by Francisco Gonzalez ~ April 24, 2012
In an intriguing op-ed piece in The New York Times, Arthur Brisbane suggests the Times needs to take a hard look at the President. As he states, during this period of the Republican primary, “we haven’t heard as much from The Times about President Obama’s re-election effort…. Now, though, the general election season is on, and The Times needs to offer an aggressive look at the president’s record, policy promises and campaign operation to answer the question: Who is the real Barack Obama?”
We wish more members of the mainstream media would have been asking this President of a junior Senator from Illinois as he made his run for the White House. It’s now nearly 4 years later, and this President’s policies have been an utter disaster for the country — in terms of his economic policies and his agenda against the Constitutional principles of limited government and the protection of private property.
But alas, the fact they are starting to ask a few more questions is welcome news. These are the questions we posed when we published our book nearly four years ago. In fact, we gave it the same title as Mr. Brisbane’s question: “Who is the Real Barack Obama?” You think we’d know by now.
by Francisco Gonzalez ~ March 8, 2012
Andrew Breitbart’s website just released what could be an earth-shattering video. It shows a clip of Barack Obama hugging racialist Derrick Bell. Obama is seen on tape at a public rally telling the students at Harvard to “Open Your Hearts and Open Your Minds to the Words of Professor Derrick Bell.”
This video - and Obama’s words endorsing Derrick Bell - is so controversial that Obama’s mentor, Professor Charles Ogletree is seen in a recent video telling students “We hid this throughout the 2008 campaign.”
As Breitbart’s story says: “There’s far more coming on Derrick Bell. This is just the beginning. And this video is a smoking gun showing that Barack Obama not only associated with radicals, he was their advocate.”
For more see the story at Breitbart.com.
by Francisco Gonzalez ~ March 7, 2012
President Obama has been Israel’s worst friend. He has been the least sympathetic to their needs as an ally than any President in U.S. History. In 2011, President Obama called on Israel to move its borders back to the 1967 lines. Israel has been at war with Palestinians and other radical Islamists for the past six decades. It isn’t even a very big country and it is right in the middle of many Muslim countries. And this President has the audacity to ask Israel to capitulate its borders? Some ally!
A new film, “Daylight: The Story of Obama and Israel” exposes the radical policies Obama has tried to force on one of our closest and dearest allies, Israel. For further reading, see The Blaze or watch the movie trailer.
by Francisco Gonzalez ~ March 6, 2012
As we stated in our 2008 book, “Who is the Real Barack Obama? For the rising generation; by the rising generation,” Barack Obama has a long history of associating with radicals. In a posthumously released article this week, Andrew Breitbart reveals something new that even our 2008 book did not uncover. (Hey, we were short on time - and there’s so much in Obama’s past that the mainstream media just never looked into).
As Breitbart writes:
In The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama claims that he worried after 9/11 that his name, so similar to that of Osama bin Laden, might harm his political career. But Obama was not always so worried about misspellings and radical resemblances. He may even have cultivated them as he cast himself as Chicago’s radical champion.
In 1998, a small Chicago theater company staged a play titled The Love Song of Saul Alinsky, dedicated to the life and politics of the radical community organizer whose methods Obama had practiced and taught on Chicago’s South Side. Obama was not only in the audience, but also took the stage after one performance, participating in a panel discussion that was advertised in the poster for the play.
Read the full story here: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/04/obama-alinsky-love-song
by Francisco Gonzalez ~ March 8, 2009
When the New York Times accuses you of being a socialist, you just might be one. But, in response to their question about whether he would describe himself as a socialist, Obama refused to admit it. However, he also refused to flat out say no.
The New York Times reporter finally got direct with Obama: ”Is there one word name for your philosophy? If you’re not a socialist, are you a liberal? Are you progressive? One word?” Obama’s answer: ”No, I’m not going to engage in that.”
Real Clear Politics posted the full transcript here.
by Francisco Gonzalez ~ February 25, 2009
Bob Williams, Founder and CEO of The Evergreen Freedom Foundation gets credit for his quick summary of the campaign promises that President Obama has already broken only a month into his first term as President. Here is that summary:
President Obama is breaking campaign promises and his White House pledges faster than I can keep track of them. Of course his office is now revising the White House webpages. I am glad I printed them out on January 20th.
1. Candidate Obama promised to go through the budget line item by line item and cut waste. He obviously has not done that. The press needs to hold him accountable for breaking this pledge.
2. A common sense way to bring the federal budget under control is to make sure each budget item meets one of the enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8 if the U.S. Constitution. If it doesn’t meet that criteria it shouldn’t be funded. PAYGO (it is also on his website) http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/fiscal/ Yet he ignored that in the $787 billion stimulus legislation.
3.The President when he speaks supports PAYGO (it is also on his website) http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/fiscal/ Yet he ignored that in the $787 billion stimulus legislation.
4. The President when he speaks supports not “burdening our children and grandchildren with excessive debt. (that also is on his website. http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/fiscal/. He ignored that pledge in his stimulus legislation.
5. The President when he speaks supports “spending that cannot withstand public scrutiny cannot be justified” (that also is on his website http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/fiscal/. He ignored that in his stimulus legislation.
6. The President when he speaks supports slashing “earmarks to no greater than the 1994 levels and ensure all spending decisions are open to the public. (that also is on his website. http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/fiscal/. Another broken promise.
7. The President when he speaks says he “will stop funding wasteful, obsolete federal government programs that make no financial sense.” (that also is on his website. http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/fiscal/. Another broken promise.
8. Candidate Obama promised more “sunlight” on legislation before he signed the legislation, i.e. the legislation would be posted online for five days before he signed it. Now that White House page has been revised. Emergency legislation is excluded from this policy and the policy isn’t in effect for non-emergency legislation because “we are working through implementation procedures and some initial issues with the congressional calendar.” http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog_post/update_on_sunlight_before_signing/
9. On January 21 President Obama announced tough new ethics rules. His ethics policy was removed shortly thereafter and “is currently being revised to reflect his Executive Order”. http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/ethics/
by Francisco Gonzalez ~ February 11, 2009
How much is Barack Obama’s first spending bill going to cost American taxpayers? The Competitive Enterprise Institute does the math. Watch this 56-second video:
Barack Obama and the Price of Change
by Francisco Gonzalez ~ February 10, 2009
Obama held his first primetime press conference last night to try to sell the nation on the large spending package (the one being sold as a “stimulus package”). While the nation is now facing a 7.6 percent unemployment rate, this is nowhere near the 25 percent unemployment we faced during the New Deal. And it still hasn’t reached the 10.2 percent unemployment we faced in the recession of 1982. We might first look at how we dealed with that recession in order to avoide the next Great Depression that Obama seems to be almost begging for.
What Obama said in his press conference was revealing. I don’t know if it was this obvious to the average American, but I think it was his first step as President into making America officially a socialist nation - perhaps modeled on some of the socialist nations of Europe. I would encourage you all to read the full transcript from his press conference.
They include statements such as these from President Obama:
“Some of the criticisms [of the spending bill] really are with the basic idea that government should intervene at all in this moment of crisis. Now, you have some people, very sincere, who philosophically just think the government has no business interfering in the marketplace. And, in fact, there are several who’ve suggested that FDR [President Roosevelt] was wrong to interfere back in the New Deal. They’re fighting battles that I thought were resolved a pretty long time ago.”
President Obama, if you really looked around, there is certainly not a concensus that FDR’s New Deal stimulated the economy. In fact, 10 years after the stock market crash of 1929, unemployment still stood at a whopping 17 percent. The only disagreements among economists and historians today is whether the New Deal prolonged the Great Depression. There is no question that it didn’t solve this. However, that myth still exists. But I thought Obama was an educated man. The only thing that actually got us out of the Great Depression was the mobilization of the nation for World War II, which we officially entered in 1941.
Still, in another statement, Obama talked about what he believes the role of government should be to solve this economic crisis:
“…The question I think the American people are asking is, do you just want government to do nothing, or do you want it to do something? If you want it to do something, then we can have a conversation. But doing nothing, that’s not an option from my perspective.”
This second statement is remarkable because it demonstrates why some people still think that FDR’s New Deal was successful - simply because he “did something.” Liberals like action, and voters like action too. Even if that action is a failure, a strong politician that appears to be “doing something” is found favorable by the masses. FDR’s actions were disastrous and did nothing to stimulate the economy - and there is debate on whether it actually made the situation worse. Sometimes doing nothing actually helps the economy do something. Sometimes having the government do something makes the economy do nothing - or even worsens the situation.
This is socialism disguised with a smile. At least Lenin was honest.
by Francisco Gonzalez ~ February 5, 2009
As a candidate for President and throughout his two books, Barack Obama consistently told us that “we must abandon the politics of fear.” Even in his inaugural address on January 20 (just two weeks ago) he said “we have chosen hope over fear.” I guess things change after sitting in the Oval office.
For today, President Obama used fear to urge the passing of a spending bill that is being touted as a “economic stimulus” package.
In an op-ed piece in the Washington Post, President Obama argued that each day without his stimulus package, Americans lose more jobs, savings and homes. The message: if legislators don’t act quick, our future is bleak. “This recession might linger for years. Our economy will lose 5 million more jobs. Unemployment will approach double digits. Our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse. That’s why I feel such a sense of urgency about the recovery plan before Congress.”
Talk about using the politics of fear to promote your policies! It doesn’t get much more fearful than this.
by Francisco Gonzalez ~ February 2, 2009
Bill Richardson. Tim Geithner. Tom Daschle. These three men represent three major appointments in the Obama Administration.
As a candidate for President, Barack Obama promised us that he would “change Washington” and do away with “the politics as usual.” His pick of 36-year Senator, “Mr. Inside the Beltway” himself, Joe Biden, as Vice President, should have given us all a forewarning that Obama wasn’t seeking change, only political gain.
First, Obama appointed New Mexico Governor and former Presidential candidate Bill Richardson to be his Commerce Secretary (folks, that’s a Cabinet-level position). But Richardson was forced to step down from his appointment before he could even be considered for confirmation. Why? Apparently he had engaged in some “pay-to-play” dealings, as he was involved with a company that has done business with the state government of New Mexico.
Then came Timothy Geithner. Some viewed Geithner as a great pick, being that he was President of the Federal Reserve. We can debate whether being President of the Federal Reserve is credible on one’s resume these days, but he was cited as one who was intelligent, someone who could help get this country back on track. President Obama nominated Geithner to be his Secretary of Treasury (a cabinet position first held by Alexander Hamilton). The Treasury Department also oversees the IRS. But, there’s just one problem. Geithner made a “mistake.” For several years, he forgot to pay his taxes.
At his Senate confirmation hearings, Geithner admitted that he had not paid $35,000 in self-employment taxes for several years. Now on the one hand, that’s either tax evasion (which is a crime) or as Geithner claimed it was simply an honest “mistake.” Well, either you’re breaking the law or you’re making mistakes with your own finances. How on earth can our nation decide to put THIS GUY in charge of the nation’s finances during a time where we face such economic challenges? Well, neither our new President Obama nor the Democrat-controlled Congress thought this was as big of a deal as most Americans did. They confirmed him and he is now our Secretary of Treasury.
Third on Obama’s naughty list for cabinet picks is our old friend, former South Dakota Senator Tom Daschle, who Obama nominated to be his Secretary of Health and Human Services. But, wait. Another tax problem. You’ve got to be kidding me, right? Nope. Daschle recently filed amended tax returns to report $128,203 in back taxes and $11,964 in interest, according to a Senate document obtained by The Associated Press. Daschle’s confirmation hearings are set to begin as questions circle both him and our new President. All of these people have one thing in common: Barack Obama.
Obama’s Vice President, Joe Biden, told us many months ago on the campaign trail that it is “patriotic” to pay higher taxes. So long as those taxpayers aren’t in the Presidential cabinet, one supposes. It is amazing that those who call for higher taxes (liberals) think it’s ok when one of their own gets caught cheating on their own. If these were Wall Street capitalists caught cheating on their taxes, they’d be locked up. But, inside the beltway of the Obama Administration, not only are you free from jail time, you get a new job in the President’s cabinet. The only hope for those who believe in low taxes and less government is that maybe these hypocrites will realize how burdensome it actually is to pay one’s taxes and have a self-conversion which would bring some real change to Washington by reducing the burden the American taxpayer has to carry while these hypocritical politicians usurp more power.
Is this change you can believe in? Is this the change Obama promised?
