NYT: Talking about a candidates religion is racist but only if that candidate is Obama

Just last week the media and Democratic operatives went crazy at the idea that a GOP Super PAC was going to run ads highlighting President Obama's 20 year association with Rev. Wright.

It would put "race front and center" claimed NBC, the NYT termed it "racial politics, 2012 style." Even Obama's own campaign claimed that to talk about Obama sitting in Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years as he said things like "God Damn America" was racist and therefore off limits.
Surely Mitt Romney's religious background should be off limits, right? Wrong.

It goes on for 4 pages and then the "reporter" went on MSNBC to talk about how much of a hypocrite Romney is for engaging in political attacks.

"The way I reported the story is I really talked to members of the LDS church who are close to Romney, who have worshiped with him over the years, who really know him. And they see one conflict in particular, which is between the kind of ideals that Romney professed in church. He put a lot of emphasis on treating other people well, on being sensitive and respectful, on being generous and giving, talked a lot about Jesus' lessons in those manner. And yet these Mormons see the way Romney is carrying out political attacks, some of which are very harsh and they see a conflict between what he taught in church and what he does on the campaign trail," Kantor said.

My question is why exactly is Romney's religious history fair game but Obama's is verboten? Enough with the double standard bull. Either Obama's 20 year friendship and church membership in a church that preached black liberation theology is fair game for political attacks or Romney's Mormon roots are not.

Making Homes Affordable?

What happens when the homes that saw their mortgages reduced under Obama's Home Affordable Modification Program go back up in value? Do the home owners see their mortgages go back up to account for the fact that the housing market has rebounded? Or do these home owners get to continue with a taxpayer subsidized mortgage of, say, 100k when their home is now worth 140k?

Sen. Tester (D-MT) says that Obama didn't stay focused on jobs and the economy

Makes sense, Obama himself did say that he "forgets [the magnitude of the recession]"

Sen. Jon Tester stands by President Barack Obama on issues like health care reform and withdrawing troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, but often thinks the Democratic leader doesn’t go far enough where rural Montana issues are concerned.

In an interview at the Missoulian on Friday, the first-term senator from Big Sandy said Obama didn’t stay focused enough on stimulating jobs and the economy after the financial meltdown of 2008. Passage of his Small Company Capital Formation Act in April – to help employers raise money for expansion – could have been done two years ago and sped up the recovery, he said.

While I like that Tester is saying this, and it will make a great ad for Romney or a Super PAC to run, I don't think he is correct. The sluggish economy isn't because Obama forgot to focus on it enough - it is because he tried to use his recession as a way to further expand the power of the government.

Instead of making it easier for companies to form and to hire, Obama used his recession to push for an expensive, government controlled health care system. He poured hundreds of billions of dollars into make work programs that are neither stimulative nor effective ways to promote long term growth. He has strangled businesses with new regulations and the threat of taxes so that they don't know if they will be able to afford to open a new plant or hire new employees.

Basically everything Obama has done during his recession has only helped prolong it. If Obama would stop trying to use his recession to further government control then the economy would improve but we all know that will never happen. Thanks to Obama's "never let a crisis go to waste" policy America will continue to suffer for as long as he is President.

Obama thinks Romney is a traitor.

Not really, but since the left went crazy over Romney not immediately castigating some lady who said Obama should be tried for treason it stands to reason that Obama should be castigated for yelling out that Mitt Romney is a traitor, right?

The shout from the crowd was clear. As President Barack Obama gave the first official campaign speech of his re-election bid at a sports arena in Ohio last weekend the first mention of his Republican opponent Mitt Romney prompted a male voice in the throng to yell: “Traitor!”

Do I think that Obama believes that Romney is a traitor or that every thing his supporters say should reflect back to him? Of course not, that would be absurd and idiotic. Then again, the Obama campaign claimed that everything Romney supporters say reflects back on him so fair is fair right?

By then, Obama's spin machine was in high gear, accusing Romney of a lack of leadership for not disagreeing with the questioner's accusation of treason.

"Time after time in this campaign, Mitt Romney has had the opportunity to show that he has the fortitude to stand up to hateful and over-the-line rhetoric and time after time, he has failed to do so," Obama campaign spokesman Lis Smith said in a statement.

What's good for the goose.

Obama Should Apologize

Fresh off the heels of the beginning of a new national nightmare, that is Mitt Romney engaging in the type of high school pranks and hazing that every normal high school guy has engaged in, comes new information that Obama pushed a little girl once. As chronicled in "his" autobiography Dreams From My Father

There was one other child in my class, though, who reminded me of a different sort of pain. Hre name was Coretta, and before my arrival she had been the only black person in our grade. She was plump and dark and didn't seem to have many friends. From the first day, we avoided each other but watched from a distance, as if direct contact would only remind us more keenly of our isolation.

Finally, during recess one hot, cloudless day, we found ourselves occupying the same corner of the playground. I don't remember what we said to each other, but I remember that suddenly she was chasing me around the jungle gyms and swings. She was laughing brightly, and I teased hre and dodged this way and that, until she finally caught me and we fell to the ground breathless. When I looked up, I saw a group of children, faceless before the glare of the sun, pointing down at us.

"Coretta has a boyfriend! Coretta has a boyfriend!"

The chants grew louder and more kids circled us.

"She's not my g-girlfriend," I stammered. I looked to Coretta for some assistance, but she just stood there looking down at the ground. "Coretta's got a boyfriend! Why don't you kiss her, mister boyfriend?"

"I'm not her boyfriend!" I shouted. I ran up to Coretta and gave her a slight shove; she staggerd back and looked up at me, but still said nothing. "Leave me alone!" I shouted again. And suddenly Coretta was running, faster and faster until she disappeared from sight. Appreciative laughs rose around me. Then the bell rang, and the teachers appeared to round us back into class.

To this day he has never apologized publicly to little miss Coretta. Since it is now big news what our candidates for President did before they were adults shouldn't we be discussing this incident? And if not, why?

Updated Unemployment Revision numbers for the entire Obama Presidency

An updated version of my most recent chart comparing the initial weekly unemployment claims vs the revisions put out by Obama's Department of Labor.

I found some interesting information while I was compiling this data. For instance, 5 of the 14 downward revisions came during a 2 month period from November 2009 to January 2010 and there hasn't been a downward revision since February 19, 2011. That means during Obama's time as President there has been an upward revision 88.2% of the time.

How does that compare to Bush? Well, in his last 55 weeks in office there were 8 downward revisions and 6 spot on estimates for an upward revision 74.5% of the time.

For a larger version click the images.

Perpetual Victimhood and the Decline of Personal Responsibility

I've been thinking about this for a long time but something that Elizabeth Warren, the Democratic candidate for Senate in Massachusetts, said today really upset me.

After being caught shamelessly lying about her "cherokee heritage" she attempted to shift the conversation away from her brazen lie to an attack on how Scott Brown hates women. Amazingly, in the fantasy world that Elizabeth Brown lives in it is now sexist to call a proven liar a liar - if she happens to be a women.

“The only one as I understand it who’s raising any question about whether or not I was qualified for my job is Scott Brown and I think I am qualified and frankly I’m a little shocked to hear anybody raise a question about whether or not I’m qualified to hold a job teaching,” she said, pushing to put Brown on defense. “What does he think it takes for a woman to be qualified?”

Of course, Brown never once questioned her qualifications; he only questioned her credibility, which as Warren's history of being a liar seems like a fair question to ask.

Warren's descent into perpetual victimhood is one of the most disgusting things about modern American society. Nobody wants to take personal responsibility anymore because it is easier to blame someone else and it protects your ego by blaming your failures on outside forces.

I don't know exactly when the perpetual victimhood mentality really started to take hold but I suspect it took root during the movement to claim that any time something bad happens to a minority then it is because of discrimination and bigotry.

Did I get fired from my job because I lacked a strong work ethic? Of course not, I got fired because my boss hates handicapped people. Did I not get hired because I am slightly less qualified than someone else? Nope, it was because of racism. Am I not getting paid as much as John Doe because I work fewer hours and receive more health benefits? Absolutely not, it's because my employer is a sexist.

Over and over again we see our goverment openly rooting for people to give up personal responsiblity and to join the brotherhood of perpetual victims. Just a week or so ago we saw the Department of Justice file a federal discrimination lawsuit against the city of Jacksonville because the city firefighters partly base their promotions on how well the firefighters do on a written skills test. The DoJ claimed that the test is racist because the black firefighters don't do as well as the white firefighters do.

It seems to me that crying racism or sexism or any other form of bigotry simply implies that the "victim" is unable to rise through the ranks or survive in the world without mamma government there to treat them as children unable to care for themselves. That to me is much more of a bigoted mindset than just about anything the government is fighting against.

There is a reason that liberal politicians seeks to expand the brotherhood of perpetual victims though - it not only keeps them in power it gives them even more power. Why do you think Obama, Pelosi, etc... have expended so much of their energy on the myth that the GOP is engaged in a "war on women" or "war on minorities?" They have no positive record to stand on so the only way they can win is by getting a huge segment of America to believe that they are the victims that only an ever expanding government can protect and keep safe.

I will never understand why someone would let themselves be conned into the becoming perpetual victims. Is there genuine racism and sexism out there? Yes and we should fight to eradicate those evils from our world but when the brotherhood of perpetual victims chimes in and makes every negative comment out to be the work of nefarious agents it diminishes actual victims.

Initial Weekly Unemployment Claims vs Revised Claims

Every week that the Department of Labor publishes the new unemployment claims for the week it seems that the previous weeks number has been "unexpectedly" revised upward. In fact, 64 of the last 68 weeks have seen upward revisions. For those of you who are more visually inclined here is a handy chart I made that includes the official DoL numbers going back to January 1, 2011.

For a larger version click here.

Happy May Day

Damn communism is awesome.

Happy May Day everyone.

Who wants to join me in creating a group called the 99.9% of people in America who hate Occupy Wall Street?

Weekly Initial Jobless Claims:

Revised upward.... again.

In the week ending April 21, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 388,000, a decrease of 1,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 389,000. The 4-week moving average was 381,750, an increase of 6,250 from the previous week’s revised average of 375,500.

The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.6 percent for the week ending April 14, unchanged from the prior week.

The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending April 14 was 3,315,000, an increase of 3,000 from the preceding week’s revised level of 3,312,000. The 4-week moving average was 3,311,750, a decrease of 9,750 from the preceding week’s revised average of 3,321,500.

That makes 59 of the last 60 weeks where the initial jobless claims has been revised upward. Of course, by putting out a lower number initially and then revising it upward the very next the Labor Department, and by extension the Obama Administration, is able to claim that initial jobless numbers are declining week in and week out.

Over the last five weeks initial jobless claims have increased by approximately 30,000 but the Labor Department has reported that number as declining week in and week out. Jon Corzine, the criminal and Obama fundraising bundler, did the same thing in New Jersey in the months leading up to his race against Christie.

I know that the initial numbers are never going to be spot on but over the course of 60 weeks you should see upward, and downward revisions. Yet, we consistently see upward revisions with the administration claiming that the new numbers are a "decrease." There is something fishy going on and Obama needs to be called on it.

Latest DCCC Fundraising Pitch

The DCCC sent this out last night after Mitt Romney's killer speech.

Did tonight’s Mitt Romney speech make you want to throw your remote at the TV?

He must think he can distract voters from his extreme agenda by lying about President Obama. And he could be right.

If Romney and the Republicans can erase their radical record and attack President Obama with enough secret SuperPAC-funded smears, then they will win in 2012.

Mitt made his case. Now, it’s time for us to make ours.

Contribute $3 right now to make sure no one forgets what radical Republicans have in store for America >>

Mitt called his speech, “A Better America Begins Tonight.”

He should’ve named it, “Forget All That Stuff I Said Yesterday.”

Now that the Republican primary race is over, Romney is trying to etch-a-sketch away his “severely conservative” policy positions. Republicans nationwide won’t be far behind. Don’t let them get away with it.

http://dccc.org/Stand-with-Obama

Thanks,

Kelly

Kelly Ward DCCC Political Director

My favorite part is the letter claiming that Romney is simply lying about Barack Obama's record. Of course, they can't actually point to where Romney was lying they simply say he was. Nothing Romney said in his speech was a lie about Obama's record

Is it easier to make ends meet? Is it easier to sell your home or buy a new one? Have you saved what you needed for retirement? Are you making more in your job? Do you have a better chance to get a better job? Do you pay less at the pump?.....

We know that this election is about the kind of America we will live in and the kind of America we will leave to future generations. When it comes to the character of America, President Obama and I have very different visions.

Government is at the center of his vision. It dispenses the benefits, borrows what it cannot take, and consumes a greater and greater share of the economy. With Obamacare fully installed, government will come to control half the economy, and we will have effectively ceased to be a free enterprise society.

This President is putting us on a path where our lives will be ruled by bureaucrats and boards, commissions and czars. He’s asking us to accept that Washington knows best – and can provide all.

Median Income is down significantly from 2009 to 2012 - Falling 6.7% In fact, Obama's policies have led to incomes falling more during the 2 year "recovery" period than they did during the actual recession under Bush.

New Homes sold are down from 374,000 a year in 2009 to 328,000 last month. With new homes for sale is down 34% since 2009.

The unemployment rate was at 7.7% when Obama took office and today is at 8.2%, and if the labor participation force was the same as when he took office the actual unemployment rate would be above 10.5%.

What about gas prices? From $1.87 the day Obama was inaugurated to $3.88 on April 23, 2012.

Clearly everything that Mitt Romney said last night about Obama's policies was true. America is not better off today than we were 4 years ago. Unemployment is up, labor participation is down, gas prices are up, incomes are down. The Obama campaign will continue to claim Romney is lying about Obama's record - just remember if Romney really was lying the Obama campaign would actually refute him with hard facts.

Stay informed and let's kick Obama out of the White House this November.

Did Bill Ayers write "Dreams From my Father"

Google books seems to think so. For some background on this particular joke, read this great multi-part article over at American Thinker

Evidence continues to mount that Barack Obama had substantial help from Bill Ayers in the creation of his 1995 book, Dreams From My Father, a book that Time Magazine has called "the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician." The evidence falls into five general categories, here summarized.

•The discovery of new matching nautical metaphors from both Ayers and Obama that almost assuredly came from the same source: Ayers, a former merchant seaman.
•The discovery of a Bill Ayers' essay on memoir writing, whose postmodern themes and phrases are echoed throughout Dreams.
•A newly discovered book chapter from 1990 that shows clearly and painfully the limits of Obama's prose style the year he received a contract to write Dreams.
•The revelation by radical Islamicist Rashid Khalidi that Ayers made his "dining room table" available for neighborhood writers who needed help.
•A refined timeline that shows Ayers had the means, the motive and the time to help Obama when he needed it most.

It's a long read but it is a good one.

Romney/Rubio 2012?

For someone who has said multiple times that he isn't going to be the Republican Vice Presidential nominee, Marco Rubio sure has spent a lot of time campaigning with Romney in the swing state of Pennsylvania.

Republican White House hopeful Mitt Romney dodged mounting speculation Monday about a potential running mate, even with Senator Marco Rubio, the man now in the VP spotlight, standing right beside him...

It had the looks of a running mate audition, with the two men striding together through the Mustang Expediting delivery company's warehouse, and Romney occasionally stepping back to let Rubio handle some questions

And now Rubio has scheduled a major foreign policy speech. We still have at least 3 months of speculation on who the VP pick will be but I hope it is Marco Rubio just so I can see a bunch of birthers heads explode.

"If I Wanted America to Fail"

Powerful powerful video about how Obama, and liberal political policies, are harming America.

The federal deficit in the first three months of 2012 is higher than 6 out of 8 yearly deficits under Bush

That's right. In the first. three. months of 2012 the federal deficit is an astounding $454.2 billion dollars. That is higher than the annual deficits (caution, it's an excel file) in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007. And it is only $4 billion less than the entire deficit in 2008, the first budget written by the Congressional Democrats.

Obama: Winning the Future through financial destruction.

Do corporations in America have a historical right to free speech?

You're damned right they do. With the Democrats starting to push the DISCLOSE Act, again I, and with Nancy Pelosi declaring that those who exercise their freedom of association should lose their right to free speech, I decided to take a look at how the Supreme Court has historically ruled on the subject of Corporations and free speech.

First up is NAACP v Patterson (1958)

"It is beyond debate that freedom to engage in association for the advancement of beliefs and ideas is an inseparable aspect of the "liberty" assured by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which embraces freedom of speech. ... Of course, it is immaterial whether the beliefs sought to be advanced by association pertain to political, economic, religious or cultural matters,

Gitlow v New York (1925)

For present purposes we may and do assume that freedom of speech and of the press-which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress-are among the fundamental personal rights and 'liberties' protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States.

Staub v City of Baxley (1958)

It is undeniable that the ordinance authorized the Mayor and Council of the City of Baxley to grant "or refuse to grant" the required permit in their uncontrolled discretion. It thus makes enjoyment of speech contingent upon the will of the Mayor and Council of the City, although that fundamental right is made free from congressional abridgment by the First Amendment and is protected by the Fourteenth from invasion by state action. For these reasons, the ordinance, on its face, imposes an unconstitutional prior restraint upon the enjoyment of First Amendment freedoms and lays "a forbidden burden upon the exercise of liberty protected by the Constitution." Cantwell v. Connecticut, supra, at 307. Therefore, the judgment of conviction must fall.

Buckley v Valeo (1976)

A restriction on the amount of money a person or group can spend on political communication during a campaign necessarily reduces the quantity of expression by restricting the number of issues discussed, the depth of their exploration, and the size of the audience reached. [Footnote 18] This is because virtually every means of communicating ideas in today's mass society requires the expenditure of money. The distribution of the humblest handbill or leaflet entails printing, paper, and circulation costs. Speeches and rallies generally necessitate hiring a hall and publicizing the event. The electorate's increasing dependence on television, radio, and other mass media for news and information has made these expensive modes of communication indispensable instruments of effective political speech.

These are just a few of the Supreme Court case decisions that prove that America has historically affirmed you don't lose your freedom of speech because you exercise your freedom of association.

Politifact: Shills for Obama and House Democrats

Politifact has long described itself as a neutral arbiter of truth in politics but is that true? After today's dust up in which they refused to issue a rating in the claim that Obama ate dog when he was younger I decided to take a deeper look.


Let's start by looking at the Obamater, a handy way to track Obama's campaign promises. It shows 63 promises "broken" 67 "stalled" Looking through that list I noticed something interesting - many of those classified as such are should be rated as "failed" promises. For example

Eliminate all oil and gas tax loopholes - Failed in the Senate multiple times.

Close loopholes in the corporate tax deductibility of CEO pay - No action at all by Obama on this. Broken promise

Lift the payroll tax cap on earnings above $250,000 - No Action, not even a proposal = promise broken

The list goes on. In fact on the first page alone 18 of the 20 listed are actually failed promises. I could go on but the first 3 on page 2 are also actually broken promises so I think it is clear virtually everything listed under "stalled" is actually a broken promise.


Now let's look at how they rate House Republican promises. 5 promises are rated as "stalled" is that true?

Repeal the Healthcare Bill - The House GOP promised to "immediately take action to repeal" and they did. The House voted overwhelmingly to repeal Obamacare. Promise kept.

Increase access to domestic energy sources - The House passed 3 separate bills. Promise Kept

So 2 of the 5 rated as stalled were actually promises kept, 1 I would consider failed (the no earmarks promise), and 2 actually stalled. That brings us to the "In the Works" claim. Of the 14 rated as in the works, 10 are actually promises kept.


Politifact is a joke and nothing more than a shill for Obama and House Democrats.

Disability Claims Skyrocket Under Obama

If you're a fan of discouraged workers giving up hope and signing up to get on the government dole then Obama is the President for you. To the other 90% of America Obama has shown himself to be an abject failure.

A record 5.4 million workers and their dependents have signed up to collect federal disability checks since President Obama took office, according to the latest official government data, as discouraged workers increasingly give up looking for jobs and take advantage of the federal program

Obama's policies simply aren't working. Massive unemployment, huge spikes in food stamp recipients, and now a record number of workers who have given up looking for a job and now depend on the government to provide for them. Obama is a SCOAMF.

The Food Stamp President

Under Obama the number of people on food stamps has risen by 70%

The Congressional Budget Office said Thursday that 45 million people in 2011 received Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, a 70% increase from 2007. It said the number of people receiving the benefits, commonly known as food stamps, would continue growing until 2014.

Ladies and gentlemen, President SCOAMF has failed us again.