Obama’s New Marching Orders: “Get In Their Face”!

Until now, Obama has only sent out marching orders to his “digital brownshirts”, people who hide behind a computer screen. This is how it’s worked, as described by The Washington Times:

A message goes out over Barack Obama’s Web site with the names, phone numbers and e-mails of editors and producers foolish enough to host Obama critics. With Mr. Obama’s extensive digital following, and his extensive fund-raising and contact lists, shutting up the Democratic nominee’s critics with a fraction of Mr. Obama’s millions of supporters is relatively simple. The digital legions plug phone lines, crash servers and intimidate the advertisers of these media outlets. This must be another instance of the “new” politics that Mr. Obama frequently talks about.

The latest incident, reported in the Chicago Tribune, “orchestrated a massive stream of complaints on the phone lines of Tribune Co.-owned WGN-AM in Chicago. “The offense: The station hosted National Review’s David Freddoso, author of ‘The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media’s Favorite Candidate,’ a fair and rigorous but adversarial examination of Mr. Obama’s record. Surely, we can’t have any of that.

Now Obama is sounding a new call:

“I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face,” he said.

“And if they tell you that, ‘Well, we’re not sure where he stands on guns.’ I want you to say, ‘He believes in the Second Amendment.‘ If they tell you, ‘Well, he’s going to raise your taxes,’ you say, ‘No, he’s not, he’s going lower them.’ You are my ambassadors. You guys are the ones who can make the case.”

Well, if the Obamabots are going to be armed with Obama’s dishonest spin, to wreak havoc across the country, like the flying monkeys in the The Wizard Of Oz, it’s only fair that we be armed with the facts to dispute their spin. Because with Obama…it’s ALL spin…always. He does not have the facts on his side.

What basis is there for voters to believe that Obama would protect the second amendment? He has obviously tried to project a moderate position on gun control during his presidential campaign. But as always, with Obama, you have to look at his record on gun control to find the truth.

Obama did endorse the Il handgun ban.

A 1996 questionnaire put out by a voting group offers better insight to Obama’s actual position:

Both versions of the 1996 questionnaires provide answers his presidential campaign disavows to questions about whether Obama supports capital punishment and state legislation to “ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.”

He responded simply “No” and “Yes,” respectively, to those questions on both questionnaires.

Obama doesn’t say he changed his mind. He blames staffers for filling out the form for him with liberal views not his own, even though an amended version of the questionnaire contains Obama’s own handwritten notes added to one answer.

This is a dishonest man, people!

Obama tells his minions to parrot the spin that he’s going to lower taxes?


No, really?

Seriously, he might want to inform his V.P. choice  about his plan to lower taxes, because Biden is running around saying that paying more in taxes is the patriotic thing to do:

Biden said: “It’s time to be patriotic … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”

YEEHAW!!! Baseball, hot-dogs, apple pie, and higher taxes!

Of course he will raise taxes.

He proposes to lower some taxes while raising others. That’s what socialists do. It’s called redistribution of wealth, or as Biden says:

We want to take money (from those awful awful rich folks) and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people.”

Here’s how progressive the tax law already is:

  • According to data from the IRS, the bottom 50 percent of income earners pay approximately 4 percent of income taxes.
  • The top 25 percent of income earners pay nearly 83 percent of the income tax burden, and the top 10 percent pay 65 percent.
  • The top 1 percent of income earners pay almost 35 percent of all income taxes.
  • The top 400 richest Americans paid 1.58 of total income taxes in 2000.

Socialists are liars, because to them, the end justifies the means. Can you say Saul Alinsky?

Intriguing thought: Ace wonders if the guy who hacked into Governor Palin’s email account is one of Obama’s loyal cultists, “inspired by the Obama Action Wire tactics to commit a crime on behalf of his God”.


Barack Obama has the unmitigated gall to mock McCain, in the wake of the Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac debacle, for bragging “about how as chairman of the Commerce Committee in the Senate, he had oversight of every part of the economy”, while at the same time, Obama himself took an outrageous amount of campaign contributions from them:

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (were) started by the Clinton Administration. Two senators received more campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than all others from 1989 – 2008. Number 1 – Senator Chris Dodd (D). . . .Number 2 – Senator John Kerry (D). . . . Number 3 – Senator Barack Obama (D) . . .How did Barack Obama do this after only four years as a senator?

McCain, on the other hand, tried to sound the alarm about these companies three years ago:

Which candidate foresaw the credit crisis and tried to do something about it?  As it turns out, John McCain did — and partnered with three other Senate Republicans to reform the government’s involvement in lending three years ago, after an attempt by the Bush administration died in Congress two years earlier.

Do they really want to get into a discussion about Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac?

Get in my face, Obamonkeys….MAKE MY DAY!


See RightWingSparkle for more about Obama, and his track record on guns.

20 thoughts on “Obama’s New Marching Orders: “Get In Their Face”!

  1. You have zero credibility. You refute that Obama will lower taxes by pointing to articles that say he’ll raise taxes on the top few percent of earners. Just confirming exactly what he’s been saying, tax cut for about 95% of Americans. You’re an ass.


  2. Seems to me they have not been well equipped. Nobody has eveh changed their mind because somebody got in their face. New information is needed or a different understanding of the information they have.

    Linked to your post from Make coffee, Obama supporter may come for a visit, invite them in, listen then share

    Obama has sent out his supporters to canvas door to door, to get in peoples faces. Great opportunity for a sit down, using Christian principles; give them blessings, coffee, offer them something to eat. Evangelistic missionaries have often noticed that after you let somebody talk first about what they believe and you listen contently, that they become open to listen to what you have to say. Turn away anger with kindness, respect, and by listening.


  3. “You have zero credibility. You refute that Obama will lower taxes by pointing to articles that say he’ll raise taxes on the top few percent of earners. Just confirming exactly what he’s been saying, tax cut for about 95% of Americans. You’re an ass.”

    You have zero credibility, you’re an ass. He’s saying that he wants to spend all of this money and pay for it by taxing the rich. Well here’s the deal, the rich have their ways of getting out of paying taxes, and by that time the money’s already spent. So taxes go up for… the middle class. It will happen under Obama, and he’ll have no problem doing it because his constituants, when he’s not in Hollywood, are the super poor. So to their way of thinking the middle class is rich.

    All that he’s going to do by taxing the rich is to discourage investment. Period, end of story. Obama will ruin the economy even further.

    Mccain/Palin 08.


  4. If the truth is not your barometer for credibility, than I guess it can be said that I have none. But when Obama tells people he will not raise their taxes, but will in fact lower them (HA!), when actually he plans on increasing taxes on an already overtaxed segment of society, that’s what most of us call a lie.

    You do realize that Obama wants to increase spending, by at least a trillion dollars over ten years.

    You actually believe he can do that while cutting your taxes?

    An analysis:

    Depending on the math you choose to believe, Obama will need to cough up at least $4.5 trillion and as much as $6.3 trillion to pay for the costs of his spending and tax cuts.

    Given that Obama has yet to identify $4 -6 trillion in unnecessary government spending, he will be forced by standard Democratic pay-go rules to break his promise to provide tax cuts for 95% of families.

    According to one Republican analysis, Obama will need to raise taxes 61% on those earning over $62,000 if he expects to balance the budget while keeping his promise to increase spending.

    Clearly, Obama cannot keep his fiscal promises because he cannot cut taxes, increase spending and balance the budget. To cut taxes, he will have to abandon either his plans to increase spending and/or balance the budget. To provide universal health care, he will need to break his promise to provide middle class tax cuts and/or balance the budget. To balance the budget, he will probably need to abandon his tax plan and/or his promise for universal health.


    Obama’s a snake oil salesman, in other words.

    The WSJ:

    Barack Obama’s tax plan is the opposite of supply-side economics. He proposes to raise marginal rates for just about every federal tax. He also proposes a raft of tax credits that taxpayers can receive if they engage in various government-specified activities.

    Moreover, the tax credits would mostly go to those who pay little or nothing in federal income taxes. His trick is to make the tax credits “refundable.” Thus, if the tax credit is for $1,000, but the taxpayer would otherwise only pay $200 in taxes, the government would write a check to the taxpayer for $800. If the taxpayer pays nothing in federal income taxes, the government would pay him the whole $1,000.

    Such credits are not tax cuts. Indeed, they should be called The New Tax Welfare. In effect, Mr. Obama is proposing to create or expand a slew of government spending programs that are disguised as tax credits. The spending on these programs is then subtracted from the total tax burden, in order to make the claim that his tax plan is a net tax cut overall.


    McCain/Palin promise to cut spending, and not raise taxes, a much more fiscally responsible plan.


  5. As someone who employs others and lives a dual income, no children lifestyle, I can attest, if my taxes are raised any more I will join the rest of the so called “rich” and move my company, my employees and my money offshore. It’s easy, it’s legal and it’s done every single day. Everyone I know in my situation will do the same and we will no longer employ people in the U.S. because we don’t *have* to we *choose* to.

    It’s not up to me to support everyone else’s “dream”. And if you expect that, then maybe you should ask yourself how you’d feel supporting my dream of business ownership because I certainly don’t get any additional tax breaks from owning one. Small businesses are what drive our nation and what employs the huge majority of people. I started a business because I used to enjoy helping others and training and employing them. I’m losing that joy a little more each year as people hold out their hands for more and more and I’m left figuring out how to fund it.

    Check out where the wealthiest individuals in the U.S. stash their money– Foundations, Trusts, Non-Profit Orgs., LLCs. They aren’t going to pay the tax increases. YOU are. Face the truth. It’s a global world – that’s what everyone wanted right?


  6. Well, this is interesting. I mean – the essay is hilarious and on the money. But the follow up is interesting. Everything from Christian love… to scorn… to “you’re an ass”.

    I’m a little weary of Dems – particularly folks like Biden – using Jesus and patriotism to shame the rest of the country into doing what they aren’t willing to do themselves: give.

    Biden has given to the tune of $3k over the last, what… 10 years? in charitable contributions. Rangle avoids taxes altogether, accepts cheap rent from a campaign donor, abuses his parking privileges, and could have sold that unused Mercedes… donated the proceeds to Katrina victims or just donated the car itself. And that’s just what’s in the news THIS week.

    So I guess I see Biden challenging my patriotism because I don’t WANT to choose between closing my small business or paying higher taxes to pad all the new social programs the are sure to follow in his administration… like teaching 2nd graders how to properly unroll a condom ( you know… just in case 10 years from now it comes up – no pun intended).

    Listening to the the Democrats lecturing on giving and patriotism is much like listening to a Sunday morning sermon from Jimmy Swaggart sermon after he’s spent the night at the Bunny Ranch.


  7. Pingback: Obama Cultist Gets In Veteran’s Face « Nice Deb

  8. Pingback: Time To Quash The Angry Republican Mob Myth, Right Now « Nice Deb

  9. There’s too much half truth making to argue it all in one post, so let me just take on three things. One, McCain’s entire staff is comprised of lobbyists, like Rick Davis, who was receiving checks from Fannie and Freddie as of two months ago, against McCain’s own internal rules. The financial sector contributes to who they believe has the best chance of winning, hence the Democrats. However, that’s recently. Since 1989, it’s been the Republicans who’ve been the beneficiaries.

    (look at second chart)

    Secondly, there has already been a redistribution of wealth, from the middle class to the top. The middle class has shrunk since the last eight years, and six out eight of those, the Republicans have been solidly in charge of every branch of government. This reverses the trend of the previous, Democratic administration. During the supposed glory days of America, the upper tax rate was 90%. And corporations have all kinds of ways of getting out of paying ANY taxes today. As for Biden, IMO, he chose his words poorly. But to be fair, he was talking about the elite in society, people who are already well off, and see it as a way of giving back to the country. You, of course, will say that it should be your choice in how much and what fashion you give back. Fair enough, but that was the context, and you failed to mention it.

    Lastly, rhetoric of a fired up nature takes place in a campaign. What he means by getting in people’s faces and what you think he means are different things. But if you really believe that, then I sincerely hope you castigate your own candidate when he says things like “I’m going to whip his you know what.”


  10. Bailout 2008, a poem by David Jeffrey:

    Like a bloodied warrior,
    laying broken and torn.

    Like a dying soldier, hopeless and forlorn.

    But the blood, it be green,
    the color of money.

    And the soldier is an economy,
    and it is anything but funny.

    Broken are it’s people and shattered are their dreams.

    Thanks to the ultra rich and their full proof schemes.

    It is a tragedy with more pain to come.

    Finance will be Hell, and their wills will be done.


  11. Pingback: Do “We the People” have the right of Revolution? « Coach is Right

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s