hello america! 1 year in office---these are the topics &, when you look at them, i only ask that you judge each one fairly.
1. transparency
2. hiring lobbyists
3. open & honest administration
4. pork infested bills
5. getting rid of programs that don't work
6. improving programs that do work
7. keeping america safe
8. putting the healthcare debate on c-span
9. healthcare for ALL americans
10. changing how washington does business
11. blaming the repubs for their opposition to the healthcare bill
12. calling the "tea party" people un-american
13. closing 'gitmo'
14. trying enemy combatants on american soil
15. affording those same combatants american constitutional rights
16. bowing to foreign dignitaries
17. fear tactics
18. teleprompters
19. attempting to shut down foxnews & other opposition outlets
20. no clear-cut foreign policy
21. no clear-cut american policy
22. 'cash-for-clunkers'
23. bank bailouts
24. auto bailouts
25. executive privilege lifting the ban on federal money to be used overseas for abortion
education, etc.
26. months long delay in approving increase of troops for afghanistan
27. 10 days plus delay in responding to xmas-day attempted plane bombing
28. no clear-cut immigration policy
29. exposing cia tactics
30. fixing the american economy
31. creating jobs
32. 'greening' america
33. reaching across the isle
34. 'card check'
35. 'cap & trade'
36. unemployment
37. 'global warming'
38. raising the taxes of the middle class
39. not pursuing our own oil interests
40. inability to provide congress with your own bill
41. inability to correct your own security breaches
42. calling mass. police action stupid
43. calling chris brown a jackass
44. lack of support for 'charlie r' to step down
45. expanding federal government
46. increasing the national deficit
47. cancelled 'ask & answer' news conferences
48. falsified 'job created' records
49. asking americans to sacrifice while their government spends more
50. blaming pres bush for all of america's present problems
51. needing more time
52. exports & imports
53. closed door deals with the unions
54. iran deadline
55. housing foreclosures
56. bank loans
57. fairness for all americans
58. lack of support for mass. senate race
59. honesty with the american people
60. opening obamas past to america
i'm sure there are other topics i over-looked however, i'm sure you get the point. i will disect each topic at a later date (after the state of the union address) & post my own grades for obama...
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Friday, January 8, 2010
OBAMA/NATIONAL SECURITY--ANOTHER OXYMORAN
hello america! if you listened to obamas speech yesterday concerning our security, you probably ended up like me---CONFUSED. common sense says that if we are at 'war' with terrorists & capture them, we should treat them as enemy combatants...
obama & his administration downplay the 'war on terrorism' & would have you believe it's a 'war on radical extremists'. well, call it what you want---the point is, they still don't get it. there are groups of people out there that are hellbent on killing americans no matter where the killing takes place.
so you ask, what's the problem, knowitall? after all, obama said 'the buck stops here' & that he would take care of it. the problem is obama can't even fix his own security. there have been 3 different reports of 'strangers' breaching his personal security at the whitehouse & 'rubbing shoulders' with him. these incidents have been on foxnews with the video to back them up. if obama couldn't fix this problem after the first incident, how in the hell can you expect him to 'fix' the bigger problems?
yeah, i know. give him more time---it's only been a year since he took over from pres bush. well, for those of you that are still willing to give him more time let me ask you this: how much more time will he need to understand that his "words must mean more then just words"? ask those people on that flight on x-mas day that actually got involved in stopping that would be bomber from blowing up that plane how much more time he needs.
more time!!! he's had more then enough time. i told you in the beginning that he didn't have any military experience; he doesn't have a clear-cut foreign policy; he doesn't understand the difference between an enemy combatant & a common criminal; he's extremely weak as a 'leader' & would rather allow others to make the decisions & then he'll support them.
still don't believe me? look at him bowing to foreign leaders & then denying it. what pisses me off the most about that is, he doesn't have enough back-bone to make them bow to him. &, no matter how you spin it, obamas bowing is a sign of submissiveness &, judging from the videos of it, he does it without thought.
need more? in reality, obama has 4 secs of state---hilary clinton (over-all flunky), richard holbrooke (afghanistan & pakistan), dennis ross (iran), & george mitchell (middle east). how are you going to reach a clear-cut foreign policy with so many cooks with their hands in the pot? the sad part of this is, they all have to report to someone that accepts the 'best sounding' thing he hears---not necessarily the 'best solution'
obama is full of crap when he grants the same rights & protection to captured enemy combatants that we give to those arrested for unpaid parking tickets. what is he trying to prove to america when he allows these people to be tried at our expense in our federal courts? they don't belong within our borders. &, if that doesn't make you mad, give some thought to this---obama is allowing some captured enemy combatants to be tried in our federal courts &, at the same time, he is allowing some to be tried in military tribunals. &, you're crazy to think that ag eric holder made the decision to try them in new york without consulting obama.
there are several 'smart' reasons they should not be tried within our borders...
1. taxpayers have to bear the cost of the security
2. americans working within the courthouse area are going to be screened & inconvenienced
3. the majority of americans don't want these people on our soil ( so who's agenda is this?)
4. if obama can allow un-maned drones to bomb suspected al queda & taliban strongholds without first reading them their rights, why be concerned with their rights when they are actually captured committing an act against us?
obama dropped the ball on our national security---he can blame it on his security advisors all he wants but let's be honest about this: instead of him supporting the cia & others for gathering info from 'terrorists', he has exposed them for their 'misdeeds' to the point that they have to change their methods for getting that info or face charges...yeah, i really feel safer...the x-mas would be bomber was willing to talk & was talking & should have been sent to "GITMO" & water-boarded by the cia; not held in one of our jails to be tried as a common criminal, nor, allowed to lawyer up & stop talking.
obama blames pres bush for all that is wrong with america. when will he man-up? he once spoke about pres bush sitting in a classroom when the twin towers went down & his handling of hurricane katrina----it took 10 plus days for obama to hold a news conference (he was on vacation) to talk to the american people. & then, remember how long it took him to respond to a request for more troops in afghanistan. NATIONAL SECURITY---
i don't think obama could find the word 'security' in websters even if i opened it to the 'n's'.
so, you obama faithful, keep on giving him more time &, when it's one of your loved ones or friends that fall victim to obamas time, don't bitch-just send him a letter saying you understand that he needs more time.
&, one more thing...just to put it in perspective---pres bush responded to the advise he received & everyone got on his case about it. afterall, he was the boss. how is that different then what obamas going through? he 'trusted' his security advisors & they failed him:::ISN'T THAT OBAMAS FAULT???
obama & his administration downplay the 'war on terrorism' & would have you believe it's a 'war on radical extremists'. well, call it what you want---the point is, they still don't get it. there are groups of people out there that are hellbent on killing americans no matter where the killing takes place.
so you ask, what's the problem, knowitall? after all, obama said 'the buck stops here' & that he would take care of it. the problem is obama can't even fix his own security. there have been 3 different reports of 'strangers' breaching his personal security at the whitehouse & 'rubbing shoulders' with him. these incidents have been on foxnews with the video to back them up. if obama couldn't fix this problem after the first incident, how in the hell can you expect him to 'fix' the bigger problems?
yeah, i know. give him more time---it's only been a year since he took over from pres bush. well, for those of you that are still willing to give him more time let me ask you this: how much more time will he need to understand that his "words must mean more then just words"? ask those people on that flight on x-mas day that actually got involved in stopping that would be bomber from blowing up that plane how much more time he needs.
more time!!! he's had more then enough time. i told you in the beginning that he didn't have any military experience; he doesn't have a clear-cut foreign policy; he doesn't understand the difference between an enemy combatant & a common criminal; he's extremely weak as a 'leader' & would rather allow others to make the decisions & then he'll support them.
still don't believe me? look at him bowing to foreign leaders & then denying it. what pisses me off the most about that is, he doesn't have enough back-bone to make them bow to him. &, no matter how you spin it, obamas bowing is a sign of submissiveness &, judging from the videos of it, he does it without thought.
need more? in reality, obama has 4 secs of state---hilary clinton (over-all flunky), richard holbrooke (afghanistan & pakistan), dennis ross (iran), & george mitchell (middle east). how are you going to reach a clear-cut foreign policy with so many cooks with their hands in the pot? the sad part of this is, they all have to report to someone that accepts the 'best sounding' thing he hears---not necessarily the 'best solution'
obama is full of crap when he grants the same rights & protection to captured enemy combatants that we give to those arrested for unpaid parking tickets. what is he trying to prove to america when he allows these people to be tried at our expense in our federal courts? they don't belong within our borders. &, if that doesn't make you mad, give some thought to this---obama is allowing some captured enemy combatants to be tried in our federal courts &, at the same time, he is allowing some to be tried in military tribunals. &, you're crazy to think that ag eric holder made the decision to try them in new york without consulting obama.
there are several 'smart' reasons they should not be tried within our borders...
1. taxpayers have to bear the cost of the security
2. americans working within the courthouse area are going to be screened & inconvenienced
3. the majority of americans don't want these people on our soil ( so who's agenda is this?)
4. if obama can allow un-maned drones to bomb suspected al queda & taliban strongholds without first reading them their rights, why be concerned with their rights when they are actually captured committing an act against us?
obama dropped the ball on our national security---he can blame it on his security advisors all he wants but let's be honest about this: instead of him supporting the cia & others for gathering info from 'terrorists', he has exposed them for their 'misdeeds' to the point that they have to change their methods for getting that info or face charges...yeah, i really feel safer...the x-mas would be bomber was willing to talk & was talking & should have been sent to "GITMO" & water-boarded by the cia; not held in one of our jails to be tried as a common criminal, nor, allowed to lawyer up & stop talking.
obama blames pres bush for all that is wrong with america. when will he man-up? he once spoke about pres bush sitting in a classroom when the twin towers went down & his handling of hurricane katrina----it took 10 plus days for obama to hold a news conference (he was on vacation) to talk to the american people. & then, remember how long it took him to respond to a request for more troops in afghanistan. NATIONAL SECURITY---
i don't think obama could find the word 'security' in websters even if i opened it to the 'n's'.
so, you obama faithful, keep on giving him more time &, when it's one of your loved ones or friends that fall victim to obamas time, don't bitch-just send him a letter saying you understand that he needs more time.
&, one more thing...just to put it in perspective---pres bush responded to the advise he received & everyone got on his case about it. afterall, he was the boss. how is that different then what obamas going through? he 'trusted' his security advisors & they failed him:::ISN'T THAT OBAMAS FAULT???
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
JUST A FEW THINGS
hello america! if you've been following the news, you know there is a lot happening & to just focus on headlines or, just one issue, is almost impossible because they are all inter-related. so...
nancy pelosi must think we are stupid. she proposes changing the name of gov't/public option to consumer option. she said we would be more willing to accept the same package with a different name---google it & there's a video of it...HMMM!
olympia snow was used to get the healthcare reform bill out of the senate finance committee &, now that harry reid has put the 'public option' back in, she will not support the bill. at what point did she realize the dems wouldn't keep their word? in fact, reid said she was the least of his problems---google it.
joe lieberman will not support the present bill with the public option in it. nor will he support it with it giving states the option to opt out---google it.
obama was in virginia trying to drum up support for the dem gov for next weeks election, who is about 10 points down in the polls. it was also said he is going back to new jersey to drum up support for the dem gov there. my problem with this is, he's going to try to drum up that supprot from the black community. i can only hope that they realize he's done nothing for them in 8 months & there's no plan to do anything in the future.
then you have the dems split on the healthcare bill &, that is where the problem lays. so, i guess those dems that oppose the present healthcare bill are also "un-americans" & "radicals".
HMMM!!!
nancy pelosi must think we are stupid. she proposes changing the name of gov't/public option to consumer option. she said we would be more willing to accept the same package with a different name---google it & there's a video of it...HMMM!
olympia snow was used to get the healthcare reform bill out of the senate finance committee &, now that harry reid has put the 'public option' back in, she will not support the bill. at what point did she realize the dems wouldn't keep their word? in fact, reid said she was the least of his problems---google it.
joe lieberman will not support the present bill with the public option in it. nor will he support it with it giving states the option to opt out---google it.
obama was in virginia trying to drum up support for the dem gov for next weeks election, who is about 10 points down in the polls. it was also said he is going back to new jersey to drum up support for the dem gov there. my problem with this is, he's going to try to drum up that supprot from the black community. i can only hope that they realize he's done nothing for them in 8 months & there's no plan to do anything in the future.
then you have the dems split on the healthcare bill &, that is where the problem lays. so, i guess those dems that oppose the present healthcare bill are also "un-americans" & "radicals".
HMMM!!!
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
OBAMA, RETURN THE MONEY FIRST...
hello america! perhaps i didn't write this dark enough:::obama & congress, before you ask wall street to repay their bonuses or cap their bonuses, why don't you return all the money they put in your 'war chests' for your campaigns?
i've said it before & you must have missed my point. if you received money from any of the businesses that received bailout funds, return it & then go after them.
our elected officials are quick to point out which businesses received bailouts but, they are extremely quiet about how much their election campaigns received from those very same businesses. HMMM, i wonder why that is!
obama, you told america you were going to have an open & honest administration & yet, you openly & honestly won't return the money you received but, you want to go after the bonuses & cap the future ones...things that make you go HMMM!
i've said it before & you must have missed my point. if you received money from any of the businesses that received bailout funds, return it & then go after them.
our elected officials are quick to point out which businesses received bailouts but, they are extremely quiet about how much their election campaigns received from those very same businesses. HMMM, i wonder why that is!
obama, you told america you were going to have an open & honest administration & yet, you openly & honestly won't return the money you received but, you want to go after the bonuses & cap the future ones...things that make you go HMMM!
OBAMA, LEAVE IT ALONE
hello america! obama wants to repeal the "don't ask-don't tell" rule which would allow those of the 'same-sex' persuasion to serve this nation openly & proudly.
before i tear this apart let me say this. i support those that seek same sex relationships openly. it's not GOD'S way or my way but, here in america, it's their way & right.
however, assuming that this rule is repealed, can you imagine what all this encompasses? as americans they would be entitled to their own set of rights that now govern the males & females. they would need their own sleeping quarters built, etc,etc. extra rules (similar to those that now govern the male/female soldier conduct) would have to be written into law. when off duty, they would have the right to dress as they wish-something they can't do now. can you imagine the 'gay' males dressed up like females in the EM, NCO & CO'S clubs? or the 'gay' females dressed up as males? can you imagine either gender acting out off duty army life as they really are?
now, i'm sure that there are some soldier's that either know or suspect that their counter-part isn't all man or woman &, because of the current rules, that's as far as it goes. they know when to use or not use the bathroom & shower. on the other hand, can you imagine those soldier's that didn't know or suspect & have used the bathrooms & showers with their counterparts that will now find out with the rule removed?
the repeal of this rule will certainly lead to a morale issue & would better be served left alone. you can't tell a 'gay man' he can serve "openly & proudly" & then restrict how 'he' can or cannot dress or act when off duty. another big problem would be in basic training...how far can you push a female mind in a male body or vice verse? --yeah, i saw G.I. Jane.
obama shot his mouth off during his election campaign to gather the 'gay' vote. now he's got a big problem because of it &, troop morale will suffer if he's successful in repealing this rule.
can you imagine if general mccrystal & general petraeus were 'gay'? in uniform they look sharp but, envision them off duty dressed in 'drag. i wonder what obamas reaction would be when they asked for more troops. can you imagine a 'gay' general colin powell reporting to pres bush & then getting off duty to dress up as a female?
as much as i am for the 'same sex persuasion' to have equal rights & protection, i am strongly against the repeal of this rule.
if i offended anyone with my choice of words such as 'gay', ect, i strongly apologize not knowing what the correct wording is.
before i tear this apart let me say this. i support those that seek same sex relationships openly. it's not GOD'S way or my way but, here in america, it's their way & right.
however, assuming that this rule is repealed, can you imagine what all this encompasses? as americans they would be entitled to their own set of rights that now govern the males & females. they would need their own sleeping quarters built, etc,etc. extra rules (similar to those that now govern the male/female soldier conduct) would have to be written into law. when off duty, they would have the right to dress as they wish-something they can't do now. can you imagine the 'gay' males dressed up like females in the EM, NCO & CO'S clubs? or the 'gay' females dressed up as males? can you imagine either gender acting out off duty army life as they really are?
now, i'm sure that there are some soldier's that either know or suspect that their counter-part isn't all man or woman &, because of the current rules, that's as far as it goes. they know when to use or not use the bathroom & shower. on the other hand, can you imagine those soldier's that didn't know or suspect & have used the bathrooms & showers with their counterparts that will now find out with the rule removed?
the repeal of this rule will certainly lead to a morale issue & would better be served left alone. you can't tell a 'gay man' he can serve "openly & proudly" & then restrict how 'he' can or cannot dress or act when off duty. another big problem would be in basic training...how far can you push a female mind in a male body or vice verse? --yeah, i saw G.I. Jane.
obama shot his mouth off during his election campaign to gather the 'gay' vote. now he's got a big problem because of it &, troop morale will suffer if he's successful in repealing this rule.
can you imagine if general mccrystal & general petraeus were 'gay'? in uniform they look sharp but, envision them off duty dressed in 'drag. i wonder what obamas reaction would be when they asked for more troops. can you imagine a 'gay' general colin powell reporting to pres bush & then getting off duty to dress up as a female?
as much as i am for the 'same sex persuasion' to have equal rights & protection, i am strongly against the repeal of this rule.
if i offended anyone with my choice of words such as 'gay', ect, i strongly apologize not knowing what the correct wording is.
CONCERN, NO---PANIC, YES!
hello america! some of you tell me that i havn't given obama enough time...others say i'm being too hard on him...& then, there are those that say i'm too judgemental. apparently, none of you have tried to get the H1N1 flu shot or spray. you damn sure are not one of the approximately 100 families that have lost a child to the H1N1 virus.
no! i am not blaming obama for the virus. however, i, & many others, am finding fault with his handling of it. &, the following is why..........
on 4/30/09, obama said there was cause for concern but not panic...how many american death's does it take to crossover from 'concern' to 'panic'? here it is almost 5 months after obama gave this speech & doctors, clinics & hospitals not only don't have the shots or spray, they don't even know when they're going to get it. i go to the allentown, pa veterans administration clinic & they didn't even know when the shots/sprays were coming in.
i find the above extremely upsetting, &, even more so when i continue to hear obama blame pres bush for all of our problems. couple that with the fact that we were pre-warned about this virus.
when will obama stand up & tell us he made a mistake? when will he he 'man up' & say he was wrong? when will he utter those words that i, for one, want him so desperately to say---i'm sorry? after all, he's the one that put the 'best people' in charge of this &, it's happening on his watch...(he'll find a way to tell you that he inherited this mess).
click on the link below & you can either watch the video or read what he said. please bear in mind that american death's have occurred since this speech & we will probably lose some more. i want to know why...we can blow up 'dirt' on the moon yet, we can't get the shots or sprays out the door.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/09/04/30/The-Presidents-Remarks-on-H1N1/
if what obama says is true---that he's on the phone daily with homeland sec, napolitano, health & human services sec, sebelius & the acting cdc director concerning the virus, what's the problem? judging the 5 months on non-action i can only assume they must be talking about snl skits & teleprompters.
america, it really is extremely troubling to know that the democrats want to control our healthcare when they set examples of their prowess like getting the virus vaccination to us in time, the bailout programs & the 'cash-for-clunkers' programs.
no! i am not blaming obama for the virus. however, i, & many others, am finding fault with his handling of it. &, the following is why..........
on 4/30/09, obama said there was cause for concern but not panic...how many american death's does it take to crossover from 'concern' to 'panic'? here it is almost 5 months after obama gave this speech & doctors, clinics & hospitals not only don't have the shots or spray, they don't even know when they're going to get it. i go to the allentown, pa veterans administration clinic & they didn't even know when the shots/sprays were coming in.
i find the above extremely upsetting, &, even more so when i continue to hear obama blame pres bush for all of our problems. couple that with the fact that we were pre-warned about this virus.
when will obama stand up & tell us he made a mistake? when will he he 'man up' & say he was wrong? when will he utter those words that i, for one, want him so desperately to say---i'm sorry? after all, he's the one that put the 'best people' in charge of this &, it's happening on his watch...(he'll find a way to tell you that he inherited this mess).
click on the link below & you can either watch the video or read what he said. please bear in mind that american death's have occurred since this speech & we will probably lose some more. i want to know why...we can blow up 'dirt' on the moon yet, we can't get the shots or sprays out the door.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/09/04/30/The-Presidents-Remarks-on-H1N1/
if what obama says is true---that he's on the phone daily with homeland sec, napolitano, health & human services sec, sebelius & the acting cdc director concerning the virus, what's the problem? judging the 5 months on non-action i can only assume they must be talking about snl skits & teleprompters.
america, it really is extremely troubling to know that the democrats want to control our healthcare when they set examples of their prowess like getting the virus vaccination to us in time, the bailout programs & the 'cash-for-clunkers' programs.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
SOCIAL SECURITY---BROKE PT 2
hello america! i said yesterday that i would continue with the social security issue & here it is.
let's face it, the future looks gloom for those retiring in about 3 or 4 years. washington has known about social security going broke for years but, as of yet, has not done anything about it. on the other hand, there's only so much they can do.
personally, i think the figures i quoted yesterday are off. not knowing exactly where & how the government got those figures, i can only speculate that the next set of figures will be even worse & this is why...
our social security is paid for by our taxes & employer taxes & with all the recent job layoffs & future job layoffs, less money will be put into the system which means, less will be paid out in the future. &, if washington waits until the last minute to address this problem, they'll simply borrow the money (they're extremely good at that).
well, let's see. if they raise the retirement age to 70, they must include themselves in it. if they raise the tax percentage taken out of our checks, they must include themselves in it. if they opt to have some of our money invested in stocks, they must include themselves in it. &, lastly, they could just ignore it & revamp the whole thing.
presently, with all that's going on this once proud nation, this is just one more thing for washington to add to its lists of 'screw-ups'.
before i close, the dems are going to blame pres bush for the current social security problems & he does share some of the blame but, obama is going to tell us how he 'inherited' this mess. america, i could accept that if they would 'man up' & remind us that they have been in control of the house & the senate for the last 3 plus years & that we should "judge" them by what they tell us & not what they do or don't do for us.
let's face it, the future looks gloom for those retiring in about 3 or 4 years. washington has known about social security going broke for years but, as of yet, has not done anything about it. on the other hand, there's only so much they can do.
personally, i think the figures i quoted yesterday are off. not knowing exactly where & how the government got those figures, i can only speculate that the next set of figures will be even worse & this is why...
our social security is paid for by our taxes & employer taxes & with all the recent job layoffs & future job layoffs, less money will be put into the system which means, less will be paid out in the future. &, if washington waits until the last minute to address this problem, they'll simply borrow the money (they're extremely good at that).
well, let's see. if they raise the retirement age to 70, they must include themselves in it. if they raise the tax percentage taken out of our checks, they must include themselves in it. if they opt to have some of our money invested in stocks, they must include themselves in it. &, lastly, they could just ignore it & revamp the whole thing.
presently, with all that's going on this once proud nation, this is just one more thing for washington to add to its lists of 'screw-ups'.
before i close, the dems are going to blame pres bush for the current social security problems & he does share some of the blame but, obama is going to tell us how he 'inherited' this mess. america, i could accept that if they would 'man up' & remind us that they have been in control of the house & the senate for the last 3 plus years & that we should "judge" them by what they tell us & not what they do or don't do for us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)