Only in America.
Pathetic, but certainly not surprising. Our Dear Leader recently told Sen. Kyl he won’t secure the border with Mexico because then the Republicans wouldn’t support immigration reform. From RedState.com:
On June 18, 2010, Arizona Republican Senator Jon Kyl told the audience at a North Tempe Tea Party town hall meeting that during a private, one-on-one meeting with President Obama in the Oval Office, the President told him, regarding securing the southern border with Mexico, “The problem is, . . . if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’” [Audible gasps were heard throughout the audience.] Sen. Kyl continued, “In other words, they’re holding it hostage. They don’t want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’”
Sen. Kyl also said he reminded President Obama that the President and the Congress has an obligation, a duty, to secure the border.
Liberal hypocrisy is on full display. From the American Thinker:
Meanwhile, our president took in a 5 hour round of golf with his vice president. Last Saturday, it was a 4 hour tour of the links.
President Barack Obama hit the golf course Saturday with Vice President Joe Biden.The White House pool report noted that Obama left at about 1 p.m. for the course at Andrews Air Force base, and his golfing parters included White House Trip Director Marvin Nicholson and David Katz, the energy efficiency campaign manager at the Department of Energy.
Obama left the course shortly before 6 p.m.
The RNC has released a scathing video showing just where The One’s priorities are. 58 days before meeting w/ BP executives? Pathetic. In times like these we need a President, a true leader. Someone to be proud of and rally behind. Instead we have a Golfer in Chief and a rampant apologizer. Someone we’re ashamed of. The One = The Mistake.
Good piece by Adam Shaw in the American Thinker on the developing calamity known as the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa. Why was it even awarded to a country w/ an infrastructure that can’t support the demands of an event such as the World Cup? Liberalism is why. Africa had never hosted one and the fact that it “felt good” to award an African nation the World Cup are the underlying reasons. So what if they don’t have the infrastructure, or stability, to deal with such an event. Who cares?! As long as it feels good, that’s all that matters.
The same could be said of Barack Hussein Obama’s election as President of the USA. For many it simply “felt good” to vote for him. So what if he had shady friends, an angry preacher, radical ties, and no real experience. So what? What could possibly go wrong?
Only a week into World Cup 2010, the decision to hold the tournament in South Africa appears to be an unmitigated disaster. The blame lies at the feet of liberal elites who have politicized soccer.
Due to its size and worldwide appeal, the selection of the host nation for the FIFA World Cup has to take many factors into account. The host needs to exhibit a nation of stability and safety, a strong soccer record, and a highly developed transport infrastructure, as well as having approximately ten large stadia in order to host the various matches.
It is a tough task that causes even the most developed soccer nations, like England, to doubt their worthiness. Yet there have been exceptions that show that nations that do not meet these criteria can host a World Cup. Mexico hosted the tournament in 1970 and 1986, and the USA (then not a strong soccer nation) successfully hosted in 1994 — producing one of the best tournaments in recent years (Diana Ross aside).
Yet the choices were based on reasons to do with soccer. Mexico was chosen due to its position as a key soccer nation, and America was chosen with the knowledge that it had the infrastructure, the enormous stadiums, and the ability to provide atmosphere. But with the ascension of the bizarre Joseph “Sepp” Blatter — a man continually dogged by accusations of mismanagement and corruption — to the Presidency of FIFA in 1998, politics and liberal elitism have taken over the World Cup.
Blatter made no secret that he wanted an African World Cup as soon as possible, irrespective of its ability to host. He worked for an African World Cup in 2006, but when Germany was chosen to host it, a furious Blatter forced through a rule-change for 2010 so that an African nation had to be awarded the 2010 tournament, with no nations outside Africa even allowed to bid.
For fans hoping to attend in 2010, the prospects were grim. The candidates were Tunisia, Morocco, South Africa, Egypt, and — incredibly — Colonel Gaddafi’s Libya. With terrorist hotspot Morocco a close second, it was with some relief that relatively stable South Africa was chosen by the FIFA executives.
Immediately, serious concerns were expressed. Was the country economically stable enough to invest in such a venture? Also, despite apartheid being a thing of the past, the region still has immense political and racial problems that often turn violent, with over fifty homicides a day. Thus, was the nation safe enough for players and fans to travel? Serious questions were raised about whether the creaking South African infrastructure could cope with the tens of thousands of fans traveling between venues, and whether it could build the amount of new stadiums required. In addition, the question was asked why a nation was given the role of hosting the World Cup when its national team had ever qualified for the World Cup only twice and had ever managed to win only one game (the same number as Iran).
Key FIFA officials such as Franz Beckenbauer called for the cup to be moved to Germany, as it was becoming clear that South Africa could not cope with the demands being placed upon it. Yet well-intentioned officials such as Beckenbauer missed the point — the decision to give South Africa the biggest soccer event in the world had nothing to with soccer. It was a political decision, with Blatter thinking in terms of “legacy” and “new frontiers.” Other officials on the side of Blatter started talking about “transnational football communities” and the “remarkable community-building achievements” that such moves would bring.
It became clear that liberal politics were put in front of the interests of the sport, which was confirmed when, after three people were killed in an attack on the Togo national team in Angola in January, Blatter was asked about security concerns for the World Cup. He responded by labeling those with concerns as “colonialists” and anti-African. Now it was racist to have doubts about a weak soccer nation with severe economic and political problems hosting a World Cup.
It was hoped that these concerns would not come to fruition. Unfortunately, the first week of the 2010 World Cup has been a disaster, with some writers already describing the choice of South Africa as host as an example of “the greatest scandal of modern sports events.”
Our Dear Leader told The Politico that the Gulf Oil Spill was similar to 9/11. Then he went golfing… From Gateway Pundit:
Then he went golfing for 4 hours.
The Hill reported:
President Barack Obama spent four hours on the golf course Sunday in temperatures that peaked in the low 90s.
The White House pool reported that they left Andrews Air Force Base as it started to rain after 4 p.m.
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood was among the group golfing with Obama.
Today’s Someone Left the Irony On Award goes to the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, better known as the Deficit Commission. Barack Obama created the panel ostensibly to reach some kind of bipartisan consensus on reducing the federal deficit; a better title may have been the Accountability Avoidance Commission, since it owes its existence to the need for Obama to avoid political blame for the massive tax hikes he needs to fund his nanny-state agenda. Even before they get to that stage, however, they have already proven that government naturally inclines towards unthinking growth and irresponsibility, as the Tax Prof discovered at Tax Analysts:
Saddled with a tight deadline and great expectations, members of President Obama’s deficit reduction commission say they may not have the resources necessary to meet their task.
The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, which the president created through an executive order in February, is charged with developing a plan by December 1 that would stabilize the budget deficit by 2015 and reduce the federal debt over the long term. The group is widely expected to consider a combination of tax reforms and spending cuts.
But despite the weighty demands, the panel has only a fraction of the staff and budget of standing congressional committees. The panel’s own cochairs and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., have criticized the meager resources and called for more support. …
According to fiscal commission staffers, there are 10 to 15 people who work for the commission, including two full-time employees, interns, employees “borrowed” from other agencies such as the Office of Management and Budget and the Treasury Department, and special government employees, who are expected to work no more than 130 days in a calendar year. The number of workers will likely grow to around 20 by midsummer.
The White House has set aside the resources to provide the equivalent of four full-time salaries and $500,000 in operating costs for the commission, fiscal commission Executive Director Bruce Reed told Tax Analysts.
The commission has as many as 15 employees, two full-time, for their work. Congress has allocated $500,000 in operating costs apart from the four full-time employees for the life of the panel, which produces its report on December 1. That is about $50,000 per month to analyze the federal budget and develop proposals for cuts, based on having an unpaid commission full of supposed experts in this field. I ran a call center of 45 people with a budget just over four times that much, which included the salaries and a lot of costs that the Deficit Commission won’t have to address, such as phone lines, rent, capital depreciation, and so on.
This is a microcosm of the very problem that the commission is supposed to fix, and the reaction from Washington pols is priceless for understanding it. The gripe from Harry Reid is that the staffing doesn’t match that of Congressional panels, such as the House Ways and Means Committee. That panel employs 90 staffers and spent over $8 million in FY2009. Ninety staffers equals more than 20% of the entire Congress. Maybe the problem isn’t that the NCFRR doesn’t have enough people, but that Ways and Means spends way beyond our means. In fact, the entire federal government spends way beyond our means, and we can thank the Democrats who added over a trillion dollars in annual federal spending in just three short years for that, increasing the budget by 40% during their control of Congress.
According his official schedule, President Obama did not attend the May 25 memorial service in Jackson, Mississippi for the workers who died in the Deepwater Horizon explosion because he was en route to a fundraiser for Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-California, in San Francisco.
At Thursday’s White House briefing, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked why Obama did not attend the service. The president’s spokesman answered, “I’d have to look at the schedule. I don’t know the answer.”
CNN examined the president’s schedule for that day, and according to it, the president left the White House at 2:55 p.m. EST en route to Andrews Air Force Base for the cross-country flight to the San Francisco fundraiser.
Alvin Greene is the latest Democrat to be accused of a a felony. The only real shocker here is that it happened during the election process instead of after spending a few years in Congress. View his odd interview below.
Jimmy Carter is probably sleeping better at night knowing there’s a president whose actually worse than him. Sweet dreams, Mr. Peanut.
Great video from the NSRC.
What a tangled web we weave. It was already known that Obama was the biggest recipient of BP campaign contributions, but now we learn that the rent-free apartment of Rahm Emanuel was owned by a major BP advisor. Hope and Change, heh? From the LA Times:
We already knew that BP and its folks were significant contributors to the record $750-million war chest of Barack Obama’s 2007-08 campaign.
Now, we learn the details of a connection of Rahm Emanuel, the Chicago mayoral wannabe, current Obama chief of staff, ex-representative, ex-Clinton money man and ex-Windy City political machine go-fer.
Shortly after Obama’s happy inaugural, eyebrows rose slightly upon word that, as a House member, Emanuel had lived the last five years rent-free in a D.C. apartment of Democratic colleague Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and her husband, Stanley Greenberg.
For an ordinary American, that would likely raise some obvious tax liability questions. But like Emanuel, the guy overseeing the Internal Revenue Service now is another Obama insider, Tim Geithner, who had his own outstanding tax problems but skated through confirmation anyway by the Democratic-controlled Congress.
Remember this was all before the letters BP stood for Huge Mess. Even before the Obama administration gave BP a safety award.
Now follow these standard Washington links if you can:
Greenberg’s consulting firm was a prime architect of BP’s recent rebranding drive as a green petroleum company, down to green signs and the slogan “Beyond Petroleum.”
Classy, but hollow. Were it day 5, 10, or even 20 this “attitude” may hold merit. But it’s day 46. Yawn.
Back in 2008 when Hurricane Gustav was nearing New Orleans, Obama told Anderson Cooper, the Paris Hilton of Television News, that since he ran such a large campaign he could surely respond to a Gulf disaster. Apples to apples, right? Wrong. He and his administration have failed at nearly everything they’ve touched. Cash for Clunkers, job creation, unemployment, you name it. Hell they can’t even get Queen Elizabeth’s birthday right. But his biggest failure to date is his lack of leadership during the Gulf Oil Spill.
From Byron York in the Washington Examiner:
It’s not mentioned much now, but in the late summer of 2008, a major hurricane, Gustav, was in the Gulf of Mexico and headed toward New Orleans, threatening a replay of the disastrous Katrina experience. On September 1, 2008, Barack Obama, fresh from his Roman-colonnade speech on the final night of the Democratic convention in Denver, talked to CNN’s Anderson Cooper about Gustav and the Gulf. The question: As president, could he handle an emergency like that? Obama pointed to the size of his campaign and its multi-million dollar budget as evidence of his executive abilities. “Our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years,” Obama said. That executive ability, he added, “indicates the degree to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.”
The Mainstream Media Death Spiral continues, as the Honolulu Advertiser publishes its last edition today. From the Washington Post:
For more than a century, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and The Honolulu Advertiser have competed to chronicle Hawaii, from the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy and the Pearl Harbor attack to statehood and the election of island-born Barack Obama.
That rivalry ends Sunday when the Advertiser, Hawaii’s largest newspaper, publishes its last edition after being bought out and combined with its smaller rival. More than 400 reporters, pressmen and other workers are losing their jobs.
The Advertiser is the latest casualty of the recession and the upheaval that the Internet has unleashed on the traditional media industry. Honolulu now joins Denver and Seattle among the cities served by only one daily newspaper and a shrinking pool of professional journalists.
The case for repealing Obamacare grows stronger each day. The harsh reality of Nationalized Healthcare is that it’s simply unaffordable over time, as we’re also seeing with Social Security and Medicare. For proof look no further than the UK, where operations such as hernias, joint replacements, and cataract surgery are being cut back in order to save costs. Sorry Seniors.
Millions of patients face losing NHS care as bosses prepare to axe treatments to make £20billion of savings by 2014, a top doctor has warned.
Among procedures being targeted by health trusts are hernias, joint replacements, ear and nose procedures, varicose veins and cataract surgery.
Dr Mark Porter, chairman of the British Medical Association’s consultants
He said primary care trusts – which commission care – are already compiling lists of ‘low value’ operations that would no longer be provided.
These include hip replacements for obese patients and some operations for hernias and gallstones. Procedures for varicose veins, ear and nose problems including grommets in children are also not funded in some areas.
Hope and Change. And Smart Power. This administration is the laughing stock of the world. From the Telegraph:
An official statement from the US foreign policy chief paid tribute to the “Queen’s life and legacy,” despite the fact that the Monarch does not celebrate her official birthday until next weekend.
The diplomatic faux pas, sent on behalf of President Barack Obama and the American people on Friday, also celebrated the “special relationship” between the British and US governments.“On this celebratory occasion, we pay tribute to the Queen’s life and legacy and honour the special relationship between our two nations,” Mrs Clinton said.
“The young princess Elizabeth helped rally her nation in the darkest days of that war, and she has remained a beacon of integrity and resolve ever since. The United States has always been grateful for her friendship and example.
“Once again, I wish Queen Elizabeth II a very happy birthday and peace and prosperity for the people of the United Kingdom in the year to come.”
Mrs Clinton added that the “special relationship continues to provide a solid foundation as the United States and Britain”, which worked “side by side to meet the challenges of the 21st century”.
A spokesman for Mrs Clinton attemped to make light of the gaffe.
“We were a week early,” Philip Crowley joked to reporters in Washington.
“As always, it is better to give a greeting a week early than a week late.”