Who Do You Trust?

Americans are learning, what we have known for a very long time:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Slowly but surely “trust” becomes the central issue.

* * * * *

The Obama thugs have tried, with great help from Big Media, to distract from the central issue: trust. But today, the Obama thugs are playing the “trust” game.

Against Richard Nixon the Democratic Left used to ask the question “Would you buy a used car from this man?” In a twist Obama thugs inadvertently ask “Would you buy a care policy from this man?” Wise Americans will find themselves willing to buy a used car from crook Nixon than a scam insurance policy from Obama.

ABC does the honors:

The Gallup poll has some discouraging news for President Obama today.

“Despite the considerable efforts of Congress and the president to pass health insurance reform, the public remains reluctant to endorse that goal,” Gallup says.

The poll shows that 49% of respondents say or lean towards saying that they would advise their member of Congress to vote against a bill, while 44% say or lean towards advocating in favor of the bill. Support among Rs, Ds, and Is has dropped since last month, having dropped 12 points among Republicans, 6 points among Democrats and 8 points among Independents since early October. By 53-40, most Americans disapprove of the President’s handling of health care policy—”his worst review to date on this issue.”

ABC News also notes the latest “distract” strategy by Obama.

Some arrows in the quivers of health care reform-backing Democrats that you may hear about today:

1) MIT professor Jonathan Gruber has released a study stating that the Senate Democrats’ health care reform bill makes “market reforms which will make health insurance much more affordable for individuals facing purchase in the non-group market.” [snip]

2) The White House this morning released this video from Vice President Biden asking the American people: who do you trust?

The Obama flim-flam team on Sunday released the Gruber report to distract from another important report issued today.

The Congressional Budget Office today published it’s new report detailing the effect of the Obama health insurance “scam” on private plans, particularly the effect on private plan premiums.

In Prognosis Negative – The Black And Blue Death Of The Obama Health Scam we discussed the then anticipated CBO report released today. It’s a tale of broken Obama promises and a trail of lies. We quoted Politico:

And in fact, for all the ink spilled on the effects of health care reform, no independent group has taken a comprehensive look at how the legislation would impact premiums for the 170 million Americans who receive insurance through their employers – a population that would receive little direct financial assistance under the various congressional proposals.

For small businesses and individuals who purchase their own plans, economists remain sharply divided over the impact on premiums.

“This town continues to miss what is going to be the real issue,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said. “The real lodestar, the thing people are focusing on at home, is all premiums, premiums, premiums. All you have right now is what the insurance industry has said.”

We’ll discuss the CBO report in greater detail in days to come. The news from the report is clear enough already. Big Media will try to portray the report as “mixed news” or even good news. But reality conflicts with the “mixed” or “good” verdicts. What is termed “good” is really the doltish “If you get government money to pay or help pay your premiums – lucky you.”

The other “mixed” report is that premiums might be cheaper (get this load of logic) because premiums will rise so much many Americans will be forced to dump their expensive policies in order to purchase cheaper policies with less benefits. How is this in any way good news?

Politico does the distraction and excuses:

The big winners are people who would qualify for subsidies to purchase insurance. Premiums would be “roughly 56 percent to 59 percent lower, on average,” than under current law, the report found.

Not-so-big winners: People who purchase coverage on the individual market, but do not qualify for subsidies. Their premiums would be 10 to 13 percent higher in 2016 than under current law, in part because of signficant changes to the insurance market. [snip]

The quick takeaways are not entirely surprising, as most health policy experts, including those in favor of the Democratic version of reform, predicted these general conclusions.

But the report by the nonpartisan congressional scorekeepers are certain to become a staple in the Senate debate, which begins at 3 p.m. today. President Barack Obama pledged during the campaign to reduce premiums by an average of $2,500 annually for families. Republicans have made premiums a central focus of their attack on the bill.

The CBO report makes clear many Americans will have to dump their current policies

Specifically, an estimated 19 percent of workers with employment-based coverage would be affected by the excise tax in that year. Those individuals who kept their high-premium policies would pay a higher premium than under current law, with the difference in premiums roughly equal to the amount of the tax.

However, CBO and JCT estimate that most people would avoid the cost of the excise tax by enrolling in plans that had lower premiums; those reductions would result from choosing plans that either pay a smaller share of covered health care costs (which would reduce premiums directly as well as indirectly by leading to less use of covered medical services), manage benefits more tightly, or cover fewer services.

….Thus, people who remained in high-premium plans would pay higher premiums under the excise tax than under current law, and people who shifted to lower-premium plans would pay lower premiums under the excise tax than under current law—with other factors held constant.

And who will pay the bills? We know that Obama intends to make the IRS the enforcer working for the insurance companies. The Obama IRS will force millions of Americans to buy insurance and pay billions of dollars to the insurance companies. But who will pay the bills for the new junk insurance policies? It will not be the insurance companies. CBO makes clear who will pay:

The legislation would impose several new fees on firms in the health sector. New fees would be imposed on providers of health insurance and on manufacturers and importers of medical devices. Both of those fees would be largely passed through to consumers in the form of higher premiums for private coverage.

We’ll have more on this report in days to come.

* * * * *

Who Do You Trust? was a Game Show on American television in 1957. The Obama health care scam will be as successful as the comic meanderings on that show.



Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Share

77 thoughts on “Who Do You Trust?

  1. U.S. Announces AIDS Programs On Eve Of World AIDS Day

    Monday, Nov 30, 2009

    (Washington, DC) — Tomorrow is World AIDS Day, held to highlight the continuing fight against a disease that’s infected an estimated 33-million people around the planet and about a million in the U.S. On the eve of that event, the U.S. has announced a new commitment to fight the disease.

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the U.S. would host the 2012 biannual AIDS conference. She also confirmed the U.S. is getting set to lift a ban on visits by foreigners infected with HIV. That ban was put in place 22 years ago but Clinton says it will be ended January 4th and will be “vigorously” enforced.

    Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius calls the ban “a policy that tore apart families, kept people from getting tested, forced others to hide their HIV status and forego lifesaving medication.”

    The AIDS Memorial Quilt, which has been an ongoing project since its creation in 1987, will be displayed on Tuesday in Little Rock, Arkansas at the William J. Clinton Presidential Library. The massive quilt is currently made up of more than 44-thousand individual three-by-six-foot memorial panels, most commemorating the life of someone who has died of AIDS. It was originally conceived as a project in San Francisco, which has lost more than one-thousand citizens to the disease. The quilt was displayed for the first time at the National Mall in Washington DC in late 1987.

    It’s been on tour and, sadly, growing ever since.

    http://mystateline.com/content/fulltext/?cid=119291

  2. Seems like BHO can get his head around the impact of his policies … http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29993.html

    so I thought I’d share this bit of encouraging financial news…

    “Is libertarian rock star and Texas Republican Ron Paul going mainstream?

    He’s got everyone from South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint to Minnesota moderate Democrat Collin Peterson to California liberal Barbara Boxer on his side in his audit-the-Fed crusade.”

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29986.html

  3. Oh Boo-hoo-hoo-sniff-sniff

    Michael Moore no longer ‘trusts’ Squat.

    Here are the LOL two-hankie excerpts. Read the rest at www dot michaelmoore dotcom/words/mikes-letter/open-letter-president-obama-michael-moore

    Entreaties:
    We the people still love you. We the people still have a sliver of hope. But we the people can’t take it anymore. We can’t take your caving in, over and over, when we elected you by a big, wide margin of millions to get in there and get the job done. What part of “landslide victory” don’t you understand?

    Threats:

    If you go to West Point tomorrow night (Tuesday, 8pm) and announce that you are increasing, rather than withdrawing, the troops in Afghanistan, you are the new war president. Pure and simple. And with that you will do the worst possible thing you could do — destroy the hopes and dreams so many millions have placed in you. With just one speech tomorrow night you will turn a multitude of young people who were the backbone of your campaign into disillusioned cynics.

    Foot-Stamping:

    It is not your job to do what the generals tell you to do. We are a civilian-run government. WE tell the Joint Chiefs what to do, not the other way around. That’s the way General Washington insisted it must be. That’s what President Truman told General MacArthur when MacArthur wanted to invade China. “You’re fired!,” said Truman, and that was that. And you should have fired Gen. McChrystal when he went to the press to preempt you, telling the press what YOU had to do

    BWA-HA-HA-HA

    More Threats:
    Choose carefully, President Obama. You of all people know that it doesn’t have to be this way. You still have a few hours to listen to your heart, and your own clear thinking.

    …….and this nation will be back in the hands of the haters quicker than you can shout “tea :bag!”
    Tears:
    The haters were not the ones who elected you, and they can’t be won over by abandoning the rest of us.
    All of us that voted and prayed for you and cried the night of your victory have endured an Orwellian hell of eight years….

  4. Basil9…Michael Moore is delusional and in denial…he simply does not get it…that O is part of what he is against…for all his analysis in all his films…he cannot accept O for who O is and like the rest of the O babysitters – they all try to blame it on ‘the Other’ or as they like to say in their groupthink “the Haters”…or anyone that does not idolize O and/or agree with them…

    poor Michael Moore for a seemingly smart guy he is wildly naive…embarrassingly naive…

    **************************************

    on another note…it will never happen, but I would “love” to see Chelsea write a tell all book…concentrating on the primaries and what went on with the caucuses and the rest of the trail to the nomination…she probably knows the real inside story…

  5. destroy the hopes and dreams so many millions have placed in you.
    ——————————————————————–
    Is that what is really important here Michael? Is that all that can go wrong. Better to destroy the country, wipe out the middle class, open the door to the four horsemen of the apocalypse under this pretender than destroy the dreams of those who placed their faith in Obama. Moore is floridly delusional. Its back to Rhett Butler again isn’t it Mrs. Smith: dreams fade in the face of reality. Wake up Michael and smell the coffee. He aint what you think he is, and get your tender loving care at home. Better still Michael get a dog. That way at least your love will be reciprocated. On second though Michael forget about the dog. That would be cruelty to animals. Just stick to your love fantasy of Obama.

  6. I don’t know if this has been posted but Chelsea is getting married this summer according to CHarlie Gibson. Its for real this time.

  7. I am so sick and tired of know-it-alls like Michael Moore who switch political allegiances whenever the wind changes direction. Did they hate/or were spitefully jealous of Hillary so damn much that they turned a blind eye to all of this bimbo’s weaknesses and racist/terrorist leanings?

    Where were they when we needed them and what makes them think anybody gives a damn what they think now?

  8. confloyd,

    I’m thrilled for Chelsea and family. I just hope bambi and his bimbo wife are too busy to attend the ceremony. I could just see meme trying to upstage the event.

  9. JanH, I know I am too, Bill & Hillary will make wonderful grand parents, lets hope they have more than one child, oops, I guess they want children?? I just hope Chelsea goes into politics, but she has seen how dirty it is and may not.

    Well, old man Teddy won’t be in attendance, so that will be good.

  10. Michael Moore is a disgrace and he and his kind brought this incompetent Obama into office. He made a movie depicting Bush as a fool, yet, Obama has by and large,maintained the same military policies, and his policies will hurt middle class Americans and small businesses arguably more than Bush.

  11. Tired of losing to Fox News, Obama’s thugs are now trying to fight with Politico.

    http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/11/the_white_house_v_politico.php

    The following is an excerpt from a joke e-mail that is circulating among White House staffers. It’s a response, of sorts, to the analytical essay that POLITICO editor-in-chief John Harris wrote about the “seven stories that Barack Obama doesn’t want told.” [snip]

    7 narratives politico is fighting in their efforts to get an interview with the President

    1. They are more interested in readers than accuracy

    2. Its okay to be wrong everyonce in a while, if your are the first to break the news

    3. More interested in gossip than news

    4. A spouter of the worst sort of insider conventional wisdom

    5. Their analysis about obama has been wrong more than any one

    6. Click … period

    7. More obsessed with personality than policy

  12. If the White House “thugs” are too stupid to realize that challenging any media groups who constructively criticize them is a recipe for failure, then they deserve the pie in the face they get everytime they try.

  13. We’ll update the Howard Dean article with this bit of news from the Yale Daily News (Howie also has a new book, precursor to candidates announcing):

    http://www.yaledailynews.com/crosscampus/2009/11/30/without-public-option-health-care-bill-worthless-d/

    “Congress isn’t going to pass a bill that reforms health care,” Howard Dean ’71 said. “What we want is to have the kinds of choices so that we can reform health care.”

    Dean, former Head of the Democratic National Committee and a 2004 Democratic candidate for president, addressed 50 undergraduates at a Pierson College Master’s Tea Monday afternoon. His talk on health care comes on the heels of the release of his new book, “Howard Dean’s Prescription for Real Health Care Reform,” as well as the start of debate about the health care bill on the Senate floor. According to Dean, the most important component of the health care bill is the public option.

    “If we don’t have a choice, this bill is worthless and should be defeated,” the former Governor of Vermont said.

  14. this bill is worthless and should be defeated,”
    ———————————————-
    Like a broke clock Dean is right twice a day. This was one of those times. Now he needs to seize the hand of destiny and challenge that ingrate and corporate shill in the white house. The little Bolsheviks need a leader and you Howie are the man of the hour. If you let this moment of opportunity pass you will regret your inaction for the rest of your life.

  15. If I were their chief of staff I would fire the people who circulated this memo. But this White House is not a political organization, it is a cult. And it is in the nature of cults that he who is not with me all the time is against me.

  16. admin
    November 30th, 2009 at 10:25 pm

    This is a riot. Either I’m prescient or we all know Pres. Obama and his staff too well. Just earlier today I predicted that the WH was going to take Politico to task over putting out this story. And away we go. They really do deserve a pie in the face for this.

  17. Biden may live to regret those words,”who do you trust”, i think the polls are starting to show exactly that Mr Biden and it certainly isnt you.

  18. Michael Moore is the ultra east coast hollywood DNC hack, if they have lost him then the good ship is going down, Sarandon won’t be far behind, i expect her to open her humungous trap this week, when the troop increase gets announced.

  19. As thought, the Salahi’s were let in by a WH staffer, adds to my theory, thye were invited on the quiet but the wife’s big mouth intervened and facebooked. Yet again more radicals invited on the quiet to the WH, what a surprise, i bet if you could track it, there are many more radicals that have been there “secretly”

  20. good morning moon. you’re on a roll this am. susan sarandon and her humungous trap. too funny. anyway, i am actually looking forward to BO’s speech tonight. i just love it when he tries to sound sooo serious. maybe he’ll inject a little gregory peck as general mcarthur. can’t wait..

    off to work!

  21. alcina, you know as well as i do, its going to be a disaster for him on all sides on this one. Dems will hate troop increases, Independents will see someone detached and Repubs will just see Obama for the joke he is. The upside being, the only real issue everyone really gives a damn about here is “what about the economy and who’s going to pay for all these soldiers increase”

    Its an unpopular subject and he’s going to announce troop increases, about as popular as a boil on the butt.

    He’s going to come across as arrogant, detached and aloof, he doesnt know any other way of delivering.

    my bet, he gets slaughtered in the media, tonight and tomorrow.

  22. Ooooooohhhh. I hope you’re right, moon.

    Thankfully I have two meetings tonight so i won’t have the chance to give in to temptation and tune in to see Squat squirm.

    But please do one of you a$$kickin’ play-by-plays. They’re always so much fun!

    😀

  23. my bet, he gets slaughtered in the media, tonight and tomorrow

    ——————————-

    well my bet is that the media turns this on Hillary and blames her for influencing his decision.

  24. Interesting assessment of the run-up to tonight’s “big speech”…

    …”But a detailed examination of news coverage of the reassessment issue in the major national newspapers, primarily The Washington Post and The New York Times, suggests that many angles and details of the stories were being carefully fed by White House aides to all-too-willing reporters who dressed it up as the inside dope. In reality, many reporters were steered into spinning the story exactly the way the White House wanted it told, with relatively little skepticism or criticism.”

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/30007.html

  25. Rather than calling Tareq and Michaele Salami gatecrashers; when they really are political operatives in the interests of the Hamas and old friends of Obama.

    This was their ‘coming out’ party giving them street cred for mingling with Obama insiders.

    Most likely, Obama did the inviting over the phone because he didn’t want to draw attention to their names on the guest list. Who are they kidding?

  26. Paula,

    Well there was a wedding on the Vineyard last August, it just wasn’t Chelsea’s. I believe it was for Mary Steenburgon’s daughter and took place in August on their estate. That corresponds to the caterer’s statements of food orders and flower rumors we heard circulating the Vineyard last summer… It wasn’t the right time for Chelsea anyway. Teddy’s funeral was looming large taking place shortly thereafter. It would have overshadowed her happy event. imo-anyway. Now it’s official…

  27. Oh, don’t forget the Big Anti-War Rally-

    EMERGENCY Anti-Escalation RALLY
    Saturday, December 12, 2009 * 11:00 am – 4:00 pm
    Lafayette Square * White House

    _____________________________________________
    Tell OBAMA & CONGRESS:
    NO, YOU CAN’T!
    NO ESCALATION!
    All US Forces
    OUT NOW!

    _____________________________________________
    Come hear:

    Cynthia McKinney, Sen. Mike Gravel, Kathy Kelly, Chris Hedges,
    David Swanson, Coy McKinney, Debra Sweet, Mathis Chiroux,
    Lynne Williams, Hon. Betty Hall, Elaine Brower, Marian Douglas,
    Michael Knox, Ralph Lopez, Ron Fisher.

    Featuring music by Jordan Page and others
    _____________________________________________

    Pre-Event Meet-Up Friday, December 11, 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm

    Busboys & Poets | 14th & V Streets NW

    Film “Rethink Afghanistan” * Discussion * Free Admission

    For more information: w…. enduswars.org

  28. If Hillary had the POWER to END the War, she would do it-

    She doesn’t have that power. She has to balance US policy with foreign policy. She doesn’t have the luxury of openly criticizing the president’s policy as you or I would because he is not our Boss.

    Hillary is not in an enviable position in that respect.

  29. Posted mainly to show Hillary’s and Bill’s comments…

    Dec. 1, 2009

    Chelsea Clinton to Wed Next Summer

    Former First Daughter to Wed Longtime Beau Mark Mezvinksy, Hillary Clinton Confirms Engagement to CBS News’ Michelle Miller

    Former first daughter Chelsea Clinton has announced she’s engaged to her longtime beau Mark Mezvinsky, and plans to wed next summer.

    CBS News correspondent Michelle Miller got the first response from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Monday night when she was the emcee at the 100th Anniversary Gala for the New York Amsterdam News. Hillary Clinton confirmed the engagement, telling Miller, “You know this time it’s true, my daughter is engaged.”

    Chelsea Clinton grew up in the public eye from the age of 12, when her father won the White House. Through the scrutiny surrounding the Monica Lewinsky scandal to her role in her mother’s presidential campaign last year, Chelsea Clinton has had to walk a fine line, Miller said, to live her private life away from the public spotlight.

    Dee Dee Myers, former Clinton press secretary, told CBS News, “I think she has worn her fame lightly. You never heard her complain. We’ve never seen her act out in public, we’ve never seen her say being famous and always being visible like that is a burden.”

    Now, 29-year-old Chelsea’s wedding plans will attract attention both inside the beltway and across New York’s high society. Chelsea’s fiancé is an investment banker who works for Goldman Sachs.

    The two met in Washington as teenagers and both attended Stanford University. Mezvinsky, Miller said, is no stranger to life in the public eye. Both of his parents served in Congress, and his father, Ed Mezvinsky, served time in federal prison for bank and wire fraud.

    Speculation earlier this year had the couple marrying on Martha’s Vineyard. The pair gave few clues in an e-mail to friends this weekend, just saying they were “looking toward summer” for the wedding.

    Former President Bill Clinton says this title is the one his wife’s been waiting to add to her resume.

    “Now she is mother-of-the-bride, and it’s a title we relish,” he told CBS News.

    Miller added the former president told her that all of his friends who are grandfathers have been e-mailing him to enjoy the time. And when she asked Bill Clinton about the possible cost of the wedding, and he said it wouldn’t matter, telling Miller he’s been working his whole life for this moment.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/01/earlyshow/main5849095.shtml

  30. This gatecrashers scandal is bs. They say they were invited. If so by whom. It would have to be someone in this corrupt administration. And then you have that shill from Mississippi Benny Hill Thompson trying to shift attention from that important to alleged Secret Service deficiencies, which is an administrative matter, and pretending that the rest of it is simply political games. Again they say they were invited and we need to know by whom. As things stand it presents a picture of a White House in total disarray–which is probably the truth.

  31. wbboei,

    I’m pretty sure that bambi and meme were hoping that the glamour of the event and their own self-importance would be all that media talked about. As it happens, this “scandal” has taken front and center which can’t be a good thing.

    And bambi being “angry” about it…well I’m angry that Rev. Wright has been to the White House since he was outed as a religious bigot.

  32. From Iain dale (political commentator UK)

    Finally, President Obama will announce today the details of his new policy on Afghanistan. It won’t make pretty reading, by all accounts. He won’t give the US armed forces the troops they want (30,000, rather than the 40,000 they have demanded) and will announce some sort of timetable for withdrawal. Every military expert I have spoken to thinks this will give succour to the enemy. I have always thought putting timetables on leaving is a very dangerous policy and I was horrified when Gordon Brown appeared to tiptoe to do the same thing. The only reason Brown and Obama are doing this is to placate domestic political audiences who would prefer an immediate withdrawal. There is no military sense in it.

    ——————————————————
    Now there is sense, the problem is that setting a timetable tells the enemy exactly in not so many words exactly what are our plans, they can work it out for themselves.

    The problem is, if the army cannot get the job done in that time that is set or the enemy decides to create an amazing amount of trouble, who looks like the dumbass. Get ready for a political speech aimed at the 2010 elections.

  33. wobbei, it Diseree Rogers who has her ass on the fire and i’m pretty sure I know who gave her the order to let them in.

  34. Obama is ordering 34,000 troops to Afghanistan tonight, thats the precise figure according to my sources.

    Watch Code pink and Susan Sarandon go into cardiac arrest.

    Also Remember the shit flung at Bush when he ordered the Iraq surge, lets see what happens tonight.

  35. moon,

    I wonder what excuses his bot lovers will make for him this time. Or…can we hope…maybe a revolution in the offing?

  36. Frankly I do not want any more young men and women going off to Talibanland to die for what is effectively a failed state living in the dark ages and frankly does not want to be democraticised.

  37. Watch Code pink and Susan Sarandon go into cardiac arrest.
    ————————————-
    Nothing non-fatal I hope.

    Re. disaree rogers the only question is will she perjure herself under oath, OR will they invoke Executive Privilege–for the good of the country, to spare us the difficult ordeal of getting to truth. Of course Barack could come clean and avoid all the distraction, but any man who would spend 1.7 million dollars to hide his birth certificate is not inclined to speak truth. Why should ANYONE who is not in the bag for this guy, and I mean on the gravy train trust him?

  38. Frankly I do not want any more young men and women going off to Talibanland to die for what is effectively a failed state living in the dark ages and frankly does not want to be democraticised.
    ———————————————————————
    Extremely well put. History and sound military analysis agree with you.

  39. I support the troop surge as it worked very well in Iraq . It is sad that Obama acted so slowly and played politics where national security is concerned.

  40. jbs, i would agree with you but Afghanistan is a whole different kettle of fish from Iraq, for one NO-One has ever won a war in Afghanistan – NO-ONE.

  41. Washington (CNN) — President Obama intends to conclude the Afghanistan war and withdraw most U.S. troops within three years, according to senior administration officials.

    Obama is sending 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and ordering military officials to get the reinforcements there within six months, White House officials told CNN Tuesday.

    Obama will travel to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York, later Tuesday to officially announce his plans. It would to be his second escalation of U.S. forces in the war-torn Islamic country since he came to power in January.

    The president also is seeking further troop commitments from NATO allies as part of a counterinsurgency strategy aimed at wiping out al Qaeda elements and stabilizing the country while training Afghan forces.

    The expected new troop deployment would increase the total U.S. commitment to roughly 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, bolstered by about 45,000 NATO forces.

    ………………………………………………………

    now what was that he said during the campaign, Leave Afghanistan in 16 months. Now its 4 years from he take office, conveniently in 2012.

  42. This will put the Taliban in a dilemma

    Let’s see, do they just sit back and wait for three more years or do they continue to push and blow up crusaders to pressure an early cut and run, lets see how many can we kill in 3 years, who ever gets closest wins the pot. Decisions, Decisions.

  43. I would prefer a complete pull-out but the message that would send suggests that obama is between and rock and a… If they are going to keep the troops there, then they have to be fully committed and not do it piecemeal. To do anything else is throwing the troops that are already stationed there under the bus.

    I agree with moon about Afghanistan though. So what is the answer? How does America protect itself against terrorism and fall back on its military commitment at the same time?

  44. Jan, How about the middle eastern muslim countries, getting off their asses for once and sorting out a failed muslim state. That would be a start.

  45. This is such a difficult situation and in many ways is a no-win situation. I dislike BO intensely, but I don’t envy him or anyone who has to make a decision to send our young men and women into harm’s way. Sigh.

  46. You ever notice that muslim countries never come to the defence of another unless its with words. They never suggest, we’ll take it over and run it, we’ll negotiate, we’ll pay to help our brothers.

    I find it ridiculous.

  47. moon,

    Again I agree, but how entangled are they? I look at Lebanon and the Hezbolah relationship. The people consider Hezbolah “heroes” in many cases for the support and assistance they give. And then I think of Iran and wonder if that is even possible given the corrupt election that obama accepted.

    As well, the hate indoctrination against the Western World has permeated into school texts, local media, etc… If they are happy/satisfied with what is going on, then they won’t make a move to change.

    I think that America arming itself top to bottom is the only answer. I think Israel does the same. If the attack comes to them, then it is another story.

  48. This history lesson is repeated today with Obama, with one glaring exception. There is no need for those business elites to overthrow Obama because he is their tool–their messiah not ours. So was W. Hillary like Roosevelt is a representative of the people. If the left ever figures this out they will have a nervous breakdown. Apropos of our current discussion Smedley Butler said war is a racket and if it were up to him he would use the military to defend out shores and nothing beyond that. That kind of isolationism may not be practical but there is a middle ground between that view and where we are today. I think the following is relevant.
    ————————————————-

    Exposing the Legacy of American Corporatism

    By Richard Sanders, editor, Press for Conversion!

    This issue of Press for Conversion! exposes a little-known, fascist plot to overthrow the U.S. government in the 1930s. We know about this scheme, and the corporate elite behind it, thanks to a high-ranking military whistle-blower: Marine Corps Maj.-Gen. Smedley Butler. Butler is largely forgotten today, but 70 years ago he was the most revered American military hero, the only man to have twice been awarded the Marine’s prestigious Medal of Honor. During his loyal 33-year military career, Butler led invasions, quelled nationalist rebellions and instituted regime changes to benefit U.S. business interests in Mexico, Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, the Dominican Republic, Honduras and China.

    In 1933, Butler was approached by men representing a clique of multi-millionaire industrialists and bankers. They hated U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) with a passion, and saw his “New Deal” policies as the start of a communist take-over that threatened their interests. FDR even had the temerity to announce that the U.S. would stop using its military to interfere in Latin American affairs! Wall Street’s plutocrats were aghast! They had long been accustomed to wielding tremendous control over the government’s economic policies, including the use of U.S. forces to protect their precious foreign investments. Because of Butler’s steadfast military role in upholding U.S. business interests abroad, the plotters mistakenly thought they could recruit him to muster a “super-army” of veterans to use as pawns in their plan to subjugate or, if necessary, eliminate FDR.

    Butler played along in order to determine who was behind the plot. He later testifying under oath before the MacCormack-Dickstein House Committee on un-American Activities. During that testimony Butler named those who were directly involved in the plot. He also identified an powerful organization that was behind the scenes coordinating and backing the plot. This organization, the American Liberty League, was comprised of some of America’s wealthiest bankers, financiers and corporate executives. (Click the American Liberty League link for details on the League’s main backers.)

    However, the House Committee did not properly investigate the coup plot. In fact they helped to cover it up. The powerful fascists plotters behind the coup were never questioned, let alone arrested or charged with sedition or treason. The Committee even dropped from their report of Butler’s testimony most of the names of these wealthy bankers and corporate presidents whom Butler had identified. Butler was of course outraged and he went on national radio to name the names of those behind the coup plot. A sympathetic reporter from the Philadelphia Herald, Paul Comly French was one of the only mainstream journalists to help Butler expose the plotters. John Spivak, a reporter, from the socialist magazine New Masses, interviewed Butler and helped him to put the coup plotters’ names onto the public record. (Click here to read Spivak’s account of the fascist plot: “The Plot and the Main Players.”) For the most part, the mainstream media either ignored the story or went to great lengths to ridicule General Butler. (In his book 1000 Americans, anti-fascist journalist and media critic, George Seldes, described the media’s coverup of Wall Street’s plot. Click here to read an excerpt.)

    Although Butler’s patriotic efforts did thwart this fascist coup plot, the Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders who sponsored it continued to conspire behind the scenes to rid America of FDR and to smash his “New Deal.” Evidence of continued efforts by powerful U.S. fascists to regain control of the White House is illustrated by a 1936 statement by William Dodd, the U.S. Ambassador to Germany. In a letter to Roosevelt, he stated:

    “A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to supplant our democratic government and is working closely with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of opportunity in my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our American ruling families are to the Nazi regime…. A prominent executive of one of the largest corporations, told me point blank that he would be ready to take definite action to bring fascism into America if President Roosevelt continued his progressive policies. Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They extended aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are helping to keep it there. Propagandists for fascist groups try to dismiss the fascist scare. We should be aware of the symptoms. When industrialists ignore laws designed for social and economic progress they will seek recourse to a fascist state when the institutions of our government compel them to comply with the provisions.”

    Many of the plotters exposed by Butler, had been boosting their fortunes by investing in the fascist experiments of Mussolini and Hitler. Some of them even amassed great profits by arming the Nazis, both before and during WWII.

  49. The problem is the fundamental part of the middle is starting to take over and its back to the dark ages.

    Frankly if they want to act like barbarians, i think we need to as well in response. Its the only way they understand and respect.

    I should know, I’ve lived in the middle east long enough to have a pretty good understanding the mentality.

  50. obama’s “make nice” policy with terrorist nations is screwing things up majorly. How many bloody times does he have to give Iran a pass? Sanctions are coming…time is running out…more sanctions are coming…more deadlines…

    He has become a laughingstock.

    And does he really think Russia and China are going to go along with him?

  51. #
    moononpluto
    December 1st, 2009 at 12:53 pm

    You ever notice that muslim countries never come to the defence of another unless its with words. They never suggest, we’ll take it over and run it, we’ll negotiate, we’ll pay to help our brothers.

    I find it ridiculous.
    ——————————————–

    They are busy financing all the terror and insurgent outfits, for instance Saudi money flowing into Kashmir on the Pak side and to the separatists on the Indian side..or to Afghanistan and Pakistan..They don’t want a stable Afghanistan.

  52. “In 1933, Butler was approached by men representing a clique of multi-millionaire industrialists and bankers. They hated U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) with a passion, and saw his “New Deal” policies as the start of a communist take-over that threatened their interests.”

    ——————-

    Amazing piece of history. And now history repeats itself.

  53. wbboei
    December 1st, 2009 at 11:44 am

    Again they say they were invited and we need to know by whom.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    A Matt Lauer interview w/them this am made it pretty apparent who invited them. They wouldn’t give a straight answer when Lauer posed the question flat out, “who invited you to the event?” Silence speaks like thunder, after they ran around the rosebush and never divulged who it was that invited them to the event after stubbornly insisting they were “invited” and not gatecrashes. It has to be Obama- who else would insist on keeping the invitee secret? Or better put, who has more to lose if their identity is revealed?

  54. Obama’s aunt defends Obama’s father and admires George W.:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091201/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_aunt

    She became angry when discussing Obama’s half brother who wrote a semi-autobiographical novel about the abusive Kenyan father he shares with the president. She called Mark Ndesandjo, who lives in China, an opportunist eager to capitalize on his famous brother. [snip]

    She said Ndesandjo’s claims against a man who died 27 years ago are unfair. The senior Obama had problems with alcohol and was difficult to live with sometimes because of his frustration over years of political persecution, but he wasn’t a child abuser or wife beater, Onyango said. [snip]

    Onyango reserved special words of kindness for former President George W. Bush for a directive he put in place days before the election requiring federal agents get high-level approval to arrest fugitive immigrants, which directly affected Onyango. The directive made clear that U.S. officials worried about possible election implications of arresting Onyango.

    She said she wants to thank Bush in person for the order, which gave her a measure of peace but was lifted weeks later.

    “I loved President Bush,” Onyango said while moving toward a framed photo of Bush and his wife standing with Barack and Michelle Obama at the White House on inauguration day. “He is my No. 1 man in my life because he helped me when I really needed that help.”

  55. A Matt Lauer interview w/them this am made it pretty apparent who invited them. They wouldn’t give a straight answer when Lauer posed the question flat out, “who invited you to the event?” Silence speaks like thunder, after they ran around the rosebush and never divulged who it was that invited them to the event after stubbornly insisting they were “invited” and not gatecrashes. It has to be Obama- who else would insist on keeping the invitee secret? Or better put, who has more to lose if their identity is revealed?
    ————————————-
    This is the same sociopathic behavior that made a game out of hiding his birth certificate. He wants to outfox the Secret Service–that was the game. There have probably been alot of other little shitties he has pulled that never came to light. He laughed about them with his cronies. Who knows what evil lurks in the mind of Obama? Only Reggie Love knows for sure.

  56. Gee, Obama really is the Dem saviour, i thought he brought millions on board, lol….

    From Rasmussen – Democrat Numbers fall to 4 year low.

    “In November, 36.0% of American adults said they were Democrats. That’s down from 37.8% a month ago and the lowest number of Democrats since December 2005.”

    “The number of Republicans inched up by just over a point in November to 33.1%. That’s within the narrow range that Republicans have experienced throughout 2009 – from a low of 31.9% to a high of 33.6%.”

  57. Since Nov 2008, Obama has lost the democrats 5.4%, that takes some doing. Wanna bet they were all Clinton voters.

  58. Good news: Hillary is on with Oprah at 4pm today.Also She will be with Bo tonight when he addresses the nation.I am enclosing some news from Hillary and I am sure you will glad to to hear of her being awarded the D. Eisenhowar award .ENJOY

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Remarks At Business Executives for National Security Gala

    Hillary Rodham Clinton
    Secretary of State
    Gotham Hall

    New York, NY

    December 1, 2009

    ——————————————————————————–

    Well, thank you very much and thanks to you, Joe, for your leadership, your dedication to country, your absolute commitment to doing all that you can to serve your fellow man and woman. Charlie, I don’t know what to say. You were getting close to talking about my favorite foods, my – I don’t think there’s anything left unsaid. But I am delighted and honored to be here with you. (Applause.)

    It’s a real pleasure to join BENS tonight. I admire the work that you do. I’m grateful to follow in the footsteps of my esteemed colleagues, Secretary Gates and General Jones, with whom I have the privilege of working closely on a daily basis on the range of issues facing our country. I want to thank General Chuck Boyd, a former colleague from our time together on the Joint Forces Command Transformation Advisory Group, and I also want to recognize one of the predecessors in this extraordinary position as Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, whom you will hear from later in the evening.

    It is a special treat for me to be given an award named for President Eisenhower, because as you have just heard (inaudible) I’ve been in public service for four decades, and alive for a little longer than that. And the first president who was part of my understanding of our country was, of course, President Eisenhower, and he was someone who I looked at from afar as a child, who I studied as a young adult, and who I admire even more today. I think it’s fair to say that he helped to lead our country to recognize the nature of the threats that we faced in the years after World War II. And yet at the same time, he (inaudible) very profound level about the responsibilities we had in the new era of the postwar world, and how important it was to be constantly self-reflective and even self-critical about how we organized ourselves and how we went about the difficult business of protecting our national security, and exercising the responsibility that we had inherited from our victory in the war.

    I think that his caution and his example are ones that we’d do well to look to today. And so I am deeply honored to receive an award named for him. I also had the pleasure of speaking at the annual Washington Forum in 2006 as a senator from New York. And although I may now view our national security from a different perch on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue deep in Foggy Bottom, I am as committed today as I was then to helping to address the urgent concerns that we face. Although our threats may be different from those confronted in President Eisenhower’s time, we recognize that every generation and every era has the challenges that one must address, and although they may be different, they still threaten liberty, they threaten freedom, they threaten human rights, they threaten democracy, all of the values that our country has stood for and exemplified for so many years.

    Those who are plotting to harm our nation may not fight under a single flag or stand together in a conventional army. They aren’t confined to one nation or one region, even. Their weapons include not only artillery, but also ideology. And so a strictly military response can only get us so far. We therefore need a more comprehensive strategy that confronts the extremists themselves as well as the political, economic, and social forces that help to fuel their extremism.

    Tomorrow night, the President will address the nation from West Point. I will have the privilege of accompanying him there as Secretary of State after having visited before as a senator and as a First Lady to see the extraordinary young men and women who will be charged with the responsibility of protecting our nation and of fighting our wars. The President tomorrow night will explain the reasoning behind the decision that he will announce. He will demonstrate the resolve and the commitment that he feels and that we all support in taking on the continuing threat of those who not only are fighting to destabilize Afghanistan, but beyond that, Pakistan, the larger region, and continue to assault and threaten

  59. wbboei
    December 1st, 2009 at 2:50 pm

    “This is the same sociopathic behavior that made a game out of hiding his birth certificate.”

    ~~~~~~~~~

    I agree- to us it’s a game, to Obama, it’s a way of life! He is so corrupt, he doesn’t recognize the Truth as having any importance whatsoever. That is, until the other shoe drops…and the day of reckoning appears with a list of grievances.

  60. The Problem with Afghanistan and ALL of these muslim countries is they are predominantly corrupt to the core. Afghanistan will never suceed because the warlords and people like Kharzai are just biding their time until they can carve it up for themselves.

    We are setting up more dictators.

  61. Clinton Says Unstable Afghanistan Is A Threat To The U.S.

    12/1/2009

    Ahead of President Barack Obama’s announcement concerning new troop levels in Afghanistan Tuesday night, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke Monday night at Gotham Hall in New York City, where she argued that instability in regions like Afghanistan still represent a threat to U.S. security.

    “We have seen in recent weeks that the stability of countries far away like Afghanistan and Pakistan is directly connected to our own national security,” Clinton said. She added, “As long as countries like that struggle to control their borders, extend their sovereignty, the door is open to the bad actors who today are more empowered because of the tools of globalization, the instant communication, the weapons of such greater force and magnitude than what came before.”

    Clinton called it “imperative” to look at the “syndicate of terrorism that operates out of the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan.” Specifically, she noted al-Qaida as “being the head of the table of this syndicate of terrorism” and argued that if they and a group like the Taliban can maintain a safe haven in the region, “then terrorists will continue to use that territory to plan future attacks on us.”

    Clinton would not go into specifics about what Obama will announce in his speech Tuesday night, but she did note that the administration’s goals in Afghanistan include “providing the government with the support that it needs to take full responsibility for its own country.”
    The secretary said that, when Obama makes his speech, “he will, like all presidents before him, do what he can to explain to a country tired of eight years of conflict in Afghanistan, why it is imperative that we do all we can to succeed.”

    She called creating stability in Afghanistan “the challenge that this administration is willing to assume.”

    Clinton’s comments came the night before Obama was expected to announce that he would be sending 30,000-35,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan. It is expected that the troops will be deployed over the next six months and will bring U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan to around 100,000.

    General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, had originally asked the administration to send an additional 40,000 troops to the region. Democrats have been, for the most part, against sending any additional troops to the region, and it is expected that Obama will face heavy opposition from his supporters for this decision. There have already been protests planned in 42 cities around the U.S. against the decision.

    http://www.rttnews.com/ArticleView.aspx?Id=1144493&SMap=1

Comments are closed.