POLITICALPYRO CONTRIBUTORS

Was it Hillary or Holder? Or can we chalk it up to the ‘New World Order’ and Obama’s attempt to rearrange the deck chairs once again.

The old conspiracy theory is true, I know it now. That is why the Bushies and the Clintons are so chummy. The Bilderberger group and the banks truly do own the world. This would explain Switzerland folding too. France folding to American pressure simply does not happen.

I smell a rat.

Hitler was failed art student. Yet so are millions. Most create as a means of expression. Hitler created as a vessel for adulation. When he did not earn respect he sought it by force.

Throughout history nations have endured the egos of dictators. Yet those like Castro and Kim Jung Ill stemmed from a military uprising that involved thousands.

Without doubt, their egos developed later but their beginnings were humble and even today both men dress plainly because they still have a genuine belief that they are one of the people.

Even Pinochet Duvalier and Mao Tse Tung never shed the military uniform that served as a symbolic reminder of the genuine movements that propelled them to and unlikely existance of power.

Seeing themselves as some sort of royalty, these dictators took on the image of having a divine purpose to their existance. Royalty throughout history created dictatorships not derived from ego of the individual but from a people’s desire to be lead by divinity. A King was informed of this divinity at birth and later comes to believe (if not sacked first) it his God chosen place among the masses.

Hitler, Stalin, Obama… are all different men. They were not propelled by the sort of revolution we have come to understand as Americans. No, not at all… Each man fed on the fears -like vultures- and fomented distrust by predicting mass carnage across a great people. Thus, filling the vacuum created with the idea of Hope and that change was said to be caused by governance that was flawed.

Spooking a trouble nation for the purposes of feeding their egos and in turn pulling out of thin air a clarion call for radical change. In short they created chaos where none could be found as a means to power.

Lenin despised Stalin who supported Trotsky. Stalin simply eliminated Trotsky by assassination. Obama eliminated Palmer by nullifying her eligibility.

Stalin eliminated his opponent then silenced the majority with fear. Obama lost the popular vote to Hilary Clinton but used his foot soldiers (The Hopians) to organize the Super Delegates.

Obamas ego like Hitlers is nothing more than a mask to hide a lifelong crisis of his true identity. Torn by opposing colors and religious zealots, Obama has chosen to forge his own identity through Jeremiah Wright and Michelle Robinson.

Yet his homosexuality developed from the need to seek a father figure. In Michelle he found the axis that squashed these homosexual leaning. Her strong minded militant black perspective gave Obama a sense of masculinity. It would be akin to dating Jodie Foster.

In all… Hitler found that the contrived adulation of his people was not enough. Then he needed to destroy those not like him, then he needed more love from Poland, Denmark then France…

This is where all short lived dictators loose their way. Hitlers ego was his driving force. Castro on the other hand never let his ego consume him. Castro knew when enough was enough and how to paralyze an nation but still make it social conscious believe that it was able to still walk and run.

What we as American should fear is that when Obama learns that his adulation stems from his false self, he will become lethal. He is too weak to tell us who the man behind the curtain is. He expects us to continually guess what shape his persona will take and he will punish those who don’t.

Like a balloon that never stabilizes, Obama -like Hitler- will rise to self destruction.

Digesting the efforts of Obama to look presidential and patriotic I noted a few things that need to be said.

Why lay a wreath at the Pentagon and not at Ground Zero in NYC?

Why is Obama continually searching for a way to dilute this day (9-11) His most recent action would have us use this day as a day of service. What? 3000 people died so he goes and paints some colored persons kitchen.

The VP of my company said I have the couth of a truck driver… SO let me say this.

Many family’s have at one time or another experienced a tragedy that is remembered by family and friends at certain times of the year. In those years too follow some my get depressed on personal days like birthdays or anniversaries.

My sister experiences this each year on the day our dad died and his birthday. I use this example to point out the fallacy of Obama and his day of service. If Obama had asked my sister to go clean a highway (our father was killed by a head on collision) on those days that she was feeling down in remembering of our father she would have smacked his purple lipped face.

He painted because he is thinking if the buildings, not the people. Had he visited an orphanage or hospital I might not have so much contempt for his sorry socialist ass.

Hopians have attacked at will the basic foundation of an American society and now the backlash is starting to be felt by the Obama administration and to his loyal subjects.

Obama and his visions of Hope is often portrayed as an apocalyptic and seismic break with our White European ideals and capitalistic history. Yet the truth is that it is the culmination and reification of European (and American) history in the 20th century. The United States connection too colonialism have prepared it for a wide range of phenomena associated with Obamas vision of Hope. This is what I now deem as the Hopian regime of the Obama Empire- from Muslim motivated terrorist murders to racial theories, from white European slave owners to the forcible annexation of Capitalism.

Moreover, a inside look at Obama and his Hopian views can suggest that it was innovated by applying prevailing racial theories (usually reserved only-whites) to the black race itself. It started with attacking those that objected to Obamas inexperience as being closet racists and denouncing religious black leaders - a non-controversial proposition - but then expanded them to include Christianity and all other forms of religion that were in contradiction to the of Hopian laws of socialist freedoms.

Hopian - and Fascism, Socialism - Obama and his ‘third world’ ideologies, adopted enthusiastically in places as diverse as Iowa, New Hampshire, and the Carolinas. It was clear by the middle of Obamas campaign that liberal capitalism, communism, and fascism (and its mutations) were locked in mortal battle of ideologies. Obamas mistake was to delusional believe in the affinity between capitalism and Americanism. But this affinity was a part of our collective DNA as a nation - and this affinity enhanced, in his mind, by Americas distrust of corporatism and by the existence of a imaginary common enemy: Capitalist Corporate Greed.

It is no wonder that the Hopian socialist movement has possessed all the hallmarks of an institutional religion: priesthood, rites, rituals, temples, worship, catechism, mythology and now school room indoctrination. Obama has deemed himself a religious ascetic saint and supreme thought provider.

Obama monastically denies himself common White European Capitalist pleasures (or so he claimed) in order to be able to dedicate himself fully to his calling. Obama is a monstrously inverted Jesus, sacrificing his life and denying himself so that humanity should benefit. By surpassing and suppressing his humanity, Obama has became a distorted contradiction and a version of embodiment of the Second Coming.

It is an aesthetic of decadence and evil (though it was not perceived this way by Obama), carefully orchestrated, and artificial. The Hopian view is about reproduced copies, not about originals. It was about the manipulation of symbols - not about veritable atavism.

In short: The Hopian is about theater, not about life. To enjoy the spectacle (and be subsumed by it), Obamas vision demands the suspension of judgment, depersonalization, and de-realization. The cleansing of American Capitalism is tantamount, in Hopian dramaturgy, to self-annulment. The Hopian is nihilistic not only operationally, or ideologically. Its very language and narratives were nihilistic. The Hopian is conspicuous nihilism - and Obama served as a role model, annihilating Obama the Man, only to re-appear as Obama the Saviour.

Obama used ‘white guilt’ and the systematic repression of blacks as a rebellion call against the “old ways” - against the assimilation culture, the upper classes, the established religions, the Capitalistic system, our leading Superpower status. The Hopians took the Leninist vocabulary and assimilated it effectively. The burgeoning movement, a reaction to narcissistic injuries inflicted upon the narcissistic upbringing of Obama . Obama himself is malignant narcissist, as too was Hitler.

The over abundance and self deprecating over indulgences of Capitalism constituted a perfect, easily identifiable, embodiment of all that was “wrong” with America. We were an old nation, with old ‘White European’ ideals that could be eerily dismissed as evil, they were slothful, they were part of the establishment, they were “decadent”, they were hated on religious and socio-economic grounds, they were different, they were greedy, they were morally superior, they were everywhere, they were defenseless, they were credulous, they were adaptable . They were the perfect hated father figure and parricide was in fashion.

This is precisely the source of the fascination with Obama. He was an inverted human. His unconscious was his conscious. He acted out our most repressed drives, fantasies, and wishes. He provides us with a glimpse of the horrors that lie beneath the veneer, the barbarians at our personal gates, and what it was like before we invented civilization.

Obama forced us all through The Looking Glass and many did not emerge. He is not the devil. He is one of us. He is the banality of evil. Just an ordinary, mentally disturbed, failure, and member of a mentally disturbed and failing political party, who lives in disturbed and failing times. He is the perfect mirror, a channel, and voice, for the very reasons why, more than ever, we as a nation have a reason to recapture those American ideals that set us free as a nation, and to reclaim those those ‘God given’ rights that pour from the very depth of our souls.

It took me a few minutes to get through this piece. Its nicely put together and does not miss anything.

Here is the Link: Barack Obama: The Naked Emperor

Here are more questions, and this time some good questions…..

While I’ve little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth
issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question:

What passport did he use when he was shuttling between
New York , Jakarta , and Karachi ?

So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later?

And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi , what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?

The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers.

It makes the debate over Obama’s citizenship a rather short and simple one.

Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A : Yes, by his own admission.

Q: What passport did he travel under?

A: There are only three possibilities.
1) He traveled with a U.S. Passport,
2) He traveled with a British passport, or
3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.

Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.

Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.

If he were traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.

Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a “natural born” American citizen between 1981 and 2008..

Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.

If you don’t care that your President is not a natural born citizen and in violation of the Constitution of the United States of America, then delete this and go back into your “hope and change” cocoon.

CNSNews.com
Federal Government Was Culprit in Housing and Economic Crisis, Says Congressional Report
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE ACTUAL REPORT

Washington (CNSNews.com) – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were the chief culprits in the housing crisis because they encouraged people who could not afford payments to borrow money, according to a congressional report released Tuesday.

The claims in the report have long been advanced by conservatives, who argue that the Community Reinvestment Act and other federal programs fed the housing bubble that burst in 2007 and led to the economic downfall in 2008.

But the report explains in detail how Fannie and Freddie — government sponsored enterprises (GSE) that were not subject to the same oversight as other publicly traded firms — “privatized their profits but socialized their risks.”

“In the short run, this government intervention was successful in its stated goal – raising the national homeownership rate,” says the report, the result of an investigation launched last fall by Republican members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

“However, the ultimate effect was to create a mortgage tsunami that wrought devastation on the American people and economy,” says the report. “While government intervention was not the sole cause of the financial crisis, its role was significant and has received too little attention.”

The report talks about the Clinton administration’s National Homeownership Strategy, citing President Clinton’s directive to “lift America’s homeownership rate to an all-time high by the end of the century.”

The Clinton strategy further said that Freddie and Fannie should reduce down-payment requirements and, according to the report, “called for increased use of ‘flexible underwriting criteria,’ which it said could be achieved in concert with ‘liberalized affordable housing underwriting criteria.’”

“That is the perfect smoking gun that tells how Barney Frank [D-Mass.], the Clinton administration and others would do it in those days,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the ranking member on the House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee, said Tuesday in a speech at the Heritage Foundation.

“The seeds of the meltdown began with the well-intentioned goal that everyone have a home even if they can’t afford it,” he said. “It led to one of the biggest ponzi schemes ever.”

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made 54 percent of the “subprime” mortgage loans from 2002 to 2007, or about $1.9 trillion in mortgage loans to borrowers with credit scores lower than 660.

The report comes after Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) – who fought against regulation of the two quasi-public mortgage giants — and Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) wrote a letter in June to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac calling on the GSEs to lower lending standards on condo buyers.

The report argues that lowered lending standards were the cause of the housing crisis and did not exempt the Republicans or the Bush administration from blame. It said placing certain lending quotas for under-served populations allowed “both Democratic and Republican administrations to consistently make campaign promises to boost homeownership through government intervention in the market.

Consequently, under both the Clinton and Bush administrations, HUD dramatically increased these quotas, which reached their zenith when the Bush administration raised them to 56 percent, 27 percent and 39 percent, respectively.”

“As home prices continued their dizzying rise, many people decided to cash in by buying a house with an adjustable rate mortgage featuring a low introductory teaser rate set to increase after a few years,” the report continues.

“These borrowers, confident in the oft-cited assertion that U.S. home values had never before fallen in the aggregate, planned to sell or refinance their investment before the mortgage rate adjusted upward, pocketing the difference between the initial purchase price and the subsequent appreciation in value,” says the report. “However, buyers failed to grasp the effect of a government policy that had quietly eroded the prudential limits on mortgage leverage, creating a dangerous speculative bubble.”

The report also talks about how the two GSEs became a powerful lobby. Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson opened up “partnership offices” in congressional districts, hired relatives of members of Congress, and GSE employees contributed $15 million to federal campaigns from 1998 to 2008. Throughout that time, all attempted reforms in Congress were blocked.

Also, in 1995, “Johnson seeded the Fannie Mae Foundation with $350 million of Fannie stock. The company used this foundation to spread millions of dollars around to politically connected organizations like the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute,” states the report.

Fannie and Freddie were not subject to regulation by the Securities and Exchange Commission, while executives were paid well. Former Fannie CEO Franklin Raines earned more than $50 million in compensation during his six-years at the helm, the report says. Fannie and Freddie paid billions more to shareholders. “Thus, the government subsidizations of GSE operations amounted to little more than corporate welfare,” the report says.

The report cites Frank’s accusations that to blame Fannie and Freddie is to blame only the lender and not the borrower.

“This misses the mark entirely. In fact, responsibility for the erosion of mortgage lending standards, which began with government affordable housing policy, rests squarely on the policy makers who advocated these ill-conceived policies in the first place,” the report says. “Borrowers quite naturally responded to the incentives they were given, irrespective of their socioeconomic status, and risky lending spread to the wider mortgage market.”

Wednesday, June 17, 2009
by John Aravosis (DC)
AMERICAblog

Is Obama giving federal agencies a right they already have?

UPDATE: The answer is “yes.” I just asked OPM Director John Berry, on a White House media conference call, whether in fact federal agencies already have the right to give these benefits to gay employees. The answer, “yes.” So what’s new about tonight? Obama is going to “tell” the agencies to give the benefits - as if any agency in the Obama administration would dare tell a gay employee no to a request for time off to attend their partner’s funeral?
__________

We all now know that President Obama this evening will give some federal agencies the right to give some federal employees some benefits at some time in the future. The problem, as one reader writes, is that federal agencies already have that right, and in fact, are already providing the benefits. So what is President Obama actually giving us?

Regarding your latest post of the WH Fact Sheet — here are some important facts that your readers may care to know.

The para (below) regarding “new” benefits available to domestic partners — these benefits have been available for YEARS !!!!

For civil service employees, domestic partners of federal employees can be added to the long-term care insurance program; supervisors can also be required to allow employees to use their sick leave to take care of domestic partners and non-biological, non-adopted children.

Nothing new here.

1) See the OPM website which permits long term care to be extended “Qualified Relatives” that includes:

QUALIFIED RELATIVE- The term ‘qualified relative’ means each of the following:
The spouse of an individual described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4).
A parent, stepparent, or parent-in-law of an individual described in paragraph (1) or (3).
A child (including an adopted child, a stepchild, or, to the extent the Office of Personnel Management by regulation provides, a foster child) of an individual described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4), if such child is at least 18 years of age.
An individual having such other relationship to an individual described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) as the Office may by regulation prescribe.

2) During the Clinton administration — guidance was requested about whether sick leave could be used to take care of same-sex partners and/children. The answer came back that a federal employee could use their sick leave to take care of, attend doctor appointments, or even attend funerals for anyone who had the “close approximation of family”. This was a guidance memo — not policy — but it has been available since the mid 1990’s. The reason I know this is that I have worked for a DOD Agency for 23 years and even DOD allowed me to take sick leave to care for my partner and my non-bio child.

What a bunch of nothing.

Lisa Polyak
Baltimore, MD

ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA; NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE

Collision or Political Hype…

From the Drudge Report
Tue Jun 16 2009 08:45:10 ET

On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care — a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!

Highlights on the agenda:

ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.

The network plans a primetime special — ‘Prescription for America’ — originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.

MORE

Late Monday night, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay fired off a complaint to the head of ABCNEWS:

Dear Mr. Westin:

As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC’s astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.” This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming.

Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party’s views to those of the President’s to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party’s opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.

In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime.

Respectfully,
Ken McKay
Republican National Committee
Chief of Staff

MORE

ABCNEWS Senior Vice President Kerry Smith on Tuesday responded to the RNC complaint, saying it contained ‘false premises’:

“ABCNEWS prides itself on covering all sides of important issues and asking direct questions of all newsmakers — of all political persuasions — even when others have taken a more partisan approach and even in the face of criticism from extremes on both ends of the political spectrum. ABCNEWS is looking for the most thoughtful and diverse voices on this issue.

“ABCNEWS alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president. Like any programs we broadcast, ABC News will have complete editorial control. To suggest otherwise is quite unfair to both our journalists and our audience.”

Developing…

In a totally unrelated story…

Solar system could go haywire before the Sun dies

43% Say CIA May Have Misled Pelosi, 41% Disagree

Monday, May 18, 2009

Forty-three percent (43%) of voters nationwide say that it’s at least somewhat likely that the Central Intelligence Agency misled Nancy Pelosi about the use of waterboarding when interrogating prisoners.

But the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey also found that 41% say it’s not likely the CIA did so.

In typical partisan fashion, 62% of Democrats give Pelosi the benefit of the doubt while 62% of Republicans hold the opposite view. As for those not affiliated with either major political party, 38% say the CIA may have misled the current House speaker, but 48% say it’s not likely.

The ideological divide is similar: 70% of liberals take Pelosi’s side, but just 24% of conservatives agree.

Overall, just 20% of voters say it’s Very Likely Pelosi was misled while 22% say it’s Not at All Likely. Most voters are somewhere in between and may be waiting for additional information.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls.) Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter.

The CIA is viewed favorably by 63% and unfavorably by 24%. For Pelosi, the comparable numbers are 35% favorable and 55% unfavorable.

The agency earns positive reviews from 78% of Republicans, 62% of unaffiliateds and 51% of Democrats.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of all voters believe it’s at least somewhat likely that harsh interrogation techniques such as waterboarding helped secure valuable intelligence information. Eighty percent (80%) of Republicans hold that view along with 60% of unaffiliateds. Democrats are evenly divided.

Sixty-five percent (65%) of voters say they’re following news about Pelosi and the CIA at least somewhat closely. Democrats are less interested in the story than Republicans and unaffiliateds.

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of U.S. voters said in late April that the Obama administration’s release of CIA memos about the harsh interrogation methods used on terrorism suspects endangered America’s national security.

While Pelosi and other senior congressional Democrats want to investigate further how the Bush administration treated terrorism suspects, 58% of voters oppose any such probes.

CIA director says Pelosi received the truth

By Sam Youngman
Posted: 05/15/09

CIA Director Leon Panetta challenged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s accusations that the agency lied to her, writing a memo to his agents saying she received nothing but the truth.

Panetta said that “ultimately, it is up to Congress to evaluate all the evidence and reach its own conclusions about what happened.”

Pelosi (D-Calif.) infuriated Republicans this week when she said in a news conference that she was “misled” by CIA officials during a briefing in 2002 about whether the U.S. was waterboarding alleged terrorist detainees.

Panetta, President Obama’s pick to run the clandestine agency and President Clinton’s former chief of staff, wrote in a memo to CIA employees Friday that “CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing ‘the enhanced techniques that had been employed,’” according to CIA records.

“We are an agency of high integrity, professionalism and dedication,” Panetta said in the memo. “Our task is to tell it like it is — even if that’s not what people always want to hear. Keep it up. Our national security depends on it.”

In the pep talk-style memo titled “Turning Down the Volume,” Panetta encourages CIA employees to return to their normal business and not to be distracted by the shout-fest Pelosi’s remarks created.

“My advice — indeed, my direction — to you is straightforward: Ignore the noise and stay focused on your mission,” Panetta wrote. “We have too much work to do to be distracted from our job of protecting this country.”

In what may be the most critical moment of her speakership, Pelosi is under fire about what she knew of the enhanced interrogation techniques used by the Bush administration and when she knew it.

At the same news conference where she accused the CIA of misleading her on the topic, Pelosi acknowledged for the first time that she knew in 2003 that terrorism suspects were waterboarded. She said she learned that from an aide who sat in on a briefing in February 2003.

For weeks, Pelosi had dodged questions about what she knew about waterboarding and when she knew it. Republicans have called her a hypocrite for criticizing techniques as “torture” when she tacitly agreed to the practices after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. At least one lawmaker — Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) — called on Pelosi Friday to step down as Speaker.

At the same time, liberal groups could question why she didn’t push back harder against the Bush administration. Pelosi defended herself for not speaking out at the time about information disclosed in a classified briefing. Asked why she didn’t co-sign a formal objection by Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), who attended the briefing with Pelosi aide Mike Sheehy, Pelosi said any objection would have done little good.

“No letter could change the policy,” she said on May 14 at a news conference. “It was clear we had to change the leadership in Congress and in the White House. That was my job, the Congress part.”

Over the years many have entered the White House as puppets of those who wish to control all the wealth and resources of the world, none succeeded but did help move the ball closer to the goal.

Circumstances were not right, and a crisis could not be “created” that was dire enough to persuade enough Americans to give up their freedoms to combat the crisis.

Obama is the Communist “Godfather” gone global. Franks, Dodd, Schumer and Durbin “created” the crisis with Fannie/Freddie by blocking every attempt to rein them in from 1998-2006 (it’s in the public records, look it up), Fannie/Freddie crashed in Sept. 2007, taking a few banks and AIG down in the process. The economy had started to adjust and was beginning to show some signs of improvement in Aug. 2008. On Sept 10 2008 McCain pulled 2,2 points ahead of Obama.(RCP national avg Sept.10 2008, McCain 47.4, Obama 45.2) On Sept 11, 2008 there was a 2 hour electronic run on the banks to the tune of 550 Billion, Rep Kanjorski (D) said if the banks had not been closed 5.5 trillion would have been withdrawn and the US economy would have collapsed, and within 24 hrs. the world economy. Thus a “crisis” was created that ensured a win for Obama.

Who but Obama’s Puppet masters George Soros and the 100+ members of the Democracy Alliance have enough money in money market funds to execute such a run on the banks, and tell George Bush and the World, “Go along with our plan for Global Communist Domination, or we will collapse the world’s economy and create Global chaos.

What will be the next “Created Crisis” that will permit Obama to declare a National Emergency which will put his Communist Puppet master Crime bosses in position to rape the worlds resources and people for their personal gain and power.

Over the past few days I have watch as the Democratic Party has lead us around by our noses. Limbaugh, Steele, Leader, Defacto Leader, Echo Beliefs, Entertainer, Want Obamas Economic Plan To Fail… It is like the Republican Party does not know who they are any longer.

I have said here that here that we need to say, Hell Yeah!… you tell them Rush, but we also need to remember that he is an entertainer and not any thing more until he throws his hat into the ring. Steele on the other hand is a leader, and must remember that. The more that the Republican Party continues to break Reagan’s #1 rule (Thy Shalt Not Eat Their Own) the more the liberal media feeding frenzy will gain momentum with many of the populace.

People want handouts, that come with no string, not hand ups. Many are hurting and though Rush and his rhetoric resonate with rich among the republican base, many that are trapped in the middle are feeling the pinch of this economy.

I do too want the socialist ideas of the Obama Administration to fail… but that is not the message that will be heard… It will be said that I want Obamas Economic plan to fail and this is not what I said and neither did Rush. Its like Newt and his “Whither on the vine” sound bit that was pulled out of a 15 minute speech that was taken totally out of context… if any of you remember that.

I have said all along that we need to let these folk do what they want, as this slow, methodically heating of the proverbial frog in the pot is what these socialists want. The heat needs to be turned up high, and soon, so that frog knows its time to jump.

Otherwise it wont matter what Limbaugh, Steele or anyone else for that matter says… The Obama administration has to poison Limbaugh’s use by republican representatives in the US congress so in turn Rush and his 20 million a week faithful will become just as big as a liability as Limbaugh. Only then can the Obama administration get any real traction when it time to ratchet up the reach of the Fairness Doctrine.

‘The Birthers’ Continue to Hound Obama

March 1) - Ever since Barack Obama became a prominent political fixture in the country, he has encountered a fair number of rumors and smears concerning him and his family.
There was the one rumor about him being a secret Muslim (he is a practicing Christian). And there was the one allegation his wife, Michelle, was caught on videotape using the word “whitey” (no such clip has ever surfaced).
Most of the charges were, for the most part, put to rest by vigorous responses from the Obama team during the campaign.
But one conspiracy theory lives on — despite overwhelming evidence debunking it.
Politico.com reports that the Birthers — a persistent group of conservatives who believe Obama is ineligible to be president because of alleged questions surrounding his birth status — continue to operate and thrive on the fringe.

This story wont go away because the left does not want it to. They (The Obamabots) must keep kicking at what they see as the achilles of the conservative party… Which would be its conspiracy mill fringe.

I say who cares where he was born… I want to know how he was the only one to come out of the most corrupt political machine (Chicago) in world history, and not be touched or influenced by its politics. Further… I want to know how he can be mentored by Davis and pal around with Ayers and back political leaders like Odinga and not be seriously questioned on that.

I “hope” you all get what you want… and you get it real hard.