Democrats are finding it easier to compare Obama to Carter

RWB News:  Republicans have been making comparisons between Obama and Carter for quite awhile; now it's the Dems turn.

As reported by:  WSJ

By JOHN FUND

Comparisons between the Obama White House and the failed presidency of Jimmy Carter are increasingly being made—and by Democrats.

Walter Mondale, Mr. Carter's vice president, told The New Yorker this week that anxious and angry voters in the late 1970s "just turned against us—same as with Obama." As the polls turned against his administration, Mr. Mondale recalled that Mr. Carter "began to lose confidence in his ability to move the public." Democrats on Capitol Hill are now saying this is happening to Mr. Obama.

Mr. Mondale says it's time for the president "to get rid of those teleprompters and connect" with voters. Another of Mr. Obama's clear errors has been to turn over the drafting of key legislation to the Democratic Congress: "That doesn't work even when you own Congress," he said. "You have to ride 'em."

Mr. Carter himself is heightening comparisons with his own presidency by publishing his White House diaries this week. "I overburdened Congress with an array of controversial and politically costly requests," he said on Monday. The parallels to Mr. Obama's experience are clear.

Comparisons between the two men were made frequently during the 2008 campaign, but in a favorable way. Princeton University historian Sean Wilentz, for instance, told Fox News in August 2008 that Mr. Obama's "rhetoric is more like Jimmy Carter's than any other Democratic president in recent memory." Syndicated columnist Jonah Goldberg noted more recently that Mr. Obama, like Mr. Carter in his 1976 campaign, "promised a transformational presidency, a new accommodation with religion, a new centrism, a changed tone."

But within a few months, liberals were already finding fault with his rhetoric. "He's the great earnest bore at the dinner party," wrote Michael Wolff, a contributor to Vanity Fair. "He's cold; he's prickly; he's uncomfortable; he's not funny; and he's getting awfully tedious. He thinks it's all about him." That sounds like a critique of Mr. Carter.

Foreign policy experts are also picking up on similarities. Walter Russell Mead, then a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Economist magazine earlier this year that Mr. Obama is "avoiding the worst mistakes that plagued Carter." But he warns that presidents like Mr. Obama who emphasize "human rights" can fall prey to the temptation of picking on weak countries while ignoring more dire human rights issues in powerful countries (Russia, China, Iran). Over time that can "hollow out an administration's credibility and make a president look weak." Mr. Mead warned that Mr. Obama's foreign policy "to some degree makes him dependent on people who wish neither him nor America well. This doesn't have to end badly and I hope that it doesn't—but it's not an ideal position after one's first year in power."

Liberals increasingly can't avoid making connections between Mr. Carter's political troubles and those of Mr. Obama. In July, MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked his guests if Democrats up for re-election will "run away from President O'Carter." After much laughter, John Heileman of New York Magazine quipped "Calling Dr. Freud." To which Mr. Matthews, a former Carter speechwriter, sighed "I know."

Pat Caddell, who was Mr. Carter's pollster while he was in the White House, thinks some comparisons between the two men are overblown. But he notes that any White House that is sinking in the polls takes on a "bunker mentality" that leads the president to become isolated and consult with fewer and fewer people from the outside. Mr. Caddell told me that his Democratic friends think that's happening to Mr. Obama—and that the president's ability to pull himself out of a political tailspin is hampered by his resistance to seek out fresh thinking.

The Obama White House is clearly cognizant of the comparisons being made between the two presidents. This month, environmental activist Bill McKibben met with White House aides to convince them to reinstall a set of solar panels that Mr. Carter had placed on the White House roof. They were taken down in 1986 following roof repairs. Mr. McKibben said it was time to bring them back to demonstrate Mr. Obama's support for alternative energy.

But Mr. McKibben told reporters that the White House "refused to take the Carter-era panel that we brought with us" and only said that they would continue to ponder "what is appropriate" for the White House's energy needs. Britain's Guardian newspaper reported that the Obama aides were "twitchy perhaps about inviting any comparison (to Mr. Carter) in the run-up to the very difficult mid-term elections." Democrats need no reminding that Mr. Carter wound up costing them dearly in 1978 and 1980 as Republicans made major gains in Congress.

Original article:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575505822147816104.html

swenbwr

http://redwhitebluenews.com/?p=2968

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Outrage--Obama claims citizens have no privacy - National conservative | Examiner.com

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-national/outrage-obama-claims-citizens-have-no-privacy<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a

Like father like son: Jesse Jackson Jr admits extramarital affair

Jesse Jackson SR's history includes paying his mistress non-profit money from his Rainbow Push Coalition to travel with him on a perpetual booty call while his wife and family were left home. The apple, as they say, often doesn't fall far from the tree. From NBC: Jesse's Girl?

Jesse Jackson Jr. doesn't deny involvement with a Washington D.C. based restaurant hostess who was named this morning in a Sun-Times story about his alleged attempt to buy an appointment to President Obama's former Senate seat.

Before the above sentence was entered into the computer, Stacy McCain posted pics of Giovana Huidobro (via Instapundit): As If I Actually Needed an Excuse to Post This Picture of a Blonde in a Bikini

Of course, Jr took a page from Sr in the 'explanation:'

"The reference to a social acquaintance is a personal and private matter between me and my wife that was handled some time ago." Jackson Jr. said in a statement. "I ask that you respect our privacy."

If memory serves, Sr also included God in the list. But there's more. Other than having an affair, he also really did pay to get Obama's Senate seat, something that he denied. It's the Chicago way. From the Sun Times:

...the congressman vowed to stay in office in the wake of a Chicago Sun-Times report that a major political fund-raiser has told federal authorities that Jackson directed him to offer former Gov. Rod Blagojevich millions of dollars in campaign cash in return for an appointment for Jackson to the U.S. Senate, to succeed President Obama.

The allegation by Oak Brook businessman Raghuveer Nayak regarding fund-raising runs counter to public statements Jackson has made as recently as last week that he never authorized any deal to attempt to trade campaign cash for the Senate appointment, which ultimately went not to Jackson but to Sen. Roland Burris.

"The allegations about fund-raising and the Senate seat are not new," Jackson said in a written statement. "I've already talked with the authorities about these claims, told them they were false, and no charges have been brought against me.

...The Sun-Times reported on Tuesday that sources said Nayak told authorities that on Oct. 8, 2008, Jackson directed him to offer Blagojevich $6 million in exchange for the Senate appointment.

A chip off the old block that Jr.

http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2010/09/like-father-like-son-jesse-jackson-jr.html

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Obama Aunt in New Vid: Despite Living Off Gov‘t She Doesn’t Owe U.S. Anything

In an new video released by WBZ-TV in Boston, Obama's aunt Zeituni Onyango praises America for being a country where one "can do whatever you want when you live here," yet believes she doesn't owe the country anything despite living here illegally for years.

As reporter Jonathan Elias writes:

Despite what's she's been given, Zeituni Onyango said flatly that she owes this country nothing in return. "But, it's given you so much?" Elias asked. "So? It's a free country under God," was her terse response.

Elias then asked about her being a burden to the taxpayers:

When asked why the taxpayers should be burdened with her needs, the feisty Zeituni said, "This country is owned by almighty God. You people who preach Jesus Christ almighty God and the rest of it, you are here to help people, help the poor, help other countries and help women.  That's what the United States is supposed to do? And you have to give me my right [like any other] person's right."

Toward the end of the interview she said she doesn't understand why people are upset: "That's God's miracles," she said. "Don't you believe in miracles?"

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-aunt-in-new-vid-despite-living-off-govt-she-doesnt-owe-u-s-anything/

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Obama Asks Religious Leaders to Preach the Gospel of HC Reform

President Obama called on religious leaders Tuesday to help him sell health care reform. (File Photo: AP)

With approval ratings plummeting and support for the new health care law waning, the president is scrambling for ways to sell his health care overhaul. Possibly looking for a miracle, he's turning to church leaders who preach about such events to deliver one.

"Obama, alongside other top administration officials, beseeched thousands of faith-based and community organizations to preach the gospel on new insurance reforms, chiefly the Patients' Bill of Rights." That's how Politico describes a conference call that featured the president on Tuesday.

"Get out there and spread the word," the president encouraged religious leaders on the call. Politico reports that Obama also advised those listening to treat the new law as settled fact and use their perches of power to convey that message to congregants and friends.

"The debate in Washington is over," he said, and called on the leaders to be "important validators and trusted resources," regarding the law.

Despite reports and news that the new health care law is not fulfilling some of the promises Obama made regarding it, and that those within the president's own party are distancing themselves from it, he still sees the law as a monumental piece of legislation that is good for the country:

This is something that we'll be able to look back on, just like we do on Medicare and Social Security, as a cornerstone that improves the security of millions of Americans, at the same time lowers costs and gets control of costs, both at the government level, but also for families and businesses.

That's a sentiment that is not shared by all those in the president's own party. For example, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) who voted for the health care bill is now encouraging his state to seek ways to bypass some of its requirement.

Tuesday's conference call was organized by Health and Human Services Center for Faith-Based and Community Partnerships.

Recognizing the large task in front of the group, Joshua DuBois, director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Partnerships, outlined the task: "We've got work to do."

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-asks-religious-leaders-to-preach-the-gospel-of-hc-reforms/

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Why is the DOJ protecting the Black Panthers? New information raises more questions

RWB News: As November elections approach, new information has surfaced about the voter intimidation case against the Black Panthers (set aside by the DOJ). Included is testimony by a man who was beaten by King Samir, possibly with the same baton Samir was shown wielding in the youtube video. This court record of violence wasn't deemed important by Eric Holder & company–so as November approaches, the question America voters should be screaming from the rooftops is 'WHY?— Ann-Marie M from CA

As reported by Big Government.com

New Information Raises More Questions About DOJ and the Black Panthers

by Mike Roman

New information about the violent criminal history of the Philadelphia Black Panthers once again calls into question the Department of Justice handling of this racist hate group.

Records obtained from the Philadelphia Courts document arrests for assault, robbery, domestic violence, and drug dealing by King Samir and Jerry Jackson.

According to one of his victims, King Samir does more than intimidate voters with his baton.  He beat the man in the head with the same type weapon he was seen brandishing outside of a Philadelphia polling place in 2008.

The beating, in 1995, was so severe the man was hospitalized and appeared in court with staples still in his head.

From the court transcript:

Q: Tell the court what if anything the defendant did

A: He hit me with a cane.

Q: What did it have on it?

A: Two D batteries

Q: Where were the batteries?

A: Wrapped around on top of the cane

Q: Is that the part he hit you with?

A: Yes.

Q: To what part of your body?

A: The back of the head, and I got hit in the jaw with a bottle.

Q: I notice you have three staples in your head, is this from getting hit in the head with the cane?

A: Yes

Samir (whose real name is Maruse Heath) plead guilty to simple assault and was sentenced to 2 years probation.

How could DOJ overlook this when they dismissed the charges against the Black Panthers? The Department's trial team surely would have introduced evidence of the fact that Samir had beaten people senseless with the same type of weapon he used at the polls in 2008.  Surely this was evidence that he was a true intimidating force.

In 1998, Samir broke into the home of his ex-girlfriend and beat and terrorized her.  From her graphicstatement to the Police:

I said I am calling the police and I dialed 911. I was giving the operator my information, that's when he punched me in the face and told me to put the f*cking phone down. I dropped the phone. I picked up a paint pole to protect myself. He knocked the pole away from me. He grabbed my hair and dragged me to the stairs. He put me in a chin lock to stop me from screaming. I bit his fingers…  He told Vera "I am going to kill this b*tch." He grabbed my hair and pulled it out when I tried to get away. I ran to the front door and the cops were there.

Samir was charged with Burglary, Aggravated Assault, and Terroristic Threats.  The charges were dismissed because his victim failed to appear at the trial.

Jerry Jackson's first encounter with Police was in 1978 when he and another man stabbed and robbed a victim in Philadelphia. Jackson was convicted and sentenced for Robbery and Criminal Conspiracy, both first-degree felonies.  Jackson has also been arrested and served time for dealing drugs in the same neighborhood where he serves as a Democratic Precinct Committeeman.

Since becoming infamous for intimidating voters, Jackson and Samir have taken to posting photos of themselves posing with handguns. See here, here, here, and here.   A felony firearm charge can be brought against a convicted felon who is found in possession of a firearm, regardless of the intended or actual use of the weapon. Certainly DOJ must be aware of these photos.  Why haven't they pursued charges under 18 U.S.C. 922 against Jerry Jackson?  Is he getting a pass on gun charges too?

This scandal is far from over.

Original Article:  http://biggovernment.com/mroman/2010/09/22/new-information-raises-more-questions-about-doj-and-the-black-panthers/

swenbwr

http://redwhitebluenews.com/?p=2886

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Gateway Pundit

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/09/it-begins-top-dem-official-calls-tea-party-fckers-video/<br><div style="color:rgb(60%,60%,60%)">Sent with <a href=

Why Bob Woodward's New Book Should Scare the Hell Out of All Americans

Last night I read the front-page Washington Post story on Bob Woodward's new book, Obama's Wars. Frankly the article gave me nightmares. The revelations about  Obama's naive views on terrorism and his lack of commitment to the Afghan war confirmed many of the worst fears about our President and the War on Terror. But his desire to place politics before victory was surprising.

The book details how Obama is not trying to win the war as much as he was desperately trying to placate his progressive base, regardless of the safety of American citizens. At one point the POTUS tells Woodward directly

 Woodward's book portrays Obama and the White House as barraged by warnings about the threat of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and confronted with the difficulty in preventing them. During an interview with Woodward in July, the president said: "We can absorb a terrorist attack. We'll do everything we can to prevent it, but even a 9/11, even the biggest attack ever . . . we absorbed it and we are stronger."

Holy Cow!! Tell that to the families of the terrorist attack's victims.

During a daily intelligence briefing in May 2009, Mr. Blair [former Director of Intelligence] warned the president that radicals with American and European passports were being trained in Pakistan to attack their homelands. Mr. Emanuel afterward chastised him, saying, "You're just trying to put this on us so it's not your fault." Mr. Blair also skirmished with Mr. Brennan about a report on the failed airliner terrorist attack on Dec. 25. Mr. Obama later forced Mr. Blair out.

Obama's Wars,  covers last fall's agonizingly slow Afghanistan strategy review last fall, Obama was more interested in mapping out an exit plan than winning the war. The book makes it clear that the U.S. military has been asked to achieve its goals in Afghanistan without the level of troops they requested and in an unrealistic time frame.

According to Woodward's meeting-by-meeting, memo-by-memo account of the 2009 Afghan strategy review, the president avoided talk of victory as he described his objectives.

The book reports that the recommendations of the Military were dismissed. 

 Along with Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan at the time, they kept pushing for their 40,000-troop option as part of a broad counterinsurgency plan along the lines of what Petraeus had developed for Iraq. The president is quoted as telling Mullen, Petraeus and Gates: "In 2010, we will not be having a conversation about how to do more. I will not want to hear, 'We're doing fine, Mr. President, but we'd be better if we just do more.' We're not going to be having a conversation about how to change [the mission] . . . unless we're talking about how to draw down faster than anticipated in 2011.

The New York Times story on the book gives the reason for the President's desire not to commit to the war, and how the President asked the SCHMOTUS to argue against the Military's plan.

The president concluded from the start that "I have two years with the public on this" and pressed advisers for ways to avoid a big escalation, the book says. "I want an exit strategy," he implored at one meeting. Privately, he told Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. to push his alternative strategy opposing a big troop buildup in meetings, and while Mr. Obama ultimately rejected it, he set a withdrawal timetable because, "I can't lose the whole Democratic Party."

Forget everything else you may read about this book, about the infighting and name-calling going on in the administration, that happens in every administration, you need to remember just one thing.  Instead of caring how to win the war in Afghanistan, and how to protect the homeland, the first priority of this President was to appease his party. That is not how you protect people.

The same President who was (and still is) willing to spend much of the last year and half going around the country to sell a health care bill to the public, much of whom will  hurt rather than helped from the legislation, is not willing to spend any time trying to sell the public on an Afghanistan plan that will protect them at home.

By ignoring the needs of the Military Obama is sacrificing crucial U.S. national security interests and leaving the American people more vulnerable to future terrorist attacks. An early exit from Afghanistan would shore up al-Qaeda and like-minded terrorists and once again provide them with a safe-haven from which to conduct their deadly attacks against the U.S. and other nations. But none of that is the priority of this President, only support from is party is important.  And that is a frightening situation.

Please email me at yidwithlid@aol.com to be put onto my mailing list. Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/blogspot/NWlS/~3/2zpOV9VUdCM/why-bob-woodwards-new-book-should-scare.html

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

What You Need to Know About Tomorrow’s New Health Regulations

Tomorrow, the six month anniversary of the new health care law, a litany of mandated health insurance changes go into effect. Thanks to CNNMoney.com, here's what you need to know:

If you get insurance through your boss: Many people who are insured through work won't notice immediate changes to their health plans until their health plans renew, which is tied to companies' open enrollment periods. Health plans offered through large employers usually get renewed on January 1.

But the mandates could kick in sooner for health plans sold to new entities or individuals after September 23.

Here are some key changes coming into effect:

• Coverage expansion for adult dependents until age 26. Employers will have to provide coverage for dependents of workers who don't have access to other employer-based health care coverage 'till age 26. Some states already mandate this coverage until age 28 or 29.

• Children no longer denied coverage for pre-existing conditions: Insurance plans can't deny coverage due to a pre-existing condition to children under age 19. For adults, the same provision goes into effect in 2014.

• Prohibit insurers from rescinding coverage: It's illegal for insurers to drop a customer when they become sick or search for an error on a customer's insurance application and then deny payment for service when the person gets sick.

• Free Preventive Care: All new plans must cover certain preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible, co-pay or coinsurance. If individuals keep their existing plans or if a group plan doesn't make major changes, the provisions won't kick in until the plans get changed.

• No lifetime limits on coverage: Insurers no longer can impose lifetime dollar limits on essential benefits, like hospital stays or expensive treatments.

• Unrestricted doctor choice: Plans must allow pediatricians and obstetrician/gynecologists to get primary care physician status. This eliminates the requirement for patients to get prior-authorization from their insurer or a doctor's referral to see a pediatrician or OB/GYN.

• Level charges for emergency services: Insurers must remove prior authorizations for ER services. Also, insurers can't charge higher co-payments or co-insurance for out-of-network ER providers.

• Patient-friendly appeals process: Insurers will have to establish new internal and external appeals processes for claims. This means that while a claim is under appeal, your insurer has to continue to pay your claims, and continue paying for subsequent treatment, until the matter is resolved.

Small business impact: The changes that kick in on Sept. 23 also apply to small businesses with 50 employees or more that already offered insurance coverage prior to reform.

Companies that didn't offer coverage pre-reform and have no more than 25 workers will be given incentives such as tax credits and grants to encourage them to offer insurance coverage, said Dorothy Miraglia, director of benefits with AlphaStaff, a firm that manages employee benefits programs for small businesses.

If you buy insurance yourself: For consumers who buy health insurance directly from insurers, some of the same key changes go into effect this month.

Most importantly, insurers can't drop you when you get sick or because you made a mistake on your coverage application. Insurers also can't set annual or lifetime limits.

If you have children under age 26, you can insure them if your policy allows for dependent coverage. Individual plans can't deny or exclude coverage to any child under age 19 for pre-existing conditions.

If you're a senior citizen: If you have Medicare prescription drug coverage and are affected by the donut hole, this year you will get a one-time tax-free $250 rebate to help pay for prescriptions.

The prescription drug coverage gap that develops when Medicare stops paying for drug coverage and patients can't afford to pay for drugs out-of-pocket is called the "donut hole."

In 2011, if high prescription drug costs put you in the donut hole, you'll get a 50% discount on covered brand-name drugs while you're in the donut hole.

Also in 2011, Medicare will cover certain preventive services without charging you Medicare Part B (coverage for doctors' services, outpatient care, home health services) coinsurance or deductible.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/what-you-need-to-know-about-tomorrows-new-health-regulations/

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone

Two Men Charged in Violent Racist Beating of White Teen (Video)

The two men robbed the teen, burnt him, beat him, pi$$ed on him and whipped him with this own belt for four hours.

Photo shows Shane McClellan after the assault. (KOMO News)
The attackers screamed while they beat the white boy, "This is for enslaving our people."

White Boy Beaten Because of Slavery

The Seattle Times reported:

Two men who were questioned and released by Seattle police after a West Seattle teen was beaten in a racially charged attack have been charged in connection with the May 25 assault. One of the men was arrested Tuesday evening.

DNA recently linked Ahmed Mohamed and Jonathan Baquiring to the attack in which a 16-year-old boy was robbed, taunted with racial insults, burned with a lit cigarette and punched repeatedly. Mohamed, 22, and Baquiring, 21, each were charged Monday with first-degree robbery and malicious harassment, the state's hate-crime statute.

Baquiring was booked into the Seattle Correctional Facility just after 6 p.m. Tuesday, according to the King County Jail Booking Register. His bail is set at $500,000.

Seattle police are still searching for Mohamed.

King County Deputy Prosecutor Samantha Kanner will also seek to have Mohamed held on $500,000 bail once he is arrested, according to charging papers.

The victim, Shane McClellan, said he was walking home around 2 a.m. when two men, whom he described as black and Filipino, asked him for a light.

He said the two men then robbed him and beat him for four hours, whipping him with his own belt while saying things like, "How do you like it, white boy?" and "This is for enslaving our people," according to the police report.

McClellan, who is white, said the two men also poured Four Loko energy beer on him, burned him with a cigarette and urinated on him, police said.

Don't expect this story to make the nightly news. It doesn't fit their narrative.

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/09/two-men-charged-in-violent-racist-attack-on-white-teen/

Sent with MobileRSS for iPhone

Sent from my iPhone