I had a revelation today...

I know most of you with think I'm being less than sincere when I say this, but I had a revelation today. I honestly feel sorry for obama.

It has to be extremely hard for a hard core liberal candidate to suddenly become president and discover that all the things you campaigned on were just naive bullshit. To discover that there are some very nasty people on this earth that want to do us serious harm. To find out that the things that Republicans do, like Gitmo and enhanced interrogations are necessary to provide the American people with safety and security.

But obama is lucky, he has an uncanny ability to claim the hard work and diligence of others as his own. He can do things like waffle on a decision to take out the most wanted scumbag on the planet and then take a victory lap at Ground Zero when the deed is done. He can criticize the actions of the CIA, even going as far as having the attorney general investigate them. Yet when the evidence they collected leads to a huge victory, he is sure to have his face in front of every TV camera he can find, taking the credit. He can bad mouth the Bush Administration non-stop, for two and a half years, and then accept the fruits of their labor as his own, without ever giving credit where credit is due.

It has to be exceptionally hard to find yourself in the real world, especially when you are an elitist douchebag who has spent your entire life avoiding taking a stand or making a decision that can be linked directly to you.

obama is a credit taking thug. The more I have thought about it, I don't feel sorry for him at all...

All the President's Funny Money

obama is a thug and a criminal. How in the hell is this guy president of our Country? Read this article. If this doesn't totally piss you off, you need to have your head examined. The rules simply do not apply to obama. He doesn't bend them, he shatters them, and then laughs at us. This guy should be in prison instead of the whitehouse...

by Michelle Malkin - Human Events

Ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching. President Obama's perpetual campaign cash-o-matic machine kicks into high gear again this week as the celebrity-in-chief heads to Hollywood for several high-priced fundraisers. But while the Democrats' 2012 re-election team stuffs its hands into every liberal deep pocket in sight, questions about the Obama 2008 campaign finance operation still fester.

Last week, the laggard watchdogs at the Federal Election Commission announced an audit of the Obama 2008 campaign committee -- which raised a record-setting $750 million. White House flacks are downplaying the probe as a "routine review."

But there's nothing routine about the nearly $3 million Obama has spent on legal expenses to address federal campaign finance irregularities and inquiries. Roll Call reports that Obama's campaign legal fees have exceeded all other House and presidential campaign committees, including members of Congress under ethics investigations.

There's nothing routine about the whopping $6 million that Team Obama has refunded to individual donors since Obama took office.

And there's nothing routine about the 26 warning letters to Obama for America totaling "more than 1,500 pages of questions and data that outlined compliance concerns -- including the longest one ever sent to a presidential candidate," according to Roll Call.

Among the Obama 2008 campaign committee's shadiest transactions that have gone unpunished:

-- Foreign funny money. Federal election law bans foreign nationals from contributing to American candidates. But during 2008, the Obama campaign was forced to return an illegal foreign donation worth $31,100 made by two brothers in the Gaza Strip, and even mainstream news outlets reported that candidate Obama's money-handlers had routinely failed to verify citizenship by checking donors' passports. As the Associated Press reported at the time: "One donor, Tom Sanderson of Canada, made clear his $500 contribution came from a foreign source. He included a note that said, 'I am not an American citizen!' Obama's campaign took the money anyway..."

Another illegal foreign donor, Australian Richard Watters, contributed $1,000, "entering a fake U.S. passport number -- a random jumble of numbers and letters" onto the Obama donation website. "He said he also checked a box stating that he was an American living overseas, 'because I could see it wasn't going anywhere if I didn't do that.'"

Obama raked in at least $2 million in overseas donations.

-- Online donor credit-card fraud. Weeks before the 2008 presidential election, investigative journalist Ken Timmerman blew the whistle on rampant phony straw contributors slipping through the Obama donation site. Just one example: "Mr. Good Will" from Austin, Texas. Mr. Good Will listed his employer as "Loving" and his profession as "You." Timmerman's analysis of 1.4 million individual donations to the Obama campaign discovered "1,000 separate entries for Mr. Good Will, most of them for $25. In total, Mr. Good Will gave $17,375. Following this and subsequent FEC requests, campaign records show that 330 contributions from Mr. Good Will were credited back to a credit card. But the most recent report, filed on Sept. 20, showed a net cumulative balance of $8,950 -- still well over the $4,600 limit."

Subsequent digging by conservative bloggers found that the Obama campaign's donor website appeared to intentionally disable security protocols and facilitate illegal donations with bogus names, shell addresses and untraceable credit cards. Among Obama's online "donors": Bart Simpson, Family Guy, Daffy Duck, King Kong, O.J. Simpson, Mr. Doodad Pro, John Galt, Della Ware, Crazy Eight and Adolfe Hitler.

-- Social justice funny money. In 2008, the Obama campaign wrote checks totaling more than $800,000 to a nonprofit offshoot of ACORN called Citizens Services Inc. The campaign claimed the money went to nonpartisan get-out-the-vote services. But receipts showed the funds paid for polling, advance work and event staging supplied by a nonprofit that supposedly does simple canvassing work on behalf of low-income people. The FEC allowed Obama to wave his magic wand and amend the records to change political expenses into non-political ones. As a Republican National Committee staffer commented at the time: "For a candidate who claims to be practicing 'new' politics, his FEC reports look an awful lot like the 'old-style' Chicago politics of yesterday."

On a related front, ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief filed an FEC complaint last year over illegal coordination between ACORN and the Obama campaign. MonCrief publicly released Obama donor lists supplied to ACORN affiliate Project Vote, which were allegedly used to target maxed-out presidential donors. The scheme involved converting the expenditures by Project Vote, ACORN and ACORN-affiliated entities to illegal, excessive corporate contributions to the Obama presidential campaign, in violation of federal law.

Nothing to see here, move along? The only "routine" business as usual being conducted here is Chicago-style self-exemption business as usual: Rules are for fools. Let the crooked cash flow in.

obama's Hidden Past

Wirecutter had this posted on Friday. Even if only half of this stuff is true, why is it not front page news all over the world? Even more important, why is obama sitting in the whitehouse instead of a prison cell?



These are some pretty big accusations. Is there anyone following up on this stuff? We all know that the media isn't going to look for anything damning on obama. But, just like the gunwalker case, there has to be some investigators doing the research, digging for some undeniable truth...

You Paid For It: Sen. McCaskill’s Air Claire Hypocrisy

I don't know Ed Martin, but if I ever meet him I'll buy him a beer. This is some damn fine reporting and near and dear to my heart. I despise a hypocrite and mccaskill has proven she is that and more. Not only is she a hypocrite, she doesn't give a damn about the people of Missouri. She cares about claire mccaskill and what she can gain from her current position. It sure seems like she has gained a lot.

Read the rest of this article at the link below. The ties between mccaskill's private businesses and her votes as a politician. It sure seems as if there could be some conflict of interest going on, and with her record so far, I have to doubt that it was unintentional...

by Ed Martin - Guns & Patriots

All Americans should thank Senator Claire McCaskill for showing – yet again – how the liberal economic “jobs” plan works for politicians instead of people.

A few years ago after her election to the U.S. Senate, McCaskill and her husband bought an airplane to use as their own charter company. She then paid her own company using tax payer dollars from her Senate office budget to fly back and forth to Missouri for official and political events.

Liberals seem to love this kind of business: funded by tax payer dollars, with no bid contracts, entirely self-dealing, and with complete secrecy.

Is it just me, or does that also remind you of the so-called Stimulus bill McCaskill helped President Obama pass in 2009?

Flash forward to a few weeks ago when McCaskill was confronted about her sketchy business deal. McCaskill did what any good taxpayer-subsidized businessperson might do. She sold the plane and shut the scheme down.

After all, it’s tough to run an airplane charter business without taxpayer payments.

It gets worse for Air Claire. The public realized (even the press) that using taxpayer dollars to pay yourself is wrong. The pressure was unbearable and McCaskill whipped out her personal checkbook and re-paid the federal treasury with an $88,000 check. It’s shameful when you game the system to the point of being politically forced to pay back a taxpayer subsidy.

As I watched the Air Claire story develop – I started http://www.airclaire.com/ to help people stay informed – I knew there were more questions not being asked.

McCaskill had been keeping the plane in Delaware and Illinois, two states that do not impose personal property taxes. Well, Missouri does. So, was McCaskill, a committed liberal millionaire who advocates soaking the rich, actually dodging taxes?

Yes, Air Claire was trying to pay fewer taxes. Caught again and pressured by the public, McCaskill pulled out her checkbook and wrote a check for over $300,000 for back taxes on the plane.

Not only was McCaskill paying her own company taxpayer dollars to fund her travels, she avoided paying taxes to the state she supposedly serves.

This is a trend with liberal power-players. Remember how Tom Daschle and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner were exposed for skipping out on taxes? It’d be different if these politicians didn’t preach for higher taxes, but these hypocrites love higher taxes for their constitutes yet hate to pay up themselves.

Go read the rest at the link above...

EXCLUSIVE: Senator’s husband’s firm cashes in on crisis

I find it very difficult to believe that this was a mere coincidence. It's much more likely that feinstein is just another thug, criminal democrat.

She introduces legislation that is out of her area of involvment that just happens to benefit her and her husband to the tune of millions. Hmmm, I'm a bit skeptical about this deal. And these types of deals are against the rules, and probably illegal.

The list of crooked democrats gets longer by the day. dianne feinstein, maxine waters, charlie rangel, john kerry, obama, the list goes on and on. Sure, there are some crooked republicans too. But the funny thing is, there criminal activity lands them kicked out of polititcs or in jail. When democrats do it, it magically goes away, just like this will.

Thanks to Marc Cote for the link to this article, it pisses me off, but thanks none the less...

From Chuck Neubauer - The Washington Times

On the day the new Congress convened this year, Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation to route $25 billion in taxpayer money to a government agency that had just awarded her husband’s real estate firm a lucrative contract to sell foreclosed properties at compensation rates higher than the industry norms.

Mrs. Feinstein’s intervention on behalf of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was unusual: the California Democrat isn’t a member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs with jurisdiction over FDIC; and the agency is supposed to operate from money it raises from bank-paid insurance payments - not direct federal dollars.

Documents reviewed by The Washington Times show Mrs. Feinstein first offered Oct. 30 to help the FDIC secure money for its effort to stem the rise of home foreclosures. Her letter was sent just days before the agency determined that CB Richard Ellis Group (CBRE) - the commercial real estate firm that her husband Richard Blum heads as board chairman - had won the competitive bidding for a contract to sell foreclosed properties that FDIC had inherited from failed banks.

About the same time of the contract award, Mr. Blum’s private investment firm reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission that it and related affiliates had purchased more than 10 million new shares in CBRE. The shares were purchased for the going price of $3.77; CBRE’s stock closed Monday at $5.14.

Spokesmen for the FDIC, Mrs. Feinstein and Mr. Blum’s firm told The Times that there was no connection between the legislation and the contract signed Nov. 13, and that the couple didn’t even know about CBRE’s business with FDIC until after it was awarded.

Senate ethics rules state that members must avoid conflicts of interest as well as “even the appearance of a conflict of interest.” Some ethics analysts question whether Mrs. Feinstein ran afoul of the latter provision, creating the appearance that she was rewarding the agency that had just hired her husband’s firm.

“This clearly gives the appearance of a conflict of interest,” said Kent Cooper, a former federal regulator who specializes in government ethics and disclosures. “To maintain the people’s trust in government, it is incumbent on a legislator to take the extra steps necessary to ensure that when she introduces any legislation that it does not cause people to question her motives or the business activities of her spouse.”

Mrs. Feinstein and Mr. Blum, a wealthy investment banker, are a power couple in both Washington and California who sat behind President Obama during his inauguration in January. Mrs. Feinstein also is mentioned as a candidate for California governor.

The FDIC contract “highlights the problem of a senator with a spouse who has extensive business interests that intersect frequently with the federal government,” said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). “Even if there is no actual conflict of interest, it often has the appearance of a conflict.”

Read the rest at the links above...