When Gas Was High Under Bush He Was A Big Oil Man

Gas prices went up under George Bush’s presidency and the left went nuts. They blamed it on Bush and Cheney because, as Nancy Pelosi attributed it, two oil men were in the White House. Yes, Pelosi and the rest of the brain dead liberals (but I repeat myself) blamed the high prices on Bush, Cheney and oil companies gouging consumers. The left initiated a few investigations into this so called gouging only to find out that it never took place.

As an aside, I made the point then and I make it again now, the only one gouging in all this is the government. State and federal government get many multiples of oil company profits in gasoline taxes. We pay them a lot of money and they do nothing to earn it. Martin O’Malley of Maryland is looking to raise gas taxes even higher to fuel (pun intended) his welfare state initiatives and big spending programs.

Bush has been out of office for more than three years but the left continues to blame him for everything. No matter the problem, to the left it is Bush’s fault.

Ironically, the left never gives him credit for anything he put in place that worked out well for them (like getting Bin Laden).

Gas prices are at an all time high for the month of March. The average is near $4.00 a gallon and the price has topped five (and is close to six) dollars in some places in the country.

Now the left, which was quick to blame Bush for the high prices under his tenure, is just as quick to tell us that presidents have little control over the cost of gasoline. It is amazing how quickly their tune changed when a Democrat suffers high prices.

As another aside, the high prices under Bush took place when Democrats controlled Congress.

The price people pay for gas is skyrocketing (something Obama and his regime want) and it is now an anchor around his neck. He keeps claiming that things are getting better and he saved the world from collapse but people on the ground, those whose children can’t jet off to a holiday in Mexico on taxpayer money, can see what things cost and how the cost is impacting their lives.

Obama falsely claims that drilling is up during his watch. The drilling is taking place on private lands as a result of what Bush did. Obama banned drilling in the Gulf, refused a pipeline, and has kept our oil rich lands off limits to oil drilling.

Obama’s policies have hampered our efforts to get more of our oil on the market.

He is doing it to force us into the green energies that he keeps wasting taxpayer money on.

Who will the left blame for the rising gasoline prices? It is not Bush’s fault and the left insists that presidents (at least Democrat presidents) can’t control gas prices so who will the left blame?

The left can set its sights on speculators but it loses credibility when one considers that the left discounted them and continued to blame Bush during his time in office.

Obama and his dim witted Democrats are playing politics at a time when the price of gas is hitting all time highs. They are desperately looking for scapegoats so they can keep Obama in office.

But the reality is that Obama is to blame. His policies have damaged the economy even further and he is rocketing us toward a Socialist state where government controls everything.

He is working us into a frenzy using the Cloward-Piven strategy.

It is time to work hard to dump this man before we end up living like Obama’s brother.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

You Know It Is Bad For Obama When…

You know it is bad for Obama and the Democrats when the talk of the weekend is the dueling Vice Presidents. Dick Cheney and Joe Biden traded shots at each other over the weekend over a number of things. Joe Biden said that he did not believe another 9/11 size terrorist attack on us (here at home) was likely.

“Look, let me put it this way. The idea of there being a massive attack in the United States like 9/11 is unlikely, in my view,” the vice president said. Info Wars

Biden accused Cheney of rewriting history or not being aware of what happened and then rewrote history himself when describing how wonderful the Obama administration has been. Listening to Biden one would think that a successful war was not waged during the Bush years and that the victory was entirely the result of Obama. Of course, one has to expect this as Biden and Obama have a game plan and that is to whine and blame Bush for everything.

Rudy Giuliani has been described as 9/11 plus a verb. Obama and Biden are best described as whine plus blame Bush. Thirty seconds into his speech today Obama blamed Bush. Obama blamed Bush and then lied about his own record (the stimulus created or saved 2 million jobs, it worked, blah, blah). It is the pattern. They figure if they keep blaming the last guy and lying about it on top, they will keep the attention off their failed policies (like the stimulus).

I happen to believe that blaming the last guy for every bad thing is a sign of poor leadership. Obama blames Bush and will not give him credit for any of the good that has been passed on (he certainly is quick to take credit for it). It is a shame because they sound like whining babies. George Bush did not blame Clinton for any problems that were passed on. Bill Clinton did not blame H W Bush for his problems and Reagan did not blame Carter for his problems. And to be fair, Carter did not blame Ford. They did all the blaming on the campaign trail, pointed out the problems in the beginning, maybe took a few veiled shots while explaining their plans and then moved on. None of the previous presidents have whined like Obama. He is a huge crybaby and not fit to lead.

As bad as it is to have all the headlines discussing a war of words between the old and new VPs, you know things are really going bad when the media points out things like the rising number of homeless on Obama’s watch. Usually, homelessness ceases to exist when a Democrat is in office. When Republicans are in office the newspapers print the stories about the number of homeless and how terrible it is. When a Democrat gets elected the MSM stops reporting on the homeless as if they magically got places to live. The tide is turning if the AP is reporting this:

Homelessness in rural and suburban America is straining shelters this winter as the economy founders and joblessness hovers near double digits—a “perfect storm of foreclosures, unemployment and a shortage of affordable housing,” in one official’s eyes.

The AP must not have gotten the “don’t mess with the messiah” memo because it reported this. The MSM got Obama elected. They were behind him, ignored his radical past, refused to vet him, and painted a better than reality picture of him. They have skin in the game and cannot lose their man. This is why you rarely see them reporting the number of war dead. When Bush was in office twits like Olberman and Matthews would have segments about the number of US service members killed. The names of the war dead would be scrolled on the TV screen. People had to be reminded of this day in and day out.

The military members who die on Obama’s watch are quietly reported. No names scrolled, no body count, no nothing. They must protect the messiah.

So it is very strange indeed that the AP would report on the homeless.

Then again, maybe they are Bush’s fault as well.

Sources:
CBS 1
CBS 2

Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Obama’s Response To Attack Is Amazingly Quick

The United States was attacked on Christmas Day in what turned out to be a failed attempt at blowing up an aircraft. The response from the Obama people was disjointed and insincere. Obama was informed of the attack a few hours after it happened and he responded three days later. Some folks have made a big deal about the time it took to respond but that is not as important as what was said when the response actually arrived. Obama contradicted his Homeland Defense Secretary and became increasingly irate at the accusations that he was weak. Regardless of how long Obama waited to respond the real problem was that his response looked more like damage control than national security.

George Bush did not respond until six days after the shoe bomber made his fatal attempt. I do not know if there were legal reasons (the shoe bomber is an American citizen and perhaps they could not make statements that would jeopardize the investigation) or if the White House Press Secretary said anything prior to Bush. When Bush finally addressed it I don’t recall it being about damage control. I just remember that I had to start taking my shoes off every time I went through airport security.

News for TSP, I am not taking my underwear off because of this incident…

Regardless of the time involved, Obama should have been more concerned with the incident and not worried about damage control and he should not have had to clean up the gaffes of his DHS Secretary. Obama and his people (including his media wing at the MSM) should have spent less time defending how long it took Obama to say something with childish comparisons to how long it took Bush and spent more time telling people how they would be kept safe and at the same time inconvenienced as little as possible during the heavy holiday travel period.

One thing that Obama and his people were quick about responding to were the attacks on Obama. Team Obama responded nearly instantaneously when Dick Cheney came out with his criticisms of Obama. Dick Cheney is not a threat to airline safety, terrorists with underpants bombs are. If it took three days to address the real threat it should have taken longer to address Cheney. It should have taken longer to address the other criticisms leveled at the Obama administration. I think Cheney was spot on but that does not mean he could not be ignored by the administration until after they addressed the threat.

By taking its time with addressing the threat but responding in near real time to criticisms the Obama team comes off as being in campaign mode and not in leadership mode. Being president is a tough job no matter who is in there and if it takes them a while to address a situation then when they do address it they should look like they know what is going on. Obama was hurt by the ineptitude of Napolitano. That made them look more inept and added fuel to the fire.

We have already figured out that Obama does not do anything regarding leading the country quickly. It has taken him days or months to come to decisions (except for the crisis spending bills) and while his supporters like to claim he is a deliberative person he does not appear as such when he is able to immediately respond to criticism.

It also did not help the cause for Obama to say; “We will not rest until we find all who were involved and hold them accountable” and then leave his press conference to play golf. I realize he is on vacation so it might have been prudent to maybe leave that “we will not rest” part out of the speech and save it for a time when he is not, you know, resting…

The left was quick to point out George Bush discussing the seriousness of the terrorism threat while playing golf but remain silent about Obama’s very similar situation.

Sources:
Washington Examiner
Swamp Politics

UPDATE: Excellent article by Charles Krauthammer.

Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Democrats And National Security

The Democrats are quick to point out that 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch and therefore he is responsible for it. Fair enough though it is just as true that the policies of the Clinton Administration led to the attacks of that day. Bush was tagged with it but Clinton made it happen.

The failed terrorist attack of Christmas Day took place on Obama’s watch and he is responsible for it. Democrats believe that it is our belligerence that causes us to be attacked and that their methods of diplomacy are the correct ones. I think it is safe to put that myth to rest. Despite the Obama view that he will usher in a new world and that people will like us if we extend an open hand the attacks continue. The people who want to do us harm do not care much about the nice talk. They have a goal and that goal is to destroy us.

No external force can defeat us. Our defeat, if we suffer one, will come from forces within and those forces are manifested in the Obama Administration and the Democrat Congress. Their policies and their positions make us weaker and will get Americans killed.

David Horowitz has a piece out at FrontPageMag.com which is entitled; “Who Will Be Responsible for the American Dead?” He answers the title’s question as follows:

The answer to the question posed above is that liberals will be responsible when the next bomber actually succeeds in killing Americans. Liberals have fought the very idea that we are at war (and should use security measures appropriate in wartime) although our enemies have declared war on us. Liberals have fought to close the Guantanamo Bay holding center and to release its terrorists back onto the battlefield.

Liberals have fought the idea that we are at war. This is a true statement and is reflected by the replacement of the phrase “War on Terror” with the phrase “Overseas Contingency Operations” and “Terrorism” with “Man Made Disaster.” This is a mindset that will get people killed and is a mindset that demonstrates weakness. The Christmas Day bomber felt no love for America or Obama and his open hand. This person felt a hatred for us and everything we believe in and felt so strongly that he was willing to take his own life in order to murder a bunch of innocent people.

Dick Cheney says that Obama is pretending that this does not exist but that pretending will not make it go away. Politico reports these words from the former Vice President:

“As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of 9/11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war.

“He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core al Qaeda trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe. Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency – social transformation—the restructuring of American society. President Obama’s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war.”

This is a very astute observation by Mr. Cheney. He has Obama completely pegged and his assessment is spot on. Obama pretends that things do not exist because they do not fit into the view he has of the world. Obama is like a child who believes that if something is not seen (or in his case acknowledged) then it does not exist. The saying that what you can’t see can’t harm you is a dangerous one indeed. While Obama pretends that there are no enemies and that we are not at war we are being targeted by those who are at war with us.

Recently, Obama gave himself a B+ grade for his work so far. Toby Harnden of the Telegraph UK has a post up indicating that Obama gets an F for protecting Americans. Mr. Harnden states:

There is no more solemn duty for an American commander-in-chief than the martialling of “all elements of American power” – the phrase Obama himself used on Monday – to protect the people of the United States. In that key respect, Obama failed on Christmas Day, just as President George W. Bush failed on September 11th (though he succeeded in the seven years after that).

Yes, the buck stops in the Oval Office. Obama may have rather smugly given himself a “B+” for his 2008 performance but he gets an F for the events that led to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarding a Detroit-bound plane in Amsterdam with a PETN bomb sewn into his underpants. He said today that a “systemic failure has occurred”. Well, he’s in charge of that system.

Yes, Obama is in charge of the system that failed and he is in charge of securing this country. Unfortunately, while he pretends that all is well the wolves are at the door.

The sad truth is that the door leads to a house made of straw.

Related:
History News Network; SYSTEM WORKED; OBAMASPHERICS FAILED

Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Cassandra

Cassandra was a mythical figure in Greek mythology- a favored priestess of the god Apollo, she resided in the city of Troy, in the temple of Apollo, where she could foretell the future to all who requested an audience. She fell out of favor with the god Apollo, because she would not submit to his amorous advances.

When that happened, Apollo cursed her , that she could foretell the future, but that no one would believe her ever again. As it happened, the Greeks had a little spat with the Trojans, recounted in the Iliad, by the Greek author Homer, and in this fight, which supposedly lasted twenty years, Cassandra made prediction after prediction, but no one believed.

At the end of the war, after twenty years had passed, the Greeks were tired, and resorted to trickery. They built a giant horse, into which went their best warriors, hidden. The rest of the armada pretended to sail away, and the trojans, awakening and seeing the giant horse, and no Greeks, came to the conclusion that they had won, and the horse was an offering to the Gods, or the Trojans (it’s unclear really who was the true intended recipient), and a peaceful offering.

Over Cassandra’s vocal protests that this horse meant doom for all Trojans, the horse was wheeled into the Walled city of Troy, and at night, during the celebrating, the hidden Greeks slipped out and, with the other Greeks who had come back under cover of darkness, killed all within Troy, or so it is written.

Former vice President Dick Cheney is the Cassandra of today’s world- he talks of terrorism (and yes, Virginia, it IS still called terrorism) that came to our shores and of terrorism that still yearns to make us very dead. He speaks from experience, experience that Skinny B and his posse DO NOT HAVE in dealing with terrorists, as evidenced by the rampant backpedaling B has had to do in the Gitmo “closings”.

“Nine-eleven caused everyone to take a serious second look at threats that had been gathering for a while, and enemies whose plans were getting bolder and more sophisticated. Throughout the 90s, America had responded to these attacks, if at all, on an ad hoc basis. The first attack on the World Trade Center was treated as a law enforcement problem, with everything handled after the fact – crime scene, arrests, indictments, convictions, prison sentences, case closed.

That’s how it seemed from a law enforcement perspective, at least – but for the terrorists the case was not closed. For them, it was another offensive strike in their ongoing war against the United States. And it turned their minds to even harder strikes with higher casualties. Nine-eleven made necessary a shift of policy, aimed at a clear strategic threat – what the Congress called “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” From that moment forward, instead of merely preparing to round up the suspects and count up the victims after the next attack, we were determined to prevent attacks in the first place.” Weekly Standard

As counterpoint to Skinny B’s watery speech, in which he prevaricated about the terror situation, and preferred his favorite childish tactic, which was pointing to the Bush administration twenty- eight times either by name or by implication, Dick Cheney didn’t truly criticize the present administration, instead, plainly making the case of why our vigilance can not be relaxed.

“Everyone expected a follow-on attack, and our job was to stop it. We didn’t know what was coming next, but everything we did know in that autumn of 2001 looked bad. This was the world in which al-Qaeda was seeking nuclear technology, and A. Q. Khan was selling nuclear technology on the black market. We had the anthrax attack from an unknown source. We had the training camps of Afghanistan, and dictators like Saddam Hussein with known ties to Mideast terrorists.

These are just a few of the problems we had on our hands. And foremost on our minds was the prospect of the very worst coming to pass – a 9/11 with nuclear weapons.” Weekly Standard

It is no accident that Dick Cheney’s popularity is growing as more and more people are becoming uneasy with this know- nothing poseur in the White House, and his crew of blame-the-victim liberals spending all their time trying to minimize  any reference to terror. Calling something a “man caused disaster” will not make the deaths any less horrible, and deleting the term “terrorist”, or “enemy combatant” from our vocabulary will not cause them to either like us more, or kill us less.

“So we’re left to draw one of two conclusions – and here is the great dividing line in our current debate over national security. You can look at the facts and conclude that the comprehensive strategy has worked, and therefore needs to be continued as vigilantly as ever. Or you can look at the same set of facts and conclude that 9/11 was a one-off event – coordinated, devastating, but also unique and not sufficient to justify a sustained wartime effort. Whichever conclusion you arrive at, it will shape your entire view of the last seven years, and of the policies necessary to protect America for years to come.

The key to any strategy is accurate intelligence, and skilled professionals to get that information in time to use it. In seeking to guard this nation against the threat of catastrophic violence, our Administration gave intelligence officers the tools and lawful authority they needed to gain vital information. We didn’t invent that authority. It is drawn from Article Two of the Constitution. And it was given specificity by the Congress after 9/11, in a Joint Resolution authorizing “all necessary and appropriate force” to protect the American people.” Weekly Standard

If you note the first sentence in that second paragraph,  you will begin to see the problem we now have vis-a-vis this current administration, as all the Liberal socialists there seem hell- bent on castrating our intelligence services, beginning with the Speaker of the House, but not limited to her alone.

Perhaps, if everyone listened to Dick Cheney a little more, and Skinny B a little less, then the similarity between Cheney and Cassandra would end at having the same first letter in their names, rather than their shared  voices in the wilderness.

Blake

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.