After solving our nation's debt crisis by making a speech in which he claimed any Republican budget cuts would involve mass graves for old people and crippled children, Barack Obama officially hit the campaign trail over the weekend...and stopped being so polite and bipartisan.
Instead, he told an enthusiastic audience in Chicago (proudly known as "The Most Politically Corrupt City in North America!") that Republican budget-balancing would turn America into a "Third World" country.
Which is an odd sort of cultural insult coming from a man who claims to have loved his youthful years in "third world" Indonesia, where he enjoyed the companionship of a monkey and the sweet, sweet sounds of the Muslim call to prayer.
But as our perceptive little friend in the cartoon notes, even "Third World" status is unacceptable to a president who seemingly wants our nation to stop being any kind of country whatsoever.
How else to explain his policy of non-existent borders and taxpayer-funded goodies for tens of millions of illegal aliens? Or his renunciation of longtime political and military allies in the world? What surer way to bring the country to its knees than by destroying jobs and crippling the healthcare system? In what way would Obama's fiscal policies differ if he wanted the world to consider America fiscally irresponsible and cause other nations to start looking for ways to replace the dollar as international currency? And how can anyone believe Mr. Obama wants the country to survive when even the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says that they can't conceive of any way our economy can continue past 2037 unless drastic changes are enacted immediately?
But in any event, the 2012 election season is officially upon us now...and Barack Hussein Obama's lies are bigger, bolder, and even more dangerous than they were in the past.
Because Hope n' Change believes him when he says he's all about "Winning the Future." And the future he's steering us towards would make "third world" status seem idyllic by comparison.
I'm just appalled that an entire 47% (or whatever it is by now) of the country is still falling for this idiot. Its sick.
ReplyDeleteSuzy, 47% fall for it because that is roughly the percentage of the population that is now almost entirely dependent upon the redistribution of wealth for their daily existence. Combine 60+ years of the ever-growing welfare state with the last decade or so of crony capitalism, and you get pretty close to 47%.
ReplyDeleteRemember: Bismarck did not conceive the paternalistic welfare state because he was so concerned about the state of the poor, but because he wanted the unfailing allegiance of a dependent working (or non-working) class.
Sarah Palin's Speech in Madison, WI addressed this - and fired a shot across the bow of the U.S.S. Gutless Old Party for flinching at the last moment on the "budget deal".
ReplyDeleteAh yes, the Democrats pushing for socialism, and the Republicans at times seeming to push for theocracy and control over what the socialists set up. Not much different in effect, just the book and words they use for the power they want. For a country based on liberty for individuals you wouldn't know it from the two parties. Maybe it's close to time to get a true third party to battle the forces of the Big Government two parties. Libertarian perhaps, since they're the only other one on the ballot in all 50 states. For has it made much difference whom is in office lately? I've called them the Demopublican party for decades, I'm still having a hard time seeing the differences in effect; though I'm well aware of the differences in the words they use.
ReplyDeleteI've argued elsewhere, let the two current parties, neither of which is ordained in the Constitution, go be the fringes, and for the rational middle to get a handle on things.
@Jim Hlavac- The problem with a true third party is in getting the numbers to actually get elected and, once in, having enough members to effect change.
ReplyDeleteThat's what makes the Tea Party so interesting; they're not "Republicans" but are willing to join with Republicans in a symbiotic relationship; the Republicans know they need Tea Party support and so must act in ways that are more Conservative (and more responsible) than they've acted in decades.
And in the long run, the goal is to transform the GOP into a genuine force for American principles. But if they simply won't change, or think they can get by on lip service, then a third party is inevitable.
Everything comes down to the Supreme Court. Have you noticed all the 5-4 decisions lately? The most important thing voters can do is to elect the most conservative candidate of the two major parties. Don't let a third party give us four more years for Obama to stack the Supreme Court. The scariest thing you can do is read the dissenting opinions from the left and realize that but for one more vote, their nonsense would be the law and the ruin of this great country. It would start with Obamacare.
ReplyDelete@Earl- Good point, and that's exactly the danger of a third party candidate. When I think of Donald Trump running as an Independent (and handing the election to Barack Obama), I get physically queasy.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, today's news is that Standard & Poors has given the United States a "negative" rating, because after hearing the president's "budget balancing" speech last Wednesday, they're convinced that there won't be any fiscal responsibility shown in the next two years. Which means we're on the (well-deserved) razor's edge of losing our AAA rating.
And when the stock market falls (as it's doing today) and that wealth/value vanishes, does Obama even care that he's shrinking the "pie" he's so eager to cut up?
Forget the billion dollars that Obama wants to raise for his re-election; his first campaign speech has already cost our economy tens of billions. But he doesn't care, because A) it's not his money, and B) only evil investors and capitalists get hurt.
85% of us own stocks / funds.
ReplyDeleteWe're ALL "the investors"
Socialists/communists took over the Demo_rat party starting in the late '60s. It's time for the Republican party to get taken over by REAL conservatives. When the almost-socialist Republicans are out of power in the party, we can see some REAL Americans in charge. And yes, I'm saying that socialists are NOT real Americans. REAL Americans neither want nor need government to do anything for them, except those few things that are specified in the Constitution.
ReplyDelete@Pete(Detroit)- Exactly. Everyone with a pension fund is an investor now. Or to some extent, everyone who has a job working for a company that's listed on the stock exchange.
ReplyDeleteAnd when he talks about the $4 trillion in tax cuts the Republicans issued which weren't "paid for," he neglects to mention that 75% of those cuts went to the middle class.
@JustaJeepGuy- Oldschool Republicans are (or must be) a dying breed. They need to change their ways or change jobs. And that's what the Tea Party is trying to enact from the inside.
Stilt - not only do we need to vote the bums out (and keep it up until they're *all* gone) we need to infiltrate the *party* from the precinct rep level, and up, and chuck 'the powers that be' there, too.
ReplyDeleteProblem is, that takes TIME, and people have OTHER priorities - kids soccer, gay rights, American Idol, internet porn...
Net result being that the people who Run Things are the same wanna be nerds that did it in High School.
Judging by the result, they haven't changed much.
@Pete(Detroit)- It does take time to effect change... and the problem is, we don't have time. It's like having cancer and deciding "well, they'll find a cure for me in 20 years." Only you don't have 20 years. You have 2 or 3.
ReplyDeleteExactly! And we are still populated by the same people that put him in office in the first place. And the number of system leaches has increased since then, too! The left base is growing! Our only hope is they are too busy being lazy to make it to the polls ... this time. Even if they are, they'll be back once the world turns against them.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to have Hope for positive Change ... but I just don't see it happening ...
Chuck - it'll come.
ReplyDeleteThe only question is before or after the global economic collapse that will leave us effectively at a 1870's agrarian level.
As Mom says (yeah, here we go again w/ Pete's Mom) "you can quit smoking and lose the weight AFTER the heart attack, or INSTEAD of... ( chose 'instead' - and am winning, so far)
@Chuck & Pete(Detroit)- In my more pessimistic moments (which seem to outnumber my optimistic moments), I think that our best chance to put America's house back in order will be at the "first bounce" AFTER financial apocalypse. I just don't think that the old-style politicians can stop playing their games, and give people bad (if truthful) news...even if it's the only thing that will save us from that "heart attack" that Pete's wise Mom warns about.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid we HAVE to have the heart attack first, and can then take restorative measures... if the nation survives.
Fun facts. The 60 vote rule in the Senate is only a rule of the Senate and can be changed anytime to a simple majority. Once that is done...
ReplyDeleteIt only takes a majority of the two houses and the President's signature to change the number of Justices on the Supreme Court. No Constitutional Amendment required.
Most Senators and Congressmen have a device known as an "IBM Selectric". Also known as a "Typewriter".
No one really cares if a member of the court plays software. They should care if the entire country is terrified to even mention that she is a "Bull Dyke".