Obama-messiah’s “Rock and Five Pillars” Speech at Georgetown University on April 14, 2009

April 30, 2009

horned-obamaI’m not sure who wrote the analysis of Obama-messiah’s “Rock and Five Pillars” speech, which is indented and highlighted in color under different sections of the speech, below.  But they sure did a good job of it.

I’d say “Why people can’t see what is happening to this country is beyond me,” but in reality, it’s not. 

I know our heavenly Father’s Word in II Thessalonians 2:11 says, “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

Obama-messiah is a “type,” so to speak, of the real thing who is soon coming (i.e., the antichrist).  And I honestly believe God is giving us a good, preparatory preview of what it’s going to be like when he gets here. 

Of course, as I’ve said repeatedly, Obama-messiah is no antichrist.  He’s just a piker by comparison.  When the supernatural one arrives, you’ll see the whole world swoon under his presence, as it states throughout Revelation chapter 13.

But watching this fraud mesmerize the people with deceptive speech and bold ventures sure  makes you wonder how soon the real thing is coming.

— Spencer

President Obama’s “Rock and Five Pillars Speech” at Georgetown University on April 14, 2009

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE ECONOMY

The White House, Office of the Press Secrectary

I want every American to know that each action we take and each policy we pursue is driven by a larger vision of America’s future — a future where sustained economic growth creates good jobs and rising incomes; a future where prosperity is fueled not by excessive debt, or reckless speculation, or fleeting profits, but is instead built by skilled, productive workers, by sound investments that will spread opportunity at home and allow this nation to lead the world in the technologies and the innovation and discoveries that will shape the 21st century. That’s the America I see….

[Notice the absence of any reference to entrepreneurial ventures — the individual ingenuity and personal efforts that has been the praise and envy of the world. Instead, he emphasized the management of “workers” — the key vision of totalitarian socialism.]

…since the problems we face are all working off each other to feed a vicious economic downturn, we’ve had no choice but to attack all fronts of our economic crisis simultaneously.

The first step was to fight a severe shortage of demand in the economy….

Second, I absolutely agree that our long-term deficit is a major problem that we have to fix. But the fact is that this recovery plan represents only a tiny fraction of that long-term deficit…..

Finally, to coordinate a global response to this global recession, I went to the meeting of the G20 nations in London the other week. Each nation has undertaken significant stimulus to spur demand…. 

It is simply not sustainable to have a 21st-century financial system that is governed by 20th-century rules and regulations that allowed the recklessness of a few to threaten the entire economy….

[In the next section, notice how God’s Word is taken out of context and used to substantiate a global socialist economic system. But his fallacious arguments have nothing to do with actual economic realities:]

Now, there’s a parable at the end of the Sermon on the Mount that tells the story of two men. The first built his house on a pile of sand, and it was soon destroyed when a storm hit. But the second is known as the wise man, for when “the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house, it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.”

It was founded upon a rock. We cannot rebuild this economy on the same pile of sand. We must build our house upon a rock. We must lay a new foundation for growth and prosperity — a foundation that will move us from an era of borrow and spend to one where we save and invest; where we consume less at home and send more exports abroad

[The next illustration brings a reminder of “The five pillars of Islam.” Islamic banking — based on Sharia law — is fast expanding into Western nations, including the USA]

 

It’s a foundation built upon five pillars that will grow our economy and make this new century another American century: Number one, new rules for Wall Street…. number two, new investments in education that will make our workforce more skilled and competitive…. number three, new investments in renewable energy and technology…. number four, new investments in health care…. and number five, new savings in our federal budget that will bring down the debt for future generations [probably includes reducing entitlements and health care for the elderly]….

That’s the new foundation we must build. … Let me talk about each of these steps in turn. The first step we will take to build this foundation is to reform the outdated rules and regulations that allowed this crisis to happen in the first place…..

 

[He proceeds to discuss the second, third and fourth points, but not the fifth point. He ends with his supposedly Biblical reference. It must sound good to all who don’t know the context. Remember, the solid rock refers knowing and following God’s Word — what Obama has repeatedly mocked. And his final statement mocks the values of America’s founders. Unlike Obama, they did attempt to build on the foundations of God’s holy Word.]

That is the house upon the rock — proud, sturdy, unwavering in the face of the greatest storms. And we will not finish it in one year. … But if we use this moment to lay that new foundation, if we come together and begin the hard work of rebuilding, if we persist and persevere against the disappointments and setbacks that will surely lie ahead, then I have no doubt that this house will stand and the dream of our founders will live on in our time.
 


In preparation for this important speech, Christian symbols had to be hidden:Religious Symbols Covered Up When President Obama Spoke at a Catholic University: Officials at Georgetown University covered a monogram symbolizing the name of Jesus because it was inscribed on the stage where the president spoke Tuesday. The White House asked for all symbols to be covered at the lecture hall. ….”The cowardice of Georgetown to stand fast on principle tells us more than we need to know… but the bigger story is the audacity of the Obama administration to ask a religious school to neuter itself before the president speaks there.”

See Not Ashamed

 


The Sting, in Four Parts by Charles Krauthammer, April 17, 2009:

In a major domestic policy address at Georgetown University this week, Barack Obama promised — eight times — a ‘New Foundation.’

For those too thick to have noticed this proclamation of a new era in American history, the White House Web site helpfully titled its speech excerpts ‘A New Foundation.’…  

Obama offered his New Foundation speech as the complete, contextual, canonical text for the domestic revolution he aims to enact. It had everything we have come to expect from Obama:

  • The Whopper: The boast that he had “identified $2 trillion in deficit reductions over the next decade.” It takes audacity to repeat this after it had been so widely exposed as transparently phony….
  • The Puzzler: He further boasted of his frugality by saying that his budget would reduce domestic discretionary spending as share of GDP to the lowest level ever recorded….
  • The Non Sequitur: …Obama rarely fails to repeat this false connection. A crisis — and the public’s resulting pliability to liberal social engineering — is a terrible thing to waste….
  • The Swindle: The Obama administration is spending money like none other in peacetime history….

Obama-messiah Earth Day Flights Burned More Than 9,000 Gallons Of Fuel

April 24, 2009

obama-space-ship

We could probably “save the planet” from “global warming” just by banning politicians like Obama-messiah from traveling to remote locations to give speeches, when there are perfectly good television cameras right there in Washington DC.   

 

Perhaps someone should teach him how to spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e, too. 

And it’s not just politicians.  Every time I turn on the television all I hear are harangues from idiotic, air-headed actors and actresses about how we have to work to “reduce our carbon footprint.” 

 

Even Fox Network is now browbeating its viewers during commercial breaks to “Go green, and mean it!”, enlisting the stars of their hit shows like “24” to guilt-trip viewers into making the reduction of their “carbon footprints” the social centerpiece of their lives. 

 

Compared to these overpaid Hollywood dolts, who jet back and forth between Los Angeles, New York and London for film shoots as frequently as most people drive to their local grocery store, my “carbon footprint” is about nil. 

 

But isn’t that always the case?  The ones who have the largest “carbon footprints” are always the ones telling the rest of us to clean up our acts.  C’est la vie.

 

Singer Cheryl Crowe says we have to learn to wipe our butts with only a single square of toilet paper.  I don’t know how that’s going to stop global warming.  But it sure will eliminate all of that glad-handling you see at political and environmental rallies.  (At least, you’d think it would.  Who knows, with these sick puppies.)

 

At any rate, I’ve decided today to start “reducing my carbon footprint” by no longer watching television shows that interrupt my enjoyment of the show by telling me to reduce my carbon footprint.  The electricity I’ll save alone should put a dramatic dent into global warming. Probably reduce earth’s temperatures by four or five degrees by this time next year.  Hell, I’ll probably have to start wearing long sleeve shirts in the summer, it will get so cold. 

 

Yes, I’m exaggerating for effect.  But if enough of us turned off those TV shows in protest, you can bet the dumb Hollywood stars would get the message, and stop blowing so much hot air.  And that would likely go a long way toward eliminating “global warming.”

 

As for our intrepid frequent-flyer-in-chief, perhaps he should catch a clue from his wife Michelle, and do something constructive, like stay home and take up organic gardening. 

 

And shut the f#$@ up, for a change.

 

— Spencer

 

Obama Earth Day Flights Burned More Than 9,000 Gallons Of Fuel

http://www.cbsnews.com/track/rss/blogs/2009/04/22/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry4962384.shtml?CMP=OTC-RSSFeed&source=RSS&attr=PoliticalHotsheet_4962384

 

It happens every time a president leaves town to make an Earth Day speech. Reporters scramble to point out how much fuel was expended so the President could talk about conserving energy and using alternative fuels.

 

In flying to and from Iowa today, President Obama took two flights on Air Force One and four on Marine One.

 

The press office at Andrews AFB wouldn’t give me the fuel consumption numbers for the 747 that serves as Air Force One without the approval of the White House Press Office, which as I write this has yet to be given.

 

But Boeing says its 747 burns about 5 gallons of fuel per mile. It’s 895 miles from Washington to Des Moines, so a round trip brings the fuel consumption for the fixed-wing portion of the President’s trip to 8,950 gallons.

 

The trip also put President Obama on Marine One for round-trip flights between the White House and Andrews AFB and between Des Moines International Airport and Newton, Iowa, site of his Earth Day speech. It totaled about an hour of flight time. The VH-3D that serves as Marine One consumes about 1200 pounds of fuel per hour which comes out to about 166 gallons consumed flying the President today.

 

Not included in these calculations are the presidential vehicles that took him the short distance from the landing zone in Newton to the event site at the Trinity Structural Towers Manufacturing Plant.

 

In his speech there, President Obama called for a “new era of energy exploration in America.”

 

At a plant that manufactures the towers for wind turbines, he urged Americans to support his plan for promoting expanded use of alternative and renewable fuels.

 

And he announced that for the first time, the Interior Department would be leasing federal waters for projects to generate electricity from wind and ocean currents.

 

President Obama could have saved at least 9,116 gallons of fuel by giving his speech at the White House – but no wind turbines are manufactured here.


Obama-messiah grabs for complete control of nation’s financial institutions

April 23, 2009

obama-wants-you-to-change-america-foreverThe financial institutions have finally figured out that the so-called “bailout” comes with so many strings attached, many of them are actually clamoring to give the money back. 

 

But Obama-messiah has now declared that before they can do so, they must pass a “financial stress test,” which, in essence, prevents them from getting out from under the onerous hand of Big Brother government. 

 

And now Obama-messiah is considering converting the stock in those financial institutions, which the government took control of as “collateral” for the loans, from preferred stock to common stock.  This means the government would completely control those 500 major financial institutions, because they would control a voting majority among the common stockholders.    

 

In other words, if Obama-messiah has his way, we will convert to a Soviet-style, nationalized business system in which the government runs the financial institutions, and therefore controls virtually every aspect of the economy.

 

The 2010 elections sure seem a long way away.  But as I’ve stated repeatedly, unless we elect a conservative majority to Congress, Obama-messiah and his socialist minions are going to continue steamrolling right over this country.

 

— Spencer

 

 

Obama’s leap to socialism 

http://thehill.com/dick-morris/obamas-leap-to-socialism-2009-04-21.html

 

 

By Dick Morris 

Posted: 04/21/09 05:21 PM [ET] 

 

President Obama showed his hand this week when The New York Times wrote that he is considering converting the stock the government owns in our country’s banks from preferred stock, which it now holds, to common stock.

 

This seemingly insignificant change is momentous. It means that the federal government will control all of the major banks and financial institutions in the nation. It means socialism.

 

The Times dutifully dressed up the Obama plan as a way to avoid asking Congress for more money for failing banks. But the implications of the proposal are obvious to anyone who cares to look.

 

When the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) intervention was first outlined by the Bush administration, it did not call for any transfer of stock, of any sort, to the government. The Democrats demanded, as a price for their support, that the taxpayers “get something back” for the money they were lending to the banks. House Republicans, wise to what was going on, rejected the administration’s proposal and sought, instead, to provide insurance to banks, rather than outright cash. Their plan would, of course, not involve any transfer of stock. But Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) undercut his own party’s conservatives and went along with the Democratic plan, ensuring its passage.

 

But to avoid the issue of a potential for government control of the banks, everybody agreed that the stock the feds would take back in return for their money would be preferred stock, not common stock. “Preferred” means that these stockholders get the first crack at dividends, but only common stockholders can actually vote on company management or policy. Now, by changing this fundamental element of the TARP plan, Obama will give Washington a voting majority among the common stockholders of these banks and other financial institutions. The almost 500 companies receiving TARP money will be, in effect, run by Washington.

 

And whoever controls the banks controls the credit and, therefore, the economy. That’s called socialism.

 

Obama is dressing up the idea of the switch to common stock by noting that the conversion would provide the banks with capital they could use without a further taxpayer appropriation. While this is true, it flies in the face of the fact that an increasing number of big banks and brokerage houses are clamoring to give back the TARP money. Goldman-Sachs, for example, wants to buy back its freedom, as do many banks. Even AIG is selling off assets to dig its way out from under federal control. The reason, of course, is that company executives do not like the restrictions on executive pay and compensation that come with TARP money. It is for this reason that Chrysler Motors refused TARP funds.

 

With bank profits up and financial institutions trying to give back their money, there is no need for the conversion of the government stock from preferred to common — except to advance the political socialist agenda of this administration.

 

Meanwhile, to keep its leverage over the economy intact, the Obama administration is refusing to let banks and other companies give back the TARP money until they pass a financial “stress test.” Nominally, the government justifies this procedure by saying that it does not want companies to become fully private prematurely and then need more help later on. But don’t believe it. They want to keep the TARP money in the banks so they can have a reason and rationale to control them.

 

The Times story did not influence the dialogue of the day. People were much more concerned with the death of 21 horses at a polo match. Much as we will miss these noble animals, we will miss our economic freedom more.

 

———–

Morris, a former adviser to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and President Bill Clinton, is the author of Outrage. To get all of Dick Morris’s and Eileen McGann’s columns for free by e-mail or to order a signed copy of their best-selling book, Fleeced, go to dickmorris.com. 


Obama-messiah rules carbon dioxide is a “threat to the planet”; moves to begin controlling emissions…

April 19, 2009

obama-superman-4The Obama-messiah’s has now ruled that carbon dioxide is a pollutant and a planetary threat. 

 

Let me explain something to you:  When you breathe, you exhale carbon dioxide.  You are now “polluting the environment,” and you thereby constitute a “threat to the planet.”

 

The bottom line is that Obama-messiah has now set the stage to micro-manage every aspect of your daily life, exactly as I’ve been warning.

 

Just about everything you do, from burning wood in your fireplace, to running your heater, to driving your car, to hosting a family barbecue (not to mention breathing), creates carbon dioxide emissions.  Even the electricity you use to run your household lights will be regulated, because coal is used to produce electricity, and the burning of coal is one of the major producers of carbon emissions.  In other words, the more electricity you use, the more coal must be burned to produce it.  Leave your lights on too long (time to be determined by your local EPA bureaucrats), and you’re now a threat to the environment.  Better get used to walking around in the dark, my friends.  (It’s called rationing.) 

 

In short, one by one, virtually everything you do will be regulated and micro-managed in the name of “saving the planet.” 

 

Not only that, but the price of everything you buy – and I mean everything — is going to skyrocket, because electricity has to be used in one form or another to produce, package, transport, warehouse and sell  products.  And since coal burning will be penalized under the new rules, thanks to its carbon emission-producing nature, that means more expensive and less efficient government-mandated means of producing electricity will be instituted.  Guess who pays the costs in higher and higher electric bills?  Yes, you, the consumer. 

 

As the article below points out, coal companies are already pulling back on production, because they don’t want to spend tens of millions of dollars on coal mining operations only to find out that coal is going to be regulated into oblivion, or taxed into oblivion, after they’ve already made the investment to mine it.  And once coal mining comes to a screeching halt, coal supplies will dwindle, which will also send prices skyrocketing due to the laws of supply and demand.

 

In short, if you think people are having a hard time making ends meet now, just wait until they start passing the new regulations limiting the carbon dioxide “threat.”

 

— Spencer

 

Obama rules carbon dioxide is a “threat to the planet”; moves to begin controlling emissions…

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123997738881429275.html#mod=djemalertNEWS  

 

By JONATHAN WEISMAN and SIOBHAN HUGHES

 

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration declared Friday that carbon dioxide and five other industrial emissions threaten the planet. The landmark decision lays the groundwork for federal efforts to cap carbon emissions — at a potential cost of billions of dollars to businesses and government.

 

The Environmental Protection Agency finding that the emissions endanger “the health and welfare of current and future generations” is “the first formal recognition by the U.S. government of the threats posed by climate change,” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson wrote in a memo to her staff.

 

The finding could touch every corner of Americans’ lives, from the types of cars they drive to the homes they build. Along with carbon dioxide, the EPA named methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride as deleterious to the environment. Even if the agency doesn’t use its powers under the Clean Air Act to curb greenhouse gases, Friday’s action improves the chances that Congress will move to create a more flexible mechanism to do so.

 

On a conference call Friday with environmentalists, EPA officials stressed they would take a go-slow approach, holding two public hearings next month before the findings are official. After that, any new regulations would go through a public comment period, more hearings and a long review.

 

“Whatever the process it, it will be the time-honored and ordinary process of soliciting public input,” an EPA official said.

 

New regulations driven by the finding could be years away. But unless superseded by congressional action, the EPA ruling eventually could lead to stricter emissions limits. Businesses that stand to be affected range from power plants and oil refineries to car makers and cement producers.

 

Uncertainty about the impact of such regulation is already affecting some companies. Consol Energy Inc., a big coal and energy company based in Pittsburgh, says it is delaying two large mining projects in Northern Appalachia because of uncertainty around pending carbon emission regulation.

 

“In terms of starting to move dirt, we would postpone that until there’s some clarity,” said Thomas Hoffman, vice president of investor relations.

 

Friday’s announcement marks a significant turn in U.S. policy on climate change. The U.S. has never ratified the Kyoto climate treaty. President Bill Clinton, who signed the pact, didn’t submit it to the Senate for ratification because of strong opposition to the deal, which didn’t impose greenhouse gas limits on China and other developing economies. President George W. Bush also didn’t submit the Kyoto treaty for ratification, and largely resisted calls for stronger action on climate change, including the endangerment finding.

 

That approach began to crumble two years ago, when the Supreme Court found that carbon dioxide is a pollutant under the Clean Air Act and declared that the EPA can regulate it.

 

With Friday’s finding, the U.S. takes a big step closer to European Union nations, which have agreed to Kyoto greenhouse gas limits and are pushing for a new treaty on climate change at a December meeting in Copenhagen.

 

Some Republicans and business groups that have long blocked action on climate-change legislation shifted positions in response, saying Congress now must act on legislation that would give businesses more flexibility in meeting emissions targets than rules issued under the Clean Air Act.

 

Rep. Edward J. Markey (D., Mass.), a co-author of sweeping climate change legislation, called the EPA’s decision “a game changer.”

 

 “It’s now no longer a choice between doing a bill or doing nothing,” said the lawmaker, who will hold four days of climate change hearings next week before the formal drafting of a bill begins the last week of April. “It is now a choice between regulation and legislation.”

 

Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, sought a middle ground, proposing to focus carbon caps on coal-fired power plants and vehicle tailpipes — and holding off any move until the nation emerges from recession.

 

American Electric Power, a utility giant with 5.2 million customers in states from Texas to Michigan to Virginia, is already considering what coal plants would have to be shuttered and how high rates would have to go to comply with either a regulatory or legislative mandates to curb carbon dioxide. AEP spokesman Pat Hemlepp said rate increases stretch from 25% to 50% and beyond, depending on the climate change strategy that finally emerges from Washington.

 

A proposal by President Barack Obama would cap the emissions of greenhouse gases, then force polluters to purchase emission permits, which could be traded on the open market. The details of the cost of carbon credits have been left to Congress, although Mr. Obama has said he wants all emissions covered, with no allowance for free emissions, as some business groups and lawmakers want.

 

Heavy carbon emitters, such as utilities that rely on coal-fired power, would pay a hefty price, but the cost of compliance would be alleviated by purchasing extra emissions permits from companies that emit less or can more easily adapt with energy-saving technology.

 

Regulation, on the other hand, would probably exclude such flexibility, and simply force businesses to reduce emissions. Businesses also see a more favorable playing field in Congress than with EPA regulators, who do not have to face the voters.

 

 “We’re pretty confident that Congress is going to be much more sensitive to the economic impact of this than some unelected bureaucrats,” said Hank Cox, a spokesman for the National Association of Manufacturers.

 

The impact of the EPA finding could be dramatic. Using the Clean Air Act, the EPA could raise fuel-efficiency standards for automobiles, such as by authorizing nationwide adoption of California’s rules for greenhouse-gas tailpipe emissions.

 

That could require auto makers to produce more hybrid and electric vehicles, such as the Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid under development by General Motors Corp. The Volt, however, is expected to carry a sticker of about $40,000, or roughly twice the price of a conventional Chevrolet Malibu sedan.

 

In electric power, the EPA could force new power plants to include emissions-reduction technology, although it is unclear whether emerging technologies to capture carbon-dioxide emissions would be feasible.

 

The EPA could order older power plants to be retrofitted, such as with more-efficient boilers, and it could mandate more reliance on wind and other renewable energy if coal-fired power plants can’t be made to run more cleanly. That could present technological and infrastructure challenges.

 

White House officials made clear Friday that President Obama prefers a legislative approach to curbing global warming. The House Energy and Commerce Committee will hold hearings next week on an Obama proposal to cap carbon emissions and sell tradable permits that businesses must buy to emit carbon dioxide. The White House will dispatch senior officials to those hearings, an official said.

 

The EPA finding comes about two years after the Supreme Court found that carbon dioxide is a pollutant under the Clean Air Act and that the EPA can regulate it.

 

Write to Jonathan Weisman at jonathan.weisman@wsj.com and Siobhan Hughes at siobhan.hughes@dowjones.com


Obama extends hands to Chavez and Ortega at South American commie-fest

April 19, 2009

che-obamaThey say a picture is worth a thousand words, which is probably why this news story didn’t bother to include any photos of our intrepid presidente Obama-messiah shaking hands with his commie counterparts in South America.  After all, even the stupid American voters who voted for the Obama-messiah know that Chavez and Co. are evil to the core.  Obviously, such a photo splashed across the internet (and on Fox nightly news) would not do much for Obama-messiah’s faltering domestic reputation.

 

Obama-messiah told his gracious communist hosts in South America that he “has a lot to learn” about working with the Latino commies, but “looks forward” to listening to them and figuring out how he can work together more effectively with them. He then shook hands with Venezuela’s communist maestro, Hugo Chavez, not once but three times. 

 

Chavez, of course, is the man who, several years back, called President Bush “the devil” at a UN General Assembly meeting where the two had spoken on successive days. Taking the podium the day after Bush spoke, Chavez stated that he could “still smell the sulfur” up on the stage.  So now, in a move reminiscent of Jimmy Carter’s apologetic stance toward the Ayatollah’s during the Iranian hostage crisis, Obama-messiah rewards Chavez for his insolence and infantile disrespect to a fellow U.S. president by repeatedly glad-handling him at the South American commie-fest.

 

The bottom line is that the Latino commies want Obama-messiah to open up the American money spigot to them, too.  Chavez even gave Obama a copy of a book called The Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent, which complains that western nations have economically plundered the Latin American nations for fifty years, and argues that now the western nations (meaning the U.S., of course) must pay through the nose if we want their cooperation in trade and political relations. 

 

In other words, the Latino commies are playing the victim card in order to convince Obama-messiah to send billions more dollars in U.S. aid to corrupt South American governments.  (Hey, everybody needs a new Mercedes or two.)  And since Obama-messiah is a professional victim himself, it will probably work.  Chavez is merely preaching to the choir.  He doesn’t have to do much to convince our globe-trotting do-gooder man-god to “spread the wealth” down South America way, too.

 

— Spencer

 

Obama extends hands to Chavez, Ortega at summit

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090418/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cb_obama_summit

 

Sat Apr 18, 5:10 pm ET

 

PORT-OF-SPAIN, Trinidad – President Barack Obama offered a spirit of cooperation to America’s hemispheric neighbors at a summit Saturday, listening to complaints about past U.S. meddling and even reaching out to Venezuela’s leftist leader.

 

While he worked to ease friction between the U.S. and their countries, Obama cautioned leaders at the Summit of the Americas to resist a temptation to blame all their problems on their behemoth neighbor to the north.

 

“I have a lot to learn and I very much look forward to listening and figuring out how we can work together more effectively,” Obama said.

 

Obama said he was ready to accept Cuban President Raul Castro’s proposal of talks on issues once off-limits for Cuba, including political prisoners held by the communist government.

 

While praising America’s initial effort to thaw relations with Havana, the leaders pushed the U.S. to go further and lift the 47-year-old U.S. trade embargo against Cuba.

 

To Latin American nations reeling from a sudden plunge in exports, Obama promised a new hemispheric growth fund, an initiative to increase Caribbean security and a partnership to develop alternative energy sources and fight global warming.

 

As the first full day of meetings began on the two-island nation of Trinidad and Tobago, Obama exchanged handshakes and pats on the back with Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, who once likened President George W. Bush to the devil.

 

In front of photographers, Chavez gave Obama a copy of “The Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent,” a book by Eduardo Galeano that chronicles U.S. and European economic and political interference in the region.

 

When a reporter asked Obama what he thought of the book, the president replied: “I thought it was one of Chavez’s books. I was going to give him one of mine.” White House advisers said they didn’t know if Obama would read it or not.

 

Later, during a group photo, Obama reached behind several leaders at the summit to shake Chavez’ hand for the third time. Obama summoned a translator and the two smiled and spoke briefly.

 

Those two exchanges followed a brief grip-and-grin for cameras on Friday night when Obama greeted Chavez in Spanish.

 

“I think it was a good moment,” Chavez said about their initial encounter. “I think President Obama is an intelligent man, compared to the previous U.S. president.”

 

At a luncheon speech to fellow leaders, Chavez said the spirit of respect is encouraging and he proposed that Havana host the next summit.

 

“I’m not going to speak for Cuba. It’s not up to me… (but) all of us here are friends of Cuba, and we hope the United States will be, too,” Chavez said.

 

The White House said Chavez was civil in his criticism of the U.S. during a summit meeting, but that there was no discussion of reinstating ambassadors who were kicked out of each other’s countries last year. “Relationships depend on more than smiles and handshakes,” Obama economic adviser Larry Summers told reporters later.

 

Bolivia President Evo Morales, a close ally of Chavez, said Obama’s pledge of a new era of mutual respect toward Latin America rings hollow.

 

“Obama said three things: There are neither senior or junior partners. He said relations should be of mutual respect, and he spoke of change,” Morales said. “In Bolivia … one doesn’t feel any change. The policy of conspiracy continues.”

 

Morales expelled U.S. ambassador Philip Goldberg in September and kicked out the Drug Enforcement Administration the next month for allegedly conspiring with the political opposition to incite violence. Chavez expelled the U.S. ambassador in Venezuela in solidarity. The Bush administration subsequently suspended trade preferences to Bolivia that Bolivian business leaders say could cost 20,000 jobs.

 

Obama also extended a hand to Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega, whom President Ronald Reagan spent years trying to drive from power. Ortega was ousted in 1990 elections that ended Nicaragua’s civil war, but was returned to power by voters in 2006.

 

Ortega stepped up and introduced himself to Obama, U.S. officials said. But a short time later, Ortega delivered a blistering 50-minute speech that denounced capitalism and U.S. imperialism as the root of much hemispheric mischief. The address even recalled the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, though Ortega said the new U.S. president could not be held to account for that.

 

“I’m grateful that President Ortega did not blame me for things that happened when I was three months old,” Obama said, to laughter and applause from the other leaders.

 ___

 

Associated Press writers Frank Bajak and Vivian Sequera contributed to this report.


Obama-messiah orders Jesus symbol blacked-out during his Georgetown Speech…

April 19, 2009

obama2During the Bush administration, when Republican Attorney General Ashcroft asked that a nude statue in the Justice Department be covered whenever he had to give speeches in that room (i.e., so that impish photographers with infantile senses of humor couldn’t snap photos of him with the nude breasts of the statue towering over his head), he was ridiculed by the mainstream news media for weeks, and lambasted for months on end by Jay Leno and other liberal late-night comedians. 

 

Now, the Obama-messiah White House has asked that Obama not have to be photographed at Georgetown University with the monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name (i.e., “IHS”) above and behind him in the background. 

 

Do you think the lamestream news media will lambast the Obama-messiah for weeks on end for wanting the Jesus symbol covered up?  Do you think late night comedians will make a mockery of him?  No.  Obama is their messiah, after all.  And our mandingo Muslim man-god clearly doesn’t want any competition from Jesus.

 

(And shame on the Jesuits for covering the name of our Lord and Savior.  Maybe they should re-name themselves the Obama-uits, instead. What a bunch of politically correct panty-waists, too afraid to stand up for the name of God.)

 

— Spencer

  

Obama-messiah orders Jesus symbol blacked-out during his Georgetown Speech…

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Jesus-Missing-From-Obamas-Georgetown-Speech.html

 

A symbol of Jesus was apparently blacked out behind President Barack Obama during his Georgetown speech.

 

By  JIM IOVINO

 

Updated 1:24 PM EDT, Thu, Apr 16, 2009

 

 

Amidst all of the American flags and presidential seals, there was something missing when President Barack Obama gave an economic speech at Georgetown University this week — Jesus.

 

The White House asked Georgetown to cover a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name in Gaston Hall, which Obama used for his speech, according to CNSNews.com.

 

The gold “IHS” monogram inscribed on a pediment in the hall was covered over by a piece of black-painted plywood, and remained covered over the next day, CNSNews.com reported.

 

The Washington Times’ Belief Blog asked the university about the presidential request:

 

Julie Bataille from the university’s press office e-mailed me that the White House had asked that all university signage and symbols behind the stage in Gaston Hall be covered.

 

“The White House wanted a simple backdrop of flags and pipe and drape for the speech, consistent with what they’ve done for other policy speeches,” she wrote. “Frankly, the pipe and drape wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”

 

While the “IHS” directly behind where Obama spoke was covered over, CNSNews.com said the monogram was still visible in 26 other places in the hall during his speech. Those areas just weren’t as prominent.

 

The Belief Blog talked with the Rev. Thomas Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock Institute at Georgetown University, who said he didn’t think “this is motivated by theology, but by communications strategy.”

 

The blog also talked with Catholic University spokesman Victor Nakas, who felt a bit more strongly on the subject:

 

“I can’t imagine, as the bishops’ university and the national university of the Catholic Church, that we would ever cover up our religious art or signage for any reason,” Mr. Nakas wrote. “Our Catholic faith is integral to our identity as an institution of higher education.”


Obama-messiah’s Department of Homeland Security labels right-wingers as “domestic terror” threat…

April 15, 2009

obama-angry-2Well, here we go again, as Ronald Reagan used to say.  Another report has surfaced naming just about anyone with conservative or right-wing tendencies as potential “domestic terrorists.”  And this time, the report comes straight from the top:  Department of Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano.

 

Like the recent Missouri “domestic terrorism” document, which was leaked to the press by stunned Missouri law enforcement officials who thought it was ridiculous to tar supporters of former presidential candidates Bob Barr, Ron Paul and Pastor Chuck Baldwin as “potential domestic terrorists,” the new, 9-page Homeland Security document names supporters of the 10th amendment (i.e., states’ rights supporters), anti-abortion activists, people who are against illegal immigration, people who support the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, and…drum roll, please…returning U.S. military veterans, all as potential “domestic terrorists.”

 

Be sure to note the last four paragraphs of the news article below, in which the infamous Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is described as being favorably “mentioned several times” in the new report.  The SPLC is a well-known, left-wing, race-baiting and fear-mongering organization that makes its money by sensationalizing accounts of racial prejudice and then raising funds from minorities to “fight racism.”  In other words, they raise millions of dollars a year by scaring poor southern blacks into believing the only thing left standing between them and the evil white hordes is the SPLC.  In recent years, the SPLC has issued dozens of thinly veiled propaganda pieces – usually disguised as “special reports,” “position papers”  or “white papers” — naming conservative social, political, military and religious groups as “right wing extremists,” “racist organizations,” “anti-semitic groups” and potential “domestic terrorists.”  These propaganda papers are in turn quoted, often word-for-word, or cited as “research sources” in advisories to local, state and federal law enforcement agencies.  Apparently, the SPLC was a major source for this new Homeland Security report, just as they were for the recent Missouri “domestic terrorism” report.

 

The bottom line, as I have stated in past commentaries on this subject, is that from the moment the Obama-messiah administration came into power, literally half the nation – the conservative half – became public enemy #1.  While it might be fun to make “You may be a potential domestic terrorist if…” jokes, the reality is, this situation is as serious as a heart attack.  When your own government brands you as the “enemy” because you hold different views on social issues than the reigning party, there is a chilling effect on your basic rights.  Anything you say or write can be misinterpreted or slanted against you.  Any association you have with others can be used to besmirch your reputation.  It is simply un-American.  It has always amazed me that the absolute rage expressed by the radical left against, say, President Bush, or against conservatives in general, is always considered to be “free speech” when conservatives are in power.  We take the frothing rage of the left with a grain of salt.  But once the lefties attain power, that same “free speech,” when exercised by conservatives, suddenly becomes labeled “hate speech” by the lefties, and is considered a sign of “potential domestic terrorism.” 

 

The lefties gain power through fear and intimidation, then they rule through brute force fear and intimidation.  They are nothing more than thugs.  Remember little Elian Gonzales, and the full-auto assault rifles shoved into his face by helmeted and flak-jacketed federal SWAT troops?  Remember the burning of 74 men, women and children at Waco?  If you do, and you don’t want a replay, then don’t forget the 2010 elections.  Start picking your candidates now, and give them all of the support you can.  Electing enough conservatives to Congress is the only chance we have right now of reigning in the Obama-messiah and his coterie of left-wing radicals before he labels us all “domestic terrorists.”

 

— Spencer 

 

Homeland Security:  Newest Threat to America is “Right Wing Radicals”…

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/14/federal-agency-warns-of-radicals-on-right/

 

9-page report is sent to police

 

The Department of Homeland Security is warning law enforcement officials about a rise in “rightwing extremist activity,” saying the economic recession, the election of America’s first black president and the return of a few disgruntled war veterans could swell the ranks of white-power militias.

 

A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines “rightwing extremism in the United States” as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority.

 

“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” the warning says.

 

The White House has distanced itself from the analysis. When asked for comment on its contents, White House spokesman Nick Shapiro said, “The President is focused not on politics but rather taking the steps necessary to protect all Americans from the threat of violence and terrorism regardless of its origins. He also believes those who serve represent the best of this country, and he will continue to ensure that our veterans receive the respect and benefits they have earned.”

 

The nine-page document was sent to police and sheriff’s departments across the United States on April 7 under the headline, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.”

 

It says the federal government “will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months” to gather information on “rightwing extremist activity in the United States.”

 

The joint federal-state activities will have “a particular emphasis” on the causes of “rightwing extremist radicalization.”

 

Homeland Security spokeswoman Sara Kuban said the report is one in an ongoing series of assessments by the department to “facilitate a greater understanding of the phenomenon of violent radicalization in the U.S.”

 

The report, which was first disclosed to the public by nationally syndicated radio host Roger Hedgecock, makes clear that the Homeland Security Department does not have “specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence.”It warns that fringe organizations are gaining recruits, but it provides no numbers.

 

The report says extremist groups have used President Obama as a recruiting tool.

 

“Most statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical, expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president, but stopping short of calls for violent action,” the report says. “In two instances in the run-up to the election, extremists appeared to be in the early planning stages of some threatening activity targeting the Democratic nominee, but law enforcement interceded.”

 

When asked about this passage, Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan said, “We are concerned about anybody who will try to harm or plan to harm any one of our protectees. We don’t have the luxury to focus on one particular group at the exclusion of others.”

 

Congressional debates about immigration and gun control also make extremist groups suspicious and give them a rallying cry, the report says.

 

“It is unclear if either bill will be passed into law; nonetheless, a correlation may exist between the potential passage of gun control legislation and increased hoarding of ammunition, weapons stockpiling, and paramilitary training activities among rightwing extremists,” the report said.

 

The FBI was quoted Monday as saying that, since November, more than 7 million people have applied for criminal background checks in order to buy weapons.

 

The Homeland Security report added: “Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point, and recruiting tool.”

 

The report could signify a change in emphasis for Homeland Security under former Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano. A German magazine quoted Ms. Napolitano as rebranding “terrorism” as “man-made disasters.” Since its inception in 2003, the department has focused primarily on radicalization of Muslims and the prospect of homegrown Islamist terrorism.

 

Ms. Kuban said, however, that the department had published reports on left-wing radicalization as well, though she could not name one.

 

“These types of reports are published all the time. There have actually been some done on the other end of the spectrum, left-wing,” Ms. Kuban said.

 

A similar headline was used in a report issued in January, Ms. Kuban said, although she could not provide the content of the headline.

 

Ms. Kuban said she did not know how long the new report had been in the making.

 

“The purpose of the report is to identify risk. This is nothing unusual,” said Ms. Kuban, who added that the Homeland Security Department did this “to prevent another Tim McVeigh from ever happening again.”

 

The Homeland Security assessment specifically says that “rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from military training and combat.”

 

Jerry Newberry, director of communications for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, said the vast majority of veterans are patriotic citizens who would not join anti-government militias.

 

“As far as our military members go, I think that the military is a melting pot of society. So you might get a few, a fractional few, who are going to be attracted by militia groups and other right-wing extremists,” he said.

 

“We have to remember that the people serving in our military are volunteers, they do it because they love their country, and they believe in what our country stands for,” he said. “They spent their time in the military defending our Constitution, so the vast majority of them would be repulsed by the hate groups discussed in this report.”

 

The Homeland Security report cited a 2008 FBI report that noted that a small number of returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have joined extremist groups.

 

The FBI report said that from October 2001 through May 2008 “a minuscule” number of veterans, 203 out of 23,000, had joined groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, the National Socialist Movement, the Creativity Movement, the National Alliance and some skinhead groups.

 

“Although the white supremacist movement is of concern to the FBI, our assessment shows that only a very small number of people with prior military experience may have an affiliation with supremacist groups,” FBI spokesman Richard Kolko said Monday when asked about the FBI report.

 

A 2006 report from the Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization that monitors white supremacists like the Klan, said that white-power groups had an interest in the kind of training the military provides.

 

Mark Potok, director of the center’s intelligence project, said the Homeland Security report “confirms that white supremacists are interested in the military. There is some concern, and there should be, about returning veterans, one need only think of the example of Timothy McVeigh, who was in the first Iraq war.”

 

Mr. Potok added that he was generally pleased with the report.

 

“Basically, the report tracks fairly closely with what we have been saying for some time now. They mention us a couple of times, though not by name,” he said.