The Long Version

Retired broadcast journalist. Blogging helps scratch the itch. Recovering exRepublican – Sober and still Conservative.

Posts Tagged ‘White House

The Patterns of Deceit

leave a comment »

Press Secretary Jay CarneyIn 2011 Jay Carney, White House press secretary, told reporters President Obama had never met his uncle Onyango “Omar” Obama, an illegal immigrant to the US, and a man the President wrote about in his book Dreams From My Father.

Today, Jay Carney acknowledged the President had not only met his uncle but actually stayed with him for several weeks when attending Harvard.  Why this sudden admission to an act that was flatly denied 2 years ago?

During a deportation hearing for Uncle Obama recently, Omar stated under oath that the President had stayed with him after he arrived in Cambridge to attend law school while then law student Barack Obama looked for an apartment of his own.

Carney stated, “When Omar Obama said the other day, and there were reports that he said the other day, that President Obama, back when he was a law school student had stayed with him in Cambridge, I thought it was the right thing to do to go ask him,” Carney said. “Nobody had asked him in the past and he said that he in fact had met Omar Obama when he moved to Cambridge for law school, that he stayed with him for a brief period of time, until his — the president’s — apartment was ready. After that, they saw each other once every few months while the president was in Cambridge and after law school they gradually fell out of touch.”

When asked why they had said differently back in 2011 Carney confessed, “Back when this arose, folks looked at the record, including the president’s book, and there was no evidence that they had met and that was what was conveyed. Nobody spoke to the president.” Nobody spoke to the President?  Well, if you didn’t speak to the president then you don’t know.  The answer in 2011 should have been I don’t know if the president knows or has met Omar Obama, but I’ll check with him when I get the chance and get back to you.  Right?  Wouldn’t that be the proper way to handle that question without directly asking the president?

No, not with this administration. If anything comes up that looks like it could harm the reputation of this President the first rule of engagement is to deny.  Just lie.

This isn’t a huge story. This isn’t an implication of guilt on the President or an indictment or a smoking gun.  In fact the story is hardly worth repeating. So I don’t want to be misinterpreted as making this into something bigger than it is.

The only reason I bring it up is because it represents a consistent pattern with this administration. They are notorious now for stating untruths, which are later discovered, only to be met with a shrug and that incredulous look only Jay Carney can provide that says, “Really? You’re asking me about that? Really??

Behavioral patterns tell stories with greater depth and clarity than words ever could.

The patterns exhibited by this administration over the past five years are very concerning.

 

Advertisements

Planning a Government Shutdown

with 4 comments

Now that the government shutdown is over and we’re back to arguing about more important things like “is $600 million too much to spend on a website?” something has been bugging me.

Government Shutdown SignsHave you wondered how it was that within 8 hours of the shutdown professionally printed signs of all shapes and sizes saying “This Park (facility, etc all with custom logos) Closed Due To Government Shutdown” appeared all over the country by the thousands?

What’s so odd about that you say?  Well consider this.  People who work in the government will tell you nothing gets done in Washington DC in 8 hours.  NOTHING.

They are all too familiar with requisitions, bidding, awarding contracts for anything and everything including printing thousands of closure signs.  It’s a time-consuming process with bean-counters and bureaucrats every step of the way.  The simplest request, they will tell you, takes months, not weeks, days, or hours.

A-sign-announces-that-the-Statue-of-Liberty-is-closed-2327220These signs were designed, specifications determined, then requisitioned. Bids would have been posted and then vetted, after which contracts awarded. That’s how the Federal government works.

The materials were then ordered, produced, and distributed via US Mail or freight companies.

It is my position then that this shutdown was planned and orchestrated well in advance of the actual shutdown date.  Considering what our friends employed by the federal government suggest, this shutdown was planned for and expected months ago.

For those of you saying, “Maybe they just used signs left over from the last shutdown?”  The last shutdown was 17 years ago and many of the things that were shutdown this time, parks, memorials, monuments, etc., were not shutdown back then.

No this was a planned event and I challenge any good investigative journalist out there to get on the paper trail. Find the work orders, contracts, and companies who printed all those signs.  The tax dollars spent on those signs should have a paper trail a mile long and if you can get on it and follow it my bet is it leads right to the White House.

The Democrats planned and perpetuated this shutdown.  That’s my premise.  Someone show me it isn’t viable.

The Path to the Government Shutdown You Didn’t See

leave a comment »

By: Soren Dayton (Diary)  |  October 2nd, 2013 at 07:05 PM As seen on Redstate.com

The press has been falling over itself to attack Republicans for the shutdown and claiming that they are the source of all the irresponsibility in the process. They have conveniently forgotten several important things about how much the Democrats have broken the budget process in the last couple of years and in this year in particular. I wrote back in January about how the Senate Democrats were dismantling the budget process. While the Senate did pass a budget resolution this year, in many ways the situation has gotten much, much worse. A shutdown is, purely for procedural reasons, a natural and logical consequence of the massive failure of the Senate to do its job.

Let’s work through the details.

The budget process starts every year with the President offering his budget in the first week of February. But that’s not what happened. He offered it on April 10, two months after the statutory deadline. In fact, he offered it after both the House and the Senate had passed budget resolutions, so his budget plan was already a moot point. He didn’t do his job, so Congress had to move on without him. (Incidentally, this was the first time that the Senate had passed one since April 29, 2009)

But then the Senate ground to a halt. The Library of Congress offers a very helpful scorecard about how the budget process is proceeding this year that makes it very easy to compare how each chamber did, and how that compares to the past.

This year, the House passed four appropriations bills:

Military Construction and Veterans Affairs on June 4, which passed 421-4. This bill cost $158 billion.
Homeland Security on June 6, which passed 245-182. This bill cost $39 billion.
Energy and Water on Jule 10, which passed 227-198. This bill cost $30 billion.
Defense on July 24, which passed 315-109. This bill cost $516 billion.
The least controversial of these, Defense and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, totaling $674 billion is over half of the $1.15 trillion that President Obama requested. The Senate could have done something with these and moved the ball forward. The House vote totals prove that these weren’t controversial.

By contrast, the Senate only put a single appropriations bill on the floor, Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, nicknamed, appropriately, THUD. This bill cost $54 billion, less than 5% of the President’s proposal. And they brought it to the floor at the end of July, at the last possible minute before the August recess.

This bill was filibustered by Republicans. Why? Because it pretended that the bipartisan sequester didn’t happen. It returned to pre-sequester spending. In fact, the spend-thrift Senate Democrats spent even more money than the President wanted:

“The vote we just had was symbolically very, very significant,” McConnell told reporters. “There is no question that if cloture had been invoked on this particular appropriations bill, which was even more than what the president asked for, your story line tomorrow would have been Congress on a bipartisan basis walks away from the Budget Control Act.”

So that’s the real history, not the mythical one driven by White House talking points, of this year’s budget process. The House started to do its job. The Senate barely got off the ground, and then only operating in a fantasy-land in which the sequester never happened. Sorry for all the wonky details here, but it is really important to see just how much the President and the Senate Democrats have failed in the budget process and how much of this lays at their feet.

 

Barry Soetoro is Registered to Vote

leave a comment »

For those who say voter fraud is rare and doesn’t effect elections, I share this interesting tidbit that should at least cause those of that opinion to think about it a little more.  No, this isn’t proof of a mass conspiracy of voter fraud, but I think it shows just how easy it is to register a fraudulent vote.  Unless, of course the president is going back to his old name at his new address…

This is a screen capture from the District of Columbia Board of Elections website.

Barry Soetoro registered to vote?

According to a search at the D.C. Board of elections using the search terms Barry Soetoro, President Obama’s date of birth and the zip code of 20500, a registered voter of that name is registered to vote at the White House for D.C. elections.  Barry Soetoro is a name that President Obama has used in the past.

Did President Obama submit this registration, or is it a fraud?  Who knows?  Obtaining the actual registration forms (or on-line) submitted to the D.C. election’s board might answer the question.  In my view, it is worse if it is a fraud because it illustrates the ease at which one can trick the system.  Or perhaps, President Obama wants out of crime-infested Chicago after his term is up and registered using his old name.  I’ll go with option 1, the fraud.

Written by DCL

July 19, 2013 at 10:24 am

Chameleon Politics – President Obama’s Change

with 7 comments

Gas prices are looking more and more like they’ll hit that $5 per gallon mark this year, probably somewhere near the peak summer travel months.

The president is now talking like a conservative when it comes to oil and gas prices. Taking an opportunity on Super Tuesday to steal some of the limelight away from the Republicans, President Obama pitched his energy strategy which is laden with green energy alternatives he plans to pay for by ending tax incentives for big oil.

While the president is saying one thing about oil and gasoline prices now, he has said something very different before.

In January 2008, candidate Obama told the San Francisco Chronicle that under his cap-and-trade plan, “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” Steven Chu, now Secretary of Energy, told the same newspaper in 2008: “Somehow, we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” That would put gas at about $10 a gallon.

This president has done nothing to pave the way for lower fuel prices since becoming president. In fact, he has done the very opposite since taking office.

In March of 2010, Mr. Obama reversed or scaled back nearly every major offshore oil opportunity that has come about since the price spike of 2008—effectively reimposing a moratorium on drilling off the coasts. His administration has killed leases in developmentally crucial areas of Alaska. His EPA has refused to issue permits. The White House used the BP oil spill as an excuse to also shut down the deep-water Gulf.

Onshore? Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has revoked oil-and-gas leases. The EPA is suffocating the coal industry with regulation. One of the president’s only clear State of the Union proposals was to raise taxes on oil and gas. The White House’s energy policy, says Dan Kish of the Institute for Energy Research, is “embargoing our own energy supplies to drive up their costs.”

During the Gulf oil spill the administration and Democrats didn’t worry about a back-lash for their blatantly “anti-oil” stance, but now that the Gulf has recovered and prices are approaching $5 a gallon their tune has changed. What do we hear coming out of the president’s teleprompter now?  Fox News correspondent Ed Henry asked the president about gas prices and the notion that Obama wants to see prices go even higher at which the president scoffed, “From a political perspective, do you think the president of the United States going into re-election wants gas prices to go up higher? Is there anybody here who thinks that makes a lot of sense?”  No, it makes no sense at all, which is why the president is now changing his tune.

It’s quite clear, going into an election year, President Obama is going to conveniently forget his past statements and actions when it comes to fossil fuels and he’ll hope you forget too. This president changes like a chameleon, liberal until it isn’t convenient or favorable and then adopting a more conservative tone to better serve his purposes.

Nobody should forget how angry the public was over $4 gas in 2008. That anger was enough to propel John McCain in the polls, where he stayed until the financial crisis. Another thing to remember; oil prices peaked in July 2008 and the unemployment rate was 5.7%. What might happen with $5 gas and 9% unemployment?

President Obama’s anti-oil record is clear through his words and actions and those of his appointees, and Republicans should use their bully pulpit in the House to directly connect prices to the Obama energy freeze. He’ll try to deflect, ignore, or minimize his record. He must be forced to face his record and explain it.

If the Republican candidates are smart they’ll continue to use this president’s past words and actions to refute and contradict what he is saying now in this election year.

Written by DCL

March 7, 2012 at 2:41 pm

It’s Time to Sacrifice

leave a comment »

Times are tough.

I’ve felt the sting of the economic downturn myself and understand the concept of differentiating between my wants and my needs.  In so doing I have had to cut back significantly on my monthly spending.  It hasn’t been easy.  In fact it’s been pretty damn hard and humbling.  But we’ve done it to the best of our ability and are managing to keep afloat even if that means our noses are just above the waterline.

With that in mind it is with great interest that I follow the current furor over the nation’s budget and the proposals to come out of congress and the White House.

The President ordered the cabinet to cut $100 million from the $3.5 trillion federal budget.

Those numbers are so incredibly large they become surreal to most of us average folks making it tough to really wrap one’s head around it.  So I decided to do some math and get some comparative figures based on my own budget.

You know, to help bring it down to earth.  The one you and I live on at least.

My monthly expenses, prior to my own personal economic downturn, came to about $5000 a month.  That includes my mortgage, car payment, utilities, groceries, household expenses, medical needs, child related expenses,  credit payments, meals out and entertainment, etc.

If I was to follow the lead of the president, taking the same action he took in the face of reduced revenue and the prospects of financial failure and a bankrupt government, I would have to get out the budget cutting axe and bite the bullet!  100,000,000 dollars is a big number.  That has to hurt.

Cutting my spending by exactly the same ratio as the president’s proposal is 1/35,000 of my total budget: 100,000,000 / 3,500,000,000,000 = 1/35,000.

The ultimate burden of sacrifice I would have to ask my family to commit to and share would be…

18 cents.

Kind of puts the whole fiasco in Washington into perspective doesn’t it?

Unfortunately I don’t have a printing press in the basement rolling out sheets of $20’s to supplement my spending habits nor can I vote myself a new debt ceiling to waylay the approaching and open hands of my creditors.

In the personal economies of my world and yours, sacrifice is real.  It can cut deep and be painful. Still, we do what is necessary to provide the needs of our families, we work to improve our situation and over time we hope it gets better.  In the meantime we survive, sometimes with a little help from our friends, families, or religious communities.

What our government is doing through its inability to understand the word sacrifice, by not saying no to its wants, by not being fiscally responsible, by printing money that has no foundational backing, spending recklessly over generations of time, over-taxing its citizens, and not seriously considering balancing its books, is making our personal efforts to improve our own personal economies next to impossible.

For me this isn’t about political parties, ideologies, or the power struggles that pervade the beltway of our nation’s capital.  It’s about liberty.  The freedom to go out and create for myself and my family the means by which we can enjoy the wonderful things and opportunities in our world.

Vote for Liberty in 2012.  Change, as we are learning, is simply too ambiguous and too risky.

Internet Identification Program…HUH?

leave a comment »

I have a seriously hard time believing this Big Brother idea will ever see the light of day, but then I didn’t see Cougar Town becoming must see TV for my wife either…  Should that bother me?

The Washington Times is warning that the White House cybersecurity adviser and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke are drawing up President Obama’s mandate for what amounts to a national ID card for the Internet.

President Obama wants to establish passwords for every citizen to centralize your personal information. Instead of logging onto Facebook or one’s bank using separate passwords established with each individual company or web site, you will be required to use the government-issued password.

According to the Washington Times, here are the problems with what some are dubbing “ObamaNet”:

  • The government will be able to track every web site you visit and every keystroke you send on your home computer.
  • The government will be able to track every purchase you make and every deposit and withdrawal, and gain access to your electronic health care records.
  • The government will be able to track every blog comment you make, along with every Facebook and Twitter post.
  • The government will be able to create lists of your friends and acquaintances and lists of all your political affiliations, political donations, club memberships, hobbies and interests.
  • It’s impossible for the government to make this system 100% secure (remember Wikileaks?), meaning criminals would need to steal only one key to unlock a vast amount of your personal and financial information.

Although the White House will tell you it is a voluntary program, the government “voluntary” programs too often end up becoming mandatory.

Written by DCL

January 28, 2011 at 6:36 pm