 9/11. As a document Jones signed back in 2004 claims:

The media and Congress have failed to question the most basic White House' statements concerning the events of September 11th and the Bush administration's response . . . We haveto hold the U.S. government accountable for its role in creating terrorists and using terrorism against other countries.

The delegation will demand that these questions (and others) be raised and answered publicly- Who created, trained and funded the Al Qaeda Network? What is the relationship between Bin Laden, his family and the Bush family and the Carlyle Group? Why were no fighter planes dispatched to intercept the four hijacked planes on September 11h , in violation of standard procedures? Who actually was in control of the "hijacked planes"?

Can you say, "loon"?
 
And yet this is the type of intellectual insight that Barack Obama has given a home in his administration. And you thought associations didn't matter? Well, they certainly do when those associations a placed in positions of power. 
 
What's even more amazing is how the mainstream media ignores the troubling facts about Obama's appointments until the blogosphere erupts and they are force to pass off a small acknowledgment (Section E, Page 7, right below the note about the opening hours changing for the local flea market).
 
Scott Whitlock reports:

From a Nexis search a few moments ago:
Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the New York Times: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy in the Washington Post: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on NBC Nightly News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on ABC World News: 0.
Total words about the Van Jones controversy on CBS Evening News: 0.

If you were to receive all your news from any one of these outlets, or even all of them together, and you heard about some sort of controversy involving President Obama's Special Adviser for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, your response would be, "Huh?" If you heard that that adviser, Van Jones, had apologized for a number of remarks and positions in the recent past, your response would be, "What?"

The pen may be mightier than the sword, but when it comes to defending their oddly blind allegiance to a radical president with radical friends pushing a radical agenda it seems our current media are satisfied keeping the truth sheathed.

Barack Obama's Address To School Children

Could you imagine the outrage from the left if George W. Bush had demanded that the public schools close the books and force their students to watch him on television? Well, I supposed there would be no reason for outrage since the teacher's union would not allow for it.

On the surface you may not recognize this as yet another maneuver of indoctrination by the left to create a Hitler . . . I mean, Obama Youth Corps. However, Michelle Malkin has written a brilliant piece exposing the objectives of the administration.

This is a must read:
Obama’s classroom campaign: No junior lobbyist left behind

Some highlights from her article:

Education Secretary Arne Duncan dispatched letters to principals nationwide boasting that “This is the first time an American president has spoken directly to the nation’s school children about persisting and succeeding in school.” But the goal is not merely morale-boosting. According to White House event-related guides developed by the U.S. Department of Education’s Teaching Fellows, grade-school students will be told to “listen to the speech” and “could think about the following:”

*What is the President trying to tell me?
*What is the President asking me to do?
*What new ideas and actions is the President challenging me to think about?

So when the Department of Education directs schools to gather children ‘round the TV monitors for Obama’s pep talk and then do this…

• Create posters of their goals. Posters could be formatted in quadrants or puzzle pieces or trails marked with the labels: personal, academic, community, country. Each area could be labeled with three steps for achieving goals in those areas. It might make sense to focus on personal and academic so community and country goals come more readily.
• Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals.

…parents have every right to worry about their children being used as
Political Guinea Pigs for Change.

I suggest to every parent that you ask your child how this was handled in his or her school and address any concerns you may have to your school's principle and board.

Van Jones And The @ssholes

The video of Van Jones, Obama's Green Jobs Czar (aka, Czar # 103), calling Republicans "assholes" is making it's way around the web like kool aid at a B.H.O. rally. You can check it out over at theblogprof, who provides a succinct summary. And if you watch the video, try to ignore the ignorance of the questioner, who seems to be unaware of the massive stimulus fiasco and other money burning bills that the current democrats in power have passed.

But beyond his recent comments, what do you really know about Van Jones? Well, here's a primer. And just try to count the assholes in his inner circle.

Independents Disapprove Of Obama

I admit that I've never been a big fan of the so-called "independents." Sure, I get that you vote for the person and not the party. And yes, there are some Republicans that I wouldn't support if St. Peter promised to give me a day running the pearly gates ("Hey, aren't you the guy who cut me off in traffic? Looks like the lake of fire for you.") But claiming you're an independent to me just speaks to a lack of fundamental philosophical grounding. As warped as their world view may be, at least liberals have one.

But "independents" do serve a purpose beyond making the beer run while the thinking people at the party have a fun-filled ideological debate. The uninformed undecided can provide a barometer for the emotional response to a candidate, and the emotional response to Barack Obama has gone from messianic to "what in God's name is this guy thinking?"

The left-loving CNN is suddenly in the uncomfortable position of divulging that the majority of "independents" now disapprove of Barack Obama.

Fifty-three percent of independents questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Tuesday say they disapprove of how Obama's handling his duties in the White House, with 43 percent in approval. That result marks the first time in a CNN poll that a majority of independents give the president's performance a thumbs-down.

And before you attribute the Chosen One's decline solely to his hapless health care plan, think again.

"Among all Americans, his rating on health care has dropped 13 points since March. Compare that to his 16 point drop on the deficit and 17 point dip on taxes and it looks like there is growing discontent with Obama's overall domestic agenda — not just his health care policy."

Oh, and we can't even stop with his domestic agenda. According to the same poll, opinion of his handling of "Afghanistan also fell 18 points since March."

So it could be that those who refused to study his record and examine his associations before the election are now finding out the hard way who Barack Obama really is.