“I will invite the same folks that we invited today,” he added. “And if that doesn’t work, we’ll invite them again the day after that. And I will have my entire team available to work through the details of getting a deal done.”

Obama’s team may not include the president himself. Despite the impasse in Washington over federal spending, the president as of early Wednesday was scheduled to give two speeches outside of Washington: one on energy in the Philadelphia suburbs, then another Wednesday evening to a group of black political activists in New York.

If the schedule remains intact, it will be the president’s first trip outside the capital since he officially declared Monday he will seek a second term. And while Obama (D) and his aides have repeated said he will not focus on his campaign in the next few months, his schedule may contradict those words.

Obama’s town hall on energy will be held at a wind turbine plant in the town of Fairless Hills in Bucks County, a well-known political bellwether in the Philadelphia area. While the city of Philadelphia overwhelmingly votes Democratic, its suburbs swing between the Democratic and Republican parties, making them crucial for Obama’s 2012 campaign.

The president defeated Sen John McCain (R-Ariz) in Pennsylvania with 55 percent of vote in 2008. But Republicans won the U.S. Senate and gubernatorial races there in November, suggesting a dip in enthusiasm for the president’s political party.

In New York City, Obama he won’t be wooing big-money donors, like he did last week. Instead, he will appear at the 20th anniversary of National Action Network, the group run by black activist and Obama backer the Rev. Al Sharpton.

For black voters, it’s not a question of whether they will support Obama, but how many will turn out in 2012. While polls show many other groups who backed the president in 2008 have fallen back in their enthusiasm, around 90 percent of blacks continue to approve of Obama’s performance in most polls. But Democrats say the huge black turnout that helped Obama win in states like Virginia and North Carolina is not a guarantee in 2012,as the motivation of electing the nation’s first black president is now gone.

Today the brave patriot,  J. Christian Adams testified in front of the Civil Rights Commission.  The Commission will be issuing a new round of subpoenas in the case to evaluate what went very wrong at the DOJ.  This is especially concerning, under sworn testimony Mr. Adams stated that the DOJ will not prosecute black individuals when the victims are white. Are all citizens held to the same standard of law?  Or are there different standards in this administration for different ethnic groups?

YouTube Preview Image

Currently the DOJ (Eric Holder) has refused to allow  employees from the DOJ to give sworn testimony to the Civil Rights Commission.  What is he hiding?  And will the pResident demand Holder releases his employees to answer the impending subpoenas?

This  reeks of Chicago politics and corruption.

Chicago On the Potomic.. Border Security

Posted by courage On June - 20 - 2010

You can’t make up the corruption and dereliction of duty coming from this administration…

From Red State:

On June 18, 2010, Arizona Republican Senator Jon Kyl told the audience at a North Tempe Tea Party town hall meeting that during a private, one-on-one meeting with President Obama in the Oval Office, the President told him, regarding securing the southern border with Mexico, “The problem is, . . . if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’” [Audible gasps were heard throughout the audience.] Sen. Kyl continued, “In other words, they’re holding it hostage. They don’t want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’”

Sen. Kyl also said he reminded President Obama that the President and the Congress has an obligation, a duty, to secure the border.

YouTube Preview Image

The pResident is  ignoring  the security and well-being of Americans.  Is willful neglect  impeachable ?

Oval Office Address… A Push for Cap and Trade

Posted by courage On June - 15 - 2010

Tonight the pResident will address the American people from the Oval office.  The official stated reason for this address is to update the people on the BP Gulf catastrophe, with the hidden agenda a prime time lecture to US citizens about the dire need for Congress to pass a comprehensive  energy program otherwise known as Cap and Trade.  Never waste a CRISIS to implement policy which has stalled in the Senate after barely passing the House last year.  Cap and Trade legislation will destroy the economy and place further hardship on households across the country as prices for every commodity we purchase jumps in price.

I don’t expect the pResident to deal with the ineptness of his administration in dealing with the clean-up and protection of the shores of Gulf.  I would hope to hear explanations and solutions offered on the fiasco of the government response.  These are a couple of items I would like to see addressed:

~  Why has the Jones Act which prevents foreign ships to operate in our sovereign waters not been suspended?  The Danes who are considered the experts in oil spill containment offered on day two of the spill to send specialized ships and gear to the region to help and were told .. NO.  In fact 13 countries have offered their assistance and have been told NO.

~  Governor Jindal   requested permission to erect shoal barriers within days of the spill to assist in protecting the delicate marsh areas, after considerable delay and much frustration Jindal finally told the federal government to f$%^ off and made the decision to begin creating the barriers, but only after the oil had already begun to taint the shores.

~  Why has a no-fly zone been instituted over the spill, which prevents reporters from first hand reporting of the devastation?

~  Why is the the military being used for a tight security lockdown on  Grand Isle, Louisiana ?

~  And what of the reports that the leak is actually below the ocean seabed, which brings an entirely new worst case scenario into the picture?  For additional information on this potentially eco-destroying possibility, check out Oil Drum, take time to read the comment section below.

My prediction the pResident won’t address any of these issues, rather staying true to form we will see him attempting to coherse the American public in embracing cap and trade. NEVER waste a CRISIS.

What questions would you like to see the pResident address?

Will any of these valid questions be answered?

During the recent Jewish Heritage Celebration at the White House…

YouTube Preview Image

One has to wonder IF during a celebration of Black History month at the White House Thomas made a statement about returning all Black citizens to Africa, how that would be interpreted by the liberal/progressive/Left ?  In all likelihood we will never know, since overt racism like that would be quickly condemned by the Left and rightfully so.

From ABC News:

Former Clinton special counsel and spokesman Lanny J. Davis issued a statement Sunday calling on the White House to suspend Thomas’ privileges in the White House press room, and for Hearst to consider a similar suspension of her position as a nationally syndicated columnist.

“Of course Helen has the right as a private citizen under the First Amendment to speak her mind, even as an anti-Jewish bigot — but not as a member, much less privileged member with a reserved seat, in the WH press corps,” Davis wrote.

Indeed as an American citizen Thomas does have the right to speak any misinformed opinion she may hold, yet when the line of private citizen crosses over and affords her the platform of a “privileged” news correspondence with access to spew her ill-informed opinions something has to give.

Being a part of the White House press corps allows Thomas a position of power in the media.  Her skewed beliefs can be presented as fact and questions can be slanted toward increased anti-semantic intolerance, with little to no moderation.  I have teetered between having her White House press pass revoked, in essence disallowing her a platform to speak, to removing her from the esteemed “Dean” of the corps and relegating her to a backroom seat.  On one hand moments like this allow for discussion of the insidious nature of racism, yet how often do we as society do we allow those who have power to continually perpetuate ignorance?

So will the left call Helen Thomas out for her comments?  Or will them remain mute, condoning the ignorance through their silence?

In adding some depth to this question, take a look at Helen Thomas during a White House press conference as she questions Gibbs immediately after the Israeli incident with the Flotilla.  Prior to knowing   facts surrounding the incident Thomas castigates  the administration for not condemning Israel.

YouTube Preview Image

From Jack Tapper ABC News:

Andrew Romanoff, the former speaker of the Colorado house of representatives, issued a statement Wednesday evening claiming that the White House raised the possibility that he might be offered an administration job if he opted to not challenge incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo.

Romanoff also released what he said was an e-mail from White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina outlining three possible jobs — deputy assistant administrator for Latin America and Caribbean for the U.S. Agency for International Development; director of the Office of Democracy and Governance at USAID; and director of the U.S. Trade and Development Agency – he could have if he didn’t run.

Romanoff did not accept any of the offers, and currently is challenging Bennet, who has the endorsement of President Obama.

The White House did not comment. The statement comes as the White House attempts to distance itself from the controversy stemming from attempts – also unsuccessful – to convince Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa., to not challenge Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., in the Pennsylvania primary. Sestak ultimately defeated Specter.

What you hadn’t heard about this quid pro quo deal to drop out of the Senate race in exchange for a White House job offer?  Funny this was originally reported on back in September 2009 by the Denver Post.

There appears to be a new era of “transparency” in the White House, actually a re-definition of standard English.  Transparency now means this administration is allowed to display through words one sentiment in the public arena and do something quiet different behind the scenes.  There are now two cases by the White House which on appearance violate federal law Romanoff and Sestak.  ahe recent statement release from the White House on the Sestek offer opens more questions for additional inquiry then it answered. IF and again this is a big IF, there was no shady dealings involved in these circumstances then why did the White House wait months to answer questions regarding the facts surrounding the job offer with Sestak?

Time and again parts of the lamestream media are commenting on how situations as these are standard operating procedures in politics, if true and I have no reason to doubt them the public should be outraged and demand a full independent investigation.  We have a pResident who championed how he would do things different if elected pResident, little did we know that he was talking about bringing overt partisanship, backroom deals and the corruption which plagues Chicago to Washington.

Anyone with two functioning brain cells can sense the cover-up being played out in Washington over the Sestak bribe.  After months of delay, the White House yesterday used a standard “dump” day to release their “investigation” of Representative Sestek’s claim he was offered a job in the White House to drop out of the Senate race.  This move by the White House was designed to clear the field for the White House supported (Benedict) Arlen Specter to run unopposed in the Pennsylvania Democrat primary. The White House’s report which barely filled a page and half leaves many questions unanswered and presents additional questions as to the operational schema of the Administration.

YouTube Preview Image

Read the rest of this entry »

The Obama Chart… Circumventing the Constitution

Posted by courage On April - 17 - 2010

The founding fathers displayed great wisdom in creating our republic.  They knew, from first hand experience, how absolute control corrupts and enslaves a population, depriving the citizenry of freedom.  They established a system of checks and balances to assure that our representative government would not be overtly powerful in any of the three branches of government.  One can only wonder, what they would have thought of the following chart and how the administration is  using all means available to circumvent the Constitutional protections granted to the people.

I happened across an excellent piece written by Phil Kerpen which explains the Obama chart precisely

Read the rest of this entry »