Krauthammer: It's Funny to Hear Liberals Talk About How Awful it is to Delegitimize a President After What They Did to Bush

Krauthammer: It's Funny to Hear Liberals Talk About How Awful it is to Delegitimize a President After What They Did to Bush

Dr. Krauthammer is quite correct and the double standard that is in play is fascinating.  It only proves the oft heard saying from Conservative commentators that if it weren't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all.  Especially liberals in the media.  The lies that were broadcast and repeated about President George W. Bush were pernicious in that the Left Stream Media repeated them over and over and over clearly following Goebbels theory that a lie, repeated often enough, becomes fact.  Obama is the choice of the Left Stream Media but, like Dan Rather's story on W's National Guard Service, is part of a greater lie repeated over and over and over.

Instead of the deep thinker they promised, we have one who apparently doesn't think and hates making decisions.  Instead of a post-racial president we have one who thrives on racism.  Instead of a president for all the people, we have one that says one thing while doing another.  Instead of a president who tries to help the nation we have one who says "Get used to it" or "You'd better buy a smaller vehicle" when questioned about the price of gasoline.  Instead of a president who is willing to "stand the heat in the kitchen" we have one who is trying to halt political speech in violation of the 1st Amendment because he can't stand criticism or dissent from We the People.

In the case of W it was the Left Stream Media that worked overtime to delegitimize the President.  In the case of Obama, he does it all by himself and Conservatives only point out what he is doing.

Follow the title link for the story.

James Clapper, DNI: Out of Touch with Reality

Which of these two is out of touch with reality?  

Is he out of touch with reality or is he just ignorant?  That is a valid question after James Clapper's appearance before Congress today.  Most well-read 10-year olds could have given better, and more accurate, testimony after searching the web for an hour than did our nation's Director of National Intelligence.

We mustn't forget that he was selected for the President Obama for some very specific reasons most of which probably center around his ability to follow Obama's orders and skew intelligence to fit Obama's game plan.

Remember when the Left Stream Media accused President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney of cherry-picking intelligence?  Anyone want to bet that they will ignore this one?

Follow the link for more.

The Federal Pay Freeze, In Context

A much bigger bus to handle all those government employees!

In the interests of full disclosure I spent 32 years in the service of my country, 25 of which were on the civilian side of the government.  I am now retired and subject to the whims of OPM and Congress when it comes to my retirement pay and I still must work to make ends meet.

I've listened for months to the chatter by fellow Conservatives about how the federal civilian work force was grossly overpaid and kept my silence not because I agreed but because I knew that there were cases where that was a true statement.  Unfortunately, for me and many in my government sector, the claim that we were "overpaid bureaucrats" was grossly misleading.  I say "unfortunately" because it would have been nice to have one of those cushy Washington jobs that paid SES salary and didn't require transfers every few years (sometimes to Third World countries), exposure to infectious diseases, gunfire and physical violence and irregular work hours that usually added up to well over 60 hours a week (for which I was paid at a rate of about 1/2 regular time).  Yes, a job like that would have been grand and I know those positions existed because I read about them on the internet where it said that those $100,000.00 a year jobs were all over the place in Washington, DC.  And they also said that those jobs gave you free health insurance when you retired.  I wish I had been able to get to one of those because I now pay 100% of my health insurance bill on my retirement salary...which is one of the reasons why I still work.

But I'm not complaining.  I enjoyed my time as a civil servant.  I do have a very bad back from a bit of a tussle with a criminal I was arresting back in the '80s but no regrets.  My last assignment was in Washington, DC, and I was able to finally buy my own home at age 58.  Quite a bit later than most of my civilian counterparts who didn't work for the government but still, thanks to Congress some aren't able to buy at all despite working hard and saving their money.  My house will be paid off when I'm 88 so then I can fully retire.

This morning I watched President Obama stand before reporters and announce that he was going to freeze the pay of civilian federal workers for the next two years.  He, reading from his teleprompter, of course, waxed eloquently about how there needed to be shared sacrifice and that the savings over the next two years would amount to a staggering $28 Billion (with a capital B, no less).  It was underwhelming speech so no wonder he took no questions.

Now this doesn't affect me monetarily because I'm retired..sort of.  The economic downturn--which is traceable more directly to Nancy "The Nanny" Pelosi's Democratic Congress under President Bush than to Bush himself (yes, I know he could have vetoed the spending but didn't)--has me underwater on my house and with no increase in my government pension this last year or in the foreseeable future.  But I started thinking about that savings of a whole $28 BILLION vs. the $1+ TRILLION debt that Obama and his minions have run up in the last 22 months and it occurred to me that it was really pretty small potatoes by comparison despite the build-up he gave it.  As a matter of fact, as I thought about it, it was clear that he'd just thrown the entire civilian side of government--minus Congress, of course--under his ever-present bus where they will join his grandmother and the Reverend Wright along with more than a few others that were necessary sacrifices in the name of his political ambition.  (The more I think about it the more it seems to me that he could have accomplished the same savings by just firing all those Czars.  Just sayin'.)

This from a man who just got 12 stitches in his lip from a wild elbow while playing basketball.  (Odd that, as I didn't think that he would play with TEA Party people.)  Despite the injury though he has returned to the court and, while heroically injured, played against his daughters.  I hope they were gentle on their daddy.

Now if like me you're actually wondering what the impact of his valiant effort to curb government spending is in comparison to his valiant effort to outspend every previous American President combined thus run-up an unconscionable debt, follow the link.  You'll be amazed.

The Government's Role by Kuya Jim

Good whisky and a cigar make for good conversation only so long as at least one person is listening.

I received an email from a good and valued friend today and with his permission am posting it with him as a "guest blogger."  Kuya Jim is an immigrant who became an American citizen and now lives in the Far East.  Always an excellent companion for stimulating conversation over cigars and whisky, he's also a thoughtful thinker and an excellent businessman.  What he's put forward is an excellent read.  Enjoy.

Bill:

I'm on a plane from Toronto to Hong Kong, so that explains this lengthy email, I thought you could relate to this.

In a speech last week Nancy Pelosi said "...we need to move more people into the middle class ..." and as she spoke her hand moved in a sweeping direction upwards.

From a cultural perspective the USA is more of a classless society than elsewhere in the world, but from an economic perspective its similar to the rest of the planet. There's the "haves" and the "have nots"...there's the rich and the poor. Then this has been further defined into sub segments.

In the UK the classes are defined as the wealthy class, middle class, working class, and dependent class. In economic terms the respective population breakdown would be 5%, 60%, 35%, 5%.

In the USA reality is ignored and only two classes are recognized, the wealthy and the middle class. In economic terms the respective population breakdown would be 5% and 95%. However, I interpret Pelosi's upward sweeping arm motion to mean that an under class exists, but it isn't talked about.

In the Philippines, my adopted home,  the classes are defined as the Elite class, the A, B, and C class, and the Massa. In economic terms the respective population breakdown would be 1%, 20%, 80%. (The A, B and C is the middle class further broken down by salary level for marketing purposes). By the way, the Massa class in the Philippines are very upwardly mobile, working hard to move into their own middle class or migrating to join the middle class or working class of developed countries.

Nancy Pelosi wants to "move" more Americans into the middle class? What's her strategy to do that? First of all the term middle class needs to be defined.

The classes throughout western society have common characteristics.

Middle Class:

1. They own a home that is mortgaged.
2. They own at least one car
3. They are in professional level jobs
4. They are salaried in high tax brackets
5. They have a college education
6. They are in strong family units

Working Class:

1. They rent a home.
2. They make car payments
3. They have manual labor & clerical jobs
4. Hourly paid in low tax brackets
5. They have a high school education
6. They are in strong family units.

Dependent Class:

1. They are in government housing
2. They have older or no cars.
3. They have menial jobs or unemployed
4. Low or no income in no tax bracket
5. They are high school drop outs
6. They are in broken homes

To create upward mobility between these groups for all their people is a shared goal of all governments no matter the political party. The difference is how they want to accomplish it.

Nancy Pelosi summed up the socialist viewpoint succinctly: Democrats want the government to move more people into the middle class. The Republican viewpoint is that people should move themselves upward in the class hierarchy.

Republicans want to influence root economic factors to create an environment wherein people have the opportunity to improve their status. Democrats want to directly provide the benefits of middle class status or make the trappings of middle class status easily attainable.

For example, the Democrats have attempted to expand the middle class by legislation.

1. Lenders must provide mortgages based on race and low income status (to
those who can't afford them.
2. Welfare payments can be included in the loan qualification process.
3. Affirmative action quotas and anti discrimination laws.
4. Union contract support and minimum wage increases.
5. More social workers in schools and public school redistricting.
6. Increased welfare payments to single parents.

As a result of this legislative strategy, the dependent class and working class should be able to own homes, own cars, have better paying jobs, have kids in better schools, and families don't need to stick together to survive and prosper. All thanks to government largess.

Its obvious to me what's happening to that utopia. America is going down a path to bankruptcy. National debt increasing, foreclosures out of control, personal bankruptcies soaring, unemployment increasing, jobs going off shore, retail spending declining, housing starts weakest for a generation.

Bill Clinton famously said "its about the economy stupid!". I'm a Republican and I agree with Clinton; but with the following additions: It's about Jobs stupid! Private sector jobs stupid! Its about creating wealth stupid!  Its about the American dream stupid! Its about the American spirit stupid!  The American spirit to grab a piece of the action, to earn that house by the river!. Immigrants don't come to America expecting a hand out or a bail out.

Business development creates wealth and jobs, but taxes and hand outs create neither. The US government should exit the hand-out business and focus on the basics, they should support business to create jobs and support the people by ensuring equal access to education, job opportunities and financing.

Winston Churchill said "Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon".

As an aside, Tony Blair gave G. W. Bush a marble bust of Winston Churchill, which was displayed in the oval office. Barack Obama packed it up and sent it back to Gordon Brown the British prime minister, with the comment that the "American people don't need this!"

God bless America,

Jim

Your rude and tackless return of the Churchill bust was noted by all, Mr. Obama.  I'm sure you did so thinking that it didn't matter but by now you also know that Sir Winston Churchill garners more respect among the American people than do you.  

Troops Returning from Iraq and Afghanistan Get a Little Surprise at Dallas/Ft. Worth Airport

While I do not miss some of his policies, he was definitely a class act and showed some great leadership in the post 9/11 era.  Had the Left Stream Media been honest in its reportage, he would have left office with a much higher approval rating for much of what was blamed on W stemmed, legislatively, from the Democrats.  The sub-prime mortgage fiasco, for instance, was a creation of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, both powerful Neo-Lib Democrats; yet the Left Stream Media has given them a total pass despite the evidence that their legislative policies led directly to the current economic recession.

And the terrorist attacks on 9/11 are no different as they stemmed from 8 years of errors by the Clinton Administration as they strove to treat terrorism as a law enforcement issue rather than the attack on the nation that it is.

Yes, I miss W.  He was, and still is, a class act.  And while the Left touts Obama's intelligence, I have a feeling that Obama's college transcripts are sealed for good reason and after he's left office on 1/20/2013, we'll see that like John Kerry, Obama's brainy advantage is more hype than fact.  And while W and Mrs. Bush can show up unannounced with little fanfare–they did it at Ft. Hood after the terror attack there as well as yesterday in Dallas–and truly raise the morale of the troops they visit, Obama uses an appearance with the troops as merely a photo-op to be tolerated, for it is easy to see that his heart is not really in it.

Follow the link form more from Michelle Malkin's blog.  

Finally! After Only 72 Days of Dithering Obama Gives a Nod to Accepting Assistance

After dithering for 72 days, Obama decides to act on the Gulf oil crisis.  Such great leadership...NOT!

For 72 days the oil has been gushing into the Gulf.  3 days after the spill the Dutch offered high-speed skimmers that could have seriously mitigated the damage to the environment.  Because it would offend the Unions, Obama and his Neo-Lib Regime said "No thanks.  We'll handle it."  In total 13 nations offered assistance and all were told the same thing, "No thanks!" while the government cited a law (the Jones Act) from the 1920's that the President could easily have waived.

Rahm Emanuel was very clear early on when he said that a good crises should never go to waste and that was clearly the plan of the Regime when BP's deepwater well blew out.  The lives lost, the damage to the environment, the economic damage to the Gulf states...none were as important as being able to use the disaster to bolster an almost dead Cap & Trade Bill that was languishing in the Senate with almost no chance of passing.  Nothing was more important than advancing the Obama agenda, and so he dithered.  He gave speeches.  He visited the beaches for photo opportunities.  He set up a commission comprised mainly of anti-fossel fuel environmentalists with no experience in oil drilling and charged it with finding a way to avoid future incidents.  He had the Coast Guard stop oil skimming barges from operating along the Louisiana coast so that they could be inspected for fire extinguishers and life vests.  He strong-armed BP using The Chicago Way and extracted $20 Billion which he put under one of his already chosen czars to disperse.  In short, other than acting like Al Capone reborn as he was strong-arming BP, Obama did nothing.

In the blogosphere and on talk radio there was outrage yet the Main Stream Media, also known as the Left Stream Media, was strangely quiet.  Americans, however, were not fooled and political pressure started building until today, finally, the Federal Government is taking action that should have started 69-days ago and is accepting help from 12 nations.  It doesn't mean, of course, that Obama and his Regime will stop trying to use the crisis as a political tool to further their energy agenda.  That will most assuredly continue.  It means only that with the November elections getting closer the Neo-Lib Democrats who must face the voters have forced the Regime to actually take action.

November just can't come soon enough!  A re-ordering of Congress is absolutely necessary to stop the Regime's abuse of its powers and, more importantly, its abuse of the American people.

One last thought:  If this had happened during the presidency of George W. Bush, what do you think would have been the reaction by the Left Stream Media?

Follow the link for more.

Self-Inflicted Defeat

The enemy.  He is not confused about who he wants to defeat.

Self-Inflicted Defeat

Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. - Sun Tzu

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. - Sun Tzu

Sun Tzu authored The Art of War centuries ago yet it is as applicable in the 21st century as it was in 300 BC. Unfortunately while professional soldiers spend their lives studying the precepts of Sun Tzu in many different forms, politicians generally fail to understand the lessons that were meant to be conveyed by the "wise" quotes that we are all used to seeing whenever authors want to appear wise when writing about war. Few politicians have read Sun Tzu and even fewer understand what was being conveyed in those writings. Obama has heard of Sun Tzu, I am sure, but I doubt that he read The Art of War and, if he did, he failed to understand it. Not that Obama is ignorant but his concept of battle comes more from the likes of Saul Alinsky than from classical strategic and tactical thought and this makes him less effective that even Lyndon Johnson who tried to run a very hot war from the White House. Democrats, with the exception of Harry Truman, have proven time and again that it just can't be done that way.

What we see with the Obama Regime, and with the Bush Administration before it, is the reticence to clearly define and identify the enemy. The failure of the Bush Administration was because after the shock of 9/11 wore off and the civil libertarians started their counter-campaigns to humanize the enemy, Republicans began acting like Democrats and paying homage to "political correctness" rather than giving the military a clear objective and allowing them to prosecute a war. With the Obama Regime, conducting war is something that has to be very tightly controlled so as to not cause any bad publicity or cause any blood to be splashed on their own shoes thus their reliance on Preditor strikes and covert action while publicly restricting the activities of troops committed openly to battle. As much as I like and admire Special Operators, folks, that is not the way to win a war. It is a way to ensure defeat, politically if not militarily. Just ask Lyndon Johnson.

You can be certain that the enemy, the Islamo-fascists who were historically allied with the National Socialists in WWII, are adhering to the teachings of Sun Tzu and von Clauswitz. You can be certain that their goal is absolute victory and they aren't worrying about looking bad in the Left Stream Media because they see the Left Stream Media, if it doesn't support them, as an enemy to be eventually eliminated as well. Their goal is total dominance. Under Obama, ours is to get along and be a "nice guy."

I wonder what Sun Tzu would say about that?

Follow the link for a very good commentary.

Money, Money, Money

Once again, the Conservative gives a higher percentage of his personal money to charity than the Leftist Liberal. It's so much easier to give away other people's money; but does he have to adopt the attitude that he cares more?  The problem with socialism, as Margaret Thatcher so clearly pointed out, is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

Follow the link for the story.

ObamaCare Signing: Ex-con at the Scene of the Crime

ObamaCare Signing: Ex-con at the Scene of the Crime

Obama is all too comfortable with ex-cons and future cons. My mother used to say "birds of a feather flock together"–among many other wise saying–and it certainly fits here.

Can you imagine the reaction of the Left Stream Media if George W. Bush had an ex-con hanging around during his two terms? The squeals of astonishment and anger would still be echoing along with accusations of ethics violations. But Obama gets a pass and becomes more arrogant with each passing day.

We clearly can't trust the media any more. The sooner they go broke the better.  And the sooner we vote the liberal-progressive-socialist Democrats out of office, the better.

Follow the link for more.

An American Liberal Reviews Karl Rove’s Account of the Iraq War

An American Liberal Reviews Karl Rove’s Account of the Iraq War

Things are different today. When I was in school the teachers all encouraged the study of history and more than once I heard the old saw that if you didn't learn from history you were doomed to repeat it. Today, however, it seems like people's memory of history only goes back as far as the last newscast they happened to hear or the last pronouncement by their favorite actor or singer. The actual study of history is usually limited to that which is approved by the increasingly liberal professors and administrators and must, of course, be absolutely politically correct. Would that the truth of history was politically correct but we know that politically correct history is the antithesis of the truth of history.

The linked review is refreshing in that the reviewer, although politically liberal, is intellectually honest. I know that's an unusual combination but it does exist more often than we conservatives imagine--Pat Caddell, the Democrat pollster from Jimmy Carter's Administration is another example--still the events in question are less than 10 years ago and should be--I stress should be--still fresh in everyone's mind. Sadly they are not. Among those who avidly voted for Obama but couldn't identify his Vice President or the things that his Vice President said or that Obama himself said, memory is about as long and in depth as that of a goldfish. That's why Karl Rove's book is needed so soon after the end of the Bush Presidency. One can fairly criticize President Bush for some of his later fiscal policies, even though those were increasingly driven by a partisan, Democrat-controlled Congress after 2006 that surely did not have Republican or the country's best interests in mind; but, his decisions on national security cannot be so easily faulted. Nor, as history clearly reveals when you remove the smoke and mirrors of the liberal-progressive-Democrat political machine and its Left Stream Media abettors, was it politically partisan. The cold, clear truth is that it was bi-partisan in nature--something the left would have you forget--and spurred by a true national interest rather than the "corporate interest" fairy tale pushed by the left today.

All in all, Rove's book looks to be an excellent read for those who want to see the truth.

Follow the link for more.

Bush says he won't take shots at Obama - Washington Times

Bush says he won't take shots at Obama - Washington Times

He wasn't perfect–a bit too liberal on some issues and too progressive when it came to the economy–but there is no way he deserved the lies that were broadcast about him during his time in office. And he shows more class than any liberal-progressive-socialist Democrat on the planet.

Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and the current president can't hold a candle to this man.

Follow the link for the story.

Freeze on HIV spending sparks concern in Africa

Freeze on HIV spending sparks concern in Africa

The Left Stream Media in its' pogrom against President George W. Bush never bothered to report on the help he extended to Africa in the fight against AIDS. Liberal-progressive-socialists, who claim the fight against AIDS as one of their causes, just ignored his help and damned everything he did. But in fact, he was much more compassionate than President Obama. Don't believe me? Then why is Obama cutting funding?

Follow the link for more.

American Thinker: Obama's Terror Non-Policy

American Thinker: Obama's Terror Non-Policy

President Obama's unconcern about Islamic terrorism has seeped to all levels of the government. That's why we're facing a renewed wave of terrorism now that his watch is well-underway. These attacks are not President Bush's fault. They are Obama's.

Follow the link for more.

ONE YEAR GONE: The Death of Class

ONE YEAR GONE: The Death of Class

George W. Bush was a gentleman and true to his word. Barack Obama is a Saul Alinsky acolyte steeped in the thuggery of The Chicago Way. The Main Stream Media consistently twisted the news to denigrate George W. Bush but Barack Obama gets a pass on everything from his close association with terrorists, questions about his record as a public servant, his educational record and his performance.

I think that history will lump the current Main Stream Media into the same trash pile with the reviled "Yellow Journalists" of the Spanish American War era. And George W. Bush will, under the harsh spotlight of history devoid of the liberal prejudices that control the airwaves, universities and print media, be judged most favorably. He wasn't a Reagan but he was a good man.

Follow the link for more.

Rethinking Bush: After the MSM’s Relentless Assault, the President Still Stands Proud

Rethinking Bush: After the MSM's Relentless Assault, the President Still Stands Proud

True words from Andrew Breitbart.

Follow the link for a good read.

Reagan v. Obama in 2010

An excellent piece from the American Spectator on the stark differences between these two political leaders. This is recommended reading.

Follow the title link for the article.