Notice to All Employees Concerning the Obama Administration

As of November 5, 2008, when President Obama is officially elected into office, our company will install a few new policies which are in keeping with his new, inspiring issues of change and fairness:

1. All salespeople will be pooling their sales and bonuses into a common pool that will be divided equally between all of you.  This will serve to give those of you who are underachieving a fair shake.

2. All low level workers will be pooling their wages, including overtime, into a common pool, dividing it equally amongst yourselves.  This will help those who are too busy for overtime to reap the rewards from those who have more spare time and can work extra hours.

3. All top management will now be referred to as the government.  We will not participate in this pooling experience because the law doesn’t apply to us.

4. The government will give eloquent speeches to all employees every week, encouraging it’s workers to continue to work hard for the good of all.

5. The employees will be thrilled with these new policies because it’s good to spread the wealth.  Those of you who have underachieved will finally get an opportunity; those of you who have worked hard and had success will feel more patriotic.

6.  The last few people who were hired should clean out their desks.  Don’t feel bad, though, because President Obama will give you free healthcare, free handouts, free oil for heating your home, free food stamps, and he’ll let you stay in your home for as long as you want even if you can’t pay your mortgage.  If you appeal directly to our democratic congress, you might even get a free flat screen TV and a coupon for free haircuts. (Shouldn’t all Americans be entitled to nice looking hair?)

7. If for any reason you are not happy with the new policies, you may want to rethink your vote on November 4th.

Advertisements

1995 Video: Obama on Jeremiah Wright

CLOSING THE DEAL: A Roadmap for Campaign 2008’s Homestretch

Must Read: H/T Hot Air

By Guy Benson (www.guybensonshow.com) and Mary Katharine Ham (www.weeklystandard.com), Editor and Contributor, Ed Morrissey

THE CONTEXT

If recent polls are to believed, freshman Senator Barack Obama has a better than average chance of becoming America’s 44th President, the Commander-in-Chief of the planet’s most powerful military, and the proverbial leader of the free world. It’s worth mentioning that just four years ago as President Bush and Senator John Kerry were vying for the White House, Obama was still a part-time State Senator representing a liberal district in Chicago. Before that he was an attorney and, famously, a community organizer. In 2008, Obama has positioned himself as a post-partisan, thoughtful moderate with the superior judgment required to lead the country. These are lofty promises from a man with precious little executive experience, and a Senate career that lasted exactly 143 legislative days before he launched yet another campaign for higher office. No one can deny his ambition. In fact, if Obama wins on November 4th—and serves one full term in the Oval Office—the Presidency of the United States would be the longest consecutively held full-time job he has ever held without seeking another.

Barack Obama promises “change,” which is an appealing concept to an American public weary of a beleaguered administration and worried about the future. They are faced with a candidate who promises them everything: Tax cuts for 95% of Americans, universal healthcare, peace, saving the planet, and—according to his wife—the “healing” of Americans’ souls. As the saying goes, if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Questions abound: Is this man prepared to be president? Does he hold mainstream values and policy preferences? Who has influenced his thinking, and where does he want to take the country? Has he been honest with the people from whom he seeks votes?

FILE: ABORTION

Barack Obama is out of the political mainstream on abortion. Don’t take our word for it, just listen to Sen. Obama’s own statements. In his final debate with John McCain, Obama asserted that “nobody is pro-abortion.” If you don’t have the time to read Princeton University professor Robert P. George’s detailed argument that Obama may actually fit that description, consider the candidate’s own record. In the clips below, you will hear Obama say three things.

First, he tells an audience that if his own daughters experienced an unexpected teen pregnancy, he wouldn’t want them “punished with a baby.”

Second, he pledges to a Planned Parenthood gathering that the very first thing he’d do as president is sign the Freedom Of Choice Act, which—according to the bill’s own supporters — would abolish bans on partial-birth abortion and parental notification laws nationwide while implementing tax-payer funded abortions. All three positions are wildly unpopular with the vast majority of Americans, yet they are Obama’s top priorities—just ask him:

Finally, Obama argues against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act as an Illinois Senator in 2002. Despite Obama’s protestations otherwise, he voted three separate times against this legislation, which was designed to require life-saving care for infants who survive botched abortions. This is a matter of record. Not only did an identical bill pass Congress without a single dissenting vote, the explanation Obama has offered for years to defend these votes has been exposed as a lie. Furthermore, Hot Air has a long list of supporting posts on this very subject:

Listen to Obama complain that providing care to these accidentally-born infants would place an undue burden on the woman and her abortionist:

Americans of good faith are divided on this issue. Many are pro-life, and many are pro-choice. Obama’s extreme record should horrify the former group, and should even give significant pause to the latter. Ask yourself, are babies “punishment”? Would you vote for the Freedom of Choice Act and against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act…three times?

FILE: TAXES

As a skilled rhetorical magician, Obama presents himself as a tax-cutter. Even though he’s voted dozens of times to raise taxes, he assures Americans that 95% of us will have our taxes slashed under his plan. The Wall Street Journal isn’t buying it. Once again, though, the best way to assess someone’s positions is to listen to his own language. Note the two telling exchanges that follow:

First, Obama tells newly-minted national celebrity “Joe the Plumber” that his tax hikes on the so-called rich are designed to “spread the wealth around,” which Obama explains is “good for everybody.” Does that sound like a genuine tax-cutter to you?

Second, Obama is challenged by ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson at a primary debate in Pennsylvania. Gibson asks Obama why he insists on raising capital gains taxes (which affect millions of American investors) even after history has proven that raising said taxes actually decreases government revenues from the taxes, and cutting capital gains taxes actually brings more revenue into federal coffers. Obama has no answer, other than to blow off all the evidence, and say that raising taxes is the fair thing to do—practical consequences be damned.

Someone so obsessed with the concept of “fairness” is unlikely to be a friend to taxpayers. Obama’s record over his brief legislative career confirms his tax-and-spend impulses.

(more…)

Jesse Jackson: Obama Hates Jews, Just Like Me!

From a NY Post interview with Jesse Jackson:

The most important change would occur in the Middle East, where “decades of putting Israel’s interests first” would end, (Jackson said).

Jackson believes that, although “Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades” remain strong, they’ll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters the White House.

“Obama is about change,” Jackson told me in a wide-ranging conversation. “And the change that Obama promises is not limited to what we do in America itself. It is a change of the way America looks at the world and its place in it.”

For the record, I think Jackson’s nuts. Obama, like every other U.S. President since Jimmy Carter, will get into office and immediately see the imperative nature of our alliance with Israel. It will be more of the same. But still, you can see why Jackson would say that.

Yasser would be proud. An American President we can work with!

Yasser would be proud. Finally! An American President we can agree with!

P.S. Watch your sack Barack…

Are Biden’s Gaffes Contagious?

“The Next Vice President of the United States, John McCain!”

Huh? WTF?

Published in: on October 8, 2008 at 11:26 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , ,

Obama Against Genocide–Just Not The Iraqi Kind…

Barack Obama preached, last night, about the need for American interventionism in order to stop genocide around the world, but that same standard, he says, does not apply to the strategically important nation of Iraq. Why? Someone should ask him.

At Tuesday’s Presidential Debate, Obama argued that America should take action to prevent genocide, “in situations where there’s a humanitarian crisis, but it does not affect our national security,” such as “the Congo, where 4.5 million people have died since 1998,” or Rwanda or Somalia.

In such cases, answered Obama, “we have moral issues at stake.” Of course the United States must act to stop genocide, he said. “When genocide is happening, when ethnic cleansing is happening . . . and we stand idly by, that diminishes us.”

Genocide isn’t a real devisive issue here in America, we are all pretty much against it and want to do something to stop it.

But, during the Democratic primaries, last year, when Obama had an opportunity to help to PREVENT a possible, some say likely, genocide in Iraq, Obama was far less sympathetic. He turned his back on the people of Iraq and advocated a precipitous withdrawal from the country–with no after-action plan.

In an interview with the Associated Press in July 2007, Barack said:

“Well, look, if that’s the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now — where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife — which we haven’t done,” Obama said.

“We would be deploying unilaterally and occupying the Sudan, which we haven’t done. Those of us who care about Darfur don’t think it would be a good idea,” he said….“There’s no doubt there are risks of increased bloodshed in Iraq without a continuing U.S. presence there.”

Does Obama hate the Iraqi people? Or does he just love his ideology more?

Somebody should really ask Obama, in light of his sermon at the debate on Tuesday, whether or not the American military, under his command, would have returned to Iraq in the event of a genocide in that country? Is there a reason for the seemingly dueling arguments? What does Joe Biden think, I wonder?

By the way, As Obama was pushing for a withdrawal from Iraq, he continually said the surge would not work and actively tried to stop General David Petraeus from carrying out his plans. To this day, the junior Senator from Illinois has not fully admitted that the surge has even worked.

There’s plenty more where that came from….

Obama: Full of Hot Air?

Obama’s 180 on genocide

“Barack Obama is swiftly becoming the poster boy for far leftist moral relativism”

The home mortgage buy-up has already been approved

Obama’s Cheap Moralism

Who was the Obama plant at last night’s debate?

That One

President Barack Hoover

The McCain Resurgence Plan

Palin 1, Protester 0

Palin Scoreboards Protester…

Ready to Lead?

To Barack from Sarah via the Great Tom Petty

It’s On…

Gwen Ifill: Obama Supporter, Unbiased Moderator

Michelle is all over it

Gwen Ifill Questioned Whether Palin Could Be Good Mom & VP– Asked If She Was Vetted

Is Veep debate moderator Gwen Ifill biased?

McCain camp didn’t know?

Obama on Bipartisanship: Uh, Not That Interested…

“I don’t think me calling House Republican members would have been that helpful. I tend not to be that persuasive on that side of the aisle.”

– Barack Obama, acknowledging he doesn’t know how to do bipartisanship and that his whole post-partisan gestalt is about as fact-based as the Easter Bunny.   H/T Dean Barnett

Hot Air