Schooling the president on what is a ‘terrorist act’

Dec. 31, 2009

American Thinker

Cliff Thier
“A full investigation has been launched into this attempted act of terrorism.”
–Barak Obama

No, Mr. President, it was not an “attempted act.” It was in fact a real, bone fide, actual, real-life, genuine, authentic, honest-to-goodness, factual, concrete, you-betcha act.

Man with bomb gets on a plane. That’s it. That’s the act. Right there. See it? It’s jumping up and down and waving a flag. It’s yelling “Yoohoo!” Hey, over here. I’m the act. Look at me!”

That, Mr. President, is what you failed to prevent. You do not get a B+ grade. This is pass-fail. Prevent man with bomb getting on plane = pass. Permit man with bomb to get on plane = fail.

Furthermore, it was quite successful terrorism in that people are more afraid to fly today than they were a few days ago. So, by the only criteria that matters for the terrorism-making people afraid-what happened over Detroit on Christmas Day was in fact quite successful. I for one wouldn’t be more frightened of flying had the plane been blown out of the sky and hundreds of lives lost than I am today. I’d be considerably sadder, but no more frightened.

Hell. I’m more afraid today when a plane flies overhead.

Because a man with bomb got on a plane.

I’m certainly more frightened of flying, Mr. President, than I was during those dark years when the apparatus of intelligence and defense was in the hands of your constitution-shredding not-as-articulate-as-you predecessor.

It was a long time ago, back in November in fact, when another terrorist was successful attacking innocent Americans at Fort Hood, Texas. That was an act, too. A successful terrorist act.

The penetration of our defenses by a terrorist a few days ago, was the second successful attack on the United States in the last few weeks.

And, Mr. President, those weeks belong to you.

Bankers Get $4 Trillion Gift From Barney Frank:


Commentary by David Reilly

Dec. 30 (Bloomberg) — To close out 2009, I decided to do something I bet no member of Congress has done — actually read from cover to cover one of the pieces of sweeping legislation bouncing around Capitol Hill.

Hunkering down by the fire, I snuggled up with H.R. 4173, the financial-reform legislation passed earlier this month by the House of Representatives. The Senate has yet to pass its own reform plan. The baby of Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, the House bill is meant to address everything from too-big-to-fail banks to asleep-at-the-switch credit-ratings companies to the protection of consumers from greedy lenders.

I quickly discovered why members of Congress rarely read legislation like this. At 1,279 pages, the “Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act” is a real slog. And yes, I plowed through all those pages. (Memo to Chairman Frank: “ystem” at line 14, page 258 is missing the first “s”.)

The reading was especially painful since this reform sausage is stuffed with more gristle than meat. At least, that is, if you are a taxpayer hoping the bailout train is coming to a halt.

If you’re a banker, the bill is tastier. While banks opposed the legislation, they should cheer for its passage by the full Congress in the New Year: There are huge giveaways insuring the government will again rescue banks and Wall Street if the need arises.

Nuggets Gleaned

Here are some of the nuggets I gleaned from days spent reading Frank’s handiwork:

— For all its heft, the bill doesn’t once mention the words “too-big-to-fail,” the main issue confronting the financial system. Admitting you have a problem, as any 12- stepper knows, is the crucial first step toward recovery.

— Instead, it supports the biggest banks. It authorizes Federal Reserve banks to provide as much as $4 trillion in emergency funding the next time Wall Street crashes. So much for “no-more-bailouts” talk. That is more than twice what the Fed pumped into markets this time around. The size of the fund makes the bribes in the Senate’s health-care bill look minuscule.

— Oh, hold on, the Federal Reserve and Treasury Secretary can’t authorize these funds unless “there is at least a 99 percent likelihood that all funds and interest will be paid back.” Too bad the same models used to foresee the housing meltdown probably will be used to predict this likelihood as well.

More Bailouts

— The bill also allows the government, in a crisis, to back financial firms’ debts. Bondholders can sleep easy — there are more bailouts to come.

— The legislation does create a council of regulators to spot risks to the financial system and big financial firms. Unfortunately this group is made up of folks who missed the problems that led to the current crisis.

— Don’t worry, this time regulators will have better tools. Six months after being created, the council will report to Congress on “whether setting up an electronic database” would be a help. Maybe they’ll even get to use that Internet thingy.

— This group, among its many powers, can restrict the ability of a financial firm to trade for its own account. Perhaps this section should be entitled, “Yes, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., we’re looking at you.”

Managing Bonuses

— The bill also allows regulators to “prohibit any incentive-based payment arrangement.” In other words, banker bonuses are still in play. Maybe Bank of America Corp. and Citigroup Inc. shouldn’t have rushed to pay back Troubled Asset Relief Program funds.

— The bill kills the Office of Thrift Supervision, a toothless watchdog. Well, kill may be too strong a word. That agency and its employees will be folded into the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Further proof that government never really disappears.

— Since Congress isn’t cutting jobs, why not add a few more. The bill calls for more than a dozen agencies to create a position called “Director of Minority and Women Inclusion.” People in these new posts will be presidential appointees. I thought too-big-to-fail banks were the pressing issue. Turns out it’s diversity, and patronage.

— Not that the House is entirely sure of what the issues are, at least judging by the two dozen or so studies the bill authorizes. About a quarter of them relate to credit-rating companies, an area in which the legislation falls short of meaningful change. Sadly, these studies don’t tackle tough questions like whether we should just do away with ratings altogether. Here’s a tip: Do the studies, then write the legislation.

Consumer Protection

— The bill isn’t all bad, though. It creates a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency, the brainchild of Elizabeth Warren, currently head of a panel overseeing TARP. And the first director gets the cool job of designing a seal for the new agency. My suggestion: Warren riding a fiery chariot while hurling lightning bolts at Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.

— Best of all, the bill contains a provision that, in the event of another government request for emergency aid to prop up the financial system, debate in Congress be limited to just 10 hours. Anything that can get Congress to shut up can’t be all bad.

Even better would be if legislators actually tackle the real issues stemming from the financial crisis, end bailouts and, for the sake of my eyes, write far, far shorter bills.

Troubling INTERPOL questions remain; White House stonewalls

Troubling questions remain concerning the secretive Executive Order Obama signed in the dead of night on December 17, which grants INTERPOL, the International Police Organization, full immunity from U.S. law.

In the face of these questions, the White House is engaging in stonewalling.

(AP Photo/Ng Han Guan).

Of the major network news organizations, only ABC News reporter Jake Tapper has expressed an interest in the issue, as Michelle Malkin reports late this afternoon.

Malkin says that Tapper has asked the White House on two separate occasions within the last week about the executive order, but Obama officials have so far refused comment.

Despite the asinine contention of some that the executive order is innocuous and poses no threat at all, the order actually gives INTERPOL broad latitude in conducting its operations on U.S. soil–even exceeding some of the most troubling aspects of the Patriot Act.

Yet the Left continues to attempt to make the issue about the Patriot Act and George W. Bush, although this particular order has absolutely nothing to do with the former President, the Patriot Act, or, as one numbskull stated, ‘This does nothing more than grant INTERPOL agents immunity from parking tickets.’

As Ed Morrissey at Hot Air states,

I seem to recall the Left getting hysterical over the Patriot Act extensions that Obama finally backed. This gives Interpol a much wider operational latitude than anything contemplated in the Patriot Act, and with no accountability at all.

In addition, confusion seems to reign supreme among some on the Internet with regard to INTERPOL’s supposed heavy restrictions and limitations on U.S. soil.  Some suggest that merely reading the organization’s history and official mode of operation will be enough to clear up any lingering doubt over the agency’s role in law enforcement in the United States.

This is all well and good…on paper.

But we all know that there is the official, public statement of purpose and then there is the actual, behind-the-scenes reality of how such organizations work apart from public view.

And with INTERPOL such a reality is even more pronounced given that it is not a U.S. agency and thus is not ultimately accountable to anyone in the U.S. government.

Obama, therefore, has removed what little safeguards were put into place by President Ronald Reagan that insured INTERPOL’s adherence to U.S. law and the Constitution.

Some have suggested that the reason for this highly disturbing move is to make it easier for international charges to be brought against George W. Bush, members of the U.S. military, and other politicians who are deemed by the puppet emperors of the International Criminal Court in the EU to be guilty of ‘war crimes’ for merely protecting U.S. interests.

But is this really where we wish to go as a nation?  Do we actually want the U.S. President to be accountable to a foreign criminal court for any military action he/she orders?  Do we want our military personnel subjected to the political whims of a court in Europe that views practically any U.S. military action to be ‘a crime against humanity?’  Do we want the ICC (via INTERPOL) going after U.S. Senators for voting in favor of certain military operations that are designed to thwart Islamic Jihadists?

And much more importantly, do we want INTERPOL probing into the private lives of U.S. citizens on our own soil?  And remember, if they can do it to our elected officials, they can do it to ANY citizen

Report: Rush Limbaugh taken to Hawaii hospital


HONOLULU (AP) – A Honolulu television station is reporting that conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh has been taken to a hospital with chest pains.

KITV reported Wednesday that paramedics responded to a call at 2:41 p.m. from the Kahala Hotel and Resort where Limbaugh is vacationing.

The station, citing unnamed sources, said paramedics treated Limbaugh and took him to The Queen’s Medical Center in serious condition.

Queen’s spokeswoman N. Makana Shook says the hospital is unable to comment on the report.

Television station KHON quoted unidentified sources saying Limbaugh was taken from the hotel in an ambulance.

Limbaugh was seen golfing at Waialae Country Club earlier this week. The country club is next to the Kahala Hotel and Resort.


Information from: KITV-TV,

White House Visitors Log: ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis In Obama Residence Week Before Sting Videos Launched

Big  Government

by Publius

This afternoon, on arguably one of the slower news day of the year, the Obama White House released another document dump of “visitor records.” According to the White House, today’s batch total more than 25,000 records, covering meetings between September 16-September 30th.


You can scroll through the list of records on the White House site OR you can download the raw data. Interestingly, the full download uncovers almost 30,000 records, including many from outside the mid-September time-frame detailed on the White House site. In other words, only the records from the specific two week time period are viewable on the White House site. Many other visitor records were released today…they are just much harder to find.

Like, for example, the visitor records for Bertha Lewis.

According to the visitor logs, on September 2nd Bertha E. Lewis made an appointment on to visit the White House on September 5th at 12:30. (We usually need to plan further ahead to get our hair cut.) On the evening of the 4th, that appointment was cancelled so Bertha could move her appointment earlier, to 10am.

And it doesn’t seem to have actually been a work visit, as her appointment indicates she was visiting the Residence within the White House. Also, September 5th was a Saturday. Nice.

In addition, the record notes that she was to receive a STAFF TOUR, which are different-and more special-than the regular Group Tours available to others.

Ms. Lewis doesn’t seem to have returned to the White House after this visit. Of course, just 5 days after this visit, James O’Keefe would release the first video of his undercover journalism on the systemic corruption within ACORN.

After the firestorm that erupted from O’Keefe’s reporting, President Obama was asked by Fox News for his opinion on the scandal. Despite long-standing ties to ACORN, Obama acted almost as if he’d never heard of the group.

Of course, at that point, it had been…several…days…since ACORN’s CEO was in the Residence at the White House. Who can keep up?

Of course, it is possible that this isn’t ACORN’s Bertha Lewis. After a previous dump of visitor records listed the name, Jeremiah Wright, the White House said, ‘oh, that was a different Jeremiah Wright.’ The media, of course, said, ‘okay,’ and never followed up. So, maybe the Bertha Lewis listed here isn’t the CEO of ACORN. Just another Bertha Lewis who gets special weekend access to the White House Residence, complete with an extra-special staff tour. Sure, possible, but we’d love to see a bookie’s odds on that.


The Post & E-Mail

News & Analysis by Doug Cook

State Seal of Texas

(Dec. 27, 2009) — Transgressions of Constitutional law by both Democratic controlled Houses of the U.S. Congress, under orders from the White House, specifically health care reform and the relation to the 1oth Amendment.


In an impassioned letter discussing financial ramifications and legality of the Health Care Reform Bill and its encroachment upon 10th Amendment sovereignty (as defined by the highest law of the United States), Texas Governor Perry sent a letter to Alabama Governor Bob Riley. Writing of the financial and social burden Obamacare would place illegally and unduly on states, Governor Perry in essence stated:

As the chief executive officers of our individual sovereign states, we must stand up to this unprecedented intrusion into our lives and the rights of our citizens. We must demonstrate resolve in the face of this infringement.


The letter is brief with its points made in clear terms. In concerns expressed by Gov. Perry, he starts out his missive to Gov. Riley stating that the financial burdens their states and citizens face by passage of the Democratic health care bill, (para phrasing Gov. Perry again):

it appears the federal health care bill will be pushed through the US Senate and passed into law. This legislation will likely result in higher health care costs and a reduced quality of care for all American families, as well as major budgetary hardships for all states except a few.

Perry goes on to point out the politics involved in passage of the bill that have raised the outrage of people across the country:

in the effort to pull together enough votes in support of this bill, Majority Leader Harry Reid made a deal to secure the vote of Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson.

As a result, Nebraskans will be exempt from increased Medicaid costs from this bill’s passage.

taxpayers in Texas and in your state will be paying even more to subsidize expanded Medicaid for Nebraska and a few other states…

In light of the current state of affairs of DC politicians in the Democratic Party and its agenda of socializing every aspect of free enterprise and disinvestment of constitutional rights of the people and states, Perry ends his letter with these thoughts:

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot is joining with several other states Attorneys General to place this deal under proper scrutiny and determine if such an exclusion-(Sen. Nelson’s deal with Sen. Reid)- is unconstitutional.

This health care bill and its unfunded mandates are unhealthy to taxpayers, our economy and our democracy. I urge you to support,(and join), the efforts of these Attorneys General and ask your own to join it, and work with me in ongoing efforts to assert the constitutional rights of states, as guaranteed under the 10th Amendment, to turn back the “one-size-fits-all” health care bill being forced through by congress.

For a full read: Gov. Perry’s letter

A growing number of states are considering actions. If effective, it could be the demise of Obamacare; for in the offing is the prospect of litigation that holds up ratification by the advent of the 2010 elections. Elections that portend a paradigm in how the electorate votes; Democrats are very conscience of the payback coming down the pike. This has the ideal benefit of avoiding legislation locked in stone; Sen. Reid’s unscrupulous attachments that secure this legislation from Amendment or removal for eternity.


While these efforts and discussion of people’s and states’ rights are encouraging, they still fall far short of addressing the root cause of the assault on the US constitution and Bill of Rights. Likely these efforts will be self serving to the financial needs of these states, if the litigation even takes place, or if so tied up for years in courts. Not to mention the further delay in justice gained and the further monetary burden of years of court actions.

There is hope that the issue of unconstitutionality of a federal health care bill, heard by a “polarized-progressive-left-orientated” federal court system, won’t go the way of Obama’s constitutional eligibility as POTUS, Acorn, the Black Panthers and voting fraud.

These States Governors may have good intentions, one wonders if in light of the lack of any effective conservative leadership they have the intestinal fortitude and vision to do what it takes.

Or, is it a case of leaden footed leadership. The importance of taking direct, effective and timely action by our states’ officials to protect and preserve sovereignty and republican government cannot be stressed enough. Pussy-footing around with niceties of fair-play legalities is to be far behind the curve of effective means to disrupting the destruction by a Marxist agenda of  Democratic lapdogs, and Obama’s vision of a fundamentally transformed “Amerika.”

Make no mistake, Obamacare is the bell weather of what is viewed as a corrupt and morally bankrupt elective government. Most likely history will show, as it did 234 years ago, that it will come down to the people to provide the effective actions and leadership to protect and assure our sovereign home.

“Isolated Extremist”

The Obama File

Dec. 30, 2009

Obama’s knee-jerk reaction to al Qaeda’s attempted Christmas Day bombing of Northwest Airlines Flight 253 was to minimize the threat — again.  Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared that the attempted bombing was not connected to a larger terrorist plot.  Business as usual, nothing to see here, move along, happy holidays.

Not quite.

Obama’s reference to the “alleged” Crotch-Bomber as an “isolated extremist,” and Napolitano saying there was “no indication” that the attack was “part of anything larger,” seems to be Obama’s default setting when faced with terrorism.  He said as much about the Nov. 5 Fort Hood massacre, even though the FBI had previously monitored communications between shooter Nidal Hasan and Anwar al-Awlaki, the radical imam and al Qaeda commander born in New Mexico and believed to be in Yemen.

The Crotch-Bomber also reportedly is one of al-Awlaki’s followers and said he was one of many bombers trained by al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula who will seek to attack the United States.  Other evidence pointing to a larger plot includes a report that the Crotch-Bomber had an accomplice in Amsterdam, the sophistication of the bomb design, and al Qaeda’s admission that it was behind the attempt.  Note also that the Crotch-Bomber was placed on a terrorist watch list after his father reported to U.S. authorities in Nigeria that his son had fallen in with a group of dangerous radicals.

Somebody should tell Obama that the Crotch-Bomber has bragged to FBI agents that there are more young men plotting to launch attacks on the West.  The 23-year-old Nigerian has told security chiefs of a sinister network of isolated extremists in Yemen who are ready and waiting to strike.

The impulse to deny that attacks such as the Crotch-Bomber’s jihad and Fort Hood massacre are part of larger plots displays a shocking ignorance of the nature of 21st-century globally networked terrorism.  Terrorists work through highly dispersed, decentralized cell structures that are designed to be difficult to track.  Investigators probably won’t find an operations order signed by Osama bin Laden directing an attack on Flight 253, but it is easy to connect the dots.  Minimizing the threat won’t make it go away.  As recent history has shown, it may embolden the terrorists to keep trying.

So Obama pleaded, “let’s not jump to any conclusions” — lied, “the system worked” — and deflected, “lax airport procedures are based on those approved by the previous administration” — it’s Bush’s fault — what a weasel.

And yes, Janet, there is terror, there are terrorists, they are waging war on all things not Islam, and they mean to murder as many Americans as they can

Republican calls on Napolitano to resign

The Hill
Posted Dec.30, 2009
By Jordan Fabian

Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) on Tuesday became the first lawmaker to call on Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to resign after the recent attempted airline bombing.

The veteran member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee called for Napolitano’s ouster in the wake of the attack on the Northwest Airlines flight on Christmas Day.

Earlier this year, some Republicans called on Napolitano to step down after her agency issued a report warning of the dangers of right wing “extremists.”

Burton made his remarks on Twitter:

Secretary Janet Napolitano should resign, saying ‘the system worked,’ undermines the confidence of Americans #redin #tcot

Napolitano came under fire after she said Sunday that “the system worked,” noting the crew of Flight 253 “took appropriate action” to address the terrorist plot as it unfolded.

But her remarks were met with instant criticism, prompting the Homeland Security chief to clarify herself during a round of media appearances Monday morning.

The secretary then conceded on Monday that the system did not work.

“Our system did not work in this instance,” Napolitano told “The Today Show.” “I think the comment is being taken out of context.”

Other Republicans, such as House intelligence committee ranking member Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), have criticized the handling of the attempted bombing, saying that the administration has not done enough to address terrorist threats on the United States.

The Obama administration and several congressional committees have said they will launch full investigations into the attack allegedly carried out by 23-year-old Nigerian Umar Abdul Farouk Adbulmutallab.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs over the weekend stressed that the attack should be a “nonpartisan issue.”

Candidates face ultimatum: Kill Obamacare, or else …

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Tea-party leaders are delivering a bold ultimatum to all congressional candidates in 2010: Pledge to repeal the health-care reform bill in its entirety if it passes – or you will be booted from office.

FreedomWorks Press Secretary Adam Brandon told WND the message couldn’t be any clearer. Asked whether he believes the tea party movement will seek to oust politicians who refuse to repeal the legislation, he emphatically declared, “Absolutely.”

This photo of a Code Red tea party protest was posted on Flikr.

Max Pappas, vice president of FreedomWorks, echoed Brandon’s statements in an interview with Gary Sargent, Washington blogger for the Plum Line, this week.

This photo of a Code Red tea party protest was posted on Flikr.

“This has an unusual ability to be repealed, and the public is on that side.” he said. “The Republicans are going to have to prove that they are worthy of their votes.”

Both Brandon and Pappas emphasized that Congress must try to repeal the whole bill if it passes.

Visit the one and only “tea party store” now

Brandon said most people are opposed to the bill’s requirement that citizens pay a fine if they don’t maintain insurance

for themselves and their families. Under the current bills, the government will also collect taxes for 10 years, but only pay out benefits for the last six years. As WND reported, majority Democrats in the U.S. Senate have inserted in the fine print a provision that it would take a supermajority of 67 votes in the Senate for future legislative bodies to even consider amendments to its provisions for “death panels.”

Other serious concerns about the current legislation include possible health-care rationing, denial of treatment, substantial cost increases and stifling of medical innovation.

Also, the Senate bill provides that Medicare fees for doctors would be cut by 20 percent beginning in 2011, but the Heritage Foundation notes, “Nobody believes these cuts will be allowed to happen.” If the cuts don’t take place, it would result in an added $196 billion to the deficit in the first 10 years and $765 billion in the following one, according to Congressional Budget Office calculations.

This photo of a Code Red tea party protest was posted on Flikr.

As WND reported, FreedomWorks is partnering with the American Liberty Alliance and several other groups to launch a massive Tax Day tea party at the White House Ellipse on April 15, 2010.

“We’re delivering this one right to the White House,” Brandon said. “It could spill out over into the Washington Monument, so it’ll be a hell of a visual.”

Brandon said FreedomWorks has been told “legislative entrepreneurs” are already planning a Senate bill calling for repeal of the health-care legislation, should it pass.

“That means there will be something we can start to rally around in 2010,” he said. “We’re going to remind them every step of the way that this bill was a real stinker.”

He said Democrats plan to tell the electorate this year: “We said we were going to do this, and we did it.”

“They passed a terrible bill. Not only was it a terrible bill, but it was a disgusting process to watch,” Brandon said. “It was almost like they were playing mafia with taxpayer dollars.”

(Story continues below)

// <![CDATA[// // <![CDATA[// // <![CDATA[// // <![CDATA[//

This photo of a Code Red tea party protest was posted on Flikr.

In an earlier interview with the Plum Line, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee spokesman Eric Schultz said Democrats are conspiring to hold Republicans’ feet to the fire as well.

“Republicans on the ballot next November who opposed the bill will be in the precarious position of telling voters they plan to rollback landmark health-care reform which will have afforded coverage

to hundreds of thousands in their state,” Schultz said. “We absolutely intend to make Republicans look voters in the eye next November and make it clear they want to take affordable health-care reform away from them.”

ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper asked Senate minority leader Mitch McConnel, R-Ky., “Do you think that Republicans running for Senate in 2010 should run on a platform of vowing to repeal the health-care reform bill, should it become law? And will that be one of your first items should you regain control of the Senate, repealing what you guys call Obamacare?”

McConnell appeared to evade the question and Tapper asked once again, “Respectfully, sir, you didn’t answer my question, which is should Republicans campaign on a platform of repealing the health-care reform measure? And will that be one of the first items on your agenda should you become the new Senate majority leader after the 2010 elections?”

Then McConnell replied, “There’s no question that this bill, if it were to become law, and frankly even if it doesn’t become law, will be a big, if not central issue not only in the 2010 election, but in the 2012 election.”

However, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, wasn’t so hesitant to declare his intentions.

“If they somehow manage to get the votes and get enough Democrats to walk the plank and commit suicide, in the next Congress, I’ll be chairman Joe Barton of the Energy and Commerce committee, and we’ll repeal it,” Barton told the Hill today.

Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press”: “I suspect every Republican running in ’10 and again in ’12 will run on an absolute pledge to repeal this bill. The bill – most of the bill does not go into effect until ’13 or ’14, except on the tax increase side; and therefore, I think there won’t be any great constituency for it. And I think it’ll be a major campaign theme.”

Brandon said, “Now, realistically, with Obama as president and with the current Congress, could you get repeal? No. But we can build up the momentum so that during the next Congress it gets repealed.

“Would President Obama veto that one? I don’t know. I think when President Clinton saw the writing on the wall, he became a pretty moderate guy. So we’ll see if Obama would then say, ‘This doesn’t reach any of our goals.'”

This photo of a Code Red tea party protest was posted on Flikr.

Brandon said Americans must act now because Democrats didn’t get everything they wanted, so they will be back for the rest of their demands.

“This issue isn’t done and over. Their final goal is to create a system where in 10 to 15 years from now, we will have a single-payer system,” he said. “We’re going to stop that and repeal this. We have to pull this weed out by the roots. ”

Dithering in Paradise

Canada Free Press

by John Lillpop  Wednesday, December 30, 2009

imageIt was embarrassing enough when President Obama was unable to make a decision about the war in Afghanistan for months on end. As distressing as his dithering was to US military professionals, it must have been a source of great inspiration to our enemies on the ground in that war-on-terror ravaged nation.

Unfortunately, Obama outdid himself with his non-responsiveness to the terrorist attack attempted by Farouk Abdulmutallab on Flight 253 on Christmas Day.

For three whole days, the leader of the Free World went missing except for golfing, swimming, and indulgence in the many other temporal pleasures offered in paradise.

Heaven knows there is nothing wrong with taking a well-deserved rest in order to recharge the batteries, but Obama’s down time came at a critical moment when the American people needed to know that our Commander- in-Chief was engaged and on top of the situation.

We also deserved to know that the United States government was doing its level best to prevent murderous jackals like Abdulmutallab from inflicting any more damage on the abused metropolis of Detroit.

Somehow Janet Napolitano’s mindless declaration that the “system worked” did not provide much comfort to a nation growing increasingly wary about the judgment and leadership of our president.

Harkening back to the days of 9-11, Americans expected to see our president with megaphone in hand, shouting “Let’s roll!” or some other banality designed to calm jittery nerves on the second most important holiday in the Christian faith.

Instead of being a war-ready Commander-in-Chief, Obama became poster boy for the Hawaii Chamber of Commerce and the tourist industry.

Can Barack Hussein Obama be trusted with the nuclear codes?

Leis, not bullets! Talk over shock and awe.

Obama’s latest failure forces a serious question that must be answered quickly.

Namely, can Barack Hussein Obama be trusted with the nuclear codes needed to defend 350 million Americans?