Friday, April 30, 2010

Did I just hear that Iran will be on a women's commission at the UN?

Please sit down and buckle your seat belt.

"Without fanfare, the United Nations this week elected Iran to its Commission on the Status of Women, handing a four-year seat on the influential human rights body to a theocratic state in which stoning is enshrined in law and lashings are required for women judged "immodest.""

Iran on a commission about women?

Wonder how the women of Iran feel about this bit of news?

Don't you remember the murder of Neda, the young woman murdered in the streets last year? How can the murderers of Neda be elected to a commission about women?

My question is this: Where was the Obama administration during this selection process?

Why didn't the US object to this?

Are you telling me that the US was not able to stop this or object to it publicly?

P.S. I agree with Anne Bayefsky, a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute and director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust:

"This is another example of just one more U.N. body created to do one thing and now doing the opposite, for which American taxpayers foot 22% of the bill.

And it will continue unless those with their hands on the spigot in Congress finally decide to turn off the tap."

A lot of hypocrisy to go around on the reaction to the Arizona law!

Before you get on the anti-Arizona bandwagon, you may want to consider a couple of details.

First, Arizona is actually enforcing a law based on something signed by Pres Clinton:

There's a federal statute -- 8 USC 1373, passed during the Clinton years -- requiring the feds to verify a person's immigration status any time a state or local official asks for it."

Second, it's hysterical to hear criticism from Mexico.

Today, we learned this about Mexico and its treatment of illegal immigrants:

Amnesty International called the abuse of migrants in Mexico a major human rights crisis Wednesday, and accused some officials of turning a blind eye or even participating in the kidnapping, rape and murder of migrants.

The group's report comes at a sensitive time for Mexico, which is protesting the passage of a law in Arizona that criminalizes undocumented migrants." (AP)

There is a lot of concern about Article 67 of Mexico's Population Law:

"Authorities, whether federal, state or municipal ... are required to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country, before attending to any issues."

Isn't Mexico doing the same thing that they accuse Arizona of doing? (Mexican Hypocrisy? U.S. Neighbor Has Its Own Tough Take on Immigration)

Don't get me wrong.

I understand completely why Mexico wants foreigners to prove that they are in the country legally.

And I agree with Pres Clinton for signing the statue that authorized the feds to check a person's immigration status.

I agree with Mexico and Pres Clinton.

I just don't agree with the hypocrisy coming from Dems and Mexico!

Check out our interview with Fausta Wertz:

This is about a border out of control!

Susan Estrich, a well known liberal, has a message for the Dems:

"The federal government is supposed to secure the border.

Its failure to do so effectively not only invites measures like Arizona's, but complicates -- if not dooms -- the prospect of immigration reform at the national level."

Are you listening Pres BO?

Estrich is exactly right.

We are fighting well armed cartels who've taken over large segments of Mexico and use routes to come to the US.

They are not immigrants looking for work. They are bad people who will kill anyone who stands in their way.

When is Pres BO going to get serious about protecting our border? The clock is ticking!

Click here for Thursday morning's thoughts:

Thursday, April 29, 2010

BO's border logic: Let's violate NAFTA and close the border to Mexican trucks BUT LET'S DO NOTHING about the cartels and border violence!

The NY Times got this one right: For Parties, Immigration Poses Risks

No kidding?

We hear more:
Chorus Grows to 'Secure the Border'

A bipartisan group of House members was sending a letter to President Obama on Wednesday asking him to deploy National Guard troops to the U.S.'s southern border to assist Border Patrol agents."

Why are border states up in arms over the border?

The answer is that border violence has exploded out of control.

We are not debating immigration anymore.

We are now trying to figure out what to do with the war on the US-Mexico border.

Just ask ranchers in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.

We want well armed troops to protect the border and the citizens in border states.

And we call on Arizona's critics to read the bill before they embark on pathetic criticisms or accusations about its intentions.

WE also call on the critics to understand what is actually happening in Arizona.

Please read
Leo W. Banks who covers the border for The Tucson Weekly:

"Today, the drug cartels have taken over the people-smuggling business.

They own the trails into the country and dominate the land, the same way urban gangs control neighborhoods

Any group wanting in has to deal with them, and the going rate is $2,500 per person.

If you don't have the cash, the cartel coyote will offer to bring you in for free if you carry his dope.

Welcome to the US-Mexico border. Welcome to our reality. Read Ralph Peters:

"The rate of killing accelerates each month.

And Washington covers its eyes like a kid at a scary movie.

Well, the Mexican narco-insurgency, in which well-armed guerrilla forces confront the authority and presence of the state, is our No. 1 security challenge.

The chaos in northern Mexico has far deeper implications for our country than Islamist terror or even an Iranian nuclear capability (as grim as those threats are)."

It's time to do something!

Since he became president, Pres BO has shown no interest on the big things, such as nuclear missiles in Iran or the war on the border.

We need Pres BO to protect our borders. It's time to defend the homeland rather than do another "hope and change" round!

Want to help Mexico? Fight the cartels rather "child obesity" in Mexico!

Have the critics actually read the Arizona bill?

We found this about the new law in Arizona: Fears of Arizona's Immigration Law Are Bogus By John Lott

"The law specifically bans picking up someone just because they are Hispanic or even because the person was originally from Mexico or any other country
you can read a copy of the law right here.

Anyone arrested for a crime must have their immigration status determined before they are released.

Thus, it is not just Hispanics who will be required to provide evidence of citizenship, but so will all whites, blacks and Asians.
If the eligibility for public services depends on citizenship, again, everyone who applies, regardless of race, will have to provide an ID.

In other circumstances, law enforcement officials must have reasonable suspicion, not based simply on the person's race or origin, that the individual is an illegal alien before they can ask to check someone's ID."

Let me translate: No one is going to be picked up in Arizona because they "look Mexican" or whatever that means.

Furthermore, 30% of the Arizona population is Hispanic.

Is the Arizona police going to stop 30% of the population?

Also, George Will makes an excellent point about the Arizona law:

Arizona's law makes what is already a federal offense -- being in the country illegally -- a state offense. Some critics seem not to understand Arizona's right to assert concurrent jurisdiction."

It's simple: It's illegal to be illegal in the US. Therefore, it is also illegal to be illegal in Arizona.

Is that radical?

What we are seeing in Arizona is utter frustration with a federal government that won't solve a crisis.

Pres BO should call for an emergency meeting with border governors. He should support their efforts by deploying 10,000 troops to the US-Mexico border.

And he should close the deal by making a speech saying that he will support US sovereignty on the border.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

A VAT or a cut in spending?

Michael Barone has a warning for Pres BO & Dems:

The assumption in some quarters is that a tax increase is inevitable and that the public won't allow any significant decrease in public spending.

But there's reason to question that assumption."

Why not cut spending? Who said that cutting spending is politically unpopular?

I think that the country is ready for a national version of Gov Christie of New Jersey.

Yes, the voters are hungry for a politician who tells them that the free lunch is over.

On Tuesday's show, we spoke with Mario Yngerto about VAT. Click here for the show:

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Remember when BO-Care was going to lower costs?

Pres BO and the Dems sold BO-Care on the grounds that it was necessary to control health care costs.

In fact, health care costs are going up and will continue to go up.

Check this:

"President Obama's health care overhaul law will increase the nation's health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation.

A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama's aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls.

But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president's twin goal of controlling runaway costs.

It also warned that Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15% of hospitals into the red and "possibly jeopardizing access" to care for seniors.

The mixed verdict for Obama's signature issue is the first comprehensive look by neutral experts." (AP)

In less than two months, BO-Care has been exposed as a first rate fraud!

Who was foolish enough to believe that a government takeover of 16% of our GDP would make things better or lower costs?

I didn't buy it. And lots of voters don't buy it either:
56% Support Repeal of Health Care Law

Ed Morrissey nailed it:

We’ve heard a lot of nonsense about ObamaCare and its fiscal discipline coming from its authors, advocates, and the national media.

We’re finally starting to get the truth, but only after the bill became law.

The electorate needs to punish all of those who voted for this disaster despite its deep unpopularity and work to defund it in the short term and repeal it when possible."

We've also heard a lot from this administration about Wall Street and how they misled investors.

Who is going to investigate this administration for misleading voters?

Let's hope that voters turn out and punish the charlatans responsible for this budget buster called BO-Care.

P.S. The WSJ called it:
ObamaCare Mulligan

The Washington Examiner called it: Obama's credibility crisis

Brian Calle wrote this:

What that means for the industry, according to Pyott, is that doctors will see downward adjustments to their payments while drugmakers and device manufacturers will face higher taxes and lower sales."

P.S. Check out Monday's thoughts:

Monday, April 26, 2010

Monday morning thoughts

We discussed a number of issues this morning.

First, what happened to the Mavs in San Antonio? How did an NBA team look so rattled in the 3rd quarter? Where was the court discipline? Where were the team leaders?

Second, check out our interview with Jose Brechner about Iran and Latin America.

I agree with Jose that the Obama administration is not serious about the growing Iranian influence in Latin America.

Third, let me say this about Arizona.

No one supports racial profiling. At the same time, 38% of the population of Arizona is Hispanic.

How can the Arizona police stop 38% of the population? They can't and they won't!

Also, I trust that Arizona's police officers will be professional and thoughtful. In other words, I am not afraid of the police!

Let's have a discussion about the real issue in Arizona: no federal action and a border out of control!

Fourth, we learned a few days ago that BO-Care is not going to control health care costs. (See the WSJ editorial:
About Those Lower Insurance Costs We Promised . . . )

Who is surprised? I am not!

Fifth, is a VAT coming? I don't think so because the public is in a very strong anti-tax mode.

At the same time, I'll trade the current IRS code for a VAT, or a national sales tax, in a heartbeat!

Click here for the show:

Iran and Latin America

On Sunday night, we spoke with Jose Brechner about Iran's influence in Latin America.

Jose is a political analyst and author.

Click here for the show:

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Phoenix is turning into Juarez....AND....that is why 70% of Arizonans (and 51% of Dems) support this law

A few years ago, we had a huge debate in the US about illegal immigration.

It was a debate about processing the 10-12 million illegals in the US.

It was an issue that had a rational solution in 2007: expand our "guest worker" program and allow millions to work here legally and pay taxes.

It did not pass for a lot of reasons, including the pressure that labor unions put on Dems to oppose a "guest worker" program.

By the way, we have the same problem today!
The labor unions have always opposed any effort to bring in guest workers!

This is Pres BO's dilemma. He promised a lot to "los hispanos" but he also took millions of dollars from the labor unions that forced him to violate NAFTA over Mexican trucks!

Today, we face an entirely new debate rooted on border security and an explosion of violence in Arizona and everywhere else along the US-Mexico border!

In case you missed it, killings are a daily tragedy across the border.
Worse than that, Phoenix is turning into our version of Cd Juarez:

An unprecedented wave of Third World-style kidnappings by well-armed drug gangs in Phoenix has stymied city leaders and law enforcement while driving up the city’s crime rate dramatically.

Despite arrests and the dismantlement of at least 20 kidnapping “cells,” the crime wave has turned the city into the “kidnap for ransom capital” of the United States.

Police say the crimes are linked to the local drug trade — the surrounding Valley of the Sun is a national distribution hub for the U.S. drug trade — but others suggest that Mexico’s narcotics war has now fully engulfed the city." (Newsmax)

Arizona is under seige:

Wave of Drug Violence Is Creeping Into Arizona From Mexico, Officials Say

We did not have those stories in 2007.

This is why 70% of the citizens of Arizona support the law......including 51% of Dems who understand the violence wave!

This is why poll after poll shows that US voters want their border protected.

In other words, they want the federal government to protect them and their private property from a chaotic US-Mexico border.

We have a whole new political climate in the US.

There won't be immigration reform until Americans are assured that their personal safety and private property are not threatened by a chaotic border!

Sen McCain is right. We need more troops on the border:

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Too many people were foolish enough to believe what BO said during the campaign!

Pres BO is under attack by the homosexual wing of the Dem party. (Barack Obama heckled out West)

Why not?

Candidate BO made a lot of promises and he is painfully discovering that the Oval Office is different than the 'yes we can" rally.

It's easy to's a lot more complicated to govern!

The disappointment grows, according to this Reuters story:

Five million first-time voters turned out in 2008, many drawn by Obama's promise of hope and overwhelmingly voting for Democrats.

Now disappointed, or at least apathetic, they may not go to the polls this year.

Obama's support has dropped below 50 percent from nearly 70 percent after 15 months in office, Gallup opinion polls show."

Today, we learned that "los hispanos" are mad at "hope and change" too.

Yesterday, Rep Luis Gutierrez, the self appointed leader of "los hispanos" in the Dem party, unloaded on "hope and change":

He is threatening to call on "los hispanos" to stay home in November!

For the record, Mr Gutierrez does not speak for me and a lot of other Hispanics.

Nevertheless, I feel all of that "yes we can" pain.

However, we did warn the "jumpin' yes we can screamers" during the campaign that BO was making too many promises!

I do recall sharing
Professor Ajami's warning from October '08, or a week before Election Day:

Victory will steadily deliver the sobering verdict that our troubles won't be solved by a leader's magic."

Again, don't blame me. I voted for McCain!

And I believe that Pres Clinton was right on target when he called BO's candidacy a "fairy tale":

Don't blame Arizona because Pres BO can not get a Dem majority in Congress to protect our citizens or private property

In a perfect world, the federal government would be on top of the border mess.

Unfortunately, we live in BO's world or a world where the federal government fails to take the border violence seriously.

Pres BO does not understand the public mood over the border.

This is not 2007 when the issue was processing the 10-12 million illegals in the country.

This is 2010 and the country is concerned about a chaotic border and the violence in cities like Phoenix.

Pres BO continues to talk about immigration reform whereas the public wants to protect the border.

Incredibly, Pres BO criticized the Arizona law in front of new US citizens.

We assume that these new citizens followed the law, played by the rules and now enjoy US citizenship.

Again, it's not the optimum situation to have a state enforce immigration laws.

However, Pres BO is not serious about immigration laws and the citizens of Arizona are!

And I don't think that the Dem majority is in a mood for tackling another controversial topic.

Don't expect Pres BO and the Dems to tackle immigration reform.

Do expect Pres BO to blame the Republicans because his Dem majority can't do a darn thing about immigration reform!

P.S. I like this from
Power Line:

How, exactly, does Arizona's law "threaten[] to undermine basic notions of fairness"?

Why is it unfair to enforce the immigration laws?

Most Americans would say that it undermines basic notions of fairness when our government deliberately refuses to enforce the laws Congress has passed, to the disadvantage of our citizens.

And as far as trust between police and "communities" is concerned--assuming we are talking about communities of American citizens--one would think it would improve trust if citizens can see that the laws are being enforced.

It's funny, isn't it: liberals love to talk about the "rule of law" when they are trying to create never-before-seen "rights" belonging to enemy combatants.

But where is the "rule of law" when the laws relating to immigration are studiously ignored, if not deliberately undermined?"

What exactly is Blago up to AND why is he going after BO?

Blago is back and he wants Pres BO to speak at his trial:

"Blagojevich's attorneys had filed a motion Thursday asking to have President Obama give testimony for the ex-governor's corruption trial."

John Kass has a few thoughts about Blago's intentions:

"So allow me to translate the Chicago Way.

"Dear Barack, my old friend. I want you to use all your powers, all your skills, to make me an offer I can't refuse.

I'm Mr. Celebrity-get-me-out-of-here, and you better get me out of here.

Thanks, Rod.""

Of course, it's tough to believe Blago, a rather corrupt Chicago politician.

At the same time, it's tough to believe that Barrack Obama grew up in the Chicago Way without getting his hands dirty or making some bad deals.

BO is a man who hung around with some rather strange people on his way to the White House: the racist minister that he never heard, Tony Rezko and the whole Chicago machine!

For the sake of the country, let's hope that Pres BO told the truth about his involvement in the sale of the US Senate seat.

We don't need a president with legal problems, specially the kinds of legal problems that Chicago is well known for.

Again, let's hope so because the country does not need this right now.

P.S. Check some of these items because they are interesting, to say the least:

Obama had a secret phone call with Blagojevich

Redacted portion: President-elect Obama also spoke to Governor Blagojevich on December 1, 2008 in Philadelphia.

On Harris Cell Phone Call # 139, John Harris and Governor’s legal counsel discuss a conversation Blagojevich had with President-elect Obama.

The government claims a conspiracy existed from October 22, 2008 continuing through December 9, 2008.

That conversation is relevant to the defense of the government’s theory of an ongoing conspiracy.

Only Rod Blagojevich and President Obama can testify to the contents of that conversation.

The defense is allowed to present evidence that corroborates the defendant’s testimony."

We are not trying to play Perry Mason. Nevertheless, this could get very interesting and extremely embarrassing for Pres BO!

Friday, April 23, 2010

Let's talk about Mexico with Patrick Corcoran

On Thursday's show, we spoke about Mexico and other US-Mexico concerns.

Our guest was Patrick Corcoran (blogger in Mexico and contributor

Check out the show:

Thursday, April 22, 2010

You will see everything in a baseball game!

This is from a college baseball game.....a runner comes around the bases and "jumps" a run?

This is Fordham vs Iona!
I have never seen anything like this before:

What happens when BO is more interested in creating "a nanny state" rather than border violence? You get ARIZONA!

Have you spoken with anyone living on the US-Mexico border?

It's violence and more violence.

As we posted before, the US is the one consuming the illegal drugs. We are the ones responsible for sending US$ 10 to 50 billion south of the border!

Yes! We consume!

Yes! We need to consume less!

However, we also have a responsibility to protect our border and our citizens' private property!

Arizona just passed a very tough "illegal immigration" law.

Let me repeat: Illegal immigration law!

It's difficult to disagree with Arizona.

What are you going to do when the federal government refuses to protect your borders?

What are you going to do when Pres BO is more focused on transforming our society into some Euro-welfare state?

Well, you do what the citizens of Arizona have done!

You pass a law that enforces illegal immigration laws and protects private property from intruders.

Arizona is just the beginning.

Other states will follow! 70% of the people in Arizona support this law, i.e. a lot of Dems and hispanics must be in favor of it!

Check out Wednesday's thoughts:

Remember Mr Blow of The NY Times?

A few days ago, we brought up that column by Mr. Blow of The NY Times:

Check out Mr. Blow:

"I had specifically come to this rally because it was supposed to be especially diverse.

And, on the stage at least, it was.

The speakers included a black doctor who bashed Democrats for crying racism, a Hispanic immigrant who said that she had never received a single government entitlement and a Vietnamese immigrant who said that the Tea Party leader was God.

It felt like a bizarre spoof of a 1980s Benetton ad."

It turns out that our friend Zo was there and responded to Mr. Blow.

Check out Zo:

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Let's chat with Dan Riehl about the tea parties!

We spoke on Tuesday with Dan Riehl of Riehl World View.

Click here for Dan's blog!

We also heard Mario Yngerto's economics commentary.

Click here for the radio show:

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Iran needs to know that we will attack, with or without the UN!

Iran is back on the front pages:

Iranian Missile May Be Able to Hit U.S. by 2015

It was Sec Gates's memo that put Iran back in the news.

Today, The Washington Post has a good editorial:
Confused on Iran

If allies and adversaries are presently confused, that would be understandable."

Yes indeed!

During the campaign, "hope and change' made a lot of silly remarks about sitting down with our adversaries.

Unfortunately, the Oval Office is not a 'yes we can' rally.

This is very simple: Iran needs to know that we will not allow them to get a bomb.

They must be told in very clear words: We "will bomb them to rubble" with or without a Security Council resolution.

Can "hope and change" speak to our adversaries like Bush? Time will tell but lots of people, including the liberal Washington Post, are very worried!

P.S. Check our interview with Bill Katz on the memo and some of the underlying motives:

"Hope and change" is now the face of a very unpopular federal bureaucracy!

Pres "Hope and change" is now hounded by those who screamed "yes we can" in 2008.

Yesterday, Pres BO was interrupted by homosexual activists. (
Gay rights protesters interrupt Obama speech at fundraiser)

Why? They voted for a guy who promised to end "don't ask don't tell"!

They voted for change and got none of it.

Lots of people voted to close GITMO, withdraw troops from Iraq and to get more allies to support us in Afghanistan.

No way! It ain't going to happen! It was all a presidential candidate telling a lot of people what they wanted to hear!

Worse than that, Pres BO has now become the face of an extremely unpopular federal bureaucracy.

And he is now the man who will have to raise our taxes to finance it!

PEW Research reported more bad news for "Hope and change":

About 8 in 10 Americans say they don't trust the federal government and have little faith it can solve the nation's problems, according to a new survey from the Pew Research Center."

Gallup added to "hope and change's" woes:

"Registered voters are about evenly divided over whether President Barack Obama is deserving of a second term in office.

Currently, 46% say he deserves re-election and 50% say he does not."

We don't know what will happen in 2012.

However, it is obvious that this presidency is turning to be a lot different than the "yes we can" screamers had in mind.

The Rangers forgot to play baseball in New York!

The Rangers went up to NY and it was a lousy weekend to say the least.

The Rangers forgot to pitch, hit, throw to first base, run the bases and just about everything that they practiced for hours in spring training.

The 5-7 Rangers are not going to panic. However, they need to play better baseball than what we saw at Yankee Stadium.

The NY Yankees have a good team. However, they are not as good as they looked against Texas.

P.S. Click here for our Monday show and audio comments about The Rangers in New York:

It's sad but Charles Blow just wants to see skin color!

The Dems must be frightened of the Tea Party movement because all they do is see skin color, or play the race card.

Let's add Charles Blow of The NY Times to the list of liberals who keep seeing everything in terms of black or white.

Check out Mr. Blow:

"I had specifically come to this rally because it was supposed to be especially diverse.

And, on the stage at least, it was.

The speakers included a black doctor who bashed Democrats for crying racism, a Hispanic immigrant who said that she had never received a single government entitlement and a Vietnamese immigrant who said that the Tea Party leader was God.

It felt like a bizarre spoof of a 1980s Benetton ad."

Of course, I saw something totally different.

I heard an American protesting about the expansion of government and the unfunded mandates that come with it.

I saw a naturalized citizen saying that she came here to live in a free country rather than to subscribe to some welfare state mentality. (This is what Michael Barone writes about in: Tea parties fight Obama's culture of dependence!

I heard a man say that our rights come from God. (By the way, isn't that what Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1776?)

Unfortunately, Mr Blow did not see anything of that.

Blow saw a black doctor, a Mexican lady and a Vietnamese man.

Again, I don't get it.

On the other hand, I do get!

Mr Blow and the liberals are scared to death of the electoral impact of The Tea Party movement.

So what do you do when you don't want to talk about issues?

What do you do when you refuse to see that Pres BO and the Dems have enacted $670 billion in tax increases?

I guess that you just look at skin color and don't listen to what people are saying!

Check out our Monday show:

BO is making Bush look better every day!

As we indicated before, Pres Bush was forced to make awful and difficult decisions.

We believe that history will be very kind to Pres Bush.

We did not think that it would be this quickly.

According to PPP:

"Americans are now pretty evenly divided about whether they would rather have Barack Obama or George W. Bush in the White House.

48% prefer Obama while 46% say they would rather have the old President back."

This is amazing considering where both men stood 15 months ago.

Bush is no longer impacted by approval ratings.

However, this is bad news for a lot of Dems running in 2010 carrying the Obama flag!

Check out our Monday show:

Monday, April 19, 2010

Iran and other Sunday night thoughts

Chris Corbett and I discussed Iran with Bill Katz of URGENT AGENDA.

We discussed Sec Gates's memo and Bill article today!

Chris and I discussed the reaction to the tea parties.

Click here for the show:

Sunday, April 18, 2010

The two Obamas---the popular in DC and unpopular outside the beltway!

Politico tells us:

"While Washington talks about Obama’s new mojo, polls show voters outside the Beltway are sulking — soured on the president, his party and his program.

The Gallup Poll has Obama’s approval rating at an ominous 49 percent, after hitting a record low of 47 percent last weekend.

A new poll in Pennsylvania, a bellwether industrial state, shows his numbers sinking, as did recent polls in Ohio and Florida.

So there are two Obamas: Rising in D.C., struggling in the U.S."

Why is Pres BO more popular in Washington than the rest of the country?

It starts with the economy and the famous stimulus that has not stimulated anything.

Add to this the way that BO-Care was legislated, i.e. corrupt deals, special treatment for some voters and a rush to pass a bill that was not properly discussed.

Add the "jobs" picture and another Friday of "unexpected" bad numbers.

Add the incident in Detroit last Christmas. How in the world do you arrest a guy trying to blow up an airplane and "lawyer him up"!

Add the insanity about holding the KSM trial in NY City.

Add the stupidity of signing an executive order to close GITMO. After all, how can you close GITMO in a year without a plan for processing the terrorists down there?

Add the Iran policy or the lack of an Iran policy. By the way, we learned that Sec Gates is very worried that the Obama administration does not have an Iran policy.

Add to the mix the fact that the US-Mexico border is burning and Pres BO has not made a public statement or agreed to send troops.

Why is Obama so popular in Washington and so unpopular outside of the nation's capital?

The answer is that the Obama administration is all about style rather than substance.

It worked during the campaign, specially after that banking crisis that froze the campaign in October '08.

It is not working anymore because the public is beyond "BO-mania" and into results!

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Where are the anti-war demonstrations now that BO is the one dropping bombs?

Professor VD Hanson wrote a beauty this morning about the state of Iraq and all of those anti-war demonstrations:

"Anti-war passion cooled once war-critic Barack Obama was no longer a presidential candidate but became president -- and commander-in-chief. "

Yes, where are all of those anti-war demonstrations?

Where are the marchers now that:

1) Pres BO is implementing the Bush-McCain plan in Iraq. In fact, anti-war BO is now deeply invested in success in Iraq.

2) Dropping bombs unilaterally in Pakistan without a congressional resolution authorizing an expansion of the war.

Where are the placards saying that Pakistan did not attack us on 9-11? or that BO's bombs are killing civilians?

Sandy Levinson has a point about the hypocrisy:

"One can only wonder what the response of the left would be if it were Bush (and, say, John Yoo) engaging in (and defending) the actions that seem central to the Obama Administration's policy in Pakistan (and Yemen and....)"

3) Pres BO has not attracted other allies to fight in Afghanistan. In fact, it will soon be the US and the UK because Canada is leaving next year.

What happened to all of that stuff that our allies did not fight in Afghanistan because they didn't like Bush?

4) Pres BO is keeping in place all of the anti-terror policies such as wiretapping and protecting executive privileges.
(It turns out that VP Cheney was right and Pres BO is the one carrying out the plan!)

5) No one is closing GITMO! I guess that it was easier to close GITMO when you didn't have to explain how you were going to close it!

The left is out of the anti-war business these days, specially now that their guy is the one dropping bombs, holding terrorists indefinitely without a trial and wiretapping phones.

P.S. Check out "Friday's thoughts":

Friday, April 16, 2010

Who is marching in the tea parties?

On Thursday, thousands of voters attended rallies and meetings across the land.

We call them "tea party" meetings.

We are learning a lot about the people attending these rallies.

CBS conducted a survey and discovered a couple of things:

"They are better educated than most Americans: 37 percent are college graduates, compared to 25 percent of Americans overall.

They also have a higher-than-average household income, with 56 percent making more than $50,000 per year."

I am not surprised that the majority is making more than $50,000! This is a movement of people who people who taxes!

They are also more likely to attend church and more conservative on the values issues!

The CBS survey is one of a few polls done about the impact of the tea parties.

I do think that the CBS survey understates the huge number of young families attending the meetings.

And I don't agree about the gender divide. It's hard to believe that only 41% are women!

Douglas E. Schoen, a pollster, is the author of "The Political Fix."

Patrick H. Caddell is a political commentator and a pollster.

They are Dems and wrote this about the tea parties and the Dem party:

"To be sure, great efforts have been made recently to demonize the Tea Party movement.

But polling suggests that the Tea Party movement has not been diminished but, in fact, has grown stronger.

The Winston Group found, in three national surveys conducted from December through February and published April 1, that the Tea Party movement is composed of a broad cross-section of the American people -- 40 to 50 percent of its supporters are non-Republicans.

Indeed, one-third of self-identified Democrats say they support the Tea Party movement.

The electorate's dissatisfaction with the established political order has led the Tea Party movement to become as potent a force as any U.S. political party.

Last week, a Rasmussen Reports survey showed that overall more Americans say that they agree with the Tea Party movement on major issues than with the president of the United States -- 48 percent with the Tea Party and 44 percent with Obama.

Among independents, 50 percent said that they're closer to the Tea Party, while only 38 percent are with Obama.

Moreover, the most recent Gallup poll shows that the Tea Party movement is at least as popular as the Democratic Party.

And the Tea Party movement stands for fiscal discipline, limited government and balancing the budget -- an agenda that has broad public support extending well beyond the movement.

Polling conducted by one of us (Schoen) found that 55 percent of respondents endorse that agenda.

More important, a solid majority of swing voters endorse it."

The "tea party voter" is passionate and well organized. They will be a huge factor in the 2010 mid-term election.

It does not help that so many Dems have mocked the movement. I think that the Dems missed a great chance to find some common ground with these voters.

P.S.: Click here for our Tea Party show:




Check Out Politics Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Silvio Canto Jr on BlogTalkRadio

Follow by Email



Search This Blog