President Obama's "peace and harmony" foreign policy is more reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain than Winston Churchill. In typical do-gooder fashion, this inexperienced leader either naively believes we can truly have "peace in our time" through dialogue with our enemies, egotistically believes he can win over our enemies by apologizing for our "past, misguided leaders," or is trying to undermine this nation's superpower status.
The president on Thursday addressed his plan to close Gitmo and ban "torture" methods used in the Bush years to extract key information from terrorists that saved the lives of many, many Americans during the past 7 1/2 years. Apparently, Obama is more concerned with this country's reputation in the world than with its security. What he doesn't seem to understand is that no matter how we try to get foreigners to like us, the rest of the world will always hate us. Just read "Hating America" by John Gibson.
Obama called the Gitmo problem a mess left him from the previous administration. It's getting tiresome hearing everything being blamed on Bush. He isn't president anymore; Obama is the man. He needs to heed his own words, quit looking to the past and just do his job. He needs to admit he made a mistake by hastily calling for Gitmo's closure without a detailed plan to handle all the inherent problems.
But then, it has become very clear, even in just 100 days into his presidency, that Obama can't --- or won't -- admit he's wrong about anything.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Friday, May 15, 2009
Ill-conceived plan
Say what?
President Obama earlier this week was seen railing against the huge federal deficit, saying it is unsustainable and that interest rates will be driven upward if foreign countries stop buying our debt -- something China already is strongly considering.
“We can’t keep on just borrowing from China,” Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt.”
What? Has the president suddenly come to his senses and become an advocate of fiscal responsibility, after following the lead of his predecessor, George W. Bush, and driving the deficit to mind-boggling levels that will only grow larger in the near future?
Don't get all giddy with joy. The president was not repenting of his free-spending practices, but instead using one of his favorite tricks -- saying something that sounds good to everyone, then using it as a springboard to launch one of his socialist programs or to expand his powers through increased government. This time, he was using his rhetoric to support his upcoming health care reform.
“Most of what is driving us into debt is health care, so we have to drive down costs,” he said.
So he plans to install a health care program like ones that exist in European countries, like Sweden. It will consolidate the health-care insurance industry under just a few of the bigger insurance companies, like Blue Cross and United Health, at the expense of smaller insurers. Individuals will have fewer choices and, unable to afford policies that cover the costliest procedures and care, droves will find themselves on the federal program, which will pay less for procedures, thereby denying the most expensive care to the masses. Only the rich will be taken care of in this kind of program as they will be able to afford it.
Every citizen deserves health care, but insure the uninsured and leave the rest of us alone. We shouldn't let Obama distract us with rhetoric while he drags down the entire U.S. health care system to a level where the government decides who gets the procedures they need or who lives and who dies.
President Obama earlier this week was seen railing against the huge federal deficit, saying it is unsustainable and that interest rates will be driven upward if foreign countries stop buying our debt -- something China already is strongly considering.
“We can’t keep on just borrowing from China,” Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt.”
What? Has the president suddenly come to his senses and become an advocate of fiscal responsibility, after following the lead of his predecessor, George W. Bush, and driving the deficit to mind-boggling levels that will only grow larger in the near future?
Don't get all giddy with joy. The president was not repenting of his free-spending practices, but instead using one of his favorite tricks -- saying something that sounds good to everyone, then using it as a springboard to launch one of his socialist programs or to expand his powers through increased government. This time, he was using his rhetoric to support his upcoming health care reform.
“Most of what is driving us into debt is health care, so we have to drive down costs,” he said.
So he plans to install a health care program like ones that exist in European countries, like Sweden. It will consolidate the health-care insurance industry under just a few of the bigger insurance companies, like Blue Cross and United Health, at the expense of smaller insurers. Individuals will have fewer choices and, unable to afford policies that cover the costliest procedures and care, droves will find themselves on the federal program, which will pay less for procedures, thereby denying the most expensive care to the masses. Only the rich will be taken care of in this kind of program as they will be able to afford it.
Every citizen deserves health care, but insure the uninsured and leave the rest of us alone. We shouldn't let Obama distract us with rhetoric while he drags down the entire U.S. health care system to a level where the government decides who gets the procedures they need or who lives and who dies.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Clever as serpents
Despite the liberal media's attempts to diminish the importance of the Tea Party Movement and to paint a Republican face on it, the Democratic Party is not taking the grass-roots activism lightly. It has prepared at least one memo aimed at combatting this growing threat and you can read it at http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/_memos/tds_SM_AL_teaparty.pdf.
The Democrats realize that they are not going to win over the tea party crowd, as it does tend to be a conservative group. But they do think the movement can be diluted and the damage limited by "agreeing" in principle with the protesters and by pointing out that the clearinghouses for the tea parties are major organizations that hold views opposed to them.
President Obama displayed the first strategy in a Georgetown speech when he said it's time to return to a responsible economic culture. "He embraced tradition, order and
authority. He quoted the New Testament and argued that it is time that the
U.S. built its economic house on rock and not sand."
The president seems very adept at using rhetoric that sounds good to his audience or critics, but his actions and political agenda often are at war with his words. It sounds a lot like the tactic used by the serpent in the Garden of Eden. It is the opinion here that he underestimates the resolve of those involved in this movement, and his clever rhetoric cannot mask the destruction he is doing to our economy, liberties and to the U.S. Constitution.
As for the tea party crowd being in bed with those whom it disagrees, wasn't that the case when the Americans and British fought beside the Russian communists to defeat a greater evil -- Nazi Germany?
We must not let these tactics dissuade, distract or divide us. We must fight beside anyone who supports our cause, but we must not be satisfied with any solution other than getting rid of elitist, greedy, power-hungry politicians bent on bigger government, out-of-control spending and progressivism and turning this country back to the principles, morals and values first set forth by its founders, like Jefferson, Franklin and Adams.
The Democrats realize that they are not going to win over the tea party crowd, as it does tend to be a conservative group. But they do think the movement can be diluted and the damage limited by "agreeing" in principle with the protesters and by pointing out that the clearinghouses for the tea parties are major organizations that hold views opposed to them.
President Obama displayed the first strategy in a Georgetown speech when he said it's time to return to a responsible economic culture. "He embraced tradition, order and
authority. He quoted the New Testament and argued that it is time that the
U.S. built its economic house on rock and not sand."
The president seems very adept at using rhetoric that sounds good to his audience or critics, but his actions and political agenda often are at war with his words. It sounds a lot like the tactic used by the serpent in the Garden of Eden. It is the opinion here that he underestimates the resolve of those involved in this movement, and his clever rhetoric cannot mask the destruction he is doing to our economy, liberties and to the U.S. Constitution.
As for the tea party crowd being in bed with those whom it disagrees, wasn't that the case when the Americans and British fought beside the Russian communists to defeat a greater evil -- Nazi Germany?
We must not let these tactics dissuade, distract or divide us. We must fight beside anyone who supports our cause, but we must not be satisfied with any solution other than getting rid of elitist, greedy, power-hungry politicians bent on bigger government, out-of-control spending and progressivism and turning this country back to the principles, morals and values first set forth by its founders, like Jefferson, Franklin and Adams.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
A Great Deception?
Why is President Obama afraid?
There are multiple lawsuits in multiple courts, trying to get the president to produce a legal birth certificate that would prove he is a natural-born citizen of the United States. By law, he should have had to produce the document before the Electoral College released his votes in December that officially made him president, but all anyone has ever seen was a bad online copy of what the Obama camp said was his Hawaiian birth certificate.
Meanwhile, attorneys representing Obama have defended the president from having to produce any such document at a cost of more than a million dollars.
Why would Obama or his proponents incur such costs fighting court battles, when a legal birth certificate could be obtained for $25-50? One explanation is that there is a coverup going on, a deception prepetrated to get this man elected to the highest office in the land to push an agenda that will suck the power from the people and U.S. Constitution, consolidate it in the federal government and prepare the country for a gobal currency and one-world government.
Could it be that President Obama doesn't really care about us because he is not one of us?
There are multiple lawsuits in multiple courts, trying to get the president to produce a legal birth certificate that would prove he is a natural-born citizen of the United States. By law, he should have had to produce the document before the Electoral College released his votes in December that officially made him president, but all anyone has ever seen was a bad online copy of what the Obama camp said was his Hawaiian birth certificate.
Meanwhile, attorneys representing Obama have defended the president from having to produce any such document at a cost of more than a million dollars.
Why would Obama or his proponents incur such costs fighting court battles, when a legal birth certificate could be obtained for $25-50? One explanation is that there is a coverup going on, a deception prepetrated to get this man elected to the highest office in the land to push an agenda that will suck the power from the people and U.S. Constitution, consolidate it in the federal government and prepare the country for a gobal currency and one-world government.
Could it be that President Obama doesn't really care about us because he is not one of us?
Prophecy come alive
With North Korea working on a way to deliver nukes, Iran working on creating them and the Taliban working on capturing them, it's easy to overlook an important upcoming meeting between two key world leaders. When Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu visits Washington next week to meet with President Obama, it could mean far more than just an opportunity to discuss Mideast peace initiatives. It could also open the door to fulfill Biblical prophecies in either the books of Ezekial or Daniel.
King Abdullah of Jordan has said that either Obama gets through to Netanyahu and a peace agreement is begun that would create a sovereign Palestinian state and assuage, at least temporarily, the Muslim world, or there likely will be an Arab-Israeli conflict that will suck in other countries. Obama's credibility with Muslims is on the line, he said.
“All eyes will be looking to Washington,” he said. “If there are no clear signals and no clear directives to all of us, there will be a feeling that this is just another American Government that is going to let us all down.”
If the Israelis and Palestinians cannot work out their differences and there is conflict, it is quite possible and maybe even likely that it could be the fulfillment of Ezekial 38 and 39, in which the great Hebrew prophet prophesied that a coalition including Russia and the Arab states would attack Israel. Only the hand of God would protect the Jews.
If on the other hand, a peace agreement does evolve from this meeting, could it signal a peace accord predicted in Daniel that would be struck between a powerful world leader and Israel that many Christian dispensationalists believe would usher in the final seven years of human history as we know it, ending in the Second Coming of Jesus Christ?
There is not enough evidence yet, nor even the preconditions, to charge Obama with the Antichrist tag, but his actions during his first 100-plus days in office certainly give pause to wonder. He is such a smooth talker -- one critic said his smooth rhetoric makes him very dangerous -- he says anything that sounds good and right then does just the opposite (in other words, he lies) and he is bent on power and transnationalism, which certainly fosters seeds for a one-world government.
It is my guess that Obama has Palestinian leanings and, while he may say he supports Israel, he would be quite willing to throw it under the bus if he thinks he can get some sort of Mideast peace accord. No matter how this plays out, we likely are entering a dangerous and momentous time in history.
King Abdullah of Jordan has said that either Obama gets through to Netanyahu and a peace agreement is begun that would create a sovereign Palestinian state and assuage, at least temporarily, the Muslim world, or there likely will be an Arab-Israeli conflict that will suck in other countries. Obama's credibility with Muslims is on the line, he said.
“All eyes will be looking to Washington,” he said. “If there are no clear signals and no clear directives to all of us, there will be a feeling that this is just another American Government that is going to let us all down.”
If the Israelis and Palestinians cannot work out their differences and there is conflict, it is quite possible and maybe even likely that it could be the fulfillment of Ezekial 38 and 39, in which the great Hebrew prophet prophesied that a coalition including Russia and the Arab states would attack Israel. Only the hand of God would protect the Jews.
If on the other hand, a peace agreement does evolve from this meeting, could it signal a peace accord predicted in Daniel that would be struck between a powerful world leader and Israel that many Christian dispensationalists believe would usher in the final seven years of human history as we know it, ending in the Second Coming of Jesus Christ?
There is not enough evidence yet, nor even the preconditions, to charge Obama with the Antichrist tag, but his actions during his first 100-plus days in office certainly give pause to wonder. He is such a smooth talker -- one critic said his smooth rhetoric makes him very dangerous -- he says anything that sounds good and right then does just the opposite (in other words, he lies) and he is bent on power and transnationalism, which certainly fosters seeds for a one-world government.
It is my guess that Obama has Palestinian leanings and, while he may say he supports Israel, he would be quite willing to throw it under the bus if he thinks he can get some sort of Mideast peace accord. No matter how this plays out, we likely are entering a dangerous and momentous time in history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)