Archive for the ‘bad news’ Category

Morning Link Round Up

March 4, 2009

A collection of links, mostly gathered from No Moss Here.

Obama buyer’s remorse.

Remember when Michelle Obama sneered at the $600 rebate checks?


As Dow keeps dropping, Obama running out of people to blame.

While Americans are forced to cut back, “Obama kicks up White House entertaining”

Obama Declares War on Investors, Entrepreneurs, Businesses, And More

Advertisements

Tim Russert died on the job.

June 13, 2008

The host of NBC’s Meet the Press, and VP of NBC News, died today of a heart attack while on the job.

I can’t think of any of MSNBC’s major news talking heads who are fit to shine Mr. Russert’s shoes, let alone fill them.

While he was former democrat political operative, he didn’t let that get the way of putting democrats on the spot during his interviews.

Welcome back Carter

June 10, 2008

The Confederate Yankee nails the bad news express that an Obama administration would be:

While the media would like to help along the meme that McCain’s financial plan of low taxes and lowered government spending is a continuation of Bush’s economy, that is fiction. McCain’s policies are in line with Ronald Reagan’s successful conservative economic plans; of the two Presidential candidates, it is Obama’s plan that is more like those practiced by Bush.

The bloated government and increased spending seen under the Bush Administration is horrific from a fiscally conservative standpoint, and a prequel to what would occur if the ultra-liberal Obama campaign lives up to its promises, creating more than $87 billion in new government and entitlements. Obama will need to substantially raise taxes to fulfill even some of his campaign promises.

Think Bush is bad? Obama will be worse, pulling for “higher income taxes, Social Security taxes, capital gains taxes, dividend taxes,” and taxes on job-creating small businesses straight out of the “dazed and malaised” days of James Earl Carter’s failed one-term Presidency. I’m sure I am not alone in hearing from parents concerned that an Obama presidency will ruin the economy for their children.

There is more, go read it.

The RNC catches up with me.

May 14, 2008

I’ve been calling Barak Hussein Obama the second coming of Jimmy Carter for a while.
Change this country doesn’t need is a return to Carter era double digit inflation and unemployment.

More on why Obama is bad for the United States of America

March 4, 2008

It’s already been proven over and over that HRC is an agent of Satan and is a Marxist in a Pantsuit. The sad part is that she is actually more conservative than Barak Obama, who is consistently rated as one of the most liberal members of the Senate.
Kids too young to remember the double digit inflation and unemployment of the Carter years (and those in “progressive” denial) don’t recognize his “message of change” as the same warmed over bullshit that Carter slung and dragged the country down with.

By way of Curt at Flopping Aces
is this Victor Davis Hanson article that spells out the horrid details of the damage that Barak Obama will inflict on this country.

At home, there will be an increase in taxes—income, estate, payroll—to fund more government health care, education, and general entitlement programs. The old Reaganesque notion that government subsidies can make one more dependent, angrier, and envious is forgotten, along with the notion that lower taxes stimulate economic growth and encourage risk-taking, innovation, and independence. I worry especially about the lifting of income caps (how far?) on social security taxes inasmuch as they were part of the original covenant justifying the caps on benefits paid out.

NAFTA and other free trade agreements would be repealed; illegal immigration would either not be an issue, or more a problem of finding the right way, with borders still open, to grant amnesties. Appointments would hinge on a belief in bigger government and the theme that the individual is currently suffering due to reactionaries in government and corporations, barely housed, fed, or educated, and deserves more federal dollars appropriated from others who either don’t need all their income or didn’t deserve the compensation they were given.

Abroad, there is a general argument that things are going terribly. Forget that the Taliban and Saddam are gone. Forget that we have not suffered another 9/11 attack. Forget that there is far more democratic promise in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Lebanon than was true in 2001. Forget that the Merkel and Sarkozy governments, along with Eastern European leaders, are more pro-American than their predecessors in 2001.

Instead, we are disliked by everyone, and for good reasons. The fact that Iranian mullahs, the House of Saud cousins, Hugo Chavez’s communists, European mullahs, and the Arab street don’t approve of America says more about us than it does them. The solution is to follow more the dictates of European Union and United Nations, where sophisticated internationalists can guide us through the maze of global power, instructing mostly ignorant Americans how and why we tend to cause so many of the world’s problems. Misunderstanding and our own obtuseness explain global tension, not the agendas of enemies who know exactly what they want and how to get it.

Our military is not so much an offensive force, designed to defeat and kill our enemies, that needs support and constant honing; better to see it as a large social organization that we must look at in terms only of proper rotations, health care, and benefits. We are to support the troops not in the sense of doing everything we can to ensure they win, and gain the proper recognition for their courage and sacrifice, but rather in consideration of their victimhood, offering proper sympathy and remediation for the defeat in Iraq, the unwise use of their skills, and the needless loss of their lives.