President Obama Is Not Being Very Presidential

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

The President of the United States should be the country’s leader.  As a leader, he should attempt to represent the entire constituency to the best of his ability and to seek common ground among the varying points of view.   I guess it’s not news to you or to anyone that what Obama has succeeded in doing through much of his impromptu rhetoric, which may not be exactly what he had intended – or perhaps it is since he is not a stupid person! – is to send the country into a greater schism.  Obama appears to be calculating in all his endeavors. 

Even after campaigning on a platform of bringing unity, he has created a greater division among philosophical and political groups than ever existed before.  In this, he receives support of his cronies and the mainstream media.  Perhaps that is why he feels comfortable in being divisive even though he promised during his campaign to “bring the two sides” together.   But, how can you call a significant group of your “constituency” derogatory names or “diss” them in public forums if you truly want them to be included in a unified group? 

I know that this may be a peculiar claim, but President Obama has spent the last few years (well before his run for the presidency) establishing his own constituency. . . and obviously, it’s not the American population at large!   It has been evident from Day One of his presidency that Obama intended to establish himself not as a leader of a united American people, but as someone who will use his high office to repay those to whom he is indebted politically and those special interest groups who had financed his rise to the most powerful position in the country (dare I say the world anymore?).   I could take up time and space listing all those entities, but we all know of whom I speak.  Suffice it to say that he obviously has enormous debts to special groups of far left idealogues with whom he’s been closely tied all of his life, and he also has political debts to repay to those within the political circles who heavily backed him in his run for the White House.  To what end?  I will answer that in a moment.

Rather than giving leadership to his own country, he behaves  as a populist trying to “up” his image among national leaders who include the most despicable of despots.  By trying to garner favorable standing with that part of the global community, he is failing miserably at maintaining his favor with the US allies; and thus, has strained if not done real harm to the foundation of those relationships.  For example, one of our closest allies, Israel, has been treated with total contempt.

On the home front,  in his role as leader of the free world, Obama certainly earns a low grade, perhaps an “F”, surely nothing higher than a “D-“.  Many times he has shown he lacks the “class” and maturity that a national leader –  yea, a world leader – should possess.   Without his teleprompter (or when he goes off-script) he demonstrates a grammar-schoolish approach to handling himself, forgetting at times who he is.  At those times, or when he has his “posse” with him, Obama  likes to portray the “playground bully”, belittling or “dissing” those who disagree with his politics, primarily those with a conservative point of view and who revere the Constitution as it was implemented by our forefathers.

So to what end?  Ever the campaigner, Obama appears to be running for the office which is still being sought by former president Bill Clinton, that of President of the World.  And, as he did as an inexperienced Senator, Obama is running for that position even before gaining experience in his present one.  However, I believe he is finding it not quite as easy to do this time since there are more competitors in play.  And too, Obama is finding that he’s not “riding as high” as he once was in the polls with those he’s supposed to be leading.

It would, of course, be important for him to remain in the good graces of the US population if he is to have any hope of a second term.  (Or it may be that he’s expecting to leapfrog quickly to that “new office” like he did to the White House!)   In regards to 2012 elections, he obviously feels he needn’t worry too much about his majority of his base of Democrats and Independents, and even some of the Republicans who “crossed over” (who have, as a rule, suffered from short-term memory loss spanning one to two elections).  However, more and more of the independents, and even some of his more moderate Democratic base, are beginning to tire of his avant-garde style of presidency.  

Let me remind you with examples from his own words and actions just how Obama shows the lack of character that a leader in his position should have. 

Obama Bows to Saudi Prince

Obama and Chavez

After seeing these few examples, I ask you this:  Is Obama behaving like YOUR President?  In my opinion, he’s not acting like America’s President. 



ACORN Tangled Up in Legal Battles as Plaintiff AND Defendant

Saturday, October 24, 2009

You know, ACORN and two of its employees  have exhibited unprecedented gall by threatening to sue the “pimp” and the “prostitute” who stirred up a political hornet’s nest with their undercover videos.  To be precise, the attorneys for ACORN are relying on Maryland’s wiretap statute to bring a lawsuit against James O’Keefe III, Hannah Giles, and Breitbart.Com LLC, for the video recordings which revealed ACORN’s more than willing assistance and counsel on establishing a brothel which would feature underage girls trafficked in from El Salvador.  The lawsuit should fail, however, because it attempts to misapply the “wiretap” statute to the legal recording of a non-protected conversation.

As an example, do you remember Linda Tripp who recorded Monica Lewinsky’s sordid tales of her encounters with then-President Bill Clinton?  They tried to prosecute her under this same law.  But she was a more valuable witness for another case, that being the impeachment of a President.  She was given immunity for her testimony, but I daresay that they would have found it extremely difficult to prosecute her under that law anyway. 

 You see, the Maryland state law is not a “wiretapping” law per se.  It’s an “interception” statute that regulates the “interception” of communications, and that is spelled out precisely in the law.  In Linda’s case, it was her own phone that she was using.  And she didn’t intercept a communication, she was participating in the conversation.  In that same vein, it is easy to see that there was no “interception” of communications by O’Keefe and Giles.  In fact, it was, as with Linda, their own conversations with ACORN employees. 

If this law is used successfully to prosecute O’Keefe and Giles for exposing the corruption within the ACORN organization, then people with cell phones that capture videos and records voices had better turn off their phones while in Maryland to avoid the temptation to break this law at some party or event!

But ACORN has other legal issues as well, this time on the defensive side.  When ACORN went to Las Vegas and started playing what they called “Blackjack” or “21,” the activist group was making a far greater gamble than it could ever have guessed, or so think the Nevada prosecutors who are, by the way, Democrats.

There’s nothing wrong with playing the tables in Vegas, but the authorities claim that ACORN was using the common names of popular casino game as a cover-up term for paying workers bonuses to sign up voters as part of a quota system which is illegal in Nevada.  As a result of an extensive investigation, a preliminary hearing in the Clark County courthouse has put ACORN on trial for the first time as a criminal defendant. 

Until now, prosecutions for voter registration fraud have focused on the ACORN workers themselves rather than the organization leadership, and yes, the authorities have secured guilty pleas from several workers who have admitted to falsifying voter registration forms. But when investigators from Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller’s office raided the ACORN Las Vegas office, Ross says they found a paper trail that not only was ACORN organization itself aware of this practice, it was actually promoting this behavior.

In an interview with Fox News, Miller said, “We came across policy manuals that outline their policy of creating a quota system, which is against the law.  This, in fact, was something that was widespread and something the organization itself knew about, and it’s important to hold the organization criminally accountable as opposed to the individual field directors.”

ACORN, of course, has consistently denied that it had a quota for the number of voter registration forms, and that it required its workers to turn in a certain minimum number every day.  The organization does say that there were “performance standards” — that standard was “an expectation” that workers would find 20 new voters each day.  But prosecutors say ACORN paid a $5 bonus to workers who would sign up 21 or more voters per day.  That’s where the “code” name “21” or “Blackjack,” came in.  It was an alleged quota system that Miller says is the first step toward corrupting the entire democratic system. 

“These charges strike at the heart of having integrity of the electoral process. That’s something that is important in Nevada and the entire country,” he told FOX News.  “By filing these charges we are sending a clear message we are not going to tolerate these kinds of activities. We have seen voter registration abuse before and we are holding these people accountable.”

With the undercover videos from several offices done by O’Keefe and Giles, and the search and seizure of such incriminating evidence in the Las Vegas ACORN office, pressure from all sides has been mounting on ACORN in recent weeks.  But it seems that the “lame street media” would rather focus on the alleged illegal actions of two young people rather than go after the organization that counsels people to commit obviously illegal activities and cheat on paying taxes. 

There has been some other fallout from the expose’ done by O’Keefe and Giles, and the revelation of the manuals and documents discovered in Las Vegas.  The IRS and Census Bureau have since severed direct ties with the group, and even the inspector general of the Department of Justice is reviewing its own involvement with ACORN.  Other state and local authorities are also beginning to distance themselves from ACORN, while others are watching them closely, including Maryland’s own attorney general.

As of this writing, I haven’t heard or read anything further on ACORN’s lawsuit against O’Keefe and Giles.  But Las Vegas officials are proceeding with their case against ACORN.  And if ACORN is convicted, the Nevada ACORN operation could lose its tax-exempt status and that would have national implications for the organization as a whole — meaning that ACORN would end up with a losing hand!

Bill Clinton Claims Vast, Right-wing Conspiracy

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Do right-wing fundamentalists or conservatives pose a genuine threat?

This accusation is coming from all fronts right now.  I suppose it’s because the showings at the townhall meetings of the summer and the greater than expected attendance in Washington on 9/12 have had an impact on those on left.   The media, or “fringe media” if you prefer, and lawmakers in Washington, as well as many others with left-leaning tendencies are doing their best to portray Conservatives as a threat.  But where’s their proof?  A threat to what? 

The AP has reported today that Former President Bill Clinton is saying a vast, right-wing conspiracy which once had targeted him now focuses on President Barack Obama.  Drawing from a quote his wife Hillary Rodham Clinton made  when he was president and was asked about something of a much more personal and significant incident in his presidency, that being the Monica Lewinsky affair which occurred over a decade ago, the then first lady had called her husband’s political enemies a “vast, right-wing conspiracy” who were out to destroy his presidency.  They do not…. DO NOT…. have any proof of their accusations; they only have speculations to support those accusations.

On NBC’s “Meet the Press” this week, Bill Clinton was asked about whether that right-wing conspiracy his wife proclaimed was out to destroy his presidency ten years ago was still around today. His reply was, “You bet.  Sure it is.  It’s not as strong as it was because America has changed demographically.  But it’s as virulent as it was.”  However, he said, this time the focus is on Obama, and now “their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail.”

He’s wrong two counts.  The conservative movement that was around ten years ago has grown, but demographics have nothing to do with it; becoming aware of what the government is up to has everything to do with it.  Neither is this a movement just made up conservatives or right-wingers.  It  includes members of his own party as well as independents – and a good number of them.  Many of these people not only put Clinton in office, but put Obama in office as well.  Some had become disillusioned by the previous administration and sought a change from those policies.  However, they never suspected that meant the total revamping of the Constitution and the dismantling of our government that has been happening over the past eight months. 

You can correctly say that this “right-wing conspiracy” as a movement  isn’t about the man.  Rather, it’s about his programs and politics.  Separating the man from his policies is validated in the major national polls results.  According to today’s Rasmussen Poll, 30% approve of Obama’s politics, 40% disapprove, but 49% approve of his overall job performance.  Many like the man, but they don’t like his politics.  So, it doesn’t necessarily follow that people generally hope he fails – personally.

I can’t speak for why Clinton chose “virulent” to describe his detractors in the ’90s.  I don’t remember any violence, any openly spiteful,  hostile, or intense bitterness, or even expressed maliciousness that would denote “virulent” – but strong opposition, yes.  However, it was not unduly so as his personal actions and his policies warranted the strong dissatisfaction expressed by those who opposed him.

Is there a conspiracy on the right?  That might be accurately descriptive if the  term “conspiracy” means the passion and determination of the “right-wingers” to protect our Constitution, to protect our country from being driven into Socialism, to keep our Congress and the media from making a demagogue out of our president.  It’s a passion driven by love of country and its founding principles and values.  It is not driven by hate of anything or anyone.  The patriotism that was present during the founding of this country is rising again in the hearts of individuals from every political sector.  And the opposition to that patriotism is just fanning the flame!