.
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Saturday, September 29, 2012
DEMOCRATS, CONFIDENT OF OBAMA VICTORY, ASSEMBLE WISHLIST
Ok, those of you who that Barry is deserving of another four years, should really be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it, and then what are you gonna do! I don’t want to hear and bitchin and complainin, you hear me? Because, I’ll tell ya, even though the presidential contest is far from over, the House Democrats are already putting together their little legislative wish-list, quite confident in the fact that Barry will be able to once again successfully hoodwink the voting public just long enough to get himself reelected. The ‘lawmakers’ are already floating a broad array of issues they'd like to see Barry tackle immediately in a second term, supposedly placing a focus on jobs and the economy, but also some of the more thorny discretionary issues like immigration, supposed ‘climate change’, housing and even a return to healthcare reform. In other words, everything but what must be addressed.
There theory is that a Barry victory in November would lend the president a brand new fistful of political capital and he would then be free to launch in any direction he wishes, impervious to any possible fallout since he will not be forced to contend with another pesky election. And, as such, will feel emboldened to go after Republican leaders seeking to push them in his direction regarding method to avoid going over that much talked about fiscal cliff as well in which direction he will work to steer the polarized country through the next four years. More than a month before November's elections, his allies in the House are already offering up some tips for how to spend what they see as being Barry’s rejuvenated political capital. None of those tips accomplishes nothing of what is actually needed to get our country back on track!
In what would seem, to most of us, as being a rather idiotic statement, Rep. Bill Pascrell in speaking about Barry, said last week that, "He's got to continue to concentrate on jobs." Continue to concentrate on jobs? At which point during the last four years has Barry ever spent anytime actually "concentrating on jobs?" Did I miss something? I mean if that had been the case would we have suffered an unemployment rate over 8 percent for the 40+ continuous months? And then we have Rep. Henry Cuellar who said, "I'm hoping he'll do immigration reform." But perhaps the most idiotic of all was when some clown from Vermont, Rep. Peter Welch actually said, "We should get back to an energy policy – one that acknowledges that climate change is real." Oh yeah, climate change, now there’s a hot button issue!
Also pushing an issue that I am sure is near and dear to ‘his heart, Rep Raul Grijalva said, "The critical issues will be revenue generation, and a concerted push on immigration reform." Oh yeah, above all else we’ve got to finagle a way to let those breaking the law by just being in this country, to stay here. And then there’s Rep. Mike Honda who said, "I think he'd want his administration to start on healthcare." The remarks highlight the variety of issues the Democrats are hoping to address after two years in the House minority, and foreshadow the degree of supposed pressure that a reelected Barry would be under to satisfy his allies after a bruising campaign season. We’ll see I guess. But the growing number of ‘suggestions’ would also seem to indicate that there now exists a rising confidence among Democrats.
The presidential contest remains a close one, but recent polls, of they are to be trusted, do seem to show Barry with a growing lead in the all important battleground states of Ohio and Florida and could be an indication that Mitt Romney has a hard road ahead to unseat our incumbent boob. Although the Republicans are expected to keep control of the House, a Barry win amid a lingering jobs crisis would, at least in the eyes of Democrats, validate some of the policies the president has adopted on the campaign trail and pressure Republicans to reach deals on them. Indeed, some leading Republicans have even said an Barry victory would be "a referendum" for raising taxes on the country's highest earners, one of Barry’s continuing top priorities. But I disagree, I just don’t see it that way. That may be the case for the crowd that Barry is playing to, the lazy parasites, or the takers in our society, comfortable sponging off of the rest of us, the makers. But certainly not the case for those who find ourselves on the receiving end of Barry redistribution policies.
There was a certain amount of post-election momentum was evident four years ago when Barry was swept into the White House in a wave of Democratic victories that allowed the party to gain control of Congress. The result of that colossal bit of stupidity be the American people not only allowed the Democrats to secure the early passage of their controversial economic stimulus package, but it also paved the way for the enactment of sweeping healthcare ‘reforms’ the following year. "Reform’ that essentially ripped from our hand control of our own healthcare decisions. Although voter enthusiasm toward Barry has waned, some would say considerably, his reelection would give Barry some much needed new leverage in his negotiations with GOP leaders over the wide range of issues favored by the Democrats.
His House supporters are hoping he would use that newly acquired leverage to fight for the long list of Democratic priorities that were lost to the partisan battles of the last Congress. Topping the list are lingering concerns about an economy where unemployment remains stuck above 8 percent. Barry last year floated legislation designed to create jobs by boosting infrastructure spending, you know, those shovel ready jobs that, as it turned out, weren’t as shovel ready as Barry thought. Barry was also boasting about his ideas for promoting manufacturing and hiking taxes on corporations that outsource jobs, central elements of the Democrats' ridiculous, "Make it in America" agenda. But Republicans in both chambers have prevented that package from going anywhere.
Other lawmakers think that it is social issues that should be on the president’s radar. A growing number of Democrats, for instance, see immigration as a top issue in a second Barry term, particularly if Latinos vote overwhelmingly for the president, as current polls predict, and Republicans are pressured to compromise or risk losing those voters in every national election for the foreseeable future. So essentially they should bow to threat of political blackmail, rather than do what’s best for this country, which is why they were sent to Washington in the first place. "If we don't do it next year, 2014 is going to be here, and then 2016 is going to be here," said Cuellar. "So I think we'll have a window like we had a window in 2009 after his election … and I hope we get to do it."
Grijalva agreed that a big win for Barry with Latinos would be enough to convince Republicans to support immigration reform in early 2013 just to "put that issue behind us." "It's been a venomous issue politically now for almost three election cycles," he said. Honda, meanwhile, wants Barry to return to healthcare reform – the issue that consumed more than a year between 2009 and 2010 – to expand on the state-based insurance exchanges enacted under the Affordable Care Act. "We've got more to do," he said. "There should be a federal exchange." There's also an emerging push for the Democrats to revisit climate change legislation next year, an issue House Democrats addressed in 2009, only to watch Senate leaders ignore their proposal. The vote was a liability for a number of conservative-leaning House Democrats in the 2010 elections that swept the Republicans into the majority, but Welch argued the issue isn't as partisan as it seems.
"By focusing on energy efficiency, where there's a lot of common ground, [we could] create jobs and it would achieve one-third of the goal of reducing carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050," he said. "That's a big deal." Barry, for his part, is said to be optimistic that Republicans would be more willing to compromise in a second term than they were in his first. But most Republicans, as do most Americans, see this climate change nonsense for exactly what is it. A scheme by Democrats to further destroy our economy and their attempt to rake in more money which they can then use to buy more votes. "My hope is that when the American people speak in this election, if I'm fortunate enough to be elected but we still have a Republican-controlled House, that some of the fever breaks and the particular goal of beating me no longer holds," Barry told Ohio's Plain Dealer Thursday.
Still, the window to act on significant legislative changes will likely be short, as the fiscal cliff debate could extend well into 2013, leaving little room to maneuver before the campaign season launches for the 2014 midterms. Asked how Barry should spend his political capital if he wins reelection, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, leader of the Congressional ‘Bonehead’ Caucus (CBC) offered up this little tidbit of advice. "Carefully," he warned. "Carefully." Adding, "Whatever we go after first has to be a bipartisan issue, whether it's cyber-security, whether it's payroll tax, whether it's the doc fix in Medicare, whether it's the jobs bill – whatever it is – we've got to do it together." He said, "Because even if we have the votes and try to run over them, the hostility will be so great here on the Hill that the midterm will very likely create problems." Gee ya think? Is this guy Cleaver a genius or what?
Ok folks, so what’s it gonna be? Did you notice here in everything that these scumbag Democrats said, there was no mention of drilling for more oil in an effort to bring gas prices down? No mention of how we can free up the private sector in an effort to encourage job growth? Not mention of how go about making realistic or serious spending cuts or honest and meaningful tax reform. Nope, not a word. It’s all about increasing the size of the public sector, about further driving up the cost of healthcare by increasing further, if that’s possible, government control, pouring more and more money into bogus ‘green technologies’ that does absolutely nothing to bring down energy costs or put people back to work. It’s all nothing more than a monumental boondoggle! This supposed wish-list now being assembled by the Democrats does nothing to fix what ails this country. It does nothing but move us from intensive care and into the morgue.
A FLAWED CANDIDATE, OR A FLAWED ELECTORATE?
Barry and member of his team insist that we focus all of our attention "FORWARD", we’re not to pay even the slightest attention to anything that has taken place between January 20, 2009 and today. Except of course, to those ‘accomplishments’ for which this president takes credit but that have essentially been created out of whole cloth. You know, like the idiotic notion that somehow things would now be so much worse had Barry not signed the very bogus $900 Billion ‘stimulus’ bill. Or how he has supposedly created some 4.5 million new jobs and yet our unemployment rate has remained stuck firmly at 8 percent or higher since he took office and that shows no sign of going below that figure in the near future under current policies.
Too many of us somehow seem to be far too willing to simply take at face value nearly everything we hear from the current team of Barry and ‘Slow Joe’. And I can’t quite put my finger on why that may be. Is it being naïve or out of some sense of misplaced loyalty? We must look beyond all of the political subterfuge that is now being perpetrated against us. These thugs have in place a game plan that consists of all manner of deception, dishonesty, distraction and is being executed in a dedicated effort to keep us disoriented just long enough to achieve an electoral victory that will allow them to march onto victory without hardly even having to break a sweat. We must be willing to expend the necessary effort to so past their political antics.
There’s a lot at stake this time around, and where in the past we could maybe afford to give a candidate the benefit of the doubt, or to cut him or her a certain amount of slack, we can ill afford to take such chances this time around. We must stiffen our resolve, question everything that we are told by this man who seeks a renewal on his contract, and simply refuse to be lied to any longer. Romney may not be the BEST candidate, but he most certainly is the BETTER candidate. I have no doubt that he will work to do what’s best for all of us, unlike Barry who has only worked to do what’s best for those who voted for him. Time is growing short, our primary objective here must be to defeat Barack Hussein Obama.
NOTHIN BUT MORE SCARE TACTICS BY A BOOB...
Come on folks, this is all nothing more than another example of this moron trying to scare seniors into voting for these two losers by continuing to spew nothing but blatant lies. Our pathetic excuse for a vice president, old ‘Slow Joe’, says he can’t go into the details but he promises those in attendance that recipients in the future will be paying a lot more. The real reason ‘Slow Joe’ doesn’t go into the "details" is because he can’t, there aren’t any details for him to go into. He’s making the whole thing up! Come on folks, we cannot simply continue to take everything this scumbag says at face value! We cannot just automatically ‘assume’ that what he’s saying is the truth, because IT’S NOT! And I know you all know what happens when you assume! We need to be smarter than this! And I’ll tell ya something else, if Social Security isn’t fixed, it’s not going to be there for ANYBODY! I’d like it to be there for me and my kids, but if today’s seniors buy into this garbage they’re very likely to be the LAST recipients! The Romney-Ryan plan, I mean the real Romney-Ryan plan, makes good sense and there are a great many folks who have said that it’s the only way to save Social Security. Barry and ‘Slow Joe’ are simply doing what Democrats always do…LIE!
Friday, September 28, 2012
WE ARE NOT THE PEOPLE THAT WE ONCE WERE...
If all the polls that are currently flying around that show Barry increasing his lead over Romney are actually correct, then there can only be one possible explanation. And it's that the American people have come to actually prefer being lied to rather than to be treated as adults. I mean what other conclusion can we come to? Because on one hand you've got Barry and his many surrogates out there telling all manner of lies about everything from Medicare to the millions of jobs that Barry has supposedly created. And on the other hand you have Romney, Ryan and few others pointing out example after example that prove what a disaster the last four years have been and how it is that we simply can't go on in the same way that we have been. But too many us seem to find it easier to fall for Barry's empty rhetoric.
And I really thought that the American people would want to be told the truth, to know what must be done so that we can get to work fixing things. I was confident that they would see through all of the "Forward" nonsense, and not fall for the efforts to distract them from recognizing just how abysmal that last four years have been. But, as near as I can tell, no one seems to care all that much about how it is that we got here. And with so much riding on this election, I was so sure that there would be a majority of folks who would be willing to do whatever is necessary to ensure the survival of this country for future generations. I guess I was wrong on all counts. Too many folks seem to be only worried about themselves and not what, if anything, is going to be left for our children. Frankly, I guess, I'm a little surprised at the level of selfishness that I'm seeing.
And it's a selfishness that I guess Barry has been able to tap into and to take advantage of better than Mr. Romney has been at explaining, or demonstrating, just how the selfishness of today is putting into jeopardy the possibility of those who come after us, the ability to enjoy the same standard of living that we do today. I honestly thought we would all be capable enough, on our own, to see that for ourselves without Mr. Romney having to draw it all out in picture form for us. I've always thought that we Americans had a quality within us that made us a little bit different from the rest of the world. A quality that has always enabled us to identify that which needed to be done, and no matter how difficult it was, or how much personal hardship we would have to be endure, we would set to work and do whatever was necessary.
But it would that that simply doesn't appear to be the case anymore. I'm not sure when it was that we might have lost that quality, but it most certainly is one that we no longer possess. We have now become pretty much just like everyone else, living only for today, comfortable in doing the minimum to get by, and happy to vote for the one guy who is only too happy to encourage us to come on down and get on the government dole. The future is definitely looking pretty dim right now, and what faith I may have at one time had in my fellow Americans, has pretty much evaporated. I just don’t see enough of us being able to come together and make the decision that ‘needs’ to be made. Too many simply fail to grasp what Barry has in mind to do once he doesn’t have to worry about another election. The floodgates will be opened and darkness will descend upon us.
IT WOULD SEEM THAT WE HAVE OUR OWN 'ROYAL FAMILY'…WHO KNEW?
I'm not sure how many of you will be as shocked as I was when I heard this, and maybe some of you will even think that he is deserving of such an extravagance, but last year taxpayers spent $1.4 billion on Barry "Almighty" and family last year. Now just to put that in perspective, British taxpayers shucked out a mere $57.8 million on their royal family. That amount covered everything from staffing, housing, flying and entertaining Barry and his family last year, that according to the author of a new book on taxpayer-funded presidential perks. Now to be honest here, Barry isn’t the only president to have taken advantage of the expensive trappings of his office. But what I'm sure will come as no surprise to anyone to has been keeping track of the many vacations and golf outings, the amount of money spent has risen tremendously under Barry's administration and needs to be reined in.
Robert Keith Gray’s new book, "Presidential Perks Gone Royal", takes a long hard look at the taxpayer money being spent by Barry. Gray writes that while other presidents have enjoyed, or taken advantage of, ‘presidential perks,’ Barry has recorded record high amounts, factoring in the cost of the biggest staff in history at the highest wages ever, a 50 percent increase in the numbers of appointed czars and an Air Force One running with all the frequency of a scheduled air line. "The most concerning thing, I think, is the use of taxpayer funds to actually abet his re-election," said Gray, who worked in the Eisenhower administration and for other Republican presidents. He added that, "The press has been so slow in picking up on this extraordinary increase in the president’s expenses." Of course the press is ignoring this. They're not going to anything that might jeopardize Barry re-election.
The book also questions the use of Air Force Barry’s "political trips." It’s not uncommon for an acting president to combine official business with a campaign stop, but according to the book, Barry has been using Air Force One with the regularity of a commercial airline. Gray also questions if it’s fair for the incumbent president to have such an advantage in an election year. All this is just another indication of how Barry is thoroughly enjoying all of the perks of being president and how he really has no interest in the day to day requirements that are part of the job description. As far as I'm concerned he's just another lazy, overpaid and underworked individual who thinks the rules don't apply to him, and who possesses none of the actual qualifications for the job that he holds. There is only one reason he is where he is, and I think we all know what that is.
OK FOLKS, HOW ABOUT THIS…CAN WE PLEASE GET OUR HEAD OUT OF OUR 'COLLECTIVE' ASS JUST LONG ENOUGH TO SAVE OUR COUNTRY?
I'm a little confused here. There are several polls flying around that would seem conflict with most presidential polls. For instance, there are recent polls that would seem to indicate that at the present time more than six in 10 independents feel that the government is doing too much and nearly the same amount say that the country is headed in the wrong direction. And yet, the one man responsible for both of these occurrences, Barry "Almighty", still leads in the polls. Now, are Americans just plain stupid or what? I mean how can your opinion be that government is too big and that the country, as a whole, is headed in what you determine to be the wrong direction, and yet you still feel compelled to vote for Barry?
And there has been yet another new poll that would seem to indicate that a majority of Americans actually reject the notion of isolationism. Also according to this same poll, Americans do not believe the U.S. spends an excessive amount on defense, and say that it’s important for the U.S. to continue playing a significant role in global affairs, according to a new opinion poll. The commissioning organization, the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI), says the findings show that "foreign policy matters" in the election campaign, despite assertions to the contrary. But if foreign policy is important to people, and possessing a strong national defense is also seen as being important, how can anyone vote for Barry?
"[D]espite continuing concerns about the economy and other domestic issues, an overwhelming majority of Americans (92.2%) assign importance to the United States continuing to play a significant role in global affairs, and a very strong majority of Americans (85.7%) still see the United States as a ‘force for good in the world,’" FPI said in a statement accompanying the results Thursday. These are astronomical numbers, folks. And this IS NOWHERE NEAR how Barry "Almighty" views things. Barry sees this country as being a source of evil and his goal is to reduce American influence in the world! Remember his little apology tour? And the continual bowing before every world leader and their brother?
Conducted by some outfit called, Basswood Research from September 15-17, the survey polled 1,000 likely voters, 37.9 percent of whom identified as Republican, 39.9 percent as Democrat, and 20 percent either as independent or not associated with a political party. Forty-nine percent of respondents named the economy as their top concern in deciding how to vote in November, followed by social security/Medicare (13.8 percent), national debt (9.5 percent), health care (8.6 percent) and national security (5.7 percent). And again, if the economy is truly the most important thing on your list, how is it, exactly, that you can vote for a guy who took a bad situation and only succeeded in making it worse?
Despite that relatively low score for national security, the poll, which was conducted several days after anti-U.S. protests and the deadly September 11 attack on a U.S. consulate in Libya, also found that recent events in the Middle East had increased national security’s importance in the mind of likely voters. A total of 59.8 percent of respondents said those events had made national security issues more important in deciding for whom to vote, while 31.9 percent said it made no difference. So once again we have another area where a majority of Americans are diametrically opposed to Barry and yet many seem to see it as being appropriate to still vote for him.
And then there was another separate poll, this one conducted by Fox News, that would seem to suggest that a large majority of likely voters actually believes that all Americans should pay some federal income tax, even if it is as little as one percent of what they make. Imagine that! Seventy-nine percent say everyone should pay something according to the poll that was released Thursday. And that includes 85 percent of Republicans, 83 percent of independents and 71 percent of Democrats. According to the IRS, last year approximately 41 percent of tax filers did not pay federal income tax. The Tax Policy Center estimates that will increase to 46 percent this year.
It would appear that there might be some sort a disconnect here, with there being very few, if any, areas that can be defined as common ground between Barry and the majority of us out here in the real world. And yet, if we can believe all of the recent polling dealing with the presidential race, most still of us want to see him re-elected. I just don't get it. Is it me? Does this make absolutely any sense to anyone? I can't help but wonder what must be running through the minds of so many of my fellow Americans. Look, I think the bottom line here is pretty damn obvious. We re-elect Barry and the country maintains it's present trajectory, spiraling wildly out of control and headed straight for the deck.
All of this is why Barry, his many surrogates and even more of those in the state-controlled media, are all so insistent upon convincing us to only look "FORWARD" and not back. Because if we spend too much time looking back at the last 4 years we're just liable to finally realize that hey, maybe all of this crazy shit isn't Bush's fault after all. Maybe, just maybe, like those Republicans have been saying all along, Barry did have a hand in all of this. Can we still be so naïve as to think that any amount of what we're experiencing today can, or even should for that matter, be blamed on the guy who left office 4 years ago. At some point shouldn’t we ‘expect’ Barry to be man enough to except some responsibility? Isn’t that what ‘real’ leaders do?
Other findings of the Basswood Research poll:
--Sixty-three percent of respondents said current levels of defense spending were "about right" (40.1 percent) or "too little" (23.0 percent); while 28.6 percent of Americans said that "too much" was being spent on the military.
--Offered three options as to the biggest contributing factor to the national debt problem, 42 percent chose spending on mandatory entitlements, 27.7 percent said "too many tax cuts," and 14.5 percent selected too much spending on defense.
--Asked which country poses "the most danger" to U.S. national security interests, 45.1 percent of respondents said Iran, with China in distant second place at 7.6 percent, followed by Afghanistan at 6.3 percent.
--As to America’s "best ally in the world today," 54 percent favored Britain, followed by Israel at 15.9 percent and Canada at 8.7 percent.
--Seventy percent of respondents (80.9 percent conservatives, 62.9 percent liberals, 68.5 percent moderates) viewed Israel favorably.
--Sixty-two percent of respondents favored preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, even if that required the use of military force; while 23.3 percent preferred the option of avoiding military conflict with Iran, even at the risk of Tehran developing a nuclear arsenal.
Even self-identified liberals and moderates leaned more towards the former option than the latter one: The poll found 44.6 percent of self-identified liberals, 57.8 percent of self-identified moderates and 78.6 percent of self-identified conservatives, favored preventing a nuclear-armed Iran, even if that meant military force was needed. In contrast, 35.9 percent of self-identified liberals, 26.4 percent of self-identified moderates and 12.3 percent of self-identified conservatives preferred the option of avoiding conflict, even if that meant Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.
--More self-identified liberals held favorable views of China (48.6 percent) and Russia (43.8 percent) than did conservatives, 31.1 percent of whom viewed China favorably, and 25.4 percent of whom regarded Russia in a favorable light.
Established in 2009, FPI describes itself as an organization that "seeks to promote an active U.S. foreign policy committed to robust support for democratic allies, human rights, a strong American military equipped to meet the challenges of the 21st century, and strengthening America's global economic competitiveness."
CAN'T YOU SMELL THAT SMELL, OOOOH THAT SMELL…
Just recently I again began smelling an old familiar stench and I knew that it could only mean one thing. And sure enough, I was right. Because like some nasty old turd, liberal, and certifiably wack-job, billionaire George Soros has once again floated to the surface, giving $1 million to a "super" political action committee backing his boy in the race, Barry "Almighty." Soros' contribution to the super PAC Priorities USA Action comes as the group raised a record $10 million last month. It has launched a rather obvious smear campaign against Republican challenger Mitt Romney, consisting of numerous rather sleazy television ads that have no basis in any actual facts. In other words, typical Democrat style tactics that are always employed when the Democrat in the race has not records on which they can run.
Priorities USA Action confirmed the amount of the donation on Thursday. Soros gave $1 million earlier this year to the pro-Democratic super PAC American Bridge 21st Century. He's contributed millions of dollars during previous presidential elections. Soros' contribution may signal that Democratic-leaning donors of elections past are starting to come around to super PACs. Those organizations can raise and spend unlimited sums of cash but can't coordinate with the candidates. The move by Soros, who had remained largely on the sidelines of this year's Super PAC fundraising barrage, could trigger more big checks from wealthy Democrats who previously avoided giving to the groups, citing supposed dismay over the growing role of money in politics.
Super PACs have been raking in unlimited amounts from individuals, corporations and unions to support candidates or issues. Until this year, Soros, whose net worth is estimated by Forbes at $19 billion, held the record as the biggest contributor in an election cycle for the $27.5 million he estimated he spent in 2004 to try to defeat Republican President George W. Bush. For all that money he spent, he only managed to buy a net gain of about 2 Electoral College votes for John Kerry-Heinz, who I believe spent a brief, but yet personally rewarding, time in Vietnam. His record was eclipsed this year by Las Vegas casino owner Sheldon Adelson, who says he has given $70 million to help Republicans in the 2012 election. Sadly, Mr. Adelson may not get much of a return on his investment either.
Some Soros' adviser said previously that the financier was more focused in this campaign on grass-roots political organizing. Soros last year made six-figure donations to the Majority and House Majority PACs and pledged $2 million earlier this year to American Bridge 21st Century, a research-focused Super PAC that does no ads, and America Votes, a group that helps coordinate campaign work for liberal groups nationwide . Soros' new pledges to the trio of Democratic Super PACs were revealed on Thursday at a gathering of big liberal donors who together have formed a little group with the rather innocuous sounding name of the Democracy Alliance, that according to The New York Times, which first reported the commitment. Right, the Democracy Alliance, is that not a twisted bot of irony?.
It was in August, that Priorities USA, for the first time, was able to raise more cash than its Republican counterpart that backs Mitt Romney in his bid for the presidency - $10.1 million to $7 million . At the end of last month, Priorities USA had $4.8 million left in cash on hand, compared with $6.3 million left in the coffers of the pro-Romney Restore Our Future. The Majority and House Majority PACs also saw fundraising increase in August. Democratic fundraisers said donors felt increased urgency in the last weeks before Election Day and in the face of powerful Super PACs backing Republican candidates. If you are the least bit familiar with the priorities of Soros, then you should be very well aware of the type of candidates and causes that he chooses to support. And they are not good for America.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
A ONCE VENERABLE ORGANIZATION NOW LIES PRETTY MUCH IN RUIN …
I know that I've asked this question before, but am I really the only one wondering if today's NAACP any longer serves any useful purpose, other than, of course, to serve as the racist smear merchants of the Democrat Party. To me it has become more and more obvious, especially so in more recent years, that it has become less of an actual advocate for the advance of blacks and more of a political smear machine serving at the beck and call of the Democrat Party. And I can't help but wonder if those brave men who first brought the organization into being aren't now spinning in their graves. They have now seen their organization co-opted by those who possess more of a political agenda than an equal rights agenda. And the reason I bring this up is that most, if not all, members of this once venerable organization now seem to be eagerly joining in the chorus of Democrats who are now making the idiotic charge that millions of citizens, two-fifths of them black, are somehow being denied the right to vote. This week what was described as a 'delegation' from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) actually called on the United Nations to investigate America’s "racially discriminatory election laws." The NAACP delegation visiting Geneva even hosted a panel on the "disenfranchisement" of U.S. citizens and addressed the U.N. Human Rights Council, which is in session in the Swiss city.
One of these 'delegates' told the HRC that the right to vote was a cornerstone of democracy and claimed that there exists in the U.S. a patchwork of divergent laws and procedures that pose as barriers to voting. This bogus group urged the U.N.’s "special rapporteur" on racism to investigate "racially discriminatory election laws," and said the HRC should then make recommendations that would restore the political and voting rights of all citizens. On Tuesday, the delegation hosted some panel on the subject at the U.N.’s Geneva headquarters. "Today, nearly 5.3 million U.S. citizens have been stripped of their voting rights on a temporary or permanent basis, including more than 4.4 million citizens who are no longer incarcerated," claimed Lorraine Miller, who chairs the NAACP national board’s advocacy and policy committee. "More than two million are African American, yet African Americans make up less than 13 percent of the U.S. population," she said. Someone should point out to this moron the fact that if these more than two million blacks hadn't made a conscious decision to break the law, they'd be able to vote today! Miller said the NAACP commended our stellar Attorney General Eric Holder for his efforts to "prevent the implementation of recent challenges to voting rights." Adding, "However, we remain deeply concerned with the continued practice and discriminatory impact of felony disenfranchisement."
Among the members of this so-called delegation was a woman by the name of Kemba Smith Pradia who, according to the organization, was convicted of a drug-related offense in 1992, granted clemency by ex-president 'Slick Willie' Clinton. This genius is barred from voting in Virginia under legislation prohibiting those formerly incarcerated to vote in the state. Ms. Pradia complained, "Nationally, I represent more than five million citizens that are disenfranchised from being a part of the political process simply because of past felony convictions." Again I would argue that had she not decided to break the law, she would, in fact, be permitted to vote today. Now I am quite sure that there was no one holding a gun to her head forcing her to break the law. She made that decision all by herself. Ya know, what people like this seem not to realize is that there are such things as consequences for bad, and/or stupid, behavior. Ms. Pradia just needs to take a little responsibility here and accept the consequences of 'her' behavior. NAACP Senior Vice President for Advocacy Hilary Shelton told the panel that the restrictions on voting "prevent those most in need of an advocate from the ability to elect someone who will represent their concerns: the need for a decent public education, for a health care system that addresses their specific demographic needs, as well as the creation of decent jobs, a functional criminal justice system and other basic human needs." Boo-freakin-hoo. Then DON'T BREAK THE LAW!
For those of you who may not remember, or who simply don't care, this is the second little trip to the HRC made by some NAACP group in just six months. It was just last March that NAACP president Benjamin Todd Jealous addressed the council on voter ID and other laws, which he said would "disproportionately block members of minority groups from voting." He said at the time, "These voter-suppression laws include so-called strict voter-ID laws, cutting of Sunday voting, early voting and same-day voter registration, and the reimposing of notoriously racist bans on formerly-incarcerated people voting." It was reported at the time, among those listening to Jealous’ appeal for HRC support were representatives of countries whose citizens have no right to vote freely, including such one-party states as Cuba and China; and Saudi Arabia, where men can only vote in municipal elections and women have been barred from even that limited right. In a Rasmussen poll last December, 70 percent of likely voters agreed that voters should be required to show photo ID before casting ballots. Only 22 percent of respondents opposed such a requirement. Although support for voter ID was significantly higher among Republicans (92 percent), 54 percent of Democrats also favored the requirement, according to the poll. Sixty-nine percent of respondents said the laws were not discriminatory, while 22 percent said they were.
Now I'm sure it can go without saying that the 2012 Democratic Party platform is very critical of voter-ID laws, claiming, that somehow they "can disproportionately burden young voters, people of color, low-income families, people with disabilities, and the elderly, and we refuse to allow the use of political pretexts to disenfranchise American citizens." But that shouldn't come as a big surprise since it's the Democrat Party that is most often found guilty of voter fraud. So why would Democrats be in favor of laws that could ultimately make it much more difficult for them to utilize one of their favorite electioneering tools? And these members of this NAACP 'delegation' border on being complete imbeciles, because despite the best efforts of Barry "Almighty", we do still have a Constitution in this country, and for them attempt to circumvent it by pleading their case to some outside organization, especially one that's as dysfunctional and corrupt as the UN, makes them appear rather shallow. Blacks in this country have always seemed to view themselves as somehow being above the rules that the rest of us must abide by, because, I guess, of the supposed injustices that they have been made to suffer in the past. But, whether they like or not, they're going to have to join us here in the 21st century, where we're supposed to act like adults, and to suffer the consequences of the choices that we make, like grownups. What these morons fail to understand is the fact that voting is not a RIGHT, it is a PRIVILEGE. So they need to suck it up and deal with it!
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
'DINGY HARRY' REID…A WALKIN, TALKIN PIECE OF DAWG SQUEEZE…
People who share the same faith often embrace divergent political ideologies. But an example that takes that scenario to a whole new level would be the case that involves Mitt Romney and 'Dingy Harry' Reid. As it happens both are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which, for some reason, seems to be much bigger issue for Romney than it is for old 'Dingy'. Anyway, despite sharing a faith allegiance, their theoretical constructs couldn’t be more oppositional. On Monday, these differences came to a head, when old 'Dingy' was heard to take aim squarely at Romney’s faith, going so far as to actually claim that Romney is "not the face of Mormonism." Following these idiotic comments, Utah state Sen. Ben McAdams (D), who also happens to be a Mormon, again apparently no big deal, chastised 'Dingy' and defended Romney.
According to CNN, old 'Dingy' made his anti-Romney claims on during a conference call with reporters. At the time the statements were made, 'Dingy' was speaking about the notion that LDS adherents in his state purportedly don’t view Romney as the face of the faith. "[Romney's] coming to a state where there are a lot of members of the LDS Church," 'Dingy' explained. "They understand that he is not the face of Mormonism." The comments mark the first time that 'Dingy' has invoked Romney’s faith as a point of criticism. Despite the 'Dingy’s' idiotic attempts to smear Mr. Romney, The Salt Lake Tribune notes that others have praised the presidential candidate on the religious front: "In contrast, other prominent Mormons have thanked Romney for presenting a positive image of the church. J.W. Marriott, head of the Marriott hotel chain and a family friend of the candidate, told Romney’s church congregation in Wolfeboro, N.H., that Romney’s presidential run has been good for the Utah-based faith. "There has never been as much positive attention to the church, thanks to the wonderful campaign of Mitt Romney and his family," Marriott said, according to news reports."
And as surprising as it sounds, at least to me, even on the Democrat front, not everyone is comfortable with the criticisms that 'Dingy" has thrown at Romney. Take, for instance, Mr. McAdams, a Democratic political leader who is also the executive director of the national LDS Democrats Caucus. Rather than supporting 'Dingy's' claims against Romney, he lambasted them. "I for one don’t want to engage in the business of whether Mitt Romney or Harry Reid is devout by my standards," McAdams said in an interview with The Daily. "I don’t think that it is appropriate to measure somebody’s faith or how they exercise their faith." McAdams also added that, despite not agreeing with all of the candidate’s politics, he’s "proud of Mitt Romney." In the end, like Marriot, the senator believes that Romney’s candidacy "is bringing a positive might to Mormons."
As is typical for someone of his rather twisted political persuasion, old 'Dingy' took his criticisms beyond merely claiming that Romney isn’t the face of Mormonism. He took it upon himself to respond to what's been described as an ‘opinion piece’ by Gregory A. Prince over on The Huffington Post, which focused upon Romney’s now-infamous, albeit completely true, comments about the 47 percent of Americans who embrace government handouts. In the article, Prince asked readers not to judge the Mormon faith based on Romney and his statements, a sentiment that 'Dingy' obviously agrees with. "He said that Romney has sullied the religion that he, Prince and Romney share," 'Dingy' explained on the conference call. "And he’s so disappointed, that in his words, ‘It’s a good religion and he’s hiding from it.’" "Dingy' is about as worthless a piece of sh!t that you're ever gonna find anywhere, and this crap just proves it.
UNDECIDED? REALLY? YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS!
For the life of me I simply cannot understand why, after experiencing all that we gone through in this country over the course of the last four years, anyone, except for the blacks of course, would be willing to give Barry four more years in the White House. And another thing that has me more than a little puzzled is how any intelligent human being can still be undecided on the matter. Although, I did hear a possible explanation for why folks might have a tendency to vote for Barry, while listening to the radio this morning as I headed into work. The caller stated that he thought that too many people have gotten comfortable in not going to work, and therefore are going to be voting for the guy, Barry, who's not going to be in any big hurry, to make them go back to work. After all, he is out to get as many people as possible very firmly attached to the government teat. Well, I guess that would explain those who say they plan on voting for Barry, but, ya know, it still doesn't explain those who still claim to be undecided.
And I gotta tell you, I worry about Americans who simply don’t think it's worth their time or effort to get informed about the stark differences between the candidates, information that would provide to them some basis on which to decide whom they should vote for. In fact, I worry more about this apparently substantial voting block more than I worry about the dependent, entitled souls who support Barry. Now I certainly am able to recognize the reasons why some conservatives and libertarians might be reluctant to support Romney. But conservatives and libertarians who cannot bring themselves to vote for Romney or plan to simply stay home on November 6th, brings to mind something my dear old mom used to say, something about biting your nose to spite your face. And then there's that 2-10 percent, or whatever it is, of voters who claim to be undecided, who plan to support one of the two major candidates, but just can't decide which one. And you have to wonder, where it is that these people have been for the past four years.
Even when discussing an undecided voter who happens to be turned off by Romney, you would still think that that individual would understand that only a fool would even consider voting for a president with a record that is as abysmal, and as destructive, as Barry’s has been. You would think that it would be obvious to everybody that Barry appears to be bent on destroying this country, and has already made some pretty significant, even impressive, progress in that regard. And it would seem that that fact alone would help clear up any remaining indecision in the minds of voters, and yet it apparently hasn't. So just in case those voters, who claim to still be undecided, have not been paying attention to what's been happening around them, or have been living under that proverbial rock for the last four years, one of my favorite economists, Thomas Sowell, paints a very clear word picture, that even a moron can understand, of what he calls "Obama’s America." It is an America characterized by the Occupy movement.
Sowell’s description of "Obama’s America" is provided here with the hope that it will find its way into the hands of undecided voters: "It is an America where history is rewritten to honor dictators, murderers, and thieves. It is an America where violence, racism, hatred, class warfare and murder are all promoted as acceptable means of overturning the American civil society. It is an America where humans have been degraded to the level of animals…It is an America where the basic tenets of civil society, including faith, family, a free press and individual rights, have been rejected. It is an America where our founding documents have now been shredded and, with them, every person’s guaranteed liberties. It is an America where, ultimately, great suffering will come to the American people, but rulers like Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, liberal college professors, union bosses and all other loyal liberal/Communist Party members will live in opulent splendor."
I feel quite confident in saying that this coming election is definitely the most important, if not crucial, in my lifetime. Even more important than was the election of 1980. And it’s because of that fact that I have very little patience for those who tell me that this is the election they have chosen to make some sort of statement, either by voting for a third-party candidate or by staying home. And I ask them how it is that this is the time the chose to draw their line in the sand and what, exactly, do they think their little act of defiance will accomplish? Other than, of course, to get Barry elected. I mean the end result of sitting this one out is to Barry to walk right back into the White House without even having to break a sweat. But, again, the folks who really drive me up the wall the most are the ones who tell me that, while they do plan to vote, they just can't seem to decide between Barry or Romney. And to me that ought to be the biggest no-brainer of all freakin time. Because even cursory glance over the last four years should provide more than enough of a clue!
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
MORE FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL 'BONEHEAD' CAUCUS (CBC)...
Demonstrating yet again that he has somewhat of a serious problem in being able to deal with reality, our old friend Emanuel Cleaver made the claim on Thursday that "we cannot even find an instance of voter fraud." Now, hating as I do to call anyone a liar, even our esteemed Mr. Cleaver, it seems that a Justice Department fact sheet just might tell us a much different story. Now according to Mr. Cleaver, "We’ve had 176 restrictive bills regarding voting laws that have been proposed in 41 states. Now understand that we cannot even find an instance of voter fraud. In the last 20-something years, the Justice Department has investigated like two." Mr. Cleaver’s claim notwithstanding, that simply ain't quite true.
I would recommend to Mr. Cleaver that before he goes about shooting his big, fat mouth off, he might first want to check the actual facts of the matter. Because according to a Justice Department fact sheet dated July 2, 2008, over 140 individuals have been charged with election fraud offenses and over 100 people have been convicted of voter fraud since the Attorney General’s Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative was launched in 2002. Cleaver made an idiotic claim that the voting public has been under attack since 2011. "We never would have predicted in the 1970s or in the 1980s that in the year 2011 that we would be fighting an attempt to suppress or discourage minority voting power," he said. Right, that’s what this is really all about. Give me a break!
Sounding more than just a little unhinged, Cleaver even went so far as to actually suggest there is some sort of a conspiracy afoot, most likely one perpetrated by those who comprise that racist right wing. A conspiracy the purpose of which is to suppress minority votes because of the record high turnout of black and Latino voters in the 2008 presidential election, when the nation elected, much to our detriment, the first, black president. He went on somewhat of a tirade saying "We should have understood it, because in 2008, African-American and Latino turnout was the highest ever, and for the first time in U.S. history, African-American voter turnout equaled white voter turnout percentage-wise – not in numbers, but percentage-wise."
And then exhibiting a level of paranoia seldom seen in someone not locked away somewhere in a padded room, Cleaver went on to say, "And we were dumb and thoughtless if we did not understand that there would be a response to that, and we did not predict what happened, and so it’s been estimated that the block-the-vote efforts could cost about 5 million black votes across the country. And that could jeopardize the election, whichever way you choose to vote," he said. "So why other than what I mentioned earlier would there be such an effort to deter minority voting power. So we see this assault as both numerous and dangerous," Cleaver added.
Now wouldn't you think that someone, such as Mr. Cleaver, who has been entrusted by the voters to represent them in Congress would want that most basic of rights, the right to vote, protected? But that kind of thinking is not something that you're going to hear coming from Democrats. You see voter fraud is one of those staples of the Democrat Party, something that is employed every election year, as needed, should it become necessary in their effort to maintain power. So Mr. Cleaver here has to go and claim that there is an attempt afoot to keep them poor black folks from voting. And he's lying through he teeth! And isn’t it strange that every time you hear about voter fraud taking place, it ALWAYS involves Democrats.
A VOTE 'FOR' OBAMA IS A VOTE 'AGAINST' AMERICA…IT'S JUST THAT SIMPLE...
Many of you, no doubt, will take exception with what I’m about to say here, perhaps even feel a little insulted. But I’m here to tell you, I just don’t care, because the stakes are just too high. Look I'll be perfectly blunt. As far as I’m concerned you cannot love this country, or want to guarantee for your children the brightest future possible, and still think that it’s in any way a good idea to vote for Barry. You cannot be FOR Barry and still be FOR the country, it’s simply impossible. Now I suppose you can scream, foul, if you want, or even claim that I’m, somehow, being unfair, but you can’t argue with the facts. And I’ll tell you something else, I have absolutely no use for people who can, and in such a cavalier way, look back at the level of destruction that has been inflicted upon our great country during the last four years, and still see absolutely nothing ‘wrong’ in voting for the one individual most responsible for bringing about that destruction. He came into office on a mission. That mission was to, in his words, "fundamentally transform" this country. And, to a great extent, he has succeeded, reducing our standard of living, putting more people into poverty, and weakening this country militarily.
For those of you who may not have been paying attention, or have perhaps been living under a rock since January 2009, which would seem to be a great many of you, we are now arrived at a rather unique point in our history. You see, we have now arrived at a crossroads, so to speak, one that I doubt our Founders could have foreseen, and one where the survival of our republic has now become very much in question. And, for some reason, instead of being able to recognize that fact, too many of us seem to be more interested in who might win the current contest on Dancing With The Stars. We are now being presented with two very different and distinct visions regarding where we go from here. On one hand, we have someone who actually wishes to 'lead' us into the future, and on the other we have someone totally incapable of leading and only wishes to drag us into what he thinks our future should be. Maybe it’s me, but after looking back at everything that Barry has done TO this country, and not FOR it, he is simply unworthy of being re-elected. And so in as much as this election ‘should’ be a no-brainer, it ‘should’ be even more of one for those who have kids.
Now how is it, exactly, that anyone with even half a brain, can after watching, the personal worth in this country be pretty much decimated, the control of our healthcare be literally ripped from our hands, and the fact that many of us are now trapped in homes that are worth less than we owe, still see any amount of wisdom in a decision to vote for Barry. And add to that, the fact that we now have in this country, more people than ever before in our history, living in poverty. All of that on top of the fact that we are now buried up to our armpits in debt, debt that our children and their children will be saddled with paying back. I just find it hard to believe that so many seem to have no problem, whatsoever, with throwing our kids under the debt bus. Yet, so many seem to be completely onboard with that notion, apparently seeing it as being a problem for their kids to deal with. I don't know, that just seems so wrong to me. Or how about this, today we are now paying twice as much for a gallon of gas as we were when Barry was elected. So why should we expect it to double again in the next four years. After all with Barry doing such a masterful job in the Middle East, that's almost a given!.
Compounding our current energy situation is Barry's stubborn refusal to allow us to drill for oil and his taking it upon himself to essentially kill the Keystone Pipeline, potential solutions to two of the biggest problems that continue to plague us, the high price of gas and our continuing high rate of unemployment. Instead he chooses to spend, make that waste, billions of taxpayer dollars on "green energy" boondoggles, literally throwing money at outfits like Solyndra that do nothing to bring down the cost of energy or put people back to work. But such is not his intent in the first place. And still a majority of Americans continue to see some level of wisdom in voting for Barry. Why? He has spent with reckless abandon for the last four years and has absolutely nothing to show for the billions that he has 'spent'. We the taxpayers have been ripped off, and ripped off bad. And, for the life of me, I just do not understand how so many of us can be so nonchalant about that fact, as if it just doesn’t matter that all that money essentially went to all of Barry’s very numerous political cronies. I mean, does that really make any sense, to ANYBODY? What exactly is it that makes this guy deserving of being reelected?
These days I find myself wondering if we are actually going to have to lose everything we have before that little light bulb finally goes off and we come to that startling realization that we've managed to piss away that little thing called freedom. Frankly I just don't understand people who can, without even the slightest hesitation, relinquish their individual freedoms, essentially handing everything over to the government, in exchange for nothing more than a monthly check. But hey, that's no big deal right? What's a little freedom in the big scheme of things, especially when you're on the receiving end of a regular check from Barry. Now maybe that's not how these people see things, but that's certainly what's going on here. It's all about living for today and the Hell with the future, we'll deal with that when it gets here. But I'm here to tell ya, once we've decided for forfeit our God given rights, there'll be no going back, Barry and the Democrats will make sure of that. So we need to tread lightly here. Do we really want to be so willingly to cut Barry what is an inordinate amount of slack? Personally I've always been more than a little suspect of his motives, and I'd hate to think we're jeopardizing everything.
'SPOKESMORON' CARNEY SOUNDING ALL INDIGNANT...
Can you possibly the outcry if Romney had used the phrase, "bumps in the road" in describing the horrific events that took place in Libya? We'd still be hearing about it, nonstop! These clowns are pathetic to the extreme.
Monday, September 24, 2012
THESE DAYS THE DEATH OF AN AMERICAN AMBASSADOR EQUALS JUST A BUMP IN THE ROAD...
Our 'Fearless Leader', referred to recent events in the Middle East, including violent attacks on embassies and the terrorist murder of a US ambassador and three other Americans, as 'bumps in the road'. The comment came in Barry's CBS '60 Minutes' interview that aired on Sunday night. Steve Kroft, the posing as an interviewer, asked: 'Have the events that took place in the Middle East, the recent events in the Middle East given you any pause about your support for the governments that have come to power following the Arab Spring?
Barry responded as only Barry can: 'Well, I’d said even at the time that this is going to be a rocky path. The question presumes that somehow we could have stopped this wave of change.' He went on, 'I think it was absolutely the right thing for us to do to align ourselves with democracy, universal rights — a notion that people have to be able to participate in their own governance.' Finally adding, 'But I was pretty certain and continue to be pretty certain that there are going to be bumps in the road because, you know, in a lot of these places, the one organizing principle has been Islam.'
Ambassador Chris Stevens died of apparent asphyxiation at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi after an attack launched under the cover of a demonstration against a crude, low-budget anti-Islam movie made in California. Sean Smith, another diplomat, and former U.S. Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods were also killed. But hey, I'm sure the family members of these folks are fine with Barry's assessment of things, that the deaths of these Americans represents nothing but a few bumps in the road. Is this not the most egregious example of a failed leader that you've ever witnessed?
Naturally Republicans leapt on Barry's 'bumps in the road' comment, and rightly so. Ari Fleischer, former press secretary to President George W. Bush said on Twitter: 'I guess when u win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing "an attack that kills an Ambassador is just a ‘bump in the road.' Barry had initially insisted the attack was nothing more than a spontaneous result of anger about the movie and had nothing to do with al-Qaeda or U.S. policy in the region. And yet Barry still remains hesitant about actually calling it what it was, a terrorist attack on Sept. 11.
After the head of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Centre told Congress that the attack was terrorism, Barry's spokesmoron, Jay "The Dim Bulb" Carney, finally came out and stated the obvious: 'It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack'. On the same day as the five-hour Benghazi consulate attack, in which RPGs and mortars were used, the U.S. embassy in Cairo was targeted by a mob that tore down the American flag and replaced it with a black Islamic flag. There were also attacks on U.S. missions in Tunis, Sana'a, Khartoum and Islamabad.
Stevens, the first U.S. ambassador to be murdered since the Carter administration was winding down, and was viewed as one of the better American diplomatic assets in the region. A diary written by Stevens and obtained by CNN after being found in the wreckage of the Benghazi consulate revealed that he had been concerned about security threats in the city and a rise in Islamic extremism. A White House official firmly rejected this, telling ABC News: 'It’s just not true that he was characterizing the attack in Benghazi - the question doesn’t even make mention of it. He’s speaking about broad trends.'
So look folks, is this really the way we want our foreign policy to be conducted, pretty much on a wing and a prayer? For crying out loud, this is an absolute embarrassment, which is probably just fine with Barry. When he's not out apologizing for us he's out trying to make us look like fools whenever he can. And apparently he's not above using our diplomatic corps as bait. If we are to ever have any hope of being taken seriously again, as a nation, then we have got to rid ourselves of this disastrous president whose only goal it seems, is to make us the punching bag of the entire world.
OK FOLKS, THIS REALLY ISN'T THAT DIFFICULT...
Proving that the great state of Pennsylvania has a burgeoning moron population, there was a recent poll conducted for the Tribune-Review which shows that there is now two percentage points that separate Barry "Almighty" and Republican nominee Mitt Romney in the state, even though both campaigns have largely ignored Pennsylvania while concentrating on other battlegrounds. Barry polled 47 percent to Romney's 45 percent among likely Pennsylvania voters, with 6 percent of voters undecided and 44 days until Election Day, that according to the survey by Susquehanna Polling & Research. The survey of 800 voters, conducted Sept. 18-20, has a margin of error of 3.46 percentage points.
The poll showed most voters are disappointed with the country’s direction, evenly split on whether Barry deserves another term and hesitant to back Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts. Strangely enough fifty-one percent of the state’s voters approve of Barry’s job performance. Which is odd really, given Barry's eagerness to start shutting down nasty coal mines, in this coal state, putting even more people out of work. But hey, go figure. Oddly enough, other recent polls showed even a larger margin for Barry, leading some to speculate that Pennsylvania, which hasn’t voted for a GOP presidential candidate since 1988, no longer is a swing state. .
"All the evidence points to a much closer margin," said Jim Lee, Susquehanna president. "Nothing suggests we’re looking at anything like 2008." Voters continue to put the economy at the top of their list of concerns. Only one in three believes the country is headed in the right direction. Yet, a deeper look at the numbers shows a more nuanced picture. Romney leads Obama, 48 percent to 44 percent, on the question of who would create jobs to speed up the recovery. But as bizarre as it sounds, if you ask who looks out for the interests of the middle class and Barry leads, 56 percent to 38 percent. Kinda makes you wonder how these people can come to that conclusion.
"People run with the numbers without really paying attention to what’s behind them," said Dilip Namjoshi, 66, of Abington, a Philadelphia suburb. "Somebody says, ‘I created 2 million jobs.’ Well, yes, but 600,000 of them are in China." Leah Brooks, 63, a Republican in New Wilmington, Lawrence County, said she has a hard time reading Romney. "He seems to mean well, but I’m not sure he always sees the whole picture. I’m not sure he can get down to where we are," Brooks said. Adding, "I don’t blame him for it. But I’m not sure he really can see what it’s like." Brooks said she’s troubled by recent events in Arab countries. "It is important how we’re seen and how we handle ourselves," she said.
And as screwy as this one sounds, Barry is said to lead, 49 percent to 41 percent, among likely voters on the question of who would better defend the homeland. But voters who peg foreign affairs and international events as their top concern prefer Romney, 53 percent to 46 percent, the same poll found. "We seem to get ourselves stuck in the mud and can’t get out. I’m not sure anybody knows how to get out of the messes we’re in," Brooks said. "It seems that what (Obama) does best is campaign. I just wish he’d get down to business." I may be missing something here, but if Ms. Brooks looks back over the last 4 years she'll see that Barry did get down to business and we're mush the worse for it.
And then we have Mr. Thomas Hohler, 67, the epitome of the brain dead Democrats who point to the Republicans in Congress as being the problem. "You can’t get anything accomplished if their goal is to say no to anything Obama wants," Hohler said. The way to solve the country’s problems "is to get members of Congress, elected officials, that are willing to work together to achieve something. I’m not sure how you can do that, or how soon that’s going to happen." Adding, "Obviously, Obama hasn’t done as well as I would’ve liked. On health care, I would’ve liked to see him go for single-payer or Medicare for everyone," Hohler said. Overall, the former high school teacher gives Barry a B grade. I think he’s being a bit too generous.
Sounding a bit more like voice of reason, there's Joseph Mozaleski who said that he used to vote for Democrats before the party embraced legalized abortions. Decades later, the Republican sees increasing reliance on government assistance and rules in Barry’s health care law that require coverage of contraceptives as the consequences of a moral drift. "Something is wrong with the moral fabric, and I think Romney has a better chance of bringing back my ideals in this country," said Mozaleski, 62, of Sterling, Wayne County. A blind man could see just how the Democrat Party has moved this country farther and farther into the gutter. We would be doing ourselves a favor by never electing another one and we can start by not re-electing Barry.
In Abington, Namjoshi registered to vote as a Republican in 1988 but changed his registration to independent last month, saying he’s fed up with both parties. He said he liked Texas Congressman Ron Paul’s small-government libertarian message during the GOP primaries and will watch the presidential debates to see whether either candidate says something convincing about stabilizing the country’s financial situation. "You’ve got to be fiscally responsible. Whoever does that is probably going to get my vote," Namjoshi said. Come on, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out here which candidate has the know how to take control of our financial situation. And it sure ain't Barry.
So here we are. We're being faced with a question, the answer to which, could have some pretty far reaching effects regarding what this country is going to look like as we head into the future after November 6. Will it be decided by a majority of Americans that we should become more like Europe, and therefore willing to forsake all that makes America so unique. Or, will we come to our senses at the last minute, able to finally see the wisdom in all that it means to BE an American? At this stage of the game I really can't determine on which side we may come down. It should be a no brainer, and yet, for far too many people, it isn't. Either we all believe in what this country is, or like Barry, we believe that it is need of some additional "fundamental transformation."
FURTHER EVIDENCE THAT THE SPEAKER HAS NO SPINE...
Demonstrating yet again the fact that he has spaghetti for a spine, our illustrious Speaker of the House, John Boehner, just could not quite bring himself to commit on whether or not he thought that Congress should investigate why, in God's name, there were no Marines stationed at the diplomatic posts in Libya, where a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans were killed in cold blood, and what idiot, it was, who made that decision. He would only say that he suspects the ongoing investigation by the FBI "will take a look at that." Duh? Ya think, there John? Come on folks, we have got to better than this! We have the 'Keystone Cops' in charge of our foreign policy and no one seems to give a flying fart.
On September 11, that date sound familiar to anyone, in what Barry "Almighty" has finally admitted was a "terrorist attack," the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya and a nearby safe house were attacked and Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other embassy personnel were killed. There were no Marines stationed at the consulate or at the main U.S. embassy in Tripoli, despite the fact that Libya was in political transition after a revolt that overthrew dictator Muammar Gaddafi last October. The FBI is investigating the attack in Benghazi and the State Department announced yesterday that a 4-person investigating committee would review and write a report about the terrorist attack. Whoopee!
It was during a Capitol Hill press conference on Friday that Mr. Boehner was asked, "Speaker Boehner, do you think Congress should investigate why there were no Marines at our diplomatic posts in Libya and who made that decision?" To which our fine, upstanding Speaker replied, "I suspect that part of the investigation underway will take a look at that. While we typically have Marine detachments at our embassies, that isn’t always the case when it comes to our consulates." Adding, "And so I’m sure there will be a review of that and a discussion about whether that’s wise going forward." he said. I wish I was as confident about that as Mr. Boehner seems to be.
And I'm sure that those of us who care about such matters were more than just little pissed when Barry's dim bulb of a U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, was heard to say that there were no Marines in either Tripoli or Benghazi prior to the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. consulate there. According to news reports, Stevens had feared he was on an Al-Qaeda hit list. "There are not Marines in every facility. That depends on the circumstances. That depends on the requirements," this moron, Rice said on Sept. 16. "Our presence in Tripoli, as in Benghazi, is relatively new, as you will recall. We’ve been back post-revolution only for a matter of months." How did this moron get her job?
For the first time, on Thursday, the administration was finally able to bring itself to describe Benghazi as an actual "terrorist attack," after previously blaming some obscure anti-Islamic film that hardly anyone saw, as prompting what they intially described as being a "spontaneous" protest. "It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack," said everybody's favorite imbecile, White House Press Secretary Jay "I ain't Got The Brains Of An Ice Cube" Carney. I guess he felt the need to add, "Our embassy was attacked violently and the result was four deaths of American officials. That is self-evident." If this isn't a case of the blind leading the stupid, I don't know what is.
When asked a day earlier during the White House briefing who decided that no Marines would protect U.S. diplomatic posts in Libya, Carney naturally referred the question to the State Department. "I think security at diplomatic facilities is overseen by and run by the State Department, so I’d refer you to them about how decisions are made and what the allocation of resources was in Benghazi and elsewhere. I think they’re the best people to answer that question," Carney said. This is nothing more than a blatant stalling tactic. And if this White House doesn't want to be forthcoming, which is usually the case with these people, then they should be forced to provide answers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)