Y3Y3's Blog

WASHINGTON -- President Obama paid a surprise visit to members of the White House press corps Thursday evening when he walked through their working area of the West Wing, but he quickly became agitated when he was confronted with a question by one of the journalists. 

According to reports, when the Politico's Jonathan Martin asked the president about his nominee for deputy secretary of defense, William Lynn, Obama refused to answer, saying he was not there to take questions.

"I came down here to visit. I didn't come down here -- this is what happens. I can't end up visiting you guys and shaking hands if I am going to grilled every time I come down here," the president said. 

Pressed further by the Politico reporter about his Pentagon nominee, Obama turned more serious, putting his hand on the reporter's shoulder and staring him in the eye.

"All right, come on," he said, with obvious irritation in his voice. "We will be having a press conference, at which time you can feel free to [ask] questions. Right now, I just wanted to say hello and introduce myself to you guys -- that's all I was trying to do," Politico.com reported.

The situation came to a close when a cameraman in the room interrupted, declaring: "I'd like to say it one more time: 'Mr. President.'"

The nominee in question, William Lynn, is a former lobbyist for defense contractor Raytheon, a pick Obama made in contradiction to his much-heralded anti-lobbying rules.

Obama was willing to field lighter questions, though. 

Have you noticed the trend to abolishing ONE TAX, only to propose ANOTHER HIGHER TAX in it's place.


The DOT administrator wants your MILEAGE TO BE TAXED, instead of by GAS CONSUMPTION. 

This is a slap in the face to the owners of efficient cars. 

It sends a message that yo WILL NOT BE REWARDED FOR DRIVING AN EFFICIENT CAR.

So much for that "GREEN" world they want.  If it was REALLY IMPORTANT to cut the greenhouse gasses by cutting the gas consumption in cars, we would be rewarded by the lesser taxes that the current system provides.  

The FACT IS that this is YET ANOTHER MONEY GRAB from your fascist president and his thugs.

NONE of the current administration has even mentioned Fiscal Responsibility. 

By taxing YOU MORE, they get to spend it on their favorite causes...like themselves.

By LARRY MARGASAK – 7 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration and the new Congress are quickly handing over to Republicans the same "culture of corruption" issue that Democrats used so effectively against the GOP before coming to power.

Freshman Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., is only the latest embarrassment.

Senate Democrats accepted Burris because they believed what he told them: He was clean. Burris now admits he tried to raise money for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who authorities say sought to sell President Barack Obama's former Senate seat.

"The story seems to be changing day by day," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Wednesday.

The political mess for the Democratic Party, however, isn't Burris' conduct alone; it's the pattern that has developed so quickly over the past few months.

_The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., is the subject of a House ethics investigation. It's partly focused on his fundraising practices for a college center in his name, his ownership financing of a resort property in the Dominican Republic and his financial disclosure reports.

_Federal agents raided two Pennsylvania defense contractors that were provided millions of dollars in federal funding by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.

_Blagojevich was arrested Dec. 9 on federal charges, including allegations he schemed to sell the Senate seat to the highest bidder.

_Tom Daschle, the former Senate majority leader from South Dakota, abandoned his bid to become health and human services secretary and the administration's point man on reforming health care; and Nancy Killefer stepped down from a newly created position charged with eliminating inefficient government programs.

Both Daschle and Killefer had tax problems, and Daschle also faced potential conflicts of interest related to working with health care interests.

_Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was confirmed after revealing he had tax troubles.

_Obama's initial choice for commerce secretary, Bill Richardson, stepped aside due to a grand jury investigation into a state contract awarded to his political donors.

_While the Senate voted overwhelmingly to confirm William Lynn as deputy defense secretary, Obama had to waive his ethics regulations to place the former defense lobbyist in charge of day-to-day operations at the Pentagon.

The No. 2 Senate Democrat, Richard Durbin of Illinois, expressed his anger about the Burris case Wednesday while he was on an official visit to Greece.

"I do believe that the public statements made by Mr. Burris to this point have raised questions ... as to the nature of his relationship with the former governor and the circumstances surrounding his appointment," Durbin said.

Reid said in Nevada, "Now there's some question as to whether or not he told the truth."

Where to go next? Reid had no answer.

"What I think we have to do is just wait and see," the Senate leader said.

Senate Democrats now may be trapped in their own ethics system. Disciplinary action against a senator usually requires a long investigation by the Senate's ethics committee. While a preliminary inquiry on Burris is under way, that's only the first early step. And, with ongoing criminal investigations in Illinois, the committee probably would have to postpone any action — as it usually does — to avoid interference.

In 2006, Republicans lost control of the House after Democrats effectively used a "culture of corruption" theme against them.

The final scandal broke shortly before the election, when it was revealed that then-Rep. Mark Foley, a Florida Republican, sent sexually suggestive e-mails and explicit instant messages to teenage boys who had served as House pages.

Republicans were further harmed when it was disclosed that several of their members were aware of the problem and failed to take action.

Democrats, who've been in control of both Congress and the White House less than two months now, are lucky on one point. The next congressional election is nearly two years away.

Instead of trusting the mortgage companies to actually helping the home-owners, How about:

1.  the mortgage companies should take your CURRENT county/city property value and apply  IT instead of the amount you borrowed to your same loan agreement, and refigure your monthly loan payment.

Say you borrowed $350K for a house 5 years ago.  NOW, it's worth $275K.  A loss of $75K.

The $75K becomes the equity in the home, and the new loan amount reflects the TRUTH of your houses value.   No money actually changes hands, just the numbers on paper. 

The Liberal political agenda seems to be more important than cutting the welfare and medicine to Illegals, and the Green policies which caused the many fires, and the social engineering BS.

California sure was STUPID to agree to NOT laying off UNION  state workers.  92,000 of them!

This is where 0bama wants to take the REST OF OUR COUNTRY!!!

Bubba claims we need more ‘fairness’.   Bubba wants the GOVERNMENT to FORCE liberally biased radio shows onto the air.  What happened to capitalism?  What happened to the concept of FREE MARKETS???

Bubba, and the liberals have forgotten that NPR is a Government funded LEFT WING opinion as news outlet.  Does NPR need some rightwing talkers added to it’s line up!  How about Pacifica, the most leftwing propaganda outlet?  Perhaps Pacifica should have to carry Dr. Michael Savage, and Mark Levin?

The mainstream media networks need to understand that because they lean heavily to the left they should also be forced to carry opposing viewpoints.   Perhaps Rush Limbaugh should be on with Katie?  Lets put Sean Hannity on NBC and MSNBC.  Lets put Glenn Beck on ABC’s evening news programs.   

The Liberal politicians are afraid of the truth.  They have been pretty stupid in the last 20+ years and even talkshow hosts have better solutions than those offered by the self centered and shallow types who seem to be get elected to office.  The politicians are never qualified to be in the industries and areas of expertise they legislate, and therefore we get such hideous outcomes as the promise of lower phone bills IF they split up AT&T.  How’d that work out?  

The fairness doctrine and all the fascist idealism being shown by our current crop of corrupt politicians point to a serious problem.   That problem is that the politicians are NOT LISTENING and are not good with details or understanding the past.

The left leaning newspapers have lost  much of their circulation.  WHY???  Nobody wants to read the propaganda and lies.  Same for those weekly “Opinions stated as News” magazines.  Do the libs want to FORCE MORE LIBERAL NEWSPAPERS ONTO THE STREET?  

Since the MSM did such a poor job reporting FACTS, of what value are they anymore?  Why should they get special legal treatment, when they are clearly not working for the publics best good, but just the opposite.

Why are the liberal politicians too stupid to realize this??   Or it this more of a lack of ethics?

Where are the liberals who whine on these blogs?   They have been scarce since 0bamas PORK bill was found to be a MISTAKE.    Where is the defense of his Economic ruination bill?


As we conservatives have said all along, the details were never understood by the libs.  For them it has been ONLY about the emotional aspects of voting for 0bama, and the NEVER HAD A CLUE what his plans were.

All you gullible liberals/Socialists/Marxists who JUST HAD TO VOTE FOR 0bama...

Thinking HE would pay your mortgage and all......


Looks like YOU served your purpose - You got him elected.

Looks like those of you WHO STILL HAVE JOBS will get a MASSIVE TAX BREAK..of  $13.00 bucks a week.  Works out to about $600 bucks a year.

THAT WILL PAY THE MORTGAGE ON ONE REFRIGERATOR BOX in an alley someplace.


YOU must be SO PROUD of your President Bigears!


LESS THAN 4 percent of the almost ONE TRILLION DOLLAR PORKBILL goes to YOU.  The rest INCREASES THE SIZE OF THE GOVERNMENT!

Even Nancy Pelosi's district gets 30 MILLION to protect an ENGDANGERED MOUSE.

OK you liberals with your heads in the  sand…AND you lazy, inept and self centered News readers…

The PROOF that 0bama was involved in a big way in the collapse of the mortgage loan industry.   

He used a ‘study’ that suggested that blacks were being discriminated against , and used it to  intimidate the mortgage companies to take Billions in BAD LOANS!!!!

Yes, your small headed, big eared dolt of a president IS ONE OF THOSE WHO NEED TO GO TO JAIL!!!

Perhaps when the Repubs are in power THEY can investigate the Democrats who did this AND SEND THEM TO JAIL!  We only have 2 years to wait…and the Dems KNOW THIS, which is why they are trying SO HARD to force Socialism and Marxist  down our throats.


HERE IS THE LINK:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314

OK you liberals with your heads in the  sand…AND you lazy, inept and self centered News readers…

The PROOF that 0bama was involved in a big way in the collapse of the mortgage loan industry.   

He used a ‘study’ that suggested that blacks were being discriminated against , and used it to  intimidate the mortgage companies to take Billions in BAD LOANS!!!!

Yes, your small headed, big eared dolt of a president IS ONE OF THOSE WHO NEED TO GO TO JAIL!!!

Perhaps when the Repubs are in power THEY can investigate the Democrats who did this AND SEND THEM TO JAIL!  We only have 2 years to wait…and the Dems KNOW THIS, which is why they are trying SO HARD to force Socialism and Marxist  down our throats.


HERE IS THE LINK:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314

'We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, and delusional. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights.'

ARTICLE I: You do not have the right

to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone --not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. This one is my pet peeve...get an education and go to work..don't expect everyone else to take care of you!

ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but if it would turn out the same way as current public housing, we're not interested in public health care.

ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people..If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you put away for the rest of your sorry life.

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful. (AMEN!)

ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

ARTICLE X : This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from!

(and last but not least....)

ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one God. You are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all, with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!

If you agree, share this with a friend.

No, you don't have to, and nothing tragic will befall you if you don't.

I just think it's about time common sense is allowed to flourish.

Sensible people of the United States, speak out, because if you do not, who will?

WASHINGTON (AP) - The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee is proposing a "truth commission" to investigate abuses of detainees, politically inspired moves at the Justice Department, and whole range of decisions made during the Bush administration.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said the primary goal of the commission would be to learn the truth rather than prosecute former officials, but said the inquiry should reach far beyond misdeeds at the Justice Department under Bush to include matters of Iraq prewar intelligence and the Defense Department.

Leahy outlined his suggestion for a "truth and reconciliation" commission during a speech at Georgetown University Monday.

"I'm doing this not to humiliate people or punish people but to get the truth out," he said.

The panel he envisions would be modeled after one that investigated the apartheid regime in South Africa. It would have subpoena power but would not bring criminal charges, he said.

Among the matters Leahy wants investigated by such a commission are: the firings of U.S. attorneys, treatment and torture of terror suspect detainees, and the authorization of warrantless wiretapping.

"Rather than vengeance, we need a fair-minded pursuit of what actually happened" during the Bush administration, Leahy said.

Some Democrats have called for criminal investigations of those who authorized certain controversial tactics in the war on terror. Republicans have countered that such decisions made in the wake of the 2001 terror attacks should not be second-guessed.

"We need to be able to read the page before we turn the page," Leahy said. "We need to come to a shared understanding of the failures of the recent past."

After the Sept. 11 attacks, the government created a 9/11 commission to examine failures within government anti-terror efforts.

Leahy said that commission was hampered by a lack of cooperation from the administration, and would like a new commission to have access to everything they needed.

He said he was offering the idea to see how much support it had.

"We need to see whether the American people are ready to take this path," he said, adding that he did not have anyone in particular in mind to lead the commission, but wanted "people with real credibility."

WHAT DEMOCRATS are smart and HONEST ENOUGH to perform such an investigation?  Surly not the current crop of tax evaders and Liars on the left.  It's not like these political hacks know right from wrong - as has been displayed over the last 3 weeks+......

No wonder there's such a rush by the Dems to get this so-called stimulus plan passed, because each day of delay increases the possibility that people will unearth another of the elements buried deep within the plan.

One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446).

The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aLzfDxfbwhzs

As the stock market slides again...after President bigears hideous press conference last night, it seems the PROFESSIONAL FINANCIAL FOLKS are voting NO CONFIDENCE for his pork filled Marxist trash. 

The fact that the Dems are NOT LISTENING TO EXPERTS, but instead, political hacks from the far far left is sending the worst message. 

Does President Bigears believe in his bailout bill???  Seems he wasn't to clear on things last night and it seemed he was LYING ALL THE TIME.    The Stock market is tanking because of his level of ineptitude.

Obama and the Economy: When, If Ever, Was He Telling Us the Truth?

By John R. Lott, Jr.
“Freedomnomics” author/Senior Research Scientist, University of Maryland

As the final push for the 778 page, $827 billion stimulus package faces votes today and tomorrow in the Senate, President Obama is hammering his opponents and pushing hard for the bill. On Friday, Obama pointedly reminded Republicans that he won the November election and had the right to get his policies enacted. But the stimulus bill bears little resemblance to his campaign promises. It bears little resemblance his many promises he made just a month ago.

If Obama claims a mandate, shouldn’t it be related to what he campaigned on?

President Barack Obama speaks during a town hall style meeting about the economic stimulus package, Monday, Feb. 9, 2009, at Concord Community High School in Elkhart, Ind. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

At the very end of the presidential campaign Obama “proposed a $175 billion plan with tax-rebate checks for consumers as well as spending on school repairs, roads and bridges, aid to states, and tax credits for job creation.”

The current bill is not only spending 4.7 times what he promised in November, but gone are the tax-rebate checks and tax credits for job creation. The new additional programs have nothing to do with roads and bridges. Yet, a package that Obama never hinted at a couple of months ago is now considered sacrosanct. The Associated Press described Obama’s position on the stimulus plan this way: “Stopping just short of a take-it-or-leave-it stand, Obama has mocked the notion that a stimulus bill shouldn’t include huge spending.”

Take an emphatic promise that Obama made just a month ago, well after the heat of the presidential campaign had passed: “We are going to ban all earmarks — the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review.” That wasn’t a new promise. During the third presidential debate on October 15, 2008 Obama bluntly promised: “they need to be eliminated.”

But now take Obama’s testy defense of those same earmarks last Friday. Obama reportedly “also defended earmarks as inevitable in such a package.”

During the third presidential debate Obama promised to rein in the budget deficit. When moderator Bob Schieffer asked Obama what he was going to do about the deficit Obama promised to cut the it: “But there is no doubt that we’ve been living beyond our means and we’re going to have to make some adjustments. Now, what I’ve done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut.”

Or take the second presidential debate on October 7, 2008. Obama noted that eliminating earmarks was “important,” but even more important “I want to go line by line through every item in the federal budget and eliminate programs that don’t work and make sure that those that do work, work better and cheaper.” This was his constant theme during the presidential debates to cut government.

So how do you go from campaigning to cut government spending and ban earmarks before the election on November 4 to start talking about a $500 to $700 billion stimulus plan in mid-November. What changed?

What exactly did he learn immediately after the election about the economy that caused him to go from a budget cutter to proposing the biggest increase in spending ever? Prior to the election, Obama was already regularly claiming that the economy was in the worst financial crisis since the depression. Do you cut spending when you are in the worst financial crisis since the depression, but massively increase it if you can claim that things have gotten a little worse?

Now Obama is saying that we will be facing trillion dollar deficits “for years to come.” There was no hint of these policies on November 4, 2008.

Some economic logic is required here. Some explanation for these changes within weeks is needed. When will someone in the press ask Obama to explain what his economic view of the world is that made him support positions right before the election that he then reversed right after he won.

I don’t know of any economic theory that explains Obama’s different policy positions. The most likely explanation is a simple one: Obama told voters what they wanted to hear during the campaign, not what he planned to do. Obama’s short Senate record tells us that he really was the most liberal member of the senate.

While the stimulus bill is going to increase federal government spending by over $800 billion, there is one place that Obama has so far announced a cut — defense spending. A 10 percent cut might be fine, but during the presidential campaign defense spending was one area where he promised to “increase” spending.

Disappointingly, no one is asking Obama to explain any of these changes. Possibly everyone has gotten so distracted or tired trying to catalogue Obama’s broken ethics promises that they are missing the littered field of broken campaign promises.

If Obama merely waited until after the election to make his policy views known, he can’t claim a mandate for his “new” policies. What should be questioned is Obama’s truthfulness to the American people.