Obama Should Take His Own Advice
Jun 8, 2010 Political
Not long ago Barack Obama expressed his disgust at the way the entities involved in the Gulf oil spill pointed fingers at each other. He said that he did not want finger pointing.
He gave a similar message to graduating students telling them not to make excuses.
This is from the same guy who has done nothing but blame George Bush for all his regime’s woes. Whenever anything goes wrong Bush gets blamed and it is not only Obama doing the blaming. Nancy Pelosi blamed Bush for the oil spill in the Gulf and a media story put the blame for the Gore split-up on Bush as well.
It seems to me that Obama would do well by taking his own advice.
While he is at it he should admonish his sock puppets in the state run media and tell them to stop making excuses and laying blame.
How on Earth can we expect the students to take Obama seriously when he tells them not to make excuses after they have seen him do that for a year and a half? How can the entities involved in the oil spill take him seriously when they have seen the same? In fact, while Obama was expressing his disgust at finger pointing, he pointed his fingers at them.
Obama is a narcissistic weenie. His lack of experience is showing in the way he does his job and the American public is getting fed up.
So Barack, how about you take your own advice and stop pointing fingers at Bush? How about you stop using President Bush as an excuse for your failings? How about you try leading, if you can?
UPDATE: Here is a list of Obama finger pointing and blame.
Related:
Boston Globe
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: Bush, excuses, finger pointing, Obama, oil
Obama’s Suggestion; Plug The Damn Hole
May 26, 2010 Political
When Katrina hit the liberals went into high gear to blame George Bush and to slam the federal response. I have often written that the federal response did lack in some areas but it was not as bad as the liberals portrayed it. The bulk of the blame for the problems at the state and federal level went to Mayor Nagin and Governor Blanco. Their missteps caused undue delay and made the federal response much more difficult.
Barack Obama promised not to forget the Gulf Coast when he was running for office. He told us that he remembered the storm and he would not forget the Gulf Coast implying that Bush had forgotten about it.
Why would he not give that impression? Bush was blasted for not going there right away, blasted for being on vacation, blasted for fundraisers, blasted for a slow response and accused of hating black people. The left painted this unfair picture and it stuck. It was deliberate and it played politics with the lives of those affected.
But Obama fairs no better. He has made one trip to the Gulf (I think Bush had visited the Gulf nearly 10 times by this time frame during Katrina), the federal response was slow, he went on a mini vacation after the disaster and he is going on another this weekend, and he is squeezing a fundraiser in as well.
Obama had no plans to go to the Gulf but has capitulated and will visit the area this Friday after he returns form a fundraiser today and then he will go to his home in Chicago for some time off. He is so worn out from his quest to destroy our nation that he will miss the Ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day.
He will reportedly go to a cemetery in Illinois on Memorial Day. I hope his vacation is not interrupted too much.
Obama is getting hammered from the right (and now some of the left is chiming in) for the way he has responded to the Gulf oil spill. He is being held to the same standard that the left held Bush to during Katrina and to the standard he promised would be better than the one Bush had set.
Perhaps this is why Press Secretary Robert Gibbs called the media into the West Wing and scolded them for asking too many questions about the oil spill. I don’t recall the media letting up on the questions asked of Bush about Katrina and I am sure that the liberals kept asking questions. It is funny how things change when the ones who criticize are on the receiving end.
And Obama, who is very thin skinned, is not happy. He knows his messianic reputation is taking a hit. He knows he is teetering on being a failure in the eyes of the public because he knows what unfair accusations did to Bush. Obama participated in those accusations. He is getting tense by the day and is reported to have snapped, “Plug the damn hole.”
Gee, if only BP had thought of that…
And yes, I said unfair accusations. No occupant of the White House can slip into a phone booth and change into Superman and fix things. Bush could not swoop into New Orleans and fix things any more than Obama can swoop into the Gulf and fix things. Leaders have to rely on the people under them who have responsibility for things. Bush had to rely on a state and city that was led by incompetent boobs and who worsened the situation. Obama has to rely on the experts in the oil industry to fix the problem that the government is not equipped to take on. He had to rely on a decades old plan that ended up falling flat because required equipment was not in place. That plan was in place long before Obama (or Bush for that matter) was in office.
It sucks being the leader when the things that are supposed to be taken care of are not. It sucks when you get the blame for things out of your control.
But Obama was happy to criticize Bush and the response to Katrina. He was happy to pile on the unfair accusations and he was happy to say he would do better.
That is important to remember. He said he would do better and he has not. Whether the problems are his fault or not means nothing because he made promises he is now unable to keep.
And he is being held to the same standard that he held Bush to.
Liberals do not like it and Obama does not like it but you reap what you sow.
So while Obama is out at fundraisers and on vacation the Gulf remains in peril and the people there feel forgotten.
Even though they were promised that would change.
How is that Hope and Change working out for you now?
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: bp, Bush, fundraiser, gulf coast, katrina, Obama, oil spill, vacation
Obama Still Blames Bush
May 24, 2010 Political
The country elected an inexperienced Socialist to the White House and it is evident each and every day that this was a mistake. Obama is unable to accept responsibility for anything and points fingers outward all the time. Ironically, he was the one who criticized the companies involved in the oil spill for pointing fingers.
Obama’s favorite target is George Bush. When something goes wrong Obama is quick to point out that Bush did it and it is all his fault. Obama ignores his own fault and rewrites history every chance he gets. His latest take is that the Republicans were responsible for the economic problems despite the best effort of Democrats to keep the ship right. This smacks in the face of reality since it was Republicans who warned about problems with the financial sector and Democrats who said that things were fundamentally sound and that there were no problems.
Barney Frank is now rewriting history by saying he never called for home ownership for all and just wanted people to be able to rent homes. This is a blatant lie. He called for mortgages to be given to low income families. Mortgages, for the challenged, are what people take out when they buy a home, not rent one.
Obama is working on his plan for the upcoming election and that plan is to blame it all on Bush. Obama will try to pin the problems the country has faced over the last nearly two years on Bush even though he [Obama] had fool proof majorities in the House and Senate and failed to get much done. His party is responsible for the high unemployment and though he will try to spin that, the reality is unemployment is much higher than under Bush and is higher than Obama said it would be when the Democrats passed the now failed stimulus package.
Obama tried to pin things on Bush in Virginia and New Jersey and he lost both governors. He tried this tack with Massachusetts and lost a Senate seat held by Democrats for nearly five decades.
Obama got away with blaming Bush for problems right after he took office but at some point people have to look at things and decide that they are now Obama’s issues. That point has been crossed and people are no longer buying the blame Bush mentality. Well, except for the rabid base that thinks Bush is responsible for all the bad in the world.
The sane among us know differently. When the election rolls around the Democrats will have had control of Congress for nearly four years and the White House for nearly two. The Democrats were in charge when things went south and they took complete control and drove things deeper into the abyss. Their years of pandering to people and redistributive policies have caused problems for the economy and our society as a whole.
But Obama will ignore all of this and blame it all on Bush.
What do you expect from a man who claims that his regime thwarted several terrorist attacks when the reality is the attackers were too inept to detonate their devices. The only thing that saved people was blind luck. That is what happens when the most transparent regime fails to provide intelligence information in accordance with the law.
And luck is not proper mission planning.
Not to worry, he can blame that on Bush as well…
Source:
Politico
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
From The I Told You So File
May 19, 2010 Political
First up, the health care takeover. Barack Obama promised people that if they liked their insurance and their doctors, they could keep them. This is not the case as the way the law is set up companies have determined they would be better off dropping employees and paying the fines. Companies can save upwards of a billion dollars:
Even with penalties in place for employers who decline to provide health insurance, documents showed that Caterpillar could reduce its health care costs by as much as 70 percent and AT&T could save as much as $1.8 billion by shifting their employees into public programs. Reason.com
In addition, the law will end up costing more than we were told and will end up costing us money, not saving any as Barack Obama said.
The Congressional Budget Office now reports that the law will require an additional $115 billion in previously unreported (and yet unpaid-for) discretionary spending. Medicare’s actuary has reported that total medical spending in the U.S. will actually go up and that crucial cuts to Medicare—cuts being used to pay for the law’s new entitlement spending—aren’t likely to happen, but that Medicare benefits are likely to be reduced. And in Massachusetts, the state whose 2006 health care overhaul served as the model for ObamaCare, insurers have gone to war with the governor, and the state treasurer is warning that the program could drive the state into bankruptcy. Reason.com
In addition, more and more doctors in Texas are not taking Medicare patients because the reimbursements do not cover costs and doctors are losing money. Doctors in other states have decided not to take them as well and this trend will only continue with Obamacare.
Texas doctors are opting out of Medicare at alarming rates, frustrated by reimbursement cuts they say make participation in government-funded care of seniors unaffordable.
Two years after a survey found nearly half of Texas doctors weren’t taking some new Medicare patients, new data shows 100 to 200 a year are now ending all involvement with the program. Before 2007, the number of doctors opting out averaged less than a handful a year. Chron
It is not hard to see that this will begin to affect the elderly and though the left despises the term “death panel” the reduction in doctors taking Medicare will lead to the same outcome.
Perhaps this is why the regime is accelerating the better parts of the law (though they have their own drawbacks). The more appealing things in the law (appealing according to the Democrats) were front loaded and the bad things like the mandates were pushed well past the 2012 elections in order to allow Democrats (particularly Obama) to be reelected before they have to answer for what they have done. Now Democrats are speeding up the front loaded items in hopes they can save seats in November.
This will not work.
Finally, the left likes to blame the economic problems we are having on the Bush tax cuts. The tax cuts did not cause the problems and, contrary to popular myth, Bill Clinton did not have a multi-trillion dollar budget surplus. He had one year with a budget surplus (not zero deficit) which means that the amount the government took in was less than it spent. A budget surplus is not necessarily a surplus. Budgetary tricks and moving things off budget can give the appearance of surplus when one does not exist. However, there was never trillions in surplus:
First, that $5.6 trillion surplus never actually existed (the budget surplus peaked at $236 billion in 2000). Instead, $5.6 trillion represents the cumulative 2002-2011 budget surplus that was projected by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in early 2001. Instead, the United States is now projected to run a $6.1 trillion deficit over those 10 years — an $11.7 trillion swing. Washington Times
The Times article is interesting and shows how the budget numbers are manipulated and lied about. The federal government has never really had a budget surplus anywhere other than on paper. Unfortunately, what is written on the paper is often not reality.
But let us suppose there was a 4 trillion dollar surplus when Bush took office (to be sure there absolutely was not but let’s pretend) . That means the government took in 4 trillion dollars more than it needed in by way of taxes. If this was the case then Bush did nothing more than give the money back to its rightful owners. The government should not be generating more than it needs and if it does it needs to give the money back. It is ours and if they get more of it than they need they find ways to spend it.
Another myth is that the tax cuts were for the rich and hurt the poor. This myth is dispelled in the article which also points out that the sun-setting of the Bush tax cuts will further hurt the poor and middle class whose taxes will go up higher than for those who make more money.
These are things I have discussed in the past and which have been denied by the drones on the progressive left. They did not go for it then and they will not go for it now even though the information is there in black and white.
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Death Of The SUV?
Apr 3, 2010 Political
George Bush started a mess by signing a law requiring vehicle fleets to average 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
Barack Obama and the Congress changed this to 2016 forcing vehicle manufacturers to step up efforts and spend billions to retool at a faster pace and the automotive industry had no choice but to accept because the government owns two of the big three. The move will greatly curtail the sales of SUVs because SUVs will not be able to get the kind of mileage that the CAFE requires and will incur a surcharge for being a gas guzzler.
The reason that SUVs and other powerful vehicles consume more is because it takes more fuel to generate more power, power required to use these vehicles to their fullest potential.
The CAFE standards will not apply to Barack Obama’s limousine, a vehicle that weighs 5 tons and though the fuel mileage is not published, one can safely assume it is fewer than 10 miles to the gallon. The vehicle has 5 inch think bullet proof glass and is armored to protect its occupants. There is no way to get fuel efficiency in a vehicle like that. The same is true for Bush who signed the original law. His limo got poor mileage as well.
But, but, he is an important man and needs the protection.
No doubt, but he is no more important than any of the citizens who employ him, pay his salary and pay for his vehicle. Yes, he gets the protection and we pay for it.
Fine, but why should we not be able to choose vehicles that suit our needs without having to pay more? Why should our selections decrease because the people who drive gas guzzlers (many of whom drive leased vehicles we pay for) and who do what they want?
Many people need SUVs or similar vehicles to do their jobs. People have to go to work regardless of the weather. Doctors, nurse, police officers, firefighters, and many others all have to go to work no matter what it is like outside. Why should any of these people not be entitled and FREE to buy the vehicles they think will best meet their needs without paying more? Why should their choices be limited?
It is pretty hypocritical for these people to drive gas guzzlers that we pay for and then to tell us that we have to drive vehicles that meet standards that do not apply to them.
Obama said that he asked if this type vehicle (his limo) comes in a hybrid (only a moron would not know that answer) and he basically has no choice in the matter. This is true but remember that Obama did not drive a hybrid as a personal vehicle until he started his bid for the White House. Prior to that he drove a Chrysler 300 with a Hemi engine. Those cars get about 17 miles per gallon.
If that is the car he wanted to drive then good for him. He chose a car that got fuel mileage that is about half of what will be imposed on us (just to note, my Jeep gets better mileage than that Chrysler 300) and that was his choice. That is what freedom is about.
In order to appeal to the enviro-nuts he went to a hybrid when he ran for the White House. And he asked about a hybrid limo knowing full well that they could not make one.
This is another case of good enough for me but not for thee.
Where I live it snows during the winter and sometimes those snowstorms are heavy and deep. People in critical jobs must get to work and many people with SUVs offer to drive critical employees to work. Unlike the slugs in DC who closed down the city, those in the real world with critical jobs must get to work.
Why should people who pay the salaries of every person in Congress and the Obama administration be required to pay more for vehicles they have to have when those very people who make the standards drive vehicles that will never meet them?
In fact, why should someone pay more for a vehicle, whether he needs it or simply wants it, just because it is on the hit list of people in DC?
The new standards go in effect in 2016. People who want SUVs need to buy them before then to slip in before the standards take effect.
One other thing to keep in mind. Any savings reported by changing to a more fuel efficient vehicle are dependent on the price of gas.
Freedom means the freedom to choose a vehicle that you want without being punished for the choice.
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: Bush, fuel mileage, gas guzzler, limousine, Obama