Archive for June, 2010

Read More

via Randy's Right

Yeah, that’s actually what happened after Obama’s oval office address. Obama took a lot of serious criticisms from the left after his speech on the oil spill. And it was a serious shock to find myself agreeing with Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann. They both made the point that Obama did not show a strong command of the situation. I agree, I’ve just picked up on Obama’s lack of strong command way before this speech. I also agreed with a point Rachel Maddow made in her own fake President Oval Office address. She said that one of the things she would do would be to mandate that companies prove they can solve the problem if there is a leak in order to drill in the first place. I agree with that also, which felt really weird. Like a lot of people, I’ve just been assuming that if an oil spill happened the oil companies would know what to do. After all, it would certainly be in their best interest to resolve a situation as serious as an oil spill as quickly as they can, but now I’m seeing the reality that there was no plan in place to solve the problem and that, two months into this massive oil spill, there is still no real solution in sight.

I’m not against drilling. I think we should be putting the resources we have to good use. And I absolutely oppose the cap and trade legislation. That places the burden on the wrong people and doesn’t really solve our energy needs. However, there are obviously very serious consequences when things go wrong and the people responsible do not know how to fix the problem. Oil companies should have to prove that they can deal with the consequences when something like this happens. BP obviously could not handle this oil spill and now all of us are facing the consequences. Making companies prove they are capable of clean up is drilling for our own oil responsibly. Assuming the oil companies have got it covered is not.


CBS is reporting that oil rig inspections were not carried out as often as they should have been  and that faults were overlooked:

Notice the dates. These missed or failed inspections took place under the Bush administration. The article does mention 2009, but most of the inspections and incidents discussed took place under George Bush.

This doesn’t mean that Obama has no responsibilities here. And I am tired of hearing everyone blame Bush instead of holding Obama responsible for his poor reaction to this crisis. Barack Obama is the President right now and he needs to start being a much better leader than he has been. However, if I found out that inspections had not been properly carried out under the Obama administration I would be furious and I would hold him accountable. Therefore, the Bush administration is not entirely off the hook here. These failed and missed inspections took place on his watch and that is something that he actually can be blamed for. Bush is not responsible, as the Democrats would have us believe, for Obama’s poor response, but he is responsible for his own administration. And his own administration was not responsible enough on oil rig inspections.


When someone makes this kind of ridiculous claim I usually just laugh it off. As a Tea Partier I know that I’m nothing like that and I know what I stand for. Every once in a while, though, it does really get to me. Not because my feelings are hurt, but because it is absolutely mind blowing to me how people can be so naive and ignorant. For one thing there seems to be a lot of confusion as to what the Tea Party stands for. We want less government and less spending. That’s the most basic, bottom line description I can give of what the Tea Party wants, yet it still gets lost on some people. You don’t need a fancy degree to understand what the Tea Party stands for. The most common criticism of the Tea Party is criticism of things that the Tea Party never said and never claimed to stand for. Liberals don’t understand the Tea Party at all. They just know they don’t like it, so they make up things about the Tea Party and then go on and on about how enraged they are over the things they just made up. The most common accusation is that the Tea Party is a bunch of racists who just hate people. This level of ignorance will never completely disappear. I’ve reached the point where I’ve realized that having to deal with the ignorance and intolerance of others is just a part of life. Even so, I’m getting really fed up with all the talk about how hateful the Tea Party is, so I’m going to explain a few things in a way that is so simple even a liberal could understand.

Let’s begin by addressing the most outrageous accusations against the Tea Party.

-They’re just a bunch of racists.

Yes, the President is black. Yes, the polls have shown that the majority of the Tea Party is white. If you have picked up on this, congratulations. Maybe you can find a successful career in color coding, but I still have a little news flash that you might find interesting. Pointing out the differences in skin color does not make your absurd claim of racism any more valid.

-But, I saw signs. Racist signs…that were mean!

Yes, I’ve seen racist signs too, but not at Tea Parties. The leadership of the Tea Party movement has repeatedly denounced racist signs and racist actions among the Tea Party. Every once in a while a nut shows up who is not welcomed among the group, but those nuts tend to show up more at liberal events than Tea Parties.

-The Tea Partiers are violent and dangerous.

Look up some videos of the May Day protests. There’s your violence. And if you think the Tea Party is violent or dangerous that is most likely due to inaccurate libelous reporting. After the health care vote when Congressmen who voted yes began receiving threats, the media immediately began pointing their fingers at the Tea Party and the Republican Party, when at the time they had no evidence to back up their claims.

-But…they’re dangerous. They want to overthrow the government!

You probably only believe that because some liberal talking head who is not intelligent enough to recognize the difference between anti-government and anti-big government incorrectly told you that the Tea Party is made up of a bunch of anarchists. There is a huge difference between being against big government and being against big government. Again, you don’t exactly need a college degree to pick up on this MAJOR difference. The liberals continue spreading this lie that the Tea Party is out to get rid of government completely, and I am left wondering how anyone could be so stupid as to be unable to recognize the difference between supporting small government and supporting anarchy.

-The Tea Party hates poor people!

Yes, I’m sure Washington told you that all of their newest entitlement programs will help people and that anyone who doesn’t support them is just a really cold and hateful person. The democrats charitable programs are not charity no matter what they say. Sure, there are the welfare programs and the homeless shelters and the unemployment benefits, but the democrats are creating so many new entitlement programs that a)make people more dependent on the government and b)we can’t afford. Take for instance the government’s new program to provide everyone with free internet. People who don’t have internet access are going to get free internet paid for by other taxpayers. That is not charity. That is the government taking advantage of someone’s hard work by giving someone else the opportunity to benefit from that hard work by doing nothing. When the money runs out all of these entitlements won’t do anyone any good anyway. There is no such thing as a free lunch. We cannot afford to keep giving people more and more entitlements like this that only protect them from facing the consequences of their own actions. And when those people who are working and funding those programs can’t fund it anymore those who are dependent on the government will have difficulty adjusting to doing things for themselves again. The democrats outrageous entitlement programs are not charity. People who stand against useless entitlements are doing the country a much better service.

-They only hate the President because he is black and they hate Mexicans because they’re immigrants!

Criticizing the President is not racist just because he is America’s first black president. And I have no problem with anyone who comes here legally. I have a problem with people who come here illegally. Illegal is not a race, such as Mexican. It is a status that is unacceptable. And if you really think wanting a tougher crackdown on illegal immigration is hating immigrants then let’s talk about immigrants who go to Mexico. They actually enforce immigration laws. Would it still be hateful of me to go down there with no legal papers and expect to be given free health care, exceptions from certain laws, exceptions from certain taxes, exceptions from documentation, a guaranteed job, free enrollment in entitlement programs, and that it be illegal to display a Mexican flag anywhere near me because I find if offensive? That would be hateful, demanding that the country accommodate my every need while showing no respect for or desire to learn anything about the country.

I believe in the principles this country was founded on, I believe that this government has gotten too big and too out of control, and I intend to continue to express those beliefs. That doesn’t make me a hateful person. That makes me willing to get involved and do something about the problems I see instead of just sitting at home complaining about them.


AssKick-Man! There Is a New Superhero in Town It’s a bird… It’s a plane… It’s AssKick-Man [CNN] Obama looking for ‘whose ass to kick’ “I don’t sit around talking to experts because this is a college seminar,” Obama continued. “We talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick.” Always … Read More

via FauxToesHopper’s Blog

Obama Gets Tough…Again…

I am so tired of hearing the latest about how the President is “getting tough” on the oil spill, on the Republicans, or on Iran. The libs love talking about how tough Obama is on Iran. Funny, every time I hear him say that he’s getting tough on Iran it’s usually followed with reassurance that Iran can still come to the table to have a discussion if they want to. For months and months Obama hasn’t been able to pick up that Iran’s President does not want to be his friend. Mahmoud could literally spit in his face and Obama would probably still mumble something about getting together for talks! After more than a year of this pathetic pandering I couldn’t help rolling my eyes when I visited the White House blog and saw this post with the title “The Toughest Sanctions Ever Faced by the Iranian Government”.

Don’t get me wrong on this. I think these sanctions are good, but why the hell did they take so long? After all the time Obama’s spent talking about how tough he is on Iran it’s not until now that we actually have these sanctions. Did he really think his “We’re gonna have to get tough, but we’re still open to talks” act was going to get their attention? Maybe he did and maybe he didn’t. I don’t know. I think there is a lot about this President that I will simply never understand.

Anyway, as I scrolled through his comments on the matter one sentence stood out to me:

“And while Iran’s leaders hide behind outlandish rhetoric, their actions have been deeply troubling”

When I read this sentence I was not thinking about Mahmoud. I was thinking about President Obama. I’m a Tea Party activist, so it’s really no secret that I find many, if not all, of his actions to be deeply troubling. And I have had more than I can take of his ‘outlandish rhetoric’. His rhetoric about jobs, about the Tea Party, about Wall Street, about Obamacare, all of it! There’s hardly any substance to it and when there is it’s not the kind of substance you want in a speech from the President of the United States. I get so fed up with it that I sometimes wish I couldn’t recognize the rhetoric so that it wouldn’t irritate me so much. It is truly sad that when the President of the US uses this sentence to describe the President of Iran I am reminded of Barack Obama, his rhetoric, and his deeply troubling actions.

It’s good that the UN is finally supporting these sanctions and “getting tough” on Iran. If it were only up to Barack Obama it probably never would have happened.


Even Bob Sheiffer has noticed. The administration seems to be coming apart at the seams. Or so it would appear. Oil in the Gulf- The rising chorus of questions about the response, or lack thereof, of the President and his actual authorities and duties under the law. The true believers will never let this become his Katrina, and when the thing is finally plugged, it will be because of his hard work.  Helen Thomas- Not an administration problem, bu … Read More

via Whiteybleu’s Weblog

I know I have posted a lot for such a new blog, but I could not pass up the opportunity to help get the word out about an impromptu Tea Party June 9 in DC at the Liaison Hotel, right outside a democratic fundraiser. Those who are going to attend should show up at about 6:15 and email to let him know that you are coming. This is very last minute and people haven’t had the opportunity to plan ahead, so we need everyone to come out who can. If you don’t live near DC please send this to any Tea Partiers you know so they have the opportunity to decide if they want to go. If any conservative bloggers are reading this, please reblog this post. Just because this is last minute does not mean we can’t have a good turn out. Come if you can.


Barack Obama can pretend all he wants to that he has been a great leader through the Gulf oil spill, but the time line says otherwise. I won’t get into the matter of when Obama said what, though I may address that in another post. At the moment, I would like to focus on the parties and celebrations the White House has engaged in since this all started on April 20.

April 23-The Obamas go on a short weekend vacation in North Carolina. At the time, the situation was not as serious and the President was probably not aware that the situation was as bad as it really was or how much worse it would get. However, the Obamas taking a vacation does hurt Obama’s claim that he has been on this since day one.

April 26-Obama welcomes the Yankees to the White House. The New York Times headline was “Yankees Take Celebration to Washington”.

April 29-Obama attends a DNC fundraising dinner.

May 1-Obama gives a comedic speech at the White House Correspondents Dinner.

May 3-Obama honors Navy football team at the White House.

May 5-Cinco de Mayo party at the White House.

May 9-Commencement speech at Hampton University. I generally wouldn’t consider a commencement speech to be a problem, but at a time like this is it really a priority?

May 17-Obama welcomes University of Connecticut’s women’s basketball team to the White House.

May 19-State dinner at the White House honoring Mexican President Calderon.

May 24-Obama celebrates Asian Pacific Heritage Month.

May 25-Obama speaks at a fundraiser for Barbara Boxer.

May 27-Obama welcomes Duke Blue Devils to the White House.

May 27-Obama greets the US World Cup Team at the White House.

May 27-Obama celebrates Jewish American Heritage Month at the White House.

May 28-Obama sees the oil spill up close for the first time.

June 4-Obama says he won’t let BP nickel and dime people. Gee, thanks for making sure we’re covered on that, Barry. We certainly wouldn’t want to be nickel-and-dimed.

June 6-Congressional picnic. On the same day, Obama admits he has not communicated with the CEO of BP.

June 8-Obama wants to know who’s ass to kick. (How ya gonna kick ass, Obama? With another party?)

This man has not been a leader from day one. Based on the events I’ve laid out here it almost seems like the oil spill is not even a priority! Over a month after the explosion he hasn’t communicated with the BP CEO, but he has had time to meet all these sports teams? When we really have an environmental disaster on our hands like this can’t the President cut down on  the White House parties and meeting sports teams? Is that too much to ask? It’s not just because he has claimed that he’s been such a great leader on this from day one. He shouldn’t be having all these parties out of respect for how much people are hurting right now. We have a bad economy, high unemployment, an environmental disaster, and a crushing debt and deficit. With the way the White House has been celebrating you would think America wasn’t facing any of these problems. The White House celebrations are not just a poor sign of leadership in a time of crisis. It’s downright unclassy. This man is not a leader. If this oil spill was really such a priority these parties and sports teams wouldn’t be.


I think this post demonstrates the increasing similarities between democrats and the socialists.

Dem Party Indistinguishable From CPUSA But you already knew that. Comrades flocked to New York City two weeks ago for the 29th national convention of the Communist Party USA. While reviewing materials from the event, we had a sudden sense of déjà vu: the feeling that we had heard these talking points before. Maybe you have as well — they’re espoused, in near identical form, by the president and his fellow Democrats. Take the quiz below, and try to determine which quotes were uttered b … Read More

via Nice Deb