According to The Weekly Standard; “Mr. Obama has told people that it would be so much easier to be the president of China. As one official put it, ‘No one is scrutinizing Hu Jintao’s words in Tahrir Square.’”

Well certainly it would be easier for Obama. He wants to be a dictator and he would love to be able to say it and have it happen. He would love to be able to quash an uprising like say, those pesky Tea Party folks. He would love to be a part of the ruling elite that steps on the throats of those who are not on board with his agenda. As Bill Kristol put it in the article:

Mr. Obama is right.

If you’re president of China, people around the world who are fighting for freedom don’t really expect you to help. If you’re president of China, you don’t have to put up with annoying off-year congressional elections, and then negotiate your budget with a bunch of gun-and-religion-clinging congressmen and senators. If you’re president of China, you can fund your national public radio to your heart’s content. And if you’re president of China, when you host a conference on bullying in schools, people take you seriously.

I imagine that being the president of any country is a pretty hard job though the way some countries are run it is easier. I imagine for Obama it would be easier to be the president of a Communist country because he has sympathies toward that ideology.

One thing I am absolutely certain of is that it would be easier on the US if Mr. Obama was the president of China.

And if we keep going the way we are he might just get his wish…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Newsweek is one of the lamestream media mouthpieces for Barack Obama and the Democrats. Given that this periodical is a firm supporter of the liberal/progressive destruction of America it is quite surprising to see this cover. Look at what it has printed on it:

The Making of a
Terrorist Coddling
Warmongering
Wall Street Loving
Socialistic
Godless
Muslim
President

*Who isn’t actually any of those things

If Obama isn’t actually any of these things then it means Newsweek is saying he is not the President. What does Newsweek know that we don’t?

This is quite a dilemma for the magazine. Newsweek cannot back off this and say it was mistaken about the president part or it admits that a mistake appears on the lost and if one mistake appears then there could be more than one. Newsweek cannot fix this problem without admitting that it could be in error on any item on the list and if it lets the list stand then it is admitting that Obama is not president, at least in the eyes of the people who made the cover.

Funny how things like this work out. In its eagerness to defend Obama the magazine actually insulted him. This is what happens when liberal/progressives live their lives of lies.

In the same spirit of living a lie, Obama was asked why so many people think he is a Muslim. He answered by saying he can’t go around with his birth certificate attached to his forehead. What does his birth certificate have to do with whether people believe he is a Muslim or not? Was Obama throwing the birther issue into the equation because racist and bigot no longer work or was he preoccupied with this issue?

I don’t know and I don’t care but I do know Don Surber had it right.

The birth certificate attached to his forehead would be better than the big L that is currently there…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

President Elect Barack Obama met with the current president and three past presidents today at the White House. Obama and current President Bush met privately and then the five gathered for a photo op and lunch. The Free Republic has the pictures and some humorous comments.

Protocol dictates that the men put differences aside during these kinds of events so there was no bickering, at least publicly, as the men who have served gave pointers to the man who is about to.

George W. Bush was a gracious host:

George W Bush gave him the warmest welcome. “One message that I have and I think we all share is that we want you to succeed,” he said. “We wish you all the very best, and so does the country.” Telegraph UK

While the men were heading off to eat Bill Clinton commented that he loved the rug in the Oval Office.

Since protocol dictates they act as gentlemen one can only imagine that the head voice inside George W Bush was saying; “Well, after your tenure the other rug was too stained to use.”

Arnold Schwarzenegger gave an interview and he said that he would love to be president one day, “if it were possible.” Schwarzenegger is the governor of California but he is ineligible to be the president. Some might think that it is because of the Constitution as pointed out in the article:

At the moment, becoming president would be impossible. Schwarzenegger, who was born in Austria and became a U.S. citizen in 1983, is not a “natural born citizen” of the United States, as required by the Constitution. LA Times

Not being natural born is not what keeps Schwarzenegger from being eligible to run. What keeps him ineligible is that he made it known that he is not natural born. If he had a way to have all his records sealed, both here and in his native country, he could have claimed to have been born here and people would have no choice but to let him be president, provided he won the election.

That is exactly what we are doing with regard to Obama. He has yet to prove he was born here. Despite what the left says there has been no proof that he was born here and no official has stated that he was. Additionally, his birth certificate was never reviewed for authenticity. This has been hashed out before so I will not go into it again but comprehension is important with this issue.

As for Schwarzenegger, he screwed himself out of the chance to be president by doing things legally. His paperwork is out there for people to see and he has never said that he was born here. Obama claims he was but his granny said otherwise and the history shows that it is likely the case that he was born elsewhere.

I am just as happy that Schwarzenegger cannot run for the presidency. He is no different than John McCain in that he is a RINO who is willing to buy into liberal pap and to compromise principle. McCain was a far better selection than Obama but McCain is no conservative. Schwarzenegger is not one either and I would not want to see him occupy the White House.

We need true conservatives in office. When they run, they win because the majority in this nation hold conservative values. Despite what the left said about the last election being a repudiation of conservatism, it was not. George Bush is not a conservative and no conservative was in the general election.

The American public picked a far left liberal candidate over a moderately liberal one.

Sorry Arnie, you screwed yourself. For the rest of you non natural born citizens who want to run, start hiding your records now.

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.

I was working on this post before Obama had officially won though his victory was inevitable. Then he was declared the winner and John McCain conceded. I listened to the concession speech John gave and it was graceful and eloquent. John said that his former opponent was now going to be his president and that he [John]would have the honor of continuing to serve this country. John had to be gracious, I don’t.

I have stated in several posts that if Obama won then, as an American, he would be my president and I would pray that he led us well and did a good job. I hold true to that but I cannot support him or his ideas. I do not believe that government is the keeper of my brother. I do not believe Americans should be disarmed. I do not believe in globalization. I do not believe in liberalism and I do not believe in socialism or the redistribution of wealth. I don’t believe that government or its surrogates should attack private citizens as we saw with Joe the Plumber and the black panthers. I swore to protect this country against all enemies foreign and domestic and I believe that Barack Obama is a domestic enemy. I will do everything possible to ensure he does not bring his visions of America to fruition.

To my liberal friends, congratulations on your victory. I hope you are not hypocritical when your guy receives the criticisms you so eagerly and viciously leveled at George Bush. I can’t wait to see how you cover for him when he does the same things Bush did. I can’t wait to see how you attack people who are less than kind to Obama considering how you treated Bush.

I also hope you don’t mind a few I told you so’s along the way because Barack Obama will set us on a bad path. Hitler and Castro promised change and we know how that worked out. While Obama will not exterminate Jews he will sign legislation and appoint judges that guarantee the unborn will be murdered for any reason and at taxpayer expense. More unborn children have been killed in the abortion Holocaust than Jews died in Germany and under Obama that number will only grow. Unfortunately, Obama will not stop at the unborn as those who survive an abortion will be left to die. His Socialist ideas will rival Castro and that is an America that I cannot tolerate.

The upside to all this is that Hillary will likely never run again. The Democrats will not be able to blame George Bush or Republicans for the problems this nation faces because they will have control of the government so all that happens will be on their watch. I also am happy that I can disregard the cries of racism and the claims that America is racist. The white vote won this election for Obama. Now we can ignore the noise made by people like Sharpton and Jackson because a black man has reached the pinnacle. The racist past of America is well behind us and Obama’s victory erases any debt that people believe is owed.

Just to be clear, I do not wish any harm to him. That is not how America should work and anyone who attempts such things should be sent away for a long time. I will oppose him in the political arena and work from his first day in office until his last to see him defeated.

Good luck, we are going to need it.

God Bless America.

Others:
Leaning Straight Up

Be sure to sign up to receive notification when I post. You can choose per post or every 5 posts in a newsletter. The form is in the sidebar.

I wrote yesterday about the public meeting between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in Unity New Hampshire. I believe that Obama needs Clinton voters and Clinton needs Obama money and outside of that they have no use for each other. There are those who claim they are friends but I think that associates would be a more apt description and now that Hillary, who believes the presidency is her birthright, has been beaten by Obama, she has no use for him and anyone associated with him except to get her debt paid.

I also pointed out that Bill Clinton was not happy with the results and that he would not actively support Obama. If he did do anything for Obama it would not be with the enthusiasm he would have had if Hillary had won. He wants Obama to lose so Hilary can run in 2012.

There is a story out in the Telegraph UK that indicates Bill Clinton is still extremely bitter (does he cling to religion and guns) and that he continues to be condescending toward Obama and says Obama cannot win. There are reports that Clinton, who is upset that his reputation suffered, has shocked friends by his blatantly bitter attitude. Mr. Clinton reportedly said, to his friends, that Obama would have to “kiss my ass” if he wants his support. Clinton seems to have this thing about people’s lips being below his waistline.

We have heard that Bill Clinton holds a grudge (as does his wife) a long time and that they can be ruthless to those who are seen as disloyal to them. There were a lot of old Clinton people who jumped on the Obama bandwagon early on and I know that irritated them to no end. Bill Richardson was one who Bill found particularly upsetting. If Hillary ever makes it to the White House then there are a lot of people who will have absolute hell to pay.

It was amazing to see how so many people who thought the Clintons walked on water threw them overboard so quickly in order to latch on to the empty suit. The Clintons have a hit list of people who need political payback and they cannot wait to unleash their fury.

Given the number of former Clinton supporters who jumped ship early, I imagine Obama might have to get in line to give that kiss.

Gloria Steinem, the aging feminazi, is on the campaign trail stumping for Hillary Clinton. While Steinem is out discussing the supposed qualifications of she who would be Queen, it boils down to one qualification and that is, Hillary is a woman. Steinem discusses the campaign and how Hillary is not given a fair chance or how the media is better to Obama or any of the other claims made by the Clinton apologists. She throws in a few of the references to male domination and all the other excuses that women use when they fail to achieve. Women have made quantum leaps with regard to equality in the workplace and in education. There are many women in institutes of higher learning and there are plenty in the workplace and they are protected under Equal Opportunity laws to such a great extent that they receive benefits of affirmative action. Women owned businesses receive special treatment so much so that contractors align with them in order to win competitive bids. This is not good enough for the feminist Steinem because, in her eyes, there must be sexism involved if Hillary is losing. Steinem goes so far as to indicate John McCain’s time as a POW was overrated and if he were a woman men would ask what she did wrong to get shot down and captured. I think we all remember this being the case with Jessica Lynch, who by the way, was rescued by a bunch of men.

Steinem, while claiming to be a feminist, is supporting a candidate who cried, who relied on a man (her husband), who debated by whining about getting questions first and who generally ran a poor campaign. Hillary Clinton had a double digit lead when this whole thing started and she was the presumptive nominee long before the contests began in earnest. The campaign process was a mere formality. Instead of sexism, isn’t it just possible that people do not think she would be a good president? Isn’t it possible that after the population had a chance to see Hillary on the campaign trail they were less enamored with her? Top this off with a candidate who has the ability to say absolutely nothing and still thrill people (especially women) and it spells disaster for any candidate regardless of that person’s sex.

The idea that Hillary is being rejected because of sexism is absolutely ludicrous but the mere suggestion shows that even staunch Democrats believe that their party is comprised of sexists. It is not the Republican Party that is giving the nod to Obama, it is the Democrats who are voting for him over the woman who has been dubbed the smartest woman in the world. The Democratic establishment has also recognized that it has racists in it because anyone who opposes Obama is tagged as a racist. Remember, this is all coming from the party of diversity and tolerance.

Hillary Clinton is being rejected because she is a polarizing person. She rubs people the wrong way and, when compared to Obama, her lack of personality is glaringly obvious. The suggestion that America rejects her because of her sex ignores the flaws of the person and lays blame on the voters who are obviously too stupid to see that she deserves to win. The fact that she is a woman does not qualify her for the job though Steinem would have us believe this. There are plenty of women in this country who would do an admirable job as President just as there are many blacks who would do an equally good job. Yes, America is ready for a black or a woman but we are not ready for this black or that woman, not because of those qualities but because of what they represent with regard to the issues.

Steinem believes that Hillary is the best candidate and that is her opinion. Just because people do not accept Hillary does not mean people are sexists any more than those who reject Obama are racists. Does this mean there is no racism or sexism? Certainly not. There are people who will not vote for either of these candidates based solely on their race or sex. I would bet though, there are more people who will vote FOR them based on these attributes than against and that is just as bad. Some however, will vote for a person based upon a perception of qualifications. In some cases it will be the lesser of two evils as it usually is in politics.

If Steinem wants a woman to win perhaps they should run one who can win. I would also wonder if Steinem would have the same feelings were the losing female candidate a Republican? BTW Gloria, I would vote for a Conservative woman or black person if I thought they would do the best job.

We have 300 million people in this country and these three are the best we can come up with? That, in and of itself, is depressing.

Related item:
Boston.com
Interesting Post:
Sonnabend

Those of us who believe in the rule of law want the borders of this country, particularly the southern border, closed down so that ILLEGALS cannot sneak across. People like Ted Kennedy and John McCain (and every Democrat) like to characterize these people as honest and hard working. I have no doubt they are hard working people (I doubt they only do jobs Americans won’t) but they are not HONEST. When a person breaks the law by crossing our border ILLEGALLY and then lives here under false pretenses then that is anything but honesty. This is criminal behavior and our government has sanctioned it for decades. The people in our Congress have turned a blind eye to border patrol agents who were thrown in jail for doing their duties, agents who received more time in jail for protecting us than any of the ILLEGALS get for invading us.

Now we have word that a border patrol agent in California was run over by a vehicle that he tried to stop after it entered this country ILLEGALLY. The area where this took place is popular among off road enthusiasts as well as drug runners entering the US ILLEGALLY. Our government is responsible for the death of this agent. The failure of the President and the Congress to secure our borders has allowed a vehicle to enter ILLEGALLY and run over an agent.

The way our government treats these things it might be a blessing that the agent died. If he had lived the government would have locked him up for a decade because he bothered an honest, hard working invader.

Story:
Fox News

Others with related items:
The Virtuous Republic, InvestorBlogger dot com, third world county, 123beta, Stix Blog, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Cao’s Blog, Leaning Straight Up, Wolf Pangloss, Dumb Ox Daily News, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, and Stageleft, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Bill Clinton is out on the campaign trail and he is whining about the press coverage his wife is getting. Clinton said that the media ignores experience and looks at political issues which he claims have a “half life of 15 seconds.” He made the claim that if the media would only look at the experience of his wife then people would see she is best qualified and most experienced to lead this country. Let us take a look.

Hillary has never run anything. She has not been a CEO of a company, she has not been a Governor of a state and she has not been the boss in a business. Her work experience is as a lawyer and as the First lady of Arkansas and of the country. She was not in a position of leadership in any of those capacities and yet this is what she claims for experience. She is no more experienced than any of her rivals other than she can lay claim to being a First Lady and they cannot. The job of First Lady does not qualify her or anyone else to be the President. The wife of a CEO for a large corporation is not qualified, based upon being the wife of the CEO, to run the company. In addition, Hillary refuses to release any of the records that might shed light on her supposed experience.

As for Bill, he has no right to complain about media coverage. He had it easy as President and continues to get great coverage. If Drudge had not broken the Monica story it might have never been told. When the “Path to 9/11″ aired Clinton used his star power to force ABC to take out truthful items that reflected unfavorably on him. He used a surrogate to steal documents from the national archives and the media failed to skewer him as they would have ANY Republican. Clinton got sympathy from the media when he was being impeached and the treatment was in stark contrast to the treatment that Republicans involved in sex scandals have received.

Bill Clinton and his wife are liars who rewrite history as a matter of convenience. He recently said that he was against the Iraq War from the start despite the fact that his earlier words on the subject convey a totally different opinion. If we were to have a Democracy in Iraq tomorrow with all fighting in the Middle East ended, Clinton would claim that he supported the effort from the start.

Hillary is no different. She changes positions depending on the latest poll and who will be offended the least. She made statements, before George Bush was in office, that Hussein was a threat and that he had WMD and needed to be removed from office. Now she claims she was misled by the President. She is a partisan hack who is only interested in attaining power, a power she feels is due to her. She believes that it is her birthright to be President and that we should trust her because she said so. She was responsible for the socialized health care plan that failed though her hubby, in revisionist style, is now taking the blame for it.

They are both snake oil salesmen who will say or do anything to get and keep power. Bill indicated that even if he were not married to her he would be out there stumping for her. The truth is, if they had never been married no one would no who she is and she would not be in the Senate and she would not be running for the presidency.

And if Bill were not married he would be out doing the same thing he has done all through his married life.

Chasing, conquering, and sexually abusing women.

Source:
Breitbart

Others with similar items:
Outside the Beltway, Wake Up America, Adam’s Blog, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Dumb Ox Daily News, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

The CNN/YouTube debate for the Republicans was held earlier this evening and I think it was a lively event. The problem with the event is that CNN allowed an activist who is a member of Hillary Clinton’s Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transsexual steering committee two minutes of talk time. It is absolutely true that CNN allowed a person affiliated with the campaign of a Democrat running for President to ask questions of the Republicans at the Republican debate. Not only was this gay retired Army general’s question one of the YouTube submissions selected but he was allowed to be in the audience and ask follow up questions. Before the LGBT community or the Democrats get their panties in a wad I want to make it clear that this person had a right to ask his question and he had a right to be at the event. However, CNN should have disclosed that this man was on a Hillary Clinton steering committee so that the public would know that he was not a Republican and that he was not unbiased.

I thought it was strange early on when someone asked a question and Anderson Cooper disclosed that the guy was in the audience and asked him if his question was answered. He gave a short answer and sat down. The only other person allowed to do that was the gay general. Now, it might be because he was the only other person to ask a question who attended the event. But it sure appears as if CNN had the first guy there so the second would not seem unusual. It also seemed strange to me that this guy asked why the candidates felt gays should not serve openly in the military and they gave their answers but when Cooper asked if he had been answered he said no and then went on a rant about his gayness and time in the service. It almost seems like it was set up that way.

As I stated, I have no problem with the question or the guy being there. I just feel that his affiliation should have been disclosed. This event makes it look like instead of planting the questions the Clinton campaign is now planting the people who ask them as well because the campaign had to know he was going to be there. CNN had to know who this guy was and it is no secret that he is connected to the Clinton campaign. The Gay general, Keith Kerr, is listed on her website as part of the steering committee and that they support her for president:

Members of LGBT AMERICANS FOR HILLARY [Keith Kerr is listed] have endorsed Hillary Clinton for President in their individual capacity. The names of past or present affiliations are included to assist in identifying the individuals listed and do not indicate any endorsement by that group or organization. HillaryClinton.com

There were well over 4000 questions submitted for the debate so it is unlikely that this guy was selected at random. His question was selected and he was present to show Republicans as people who hate gay people. I thought all the answers were pretty good. They told why they were opposed to gay people in the military. They did not say anything hateful but just that they felt it was not a good thing. The only one who tripped up on it is Romney who flipped from a previous position where he said he could not wait for the day when gays could serve openly in the military. This part of the debate is sure to rile up the gay brigade and have them out in hater mode tomorrow discussing how terrible the Republicans are. Don’t buy it, the answers were fine. People do not have to agree with that lifestyle and that does not make them hateful people. It just means they do not agree.

I wonder why it is that no Republican was at the Democratic YouTube debate to be selected for follow up. Can you imagine how Hillary would be in full conspiracy mode with the VRWC and black helicopters if a person on a Republican steering committee who had endorsed a Republican candidate was there and asked a question in an attempt to make the Democrats look bad? They would go nuts and Hillary, in particular, would be carping about the Republican attack machine. After all those years of being someone’s bitch in private tonight, this guy was Hillary’s bitch in public.

It does seem amazing that the Democrats did not have this happen to them but the Republicans did. Not too amazing because CNN (and they have some explaining to do) is the Clinton News Network but the Republicans allowed a Democratic operative, and a gay one at that, to come to their debate and ask a follow up question.

Who says Republicans are not inclusive?

Want to bet Hillary denies, claims ignorance or blames it on someone else? How about she says it is a coincidence?

UPDATE: Anderson Cooper says they did not know. I guess that means the gay general is unethical. But then again we knew that because if he served for 43 years he answered the “have you ever engaged in homosexual behavior” question and he had to put NO.

Big Dog salute to Webloggin and Stop the ACLU.

Others:
Liberty Pundit
Right Voices
Sister Toldjah
Michelle Malkin
Right Angles
Assorted Babble
TownHall Blog