Normally, I don't copy and paste articles into my blog form. I even put that in my blogger profile. I usually would rather offer my own thoughts, however disjointed and illogical they may be, and let the chips fall where they may.
That said, this article nailed Obama more accurately than anything I've ever read. Andrew Cline is dead on in his assessment of Barack Hussein Obama.
So, with the readers indulgence, here's a teaser for you offered in the hope it will entice you to read further:
"Patience, Obama repeatedly said. Patience. Fixing the enormous mistakes of the Bush years would take time. There would be no quick fix. Don't look for immediate results, keep gazing into the horizon. Here, I'll show you how, just tilt your head this way, slightly squint your eyes… there, now hold that position for the next three years.
Then, without warning, a pocket of methane gas exploded on an oil rig roughly 50 miles offshore. Suddenly we had a crisis that demanded a real-time solution, not a promise of rewards to be reaped after the next election."
I couldn't say it any better.
Cross posted at Casting Pearls Before Swine
sometimes you just have to pass along those gems!
ReplyDeleteHope you're having an amazing Holiday weekend!!
I've said it before, and I'm saying it again...
ReplyDeleteThe most dangerous president in roughly a hundred years. The greatest danger to American liberty since presidents Woodrow Wilson, and FDR. And as difficult as it is to imagine, a worse presidency than even Jimmy Carter's.
In addition to banning everyone on government assistance from the polls, perhaps we should raise the voting age to 30? Because if this is what we can expect from the 'youth vote' I'm all for asking the 'youth' to wait until they have some life perspective before being allowed a vote (provided they're not on welfare).
ReplyDeleteIs that radical enough for you? Is it any more radical than what Obama is trying to do to this country... strike that: he's not trying to do anything, he's ACCOMPLISHING.
Take Back America, folks! November 2, 2010. Get out and vote... unless, that is, you're on welfare.
One downside, Eric. Some of those currently on welfare are among those who have been unable, not unwilling, to find work. Many take whatever available, even if it's part-time or temporary, and then they have to go back on hand-outs. If this were ten years ago or more, I would possibly feel the same about those on welfare or other forms of gov't assistance. Not so much now.
ReplyDeleteTrue enough. My only concern is the moocher class who derive their total subsistence from the government; they have nothing invested in their country-- just their hands out. These folk will never vote for what's best for the nation, but rather, will vote time and again for whomever promises them the most 'you-don't-have-to-provide-for-yourselves' perks.
ReplyDeleteAnother downside (and a bit tangential), and true. Assistant managers at the south-side Wal Mart Supercenter (Dothan, AL) all make, upon hire, a minimum of 35k a year. And yet each one of them, through Wal Mart, have EBT cards. I make less than 20k a year and I can't get EBT. But Wal Mart can game the system and get their minimum 35k-a-year assistant managers government assistance? My tax-dollars mismanaged by government. Again. And no, I'm not surprised.