Sunday, August 30, 2009

Proposed Presidential Portrait of Obama

Proposed Official Presidential Portrait of Barack Hussein Hoover Muhammad bin Obama (c)

I want to get into the act while the money is still good. Numerous artists have made scads of money developing striking portraits designed to bring out our Fair President's essence. I offer my interpretation not only to make money in the present (I think you will agree that the above offering would make an excellent T-shirt!), but I think that my interpretation works well to memorialize The One as his eventual official presidential portrait.

The reasons why my interpretation is such a fitting one are obvious, but being the utter pedant that I am, I cannot resist explaining my artistic composition.

First, note the similarity to Obama's official propaganda seal:

The similarity between the two will help Obama's supporters, a class largely illiterate, to identify the significance of the portrait! The round shape, mimicking the "O" in Obama, the white background ringed by a border. This has the classic shape of an old-timey reader, helping the illiterate to learn their ABCs and basic words: A is for apple, B is for boy, O is for zero or Obama! Who says that I do not "respect diversity?" My design appeals to both those who can read (Republicans) and those who cannot (Obama Supporters).

Secondly, note that the proposed official portrait stunningly encapsulates the contribution that Barack Hussein Hoover Muhammad bin Obama will make to the long-term good of the United States of America: Zero. It also strikingly captures the qualifications that BHO44 has for performing the job of President of the United States: Zero. And of course, it represents the real change that will ultimately be ushered in by The Messiah: Zero. Conversely, and somewhat frighteningly, it also represents the measure of the Dow Jones Industrial Average when Obama and Biden finish "guessing" about how to fix the economy: Zero.

Finally, I think that my offering should be adopted as the official Presidential Portrait of Barack Hussein Hoover Muhammad bin Obama because it accurately reflects who he is: an empty suit. A person of no distinction whatsoever. A person of such mild accomplishment that he reckons being the editor of the law review and managing his own campaign to be significant leadership experience. In short, a person of such minor accomplishment that he might as well not even exist. Al Bundy's four touchdowns in one game looks to be an astounding achievement by contrast.

Join me in petitioning the Office of the President and the eventual Presidential Library (certainly to be funded by various Kenyan, Iranian, and North Korean interests!), and all others in relevant authority, to adopt my artistic presentation as the official Presidential Portrait of Barack Hussein Hoover Muhammad bin Obama!

I have hope! Let's work for change! Let's change the Presidential Portrait from a mere picture to something really meaningful!

Thursday, August 27, 2009

The Obama Economy

Atlanta Fed Chief Dennis Lockhart says that if the national unemployment rate were figured by the old rules - including those who are underemployed and those who have stopped looking for work - that rather than the outrageous 9.4% rate touted by the Obama administration, the real rate of unemployment is approximately 16%.

Lockhart, whose knowledge of economics is more advanced than the guesswork indulged in by the Obama administration, says that public spending will not solve the unemployment problem. He additionally forecasts a protracted period of recession typified by perennial joblessness, and calls fears about excessive government spending leading to high deficits and inflation "warranted."

Economist John Williams of estimates that, when all data is taken into consideration, the real unemployment rate is teetering on the brink of The Great Depression's 25%. In an article at U.S. News & World Report, Williams is quoted:

So if you care not just about people who meet the official definition of "unemployed" but also about people who are dropping out of the labor force, 2009 seems to be trailing 1982 in terms of the health of the labor market. Williams says that when he takes into consideration people who haven't looked for work in more than a year because they can't find jobs, the real unemployment rate today goes all the way up to 20.6 percent by his calculations. "It won't take much to get it to the worst since the Great Depression," he says.
Whether you go with the Atlanta Fed's number of 16% or John Williams' number approaching 21%, it is plain that Obama will indeed go down in history...

... with Hoover.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

The ONE Thing Edward Kennedy Got Right.

"The problems of our economy have occurred not as an outgrowth of laissez-faire, unbridled competition. They have occurred under the guidance of federal agencies, and under the umbrella of federal regulations."

Over My Cold, Dead, Fresh Body: The Criminalization of Tupperware

Idiot legislators in Missouri recently managed to criminalize Tupperware. Mark my words - when Tupperware is criminalized, only criminals will have Tupperware!

Inside sources indicate that their next acts will be to enact regulations for the proper use of Cracker Jacks, to remove the toe-stopper from speed skates, and to demand the re-issuance of millions of dollars worth of S&H Green Stamps. As the Founding Fathers warned, surrendering our rights to carry dishwasher safe storage containers is a slippery slope to the compromise of the remainder of our civil rights.

Of course, this story is not as weird as it might first appear (!!!). You see, these unctuous monuments to stupidity and self-righteousness did not actually intend to outlaw Tupperware.

Yes, it was a mistake. The intent was to criminalize the use of Styrofoam on waterways, but due to a mishap (perhaps, like Arlen Specter, they did not read the bill? or perhaps, like Joe Biden, they "guessed wrong" about the type of plastic container they needed to regulate? or perhaps, like Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama, they simply didn't know how bad that type of plastic was until they actually got into office, and it was really all George W. Bush's fault?), sources report that these insightful legislators "confused their plastics."

Important lessons to learn:

1) The confidence that the masses place in their government is incomprehensibly misplaced. These people are not only idiots, they are professional idiots. They are idiots excelsior; idiots of surpassing beauty.

2) The ability of government functionaries and the bureaucrats who shiftily enact their decrees to get ANYTHING AT ALL RIGHT is roughly inverse to the Constitutionality of their political views. The next time an intellectual midget the size of Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama or Joe Biden assures you that if you pass their silly stimulus, unemployment will not exceed 8%, or that they are appropriately "guessing" as to how to fix the economy, remember that. The collective government of these United States of America, whether at the federal, state, or local level in this era, causes the Detroit Lions to appear positively competent by comparison.

3) These same bloated intellectual dirigibles, questionable both as to literacy and morality, want to run your health care, the energy industry, and are promising that they have saved your economy. As the story indicates, the state law was based on a federal rule, which was sumptuously plagiarized by the local yokels. The federal rule did, in fact, intend to ban Tupperware. So the stupidity that is enacted by accident at the state level is in fact the intent of the mental wizards in Washington, D.C.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Credit Where the Credit Crisis Is Due

I have demonstrated previously on the hallowed pages of Obama Watch that the economic crisis as it now exists is fully the fault of the Democratic party in the United States. Their semi-retarded politics designed it and, while it is certain that some Republicans cooperated with and facilitated their (always) hare-brained ideas, it is also true that Democrats intentionally stepped over the bodies of protesting Republicans to enact the policies that have brought on the current economic morass.

A crisis of the magnitude of that which the country now faces has the interesting consequence of producing stark honesty where one would not necessarily expect to find such honesty. In reading the book, A Colossal Failure of Common Sense: The Inside Story of the Collapse of Lehman Brothers, author Lawrence G. Mcdonald, who seems generally very sympathetic to Bill Clinton personally and to his administration, nevertheless writes (from the historical perspective of an industry insider - Mcdonald was a Vice President at Lehman Brothers):

Roberta Achtenberg, the daughter of a Russian-born owner of a Los Angeles neighborhood grocery store, was plucked by President Clinton from relative obscurity in 1993 and elevated to the position of assistant secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Roberta and Bill were united in their desire to increase home ownership in poor and minority communities.

And despite a barrage of objections led by Senator Jesse Helms, who referred to Achtenberg as that "damn lesbian," the lady took up her appointment in the new administration, citing innate racism as one of the main reasons why banks were reluctant to lend to those without funds.

In the ensuing couple of years, Roberta Achtenberg harnessed all of the formidable energy on the massed ranks of the United States bankers, sometimes threatening, sometimes berating, sometimes bullying - anything to persuade the banks to provide mortgages to people who might not have been up to the challenge of coping with up-front down payments and regular monthly payments.

Between 1993 and 1999, more than two million such clients became new homeowners. In her two-year tenure as assistant secretary, she set up a national grid of offices staffed by attorneys and investigators. Their principal aim was to enforce the laws against the banks, the laws that dealt with discrimination. Some of the fines leveled at the banks ran into the millions, to drive home Achtenberg's avowed intent to utilize the law to change the ethos of providing mortgage money in the United States of America.

Banks were compelled to jump into line, and soon they were making thousands of loans without any cash-down deposits whatsoever: an unprecedented situation. Mortgage officers inside the banks were forced to bend or break their own rules in order to achieve a good Community Reinvestment Act rating, which would please the administration by demonstrating generosity to underprivileged borrowers even if they might default. Easy mortgages were the invention of Bill Clinton's Democrats.

However, there was, in the mid- to late 1990s one enormous advantage: amid general prosperity, the housing market was strong and prices were rising steadily. At that point in time, mortgage defaults were relatively few in number and the securitization of mortgages, which had such disastrous consequences during the financial crisis that began in 2007, barely existed.

Nonetheless, there were many beady-eyed financiers who looked askance at this new morality and privately yearned for the days when bank policies were strictly conservative, when credit was flatly denied to anyone without the proven ability to repay.

And at the center of this seething disquiet, somewhere between the persuasive silken-tongued members of the banking lobby and the missionary zeal of Roberta Achtenberg, stood William J. Clinton, whose heart, not for the first time, may have been ruling his head.

Emphasis added throughout. But catch the specific wording: "innate racism" is the reason that loans were not extended to "those without funds"? The Clintonistas were willing to do "anything to persuade the banks to provide mortgages to people who might not have been up to the challenge of coping with up-front down payments and regular monthly payments"? Achtenberg's intent was to "change the ethos of providing mortgage money"? Banks and mortgage companies were "forced to break their own rules"?

Now hear this: "Easy mortgages were the invention of Bill Clinton's Democrats." And all those mortgage companies, investment banks, and community banks that are now getting the blame were nonetheless peopled by "beady-eyed financiers who looked askance at this new morality."

Remember, the same people who designed this economic earthquake are in the process of taking over large swathes of American business, the energy industry, and health care - and in the case of Congressional Democrats, it is not merely the same party, but actually the same people involved.

The Democratic party is either populated by the largest concentration of morons in the universe, or is populated by an exceedingly large contingent of wholly evil individuals who are bent on pursuing their utopian political goals in the face of reality and at the expense of their constituents. What idiot actually believes that racism is the reason that banks won't lend money to people who can't pay? What fool thinks that it is a positive step forward to compel banks to forsake their own rules and extend loans to those who have not even demonstrated an ability to regularly and fully pay rent? Only Democrats are capable of these anti-intellectual paroxysms into mental disease. Or at least they are the only ones who can do it and escape being committed....

Are these the people that you really want to trust to do what is best for you and the country in regard to your health care? Have these same individuals not already demonstrated their inarguable inability to get anything right? Look around....

Democrat, thy name is guilty. See what thou hast wrought.

Monday, August 17, 2009

Canadian Socialized Medicine "Imploding"

Excerpted from Google News, via Canadian Press:

SASKATOON — The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.

Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.

"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"We know that there must be change," she said. "We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands."

The pitch for change at the conference is to start with a presentation from Dr. Robert Ouellet, the current president of the CMA, who has said there's a critical need to make Canada's health-care system patient-centred. He will present details from his fact-finding trip to Europe in January, where he met with health groups in England, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and France.

His thoughts on the issue are already clear. Ouellet has been saying since his return that "a health-care revolution has passed us by," that it's possible to make wait lists disappear while maintaining universal coverage and "that competition should be welcomed, not feared."

In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system....

The Obama administration, far from being "hip" and "cutting edge" and "progressively forward thinking," is mired in an idealistic socialism that even modern socialists reject - that which fell with the Berlin Wall and the Warsaw Pact. All the evidence is in - and Obama's socialist impulses have been conclusively proven not to work.

It is joyously ironic that at the exact moment that the socialized health care systems are seeking to encourage private insurance health care delivery, the Obamazombies, mired in 1970s Soviet propaganda, are seeking to dispense with the same.

Poor Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama! Apparently editing the law review gave him no understanding of history or economics!

Sunday, August 16, 2009

Obama Administration Signaling Public Option May Be Off Table

Excerpted from AP Reports:

By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Philip Elliott, Associated Press Writer – 11 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Bowing to Republican pressure and an uneasy public, President Barack Obama's administration signaled Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new health care system.

Facing mounting opposition to the overhaul, administration officials left open the chance for a compromise with Republicans that would include health insurance cooperatives instead of a government-run plan. Such a concession probably would enrage Obama's liberal supporters but could deliver a much-needed victory on a top domestic priority opposed by GOP lawmakers.


Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that government alternative to private health insurance is "not the essential element" of the administration's health care overhaul. The White House would be open to co-ops, she said, a sign that Democrats want a compromise so they can declare a victory.

Under a proposal by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., consumer-owned nonprofit cooperatives would sell insurance in competition with private industry, not unlike the way electric and agriculture co-ops operate, especially in rural states such as his own.


Obama's spokesman refused to say a public option was a make-or-break choice.

"What I am saying is the bottom line for this for the president is, what we have to have is choice and competition in the insurance market," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Sunday.

A day before, Obama appeared to hedge his bets.

"All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform," Obama said at a town hall meeting in Grand Junction, Colo. "This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it."


Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., said Obama's team is making a political calculation and embracing the co-op alternative as "a step away from the government takeover of the health care system" that the GOP has pummeled.

Friday, August 14, 2009

American College of Surgeons: Obama "Uninformed"

The American College of Surgeons, on August 12, responded with a press release concerning recent remarks made by Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama with a curt categorization of his remarks as "uninformed." Well, at least he is consistent....

The press release read (in part):

The American College of Surgeons is deeply disturbed over the uninformed public comments President Obama continues to make about the high-quality care provided by surgeons in the United States. When the President makes statements that are incorrect or not based in fact, we think he does a disservice to the American people at a time when they want clear, understandable facts about health care reform. We want to set the record straight.

Yesterday during a town hall meeting, President Obama got his facts completely wrong. He stated that a surgeon gets paid $50,000 for a leg amputation when, in fact, Medicare pays a surgeon between $740 and $1,140 for a leg amputation. This payment also includes the evaluation of the patient on the day of the operation plus patient follow-up care that is provided for 90 days after the operation. Private insurers pay some variation of the Medicare reimbursement for this service.

Joe Biden quickly responded to this press release by insisting that the Obama administration had merely "guessed wrong."

Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama responded by blaming the high cost of surgery on former president George W. Bush. "We had no idea surgeries were so expensive when the campaign was going on," said Obama. "But it has become clear in recent days that the situation is much worse than we had anticipated."

Monday, August 10, 2009

Black Preacher: Find a Way to Get Rid of "Long-Legged Mac Daddy" Obama

Obama is identified as a congenital liar, a freak, a communist, a socialist, and a "long-legged mac daddy" homosexual.

Americans are warned to find a way to get rid of the "long-legged mac daddy" lest White Folks begin rioting - because this preacher is "praying for the success" of the White Folks who are going to riot - and be warned, you don't want to see what is going to happen when White Folks begin to riot!

The spontaneous love song in honor of Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama's alleged affair with one Larry Sinclair is genuine entertainment: "Obama and Larry Sinclair, had a steamy love affair!"

Is this guy serious?

The sad thing is - he could be!

Obama to Democrat Fascist Brownshirts: GET IN THEIR FACE!

It is the stuff of perverted Saturday morning cartoons: Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama and his Gestapo clan at the DNC warble on about the right using "organized groups" to protest his attempted decline into Fascism via government-run and -rationed health care, while simultaneously sending out the SEIU thugs and other Democrat Brownshirts to physically assault normal citizens who are simply utilizing their First Amendment rights.

Remember, this is the same administration who refused to prosecute Black Panthers for polling-place intimidation that was caught on camera on election day in Philadelphia.

Welcome to Obama's Chicagoland thuggery as fully anticipated by Orwell....

Another perspective - notice the number of SEIU Union T-Shirts in this video, which, by happenstance (?) are similar in hue to those originally worn by the SS:

More Obamazombie thuggery, in Philadelphia on election day.

Saturday, August 8, 2009

Fact & Fiction in the Health Care Debate

The following is from AP wire reports and appeared in the Monday, August 3 edition of the Kinston (N.C.) Daily Free Press. The "claims" are excerpted objections to the Obama/Democratic health care proposals as they currently stand, while the "Facts" are excerpts showing that Democratic denials are simply not true.

Let it be said, by way of definition, that as of right now, there is no "Obama" plan for health care. While he has outlined certain goals that he would like to have reached, he has not yet put forth a plan. The plans that are currently wending their way through the Congress are all Democratic plans, however. The Senate has two bills it is considering, while the House is waiting for its plan to make its way out of committee.

But the intent of the plan is discernible from the structure of these currently-known plans, and a close examination of the objections to the various plans and the Obama administration's denials show that Obama and the Democrats are simply lying about key provisions.

"CLAIM: Americans won't have to change doctors or insurance companies.

'If you like your plan and you like your doctor, you won't have to do a thing,' Obama said on June 23. 'You keep your plan; you keep your doctor.'

THE FACTS: The proposed legislation would not require people to drop their doctor or insurer. But some tax provisions, depending on how they are written, might make it cheaper for some employers to pay a fee to end their health coverage. Their workers presumably would move to a public insurance plan that might not include their current doctors.

CLAIM: The Democrats' plans will lead to rationing, or the government determining which medical procedures a patient can have....

THE FACTS: ... Denying coverage for certain procedures might increase under proposals to have a government-appointed agency identify medicines and procedures best suited for various conditions....

CLAIM: Overhauling health care will not expand the federal deficit over the long term.

THE FACTS: ... the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the House bill lacks mechanisms to bring health care costs under control."

Again, these are direct quotations from an Associated Press wire story - not Sean Hannity or The American Spectator.

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Obamaspeak: Tell a Big Enough Lie....

Obama is spending a lot of time these days impressing upon his listeners that Obamacare doesn't mean the end of health care as we know it - rather it is just an expansion of an already good thing. This is a necessary tack for him to take, inasmuch as opinion polls show that most Americans are satisfied with their own health care plans, and don't wish to exchange them for something run by the government. In excess of 80% of recently-polled Americans expressed fear that Obama's health care reforms would make their current level of care more expensive, would decrease the quality of care, or would result in rationing of some sort.

And even among those who seek expansion of governmental involvement in health care, typical complaints are that something "needs to be done for children and the elderly."

"Something needs to be done, especially to help the kids and the elderly," said [Sharon] Williams, 48, who works for the school district in Forsyth County, Ga [and who voted for Obama]. "But if the reforms affect the insurance I have now, I would have a deep issue with it." Of course, something is already being done for the elderly and children - S-CHIP, Medicaid, Medicare (parts A, B, C, D, and E)... but her utter lack of awareness of this fact and her location within a public school identify her as the somewhat typical Obama voter.

In a speech in 2003, Obama was at least honest about his incipient socialism. He states, "I happen to be a proponent of single-payer, universal health care programs."

He further assures his listeners (at about :35 of the above video) that "a single payer, universal health-care plan - that's what I'd like to see. But, as all of you know, we may not get that immediately. because we've got to take that to the White house, and we've got to take that to the Senate..." (emphasis added).

Then, in 2007, while addressing the SEIU, Obama states very clearly that his intent is to "eliminate" private insurance, though it probably will not be possible "immediately," and may need to wait "15 or 20 years out."

How odd, then, that less than a full 24 hours after these videos began to be disseminated in mass, that the White House would respond with an allegation that Obama's own words represent "disinformation" about his own position!

It seems to me that we have been here before (and not just in the Clinton administration); yes, wasn't it just this past weekend - and this same group of people - that was gloating all over the Sunday talk shows that tax increases on those earning less than $250,000 were not "off the table?" Only to be assured by Robert Gibbs on Monday that, in fact, Obama does not (yet) intend to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000 per year?

Which to believe? How about none of them?

Is there something in the water that makes Democrats congenital liars? Or is it perhaps a strategy...?

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels

Monday, August 3, 2009

What Real Americans Think About Obamacare

Lloyd Dogget (D-TX) shouted down and flees his own town hall meeting:

Arlen Specter shouted down when he excuses not reading bills by saying, "We have to make judgments really fast..." because of a plethora of "many" "thousand page" bills! The odd thing is that this weiner actually seems to think this is an excuse....