ObamAcorn America

GAH!

acorn-sunrise

I wish I could say this is one of Michelle Malkin’s cute ACORN photoshops, but noooo, I found this disturbing image at ACORN’s own website where they announce their latest efforts to bully companies into complying with Obama’s plan to prevent foreclosures:

In the first effort of its kind, ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) surveyed all major mortgage servicing companies in the nation, and has found that at least 76% of outstanding mortgage loans are serviced by companies who have committed to implementing the Obama plan. ACORN expects further progress in the coming weeks as the Obama Administration releases the contracts mortgage servicing companies will sign to participate in the program. ACORN will continue to encourage all mortgage servicers to join the program, with plans to target those outlier companies that refuse to engage in sensible foreclosure prevention.

Other ACORN actions include:

Tell Your Senator to Support President Obama’s 2010 Budget!

Call on Homeland Sec. to Suspend Sheriff Arpaio’s 287g Agreement

Be a Home Defender

Tell Your Senator to Support the Job and Economic Recovery Bill

Stop Foreclosures for Real Economic Recovery

Urge Your Representative to Make Bankruptcy Laws Fair to Protect Homeownership

Needless to say, patriotic Americans should do the exact opposite of what ACORN suggests. Tell your Senator to not support Obama’s budget. Tell Your Senator to not support Obama’s ruinous bills. Support Sheriff Joe Arpaio. If you see any “home defenders” in your neighborhood, call the cops, etc.

Hat tip: Atlas Shrugs.

RELATED:

Report:

More than half the voter registrations turned in by ACORN canvassers during the last election were not valid, according to testimony to be presented before a House Judiciary subcommittee.

Anyone surprised?

If a canvasser was caught committing fraud, ACORN threw the individual “under the bus,” MonCrief said. ACORN employees were briefed on how to deny that voter registration fraud existed, she said.

According to MonCrief, the Obama presidential campaign called her in October 2007 asking for coordination in soliciting donations from people who had already made the maximum contribution to Obama allowed by election laws. MonCrief testified that she was given a massive database of Obama donors who had already reached the limit. Her task was to cull it for potential donors who would then donate to Project Vote, an ACORN affiliate which targets individuals and entities to solicit donations.

If true, MonCrief’s allegations constitute violations of the Internal Revenue Code, federal campaign finance laws, and laws against voter registration fraud, according to a memo by Cleta Mitchell, co-chairman of the Republican National Lawyers Association.

I expect Republicans to act on this immediately…3…2..1…..HELLO?

Nobody’s home.

Hey! Is there anyway we can give this group more money? What? Obama’s already taken care of that?

ADDITIONAL ACORN-ELIGIBLE BLOCK GRANTS

DIP: $1 Billion in Stimulus: “For an additional amount for `Community Development Fund’ $1,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2010 to carry out the community development block grant program under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.)” (H.R.1, Enrolled As Agreed To By Both House And Senate)

RE-DIP: $3.9 Billion in Omnibus: “The bill provides $3,900,000,000 for the Community Development Fund…” (“Division I – Transportation, Housing And Urban Development, And Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009; Joint Explanatory Statement” Rules Committee, U.S. House Of Representatives, Pg. 106)

Awwwwesome!

Obama’s Teleprompter’s Lies

It’s so sad that the Washington Press Corps lets Obama get away with all of these whoppers. He started out last night with a hum dinger:

At the end of the day, the best way to bring our deficit down in the long run is not with a budget that continues the very same policies that have led us to a narrow prosperity and massive debt. It’s with a budget that leads to broad economic growth by moving from an era of borrow and spend to one where we save and invest.

(?!)

Then in answer to a question about the national debt, he blamed Bush:

QUESTION Chip Reid: Thank you, Mr. President.

At both of your town hall meetings in California last week, you said, quote, ”I didn’t run for president to pass on our problems to the next generation.”

But under your budget, the debt will increase $7 trillion over the next 10 years. The Congressional Budget Office says $9.3 trillion. And today on Capitol Hill, some Republicans called your budget, with all the spending on health care, education and environment, the most irresponsible budget in American history.

Isn’t that kind of debt exactly what you were talking about when you said passing on our problems to the next generation?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: First of all, I suspect that some of those Republican critics have a short memory, because as I recall, I’m inheriting a $1.3 trillion deficit, annual deficit, from them.

Well, here’s the truth:

obama-bush-debt

As Ed Morrissey says:  “They’re not doing everything they can do to eliminate the deficit.  They’re doing everything they can do to make them exponentially worse”.

Here is a chart of the national debt since the Great Depression:

national-debt-gdp

Notice how it’s shooting back up to 1940’s era  levels with no promise of ever decreasing?

The Heritage Foundation explains:

President Obama has framed his budget as a break from the “failed policies” of the Bush Admin­istration. Actually, his budget doubles down on President George W. Bush’s borrow, spend, and bail­out policies. For example:

* President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.[3]
* President Bush began a string of expensive finan­cial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.[4]
* President Bush created a Medicare drug entitle­ment that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new govern­ment health care fund.
* President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. Presi­dent Obama would double it.[5]
* President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama has already in­creased this spending by 20 percent.[6]
* President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.[7]

President Bush ran budget deficits averaging $300 billion annually. After harshly criticizing Bush’s budget deficits, President Obama pro­posed a budget that would run deficits averaging $600 billion even after the economy recovers and the troops return home from Iraq.

The President’s tax policy is the only sharp break in economic policy. President Bush reduced taxes by approximately $2 trillion; President Obama has proposed raising taxes by $1.4 trillion. In doing so, President Obama has rejected the most successful Bush fiscal policy. In the 18 months following the 2003 tax rate cuts, economic growth rates doubled, the stock market surged 32 percent, and the econ­omy created 1.8 million jobs, followed by 5.2 mil­lion more jobs in the next 27 months.[8] Not until the housing bubble burst several years later did the economy finally lose steam.

There is something deeply wrong with a person who tells us with a straight face, that these are policies “where we save and invest”. The best way to “bring the deficit down in the long run” is to decrease taxation, and stop spending so damn much.

But maybe Obama’s really not interested in reducing the deficit.

James Lewis at The American Thinker asks: What kind of President thrives on chaos? “Is it conceivable that a president would want matters to get worse”?

What’s the actual evidence that Obama is trying to make things worse? At this point, it can only be inferred from his actions and statements. Outright proof of sabotage would trigger a political earthquake. Imagine a White House insider leaking Blackberry emails between Obama and Axelrod about how to make the economic crisis last longer. Imagine evidence coming to light that the five-hour electronic assault on the financial markets on September 17, 2008, was timed to elect Obama. Imagine Rahm Emanuel actually advising the President in a concrete policy discussion, “Never let a crisis go to waste!”
I’m not claiming it’s true. It’s a question.

Read on.

Meanwhile Senator Judd Gregg continues to sound the alarm.

Obama taunted Republicans during the press conference for not coming up with a plan of their own. Well, they’re in the vast minority, right now, and he knows that nothing they come up with has a prayer of passing. Why on earth should they be wasting their time with that, and taking their eyes off what he’s doing? I want them to focus on the bills that the Dems are trying to pass, and working to limit the damage.

“Overseas Contingency Operation” To Combat “man-caused” disasters.

terror-busterGeorge Orwell is spinning in his grave…

The Washington Post reports:

The end of the Global War on Terror — or at least the use of that phrase — has been codified at the Pentagon. Reports that the phrase was being retired have been circulating for some time amongst senior administration officials, and this morning speechwriters and other staff were notified via this e-mail to use “Overseas Contingency Operation” instead.

“Recently, in a LtGen [John] Bergman, USMC, statement for the 25 March [congressional] hearing, OMB required that the following change be made before going to the Hill,” Dave Riedel, of the Office of Security Review, wrote in an e-mail.

“OMB says: ‘This Administration prefers to avoid using the term “Long War” or “Global War on Terror” [GWOT]. Please use “Overseas Contingency Operation.'”

Riedel asked recipients to “Please pass on to your speech writers and try to catch this change before the statements make it to OMB.”

Last week,  Janet Napolitano introduced the term, “man caused disasters” to describe terrorists.

Aren’t liberals, cute?

Teleprompter v.s. No Teleprompter

That clever, snarky David Letterman came up with an ingenious way to display the wisdom of  Obama’s reliance on his teleprompter… taking the opportunity to gratuitously bash former President Bush, to make his point.  Obama’s suave and debonair performance using it is compared to an inarticulate moment of  Bush’s, while not using a teleprompter:

Oh, haha. See how cool Obama is, and what a dolt, Bush was?

Apparently, Letterman hasn’t visited YouTube much at all during the past year, or he wouldn’t have brought this up.

A YouTube  wise-ass has a little bit of fun, calling his creation, “the rough cut, original version of TelePrompTer vs. No TelePrompTer”:

Now, that’s more like it.

UPDATE:

A good example of George Bush without his teleprompter: