President Bush, Integrity; Barack Obama, Floppy Fish
If there was one thing you could always say about President Bush, it is that he always stood on his principles and values. He had an enormous amount of integrity and did not compromise any of those things for political expediency. He firmly believed every move and decision he made was based on what was best for the American people. He did not rely on polling data or popularity statistics. President Bush’s firmly held beliefs in a post 9/11 world are what guided him.
Now President Obama, on the other hand, stands on his teleprompter. As he has “navigated” his way through the first 100 days in the Oval Office, we have yet to really see the characteristics of integrity or doing what is right by the American People. At least two of his cabinet members should have been tossed; Turbo Tax Tim Geithner and Secretary Napolitano, both of whom have embarrassed the Oval Office and outraged the American people. If he really stood on principle and integrity they would have been gone.
President Obama showed signs of this early in the election cycle when he said he would accept public financing of the campaign, but when the primary season was over and he was the nominee, he opted out of the system and continued to collect just shy of 3/4 of a billion dollars, most of which is untraceable. That in itself goes against the Open Government Act by fully disclosing all donors.
President Bush walked his talk after the campaign. He worked with the Democratic leadership, showing bipartisanship on the budget, FISA, immigration and other issues. The only thing he would not compromise on (thank goodness) was a troop withdrawal time table. Democrats tried in vain to force his hand as the Obama backing MSM flooded the evening news night after night with each road side bomb image they could find. Very little attention was paid to the success we were having, only the carnage. This unwavering stance against a timed withdrawal was significant because he did not want give the emboldened insurgency a window in which to “wait it out”, and to prevent these politicians from micromanaging commanders in the field. True, there was pressures to change strategies in order to combat this issue, and the administration did just that; they initiated the “surge”. And guess what, it worked! Now Mr. Obama on the other hand has shown about as much bipartisanship as Iran has shown cooperation with the UN….Uh that would be none! The GOP has been completely shut out of the administration, being told to basically shut up and sit down because “we” (the Dems) won. So much for a new era of cooperation and open government.
What people fail to realize in Iraq, is that not only did we rid the world of a very evil dictator, who’s atrocities are well documented (so in fact there is you weapon of mass destruction), shut down Dr. Germ Rihab Taha (who was identified by UN weapon inspectors specifically), the mission also brought stability to the region as a whole.
If you look back, Moamar Kadafi quickly and quietly ended their rebellious ways and cracked down on terrorists in Libya. Syria also became much more user friendly, and cooperative. So there were broader positive effects.
Mr. Obama who was not a Senator when the Congress initially authorized action in Iraq, on the campaign trail he waved the “No More War” flag like the checker flag at the end of a car race. The election was soundly anti-Bush, and all the rhetoric that goes with that. ‘When he is elected president, we will be out of Iraq in 16 months at the most. There should be no confusion about that’.
Well as you all know, the mission (and I am not complaining about this) remains on target and is, in fact, in a winding down phase. We have consolidated much of our operations to specific areas in Iraq, handed over control and security operations to the Iraqi Army and Police force in many areas, continue to train and equip those forces so when we do leave, there will be stability and peace inside the borders. Mr. Obama’s rhetoric got him into the White House, but the reality of the situation on the ground in Iraq dictated his actions. And if the people who were so hell bent on completely ditching the quote “Bush Doctrine” (as Charlie Gibson tried to nail Sarah Palin with) they would have realized that this notion of up and run out of Iraq was not plausible in the least.
President Bush was thrust into a situation that day in September, unbeknown to America or our intelligence agencies. We went from a 20 plus year time of relative peace and suddenly thrust into war, against an enemy that does not belong to a nation or state, but operates in the shadows among innocent people whom they will sacrifice without any hesitation. Yes, mistakes were made. But this nation was kept safe, and still is, by those policies President Bush put into place.
Now we have a floppy fish in the White House. Yes he was thrust into an economic situation that has not been pretty. However, Mr. Teleprompter as not shown us anything except he is bent on a socialistic agenda and that he changes his word like we change underwear.
Now Mr. Obama wants to openly (yes there is that word open again) and without preconditions, have talks with these nations that simply hate the United States. Iran, who is pursuing nuclear weapons and calling for the destruction of Israel, North Korea, who has nuclear material but can not build a delivery vehicle, Venezuela, who just yesterday seized American Owned and Operated energy sites and equipment, and Cuba, where money can now flow freely without using a 3rd and 4th party intermediary. Oh yes lets not forget Mexico. Yet, another apology from Mr. Obama and Secretary Clinton for causing the drug war along the boarder.
Mr. Obama and his economic team have showered the coffers with billions and billions of dollars in order to prop up the economy. Thus far, nothing. New jobless filings hover around 600K and overall, 6.5 million people are out of work, and counting. Now that Chrysler and GM are making significant cuts, that is going to go up more this year. Not only does that effect line workers in the auto plants, but spills out to the suppliers and peripheral businesses that support them.
Mr. Obama, first week in office broke the most basic of his campaign pledges, saying that the practice of earmarks and pork spending would immediately come to and end. Say what? The first two things he signs into law are pork laden wasteful bills that did nothing. The Stimulus package, which failed to stimulate the American people, was shoved through the congress by the new Dem Majority in the middle of the night in which no one was even able to read. And what was in there (Mr. Dodd)? Bonuses for the executives at AIG, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac!!! Next he signed an Omnibus bill that contained over 9000 earmarks, again pushed through on a Dem freight train in the middle of the night.
Now the administration continues to politicize national security doctrine as the administration stammers on what our evil interrogators did to terror suspects. This emboldens the enemy, teaches them our techniques so now they can prepare for what little we actually do. The September 10th mentality of the administration puts us in jeopardy. Many of the policies that Mr. Obama so vehemently touted against remain in effect. The naval prison at Guantanamo Bay was ordered closed yet remains open as Obama plans where to send its inmates; the president has yet to establish a coherent policy on Iran — following in the Bush administration’s footsteps and while American troops are being removed from Iraq, most will stay in place until 2010.
It is important to note that all the enhanced interrogation tactics that we used actually yielded crucially important intelligence that helped keep this country safe,” with the eight years of safety on the home front since Sept. 11, 2001. Even though congressional leaders claimed to be left out of the loop on these techniques, it was revealed that the same Dem leaders, who bewitched President Bush, were duly informed of those methods. But as Dems, true to color, they pretended to take the moral high road, and were thus outed as hypocrites using this issue for political expediency.
Obama’s own Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, wrote an internal memo last week citing the “high value” information about Al Qaeda’s operations yielded by tactics such as water boarding, but its morality has been called into question by human rights monitors and many others both in and out of the Obama administration.
So therein lays the conflict with this administration. Integrity, direction, political expediency, governing by polling data, and letting Nancy Pelosi write its budget a mere 3 Trillion and some change.
So we as Americans have to wonder, where the transparency, openness, and new era of cooperation is. Yeah, that is right, so sorry, we lost.
Obama Budget Dumps Funds for Jailing Illegal Immigrants and Teaching Abstinence
President Obama voted in the Senate to provide additional funding for a program targeted for elimination by his budget that provides states a federal subsidy to offset the costs of jailing illegal immigrants.
Killing the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAPP) would save $400 million, according to Obama’s budget for fiscal 2010 released Thursday. It’s one of the largest non-defense discretionary cuts proposed in the president’s budget.
Think along with me here folks… Each illegal immigrants, studies show, cost Americans roughly $1 million dollars. Democrats are trying to push through a new Amnesty bill for nearly 12 million illegal immigrants. $1M x $12M = More than $400M! The logic of Democrats make absolutely no sense at all. They never plan ahead or measure the possible long-term repercussions of their actions. Obama sees money that can be cut now – so he doesn’t, or can’t, look beyond that. This action will actually cost us more money in the end.
Obama cuts abstinence-only programsout of the budget as well. Many argue that abstinence is not realistic in today’s society, but that has become more the norm due to Hollyweird and others advocating sex on a regular basis. Sex sells and sex is becoming the norm. My personal belief is to teach both and emphasize that the only sure fire way to avoid getting pregnant and contracting an STD is abstinence. What doesn’t make sense to me is the budget cut for this.
The White House wants to get out of the business of telling youngsters “Just Say No to Sex.”
President Obama is putting his own ideological stamp on federal spending in his proposed 2010 budget by cutting cash for abstinence-only sex ed programs.
He’s taken a scalpel to a pair of $100 million George W. Bush-era programs that exclusively preached abstinence. Obama is replacing them with $110 million for comprehensive teen pregnancy prevention.
“It’s about time that evidence-based management – and sanity – return to family planning programs,” said Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan).
Think along with me again. The more young unwed mothers you create, the more welfare recipients you create. The more welfare recipients you create, the more loyal Democrat voters you create.
Thus, Democrat sex-education must always focus on getting teenagers to have more sex, not less.
Another important point to note – see what I bolded above? How is this a tax cut? If he is replacing the PAIR of programs that each equaled $100 million with only one program worth $110 million then it is, but the writing is very vague and misleading here… the question is if he is going to replace both programs with two other programs worth more money than the previous ones…
A picture of what his budget cuts really look like in the scheme of things:
Dumping the say-no-to-sex programs were a tiny fraction of the $17 billion Team Obama trimmed from its $3.4 trillion funding budget request.Overall, New Yorkers say Obama’s budget helps the city – but raised several red flags.
One is Obama’s plan to cut $600 million from the federal terrorism insurance program.
Maybe that’s what New Yorkers should be focusing on – not sex! Wake up!
Napolitano Flip-Flops – Make Up Your Mind!
Active or Passive – which one is it?
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is asserting that the description she initially gave of the border swine-flu monitoring effort no longer applies.
Appearing Wednesday before a Senate panel, Napolitano said that “passive surveillance” is “not an accurate picture of what is going on” at U.S. entry points. She had used that term Tuesday morning to describe the nature of the monitoring for illness.
On Wednesday, Napolitano said that U.S. officials are “actively” questioning visitors at the border, asking questions about “whether they are ill, their travel history and the like.”
She also discounted turning to thermal meters to gauge whether people are carrying a fever, and Napolitano also said she does not believe the facts of the current situation would merit closing the borders.
McCain Will Face 2010 Challenger in The Primaries
Good! Let’s get a true conservative/libertarian leaning politician in the Senate. It’s time to take back America and kick the bums out!
Social conservatives tolerated John McCain as the party’s nominee, but never trusted him, and he now appears to be facing a serious primary from the right in Arizona next year.
Chris Simcox, the founder of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps and a prominent figure in the movement to clamp down on illegal immigration, will be announcing tomorrow at an event on the Mexican border that he’s resigned from the group to run in the 2010 Senate primary.
From a forthcoming release:
“John McCain has failed miserably in his duty to secure this nation’s borders and protect the people of Arizona from the escalating violence and lawlessness,” Simcox said. “He has fought real efforts over the years at every turn, opting to hold our nation’s border security hostage to his amnesty schemes. Coupled with his votes for reckless bailout spending and big government solutions to our nation’s problems, John McCain is out of touch with everyday Arizonans. Enough is enough.”
McCain was forced to abandon his own immigration reform legislation during last year’s Republican Primary, a move that may have cost him substantial Hispanic support to which his record could have given him access.
So he’s basically getting it from both sides on this one.
Simcox, with a national base and a high profile on the right, is well positioned to give McCain a serious local headache. He’ll find some allies among the conservatives who recently took over the Arizona Republican Party from McCain’s allies, and he has a national fundraising base.
UPDATE: Here’s his campaign website, which includes a clear effort not to be a single-issue immigration candidate.
And just for the record Politico – it wasn’t just social conservatives who didn’t find McCain palatable, but it was those who believed in the constitution, true Federalism, limited government and weren’t pro-amnesty.






