PDA

View Full Version : An article from the MSP???



Uncle Bill
05-11-2012, 11:18 AM
Hard to believe this was written by a Democrat...but even some of them are beginning to see the light.

UB


Here's an opinion piece by Chuck Green who writes "Greener Pastures" for the Denver Post Aurora Sentinel...one of the more liberal papers in the country. Additionally, Mr. Green is a lifelong Democrat...so this is rather a stunning piece...

Obama is victim of Bush's failed promises!

Barack Obama is setting a record-setting number of records during his first term in office:
Largest budget ever. Largest deficit ever. Largest number of broken promises ever.
Most self-serving speeches ever. Largest number of agenda-setting failures ever. Fastest dive in popularity ever!

Wow! Talk about change.

Just over two years ago, fresh from his inauguration celebrations, President Obama was flying high. After one of the nation's most inspiring political campaigns, the election of America 's first black president had captured the hopes and dreams of millions. To his devout followers, it was inconceivable that a year later his administration would be gripped in self-imposed crisis.

Of course, they don't see it as self-imposed. It's all George Bush's fault !

George Bush, who doesn't have a vote in congress and who no longer occupies
The White House, is to blame for it all.

He broke Obama's promise, to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.

He broke Obama's promise, to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.

He broke Obama's promise, to end earmarks.

He broke Obama's promise, to keep unemployment from rising above 8 percent.

He broke Obama's promise, to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.

He broke Obama's promise, to make peace with direct, no precondition talks with America 's most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.

He broke Obama's promise, to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.

He broke Obama's promise, to end no-compete contracts with the government.

He broke Obama's promise, to disclose the names of all attendees at closed
White House meetings.

He broke Obama's promise, for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

He broke Obama's promise, to have chosen a home church to attend Sunday services with his family by Easter.

Yes, it's all George Bush's fault! President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending failed Bush administration. If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, all of President Obama's problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel . North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government.

Oh, and did I mention what it would be like, if the Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, didn't have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks? There would be no ear marks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit spending, no special-interest influence (unions), no vote buying ( Nebraska, Louisiana ).

If only George Bush wasn't still in charge, we'd have real change by now.

All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama's fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Congress. It's all George Bush's fault !

Take for example the attempt of Eric Holder, the president's attorney general, to hold terrorists' trials in New York City . Or his decision to try the Christmas Day underpants bomber as a civilian.

Two disastrous decisions.

Certainly those were bad judgments based on poor advice from George Bush!

Need more proof?

You might recall when Scott Brown won the election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts, capturing "The Ted Kennedy Seat", President Obama said, Brown's victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008. People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years. And they wanted change.

Yes, according to the president, the voter rebellion in Massachusetts , was George Bush's fault.

Therefore, in retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats. It is all George Bush's fault !

Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end, and the time for hope and and change ever arrive ???

Will President Obama ever accept responsibility for something / anything?

Uncle Bill
05-11-2012, 11:25 AM
Just to be fair and balanced...here's an article from a conservative. :p UB



Written by former Mayor of San Diego ..

CALIFORNIA IS OBAMA'S DREAM Written by Roger Hedgecock
Wednesday, 25 January 2012

I live in California . If you were wondering what living in Obama's
second term would be like, wonder no longer. We in California are
living there now.

California is a one-party state dominated by a virulent Democrat Left
enabled by a complicit media where every agency of local, county, and
state government is run by and for the public employee unions. The
unemployment rate is 12%.

California has more folks on food stamps than any other state, has
added so many benefits and higher rates to Medicaid that we call it
"Medi-Cal." Our K-12 schools have more administrators than teachers,
with smaller classes but lower test scores and higher dropout rates
with twice the per-student budget of 15 years ago. Good job, Brownie.

This week, the once and current Gov. Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown had to
confess that the "balanced" state budget adopted five months ago was
billions in the red because actual tax revenues were billions lower
than the airy-fairy revenue estimates on which the balance was
predicated.

After trimming legislators' perks and reducing the number of cell
phones provided to state civil servants, the governor intoned that
drastic budget reductions had already hollowed out state programs for
the needy, law enforcement and our schoolchildren. California
government needed more money.

Echoing the Occupy movement, the governor proclaimed the rich must pay
their fair share. Fair share? The top 1% of California income earners
currently pays 50% of the state's income tax.

California has seven income tax brackets. The top income tax rate is
9.3%, which is slapped on the greedy rich earning at least $47,056 a
year. Income of more than $1 million pays the "millionaires' and
billionaires'" surcharge tax rate of 10.3%.

Brown's proposal would add 2% for income over $250,000. A million-
dollar income would then be taxed at 12.3%. And that's just for the
state.

Brown also proposed a one-half-cent sales tax increase, which would
bring sales taxes (which vary by county) up to 7.75% to as much as
10%. Both tax increases would be on the ballot in 2012.

The sales tax increase proposal immediately brought howls of protest
from the Left (of Brown!). Charlie Eaton, a sociology grad student at
UC Berkeley and leader of the UC Student-Workers Union, said, "We've
paid enough. It's time for millionaires to pay."

At least five other ballot measures to raise taxes are circulating for
signatures to get on the 2012 ballot in California . The governor's
proposals are the most conservative.

The Obama way doesn't end with taxes.

The governor and the state legislature continue to applaud the efforts
of the California High Speed Rail Authority to build a train
connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco . Even though the budget is
three times the voter-approved amount, and the first segment will only
connect two small towns in the agricultural Central Valley . But hey,
if we build it, they will ride.

And we don't want to turn down the Obama bullet-train bucks Florida
and other states rejected because the operating costs would bankrupt
them. Can't happen here because we're already insolvent.

If we get into real trouble with the train, we'll just bring in the
Chinese. It worked with the Bay Bridge reconstruction. After the 1989
earthquake, the bridge connecting Oakland and San Francisco was
rebuilt with steel made in China . Workers from China too. Paid for
with money borrowed from China . Makes perfect sense.

In California , we hate the evil, greedy rich (except the rich in
Hollywood , in sports, and in drug dealing). But we love people who
have broken into California to eat the bounty created by the
productive rich.

Illegals get benefits from various generous welfare programs, free
medical care, free schools for their kids, including meals, and of
course, instate tuition rates and scholarships too. Nothing's too good
for our guests.

To erase even a hint of criticism of illegal immigration, the
California Legislature is considering a unilateral state amnesty.
Democrat State Assemblyman Felipe Fuentes has proposed an initiative
that would bar deportation of illegals from California .

Interesting dilemma for Obama there. If immigration is exclusively a
federal matter, and Obama has sued four states for trying to enforce
federal immigration laws he won't enforce, what will the President do
to a California law that exempts California from federal immigration
law?

California is also near fulfilling the environmentalist dream of
deindustrialization.

After driving out the old industrial base (auto and airplane assembly,
for example), air and water regulators and tax policies are now
driving out the high-tech, biotech and even Internet-based companies
that were supposed to be California 's future.

The California cap-and-trade tax on business in the name of reducing
CO2 makes our state the leader in wacky environmentalism and
guarantees a further job exodus from the state.

Even green energy companies can't do business in California . Solyndra
went under, taking its taxpayer loan guarantee with it.

No job is too small to escape the regulators. The state has even
banned weekend amateur gold miners from the historic gold mining
streams in the Sierra Nevada Mountains .

In fact, more and more of California 's public land is off-limits to
recreation by the people who paid for that land. Unless you're
illegal.

Then you can clear the land, set up marijuana plantations at will,
bring in fertilizers that legal farmers can no longer use, exploit
illegal farm workers who live in hovels with no running water or
sanitation, and protect your investment with armed illegals carrying
guns no California citizen is allowed to own.

The rest of us only found out about these plantations when the
workers' open campfire started one of those devastating fires that
have killed hundreds of people and burned out thousands of homes in
California over the last decade.

It's often said that whatever happens in California will soon happen
in your state.

You'd better hope that's wrong.

Roger Hedgecock is the former mayor of San Diego and a nationally
syndicated radio talk show host.

Uncle Bill
05-11-2012, 12:02 PM
Sometimes 'piling on' is fun. Now I'll have to search out another conservative column to keep this "fair and balanced".:rolleyes:

UB








As I'm sure you know, the Washington Post Newspaper has always had a reputation for being extremely liberal, so the fact that their Editor saw fit to print the following article about Obama in their newspaper makes this a truly amazing event and a news story in and of itself.
Finally, the truth about our radical President's agenda is starting to trickle through the 'protective walls' built by our liberal media.



Matt Patterson (columnist - Washington Post, New York Post, San Francisco Examiner)




Government & Society
Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages.
How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy, direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most consequential job?



Imagine a future historian examining Obama's pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a "community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote "present") ; and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.




He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's "spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future



historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?



Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers,would have lasted a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and



therefore entitled in the eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard - because of the color of his skin.



Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said) "non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama phenomenon -affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially white liberals, feel good about themselves.
Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and high drop-out rates which follow.



Liberals don't care if these minority students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and deflated self esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of the color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that isn't racism, then nothing is.


And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois ; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.
What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character. Those people - conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed.
The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches, and that's when he has his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely think or speak at all.



Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth - it's all warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100 years.





And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited this mess.




It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence.




But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?




In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the temperament nor the intellect to handle his job.




When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.