Category Archives: Barack Obama

Who is he kidding?

By CtH

Click on graphic to embiggen for easier reading.

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2623589420056011884WPMiDC

One of the riders on the FY2011 appropriations bill that Congress is fighting about is the one that would prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gasses. This is a very important issue for two reasons:

  1. Last year, Congress voted down the Left’s beloved cap-and-tax energy bill, so the Obama administration is trying to use the EPA’s regulatory power to force that tax on us without Congressional approval! This is a major violation of our rights.
  2. Cap-and-tax is going to make our economy even worse by driving energy prices up and by imposing a ton of additional expenses and regulatory bull-puckey on job-creating businesses.

Lefties claim this is all “necessary” because of the alleged threat of Anthropogenic Global Warming, which the American people have finally gotten a clue is the biggest hoax in history. Right from the beginning, the whole AGW fraud has been driven by powerful Lefties like George Soros (who wants to destroy the U.S. so it will be easier to suck into a one world government that people like him can control) and Al Gore (who has been making big bucks investing in government-subsidized “green” businesses).

These are bad people who are actively working to harm our great nation. This EPA thing needs to be stopped, even if it does mean the government shuts down. And I’m not one who will be unaffected by a shut-down. ALL of my kids are in the military and were told weeks ago that in the event of a shut-down, they would still have to go to work, but they would NOT get paid.

Learn more at my new energy albums at Chrissy’s Site Bite:

“Energy Prices and Policies”

http://news.webshots.com/album/578480473InUqkG

“Stop Global Whining”

http://news.webshots.com/album/580026959RRKqbB

1 Comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Democrats

Why I think we need Sarah for 2012

By Chrissy the Hyphenated

Click on graphics to embiggen for easier reading.

I hope you all don’t mind what I’m going to do here … I started to write a comment in Wednesday’s Path, but it ended up so LONG that I think it really should just be a blog post unto itself. So I’m going to polish and post it here, after which all y’all can continue discussing potential candidates for 2012 and point out where I’m wrong.

I believe what I say here, but I thought McCain could win right up until he didn’t. So I take even my strongest opinions (especially about politics where I am a total newby!) with a pound of salt.

My gut feeling is that no man can win against Obama, especially not a white man. And I don’t see any viable Republicans of color at this point. Down the road, sure. But not for 2012. All the people they’re talking about are doughy white guys.

One thing I do in my poll watching is look at how much of the country inhabits Obama’s true base – i.e., the ideologically Hard Left. I see numbers between 11% and 15% over and over for Hard Left, plus another 10% or so for the Soft Left that will vote reliably Democrat no matter how dumb or unethical the candidate is.

These numbers show up especially clearly and often in the one issue I’ve tracked the longest – abortion.

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2941788060056011884MEoLDp

The Democratic Party’s platform supports the Hard Left – i.e., legal abortion for any reason up to the moment of birth (and make Pro-Life taxpayers foot the bill, please). The Soft Left draws the line at viability after which even they can’t see abortion as anything but what it is — early infanticide. The Hard Left, however, supports abortion so blindly that they object to health inspections at abortion centers and, back when Obama was in the Illinois Senate, he personally shot down a bill that would have required medical and comfort care be provided to abortion survivors.

In other words, the Hard Left’s attitude is not “Safe, Legal and Rare,” but “Free, Legal and Lots.” Or as I like to put it: “Kill Babies, Kill!”

I heard Gianna Jessen (famous abortion survivor, pro-life advocate) say she has had people come up to her and practically spit in her face that she has No Right to Be Alive! Can you imagine? That is the face of the Hard Left. And Obama is their leader.

I admit that, what with Libya, the Gulf oil spill, and his occasional forays into actually breathing the same air as Republicans without barfing on their shoes, Barack Obama has lost some approval points among the Hard Left. But face it. That won’t matter a whit in 2012. They’re mad at him for not being Left enough. Neither they nor their slightly less odious companions among the Soft Left are ever going to vote for anyone who is to the Right of Obama. The best we could hope for with this bunch is that some of them are too stoned or hung over to remember to vote.

So let’s just concede that Obama has the 25% ideologically, close-mindedly Left all sewn up. Fine. Forget them! We only need 50.1% to win. Maybe not even that much; Bill Clinton won with only 43% of the vote. Not that I want to see another 3-candidate race, but when Perot siphoned off the Conservative vote, the results were:

  • Clinton 43.0% v. GHW Bush 37.5% v. Perot 18.9%

Now take a look at this:

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2991174480056011884bHeNAs

The McCain-Palin ticket scored 45.7% of the vote. A bunch of them were willing to give the new president a chance. But it wasn’t long before they all planted themselves firmly in the Disapprove and Strongly Disapprove section. These people are NOT going to vote for Obama NO MATTER WHO RUNS AGAINST HIM.

And vice versa. That 44% who Strongly Approved on Inauguration Day may have dropped in overall enthusiasm, but they’ve held steady in Obama’s camp. I don’t see them shifting sides, particularly not so long as the MSM continues to force-feed them pro-Obama news and entertainment. And oh golly … isn’t 44% pretty darn close to the 43% who voted for Clinton the first time?

And here’s another thought. After the Democrats got creamed on HillaryCare and Clinton wisely started governing from the middle (which Obama is not doing), his job approval numbers went way up.

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2852954620056011884HulDdM

Obama’s job approvals have been below 50% for a long time. When Clinton ran for re-election, his were well above 50%.  But check out the election results:

  • Clinton 49.2% v. Dole 40.7% v. Perot 8.4%

Despite very high job approval numbers, Bill Clinton only wooed about 6% more to vote for him the second time around than had voted for him the first time.

Obama’s approvals stinks, but let’s be realistic and just give him the 44% Kool-aid vote. We’ve got the 46% who voted for McCain in 2008 locked down (rounding up for ease).

I’m thinking that, given a two-party race, about 90% of voters are already decided and will not be much affected by who does or does not run on the Republican ticket. I think the GOP establishment that enjoys big government and fat earmarks is going to do what they have done before – i.e., try to convince us to run a “mayo and cucumber” moderate. You know … because we need to get someone who won’t OFFEND the critical middle.

I don’t agree. Yes, the voters we need to focus on are the 10% that are not on board with either side. But we’ve got 46% already; we only need 5% of the middle to win.  These people did vote for Obama last time, so let’s take a look at who they might be and who might best appeal to them.

First, there was a significant number of fad-fans, mostly young “Rock the Vote”rs who were juiced about Obama’s youth and really wanted to vote for The First Black President. These people rarely vote in any serious election, though. And they are notoriously fickle about their celebrities, have the attention spans of gnats and … oops, Obama’s not only gotten gray, but also has been such a media hog that he may have over-exposed himself and become Boring and Last Year.

Frankly, I doubt if he can count on the youth vote for 2012. However, I do think that this type of unreliable “only if it’s fun” voter could be revved up about voting for The First Female President.

Another big Obama bloc was Voters of Color. They’re holding hard to their First President, but I have a feeling his Black support is quietly eroding with the spread of the movie Maafa 21 and the rising up of devout Black clergy who are taking their churches back from the pro-abortion Left and recommitting them to Jesus Christ. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, check out: http://www.maafa21.com/.

I think we could make real inroads in that group with a no-apologies, no-compromise, mother of five, evangelical, Bible thumpin’, Grizzly Mama, Pro-Life candidate. But, like the youth vote, the Black vote is unreliable.  They don’t vote so much when they’re not revved up about the candidate. And I really don’t see them getting excited about any of the mealy-mouthed male Republicans out there, most of whom are only slightly to the Right of the “personally opposed to abortion but” Democrats.

And have you ever seen Tyler Perry’s Madea? Blacks adore that feisty Mama Grizzly! And the message of all of Perry’s extremely popular plays and movies is that Blacks need to Take Responsibility for Their Lives! Perry is enormously popular with the Black community and he’s a seriously devout Christian. In 2008, he was pro-Obama. But one of these days, if He hasn’t already, God’s going to get through to that man about Black Genocide and we’re going to have a powerful ally in the Black community. Pray for him, please.

The other big Obama bloc was the herd of Mushy Middle Sheeple, those nice, but deluded folk that the Left is so good at guilting into voting Democrat. We’re converting them slowly (hey, look at me!) and we need to keep at that. But again … another white guy just isn’t going to overcome melanin-induced guilt for many of them on election day. Not so a First Female President who has proven street cred in areas that NICE people relate to … raising a disabled child, supporting a teen out-of-wedlock-pregnant daughter, married to a smart, manly hunk who absolutely ADORES her.

Besides, Sarah is also very much associated with the Tea Party, which the Left obviously fears or they wouldn’t be blatting about that biased, “47% unfavorable” CNN poll. (More on that in another blog.)

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2059361280056011884XQkODT

LOOK at these numbers! 71% of Adult Americans say we should at least listen to the Tea Party. And 26% of Democrats and 46% of Independents say Tea Party ideas are Very Important!

The RINO elite who have been hand-in-glove with the Dems for decades, expanding government and scarfing down the pork, are going to tell us we have to nominate someone like John McCain, a centrist who will be palatable to the Soft Left. But that’s STOOOOPID. Who were we really working for in 2008? Huh? Not nice, doughy, white male John McCain that the MSM pimped right up until he was nominated and then, oh boy, he couldn’t even get an opinion piece printed. He is a good man, for sure. A war hero, no doubt. But he never was the serious Conservative or inspiring, charismatic leader Sarah is.

We NEED Conservatives on board and charged up about the Republican candidate. With Sarah Palin at the top of the GOP ticket, we would have the Right-wing not only sewn up, but the Tea Party Conservatives fired up and OUT THERE campaigning! Besides, the media is going to crucify our candidate no matter what. So let’s get someone who has proven she can deal with it by writing Hi Mom! on her hand and waving at the cameras.

When Clinton won the first time, the GHW Bush + Perot vote added up to 56%. The second time, the Dole + Perot vote added up to 49%.  Taking those Obama v. Clinton job approval ratings into consideration, let’s just say that we could easily count on that latter, lower 49%.  We would only need to capture another 2% to win. And that’s not two percent of Adult Americans (the group surveyed by Gallup in the graphic above). It’s 2% of VOTES and Likely Voters routinely poll to the Right of Adult Americans.

Basically, I believe that we can’t win a 2-party race with any of the viable white males out there and that, with the size and power of the Tea Party, a RINO nomination could get us another Perot-style 3-party race that will hand a second term to Obama. But as I was writing, it occurred to me that an Obama v. RINO v. Tea Party race is not the only 3-party possibility. What if Hillary Clinton decides to run as a 3d candidate?

Would we still need Sarah? I think we would. In fact, I think a race like that would be fascinating to watch. For example, what if the focus was not on Obama’s skin color any more, but on which of the two women, Left or Right, was going to be our First Female President? My but we do live in interesting times!

(And my apologies AGAIN. My “comment that got too long” got even longer and acquired graphics when I tried to polish it into a blog posting! LOL)

16 Comments

Filed under Abortion, Barack Obama, Democrats, Human Rights, Obamacare, Republicans, Sarah Palin, Tea Party

Random stuff

By CtH … click to embiggen yada yada

Photoshop by Terrell @ http://terrellaftermath.com/

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2118654750056011884aumPav

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2260486910056011884KtfCOh

Source @ http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2011/20110404055945.aspx

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2464059830056011884jjGwXx

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2020479710056011884IwzQKS

CSB @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2148141360056011884reMvTf

Comments Off on Random stuff

Filed under Barack Obama, Democrats, Funny Stuff, Obamacare, Republicans, U.S. Congress, U.S. Senate

Tuesday’s Path – April 5, 2011

Posted by CtH

http://terrellaftermath.com/

11 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama, Benghazi

Friday, April 1, 2011: That was the week that was

by Chrissy the Hyphenated

Click on graphics to embiggen for easier reading.


Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2989601210056011884HLipJl


Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2023115550056011884EjDCXq


Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2027912660056011884FaGMNy


Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2662843090056011884XgzgeF


Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2639292860056011884hmHoIW

Comments Off on Friday, April 1, 2011: That was the week that was

Filed under Armed Forces, Barack Obama, Benghazi, Democrats, Education, Obamacare, Republicans, Unions

Obama the Opaque

By Chrissy the Hyphenated

Click on graphics to embiggen for easier reading.

For the first time EVAH, President Obama has consented to receive an award in a closed door, no press ceremony.

Yep. It’s true!

Hard to believe the Ego-in-Chief demanded that NO press record him getting an award, isn’t it?

And guess what the award was for?

Transparency!

(Isn’t a closed-door transparency meeting an oxymoron?)

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2648350910056011884uRsZkz

So far as I can tell, skulking in corners and claiming the dog ate his homework is SOP for Obama.  For example, there was that time he made a unilateral decision to send an American ambassador to Syria. Syria is an anti American, terrorist country that embraces Iran.

Before Obama, we hadn’t sent an ambassador there for years. Not sending an ambassador is one of the few diplomatic, non-violent ways a nation has to express disapproval for the way another country is behaving.

Changing something like that would usually get a lot of discussion in Congress, which is no doubt why Mr. New Kind of Politics appointed his ambassador to Syria during the Christmas recess when our legislators and the press and everyone else in the country was busy with other “Winter Holiday” stuff.

Nice, right? Real transparent!

But seriously, folks, Obama the Opaque virtually announced on his very first day in office that this would be his modus operandi.

Remember all the things he said would be the First Thing he’d do if he got elected? Well … the first thing he ACTUALLY did was throw a shroud of secrecy over his entire administration.

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2916849130056011884mBebYu

Obama’s Executive Order 13489 is posted @ http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13489

The First Executive Order of the Obama Presidency is … well, “dry” would be a nice way to put it.  It’s just a list of procedures for dealing with the National Archivist’s office … hardly what you’d expect for Unprecedentedly Historic Barry’s choice for his First Official Act.

And it’s not some paperwork-y nonsense that all presidents just have to get out of the way before they can get to the good stuff.  In fact, only two other presidents in history have ever signed an order like this — George Bush a few weeks after the 9/11 attacks and Ronald Reagan a few days before he left office.

Bush’s Executive Order 13233 is posted @ http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13233

Reagan’s Executive Order 12677 is posted @ http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12667

So what’s the big deal?  Why did Obama make his Numero Uno Presidential Act a dry-as-dirt order about Presidential Records?

Quick history:  Until 1978, presidential records were considered the private property of the president. But in the aftermath of the Nixon administration’s paranoia, Congress passed and Carter signed the Presidential Records Act of 1978, which redefined presidential records as public property which, with the Freedom of Information Act, gives the rest of us a chance to get a look at them.

The text of the Presidential Records Act of 1978 is posted @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Records_Act

Given the potential for disaster if some records are made public, presidents past and incumbent are given the opportunity to invoke “executive privilege” — that is, designate certain records are nobody’s beeswax.

Reagan’s Executive Order 12677 laid out procedures for when, where and how a president (incumbent or former) could invoke executive privilege, in part by requiring a timely response when the archivist asks, “Is this one okay to release?”

I compared the three orders line by line. [Yaawwwwwwwwwwwwn. You’re welcome!]  The funny thing is … apart from specifying that the Vice President’s records are to be handled the same way as the President’s, Obama’s order is almost identical to Reagan’s.

But Bush’s order … the one in the middle … was nearly 1,000 words longer.

One thing Bush added to Reagan’s procedures was to create a distinction between records less than 12 years old and records older and presumably less likely to have national security implications. He also put in a long section that gave former presidents a lot more consideration in the handling of their legacy.

Obama swept both of those elements away.

More importantly, Obama also swept away an important limitation Bush had placed on executive privilege —

i.e., that it only applied to records reflecting “military, diplomatic, or national security secrets, Presidential communications, legal advice, legal work, or the deliberative processes of the President and the President’s advisors.”

Obama went back to the broadest definition possible –

i.e., any and all ‘‘documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act.”

The Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207 is posted online @ http://www.archives.gov/about/laws/presidential-records.html.

The section about what “presidential records” means is “2201. Definitions” –

“All books, correspondence, memorandums, documents, papers, pamphlets, works of art, models, pictures, photographs, plats, maps, films, and motion pictures, including, but not limited to, audio, audiovisual, or other electronic or mechanical recordations created or received by the President, his immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise and assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.”

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2698365190056011884iqVUTh

But hey … don’t take my word for it. The record proves that Obama is MUCH MORE SECRETIVE than Bush ever was!

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2685916830056011884rZnUgq

No wonder Obama didn’t want any public attention over his unearned transparency award presentation.

I bet it looks just swell hanging next to his Nobel medal.

(I’ve seen some sites claiming that Obama’s first Executive Order was about keeping his birth certificate and college transcripts sealed, but that stuff is already legally defined as private. Obama didn’t need a presidential order to keep them sealed.)

12 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama

O’drooly media ignores major Libya issues

By Chrissy the Hyphenated
Click on graphic to embiggen for easier reading

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/28535

SOURCES:

http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2011/20110330092541.aspx

http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2011/20110329043748.aspx

http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2011/20110329040644.aspx

http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2011/20110329042730.aspx

1 Comment

Filed under Armed Forces, Barack Obama, Benghazi, Media Bias, U.S. Senate

MAD’s sad love affair with Barry Ø

By Chrissy the Hyphenated
  1. Autumn 2008, the “Vote Obama” election issue
  2. February 2009, when MAD lurved Obama
  3. March 2010, when MAD unfriended Obama
  4. April 2011, when MAD published an Obama Slam Book

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2646346080056011884TvuiFH

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2669397530056011884Vixxje

Posted 2 http://news.webshots.com/photo/2321566200056011884jUPytw

Click on image to embiggen.

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2299953800056011884GcVsrC

Me and Dearest splurged $6 whole bucks on the current issue of MAD to get the two pages of the presidents feature for our scrapbook. But after we looked at the rest of the magazine, we thought what a shame we don’t have any pet birds. It’s in the recycle.

Neither of us has looked at a MAD in eons. We recall it being fairly 12-year-old boy juvenile … fart jokes and such. Now it’s very political and, from what I could discern, targeted at chronically unemployed, male drop-outs living in their moms’ basements with their Che posters and pot plants, which they carefully nurture under grow lights.

MAD was high on Obummer in 2008 and 2009. Now, he’s the jerk who couldn’t deliver on their ultra left wet dream of a Nanny State that would send losers like them monthly welfare checks, food stamps and free health care so they could afford their own pads without having to get jobs.

For example, they hate Christians, Republicans and Sarah Palin (even though they think she’s hot). They also kinda hate Buddhists, but don’t have much to say about Muslims, the cowards. And they think babies are gross and parents are stupid. (Did I mention the basement?)

Based on their obvious attachments to 60s things like the Beetles and Laugh-In, I have to wonder what they will do when their aged mothers die and those Social Security checks stop.

7 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama, Media Bias

Who shot the video? And why?

By Chrissy the Hyphenated

Click to embiggen graphic

Hubby Dearest and I were puzzling over how the “Obama locked out of his office” video even got made, much less released. I googled aerial and ground imagery and it really looks to me like the camera person had to have been inside the Rose Garden.


Dearest suggested it was a deliberate attempt to distract us right-wingnut bloggers from Libya. If that’s true, it surely wasn’t anything BHO knew about. He’d walk through fire before he’d go along with looking stupid.

I can’t help wondering, considering the way we have seen him treat people, if it wasn’t some staffer who is fed up with Mr. Respect and Caring (NOT).  It reminds me of that thing with Martha Coakley and the garden club letter, you know?

11 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama

It’s not really a war-war

By Chrissy the Hyphenated
Click to embiggen graphics for easier reading.

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2545125870056011884RTjREx

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2669859560056011884IoKzPw

Posted @ http://news.webshots.com/photo/2919457810056011884yblMEY

4 Comments

Filed under Armed Forces, Barack Obama, Benghazi, Democrats