Jimmy Carter Doth Protest Too Much Methinks!

When I heard Jimmy Carter state that he believes that everyone that disagrees with Obama are basically racists, the first thing I thought was “that doddering old fool”, then I thought a little more.
It seems whenever the “Race Card” gets pulled, it is a political last ditch effort to cut losses in an argument that is being irrevocably lost; it is meant to stop all further discussion and pull the opponent’s defenses down. Especially if it comes out of nowhere,the Race Card distracts the opponent enough that perhaps they will cease the attack entirely, and retreat.
The unnecessary commentary by Jimmy Carter came completely out of the blue; who the heck asked his opinion anyway? Why does he have to put his two cents in? How did he become relevant all of a sudden? And why is the Democratic Party so threatened by free discussion that they have to reconstitute him politically?
This is my theory, don’t take it as the opinion of “every Conservative that thinks Obama is an arrogant amateur” it’s just mine.
I have two theories on this issue, first of all, Jimmy Carter has “white guilt”, a disease of the elite class of Democrats that make a lot of money and feel guilty about it, one of the main reasons some Americans are raving liberals. White Guilt entails the opinion that we should spread the wealth around; other people’s wealth, not theirs. Carter cannot explain why everyone is not on board with all of Obama’s radical plans for America unless they are racists; after ruling out any other reason that may make total sense.
My other theory is that Jimmy Carter himself is a closet racist. Certainly he could not come out from under the sheet and be as successful (not a good choice of words) in today’s Democratic Party, now could he? Who else but a racist would call another a racist? Why would anyone pull that outdated idea out of the mothballs and fling it around so freely unless they themselves are guilty of it? After all, don’t you find that the thief is the one that calls everyone else dishonest?
The Democratic Party, wishing to distance themselves from either of these two possibilities, would naturally think of Carter first. After all, he is disposable, irrelevant and already has damaged his legacy irrevocably; he is a perfect candidate to fall on his sword.
The rest of us are thinking “Huh?”, what’s racism got to do with the repartee at hand? What is the big deal that Obama happens to be of a darker skin color than myself or you perhaps? Doesn’t it matter most of all that he be an American (not a slash type American such as an African/American-that would imply that he is not totally committed to America and retains the right to deny us, doesn’t it?) Doesn’t it matter mostly that our President be a patriot, looking out for our country’s safety and the freedom of its citizens, and above all, preserve and uphold the Constitution?
Well, that is where the tar hits the road (pardon the usage, see disclaimer regarding use of old sayings that may imply directly or indirectly any color or lack of color thereof). President Obama has proved himself to be at best an amateur, especially at foreign policy, and has alienated our allies, he has endangered our safety and made our country look foolish and weak to our enemies. He has sworn an oath to uphold and preserve the Constitution, yet he has proclaimed it to be imperfect and needing of alteration. He is an all but avowed Marxist, after all, we are judged by the company we keep. Are we expected to stifle our opinions and political discourse because our less than perfect President is of color? Are we supposed to ignore the sense of endangerment he has given us just because Jimmy Carter or even Bill Cosby have had a brain infarction? Could the Democrats quit the whining, pissing and moaning because they woke up the Silent Majority and we refuse to stand down? Or perhaps by pointing the finger at the American public, they are attempting to deflect their own guilt; after all, when you point your finger at someone, three are pointing right back at you.

Support the Anti-Czar Bill HR 3226

H.R. 3226, the Czar Accountability and Reform Act of 2009, would bar the use of appropriated funds to pay either expenses or salaries of members of task forces, councils, or similar offices established by the president and headed by a person appointed inappropriately to such a post without Senate advice and consent.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/08/anticzar_bill_introduced.html

So far the White House has created 34 jobs (czars)

Welcome to Czarist Amerika
By Michelle Malkin • July 30, 2009 01:03 PM
Chapter 5 of Culture of Corruption exposes the shadiest Obama czars. GOP Rep. Jack Kingston has been hammering at the czar explosion and put together a great overview of the overlords on YouTube. Pass this one on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ClRQvu9ndg&feature=player_embedded

Big Brother Will Educate Your Children Now

It's Like 1984 All Over Again.

Tuesday, Sept. 8, is the first day of classes in many schools across the Fruited Plain -- and Barack Hussein Obama will use his presidential bully pulpit to interrupt the very start of classroom studies with an unprecedented nationwide speech to students...

http://www.patriotpost.us/

Can the purchase of mens' underwear forecast the economy?

The MUI does not lie! (Men's Underwear Index)

Blue Chip, White Cotton: What Underwear Says About the Economy

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/30/AR2009083002761.html?hpid=topnews

OMG! I'm a Right Wing Domestic Terrorist!

Obama’s 9/11 War Against "Right Wing-Domestic Terrorists"
Now he's hijacked Patriot Day to serve his agenda and branded us as terrorists.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2009/sep/obama-s-9-11-war-against-right-wing-domestic-terrorists

Where is Your America? Dr. Libor Brom

From "Marxist Fundamentals" Dr. Libor Brom "The Communist Intl's 7th Congress concluded that open use of revolutionary terminology does not promote the Marxist-Leninist drive for world domination...the word "Communism,"... which every revolutionary is so proud of, has been changed into "progressive ..."anti-Fascist" or "liberal." Read more...

http://www.marianland.com/bromlibor/whereisyouramerica.html

Totalitarianism - Is This Our Future?

Once again, straight from Wikipedia: Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible[2]. Totalitarianism is generally characterized by the coincidence of authoritarianism (i.e., where ordinary citizens have no significant share in state decision-making) and ideology (i.e., a pervasive scheme of values promulgated by institutional means to direct the most significant aspects of public and private life)[3]. Totalitarian regimes or movements maintain themselves in political power by means of an official all-embracing ideology and propaganda disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, a single party that controls the state, personality cults, control over the economy, regulation and restriction of free discussion and criticism, the use of mass surveillance, and widespread use of state terrorism.

Obama - Cult of Personality?

Taken straight from Wikipedia : A cult of personality arises when a country's leader uses mass media to create an idealized and heroic public image, often through unquestioning flattery and praise.[1] Cults of personality are often found in dictatorships and Stalinist governments.
A cult of personality is similar to general hero worship, except that it is created specifically for political leaders. However, the term may be applied by analogy to refer to adulation of religious or non-political leaders.
The subsequent development of photography, sound recording, film and mass production, as well as public education and techniques used in commercial advertising, enabled political leaders to project a positive image like never before. It was from these circumstances in the 20th century that the best-known personality cults arose.
Generally, personality cults are most common in regimes with totalitarian systems of government, that seek to radically alter or transform society according to (supposedly) revolutionary new ideas. Often, a single leader becomes associated with this revolutionary transformation, and comes to be treated as a benevolent "guide" for the nation, without whom the transformation to a better future cannot occur. This has been generally the justification for personality cults that arose in totalitarian societies of the 20th century, such as those of Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler.
The criticism of personality cults often focuses on the regimes of Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Mao Zedong, Josip Broz Tito, Nicolae Ceauşescu, Ferdinand Marcos, Saparmurat Niyazov, Ho Chi Minh, Kim Il-Sung, Ayatollah Khomeini, Soekarno, and Kim Jong-Il.
During the peak of their regimes, these leaders were presented as god-like and infallible. Their portraits were hung in homes and public buildings, with artists and poets legally required to produce only works that glorified the leader. Other leaders with such cults include Siad Barre of Somalia.

The Obama Youth?

Critics Decry Obama's 'Indoctrination' Plan for Students
A suggested lesson plan that calls on students to write letters to themselves about what they can do to help President Obama following his address to students nationwide is troubling and establishes the president as a "superintendent in chief," education experts told FOXNews.com.
By Joshua Rhett Miller
FOXNews.com
Wednesday, September 02, 2009

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/02/critics-decry-obamas-lesson-plan-students/?test=latestnews

Sentenced to death on the NHS (England's National Health Care System)

Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors warn today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6127514/Sentenced-to-death-on-the-NHS.html

Letter to the Editor Telegraph UK

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4623148/Barack-Obama-sends-bust-of-Winston-Churchill-on-its-way-back-to-Britain.html
Email to Editor, Telegraph
RE: Barack Obama sends bust of Winston Churchill on its way back to Britain
Tuesday, August 25, 2009 10:34 PM
From: "SueAnn Schroer" saschroer@xxxxxx
To: stnews@telegraph.co.uk
Editor, Telegraph
Dear Sir: Since our illustrious President Obama has been apologizing all over the globe for any and all transgressions that we as Americans have committed since and including the extinction of the dinosaurs, please accept my personal apology for Mr. Obama's faux pas of this enormity. Sir Churchill is a personal hero of mine along with many other great Britons that served the world during WWII to preserve our freedom. Please accept my humble apology for him, as he takes it upon himself to apologize for me and my ancestors. Sincerely, SueAnn Schroer, American Citizen

Are We Entitled to Free Health Care?

Are we entitled to health care at all? Are we actually entitled to anything? As an American, a human being, simply existing on this planet Earth, is there anything such as true Entitlement?
Once again, channeling my inner Librarian, I look towards Webster’s Dictionary. I have a version of Webster’s dated 1974, and curiously, this version does not have the actual word “entitlement”, but does define “entitle” as 1) to give title to, designate 2) to furnish proper grounds for seeking or claiming something.
Thirty five years later, the web version of Webster’s defines, “Entitlement”: 1 a : the state or condition of being entitled , a right to benefits specified especially by law or contract 2 : a government program providing benefits to members of a specified group; also : funds supporting or distributed by such a program 3 : belief that one is deserving of or entitled to certain privileges.
Interesting in itself, isn’t it?
Entitlement seems to be a new idea, not around in 1974 when I was growing up. As I recall, in my parents’ house, I don’t recall being “entitled” to anything, including transportation, spending money, even a college education. I do recall that anything I got beyond what was generally given by nurturing parents just because they loved you, such as meals, clothing and tenderness, I had to earn.
Where does this new sense of “entitlement” come from? How have the children of the new generation gotten some idea that they are entitled to a car, designer clothing, spending money and one of anything their friends have?
Why do a lot of Americans have some idea that everyone is “entitled” to Health Care, much less even a roof over their heads, a job or even money that comes in the mail without earning it? As I see it, we are not entitled to even air and water, we must seek them ourselves; if we do not choose to do so, someone else is not going to breathe for us and pour water down our throats unless we are in a hospital on life support.
Entitlement has been invented by liberals and the programs they have passed in Congress, starting with The New Deal. Beginning then, people no longer had to save for their retirement, or take care of their elders, the government would take care of it. The current workers would be taxed heavily in order to support the retired, on the promise that they would get the same.
Somehow it seems that every time you listen to debate on the issue, someone is adding to this list of things we are entitled to, sometimes even calling them basic rights. Do we actually have an inherent right to going to a doctor when we get sick? Does that also include preventative care; do we draw the line at abortions for the asking, even sex change operations? Just how “entitled” are we? It doesn’t seem to be enough for us any more to have the basic human rights of “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” without interference from the government; that would mean that we have to take responsibility for ourselves; what a novel concept!

Obamaspeak Dictionary

Following is a partial dictionary that hopefully will help explain the Democratic Party’s spin on the English language in today’s political climate.
“Health Care Reform” Obamaspeak for a radical government entitlement program that is not fundamentally “reform” of health care at all as one would normally think. Reform, according to Webster’s Dictionary is : 1) amendment of what is defective, vicious, corrupt or depraved 2) a removal or correction of an abuse or wrong or 3) to amend or improve by change of form 4) to put an end to (an evil) by enforcing or introducing a better method or course of action 5) to induce or cause to abandon evil ways. Whichever definition you choose, the HR3200 Senate Bill and ancilliary ideas the Dems have in mind is not “Reform” unless you see your current health insurer as evil. True reform would correct that which is in place, not replace it entirely.
“Change”-Obamaspeak for an altering of any and all values that your were raised on as an American. For example, instead of America standing up to its enemies and bringing peace through strength, Obama believes in appeasement. Also, instead of belonging to the middle class of America and being self sufficient, Obama believes that all should hand over their wealth to be redistributed.
“Patriotic” Obamaspeak for a left wing Democrat, alternatively, to pay more taxes than due.
“Un-Patriotic” Obamaspeak for disagreeing with him.
“Astroturf”-Obamaspeak for grassroots independents and conservatives.
“Overseas Contingency Operation” A rebranding of the War on Terror against Islamic Terrorists by the Obama Administration. Contingent according to Webster’s Dictionary is : 1) to have contact with, befall or touch 2)likely but not certain to happen, possible 3) happening by chance or unforeseen causes 4) dependant on or conditioned by something else 5) not logically necessary.
This in itself gives pause to think about our President taking his Oath of Office seriously (herein a reminder:"I,Barack Hussein Obama, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." (Perhaps it’s the ability that’s the problem).
“Czars” Obamaspeak for shadow cabinet members inside the Executive Branch of the US government that answer only to the President. An innovation of Obama’s that subverts ordinary law and process, leaving many questions such as where his copy of the Constitution came from.
“Fairness Doctrine” Obamaspeak for a bill in Congress whose sole purpose is to subvert the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution. So called because the Dems cannot get a talk radio or TV show off the ground, it obviously follows that it is not fair that the Conservatives have many successful radio and television programs to their credit.

Living Beyond Our Means

What happens when we as consumers live beyond our means and go on a manic spending spree, racking up debt faster than our debtors can keep track? Sure you have some nifty new duds in the closet that you may get around to wearing one day, and it sure felt good to shop with abandon, but paybacks are hell.
The next morning, when you’re back in your right mind, reality strikes. How do you eat and pay back your creditors as well? What about that new home you were thinking about trading up to? Just how bad did you ruin your credit, and will you be able to change jobs now? How long will this follow you into your future, one that may not already be written? Will you have to declare bankruptcy?
Maybe that shopping binge wasn’t so great after all. If realized in time, you can always return that new dress, but oh it was such a good deal! Some is not returnable, but that six course dinner with matching wines at that upscale French restaurant for twelve of your best friends was good (probably won’t even get a thank your from those people; what were their names again?).
Does this sound familiar? Not you! Congress!
Since Obama has been in office, he has been on a drunken spending spree, lighting his smokes with million dollar bills and buying everything that strikes his fancy. According to one report, Obama has spent $36 billion dollars PER DAY since he has been President.
The approximate current Gross National Product for the United States per capita is $47,000. The National Debt per capita is approximately $38,200 and rising every minute. Obama wants to institute what he calls in Obamaspeak “Health Care Reform”, at the cost of who knows what at this point. If I understand this information, that leaves less than $9,000 per person per year for other essentials and non-essentials that the Federal Government has committed to (today). Would this work in your household? Could you pay for your rent or mortgage, electricity and other utilities as well as food on this budget? Of course not.
Our Federal government does not have the option that seems too easy for consumers today that put themselves in this position. The US cannot afford to be declared bankrupt.
In my humble opinion, this spend at will lifestyle our President and Congress are living vicariously through our government is due to an elitist sense of entitlement. It’s as if you gave all of your credit cards to your teenager and what happens next? Scary to think about, isn’t it?
Spend in haste, repent at leisure!

Beltway Story

I’ve got this great idea for a book; it is full of action, intrigue, double-dealing and power-mongering. It starts off with a virtually unknown politician that has been in government for only a short time, running for high office as a dark horse. He lies, cheats and bullies his way to the top, along with his equally ambitious and power hungry wife; and by using the most modern methods available, mesmerizes the young American public while negotiating the most complicated political deal of all time, even by Chicagoan standards.
He makes promises to union thugs, power brokers, lobbyists and beltway insiders, and shoves and pushes his way into power by any and all means at his disposal. His campaign finances become so cumbersome and intricate that no one can possibly discern where most of the massive campaign funds in his coffers come from, much less if they are legal. He negotiates for campaign dollars with corrupt dictators in unfriendly countries, promising to look the other way when he comes to power, while bowing and scraping at their hems.
Little has anyone noticed that the virtually unknown Presidential candidate has been spending his younger years being schooled by the brightest and best of radicals, learning at the knee of some of the most violent liberals ever put on God’s green earth. He had bid his time, he knew his day would come; he plotted and planned, but he never got his hands dirty, so he left no trail.
He creates a personality cult that places his face on every surface and every web page on the internet, branding a magic word (perhaps this word could be “Different”, or “Change”??) , easily found in Webster’s Dictionary, but the lulling manner in which he employs it leaves all enthralled.
As the campaign ensues, he tramples the other major candidate, weak and unassuming, and his star rises quickly. He makes few unscripted remarks, and is always on point. He is elegant, poised. He says all the right things; he plays all sides of the game.
Come Election Day, he is elected as the next President of The United States. Immediately he begins his evil plot to subvert the American Constitution and to wreak revolution from within. He plans his Cabinet, but few can make the grade; even his Party controlled Senate has problems with the cronies he wishes to appoint. In order to get around this not so small problem, he appoints an Orwellian-like cabinet that answers to none but him. He gets cocky, he can say or do anything and no one seems to notice. He spends the next several generations of Americans into poverty with self serving projects that pay back his political debts and extend power to himself and his Party into the foreseeable future, only within a few short months of coming to power.
His plan is insidious; (I hate to give the plot away, but here it goes)-
a. He creates class warfare by pitting capitalists against the governmentally entitled, the wealthy against the poor,even white against black.
b. He cunningly nationalizes the largest financial institutions and businesses; the plan unfolds as set up by him and his cronies previously using Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
c. He creates burdensome taxes and laws that destroy the economy and unemployment runs amuck.
d. He thumbs his nose at our allies with small gestures that seem innocuous at the time.
e. He embraces our enemies by cow-towing to them and visiting them at their palaces in their respective Oligarchies, paying obeisance for past and future favors.
f. He creates terror within the borders by releasing Islamic Terrorists onto American soil that were previously held for high crimes and misdemeanors in an offshore white collar prison.
g. A self-fulfilling tragedy of Biblical proportions ensues, thus allowing the President to instigate martial law.
h. Along with his lawless Orwellian cabinet, he takes control of the military, the internet and all productive facilities in the name of Public Safety; suspends the Constitution as well as Habeas Corpus. All power rests in him and a few Party elite.
i. Thus things are“Different"(or should we use Change(d)?, you decide). Perhaps a better name would be “What Audacity!”. Let me know what you think. SueAnn