Obama Taught in His Youth to Hate the United States

There sure is a lot of vitriol and hatred being thrown around in this article about Rudy Giuliani's comments. I have to say that regardless of the veracity of the messenger, the message seems to be true.

1. Obama was surrounded by socialists and communists while growing up; his father, step-father, his grandfather, Frank Marshall Davis, Saul Alinsky, etc.

2. Obama was raised the first 9 years of his life in a Muslim home in an Islamic country, Indonesia.

3. Obama was raised as a teen-ager in a white home, in a white neighborhood, not in the ghettos of Chicago.

4. His policies are socialistic in nature; government job creation, "you didn't build that", Obamacare, redistribution of wealth, etc. Programs to take money from someone who earned it and give it to someone who didn't.

5. Proud supporter of gun control. Every dictator, socialist, communist, or banana republic despot's first order of business is gun control

6. Detests saluting his own Presidential Marine Corps honor guard, even though they would lay down their lives, along with the Secret Service, if he was threatened while in their care.

7. To further his agenda, he has circumvented laws, created flimsy excuses, or ignores any criticism.

8. He has openly stated that if Congress will not implement his plans, he will go around them with Executive Orders and Departmental Decrees. If I remember correctly, King George of England, did the same thing back in the 1770's, disbanding the Colonial Assembly more than once when they challenged his policies.

9. He has expressed his continual shame for the United States, their policies, and accomplishments. Not only locally, but he has traveled the world expressing how bad the United States has been in the past.

10. He has been instrumental in trading a suspected traitor, (Bowe Bergdahl, who was charged with desertion) for the release of 5 known and avowed terrorists. Most of them are actively planning damage to this country again.

11. He, along with Hillary Clinton, allowed the Libyan Government to collapse and did nothing while 4 American Citizens died in Benghazi.

12. He is trying to negotiate and talk nice with organizations and mosques that have ties to, as well as members of, terrorists groups, by inviting them to the White House. These same groups insist that they will never capitulate to any demands other than the ones they have already stated publicly, namely; the destruction of the US and Western Europe, along with the implementation of Sharia Law worldwide.

13. His economic policies have destroyed thousands of private businesses in this country.

14. He is spinning the unemployment numbers to make him look good. He states that the rate is around 6%, but if you factor in all those who have simply stopped looking for work and are relying on government assistance, the real number is around 12%, the same as it was when he took office. All his programs have done is removed people from unemployment and moved them to welfare, food stamps, and permanent unemployment checks.

So, I am not sure that Obama really has the best interests of the United States of America at the forefront of all he does. His Hope and Change mantra appears to be changing the US from all that made us the leader in the world into another banana republic taking orders from terrorists and despotic rulers. I respect the Office, even if I detest the person who resides there presently.

Anarchy in America

The legacy of President Obama will likely be "Anarchy in America". For those who may not understand the word, "anarchy" is when laws are unenforceable, there is not police protection or government structure, and everyone is on their own.

In Ferguson, New York and now Baltimore, we are watching people tear their towns and cities a part while the police look on with orders to "stand down". People are hurt, businesses are burned, a new generation of lawlessness is ushered in.

How did this start? Poverty, neglect of the inner cities, too much free stuff? It is hard to tell if they are the cause or the effect. Are people poor and uneducated because they are neglected or are they neglected because they are poor and illiterate?

We have been grappling with these social issues for decades and none of the "oh, you poor baby" programs inaugurated in by Democratic Progressive Liberals seems to have reduced the size of the city slums nor increased the number of gainfully employed minorities.

But then again we can ask the question, "Why is it that the majority of the devastatingly poor neighborhoods, rife with drugs, crime, and murder, are primarily black? Why don't we also have vast inter-city waste lands inhabited by Latinos, Asians, Filipinos, or Iranians? Why are blacks the poster children for oppression and poverty?"

Does everyone in the world really just hate blacks?

Our black/white President, and his Progressive cronies, have set an example of ignoring the rule of law and doing what they feel is best or the will of the people, whether it is or not. Examples:

Executive orders from the President intentionally written to by-pass Congress.
Laws on the books that the Attorney General refuses to enforce.
Open invitations from the President for non-citizens to illegally enter this great Country.
Then giving them food, shelter and education denied many life-long citizens.
Complicite in ordering the police to stand-down while gangs destroy property and threaten lives.

President Obama is teaching the black youth of this country that they will not be held accountable for any laws they break. Even those arrested in the Baltimore Riots are being released because the 48 hour holding period has expired.

Instead of listening to Obama's horrible example, kids should be listening to Toya Graham, the mother who was filmed smacking her 16 year old son when she caught him throwing rocks as the police. 

There are many reasons why not all parents can be there every minute to teach their children, but we can have neighborhood mentors, as well as professional and political examples of integrity, hard-work, and service. 

The good people of this country need to say this is enough, we are fed up with the greedy, economically ignorant socialites and politicians setting the example for our children. 

We need to shine. 
We need to set the example. 
We need to be honest. 
We need to work hard. 
We need to require our children to follow our example.

Stand up, be an example for good. 

There are absolute truths that absolutely bring happiness when followed and absolutely bring sorrow when ignored.

Photo courtesy of:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/29/we-shouldnt-condone-the-baltimore-riots-but-lets-stop-calling-them-senseless/

Benghazi Lies - Terrorists, Treachery, and Treason

There has been too much hoopla and mis-representation about how President Obama, Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice lied to the American people about the real cause for the attack in Benghazi. Rices's talking points, and new emails, that twisted the narrative of what happened that night of September 11, 2012, are for everyone, except Jim Carney, the Presidents Press Secretary, acknowledged as lies, mis-directing responsibility of the attacks onto an aspiring, political film maker. We supposed that the lies were to protect President Obama and his administration from a negative image of his foreign policy as he entered the home stretch in his bid for re-election against Mitt Romney, 2 months later in November.

Now it has come to light, with the release of a report from the Citizens' Commission on Benghazi, that there were many more lies that were much more serious that letting 4 Americans die at the hands of terrorists. Here is the link to the complete report.

Just in case you can't remember that well, here is a photo of Ambassador Christopher Stevens after he was killed, courtesy of an Al Qaeda terrorist and the internet. He and Glen Doherty were trapped in the Embassy the night of the attack. Doherty was killed in the compound and Stevens was found wounded in a Libyan hospital, but was killed and drug out into the street by the terrorists. (More photos from the night of the attack)

Here are photos of the 4 Americans who were killed that night. Woods and Smith left the comfort of a CIA safe house to go to the Embassy a mile away, but the attack there was over. They went back to the safe house to protect the other Americans hiding there, but it was attacked a few hours later and in the ensuing 4 hour battle, Woods and Smith were also killed.

The most terrible tragedy that occurred is that multiple mistakes were made that could have saved the lives of all 4 of these people, regardless of the reason for the attack.

• The Embassy security staff was reduced by Hillary Clinton's State Department office, from 16 to 4 people a few weeks before the attack.
• Woods and Smith wanted to leave the safe house immediately upon hearing of the attack at the Embassy, but were told to wait. They might have saved Stevens and Doherty
• Lt. Col. Gibson and his Special Forces Team heard of the attack on the Embassy and were on their way to board a C-130 cargo plane from Tripoli for Benghazi prior to the second attack on the safe house when he received a phone call from SOCAFRICA which said, "You can't go now, you don't have the authority to go now." And so they did not go.
• Hillary Clinton and Military Commanders said there were no available resources (planes) to send in time. President Obama could have boarded a commercial flight and been there, from Washington DC, in 14 hours. They could have scrambled jets from Andrews Air Force Base and been there before the second battle started, (F-22 Raptor, 5221 miles/1220 mph cruising speed = 4 hours 30 minutes). But we also had scores of jets within 30-60 minutes; in Italy, Turkey, Germany, Spain, England, all armed and ready to fight.
• F-16 fighters were available and according to the Commission's report, “Even if they were not armed, even if they were not loaded with munitions, simply flying a jet like that low and fast on afterburner over a scene like this, has, in the past, in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, had the salutary effect of absolutely scattering the attackers, who are taken by surprise and frightened out of their wits,”

In an article, What Assets Could US Military Use Against Syria Chemical Sites, by Michael Lipin, he discusses the positioning of US Bases and ships at the time of the Benghazi attack. This map was generated to show the US Military Assets available in the fall of 2012, capable of striking Syria. That little bump of land, below the back end of the destroyer, the USS Dwight D Eisenhower, in the Mediterranean, (15) is Benghazi. 

To quote Mr. Lipin, "Two U.S. navy battle groups capable of firing those missiles are on duty in the region."
"The USS Iwo Jima amphibious assault group is at sea as part of the U.S. 6th Fleet, whose area of responsibility includes the Mediterranean. Pike said that is where the group spends most of its time.The USS Eisenhower aircraft carrier group is on duty specifically in the Mediterranean. Pike said the two battle groups likely have about 500 Tomahawk cruise missiles between them." 
"The USS Eisenhower also has the ability to launch warplanes into Syria. Additional U.S. warplanes could be sent into Syria from a variety of air bases that United States shares with allies in Europe and the Gulf." (Bold text added)

Half of these planes would have flown past Benghazi on their way to Syria.

 The biggest mistake of all, was when the Libyan Rebellion began months before and we started to bomb the day lights out of Libya, Muammar Qaddafi offered to step down with only 2 conditions. 

1. Assurances that Libya would not fall into the hands of Al-Qaeda 
2. Legal protection for himself and his family

That was all he wanted. But we said, "No."

We then continued to provide support for the Libyan Rebels, by helping to broker a deal for guns to be purchased from Eastern Europe with a loan from the United Arab Emirates for about $1 billion. The guns were sent to Libya and the Transitional National Council, (the revolutionary government) which was staffed by the Muslim Brotherhood (Al-Qaeda supporters) and enforced by Al-Qaeda operatives. As the guns were sent into the country, NATO had such a tight blockade, that nothing went in or out without NATO (and US) approval. This meant, the United States was knowingly helping to supply guns and ammunition to Al-Qaeda, the same organization who declared war on us on September 11, 2011 and over 3000 of our young men and women had given their lives fighting to destroy for the past 11 years.

(It should also be noted that during this time, the uprising in Syria was gaining momentum and many of the weapons purchased were also shipped on to Syria to aid the Al-Qaeda-backed rebels.)

The US Constitution states in Section 3: "Treason against the United States, shall consists only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid or Comfort." Anyone who condoned, allowed, or ordered this gun transaction to occur is guilty of treason.

Then to move from ridiculous to incredulous, the TNC decided to sell half of the guns and munitions to Qaddafi supporters for $500 million. That's right, they sold guns to the very people they were fighting. Since they had the backing of NATO, the TNC was sure they could not lose; so this transaction allowed them to raise cash, prolong the war and liquidate more of their opponents before a new government was installed.

To summarize:

• Qaddafi offered to step down shortly after the Libyan Rebellion began which was months before the Benghazi attack.
• Tens of thousands of lives and damage would have been spared if the President Obama had agreed, but he said, "No."
• The Transitional National Council was staffed by the Muslim Brotherhood (Al-Qaeda supporters) and enforced by Al-Qaeda operatives.
• The rebellion and overthrow of Qaddafi were the goal of Al-Qaeda, supporting the ouster was supporting the agenda of Al-Qaeda.
• The US had brokered a deal for arms to be purchased and shipped to Libya to support the rebel fighters, knowing who they really were.
• The US and NATO allowed the guns and ammunition to pass through the blockade into the hands of the rebels.
• Providing aid to Al-Qaeda is treason.
• The rebels turned around and sold half the guns and ammunition to their enemies, Qaddafi supporters, raising cash and prolonging the war.
• The State Department, under the direction of Hillary Clinton, intentionally reduced the number of security personal at the Benghazi Embassy from 16 to 4, even though the anniversary of the 9-11 attacks were just a few weeks away.
• When the attack occurred, no one was mobilized to provide any aid or extraction for the Americans at the Embassy.
• Stevens and Doherty were completely abandoned by the United States Government.
• At least 2 different independent rescue missions were started, but told to "wait". The order to "stand down" was never given, but "wait" produces the same result.
• There WERE assets available to have evacuated the CIA safe house and possibly have saved the lives of Stevens and Doherty.
• Who abandoned our people, allowing them to be butchered and the debauchery published on the Internet?

Anyone who refuses to support investigations that get to the bottom of who was responsible so those people can be appropriately punished, is complicit or an accessory after the fact, in these horrible acts.

Bibliography:

Media Hits and Misses Covering Benghazi Press Conference

Committee Finds Major Problems with Benghazi

Declaration of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi

Did the U.S. help arm the Benghazi attackers?

How America Switched Sides in the War on Terror

Surreal: White House denies memo was about Benghazi attack

Report that CIA in Benghazi Told to Stand Down, Shot Down by Report that They Were Told to Stand Down

Benghazi Alert: Syrian Sideshow Hides New FOIA Report Obama White House Let Them Die

What Assets Could US Military Use Against Syrian Chemical Sites?

Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi Releases Interim Report

All photos are from the afore-mentioned articles.

Income Gender Inequity; Discrimination or Deception?

Victimization is on the rise. Calls of discrimination, racism, inequity, and persecution ring through the halls of Congress and reverberate across the country. Anyone who is misrepresented, opposed, or accused, now cheerfully claims that hate-spewing bigots are innocently attacking and maligning them. What a twisted day we live in.

While this problem is rampant in nearly every walk of life, I will only address one issue today, Income Gender Inequality.

Thomas Sowell published an interesting article in GOPUSA on this topic entitled, "Statistical Fraud". 

He sites the oft quoted statistic that women only receive 77% of the pay men receive for the same job. The point he makes is that the figure is skewed and unreliable because there are too many variables that have to be factored in to make the statistic reliable.

"It would certainly be discrimination if women were doing the same work as men, for the same number of hours, with the same amount of training and experience, as well as other things being the same, But study after study, over the past several decades, has shown repeatedly that those things are not the same. . ."

"Even where relevant statistics are available, careful judgment is required to pick samples of women and men who are truly comparable."

I am not so blind as to not admit that there are many instances where bigoted, chauvinistic males exert discriminatory control, pay less, denigrate and heap other forms of abuse over their women employees.  This behavior is not discrimination, but greed, contempt or sadism. There are also other examples where greedy, contemptuous, sadistic women exert the same type of control over males in the market place.

Mr Sowell expounds how difficult comparisons are to make and how the realities of life, along with our life choices, affect our incomes and career status much more than discrimination.

"For example, some women are mothers and some men are fathers. But does the fact that they are both parents make them comparable in the labor market? Actually the biggest disparity in incomes is between fathers and mothers. Nor is there anything mysterious about this, when you stop and think about it."

"How surprising is it that women with children do not earn as much as women who do not have children? If you don't think children take up a mother's time, you just haven't raised any children."

"How surprising is it that men with children earn more than men without children, just the opposite of the situation with women? Is it surprising that a man who has more mouths to feed is more likely to work longer hours? Or take on harder or more dangerous jobs, in order to earn more money?"

"More than 90 percent of the people who are killed on the job are men. There is no point pretending that there are no differences between what women do and what men do in the workplace, or that these differences don't affect income."

The real kicker is in his concluding paragraph, (remember, follow the money).

"If the 77 percent statistic was for real, employers would be paying 30 percent more than they had to, every time they hired a man to do a job that a woman could do just as well. Would employers be such fools with their own money? If you think employers don't care about paying 30 percent more than they have to, just go ask your boss for a 30 percent raise!"

So, again, as with Obamacare, Immigration, or Fast and Furious, etc., the President and his Party are trying to use manipulated statistics, lathered with disingenuous outrage, to fool the American People into accepting victimization and teach them to rely on the Federal Government to fix a national problem that doesn't exist.

Image from http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2014/03/31/payday-a-comparison-of-three-popular-payroll-systems/

Obama Barely Beats Nobody

President Obama has thrown his campaign to full swing, pulling out all the stops to regain the Presidency and it is a good thing he did.

On May 9, in West Virginia, he won a stiff primary battle against Keith Judd.  Obama took home 60% of the vote while Judd only held on to 40%.  Judd is a convicted felon serving time in a Texas Penitentiary.

Undeterred, 2 weeks later, President Obama beat John Wolfe in Arkansas by the same margin, 60% to 40%.  Wolfe is a Tennessee attorney who never ran an ad or made a speech in Arkansas at all.

And the same day in Tennessee, President Obama also won 60% to 40% over, . . . let's see who was it?  It was, it was . . ., a . . . Nobody.  That's right, with absolutely no opponents, Obama was only able to garner about 60% of the Democratic vote.

So, the man that Larry Flynt, owner and publisher of Hustler Magazine, gushed over and said , "President Obama as over-performed . . . he's done a marvelous job," can barely eek out a victory with his own party, even when there is no opposition.

Saddam Hussein and Vladimir Putin do much better than that.

There you have it, President Barack Obama, the only sitting United States President who barely beat nobody.

Photo from:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/frustrated-obama-sends-nation-rambling-75000word-e,18516/

Occupy Wall Street = Acorn and Other Disgusting Stuff

Occupy Wall Street, the movement hailed by the White House as the voice of the people rising up in rebellion, now has some serious questions to answer.

A news article by Jana Winter of Fox News entitled:

EXCLUSIVE: ACORN Playing Behind Scenes Role in 'Occupy' Movement

details how the Occupy movement has been organized and funded by Acorn.

Well, let's back up, since Acorn was officially disbanded in 2009, it is not really Acorn, but the New York Communities for Change, (NYCC) that is running Occupy Wall Street. It seems that this community activist group was started in 2009, as Acorn died, by the same people who ran Acorn.

Jana Winters article states:

"NYCC’s connection to ACORN isn’t a tenuous one: It works from the former ACORN offices in Brooklyn, uses old ACORN office stationery, employs much of the old ACORN staff and, according to several sources, engages in some of the old organization’s controversial techniques to raise money, interest and awareness for the protests.

Sources said NYCC has hired about 100 former ACORN-affiliated staff members from other cities – paying some of them $100 a day - to attend and support Occupy Wall Street. Dozens of New York homeless people recruited from shelters are also being paid to support the protests, at the rate of $10 an hour. . . "

Additional comments in the article from workers inside NYCC:

"Another source, who said she was hired from a homeless shelter, said she was first sent to the protests before being deployed to Central Islip, Long Island, to canvass for a campaign against home foreclosures.

“I went to the protests every day for two weeks and made $10 an hour. They made me carry NYCC signs and big orange banners that say NYCC in white letters. About 50 others were hired around my time to go to the protests. We went to protests in and around Zuccotti Park, then to the big Times Square protest,” she said.

“But now they have me canvassing on Long Island for money, so I get the money and then the money is being used for Occupy Wall Street—to pay for all of it, for supplies, food, transportation, salaries, for everything ... all that money is going to pay for the protests downtown and that’s just messed up. It’s just wrong.”

Additionally:

Sources said staff members also collected door-to-door for NYCC’s PCB campaign — which aims to test schools for deadly toxins —but then pooled that money together with cash raised for the teachers union and other campaigns to fund Occupy Wall Street.

So, NYCC has been supporting Occupy Wall Street by not only:

• Hiring protesters
• Hiring fundraisers and canvassers

But also illegally collecting money for:

• United Federation of Teachers
• PCB Testing in Schools
• Reducing home foreclosures
• And diverting the money to Occupy Wall Street.

Incidentally, the UFT has said, "The UFT is not involved in any NYCC fundraising on the PCB issue.”

Little wonder that the rag-tag occupiers in 2011 are reminiscent of the sit-in hippies of the 1960's and not the Tea Party demonstrations. While the hippies scavenged off the urban landscape for subsistence, the occupiers fraudulently collect funds to pay, feed and house their members. The Tea Party activists rallied, demonstrated, clean-up their messes and then went back to work.

The same community organizers (Acorn) that have been secretly sucking funds from the government to promote and maintain poverty and urban unrest for the past decade, are continuing their efforts under a different name, (NYCC), but with the same agenda.

It is no wonder that President Obama has given his backing to this movement. His only real job listing on his resume is that of a community organizer.

Is U.S. Ready For Second Black Leader?

Charles Hurt wrote an interesting article in the Washington Times entitled,

"Is U.S. Ready For Second Black Leader?"

In posing the question, Mr. Hurt reminded us how the Democratic Party and Liberal idealists have blatantly attacked both blacks and whites, labeling them racists merely because they disagreed with their own personal philosophies. From Clarence Thomas to Herman Cain, "pulling the race card" has been an acceptable method of operation to divert attention from their failed ideals.

While there are far too many ignorant, bigoted, narrow-minded sociopaths in this country that judge people by their appearance or the color of their skin, I have found that most of the population of the United States accepts people for what they do and who they are. We all have apprehension when we are introduced into a new environment such as moving to communities where the dominate religion is not our own or the majority of the people are a different color. This concern doesn't mean that we are racists. It is just the process of being stretched out of our comfort zone. After we have time to acclimatize, we learn to love and appreciate our new home and associations as much as the last place we lived.

In a recent article I wrote, Americans Are Not Racial Cowards, as a rebuttal to the comment by Attorney General Eric Holder where he said that,

. . . in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.

I identified who a racist is:

A racist is a person who identifies or defines people by their race, whether they discriminate against them or not. We will never be a nation without racial, sexual or economic boundaries until we ignore these boundaries.

In an effort to teach the truth of this concept I ended the article with the following analogy.

Four states, Utah, Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico, all meet at one common point. The sand, air or vegetation around this point is the same for miles in any direction. The only difference between these four States is in our minds, not in the dirt.

There is no better way to create unity in our country than for people to work shoulder to shoulder helping someone else. These situations can not be mandated by government. It is necessary for those confident in their own identity to cross artificial lines in the sand so others can follow. Mr Holder can and should step forward as a man, as the Attorney General, as an American, to fight for equal treatment under the law for all. Justice is blind to our differences, but smiles at our similarities. Only as we are blind to our differences will we begin to sense the symbiotic strength in our similarities.

I supported the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court because he believed in the principles I uphold in our Constitution. It had nothing to do with him being black and I was not disappointed.

I didn't support Barack Obama as President of the United States because I do not agree with his idea of changing our country into a Socialistic State, an idea that has never succeed in any country in the world, ever. It had nothing to do with him being black and I have been thoroughly embarrassed by him.

I would support Herman Cain if his ideals for this country center around hard work, sound fiscal practices and ethical political leadership whether he was black, white or green. I don't care if our President is White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, Jewish, Mormon, Catholic, Protestant, Male or Female. As long as they are born and raised in this country, have a love of the constitution and the tenacity to defend it, I will throw my support and vote behind them.

If not, I will look for another candidate.

Also of interest, "Wanted, Real Leaders"

Taxes and Integrity

After Tom Daschle was thoroughly trounced in the 2004 Senatorial election in South Dakota, he has now been invited back to Washington by Obama to be the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The people of his state were fed up and through with him, but the President thinks that he still has some value.

Now the corker . . . Mister Former Senate Majority Leader has problems doing his taxes. He used a donated car and driver for 2 years without reporting the "income" to Uncle George, a . . I mean Uncle Sam. So, another of Obama's choices to lead our country has an integrity problem, or a math problem or something.

But the most disturbing problem is the reoccurring theme of members of the Democratic Party. Gary Hart, from the 1970's, appears to be the last Democrat with integrity. Everyone since then, when caught doing something wrong, did one of two things.

1. Told the country to shove it, i.e.; Barney Frank who took a male Congressional page to Europe for several weeks or Bill Clinton who had sex with Monica Lewinsky and then lied to a Grand Jury.
2. Immediately righted the wrong and went on as though nothing had happened, i.e.; the DNC returning campaign contributions from China or Sandy Berger, former National Security Adviser, returning the top secret papers he stole from the National Archives, well most of them.

The list of candidates using either remedy goes on and on.

Now Congress feels that because Geithner and Daschle have both received solid support from President Obama, they should be confirmed, because these are troubled times. President Bush strongly supported all his nominees as well. But what would have happened if Clarence Thomas, John Roberts or any of either of the Bush's nominees had a real tax infraction, or a real traffic ticket?

The reason we have troubled times is because of Tom Daschle, who as Senate Majority Leader in 1992, mandated the sub-prime lending practices that caused the world wide economic turmoil we face today.

It is usually proper to expect someone to clean up the mess they made. The problem with this situation is since they won't acknowledge that they really caused the mess, how will they ever figure out how to correct it?

Are You Who You Hang Out With?

Watching the movie "Oliver" with my grandchildren the other night, I was intrigued by Ron Moody's performance of Fagin as he sang "I'm Reviewing the Situation." When he uttered the words: "All my dearest companions Have always been villains and thieves . . . ", I was reminded of Obama and his friends that are nothing but sleaze.

I spent my parenting years telling my children the friends they chose would influence who they became. In my occupation, I tried to only work with people who had similar values and standards. Now I see that Barak Obama, soon to be the most powerful and potentially influential person in the world, has been surrounded by "villains and thieves."

Here is the list that I am aware of:

1. Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his pastor for over 20 years, says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."
2. Governor Blagojevich of Illinois is indicted on charges of bribery and fraud trying to sell the Senate seat.
3. Three other ex-Illinois Governors have been convicted of felonies during Obama's life. The last one, George Ryan, was Governor while Obama was an Illionis lawmaker.
   
4. Gov. Bill Richardson from New Mexico, a nominee for Commerce Secretary, withdrew because of an investigation of corruption. It is interesting to note, David Rubin, the suspect in this bribery probe, also donated $2,300 to Mr. Obama's campaign and $26,200 to the Democratic Party
5. Timothy Geithner, nominated for Secretary of the Treasury failed to properly pay his taxes from 2001-2004. A 2006 audit by the IRS revealed the error, but Geithner didn't pay the back taxes until he was nominated for the Cabinet position???
6. Hillary Clinton, nominee for Secretary of State, has always been at the center of corruption from Whitewatergate, to Travelgate to the impeachment of her husband Bill.
   
7. Seven of the Top Ten Political Scandals of 2008 were from the Democratic Party. If you remove David Kernell, who was the son of Tennessee Democrat Mike Kernall and Sarah Palin who was exonerated after the investigation, that leaves six out of eight were Democrats.

If an eagle hangs out with the chickens, it won't change his genetic code, but it might influence the important decisions he makes in life. I'm just worried.

Can Obama Fix The Economy?

President Elect Obama has released his latest economic recovery plan, his attempt to fix the economy. On the campaign trail, he promised 1 million new jobs. A few weeks ago he promised 3 million new jobs. This week, his plan would create 4.1 million new jobs. When you make promises, the sky's the limit.

Funny thing about promises, the very same announcement that promised 4.1 million jobs, also promised that he would have to renege on many of his other campaign promises. Where did "pinky promise" or "cross my heart and hope to die" disappear?

The truth is, the new administration doesn't understand or acknowledge how we arrived on our current catastrophic course. Since they don't know how this happened, they have no clue how to fix the economy.

We should expect a continued flurry of pie in the sky promises that change with every economic report.

Not With My Paycheck You Don't

"We want to spread around the wealth." - Barrack Obama, the Socialist

$700 million or even $700 billion will not fix the financial crisis if we don't understand what caused it. The meltdown of our economy was not a natural result of the failure of Capitalism. It did not happen because greed came home to roost. It occurred because the first law of Capitalism was broken and then ignored while the greedy cashed in.

The basic rule of Capitalism, never loan money to someone who can't pay it back.

The Democratically controlled Congress of 1992, forced into law the Socialistic concept that every person, regardless of income, had the right to own a home. Ann Coulter, in her column on September 24, 2008, reported the following:

Before the Democrats' affirmative action lending policies became an embarrassment, the Los Angeles Times reported that, starting in 1992, a majority-Democratic Congress "mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their purchases of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and creative in stimulating minority gains."

Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.

She goes on to state:

Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.

When Democrats controlled both the executive and legislative branches, political correctness was given a veto over sound business practices.

These loans were known as "sub-prime mortgages" because the standards for qualification were below the prime or normal requirements. Adjustable rates, interest only and other anomaly instruments of lending were invented to satisfy the need. The rational used was that because of inflating prices in the housing market, an owner could hold on to the house at the reduced payment rate, sell it before the terms changed and cash in on the appreciation. It was nothing more than a government sponsored pyramid scheme.

What was the basic rule? Never loan money to someone who can't pay it back. If you do, you are just giving the money away. Reality is coming back to bite us in the behind. Over the past 16 years we have given away millions of houses, now they are giving them back.

The Democratic (Socialist) Party created this mess by tinkering with the universal laws of economics. Now Obama is suggesting that he wants to take my paycheck, spread it around and fix the problem. Has he talked with Matt Damon, Barbara Streisand, Whoopi Goldberg, Sean Penn and the Dixie Chicks about spreading their money around? I'm sure he would leave them with about $50,000 each, like the rest of middle America.

I think not.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice and I must be a Democrat.

Rev. Wright, Say What. . .?

The controversy surrounding Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his inflammatory statements about the United States, Jews and AIDS have subsided to the point that they may no longer cripple Barak Obama in his bid for the Democratic Party Nomination for President. That said, there is still a bad taste left from his remarks in trying to make amends.

In defense of his position and statements, Rev. Wright said that the attacks on him were an attack on the Black Church.

Wright said the black church tradition is not bombastic or controversial. It is simply different — and misunderstood by the dominant culture in the United States

Was he actually saying that members of black churches can make blasphemous, inflammatory statements and they are not bombastic or controversial? They can implore damnation on America, claim that the CIA developed the AIDS virus to destroy the black race and state that the U.S. Government supports the genocide of Palestinians and black South Africans; and we should just chuckle?

What would happen if Billy Graham said that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were divisive elements that prolonged the self-imposed oppression of black people and prevented them from achieving and realizing their full potential and status as citizens of the United States of America? I'm not sure, but maybe Don Immus' time in the penalty box is a foreshadowing.

I guess that his logic goes something like this: it is okay for a black person to call a distasteful black person a nigger or a white person a honky, cracker or bigot, but it is not okay for a white person to think or say nigger, let alone apply it as a moniker to a black person because . . . sorry, that doesn't work. Let's try it again.

It is okay for a member of the Black Churches to damn America but a white person can not publicly say that they wish for President Bush or Vice-President Cheney to be shot, . . . no, wait a minute, Rosey O'Donnell can say that.

This is all so confusing. How's a middle-class, middle-aged white boy in the dominate culture going to deal with the complicated social interactions of different races? I think I need more time to evaluate this.

. . . Okay, I think the only way I can survive in a multi-cultural environment is to revert back to the things my mother taught me:

1. Only say nice things about others, even when they say nasty things about you
2. Protect the weak and innocent then, let the stupid take responsibly for their own actions