Thankfully Obamacare is running into some roadblocks.  It is doubtful that they will be sufficiently strong to stop Obamacare given the Democrats control of the White House, Congress, and media.

It is shameful that the Democrats tried to ram Obamacare through without debate.  That is not how major proposals are supposed to be passed in the United States.  It is how things happen in absolutist states.

Obama and his allies’ efforts to force through Obamacare reveals the heart of the matter.  It is genius.  Obamacare has nothing to do with health care or helping people.  It is everything to do with increasing state control over the economy, restricting freedoms, further distancing the American people from their political principles, subsidizing illegal immigration, perpetuating an expanding welfare state.

Cloaking a socialist agenda under the guise of “helping people” and solving a “crisis” which does not exist, is brilliant.  Some people are on to the agenda, and have slowed it down.  They have not stopped it.  And the Democrats have until November 2010 to pass it, whatever its final form may be.

Additionally, it is a long way to the midterm elections, and the passions kindled in the summer of 2009 may have cooled by the fall of 2010.

All he needs to do is resign the Presidency, and then he could travel the world apologizing.

Let’s see, where could he go?  How about Japan?  There he could apologize for starting horrific wars, using biological weapons, killing millions.  Next, he could go to Russia to apologize for killing millions.  After that, he could go to China to apologize for killing millions.  Then off to Cambodia to apologize for killing millions.  On to Rwanda, Germany, North Korea….  

The strange thing is, unlike Obama, these countries are not interested in apologizing to the rest of the world.  How curious.  Obama clearly has his work cut out for him.  So many countries.  So much difficult history.  Yet, they have little interest in describing their past sins, let alone apologizing for them.

Thank goodness America has Obama.  He is a leader unlike the rest.  Obama is ready to prostrate himself, to bow before Saudi Kings, and to beg forgiveness from America’s enemies at a moment’s notice.  No other country’s leader would do these things.

In fact, he does it so well, it is really selfish for America to keep him as president. He needs to be shared with the world.  After he resigns, he could apologize for so many things from great injustices like the Ukrainian famine to Hello Kitty to the macarena. He needs to get started immediately.

Some of the key findings:

Obama’s first 100 days were defined by massive spending, aggressive intervention in the private sector and proposals for a huge expansion of the federal government. Yet none of the networks aired a single story on whether Obama’s policies were pushing the U.S. toward socialism, and no reporter used the term “socialist” to describe Obama.

Not only that, network reporters never used the word “liberal” to describe either Barack Obama or his agenda during the first 100 days.

The networks lavished good press on every major initiative of the early Obama administration, including the massive stimulus package, all of the various bailouts, health care, stem cells, the environment and foreign policy.

In the days before the President unveiled his unprecedented $3.5 trillion budget — with a record-shattering $1.75 trillion deficit — four out of five statements on the evening newscasts parroted the White House spin that Obama was a deficit fighter.

Reporters treated Obama’s hugely expensive $787 billion stimulus bill to mainly positive coverage (58 percent positive, 42 percent negative).

The networks applauded Obama’s decision to use taxpayer money to fund embryo-destroying stem cell research (82% positive coverage).

Network coverage of Obama’s mortgage bailout was also positive — 59% of statements supported the bailout or wanted even more intervention, compared to 41% who opposed the bailout as unfair to responsible homeowners.

Reporters heavily skewed their coverage in favor of the President’s actions on global warming (78% positive).

President Obama’s decision to send thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan was greeted by nearly unanimous (91%) positive coverage — a far cry from the highly negative coverage of President Bush’s successful troop surge in Iraq two years ago.

Like Obama and the Democrats, the networks went on a feeding frenzy against big corporate bonuses. The networks aired six times more statements forwarding the “infuriated” reaction to business (104) than criticized politicians’ grandstanding (16).

The networks spent days decrying AIG’s $165 million bonuses, but hardly mentioned the $210 million in bonuses handed out by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the bailed-out mortgage giants with strong Democratic ties). ABC and NBC completely ignored the Fannie and Freddie bonuses, while the CBS Evening News gave it 27 seconds.

This is how propaganda works, right here in the United States.

The reasons why are, first, he has undermined American security. What foreign policy accomplishment do you remember from the first 100 days: not one. Just the reverse. He began with his apology tour. The U.S. president always speaks to many audiences and blaming his predecessor smacks of petulance and weakness. Obama does not get a time out and he does not get to reset the relationship with key countries. Aggressors are heartened by his words and America’s friends sense weakness. Expect Japan and Saudi Arabia to move toward proliferation. New NATO allies rightly understand that Obama is abandoning them in favor of the chimera of improving relations with Russia. The Russians understand and respect strength, for which there is no substitute. They are not going to find it in this administration.

Second, over 100 days in it is clear that the Obama administration is actively moving the United States toward socialism in deed, if not in word. The administration is chock full of cultural Marxists. They understand the need to move slowly, over generational time. They prefer to focus on the young as they are easier to shape and since they were born after the Cold War they have little aversion to socialism. Bailouts to Democratic constituencies, sharing the wealth, attacking and suppressing the opposition, normalizing socialism by casting it in a good light, blaming traditional American values and capitalism are all part of the effort to move the United States toward socialism. In other words, an attempt for the Marxists, hidden behind the mask of the Democratic Party, to seize power in the United States.

About 1,300 days to go. Now is the time for Republicans to re-connect with American political principles. Republicans hold fast.

It speaks volumes about politics in America today that no one cares if the President’s aunt breaks U.S. laws or that the President must have known this.  Yet, he permitted this to occur.  Why did Obama not pay for her to return to Kenya when he knew she was illegal?  Why did Obama not call the immigration authorities when knew is aunt was illegal and insist that she be deported?

Where is the outrage?  Why do Americans tolerate this?  This was a nation of laws.  The arrogance of Obama demonstrates once again that the laws do not apply to the elite.  The United States is eroding at ever greater speed.

The real views of many in Obama administration were laid bare by a State Department official involved in planning the Brown visit, who reacted with fury when questioned by The Sunday Telegraph about why the event was so low-key.

The official dismissed any notion of the special relationship, saying: “There’s nothing special about Britain. You’re just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn’t expect special treatment.” The apparent lack of attention to detail by the Obama administration is indicative of what many believe to be MrObama’s determination to do too much too quickly.

That is it! Britain is no longer a special country, not for the multiculturalists. They must demote Britain and end any talk about a “special relationship” because it reminds Americans of another, better time in the United States, and one not that long ago, where the Anglo-American relationship was the bedrock of West’s security.

Together, the English-speaking peoples stood united and defeated the Soviets, Germans, Italians, and Japanese, among others. An impressive list of foes. They were defeated because of unity in a shared culture and traditions.

For the Left, that has got to go to be replaced by the privileging of Kenya, Peru, or you pick the country, so long as it is not a Western one.

Too bad the English-speaking peoples were not able to unite against their greatest, and indeed mortal, foe: the Left’s agenda.

I just want to voice my utter disdain for the people we call “Our Leaders” for their continued support of this un-American, anti-capitalist, freedom trouncing, leftist, gravy train of a stimulus package. Democratic, Republican, Centrist, Leftist, blah blah blah… If you support this “stimulus” then you are a COWARD.  You lack the moral intellect/judgement, the fortitude, the gravitas to be in a position to make any sort of intelligent decision/input on this matter.  You are followers begging to be lead when you should be LEADING.  You ask no questions because you believe you have all the answers.  Your utter neglect of the basic principles of this great society is shameful and it is YOU that will ultimately have to take responsibility for destroying the core values of this great nation. It is YOU and only YOU that power was given to, BY THE PEOPLE, to make the best and most informed decisions for the PEOPLE and not for yourself.  You live from election to election while we live from generation to generation.  You are so out of touch it’s pathetic and one day you will realize that being a feeble politician is not all it’s cracked up to be.

Now for you, the Citizens.  With the passage of this “stimulus,” your individual liberties will soon begin to errode.  Liberties that you once took for granted will no longer be available to you.  Afterall, the Government knows what’s best for you.  It is now up to us, the citizens of of this great nation, to stand behind those that are trying to prevent the passage of the “Spendulus.” Say “No More!” to government greed and corruption; “No More!” to government expansion and the trouncing of individual liberties.  It is now up you to YOU, the citizens, to lead the way since our leaders appear to have vanished during these trying times.

Average Joe

Jason D. Wood has written an excellent article detailing why Obama’s space policy is impractical and dangerous.

Wood writes that it is impractical for 3 major reasons:

First and foremost, there is no internationally agreed-upon definition of a space weapon. One proposed definition includes only space-based systems specifically produced to destroy other space objects. But that raises the question of intent, always difficult to prove. This definition also fails to take into account Earth-based systems that could be used to destroy objects in space, like the anti-satellite weapons used by the People’s Republic of China in 2007 and the United States in 2008. Nor does it include terrestrial laser systems capable of jamming satellite communications. An alternate definition — any object in, or passing through, space that has the capability of damaging or destroying another space object — is equally unfeasible. Theoretically, any object in space could be used to intercept or collide with another object, again raising the issue of determining intent.

Second, there is no conceivable way to effectively verify a space weapons ban. Assuming that a workable definition of “space weapon” could be agreed upon, effectively inspecting space payloads would present enormous challenges. Some components could have dual use applications. And unlike Earth-based systems, where inspection delays simply postpone verification, an inspection delay in this case would allow the launch of the disputed payload.

Third, because the U.S. relies heavily on space systems to achieve battlefield dominance, our adversaries have greater incentive to develop the means to negate U.S. space capabilities. Given U.S conventional superiority, a strike on U.S. space assets becomes a quick and relatively cheap way of gaining an asymmetric advantage. An ambiguously defined treaty that cannot be verified or enforced — but that would limit U.S. options to deter and defend against enemy space attack — would not alter this calculus, and would therefore be unlikely to prevent an attack on U.S. space assets or forestall the deployment of space weapons by other nations.

The result of Obama’s effort would be damaging to American security:

The importance of space to the security of the United States cannot be overstated. In the military sphere, space assets serve as a tremendous force multiplier — providing early warning, communications, timing, navigation, and targeting information around the globe. The diplomatic arena also benefits greatly from U.S. space capabilities. Space-based intelligence systems provide the means to verify arms reduction treaties and nonproliferation agreements. These same systems help policymakers assess the damage of manmade or natural disasters, allowing humanitarian aid to be directed more efficiently and effectively. U.S. space assets are also increasingly vital to the commercial sector, providing data that is critical for weather forecasts, agriculture, construction, and geological surveys. More and more, everyday citizens rely on satellite systems for GPS navigation, direct-to-home television, financial transactions, and emergency services. In the future, space will continue to become exponentially more important across the spectrum of defense, diplomacy, commerce, and daily life.

Under a space weapons ban, the United States would not be able to deter an attack on these vital systems. Given the difficulties of determining intent, as well as verifying and attributing noncompliance, the United States cannot guarantee that an aggressor will be swiftly and harshly punished, militarily or diplomatically. Barring the ability to deter an attack, protection is the next reasonable alternative. However, under a treaty banning space weapons, the United States would be hampered in its ability to defend its satellites against enemy attack, leaving its increasingly vital space assets vulnerable.

All of us owe Wood thanks for calling attention to what the Obama administration is doing to hinder American security.