Will Arrogance And Narcissism Toll The End Of Obama’s Legacy

Loading

If this were play’d upon a stage now, I could condemn it as improbable fiction

Twelfth Night III:4

The midterm elections are basically over and has left the Democrat Party shaken and demoralized, everyone except the leadership. Reid and Pelosi see their individual wins as an endorsement of their leadership, an attitude that is shared by President Obama. They the Undaunted Triumvirate of Marxism feel that the only failing on their behalf was to push forward without adequately explaining to the people of America the benefits and advantages of increased governmental control of their lives and how we will benefit from the dissolution of our national sovereignty. Thus with the flimsiest of mandates that relies on arrogance and narcissism rather than substance, they intend to forge ahead with their Marxist-Leninist policies and continue implementing the Obama/Soros policies of Open Society and Open Borders as if the American people and their opinions are inconsequential and the election didn’t happen.

I think that’s a fair argument. I think that, over the course of two years we were so busy and so focused on getting a bunch of stuff done that, we stopped paying attention to the fact that leadership isn’t just legislation. That it’s a matter of persuading people. And giving them confidence and bringing them together. And setting a tone.”

“Making an argument that people can understand,” Mr. Obama continued, “I think that we haven’t always been successful at that. And I take personal responsibility for that. And it’s something that I’ve got to examine carefully … as I go forward.”

“I think that, over the course of two years we were so busy” playing golf and vacationing, I neglected my duties as a war time President trying to impose Marxism on an unsuspecting electorate; there simply wasn’t enough time to do everything.

Never even admitting in the slightest that Americans might be reluctant to join the Obama/Soros march toward International Marxism, he is driven towards his final goal like any true despot. Instead, it is the ignorance of Americans that prevents them from seeing the wisdom of his genius and the only reason why they want to repeal his plan for Socialized Medicine.

The Great Unifier that was going to unite america has created an even larger chasm of political polarity in America, a void so immense that he hasn’t even begun to realize its width or depth. At some point the stark realization will set in, he no longer has the support of America except for the unions, entitlement classes and the Blacks; a coalition that may have seemed powerful as a Community Organizer, but will be a disaster in 2012, despite the billions of Soros and his direction.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
52 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Stopping Obama In 2012

The Midterm Elections have handed America the opportunity it needs to toss out Obama in 2012.

With the Republicans taking control of many of the State Houses around the country, legislation can now be passed to keep Obama off the ballot in those States for 2012.

By passing legislation requiring all Presidential Candidates to Constitutionally prove their citizenship as required, these States can prevent Obama from getting the amount of Electoral College votes he will need in order to stay in office, by keeping him off the ballot, unless he proves he is qualified under the Constitution to the hold the office.

Looking at the recent gains and the Electoral Votes, here is what we see.

ID=……… 3
MT=…….. 4
UT=……… 5
AZ=……… 10
WY=……. 3
ND=…….. 3
SD=…….. 3
KS=…….. 6
OK=…….. 7
TX=……… 34
MN=……. 10
IA=……… 7
MO=……. 11
WI=…….. 10
MI=…….. 17
IN=…….. 11
OH=…… 20
PA=…… 21
AL=…… 9
GA=….. 15
TN=…… 11
NC=….. 15
SC=….. 8
FL=…… 27
NH=……… 4
VT=……… 3

Total =…….. 274 Denied Electoral Votes = 4 short

http://www.ncsl.org/?tabid=21253

“Making an argument that people can understand,” Mr. Obama continued, “I think that we haven’t always been successful at that. And I take personal responsibility for that. And it’s something that I’ve got to examine carefully … as I go forward.”

The hits keep on coming, Skook. It just doesn’t get better than this. As you’ve pointed out, his narcissist and arrogant finger points at the ignorance of his electorate preventing its grasp of his policies.

He evidently has done a beautiful job of cushioning his staff with worshippers, who can’t tell him any truth. Surely some of them are beginning to feel embarrassed with themselves.

In the above statement, he manifests a great deal:

1. His brain has obliterated the fact that he has “addressed” the World almost every single day of his administration, obviously much more than any other President, ever, through prepared teleprompted speeches.

2. He picks the most inane element through which he thinks he can feign “responsibility” for the historical political disaster his party endured on Nov.2, . . . he was so busy with agenda, he didn’t communicate. Yah, that’s the problem.

3. “Examine carefully” what exactly? Not enough teleprompter addresses? The ignorant electorate perhaps just didn’t hear all those speeches and all of those structured network interviews, or the lip flapfests on the talkshow circuit.

4. “. . . an argument that people can understand,” is the most telling part. It actually demonstrates a lack of cerebral perspicuity. Even a President of average intelligence would not make such an inane statement. It is certainly not a manifestation of properly firing synapses.

His apologizers (like Krugman) are on the stump whining that he didn’t do enough, and that the election wasn’t pushback against Obama and his government expansion policies, but were a result of dissatisfaction with the economy. That’s good news. Let them keep “believing.” The pushback will continue all the way to 2012.

The other good news – he won’t compromise. He can’t. Doesn’t know how to. The electorate will demand that its wishes be listened to and elected conservatives will have to heed those wishes.

Can We Pay Down The Debt In Frequent Flyer Credits?

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=42141

<strong>For the curious, you can go to wikipedia and see the list of Obama’s trips. It is astounding. And this doesn’t even include his off the record trips to Man Country or Michelle’s world tour of Earth’s culinary offerings. Obama is not a U.S. President. He is the U.S. Ambassador to the planet.

But You have admit, the First Affirmative Action President sure knows how to Party.
Governing, not so much. He is stuck in Campaign Mode and this time the Taxpayer
is footing the bill. Not to worry, it’s OPM!

Obama on ’60 Minutes’: Surprised by Political Cost of Health Law

(You gotta be Kidding Me)

The president says overhauling the health care system turned out to have a higher political cost than expected — but hopes to find common ground with Republicans by advancing their health care proposals.

Republicans Look at Budget Maneuvers to Prevent Spending on New Health Law

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/07/republicans-look-budget-maneuvers-prevent-spending-new-health-law/

GOP: ‘We Have a Spending Problem’

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/07/gop-message-revenue-problem-spending/

GOP on Message: Revenue Not the Problem, Spending Is

If voters didn’t send a message in last week’s election, somebody better tell Republicans because they heard one and are harmoniously repeating it.

“We don’t have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem,” as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Sunday.

In fact, no fewer than four Republican lawmakers who rode the wave of morning talk shows repeated the new mantra Sunday in what is undeniably the underlying theme behind the GOP approach to tackling government spending in the next Congress.

“The election result reflected the fact that people get Washington does not have a revenue problem. It’s got a spending problem,” Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., the expected next House majority leader, said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“We do not have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem. Let’s focus on the problem,” Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the likely next House Budget Committee chairman repeated later on the same show.

“Well, I think it’s not a revenue problem; it’s a spending problem,” said Sen.-elect Rand Paul, R-Ky., on ABC’s “This Week.” “A lot of times people would come to me and say, well, you don’t believe in any government. And I would tell them, you know what? I believe in $2.4 trillion worth; I just don’t think you can have $4 trillion worth if you only bring in $2.4 trillion.”

Paul said some of the suggestions he will make to reduce the size of government include freezing federal hiring, reducing the federal workforce by 10 percent and possibly cutting wages for federal employees by 10 percent, though military would be exempted.

“The average federal employee makes $120,000 a year. The average private employee makes $60,000 a year. Let’s get them more in line, and let’s find savings. Let’s hire no new federal workers,” he said.

Paul added that he would also end earmarks and would consider an across-the-board cut of all programs, that includes military as well as social programs.

But reducing the size of government is easier said than done. Entitlements take up a majority of federal spending, and they are not budget items that Congress has the authority to cut. If the military were also removed from the budget-cutting formula, that leaves only 16 percent of the budget that Congress can chop.

In each Congress, lawmakers are confronted with the battle between political will and public perspective. A majority of Americans don’t want Congress to touch the entitlement system. And the resolve is also apparently lacking within President Obama’s deficit commission, which is expected to issue a set of recommendations next month for getting control of runaway spending.

But Ryan, who is a member of the deficit panel, said he doesn’t expect a supermajority — 14 of the 18 commissioners on — to join him in a “grand bargain” to reduce entitlements because few on the panel have interest in redoing the new health care law, which takes $500 billion from Medicare over the next 10 years to pay for new programs.

“When it comes to entitlements, the big problem, about 85 percent of it, is health care,” Ryan told “Fox News Sunday,” noting that the group does agree that it is not interested in raising the revenue line but in decreasing the spending line.

“It’s unclear where we’re going to go. But I don’t think you’re going to see some big grand bargain. My personal hope is a big dent on spending in some categories where we can get some common ground on.”

Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., who appeared on ABC’s “This Week,” said he too agrees that entitlement programs are “threatening the fiscal vitality of future generations of Americans” but balancing the budget — and not merely by creating a spending freeze — will be the new priority for Republicans.

“We think we ought to go back to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels and freeze there — there’s been an 84 percent increase in domestic spending since this administration took office. We’ve got to roll back there. That will save $100 billion in the first year. How about a net hiring freeze on Capitol Hill?” he said.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who appeared with Ryan on “Fox News Sunday,” said not only congressional earmarks should be taken off the table but “administration earmarks” in the form of competitive grants need to be removed.

“That’s where we give a slush fund, just like the stimulus, to the president. And then they come up with who they like and where they like them and they issue the money. Congress has to start saying no.You figure out who wins the competitive grant. You come back to us and say, ‘I’d like to award this amount of money for this,’ instead of a budget that has blank checks. If you do that, there will be less money awarded, and it will be awarded for more meritorious projects,” he said.

McConnell agreed that he would like to limit congressional earmarks though it’s not as easy as it sounds because of the process by which the president is given authority over spending in the states.

“The earmark issue is about discretion, about an argument between the executive branch and the legislative branch over how funds should be spent,” McConnell, R-Ky., said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “We ought to also deal with executive branch earmarks. The stimulus bill that passed last year, the almost a trillion-dollar stimulus bill, was riddled with executive branch earmarks.”

Wow, now who would have imagined that?

Well said, Skookum! Like a true Marxist, Obama is incapable of seeing that his policies are being soundly rejected by the people he is attempting to rule govern. Like a true Marxist, he figures that he just has to find the right words to sell those policies to “the masses.” After all, in his mind (as he’s been told for far too long now) he’s brilliant, and we, we are just too stupid to understand what is best for us.

Thus with the flimsiest of mandates that relies on arrogance and narcissism rather than substance, they intend to forge ahead with their Marxist-Leninist policies and continue implementing the Obama/Soros policies of Open Society and Open Borders as if the American people and their opinions are inconsequential and the election didn’t happen.

Classic, textbook case of narcissism right there.

The next two years are going to be very interesting indeed.

Unfortunately, Obama had no choice. If he didn’t defend the red (deficit inducing) Social Engineering Experiment (hereafter referred to as the Red SEE,) he would be sending the message to his supporters – and tbe rest of the world – that the progtams were ill-conceived (like “shovel-ready” jobs) or more expensive than he thought (like Obamacare) – or both (everything else.) Basically he’s giving a pep talk, because he doesn’t think he can alienate any of his supporters. He’s trying to look like Moses by channeling Woodrow Wilson, Herbet Hoover, FDR, and Jimmy Carter (I know Carter isn’t dead yet, but I don’t think it changes the dynamic all that much.)

Of course, Obama needed to emulate Clinton (Bill, that is; not the man of the house,) but that wasn’t going to happen. With all the departures from Obama’s administration, he couldn’t afford to lose more face.

This is a golden opportunity for real conservatives in government to make or break their chance to improving this economy and country. It’s going to be a long two years.

Jeff

Skookum
“That it’s a matter of persuading people. And giving them confidence and bringing them together. And setting a tone.”

The problem with a lot of Americans, as King Obama sees it, is we can’t be “persuaded” that his way is the best. How could we be so dumb?

Old Trooper 2
His first year in office he threw an average of one party every three days. I would like to know how many he threw the second year.

@Smorgasbord:

His first year in office he threw an average of one party every three days. I would like to know how many he threw the second year.

Obama parties amounted to 170 that first year and that didn’t include Christmas events. Don’t know what the grand tally is this year, but I suspect they were scaled back just a bit to make room on the calendar for golf, vacations, and campaigning. They will probably ramp back up now that the election is over.

Here’s one event they have missed, forgot to mention on the White House website or even give a “shout out” to family, friends, co-workers, etc. at Ft Hood:

On the first anniversary of the Fort Hood massacre, Barack Hussein Obama and an entourage of 3,000 left Washington D.C. for India. As Mr. Obama and his fellow travelers were racking up $200 million a day in expenses, a solemn ceremony honoring the victims of Major Nidal Hasan was keeping the faith at the Central Texas army base.

Not willing to believe that the president or the White House staff could be so callous and disrespectful as to simply blow-off the soldiers, civilian staff, police and families whose lives were forever changed on November 5, 2009, I searched the whitehouse.gov website for some proof that the commander in chief really does care. Among the ‘Statements and Releases’ was the ‘Weekly Address: President Obama Calls for Compromise and Explains his Priorities on Taxes,’ the ‘Statement by the President on Diwali’ and a ‘Readout of the President’s Call with the SanFrancisco Giants.’ Not a word anywhere about Fort Hood.

A search of ‘Presidential Actions’ revealed ‘Presidential Proclamation-Veteran’s Day’ and ‘Presidential Proclamation-Military Family Month,’ wrapped around proclamations for a free trade agreement for Bahrain and National Adoption Month. No mention of the first anniversary of the Fort Hood massacre, not a word.

Meanwhile in Mumbai Mr. Obama addressed a group of survivors and government officials, The Times of India reports:

US President Barack Obama on Saturday struck a strong bond with his audience at Mumbai’s Taj Mahal Palace Hotel, which bore the brunt of 26/11 terror, by saying America shared India’s grief over the attacks and would not forget the savagery.

But not all 26/11 survivors were impressed, especially as Obama desisted from mentioning the Pakistan connection to the terror strike: something that has been established in the investigation by US’s own agencies.

A large number of Indians remain skeptical of Mr. Obama‘s intentions and many like writer Bhisham Mansukhani (a 26/11 survivor) are angry that conspirator David Headley remains in U.S. custody. Echoing the sentiment of a growing number of his countrymen, Mansukhani said that Headley “deserved to be in an Indian prison. Unless that happens Obama’s visit is meaningless. If he doesn’t give us Headley, he doesn’t give a damn about victims of attack.”

If Mr. Obama had gone to Fort Hood to honor the victims, their friends and family and the survivors of Major Hasan’s attack he would have been on hand when Sgt. 1st Class Maria Guerra was honored for her actions on that fateful day. The Dallas Morning News reports that Sgt. Guerra was honored for securing the front doors of the medical processing building during the attack and then organizing the other nurses and medics to help treat the wounded.

“Don’t ever forget us,” Guerra said. “Do not forget about us. That’s what we’d like to ask the rest of the country.”

Sadly those words did not reach the ears of the commander in chief .

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/11/obamas_fort_hood_amnesia.html

Missy, why should he care about the military? They aren’t union and they largley vote against him. They are the “enemy”.

This man is, and has been so self- absorbed in his own image and in love with his own voice so much, that he truly doesn’t see that it is the policies that he and his party have forced through
congress, without regard for the priorities of the People- he could have focused on jobs right out of the box, but instead chose to keep the level of fear high so he could get this unneeded FUBAR legislation rammed through with a minimum of difficulty.
Even then, he had a hard time, and he shouldn’t- he had control of EVERYTHING, and yet he was truly “Carter-esque” in his ineptitude- and he still believes it was a “lack of communication” that caused all his troubles?
Give me a break!

@Missy: #8 Missy

You keep thinking backwards. Would you want to attend a ceremony of Muslims mourning the loss of some of there members being killed by our troops? That would be the equivalent of our King-in-Chief attending the Fort Hood ceremony.

You might have hit upon the reason he left the USA. I can imagine how much he hates attending such events and having to hand out medals to the troops his enemy. How many military events has he missed?

OP and James Raider’s #2 comment hint at what I’ve been wondering about since before the election (of 2008).
Obama had a fairly decent chief speech writer in Jon Favreau.

But Jon got so drunk he got caught on camera gropping the breast of a cardboard cutout of a life size Hillary.

A poll of Obama’s supporters said: 32.73% “No Big Deal.”
18.18% called it ”Party Time.”
Only one in five thought he ought to be dismissed.

Well, he was NOT dismissed.
And now, he has proven to be an awful speechwriter.
Yet STILL he is not dismissed.

I happen to believe he has ”something” on Obama.
Why else keep a lousy writer in charge of your messaging?

In my 45 years on Earth, I have found that people who use the word “narcissist” to describe another person tend to have as the definition “Anyone who does not spend their time thinking about me.” There is a ton of projection involved in a lay person using that word.

I have also found that a person is “arrogant” if there is something about them that makes the speaker feel insecure or inferior. Self-confident people NEVER complain about the arrogance of others.

Whenever I hear cons talk about how Obama is “arrogant” or “a narcissist,” I smile . . . he’s getting to you, isn’t he? When Dinesh D’Souza writes an entire book of unlearned pop psychology, claiming that the biracial guy raised by White Kansans is REALLY channeling a dead Kenyan father who he met once after age two, then I KNOW he has gotten to you. You folks are no longer rooted or grounded in any reality; it is all emotion now.

Obama has become the wingnuts’ boogieman! He is your “haint,” a gollum. He is the person to whom you cons ascribe all your fears and insecurities — fears about minorities and smart people and people who live in cities and read the New York Times, people who did well in college. People who took the proverbial “road less traveled” and, through hard work, a good character, an easygoing personality and luck, amass amazing wealth . . . all the while you cons who feel you are really superior sit back and wonder “why the hell didn’t I think about that?”.

Face facts, cons — if Obama did not have such a non-angry vissage, he would have gotten nowhere in life; and his calm incenses you. If he did not graduate at the top of his class at Harvard Law, you would question his intellect; and his intelligence makes you despise him. If he actually was a firebreathing angry Socialist, he would never have been elected, nonetheless presiding over an expanding economy after being handed a deep and horrid recession by a GOPer president. It is this very success, of course, that drives cons absolutely NUTS because they KNOW it means a second Obama presidential term.

There is so much projection in the GOPer anger. The more you guys talk, the more you expose your own emotional fragility.

@ Nope. It just proves that Obama doesn’t get it and His Bootlickers like You don’t get it either.

B-Rob!

While playing with yourself to the vision of Marcia Brady back in your prepubescent days…Jimmy Carter and the Dem’s were sowing the seeds of the current economy. The Dem’s have been using the compassionate mantra to steal from the tax payers in order to buy votes ever since FDR.

Your assertion the GOP’ers handed the country this economy, is laughable at best. Your ignorance on display so to speak.

“Bush Called For Reform of Fannie/Freddie 34 Times Since 2001”

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/bush-called-for-reform-of-fanniefreddie-34-times-since-2001/blog-16522/

Unfortunately for our country, Obama is willing to put us in great jeopardy by giving away our secrets and technology to the enemy. He is capable of signing UN treaties that will infringe on our rights…(small arms treaty) to mention just one. He can commit our troops to war crime trials in the Hague. He can tie our dollar to the IMF which means they will tell us what it is worth instead of the free market…not to mention just collapsing the currency in it’s entirety. These are just a few of the things he can do causing this country great harm…or greater harm than he has already caused.

Obama must be stopped, less his ideas will push the country to total collapse. If a Civil War ensues, then so be it…it would be a much better option, than being reduced to a third world country controlled by the likes of the UN. There are people out there who believe in the romance of…’we are the world”…and for them, the fruit of my labor is meant to feed their romantic notions and ideas. When I go to work, it is for the finance NOT! the romance…to get ahead and prosper. I for one, am tired of paying for every underachiever that happens onto the face of the planet…I am tired of paying for the corruption of others…(i.e. Medicare fraud, Welfare fraud, Foreign Aid fraud). I watched LBJ put the Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid system in motion all in an effort to BUY votes because Vietnam was diminishing his popularity. Since his signature went on those documents we have spent $12 trillion on these programs and those folks are no better off now, than they were back then…back then and before Medicare doctors would make house calls.

Now this Socialist wants to expand all of this very very expense stuff to everybody…I do not think so. If the currency collapses this is what you are in store for…from 1968, the Chicago riots when King got shot…enjoy the show.

Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pvfa0Rv4efo

Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoEeaaeY164

Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTpk_h7by3c

Chicago Fire Dept.

Riots Main Page http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=1968+riots&aq=f

Hey!

Gold breaks $ 1,400.00….keep up the good work “O”

http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html

Before Bush

NYT 1999

Fannie & Freddie Warnings

DAMN!!!! where did that come from?

B-rob is following the new lefty talking point. Accuse the Conservatives of projection, displacement, and hypocrisy. Funny, I’ve been proving how B-rob and other drones have been guilty of those things for some time now. They think they are clever by heaping even more projection upon us. Ironic and sad.

Harley-Davidson times announcement to Obama’s visit:
to build bikes in India.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-11-04/world/india.bikes_1_india-market-harley-davidsons-haryana?_s=PM:WORLD

aceofwands —

Which party controlled the House, the Senate and the White House from 2001 through 2007? The GOP. If they actually wanted any changes in Fannie Mae, they certainly could have done it. Hell, they forced through just about everything else they wanted to — tax cuts, the Medicare drug bill, Iraq War spending on a credit card!

Please name the actual legislation, the bills, proposed by the GOP to fix Fannie. Because that is the only actual active power that the Congress has — to vote on legislation. If it is not in a bill that is voted on, it does not exist. So unless you can show me the actual bill that the GOPers or Bush proposed, your claims that Bush “wanted to reform Fannie Mae” are quite empty statements of ambition.

aceofwands,

“Bush Called For Reform of Fannie/Freddie 34 Times Since 2001″

Fannie/Freddie – You have pointed right at the heart of the accelerant that propelled mortgage lending into the bubble which exploded and left us in the current mess.

Why would organizations which were “backed” by taxpayers, have had a need to “payoff” members of Congress? Their profitability didn’t matter, so why would they have paid tens of millions in salaries and bonuses to their senior executives like the thief Franklin Raines, when there was no risk? . . .

UNFORTUNATELY, the list of those in Congress who enjoyed Fannie’s and Freddie’s beneficence includes Democrats and Republicans, and it is deep and wide, although, Dems received almost three times the amount received by Reps.

TOP RECEIVERS of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions:



1. Dodd, Christopher – Dem. $165,400 

2. Obama, Barack – Dem $126,349 

3. Kerry, John – Dem $111,000

. . . and the great overseer Barney Frank has the guts to run again, . . . AND HE GETS RE-ELECTED. What insanity.

Hey Raider

I like this quote from the Times

”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”

GEE! according to the Lib’s…”nobody saw this coming”…fucking morons.

@B-Rob,

In my 50 years on earth, I have learned that people who use the word “cons” when talking about conservatives are really projecting that they themselves are trying to con others. Maybe that’s because they realize that they’ve been conned and don’t want the rest of the world to see them for who they really are. 

Narcissist, arrogant, haughty, audacious, self-important – these aren’t terms that just conservatives are using to describe Obama; these are the kinds of things independents and liberals have been using with even greater frequency lately to describe The One. YOU can’t handle it, because you don’t want to admit that you have been publicly supporting and empty suit, one whose narcissism and arrogance (along with that of Reid and Pelosi) have angered the voting public. It cost the left a massive amount of credibility, and it hurts, doesn’t it.

Instead of “manning up” and admitting these traits, you try to deflect the criticism with sophomoric psychological babble. We conservatives see the truth, just as we saw these traits in G. W. AND criticized him for them. We are not the ones with a superiority complex. Most of the “rank and file” conservatives are hard-working people who want as little government interference in our lives. We are not perfect, but we’ve learned the historical lessons that liberals seem destined to have to learn by repeating history. We wouldn’t even mind it if it wasn’t on our dime and didn’t affect our lives, liberties, and pursuit of happiness – but it always does.

If you haven’t already done so, read “Economics in One Lesson” by Henry Hazlitt. I’ll even send you a copy if you can’t find it. Maybe if you read it you’ll understand us “cons” better than you think you do.

Jeff   

What JVerive said. And do read Hazlitt’s book. Knowledge truly is power.

Reading the New York Times just isn’t going to educate you very much, B-Rob, though it does have a great crossword puzzle.

B-Rob!

The only empty thing around here is your head.

From Congressional testimony…the Dem’s blocked all efforts.

B-Rob, you can pretend to have a man-crush on Obama, but us goobers can tell you’re secretly seething with jealousy and rage at him. Why else would you play the cool, intellectually superior, sneering-from-an-impressive-height Obama persona, as if we wouldn’t notice you’re just another smug, snotty liberal taking shots at conservatives on a blog? You hate him, don’t you, for being everything you only wish you were, yet still clearly a dope and a loser?

Trying to make out like it’s conservatives who resent and despise him–now that’s projection!

@ aceofwands, . . . #25,

That is an extremely powerful video clip – clearly setting responsibility for the financial disaster on the shoulders of a pathetic bunch of Democrats now disavowing any knowledge, and on Barney whose ability to knowingly lie is hard to equal. He did a good job of misrepresenting his role at the centre of the maelstrom and Massachusetts keeps believing him. Discerning minds have vacated that state.

BTW, don’t get too worked up over trolls whose only source of income is “trolling.” Telltale signs, . . . not much sign of common sense, and any arguing sentence longer than 3 words loses any sign of a logical reasoning thread.

If trolls could get productive jobs, or if they could build any business even the size of a lemonade stand on your street corner, they wouldn’t be trolls, they’d inject intelligent argument to the debate without perverted invectives that betray a lack of mental dexterity.

Thank you Raider

Not to worry…having survived the 68 riots…(I’m from Chicago)…it’s all good.

That was the 33rd Military Police Battalion at Cabrini Green taking out the snipers…my old unit. They taught me well.

@B-Rob: #13 B-Rob

All I am going to say is wait until the higher taxes kick in in January. Also, since a lot of democrats lost the election, I am guessing they are going to push harder for their liberal agendas since they won’t be in office again.

Insurance companies are raising their rates because they will have to cover everyone with pre-existing conditions. Doctors are refusing to take on new Medicare patients because ObamaCare won’t pay as much to them as Medicare does now. There is an estimated 43,000,000 more people that will be put on ObamaCare that don’t have insurance now, but there will be fewer doctors accepting them, so what good is the coverage if you can’t get a doctor to treat you?

In your 45 years on earth have you paid into a 401(k) plan? Will you go along with King Obama taking away the tax break for investing in them?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2102082/posts

Maybe you are so dedicated to your King Obama you will donate your whole 401(k) account to him so he can pay for the expensive programs he has created and will keep creating:

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/10/23/would-obama-dems-kill-401k-plans.html

How far are you willing to go to support YOUR king?

B-Rob- Do you really believe the tripe you claim passes for logical thought and reality?
The Reps had, from 2001- 2007, a RAZOR-THIN majority in the Senate, and not much better in the House- therefore, the Dems were able to block EVERY attempt to reform the FMs.
You, without any trouble at all, could find AT LEAST six youtube “Barney Frank” moments, wherein he claims, as early as 2001, that the FMs are sound investments, and indeed, he wants to “roll the dice” with them- not exactly a Mensa moment for him, or for Dodd and Schumer, either, both of whom, on the Senate Banking committees, said much the same thing, even while Bush, McCain, and others were wanting to tighten regs.
Heck, there is even a youtube vid showing Bubba Clinton saying that it had been the Dems blocking the reforms.
You really should research before typing anything into cyberspace- you WILL get caught out.

Obama is giving the opposition (whether Republican or Democrat) plenty of ammunition for sound bite ads against him:

Obama on the perks of the job:

“…..as president I can’t even see any traffic because they block all of the streets.”

“I thought I had a pretty nice room [before]. But now that I’m president, they upgraded me. I got the upgrade. And it’s a really nice room now.”
(Obama was referring to a 22,000 square foot suite — equal to roughly 10 average-sized American homes.)

CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/09/obama.perks/

aceofwands and Blake —

Let’s walk through this. In the House, there is NO WAY for the Dems to block anything UNLESS they get a majority vote, meaning a bunch of GOPers side with the Dems. If the GOPers wanted to do something that Barney Frank did not want to have happen, the only way to derail it would be to get the votes . . . the same as the GOPers failed opposition to Obamacare.

I say the same thing again — show me the House vote where an actual BILL REFORMING FANNIE MAE was voted on! Give me the number, then explain how the Dems “blocked” it. Show me the Senate bill that the Dems filibustered, or otherwise blocked in committee.

Neither of you can show me any bill the Dems opposed because the GOPers NEVER PROPOSED A BILL REFORMING ANYTHING. You are recycling talking points that make no sense. A speech on youtube does not constitute an actual effort to block legislation. No such thing ever happened; and if I am wrong, I am SURE you will provide the bill number that proves me wrong.

Quick dash in and out to again shoot the fish in the barrel, better known as Billy Bob.

Billy Bob sez: I say the same thing again — show me the House vote where an actual BILL REFORMING FANNIE MAE was voted on! Give me the number, then explain how the Dems “blocked” it. Show me the Senate bill that the Dems filibustered, or otherwise blocked in committee.

Neither of you can show me any bill the Dems opposed because the GOPers NEVER PROPOSED A BILL REFORMING ANYTHING. You are recycling talking points that make no sense.

HR 1461, the Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005, passed the House 331 to 90, with 12 not voting. Among the 74 nay Dem votes are the usual progressive suspects… Pelosi, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Henry Waxman, Cynthia McKinney, Barney Frank… you know, the group who proudly proclaimed the GSEs had no problems.

Sister bill, S 190, sponsored by Dole, Hagar, McCain and Sununu, did not fare so well. As both Peter Wallison and Charles Calomiris pointed out in their Sept 2008 WSJ op-ed, had the Senate Dems allowed the bill to come to a vote back in 2005, the huge growth in the subprime and Alt A GSE portfolios would not have happened.

In 2005, the Senate Banking Committee, then under Republican control, adopted a strong reform bill, introduced by Republican Sens. Elizabeth Dole, John Sununu and Chuck Hagel, and supported by then chairman Richard Shelby. The bill prohibited the GSEs from holding portfolios, and gave their regulator prudential authority (such as setting capital requirements) roughly equivalent to a bank regulator. In light of the current financial crisis, this bill was probably the most important piece of financial regulation before Congress in 2005 and 2006. All the Republicans on the Committee supported the bill, and all the Democrats voted against it. Mr. McCain endorsed the legislation in a speech on the Senate floor. Mr. Obama, like all other Democrats, remained silent. Mata Musing: probably too busy on the campaign trail…

Now the Democrats are blaming the financial crisis on “deregulation.” This is a canard. There has indeed been deregulation in our economy — in long-distance telephone rates, airline fares, securities brokerage and trucking, to name just a few — and this has produced much innovation and lower consumer prices. But the primary “deregulation” in the financial world in the last 30 years permitted banks to diversify their risks geographically and across different products, which is one of the things that has kept banks relatively stable in this storm.

As a result, U.S. commercial banks have been able to attract more than $100 billion of new capital in the past year to replace most of their subprime-related write-downs. Deregulation of branching restrictions and limitations on bank product offerings also made possible bank acquisition of Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch, saving billions in likely resolution costs for taxpayers.

If the Democrats had let the 2005 legislation come to a vote, the huge growth in the subprime and Alt-A loan portfolios of Fannie and Freddie could not have occurred, and the scale of the financial meltdown would have been substantially less. The same politicians who today decry the lack of intervention to stop excess risk taking in 2005-2006 were the ones who blocked the only legislative effort that could have stopped it.

Anyone feel like attending another Billy Bob “fish fry”?

jim DeMint was right “Barry’s healthcare was his WATERLOO” (Webster’s meaning***a Decisive or final defeat or set back) Ass kidding doesn’t even come close. Now he knows how Napoleon and Custer felt.

@Billy Bob sez:: If he did not graduate at the top of his class at Harvard Law, you would question his intellect; and his intelligence makes you despise him.

Careful now, bubba. Your self-proclaimed omnipotence is showing. Obama refuses to release his grades from Occidental, Columbia or Harvard, and guards his SATs and LSATs like they are state secrets. (where’s WikiLeaks when you need ’em, eh?). So from which fork in your tongue are you speaking from when you claim to know he was “at the top of his class”?

And, as a matter of fact, what little we do know is that Obama graduated Columbia in political science, *without honors*. This per university spokesman Brian Connolly, and reported in the New York Sun.

Which of course makes you wonder just how he managed to get into Harvard at all.

Oh, silly me… affirmative action. Alive and well.

@MataHarley: #34

I appreciate the offer of the “fish fry,” but I would have a hard time eating that kind of stuff for the following reasons:

(1) Full of fat.
(2) Hard to swallow.
(3) No nutritional value.
(4) Too many side effects, including hallucinations and brain damage.
(5) Hard to KEEP down no matter how many times you swallow it.
(6) Stinks.
(7) Not fit for human consumption.

You should hold your “fish fry” in China. They love that kind of stuff. They would just eat it up.

He should live by the philosophy that “It is better to remain silent and be THOUGHT a fool, than to speak, and leave NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

@MataHarley: #35

Obama never went to Harvard. Fox News interviewed 400 of his classmates and not one remembers him, not even one who was in the same Class of ’83 political science, pre-law that Obama SAYS he was in. Obama’s picture is not in their yearbook.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2365625/posts

If I had the money I would put up a large reward for anybody that can produce pictures of Obama in ANY school. I would like to see someone do this. One picture was of him in 3rd grade in Hawaii in 1969, but his timetable says he wasn’t in Hawaii at that time.

Home

Now we find out that congress admits that Obama hasn’t proven his citizenship.

Home

What is the punishment for impersonating a president?

Smorgasbord: Despite the fact that he may not of have attended Harvard and was the Editor of the Harvard Law Review without writing anything, an astounding feat in itself, it is hard to make the assumption he did not graduate at the top of his of his class; because, he may not have graduated at the bottom or the middle, therefore it hard to say he didn’t graduate at the top. This is syllogistic logic from the days of the early Greeks and is a foundation of advanced mathematical theory. If you can prove two of three parts, then you can prove the third part. Oh well, it went something like that. Back in the days of slide rules, we had computers that didn’t require electricity. They were a lot cheaper and you didn’t need to worry about viruses or someone stealing your identity.

I think mathman can bail me out on this one.

@Skookum: #38

It was Columbia University and not Harvard I should have referred to. My mistake. As I mentioned earlier, Fox News asked 400 students from the same year he was there about Obama and none remembered him. The ones in one of the classes he said he took said he wasn’t there. No picture of him in the yearbook.

Now, where does that put him on their graduation list?

Graduating in the top of one’s graduating class means nothing unless you state how many were in the graduating class AND the percentage bracket one was in. Anyone who graduated in the top half of the class can claim to have graduated at the top. And if it as an unusually small OR unusually large class, what can reasonably be deduced? At best, and this assumes no stretching of the truth, all that can be concluded is that Obama finished somewhere in the 51st and 99th percentile groups. Without the other information, no other valid deduction can be made.

It’s so easy to shade the truth or even outright lie with statistics and related proclamations. Ask anyone in marketing.

Jeff

@Skookum: #40

I agree. I just hope it isn’t after Obama is crowned king.

@JVerive: #41

How could he have graduated at any level if he wasn’t there? He was never there. No hospital claims him as being born there, no city claims him as being born there. The only one who claims him being born anywhere is his grandmother, and she says she was at his birth in KENYA.

Now, the Congressional Research Service admits that Obama was not checked for proof of citizenship like the Constitution requires. Nobody checked to see if he is a citizen of the USA. Let’s let the democrats explain that one away.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=225561

@Skookum: #43

It will give him another reason to throw a party. I wonder if our liberal commentors are OK with the cost of all the parties he is throwing at our expense.

Smorgasbord: The Libs are involved in a form of cult worship with Obama. In their eyes he can make no mistake. With them he has a mythical G-dlike stature; consequently he is entitled to the perks of royalty. Thus they defend his outrageous and extravagant behavior in this most inappropriate era.

Independents have managed to see past the hypocrisy and have realized that if an admitted Marxist had won the election, he could move no faster to subvert our country and economy towards Socialism.

Of course this is the philosophy the Progressive Socialist celebrates, to these anti-religious people, he the epitome of a savior and they worship him and want to treat him like a king, with all that is due a king or savior. The more money he spends and wastes, the quicker the our form of economy and government will fail. For them, there is nothing to complain about; they only see reasons to celebrate, profligacy, inefficiency, corruption, and incompetence only hasten and propel them toward their long term goal of International Socialism.

We hate obama because he is brilliant? It clear from such a post that B-Rob is not brilliant. You see why I call him braindead.

Refernece Posts 35-47,

We shouldn’t question O’s supporters or anyone else on the left. If they say it’s true, then it’s true. They don’t need facts because they are of vastly superior intellect to the rest of us and know everything. And if worse comes to worse, they’ll just change the facts so they support their opinions.

Happy Veteran’s Day to all the Vets who post here.

@Skookum: #46

Everything you have said I have said at one time or other.

I wonder if the libs will worship their king after the democrats take away their 401(k) money and guarantee them a 3% return on it?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2102082/posts

I love this quote from it:

“The way the government now encourages 401(k) plans is to spend $80 billion in tax breaks,” which goes to the highest-income earners, Ms. Ghilarducci said.

The libs have a way with words. They call tax breaks “spending.” How can you spend something you don’t collect? This is just another proof that the libs consider the Federal money “their” money and any reduction in it comes out of THEIR pockets. In one sense it does, since money NOT collected can’t go in their pocket.

The highest income earners will save more money from the deduction because they pay more into it. All who put into a 401(k) account choose what PERCENTAGE of their income to put in it. The higher the income, the the more they put in. The libs don’t mention that the higher the income, the higher the percentage of income tax the employee pays. Last I heard it was around 70% Would our liberal commenters be OK with the government taking 70% of their wages? Let’s make the tax system fair and tax everybody at the 70% level and take away ALL tax breaks, then nobody can complain about the rich getting their tax breaks.

@Skookum: #50

You said:
if every congress raises taxes to pay for its pet projects, how long will it be before we just work to support the government

They don’t even have to raise taxes. The tax code is set up on a fixed percentage tax for different income levels. As the cost of living goes up and people’s wages go up they automatically go into higher tax brackets without raising the tax rates. That’s why a worker in the 1930s could afford the things they could and still be the only wage earner. Their percent tax was very low.

Let my imagination go wild for a little bit. Imagine two cities in the USA that border each other and are almost identical in all respects. One of them goes 100% liberal and the other goes 100% conservative. I will name them Liberal City and Conservative City. Each city lives according to their name.

How long would it be before we have a situation like East and West Berlin during the Cold War, North and South Korea, and North and South Vietnam where the people of one city want to leave it and go to the other city? Which ones will be loosing citizens?

We have something similar going on right now. California and New Jersey are loosing tax paying citizens. I am guessing other states are having the same thing happen. What are these states going to do when enough tax paying citizens leave the state that the state can no longer pay the non-tax paying people to live there.

Something I just thought of while I was writing this comment is all of the retired seniors who left and will continue to leave the USA because of the high cost of living here. After ObamaCare really kicks in I can see a lot more doing this. I might have to consider it. This would be sending more money out of the USA because they will still get their Social Security and other retirement checks sent to them.