Wednesday, June 29, 2011

A SLEEPER AMONG US

Official presidential portrait of Barack Obama...Image via Wikipedia
Obama: Where are his girl friends?????
Where are his girl friends? Strange that none have popped up!!!!
Strange to the point of being down right WEIRD!
OK.. this is past the ‘birthers’ questions…this is just plain old common sense, no political agendas for either side.
Just common knowledge for citizens of a country, especially American citizens, who even know that Andrew Jackson’s wife smoked a corn cob pipe and was accused of adultery, or that Lincoln never went to school or Kennedy wore a back brace or Truman played the piano.
We are Americans! We are known for our humanitarian interests and caring for our ‘fellow man.’ We care, but none of us know one single humanizing fact about the history of our own president.
Honestly, and this is a personal thing…but it’s niggled at me for ages that no one who ever dated him ever showed up. The simple fact of his charisma, which caused the women to be drawn to him so obviously during his campaign, looks like some lady would not have missed the opportunity….
We all know about JFK’s magnetism, McCain was no monk, Palin’s courtship and even her athletic prowess were probed. Biden’s aneurysms are no secret. Look at Cheney and Clinton…we all know about their heart problems. How could I have left out Wild Bill before or during the White House?
Nope…not one lady has stepped up and said, “He was so shy,” or “What a great dancer!” Now look at the rest of this…no classmates, not even the recorder for the Columbia class notes ever heard of him.
I just don’t know about this fellow.
Who was the best man at his wedding? Start there. Then check groomsmen. Then get the footage of the graduation ceremony.
Has anyone talked to the professors? It is odd that no one is bragging that they knew him or taught him or lived with him.
When did he meet Michele and how? Are there photos? Every president gives to the public all their photos, etc. for their library.
What has he released?
And who in hell voted for him to be the most popular man in the world?
Does this make you wonder?
Ever wonder why no one ever came forward from Obama’s past, saying they knew him, attended school with him, was his friend, etc.? Not one person has ever come forward from his past.
VERY, VERY STRANGE. This should really be a cause for great concern. To those who voted for him, you may have elected an unqualified, inexperienced *shadow man*.
Did you see a picture called The Manchurian Candidate?
Let’s face it; as insignificant as we all are…someone whom we went to school with remembers our name or face…someone remembers we were the clown or the dork or the brain or the quiet one or the bully or something about us.
George Stephanopoulos of ABC News said the same thing during the 2008 campaign. He questions why no one has acknowledged the president was in their classroom or ate in the same cafeteria or made impromptu speeches on campus. Stephanopoulos also was a classmate of Obama at Columbia — the class of 1984. He says he never had a single class with him.
While he is such a great orator, why doesn’t anyone in Obama’s college class remember him? And, why won’t he allow Columbia to release his records?
NOBODY REMEMBERS OBAMA AT COLUMBIA
Looking for evidence of Obama’s past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there, but none remembered him.
For example, Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama, a political science major at Columbia, who also graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, “I don’t know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me. I don’t have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia …EVER!
Nobody recalls him. Root adds that he was also, like Obama, “Class of ’83 political science, pre-law” and says, “You don’t get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don’t know anyone who ever met him.”
At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me. No one ever heard of Barack! And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was.
The guy who writes the class notes, who’s kind of the, as we say in New York, ‘the macha’ who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him.”
Obama’s photograph does not appear in the school’s yearbook, and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia.
NOTE: Root graduated as valedictorian from his high school, Thornton-Donovan School, then graduated from Columbia University in 1983 as a political science major in the same class in which Barack Hussein Obama states he was.
Some other interesting questions.
Why was Obama’s law license inactivated in 2002?
Why was Michelle’s law license inactivated by court order?
It is circulating that according to the U.S. Census, there is only one Barack Obama but 27 Social Security numbers and over 80 aliases.
WHAT!?
The Social Security number he uses now originated in Connecticut where he is never reported to have lived.
No wonder all his records are sealed!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

The New "Consensus" Predicts an Ice Age

Global Warming FAILImage via WikipediaBy Alan Caruba  over at Warning Signs


Since the late 1980s a “consensus” of scientists, we were told, agreed that the Earth was in a period of “global warming” and anybody who disputed that was a “skeptic” or a “denier.”

Then, in 1998, the Earth began to cool. The handful of scientists at the heart of the global warming hoax began to sweat and not from the heat, but because they knew their scheme, created and blessed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) would soon be revealed. Frantic emails went back and forth as they tried to come up with some way of keeping the lie alive.

Literally thousands of scientists had climbed on the global warming bandwagon, scooping up billions in research grants that were all intended to “prove” that global warming was real. Nations, including ours, were making investments and controlling people’s lives based on the hoax. By 2009, the game was up. A huge blizzard concluded the 2009 IPCC Copenhagen climate change conference. The next one was held in Acapulco.

On June 30-July 1, the Heartland Institute, headquartered in Chicago, a free-market policy center, will hold what may likely be the last of its six climate change conferences, all of whichdebunked global warming by bringing together some very brave scientists to present seminars based on real, not fraudulent, science. It will be held in Washington, D.C. You will be able to “attend” by watching it on streaming video.

In 1997 Robert W. Felix published a book, “Not by Fire, but by Ice”, a softcover. It’s second edition, can be purchased from his website, IceAgeNow.com. For anyone interested in knowing the truth about the Earth’s many cycles of warming and cooling, and especially about its ice ages, I recommend it. While there, pick up his other book, “Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps.”

Fourteen years ago Felix pointed out that ice ages occur in a “dependable, predictable, natural cycle that returns like clockwork every 11,500 years.” Then he noted that the Earth is at the end of the current interglacial period! 

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Overdrawn at the Ideas ATM

PNC Financial ServicesImage via WikipediaBy  on 6.17.11 @ 6:08AM at The American Spectator



President Obama recently blamed today's high unemployment on… automation. Yes, you heard at right. He singled out automatic teller machines (ATMs), which he said have eliminated many human bank teller jobs. Blaming an invention for job losses is a display of economic ignorance worthy of the Luddites. Not only are Obama's comments wrong at a factual level, they display a complete lack of basic knowledge about the means of human progress. For a self-styled "progressive" to make this mistake displays how bankrupt that ideology is.
For a start, President Obama is wrong as a matter of fact. From 1985 to 2002, U.S. banks added some 300,000 ATMs around the country, but also added 42,000 bank teller jobs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicted in 2010 that a further 40,000 or so teller jobs would be added by 2018 -- presumably not as the result of mass removal of ATMs. ATMs allow banks to employ tellers in more useful services than simply counting and distributing money, as well as serve customers during late night hours when it is not feasible to keep branches open.
Automation doesn't destroy jobs. It frees us from mundane tasks so that we can do other, more complex -- and more rewarding -- tasks. The washing machine didn't put housewives out of work; -- it enabled them to have careers. The industrial revolution allowed people to leave the fields and enter factories, where, despite popular conceptions of "satanic mills," they could earn far better livelihoods. As the great economist Joseph Schumpeter noted, the genius of the free market and the automation is that it "does not typically consist of providing more silk stockings for queens but in bringing them within reach of factory girls in return for steadily decreasing amounts of effort."
This, incidentally, is why affordable energy is important. We burn fossil fuels to provide energy so that men and women do not have to supply their labor directly. As Thomas Edison remarked, "I am ashamed at the number of things around my house and shops that are done by animals -- human beings, I mean -- and ought to be done by a motor without any sense of fatigue or pain. Hereafter a motor must do all the chores."
The progressives' failure to appreciate the value of automation is at its most apparent in their greatest invention -- bureaucracy. At a time when, by my calculations, a quarter of the American labor force works either directly or indirectly for government, the administration appears intent on increasing that number. As more and more pages of new rules are added to the Federal Register (a record 81,000 of them last year), more and more people must be employed, not by the government, but by businesses to comply with the new rules.
So far from freeing humanity from fatigue and drudgery, which is the story of automation, "progressive" policies have only added to the burden. Lip service to more "efficient" government does not obviate the fact that people have to read, interpret, and understand the regulations in the first place, under penalty of law. The more new rules accumulate, the harder this task becomes.
It is no wonder that the stimulus failed, if the President so misunderstands the way the world works. In Los Angeles, two city departments received between them $111 million from the stimulus but "saved or created" a mere combined total of 55 jobs. Such is the cost of bureaucracy.
Automation is a product of innovation, which is America's genius, and has proved essential to making our lives better. When the President denounces it as a bad thing, we may be in economic trouble, indeed.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, June 17, 2011

States’ Rights Live On

Thomas edison glühbirneImage via WikipediaPosted by Tait Trussell on Jun 16th, 2011 at FrontPage Magazine



The fundamental principle of states’ rights survives—at least in South Carolina. The Palmetto State’s House chamber last month passed a measure standing up to a federal “green” law. The law requires all Americans to buy new-fangled light bulbs to save energy, even if it doesn’t save our eyesight and even if it can make us ill.
The South Carolina bill, called “The Incandescent Light Bulb Freedom Act,” would let South Carolinians buy the light bulbs everybody is used to, as long as the bulbs are made and sold in South Carolina. For anyone not aware of the federal law, which takes effect in six months, you will be forbidden to buy those inexpensive, bright 100-watt bulbs to read your bedside book, your newspaper, magazines, research papers, or anything else.
South Carolina State Rep. William Sandife III, chairman of the House Labor, Commerce, and Industry Committee, predicted the measure will become law. Because it is a product of intrastate commerce it is, therefore, not subject to federal regulation.
A spokesman for South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said she is waiting to see the specific bill language. But, it would be hard to imagine the conservative governor would not sign such legislation once it completes its course through the state assembly.
Under federal law, intended to save energy, you will be required by Jan. 1 to buy the dim, compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) containing illness-causing mercury. Thomas Edison must be shuddering in his grave.
While Obama wants to force everybody to buy health insurance or pay a fine, you will just have to buy the new light bulbs. No fine or imprisonment has been mentioned. Attorney General Eric Holder, however, could be mobilizing light-bulb squads to ride through the countryside at night to enforce the law. Nothing is impossible in Obamaland. A query to the Justice Department on enforcement was not answered.
Not only will manufacturers be banned from making the incandescent 100 watt bulb after Jan. 1, this will be followed by restrictions against lower watt versions in future years.
It doesn’t stop there. Our debt-ridden government is spending money we don’t have to subsidize development of more “high-efficiency” bulbs. The Obama Energy Department June 7 announced it is giving three California companies$4.2 million to speed up development of the bulbs, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Thursday, June 9, 2011

How To Win Friends And Influence Liberals

A year ago, this photo was posted on Facebook with the caption
 "The first ever Weiner Caption Contest.
I can't offer a prize but if you write the best caption,
I'll call you and tell you and I'll announce it here."
June 9, 2011 by Ben Crystal at Personal Liberty Digest



Hey there, Democrats. It’s your pal, Ben. I want you to know I feel just awful about the way Representative Anthony Weiner not only lied about his misadventures on Twitter, but used your devotion against you. Weiner turned out every Democratic double-talking trick from Ted Kennedy to Bill Clinton in an effort to hide his dalliances with dozens of women who he’s fairly certain were not still in junior high school. And most of you bought it. When Weiner claimed he was the real victim, you demanded justice. When Weiner told you he was hacked, you changed your passwords. When Weiner said it was a conservative conspiracy, you put on your tinfoil hats.
Let me use an old-neighborhood euphemism Weiner would recognize: Not for nothin’  — you got played.
But I’m not here to gloat. I have liberal friends who are beside themselves over Weiner’s amateur photography project. Liberals are fond of suggesting that conservatives are cruel. So I’m going to do something Weiner does only if you are female, hot and at least 18 (although he’s evidently flexible on proof of that last one): invite you to join us in the conservative ranks.
Think about it. This whole liberal thing isn’t working out all that well for you. President Barack Obama is as capable of dispensing his Presidential duties as I am of starting in place of Eli Manning next season. I’m fairly certain there’s a short in Vice President Joe Biden’s wiring. And now, your House of Representatives rising star has done a swan dive into the creepy end of the Internet.
Your party’s ideas are sillier than a little-watched cable network offering Lawrence O’Donnell an hour-long program. Obamacare seemed great, didn’t it? Resurrect Hillarycare and ram it down the nation’s throat. Too bad that pesky Constitution keeps getting in the way. Are you sure these are the guys with whom you want to share a political foxhole?
Join the conservative movement. Imagine the joy of not having to be so damned indignant all the time. You never have to watch MSNBC and pretend you didn’t notice Ed Schultz has a severe personality disorder. You never have to listen to NPR and its parade of people who obviously talk with their eyes closed. No more pretending you’re not appalled when Obama tells you to cut back while his wife cavorts around some five-star resort in a dress that cost five figures.
If you’re a conservative, you can tell elected representatives who annoy you to “get stuffed.” When our guys disappoint us, we dump them faster than Larry Craig can tap his foot. We only begrudgingly showed up for Senator John McCain, and even then only because we liked Sarah Palin — and the alternative was worse than being forced to watch four years of Chris Matthews sneering like a crack-addled movie villain.
And you will be well protected. As long as you’re not a felon or Dailykos.com-stupid, we will encourage you to get a firearm. Let me amend that. I’ve seen how some of you throw a football. We will handle the weapons. Most of us own them, and we can shoot straight. Plus, most of the military is on our side — and soldiers really can shoot straight.
And conservative food is better. You’ve sworn off animal flesh because you heard California Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown likes vegetarians. I’m sure that vegan diet is really, really healthy, but have you smelled Moonbeam? Step into Smith and Wollensky the next time you get a chance and tell me you’re sticking with your… er… what is that, a dirt sandwich?
But wait, there’s more! Nothing against home brewers, but imagine a pint of something that doesn’t involve ¼ inch of beer-flavored mud at the bottom of the glass. And making that “wine” must be fun. I have two fingers of single malt that says you would prefer a wingback chair, some old amber liquor over ice and an Ashton 8-9-8. That’s right: We get to smoke, too. And our smoke doesn’t always involve the fear of Drug Enforcement Administration assault teams. And a growing number of us think the DEA should concern itself with substances that involve worse outcomes than buying out the local Papa John’s.
No more kowtowing to tin-pot dictators and Islamofascist psychopaths. No more shovel-ready projects. No more racist Attorneys General. No more class warfare as a substitute for meaningful tax policy. No more dues to support union thugs. No more protecting foreign-oil godfathers. No more bald-faced hypocrisy.
At the very least, our women are all older than 18.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

The Media Ride of Sarah Palin

35 x 28 1/2" (88.9 x 72.3 cm)Image via WikipediaThe Washington Times 6:30 p.m., Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Listen, my children, and you shall hear
About a political dustup over Paul Revere,
On the second of June in Twenty-eleven;
Hardly a liberal now alive, by heaven,
Won’t stop saying “Sarah Palin” with a sneer.
Sarah Palin’s impromptu, slightly rambling statement about Paul Reverelast week set off volleys of verbal musket fire from her many left-wing critics in the media. Touring Boston on Thursday, she gave a folksy account of Revere’s ride, saying he was one of the men who “warned the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms, by ringin’ those bells and by makin’ sure that as he’s ridin’ his horse through town to send those warnin’ shots and bells that we were gonna be secure and we were gonna be free.”
Revere warned the British? The tut-tutting was immediate. Reporters and commentators, having griped for days about being given insufficient courtesies on Mrs. Palin’s East Coast bus tour, had a field day. One if by land, two thousand by tweet.
It soon turned out, however, that Mrs. Palin’s version of history was correct. While Revere warned the Americans that the British were coming, he also warned the British - not for their benefit - that the Americans were coming. When Revere was detained by British soldiers during his ride, he told them, in his own words, “that their troops had catched aground in passing the River, and that There would be 500 Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.” As for the bells and gunshots, David Hackett Fischer - in the 1994 book “Paul Revere’s Ride” - quotes a townsman saying that on that night, “repeated gunshots, the beating of drums and the ringing of bells filled the air.”
This was not the first time that Mrs. Palin was mistakenly taken to task by self-appointed history police. At an October 2010 Tea Party Express event in Reno, Nev., Mrs. Palin urged attendees to “party like it’s 1773.” PBS commentator Gwen Ifill and leftist busybody Markos Moulitsas launched tweets mocking the former GOP vice presidential nominee for her supposed “gaffe.” “She’s so smart,” Mr. Moulitsas wrote sarcastically. Well, smarter than him, since the Boston Tea Party occurred in December 1773.
Mrs. Palin is in good company. Ronald Reagan faced the same sniggering comments whenever he invoked inspirational examples from history. Of course, what the left is really snarking at is the notion that history even matters. Starting in the 1960s, the New Left movement rejected the past as having any relevance to the revolution they wanted to bring to this country. In their view, American history was simply a compendium of crimes committed by dead white males. When then-candidate Barack Obama promised to “fundamentally transform America,” he meant that to be taken literally. When Michelle Obama said in February 2008 that “for the first time in my adult lifetime I’m really proud of my country,” it was a genuine expression of the basic liberal attitude toward America and its history.
Tea Partyers and others who look to America’s past for inspiration are appealing to the great national narrative that the left has rejected. In essence, we have become two peoples: one with a vision of America as an exceptional country with a heroic history, and another believing the country and its people are burdened by a multitude of original sins and populated by groups who are owed continuing and endless debts because of that corrupt past.
If a nation doesn’t revere its history, doesn’t exalt its national story, doesn’t look with pride on its accomplishments and honor its heroes, it will not long survive. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s famous 1861 poem about Paul Revere sought to inculcate belief in America’s destiny. It closes with the lines, “In the hour of darkness and peril and need, The people will waken and listen to hear, The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed, And the midnight message of Paul Revere.” Longfellow got several facts wrong in his epic poem, but like Mrs. Palin, he got the message right.
© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, June 2, 2011

Why Barack Obama may be heading for electoral disaster in 2012 – Telegraph Blogs

Barack Obama - CaricatureImage by DonkeyHotey via FlickrOn a recent visit to London I was struck by how much faith many British politicians, journalists and political advisers have in Barack Obama being re-elected in 2012. In the aftermath of the hugely successful Special Forces operation that took out Osama Bin Laden and a modest spike in the polls for the president, the conventional wisdom among political elites in Britain is overwhelmingly that Obama will win another four years in the Oval Office. Add to this a widespread perception of continuing disarray in the Republican race, as well as a State Visit to London that had the chattering classes worshipping at the feet of the US president, and you can easily see why Obama’s prospects look a lot rosier from across the Atlantic.
But back in the United States, the reality looks a lot different. Many political leaders in Britain fail to understand the degree to which the American people are deeply unhappy with their president’s poor handling of the economy. Nor have they grasped the epic scale of the defeat suffered by the president in the November mid-terms, and the emphatic rejection by a clear majority of Americans of the Big Government Obama agenda.
Just seven months ago, the United States was swept by a conservative revolution that fundamentally transformed the political landscape on Capitol Hill, and gravely weakened the ability of the president to pass legislation. This revolution is not in retreat but gaining ground, led by charismatic figures such as Paul Ryan, the Reaganite chairman of the House Budget Committee, entrusted with reining in out of control government spending. And as a Gallup poll showed, America is unquestionably a conservative country ideologically, but one that is ironically led by the most left-wing president in the nation’s history.
Ultimately, the 2012 presidential election will be decided by the state of the economy, and new data released this week makes grim reading for the White House. In fact you cannot watch a US financial news network at the moment, from Bloomberg to CNBC to Fox Business, without a great deal of pessimism about the dire condition of the world’s biggest economy. 66 percent of Americans now worry the federal government will run out of money in the face of towering public debts.
To say this has been an extremely bad week for the Obama administration on the economic front would be a serious understatement. As The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday, home prices in the United States have sunk to their lowest levels since 2002, falling 4.2 percent in the first quarter of 2011. At the same time, employment growth is stalling, with only 38,000 Americans added to the workforce in May, the smallest increase since September. This compares with 179,000 jobs added in April. There has also been a steep slowdown in the manufacturing sector, and a downturn in the stock market on the back of weak economic news.
Bill Clinton’s labour secretary Robert Reich summed up the grim mood in a hard-hitting op-ed in The Financial Times, which took aim at both the administration and Congress:
The US economy was supposed to be in bloom by late spring, but it is hardly growing at all. Expectations for second-quarter growth are not much better than the measly 1.8 per cent annualised rate of the first quarter. That is not nearly fast enough to reduce America’s ferociously high level of unemployment… Meanwhile, housing prices continue to fall. They are now 33 per cent below their 2006 peak. That is a bigger drop than recorded in the Great Depression. Homes are the largest single asset of the American middle class, so as housing prices drop many Americans feel poorer. All of this is contributing to a general gloominess. Not surprisingly, consumer confidence is also down.
Unsurprisingly, the polls are again looking problematic for the president. The latest Rasmussen Presidential Tracking Poll shows just 25 percent of Americans strongly approving of Obama’s performance, with 36 percent strongly disapproving, for a Presidential Approval Index rating of minus 11 points. In a projected match up between Obama and a Republican opponent, the president now trails by two points according to Rasmussen – 43 to 45.  The RealClear Politics poll of polls shows just over a third of Americans (34.5 percent) agreeing that the country is heading in the right direction, with nearly three fifths (56.8 percent) believing it is heading down the wrong track. That negative figure rises toa staggering 66 percent of likely voters in a new Rasmussen survey,including 41 percent of Democrats.
There is no feel good factor in America at the moment. But there is a great deal of uncertainty, nervousness, even fear over the future of the world’s only superpower. This is hardly a solid foundation for a presidential victory for the incumbent. Even though we don’t know yet who he will be up against, Barack Obama could well go into 2012 as the underdog rather than the favourite he is frequently portrayed as. On balance we’re likely to see a very close race 17 months from now. But there is also the distinct possibility of an electoral rout of the president if the economy goes further south. “Hope and change” might have played well in 2008, but it is a message that will likely ring hollow in November 2012, with an American public that is deeply disillusioned with the direction Obama is taking the country.

Enhanced by Zemanta