Lindaland
  Global Unity 2.0
  He's a Sick, Sick, Sick Man (Page 9)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 20 pages long:   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   He's a Sick, Sick, Sick Man
Node
Knowflake

Posts: 3159
From: 2,015 mi East of Truth or Consequences NM
Registered: Apr 2009

posted June 29, 2010 10:53 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Node     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

I was wondering why you hadn't posted an article about the General yet. But it is not really about the Gen. is it? It would seem you were waiting for just that perfect page, one that not only presents Stanley McChrystal as a leftist (and do I smell victim?)... rounds it all out with a tidy leftist controlled BP , and includes Afghanistan as a "Democrats' war".

Well Done!

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 10, 2010 12:41 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yes, O'Bomber is a sick, sick, sick man.
But, who knew he is this sick.

O'Bomber has now decided to fly a NASA mission to the Muslim world. Not to the Moon, not to Mars, not to Venus, not to explore space...but to the Muslim world...to make them feel good about themselves and raise their self esteem.

Is this not clinical insanity?

So now, we can do away with the State Dept and do away with the Dept of Education. The new NASA administrator is going to take over their functions...instead of developing technology and physical assets for their primary reason for being...the exploration of space.

I guess NASA has to have something to do...since O'Bomber has decreed the Space Shuttle missions to the Space Station will cease after two more flights...and US astronauts will fly on Russian ships. Wonderful.

O'Bomber has also defacto canceled the follow on vehicle which was to replace the Space Shuttle so what else could the NASA administrator do but...make the Muslim world...feel good about themselves.

But, there's nothing wrong with the US fleet of Space Shuttles and if there were...then why stop the follow on vehicle which was to replace it.

I think 2 psychiatrists are needed here.

One for O'Bomber and...
One for the Muslim world to raise their self esteem...which O'Bomber says needs to be raised.

In one swoop, O'Bomber has canceled one of the most successful American projects in the world..if not the most successful project in world history.

Article II, Section I
"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States."

Let's amend Article II, Section I to read:
"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States, neither shall any person who is not of sound mind be eligible for the office of President.


IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 10, 2010 12:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
July 10, 2010
Obama's 'Fly Me to the Crescent Moon' Policy
By Ken Blackwell

Maybe it's the Dog Days of Summer. Perhaps it's the heat -- 102 degrees in Washington -- that's getting to people's heads. But President Obama's latest policy, announced by his NASA administrator, astronaut Charles Bolden, is about to melt down.

Speaking on the Arabic language network Al Jazeera, Bolden said Mr. Obama had given him his marching orders for NASA: Get American kids re-inspired to do better in math and science. Work on international cooperation. And perhaps most important: Find ways to "reach out" to the Muslim world to affirm their strong contributions to science and engineering.

First, we have to consider that President Obama is gutting NASA's budget. He has scrapped the Constellation Program that would take Americans back to the moon. There are possible resources there that could help all of us on earth with our energy needs. Former Sen. Harrison Schmitt, who walked on the moon, says we could mine the helium-3 that is abundant beneath the lunar surface and use it for nuclear fusion. Perhaps, perhaps not, but we are unlikely to know if we're not going back there.

Second, why should American kids be excited about math and science when Administrator Bolden confesses that the U.S. can no longer even put astronauts in low-earth orbit without help from other nations? President Kennedy led this nation to the moon, but President Obama is teaching us to look inward. Under this administration, NASA has been grounded.

Third, this "outreach" to Muslims by NASA is, well, lunacy. Telling Muslims that they once led the world in science and technology is wonderful. They did. But that was before murderous mullahs took over control of Muslim societies and threatened with death anyone who didn't toe the line of theocratic control.

I have a simple way for Muslim-majority nations to excel in science and technology: Have everyone read a list of Jewish scientists who have won the Nobel Prize in Physics, Chemistry, or Medicine in the past century. Then, perhaps, their leaders could stop their Israel-bashing and Jew-baiting.

They might also read George Gilder's latest book, The Israel Test. Gilder, who is not Jewish, says Israel is a wonderful test for everyone. Do we envy and resent this people?

Do we covet what they have produced? Do we want to emulate their productivity and creative genius, or do we darkly ascribe their feats to a "Zionist" protocol? Gilder holds up a mirror to anti-Semites everywhere. What do you see?

The U.N. is filled with anti-Israel, anti-Semitic delegates who cheer Ahmadinejad from Iran and Khaddafi from Libya. These murderous despots have stayed in power by fanning the flames of resentment against the Jews. Khaddafi says he has given up his nuclear ambitions. I'd prefer Ronald Reagan's words: Trust, but verify. Ahmadinejad is racing to complete Iran's first nuclear weapon. He is thought to have enough fissile material for two nuclear bombs.

The U.N. has dragged its feet and resisted imposing sanctions on Iran. It succeeded only belatedly in approving very lax sanctions. These are far from the "sanctions that bite" and "crippling sanctions" the Obama administration have been promising for the year and a half they squandered in meaningless "outreach" to Tehran.

Charles Krauthammer, the distinguished columnist, has denounced the new NASA mission as "adolescent diplomacy." It's certainly that. But NASA Administrator Charles Bolden can hardly be blamed for loyally carrying out the policies put into effect by President Obama.

We can find something else interesting in this loony story: Where are the atheizers and arch-separationists on this one? Do they support "separation of church and state" but go suddenly silent when the issue is "separation of mosque and state"?

What would they say if President Obama had appointed a religious-freedom-centered, roving ambassador, whose duty it would be to travel the world taking up the cause of Christians who are being persecuted in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia, and yes, Iraq and Afghanistan? We'd hear them scream like stuck pigs. Why are they so silent now?

This latest furor should not cover up the fact that President Obama's policy for NASA is to go nowhere and do nothing. No wonder young kids in the U.S. -- and throughout the world -- are not interested. It was no small part of President Kennedy's appeal that he pledged "to get America moving again." And he did.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/obamas_fly_me_to_the_crescent.html

IP: Logged

katatonic
unregistered
posted July 10, 2010 03:48 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
let's see...saving money instead of face by sharing transportation costs on an already established space route - dastardly

bypassing more moon voyages in favour of FAR space exploration as has been discussed publicly though i guess you missed that..

and wasn't it you who said nasa was staffed with losers and bloodsucking government boobies who don't know what they're doing? all of a sudden they are the most successful arm of the govt?

verdict...still clutching at straws, bent ones at that.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 13, 2010 08:54 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
And then, one day Putin says to O'Bomber....we don't like your support for Georgia so....Americans can't fly up to the space station on our rockets...anymore!

Or, Putin calls a press conference to rename the International Space Station; behold...the Russian Space Station.

What then? Why get the US in such a position in the first place?

O'Bomber is an intellectual pygmy.

Let's see, don't you think it would be a good idea to fly some Moon missions to perfect the new Shuttle...or whatever it will be called, perhaps establish a base on a low gravity body, make some fuel on the Moon which doesn't have to be lifted off from earth's higher gravity...which burns most of the fuel you're trying to get into space and use the Moon as a jumping off point to further exploration?

O'Bomber is an intellectual pygmy.

So, you think we should be sending unmanned missions to Venus, to Mercury, to Saturn, to Jupiter, to Uranus....? For what purpose?

Your analysis is fatally flawed katatonic. The only fool at NASA I'm aware of is Jim Hansen, aka "Chicken Little" of the man made global warming religion.

And now...Charles Bolden who should have told O'Bomber to "take this job and shove it" just as soon as he realized O'Bomber is effectively shutting down American space exploration which is and always was the mission of NASA.

IP: Logged

katatonic
unregistered
posted July 13, 2010 10:36 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
i'm sorry are you suggesting that the russians will then OWN space? are you aware that there ARE plans to continue DEEP space travel and that the technology and machines will still be in our possession, only capable of much more than mere moon missions?

or, dare i suggest it?, perhaps the president of the us actually has some information that you don't that might warrant his making decisions you don't understand?

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 13, 2010 12:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
When you are in no position to do anything about it...yes, Putin could well say it's now the Russian Space Station.

Further, it's doubtful O'Bomber knows much of anything given the messes he's started all over America.

There are no "deep space machines" capable of doing anything more than take pictures katatonic...if they can get to where they've been sent.

The Rovers are a small exception to that rule but even the Rovers have very limited range and utility and any kind of mishap would put them out of commission permanently.

O'Bomber is an shortsighted intellectual pygmy.

IP: Logged

katatonic
unregistered
posted July 13, 2010 02:07 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
okay jwhop you win. the socialists have taken over the country and it is doubtful you or anyone can do anything about it. happy now? obama is really a secret agent working to turn the usa over to russia so the whole world can be commies. oh, but wait, russia isn't really communist anymore is it? oops.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 13, 2010 05:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Correction katatonic.

While O'Bomber and the rest of the Socialist Progressive cadre ARE Socialists of one stripe or another; what we're talking about with the defacto cancellation of US Space Exploration Programs through NASA is sheer, utter, mind numbing incompetence on the part of O'Bomber.

O'Bomber isn't competent enough to be the leader of a banana republic.

IP: Logged

Node
Knowflake

Posts: 3159
From: 2,015 mi East of Truth or Consequences NM
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 13, 2010 07:12 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Node     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:

And Newt Gingrich, speaking from what is actually considered by Beltway types as the responsible center of the Republican Party, calls him "the most radical president in American history" and "potentially, the most dangerous" as he urges his minions to resist the president's "secular, socialist machine."



quote:
Gingrich's comments Monday that he's never been this serious about seeking the White House

http://www.aolnews.com/politics/article/newt-gingrich-says- hes-seriously-considering-running-for-president/19551156

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 14, 2010 08:29 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Newt lost me when he appeared in an Algore man made global warming ad with Nancy Pee-Lousy...and I wrote Newt and told him so.

I told Newt he's either incredibly stupid to fall for a total hoax or so corrupt he should never be elected to any federal office.

IP: Logged

amowls*
Newflake

Posts:
From:
Registered:

posted July 14, 2010 09:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for amowls*     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
My word.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 22, 2010 08:58 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
July 22, 2010
Obama's Failing Presidency
By J.R. Dunn

Steven Thomma and Charles Krauthammer may disagree on everything else, but they do agree that Obama is a historical titan whose influence will echo across the rest of the century and beyond. Krauthammer looks upon this with foreboding, while Thomma, editorial writer for the McClatchy group ("TRUTH to POWER!") can't understand why we aren't all dropping to our knees weeping in gratitude.

While Obama's reputation may no longer be that of a demigod, it hasn't fallen very far among much of the country's political elite. In uptown Manhattan and within the Beltway, Obama is viewed as a mastermind, a political wizard who gets pretty much what he wants and accomplishes what he sets out to do. As evidence for this thesis we're reminded that in his first eighteen months as president, Obama passed the stimulus, ObamaCare, and now a financial reform bill, a record unparalleled since FDR's legendary "Hundred Days." To Thomma, this means the coming of the millennium, a down payment on a pure socialist state that the left has been yearning for since the 30s. To Krauthammer, it represents a terrible threat to every aspect of American well-being.

Neither appears to have considered the possibility of complete failure. It seems to me that a string of failed programs will have a slightly different historical impact from what Krauthammer and Thomma appear to be expecting.

Both conclusions are reflections of the Beltway mentality, in which all that matters is process. If the bill is passed, that's what counts. Results and consequences exist in a totally different dimension with no tangible connection to the inner-Beltway continuum. Once a bill is on the books, it stands as an accomplishment in and of itself, complete for all time, like a prehistoric stone obelisk left for future generations of peasants to gape at.

Compare this to the quotidian world in which the rest of us live. Suppose you take a car to the garage for repairs. Two days later, you pick it up, only to discover after rolling through a red light and nearly ending up underneath an eighteen-wheel semi that the problem remains unfixed. When you return to the garage, the owner tells you that none of this matters, since he and his mechanics worked out the bill, wrote it down, and then voted on it.

What happens at the garage at that point is exactly what should happen on Capitol Hill at least once a year (and may in fact happen this November). But for the moment, let's simply use the garage metaphor as an analytical tool to examine Obama's "achievements".

The stimulus was supposed turn the economy around, limit unemployment to 8%, and prevent a deepening recession. It has accomplished nothing of the sort. The economy is effectively frozen, with business mesmerized by Obama's increasingly frenetic antics. Unemployment is officially above 10% and in truth much higher. Though commentators keep insisting that we're not in for a double-dip recession, it's apparent to anyone with two eyes that the second slump actually kicked in at the end of Spring. The reasons for this aren't difficult for anybody apart from a government economist to work out. Much of the $860+ billion (simply trying to nail the exact number down is a chore in itself. I've found anything from $787 billion to $866 billion) was awarded to Obama's supporters in the financial industry and the unions, which automatically removed it from any productive use. The remnant was scattered across the country with no rational form of targeting, going to things like earmarks, environmental programs, and affirmative action projects. For all the effect it's had, that money may as well have been taken and tossed into the Marianas Trench. The sole thing that the stimulus succeeded in doing was to remove three-quarters of a trillion dollars from the working economy, where it could have been used for capitalization, hiring and to pay down debts.

In the rest of the world, a large number of countries that attempted no such thing as a stimulus -- including Canada, much of Latin America, and much of Southern Asia -- are now back on their feet. Obama's response has been to beg the EU to increase its spending, more to act as a cover for his own actions than anything constructive. Angela Merkel, the EU's de facto economic head, quite rightly told him to take a hike.

That's a triumph? As Pyrrhus said after whipping the Romans at Heraclea: "Another such victory and we are undone!"

But Obama has plenty such victories rolling in. I wouldn't wade through the 2600 pages of the financial reform bill at gunpoint, but I don't have to. All I need to do is look at the title page featuring the names of the chief sponsors, Dodd and Frank. The Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act. This is the equivalent of the Capone-O'Bannion crime-control bill. If any politicians are up to their necks in the chicanery that led to the latest crash, it's that pair. Frank's most recent paramour held a high position at Fannie Mae, while Dodd was snagging payoffs right and left. In a just world they'd be in custody, not sponsoring bills.

Dodd-Frank is likely to carry on in crippling the economy where the stimulus left off, with its 500 new regulations and complex bureaucracy extending down to the guy who sells toy robots out of cart on the street corner. The effect of regulation and bureaucracy on business is so well known as to have achieved the status of cliché. This bill has added a least another year to the recovery. But that won't bother Obama. Why should it?

So we come to ObamaCare, the program that, so we're told, will see him carried about in a solid gold sedan chair for the rest of his life by an eternally grateful populace. The sneak appointment of David Berwick to run the thing makes transparent a fact that was brought up continually and just as continually dismissed during the health-care debate: that Obama wants a duplicate of the UK National Health Service, the sole British feature that he admires.

And that's an interesting development. Because, according to studies by British health-care specialists, the NHS kills up to 95,000 patients a year through incompetence, mistakes, and accidents. This number is ten times the international per capita average. It is the highest in Europe, and twice that of the U.S., with six times the population.

Since the NHS was established in 1948, hospital beds have dropped from over 800,000 to 160,000, while the number of bureaucrats has expanded to nine for each patient. Tales of patient abuse are a never-ending, almost daily occurrence. A week ago, the Daily Mail featured a story about a young woman who entered an NHS hospital with excruciating head pain. Assuring her that it was merely a headache, the staff dumped her in a ward. It was actually a rare brain infection. When she began screaming uncontrollably as her brain was crushed against the inside of her skull, the staff tied her to a bed and left her. The next time they checked, she was dead.

Then we have the Liverpool Care Pathway or LCP, a method of end-of-life treatment in which any given doctor decides whether a person is dying or not, and then orders all food and water withheld -- the Terri Schiavo treatment -- along with heavy sedation. Hundreds have died from mistaken LCP diagnoses, including people suffering from such terminal ailments as broken legs, gastritis, and skin infections. I seem to recall a certain lady mentioning "death panels" at some point or other.

Just last week, the NHS ran into a "cash flow" problem (a neat trick with a budget of nearly $100 billion a year). The "trusts" which control hospital operations ran out of funds, leaving the hospitals high and dry. Patients were abandoned on operating tables for hours. Others scheduled for procedures were sent home. Ward patients were denied necessary drugs and painkillers. (The same thing happened in New South Wales in 2008, almost driving the state's health-care system -- also based on the NHS -- to collapse. This episode was kept very quiet. So quiet that no single reference to it was made in the American media.)

That's what's coming to us with ObamaCare. Oh yeah -- the number of accidental deaths under such circumstances will rise to the vicinity of 450,000. This won't simply increase Obama's popularity, it will raise him to the level of legend. The problem is that the legend will be comprised of equal parts Bernard Madoff, Charles Manson, and Ludwig, Mad King of Bavaria.

With luck, Obama's halcyon days will end this November 2nd. I say "with luck", because the GOP will have very little to do with it. (Last week, John Boehner and John Cornyn revealed that the GOP campaign will set aside such dull issues as the economy and immigration to focus on the emotionally gripping topic of the deficit. With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?) But at that point, the circus will stop. Having refused to commit themselves to a budget, the Dems will have no recourse to such tricks as "reconciliation", which can only be used in conjunction with budget bills. So the lame duck session will truly be lame. When Congress reconvenes in January, Obama will see how it feels to stare failure in the face.

Curiously, Obama is following his model Franklin D. Roosevelt here as in everything else. The "FDR as national savior" image is almost pure fabrication. The NRA didn't work. The AAA didn't work. The PWA, WPA, and the CCC provided only make work jobs at the lowest economic level. FDR's insistence on raising taxes led to another collapse late in 1937. Though not often mentioned, the Great Depression was also a double-dipper. (See Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism and Amity Shlaes' The Forgotten Man for details.)

Only three months later Hitler saved FDR's bacon at Munich. By making it clear (to everybody but Neville "Peace in our Time" Chamberlain, anyway) that he was out to devour Europe and would be stopped by nothing short of war, Hitler broke the economic logjam. States began rearming, the tariff barriers dropped, and in a short time the Depression began to ebb. It was the response to Hitler, not the Depression programs, that rescued Roosevelt's reputation.

So will Ahmadinejad save Obama? Stranger things have happened. But I have my doubts. When push came to shove, FDR turned out to be a warrior, the exact kind of leader the situation demanded. The man humiliated by the Depression had what it took to become a great warlord. Now I may be wrong, but I don't think even the McClatchy papers would claim any such thing for Obama.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/obamas_failing_presidency.html

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted July 22, 2010 09:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
July 22, 2010
Race Played Role in Obama Car Dealer Closures
By William Tate

The Obama administration, already under fire for unprecedented allegations of racial bias, faces a new bias claim from a most unlikely source: one of the administration's own inspectors general.

Decisions on which car dealerships to close as part of the auto industry bailout -- closures the Obama administration forced on General Motors and Chrysler -- were based in part on race and gender, according to a report by Troubled Asset Relief Program Special Inspector General Neal M. Barofsky.

[D]ealerships were retained because they were recently appointed, were key wholesale parts dealers, or were minority- or woman-owned dealerships. [Emphasis added.]

Thus, to meet numbers forced on them by the Obama administration, General Motors and Chrysler were forced to shutter other, potentially more viable, dealerships. The livelihood of potentially tens of thousands of families was thus eliminated simply because their dealerships were not minority- or woman-owned.

As has been widely reported, the Inspector General's study skewered the Obama Gang for strong-arming the companies into closing 2,000 dealerships, costing an estimated 100,000 people their jobs during a recession.

But the news media has ignored key elements of Barofsky's report -- elements that are far more damaging, if possible, to Obama. As we reported earlier in the week, a top Obama official, manufacturing czar and "Auto Team" leader Ron Bloom admitted that the dealerships could have been kept open, saving those jobs, "but that doing so would have been inconsistent with the President's mandate for 'shared sacrifice.'"

Barofsky says the administration insisted on the closings even though a GM official told him

that GM would usually save 'not one damn cent' by closing any particular dealership. ... Furthermore, a GM official stated that removing a dealership from the network does not save money for GM -- it might even cost GM money -- and that savings cannot be attributed or assigned to any one dealership.

And a reading of the IG's study makes plain that some dealership closings forced by the administration were based largely on politics.

The report is highly critical of how dealerships were selected for closure, or termination. Barofsky notes that

experts said that while metro areas were oversaturated with GM and Chrysler dealerships and reductions were needed in these areas, this was not the case in rural areas where GM and Chrysler had an advantage over their import competitors. [...]

Although sales volume in small towns may be lower, the cost of operating dealerships in small towns is lower as well. In addition, closing dealerships in small towns could ruin the "historic relationship" that GM has had with residents in small towns and force buyers to drive to metro areas, where there are more competitors. In the worst case, the loss of market share in small and medium-sized markets could "jeopardize the return to profitability" for GM and Chrysler, the (the Center for Automotive Research) representative said. Representatives from the National Automobile Dealers Association also concurred that dealership terminations would cause GM and Chrysler to lose market share in rural areas. [Emphasis added.]

Nevertheless, as Barofsky notes, "ultimately close to half of all of the GM dealerships identified for termination were in rural areas."

That is where raw, hard, sewage-filled Chicago politics came into play.

Records indicate that in 2008, Obama lost the vote totals in the nation's 1,300 rural counties by nearly 80%.

The Obama administration's insistence on radical numbers of closures ended up shuttering dealerships in those rural areas disproportionately, while dealerships and jobs in metro areas -- Obama's geographical base -- were left open.

Additionally, it has been widely theorized that dealers targeted for closure as a result of Obama's interference were predominantly those who donated campaign contributions to Republicans. Although evidence to date is largely anecdotal, given what we've already reported about the Obama administration's handling of the auto bailout, such speculation does have considerable grounds for support.

While that last point is leaves room for debate, the details contained in the Barofsky report are not. As Barofsky points out, the Obama administration was given an advance copy, and "Treasury [the Obama Treasury Department] might not agree with how the audit's conclusions portray the Auto Team's decision making or with the lessons that SIGTARP has drawn from those facts, but it should be made clear that Treasury has not challenged the essential underlying facts upon which those conclusions are based."

Included among those undisputed facts:

-"[D]ealerships were retained because they were ... minority- or woman-owned dealerships";

-Thousands of jobs were lost, unnecessarily, due specifically to Obama's "mandate for shared sacrifice";

-A disproportionate number of Obama-forced closings were of rural dealerships, in areas unfriendly to Obama, even though such closures could "jeopardize the return to profitability" for GM and Chrysler.

The media, of course, remain mute about these serious allegations in the Barofsky report. They have limited their coverage to the job loss numbers and tried to place the blame on Treasury Secretary Turbo-Tax Tim Geithner.

For now.

Before long, we'll be reading that it was somehow Bush's fault.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/race_played_role_in_obama_car.html

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 10, 2010 08:35 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The Obama presidency increasingly resembles a modern-day Ancien Régime: extravagant and out of touch with the American people
By Nile Gardiner
August 7th, 2010

What the great French historian Alexis de Tocqueville would make of today’s Obama administration were he alive today is anyone’s guess. But I would wager that the author of L’Ancien Régime and Democracy in America would be less than impressed with the extravagance and arrogance on display among the White House elites that rule America as though they had been handed some divine right to govern with impunity.

It is the kind of impunity that has been highlighted on the world stage this week by Michelle Obama’s hugely costly trip to Spain, which has prompted a New York Post columnist Andrea Tantaros to dub the First Lady a contemporary Marie Antoinette. As The Telegraph reports, while the Obamas are covering their own vacation expenses such as accommodation, the trip may cost US taxpayers as much as $375,000 in terms of secret service security and flight costs on Air Force Two.

The timing of this lavish European vacation could not have come at a worse moment, when unemployment in America stands at 10 percent, and large numbers of Americans are fighting to survive financially in the wake of the global economic downturn. It sends a message of indifference, even contempt, for the millions of Americans who are struggling just to feed their families on a daily basis and pay the mortgage, while the size of the national debt balloons to Greek-style proportions.

While the liberal-dominated US mainstream media have largely ignored the story, it is all over the blogosphere and talk radio, and will undoubtedly add to the President’s free falling poll ratings. As much as the media establishment turn a blind eye to stories like this, which are major news in the international media, the American public is increasingly turning to alternative news sources, including the British press, which has a far less deferential approach towards the White House.

The First Lady’s ill-conceived trip to Marbella and the complete disregard for public opinion and concerns over excessive government spending is symbolic of a far wider problem with the Obama presidency – the overarching disdain for the principles of limited government, individual liberty and free enterprise that have built the United States over the course of nearly two and a half centuries into the most powerful and free nation on earth.

It is epitomised above all by the President’s relentless drive towards big government against the will of the American people, and the dramatic increases in government spending and borrowing, which threaten to leave the US hugely in debt for generations. It is also showcased by Barack Obama’s drive towards a socialised health care system, which, as I’ve noted before, is “a thinly disguised vanity project for a president who is committed to transforming the United States from the world’s most successful large-scale free enterprise economy, to a highly interventionist society with a massive role for centralized government.”

There is however a political revolution fast approaching Washington that is driven not by mob rule but by the power of ideas and principles, based upon the ideals of the Founding Fathers and the US Constitution. It is a distinctly conservative revolution that is sweeping America and is reflected in almost every poll ahead of this November’s mid-terms. It is based on a belief in individual liberty, limited government, and above all, political accountability from the ruling elites. The Obama administration’s mantra may well be “let them eat cake”, as it continues to gorge itself on taxpayers’ money, but it will be looking nervously over its shoulder as public unease mounts.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100050002/the-obama-presidency-increasingly-resembles-a-modern-day-ancien-regime-extravagant-and-out-of-touch-with-ordinary-people/

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 11, 2010 01:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
He's a sick, sick, sick narcissistic man; yes he is, yes he is, yes he is.


"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow, and our planet began to heal."
Barack Hussein O'Bomber

Description:
Barack claims people will be able to tell their children that his election day could be the moment when oceans will stop rising because of climate change and people stop exploiting the environment.

http://www.entertonement.com/clips/shfmfmqdmn--Rise-of-the-OceansBarack-O bama-Primary-Victory-Speech-

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 13, 2010 08:32 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The stunning decline of Barack Obama: 10 key reasons why the Obama presidency is in meltdown
By Nile Gardiner
Last updated: August 12th, 2010

The last few weeks have been a nightmare for President Obama, in a summer of discontent in the United States which has deeply unsettled the ruling liberal elites, so much so that even the Left has begun to turn against the White House. While the anti-establishment Tea Party movement has gained significant ground and is now a rising and powerful political force to be reckoned with, many of the president’s own supporters as well as independents are rapidly losing faith in Barack Obama, with open warfare breaking out between the White House and the left-wing of the Democratic Party. While conservatism in America grows stronger by the day, the forces of liberalism are growing increasingly weaker and divided.

Against this backdrop, the president’s approval ratings have been sliding dramatically all summer, with the latest Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll of US voters dropping to minus 22 points, the lowest point so far for Barack Obama since taking office. While just 24 per cent of American voters strongly approve of the president’s job performance, almost twice that number, 46 per cent, strongly disapprove. According to Rasmussen, 65 per cent of voters believe the United States is going down the wrong track, including 70 per cent of independents.

The RealClearPolitics average of polls now has President Obama at over 50 per cent disapproval, a remarkably high figure for a president just 18 months into his first term. Strikingly, the latest USA Today/Gallup survey has the President on just 41 per cent approval, with 53 per cent disapproving.

There are an array of reasons behind the stunning decline and political fall of President Obama, chief among them fears over the current state of the US economy, with widespread concern over high levels of unemployment, the unstable housing market, and above all the towering budget deficit. Americans are increasingly rejecting President Obama’s big government solutions to America’s economic woes, which many fear will lead to the United States sharing the same fate as Greece.

Growing disillusionment with the Obama administration’s handling of the economy as well as health care and immigration has gone hand in hand with mounting unhappiness with the President’s aloof and imperial style of leadership, and a growing perception that he is out of touch with ordinary Americans, especially at a time of significant economic pain. Barack Obama’s striking absence of natural leadership ability (and blatant lack of experience) has played a big part in undermining his credibility with the US public, with his lacklustre handling of the Gulf oil spill coming under particularly intense fire.

On the national security and foreign policy front, President Obama has not fared any better. His leadership on the war in Afghanistan has been confused and at times lacking in conviction, and seemingly dictated by domestic political priorities rather than military and strategic goals. His overall foreign policy has been an appalling mess, with his flawed strategy of engagement of hostile regimes spectacularly backfiring. And as for the War on Terror, his administration has not even acknowledged it is fighting one.

Can it get any worse for President Obama? Undoubtedly yes. Here are 10 key reasons why the Obama presidency is in serious trouble, and why its prospects are unlikely to improve between now and the November mid-terms.

1. The Obama presidency is out of touch with the American people

In a previous post I noted how the Obama presidency increasingly resembles a modern-day Ancien Régime, extravagant, decaying and out of touch with ordinary Americans. The First Lady’s ill-conceived trip to Spain at a time of widespread economic hardship was symbolic of a White House that barely gives a second thought to public opinion on many issues, and frequently projects a distinctly elitist image. The “let them eat cake” approach didn’t play well over two centuries ago, and it won’t succeed today.

2. Most Americans don’t have confidence in the president’s leadership

This deficit of trust in Obama’s leadership is central to his decline. According to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, “nearly six in ten voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country”, and two thirds “say they are disillusioned with or angry about the way the federal government is working.” The poll showed that a staggering 58 per cent of Americans say they do not have confidence in the president’s decision-making, with just 42 per cent saying they do.

3. Obama fails to inspire

In contrast to the soaring rhetoric of his 2004 Convention speech in Boston which succeeded in impressing millions of television viewers at the time, America is no longer inspired by Barack Obama’s flat, monotonous and often dull presidential speeches and statements delivered via teleprompter. From his extraordinarily uninspiring Afghanistan speech at West Point to his flat State of the Union address, President Obama has failed to touch the heart of America. Even Jimmy Carter was more moving.

4. The United States is drowning in debt

The Congressional Budget Office Long-Term Budget Outlook offers a frightening picture of the scale of America’s national debt. Under its alternative fiscal scenario, the CBO projects that US debt could rise to 87 percent of GDP by 2020, 109 percent by 2025, and 185 percent in 2035. While much of Europe, led by Britain and Germany, are aggressively cutting their deficits, the Obama administration is actively growing America’s debt, and has no plan in place to avert a looming Greek-style financial crisis.

5. Obama’s Big Government message is falling flat

The relentless emphasis on bailouts and stimulus spending has done little to spur economic growth or create jobs, but has greatly advanced the power of the federal government in America. This is not an approach that is proving popular with the American public, and even most European governments have long ditched this tax and spend approach to saving their own economies.

6. Obama’s support for socialised health care is a huge political mistake

In an extraordinary act of political Harakiri, President Obama leant his full support to the hugely controversial, unpopular and divisive health care reform bill, with a monstrous price tag of $940 billion, whose repeal is now supported by 55 per cent of likely US voters. As I wrote at the time of its passing, the legislation is “a great leap forward by the United States towards a European-style vision of universal health care, which will only lead to soaring costs, higher taxes, and a surge in red tape for small businesses. This reckless legislation dramatically expands the power of the state over the lives of individuals, and could not be further from the vision of America’s founding fathers.”

7. Obama’s handling of the Gulf oil spill has been weak-kneed and indecisive

While much of the spilled oil in the Gulf has now been thankfully cleared up, the political damage for the White House will be long-lasting. Instead of showing real leadership on the matter by acing decisively and drawing upon offers of international support, the Obama administration settled on a more convenient strategy of relentlessly bashing an Anglo-American company while largely sitting on its hands. Significantly, a poll of Louisiana voters gave George W. Bush higher marks for his handling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, with 62 percent disapproving of Obama’s performance on the Gulf oil spill.

8. US foreign policy is an embarrassing mess under the Obama administration

It is hard to think of a single foreign policy success for the Obama administration, but there have been plenty of missteps which have weakened American global power as well as the standing of the United States. The surrender to Moscow on Third Site missile defence, the failure to aggressively stand up to Iran’s nuclear programme, the decision to side with ousted Marxists in Honduras, the slap in the face for Great Britain over the Falklands, have all contributed to the image of a US administration completely out of its depth in international affairs. The Obama administration’s high risk strategy of appeasing America’s enemies while kicking traditional US allies has only succeeded in weakening the United States while strengthening her adversaries.

9. President Obama is muddled and confused on national security

From the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to the War on Terror, President Obama’s leadership has often been muddled and confused. On Afghanistan he rightly sent tens of thousands of additional troops to the battlefield. At the same time however he bizarrely announced a timetable for the withdrawal of US forces beginning in July 2011, handing the initiative to the Taliban. On Iraq he has announced an end to combat operations and the withdrawal of all but 50,000 troops despite a recent upsurge in terrorist violence and political instability, and without the Iraqi military and police ready to take over. In addition he has ditched the concept of a War on Terror, replacing it with an Overseas Contingency Operation, hardly the right message to send in the midst of a long-war against Al-Qaeda.

10. Obama doesn’t believe in American greatness

Barack Obama has made it clear that he doesn’t believe in American exceptionalism, and has made apologising for his country into an art form. In a speech to the United Nations last September he stated that “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.” It is difficult to see how a US president who holds these views and does not even accept America’s greatness in history can actually lead the world’s only superpower with force and conviction.

There is a distinctly Titanic-like feel to the Obama presidency and it’s not hard to see why. The most left-wing president in modern American history has tried to force a highly interventionist, government-driven agenda that runs counter to the principles of free enterprise, individual freedom, and limited government that have made the United States the greatest power in the world, and the freest nation on earth.

This, combined with weak leadership both at home and abroad against the backdrop of tremendous economic uncertainty in an increasingly dangerous world, has contributed to a spectacular political collapse for a president once thought to be invincible. America at its core remains a deeply conservative nation, which cherishes its traditions and founding principles. President Obama is increasingly out of step with the American people, by advancing policies that undermine the United States as a global power, while undercutting America’s deep-seated love for freedom.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100050412/the-stunning-decline-of-barack-obama-10-key-reasons-why-the-obama-presidency-is-in-meltdown/

IP: Logged

katatonic
unregistered
posted August 13, 2010 12:59 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
since it is only since america started being "socialized" by your definition, and indeed since FDR really went to town with regulations that curbed IRRESPONSIBLE capitalists, that america has been considered "the greatest nation" i wonder why you think our debt and/or fall from grace are obama's fault?

a HUGE portion of that debt you talk about is basically the loans and interest to china that BUSH put in place to pay for his war against islamic sovereignty in the middle east.

i happen to agree that the regulation business is getting over-reached. but as i said in 2008, the economy was going to tank whoever got in. sarah palin should thank her lucky stars it wasn't mccain's victory, because bucking this global trend would not have happened under their watch either. and the "free market" has shown us that it is a one-way ticket to the rich getting richer while the middle class disappears.

when palin appeared on glenn beck's show in january 09 she smarmily asserted that obama was "her president" and she would do anything she could to help. but being in the political arena was too daunting for her so she took to the public speakers circuit where she makes more money than the president and uses the platform to undermine him and the country. if she couldn't stand the heat in alaska how do you think she is going to fare in washington? pink elephants on parade indeed...

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 13, 2010 05:34 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Sarah and Todd Palin make their money the old fashioned way katatonic.

They earn it.

Unlike O'Bomber who took money from a convicted felon..Tony Rezko who also cut O'Bomber a very sweet deal on an adjoining lot after buying the house and extra lot next door to the O'Bomber's new digs....just for that purpose.

I know how much it galls Socialists when someone demonstrates they don't need the paternalistic Socialist gulag to make it in America.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 13, 2010 06:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
One of O'Bomber's associations...ACORN..which was caught red handed attempting to overthrow the election system in America with fradulant voter registrations..got handed a loss in their lawsuit.

This is the group O'Bomber said wasn't going to have to come to him to give him advice. He was going to come and consult them. O'Bomber and ACORN, joined at the hip.

They also got nailed for supposedly being a "non-partisan" tax exempt organization when in fact, they are totally partisan Socialist demoscats.

Federal appeals court in NY rules against ACORN
Posted: Aug 13, 2010 12:49 PM EDT
Updated: Aug 13, 2010 5:09 PM EDT
By TOM HAYS
Associated Press Writer


NEW YORK (AP) - A federal appeals court on Friday threw out a decision that had barred Congress from withholding funds from ACORN, the activist group driven to ruin by scandal and financial woes.

The ruling by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan reversed a decision by a district court judge in Brooklyn that found Congress had violated the group's rights by punishing it without a trial.

Congress cut off ACORN's federal funding last year in response to allegations the group engaged in voter registration fraud and embezzlement and violated the tax-exempt status of some of its affiliates by engaging in partisan political activities.

Fueling the outrage was a video that caught three employees allegedly advising a couple posing as a prostitute and her boyfriend to lie about her profession and launder her earnings.

ACORN responded with a lawsuit accusing Congress of abusing its power with what amounted to a "corporate death sentence."

The appeals court disagreed, citing a study finding that ACORN received only 10 percent of its funding from federal sources.

"We doubt that the direct consequences of the appropriations laws temporarily precluding ACORN from federal funds were so disproportionately severe or so inappropriate as to constitute punishment," the three-judge panel wrote.

The Center for Constitutional Rights, which argued on behalf of ACORN, said it was considering asking the appeals court to rehear the case with more judges.

"We cannot let Congress be pushed around by the right-wing media machine into becoming prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner of politically unpopular people or organizations," said Bill Quigley, legal director for CCR.

A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's office in Brooklyn declined to comment on Friday.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., a sponsor of the bill denying ACORN funding, applauded the decision.

"Hopefully, today's ruling ... puts an end to ACORN's misguided belief that there exists some right to taxpayer dollars to fund their overtly criminal and partisan political agenda," Issa said in a statement.

ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, had described itself as an advocate for low-income and minority home buyers and residents. The national organization announced earlier this year it was folding because of falling revenues.

Several of its largest affiliates, including ACORN New York and ACORN California, broke away and changed their names in a bid toditch the tarnished image of their parent organization and restore revenue that ran dry in the wake of the video scandal. They continued to operate under their new names.

In written arguments submitted to the appeals court, the government said ACORN had acknowledged embezzlement and subsequent cover-up at the highest levels of the organization, including nearly $1 million taken from the group by the brother of its founder in 1999 and 2000.
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=12975806

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 13, 2010 06:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
When Republicans get control of Congress, there needs to be investigations of the George Soros funded Center for American Progress...another so called non-partisan tax exempt group which is anything but non-partisan.

In fact, there's a lot of overlap between the O'Bomber administration and the Center for American Progress.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8749
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 13, 2010 07:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Sarah and Todd Palin make their money the old fashioned way katatonic.

They earn it.


Actually, they just solicit it at this point.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 13, 2010 11:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
No, actually Todd and Sarah Palin own a fishing business in Alaska.

Additionally, Sarah Palin is an author and speaker.

Any way you cut it, that's earning it....

unlike O'Bomber who never had a "real job" in his life and is an utter failure in the one shot he has...OR, his Sec Treasury who at least has the common sense to admit he's never had a "real job".

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 11030
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted August 15, 2010 11:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The worst federal disaster response in our nation’s history
Published: 12:03 PM 08/12/2010 | Updated: 12:04 PM 08/12/2010
By Rory Cooper - The Daily Caller


President Obama wishes everyone would stop talking about the oil spill. His federal government’s response has been incompetent at best, malevolent at worst. Yet, lacking any evidence of a credible response, Obama still sent Carol Browner to the Gulf on a victory lap last week after oil stopped appearing on beaches and the water’s surface. But while the Obama administration is doing victory laps, more news of their botched efforts are coming to light.

Case in point: reports out today show that the government tried to silence scientists from the University of South Florida who had discovered a 6-mile-wide plume of oil in the deepest recesses of the Gulf.

USF Marine Sciences Dean William Hogarth told the St. Petersburg Times: “I got lambasted by the Coast Guard and NOAA when we said there was undersea oil.” He further said that government officials told him to retract any public statements and compared it to being “beat up” by the government.

According to the Times, Hogarth was not the only one bullied by the Obama administration. Oceanographers at the University of Southern Mississippi drew similar conclusions about underwater plumes. Oceanographer Vernon Asper said: “We expected that NOAA would be very pleased…NOAA instead responded by trying to discredit us.”

Why would the Obama administration try to silence environmental scientists? Because its victory lap would be less victorious if millions of barrels of oil are still lurking in the Gulf.

Mother Nature, though, might throw a wrench in the president’s oil spill cleanup cover-up machine. If a hurricane hits, the oil that lurks beneath the deep dark see will surely become evident. But what happens then?

The AP reported on Monday that if a hurricane hits the Gulf and oil is displaced onto land, a “new Obama administration edict requires that the oil be tested before it can be cleaned.” Translation? That means even further delays in the oil spill cleanup.

Let’s put that in perspective: 1) The Obama administration wasted months of clear weather delaying skimmers, barriers and clean-up responses, leaving the Gulf vulnerable to oil being washed ashore in hurricane season; and 2) The Obama administration now won’t allow residents to even clean the oil ‘onshore’ that their incompetence allowed to happen.

This is simply incredible. Or, as LSU Environmental Studies Professor Ed Overton said: “This is insane. You don’t have to hold up the cleanup just because you’re waiting on a crazy lab analysis.” Former FEMA Director David Paulison agreed, saying: “I just don’t believe it’s a workable plan.”

The government claims this step is necessary to determine that the oil is actually a result of the BP spill so it can be reimbursed for any response. Y’know, in case the oil happens to be from that oil spill in Michigan last month. As the AP reports: “[I]t also could cause frustrating delays and prevent residents from returning to their homes while the government figures out who pays the bill.”

Residents of the Gulf have had enough of this bureaucratic neglect. Charlotte Randolph, president of the Lafourche Parish, La., told the AP she will have it cleaned up, regardless of government edict. Randolph said: “The assumption will be that the oil belongs to BP…I don’t care what the federal government says.”


And that sums up the total response in a nutshell. State and local residents have continually taken matters into their own hands to direct resources and manage response, while the White House has made a show of eating Gulf shrimp on the South Lawn.

But it doesn’t stop there. Today, after 57 days of silence from President Obama and BP, details of their backroom liability deal have emerged from the White House. (Parenthetically, 57 days is apparently the new standard of White House transparency.) These latest details again prompt us to consider how little of the $20 billion BP oil spill relief fund will actually reach victims of the spill.

As The Heritage Foundation reported in July, BP is claiming a tax deduction worth roughly $9.9 billion as a result of the backroom deal. This means that taxpayers are either now on the hook for part of the costs of cleanup, if costs truly reach $20 billion, or that another negotiation is necessary. The White House has failed to answer this question, likely because nobody in the White House press briefing room has asked it.

President Obama knows better than anyone that he has failed the residents of the Gulf. That is why he refuses to step foot in Louisiana, where his job-destroying drilling moratorium continues to take place, despite his own assurances that the spill was overblown and the oil has dissipated.

Instead, President Obama will spend one night in Florida with the hospitable Governor Charlie Crist (I) who, like the White House press, will not ask him any tough questions. While this political trip may deflect criticism of the president’s Maine vacation last month, the first lady’s vacation in Spain this month, the president’s vacation in Chicago this month or their planned Martha’s Vineyard vacation later this month, it will not display any empathy for the tragedy he has helped create.

After ignoring two federal court decisions, the Obama administration is once again returning to federal court this week to try to keep his economy-crushing moratorium in place. The current re-issued federal language applies to all floating rigs in the Gulf. Entire cities are losing jobs and livelihoods due to the moratorium — not the spill — and yet President Obama continues to show a callous disregard for the economic catastrophe he has created.

You can count on one hand the number of times President Obama has addressed the crisis in the Gulf since his bungled Oval Office speech. During that time the federal government has failed the residents of the Gulf time after time. It’s time the Obama White House be held responsible for the worst federal disaster response in our nation’s history.
http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/12/the-worst-federal-disaster-response-in-our-nati ons-history/


IP: Logged

katatonic
unregistered
posted August 15, 2010 01:11 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
funny that author and public speaker (in her own interest as it happens) are considered REAL jobs when sarah palin does them but not when the president does.

as to response to the oil spill the area is looking a lot better a month after THIS disaster than new orleans looks 5 YEARS after katrina.

have you considered learning to fly a kite jwhop? very relaxing.

IP: Logged


This topic is 20 pages long:   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20 

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright 2000-2017

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a