Saturday, December 10, 2011

Yowza! Here's your Daily Catz!

Obama’s Osawatomie Outing Circa 2008

By Judi McLeod

Osawatomie is more than a place whose name is hard to get the tongue around; more than the location where President Barack Obama outed himself as a Marxist in Tuesday’s defiant speech. The name Osawatomie is rooted in infamy.

Thanks to savvy Trevor Loudon, a blogger from whom mainstream media should be taking lessons, comes the reminder of the infamy of Osawatomie:

“Why would Barack Obama choose to give a controversial speech attacking American capitalism in Osawatomie, Kansas?” Loudon asked on his blog New Zeal Blog yesterday.

“Hang on! Where have I heard that name before? Osawatomie? ...back, in the ‘70s? Weather Underground terrorists…Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn. Didn’t Obama used to
hang out with those guys?”

“I remember! Osawatomie was the publication of the Weather Underground! “No, surely it’s a coincidence…

“Just sayin.”

Here’s another one of those “coincidences” about Obama and Osawatomie unearthed by Zombietime.com back in 2008: “Obama’s Election ’08 logo, and the logo of Osawatomie, the newspaper of the Weather Underground are one and the same. (Canada Free Press, November 2, 2008).

“Confronted, they (Obama and Ayers) would laugh it off as coincidence and conspiracy theory, and generations of graduates from the public school system, would counter a unified: “So what?”

So when Obama was doing the talking in Osawatomie on Tuesday, Billy Ayers and the Weather Underground were pulling his wobbly strings.

And for those who would say the Weather Underground was yesterday, Obama, who is now professing to be Israel’s best friend knows that Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn are more recently “occupied”.

Make that occupied on Israel-bound flotillas.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/43080

The Plan.

Obama's Not Changing His Spots

By Richard N. Weltz

(Snip) From the January in which Obama took office until right now, his has been a totally failed presidency.

In foreign policy, we have mismanaged every relationship, insulting our friends and feeding our enemies' bad feelings toward America. In domestic matters, there has been a sharp and dangerous run-up of national debt, failed attempts to ameliorate high unemployment, and obstructionism regarding development of energy resources available to lower fuel costs and reduce our dependence on unfriendly foreigners.

There have been extensive moves to exercise regulatory powers as a means of bypassing the legislative authority of Congress; dozens of appointed "czars" unaccountable to anyone; and massive expansion of government control and micromanagement of large sectors of the financial, banking, automotive, food, and pharmaceutical industries. Add to that the forcing through Congress of the disastrous ObamaCare legislation, still not fully understood by anyone and against the clearly expressed will of the American people.

How to run on such a record? It must be overwhelmingly daunting even for the narcissistic Obama, let alone for the powerful political interests behind him, to contemplate what a good GOP candidate can do to that record -- even with the mainstream press covering and cheerleading.

In such a situation, as I noted, one reverts to whatever worked best in one's past. In Obama's case, that was his service as a rabble-rouser (euphemistically known by some as "community organizer") in the slums of Chicago.

And, thus, we have Obama making it clear -- through a buildup of statements denouncing the "millionaires and billionaires," giving a wink and a nod of approval to the "Occupy" mobs in Zuccotti Park and elsewhere, and his Tuesday speech in Kansas -- that class warfare will be the central them of his bid for a second term.

"Community organizing" means getting the losers and the lazy together to badger the successful and productive for an undeserved share of the wealth the latter have attained. "Tax the rich" is another name for program. "I'm doing it for the middle class who are being oppressed" is the lie that's used to justify it.

Obama and his henchmen believe that the only shot they have at winning is to gin up anger among the 50% or so of American families who pay no federal income taxes and/or are receiving federal bounty. Tell them that a handful of people control most of the nation's wealth. Tell them that those one-percenters are the reason for their own lack of success. Tell them that the likes of Vikram Pandit and Jamie Dimon spend the day in luxurious office suites (when they're not gallivanting around on corporate jets), scheming to gobble up the poor folks' money and houses -- and when they're not doing that, they are scheming about how to screw the middle class.

Obama is an expert at turning people's hatred toward the Snidely Whiplashes he wants them to see out there. It's what he did and does best; he has a great track record with the class warfare ploy. He's lousy at everything else.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/obamas_not_changing_his_spots.html#ixzz1g7hMdrUX

Good Morning! Happy snuggle Saturday!

Friday, December 9, 2011

Have a lovely evening!

TechnoCat!

Friday night vegetable review!

Here's a Friday catz!

Screwing us into the ground.

Five Big Lies in Obama's Economic Fairness Speech

IBD Editorials

Election '12: One thing is certainly true about President Obama — no matter how many times people point out the falsehoods in his speeches, he just keeps making them.

Case in point: his latest "economic fairness" address. In that speech Tuesday, Obama once again tried to build a case for his liberal, big-spending, tax-hiking, regulatory agenda. But as with so many of his past appeals, Obama's argument rests on a pile of untruths. Among the most glaring:

• Tax cuts and deregulation have "never worked" to grow the economy. There's so much evidence to disprove this claim, it's hard to know where to start. But let's begin with the fact that countries with greater economic freedom — lower taxes, less government, sound money, free trade — consistently produce greater overall prosperity.

Here at home, President Reagan's program of lower taxes and deregulation led to an historic two-decade economic boom. Plus, states with lower taxes and less regulation do better than those that follow Obama's prescription.

Obama also claimed the economic booms in the '50s and '60s somehow support his argument. This is utter nonsense. Taxes at the time averaged just 17% of the economy. And there was no Medicare, no Medicaid, no Departments of Transportation, Energy or Education, and no EPA. Had Obama been around then, he would have decried it all as un-American.

• Bush's tax cuts on the rich only managed to produced "massive deficits" and the "slowest job growth in half a century." Budget data make clear that Obama's spending hikes, not Bush's tax cuts, produced today's massive deficits. And Obama only gets his "slowest job growth" number by including huge job losses during his own term in office. Also, monthly pre-recession job growth under Bush was about 40% higher than post-recession growth has been under Obama.

• During the Bush years, "we had weak regulation, we had little oversight." This is patently false. Regulatory staffing climbed 42% under Bush, and regulatory spending shot up 50%, according to a Washington University in St. Louis/George Washington University study. And the number of Federal Register pages — a proxy for regulatory activity — was far higher under Bush than any previous president.

• The "wealthiest Americans are paying the lowest taxes in over half a century." Fact: the federal income tax code is now more progressive than it was in 1979, according to the Congressional Budget Office. IRS data show the richest 1% paid almost 40% of federal income taxes in 2009, up from 18% back in 1980.

• We can keep tax breaks for the rich in place, or make needed investments, "but we can't do both." Not true. Repealing the Bush tax cuts on the "rich" would raise only about $70 billion a year, a tiny fraction of projected deficits. With or without the Bush tax cuts, the country can't afford Obama's agenda.

Obama's continued dismal approval ratings suggest that voters aren't buying into these lies — yet. But they might, if he's able to endlessly repeat them without a peep of protest from the mainstream press.

http://news.investors.com/Article/594075/201112071902/obama-reruns-5-lies-in-fairness-speech.htm

Hi, Ponders!!!

Thursday, December 8, 2011

See you tomorrow, Pond People!

What a total JACKASS!

Obama celebrates Hanukkah at White House...
TWO WEEKS EARLY?
LIGHTS ALL THE CANDLES...

'We Never Need an Excuse For a Good Party'...

(Ribbet!)

This dedicated idiot... Hanukkah is not simply a 'good party'. It is Drogheda, Lodz, the 300, the Christian Martyrs. It is people willing to die for their faith, die rather than be slaves, die rather than deny their country or their God.

Yes, it is glorying in the upholding of that most high value and victory bought at such a high, high price, but it is not simply getting the boys together to go out stepping, playing pool, or eating barbecue after playing a little round ball.

It most certainly isn't an 'excuse' to kick it with his homies and listen to a few tunes. This man doesn't have a blessed clue. Nobody could be that thoughtlessly stupid. He is intentionally making fun of Jews everywhere and our beautiful religion, revealing once again, what a small, small man he really is!

P.S. I understand that Hanukkah is about God's miracle of making oil in a lamp for one day last for 8 to consecrate the temple, but it is the tremendous faith the people showed behind it that pleased God so and was touching and so meaningful.

MUST READ: Obama's Plan to Bring Down America

Summary of Briefing: White House Review Threatens Counter-Terrorism Operations

Summary of Dr. Sebastian Gorka's Briefing

[Click here to listen to a recording of the briefing]

Issue: The White House-instituted review of federal law enforcement and military counter-terrorism training is directly impacting the capacity of federal agencies, such as the Department of Justice, to protect the United States from real and imminent threats to our security.
- Members of the FBI have voiced that this kind of action will directly affect the United States's capacity to protect its citizens on U.S. soil.
  - The concept that we are not allowed to talk about Islam, Islamic doctrine, or the concepts of holy war when trying to understand organizations like al-Qaeda will make it needlessly difficult for counter-terrorism agents to adequately penetrate and understand Salafi jihadism and its implications for U.S. national security.
Background: Since September 11th, we have witnessed a lawfare campaign aimed at making the tactical approach to securing America against another terrorist attack less specific and more blurred.
- Move from using the language "the war on terror" and "the war against al-Qaeda" to discussing the need to fight "violent extremism," a generic concept suggesting that the issue is not about Islamic fundamentalism, Salafi terrorism, individuals like bin Laden, but rather a nebulous response to any type of violent extremism.
Now: Approximately 6 months ago, the White House began an across-the-board review of all counter-terrorism trainers and training in the United States (anyone involved with the Departments of Defense or Department of Justice). Documents have come out of the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice to the effect that:
- There is a problem with the training;
- It is potentially "Islamophobic"; and
- We need a review of the credentialing of all trainers and training - how are these people chosen, and what qualifications must they meet?
Problems:
- The review is anonymous.
- There is already a blacklist of individuals who will not be permitted to train again on subject on which they have been training. Even seasoned members of FBI's training division have been put on this list.
Congresswoman Sue Myrick (R - NC, 9th District) wrote a letter to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta & U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder highlighting 3 issues (signed by 9 members of Congress):
1. The White House has not demonstrated any problem with current training.
- No proof has been given except one article from Wired.com with photographs that supposedly demonstrate "Islamophobia."
2. The identity of those doing the review has been kept secret, even within organizations like the Department of Justice.
- Also, the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point is involved with this review, which is disturbing because CTC at West Point has a multimillion-dollar contract to provide training for the Department of Justice. This is equivalent to an entity with a clear conflict of interest inside the machine being asked to review its competitors.
3. No appeal process exists for those who discover they are on the "blacklist" (and no longer permitted to train).

Additional Takeaways

We are witnessing a harmful and destructive policy evolution.
If the counter-terrorism community is prevented from speaking about and defining real and violent threats to this country, how can we counter and defeat such threats?
This is lawfare - targeting the open dissemination of ideas with quasi-legal claims of civil rights abuses via charges of "Islamophobia" - and is akin to censorship.
The media must be pressured to raise awareness about politically-driven censorship from within the administration on counter-terrorism training across the national security establishment.
- A review of the situation indicates, according to Dr. Gorka, that this phenomenon is due to individuals inside the machine who are directly using a lawfare approach to undermine our ability to understand and defeat militant Islam.
On December 12-14, 2011, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be meeting with the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to discuss religious tolerance. The OIC is the largest proponent of lawfare in the international arena, its goals are to criminalize the defamation of religion and blasphemy of Islam.

Links

Spencer Ackerman, Obama Orders Government to Clean Up Terror Training
Book: Brooke Goldstein & Aaron Eitan Meyer, Lawfare: The War Against Free Speech: A First Amendment Guide for Reporting in an Age of Islamist Lawfare
- Please remember to visit our site on Amazon and, if you are so inclined, "like" the book and write a review!
57 Organizations Call on White House to Investigate Offensive FBI Trainings [scroll down for PDF of letter]
Nina Shea, White House to aid Islamic states defy free speech
Nina Shea & Paul Marshall, The State Department vs. Free Speech [WSJ subscription required]
For additional information, please email Katharine Gorka, Executive Director of The Westminster Institute, at kcg@westminster-institute.org.

We miss you!

I think we saw this one coming...

New Documents Show Fast and Furious Was Going to Be Used to Justify Gun Control Measures

By Rick Moran

I had seen this theory kicking around the internet for months. The Obama administration authorized Fast and Furious at least in part to make a case for stricter gun laws.
I dismissed it as just one more conspiracy theory on the net. Now I'm not so sure.

CBS News:

In Fast and Furious, ATF secretly encouraged gun dealers to sell to suspected traffickers for Mexican drug cartels to go after the "big fish." But ATF whistleblowers told CBS News and Congress it was a dangerous practice called "gunwalking," and it put thousands of weapons on the street. Many were used in violent crimes in Mexico. Two were found at the murder scene of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

ATF officials didn't intend to publicly disclose their own role in letting Mexican cartels obtain the weapons, but emails show they discussed using the sales, including sales encouraged by ATF, to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3". That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or "long guns." Demand Letter 3 was so named because it would be the third ATF program demanding gun dealers report tracing information.

On July 14, 2010 after ATF headquarters in Washington D.C. received an update on Fast and Furious, ATF Field Ops Assistant Director Mark Chait emailed Bill Newell, ATF's Phoenix Special Agent in Charge of Fast and Furious:

"Bill - can you see if these guns were all purchased from the same (licensed gun dealer) and at one time. We are looking at anecdotal cases to support a demand letter on long gun multiple sales. Thanks."

A couple of documents speculating on the value of Fast and Furious to gun control efforts does not mean that the White House planned it or was even aware of it. But don't you think those are questions that should be asked of Eric Holder and Barack Obama?

Fast and Furious appears to be a bottomless pit of breathtaking stupidity and inexplicable incompetence. To use a program that the ATF knew was killing people to gain crass political advantage in a debate over gun control is just mind boggling - until you remember who is running the country.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/12/new_docs_show_fast_and_furious_was_going_to_be_used_to_justify_gun_control_measures.html