Tickler (laughing): “I’m reading this article where Obama compared Geithner to Alexander Hamilton.”
Tickler’s Wife: “What do you expect from a guy who compares himself to Lincoln.”
Obama’s making this easy. He’s completely incompetent and is literally destroying our economy, but he’s not even clever and clandestine enough to hide it. So we find but small solace in the obviousness of his idiocy.
Having had some good fun here on Politicklish.com with Obama’s primary crutch, the teleprompter, I was tickled to hear of a new blog that just came out called Barack Obama’s Teleprompter’s Blog. It has some hilarious content and is worth a look. We have no affiliation with this site, we just appreciate the truth and humor that pokes fun at the obvious issues Obama has, that are also somehow ignored by the liberal-controlled NBC/ABC/CBS/CNN/MSNBC, etc.
Unbelievable. Obama has no shame, nor does the Census Bureau. Write, call, post, to let it be known this can’t go on. They defrauded the American public by registering thousands of dead or duplicate people on the Democrats ticket. Yes, only one sided as they have been proven repeatedly to be. See my many posts last year on the subject for background. What do you get when you employ a bunch of people who themselves desperately want to keep the hand-outs coming to do political ground work? ACORN.
I feel a coining coming on. I think a clearer outlining of ACORN’s mission could best be defined by a renaming… to The Association to Coordinate Obama Redistricting via NecromancyTM. Just remember you heard it here first.
An article on FoxNews.com outlines the threat and utter incredibility of the concept.
ACORN to Play Role in 2010 Census
The U.S. Census is supposed to be free of politics, but one group with a history of voter fraud, ACORN, is participating in next year’s count, raising concerns about the politicization of the decennial survey.
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now signed on as a national partner with the U.S. Census Bureau in February 2009 to assist with the recruitment of the 1.4 million temporary workers needed to go door-to-door to count every person in the United States — currently believed to be more than 306 million people.
A U.S. Census “sell sheet,” an advertisement used to recruit national partners, says partnerships with groups like ACORN “play an important role in making the 2010 Census successful,” including by “help[ing] recruit census workers.”
…
But ACORN’s partnership with the 2010 Census is worrisome to lawmakers who say past allegations of fraud should raise concerns about the organization.
“It’s a concern, especially when you look at all the different charges of voter fraud. And it’s not just the lawmakers’ concern. It should be the concern of every citizen in the country,” Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland, R-Ga., vice ranking member of the subcommittee for the U.S. Census, told FOXNews.com. “We want an enumeration. We don’t want to have any false numbers.”
ACORN, which claims to be a non-partisan grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people, came under fire in 2007 when Washington State filed felony charges against several paid ACORN employees and supervisors for more than 1,700 fraudulent voter registrations. In March 2008, an ACORN worker in Pennsylvania was sentenced for making 29 phony voter registration forms. The group’s activities were frequently questioned in the 2008 presidential election.
…The census is an official count of the country’s population mandated by the U.S. Constitution. It is used to determine distribution of taxpayer money through grants and appropriations and the apportionment of the 435 seats in the House of Representatives. Every U.S. household unit, including those occupied by non-citizens and illegal immigrants, must be counted.
Which is why ACORN wants to be involved since nearly all of their employees not only have, but ARE horses in the race.
Westmoreland and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a member of the House census subcommittee, said the panel has held hearings to make sure the penalties for census takers committing fraud are clearly defined.
“I feel fairly confident that the penalties for an individual manipulating the count are pretty severe,” Chaffetz said. The penalty for any fraudulent activity can be up to five years in jail.
Westmoreland said he hopes the Census Bureau will maintain its measures to ensure an accurate report.
“I feel comfortable right now with the people at the census department that they’re going to put forth their best effort to have a fair count,” he said.
The U.S. Census Bureau has refuted any suggestions that ACORN or any other groups will fraudulently and unduly influence the results of the census.
“The Census (Bureau) is a nonpartisan, non-political agency and we’re very dedicated to an accurate account,” bureau spokesman Stephen Buckner told FOXNews.com. “We have a lot of quality controls in place to keep any kind of systemic error or fraudulent behavior to affect the counts.”
We’ll see. They said that about Obama’s fraudulent state senate race and others. From where I sit, anyone who is or knows anyone who is on the dole must be disallowed from being any part of the count.
Here’s a doctor who decided to find a better way to provide care to his patients. He sees all of the waste and fraud tied to our traditional insurance system and decides, hey, there’s a better way to do this. So he sets up his practice so that his patients just pay a flat $79/month for their healthcare. Under this, they can see him as many times as they need to, and he will take care of any x-ray, sonogram, etc. that needs to be done in connection with their visits. All for $79/month. New York State didn’t like that idea (heaven forbid we find a way to reduce bureaucratic jobs and waste) and tried to shut him down. Read what transpired next here.
Obama, not just the latest liberal president who truly doesn’t care for the American soldier, this one’s more dangerous than those who came before. Quite an accomplishment.
My wife just brought this article to my attention. Obama’s trying to be sneaky yet again with back-door manipulation toward socialized healthcare. If private insurance pays for veterans, as opposed to the government, all premiums will rise and all policies will feel the impact. Obama wants you to hate private medicine without knowing he’s to blame for it, so you’ll swallow the cyanide on demand. Don’t be fooled by his dirty Chicago parlor tricks.
The leader of the nation’s largest veterans organization says he is “deeply disappointed and concerned” after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases.
“It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan,” said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. “He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it.”
The Commander, clearly angered as he emerged from the session said, “This reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate ‘ to care for him who shall have borne the battle’ given that the United States government sent members of the armed forces into harm’s way, and not private insurance companies. I say again that The American Legion does not and will not support any plan that seeks to bill a veteran for treatment of a service connected disability at the very agency that was created to treat the unique need of America’s veterans!”
…
Read the full article here.
My wife brought an entertaining piece to my attention the other day entitled “Is Obama The New Coke”
…
There are two basic scenarios for Brand Obama at this point.
One, the electorate thought they were getting one thing in Obama and instead got something very different. In other words, they wanted the change he said he would bring, but dislike the change he is actually bringing and actually believes in. In this scenario, Obama is what he is and simply won’t be able to adapt to what the Target Market demands –this spells a short stay — one term — in the White House.
Two, Obama is the change the electorate wants and he is capable of embodying this change. But the president has lost sight of his Target Market’s needs and is falling prey to inside-the-Beltway realities and left-leaning pieties and interest groups.
…
Read the full article here. Clever observations.
My wife brought an entertaining piece to my attention the other day entitled “Is Obama The New Coke”
…
There are two basic scenarios for Brand Obama at this point.
One, the electorate thought they were getting one thing in Obama and instead got something very different. In other words, they wanted the change he said he would bring, but dislike the change he is actually bringing and actually believes in. In this scenario, Obama is what he is and simply won’t be able to adapt to what the Target Market demands –this spells a short stay — one term — in the White House.
Two, Obama is the change the electorate wants and he is capable of embodying this change. But the president has lost sight of his Target Market’s needs and is falling prey to inside-the-Beltway realities and left-leaning pieties and interest groups.
…
Read the full article here
Just for the record and because I’m frankly so far beyond tired of Obama’s naive amateur dense dangerous foolhardy undeserved race-baiting foolishness that I can’t even sufficiently describe it anymore without extremely foul language — anyway, again just for the record…
The very last thing in the entire world — including rare species of insect and mongrel in the Amazon Basin and flecks of rock and snow in Antarctica, as well as every speck of space dust in the solar system… — again I say, the very last thing Obama could ever be compared to in this life, the life before, or the life to come, is our revered President Abraham Lincoln. The… very… last… thing.
Was I clear about how unlike the Crooked Community Rabble-Rouser Obama is to the revered name of an actual President, like Abraham Lincoln? Hopefully you can tell that I would like to be clear, and speak in certain terms. He needs to shut up and sit down because no one — no, not even the most inebriated liberal messia-O worshiper in the whole of the world — could honestly believe the two are from the same planet.
Obama is the weakest bureaucrat cog to ever swindle his way into power (even more than FDR, whose worst facets Obama actually resembles), and as such should never dare even invoke the comparison to Lincoln, even as the most inappropriate and irreverent attempt at humor. I think I can speak for all thinking people, particularly conservatives (who actually are like Lincoln and still live by his principles) when I say you, Mr. two-months-and-already-a-total-failure, …you are certainly no Abe Lincoln.
And I end this rant.
You knew it would happen. While I certainly don’t give just to get tax breaks, I certainly don’t want to double it by giving through taxes and then again outside of them. Obama has no clue about charity, after all, he’s never been to Sunday School, or perhaps if he did he was too busy scheming how to game the teacher into giving him special treatment for all of his “struggles”.
Among those shocked by President Obama’s 2010 budget, the most surprising are the true-blue liberals who run most of America’s nonprofits, universities and charities. How dare he limit tax deductions for charitable giving! They’re afraid they’ll get fewer donations, but they should be more concerned that Mr. Obama’s policies will shove them aside in favor of the New Charity State.
And to keep the record straight. All evidence has made clear that, though the liberals run most of the non-religious charities, and seem to do a lot of very visible charity work (to get praise and honor), the conservatives are by far the biggest charity donors in all aspects, and most of it is done anonymously. Who really cares about people, a visible credit seeker or a private citizen donating quietly and anonymously? But anyway, back to the story.
What did these nonprofit liberals expect, anyway? Mr. Obama is proposing a vast expansion of the entitlement state, and he has to find some way to pay for it. So logically enough, one of his ideas for funding public welfare is to reduce the tax benefit for private charity. His budget proposes to raise the top personal income tax rate to 39.6% in 2011 from 35%, and the 33% rate to 36% while reducing the tax benefit from itemized deductions for the top two brackets to 28% from 35% and 33%, respectively. The White House estimates the deduction reduction will yield $318 billion in revenue over 10 years.
From the Ivy League to the United Jewish Appeal, petitions and manifestos are in the works. The Independent Sector, otherwise eager to praise the Obama budget, worries the tax change “could be a disincentive to some donors.” According to the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, total itemized contributions from the highest income households would have dropped 4.8% — or $3.87 billion — in 2006 if the Obama policy had been in place. That year, Americans gave $186.6 billion to charity, more than 40% from those in the highest tax bracket. A back of the envelope calculation by the Tax Policy Center, a left-of-center think tank, estimates the Obama plan will reduce annual giving by 2%, or some $9 billion.
…Mr. Orszag revealed the real agenda at work when he pointed out that the money taken from the “rich” would be used to fund such Obama state-run charities as universal health care. The argument is that any potential declines in private gifts, whether to universities or foundations, will be balanced by increases in government grants paid with higher taxes — redistribution by another means. This is how Europe’s welfare state works: Taxes are so high that private citizens have come to believe it is only the state’s duty to support cultural institutions and public welfare. The ambit for private giving shrinks.
Told you this would happen. My brother once said Obama wants to create a country of human cattle that need to be tended and manipulated without choice, only the state matters. He’s dead on. Obama’s a nightmare to free agency and freedom in general.
America has always operated on a different philosophy, going back to Tocqueville’s discovery of thousands of private associations that sustained communities without a commanding state. We doubt that a tax benefit is what drives most giving even today. The exception may be the confiscatory death tax that drives many of the superrich to form foundations to avoid the tax. But we suspect that without the death tax the wealthy would give even more of their income away.
Americans of all income levels have long given generously, notably in the 1980s as income tax rates fell and the economy boomed. Over the last five decades, American giving overall has hardly deviated from 2% of personal income, according to the Tax Foundation. In an ideal world, the U.S. would eliminate most tax deductions, including the one for charity, in return for a simpler, flatter tax that would help create more wealth to give away. With his many new income-limited tax credits and deduction phase-outs, however, Mr. Obama is sprinting in the opposite direction.
Meanwhile, the White House may have underestimated the power of the liberal nonprofit lobby. The charity deduction cut is the only one of the President’s many tax increases that Democrats on Capitol Hill have publicly criticized. Politics hath no fury like a rich liberal scorned.
Read the full article here.
Judicial Watch, a legal watchdog group, published a story today recounting the high-maintenance sock-puppet Speaker of The House’s demands on the military to waste taxpayer dollars and resources.
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has obtained documents from the Department of Defense (DOD) detailing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s multiple requests for military air travel. The documents, obtained by Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), include internal DOD email correspondence detailing attempts by DOD staff to accommodate Pelosi’s numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker’s last minute cancellations and changes. The following are a few highlights from the documents, which are linked in full [on the site]:
- In response to a series of requests for military aircraft, one Defense Department official wrote, “Any chance of politely querying [Pelosi’s team] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend?…[T]here’s no need to block every weekend ‘just in case’…” The email also notes that Pelosi’s office had, “a history of canceling many of their past requests.”
- One DOD official complained about the “hidden costs” associated with the speaker’s last minute changes and cancellations. “We have…folks prepping the jets and crews driving in (not a short drive for some), cooking meals and preflighting the jets etc.”
- The documents include a discussion of House Ethics rules and Defense Department policies as they apply to the speaker’s requests for staff, spouses and extended family to accompany her on military aircraft. In May 2008, for example, Pelosi requested that her husband join her on a Congressional Delegation (CODEL) into Iraq. The DOD explained to Pelosi that the agency has a written policy prohibiting spouses from joining CODEL’s into combat zones.
- Documents obtained from the U.S. Army include correspondence from Speaker Pelosi’s office requesting an Army escort and three military planes to transport Pelosi and other members of Congress to Cleveland, Ohio, for the funeral services of the late Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones. Pelosi noted in her letter of August 22, 2008, that such a request, labeled “Operation Tribute” was an “exception to standard policy.”
- The documents also detail correspondence from intermediaries for Speaker Pelosi issuing demands for certain aircraft and expressing outrage when requested military planes were not available. “It is my understanding there are no G5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable…The speaker will want to know where the planes are…” wrote Kay King, Director of the House Office of Interparliamentary Affairs. In a separate email, when told a certain type of aircraft would not be available, King writes, “This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset [s]peaker.”
- During another email exchange DOD staff advised Kay King that one Pelosi military aircraft request could not be met because of “crew rest requirements” and offered to help secure commercial travel. Kay King responded: “We appreciate the efforts to help the codel [sic] fly commercially but you know the problem that creates with spouses. If we can find another way to assist with military assets, we would like to do that.”
Speaker Pelosi came under fire in 2007 for requesting a 42-seat Air Force carrier to ferry the Speaker and her staff back and forth between San Francisco, CA and Washington, DC. Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert was allowed access to a 12-seat commuter jet for security reasons after the events of 9/11.
“Taken together, these documents show that Speaker Pelosi treats the Air Force like her personal airline,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Not only does Speaker Pelosi issue unreasonable requests for military travel, but her office seems unconcerned about wasting taxpayer money with last minute cancellations and other demands.”
Read the details and emails here.