The Political Battlefield/Knowing Your Enemy

Inside information is making millions!

2009-11-18T08:10:00.001-06:00

watch this video and see how people are getting rich during a catastrophe..........

http://w3.newsmax.com/newsletters/mmi/offer1.cfm?s=al&promo_code=915A-1

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

2009-11-06T19:33:00.000-06:00

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

Nobody Remembers Obama at Columbia

2009-10-30T07:38:00.000-05:00

NOBODY REMEMBERS OBAMA AT COLUMBIA ( But heck, we're all just racist birthers...yea right! )

antimullah.com ^ | 10/18/2009 | Alan Peters

Looking for evidence of Obama's past, Fox News contacted 400 Columbia University students from the period when Obama claims to have been there, but none remembered him. Wayne Allyn Root was, like Obama, a political science major at Columbia who also graduated in 1983. In 2008, Root says of Obama, "I don't know a single person at Columbia that knew him, and they all know me.I don't have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia.

Ever! Nobody recalls him. I'm not exaggerating, I'm not kidding." Root adds that he was also, like Obama, "Class of '83 political science, pre-law" and says, "You don't get more exact or closer than that. Never met him in my life, don't know anyone who ever met him. At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me.

No one ever heard of Barack! And five years ago, nobody even knew who he was. The guy who writes the class notes, who's kind of the, as we say in New York, the macha who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him. Is that not strange?

It's very strange." Obama's photograph does not appear in the school's yearbook and Obama consistently declines requests to talk about his years at Columbia, provide school records, or provide the name of any former classmates or friends while at Columbia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Allyn_Root#column-one

NOTE: Root graduated as Valedictorian from his high school, Thornton-Donovan School, then graduated from Columbia University in 1983 as a Political Science major (in the same class as President Barack Obama WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN IN)

Video: 7 Lies In Under 2 Minutes

2009-10-30T07:34:00.000-05:00

This is unbelievable

Video: 7 Lies In Under 2 Minutes

Telegraph.co.uk says Obama needs to start governing and stop campaigning

2009-10-25T12:36:00.000-05:00

Barack Obama must stop campaigning and start governing

President Barack Obama still steems to be running for office, rather than running the country, says Toby Harnden

By Toby Harnden
Published: 3:55PM BST 24 Oct 2009
Comments 114 | Comment on this article

Barack Obama retains the style of a campaigner, even in office Photo: GETTY

Perhaps we should not be surprised that the land of the permanent campaign has produced a president like Barack Obama. During his White House bid, Mr Obama's staff argued that his masterful oversight of the machinery that ultimately got him elected was his highest achievement.
In many respects this was true, though Mr Obama was more chairman than CEO. Even Republican political operatives acknowledge that the Obama '08 campaign was a thing of beauty.

Essentially, however, Mr Obama won because of his persona – post-racial, healing, cool, articulate and inspirational. In a sense, therefore, his greatest achievement in life is being Barack Obama. Or the campaign version, at least.
Therein lies the problem. While campaigning could centre around soaring rhetoric, governing is altogether messier. It involves tough, unpopular choices and cutting deals with opponents. It requires doing things rather than talking about them, let alone just being.
Mr Obama is showing little appetite for this. Instead of being the commander-in-chief, he is the campaigner-in-chief.
After a disastrous summer that saw his approval rating drop more than any other president at the same stage since Harry Truman in 1953, Mr Obama has temporarily abandoned the campaign-style events promoting his stalled health-care reform initiative.
Now, he is stumping for Democratic candidates in states he won last year but which are now in danger. Last Wednesday in Hackensack, Mr Obama took to the stage to proclaim: "Your voice can change the world. Your voice can elect Jon Corzine, governor once again of New Jersey." Change the world? Mr Corzine is a former Goldman Sachs executive whose political career was launched when he spent $57 million of his own money on a Senate seat in 2000.
The rally was an attempted 2008 reprise. There was the spontaneous (or not) cry of "I love you!" bashfully acknowledged by Mr Obama with a "I love you back."
There were the Obama-led chants of "Fired up! Ready to go!" and the ubiquitous "Yes We Can" signs.
And as he always does, Mr Obama blamed every economic woe on the Bush years, conveniently forgetting that Republicans are no longer in office and it's been his mess for nine months now.
Campaigning and raising cash is what Mr Obama does best. Next week's fundraising events in Florida and Virginia will bring to 24 the number of such functions he had headlined since entering office in January. During his first year in office, Mr Bush attended just six fundraisers.
Just as instructive is Mr Obama's war on the cable channel Fox News.
Everyone knows that Fox leans Right and contains some of the most virulent critics of the president. Most prominent is Fox's weeping, ranting Glenn Beck, who fulminated bizarrely in July that Mr Obama "has a deep-seated hatred for white people".
Rather than ignoring or even repudiating Fox commentators, the White House has instead sought to marginalise Fox News in its entirety. Top Obama aide David Axelrod even lectured that Fox was not a news organisation and the rest of the media "ought not to treat them that way".
This was the same Mr Axelrod who advised Mr Obama in a 2006 campaign memo: "You care far too much what is written and said about you."
Also in the doghouse is the US Chamber of Commerce, which Obama aides have branded as representing "special interests" and a Bush agenda. Never mind that moderate Democratic candidates across the country proudly tout endorsements for the Chamber, which is hardly part of any radical Republican fringe.
All this says much about Mr Obama's priorities at a time when he is sitting on an urgent request for 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan, seemingly unsure about whether the counter-insurgency strategy he announced in March is the right one.
Late-night comics, although unabashedly liberal and at a loss last year as to how to poke fun at the rather humourless Mr Obama, are having a field day portraying him as a do-nothing prevaricator obsessed with his own image.
"President Obama agreed to commit an additional 40,000 troops to help fight Fox News," quipped NBC's Jay Leno. "Senior White House adviser David Axelrod told reporters that Fox News is just pushing a point of view. Well, yes, but at least they've got a point of view." Mr Obama was elected on a promise of being post-partisan to Washington and transforming the country. Thus far, he has won the support of only a single Republican for his health-care plan and has shown himself to be as aggressive a Democratic partisan in office as anyone in the fabled Clinton war room.
Beyond the grand announcements, fine speeches and his eager acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr Obama has yet to achieve anything of substance. It is time for the campaign to end.

White House attack on Fox backfires

2009-10-25T12:16:00.000-05:00

Why the White House attack on Fox is backfiring

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
10/21/09 10:14 AM EDT

There seems to be general agreement that the Obama White House's campaign against Fox News is actually directed at other news organizations -- to "get other journalists to think twice before following [Fox's] stories in their own coverage," according to an article in the Politico. Fox is beyond the pale, the White House is telling the press corps: You wouldn't want to have anything to do with that, would you?
But the White House campaign appears to be backfiring. A number of mainstream journalists are reacting badly to the attempt to declare a journalistic organization off-limits. Why the negative reaction? Is it because of solidarity among reporters? A reflexive defense of freedom of the press? Secret sympathy for Fox?
None of the above. The real reason the White House campaign is backfiring is that it offends journalistic self-esteem.
Most mainstream reporters are already ignoring stories critical of the Obama administration that Fox plays up. They famously stayed away from the Van Jones story, and the ACORN story, too, for as long as possible. They were doing exactly what the White House wanted, but they believed they were doing it for sound journalistic reasons, not as the result of any bias, and certainly not as the result of any directive from the White House.
Now, when the White House takes the too-obvious step of actually issuing them marching orders, they recoil. Such orders are an insult to their image of themselves as tough-but-fair journalists. Even if they were completely in the tank -- remember when Obama told them, "Most of you covered me; all of you voted for me" -- their most cherished image of themselves is of savvy, straight-shooting reporters, not taken in by the spin and talking points of the officials they cover.
The anti-Fox campaign offends that sense of self-esteem in the clumsiest way possible. That's why it's backfiring.

Current health care provider profits much lower than assumed

2009-10-25T11:02:00.000-05:00

By CALVIN WOODWARD, Associated Press Writer Calvin Woodward, Associated Press Writer – 27 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Quick quiz: What do these enterprises have in common? Farm and construction machinery, Tupperware, the railroads, Hershey sweets, Yum food brands and Yahoo? Answer: They're all more profitable than the health insurance industry.
In the health care debate, Democrats and their allies have gone after insurance companies as rapacious profiteers making "immoral" and "obscene" returns while "the bodies pile up."
Ledgers tell a different reality. Health insurance profit margins typically run about 6 percent, give or take a point or two. That's anemic compared with other forms of insurance and a broad array of industries, even some beleaguered ones.
Profits barely exceeded 2 percent of revenues in the latest annual measure. This partly explains why the credit ratings of some of the largest insurers were downgraded to negative from stable heading into this year, as investors were warned of a stagnant if not shrinking market for private plans.
Insurers are an expedient target for leaders who want a government-run plan in the marketplace. Such a public option would force private insurers to trim profits and restrain premiums to compete, the argument goes. This would "keep insurance companies honest," says President Barack Obama.
The debate is loaded with intimations that insurers are less than straight, when they are not flatly accused of malfeasance.
They may not have helped their case by commissioning a report that looked primarily at the elements of health care legislation that might drive consumer costs up while ignoring elements aimed at bringing costs down. Few in the debate seem interested in a true balance sheet.
But in pillorying insurers over profits, the critics are on shaky ground. A look at some claims, and the numbers:
THE CLAIMS
_"I'm very pleased that (Democratic leaders) will be talking, too, about the immoral profits being made by the insurance industry and how those profits have increased in the Bush years." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who also welcomed the attention being drawn to insurers' "obscene profits."
_"Keeping the status quo may be what the insurance industry wants their premiums have more than doubled in the last decade and their profits have skyrocketed." Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, member of the Democratic leadership.
_"Health insurance companies are willing to let the bodies pile up as long as their profits are safe." A MoveOn.org ad.
THE NUMBERS:
Health insurers posted a 2.2 percent profit margin last year, placing them 35th on the Fortune 500 list of top industries. As is typical, other health sectors did much better — drugs and medical products and services were both in the top 10.
The railroads brought in a 12.6 percent profit margin. Leading the list: network and other communications equipment, at 20.4 percent.
HealthSpring, the best performer in the health insurance industry, posted 5.4 percent. That's a less profitable margin than was achieved by the makers of Tupperware, Clorox bleach and Molson and Coors beers.
The star among the health insurance companies did, however, nose out Jack in the Box restaurants, which only achieved a 4 percent margin.
UnitedHealth Group, reporting third quarter results last week, saw fortunes improve. It managed a 5 percent profit margin on an 8 percent growth in revenue.
Van Hollen is right that premiums have more than doubled in a decade, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study that found a 131 percent increase.
But were the Bush years golden ones for health insurers?
Not judging by profit margins, profit growth or returns to shareholders. The industry's overall profits grew only 8.8 percent from 2003 to 2008, and its margins year to year, from 2005 forward, never cracked 8 percent.
The latest annual profit margins of a selection of products, services and industries: Tupperware Brands, 7.5 percent; Yahoo, 5.9 percent; Hershey, 6.1 percent; Clorox, 8.7 percent; Molson Coors Brewing, 8.1 percent; construction and farm machinery, 5 percent; Yum Brands (think KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell), 8.5 percent.
___
Associated Press writer Tom Murphy in Indianapolis contributed to this report.

Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

2009-10-24T15:44:00.000-05:00

The GOP advantage over Democrats increased from two points to five in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 42% would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate while 37% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent.

Support for Democrats dropped two points this week, while support for the GOP slightly increased.

Voters not affiliated with either party heavily favor the GOP, 40% to 23%.

Current approval ratings

2009-10-22T10:18:00.000-05:00

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 26% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. That’s the lowest level of Strong Approval yet measured for this President. Thirty-nine percent (39%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -13 (see trends).

For the first time during Obama’s time in office, the Approval Index has been in negative double digits for seven straight days. Fifty percent (50%) of Democrats Strongly Approve while 66% of Republicans Strongly Disapprove of his performance. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 18% Strongly Approve and 42% Strongly Disapprove.

As Americans feel the squeeze of an ever dwindling economy our administration works on campaign funds for it's Democratic party. Afghanistan goes on the "back burner" and the truth is understated by the liberal media.

How much can America take?

2009-10-22T10:12:00.000-05:00

How much more "change" can America take before we're a 3rd world country? The current administration has done nothing to soften the impact of the impending hyper inflation that even warren Buffet says will cripple America even further. Irresponsible spending has reaped no rewards or positive results.

WASHINGTON – The Democrats' control of a hefty majority in the Senate — plus the House — would suggest that President Barack Obama is within reach of overhauling the nation's health care system this fall.

But the numbers mask a more complicated reality: Obama and Democratic leaders have modest leverage over several pivotal Senate Democrats who are more concerned about their next election or feel they have little to lose by opposing their party's hierarchy.

One is still smarting from being forced to abandon next year's election. Another had to leave the Democratic Party to stay in office. And some are from states that Obama lost badly last year.

These factors will limit the president's ability to play his strongest card — an appeal for party loyalty and Democratic achievement — in trying to muster the 60 votes his allies will need this fall to overcome a Republican filibuster in the 100-member Senate.

When lawmakers face a tough vote, their uppermost thought is "survival," said Alan Simpson, a Wyoming Republican who spent three terms in the Senate.

On a very few occasions, Simpson said, then-President George H.W. Bush asked him to cast a vote likely to cause him political problems back home. That was perhaps three times in 18 years, said Simpson, who held a GOP leadership post. "I swallowed hard and went over the cliff," he said.

But it's a sacrifice that presidents and party leaders should not count on, he said.

The Democratic leaders' limited leverage will complicate the push for allowing the government to sell insurance in competition with private companies. Some Senate Democrats who oppose the idea are from states that voted heavily against Obama last fall.

Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln faces a potentially tough re-election race next year in Arkansas, where Obama lost to Republican John McCain by 20 percentage points. She says she will base her health care votes on what is best for Arkansans.

Choice and competition among insurers are good, Lincoln said, but "I've ruled out a government-funded and a government-operated plan."

Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, where Obama lost by a similar margin, said she might be willing to let some states try "fallback or trigger" mechanisms that would create a public option if residents don't have enough insurance choices.

But she told reporters, "I'm not for a government-run, national, taxpayer-subsidized plan, and never will be."

Another Democratic senator, who also may prove wary of Obama's overtures, takes the opposite stand.

"I would not support a bill that does not have a public option," said Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill. "That position will not change."

Burris' willingness to bend could prove crucial this fall if Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., need every possible vote in crafting a compromise, such as a national public option that is triggered if certain insurance availability targets aren't met.

But Burris may be in no mood to play ball. Obama and other top Democrats sharply criticized his appointment to the Senate in December by an ethically tainted governor, Illinois' Rod Blagojevich, and they forced Burris to abandon hopes of winning election in 2010 by making it clear they would not back him.

In short, Burris, 72, has virtually nothing to lose by defying his party's leaders and voting as he pleases.

Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut is another potentially crucial senator with tenuous ties to the Democratic Party's hierarchy. Rejected by Connecticut's Democratic voters in the 2006 primary, he kept his Senate seat by running as an independent. He now calls himself an Independent Democrat.

Lieberman has criticized the health care bill that emerged from the Senate Finance Committee, but it and other health bills are undergoing changes.

Another centrist Democrat whose vote is uncertain is Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, a political battleground state.

"I want to know what works for families and small businesses," said Bayh, adding that he might back public insurance options run by states, not the federal government.

It's possible that Obama and party leaders eventually will ask Democrats such as Bayh, in the name of party loyalty, to vote to block a GOP filibuster of a health bill even if they plan to vote against the bill on final passage. The strategy might enable Democrats to muster the 60 votes needed on a crucial procedural question and then pass the bill with a simple majority.

Bayh said that if a party leader "is asking some of us to enable the passage of legislation that we think would be harmful to the people of our state, I don't think that's a fair thing to ask."

It's possible that centrist Democrats are holding out for favors from Obama and party leaders, such as pet projects for their states or help in their next campaign. Obama already has lavished special attention on some of them.

He invited Bayh to the White House last week for a chat about health care and the deficit. In an interview that led to good publicity back home, Bayh told Indiana reporters that the president "was asking for my leadership on both of those issues."

The Political Battlefield/Knowing Your Enemy

Inside information is making millions!

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

Nobody Remembers Obama at Columbia

Video: 7 Lies In Under 2 Minutes

Telegraph.co.uk says Obama needs to start governing and stop campaigning

Barack Obama must stop campaigning and start governing

President Barack Obama still steems to be running for office, rather than running the country, says Toby Harnden

Related Articles

Obama declares national emergency over swine flu

Worrying rise of Obama’s Mr Wrong

Iranian blow to Obama's diplomatic approach

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton unite at last

President Barack Obama tells Europe it must contribute more to the fight against terror

Confident Clinton vows to fight to the bitter end

White House attack on Fox backfires

Why the White House attack on Fox is backfiring

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
10/21/09 10:14 AM EDT

Current health care provider profits much lower than assumed

Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Current approval ratings

How much can America take?

The Political Battlefield/Knowing Your Enemy

Inside information is making millions!

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

Nobody Remembers Obama at Columbia

Video: 7 Lies In Under 2 Minutes

Telegraph.co.uk says Obama needs to start governing and stop campaigning

Barack Obama must stop campaigning and start governing

President Barack Obama still steems to be running for office, rather than running the country, says Toby Harnden

Related Articles

Obama declares national emergency over swine flu

Worrying rise of Obama’s Mr Wrong

Iranian blow to Obama's diplomatic approach

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton unite at last

President Barack Obama tells Europe it must contribute more to the fight against terror

Confident Clinton vows to fight to the bitter end

White House attack on Fox backfires

Why the White House attack on Fox is backfiring

By: Byron York Chief Political Correspondent 10/21/09 10:14 AM EDT

Current health care provider profits much lower than assumed

Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Current approval ratings

How much can America take?

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
10/21/09 10:14 AM EDT