http://theamericancritic.com/categories/rss/PoliticsLatest Articles Posted on The American Critic Filed Under PoliticsLatest Articles Posted on The American Critic Filed Under Politics
You should be disappointed with the behavior of all those elected officials who are supposed to be “representing the interest” of the population.

Few, congressional members even read the bill, but voted for it just the same. (Verified-information link below)

Nancy Pelosi was quoted; (verified-info-link) see for yourself.

“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it”

Nancy Pelosi remarks at the 2010 Legislative Conference for the National Association of Counties. (Shows how she thinks!)

Obama Health Care was a “cheap-shot” for the us citizens by attaching it to another legislative package and “pushing it through” so very quickly!!!

That is why the recent election took so many democrats "out-of-power" and to loose a lot of seat-positions, etc.

Voters did not understand the health care reform law, were not given a chance to discover it's content or even see a full length copy!

How can anyone think this was appropriate behavior for all of our elected Democrats. It was a Democratic controlled vote and received a great-push from Speaker of The House, Nancy Pelosi.

It clearly shows how terrible politics has become in US when elected officials do not listen to the people and when Democrats think they can make Health Care laws for us without our approval.

More trouble has been discovered with this Health Care Law.

The “Joint Economic Committee” explained that one problem is the direct impact of tax on this “health insurance,” effective in 2014.

The tax will be passed through to consumers in the form of higher costs ($$$) and premiums. (Verified-information link below)

• It increases health costs. This so-called fee on insurance companies would be passed on to consumers, directly increasing the cost of health insurance for tens of millions of Americans and contravening Congress's stated intention that its legislation will reduce health insurance costs.

• It increases taxes. Because this "fee" is effectively an insurance premium tax imposed on policies purchased by half of all Americans, it violates President Barack Obama's repeated promise that most Americans, or at least those with incomes below $250,000, would not see their taxes increased in any way, shape, or form.

• It creates new inequities. Because it would apply to policies purchased from insurers but not to employer self-insured health plans, this insurance premium tax would create new inequities by disadvantaging one source of health insurance coverage relative to another source of coverage, thus creating winners and losers based on where people happen to work.

• It is disingenuous. Labeling these provisions a "fee" imposed on insurance companies is designed to give the impression that it affects only a politically disfavored interest group. In reality, however, since the legislation specifies that it will be apportioned based on each insurer's premium revenues, it would function exactly like a direct insurance premium tax paid by consumers.

• It creates perverse incentives. This tax would apply to those who have purchased health insurance, with the proceeds funding subsidies for those who have not purchased such coverage.

• It distorts markets. The tax would apply to both an insurance company's premium revenue and its revenue from providing "administrative services" (such as claims processing) to employer and union self-insured plans. However, a vendor that provides self-insured plans with administrative services but does not sell health insurance would not be subject to the tax. Thus, self-insured employers would have a financial incentive to prefer "third-party administrators" that are not insurance companies when contracting for administrative services for their plans.

• It expands federal power. This insurance premium tax would create a new, permanent federal tax that could, and likely would, be increased by Congress in future years as the growth in new government spending in the legislation outstrips the growth of revenues to fund that spending.

Federal legislation requiring that every American have health insurance is part of all the major health-care reform plans now being considered in Washington. Such a mandate, however, would expand the federal government’s authority over individual Americans to an unprecedented degree. It is also profoundly unconstitutional.

States are fighting back.
My State is Florida.

The Florida legislature voted to place a state “constitutional amendment” on the ballot that would ban any laws that compel someone to “participate in any health care system.” It requires a 60 percent vote to succeed.

The legislation is modeled after the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act, which has been introduced in 42 states.

Find out what is happening in your State today.
Do you know?





]]>Sun, 05 Dec 2010 19:59:10 PST1291607950
Building a mosque near the site of defeated enemies is a symbol of conquest for Islam. "We need to consider the facts of history!"

There is mysterious funding ($$$) to pay for construction of this.
Who are the people behind the cash? The money trail ends abruptly.

The real issue behind the controversy to build a 15-story mosque a few yards from Ground Zero is not only about the mysterious funding behind the Cordoba Center initiative. It is primarily about Muslims across the world who would view the site as a victory of the greatest Muslim attack on U.S. soil.

The symbolism could not be clearer. If the Cordoba's House supporters
win the day they are unwittingly declaring their acceptance of Muslim rule.

There is a long cultural history of mosque-building following Muslim military victories. The building of the Cordoba House on Ground Zero will be seen in the same light as the Muslim conquests of Mecca, Jerusalem, and Constantinople. Islam followers will see it as a first step towards the decline of America.

This is what it is all about people. Wake-up!
A church dedicated to "John the Baptist" in 705, fell to Islam rule!

This would not be read in the Muslim world as a sign of the West's tolerance, but of its weakness. In its very long history Islam has converted the sacred shrines of its enemies into mosques. Many were churches or former houses of worships of defeated enemies. Islam is
not a tolerant religion and it's goal is worldwide domination. Death or
jail to anyone who opposes the teachings of Islam.

Islam's most sacred site, al-Kaaba, in Mecca was a pagan shrine that predated Islam by hundreds of years. Mohamed himself, after his army's conquest of Mecca in 630, destroyed hundreds of idols, proclaiming the truth of his new religion, and, since, it has become the hub of the annual Muslim pilgrimage, hajj, and a core pillar of Islam.

Following the Muslim conquest of Jerusalem, the Ummayad Caliphate proceeded to build the Dome of the Rock, the Masjid Qubat al-Sakhra, on top of the Jewish Temple Mount in 689.

Inscribed on the inner walls of the shrine are clear warnings to Christianity, professing Islamic supremacy. Sprawled on the inner octagonal arcade, flowing counterclockwise, the dedication warns Christians and Jews to "not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning God save the truth" and threatens the Christian Trinity by insisting that "The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a Messenger of God, and His Word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him.

Having defeated their Christian enemies, the Umayyads built a grand mosque on top of Judaism's most sacred site that contained a clear declaration of Muslim supremacy over their brother Abraham, and all religions.

A church dedicated to John the Baptist in 705, fell to Islam rule.

The Grand Mosque of Damascus, also known as the Umayyad Mosque, was converted from a church dedicated to John the Baptist in 705.

The world-renown Hagia Sophia in Istanbul was a thousand year-old Christian church before being transformed into a mosque following the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople in 1453. It was only converted into a museum in 1935 by ultra-secularist and Turkish founding father Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

Over the long history of Muslim territorial advance, thousands of mosques, from Spain to India, were built on sites of important religious or political value.

Islam is a violent religion.



]]>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:56:09 PDT1284069369
From http://www.zoklet.net/bbs/showthread.php?p=1829755
Published by OFF! Magazine, a zine produced by students at SUNY Binghamton and edited by Tim La Pietra.

Once upon a time, the captain and the mates of a ship grew so vain of their seamanship, so full of hubris and so impressed with themselves, that they went mad. They turned the ship north and sailed until they met with icebergs and dangerous floes, and they kept sailing north into more and more perilous waters, solely in order to give themselves opportunities to perform ever-more-brilliant feats of seamanship.

As the ship reached higher and higher latitudes, the passengers and crew became increasingly uncomfortable. They began quarreling among themselves and complaining of the conditions under which they lived.

"Shiver me timbers," said an able seaman, "if this ain’t the worst voyage I’ve ever been on. The deck is slick with ice; when I’m on lookout the wind cuts through me jacket like a knife; every time I reef the foresail I blamed-near freeze me fingers; and all I get for it is a miserable five shillings a month!"

"You think you have it bad!" said a lady passenger. "I can’t sleep at night for the cold. Ladies on this ship don’t get as many blankets as the men. It isn’t fair!"

A Mexican sailor chimed in: "¡Chingado! I’m only getting half the wages of the Anglo seamen. We need plenty of food to keep us warm in this climate, and I’m not getting my share; the Anglos get more. And the worst of it is that the mates always give me orders in English instead of Spanish."

"I have more reason to complain than anybody," said an American Indian sailor. "If the palefaces hadn’t robbed me of my ancestral lands, I wouldn’t even be on this ship, here among the icebergs and arctic winds. I would just be paddling a canoe on a nice, placid lake. I deserve compensation. At the very least, the captain should let me run a crap game so that I can make some money."

The bosun spoke up: "Yesterday the first mate called me a ‘fruit’ just because I suck cocks. I have a right to suck cocks without being called names for it!"

It’s not only humans who are mistreated on this ship," interjected an animal-lover among the passengers, her voice quivering with indignation. "Why, last week I saw the second mate kick the ship’s dog twice!"

One of the passengers was a college professor. Wringing his hands he exclaimed,

"All this is just awful! It’s immoral! It’s racism, sexism, speciesism, homophobia, and exploitation of the working class! It’s discrimination! We must have social justice: Equal wages for the Mexican sailor, higher wages for all sailors, compensation for the Indian, equal blankets for the ladies, a guaranteed right to suck cocks, and no more kicking the dog!"

"Yes, yes!" shouted the passengers. "Aye-aye!" shouted the crew. "It’s discrimination! We have to demand our rights!"

The cabin boy cleared his throat.

"Ahem. You all have good reasons to complain. But it seems to me that what we really have to do is get this ship turned around and headed back south, because if we keep going north we’re sure to be wrecked sooner or later, and then your wages, your blankets, and your right to suck cocks won’t do you any good, because we’ll all drown."

But no one paid any attention to him, because he was only the cabin boy.

The captain and the mates, from their station on the poop deck, had been watching and listening. Now they smiled and winked at one another, and at a gesture from the captain the third mate came down from the poop deck, sauntered over to where the passengers and crew were gathered, and shouldered his way in amongst them. He put a very serious expression on his face and spoke thusly:

"We officers have to admit that some really inexcusable things have been happening on this ship. We hadn’t realized how bad the situation was until we heard your complaints. We are men of good will and want to do right by you. But – well – the captain is rather conservative and set in his ways, and may have to be prodded a bit before he’ll make any substantial changes. My personal opinion is that if you protest vigorously – but always peacefully and without violating any of the ship’s rules – you would shake the captain out of his inertia and force him to address the problems of which you so justly complain."

Having said this, the third mate headed back toward the poop deck. As he went, the passengers and crew called after him, "Moderate! Reformer! Goody-liberal! Captain’s stooge!" But they nevertheless did as he said. They gathered in a body before the poop deck, shouted insults at the officers, and demanded their rights: "I want higher wages and better working conditions," cried the able seaman. "Equal blankets for women," cried the lady passenger. "I want to receive my orders in Spanish," cried the Mexican sailor. "I want the right to run a crap game," cried the Indian sailor. "I don’t want to be called a fruit," cried the bosun. "No more kicking the dog," cried the animal lover. "Revolution now," cried the professor.

The captain and the mates huddled together and conferred for several minutes, winking, nodding and smiling at one another all the while. Then the captain stepped to the front of the poop deck and, with a great show of benevolence, announced that the able seaman’s wages would be raised to six shillings a month; the Mexican sailor’s wages would be raised to two-thirds the wages of an Anglo seaman, and the order to reef the foresail would be given in Spanish; lady passengers would receive one more blanket; the Indian sailor would be allowed to run a crap game on Saturday nights; the bosun wouldn’t be called a fruit as long as he kept his cocksucking strictly private; and the dog wouldn’t be kicked unless he did something really naughty, such as stealing food from the galley.

The passengers and crew celebrated these concessions as a great victory, but the next morning, they were again feeling dissatisfied.

"Six shillings a month is a pittance, and I still freeze me fingers when I reef the foresail," grumbled the able seaman. "I’m still not getting the same wages as the Anglos, or enough food for this climate," said the Mexican sailor. "We women still don’t have enough blankets to keep us warm," said the lady passenger. The other crewmen and passengers voiced similar complaints, and the professor egged them on.

When they were done, the cabin boy spoke up – louder this time so that the others could not easily ignore him:

"It’s really terrible that the dog gets kicked for stealing a bit of bread from the galley, and that women don’t have equal blankets, and that the able seaman gets his fingers frozen; and I don’t see why the bosun shouldn’t suck cocks if he wants to. But look how thick the icebergs are now, and how the wind blows harder and harder! We’ve got to turn this ship back toward the south, because if we keep going north we’ll be wrecked and drowned."

"Oh yes," said the bosun, "It’s just so awful that we keep heading north. But why should I have to keep cocksucking in the closet? Why should I be called a fruit? Ain’t I as good as everyone else?"

"Sailing north is terrible," said the lady passenger. "But don’t you see? That’s exactly why women need more blankets to keep them warm. I demand equal blankets for women now!"

"It’s quite true," said the professor, "that sailing to the north imposes great hardships on all of us. But changing course toward the south would be unrealistic. You can’t turn back the clock. We must find a mature way of dealing with the situation."

"Look," said the cabin boy, "If we let those four madmen up on the poop deck have their way, we’ll all be drowned. If we ever get the ship out of danger, then we can worry about working conditions, blankets for women, and the right to suck cocks. But first we’ve got to get this vessel turned around. If a few of us get together, make a plan, and show some courage, we can save ourselves. It wouldn’t take many of us – six or eight would do. We could charge the poop, chuck those lunatics overboard, and turn the ship to the south."

The professor elevated his nose and said sternly, "I don’t believe in violence. It’s immoral."

"It’s unethical ever to use violence," said the bosun.

"I’m terrified of violence," said the lady passenger.

The captain and the mates had been watching and listening all the while. At a signal from the captain, the third mate stepped down to the main deck. He went about among the passengers and crew, telling them that there were still many problems on the ship.

"We have made much progress," he said, "But much remains to be done. Working conditions for the able seaman are still hard, the Mexican still isn’t getting the same wages as the Anglos, the women still don’t have quite as many blankets as the men, the Indian’s Saturday-night crap game is a paltry compensation for his lost lands, it’s unfair to the bosun that he has to keep his cocksucking in the closet, and the dog still gets kicked at times.

"I think the captain needs to be prodded again. It would help if you all would put on another protest – as long as it remains nonviolent."

As the third mate walked back toward the stern, the passengers and the crew shouted insults after him, but they nevertheless did what he said and gathered in front of the poop deck for another protest. They ranted and raved and brandished their fists, and they even threw a rotten egg at the captain (which he skillfully dodged).

After hearing their complaints, the captain and the mates huddled for a conference, during which they winked and grinned broadly at one another. Then the captain stepped to the front of the poop deck and announced that the able seaman would be given gloves to keep his fingers warm, the Mexican sailor would receive wages equal to three-fourths the wages of an Anglo seaman, the women would receive yet another blanket, the Indian sailor could run a crap game on Saturday and Sunday nights, the bosun would be allowed to suck cocks publicly after dark, and no one could kick the dog without special permission from the captain.

The passengers and crew were ecstatic over this great revolutionary victory, but by the next morning they were again feeling dissatisfied and began grumbling about the same old hardships.

The cabin boy this time was getting angry.

"You damn fools!" he shouted. "Don’t you see what the captain and the mates are doing? They’re keeping you occupied with your trivial grievances about blankets and wages and the dog being kicked so that you won’t think about what is really wrong with this ship --– that it’s getting farther and farther to the north and we’re all going to be drowned. If just a few of you would come to your senses, get together, and charge the poop deck, we could turn this ship around and save ourselves. But all you do is whine about petty little issues like working conditions and crap games and the right to suck cocks."

The passengers and the crew were incensed.

"Petty!!" cried the Mexican, "Do you think it’s reasonable that I get only three-fourths the wages of an Anglo sailor? Is that petty?

"How can you call my grievance trivial? shouted the bosun. "Don’t you know how humiliating it is to be called a fruit?"

"Kicking the dog is not a ‘petty little issue!’" screamed the animal-lover. "It’s heartless, cruel, and brutal!"

"Alright then," answered the cabin boy. "These issues are not petty and trivial. Kicking the dog is cruel and brutal and it is humiliating to be called a fruit. But in comparison to our real problem – in comparison to the fact that the ship is still heading north – your grievances are petty and trivial, because if we don’t get this ship turned around soon, we’re all going to drown.

"Fascist!" said the professor.

"Counterrevolutionary!" said the lady passenger. And all of the passengers and crew chimed in one after another, calling the cabin boy a fascist and a counterrevolutionary. They pushed him away and went back to grumbling about wages, and about blankets for women, and about the right to suck cocks, and about how the dog was treated. The ship kept sailing north, and after a while it was crushed between two icebergs and everyone drowned.

© Ted Kaczynski, 1999 ]]>Sat, 22 May 2010 10:16:46 PDT1274548606THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER

Two Different Versions....Two Different Morals
__________________________


OLD VERSION

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building
his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a
fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away..

Come winter, the ant is warm
and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he
dies out in the cold.


MORAL OF THE STORY:
Be responsible for yourself!
__________________________

MODERN VERSION

The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool
and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.


Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press
conference and demands to know why the ant should be
allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.


CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to
provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a
video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

America is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody
cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green...'

ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house
where the news stations film the group singing, “We
shall overcome.” Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.

President Obama condemns the ant and blames President Bush, President Reagan, Christopher Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper's plight.


Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both
call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.


Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the grasshopper.


The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading
friends finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn't
maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and once peaceful, neighborhood.


The entire Nation collapses bringing the rest of the free world with it.


MORAL OF THE STORY:
Be careful how you vote in 2010.
]]>Thu, 13 May 2010 16:01:26 PDT1273791686
Granted, even if health care costs are to blame in some situations, to compensate for rising costs, we can't have a heartless system where hospitals have financial departments to place a lien on your home prior to providing you a surgery. Now if socialized health care is the solution, then so be it. What's always amazed me about the capitalist system is that the people that fear shared benefits are usually puppets for those that reap the rewards of a winner-loser system, yet these people aren't making anything off of the deal anyways. I always ask why someone wouldn’t stand for a fairer system that everyone would benefit from. Even they would save.

I guess until your health and finances are at stake from a single blow could an opponent of health-care-for-all really see the light in thorough reform. Many persons that suffer from ailments at an early age are plagued with a resultant financial burden for life. I shouldn’t win a Nobel for saying that situations like this can be avoided.

If a public option requires all to buy in, then that's the way it has to be. Now we still could have an adequate system without a public option, but for many, including myself, the public options seems like the only hope there is for cost protection. Face it, without an employer-sponsored health plan, coverage is way too expensive in this economy. Having health care is like going to the casino. The casino wouldn't let you play unless they knew they were going to win. And furthermore, if you become a financial burden, they can refuse you the service, and they do it all the time to people. A public option might have a greater trickle-down effect, one that could actually influence provider (hospital and doctor) fees.

I've noticed that medical talent is available. There are persons from throughout the world (e.g., India, Mexico) that will work as a doctor for a modest rate. So then, let's welcome them along with programs for converting foreign medical talent/education to US standards. I don't need an expensive doctor, I just need licensed health care. And in this age of information, care is more standardized than ever before, so you would think costs should decrease as information and practice normalizes. Let's standardize the insurance costs and then, in turn, make the rest flex and standardize the provider and equipment fees to pave the way for healthy, not in-the-poor-house, families---a stronger generation and economy, a stronger US.
]]>Sun, 07 Mar 2010 21:31:25 PST1268026285
Why would some Democrats like to stop us from understanding the new Health-Care-Bill? What is the meaning of the sudden private meetings, less coverage of citizen tea parties and ignoring the public demands to answer questions in a straight-forward manner?

Watch this short video. Shocking pages & sections in the bill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcBaSP31Be8
View the video link!

Even, "Ryan29" might not like what is written in this bill.

Phew... it is very scary for me!]]>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 14:57:23 PST1264978643 Here's another issue. Sarah Palin. Honestly, you want her to lead the free world? Madness. She has no knowledge of Foreign affairs, other countries, cultures and pretty much anything. She couldn't even finish her term as Gov. Something the people of Alaska voted her to do. I have yet to hear this women say anything of substance.
Republicans seem to be screaming for less government these days. Hmm, wasn't it huge companies that usually give overwhelmingly to Republican candidates who got us into this mess economically, screwed a lot of hard working Americans, and THEN SAID THEY WOULD GO UNDER unless the GOVERNMENT BAILED THEM OUT. and why? So they could keep making money. Now, less than a year after the bailout, Banks are posting record profit and giving bonuses out like candy. That's ok right, since they are paying back the money? without oversight, Banks, insurance companies, and other controlling groups (Big Oil) would run roughshod over the country and the world. it's not like they don't own so many people already. That's Capitalism right? It's bullshit where a few get rich at the expense of many.
And now on to my favorite moron, Rush Limbaugh. You love this man because he compares our President to Hitler. Here's one of the fattest of fat cats, a man with his 500 million dollar contract, who preaches hate and intolerance all day long. From day one he has been against everything the rightfully elected president has done or tried to do. of course he doesn't want to see health care passed, why should he? he's rich, he could care less about the common man. Yet you eat it up. I find it amazing that Republican politicians make no secret that they do not believe in equality for all, that only people with money matter, yet you eat it up. Makes me want to puke. at least the Democrats make it sound good.
In the end, nothing will change too much till we get off a two party system. I'm an Obama supporter, yes, but I think he could do more but he has to play politics. We need to see a powerful independent party that can attract those smaller groups of people who see something wrong with the current system in place today.
Peace and Love to All
Ryan the Great
]]>Sat, 19 Dec 2009 11:52:16 PST1261252336 Presidential politics is about storytelling. Presented with a vivid storyline, voters naturally tend to fit every new event or piece of information into a picture that is already neatly framed in their minds.
No one understands this better than Barack Obama and his team, who won the 2008 election in part because they were better storytellers than the opposition. The pro-Obama narrative featured an almost mystically talented young idealist who stood for change in a disciplined and thoughtful way. This easily out powered the anti-Obama narrative, featuring an opportunistic Chicago poll with dubious relationships who was more liberal than he was letting on.
A year into his presidency, however, Obama’s gift for controlling his image shows signs of faltering. As Washington returns to work from the Thanksgiving holiday, there are several anti-Obama storylines gaining momentum.
The Obama White House argues that all of these storylines are inaccurate or unfair. In some cases these anti-Obama narratives are fanned by Republicans, in some cases by reporters and commentators.
But they all are serious threats to Obama, if they gain enough currency to become the dominant frame through which people interpret the president’s actions and motives.
Here are seven storylines Obama needs to worry about:

1. He thinks he’s playing with Monopoly money

Economists and business leaders from across the ideological spectrum were urging the new president on last winter when he signed onto more than a trillion in stimulus spending and bank and auto bailouts during his first weeks in office. Many, though far from all, of these same people now agree that these actions helped avert an even worse financial catastrophe.
Along the way, however, it is clear Obama underestimated the political consequences that flow from the perception that he is a profligate spender. He also misjudged the anger in middle America about bailouts with weak and sporadic public explanations of why he believed they were necessary.
The flight of independents away from Democrats last summer — the trend that recently hammered Democrats in off-year elections in Virginia — coincided with what polls show was alarm among these voters about undisciplined big government and runaway spending. The likely passage of a health care reform package criticized as weak on cost-control will compound the problem.
Obama understands the political peril, and his team is signaling that he will use the 2010 State of the Union address to emphasize fiscal discipline. The political challenge, however, is an even bigger substantive challenge—since the most convincing way to project fiscal discipline would be actually to impose spending reductions that would

2 Too much Leonard Nimoy

People used to make fun of Bill Clinton’s misty-eyed, raspy-voiced claims that, “I feel your pain.”
The reality, however, is that Clinton’s dozen years as governor before becoming president really did leave him with a vivid sense of the concrete human dimensions of policy. He did not view programs as abstractions — he viewed them in terms of actual people he knew by name.
Obama, a legislator and law professor, is fluent in describing the nuances of problems. But his intellectuality has contributed to a growing critique that decisions are detached from rock-bottom principles.
Both Maureen Dowd in The New York Times and Joel Achenbach of The Washington Post have likened him to Star Trek’s Mr. Spock.
The Spock imagery has been especially strong during the extended review Obama has undertaken of Afghanistan policy. He’ll announce the results on Tuesday. The speech’s success will be judged not only on the logic of the presentation but on whether Obama communicates in a more visceral way what progress looks like and why it is worth achieving. No soldier wants to take a bullet in the name of nuance.

3.That’s the Chicago Way

This is a storyline that’s likely taken root more firmly in Washington than around the country. The rap is that his West Wing is dominated by brass-knuckled pols.
It does not help that many West Wing aides seem to relish an image of themselves as shrewd, brass-knuckled political types. In a Washington Post story this month, White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina, referring to most of Obama’s team, said, “We are all campaign hacks.”
The problem is that many voters took Obama seriously in 2008 when he talked about wanting to create a more reasoned, non-partisan style of governance in Washington. When Republicans showed scant interest in cooperating with Obama at the start, the Obama West Wing gladly reverted to campaign hack mode.
The examples of Chicago-style politics include their delight in public battles with Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. (There was also a semi-public campaign of leaks aimed at Greg Craig, the White House counsel who fell out of favor.) In private, the Obama team cut an early deal — to the distaste of many congressional Democrats — that gave favorable terms to the pharmaceutical lobby in exchange for their backing his health care plans.
The lesson that many Washington insiders have drawn is that Obama wants to buy off the people he can and bowl over those he can’t. If that perception spreads beyond Washington this will scuff Obama’s brand as a new style of political leader.

4.He’s a pushover

If you are going to be known as a fighter, you might as well reap the benefits. But some of the same insider circles that are starting to view Obama as a bully are also starting to whisper that he’s a patsy.
It seems a bit contradictory, to be sure. But it’s a perception that began when Obama several times laid down lines — then let people cross them with seeming impunity. Last summer he told Democrats they better not go home for recess until a critical health care vote but they blew him off. He told the Israeli government he wanted a freeze in settlements but no one took him seriously. Even Fox News — which his aides prominently said should not be treated like a real news organization — then got interview time for its White House correspondent.
In truth, most of these episodes do not amount to much. But this unflattering storyline would take a more serious turn if Obama is seen as unable to deliver on his stern warnings in the escalating conflict with Iran over its nuclear program.

5.He sees America as another pleasant country on the U.N. roll call, somewhere between Albania and Zimbabwe

That line belonged to George H.W. Bush, excoriating Democrat Michael Dukakis in 1988. But it highlights a continuing reality: In presidential politics the safe ground has always been to be an American exceptionalist.
Politicians of both parties have embraced the idea that this country — because of its power and/or the hand of Providence — should be a singular force in the world. It would be hugely unwelcome for Obama if the perception took root that he is comfortable with a relative decline in U.S. influence or position in the world.
On this score, the reviews of Obama’s recent Asia trip were harsh.
His peculiar bow to the emperor of Japan was symbolic. But his lots-of-velvet, not-much-iron approach to China had substantive implications.
On the left, the budding storyline is that Obama has retreated from human rights in the name of cynical realism. On the right, it is that he is more interested in being President of the World than President of the United States, a critique that will be heard more in December as he stops in Oslo to pick up his Nobel Prize and then in Copenhagen for an international summit on curbing greenhouse gases.

6.President Pelosi

No figure in Barack Obama’s Washington, including Obama, has had more success in advancing his will than the speaker of the House, despite public approval ratings that hover in the range of Dick Cheney’s. With a mix of tough party discipline and shrewd vote-counting, she passed a version of the stimulus bill largely written by congressional Democrats, passed climate legislation, and passed her chamber’s version of health care reform. She and anti-war liberals in her caucus are clearly affecting the White House’s Afghanistan calculations.
The great hazard for Obama is if Republicans or journalists conclude — as some already have — that Pelosi’s achievements are more impressive than Obama’s or come at his expense.
This conclusion seems premature, especially with the final chapter of the health care drama yet to be written.
But it is clear that Obama has allowed the speaker to become more nearly an equal — and far from a subordinate — than many of his predecessors of both parties would have thought wise.

7. He’s in love with the man in the mirror

No one becomes president without a fair share of what the French call amour propre. Does Obama have more than his share of self-regard?
It’s a common theme of Washington buzz that Obama is over-exposed. He gives interviews on his sports obsessions to ESPN, cracks wise with Leno and Letterman, discusses his fitness with Men’s Health, discusses his marriage in a joint interview with first lady Michelle Obama for The New York Times. A photo the other day caught him leaving the White House clutching a copy of GQ featuring himself.
White House aides say making Obama widely available is the right strategy for communicating with Americans in an era of highly fragmented media.
But, as the novelty of a new president wears off, the Obama cult of personality risks coming off as mere vanity unless it is harnessed to tangible achievements.
That is why the next couple of months — with health care and Afghanistan jostling at center stage — will likely carry a long echo. Obama’s best hope of nipping bad storylines is to replace them with good ones rooted in public perceptions of his effectiveness.
]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:35:38 PST1259602538
She has written a book. So What! Isn’t that the way politicians and “celebs” put pots of gold in their pockets? The Clintons were given over $20 million in advances for their memoirs, proving the old adage that, “if you can’t be famous-be infamous.”

Meanwhile, Sarah’s book is already presold. At her last book signing event, she drew 4000 people who paid $30 each just to see her. As an aside, has anyone noticed that 98% of the books on the NY Times best seller list are written by conservatives...but never reviewed! Now that's objective jounalism.

Sarah’s book will definitely be a best seller. Her multi-city tour will be a smashing success. During the election, she drew crowds in the tens of thousands. What is going on?

The answer is that it is not about Sarah, but the “disconnect” that has grown among the Media, Washington and the average American. Americans are frustrated that their voices are not being heard. The tea parties were under-covered by the media, and demeaned by the Obama administration. Washington’s spending is out of control. Medicare is being cut by $500 billion while the Obama administration is unearthing 1/6th of the economy with Health care reform. $700 billion was wasted on the stimulus. Cap and trade is going to coast billions. Taxes are going up for everyone. Yet unemployment continues to grow to over 10%. The real number is closer to 18%. Obama is on his 20th international trip giving the same apologetic speech instead of managing the country. Even among the independents who voted for him, the polls on his leadership are dropping like a rock. Meanwhile, the Republicans have no clear leader.

Sarah is more closely aligned with average Americans values - smaller government, personal responsibility, superior military and a strong patriotic belief. They are sick of a nanny government attitude, Acorn, unelected Czars, apologetic speeches, the loons running the Congress, and a general redistribution of wealth. This is why the more the media and liberal pundits insult Sarah, the more popular she becomes. She is only a symbol of the discontent. I don’t believe she will run for President but continue to highlight the dangers of the liberal agenda. As an aside, how stupid can she be? - A mother, a mayor, a governor, a best selling author and soon to be a multimillionaire. She is doing a lot better than most of her critics and most of us.

My advice is to sit back and relax. She isn’t going away. She is a fighter and for that she has my admiration. If you’re a liberal, I would worry more about the political earth quake that is building not Sarah. Obama ran as a moderate and is governing as a far left liberal. Not surprising since he was ranked as the most liberal voting senator. He speaking skills mesmerized us in to overlooking his shortcomings. Change is coming. Not from him but to him. Fool me once - shame on you. Fool me twice – shame on me.

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:41:13 PST1258400473

'Going Rogue' reignites Palin divide, even in her hometown

OK, look---who is really interested in Palin and WHY? It bothers me that she is writing a book (which I'm sure she thinks is a fast track to the White House---following Obama's success with his books). But seriously, Palin represents maybe 25% of the country (at most), and that percentage is made up of the people that we want to evolve (in many ways) anyways. When Palin speaks, I feel like I'm crammed in a hot living room, against my will, having to endure an Amway presentation---I just want an exit!

So, if anyone cares enough, please tell me what value Palin brings to not only politics (because she's even trouble to McCain who, unfortunately, gave her the idea) but our country and government? She is completely transparent in my opinion, and what we see in her is not complex, just average, and she's not even good at being average. Furthermore, if Palin really wanted to serve our country, she'd disappear (except for appearances in Mad magazine, et al.), like the majority thought she would. I mean face it, it's a fact that she pisses off most people anyways and rarely has anything unique to say. She can only speak to a polarized audience. Her leading would be a disaster or a massive lowering of our nation's stock of intelligence. Yes, it would be mind numbing.

As much as I like this sticker below, it still irks me to view it. That's how distasteful Palin is to me. I mean give me reason to change my views, please, because it's rare that I don't trust someone as much as I don't trust her. But again, she's aiming beyond her capabilities in my opinion, and even worse, she's trying to force it. Too bad she didn't stay in China following her business seminar there. Maybe Greenland, or Antarctica, could use a governor. Ah, but then she'd drill both of those future refuges into the sea.



]]>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:54:11 PST1258170851