No longer ‘Fundamental Transformation of America’ but the Free World

Obama hates America and capitalist society; doesn’t loathe Putin as much as he envies him. Totalitarianism is where Obama plans to take the US and the Free World

He’s no longer solely America’s biggest headache.

It’s now Obama’s ‘Fundamental Transformation of the 
Free World’,  and for anyone awake, it can be watched being played out day by day.

The unquenchable ego of President Barack Hussein Obama is rebuilding the Russian bear and destabilizing the entire Free World.

With 13 questionable US government YouTubes showing that chemical attacks did take place on August 21 in Syria—with no proof who was responsible for them—Obama, who was trying to advance World War III—merely stumbled back into his own trap.  And that’s only if he’s not part of the Putin act.

Last night’s address to the nation proved a walk back on the ‘Highly propagandized America Attack on Syria’. Russian president Vladimir Putin came out of this one like a John Wayne movie hero.  But unfortunately it won’t end there.

One day after Obama’s putting-Syria-attack-on-ice televised address to a captive nation,  we get to hear how Putin is now arming Iran.

“Russian President Vladimir Putin will offer to supply Iran S-300 air defence missile systems as well as build a second reactor at the Bushehr nuclear plant, the Kommersant business daily reported Wednesday. (AFP, Sept. 11, 2013)

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading...

Pelosi Fawns Uncontrollably Over Dear Leader: “Obama’s Strength” Led To Russian WMD Proposal…

She is clearly insane.

Via: Weasel Zippers

Continue Reading....

Intelligence insider speaks on the record about false flags & government lies

Our nation and all of humanity stands at a critical crossroads in history, with Syria as the epicenter of a looming global conflict that will leave no one untouched. Despite a nearly unanimous consensus of the American people against military action in Syria, elements of our government are determined to override the will of the people and push us headlong into war in Syria, which will lead to a much greater conflagration than most are willing to believe or imagine.

As I have extensively written over the last 12 months, we are being pushed into World War III. This war, like others in the past, is based on lies and “false flag” operations, some of which have occurred, some thwarted, and others that loom just over the horizon.

Regular readers of my columns and listeners to my talk show know that the information I’ve provided about Syria and Benghazi has not only been proven accurate, but provided months in advance of the reports by the corporate media and even most conservative talk show hosts. I mention this not for self-aggrandizement, but to validate the credibility and authenticity of my “intelligence insider” who has provided me with this information. He has been extremely accurate on every aspect of what is taking place behind the veil of lies packaged for Western consumption. For the first time ever, this insider has agreed to speak on the record in an exclusive 90-minute interview about what is really taking place behind the curtain of lies and deception.

Despite the risks, he has agreed to lend his voice to the growing opposition to the madness we see taking place at the highest levels of our government, and tell us exactly what appears to be playing out in real-time. The Western-backed uprising in Syria has claimed the lives of around 150,000 men, women and children, and displaced some five million people. If permitted to continue, some estimate the deaths of four million people in Syria alone, with death spread on a wholesale level across the globe. And it’s being done in your name.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading....

The Mythical Public-Sector Collapse

At The Atlantic, there is a story discussing private- and public-sector job-creation under Obama relative to the other presidents since Reagan.  The Atlantic's coverage of this topic illustrates once again the need to normalize data when making comparisons.

Over at this other publication, the equivalent of the figure on the left shown below is provided -- which illustrates absolute cumulative private sector job creation since taking office for Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, Bush 43, and Obama.

Looking at the data this way suggests that Obama's administration has seen net private-sector job-creation on the order of 3.25 million jobs.  It also suggests that Obama's job-creation record is in the ballpark (i.e., about half) of Reagan's at the same point in their respective terms.

But this fails to account for population growth.  When we normalize the data to population, we get the plot above on the right.  Obama is still well into the job-creation hole, and not even close to where the Reagan recovery was at this point in time.  When Reagan took office, there were 326,000 private-sector jobs per million population.  At this point in his term, that had already increased to 340,000, heading up to 363,000 by the time he left office.

Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading....

Obama is a laughing stock: Column

Remember that dumb cowboy George W. Bush, who alienated all our allies and dragged us into wars of choice in the Mideast? And remember that goofball Mitt Romney, whom Joe Biden a year ago accusedof wanting to go to war in Syria?

Both of them must be having a big laugh over the way things are going for Obama now. When I wrote last week on our bumbling Syria diplomacy, it seemed that things couldn't possibly go further downhill. Boy, was I wrong.

Last week, it seemed our only ally was France. But now the French are having second thoughts. Obama's efforts to get support at the G20 conference came to nothing. Even the pope is undercutting him.

Meanwhile, at home, polls show Americans are against a strike, and Obama is facing double-digit defections among Democrats in the Senate. The outlook for passage in the House, meanwhile, looks so bad that a resolution to authorize war may not even make it to a vote. If it's sure to fail, why force members -- Republicans and Democrats alike -- to go on record? You can bet they don't appreciate Obama putting them in this position.The Pentagon isn't happy, and even The Atlantic's Ta-Nehisi Coates, a reliable Obama supporter, calls his policy "dumb."

Some critics are even comparing the collapse of American influence under Obama to the end of the Soviet Union. Well, that may be an exaggeration -- but Obama promised a "fundamental transformation," after all..

Via: USA Today

Continue Reading...

Putin Didn't Save Obama, He Beat Him

With the Russian proposal on Syrian chemical weapons, the United States is being escorted out of the Middle East.

Maybe Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin really did discuss the idea of putting Syrian chemical weapons under international control last week on the sidelines of the G20 conference. Putin sure doesn’t care that Obama’s taking credit for the proposal, or that the administration is posturing like a Mob enforcer.  “The only reason why we are seeing this proposal,” said White House spokesman Jay Carney, “is because of the U.S. threat of military action.”

Right, Putin is laughing to himself. Whatever. If Obama wants to sell it like a Christmas miracle on Pennsylvania Avenue that’s fine with Putin, because Putin won.

Reset with Russia was originally a strategic priority for the Obama administration because it saw Moscow as the key to getting Iran to come to the negotiating table. Putin, from the White House’s perspective, was destined for the role of junior partner. Now Putin has turned “Reset” upside down. By helping Obama out of a jam with Syria, Putin has made himself the senior partner to whom the White House is now beholden. Accordingly, when Putin proposes the same sort of deal with Iran, with Russia having established its bona fides as an interlocutor for Syria, Obama is almost certain to jump at it.

What’s unclear is whether Obama understands that his foreign policy legacy will be to have ruined the American position in the Middle East, our patrimony of the last seven decades. If the 1979 takeover of the U.S. embassy in Tehran signaled weakness, the Russian deal screams surrender. The real surprise is that it’s not Iran kicking the United States out of the region under Obama’s watch, but Putin.

Via: Weekly Standard

Continue Reading....

How the Obama administration commemorates the anniversaries of 9/11 and Benghazi terrorist attack

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush has zero respect for the four courageous Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who lost their lives in a terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, one year ago tomorrow.

Otherwise, he wouldn’t be the one to honor former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with this year’s Liberty Medal from the National Constitution Center, today, on the eve of the first anniversary of the Benghazi terrorist attack.

What’s with the Philadelphia-based National Constitution Center allowing the Liberty Medal to be awarded to Clinton on the very eve of the day before she allowed Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty and Sean Smith to die with no help from the administration she was serving?

Where is the National Constitution Center’s on-the-books protocol?

It seems that everything that comes from the Obama administration has an added sting to human dignity.

The day after Hillary Clinton shamefully accepts the Liberty Medal from sycophant Jeb Bush, this is what the Obama administration has lined up for tomorrow, the 12th anniversary of 9/11:

Susan Rice will be in front of TV cameras reading CIA talking points on Syria.

“About a year ago, the White House put Susan Rice, then the ambassador to the United Nations, on TV to read CIA talking points that turned out to be false about the attack in Benghazi, Libya. The b

acklash poisoned her relationship with Republicans in Congress and dashed her chances of becoming secretary of state. President Obama instead named her national security adviser, which didn’t require Senate confirmation,” Dana Milbank at the Washington Post writes today.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading....

LEFTIST POLICIES ALIENATE BIG LABOR FROM OBAMA AND MEAN LESS PROSPERITY FOR ALL

Big labor unions that supported Obamacare are learning the meaning of “you reap what you sow” the hard way.  Teamsters, UNITE-HERE, and the United Food and Commercial Workers are among many unions that worked for the passage of Obamacare.  But now relations between Big Labor and President Obama have soured – and that’s putting it lightly.

Why are union members so angry?

Obamacare!  Obamacare is a threat to union members’ jobs, and it is already endangering generous health care plans that unions have negotiated for their members.  Obamacare means higher taxes, onerous regulations, oppressive mandates, and higher health care costs for unions.  Consequently, it also means fewer full-time jobs and less hours of work.

But Obamacare isn’t the only leftist policy infuriating unions. 

The Washington Free Beacon (WFB) reports that labor groups are also angry about the “administration’s aggressive Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations.”

Indeed, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) found that America has lost between 13,000 and 17,000 coal jobs due to EPA regulations.  Pennsylvania lost and estimated 3,000 coal-related jobs in Obama’s first term.

Via: Heritage Action

Continue Reading....

Updated: Refocusing on Obamacare

[Update: Based on what I'm hearing from House sources, the worst suspicions are confirmed.  Eric Cantor is floating an idea to pass a short-term CR with a defund rider.  But just as we predicted, they plan to write a rule that will sever the defund rider from the body of the bill after it passes the House.  This will allow the Senate to vote down the defund part separately, and send a clean CR straight to the President's desk without ever returning to the House.  This will ensure that we capitulate while allowing House and Senate Republicans to be shielded from charges of voting to defund Obamacare.  Here is the link from Politico.

This is exactly why we need new leadership in the party.  Call your members and make sure they are opposed to any trick that will allow the Senate to separate Obamacare funding from the rest of the bill.  If they support funding Obamacare in the budget, they should have the courage to do so through the front door.]

Washington is a strange place.  If you only spent your time inside the D.C. beltway you would come away with the impression that the most important policy issues are amnesty for illegals and air strikes for Al-Qaeda in Syria.  Yet in the real world, Americans are concerned about the lethargic economy and the destruction of the healthcare system at the hands of Obamacare.  Only in Washington can the focus be shifted to foreign interests just three weeks before implementation of the worst domestic program in American history.

On October 1, the Obamacare exchanges will officially open their doors, bringing us one step closer to the immutable dependency on government and the inexorable unsustainability of the private healthcare sector.  Employers are cutting health benefits, jobs – or both.  Healthy individuals who purchase their own health insurance will no longer be able to afford their own plan.  Doctors with decades of experience plan to retire due to the cumbersome mandates, restrictions, and paperwork.  Even many Democrats believe this plan is unworkable and are looking for leadership to stop this travesty from taking root.

Via: Red State

Continue Reading....

Vice President Biden Awards $10 Million Grant To The Port Of Baltimore

OBAMA "SHIPS" BIDEN OUT OF WASHINGTON

BALTIMORE (WJZ) — Vice presidential visit. Joe Biden comes to the Port of Baltimore with a $10 million check.

Alex DeMetrick reports it’s just the latest investment in a port positioning itself for the future.

The dockside applause may not have been heard by longshoremen unloading one of the largest container ships ever to call at the Port of Baltimore.

“And all indications are they’re going to get larger,” said Jim White, the port’s executive director.

Millions have already been spent on cranes massive enough to serve the mega-ships coming with the expansion of the Panama Canal.

Biden announced the federal government will now spend another $10 million on a port that is already ahead of most others when it comes to handling super-sized vessel.

“The Port of Baltimore is going to continue to send ships out over the horizon, but it’s not just Baltimore. The rest of the country has got to catch up with you. The rest of the East Coast has got to catch up with you because the opportunities are immense,” said Vice President Joe Biden.

Much of the money will be spent underwater, widening and straightening the shipping channel into the port.

Via: CBS Baltimore

Continue Reading.....

Senior Democratic Whip says Congressional Black Caucus does not support Obama on Syria

Congressional Black Caucus members hesitate to support President Obama's call for a military strike on Syria because of their constituents ongoing disappointment with his economic policies with respect to the African American community, according to a senior House Democratic Whip.

"There are a few who are supportive of having a targeted strike, and there are many more members who are indifferent, and then there are others who are outright against against the strike," Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., told WTLC AM's Amos Brown on Wednesday when asked to describe the mood of the CBC.

"I'm not convinced that military action in the manner sought by the administration is in America's best interest," the CBC member also said, explaining that he would prefer that regional allies put pressure on Syrian dictator Bashar Assad's regime.

Carson attributed Obama's difficulty in rallying CBC votes to frustration with his domestic agenda as it pertains to the black community.

"You know the congressional black caucus has pushed over the past several years for targeted dollars going to the African American community going to summer jobs programs; targeted dollars from the federal government in terms of helping to empower small businesses, women-owned businesses, and minority-owned business; targeted dollars that will help bolster our economy; targeted dollars that will help improve the health of our public school systems," Carson said.

The sentiment is not a new one. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., admitted that the CBC was "getting tired" of Obama's failure to deliver economic benefits for the black community.

"The unemployment is unconscionable," she said during a CBC town hall in Detroit in 2011. "We don't know what the strategy is. We don't know why on this trip that he's in the United States now, he's not in any black community. We don't know that."

Waters eventually praised the jobs proposal Obama outlined in September of 2011 — "as a matter of fact we can see our hand print all over this proposal," she said — but the stimulus package never passed into law.

"And so, we're still fighting that fight while we're facing spending millions more dollars in drone attacks and even boots on the ground — we've not gotten there yet, but it's a proposition that causes a lot of emotion, as you can imagine," Carson continued.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading....

Priorities: President's Dog Gets More Airtime than Move to Defund ObamaCare

According to the three networks, the serious effort by conservatives to defund ObamaCare isn't worth as much coverage as the addition of a new dog to the President's family. In just a 24-hour period, the ABC, CBS and NBC evening and morning shows devoted six minutes and 23 seconds to the debut of the puppy "Sunny." In contrast, those same shows have granted a scant two minutes and 26 seconds over a two-month period (July 9 through September 8) to the move by conservative senators such as Mike Lee and Ted Cruz to strip funding from the increasingly-unpopular ObamaCare.

The networks didn't bother to stack the deck with segments heavily opposed to the "Defund It" push, promoted by influential conservative organizations and some GOP lawmakers. Instead, they chose to deprive the campaign of nearly all publicity, omitting it from their normal political coverage. ABC was the worst offender, with the network offering a mere eight second reference to the defund effort.

However, on August 19 and 20, the hosts of World News and Good Morning America discussed the Obamas acquisition of Sunny the Portugese Water Dog for 174 seconds. This is a disparity of 20 to one – an accomplishment even more amazing considering that it was July 9 when Senator Lee first began pushing to defund ObamaCare.

The sole ABC mention of the conservative plan came on the August 18 Good Morning America. George Stephanopoulos told GMA Sunday host Bianna Golodryga: "...If [congressional Republicans] shut down the government, say, over their cause to de-fund Obamacare, they will relegate themselves to minority status for generations."

NBC allowed slightly more coverage, 52 seconds worth. On August 9, Chuck Todd simply repeated White House talking points. Recounting an Obama news conference, he hyped, "[The President] said this about Republicans threatening government shutdown: 'The idea that you would shut down the government unless you prevent thirty million people from getting health care is a bad idea.'"

The key players in the effort, people like Lee and Cruz, also didn't get much attention. Since July 9, CBS included one clip of Lee and one of Cruz. NBC allowed just one snippet of Cruz. ABC's morning and evening shows had

Via: Newsbusters

Continue Reading...

Ed Schultz: The “spite in conservative hearts” for Obama is the “only reason they are against war for the first time, ever”

The intellectualism. The nuance. The insight. It’s overwhelming me. 

Isn’t this an interesting collection of folks right here. What does it take to get a Republican to be against an airstrike? What does it take a Republican to be against a war or confrontation? Correct me if I’m wrong, folks, you can do it on Twitter — don’t the Republicans always run on the foreign policy that they are the experts? That the Democrats are weak, and that they are the ones that are so concerned about America’s security? You know, as the evidence comes in about the use of chemical weapons, how can they oppose the president? And a growing number of far right-wing Republicans are coming out and opposing an airstrike on Syria? Believe it or not, the righties like Rick Santorum and Marco Rubio and Michele Bachmann. And then, of course, there’s Donald Rumsfeld, Mr. Expert. They are saying no to an airstrike on Syria — and I agree with them. But for, of course, completely different reasons folks. The Republicans, they don’t hate war. They hate this guy: Barack Hussein Obama. They just cannot stomach the fact that they might be agreeing with him, ’cause they’d have a lot of trouble back home. They have fought this president, obstructed this president, their whole focus is to make him a failure. How in the world can they support him on going up against Syria? The level of spite in conservative hearts for this president is the only reason they are against war for the first time ever.

Yes, because as all of us here know, Republicans are unabashedly for war in and of itself, and not actually for the long-term goals and careful military reasoning behind war (which, by the way, the president is very much lacking in this case). Duh.

Via: Hot AIr

Continue Reading....

Obama: I'm Bypassing the 'Hocus Pocus' of the United Nations

President Obama said that the U.S. talk of military action in Syria is bypassing the "hocus pocus" of the U.N.:

"Frankly, if we weren't talking about the need for an international response right now, this wouldn't be what everybody would be asking about," said Obama at a press conference this morning. "You know, there would be some resolutions that were being proffered in the United Nations and the usual hocus pocus, but the world and the country would have moved on. So trying to impart a sense of urgency about this, why we can't have an environment in which over time, people start thinking this we can get away with chemical weapons use--it's a hard sell, but it's something I believe in."

Via: The Weekly Standard

Continue Reading....

The Most Embarrassing President of My Lifetime

Obama is a symbol of much of today’s generation, which accepts no responsibility for anything

“Speak softly and carry a big stick.” — Teddy Roosevelt
“The buck stops here.” — Harry Truman
“I didn’t set a red line.” — Barack Obama

Barack Obama is, without question, the most embarrassing president of my lifetime — and that is saying something, since my life so far has encompassed 12 presidencies, some of which have brought a lot of embarrassment to the nation. Even Richard Nixon, with his Watergate scandal, Jimmy Carter, with his malaise, and Bill Clinton, with his lewd behavior in the Oval Office, could not top this president for pure, unadulterated disgrace.

Of course, in Obama’s case, it is not a matter of personal scandal like it was for Clinton. By telling the world a year ago that he was drawing a red line in the hot desert sands of Syria — that red line being the use of chemical weapons — he created the debacle that currently threatens to engulf the Middle East. He blustered at the time that if the regime of Bashar al-Assad crossed that red line, there will be a price to pay. No one yet knows what that price will be, but from the current discussion, it appears that it will involve the destruction of at least three camels, four sheep, a half-dozen goats and an abandoned aspirin factory.

That oughta show ‘em!

What it will do, in all likelihood, is unify the Islamic crazies in the Middle East and turn Assad into a regional hero, emboldening him to attack Israel, secure in the knowledge that the United States has no stomach for a wider war.

Congressional offices on Capitol Hill are reporting phone calls coming in at a rate of more than 200 to 1 against approving Obama’s plan to attack Syria. Republican and Democrats alike are being bombarded with negative responses from their constituents. Still, there are those among the insulated legislative class — John McCain, Lindsay Graham, John Boehner, etc. — who have not gotten the message that the American people are about as enthusiastic about Obama’s proposed war plans as they are about undergoing a quadruple root canal. In fact the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to approve a resolution to allow Obama to use force.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading....

90,473,000: Record Number Not in Labor Force--Up Almost 10M Under Obama

(CNSNews.com) - The number of Americans who are 16 years or older and who have decided not to participate in the nation's labor force has pushed past 90,000,000 for the first time, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The BLS counts a person as participating in the labor force if they are 16 years or older and either have a job or have actively sought a job in the last four weeks. A person is not participating in the labor force if they are 16 or older and have not sought a job in the last four weeks.

In July, according to BLS, 89,957,000 Americans did not participate in the labor force. In August, that climbed to 90,473,000--a one month increase of 516,000.

In January 2009, when President Barack Obama took office, there were 80,507,000 Americans not in the labor force. Thus, the number of Americans not in the labor force has increased by 9,966,000 during Obama's presidency.

Part of the increase in the number Americans not participating in the labor force can be explained by Baby Boomers reaching retirement age and deciding to stop working--and not be replaced by an equal number of younger people reaching age 16 and thus becoming part of the BLS labor force population.

Via: CNS News

Continue Reading....

Obama's lobbying organization: We will not engage in Syria debate

The director of President Obama's political arm, Organizing for Action, confirmed to supporters that the group will not lobby on the president's behalf in the debate over whether the U.S. should strike Syria.

OFA Executive Director Jon Carson acknowledged in a conference call Tuesday that many of the group's volunteers have raised the issue of Syria since Obama over the weekend announced that he would seek congressional authorization for the strike. But OFA, Obama's most potent lobbying apparatus, has decided to sit out the Syria debate, Carson said.

There was speculation that OFA, which has mobilized millions of supporters and volunteers on Obama's behalf on issues ranging from immigration to gun control, wasn't being used to lobby for an intervention in Syria because so many of Obama's liberal supporters object to his taking military action in another Middle Eastern country, as does most of the general public.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading...

13 Relevant Reports at AP's National Site Fail to Quote Obama's 'I Didn't Set a Red Line' Statement

Yesterday in Stockholm at the G20 summit, President Barack Obama said the following in regards to the use of chemical weapons in warfare: "I didn't set a red line. The world set a red line." For years, the press obsessed over the alleged untruthfulness of President George W. Bush's "16 words" ("The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa") in his 2003 State of the Union address. Today, the Associated Press won't even directly quote the first six of Obama's.

Regardless of whether one thinks that Obama's statement is an attempt to abdicate personal responsibility for his original "red line" (i.e., in the sand) statement a year ago or an assertion that his year-ago statement merely affirmed what the rest of the world believes, it's news, and should be presented to the nation's readers and viewers in quotes. But not at the Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press, which is barely recognizing the existence of the "red line" at all.

Here are relevant passages from an AP report on yesterday's war resolution committee vote in the U.S. Senate currently time-stamped early this morning by Donna Cassata with the help of eight other AP reporters:

DIVIDED VOTE FORESHADOWS OBAMA CHALLENGE ON SYRIA

... Speaking in Sweden on Wednesday, Obama left open the possibility he would order retaliation for the deadly chemical weapons attack even if Congress withheld its approval. "

I always preserve the right and responsibility to act on behalf of America's national security," he told a news conference. In a challenge to lawmakers back home, he said Congress' credibility was on the line, not his own, despite saying a year ago that the use of chemical weapons would cross a "red line."

The Senate panel's vote marked the first formal response in Congress, four days after Obama unexpectedly put off an anticipated cruise missile strike against Syria and instead asked lawmakers to unite behind such a plan.

Via: Newbusters 

Continue Reading....

COMMUNITY ORGANIZER GOES TO WAR By: Ann Coulter

Oh, how I long for the days when liberals wailed that “the rest of the world” hated America, rather than now, when the rest of the world laughs at us.

With the vast majority of Americans opposing a strike against Syria, President Obama has requested that Congress vote on his powers as commander in chief under the Constitution. The president doesn’t need congressional approval to shoot a few missiles into Syria, nor — amazingly — has he said he’ll abide by such a vote, anyway.

Why is Congress even having a vote? This is nothing but a fig leaf to cover Obama’s own idiotic “red line” ultimatum to President Bashar al-Assad of Syria on chemical weapons. The Nobel Peace Prize winner needs to get Congress on the record so that whatever happens, the media can blame Republicans.

No Republican who thinks seriously about America’s national security interests — by which I mean to exclude John McCain and Lindsey Graham — can support Obama’s “plan” to shoot blindly into this hornet’s nest.

It would be completely different if we knew with absolute certainty that Assad was responsible for chemical attacks on his own people. (I’m still waiting to see if it was a Syrian upset about a YouTube video.)

Via: Human Events

Continue Reading....