While many chief executives experience marked aging in the job, Obama looks increasingly drawn and stressed. One can only speculate as to whether he has sought chemical assistance in managing himself during his presidency, but I have heard it suggested. And while I'm no physician, I've enough experience with chemical dependency to say that I would not be surprised, given his demeanor and comportment in recent months. As I write this, Obama is creating a train wreck of decorum during his trip to the United Kingdom, babbling insensibly to Irish citizens who entertained him, botching a toast to the queen and forgetting what year it was.
Asking an individual what year it is, as you may be aware, is one of the often-employed indicators of mental capacity when a head injury or psychological impairment is suspected.
America's traitorous elitists saw in Obama a figurehead that a nation of poorly educated, but well-indoctrinated student-loan serfs, welfare dependents, public sector union "servants" and "what's in it for me independents" would vote for under the heading of "affirmative action."
They were correct.
What they failed to calculate was the cost of his election to the nation.
For the nation, the term "natural born citizen" meant at the time the Constitution was written – and means today – someone born in America to parents who are themselves both American citizens. Obama's presidency is illegal – and the elites could have spared this nation a great deal of grief if they had looked it up in the Constitution. You owe America an apology.
Some call Obama the "man-child" in the White House. They're right. He's in over his head. He's so unequipped to do the job the presidency demands that the rest of the world laughs at him, and he's an embarrassment for all Americans and certainly, those we honor on Memorial Day.
Despite the past two and a half years America has been run by a president who is in every respect a socialist with communist tendencies, the pathetic GOP cannot effectively mount a first-tier candidate to seriously challenge this diminutive Marxist professor. Why? Because for 40 years the GOP has used the rhetoric of conservative Ronald Reagan, but the tactics, strategies and policies of RINO Richard Nixon.
People will make mistakes. Some will expose some freaky fetish or even worse. However, these mistakes can be corrected every two years for Congress, six years for the Senate and, thank God, every four years for the president.
Oh yes, I said the president. What outlandish behavior of his has been exposed?
He was deluded enough to actually believe he had the ability to be a leader and statesman. In reality, he is merely a community organizer wholly owned by the various unions who ensured him the vote of members too uneducated to think for themselves.
That behavior is more twisted than Weiner's behavior, in my opinion.
Weiner can merely destroy himself and his reputation. Mr Obama has the ability in his position to ruin an entire country and all of our reputations – especially those who voted for him in 2008.
Oh and yes, he is fully paid for by the unions, George Soros and others foolish enough to believe in the hope and change Mr. O was peddling.
As many a reader is aware, I have maintained for many months now that President Obama is a Marxist-Leninist with a marked affinity for Islam. I don't believe he considers himself a Muslim, but it is – or should be – evident that he displays a dangerous favoritism for radical Islamists over our allies and even the American people.
Between his Marxist-infused Muslim background and 20 years in Wright's church, of course it should be no surprise Obama has moved to compromise the United States economically, militarily, diplomatically and in terms of national security.
The art of Jiu-Jitsu is to use an opponent's weight and strength to your advantage. I believe this is what the conservatives must do in the coming 2012 presidential election.
Obama's "weight and strength" is that by next year he will have a surplus of $1 billion in campaign money and the mainstream media supporting him. He also has ACORN (or whatever they call themselves now) and other community organizers rallying the liberal troops to make sure he gets re-elected. Add to that his slick-willy youth charm and pseudo-charisma with which he has bamboozled a large part of the American public, who neither follow politics nor understand how he has unraveled the very fabrics of our republic. And tailor that with Obama's unique ability to make one believe he means what he says from a teleprompter, and you have a formidable foe.
But as Rickson Gracie, retired mixed martial artist, an eighth-degree black and red belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, and a member of the renowned martial arts family – the Gracie family, once said, "If size mattered, the elephant would be the king of the jungle."
The thick cloud of uncertainty hanging over the country originates far beyond the hallowed halls of Washington politics or the White House. Roots of this darkness are so deep, a new dawn is almost inconceivable – especially with Barack Obama residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
The promised hope and change has quickly succumbed to high unemployment, foreclosures, millions on food stamps and an overall sense that the best is behind us, not ahead. We all wonder how this could have happened to a once great nation, and how in the world we are going to get things turned around.
Difficult times are not a new phenomenon in America. We have had hard times before. So why is there such a sense of hopelessness and gloom throughout the land this time?
Barack Hussein Obama.
He doesn't believe in America and her greatness. Oh, he may say so in his teleprompter-scripted speeches, but he surely doesn't believe what he is saying. Otherwise, his actions would be far different. He would not be siccing the National Labor Relations Board on Boeing to stop thousands of new jobs. He wouldn't have force fed us a 2,300-page health-care bill, adding massive burdens on business. The Dodd-Frank bill, which cripples growth in America, would never have received Mr. Obama's signature if he truly believed in the country.
We've previously detailed CNSNews.com's obsession over words President Obama says -- or doesn't say. CNS has decided to expand that obsession to the rest of Obama's administration. Penny Starr writes in a June 20 article:
Although the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that gay and bisexual men comprise “the only risk group in the U.S. in which new HIV infections have been increasing since the early 1990s” and make up 53 percent of all new HIV infections in the United States each year, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius did not mention them in a speech she gave about the disease.
In her speech, Sebelius only referred to “Americans,” “people,” “children” and “human lives.”
Apparently, according to Starr and CNS, gays aren't Americans or even human.
WND's Lamb Misleads About Community Reinvestment Act Topic: WorldNetDaily
Henry Lamb writes in his June 11 WorldNetDaily column:
The housing market crumbled because of government intervention. The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 and subsequent revisions imposed government management of the housing industry by forcing banks to issue loans to credit risks a free market would never tolerate. To entice banks to make these unjustified loans, the government guaranteed repayment. When some of the people couldn't, or wouldn't, repay their mortgages, the government took your tax money to make good the guarantee. This is the single most important cause of the current economic disaster, and the responsibility rests upon progressive Democrats who firmly believe that government must control and manage human activity.
In fact, experts agree that the Community Reinvestment Act had no significant role in the financial crisis, and that lending money to poor people and minorities isn't inherently risky.
CNS' Jeffrey Still Won't Mention Thomas' Conflict of Interest Topic: CNSNews.com
We've detailed how CNSNews.com, led by editor in chief Terry Jeffrey, has been determined to portray Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan has having a conflict of interest from serving as as President Obama's solicitor general that should force her to recuse from deciding any lawsuit regarding health care reform that is likely to come before the Supreme Court -- while ignoring that conservative Justice Clarence Thomas also has an apparent conflict of interest due to his wife's activism against the reform measure.
Jeffrey keeps that up in his June 8 column, repeating his previous contention that Kagan's naming of a deputy to handle the administration's case while solicitor general constitutes a conflict of interest, since she had previously recused herself from a case involving Harvard Law School, where she previously served as dean.
Jeffrey didn't mention, as CNS has in previous articles, that the emails CNS obtained from the solicitor general's office through a Freedom of Information Act request offered no evidence that Kagan offered any opinion of the health care law, nor did he note as he did in a June 3 article that the solicitor general's office determined that Kagan had been "walled off from Day One" from health care litigation.
And, of course, at no point did Jeffrey mention Thomas' apparent conflict of interest. Then again, Thomas can be presumed to vote against health care reform, and Jeffrey doesn't want to jeopardize that.
WND's Mercer Pines For the Days of Apartheid Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily columnist Ilana Mercer has already lionized the leader of South Africa's Afrikaner Resistance Movement while hiding the group's history of violence and white supremacism, so it's no surprise to see South Africa native Mercer pining for the days of apartheid.
That's essentially what Mercer does in her June 10 WND column touting her new book, "Into the Cannibal's Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South Africa." She complains:
Washington and Westminster bear considerable responsibility for the "swelling social disorder" in South Africa, having insisted that South Africa pass into the hands of a voracious majority. Unwise South African leaders acquiesced. Federalism was discounted. Minority rights for the Afrikaner, Anglo and Zulu were dismissed.
Ironically, America's Founding Fathers had attempted to forestall pure democracy by devising a republic. Yet under the wing of the American eagle a dispensation was negotiated in South Africa, the consequence of which is the raw, ripe rule of the mob and its dominant, anointed party.
The time is thus historically ripe to challenge some of the central tenets of a liberal democratic ideology that would bring about the disaster that is post-apartheid South Africa.
While Mercer does concede that apartheid was "racist," she presents it as infinitely preferable to the country's current rule and apparently unable the fundamental unfairness of a tiny minority ruling over others. Instead, she insists that South Africa is a "cautionary tale" and that, apparently, people not like her shouldn't get to vote:
In their unqualified paeans to the will of the majority everywhere, Americans must understand that universal suffrage is not to be conflated with freedom. As the democratic South Africa (and Iraq) amply demonstrates, political rights don't secure the natural rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness; ink-stained fingers don't inoculate against blood stains. Extant societal structures that safeguard life and property can always be improved upon. But once these bulwarks against mob rule and mayhem disintegrate, they are seldom restored.
Lest anyone doubt Mercer's racial ambitions, the preface of her new book is published at VDare, a website whose own editor describes as "white nationalist." In it, Mercer mostly whines that no mainstream publisher would touch her book. That editor, Peter Brimelow, writes an introduction to Mercer's preface.
NewsBusters Ridicules Weiner Conspiracies -- Though It Entertained Them About Foley Scandal Topic: NewsBusters
A June 7 NewsBusters post by Lachlan Markay outlines "The Most Ridiculous Leftist Defenses of Anthony Weiner." It might be funny if NewsBusters and its Media Research Center parent hadn't invoked some of those same defenses in the 2006 scandal surrounding Republican Rep. Mark Foley and his communications with young male congressional pages.
Markay writes that "the 'it's a coordinated plot to take down Weiner' line mostly originated in the blogosphere, but made its way into the mainstream via some of the usual suspects, such as The View's Joy Behar." But as we detailed at the time, his NewsBusters colleague Mark Finkelstein wrote regarding the Foley scandal in an Oct. 2, 2006, post that "it seems increasingly plausible that the timed release of information - of ever-escalating seriousness - is part of a calculated campaign to keep the story in the news and inflict maximum political damage on the GOP."
Markay also noted that some attacked Andrew Breitbart for forwarding the story. That's the exact same tactic NewsBusters used in the Foley scandal. An Oct. 4 post by Al Brown suggested that ABC's Brian Ross, who first reported the Foley scandal, "willfully lie[d] in order to run with the story and "get" the Republicans five weeks before the elections."
Markay claimed that some invoked the "Nothing to see here. Move along, people" defense. But that's exactly what the MRC did. Brown wrote inhis NewsBusters post that the Foley scandal was nothing more than "two consenting adults exchanging instant messages." And theMRC's CNSNews.com insisted that there were more pressing matters:
While Washington insiders were distracted with a Capitol Hill sex scandal -- and while media outlets and politicians are doing all they can to keep the story alive -- the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at its second, consecutive record high on Wednesday; President Bush signed a bill that frees up funds for a U.S.-Mexico border fence; and a federal appeals court unanimously ruled that the Bush administration may continue its terrorist surveillance program while it appeals a judge's ruling that the program is unconstitutional.
Last week, Markay accepted a job as an "investigative reporter" for the Heritage Foundation. If he had done some actual "investigative reporting" before he wrote his NewsBusters post, he'd look a little less foolish.
WND's Unruh Begins Anti-Gay Attack With Obsolete Study Topic: WorldNetDaily
Bob Unruh begins a June 9 WorldNetDaily article touting the rantings of anti-gay activist Peter LaBarbera this way:
The chief of a watchdog organization working to combat the spread of HIV and AIDS has launched a campaign to demand a government investigation of – and action over – the homosexual behavior that has been linked to more than 25 million deaths over the last 30 years, likening the problem to smoking, which was blamed for 100 million deaths in the 20th century.
Although statistics on the diseases linked to homosexual activity notoriously are hard to obtain, a report from the International Journal of Epidemiology estimated from a review of the "gay" population of Vancouver, B.C., that HIV/AIDS costs homosexuals up to 20 years of their lives on average.
In fact, as we detailed when WND allowed Molotov Mitchell and Bryan Fischer to make the same claim, the study published by the International Journal of Epidemiology is irrelevant to today; it examined data "obtained for a large Canadian urban centre from 1987 to 1992," and the life expectancy differential was specifically attributed to losses "due to HIV/AIDS," for which treatments were in their infancy and not widely available. The Southern Poverty Law Center notes that the authors of the study updated it in 2001, pointing out that advances in treatment of HIV-AIDS even at that point had significantly improved the expected longevity of those infected, which would inevitably narrow any gap between gay and straight life spans caused by the disease. The authors also rejected the attempts of anti-gay organizations to construe the 1997 observations to justify denigration of gays.
This reliance on obsolete data completely undermines the thesis Unruh and LaBarbera have based their article on: that "homosexual behavior" be treated as a public health threat like smoking. Further, as is typical WND behavior, Unruh forbids anyone from responding to LaBarbera's anti-gay hatred.
Geoffrey Dickens has absolutely no evidence that Jon Stewart's "Daily Show" joke that Herman Cain doesn't "like to read" is "racially charged" -- indeed, as the transcript Dickens supplies in his June 10 NewsBusters post demonstrates, the full context of the joke makes it clear that Stewart was mocking Cain's contention that legislation should run no longer than three pages.
But Dickens has decided it is anyway, putting "racially charged" in his headline. His reasoning? "The Daily Show" might have said that if a right-wing radio host had said the same thing about President Obama. No, really:
It would be unfair to call Jon Stewart a racist but when he mocked GOP presidential contender Herman Cain as essentially an illiterate, on Thursday's show, it has to be asked wouldn't Stewart and his cronies at The Daily Show have satirized any sort of conservative talk show host, like a Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, as a bigot if they had joked that President Barack Obama didn't "like to read?"
So it's unfair for Dickens to call Stewart a racist but perfectly in bounds to falsely call Stewart's joke "racially charged" when he has no evidence to back him up? We're confused.
The whining continues in yet another WorldNetDaily article baselessly suggesting that White House press secretary Jay Carney knew what WND reporter Les Kinsolving would ask and refused to let him ask it.
Even though Kinsolving was not going to ask anything about net neutrality, WND goes on to whine about that, too, rehashing a previous WND article:
WND has reported the FCC colluded with a George Soros-funded, Marxist-founded organization to publicly push a new plan to regulate the Internet under the government’s "net neutrality" program, according to just released documents.
The shock material was released in response to a Freedom of Information request from Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption
The released documents include internal correspondence and emails evidencing some coordination between FCC officials and leaders of Free Press, a controversial nonprofit which petitions for more government control of the Internet and news media.
In fact, there was no collusion, and the communications between the FCC and Free Press were no different than between other interest groups and the government.
Newsmax Publishes, Then Deletes, Poorly Written Article on Palin Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax his historically shilled for Sarah Palin -- especially after Palin declared herself to be a regular Newsmax reader. So it's odd that Newsmax would publish an strangely incoherent article on her.
An unbylined June 9 article began by claiming that “I can see Russia from my house” was one of Palin's catchphrases -- actually, that was Tina Fey's Palin parody that forwarded that -- before going on to criticize Palin's Facebook attack on President Obama's alleged plan to demilitarize Alaskan and share missile defense with other countries. The short article goes on to state that "It almost sounds like Palin is suggesting a better route would be to sell the technology to Russia," but that she actually "ndicates it is irresponsible for the government to leak America’s military secrets to any foreign body — whether they pay for them or not."
It's not very well written, so much so that the Palin-philes at Conservatives 4 Palin declared the piece to be an attack on her.
Newsmax has now deleted the article; its URL now returns an empty page.
Jerome Corsi has turned in to WorldNetDaily the last of three articles on Doug Vogt's claim that President Obama's long-form birth certificate is a fake.
As with the previoustwo articles, Corsi refuses to acknowledge that the Obama Conspiracy blog has provided a detailed rebuttal discrediting many of Vogt's claims.
But that's not all: In an interview with insanely anti-Obama pastor James David Manning -- whom WND haspresented as a credible critic of Obama without noting that he has repeatedly insulted the president as a "long-legged mack daddy" -- Vogt can't even correctly identify what PDF stands for and falsely claims that a consortium developed the PDF format. In fact, PDF began as a proprietary format created and owned by Adobe Systems, and it did not become an open standard until 2008.
This is Corsi's "expert," folks.
It seems that Corsi cares nothing about the truth when it conflicts with his anti-Obama agenda.
Huma Abedin (And Clinton) Derangement Syndrome Watch Topic: WorldNetDaily
The real scandal is Weiner's practicing Muslim wife, Huma Abedin. Ms. Abedin became Mrs. Weiner in 2010, at a wedding "presided over by President Bill Clinton." Mr. Clinton, of course, "presides" at any typical New Yorker's wedding, upon request.
You don't think so? Neither do I.
Mrs. Weiner is in fact Hillary Clinton's top State Department aide. She has been Mrs. Clinton's top aide in a variety of positions since coming to the White House as an intern in 1996. Persistent reports indicate that some of those positions have been very personal, indeed.
Leaving aside the politically arranged aspects of Mr. Weiner's marriage, one wonders what a Jewish boy from New York, schooled by Sen. Charlie Schumer, might have in common with a practicing Muslim wife? Especially one who spends most of her time on the road with the U.S. secretary of state. One who visits her mother in Saudi Arabia.
The Saudis, you may remember, provided most of the passports to the jihadists who flew jetliners into the World Trade Center.
It gets worse. The little weasel is a newlywed. His unfortunate wife is an exotic Iranian-Pakistani beauty, Huma Abedin, the deputy chief of staff to Hillary Rodham Clinton. Weiner and Abedin were married last year by none other than the philanderer in chief, Bill Clinton. No wonder Weiner thinks he can keep his day job.
Abedin has been at Hillary Clinton's side for 15 years and was there through the Lewinsky scandal.
(Unofficial) advise from the former first lady to Abedin: "Any publicity is good publicity. Hold you head up high. Let your lip quiver occasionally when it suits your purpose but don't divorce him. That's too good for the -----. See if he survives. Then, have him carry your purse and stand behind you as you run for mayor of New York City (the job Weiner covets)."
Buck up, Anthony. You picked the wrong mate to cheat on. You are not dealing with amateurs here.
WND Hypes Mosque Report By Anti-Muslim Author Topic: WorldNetDaily
In a June 8 WorldNetDaily article, Bob Unruh touted "survey compiled by Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi and published by the Middle East Quarterly" claiming that "Dozens of mosques around the United States have been identified in a new study as incubators for jihad against America, with more than 80 percent of those surveyed advocating violence."
What Unruh didn't tell you: One of the authors of the study has a history of anti-Muslim bigotry.
As Media Matters details, Yerushalmi, has been cited by the Anti-Defamation League for his "record of anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and anti-black bigotry," and he has even defended the anti-Semitism of Mel Gibson and Pat Buchanan. The organization Yerushalmi founded, Society of Americans for National Existence, has proposed legislation that furthering or supporting adherence to Shari'a "shall be a felony punishable by 20 years in prison."
Meanwhile, Richard Bartholomew notes that Yerushalmi -- who has seved as an attorney for rabidly anti-Muslim writer (and newly minted WND columnist) Pamela Geller -- uses questionable methodology in his survey, calling his approach "of very limited value and is probably even misleading."Bartholomew also notes that the journal that published this study, Middle East Quarterly, has a history of rejecting peer review of its article because it claims most specialists were not interested in “American interests” or were hostile to USA.
Not only does Unruh not mention any of this, he does not permit any contradictory views of the study. So much for journalism.
Root Laments That Businesses Can't Easily Cheat On Taxes Anymore Topic: WorldNetDaily
Wayne Allyn Root writes in his June 9 Newsmax column:
Finally, Obama purposely leaves out the important fact that only in the last 30 years have we moved away from a cash economy. Tax rates at 70 percent or higher didn’t matter prior to 1980 because most small businesses earned unreported cash. Today we have a computerized economy based on credit cards.
Virtually every dollar that every business takes in is tracked and reported. So tax rates are immaterial — all of us are paying more in taxes than ever before. To not report that difference is deceptive.
Is Root saying it was OK for business to cheat on their taxes by not reporting cash income? That's not exactly the behavior of an ethical businessman, particularly one with presidential aspirations (Root was the 2008 Libertarian Party vice presidential nominee and proclaims himself to be "the leading contender for the 2012 Libertarian Presidential nomination").
What Happened To TV Ad Campaign For Corsi Book (And The Money Farah Begged Readers For To Fund it)? Topic: WorldNetDaily
Bach in March, we wondered why WorldNetDaily's Joseph Farah was begging for money to run commercials for Jerome Corsi's birther book. Now we must wonder what happened to those commercials -- and the money.
In a March 27 article, WND kicked off its publicity campaign for Corsi's "Where's the Birth Certificate?" by declaring that "WND needs to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to air these commercials on television networks and stations throughout the country" and begging readers for money, with only the promise of a signed copy of Corsi's book in return.
But to our knowledge, no commercials for the book have ever aired on TV. And the page at the WND online store to donate to the ad campaign now redirects to a general page about Corsi's book, with no mention whatsoever about the donation drive.
So what happened? Did nobody answer Farah's pleas, perhaps concluding that, since WND is a for-profit operation, he can use his own money to buy ads? Or did Farah decide that the book received enough free publicity (i.e., from Drudge) that paid advertising was superfluous?
And if people did donate to the ad campaign, what happened to that money? Did Farah return it, or is he hoarding it for some future Obama-bashing endeavor?
Farah has generally declared himself exempt from the accountability he demands from others. Given that this is a case that involves him publicly soliciting money from others for his business ventures, it would be prudent and moral of him to just as publicly account for where the heck that money went and prove that it wasn't diverted to, say, WND's day-to-day operations or remodeling his house.
Then again, he never promised accountability, so one could say that Farah's scam of profiting off other people's money appears to have been a success -- not exactly a business model most reputable schools teach.