The link: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/18/obamas-new-flag-frenzy/
"The White House has rediscovered - or possibly reinvented - the patriotic cachet of Old Glory as a perfect frame for the new president.
"That's the same president [Obama] who once would not wear an American flag pin. Things have changed."
No, things really haven't changed. He's a Theftocrat, and one thing they're really good at is getting the American People to swallow their shallow symbolism. That's all those flags are ... a symbol.
" "I caution people to be careful about their own perceptions and judging these situations," Mr. Glaser said.
" "This does not have the same connotation as the shallow patriotism one might adopt during a political campaign." "
He's right. Now it's all about style over substance. The Theftocrats want to make the American People forget that they're into Socialism and the best way to do that is put Old Glory everywhere ... including the Usurper's lapel.
They seem to be saying "False Patriotism for me, but not for thee." In other words, if we don't pay our taxes to fund the Generational Theft Act of 2009, we're "unpatriotic." But using Old Glory as a stageprop and making sure it's there during a photo-op ... well, that's perfectly OK.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Impeach Barack Hussein Obama
No, seriously. The United States is built on Capitalism, not Socialism, yet we're getting Socialism.
The American People wanted 'change,' apparently, for the sake of 'change.' But they really didn't know what they were getting, especially with the lapdogs in the liberal press cheering it all on.
Today, the Usurper in the White House signed the porkulus bill (aka; stimulus.) Michelle Malkin and others are referring to it as the "Generational Theft Act of 2009."
But it's worse than that. You, your children, your GRANDchildren and your GREAT-GRANDchildren will be paying on the porkulus that the Theftocrats rammed through the Congress and onto the Usurper's desk.
You'll notice I'm referring to Barack Hussein Obama as the Usurper. That's because under the current US Constitution, the man is owed no allegiance, is unable to give a direct order, and is unable to order our military.
IMPEACH Barack Hussein Obama before we lose our Country.
The American People wanted 'change,' apparently, for the sake of 'change.' But they really didn't know what they were getting, especially with the lapdogs in the liberal press cheering it all on.
Today, the Usurper in the White House signed the porkulus bill (aka; stimulus.) Michelle Malkin and others are referring to it as the "Generational Theft Act of 2009."
But it's worse than that. You, your children, your GRANDchildren and your GREAT-GRANDchildren will be paying on the porkulus that the Theftocrats rammed through the Congress and onto the Usurper's desk.
You'll notice I'm referring to Barack Hussein Obama as the Usurper. That's because under the current US Constitution, the man is owed no allegiance, is unable to give a direct order, and is unable to order our military.
IMPEACH Barack Hussein Obama before we lose our Country.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Schumer: "The American People Really Don't Care."
The link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEfICUoWKBw
"And let me say this to all of the chattering class that so much focuses on those little, tiny, yes, "porky" amendments: The American People really don't care."
I do, you fat, ignorant, self-righteous son of a bitch. Of the $800BILLION porkulus (coined by one of Michelle Malkin's readers) package, roughly $100 - 150 MILLION is ... wait for it ... PORK.
And that number, you self-righteous windbag, is your own. Or, more accurately, your party's. That's a pretty penny.
Remember that damming Congressional Budget Office report (link: http://www.cbo.gov/) which concluded that the porkulus package would actually be worse than doing nothing?
Don't believe me? FOLLOW THE LINK.
Remember when one of your own people said that they couldn't guarantee that the porkulus would create one single job?
So tell me - who is going to bailout the Americans that lost 35 - 40 per cent of their life's earnings when the stock market tanked?
You're going to use our tax dollars for your porkulus and to bail your friends out. It makes me wanna spit.
People are getting pissed off, and I do believe a few of them are ready to stop paying their taxes. It's all going to be wasted anyway.
"And let me say this to all of the chattering class that so much focuses on those little, tiny, yes, "porky" amendments: The American People really don't care."
I do, you fat, ignorant, self-righteous son of a bitch. Of the $800BILLION porkulus (coined by one of Michelle Malkin's readers) package, roughly $100 - 150 MILLION is ... wait for it ... PORK.
And that number, you self-righteous windbag, is your own. Or, more accurately, your party's. That's a pretty penny.
Remember that damming Congressional Budget Office report (link: http://www.cbo.gov/) which concluded that the porkulus package would actually be worse than doing nothing?
Don't believe me? FOLLOW THE LINK.
Remember when one of your own people said that they couldn't guarantee that the porkulus would create one single job?
So tell me - who is going to bailout the Americans that lost 35 - 40 per cent of their life's earnings when the stock market tanked?
You're going to use our tax dollars for your porkulus and to bail your friends out. It makes me wanna spit.
People are getting pissed off, and I do believe a few of them are ready to stop paying their taxes. It's all going to be wasted anyway.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Article: "U.S. sets executive pay limits for bailout companies."
The link: http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/090204/business_us_obama.html?.v=9
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama took on bailed-out Wall Street firms on Wednesday, setting a $500,000 annual cap on executive pay for companies getting taxpayer funds and tapping popular anger over financial sector excesses."
It's about bloody time. I'm going to agree with part of what the article said: " "This is pure political grandstanding. If the limit has bite, it will be counterproductive and the unintended consequences will hurt the U.S. as skilled and bright senior managers make choices," said David Kotok, chief investment officer at Cumberland. "If the limits have loopholes, they are a sham. Industrial policies fail. So will this one." "
Ok..there's a lot there, but I didn't want to be accused of taking something out of context (again.) Yes, for my money, this is a political grandstand. But I also agree with it.
Why? Because the fat, greedy business "executives" who make the decisions frequently got their "knowledge" of their business from a book when they were at University. I've seen that all too often, in fact, dealt with some of them at KMart, where I used to work well over a decade ago now.
One "manager" let's call him Mr Z (for the record, there was no manager at that store that had a last name that started with "Z", which is why I chose it) had just gotten out of University, still had his degree in his hot sweaty hands and was going to tell us how to fix things.
By this time, however, I'd worked for KMart for over nine years in the trenches. I'd covered every department the store had, including loss control and pharmacy. Mr Z came up to me and said "Greg, I want you to do this, that, that, this, and then something else. I want you to do it this way, and I want it done as quickly as possible."
"Aye, Sir. I'll get it done immediately after I get Ms Z's list done" (They're not related, but I did have another manager who had her own list of things to do.)
"Greg, I meant right now."
"I understand that, Sir. However, if I do your list first, Ms Z will not be pleased. Would you be so kind as to tell her that I have a new set of instructions?"
"Why are you being so damn stubborn! I NEED THIS DONE."
"Alright - look. You come in here cocking the walk and by your own admission you've never worked on the sales floor of a retail store. By your own admission all that you know you read in a book. Things don't work that way in real life. I'm sorry, but they don't.
If you're going to be a successful manager, you need to learn a few things. Start by sitting down and talking with Ms Z, who does understand. After all - she's been doing it longer than you've been alive. You need to pay attention and listen to your people - you'll learn quite a few things."
That got me written up, but true to form Mr Z and Ms Z did have words. It was Ms Z chewing him out, and to be frank - he deserved it.
But to her credit, Ms Z did tell me off the record that if I hadn't done it first, she would have.
That, however, should tell you something. First, that I'm mouthy. :) Second, that many managers simply have no clue as to what's going on. Executives also fall into this category. I know that some hiring manager will read this posting in future and decide I'm too "combative."
Their loss. But if you're going to hire managers and executives who don't know how to get their hands dirty doing honest work ... perhaps you have it coming?
So yes, this latest bit from President Obama is political grandstanding. I firmly believe that. I also firmly believe that it needed to be done.
I've said quite a few bad things about President Obama - I know that. But I also will give credit where it's due. And my hat is off to him for this.
It's past time to make the fat morally-bankrupt executives take notice. The American People are pissed off at their largesse. It's time to slap them upside the head and make them learn. And since money seems to be all they're interested in - that's where you start.
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama took on bailed-out Wall Street firms on Wednesday, setting a $500,000 annual cap on executive pay for companies getting taxpayer funds and tapping popular anger over financial sector excesses."
It's about bloody time. I'm going to agree with part of what the article said: " "This is pure political grandstanding. If the limit has bite, it will be counterproductive and the unintended consequences will hurt the U.S. as skilled and bright senior managers make choices," said David Kotok, chief investment officer at Cumberland. "If the limits have loopholes, they are a sham. Industrial policies fail. So will this one." "
Ok..there's a lot there, but I didn't want to be accused of taking something out of context (again.) Yes, for my money, this is a political grandstand. But I also agree with it.
Why? Because the fat, greedy business "executives" who make the decisions frequently got their "knowledge" of their business from a book when they were at University. I've seen that all too often, in fact, dealt with some of them at KMart, where I used to work well over a decade ago now.
One "manager" let's call him Mr Z (for the record, there was no manager at that store that had a last name that started with "Z", which is why I chose it) had just gotten out of University, still had his degree in his hot sweaty hands and was going to tell us how to fix things.
By this time, however, I'd worked for KMart for over nine years in the trenches. I'd covered every department the store had, including loss control and pharmacy. Mr Z came up to me and said "Greg, I want you to do this, that, that, this, and then something else. I want you to do it this way, and I want it done as quickly as possible."
"Aye, Sir. I'll get it done immediately after I get Ms Z's list done" (They're not related, but I did have another manager who had her own list of things to do.)
"Greg, I meant right now."
"I understand that, Sir. However, if I do your list first, Ms Z will not be pleased. Would you be so kind as to tell her that I have a new set of instructions?"
"Why are you being so damn stubborn! I NEED THIS DONE."
"Alright - look. You come in here cocking the walk and by your own admission you've never worked on the sales floor of a retail store. By your own admission all that you know you read in a book. Things don't work that way in real life. I'm sorry, but they don't.
If you're going to be a successful manager, you need to learn a few things. Start by sitting down and talking with Ms Z, who does understand. After all - she's been doing it longer than you've been alive. You need to pay attention and listen to your people - you'll learn quite a few things."
That got me written up, but true to form Mr Z and Ms Z did have words. It was Ms Z chewing him out, and to be frank - he deserved it.
But to her credit, Ms Z did tell me off the record that if I hadn't done it first, she would have.
That, however, should tell you something. First, that I'm mouthy. :) Second, that many managers simply have no clue as to what's going on. Executives also fall into this category. I know that some hiring manager will read this posting in future and decide I'm too "combative."
Their loss. But if you're going to hire managers and executives who don't know how to get their hands dirty doing honest work ... perhaps you have it coming?
So yes, this latest bit from President Obama is political grandstanding. I firmly believe that. I also firmly believe that it needed to be done.
I've said quite a few bad things about President Obama - I know that. But I also will give credit where it's due. And my hat is off to him for this.
It's past time to make the fat morally-bankrupt executives take notice. The American People are pissed off at their largesse. It's time to slap them upside the head and make them learn. And since money seems to be all they're interested in - that's where you start.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Article: "GOP leaders doubt stimulus bill will pass Senate"
The Link: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gdDrWnoMueqVFI-Uo1ClxVZur22AD9631OL80
"WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said Sunday the massive stimulus bill backed by President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats could go down to defeat if it's not stripped of unnecessary spending and focused more on housing issues and tax cuts."
"The Senate version of the bill, which topped out at nearly $900 billion, is headed to the floor for debate."
You read that correctly. Remember, that this is Crap Sandwich v2.0. The first one, of course, was that $700BILLION that Mr Paulson (yes, that one) said that we don't have the right to know where the money went or how they spent it.
Time for some math. 700,000,000,000 + 900,000,000,000 = $1.6TRILLION
And yet, we're still not promised that this will create one single job. And as far as I know, there are no controls put on this latest Crap Sandwich to force them to document where the money is going or who gets it.
Mad yet?
"WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said Sunday the massive stimulus bill backed by President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats could go down to defeat if it's not stripped of unnecessary spending and focused more on housing issues and tax cuts."
"The Senate version of the bill, which topped out at nearly $900 billion, is headed to the floor for debate."
You read that correctly. Remember, that this is Crap Sandwich v2.0. The first one, of course, was that $700BILLION that Mr Paulson (yes, that one) said that we don't have the right to know where the money went or how they spent it.
Time for some math. 700,000,000,000 + 900,000,000,000 = $1.6TRILLION
And yet, we're still not promised that this will create one single job. And as far as I know, there are no controls put on this latest Crap Sandwich to force them to document where the money is going or who gets it.
Mad yet?
Article: "Beware of CAIR."
The link: http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=318212502081788
NOTE: You'll notice that part of the URL says "editorialcontent." In fact, when the page loads it does say "Editorials & Opinion." Therefore, it could be said that the article is, in fact, an Op-Ed peice. But it is damming. Very damming.
"Homeland Security: You'd think the Council on American-Islamic Relations would be savoring the results of an election that favors its agenda. Instead, it's having to do major damage control. " ("Homeland Security" is in bold because it is on bold on the webpage.)
"Over the past several months, the Washington-based pressure group has suffered a series of punishing blows to its reputation as a self-proclaimed "moderate" voice for Muslim-Americans. In the latest setback, a "Dear Colleague" letter sent out to every House member warns lawmakers and their staffs to "think twice" about meeting with CAIR officials.
"The FBI has cut ties with them," the letter says. "There are indications" CAIR has links to Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group."
"The marginalization of CAIR, which has enjoyed astonishing access to official Washington, comes after the successful prosecution of leaders of a U.S. Muslim charity that funneled millions to Hamas terrorists. CAIR and its co-founder Omar Ahmed were named unindicted co-conspirators in that Holy Land Foundation case.
"CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, moreover, was caught on tape participating in a meeting with Hamas leaders to disguise payments as charity. During the trial, the FBI described CAIR as a front group for Islamic extremists.
"It just gets worse for CAIR. Former clients of the group are suing it for fraud. The Muslims say CAIR, which claims to be an advocate for Muslim rights, extorted thousands of dollars from them in a scam in which CAIR said it would help them get U.S. citizenship."
That's a long quote, so let's parse this down. First, the U.S. Muslim charity that they reference is the Holy Land Foundation as evidenced by "CAIR and its co-founder Omar Ahmed were named unindicted co-conspirators in that Holy Land Foundation case."
Unindicted co-conspirators!
Let's repeat one of those lines: "CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, moreover, was caught on tape participating in a meeting with Hamas leaders to disguise payments as charity. During the trial, the FBI described CAIR as a front group for Islamic extremists. (emphasis added)
But what is this FBI document they reference? Here's the direct link to it: http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/238.pdf
Again, that's a direct link to the document. You'll notice the date on the document; 8-OCT-2008.
I know I'm probably going to get sued by somebody for posting this. Yet, these are direct quotes from articles already published, and direct links to said articles.
"The Company That You Keep?"
NOTE: You'll notice that part of the URL says "editorialcontent." In fact, when the page loads it does say "Editorials & Opinion." Therefore, it could be said that the article is, in fact, an Op-Ed peice. But it is damming. Very damming.
"Homeland Security: You'd think the Council on American-Islamic Relations would be savoring the results of an election that favors its agenda. Instead, it's having to do major damage control. " ("Homeland Security" is in bold because it is on bold on the webpage.)
"Over the past several months, the Washington-based pressure group has suffered a series of punishing blows to its reputation as a self-proclaimed "moderate" voice for Muslim-Americans. In the latest setback, a "Dear Colleague" letter sent out to every House member warns lawmakers and their staffs to "think twice" about meeting with CAIR officials.
"The FBI has cut ties with them," the letter says. "There are indications" CAIR has links to Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group."
"The marginalization of CAIR, which has enjoyed astonishing access to official Washington, comes after the successful prosecution of leaders of a U.S. Muslim charity that funneled millions to Hamas terrorists. CAIR and its co-founder Omar Ahmed were named unindicted co-conspirators in that Holy Land Foundation case.
"CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, moreover, was caught on tape participating in a meeting with Hamas leaders to disguise payments as charity. During the trial, the FBI described CAIR as a front group for Islamic extremists.
"It just gets worse for CAIR. Former clients of the group are suing it for fraud. The Muslims say CAIR, which claims to be an advocate for Muslim rights, extorted thousands of dollars from them in a scam in which CAIR said it would help them get U.S. citizenship."
That's a long quote, so let's parse this down. First, the U.S. Muslim charity that they reference is the Holy Land Foundation as evidenced by "CAIR and its co-founder Omar Ahmed were named unindicted co-conspirators in that Holy Land Foundation case."
Unindicted co-conspirators!
Let's repeat one of those lines: "CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, moreover, was caught on tape participating in a meeting with Hamas leaders to disguise payments as charity. During the trial, the FBI described CAIR as a front group for Islamic extremists. (emphasis added)
But what is this FBI document they reference? Here's the direct link to it: http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/238.pdf
Again, that's a direct link to the document. You'll notice the date on the document; 8-OCT-2008.
I know I'm probably going to get sued by somebody for posting this. Yet, these are direct quotes from articles already published, and direct links to said articles.
"The Company That You Keep?"
The Company That You Keep
Have you ever been "convicted" of something in the Court of Public Opinion? I have, and it ain't pretty.
My "crime" was to tell the truth about some people that had turned on me. To be fair, I do share some of the blame for what happened. It's not that I'm looking to shoulder more blame or portray myself as a "victim," it's that that is the truth.
I've always told the truth on this blog, and I'm not about to do otherwise. For me to spin stories or to bury others would be to ruin whatever credibility that I'd earned.
And this is one of those times. I've been "convicted" in the CoPO before when our role-playing Community was coming apart at the seams. My 'friends' had turned on me, and one of the others who'd been silent throughout the entire ordeal posted a message defending me.
I didn't ask this person to do it, and I hadn't known before hand that the message would be posted. Yet when that message defending me was posted to the forums, well. You'd think we were a Cabal and that our goal was to destroy our Community. Nothing could be further than the truth. But that doesn't matter to those with an agenda or with their own ideas.
But that comes back to the subject of this posting "The Company That You Keep." I was "guilty" of a "crime" because a person who was not liked in our Community posted a message defending me. Therefore, I was guilty by association.
And those are the most important words thusfar ... guilty by association.
The link: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/125656 (Now bear in mind, that this is Israel National News.)
"(IsraelNN.com) Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama is currently hiding his anti-Israel views in order to get elected, according to a well-known anti-Israel activist. The activist, Ali Abunimah, claimed to know Obama well and to have met him on numerous occasions at pro-Palestinian events in Chicago."
Before we go further, you'll notice that they're saying he's doing this to get elected. That's because this article was written on 23-MAR-2008. But remember that name - Ali Abunimah - you'll be seeing it again.
" "As he [Obama] came in from the cold and took off his coat, I went up to greet him. He responded warmly, and volunteered, 'Hey, I’m sorry I haven’t said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race.' I’m hoping when things calm down I can be more up front.' He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the The Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy [and said:] 'Keep up the good work!'" "
But that's not all: "Barack, Michelle, Edward and Mariam Abunimah's report included a photo of Obama with his wife Michelle seated at a table with virulently anti-Israeli Professor Edward Said and his wife Mariam, in what Abunimah said was a May 1998 Arab community event in Chicago at which Said gave the keynote speech. " (emphasis added)
Why is that important? Here's that name again: Ali Abunimah. "Now, the other pillar of Israeli power -- Western support and complicity -- is starting to crack. We must do all we can to push it over."
Here's that link: http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10215.shtml You'll notice the name of the person that wrote this: Ali Abunimah.
Mr Abunimah actually said this: " "I [Mr Abunimah] remember personally introducing him [Obama] onstage in 1999, when we had a major community fundraiser for the community center in Deheisha refugee camp in the occupied West Bank," he recounted. "And that's just one example of how Barack Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation." " Link: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/125656
The Company That You Keep?
My "crime" was to tell the truth about some people that had turned on me. To be fair, I do share some of the blame for what happened. It's not that I'm looking to shoulder more blame or portray myself as a "victim," it's that that is the truth.
I've always told the truth on this blog, and I'm not about to do otherwise. For me to spin stories or to bury others would be to ruin whatever credibility that I'd earned.
And this is one of those times. I've been "convicted" in the CoPO before when our role-playing Community was coming apart at the seams. My 'friends' had turned on me, and one of the others who'd been silent throughout the entire ordeal posted a message defending me.
I didn't ask this person to do it, and I hadn't known before hand that the message would be posted. Yet when that message defending me was posted to the forums, well. You'd think we were a Cabal and that our goal was to destroy our Community. Nothing could be further than the truth. But that doesn't matter to those with an agenda or with their own ideas.
But that comes back to the subject of this posting "The Company That You Keep." I was "guilty" of a "crime" because a person who was not liked in our Community posted a message defending me. Therefore, I was guilty by association.
And those are the most important words thusfar ... guilty by association.
The link: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/125656 (Now bear in mind, that this is Israel National News.)
"(IsraelNN.com) Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama is currently hiding his anti-Israel views in order to get elected, according to a well-known anti-Israel activist. The activist, Ali Abunimah, claimed to know Obama well and to have met him on numerous occasions at pro-Palestinian events in Chicago."
Before we go further, you'll notice that they're saying he's doing this to get elected. That's because this article was written on 23-MAR-2008. But remember that name - Ali Abunimah - you'll be seeing it again.
" "As he [Obama] came in from the cold and took off his coat, I went up to greet him. He responded warmly, and volunteered, 'Hey, I’m sorry I haven’t said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race.' I’m hoping when things calm down I can be more up front.' He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the The Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy [and said:] 'Keep up the good work!'" "
But that's not all: "Barack, Michelle, Edward and Mariam Abunimah's report included a photo of Obama with his wife Michelle seated at a table with virulently anti-Israeli Professor Edward Said and his wife Mariam, in what Abunimah said was a May 1998 Arab community event in Chicago at which Said gave the keynote speech. " (emphasis added)
Why is that important? Here's that name again: Ali Abunimah. "Now, the other pillar of Israeli power -- Western support and complicity -- is starting to crack. We must do all we can to push it over."
Here's that link: http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10215.shtml You'll notice the name of the person that wrote this: Ali Abunimah.
Mr Abunimah actually said this: " "I [Mr Abunimah] remember personally introducing him [Obama] onstage in 1999, when we had a major community fundraiser for the community center in Deheisha refugee camp in the occupied West Bank," he recounted. "And that's just one example of how Barack Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation." " Link: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/125656
The Company That You Keep?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
