Will Obama Finally Answer a Question About Legalizing Pot?

Of course not!  That would involve taking a position, any position, when doing so might alienate a potential voter base.  And we all know the campaigner-in-chief won't do that.  Certainly not in an election year. 

Fast and Furious Update

Emails found in a Department of Justice document dump made late last Friday suggest that Attorney General Eric Holder may have perjured himself regarding when he knew about Operation Fast and Furious:

In testimony in front of Congress on May 3, 2011, Holder insisted he’d only heard of Operation Fast and Furious “a few weeks” before he testified; a story he later change to “a few months.” These emails strongly suggest that Holder was aware of Operation Fast and Furious within 48 hours of Brian Terry’s death, if he did not know already about the operation well before then from the memos he began receiving in July of 2010, six months before the firefight that ended Agent Terry’s life.

Holder’s expected appearance before the House Oversight Committee on Thursday, February 2, is further complicated by the actions of Patrick Cunningham, the chief of the Phoenix office’s criminal division within the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona. Cunningham invoked his Fifth Amendment rights in an effort to avoid testifying in front of the Oversight Committee — you can only invoke the Fifth to avoid self-incrimination. The invocation makes it even less plausible for Holder to claim that DOJ was acting lawfully with the Operation. Cunningham resigned from the U.S. Attorney’s Office on Friday, January 27.

The question is starting to become what will happen first: Holder resigns as a result of the Fast and Furious scandal or the "mainstream" media actually starts covering the Fast and Furious scandal?

The Debt Generation

This video, which I first spotted on Gateway Pundit, is definitely worth a minute of your time.  It does a nice job of illustrating one of the sad ironies of the Obama presidency.  Obama could have never become president without the overwhelming support of the millennials, my generation, but no generation will be hurt more by Obama's policies.  Not only is the youth unemployment rate sky high; Obama has also borrowed more than $5 trillion that we will eventually have to repay.  It is generational theft and we are the victims.   

Big-Drama Obama?

Even the Washington Post is acknowledging:

President Obama’s raw exchange with the governor of Arizona on an airport tarmac this week did more than overshadow his carefully stage-managed road trip to trumpet his State of the Union goals.

The discussion revealed a testy side of the president’s personality that is at odds with his public image as “no-drama Obama,” reviving criticism that he is unwilling to be second-guessed — or to even entertain another point of view.

Well, he is The One after all.  And already one of America's greatest presidents, in his own mind.   Why should he be second guessed?

Don't We Need a Food Stamp Prez?

In defense of Obama, Frank J. Fleming observes:

Obama tried to get everyone jobs — he even had the surefire plan of spending hundreds of billions of dollars in stimulus money — but it turns out, making lots of new jobs is really, really hard. Who knew?

But Obama was easily able to relax the requirements for receiving food stamps and increase the program’s benefits. So now if you can’t get a job, it doesn’t matter, because you still get to eat.

But how do people react to seeing millions more on food stamps? It’s not the logical, “Yay — look at all the new people I get to help with my tax dollars!” No, it’s irrational yelling about all the extra people dependent on government. To which I ask: What’s so wrong with being dependent on government?

Of all the things to depend on, isn’t government the smartest choice? You could depend on yourself, but come on. You know yourself; you fail all the time. You could depend on your friends and family, but they’d eventually get sick of you. But government will always love you and always be there. Long after you’re dead and forgotten, there will be government . . . .

Taxes Are for the Little People

Guess who's not paying their "fair share:"

A new report just out from the Internal Revenue Service reveals that 36 of President Obama's executive office staff owe the country $833,970 in back taxes. These people working for Mr. Fair Share apparently haven't paid any share, let alone their fair share.

Previous reports have shown how well-paid Obama's White House staff is, with 457 aides pulling down more than $37 million last year. That's up seven workers and nearly $4 million from the Bush administration's last year.

Nearly one-third of Obama's aides make more than $100,000 with 21 being paid the top White House salary of $172,200, each. 

They must be using the Geithner exemption.

78, 75, 75, 73, 63, 61, 57, 57, 51

It may not be obvious, but these numbers represent a key reason why Obama must be defeated in November.  These are the ages of the Justices of the United States Supreme Court.  In three years, Obama has already nominated two justices to the Court.  More likely than not, the next presidential term will bring at least two more openings to be filled. 

If Obama wins in November, he could fundamentally reshape the Supreme Court with those two additional nominees and, with it, the United States for decades.  That is because two of the three most senior justices are Scalia, arguably the most prominent member of the Court's conservative, originalist wing and Kennedy, the Court's swing vote.  If you want to understand what is at stake, just consider DC v. Heller, which confirmed the constitutional right of an individual "to keep and bear arms" and self-defense.  That was a 5-4 decision. It does not take much to imagine its ruling being overturned, if Obama is wins in November

A Balanced Assessment of Obama's State of the Union Speech

Over at The Atlantic, the always insightful Megan McArdle offers her take on Obama's speech.  She found:

the speech was better-written and better-delivered than many of the critics I read this morning; it had a lot of good applause lines (along with, yes, the groaner about spilled milk), and the president is stylistically a very good speaker.

But I also thought that, three years in, I'd like to see a little more from his speeches than base-pleasing applause lines and pleasing delivery.  The content of the speech was sorely disappointing. 

The harsh way to put it is that the speech was an extended whine about how all the rich bankers and George Bush have screwed everything up.  That was fine campaign rhetoric when he was a Senator.  But it's pretty weak when he's been in charge for most of a full term--two years of that with a majority in congress.

Of course, one can argue--correctly--that Obama actually doesn't have the power to fix the economy; the recession was deeper than he thought it would be.  I'm entirely sympathetic to this argument except for one thing, which is that Barack Obama got himself elected by claiming that "the Republicans have driven the economy into a ditch" and he could drive it out again.  It doesn't seem unfair to judge him on his failure to actually deliver what he promised . . . .

Technically, It Has Now Been 1,001 Days

How Serendipitous!

Obama friend and ally, Warren Buffett "stands to benefit from the president's decision to reject the Keystone XL oil pipeline permit.  Mr. Buffett's Bershire Hathaway Inc. owns Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC, which is among the railroads that would transport oil produced in western Canada if the pipeline isn't built."

And I am sure that he will donate every penny of his windfall to the government.  It only seems fair, right?

Republican Debate

Stephen Green is drunkblogging tonight's Republican debate.

Democratic Operative Arrested for Identify Theft in Effort to Frame Republican Secretary of State

John Hinderaker has reported on the story of Zachary Edwards,  an Iowa Democrat, arrested for allegedly trying to steal Iowa Secretary of State (and Republican) Matt Schultz's identity "in order to frame Schultz for "'unethical behavior' . . . ."

As the article explains, the suspect has close ties to both the Iowa Democratic Party and Obama:

Edwards is a former Obama staffer who directed “new media operations” for Obama in five states during the 2008 primaries. Thereafter, he was Obama’s Director of New Media for the State of Iowa. In the Democratic Party’s lexicon, “new media” apparently includes identity theft.

Edwards now works for LINK Strategies, a Democratic consulting firm with extraordinarily close ties to Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin. Its principal, Jeff Link, has served as Harkin’s campaign manager and chief of staff. Link, too, is a former Obama staffer. The LINK Strategies web site says that Jeff Link “served as a media consultant to the Obama for President Campaign, coordinating branding, all paid media and polling in 25 states, including seven battleground states (VA, NC, FL, CO, NM, NV, MT)….”

 The crime also appears to have coincided (been coordinated?) with a campaign by Iowa Democrats to level false accusations against Schultz in an effort to bring him down.  Seems like a story that is worth keeping an eye on.

A Message Republicans Would Do Well to Remember This Election

Newt Takes South Carolina

Here is a recap of last night's events, with analysis, over at Hotair.  Next stop: Florida.

Unexpectedly, Obama's First Re-Election Ad Is "Filled With Fibs."

"In his very first TV ad of the 2012 campaign, the president is feeding the public false information about America's dependence on foreign fuels. His twisted statistics actually celebrate the Obama recession."

Blocking the Keystone Pipeline

Powerline has two articles explaining why Obama's Keystone decision is both an economic disaster and an environmental disaster. 

The eventual Republican nominee may be wise to consider this advice:  "If Republicans spend half their time between now and November talking about energy, we will have a new president in 2013."

Summarizing Everything Obama Knows About Economics in One Blog Post

.













.

Republican Debate

For a recap of tonight's Republican Debate, here is the transcript of Vodkapundit's drunkblogging.

UPDATED: Some of that "smart diplomacy" the Obama administration was taking about?

Following up on yesterday's post, the Obama administration today announced its plans to block the Keystone XL pipeline.  It did so while attempting to blame Republicans, claiming Congress had not given the administration sufficient time to review the project before requiring a decision.  It made this claim despite the fact that the project has been under review for three years and previously received several approvals at the federal, state, and local levels.  So much for shovel ready projects. 

While it may not provide the jobs the Keystone project would have, at least we can still buy oil from places like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.  More commentary can be found here and here.

Some of that "smart diplomacy" the Obama administration was taking about?

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said "news the Obama administration would delay a decision on whether to approve extending TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline was a wakeup call about the degree to which Canada is "held hostage" to U.S. decisions."  At least the Canadians can take comfort in knowing that they have China as a potential buyer to fall back upon, while we Americans can take comfort in . . . ?

Three Years Under Obama: By Bill Whittle

In this video, Bill Whittle offers, with his typical insight, a look back on the last three years under Obama.  A concise, if depressing, assessment, you should watch the whole thing.  It serves as another important reminder why this is not a "sit-it-out-and-pout" election, but a "get-Obama-out" election.

Losing our Economic Freedom

This graph, prepared by the Heritage Foundation, charts America's economic freedom during the Obama presidency.  John Hinderaker at Powerline offers this commentary:

The source of America’s prosperity is no secret: our economy has historically been freer than those of almost all rivals. Unfortunately, that advantage–the essence of what America is all about–is being lost.

The Heritage Foundation has released its annual Index of Economic Freedom, and the United States has slipped to tenth place, trailing Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Canada, Chile, Mauritius and Ireland . . . .

I think that lays out the path Obama is leading us down rather clearly.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

This is not a "Sit-It-Out-And-Pout" election. This is a "Get-Obama-Out" election.   This statement pretty well sums up the principle driving me to write this blog.  We (literally) cannot afford four more years of President Obama.

Disappearing Workers

The above graph really makes clear just how historically bad the Obama years have been for American workers (would be workers anyway).  John Merline of Investor's Business Daily explains how:

In the 30 months since the recession officially ended, nearly 1 million people have dropped out of the labor force — they aren't working, and they aren't looking — according to data from Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. In the past two months, the labor force shrank by 170,000.

This is virtually unprecedented in past economic recoveries, at least since the BLS has kept detailed records. In the past nine recoveries, the labor force had climbed an average 3.5 million by this point, according to an IBD analysis of the BLS data.

He further notes that, when one adjusts for this drop, the unemployment rate jumps to near 11%  from the official 8.5%.

I read this and I am reminded of certain attacks leveled against Reagan during his presidency.  Reagan's critics sought to dismiss the success of his economic policies by claiming that anyone could give the illusion of national prosperity, if they spent 100s of billions of dollars in deficit spending.  It has taken more than twenty-five years, but Obama has proven those critics wrong. And he has been wasting trillions of dollars we do not have, not just billions.  Yes, we have been brought to the point where I can say "just billions."   (Hat tip to Instapundit for the link).

Obama and the troops

Michael Hastings' new book, The Operators, offers this glimpse of Obama while visiting Iraq: 

After the talk, out of earshot from the soldiers and diplomats, he starts to complain. He starts to act very un-Obamalike, according to a U.S. embassy official
who helped organize the trip in Baghdad.
He’s asked to go out to take a few more pictures with soldiers and embassy staffers. He’s asked to sign copies of his book. “He didn’t want to take pictures with any more soldiers; he was complaining about it,” a State Department official tells me. “Look, I was excited to meet him. I wanted to like him. Let’s just say the scales fell from my
eyes after I did. These are people over here who’ve been fighting the war, or working every day for the war effort, and he didn’t want to take fucking pictures with them?"

I guess the good news for Obama is that, with his recently announced defense cuts, there will be less soldiers to bother him for a picture.

Broken Campaign Promises - No Individual Mandate

The most controversial part of Obamacare, Obama’s centerpiece legislation, is the individual mandate.  Should it come into effect, the individual mandate will require every U.S. citizen to purchase health insurance.  Failure to do so will result in a fine.  An unprecedented intrusion on personal autonomy by the federal government, the mandate has been the focal point of several legal challenges.  In the face of these challenges, the Obama administration has been unwavering in arguing both that the mandate is constitutional and that it is an essential part of health care reform.  With the Supreme Court set to rule on the provision's constitutionality this summer, it will undoubtedly prove a key issue in the run up to the election.

What many people are likely to have forgotten in 2012 is that the individual mandate was also a contentious issue in 2008.  During the 2008 election, however, Barack Obama was not the candidate advocating for an individual mandate.  He was its most vocal detractor.  Indeed, Obama’s opposition to the individual mandate distinguished his health care plan from Hillary Clinton’s and likely helped him to secure the Democratic nomination.  Here is Obama, in 2008, explaining why health care reform should be focused on reducing costs. Not mandates.

    

The Deceased Vote in New Hampshire

Just how easy is it to commit voter fraud?  In New Hampshire at least, the answer appears to be: very easy.  James O'Keefe, best known for exposing ACORN's corruption in the prostitution scandal, demonstrated this yesterday along with his group, Project Veritas.  As he explained it:

On January 10th, Project Veritas reporters walked into New Hampshire Polling Locations during the Presidential Primaries, saying dead people’s names. We stated the name of a dead person we got from the NH obituaries. The names of the deceased were both Registered Republican and Democrats And in almost every case, saying a dead person’s name, we were handed a ballot to cast a vote. We used no misrepresentation and no false pretenses. in fact, in almost every case, we insisted we show ID and they insisted that we vote without showing ID.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is doing what it can to block states attempting to take measures that would prevent voter fraud.  If the Republicans are going to win in November, they are going to have to secure a big enough lead to get them outside the "margin of fraud."  Remember every vote counts (apparently even those of the deceased).

Obama's Poll Numbers Slipping

Did the (unconstitutional) Cordray “Recess” Power Play Backfire?  One would certainly hope.

Mitt Romney wins New Hampshire

By no means surprising, but Mitt Romney coasted to an easy victory in today's New Hampshire primary.  After winning both Iowa and New Hampshire, Romney could very easily lock up the Republican nomination within a few weeks time.  That said, I'm still not sure whether he is the best choice for Republicans.  What I do know, however, is that, flaws and all, Romney would make a vast improvement over Obama.  That same holds true for any candidate that could conceivably emerge as the Republican nominee (and most names you might stumble across in a phone book). 

With this blog, I will spend the coming months working to convince every conservative, libertarian, and moderate, and any liberal that will listen, that they need to rally around the Republican candidate, whoever he is, and send Obama back to Chicago this November.  I plan to offer a resource that highlights all the broken promises, all the failures, and all the scandals, offers commentary on pertinent political news, and maybe even has a laugh or two at Obama's expense. 

To whoever may stumble across this blog, enjoy!         

Hope Turns to Fear?

Courtesy of Instapundit: According to the latest poll from U.S.News, when asked what news event they fear most about 2012, Americans by a margin of two-to-one said Obama's reelection.  Americans fear four more years of Obama more than they fear Iran obtaining a nuclear bomb. 

Third Time's the Charm?

Some thoughts from Vodkapundit, Stephen Green, on the resignation Bill Daley and his replacement by Jacob Lew as President Obama's White House Chief of Staff.  I think it is also bears mentioning that Obama, who will be looking to portray himself as the anti-Wall Street candidate this election, just replaced his JPMorgan Chief of Staff with one from Citibank.