Barry In Charge: Candidate Obama Protested Funding Iraqi War, President Obama Asks For Extra Iraqi War Funding

What's new? The about-faces are almost mind-numbing, aren't they? Here's the latest: Barry now has learned that President Bush was right all along about many things, but this flip-flop about Iraq is sure to set his pink protester's purses afire.

"But he said he would have them out in 16 months, so he has to keep funding them until then", I hear the apologist brain-dead idiots whine. They're too busy hiding beneath their covers to realize that this is supplemental funding that he is asking Pelosi for, not regular operational funding. Regardless, can you still hear what reactions the Queen Of Botox gave president Bush when he asked congress to help the troops out with supplemental OR regular funding for the past 8 years?

Her shrill stupidity is still ringing in my ears. When the first request from President Bush for supplemental funding arrived to congress, then rep Pelosi had these bellicose words to say back:

[In 2003, only 6 months into the war, facing additional funding for infrastructure projects heretofore unseen]
"The American people look to us to ask the difficult questions, to ensure accountability, and not to rubber stamp a policy that has failed in terms of its planning and has therefore endangered the lives of our sons and daughters in uniform." (source)

"The Administration wants us to do a gold-plated, no-bid contract version of the story. They want the gold-plated version, and they have a tin ear to what the American people are saying. They all say: 'We honor our responsibilities. We honor our men and women in uniform. But please do not put our children into debt, our grandchildren into debt, without some idea of how this is going to be paid for and some idea of what the costs will be." (source)

[In 2007, when the Idiot Queen Of The Left was finally Speaker Of The House, President Bush sent congress another supplemental request for more funds to help with day-to-day needs, such as bullets and body armor, protection against IEDs, and Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected vehicles]
"The colossal cost of this war grows every day – in lives lost, dollars spent, and to our reputation around the world. The American people long ago rejected the President’s planned 10-year occupation of Iraq and want the Administration to provide a concrete plan to bring our troops home.

The choice is between a Democratic plan for responsible redeployment of our troops and the President’s plan to spend another trillion dollars for a 10-year war in Iraq. We must end this war." (source)

In case you were living under a rock for the 2 years that candidate Barry paraded around the country telling anyone who would listen that he was very proud for not voting on giving permission to President Bush for the Iraq invasion (which the smug Ill state senator at the time the US congressional authorization was taken couldn't have, anyway, due to the fact that he wasn't even a US senator yet), here's a little refresher course:

"When you're spending over $50 to fill up your car because the price of oil is four times what it was before Iraq, you're paying a price for this war." (source)

"John McCain once opposed these tax cuts -- he rightly called them unfair and fiscally irresponsible, but now he has done an about-face and wants to make them permanent, just like he wants a permanent occupation in Iraq.'' (source)

"Iran is the biggest single beneficiary of the war in Iraq." (source)

"I will remove all our combat troops. We will have troops [in Iraq] to protect our embassies and our civilian forces and we will engage in counter terroism activities." (source)

"I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as Al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade … They took their eye off the people who were responsible for 9/11, and that would be Al Qaeda in Afghanistan that is stronger now than at any time since 2001." (source)
-“[Osama] bin Laden himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995.” -- 9/11 Commission Report (source)

-"Bin Laden asked for assistance in weapons procurement and permission to establish terrorist training facilities in Iraq. The ensuing years saw additional efforts to establish connections."--9/11 Commission Report (source)

-"There are indications that [by 2001] the Iraqi regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam [the al Qaeda-affiliated terror group with training camps in Iraqi Kurdistan prior to our invasion. ] against the common Kurdish enemy."
-- 9/11 Commission Report (source)

And now for the latest reversal from this brilliant Harvard grad who duped so many Code Pink'rs, pacifists, and cowards known as Leftist Liberals:

WASHINGTON, April 9 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama asked the U.S. Congress for an additional $83.4 billion to fund the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan on Thursday, saying the security situation along the Afghan-Pakistan frontier was urgent.

"The Taliban is resurgent and al Qaeda threatens America from its safe haven along the Afghan-Pakistan border," Obama said in a letter to Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House of Representatives, that was released by the White House.

Obama said 95 percent of the $83.4 billion in supplemental funds he was requesting would go to support U.S. military operations in Iraq and the U.S. effort to disrupt and defeat al Qaeda. (source)

In Barry's Cabal Of Liars And Cheats: Joe Biden (the Karl Rove dust-up)

"Pay every single hour, every single day that bombs were dropped in Afghanistan. How much longer does the bombing campaign continue?" Biden asked during an Oct. 22, 2001 speech at the Council on Foreign Relations.

"We’re going to pay every single hour, every single day it continues." (Miles A. Pomper, “Building Anti-Terrorism Coalition Vaults Ahead Of Other Priorities,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 10/26/01)

“The bombing campaign, [Biden] said, reinforced existing stereotypes of the United States as a ‘high-tech bully …’” (Miles A. Pomper, “Building Anti-Terrorism Coalition Vaults Ahead Of Other Priorities,” Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 10/26/01).

"We've tried the military surge option before and it failed. If we try it again, it will fail again." --December 2006, after the announcement of president Bush's surge strategy.

"You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts franchise unless you have a slight Indian accent." --2006

"You don't know my state. My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state has the eighth-largest black population in the country." --Response when Fox News' Chris Wallace suggested he couldn't draw votes in the South. As if being a slave state makes modern Southerners happy.

"[Obama is] the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy." --Jan. 31, 2007, New York Observer.

And here's the latest bit of brain damage from this aneurysm victim:

Republican strategist Karl Rove called Vice President Biden a "liar" on Thursday, dramatically escalating a feud between Biden and aides to former President George W. Bush over Biden's claims to have rebuked Bush in private meetings.

"I hate to say this, but he's a serial exaggerator," Rove told FOX News. "If I was being unkind I would say liar. But it is a habit he ought to drop."

Rove added: "You should not exaggerate and lie like this when you are the Vice President of the United States."

Biden's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment, although Biden spokesman Jay Carney told Fox on Wednesday: "The vice president stands by his remarks."

Carney was referring to two controversial assertions by Biden, the latest coming Tuesday during an interview on CNN.

"I remember President Bush saying to me one time in the Oval Office," Biden began, "'Well, Joe,' he said, 'I'm a leader.' And I said: 'Mr. President, turn and around look behind you. No one is following.'"

The exchange is purely "fictional," said Rove, who was Bush's top political adviser in the White House.

"It didn't happen," Rove, a FOX News contributor and former Bush adviser, told Megyn Kelly in an interview taped for "On The Record." "It's his imagination; it's a made-up, fictional world.

"He ought to get out of it and get back to reality," Rove added. "He's making this up out of whole cloth."

Rove's skepticism was echoed by a variety of other Bush aides, including former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer, chief of staff Andy Card and legislative liaison Candida Wolff.

They also disputed a similar assertion made by Biden in2004, when the former senator from Delaware told scores of Democratic colleagues at a lunch that he had challenged Bush's moral certitude about the Iraq war during a private meeting in the Oval Office. Two years later, Biden repeated his story about dressing down the president.

"When I speak to the president - and I have had plenty of opportunity to be with the president, at least prior to the last election, a lot of hours alone with him. I mean, meaning me and his staff," Biden said on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" in April2006. "And the president will say things to me, and I'll literally turn to the president, say: 'Mr. President, how can you say that, knowing you don't know the facts?' And he'll look at me and he'll say - my word - he'll look at me and he'll say: 'My instincts.' He said: 'I have good instincts.' I said: 'Mr. President, your instincts aren't good enough.'"

On Thursday, Rove ridiculed the claim that Biden spent "a lot of hours alone with" Bush.

"Joe Biden was never alone with the president for more than few moments," Rove said. "There was staff in the room the whole time."

Rove was equally appalled by Biden's claims of having given Bush his comeuppance.

"If you notice, all of these incidents have the same structure: Joe Biden courageously raises the impudent question; the president befuddles the answer; and Joe Biden drives home the dramatic response."

Rove scoffed at Biden's claims that "he and the president were sitting there in the Oval Office, he was tutoring the president, he was asking him the critical questions that no one was willing to confront him with."

"With all due respect to the vice president, these are the kind of things you can get away with if you are a United States Senator, ora backbencher in the U.S. House of Representatives," Rove said. "You should not exaggerate and lie like this when you are the Vice President of the United States."

Carney declined to specify the dates of his boss's purported Oval Office scoldings of Bush. Nor would he provide witnesses or notes to corroborate the episodes.

Throughout his career, Biden has often been accused of boasting about his accomplishments, embellishing his credentials and even stealing the words of others. He dropped out of the 1988 presidential race after being accused of plagiarizing British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock.

Last July, Biden came under fire for telling a questionable story about being "shot at" in Iraq. When questioned by the Hill newspaper, Biden backpedaled by saying: "I was near where a shot landed."

Biden went on to say that some sort of projectile "landed" outside a building in the Green Zone where he and another senator had spent the night during a visit in December 2005. The lawmakers were shaving in the morning when they felt the building shake, Biden said.

"No one got up and ran from the room-it wasn't that kind of thing," he told the Hill. "It's not like I had someone holding a gun to my head."

In September, Biden again raised eyebrows with another story about his exploits in war zones -- this time on "the superhighway of terror between Pakistan and Afghanistan, where my helicopter was forced down."

"If you want to know where Al Qaeda lives, you want to know where bin Laden is, come back to Afghanistan with me," Biden bragged to the National Guard Association. "Come back to the area where my helicopter was forced down, with a three-star general and three senators at10,500 feet in the middle of those mountains. I can tell you where they are."

But it turns out that inclement weather, not terrorists, prompted the chopper to land in an open field during Biden's visit to Afghanistan in February 2008. Fighter jets kept watch overhead while a convoy of security vehicles was dispatched to retrieve Biden and fellow Sens. Chuck Hagel and John Kerry.

"We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to," joked Kerry, a Democrat, to the AP. "Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."

(source)

Barry In Charge: Appointing A Hate-Filled Mental Patient To His Faith-Based Advisory Council

Here's yet another "Cafeteria Christian" who thinks just because his mind is deluded about the Christian take on homosexuality that you will believe his hateful lies:



What do you call a person who earnestly says that the Pope is responsible for killing millions of people because he doesn't preach about men putting a condom on when they put their genitals into another man's anus? (besides 'lunatic')

I call him evil.

Just like most homosexuals I've ever met, they can't take ownership of their own behavior. Because they aren't real men, they try to blame someone else (like the Pope) for their own behavior.

And of course, Obama wants to give this lunatic credibility because he gave Barry a tongue-lashing over his choice of best-selling author Rick Warren to merely say a prayer at the recent innauguration.

Can anyone understand how a gay person like this thinks? Has he ever met a real Christian? When you listen to his delusions about those of us who know how to read, you really come away thinking, "Wow. This guy really thinks that we're all stupid."

To drum up sympathy, the little liar claims that "hate crimes" are committed against his special people. The problem is, they can't point to a "hate crime" that is any different from any other crime. For every Matthew Sheppard case, (which we still don't know everything about, such as full conversations held between Matthew's assailants and himself leading up to the crime), I can name for you TEN rapes that are committed in male prisons every day.

Why don't we ever hear about those? Homosexuals are not the innocent little victims they claim to be. They will do the most vile, perverted, evil things, then act like they never did anything wrong.

Just like a woman can kill her two children in a lake and then scream that a "black man hijacked her car and kids", homosexuals often rape and kill then turn around and act like "victims of society." It only works on people who haven't been around a bit. I've been around a bit.

Their mealy-mouthed cries of victimhood don't work on me. I can tell you of personal stories of two guys I grew up with and used to call friends. Trust me when I say that homosexuals are not all victims.

Here's the story on this delusional mental patient whom Barry has suspiciously taken a liking to:

CNSNews.com) – President Obama has named to his faith-based advisory council a self-professed Christian who holds that the New Testament's teaching that homosexual behavior is unnatural and wrong--which is found in St. Paul's letter to the Romans--“is not true."

The appointee, Harry Knox, has also said that Obama's decision to invite the Rev. Rick Warren to say a prayer at the Inauguration "tainted" the ceremony and that Pope Benedict XVI is a "discredited leader."

Harry Knox, a professed gay Christian who is director of the religion and faith program at the Human Rights Campaign, a homosexual rights group, was named to President Obama's Advisory Council on Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships on Monday. The advisory council gives federal grants to faith-based organizations.

The appointment came after Knox criticized Obama prior to the Inauguration for selecting Warren, a California megachurch pastor and best-selling author, to deliver the invocation. Writing in The Huffington Post blog, Knox said to Obama, “We don’t feel hopeful anticipation of a new day in our country, and we don’t feel optimism. We feel betrayed.”

Knox said in the December article that Warren’s invocation would make the Jan. 20 Inauguration a “tainted” event because Warren supported the ballot initiative in California to amend the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

On the PBS News Hour in December, Knox said that Warren “has in fact leveraged homophobia to get ahead in his career. … This is the worst possible choice the president could have made. This is a divisive choice. … We said to the president-elect today in very strong language, the strongest we can think of and be respectful of the office, you have really slapped us. And we want you to think about that and think very hard what your actions will be going forward because this very symbolic, early decision has sent the exact wrong message.”

Knox could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

Knox is one of 25 members of the advisory board of the White House Office Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Obama announced the formation of the office in early February, a continuation of a similar office started by President George W. Bush to issue federal grants to faith-based, non-profit charitable organizations.

Other members include Bishop Charles Blake of the Church of God in Christ in Chicago; the Rev. Peg Chemberlin, president-elect of the National Council of Churches USA; Dr. Frank Page, president emeritus of the Southern Baptist Convention; the Rev. Jim Wallis, president of the liberal Christian group Sojourners; and the Rev. Joel C. Hunter of Northland Church in Longwood, Fla.

Knox has been a long-time gay activist focusing on the faith community. He previously worked for the New York-based Freedom to Marry group, for Georgia Equality and Equality Florida. He has won awards from liberal religious organizations.

In a debate with the Rev. Gino Jennings recorded Nov. 28, 2004 at the First Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ in Philadelphia, the two men sparred over various biblical verses references homosexual behavior.

This included the Book of Romans, in which St. Paul wrote, “Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”

After reading the scripture, Jennings asked, “Do you believe that? That if a man lie with a man or a woman with a woman it is against nature?”

“I do not believe it,” answered Knox, who at the time was the program director for the group Freedom to Marry.

Jennings responded, “So this is a lie?”

Knox affirmed, “That is not true.”

“Paul did not have any idea of the kind of love that I feel for a partner when I am partnered. He didn’t know what that was about,” Knox said. “The straight man, the heterosexual man who got the privilege of writing the book, the educated, rich, heterosexual man, Paul, who got to write the book, didn’t think it was natural because for him it must not have been.”

Jennings later responded that Paul was not the sole author of the writings. “So you are saying Paul was just closed-minded. I totally disagree because the book says this, the book tells us that all scripture, all of the scripture, not some of it, but all scripture are given by the inspiration of God,” said Jennings.

Before starting at the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) in 2005, Knox also worked as development director of Equality Florida and was the executive director of Georgia Equality. While in Georgia, his groups successfully lobbied corporations such as Coca-Cola, Bell South, Delta, and Cingular to extend same-sex benefits to employees.

At the HRC, Knox established a weekly preaching resource that provides scriptural commentary to pastors interested in homosexual perspectives on the Bible. He also helped create a network of 22 “progressive state clergy coalitions” around the country, according to the HRC Web site.

Knox has the potential to be a polarizing figure, said the Rev. Louis Sheldon, chairman of the conservative Traditional Values Coalition.

“Everything he says will be front-page news,” Sheldon told CNSNews.com. “He will be a political liability to the president. All the good that the faith-based office does will get buried by a loose cannon that fires over the bow. But that’s what Obama wants.”

Last month, Knox was quoted in a gay newspaper criticizing the pope and the Catholic group Knights of Columbus, mainly because the Knights supported the traditional marriage amendment to the California constitution.

Knox told the San Francisco-based gay newspaper the Bay Area Reporter, “The Knights of Columbus do a great deal of good in the name of Jesus Christ, but in this particular case, they were foot soldiers of a discredited army of oppression.” In the newspaper, he included among the “discredited leaders” Catholic bishops and Pope Benedict XVI, as “A pope who literally today said condoms don't help in control of AIDS."

In a brief interview Monday with CNSNews.com, Knox stood by his comments on the pope.

“The pope needs to start telling the truth about condom use,” Knox told CNSNews.com. “We are eager to help him do that. Until he is willing to do that and able, he’s doing a great deal more harm than good--not just in Africa but around the world. It is endangering people’s lives.”

The pope’s comments were mischaracterized by Knox, said Catholic League President Bill Donohue.

“When Pope Benedict XVI recently said that condoms are not the answer to HIV/AIDS, he was simply voicing common sense: the promiscuous distribution of condoms has coincided with a precipitous increase in HIV/AIDS,” Donohue said in a statement Tuesday. “But to gay activists like Knox, the pope is a liar. Indeed, he instructed the pope to ‘start telling the truth about condom use,’ holding the Holy Father accountable for ‘endangering people’s lives.’ He never explained how calls for abstinence could possibly jeopardize anyone’s life.” (source)

Death By A 1,000 Cuts: Head Case Gets $400,000 Over Head Scarf

We are filled with public school administrators who cowardly cave in at almost every turn. I know from my own experience as a teacher in Montgomery County, Va in 2001. Weak-knee'd grown men act like little girls afraid of a fight.

What do you expect, though? Public schools have been co-opted by sissies in college who think our brave American past was one of "bullying", anyway. Fifty years of communist infiltration and indoctrination has definitely done its trick.

This case involves a Nevada public school that just awarded 400,000 dollars in punitive damages to an Egyptian female student who, while here attending the school, claims to have been "threatened" to be killed. She told administrators, who had her under heavy surveillance from there on out, but couldn't find any case of being harassed or threatened.

"Did they pursue the person who threatened her?" I hear you asking. Well, that's the rub: this Egyptian girl couldn't identify the person who "threatened" her. Could she at least say whether it was a male or female who did the threatening?

Nope.

What about a tone of voice??? Nope.

According to the report, school district officials went to great lengths to identify the aggressor and protect the Egyptian girl. But without a real person, or even the gender to go after, they came up with nothing.

This girl was so "distraught" that she stopped attending classes there, despite the fact that every resource to accommodate her safety was taken. She saw the easy money in front of her, so she listened to her lawyers, kept the case going, even though she couldn't even identify the sex from which the "threat" came.

Did the school district try to remain honest and vanguards of our tax dollars? Did they try to fight the good fight to ensure that future extortion like this wouldn't take place in some other school district?

Nope.

They caved in. The district just awarded her and her little friend (who ALSO couldn't identify even the gender of the person who "threatened" her friend) 400,000 dollars.

How much longer can we continue to let these lawyers use our Constitution against ourselves?

Here's the full story.

Race-Baiter's Digest: Al Sharpton And Bertha Lewis Call For Sheriff's Hanging, er, Ouster

When Sharpton missed out on the casting call for extras in the movie Planet Of The Apes, all of his admirers felt that Al was destined for a life of missed opportunities and crack. But years later, as if moved by the gods of Kwanza, there emerged another chance for Al to make good: Tawanna Brawley.

From that shinning moment to the next, Al has ironed his hair, slimmed down, and continued the fight for a race war without fail.

Fast forward to April 07, 2009. Despite the fact that there is more tension between inner-city blacks and inner-city Hispanics than a cat in a room full of rocking chairs, Al is claiming to be representing the long-held sentiment that blacks are fed up with the mistreatment of illegal Hispanics here in America.

I'm always hearing about it from my African American friends: "My homey Pedro was stopped yesterday for DWH: driving while Hispanic".

Well, the intrepid Sharpton has mounted an investigative campaign that rivals any of Inspector Cleaseau: he says that Sheriff Arpaio of Maricopa County, AZ, while enforcing a special mandate from the federal government to eradicate illegal aliens in the county, is racially profiling.

When asked for details, Sharpton said, "The sheriff is systematically proceeding to disencompensate the disenfranchised participatoriants of the American dream, see. I don't see him arresting the Asians coming over the border. How about the Africans? What about the Mongolians and the Aborigines?"

Asked for a response, the four-time elected sheriff in a county of Hispanic-majority residents took a deep breath:

"I'm never going to resign," he said. "The guy is living in a fantasy land if he thinks he is going to pressure me into anything. He doesn't even know where Arizona is."

Here's the full story.

Here's Bertha and Al making their pitch to CNN's Lou Dobbs, who isn't fooled one bit by their veiled attempt to erase our borders and cause a race war:
[pt I]


[pt II]

(notice the idiot who posted these video captures wrote in the video, "you're wrong Lou. Watch and learn", and some desperate propaganda about apartheid. Silly brain-dead people can't stand that a freely-elected sheriff of mostly-Hispanic people in his county want him in office, doing exactly what he's supposed to be doing.)

Cloward-Piven Strategy: Keep The Banks From Returning The TARP Money, Thus Maintaining A Need For Government Takeover

Stuart Varney, business analyst.

Cloward-Piven Strategy

The communists haven't been in power for even 90 days, and we're seeing Stalin-esque maneuvers already. Cripple the banks, fire the CEO's, create a panic. It's all happening right before our eyes.

This manchurian candidate has passed three times the stimulus spending that his predecessor did. Yet Barry hides behind President Bush's mild 700 billion TARP package from last fall when you hit him between the eyes with the figures.

"Mr President, you have now increased the US debt to 9.7 trillion dollars by designing and signing these stimulus bills."

"But I inherited a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit from my predecessor's TARP package." he returns.

Does that make sense? Let's see: If you inherited credit card debt equaling 20,000 dollars when you got married to your wife, what sane person says it's only right to use those credit cards to rack up 160,000 dollars in more debt? Do the lenders accept that reasoning when they keep calling your house for lack of paymnent?

"Hey, VISA, my wife put that original 20,000 dollars on there. I HAD to increase it eight-fold, so far. By the way: there's more to come."

When you press the genius Harvard grad even further, he smugly says that we will be paying down that monstrous debt [every child being born right now in America is automatically saddled with 20,000 dollars in debt, before Barry pushes even more "stimulus" bills through congress] in a short amount of time because his OMB (office of management and budget) declares that America's GDP growth for the next four years will be at 4.7%.

Do you know what our GDP growth has been, on average, for the last 10 years--while the economy was at its best? 3%.

But now, the brilliant communist Barry claims that our economy will start growing at 4.7% by next year. After he breaks the legs of business, big and small, by regulations and taxation, this ACORN nut--who's NEVER worked a real job in his life--tries to tell working people like us that people will open up new business and bring back the tens of millions of jobs that have been lost in the past two years.

It would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic. Stuart Varney is another person who feels the tragedy coming:

I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.

It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration's thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.

If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash -- which was often forced on them in the first place -- the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That's what's happening right now.

Here's a true story first reported by my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano (with the names and some details obscured to prevent retaliation). Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with "adverse" consequences if its chairman persists. That's politics talking, not economics.

Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can't a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can't special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit -- until now.

Which brings me to the Pay for Performance Act, just passed by the House. This is an outstanding example of class warfare. I'm an Englishman. We invented class warfare, and I know it when I see it. This legislation allows the administration to dictate pay for anyone working in any company that takes a dime of TARP money. This is a whip with which to thrash the unpopular bankers, a tool to advance the Obama administration's goal of controlling the financial system.

After 35 years in America, I never thought I would see this. I still can't quite believe we will sit by as this crisis is used to hand control of our economy over to government. But here we are, on the brink. Clearly, I have been naive.(source)

Barry In Charge: His Dixie Chicks Moment

Poor Barry. He tries so hard to sound eloquent, but fails. He fails like a public school student fails when he writes a paper on European history for the past 100 years and doesn't even mention fascism, communism, and despotism.

The errant high school student is only regurgitating what the public school teachers have indoctrinated into him, which is usually a one-sided view of history. The Howard Zinn version. You know that version, don't you? If you haven't been to college, you probably never heard the name, but you definitely received the brainwashing that comes from it: America's history is a story of enslavement and defiling of the planet, it's cultures, and its prosperity.

It's that simple, you see. Whenever you're speaking about ANY other culture, just blame America first for its shortcomings. If it's the Native Americans, the Asians, the Middle East, Africans, etc, it's all one tidy answer: America is to blame.

"Blame for what", you may ask. But that betrays your bias, my friend. For you to even ASK what we are to blame for exposes your boorish lack of sophistication and elucidation like our good, honest, citizens of America, such as Barry.

See, Barry doesn't have to provide any context for what he means. No details are necessary when you're in another country talking bad about America. The brainwashed drones in the audience just sit there, transfixed on his visage, mesmerized beyond rational thought or care. "America has been arrogant", he preaches.

"Yes, America has been arrogant" they chant silently in their minds.

Just as there were no free thinkers allowed in the re-education camps of Southeast Asia under Ho Chi Min, Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot, there are no questions allowed of this historic truth-teller named Obama. Just mouth the words, and you won't be singled out, as the poor folks who were unlucky enough to wear eyeglasses under the Khmer Rouge's reign of terror found out after we left Vietnam.

But I am too old at this point to worry about being singled out. I'll bite: just what are we Americans guilty of when it comes to arrogance towards Europe?

When my uncle was a POW of the Germans after being caught in the Battle Of The Bulge, what arrogance did he show? The only arrogance I know of was the draft board of Riner, Va, in the 40's when they defied the American system of not drafting the last male in a family for any war. He, indeed, was the last male in my family at the time, but the arrogance of the Riner citizens who made up that board was on display when they forced his name into the pool of draftees.

The fact that he was the last son to work their family farm back then was of little consequence.

But Europe benefited dramatically when my uncle, and hundreds of thousands of country farm boys (overwhelmingly white) were forced to go to their deaths for a European continent that didn't have enough fight left in their souls. They were saved from Germany twice in the past century, but you'd have to be a self-educated person who seeks the truth to know it in our glorious public school system today.

American academians have succeeded in erasing our history. They don't teach it, and our citizens don't care to read about it anymore. Years go by, young skulls full of mush grow up to be adult skulls full of mush, and voila': America gets the president it deserves! A typical sycophant who blames America first.

Here's Charles Krauthammer's succinct reading of the latest tragedy that Barry has performed against this great nation:

At The Islamic University In Gaza: Jews Drink Muslim Blood!

Why FM Radio Is For Not Only The Brainwashed, But The Brain-Dead

Simply put, FM radio is only as intelligent as the lowest common denominator in the USA. Take it from someone who worked in it, off and on, for over 20 years, in market sizes from 214 to 60: the program directors are usually the most jealous, have biggest egos, yet the lowest IQs in the business.

They control what comes out of the mouths of the other jocks in the rest of the station's dayparts to which you are listening. They control EVERY song that gets played in the 24-hour rotation, while so many think that (fill in the blank) dj is playing something that he/she was in the mood to hear.

They are famous for underestimating the audience, anticipating that the average listener is as clueless about culture, history, or anything meaningful on this planet as is he.

It is what has destroyed fm radio, in my opinion, besides a lot of bad business decisions made by bean counters who weren't satisfied with the way mom and pop-owned stations were doing things.

Take for example WMMR. The "wild and crazy" midday jock there is some Wavy Gravy wannabe. He is one of the few jocks that tries to address something of substance--the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

WHAT???? you may shriek. I know, I know. Some aging boomer is left standing in an active-rock format outside of Philly, and he's surrounded by brilliant things like tits and asses from the girls gone wild in the radio audience, (average lowest common denominator-types, of course), offers to attend a BBQ with Papa Roach, concerts, baseball games, and Facebook and Twitter links...and he tries to introduce the Middle East Problem to the same Neanderthals who can't even find their own country on a world map!

Just what is the nature of the discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian issue that "Pierre Robert", who keeps you rockin' through the lunch hour every day on WMMR, wants to expand upon? Well, he points the hungry-for-learning WMMR listener to a blogger account with two supposedly "unbiased" residents in Gaza and Israel for further learning.

Frankly, it's the biggest bunch of NOTHING that I've ever run across. The Gaza resident never even brings up Hamas, or how they are placing their gun systems in civilian apartments in Gaza, hiding behind adolescent boys when firing at the Jews, or the history of the conflict at all. The Israeli writer says nothing of importance, either, except that war is bad.

Can the average WMMR listener even recite the wars that have been waged against Israel for the past 60 years? Can they name the amounts of nations that ganged up against the one, lone, country? How about the origin and definition of the disputed territories?

The answer is "no" to all of the above questions, I'm sure, despite the fact that you don't have to be a poli sci major to know the answers, much less a college grad. I knew the answers to them well before I entered college. I picked up newspapers and read them from a young age because my conscience told me that it was important to learn these things that change history and challenge my country.

(And it also wasn't because I had a teacher in public school who opened my eyes to these things, or even parents who instructed me to search out these answers. My teachers were mostly liberal or had shallow understandings of these issues, no doubt because their college teaching programs taught them to ignore the reasons why America is great. I remember in 1978 hearing one of my teachers explain why we weren't studying Davy Crockett and Daniel Boone: today's teachers, she explained, weren't to accent the more romantic elements of our country's origins for fear of making the participants into heroes, you see.
As far as my parents go, both never went to college. My mother is very intelligent, but missed out on a lot of formal education. She is an avid reader, however, to this day. My father was a monosyllabic country bumpkin who resented me for my vocabulary and depth from an early age, and constantly made fun of me for it. I left my house at 17, and never looked back.)

After reading them both for painful blog after blog, I began to suspect that this is all a ruse, designed to make the average idiot listener of WMMR believe that both sides are to blame in this conflict.

Which, by implication, makes the reader think that there isn't a clear side for which to support.

Again, this is exactly why I left this industry--weak idiots only interested in keeping the masses stupid and selling cars in the meantime after every three songs.

Where Is The Outrage From The Left?

I have been paying close attention to American and world politics for over 25 years. I even majored in political science, with a concentration in American politics, and international relations, in college at Ohio University.

In my time of study and observation, I have been inundated with the Left's worldview through the newspapers I have read (The New York Times, The Washington Post, etc), the textbooks I was forced to buy and read, and the professors I questioned and learned from.

I have never heard the same amount of outrage from the Left towards the fundamental Islamicists as they always direct towards the fundamental Christians. It is almost as if you could picture who fills up the writer's desks, the editor's offices, and the tv news producers in America: young, self-righteous, haters; middle-aged baby boomers who are still fighting the Nixon administration, and unloved hysterical shrews called feminists.

As I have written of in the recent past, there is no excuse for the egg that is on the face of the Left these days. They have screamed "cultural relativism" at us for over 40 years, now. They always throw up the Howard Zinn version of America when prefacing ANY comparison of the USA to another country, but NEVER admit how dark and bottomless is the evil outside our borders.

CNN and the New York Times kept news bureaus in Baghdad after I participated in Persian Gulf I in 1991. "Big deal" many of you may say. But that is exactly why the Left's insidious indoctrination of American minds is so dangerous. The Left never questions the evil from outside our borders. They only highlight any grain of bad news from within our Christian-based culture.

The reason I bring up CNN and the NYT in Baghdad after the first Gulf War is because they are the most complicit in both keeping the monster Saddam Hussein in a neutral light for the years between the first and second Persian Gulf War, and in cultivating an anti-American attitude amongst its countrymen as Congress authorized President Bush to use "any means necessary" to perform regime change in Iraq.

See, Saddam Hussein was a monstrous dictator. Before our invasion in 1990-1991, and afterwards, as well. Not only did he regularly slaughter Shi-ites, Kurds, and rebellious members of his own tribe, Sunni, he routinely massacred thousands of his citizens at a time. The mass graves of bodies that were killed in the 1990's were first discovered when our brave soldiers returned to Iraq for regime change in 2003.
Victim's relatives have subsequently confirmed that their relatives were summarily rounded up and executed in the 1990's. There is obvious proof of this Hitler's nightmarish deeds for anyone who isn't committed to making America Enemy #1.

But CNN and the NYT looked the other way throughout the entire 1990's for this devil. The reason that Reuters, UPI, and the cabal of other American news agencies left Baghdad after the first war was over was because Saddam forced them to clear ANY news coming out of Iraq with HIM FIRST. Even those blame-America-first'ers were not willing to whitewash their reports at the hands of this dictator.

What??? An American news agency being forced to allow a president to censor their news? No agency would do that here in the good ol' USA, but the NYT and CNN were all to happy to hand over every interview, news clip of the intrepid Christiana Annanpour, or tip from a dead victim's relative about Saddam to the dictator himself to destroy.

Only whitewashed information from Ted Turner's Frankenstein and the Grey Old Lady made it out for over ten years. That is only ONE instance of how devious, deceitful, and biased the major dailies and mainstream media in America truly are. How they can sleep at night is beyond me.

After all, do we Americans EVER get the ugly truth about the rest of the cultures to which we're supposed to remain "relativistic" about? In America, our press LOVES to broadcast anything that makes Christians look homophobic, misogynistic, or as the brilliant lover of Ben Affleck, Matt Damon so wisely said of Sarah Palin last fall, whether they "believe that dinosaurs roamed the earth 4,000 years ago."

We don't get to see the real atrocities in 95% of the rest of the world unless it's from a bystander with a cellphone [who is probably going to be hunted down and killed by his "peace-loving" Muslim brothers for uploading this recent footage from northwestern Pakistan:]



Ask yourself if you ever see news footage and careful reporting like this from anyone other than Fox news and Glenn Beck:


To be fair, here is one of the rare news segments dealing with the horrors of Shariah Law by CNN:



Notice they don't even try to expand the understanding of how widespread this Islamic fundamentalism goes. This CNN story merely spotlights this one country, dealing with this one "witch" as if there isn't any more context to it. Glenn beck did a more lengthy, investigative search for the truth. He also interviewed an expert on Shariah Law.

If you're an honest person, with a soul, you'll admit that there is something very, very, wrong with the worldview of the Left in our country.