Subscribe to Journal

Tag Board

Kerri: Hi, just surfing through. Interesting visit.
republic: Sonya Sotomayor, Racism, progressive politics
Anthony: auto makers, bailouts, healthcare, AIG, Chrysler,
anthony: Barack Obama, Somali pirates, somali hostage crisis

Please type in the four characters shown in the black box.

Saturday, February 6th 2010

7:13 PM

Sinking the Moral High Ground

While speaking at the 2010 national prayer breakfast, President Obama invoking health care proclaimed; that “we may disagree about the best way to reform our health care system, but surely we can agree that no one ought to go broke when they get sick in the richest nation on earth.” This statement was meant to be another of the Presidents’ toothpaste ad platitudes. (Nine out of ten dentists agree) But it actually exposed his extreme adherence to the Marxist ideology which has created such a chasm between the American people and himself. 

   It is certainly true that the majority of Americans have no interest in seeing innocent individuals struggle, financially or otherwise. Our nature however dictates that those struggles are a part of the human experience, and it is that very nature that limits our ability to address these struggles. I don’t know anyone who wants to see people go broke for any reason, but the question is, at what and who’s expense? It is for this reason that Obama tries to wrap his agenda in a cloak of moral superiority. But there is nothing moral about forcibly limiting the individual’s ability to provide for himself and his family for the sake of political expediency.  

  Obama suggests that we have this “moral” obligation as a result of being “the richest nation on the face of the earth.” This is an extremely ideological statement from a man who just days earlier declared that he is not an ideologue. While it is true that The United States is the home of a fourth of the world’s wealth, President Obama implies that this wealth belongs to the state. Our current deficits show that nothing is farther from the truth. The nation’s wealth in fact resides with its private citizens. It is extremely laudable for an individual to freely commit a portion of his wealth to the service of others, but there is however no moral obligation to do so. Finally, politicians seeking to use the iron fist of government to coerce the individual into the service of others or some dictated high virtue is not morality, it is tyranny.

Anthony D Dolpies
0 Feedback / Leave Feedback

Friday, February 5th 2010

7:53 AM

You Think Your Safe

The Senate health care bill wouldraise effective marginal tax rates on lower and middle-income singles and families up to 41%.


Windmills installed by Minnesota cities to meet the state's new mandated global warming renewable energy requirements arefailing to provide any power thanks to the snow.


The House voted Thursday to allow the federal government to go $1.9 trillion deeper in debt, an increase of about $6,000 for every U. S. resident.

Stocks worldwide suffered sharp losses as the cost of insuring Greek and Portuguese sovereign debtsoared.
0 Feedback / Leave Feedback

Wednesday, February 3rd 2010

9:44 AM

Bailouts could lead to bigger meltdown

Federal Watchdog: TARP Program Opens Way for Deeper Economic Meltdown
(CNSNews.com) – Neil Barofsky, the man tasked with overseeing the administration of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), told Congress in a report released Sunday that the bank bailouts have cleared the path to another financial crisis -- potentially even more grave than the 2008

White House Report: First Three Years of Obama Will Bring Three Largest Budget Deficits Since World War II
(CNSNews.com) - The historical budget tables released Monday by the White House along with President Barack Obama’s budget indicate that the first three years of Obama’s presidency—2009, 2010 and 2011—will feature the three largest annual budget deficits (when measured as a percentage of GDP) since World War II...
0 Feedback / Leave Feedback

Tuesday, February 2nd 2010

7:05 AM

Middle Class Tax Increase




Rueters has curiously pulled this story, yours truly has a copy, I will break it down in detail during my broadcast today @ 3pm eastern


Largest-ever federal payroll to hit 2.15 million

Stephen Dinan


Virginia's Democratic-controlled state Senate passed measures Monday that would make it illegal to require individuals to purchase health insurance, a direct challenge to the party's efforts in Washington to reform health care.

0 Feedback / Leave Feedback

Monday, February 1st 2010

11:16 AM

More Spending, Debt & Deceit






The Obama Budget: Higher Taxes, Higher Spending and More Debt



Defending the secret negotiations and special interest deals used to advance President Obama's health care plan, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told journalists: "The American people don’t care about process."

The United States will deploy amissile defense shield to protect American allies from a potential Iranian strike.

Since some states have already spent the money on the belief that President Obama's health care legislation would pass, the administration's budget includes an additional $25 billion in Medicaid funding for states - an amount that was originally part of Obamacare.
0 Feedback / Leave Feedback

Friday, January 29th 2010

2:02 PM

Obama admits Pledge on keeping doctors & insurers was untrue

Obama: Health Care Bill "Might Have Violated Pledge" On Keeping Some Doctors And Insurers
0 Feedback / Leave Feedback

Thursday, January 28th 2010

11:44 AM

State of Confusion



  During the Presidents State of the Union Speech I was repeatedly overcome with the urge to look out of the window to make sure I was not living in some kind of a third world Banana Republic. From his Unpresidential Attacks on the courts and the private sector, to his condescending lecture of congress, to his obviously insincere attempt to praise the nations history and the resilience of it’s people. The President painted a picture of a country in dire straits. While it is true that our economy is stagnant, this country has made its way through far more tumultuous times, despite the assertions of our present executive. 

The President seems to be becoming evermore detached from reality. Speaking of the recent supreme court decision regarding campaign financing Obama would do well to take a refresher course in American government, the executive is not superior to the other branches, the congress and the courts do not answer to him, this attempt to intimidate the court could very well backfire severely.  

  He credited the stimulus pkg with keeping two million people on the job. (He interestingly left out his trade mark phrase “created or saved”) but these numbers cannot be verified and the congressional budget office has said repeatedly that it is impossible to determine how many jobs would have existed without the stimulus. Fiscally the president seemed to be grasping at straws, calling for more aid to middle class families and at the same time calling for a freeze on discretionary spending. A spending freeze may sound good but it is important to remember that the agencies that would be affected have already seen a baseline budget increase under Obama. Even if the President can get congress to go along with such a freeze it would only amount to 1% of the deficit. If the President really wanted to get serious about the long-term fiscal health of the nation he would look at beginning a gradual rollback of Medicare, Medicaid & Social Security, these massive unfunded entitlements are sinking the fiscal ship, the president however is ideologically opposed to facing this reality.

 Instead of using this address to reach out to the American people, the President seemed more disconnected, hunkering down behind his unpopular agenda instead of acknowledging the citizenries rejection of it. In the end Obama’s address was not an attempt too sure up the electorate; he wasn’t even speaking to them, it was  an effort to convince congress to resume their commitment to the political death march he is leading.


Anthony D Dolpies
2 Feedback / Leave Feedback

Wednesday, January 27th 2010

7:12 AM

Obama Throws congress under the bus

Obama: 'I didn't sign off on those shady health care deals.' Really?

By: John McCormack
0 Feedback / Leave Feedback

Sunday, January 24th 2010

12:16 PM

Misplaced populism


   It was not that long ago that a newly inaugurated President Obama, projecting an image of sure-footed confidence, stood on the steps of the capitol, chiding his critics about the shifting sand beneath them. Now with his poll numbers in free fall and reeling from election defeats where establishment democrats supporting his agenda were rejected despite the political clout he expended on their behalf, the president seems desperate to find solid ground.

   Being a community organizer and Senator, Obama has had the luxury of being able to call both sides of the coin. As a community organizer Obama’s job was to marshal the mob against an economic or government institution in an effort to strong-arm an executive or politician into finding a solution to some perceived injustice. In essence create a problem and force someone else to solve it. As a Senator, much like other senators he could support a certain course action with his vote then act as a bystander if the results of that action are unpopular or unsuccessful. For example railing  against “fat-cat bankers” and bailouts, but voting for the TARP legislation. Now he is President and the buck stops with him, there is no one left to organize against. Being President has exposed some serious flaws in the Obama image, for one he is visibly angered by the public’s opposition to various elements of his agenda. It is not just Health care. Cap & trade, his approach to national security, foreign policy or  immigration, Obama’s Ideas are not inline with the electorate.  In a recent interview with George Stephanopoulos the President more or less said that the people just don’t get it.

   
   In an effort to regain his footing and rally the pitchforks to his cause, Obama has renewed his attacks on Wall Street and the financial sector. The president has rolled out a new theme in his recent speeches saying repeatedly “that the people want their money back.”  This is curious considering that the majority of the American people were against the TARP legislation and the uncertainty caused by his attacks over the past week has been a major factor in driving the markets into negative territory, that’s real money being lost, not just by “fat cat bankers” but fixed income retires and just about any worker with a 401k. Once again, as on his inauguration day Obama has fatally misread the political landscape with his misplaced populism. The rest of his agenda will offer no salvation from his political free fall and the incessant blaming of his predecessor will only endear him to a minuscule potion of the electorate, lashing out at the Voter will endear him to no one. Obama either fails or refuses to see that the forces behind his recent setbacks are pushing in the opposite direction. The people who determined the outcomes of the VA, NJ and Massachusetts elections, organized the massive march on D.C. and overflowed from tea-parties into townhall meetings are not interested in centralized government solutions, they seek a rollback of the overbearing bureaucracy that has stagnated our economy and set its aim on the individual liberty of the citizen. 

Anthony D Dolpies
0 Feedback / Leave Feedback

Monday, January 4th 2010

4:55 PM

This story needs to grow some legs

Executive Order: International Police Granted Full Immunity in US and Not Subject to FOIA Requests

Posted By Larry O'Connor On January 1, 2010 @ 9:59 am In Justice/Legal, Obama   283 Comments

In 1983, President Ronald Reagan issued an Executive Order   which gave permission to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) to operate within the boundaries of the United States.  Reagan’s EO put INTERPOL under the same basic guidelines as the CIA, FBI, ATF and other Federal law enforcement agencies.

Interpol_logo

Two weeks ago, without any announcement, debate, discussion or inquiry from journalists charged with “speaking truth to power” President Obama issued an amendment to this EO  .  The amendment removed part of Reagan’s order that kept INTERPOL   from having full diplomatic immunity while operating within the United States.  In other words:  Under Reagan and right up until two weeks ago, INTERPOL was authorized to operate within the USA but they did not have full diplomatic immunity and had to adhere to certain laws set forth for investigative agencies.  Laws that prohibit authorities from violating our constitutionally protected rights.

This story has begun to make the rounds at some other blogs and web sites.  Some scream about the on-set of the New World Order  , some merely question the timing, motives and logic   behind such a move while we are still fighting foreign wars and under threat of attack from Al Qaeda and other international terrorist bodies.  I certainly don’t walk down the New World Order/One World Government path, I don’t look good in tin-foil hats… but, I do wonder why this move was made so quietly and why the White House Press Corps has not made any hay about it.

I also wonder why my friends on the left, who screamed from the rooftops about phone companies conducting analysis of phone calls made from the US to known over-seas terrorists, about members of the Saudi family being allowed to leave the country in the days following 9/11, about the EVILS of the Patriot Act and how it would lead to the stripping of basic civil rights to anyone checking out a book in a library.  I wonder how they feel about the President granting permission to an international organization to operate within our borders under full diplomatic immunity.

One other tasty tidbit:  Due to the amended language created by President Obama, INTERPOL is now, no longer subject to Freedom of Information Act Inquiries  .

I wonder if during his vacation in Hawaii if one of the intrepid reporters could ask the President:

“Mr. President, is it true that due to your amendment to Executive Order 12425, INTERPOL may break into a home without a warrant, seize private property of a US citizen, hold a citizen for questioning without the right of legal representation and not be subject to any legal or criminal repercussion?”

I’d really like them to ask that question.  Wouldn’t you?
0 Feedback / Leave Feedback