TELLING IT LIKE IT IS !

Truth is the beginning of wisdom…

Archive for the ‘Political Terrorism’ Category

Congressional Budget OfficeThe Obama administration is finally hitting its biggest roadblock in the debate over health care: the facts. Despite his best attempts to gloss over the real cost, the President continues to lock horns with the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), whose unflattering analyses are cutting significantly into the administration’s efforts to sell this as reform. Much to this administration’s displeasure, the CBO continues to provide an honest assessment of the bill’s price tag, which has rocketed well above $1 trillion.

Unlike other entities, the CBO is supposed to be above partisanship–but in the eyes of the Obama administration, that’s a problem. For an administration so accustomed to having its way with Congress, the press, and the American people, the CBO’s independence has been a powerful annoyance. Frustrated by his inability to control how CBO scores his proposal, President Obama took the unprecedented step of calling CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf into his office for a heart to heart. The White House was particularly angry over Elmendorf’s estimate that the House version of “reform” would “result in a net increase in the federal budget deficit of $239 billion over the 2010-2019.” Obviously the President didn’t take kindly to the CBO for interrupting his public spin with the bottom line.

But calling in Elmendorf to “discuss” these costs is highly unusual – even by liberal standards. To the best of anyone’s knowledge, this is the first time an administration has tried to directly intervene in how the CBO appraises legislation. More than a few people speculated that the administration was trying to strong-arm the Office into releasing more budget-friendly numbers in their scores. There would be no other motivation for the meeting, particularly since (as both Ed Morrissey and John Fund point out), the White House has its own budget office.

If President Obama were earnestly looking for ways to cut costs, he could have picked up the phone and called the OMB, the Office of Management and Budget. Instead, he reached across the entire Executive Branch to strong-arm a congressional appointee, a move that shows this President isn’t willing to fight fair in the most expensive policy initiative of his term.

As Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell described it, “that’s like asking the umpires to come up to the owner’s box…. I mean, if the CBO is to have credibility, they’re the umpire.” To his credit, Elmendorf said that the meeting with President Obama would not impact how the CBO scores health care reform. And to prove it, the CBO released an assessment on Friday afternoon that disputed the Democrats’ claim that a few changes to the plan would result in big savings. On the contrary, the proposed cuts would only skim a measly 0.2% off the bill’s total price.

SIX REASONS OBAMACARE IS BAD MEDICINE

Posted by straight shooter on July 30, 2009 under Economy, General, Health Care, Political, Political Terrorism

No one denies that in an affluent country such as our own, it borders on tragic that millions do not have some form of health care, some by choice and some not. I feel for those Americans. I agree that health care reform is needed badly in America, but I don’t believe the bill of goods called “universal health care” that is being pitched presently by our president contains the solution. In fact, it is bad medicine for America.

1. Universal health care is being recklessly rushed.

Just like the stimulus packages and bogus bailout baloney, Obama-care is being shoved downed America’s throat (without explanation) and propelled like a ramrod through Congress (without being totally read and examined). This Obama blitzkrieg: create crisis; crunch numbers; and cram legislation is getting old fast.

2. Universal health care clearly would drive our country dangerously deeper into debt, which is being progressively purchased by foreign powers without any concern by Washington to stop it.

Obama said in his nationally televised news conference, “Health care reform is not going to add to that deficit; it’s designed to lower it.” How can he say that when he doesn’t know the far-reaching implications of offering it across the nation? What about the countries where socialized medicine are failing their people?

The president is struggling to base his rhetoric in fiscal reality. Even according to the Congressional Budget Office, the Senate version of the health care legislation “would result in a net increase in federal deficits of about $1.0 trillion for fiscal years 2010 through 2019.” Is that what you call good fiscal responsibility within an economy and government that already is bordering on bankruptcy?  Even worse with the addition of up to 20 million illegal immigrants on this system.

3. Uuniversal health care would impersonalize health care and ration medical services.

Government takeover of health care also would allow Washington to use “comparative effectiveness research” to dictate to doctors which treatments they should prescribe and how much they should cost. That in turn would lead to rationing of health care services.

Canada and Europe already have proved that national health care translates into national nightmares, with a plethora of new government regulations and new systems of rationing medical attention. Under government-run services, personal health care would transform into more impersonal harassment. More government means more bureaucrats running our lives.

4. Universal health care ultimately would limit the competitive market of health care.

You don’t create competitive markets by creating monopolies, yet that is exactly what government-run universal health care would prevent: competition. If government should do anything, it should crack down on medical insurance monopolies. If government wants to regulate one more thing, it would be better to regulate the medical insurance companies, not the American people.

5. Universal health care ultimately would transform legislators into quasi health care practitioners.

With government-sanctioned universal health care, legislators would become quasi medical practitioners because they would lead and guide the government-controlled medical boards, personnel and policies that would oversee the program. That would include abortive and end-of-life counsel and services. Federal politicians would rely upon relatively few chief physicians (appointed mostly by them), who in turn would oversee and implement the medical policies and procedures that they felt were best for the country. American choice and freedom would be passé.

6. Universal health care would increase big government, and America would continue toward socialism.

The nanny state is not our solution to better health. Our government already provides two medical coverage programs: Medicare (for senior citizens) and Medicaid (for low-income citizens). The president mentioned in his speech last week that those two programs are the greatest contributors to our skyrocketing deficit. So why not reform, improve and enhance those programs rather than create a third (or fourth or fifth) government medical bureaucracy called “universal health care”?

What is needed in Washington is a truly bipartisan group that is allowed an ample amount of time to work on a compromise health care program that wouldn’t raise taxes (for anyone), nor regulate personal medical choices or ration health care.

Don’t wait for Washington! Go to http://PatientsUnitedNow.com to learn more about how you and your local community can reform health care and keep your options for doctors and medical care. And mostly, go to the Web site of Dr. Betsy McCaughey at http://www.DefendYourHealthCare.us. She is a health policy expert and former lieutenant governor of New York and actually has read the entire Senate bill on universal health care. She is disclosing many hidden details within it that are not being discussed with the American public.

Michelle Malkin Reveals How Obama’s “Unprecedented”

Presidency Breeds Corruption and Kills Change

When Barack Obama launched his presidency, he pledged to “build a more hopeful America.” On the campaign trail he promised to do away with Washington politics as usual.Book-Culture Of Corruption

But in the first six months of his term, Obama has indulged in a breath-taking campaign of nepotism, self-dealing, back-scratching, corporate lobbying, government favors, entrenched incumbency, and hypocrisy.

Obama’s government is not exactly the change people were hoping for.

In her devastating exposé, Culture of Corruption, bestselling author and investigative reporter Michelle Malkin cites example after example of Team Obama’s corrupt dealings and abuses of power. Malkin shows how Obama has hand-picked a team that will do his dirty work for him and exposes dozens of corrupt dealings—all of which the liberal media would rather keep hidden.

From power broker Rahm Emanuel, to pay-to-play tainted Michelle Obama and Joe Biden, to ethically challenged Tim Geithner, to crime-coddling corporate lawyer Eric Holder, Obama’s cabinet is all about increased government power and very little about helping Americans get ahead.

In Culture of Corruption you will learn:

  • How the Obama White House has circumvented the pesky approval process by simply appointing unaccountable, unqualified, scandal-ridden “czars” to key posts—16 and counting

  • How Obama asserted he “never organized with ACORN,” but Federal Election Commission records show he paid more than $832,000 to CSI “ACORN’s Campaign Services Entity” and then lied about it

  • How Obama promises low-cost healthcare for everyone, yet his wife, First Crony-In-Chief, championed a University of Chicago healthcare program that was accused of “patient dumping” and “cherry picking” wealthy patients over poor

  • How “Average Joe Biden” has benefited from the former credit card giant MBNA’s wealth, enjoying sweetheart real estate deals and lining his lobbyist son’s pockets

Culture of Corruption proves that this is the government of the crony, by the lobbyist, and for the well-heeled. Obama lacks the will to change Washington politics, and Culture of Corruption reveals what his agenda will mean for his presidency—and America.

Socialism

Climate Change ReconsideredAn authoritative new book draws on thousands of peer-reviewed research papers and books, plus additional scientific research, as it challenges popular concerns that global warming is either man-made or would have harmful effects.

The hefty “Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change” weighs in at more than 4 pounds, and is available free online.

“We see no evidence whatsoever for the claim that the warming of the last 50 years is due to human activities,” co-author Dr. S. Fred Singer said in presenting the report. “On the contrary … we see evidence against man-made global warming.”

Singer and Dr. Craig Idso, as well as 35 contributors and reviewers, offer an authoritative and detailed rebuttal of the findings of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), on which the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress have relied for regulatory proposals, including the energy tax known as “Cap and Trade.”

“This is really not about science,” Singer said. “What is really going on – not only in Washington, but in Europe and elsewhere – is money and power. That is what it’s all about.”

Learn more online.

Download the Report in pdf format.

Senators on Capitol Hill may be forced tomorrow to make a choice between approving an important defense spending bill and voting down “hate crimes” legislation. Senate Democrats are once again trying to pass a hate crimes bill by attaching it as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill.

The hate crimes legislation, known as the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (S. 909), would add gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability to the list of protected categories under federal hate crimes law. A vote is expected Thursday on the Defense Authorization bill and its accompanying hate crimes amendment.

Bishop Harry Jackson, Jr., chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition, warns the hate crimes measure will lead to more than just the prosecution of violent crimes that are deemed bias-related.

“The problem is that the way that they define violence has to do with name-calling, but has to do with an array of different things,” he explains. “And the ultimate issue is going to be that it only takes one or two lawsuits, or the threat of a lawsuit, for there to be a chilling effect on pastors from preaching these passages of the Bible like Leviticus and Romans 1, and many, many other passages as our culture slips more into darkness.”

Those scriptural passages address homosexual acts, which the Bible says God considers to be an abomination.

Jackson and other conservative activists are hoping to persuade a group of about 14 moderate senators to oppose the bill. They include Arkansas Democrats Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor, Louisiana Democrat Mary Landrieu, and Republicans John McCain (Arizona) Lindsey Graham (South Carolina) and Judd Gregg (New Hampshire).

It is immoral for these kinds of antics and coercion to have to be endured. Each bill should be going though by itself, not piggybacked, and rise or fall on its own merit or lack thereof!

OBAMA THE NARCISSIST

Posted by straight shooter on July 8, 2009 under General, Political, Political Terrorism

Samuel Vaknin, Ph.D. Dr. Vaknin has written extensively about narcissism.

Dr. Vaknin states, “I must confess I was impressed by Sen.Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first, I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident – a wholesome presidential package. I was put off soon, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words.

Obama’s speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history. Never a politician in this land had such quasi “religious” impact on so many people. The fact that Obama is a total incognito with zero accomplishment makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming.

Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact, he is quite ignorant on most important subjects. Barack Obama is a narcissist.

Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self Love believes “Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist.” Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no other person. When he20talks about narcissism, everyone listens. Vaknin says that Obama’s language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD).

Narcissists project a grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People’s Temple, the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao, Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time. All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom.

When you are a victim of a cult of personality, you do not know it until it is too late. One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse. “Obama’s early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations,” says Vaknin. “Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a20divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia, a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white) grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995”.

One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents.

Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is power. All other issues are meaningless to them and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and does not deserve their attention.

If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The “present” vote is a safe vote. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him.

Obama’s election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations. The University of Chicago Law School provided him a lot longer than expected and at the end it evolved into, guess what?  His own autobiography!  Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father. Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself?

Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience. This is evident from Obama’s lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month. A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii, and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power. A narcissist cares for no one but himself. This election is like no other in the history of America . The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake.

What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world?

I hate to sound alarmist, but one is a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others…They are simply self serving and selfish. Obama evidences symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined. This is a mental health issue, not just a character flaw.

Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them treacherous. Today the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama.

But this man could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven. This is racism, pure and simple. The downside of this is that if Obama turns out t o be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites. The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama’s detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites.

The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960’s. Obama will set the clock back decades… America is the bastion of freedom.

The peace of the world depends on the strength of America, and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and victory of rogue nations. It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man in the White House.

America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.”

Further reading:

Barack Obama – Narcissist or Merely Narcissistic? 2008-08-13

The Narcissist in Chief 2009-06-21

Ayer’ed Out: How Bill Ayers is Influencing Your Kids 2009-03-29

The Real Reason the Queen Got Dissed: Bam Bam and the Mau Mau 2009-05-31

Christian legal group battles FDA over ‘morning after’ pill

I thought it was the FDA who was suppose to be the “safety monitors” when it came to drugs, yet the court is going to bully the FDA for the agenda of pro-abortion political activist groups over the safety of our young people?

The Alliance Defense Fund is seeking permission to intervene in a court decision ordering the Food and Drug Administration to sell the “Plan B” pill to minors.

The Plan B pill, otherwise known as the “morning-after pill,” is a very strong dose the same hormones used in oral contraceptive pills.  Some doctors believe it could cause an abortion to an expectant mother. Matt Bowman is an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund.

“This is a case where pro-abortion activist groups have put their political agenda over the health of minors by attempting to force a court to expose them to a troubling drug,” he contends.  Bowman says there is no research on what potential medical problem the Plan B pill might cause for a minor.  He adds that most minors who will be given the pill will happen without parental knowledge.

“We’re representing thousands of medical personnel to get involved in this lawsuit because they’re concerned that the court’s order will result in both parents and doctors being left out of the loop in the care of these children who are seeking these powerful drugs,” he adds.

The health and well-being of children should be more important than the political agenda of pro-abortion activist groups, Bowman concludes.  This is not the courts business … twisting arms and taking authority over those who have the legal authority.  What the court is doing here is really illegal.

Planet Earth is actually in a cooling cycle … except around Washington where the hot air of a fake crises so Gore and his “the sky is falling” cronies who stand to make huge profits are heating up the rhetoric. All this, of course, on the backs of Americans in the form of MORE TAXES after the many promises of “no new taxes” from Obama.

In the last week of June, the House of Representatives passed a bill intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 17% by 2020 and 83% by 2050.

The politics of what used to be called “global warming,” and now labeled “climate change,” isn’t limited to Capitol Hill. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal tells us, at the same time that the House was debating its bill, other countries were having second thoughts about their already enacted measures.

The Polish Academy of Sciences, for one, has publicly challenged the science behind man-made global warming. And only 11% of Czech citizens believe that human activity contributes to the measured rise in temperatures. Even New Zealand, rightly regarded as an ecological wonderland, suspended its emissions-reduction program.

Then there’s Australia. Earlier this year, the government submitted its proposal to limit CO2 emissions. Given the potential costs and the prospect of, as some Australian commentators put it, “carbon cops” knocking on people’s doors, Australian senator Steve Fielding asked the obvious question: Is this necessary?

Fielding, an engineer, was concerned that the government had accepted “one scientific explanation for climate change at face value” without looking at all the data … the scientific data and scientists that didn’t agree with what has been stated. Just like our EPA and government has done.

So he examined the science himself, including asking the Obama administration to address his concerns about the science. While the administration didn’t respond to his request, what Fielding learned persuaded him not to support the proposal. He realized that those in the EPA and others would risk job losses for not following the party line.

And Fielding is far from alone. As the Journal put it, “The number of [global warming] skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling.”

Even if some of the “green science” were convincing, there are good reasons to be skeptical about the approach being debated in Congress. Columnist David Brooks spoke for many when he called the bill “a morass of corporate giveaways.” No one knows what effect it will have on CO2 emissions. A similar European effort failed and actually was followed by a rise in emissions.

Then there’s the elephant in the room: China. China is building two coal-fired power plants every week. It’s estimated that, within 20 years, China’s CO2 emissions will be equal to the entire world’s today. Other developing countries are following China’s lead. Even the European Union is increasing its use of coal.

As any one of these alone would overwhelm American reductions, together they make the House vote seem almost perverse. A massive transfer of wealth from ordinary Americans to favored industries in furtherance of a policy that won’t work in response to a “crisis” whose scientific basis is far from proven. What am I missing here?

Would-be technocrats whose goal is to manage and shape our society are working hand in hand with those who would profit from their efforts. They insist that the global warming debate is “over” and compare those who disagree, or even ask questions, to Holocaust deniers.

Outrageous? Sure. Surprising? Not really look who is in office. What do they do when their argument is unconvincing … they take away more of your freedoms … because they have the power to do so!

When color trumps Christianity

Star Parker – Syndicated Columnist – 7/6/2009 7:20:00 AM

Star ParkerPresident Obama hosted a reception at the White House celebrating LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) Pride month. Black Christians should take note and learn a few things about our black president.

As they say, we are what we do.

It tells us something that Mr. Obama had no time to host an event for the National Day of Prayer. Nor did he have time to accept the invitation to convey greetings and a few remarks to the couple hundred thousand who came to Washington, as they do every January, for the March for Life.

However, the LGBT Pride event did make it onto the president’s busy schedule.

Here are parts of his remarks I think noteworthy for black Christians:

First, we now know that Mr. Obama buys into reasoning equating the homosexual political movement to the black civil rights movement: “… it’s not for me to tell you to be patient any more than it was for others to counsel patience to African Americans who were petitioning for equal rights a half century ago.”

Perhaps Obama can extend some of his famous empathy to a black Christian woman, Crystal Dixon, who lost her University of Toledo job for writing a column in her local paper challenging this premise. Dixon was fired for being uppity enough to write “… I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are ‘civil rights victims’ … I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a black woman.”

Considering our president’s priorities, I recall a song popular during the civil rights movement: “Which Side Are You On?”

Second, Obama sees the black community as being a little slow on the uptake to grasp that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are okay. There still are those, according to him, “who don’t yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters …” He deals with this, he said, by talking about it in front of “unlikely audiences,” such as, “in front of African American church members.”

Maybe a lot of us black folks, still readin’ our Bibles, just haven’t had enough of that Harvard learnin’.

And, third, Obama talked about HIV/AIDS but didn’t bother to mention that it’s overwhelmingly blacks that this scourge is killing.

Why would our black president discuss HIV/AIDS and not mention that although blacks represent 12% of our population, they account for 50% of HIV/AIDS cases and half of HIV-related deaths? Or that the incidence of HIV/AIDS infection per every 100,000 people is nine times higher among blacks than whites?

Of course, it would have been bad form for Obama to sour the punch bowl at the LBGT Pride month festivities by mentioning the disproportionate toll this lifestyle takes on blacks.

Blacks, of course, made the difference in getting Proposition 8 passed in California, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. They then switched over and voted for Obama.

Obama has said he opposes same-sex marriage. Can this really be so? He said at the White House event that he’s called for Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. DOMA is the main obstacle to nationalizing legalization of same-sex marriage.

Black Christians have a lot of soul searching to do. We know the pain of black history. But we also must retain clarity that these many injustices were the result of race and color trumping Christian principles.

How can black Christians do this themselves? How can black Christians allow race and color to trump Christian principles in driving their support for a leader?

Particularly as sexually transmitted diseases kill our people, when a third of all abortions are black babies, and the only hope for future black prosperity is restoration of the black family?