Friday, December 25, 2009

New Year..New Blog.

Ordinarily, it would give me great pleasure to say," I told you so..."

Ordinarily, as in, "I told you it was going to snow" or "I told you not to burn the bacon" or, even better, "I told you that you would like it."

When it comes to anything and everything Obama related, I take no pleasure in saying, "I told you so" but, in fact, I did. Not loudly enough, I suppose. In any event, Obama is what I said he is and is doing what I said he would do. Fortunately, those of you who did not hear or did not want to hear, have seen what is an Obama presidency, and you do not like it:




And so now, let us move on to other matters. The trend on the graph above will continue on it's own. We might comment occasionaly until this horrible episode is concluded, but we have made our point, and we have new points to make. In the matter of Obama, I never did want to say, "I told you so."

It would have been so much better not to have found out that I was correct.

Next post: New Years Resolutions!

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

An early Christmas present

If the election were held tomorrow, well...voters who were fooled would not be fooled again. Not by a longshot. Numbers like this demonstrate that a great many of the voters who voted for Obama have realised their mistake.

It is one thing for well-meaning but ill-informed voters to have voted for a candidate who never had any intention of upholding the presidential oath of office. It would be quite another matter if, as Obama's unsuitability for the office becomes more and more obvious to even those with only a modicum of patriotism or, perhaps, literacy, were not "strongly disapproving" at this point. Thankfully, they are.

Now if only the people who vote for Barney Frank again and again would start paying attention.

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Thursday, November 19, 2009

Friday, November 13, 2009

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Thursday, November 5, 2009

A shout-out and a tragedy.

The pictures are the same feeds from the scene at Fort Hood on every station. The talk radio stations are all covering the same breaking news.

The White House has made the press aware of the Commander-in-Chief's intention to address the nation from the conference he is attending. At 5 o'clock every news outlet picks up the same feed of President Obama addressing the nation regarding the breaking news of a shooting resulting in the deaths of at least 12 soldiers and wounding of at least 30 at Fort Hood in Texas.

Monday, November 2, 2009

Voters are waking up.

The opt out of the public option

Opt out? What does this mean?

Very simple actually. Opt-out is what you do with the public school system. Public schools are run by the government with taxpayer dollars.

Do your children go to the public schools? If you opted-out, you are in a better school, but you are still paying for thre public school. Opt-out means you don't have to send your kids there, but you still have to pay for it.

How will that work with Health Care????

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Ann Coulter has the facts

This is an informative read.

Some of the facts are "antiquated." Why are they antiquated? Because the events happened a long time ago. Despite arguments to the contrary from the left, old facts are not less true because they are old. Facts are provable and can be described in simple, straightforward terms.

Print this one and if you are able...please tell me what isn't true.

Ann Coulter

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

We are paying for WHAT?

Why are convicted murderers in Massachusetts Department of Corrections facilities getting sex-change procedures at taxpayer expense?

AMENDMENT XVI
Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.
Note: Article I, section 9, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 16.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

That is quite a question is it not?

The sixteenth amendment provides for an income tax. One hundred years after the amendment was passed, taxpayer dollars, having been raised from none to 50 percent or more of taxpayer income, are being spent on not on infrastructure such as roads and bridges, but on sex change operations for convicted murderers. How is this possible you might ask – particularly if it’s your money being used for this abomination. How is this possible? In a word, the answer is Democrats.

The Constitution of the United States of America is intended to limit the role of government. Democrats want to tell everyone else what to do. Democrats want to spend everyone else’s money for them. Democrats are anti-Constitution. Not all of them, of course. Some Democrats are not aware of the facts. They are ignorant and ignorance is often curable. Some Democrats are ignorant and stupid. When presented with the facts on a given situation, any given situation, they will ignore any facts presented and attack anyone with a view opposing their view of the situation. (e.g. Taxpayer-“I do not want to pay for this convicted serial killer to get sexual re-assignment surgery while he is serving his sentence for killing six people.” Democrat, “Taxpayer is a racist bigot.”)

Why do you suppose so many prisoners serving life sentences opt for taxpayer paid operations? Could it be that they seek some control of their lives? When everything a person does is controlled, the controlled person will naturally seek to control whatever they might. Why are the alumnae of the prison system so often covered in “prison tats?” Because they can. Prisoners cannot control what they eat or when they sleep or where they go or what they do - most of the time. This is a condition not natural to human existence. While the vast majority of prisoners enduring conditions not natural for humans have earned a place in prison by exhibiting behavior not natural for humans, often repeatedly, the natural tendency for control of one’s life remains instinctual. Hence, prison tats.

So how does this relate to sex-change operations?

Prisoners will control what they might control to the extent that they are able.

Democrats demand that taxpayers pay for abortions, illegal aliens, sex-change operations, you-name-it. Those of us who would prefer to keep our money and not pay for illegal aliens convicted of killing American citizens to get sex-change operations are, of course, racist bigots.

The prisoners, while killing is still illegal, who are sentenced to lengthy terms in prison strive to control whatever they might. Tattoos, or whatever they might.

All day every day in an 8x10 cell makes the short list of possibilities more and more appealing.

Facing a lifetime of staring at the same four walls, a course of hormone injections and psychotherapy starts to look pretty good. Someone to talk to, anyone. Surgery…hmmmm.

Does that involve narcotics?

It is all about control. If you were given a choice, while serving an irrevocable life sentence for murder, between a bullet in the head and a sex change operation…what would you choose? I know, I know, I am a racist bigot.

Monday, October 26, 2009

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Lack of Transparency = Taxation without representation.

This was pre-teleprompter. The reasons for a teleprompter are transparent.

Do you know what is in the Health Care Bill?

Do you know what is in the "Cap and Trade" Legislation?

Do you know who the Czars are?

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

U.N. climate meeting was propaganda: Czech president

Reuters Story



Obama's Speech:

Mr President, Mr Secretary-General, fellow delegates, ladies and gentleman: it is my honor to address you for the first time as the forty-fourth president of the United States. I come before you humbled by the responsibility that the American people have placed upon me; mindful of the enormous challenges of our moment in history; and determined to act boldly and collectively on behalf of justice and prosperity at home and abroad.

Humbled? Really?

I have been in office for just nine months, though some days it seems a lot longer [to me]. I am well aware of the expectations that accompany my presidency around the world. These expectations are not about me.

I, I, my, to me and not about me. It shouldn't be about you, but you are making it about you. The person in the office of the President of the United States serves the people, the country and the Constitution of the United States, not the other way around.

Rather, they are rooted - I believe - in a discontent with a status quo that has allowed us to be increasingly defined by our differences, and outpaced by our problems. But they are also rooted in hope – the hope that real change is possible, and the hope that America will be a leader in bringing about such change.

More "Hope and Change" nonsense. Are you running for king of the world now?

I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust. Part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies, and a belief that on certain critical issues, America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others. This has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism, which too often has served as an excuse for our collective inaction.

Blaming President Bush once again while describing a flawed America. "my country" he says. Is he about to give control of his country to the U.N.? Why does Obama talk about a "reflexive anti-Americanism?" Ask William Ayers. Ask Reverend Wright. Ask Van Jones.

Ask Michelle.

The United States of America is the most productive and the most generous country on the planet. This President thinks we have been listening to the wrong radio stations while he has been listening to the wrong teachers and preachers.

Like all of you, my responsibility is to act in the interest of my nation and my people, and I will never apologize for defending those interests. But it is my deeply held belief that in the year 2009 - more than at any point in human history - the interests of nations and peoples are shared.

He will never apologize for defending the interests of his nation and his people. This is purely Clintonian language: He won't apologize for defending the interests of Americans because he won't defend the interests of Americans. Why would he apologize for doing something he will not do?

The religious convictions that we hold in our hearts can forge new bonds among people, or tear us apart. The technology we harness can light the path to peace, or forever darken it. The energy we use can sustain our planet, or destroy it. What happens to the hope of a single child - anywhere - can enrich our world, or impoverish it.

You ever hear a fortuneteller speak? This is what they sound like: Sometimes your world is full of joy and bluebirds; and sometimes you find yourself at the edge of a great abyss!

In this hall, we come from many places, but we share a common future. No longer do we have the luxury of indulging our differences to the exclusion of the work that we must do together. I have carried this message from London to Ankara; from Port of Spain to Moscow; from Accra to Cairo; and it's what I will speak about today. Because the time has come for the world to move in a new direction. We must embrace a new era of engagement based on mutual interests and mutual respect, and our work must begin now.

Hope and change for everyone; everywhere.

We know the future will be forged by deeds and not simply words. Speeches alone will not solve our problems - it will take persistent action. So for those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions that we have taken in just nine months.

So for those of you who think America is bad, you're right. But now I, Barack Hussein Obama am fixing everything. Just look at the last nine months.

Yes, let's start a list. Broadway show with Michelle. Took over General Motors. Got a Latina racist appointed to the Supreme Court. Air Force One buzzing Manhattan over ground zero. Quadrupled the deficit. 9 Trillion, right? Ended the war in Iraq. Oops. Scratch that one. Appointed Czars to fix everything. Well, not everything. Turns out some of them were from the Reverend Wright- Bill Ayers school of acting stupidly. Or was that the Cambridge Police Department? The President has much more important things to be worried about. ACORN? Never heard of them. Much more important issues at hand. Socializing medicine for example. Where were we?

On my first day in office, I prohibited - without exception or equivocation - the use of torture by the United States of America. I ordered the prison at Guantánamo Bay closed, and we are doing the hard work of forging a framework to combat extremism within the rule of law. Every nation must know: America will live its values, and we will lead by example.

You want to kill or have killed American Soldiers or Citizens? This President demands that his people make no extraordinary efforts to defend themselves.

We have set a clear and focused goal: to work with all members of this body to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaida and its extremist allies - a network that has killed thousands of people of many faiths and nations, and that plotted to blow up this very building. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, we - and many nations here - are helping those governments develop the capacity to take the lead in this effort, while working to advance opportunity and security for their people.

Working to advance opportunity and security for their people. That's wonderful. Their people.

In Iraq, we are responsibly ending a war. We have removed American combat brigades from Iraqi cities, and set a deadline of next August to remove all of our combat brigades from Iraqi territory. And I have made clear that we will help Iraqis transition to full responsibility for their future, and keep our commitment to remove all American troops by the end of 2011.

Brave American troops have been successfully carrying out the orders of the current Commander-in-Chief for the past nine months, sacrificing life and limb only to be referred to as though they were an infestation in Iraq. 2 years, and I will have 'em all out. Sorry for what Bush did. I'll be visiting the injured soldiers right after my next appearance on Letterman.

I have outlined a comprehensive agenda to seek the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. In Moscow, the United States and Russia announced that we would pursue substantial reductions in our strategic warheads and launchers. At the conference on disarmament, we agreed on a work plan to negotiate an end to the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons. And this week, my secretary of State will become the first senior American representative to the annual members conference of the comprehensive test ban treaty.

I will leave this to Hillary, my secretary of State. PWND

Upon taking office, I appointed a special envoy for Middle East peace, and America has worked steadily and aggressively to advance the cause of two states - Israel and Palestine - in which peace and security take root, and the rights of both Israelis and Palestinians are respected.

Bush didn't appoint a special envoy. I did. Israelis and Palestinians will now get along just fine. Does Iran have nukes? We don't use nukes anymore. I am going to tell Iran and they will listen to me. Jimmy Carter agrees with me. Jimmy Carter showed us all how to deal with Iran didn't he?

To confront climate change, we have invested $80bn in clean energy. We have substantially increased our fuel-efficiency standards. We have provided new incentives for conservation, launched an energy partnership across the Americas, and moved from a bystander to a leader in international climate negotiations.

The ultimate in snake-oil, climate change is the perfect argument for getting you, who cannot prove it isn't true, to give your money to me, who cannot prove that it is true! See link at top of this post.

To overcome an economic crisis that touches every corner of the world, we worked with the G20 nations to forge a coordinated international response of over two trillion dollars in stimulus to bring the global economy back from the brink. We mobilized resources that helped prevent the crisis from spreading further to developing countries. And we joined with others to launch a $20bn global food security initiative that will lend a hand to those who need it most, and help them build their own capacity.

Not bad for a guy who has done nothing of any substance as a Community Organizer or State Senator. "Back from the brink." Awesome. Did Michelle enjoy her shopping spree in Paris? It's like winning the lottery isn't it? And, bonus, you all get Secret Service protection. Wait until the next cover of Vogue...

We have also re-engaged the United Nations. We have paid our bills. We have joined the Human Rights Council. We have signed the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. We have fully embraced the millennium development goals. And we address our priorities here, in this institution - for instance, through the security council meeting that I will chair tomorrow on nuclear non proliferation and disarmament, and through the issues that I will discuss today.

America is no longer a Super Power. I, Barrack Hussein Obama, am the Super Power and I concede the power of the United States of America. The Constitution is flawed and now, finally subject to my interpretation. Me me me me.

This is what we have done. But this is just a beginning. Some of our actions have yielded progress. Some have laid the groundwork for progress in the future. But make no mistake: this cannot be solely America's endeavor. Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world's problems alone. We have sought - in word and deed - a new era of engagement with the world. Now is the time for all of us to
take our share of responsibility for a global response to global
challenges.

Vote for me. Hope and Change.

If we are honest with ourselves, we need to admit that we are not living up to that responsibility. Consider the course that we are on if we fail to confront the status quo. Extremists sowing terror in pockets of the world. Protracted conflicts that grind on and on.

Vote for me. Hope and Change.

Genocide and mass atrocities. More and more nations with nuclear weapons. Melting ice caps and ravaged populations. Persistent poverty and pandemic disease. I say this not to sow fear, but to state a fact: the magnitude of our challenges has yet to be met by the measure of our action.

This should get the Al Gore folks votes. Some of them have money and I need money if I am going to be elected King of the World!

This body was founded on the belief that the nations of the world could solve their problems together. Franklin Roosevelt, who died before he could see his vision for this institution become a reality, put it this way - and I quote: "The structure of world peace cannot be the work of one man, or one party, or one nation. It cannot be a peace of large nations - or of small nations. It must be a peace which rests on the cooperative effort of the whole world."

Vote for me. Hope and Change.

The cooperative effort of the whole world. Those words ring even more true today, when it is not simply peace - but our very health and prosperity that we hold in common. Yet I also know that this body is made up of sovereign states. And sadly, but not surprisingly, this body has often become a forum for sowing discord instead of forging common ground; a venue for playing politics and exploiting grievances rather than solving problems. After all, it is easy to walk up to this podium and to point fingers and stoke division. Nothing is easier than blaming others for our troubles, and absolving ourselves of responsibility for our choices and our actions. Anyone can do that.

Vote for me. Hope and Change.

Responsibility and leadership in the 21st century demand more. In an era when our destiny is shared, power is no longer a zero sum game. No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold. The traditional division between nations of the south and north makes no sense in an interconnected world. Nor do alignments of nations rooted in the cleavages of a long gone cold war.

The United States of America is no longer a Super Power. I, Barrack Hussein Obama have taken the Office of the President of the United States and have no intention of protecting or defending the "flawed" Constitution of the United States of America. Senior Chavez? Did you have something to say?

The time has come to realize that the old habits and arguments are irrelevant to the challenges faced by our people. They lead nations to act in opposition to the very goals that they claim to pursue, and to vote - often in this body - against the interests of their own people.

Representing the will of the people is not the same as doing what is good for them. We need to tell people what is good for them and not the other way around. The people of the world need to be free to do what we tell them is in their best interest.

Have you noticed that traditional or conservative now equals old and outdated? The old outdated ways like keeping most of what you earn are being replaced by government deciding how to spend your money.

The old way, the Constitutional way, was that government collected money from people to pay for what people could not pay for individually such as highways and military. Old and outdated. The new and unconstitutional government uses our money to tell us what we can drive and what we can eat: The interests of the leaders own people.

They build up walls between us and the future that our people seek, and the time has come for those walls to come down. Together, we must build new coalitions that bridge old divides - coalitions of different faiths and creeds; of north and south, east and west; black, white, and brown.

They? Who, exactly, are they? You mean Rush Limbaugh? You mean Glenn Beck? Who is Glenn Beck? I don't know, ask Van Jones.

The choice is ours. We can be remembered as a generation that chose to drag the arguments of the 20th century into the 21st; that put off hard choices, refused to look ahead, and failed to keep pace because we defined ourselves by what we were against instead of what we were for. Or, we can be a generation that chooses to see the shoreline beyond the rough waters ahead; that comes together to serve the common interests of human beings, and finally gives meaning to the promise embedded in the name given to this institution: the United Nations.

The choice was ours and we choose poorly. Good bullshit though: rough waters, common interests, and the United Nations ending...Ta DA!

That is the future America wants - a future of peace and prosperity that we can only reach if we recognize that all nations have rights, but all nations have responsibilities as well. That is the bargain that makes this work. That must be the guiding principle of international cooperation.

This speech is loaded with spelling errors. Was is released from the White House that way?

Today, I put forward four pillars that are fundamental to the future that we want for our children: non-proliferation and disarmament; the promotion of peace and security; the preservation of our planet; and a global economy that advances opportunity for all people.

When you hear the "for our children" argument you know this means money from your pocket to theirs right? Preservation of our planet? President Obama is going to preserve the planet. Remarkable. President Obama, when did you most recently smoke a cigarette and where?

First, we must stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and seek the goal of a world without them.

Iran. Say it. ACKmadinigiad. Say it. The United States will not tolerate...etc. Oh yeah, we are not in charge anymore. Son.*

* Moooamar Quaddaffy referred to "Our son Obama" in his ninety minute rant to the UN.

This institution was founded at the dawn of the atomic age, in part because man's capacity to kill had to be contained. For decades, we averted disaster, even under the shadow of a superpower stand-off. But today, the threat of proliferation is growing in scope and complexity. If we fail to act, we will invite nuclear arms races in every region, and the prospect of wars and acts of terror on a scale that we can hardly imagine.

Let's strike the science behind gunpowder while we are at it shall we? Is there anything we can do to legislate something about sticks and stones? What foolishness. The arms race is on at it always has been. The problem is that radical lunatics are in charge of so-called countries and regimes such as Pakistan, North Korea and Iran. They need to know that if they dare go too far, we, the United States of America, will annihilate them. Or, as Obama suggests, we could put down our weapons and Hope and Change that they will put down theirs.

A fragile consensus stands in the way of this frightening outcome - the basic bargain that shapes the nuclear non proliferation treaty. It says that all nations have the right to peaceful nuclear energy; that nations with nuclear weapons have the responsibility to move toward disarmament; and those without them have the responsibility to forsake them. The next twelve months could be pivotal in determining whether this compact will be strengthened or will slowly dissolve.

America will keep our end of the bargain. We will pursue a new agreement with Russia to substantially reduce our strategic warheads and launchers. We will move forward with ratification of the test ban treaty, and work with others to bring the Treaty into force so that nuclear testing is permanently prohibited. We will complete a nuclear posture review that opens the door to deeper cuts, and reduces the role of nuclear weapons. And we will call upon countries to begin negotiations in January on a treaty to end the production of fissile material for weapons.

I will also host a summit next April that reaffirms each nation's responsibility to secure nuclear material on its territory, and to help those who can't - because we must never allow a single nuclear device to fall into the hands of a violent extremist. And we will work to strengthen the institutions and initiatives that combat nuclear smuggling and theft.

We will ensure that violent extremists do not get weapons by laying ours down because we believe in strength through weakness.

All of this must support efforts to strengthen the NPT. Those nations that refuse to live up to their obligations must face consequences. This is not about singling out individual nations - it is about standing up for the rights of all nations that do live up to their responsibilities. Because a world in which IAEA inspections are avoided and the United Nation's demands are ignored will leave all people less safe, and all nations less secure.

Vote for me. Hope and Change.

In their actions to date, the governments of North Korea and Iran threaten to take us down this dangerous slope. We respect their rights as members of the community of nations. I am committed to diplomacy that opens a path to greater prosperity and a more secure peace for both nations if they live up to their obligations.

As President of the World, I would rather see American Citizens killed by the thousands or tens-of-thousands than disrespect Kim Jong-il or whoever thinks Americans might be worshiping the wrong gods.

But if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards; if they put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and the security and opportunity of their own people; if they are oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms races in both East Asia and the Middle East - then they must be held accountable. The world must stand together to demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise, and that Treaties will be enforced. We must insist that the future not belong to fear.

What does that mean? Accountable? Treaties will be enforced how? and by whom?

That brings me to the second pillar for our future: the pursuit of peace.

The United Nations was born of the belief that the people of the world can live their lives, raise their families, and resolve their differences peacefully. And yet we know that in too many parts of the world, this ideal remains an abstraction. We can either accept that outcome as inevitable, and tolerate constant and crippling conflict.

Or we can recognize that the yearning for peace is universal, and reassert our resolve to end conflicts around the world.

Look, a unicorn! You cannot end conflicts in New Jersey and you want to end them everywhere?

We can recognize that the yearning for peace is NOT universal and it never has been, and dedicate ourselves to peace through strength.

There are people on this planet with the intellect and intent of rabid dogs. Are you really so dangerously arrogant that you think you can talk a rabid dog out of biting us?

That effort must begin with an unshakable determination that the murder of innocent men, women and children will never be tolerated. On this, there can be no dispute. The violent extremists who promote conflict by distorting faith have discredited and isolated themselves. They offer nothing but hatred and destruction. In confronting them, America will forge lasting partnerships to target terrorists, share intelligence, coordinate law enforcement, and protect our people. We will permit no safe-haven for al-Qaida to launch attacks from Afghanistan or any other nation. We will stand by our friends on the front lines, as we and many nations will do in pledging support for the Pakistani people tomorrow. And we will pursue positive engagement that builds bridges among faiths, and new partnerships for opportunity.

Tell it to Osama, Obama.

But our efforts to promote peace cannot be limited to defeating violent extremists. For the most powerful weapon in our arsenal is the hope of human beings - the belief that the future belongs to those who build, not destroy; the confidence that conflicts can end, and a new day begin.

Vote for me. Hope and Change.

The most powerful weapon in an election maybe, but hope and change is crap next to a nuke.

That is why we will strengthen our support for effective peacekeeping, while energizing our efforts to prevent conflicts before they take hold. We will pursue a lasting peace in Sudan through support for the people of Darfur, and the implementation of the comprehensive peace agreement, so that we secure the peace that the Sudanese people deserve. And in countries ravaged by violence - from Haiti to Congo to East Timor - we will work with the UN and other partners to support an enduring peace.

We, and by that I mean U.S. taxpayers, will have their money confiscated by my administration and given to the UN and their third world causes.

I will also continue to seek a just and lasting peace between Israel, Palestine, and the Arab world. Yesterday, I had a constructive meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas. We have made some progress. Palestinians have strengthened their efforts on security. Israelis have facilitated greater freedom of movement for the Palestinians. As a result of these efforts by both sides, the economy in the West Bank has begun to grow. But more progress is needed. We continue to call on Palestinians to end incitement against Israel, and we continue to emphasise that America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.

The time has come to relaunch negotiations - without preconditions - that address the permanent-status issues: security for Israelis and Palestinians; borders, refugees and Jerusalem. The goal is clear: two states living side by side in peace and security - a Jewish state of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967, and realizes the potential of the Palestinian people. As we pursue this goal, we will also pursue peace between Israel and Lebanon, Israel and Syria, and a broader peace between Israel and its many neighbors. In pursuit of that goal, we will develop regional initiatives with multilateral participation, alongside bilateral negotiations.

I am not naive. I know this will be difficult. But all of us must decide whether we are serious about peace, or whether we only lend it lip-service. To break the old patterns - to break the cycle of insecurity and despair - all of us must say publicly what we would acknowledge in private. The United States does Israel no favors when we fail to couple an unwavering commitment to its security with an insistence that Israel respect the legitimate claims and rights of the Palestinians. And nations within this body do the Palestinians no favors when they choose vitriolic attacks over a constructive willingness to recognize Israel's legitimacy, and its right to exist in peace and security.

Quick question Mr. President: Not being naive and all, could you venture a guess how many times this has been said before? What, other than the date, is different now?

We must remember that the greatest price of this conflict is not paid by us. It is paid by the Israeli girl in Sderot who closes her eyes in fear that a rocket will take her life in the night. It is paid by the Palestinian boy in Gaza who has no clean water and no country to call his own. These are God's children. And after all of the politics and all of the posturing, this is about the right of every human being to live with dignity and security. That is a lesson embedded in the three great faiths that call one small slice of Earth the Holy Land. And that is why - even though there will be setbacks, and false starts, and tough days - I will not waiver in my pursuit of peace.

Third, we must recognize that in the 21st century, there will be no peace unless we make take responsibility for the preservation of our planet.

Oh yes, it is the 21st century. That changes everything. We must take responsibility for the preservation of the planet.

This is either amazing arrogance or amazing stupidity. Take your pick, but don't take a cent of my money for your "planet preservation project" until you have at least one iota of scientific evidence that we can have ANY impact on the planet one way or another.

The danger posed by climate change cannot be denied, and our responsibility to meet it must not be deferred. If we continue down our current course, every member of this assembly will see irreversible changes within their borders. Our efforts to end conflicts will be eclipsed by wars over refugees and resources.

This is truly scary; not the threats of danger but that the President of the United States is a fortune teller. Climate change threats cannot be denied? Is Al Gore's special effects movie your best evidence or do you have a crystal ball?

Development will be devastated by drought and famine. Land that human beings have lived on for millennia will disappear. Future generations will look back and wonder why we refused to act - why we failed to pass on intact the environment that was our inheritance.

What future generations? If what you say is true...if we do not give you control of all of our earnings, the world will end in a nasty fireball.

That is why the days when America dragged its feet on this issue are over. We will move forward with investments to transform our energy economy, while providing incentives to make clean energy the profitable kind of energy. We will press ahead with deep cuts in emissions to reach the goals that we set for 2020, and eventually 2050. We will continue to promote renewable energy and efficiency - and share new technologies - with countries around the world. And we will seize every opportunity for progress to address this threat in a cooperative effort with the whole world.

The whole world, which by the way, I, Barack Hussein Obama, am generously offering to lead. I will speak with great eloquence and practiced rhythm for all countries.

Those wealthy nations that did so much to damage the environment in the 20th century must accept our obligation to lead. But responsibility does not end there. While we must acknowledge the need for differentiated responses, any effort to curb carbon emissions must include the fast-growing carbon emitters who can do more to reduce their air pollution without inhibiting growth. And any effort that fails to help the poorest nations both adapt to the problems that climate change has already wrought - and travel a path of clean development - will not work.

Is the President of the United States talking about the United States here? This is global redistribution of wealth using a "green" campaign. Where is Van Jones and what is he doing for Obama now?

It is hard to change something as fundamental as how we use energy. It's even harder to do so in the midst of a global recession. Certainly, it will be tempting to sit back and wait for others to move first. But we cannot make this journey unless we all move forward together. As we head into Copenhagen, let us resolve to focus on what each of us can do for the sake of our common future.

This leads me to the final pillar that must fortify our future: a global economy that advances opportunity for all people.

The world is still recovering from the worst economic crisis since the great depression. In America, we see the engine of growth beginning to churn, yet many still struggle to find a job or pay their bills. Across the globe, we find promising signs, yet little certainty about what lies ahead. And far too many people in far too many places live through the daily crises that challenge our common humanity – the despair of an empty stomach; the thirst brought on by dwindling water; the injustice of a child dying from a treatable disease, or a mother losing her life as she gives birth.

In Pittsburgh, we will work with the world's largest economies to chart a course for growth that is balanced and sustained. That means vigilance to ensure that we do not let up until our people are back to work. That means taking steps to rekindle demand, so that a global recovery can be sustained. And that means setting new rules of the road and strengthening regulation for all financial centers, so that we put an end to the greed, excess and abuse that led us into disaster, and prevent a crisis like this from ever happening again.

Does that mean you are going to put a stop to forcing financial institutions into lending money to people who will not pay it back? Will you be rescinding the CRA from the Carter administration? Will Clinton's "welfare as income" policies be ended? Will Barney Frank and Chris Dodd be admonished?

At a time of such interdependence, we have a moral and pragmatic interest in broader questions of development. And so we will continue our historic effort to help people feed themselves. We have set aside $63bn to carry forward the fight against HIV/Aids; to end deaths from tuberculosis and malaria; to eradicate polio; and to strengthen public health systems. We are joining with other countries to contribute H1N1 vaccines to the World Health Organization. We will integrate more economies into a system of global trade. We will support the Millennium Development Goals, and approach next year's summit with a global plan to make them a reality. And we will set our sights on the eradication of extreme poverty in our time.

Now is the time for all of us to do our part. Growth will not be sustained or shared unless all nations embrace their responsibility. Wealthy nations must open their markets to more goods and extend a hand to those with less, while reforming international institutions to give more nations a greater voice. Developing nations must root out the corruption that is an obstacle to progress - for opportunity cannot thrive where individuals are oppressed and business have to pay bribes. That's why we will support honest police and independent judges; civil society and a vibrant private sector. Our goal is simple: a global economy in which growth is sustained, and opportunity is available to all.

Redistribution. Communism.

The changes that I have spoken about today will not be easy to make. And they will not be realized simply by leaders like us coming together in forums like this. For as in any assembly of members, real change can only come through the people we represent. That is why we must do the hard work to lay the groundwork for progress in our own capitals. That is where we will build the consensus to end conflicts and to harness technology for peaceful purposes; to change the way we use energy, and to promote growth that can be sustained and shared.

We must lead and they must follow. It won't be easy because some still want freedom and liberty. We must use green initiatives and healthcare initiatives to take control of how the workers can spend.

I believe that the people of the world want this future for their children. And that is why we must champion those principles which ensure that governments reflect the will of the people. These principles cannot be afterthoughts - democracy and human rights are essential to achieving each of the goals that I have discussed today.

We need Affirmative Action on a Global Basis. Have you all signed on the the black theology doctrine? I signed the document while I was attending the church of my mentor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, for 20 years. He was my role model until associating with him became a threat to my campaign to take the White House.

Because governments of the people and by the people are more likely to act in the broader interests of their own people, rather than the narrow interest of those in power.

Huh? You know in only a few months it has become obvious that the lies are not simple mistakes. They are not all based on ignorance as the, "This is not a tax, George" (Stephanopolous) argument. It is a tax, of course, but we shouldn't presume Obama knows the difference, should we? What is his experience? Acorn?

The test of our leadership will not be the degree to which we feed the fears and old hatreds of our people. True leadership will not be measured by the ability to muzzle dissent, or to intimidate and harass political opponents at home. The people of the world want change. They will not long tolerate those who are on the wrong side of history.

That sounds like a threat, doesn't it? Did you know that National Prayer Day at the White House was canceled by Obama? September 25, Muslim prayer day is sanctioned. These are just facts. No one here is asking for a birth certificate.

This assembly's Charter commits each of us, and I quote - "to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the
human person, in the equal rights of men and women."

Among those rights is the freedom to speak your mind and worship as you please; the promise of equality of the races, and the opportunity for women and girls to pursue their own potential; the ability of citizens to have a say in how you are governed, and to have confidence in the administration of justice. For just as no nation should be forced to accept the tyranny of another nation, no individual should be forced to accept the tyranny of their own government.

As an African-American, I will never forget that I would not be here today without the steady pursuit of a more perfect union in my country. That guides my belief that no matter how dark the day may seem, trans formative change can be forged by those who choose the side of justice. And I pledge that America will always stand with those who stand up for their dignity and their rights - for the student who seeks to learn; the voter who demands to be heard; the innocent who longs to be free; and the oppressed who yearns to be equal.

Oh that's right, you're an African-American. You just finished the "everyone is equal" speech and now you're reminding us of your racial mix. While you are quoting the UN charter, perhaps you would like to tell us about another charter that you signed: Black Liberation Theology.

"Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community ... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love."

Democracy cannot be imposed on any nation from the outside. Each society must search for its own path, and no path is perfect. Each country will pursue a path rooted in the culture of its people, and - in the past - America has too often been selective in its promotion of democracy. But that does not weaken our commitment, it only reinforces it. There are basic principles that are universal; there are certain truths which are self evident - and the United States of America will never waiver in our efforts to stand up for the right of people everywhere to determine their own destiny.

Which is why as President of the World, I will tell them what to drive and what to eat. I will tell them how much fuel they can use, and where to set their thermostats, and what kind of health care their neighbors will buy for them.

Sixty-five years ago, a weary Franklin Roosevelt spoke to the American people in his fourth and final inaugural address. After years of war, he sought to sum up the lessons that could be drawn from the terrible suffering and enormous sacrifice that had taken place. "We have learned," he said, "to be citizens of the world, members of the human community".

The United Nations was built by men and women like Roosevelt from every corner of the world - from Africa and Asia; form Europe to the Americas. These architects of international cooperation had an idealism that was anything but naive - it was rooted in the hard-earned lessons of war, and the wisdom that nations could advance their interests by acting together instead of splitting apart.

Now it falls to us - for this institution will be what we make of it. The United Nations does extraordinary good around the world in feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, and mending places that have been broken. But it also struggles to enforce its will, and to live up to the ideals of its founding.

I believe that those imperfections are not a reason to walk away from this institution - they are a calling to redouble our efforts. The United Nations can either be a place where we bicker about outdated grievances, or forge common ground; a place where we focus on what drives us apart, or what brings us together; a place where we indulge tyranny, or a source of moral authority. In short, the United Nations can be an institution that is disconnected from what matters in the lives of our citizens, or it can be indispensable in advancing the interests of the people we serve.

"Outdated grievances..." Do you mean waging Jihad for a couple of thousand years? Is that an outdated grievance, Mr. President of the World?

This speech, presented by Barack Hussein Obama, the President of the United States to the United Nations in September 2009 is scarier than anything Steven King has ever written. This is real and it is happening right now.




Saturday, September 19, 2009

''Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive''

Let’s start with a quick lesson from Minute Maid® We have all seen this before. The packaging is designed to make it look like there is something special about this package. Free something or other. Bonus: 20% more. New and Improved. We have come to expect this as typical marketing, but when it is blatantly deceptive it is insulting is it not?

This packaging says, “ 2 more boxes than other leading juice box 8-packs.




This packaging also says, “10 pack.”

Are the folks at Minute Maid® telling us that a 10 pack has 2 more boxes than an eight pack or are they trying to make us think we are getting 2 more boxes for the same price as an 8 pack? What they actually say on the package is true. How they say it is intended to deceive.

Example from a radio interview with President Obama:

Q And Congress has voted, to my understanding, not to join the public plan once it passes because they want to keep their good federal plan. Would you be willing to either urge Congress to have the federal employees join the public plan, or would you be willing to urge Congress to somehow open up the federal health plan to all Americans?

MR. SMERCONISH: Thank you, Ernie. I hear this all the time, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, it's a great question, Ernie. First of all, understand that currently federal employees have a very good health care plan because they're able to leverage the insurance companies. There are so many members of their -- of the federal workforce that they can get the best rates possible. Every insurance company wants to do business with the federal government. So premiums are lower and it's a better deal overall.

The same concept is what we're trying to do in setting up what's called a health insurance exchange. Essentially it'd be a marketplace where people who currently don't have health insurance or small businesses could pool their numbers so they have leverage over the insurance companies and they could go on a Web site and look at the various options, the types of various private health insurance plans that are being offered, and choose the one that's best for their families. So we're actually trying to duplicate what exists for federal employees. We want to make that available to everybody else.

Now, what we have said is, let's make a public option one choice of many choices that are available to people who are joining the exchange.
And I see nothing wrong with potentially having that public option as one option for federal employees, as well.

But the important thing that I think I have to make absolutely clear: Nobody would be obligated to choose the public option. If you went on that Web site and you said, you know what, Aetna or Blue Cross Blue Shield are offering a good deal and I would rather choose that plan than the public plan, you'd be perfectly free to do so. Nobody would be saying you are obligated to go into a public plan.

MR. SMERCONISH: I think what folks are saying is that they'd love it if you'd stand up and say, whatever it is that we're creating, be it a co-op, be it a public option, whatever name ultimately might be ascribed to it, we in the executive branch, we in the Congress, we will live with exactly these parameters.

THE PRESIDENT: I think there would be -- I think it would make perfect sense for us to make the public option available to federal employees, as well. But keep in mind it would just be a choice.

The President says the choice available to the public should also be a choice to the executive branch and the Congress. The question was, “Do citizens get the same healthcare choices as members of Congress?” and the answer was, “Congress gets the same healthcare choices as citizens.” Do you see the difference? Do you see the deception? The statement, while it does not answer the question is true, but is clearly intended to deceive. The carpool has two vehicles. One is a Prius and the other is an Expedition. Citizens get the Prius and the members of Congress should be able to choose the Prius too. But keep in mind it would just be a choice (for members of Congress.)

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Monday, September 14, 2009

The Boston Sunday Globe Democrat



On the Sunday after September 11th, The "Ideas" section of The Boston Sunday Globe led with these two stories. The first is an essay written by a history professor at the University of Georgia about Hyman Minsky who predicted that capitalism would fail. Two popular views supporting Minsky's predictions are that 1) capitalism is inferior to socialism and 2) capitalists will capitulate to socialism which has failed on every occasion attempted throughout recorded history.

The second article, written by a fellow for Southeast Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations. We might expect an impressive email address for this correspondent @ SACFR.gov or perhaps an @boston.com, but @hotmail will have to do. We might also expect a strong first sentence. "At times this summer, much of the Muslim world seemed at war with itself" will have to do. Other than this summer, when has the Muslim world not been at war with itself and/or everyone else, fellow@hotmail? OK, we have seen your open, let us skip to the end. Do we want to read the middle? Let's see: "In addition, the example of Indonesia suggests that in many cases, America would be wise to intervene less." Whether by the examples of success or by the examples of failure, it doesn't matter does it? America has something to learn from Indonesia. Did you get that America? You have something to learn from Indonesia and don't forget: Capitalism fails.



Why Capitalism Fails



A Muslim Model

Boston Globe Editor: "What should we run for the Sunday "Idea's" section?"


How about? A tribute to the Armed Forces of the United States of America, The 9/11 Memorial at ground Zero, A tribute to America's Firefighters and Police, The families and the orphans of 9/11, The Muslim community and their apology to America, NYFD, NYPD, Rebuilding the Trade Center Buildings, The Survivors of the 9/11 attack...

Boston Globe Editor:" Let's go with "Why capitalism fails and what we can learn from Muslims."

Here is another lesson from Indonesian Muslims: Indonesia's Aceh to allow stoning for adulterers by The Associated Press

Maybe the Boston Globe is saving that one for Valentine's Day.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

What happens when the President breaks their oath of office?

Presidential oath of office:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Former Thai President faces life in prison

Sunday, September 6, 2009

"Do you find what Van Jones said objectionable?"

Will David Axelrod answer the question? Any question?

Thursday, September 3, 2009

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Monday, August 31, 2009

Throw them all out!



Please "Google" the New York Representative from Harlem. Use whatever search engine you prefer. I am saying nothing about Charlie Rangel more than "Charlie Rangel." I know the picture says something about Charlie Rangel, but I won't dwell on that longer than his tax statements. Charlie won't answer but I have only one question for Charlie Rangel and that is this: Are you answerable to anyone?

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Reasons to Boycott Whole Foods Markets

This is particularly applicable if you are proximate to the Whole Foods Market in Portland, Maine where fresh lobster is not only available, but is an industry. People feed, clothe and shelter their families with jobs in the lobstering industry. But they don't sell any lobsters to Whole Foods Market because Whole Foods Market is worried more about the humane treatment of lobsters than they are supportive of their human neighbors in Maine.

"Although we discovered significant improvements are possible from capture up to in-store tank conditions, we are not yet sufficiently satisfied that the process of selling live lobsters is in line with our commitment to humane treatment and quality of life for animals," said Margaret Wittenberg, vice president of quality standards for Whole Foods Market. "At this time, we believe it is too difficult to maintain consistent conditions throughout the entire supply chain to ensure the health and wellbeing of lobsters outside their natural environment for such a long period of time. Many lobsters are held in storage facilities for several months."

While it might be interesting to debate the perceived differences between "storage facilities" and the ocean floor to a lobster, or for that matter the knife-in-the-brain vs. straight-into-the-pot-of-boiling-water methods of execution, another interesting debate might involve the age-old question, "Why is it OK to sell live mollusks, but not crustaceans?" Do the Oysters not know they are -shudder- being stored on ice?!

Why should we boycott Whole Foods Market?

Reason #1:

Whole Foods Market Stops Selling Live Lobsters

AUSTIN, Texas (June 16, 2006). After evaluating the entire supply chain process, Whole Foods Market® (NASDAQ: WFMI) announced today it will stop selling live lobsters effective immediately.

We love lobster don't we? And lobster is better served very recently dispatched. Oysters are savored when served on the half-shell. Ask any supermarket, the canned oysters are not a big seller. I bet even Whole Foods Market would tell you that the frozen or previously cooked lobster doesn't sell well. We know why not, don't we? It isn't as good. Seafood is like that. We see restaurants and butcher shops touting the wonders of "aged beef," but we do not see "aged seafood" do we? No, we do not. What do we see? We see "Fresh Seafood!" "Today's Catch!"

Whole Foods Market should be able to figure out a way to provide customers with fresh Maine lobster without violating the lobsters civil rights before we dispatch them and eat them with lemon and butter.

Reason #2

There is no reason number two.

There are a number of people, and by that I mean liberals, who think that the Wall Street Journal op-ed by John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Market is sufficient reason to boycott.

Please add me to the list of people who enthusiastically endorse this boycott!

People who were offended by John Mackey's op-ed should shop elsewhere. Leave the good grapes for people with rational gripes. Have fun at the Megamart! And don't forget the oysters.




Friday, August 21, 2009

Green: It is the new snake oil.

Are you buying?




If you are a taxpayer, you are buying:

Van Jones in the Obama White House link

This is promoting Socialism. This is promoting Social Engineering.

The science of Green is the science of snake oil.

"Your goal has to be to get the greenest solutions to the poorest people," Jones told me. "That’s the only goal that’s morally compelling enough to generate enough energy to pull this transition off. The challenge is making this an everybody movement, so your main icons are Joe Six-Pack—Joe the Plumber—becoming Joe the Solar Guy, or that kid on the street corner putting down his handgun, picking up a caulk gun."

The quotation above can be found on the Whitehouse.gov website. Really!

Mr. Jones, my goal is to protect my family from people who want to put our country 10 trillion dollars in debt to finance "greenest solutions" snake oil, or any other unconstitutional taxation without representation or for that matter evidence. Speaking of evidence, do you want the "kid on the street corner who just put down his handgun" to come to our homes with a caulking gun? Is that your idea of a greenest solution?

Taxation necessary to pay for basic infrastructure at a local level (i.e. roads and water) and military at a federal level are provided for in the Constitution.

"Joe the Solar Guy" is on his own.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Domestic Enemy

Currently, no one has done more damage to the United States from within than Ted Kennedy.

1969
“Our cities will not be flooded with a million [illegal] immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same. Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset. Contrary to the charges in some quarters, the bill will not inundate America with [illegal]immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia — and in the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.”

“The bill will not flood our cities with [illegal]immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs,” Behind the Immigration Nationality Services Act of 1965 and who is now leading the charge to reform his own error, to reform his own failure, to reform his own bad legislation, Ted Kennedy said, “No immigrant visa will be issued to a person who is likely to become a public charge.”

2009

When there was a possibility that Senator Kerry might be elected to the Presidency, Kennedy proposed legislation that eventually stripped the then Governor of Massachusetts. Mitt Romney, of the ability to appoint an interim Senator while a special election to replace the vacated seat was organized and scheduled.

The Governor was stripped of the ability to appoint an interim Senator while the special election process took place. This was what Kennedy wanted when a Republican Governor was in office.

Now that his own Senate seat is facing vacancy, Kennedy wants to reverse his own legislation, again. With Liberal Democrat Deval Patrick in the Massachusetts Governors office, Kennedy wants to restore the Governors ability to appoint an interim Senator. If the government takeover of health care, which Kennedy wants, comes to a vote in the Senate, his vote could be the 51st vote. What was best for the country when the majority didn't want it turned out to be bad for the country. Kennedy wanted it, and now he wants to fix his mistake. Now, what is best for the country according to Kennedy is not what the citizens want and he wants to change the laws he proposed to override the citizens will again.

Confused? Here is all you need to know about Ted Kennedy:

These are the FBI Reports on the investigation of the death of Mary Jo Kopechne:

Click here






Sunday, August 16, 2009

The President's July 11th op-ed in the Washington Post

There are nearly 800 comments following the the President’s Washington Post op-ed, “Rebuilding Something Better.” Many of them are very well thought out, and of course, many of them are angry - on both sides.

Keith Hennessey served as the senior White House economic advisor to President George W. Bush. Mr. Hennessey wrote a response on his website which everyone with an interest in the facts should read here: http://keithhennessey.com/2009/07/12/responding-to-the-presidents-op-ed/

Saturday, August 15, 2009

Friday, August 14, 2009

What the Left will not do, continued: Answer the question.

Will the White House Spokesperson answer a simple, direct, yes or no question?

You be the judge.

Socialized Medicine

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Rasmussen August 13.

Pride in the United States of America. Not on the left.

All that is missing from the following video is Hillary munching from a bag of Cheesy-puffs while she represents the United States of America as the Secretary of State.

This is our Secretary of State answering a Congolese Student's Question:



This is our Secretary of State in Nigeria comparing the 2000 election in the United States of America to the election process in Nigeria:



If the Secretary of State wanted to show Nigeria problems with the elections in the United States, she might have referred to more current examples:



The Secretary of State, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, is the President's chief foreign affairs adviser. The Secretary carries out the President's foreign policies through the State Department and the Foreign Service of the United States. On January 21, 2009, Hillary Rodham Clinton was sworn in as the 67th Secretary of State of the United States.

Was Roseanne Barr not available?



Respect for the United States of America and what so many brave men and women have sacrificed to ensure our way of life - no repect from the left.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Friday, August 7, 2009

Is he talking about Barney Frank?




What the left won't do, continued: The left will never take responsibility.

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Did you mean, "Please General, call me senator?"

What the left won't do #2: Respect the U.S. Military.


Senator Boxer(D-CA) doesn't have manners. Here is a funny clip. She worked so hard...

She doesn't know anything about military protocol. Sir and Ma'am are the terms in the manual.

Monday, August 3, 2009

What the Left will not do #1: Defend and Protect the Constitution.

Defend and protect the Constitution of the United States of America:The Left will not.

Obama said as much during a 1991 radio interview broadcast on a Chicago NPR station.

The audio clip on YouTube of this interview has been removed. Here is the transcript:


MODERATOR: Good morning and welcome to Odyssey on WBEZ Chicago 91.5 FM and we’re joined by Barack Obama who is Illinois State Senator from the 13th district and senior lecturer in the law school at the University of Chicago.

OBAMA: If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be okay.
But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as people tried to characterize the Warren court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, it says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn’t shifted. One of the I think tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributed change and in some ways we still suffer from that.

MODERATOR: Let’s talk with Karen. Good morning, Karen, you’re on Chicago Public Radio.

KAREN: Hi. The gentleman made the point that the Warren court wasn’t terribly radical with economic changes. My question is, is it too late for that kind of reparative work economically and is that that the appropriate place for reparative economic work to take place – the court – or would it be legislation at this point?

OBAMA: Maybe I’m showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. The institution just isn’t structured that way.
You just look at very rare examples during the desegregation era the court was willing to for example order changes that cost money to a local school district. The court was very uncomfortable with it. It was very hard to manage, it was hard to figure out. You start getting into all sorts of separation of powers issues in terms of the court monitoring or engaging in a process that essentially is administrative and takes a lot of time.
The court’s just not very good at it and politically it’s very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it legally. Any three of us sitting here could come up with a rational for bringing about economic change through the courts.



"...generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, it says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf."

The first and foremost responsibility of the President of the United States is to protect and defend the Constitution. Obama has stated, publicly, that the Constitution is flawed.

Should it concern us that these clips are being removed from YouTube? Is Chicago NPR invoking terms of use arguments to have an exclusive interview with then Senator Obama not be broadcast over the internet? It is taxpayer funded radio, isn't it?



What the Left will not do continues with the next post.

This clip where Obama says the Constitution has a "fundamental flaw" was working on YouTube on August 3, 2009.

Why so stimulus?