The Obama Record

Tuesday night at the debate, Mitt Romney summed it up: "We have fewer people working today than we had when the president took office. The unemployment rate was 7.8 percent when he took office; it's 7.8 percent now. But if you calculated that unemployment rate, taking back the people who dropped out of the workforce, it would be 10.7 percent [today]." He later added, "I look at what's happened in the last four years and say this has been a disappointment. We can do better than this. We don't have to settle for ... 43 months with unemployment above 8 percent, 23 million Americans struggling to find a good job right now. There are 3.5 million more women living in poverty today than when the president took office. We don't have to live like this. We can get this economy going again."

Obama and FDR

           

We scratch our heads that people still support Obama despite his failures in the domestic economy and the foreign scene, particularly the Middle East where he’s interfered in civil wars and lost more American soldier in 3 years than Bush did in 8 . Yet, Americans kept reelecting FDR during the Great Depression (including my sainted mother), and unemployment was as high as 25% and in 1942 he imprisoned or put in camps almost a million Americans of Italian, German and Japanese ethnicity. There's just no accounting for political blinders.

FDR particularly hurt blacks and poor with minimum wage legislation which is always a job killer at the bottom ranks; lots of minor taxes that hurt the poor the most—like movies and candy; also wouldn't support anti-lynching legislation, snubbed Jesse Owens and Joe Lewis, allowed unions to keep out blacks; manipulated public works programs for votes. But . . .to this day he is revered by blacks and minorities. It seems people found him charming and believed his lies. Sound familiar?

Fifty percent?

I’m shocked 50% could still support Obama after the massive cover up, bigger than Watergate, in which no one died.

GOP women have binders; Democrat women have blinders

From the debate transcript, a comment that Democrats find so hilarious it completely made them forget about 4 dead Americans and a campaign cover-up:

"ROMNEY: And -- and so we -- we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet. I went to a number of women's groups and said, "Can you help us find folks," and they brought us whole binders full of women."
Now they can talk of nothing else.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/16/transcript-second-presidential-debate/#ixzz29gSOFUa1

Which one better represents America?

The taxman cometh, and cometh, and cometh—he will keep coming long after Obama is out of office

a little-known part of ObamaCare, levies a 3.8 percent Medicare tax on investment income for couples making more than $250,000 or individuals making more than $200,000 a year. The tax is scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2013.

7 new taxes: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/29/Seven-new-taxes

Religious tolerance? Think again.

Back when Hillary Clinton was still blaming the internet for the Benghazi terrorist attack, she made this odd statement, "Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation." There was no religious tolerance at the beginning of our nation when we were English, French and Spanish colonies, nor is it a Biblical value or ethic. True, Catholics and Protestants weren't slaughtering each other like they did in Europe, but those who came here for religious freedom really didn't want other groups, or the STATE, telling them how to worship or act.

One of the geniuses of our Bill of Rights is that our Founders were able to get all these disparate groups to actually agree that religious freedom was primary to all other freedoms. The Northwest Ordinance (1787) preceded the Bill of Rights, and also enshrined the idea the state couldn't decide your religious beliefs and behavior.

And now with 70% of the world without religious freedom, and even outright religious oppression and terrorism, our current President wants to diminish what centuries of Christians and Jews died for--not tolerance, not non-judgementalism, not political correctness--but religious freedom. The HHS Mandate is the camel's nose in the tent.

Good-bye Newsweek

It’s been announced that the print edition disappears at the end of the year.  I read the digital edition, The Daily Beast, just so I’m up on the loony tunes liberals.  It’s just unbelievable.  They are hysterical over “binders full of women” but pretty quiet about Benghazi. They even swear with a straight face that Obama “won on points” the last debate. (Apparently there were no points for the truth.)  Tina Brown made her name in women’s and gossip magazines.  I just don’t think she’s a good fit for serious news.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/18/a-turn-of-the-page-for-newsweek.html

Let’s talk about that 47%

On the expanding wars

The left says they support Barack 0bama because he won't get us into unnecessary wars. B0 has been using drones to bomb countries in the Middle East, and has American Soldiers in up to 7 countries at this point. More American soldiers have been killed since Obama has been president than during the 8 years Bush was president. Their argument about Obama and war is illogical and contrary to proven facts.

From Beth Shaw’s Facebook page

Also, Big Bird has been mentioned as often during the debates as veterans.  Think about it!

Where’s your plan, Mr. President?

TIME MAGAZINE’S MARK HALPERIN: “I just want to say one thing we haven’t brought up yet, but it’s incredibly important. The President did not lay out a second-term agenda. And if there’s an undercurrent here, that could really hurt him, not in the room, because it wasn’t evident, it was absent. He didn’t lay out a second term agenda any more than he did in the first debate. And that is where he is the weakest. And he didn’t address it, I thought at all.”

MSNBC’S JOE SCARBOROUGH: “Looking for a way forward, you want to know what’s going to be different over the next four years and you just didn’t get that from Barack Obama. And I’ve just got to think after the second debate this president has laid out no plan for the next four years. No plan. That’s got to be devastating in some voters’ eyes.”

NBC NEWS’ DAVID GREGORY: “I think liberals can breathe a sigh of relief. It’s not curtains for the president. He showed up and showed up big tonight. He was more aggressive; he had a lot of fight in him. A little light on his vision for the future.”

CNN’s JOHN KING: “If people think you have a plan, likability comes into play. The president has still left a whole lot of people, as I’ve been traveling the last few weeks, this is what people say, I want to vote for him, but he hasn’t told me what he’s going to do.”

NEW YORK TIMES’ TOM FRIEDMAN: “I continue to believe Obama has a weakness when it comes to the question of will the next four years really be different? Do you have a plan that excites you and me to get out of my chair and say that’s the guy, that’s it, that’s the person I want to follow now. He has not closed that deal.”

POLITICO’S BEN WHITE: “But Obama was far less effective in making an affirmative case for a second term, saying only that he wanted to create more manufacturing jobs and reduce the debt and deficit and keep investing in alternative energy sources. Romney had his strongest moments ripping up Obama’s first term record, citing the persistently high jobless rate, the rising debt and the lack of action on Social Security, Medicare and immigration reform. Obama mainly tried to refresh his campaign’s initial – and largely successful – disqualification effort against Romney rather than making a strong pitch for a second term vision.”

WSJ EDITORIAL: “Judging by Tuesday’s debate, the president’s argument for re-election is basically this: He’s not as awful as Mitt Romney. Mr. Obama spent most of his time attacking either Mr. Romney himself (he invests in Chinese companies), his tax plan as a favor for the rich (‘that’s been his history’) or this or that statement he has made over the last year (‘the 47%,’ which Mr. Obama saved for the closing word of the entire debate).”

FORMER NEW YORK GOV. ELIOT SPITZER: “We shouldn’t be blind to what continues to be the soft underbelly of the president’s campaign, which is that when all is said and done, you didn’t leave last night with a real tangible sense of what the second term agenda is going to be.”

http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2012/10/17/national-voices-question-whether-obama-has-detailed-a-second-term-plan/article?nclick_check=1

The Benghazi cover up and why

Why did the White House persist with the phony story of a protest against a video being the cause of Ambassador Stevens' death, when they had to know there was no protest?

The most plausible explanation is that the truth -- we were being hit with the worst terror attack since 9/11 in a city we saved -- would have exposed Obama's boasting about his Libya triumph and al-Qaida being "on the run" and "on the path to defeat" as absurd propaganda.

Al-Qaida is now in Libya, Mali, Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Pakistan.

And the epidemic of anti-American riots across the Muslim world, with Arab Spring elections bringing to power Islamist regimes, testify to the real truth. After four years of Obama, it is America that is on the run in the Middle East.

But we can't let folks find that out until after Nov. 6.

Hence the Benghazi cover-up.

Read full essay with time line here.

From Mike Huckabee on refurbishing mosques

Why is our State Department spending your tax money to build mosques in the Middle East? Frontpage magazine reports that there there’s a little-publicized federal program to refurbish mosques in 27 Islamic countries. Using federal money to save religious buildings is illegal, but they get around that by calling it developmental aid. The idea is that refurbishing mosques will convince Islamists to respect other cultures. And how’s that working? In nations where we’re rebuilding mosques – Pakistan, Egypt, Afghanistan, Sudan, Kenya and more -- dozens of Christian churches have been burned to the ground by angry Muslim mobs. So far, no protests from the left. I wonder what they’d say if we started using federal money to rebuild the Christian churches?
tps://www.facebook.com/mikehuckabee/posts/10151099666327869

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/10/tax-dollars-to-build-mosques/print/

Will women swing to Romney?

Christians for Mitt says: “Goodbye, Obama! USA Today says that WOMEN in swing states are swinging towards Romney & Ryan! Why? Because we want jobs, national security, our consciences and families honored, religious liberty -- we want America back!”

As the presidential campaign heads into its final weeks, the survey of voters in 12 crucial swing states finds female voters much more engaged in the election and increasingly concerned about the deficit and debt issues that favor Romney. The Republican nominee has pulled within one point of the president among women who are likely voters, 48%-49%, and leads by 8 points among men.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/10/15/swing-states-poll-women-voters-romney-obama/1634791/

Fake ads—but still the truth—sort of

Let’s review the history of this administration

January 2009
Americans out of work(1) 21.5 million
Gas Prices (2) $1.89
National debt (3) $10.6 trillion
Family Income (4) $54,962
Americans in Poverty (5) 39.3 million

October 2012
Americans out of work(1) 23.1 million
Gas Prices (2) $3.91
National debt (3) $16 trillion
Family Income (4) $50,054
Americans in Poverty (5) 46.2 million
Question? Are we better off today than 4 years ago?

Sources: (1) US Dept of Labor statistics (2) US Energy Information Administration (3) Treasury direct (4) Sentier Research LLC (5) US Census Bureau

Neither wants to go back far enough

To respect for life and marriage, to less hype and more hope.

For 2 weeks he continued to enflame unstable mobs

The Obama full team press

Joe Pags summary of the debate Tuesday 10/16:  “Just a quick note to all before I turn in for a few hours.. . I realize we have some liberals here. Don't get frustrated by them. They'll repeat the Obama and lefty lies and think if they say it enough, people will start to believe them. The truth ALWAYS wins. The truth is, one man was spinning and lying tonight and the other was telling the truth and showing his leadership. For that reason alone, Romney wins. .”

Debt relief for students–big give away for wealthy

The student loan bubble will be the next housing bubble, and I haven't heard much about it during this campaign. It's being kicked down the road for the next administration--perhaps Romney will get the blame instead of Bush (if Obama is reelected, we know Bush will be blamed). But according to an article in today’s New York Times it seems the new changes in student debt relief will benefit the wealthy, not the poor.

Surprise! Where would jobs for liberals come from it they didn't create a permanent low-income class?

“. . . the changes introduced by the Obama administration could allow a graduate making $70,000 a year to reduce monthly payments to $448 a month and “have over $100,000 of debt forgiven, . . .  If you are low-income, it doesn’t really give you a big bang,” said Jason Delisle, one of the authors of the study, which estimates that monthly payments for low-income borrowers would drop to $20, from $25, under the changes. “If you are high-income and have a lot of debt, this is a huge giveaway.”