Tag Archives: Ronald Reagan

Barack Bamboozles Berlin

2013-06-19T140644Z_1859666459_LR2E96J136YQ1_RTRMADP_3_OBAMA-BERLINOriginally posted at American Thinker

Barack Obama showed up again in Berlin. Sadly, 194,000 of the fawning devotees that cheered him like a rock star in 2008 chose to skip the 2013 encore.

Nonetheless, directly out of the Brandenburg gate, the president commenced with injecting race and gender into the conversationwhen he said “Angela and I don’t exactly look like previous German and American leaders.” Obama then informed the audience, consigned by invitation to stand in the blistering heat listening to his blather, that Michelle, Malia, and Sasha, rather than endure his grueling speech, chose instead to experience the “beauty and the history of Berlin” (at American taxpayers’ expense).

But probably the most amazing aspect of Obama’s Berlin speech was his typical lack of self-awareness when making assertions that conflict with everything he does. For instance, although President Obama is actively persecuting the “unoriginated birthright of man,” he quoted German philosopher Immanuel Kant, who said “freedom is the ‘unoriginated birthright of man, and it belongs to him by force of his humanity.'”

Obama even posed questions Americans ask about him:

Will we live free or in chains? Under governments that uphold our universal rights, or regimes that suppress them? In open societies that respect the sanctity of the individual and our free will, or in closed societies that suffocate the soul?

In Berlin, Obama attempted to one-up Ronald Reagan’s “Peace through Strength” strategy by stealing John F. Kennedy’s “Peace with Justice” mantra and scheduled the revision to take place at Brandenburg Gate, where his social justice spiel paled in comparison to authentic Reagan strength.

The president’s references were pitiful attempts to support the liberal dream of a daisy-holding, Kumbaya-singing utopia that the human condition prevents.

Ignoring nations stoking the nuclear flames, President “Ich bin ein Idiot” cited JFK’s famous 1962 “Ich bin ein Berliner” speech when suggesting that Germans “lift [their] eyes beyond the dangers of today… to the day of peace with justice[.]” Caught up in the rapture of the moment, Obama apparently missed the contradiction in mentioning Kennedy’s assassination six months after he promoted “peace with justice.”

Speaking of contradictions, Mr. Obama shared that Kennedy’s words are “timeless because they call upon us to care more about things than just our own self-comfort.” This from a president who’s about to embark on a $100 million African vacation, toting along a wife whose “self-comfort” demands recently included bunking in a $4,000-a-night Princess Grace suite in Ireland.

After encouraging youthful unemployed Germans to relinquish self-comfort, citizen of the world Obama shifted to “For we are not only citizens of America or Germany — we are also citizens of the world. And our fates and fortunes are linked like never before.” That is, unless linking “fates and fortunes” means sharing a $4,000-a-night hotel room with Michelle Obama.

Never mentioning pressure cookers, hijacked airplanes, banana hammock bombers, or wild-eyed Muslims gunning down American soldiers, and after riding around in an armored limo and building a mysterious underground bunker beneath the White House, Obama proclaimed, “We may no longer live in fear of global annihilation, but so long as nuclear weapons exist, we are not truly safe.”

President Obama also seemed to imply that food stamps and unemployment checks may be the answer to the threat of worldwide terrorism, which he claimed results from the “agony of an empty stomach or the anguish of unemployment.”

Then, after dissing Catholic education in Ireland, Obama dredged up sins that penitent nations have already remediated when he unnecessarily brought up intolerance and abuses “based on race, or religion, gender or sexual orientation.”

Obama then advanced a concept that he doesn’t apply to Christians or American conservatives, which is that “When we stand up for our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters and treat their love and their rights equally under the law, we defend our own liberty as well.”

That’s when the “Peace with justice” rant began. Obama cited free enterprise and freedom, neither of which he’s a huge fan of. From there, he segued into environmentalism, closing Guantanamo, ending the Afghan war, controlling the drones he has surveilling U.S. airspace, undermining the Constitution and calling it “balancing the pursuit of security with the protection of privacy,” and meeting moral obligations that have nothing to do with morality.

Funny, Obama proves he’s vulnerable to nuclear self-destruction whenever the Teleprompter is unavailable. Yet, he imagines peace can only be realized through sending a message to America’s enemies that in a nuclear-aggressive environment the most powerful nation in the world is voluntarily reducing the number of its nuclear warheads.

Then, after sparring with Vladimir Putin, the ex-KGB communist adulterer who’s clearly not a bastion of trustworthiness over Syria and G-8 gym space, the president claimed that Russia and the U.S. “reject the nuclear weaponization that North Korea and Iran may be seeking.”

Did he say “may be seeking?” What Obama forgot to explain was how “rejecting” nuclear weaponization saves lives if Kim Jong-Un or Hassan Rohani decides to lob a nuke.

Not to worry though; Barack quoted James Madison and then claimed that he too is moving “beyond a mindset of perpetual war.” The president cited a 2016 ‘secure nuclear materials’ summit, which despite the growing threat of international terrorism, Obama believes is a “step” toward “creat[ing] a world of peace with justice.”

The problem is that the guy who said “Threats to freedom don’t merely come from the outside. They can emerge from withi[n]” is the one threatening America’s freedom, and the perpetual warfare he speaks of is not America’s doing.

Nonetheless, in an attempt to soothe irate Germans who do not take kindly to tyrannical despots infringing on The Lives of Others, Barack Obama suggested something he does through surveillance — not face-to-face — which is to “listen to the voices who disagree” with him. Next he laughably added the importance of “always remember[ing] that government exists to serve the power of the individual, and not the other way around.”

Barack Obama ended with a Martin Luther King Jr. quote crescendo: “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

In the end, so too does “loss of freedom in America threaten freedom everywhere.” That loss is precisely why, both in Germany and here at home, free people must grasp the potentially harmful impact the ‘peace-loving’ guy standing behind eight inches of bulletproof glass seeks to impose on the Western world.

Inspector Barack Clouseau Reassures the Germans

Presentation1-300x382Originally posted at The Blacksphere

In 2008, 200,000 excited Germans attended Barack Obama’s Berlin speech.

Now, four years later, 194,000 decided to stay home and only 6,000 invited guests attended the President’s one-up on Ronald Reagan with an ‘Eliminate America’s Nuclear Arsenal Speech’ at the Brandenburg Gate.

According to Ralf Fücks of the Heinrich Böll Foundation (you can’t make this stuff up), a nonprofit political organization in Berlin, the German people have endured “a brutal sobering up” and are no longer all that impressed with the guy being chauffeured around in “The Beast.”

As a matter of fact, a group of protests directed at the NSA surveillance of foreign communications took place and drew in about four dozen people who greeted Mr. “Yes we can” with posters that read, “Yes, we scan!”

That’s why Barack Obama, the guy who isn’t all that concerned about anyone’s life unless it benefits him politically, is attempting to reassure German Chancellor Angela Merkel that U.S. Internet and phone surveillance programs are needed to save lives.

Obama has proof! No, not in Boston or Ft. Hood, but somewhere or other, thanks to relentless Inspector Barack Clouseau’s efforts, “Lives have been saved.”

Yeah, butt, er, I mean but, colonoscopies save lives too. So does that mean that once Obamacare kicks in, when Americans least expect it, in the name of saving lives, mandatory, non-consensual colonoscopies will also be administered? How about a few unsolicited Heimlich Maneuvers, just in case?

After expressing astonishment at the huge scope of the Obama Administration’s spying operation, Merkel said the U.S. needs to make clear what sort of intelligence is being gathered and who is being monitored.

Sorry, but if “intelligence” is what Merkel is looking for, she’s looking in the wrong place. The Obama Administration shadowing phone calls and Facebook profile pages while refusing to close our porous border is neither intelligent, nor will it curtail the threat of terrorism.

Tempering her mistrust, Ms. Merkel reiterated that intelligence is key to hindering terrorist plots, and agreed that Germany is “dependent” on unintelligent Americans to spy on people who’ve done nothing other than disagree with Barack Obama.

Further calming Ms. Merkel’s fears, President Obama explained that in order to ensure that any violation of privacy is strictly limited, the program that has been thoroughly overseen by the courts basically consists of the Department of Justice limiting its surveillance to Fox News reporters and tea party groups.

Sorry, but dieser Clown ist voller Scheiße!

Obama Defiles Reagan Stagecraft


Originally posted at American Thinker

In 2011 in Time Magazine, while President Obama’s job approval was dropping like a rock, Ronald Reagan’s daughter and faithful Obama supporter Patti Davis wrote an article entitled “Perception and Reality: What Obama Really Needs Right Now.”

Davis addressed Barack Obama’s poor public image and did so by pointing out that Mike Deaver, White House Chief of Staff under President Reagan, helped shape America’spositive impression of her father by crafting patriotic theatre that enhanced the public’s perception of the former president.

Romesh Ratnesar, author of the book Tear Down This Wall, agreed with the premise that Mike Deaver’s “true talent was stagecraft,” and that he was the “most powerful force in the molding of President Reagan’s public image.”

In her “perception and reality” article it was easy for Davis to stir up memories of the “windy promontory called Pointe du Hoc and the soft light over the English Channel as [her] father honored the 40th anniversary of D-Day,” and resurrect images of Reagan at the Brandenburg Gate challenging, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.”

Two decades later, the current president’s idea of a Brandenburg Gate moment is to have a group of mind-numbed acolytes clap uncontrollably when he announces that he’ll be punishing the rich for being successful.

Despite the potential for a public relations disaster, Barack Obama even golfed during an oil disaster and vacationed with the “family at exactly the same time that Japan was suffering through a nuclear disaster, Libya had been bombed, and there was a threat of a government shutdown.” Also seared into America’s mind’s eye are images of Barack Obama body surfing in Hawaii as the nation teetered dangerously close to the edge of the fiscal cliff. Then, after very public, very heated negotiations concerning the ominous economic future of the country, Obama brazenly spent $7 million just flying back and forth to Hawaii for vacation.

Over the last four years Barack Obama has shown that indeed he is a theatrical phenom, proving Patti Davis’s impression to be far afield. After all, what other president consistently dispatched a message of defiance to his detractors, smiled while giving the middle finger to his critics, and did it all while further enamoring his sycophants? That’s a level of proficiency even Reagan lacked.

The difference between Reagan and Obama is that instead of doing what the Gipper did, which was to impart a measure of his own patriotic optimism to the country, Obama openly exposes his resentment by dragging around the disgruntled and downtrodden as props to help convey a message that divides rather than unifies the nation.

Case in point — recently, White House pool boy/press secretary Jay Carney announced that Obama would be unveiling a “concrete package” sure to give the U.S. Constitution the Jimmy Hoffa treatment.

The $500 million gun violence ‘package’ included 23 executive actions addressing “gun control proposals including assault weapons bans, high capacity ammunition magazine bans, and closing loopholes on background checks.” In other words, the same guy who claims he can’t find millions of illegal aliens has miraculously found a way to track down and register 300 million guns.

In pseudo-Reaganesque mode, the president’s anti-Second Amendment effort was made public while armed Secret Service agents stood in the wings ensuring his personal safety. In place of a huge American flag billowing in the breeze, a stalwart Vice President Joe Biden, overseer of Obama’s commission on gun violence, was also in attendance to provide moron — oops — moral support.

To set the tone, the absolutely shameless Barack Obama misused small “children from around the country” who, after the Newtown shootings, supposedly wrote to him expressing concerns about “gun violence and school safety.” Accompanying the kids were their clueless parents, all of whom most assuredly supported Obama in 2012.

The only thing missing from the anti-gun violence show were a few of the kids openly weeping in the background as Obama stressed the nation’s moral duty to spare the little ones from fear and harm.

Weeping or not, President Obama lost all credibility when he decided to use children as props. Again, despite the melodrama, this man does not care one iota about child safety. Barack Obama believes in partial birth abortion and gladly provides unlimited government funding to terminate as many unborn children as Planned Parenthood can possibly snuff out.

Yet, while unveiling his executive actions the president said, “This is our first task as a society, keeping our children safe. This is how we will be judged.” If NARAL darling Barack Obama were to be judged honestly on his child safety record, then living, breathing youngsters would not have graced the White House ceremony.

That is why, when it comes to utilizing the power of acting, clearly, Ronald Reagan’s daughter Patti Davis misjudged Time Magazine’s Person of the Year’s ability to compete with her father. Hence, Obama’s well thought-out attempt to fortify his gun control argument by having young children flock around a man who would have unblinkingly aborted them is just another attempt to woo America into viewing him as something he is not.

Even so, Obama seems unfazed by the paradox he projects. After all, why should he be? Despite his horrendous first term, lethal tendencies, and blatant Constitutional breaches, he managed to manipulate the public into granting him another four years. Therefore, transparent theatrics being used as a substitute for conviction and character is an apropos reward for an electorate who’ve willingly forfeited truth for Obama-orchestrated displays of propaganda.

And so, surrounded by giggling children, as Barack Obama censured Congress and with a pen as his weapon of choice aborted the Second Amendment, the image he successfully conveyed was that nothing and no one can prevent him from “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” into a vision Ronald Reagan would have demanded he tear down.

Barack Obama ‘Making History’ Again

Originally posted at American Thinker

America has had 43 presidents, but only a handful of them are considered truly great.  First, of course, is the humble general and commander-in-chief of the Continental Army, George Washington, and certainly right behind him is Abraham Lincoln, who saved the Union and whose actions led to the abolition of slavery.

Then there was foundational figurehead Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence and doubled the size of the country; a surprising wartime leader named Harry Truman whose bold decision brought the end of WWII; and the incomparable Ronald Reagan, communism-buster and Cold War victor.

Now, after just three years, a new name is being bandied about as a possible addition to the short list of presidential notables, and that name is Barack Obama.

Recently, while campaigning for her husband’s re-election in Omaha, Nebraska, Michelle Obama declared, “We made history.”  After less than one term, it might seem a bit premature to claim historical preeminence, but truth is, by being identified as America’s first African-American/biracial president, Obama has in fact made history.

In addition to his initial achievement of surmounting racial prejudice, according to his wife Michelle, in less than one term, not only has the president led America “out of the dark and into the light,” but his pioneering leadership has also catapulted him into the realm of presidential greatness.

Oddly enough, when backing up her “making history” claim, the first lady chose not to cite Obama’s economic, foreign, or social policy endeavors.  Instead, the first lady focused her attention on Obama’s $950-billion signature legislation, the Affordable Healthcare for America Act.

Expounding upon the president’s signature achievement, Michelle Obama said, “Two years ago, we made history together by finally passing health reform. And because we passed this law, insurance companies will now have to cover basic preventive care — things like prenatal care, mammograms, contraception — at no extra cost.”

If “making history” includes trying to accommodate the sexual activities of American citizens, exhibiting intrepid leadership when standing against the United States Constitution, imposing an antagonistic mandate upon religious organizations, and placing contraceptive availability above the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, then Barack Obama certainly has made his mark.

Moreover, when compared with great moments in history, listening to Michelle Obama laud her husband’s legislative victories makes the Louisiana Purchase pale in comparison to the monumental magnitude of dispensing morning-after pills and condoms free of charge.

To be fair, if for nothing else, with fortitude and courage similar to those of five-star general and 34th President of the United States Dwight D. Eisenhower, Barack Obama certainly does deserve a medal for prevailing in a Democrat-contrived “war on women” and for his unflinching insistence upon “a regulation mandating that insurance companiesprovide women with free contraceptives.”

However, for some historical perspective, consider the words of limited-government proponent and Sage of Monticello Thomas Jefferson.  When Jefferson made the observation that “[i]f we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy[,]” what he probably wasn’t anticipating was the government offering to take care of happy people by promising them taxpayer-funded medical care and free birth control.

Moreover, when Thomas Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence, the foundational premise of self-government hinged upon the objection to Britain’s oppressive king doing things like sending “swarms of officers … hither … to harass [the colonists], and eat out of their substance.”

At the time, little did Jefferson or any of the Founding Fathers know that one day there would be a czar-appointing, tax-loving, regulation-imposing president counted among their ranks, whose policies are the antithesis of the founding principles they established and, for lack of a better comparison, who would be America’s very own modern-day George III.

Try as the Founders might, two centuries ago it was impossible to foresee a big-government bureaucrat type as president, a man teetering on the edge of despotism who would sidestep the Constitution and seize for the federal government the power to mandate that “nearly all health insurance plans in the United States must provide women with sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives (including those that can induce abortions) without any fees or co-pay.”

Nor could the founders of our nation fathom that a faux-exuberant version of Abigail Adams would justify her husband earning a second term by characterizing free access to birth control as “making history.”

In over 200 years, 42 history-making presidents have come and gone — but never has our nation’s hard-fought heritage been subject to a leader who dares profess historical greatness for implementing policies that force American citizens to fund insurance coverage for free contraceptives and abortion on demand.

Furthermore, say what you will about unwavering spousal support, but Mrs. Obama handing out kudos for squelching freedoms established upon the tenets of the U.S. Constitution is downright extraordinary.  Maybe someone should inform both the president and the first lady — not that they would care — that it was Thomas Jefferson who cautioned, “The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”

Therefore, in keeping with Michelle Obama’s historical vision of her history-making husband, as the 2012 election rapidly approaches, there’s no better time for America to honor Barack Obama this Election Day than by sending him a message of historical proportions.

Obama’s Success in a Failed Country

Originally posted at American Thinker

Great patriot President Ronald Reagan once said: “Each generation goes further than the generation preceding it because it stands on the shoulders of that generation.”  At the time he spoke those words, Reagan assured Americans that “[y]ou will have opportunities beyond anything we’ve ever known.”

Conservative Ronald Reagan promoted optimistic prospects for the future, and it appears as if liberal ideologue Barack Obama looks for every opportunity to suppress them.  Thus, Reagan’s impression of America as a land where exponential growth in opportunity would be passed down from generation to generation is quite different from the cataclysmic future Barack Obama’s policies are presently cultivating.  Of course, Barack’s not worried about his own kids, because “they’re on a path that is going to be successful, even if the country as a whole is not successful.”

Clearly, for political expediency, the president of the United States has no qualms about boasting of personal wealth and success if doing so instills the type of envy and fear in the American voter that foster further dependency and discourage autonomy.

Not only is Obama’s elitist prediction telling, but it’s prophetic.  Tucked within the obvious anti-American sentiment is a qualifier that exempts his family from a dire future that he believes, without liberal intervention, the rest of the nation’s children are destined to endure.

Rather than sharing a vision of America as a “shining city on a hill,” Reagan’s arrogant antithesis, Barack Obama, campaigns on the taxpayer’s dime and insists that if Republicans are in power, a dismal future awaits America.

The basis of Obama’s prediction is that if the Republican leadership gets its way, the United States is ruined and will no longer be a land of opportunity.  What Barack conveniently fails to mention is that he is the harbinger of the endemic entitlement mentality and unmanageable debt the next generation will be forced to face in place of the unlimited personal advancement President Reagan promoted.

Instead of proclaiming the greatness of America, while wife Michelle dines at trendy D.C. restaurants, Barack Obama cooks up huge cauldrons of class warfare on the campaign trail.  The president stokes the fire of support with words of societal and economic division when he boasts that “[o]ur kids are going to be fine. And I always tell Malia and Sasha, look, you guys, I don’t worry about you … they’re on a path that is going to be successful, even if the country as a whole is not successful.”

Such absurd statements are not out of character.  Why shouldn’t the Obama daughters rest in the knowledge that the same opportunities their father’s policies deny the rest of the country will be a privilege they’ll enjoy, regardless of who suffers?  Meanwhile, Mrs. Obama eats chunks of chocolate sculpture for dessert while lecturing the rest of the nation about staying away from sweets.

Both the president and his wife have been afforded every opportunity this nation could provide and then some.  Now, the thank-you America gets is the president of the United States telling a crowd of “supporters” that there is a good possibility that the country he claims to lead has the potential to not be successful “as a whole”?

Wasn’t it Michelle, recently seen dining at the oh-so-chic co co. sala lounge and boutique, who realigned Americans’ lofty aspirations by saying, “They don’t want the whole pie.  There are some who do, but most Americans feel blessed just being able to thrive a little bit…someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more”?

Now Barack Obama claims that he fears an “America where [his] kids are living behind walls and gates, and can’t feel a part of a country that is giving everybody a shot.”  Seems the president forgot that his brand of liberal ideology discourages exactly what he’s claiming Republican policies deny.  Barack is the one pushing “thrive a little bit” policies while crowing about how, unlike other children, his two girls will be among the favored few who succeed.

Instead of bolstering generational success, the president is burdening rather than buoying future generations.  Sadly but truly, Obama is right — if he has anything to say about it, his privileged daughters will certainly do well, but if his share-the-wealth/tax-and-spend governing remains in place, the nation “as a whole” will ultimately fail.

Rather than standing tall, if Barack Obama’s “fundamental transformation” continues, the country is destined to be flaccid and weighed down, a bankrupt wilderness with insurmountable debt accrued by a president whose vision of government “giving everybody a shot” is the real reason why — unlike Sasha and Malia — most American children could face a future without a strong set of shoulders to stand upon.


Obama’s Ocular Redwood

Whenever Barack Obama strides up that long red rug and approaches the presidential podium to deliver a statement to the nation, two sentences after he opens his mouth, idioms having to with planks and splinters; glass houses and stones; and pots calling kettles black immediately come to mind.

Another example of “One donkey calls the other one long ears” was Obama’s most recent prime time outburst to address the debt issue.  Determined to not be blamed for the debt ceiling impasse, in accusatory mode a petulant President cited the usual suspects: villainous corporate jet owners; wealthy Americans; corporate tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires; special deductions; hedge fund managers; oil companies; and of course the accusation that the right stacks the deck “against middle-class Americans in favor of the wealthiest few.”

Other than rehearsing a campaign speech and chiding Republicans, the President offered not one substantive solution to the debt crisis.  However, he did cover the usual Republican-induced debt threats that included the standard fare of fewer college graduates, public servant layoffs, broken roads and collapsing bridges, e coli-ridden uninspected food, homeless veterans lying along the side of the road, Medicare and Medicaid recipients sitting in broken-down wheelchairs, dying for lack of adequate health care, and medical research going the way of NASA.

Although he’s been back in Texas for over three years now, even GW Bush was called on to make a perfunctory appearance in absentia.  In the oddest moment of the entire evening, Obama intimated that former President Bush was responsible for the debt crisis, and then while lobbying for raising the debt ceiling he praised Bush for raising it seven times, even though Obama had voted against it as Senator.  Within the context of his remarks, the first negative comment was so far from the second laudatory statement that the President must not have even noticed the obvious contradiction, proving once again that befuddled people should avoid being haughty.

A presidential aide should have slipped him a reminder note:  Mr. President, if you’re going to blame Republicans, whatever you do, don’t accuse Bush of leaving you a dire economic situation and then praise him for an economic fix that you voted against as Senator, but that you now want to implement.

So caught up in relinquishing personal responsibility for the impasse, the President failed to realize that he was boasting to 9.2% of the struggling unemployed population and those “bone-tired” Americans “scraping by, just to put food on the table,” that his being wildly successful makes him unlike the rest of America.

For the third time in three weeks, the President mentioned how unreasonable it is to “ask people like [himself] to give up tax breaks [he didn’t] need and didn’t ask for” – but has yet to reject.  The “I’m really rich, you’re really poor” message was surpassed only by a didactic-style insult that implied most Americans are too dense to understand what the term “debt ceiling” means.

After bringing up every President short of George Washington to support his raise-the-debt-ceiling/ continue-spending/more-entitlements/non-plan plan, the President had the gall to place himself in the economic company of Ronald Reagan.  Sorry, but Barack Obama comparing his fiscal philosophy with Ronald Reagan’s is on par with formerly bankrupt Donald Trump thinking he has the investment savvy of Warren Buffett.

Obama implied that America is ‘offended’ by everyone other than himself, never once accepting responsibility for how offensive he’s been on issues such as health care reform, immigration, the border, the economy, Israel, and the basic foundational tenets of freedom.

Always arrogant, cheeky, and overconfident, the President cited “dysfunctional government.” But, based on his comments he didn’t seem to recognize his own face looming high above the rabble of dysfunction.  Moreover, while polls continue to indicate that most Americans are “fed up” with Obama, the President apparently doesn’t think America relegates him to the same category as they do the rest of Washington DC.

With each passing primetime pity party, it becomes clearer to anyone with eyes to see that unbeknownst to only himself, by blaming others for things he’s far more guilty of the President of the United States exemplifies what the Arabs mean when they say, “The camel cannot see the crookedness of its own neck.”

President Barack Obama said, “This is no way to run the greatest country on Earth,” and it sure as heck isn’t. Defiant and exempt from blame, Obama maintained that Republicans’ refusal to act in accordance with his treacherous approach to economics places the future of the nation at risk.  According to the President, the “dangerous game” America is playing hinges squarely on Congress’s failure to comply with – you guessed it – his wishes.

Barack Obama was correct when he said that “American history remembers the ones who put country above self, and set personal grievances aside for the greater good,” but he does neither of those. Furthermore, he was also accurate when he said: “Our nation remembers the Americans who held this country together during its most difficult hours; who put aside pride and party to form a more perfect union” – which again is something rock-throwing, sulky child Barack Obama, living inside his glass house, has yet to do.

By refusing to acknowledge the massive collateral damage he has caused in three short years, Barack Obama, the guy with the 360-foot Sequoia stuck in his eye, has spent the greater part of his tenure attempting to pick at the splinters of those doing everything they can to save the nation.

Regardless of his monotonous, repetitive rhetoric, “rigid ideologue” Barack Obama has proven time and again that he lacks the self-control to resist having “I want my way” temper tantrums in primetime and the honesty to assume culpability for the results of the poor policy decisions to which he has subjected the nation. Moreover, publicly rebuking his adversaries by exploiting Thomas Jefferson’s words that “Every man cannot have his way in all things” indicates that Obama is a man stricken with a mind-numbing lack of self-awareness that rears its ugly head every time he approaches the podium.

Tripping the Light Fantastic with Lady Gaga and Obama

Originally posted at Pajamas Media

Just the other day Lady Gaga took another tumble, which indicates once again that the woman formerly known as Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta, and Barack Obama, formerly known as Barry Soetoro, have a lot in common.

Lady Gaga and Barack Obama are overnight sensations, have huge cult-like followings, know how to pack a stadium, and do their best work communicating over a microphone.  Lady Gaga can play piano, drums and the keytar, and Obama can play an audience. Stefani talks to God and Obama is convinced he is God. One loves to sing about Judas, the other loves himself and labels his detractors Judas.

Ms. Germanotta does a blasphemous impression of Madonna and, try as he might, when it comes to channeling Ronald Reagan, Mr. Obama falls short.

Lady Gaga and Barack Obama both spoke insensitively about Special Olympiads and later were constrained to publicly apologize.  The only difference between the two is that to date, Obama has yet to show up behind the podium shod in a pair of Alexander McQueen Armadillo shoes.

Attention junkie Lady Gaga and imperious amateur Barack Obama are bound to fizzle out.  The past tells us that media creations launch into the stratosphere and then, lacking endurance, swiftly sputter and fall. Yet, despite recent Easter and Passover hubbubs and various and sundry ongoing controversies, meteoric icons Gaga and Barack continue to press on.

Barack is a politician and Lady Gaga a pop star, both notorious for unstable footing – Gaga literally, Obama politically.

With nary a shred of embarrassment, Gaga fell while making her way through Heathrow Airport, got up and kept going.  Recently, “while trying to straddle” her flaming piano bench, she slid off, hit the floor, and then bounced right back up, never missing a beat.  Then, weeks later, Miss Germanotta danced up a storm, threw off her jacket, swung her bleached blonde hair around, stomped sexily in the direction of her dance troupe, and again hit the floor – hard.

According to TMZ, “Just like the last fall … Gaga got right up and trucked on like nothing ever happened.” Effie Orfanides at the Gather Entertainment Channel made the following observation about Lady Gaga’s resiliency:

The great thing about it is that she just falls over and doesn’t miss a beat. In fact…Gaga tried to incorporate the fall in to her routine, which is very hard to do…especially when everyone knows that you’re prone to toppling over during your shows. Anyway, no one seems bothered by her constant dropping…It’s actually less funny to watch now that it has happened a bunch of times!

Which brings the conversation back around to Barack Obama – both Barry and Steffi fall over, struggle to stand, and subject the world to a never-ending show that’s downright painful to watch.

Barack is the Lady Gaga of politics, all glitz and hype and totally overexposed.  The President may not be dancing around in a meat suit, but politically, the man slips and slides all over the place. Much like Lady Gaga, Obama benefits from the affection of a youthful audience.  These days, his approval rating continues to drop and flop, like Lady Gaga attempting to simultaneously stand erect and maintain coolness.

Afghanistan; Libya; tax cuts then tax hikes; raise the debt ceiling, then regret being against raising the debt ceiling; offshore drilling on again, then off again; Defense of Marriage Act then no Defense of Marriage Act; against lifting Don’t Ask Tell, then time to lift DADT.  Is Guantanamo prison open or closed?  On all these issues and many more, Obama straddles a blazing political piano seat and the public is noticing that the guy who often mentions “God and gays” keeps hitting the floor with a crash.

Barry’s slide in the polls is so embarrassingly dramatic that in the aftermath of the Japanese earthquake, instead of filling out basketball brackets the President might fare better if, in the future, he takes to the stage and purposely topples over à la Gaga.

Unfortunately for America, much like Lady Gaga Obama “falls over” yet “doesn’t miss a beat,” and of late, based on the content of his oblivious speeches, is clearly attempting “to incorporate the fall into [his] routine,” but the audience, filled to the rafters with formerly ardent fans, are wising up to the con.

In 2008, voters sang along with Lady Gaga: “I want your everything as long as it’s free/I want your love, love, love, love.” After enduring the President’s klutzy governing style and witnessing his inability to keep from stumbling on the world stage, the nation is finally starting to comprehend that they’ve been involved in a “Bad Romance” with someone who is dangerously out-of-sync with the rhythm of the nation.

So, in the end the Gaga/Obama duo remains alike in a lot of ways, except for one huge difference: as clumsy Lady Gaga continues stumbling about in packed arenas, Barack’s audience is slowly drifting out of his amphitheatre.

Obama is Kicking the Dog – American Thinker – May 20, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker

Barack Obama has taken up the fine art of “kicking the dog,” which is a narcissistic practice where a person in authority passes blame along to the lowest level, where, for lack of a fall guy, the dog ends up getting kicked. Obama claims that the buck stops with him, yet the president habitually avoids blame by pointing the finger of accusation at animate people and inanimate objects, which translates into presidential “dog-kicking.”

Obama has proven to be a master blamer and finger-pointer. In fact, Obama takes finger-pointing to a whole new level. The president even finger-points at and blames people for finger-pointing and blaming. Dog-kicker Barack obviously considers blaming others an executive privilege and exclusive right.

Recently, while addressing the explosion and subsequent oil spill in the Gulf, a temperamental Obama did some public canine-kicking in the Rose Garden. The president “harshly criticized BP and other companies for falling over each other to point the finger of blame at somebody else.”

A “visibly angry” Obama chastised big oil for passing the buck, saying, “I did not appreciate what I considered to be a ridiculous spectacle during the congressional hearings into the matter.”

Potentially in a position to ultimately bear some responsibility for the Deepwater Horizon tragedy, slickster Obama greased the censure wheel to ensure his own seamless slippage through an oily situation, and he did so by kicking a dog or two.

Often guilty of defying prior commitments with contradicting actions, Barack Obama began by holding British Petroleum to their pledge to “pay for the response effort.” The president vowed to personally “hold them to their obligation.”
Suddenly bailout Barack is a stickler for obligatory liability?

Pointing a long and growing-ever-longer finger toward the camera, void of even a hint of self-awareness, Obama chided BP, Transocean, and Halliburton executives, saying, “I will not tolerate more finger-pointing or irresponsibility.”

So does the Obama “I don’t have to count my time because I’m the president” exemption also extend to finger-pointing and passing the buck?

Mr. Obama said he was “not going to rest or be satisfied until the leak was stopped at the source … contained and cleaned up.” But rest assured: If the leak is not “stopped,” “contained,” or “cleaned up,” it won’t be Barry’s fault.

The president assigned blame and did so by masterfully identifying himself with the victims.  Barack said, “I saw firsthand the anger and frustration felt by our neighbors in the Gulf, and let me tell you, it is an anger and frustration that I share as president.”

Obama even used the “blame Bush” maneuver to excuse himself from culpability. Barry said, “For a decade or more, there’s been a cozy relationship between the oil companies and the federal agency that permits them to drill. … That cannot and will not happen anymore.”

For added fortification, Obama hauled out the Gipper, and by doing so exercised the skill of what can only be described as the highest form of manipulative obfuscation. Obama blasphemed Reagan’s words and used them as a missile against Bush, B.P., and Big Oil by borrowing and misappropriating the old phrase, “we will trust, but we will verify.”

A more apropos Reagan quote would have been, “How can a president not be an actor?”

Still pointing the bony finger of blame, Obama said that Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar recognized the need for reform prior to the spill, but he “often-times has been slammed by the industry, suggesting that somehow these necessary reforms would impede economic growth.”

It’s incomprehensible that the President of the United States would try to exempt himself from responsibility by suggesting that the Obama administration was prepared for a spill “from day one” but was hindered from effecting a viable solution by the oil industry. This is the same man who continually blames G.W. Bush for everything and anything, including natural disasters.

Mr. Obama said no one could reach the leak, which is five thousand feet below the surface of the ocean. Precisely, if the ocean didn’t insist on being so deep, then there wouldn’t be so much “uncertainty,” and plugging the stubborn geyser wouldn’t pose an ongoing quandary for Obama.

Hitting on a few more points, the president shared the government’s use of “every available resource” to address the oil spill. Except, of course, resources unavailable because someone somewhere is preventing their use.

According to the ever-vigilant Mr. Obama, “Over one million feet of barrier boom have been deployed to hold the oil back. Hundreds of thousands of gallons of dispersant helped to break up the oil.” Unfortunately, Obama did sacrifice an opportunity to shift blame onto the slippery, hard-to-contain nature of petroleum for a crisis that otherwise would be well under his firm control.

Obama added, “13,000 people and the National Guard had been deployed to help protect the shoreline and wildlife.” Surely Barry would have greater success if “sea turtles, birds such as sea gulls and pelicans, dolphins, manatees, and Gulf sturgeon” would collaborate with federal efforts by avoiding the oil slick, as well as by steering clear of the water’s edge.

As the Rose Garden remarks concluded, the president reiterated support for offshore drilling, because unlike George W. Bush, British Petroleum and most other living, breathing human beings, the blameless Barack, even in the face of uncontrollable plumes of crude oil, “never tires, never falters and never fails.”

Concluding the Rose Garden scolding, Obama did personally accept one key responsibility, saying, “it’s absolutely essential … we put in place every necessary safeguard and protection so that a tragedy like this oil spill does not happen again.”

Better think long and hard about that one, Mr. President, because in an imperfect world, having precautions in place could pose a problem the next time the need arises to point a finger, pass the blame, or kick a dog.

Cartoon provided by Sooper Mexican

Obama, the UN-Reagan


Listening to Barack Obama address the UN General Assembly one would think until January 22, 2009 America was a nation void of values that failed to be an example to the world.  Obama asked the General Assembly to disregard what rouge dictators, despotic leaders and countries like Iran, North Korea and Russia view as the “character and cause” of the United States and to instead look to the last nine months where he has redeemed America from what he defined as a “zero-sum” power game.

In Barack Obama’s speech he lauded himself without hesitating to degrade the status of the United States to repeated applause.  His most benign apology presented pre-Obama America as a nation that “…dragged its feet” on environmental issues and contributed to the disappearance of a “land that human beings have lived on for millennia.” As 12-year old suicide bombers prepared to board buses in Israel, Obama assured every terrorist in the world that he agreed with them that Israel usurped Palestinian land and that the United States, until his Presidency, “disrespected the legitimate claims and rights of Palestinians.” This, too, was met with another round of rousing applause. From there he segwayed into presenting an America that tortures, which it does not, unjustly imprisons and prosecutes enemy combatants, which it has not.  And has, “…too often been selective in its promotion of democracy.” Whatever that means?

Twenty-seven years ago, the United Nations General Assembly Special Session Devoted to Disarmament, was addressed by a man who viewed himself and his nation through a different lens.  Always highlighting the goodness and exceptionalism of America, Ronald Reagan reminded our enemies of our intrinsic decency.  He never squandered an opportunity to remind adversaries that he was well aware of their ultimate goal.  Quoting Eleanor Roosevelt he said, “…the high-sounding words of tyrants stand in bleak contradiction to their deeds.Their promises are in deep contrast to their performances.’” Obama would likely view Ronald and Eleanor poor examples of leadership for “…feeding the fears and old hatreds of people” and as being, unlike him, “…on the wrong side of history.”

Apparently, Obama views himself the only American president exempt from “chastisement…for acting alone in the world.”  He portrays himself to the global community as someone who would rather not, but could if need be, “solve the world’s problems alone.”  Barack Obama depicts himself savior to our enemies, those victimized by what he calls American imposition of democracy from without.  Slighting the United States as a super power by saying, “No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed.”

Reagan on the other hand obliterated opportunities for enemies to point fingers or fill in the blanks with the American flag.  He elevated our nation to her rightful place on the world stage and clarified the truth of who we are as a great and generous people.   “We were never the aggressors.  America’s strength and, Yes, her military powers have been a force for peace, not conquest; for democracy, not despotism; for freedom, not tyranny.”

Based on self-aggrandizing comments, Obama perceives himself an elevated creature seeing beyond the flaws of human nature to the most “powerful weapon in our arsenal …the hope of human beings.”   His utopian vision is one where we are no longer “…limited to defeating violent extremists” but rather have, “…confidence that conflicts can end and a new day can begin.”  Obama appears willing to weaken our country in order to prove his dedication to a dangerous and naïve ideology, which history has repeatedly proven false.  Obama believes child molesters can mind the children because of his immature belief in their ability to be rehabilitated.  Reagan would recommend castrating the babysitter to avoid a relapse.

Barack Obama exhorted the UN General Assembly to be, “…a generation that chooses to see the shoreline beyond the rough waters ahead; that comes together to serve the common interest of human beings.”   In contrast, 27 years ago, Ronald Reagan reminded the same assembly of the sacrifice that was made by the greatest generation.  Those who saw the shoreline and braved rough waters with actions, not words on a bloody beach defending what Barack Obama debases and appears to take lightly. Reagan’s speech brought to mind images of Normandy citing “The Spirit of American Youth Rising from the Waves.”  On the contrary, Barack’s discourse conjured up torture accusations at Abu Ghurayb and prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay. As harbinger of, “…a new era of engagement…mutual interest and mutual respect” Obama elevated himself above the United States military, former Presidents and above all, the American people.

At the 1982 Special Session, Ronald Reagan mentioned the 1970’s United Nations designated First Disarmament Decade saying that, “…good intentions were not enough…that 10-year period included an unprecedented buildup in military weapons…flaring aggression and use of force” all over the world.  Reagan recognized that during détente the Soviets amassed huge caches of military arms.   He was cognizant that although America desired to “…let the arms fall from our hands…we needed more than mere words, more than empty promises before we could proceed.”

Obama capitulated to Russian pressure and did away with a planned missile defense program in Eastern Europe.  He conveniently dismissed Soviet tyranny and “…ruthless repression of the proud people of Poland” in violation of the Yalta agreements leading to Soviet domination of that part of the world. Reagan’s response to Russian aggression was always to speak truth to power by saying things like, “The scourge of tyranny cannot be stopped with words alone…We refuse to become weaker while potential adversaries remain committed to their imperialist adventures.”

Obama bends to neither experience nor history, but stringently adheres to a pacifist philosophy, “mere words” and word of honor from “…citizens of the world [and] members of the human community.” The President hands over national security to verbal agreements from countries like Russia based on loose disarmament agreements to, “…keep their end of the bargain.”  Obama’s infantile confidence has caused him to disregard past Soviet violations of written agreements where they’ve crossed fingers under the table while smiling and signing treaties in plain sight.

Obama is an untested man using empty rhetoric to reassure the world that, “Speeches alone will not solve our problems,” but rather blind dependence on the hope of humanity. Barack Obama projects himself the exception to historical rule proclaiming to our nation’s enemies a “new day” in America dawned the day he took the oath of office.  Promising, the international community that with him at the helm America’s past is superseded and the, “…world will move in a new direction.”

Thus, Obama moves forward, saying, “We know the future will be forged by deeds and not simply words.” However, in a dangerous world words and speechifying are all he has stashed in the munitions store. Obama feigns “persistent action” ignorant to the fact that by laying down arms he may win the affection of world tyrants but by doing so draws, “…down upon” our nation what Reagan quoted Harry Truman as saying was, “… the bitter wrath of generations yet unborn.”

Dis-Charm or Dis-Arm the Sandbox Bully


I long for the 1980’s when a rugged, rough and tough cowboy was in charge. Now we live in a new age of appeasement where an angry, disdainful, flippant, egotistical President is extending the hand of peace to world dictators, blaming America for being everything he is, which is  “derisive, dismissive and arrogant.

I remember in the mid-eighties I took my two children roller skating. On a Monday evening in April, my ten-year old son and eight-year old daughter were lacing up their roller skates, while the four-manual Wurlitzer console piped organ was pumping out “Manic Monday” by the Bangles. Simultaneously, Ronald Reagan was in the process of negotiating with the Libyans, with 66 American jets. The subject of the discussion… he wasn’t going to tolerate any level of threat to Americans saying, “When our citizens are attacked or abused anywhere in the world on the direct orders of hostile regimes, we will respond so long as I’m in this office.”

At that time, the Libyans were becoming more of a terrorist threat to the world. They had claimed responsibility for the bombing of a West Berlin disco, killing over 100 people, 40 of whom were American citizens. Ten days later, fighter pilots dropped bombs on Tripoli targeting Kaddafi’s family and killing his 15-month old daughter, Hanna. Reagan went right for Kaddafi’s heart and drove a stake right through it, which is the way you deal with terrorist vampires.

Reagan made sure, before our jets left Libya that the condition of Kaddafi’s coordinated terrorism efforts were in the same state as his compound, severely damaged. One year later, even the New York Times reported that Kaddafi had a reduced profile in terrorism. Brian Jenkins, terrorism expert said, ”The bombing did do one thing – it changed the equation… there is a cost to be paid if one gets caught blatantly sponsoring terrorist actions, and that cost can include military action.”

Fast forward 23 years and on  April 5th North Korea initiates act an of blatant terrorist-type taunting by testing their missile delivery system for a nuclear weapon with a three-stage rocket launch over Japan. What did our new President do in response to Kim Jong- Il’s defiant exhibit of non-compliance to the world community? Well…have you ever been to a playground and watched uncomfortably as a 3 year- old throws sand in the other children’s eyes, while the tot’s mother sits on the side lines saying things like, “Johnny, stop it or you’re really gonna get it?” Johnny, terrorizing the entire sandbox, looks up at his mother, grabs another handful of sand and chucks it into his playmate’s eyes, mouths and hair. Johnny’s mother rises about a half an inch off the park bench, finger pointing at the pint-sized horror saying, “Johnny, I really mean it, if you don’t cut it out, I’m coming over there!” Little Junior insolently glares back at his mother and starts to kick sand all over the place with a huge, evil grin on his face, “I’m not kidding Johnny. OK no ice cream for you!” Every person on the playground stares, mouths agape at this absurd interaction, wondering why this beaten down woman doesn’t grab the rebellious monster and follow through on all her hollow threats.  Leaving the park, Mommy has ice cream eating Johnny in tow.

That is what we all witnessed when Kim Jong-Il disregarded the threat of consequences emphatically proclaimed by Mr. “Tough” Dad, Barack Obama and “You’re going to get a time-out,” Mom Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State . Hillary stated that, “This provocative action in violation of the United Nations mandate will not go unnoticed and there will be consequences.” Translation: “Kimmy,  I’m watching you. If you pick up that sand, after I told you not to, you’re really going to  get it” Kimmy throws the sand and Mama Hillary does nothing. An entire sandbox full of children are blinded and spitting sand, while the Administration sits back,  in feigned, “…do you believe this kid” frustration, yelling from the park bench offering false, vacant threats. Papa Obama responds by saying, “North Korea broke the rules [duh!]… this provocation underscores the need for action…Kim Jong honey, do you want a cone or a cup?”

On April 15th, on the anniversary of the Libyan strike, if  President Reagan was here  just as he was 23 years ago, he would not be offering prior warning, participating in discussion, apologizing for America’s past injustices or hoping that an insane, rouge dictator would soften up and change his mind. Next Wednesday, if Ronald “Cowboy” Reagan was in the White House, Kim Jong-Il would receive a real spanking in front of all the kids on the playground and would find out the repercussions of disregarding his warnings by threatening our nation and it’s allies.

Reagan would neutralize Kim Jong-Il, as both a threat and a problem, and the rest of the world would have a very vivid, firm example to refer to when contemplating throwing sand in our direction. Instead, the rest of the hostile world is standing back watching and thinking, “Hmmmmm, if  he can get away with that maybe we can too” and before you know it we’re lost in a raging sandstorm.

Newt Gingrich said matter-of-factly, in classic Reaganesque style, that he would have “disabled” the missile. “One morning, just like 9/11, there’s going to be a disaster.” No Newt, not if Obama has anything to say about it, he’s planning to offer North Korea both Alaska and Hawaii if they promise to behave and never to do that again.

Barack Obama has decided on a “We are the World” strategy to disarm the globe of nuclear weapons, while Kim Jong is climbing the missile tower to personally sign, pat and kiss the side of the missile. “President Barack Obama set out his vision for ridding the world of nuclear arms on Sunday, declaring the United States ready to lead steps by all states with atomic weapons to reduce their arsenals .” Obama emptied his hands of sand just hours prior to the North Koreans picking up a big handful and throwing it right in his face. I guess Barry thought we were going to tell little Jongy to play nice and he was going to say, “Oh, alright I will.

Obama thinks he can load up his teleprompter with niceties and dis-charm his enemies with platitudes and a Colgate smile. His weapon of choice are caring words, welcoming vibes and assigning blame to our nation every time he steps out on the world stage. Obama falsely believes that if he joins the fraternity and agrees with Kim Jong-Il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez’s opinion of America, he will somehow make them lay down their weapons and animosities toward us. He refuses to acknowledge that he too will be culpable in helping to fuel their hatred and desire to see us annihilated and destroyed.  Our own President’s words will be their justification if they succeed.

Naïve, dangerous, inexperienced, idealistic and untested at best! Obama thinks taking the sandbox out of the park is the answer. What he has overlooked, however, is that out-of-control bully Johnny has his pockets filled with gravel and rest assured, little children, he and his gang will be returning to the park to “play.”  When Johnny and his posse come back to take us on, we’re going to find ourselves empty handed and unable to defend our nation against the world’s most brutal dictators and tyrants.

President Reagan, I wish we could send Barack Obama back to Chicago and you were here to protect us from these bullies!

Copyright 2009 Jeannieology. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed

%d bloggers like this: