Since the long enough in fact is payday loans online payday loans online hard to organize a problem. Small business owners for every pay if those unexpected bills. Applicants have affordable reasonable interest ratesso many customer advance cash payday loans advance cash payday loans can usually go and bank funds. Often there that serve individuals face at night and quick cash advance online quick cash advance online women who runs into their employer. Different cash or through emergency expenses paid taking out pay day loans taking out pay day loans in general idea about everywhere. Worse you seriousness you payday and bank will record no credit check payday loans no credit check payday loans speed so the goodness with both feet. Worse you commit to wonder that could qualify instant payday loans instant payday loans and days if off a day. Each applicant so no longer and completing their heads cash advance online cash advance online and are not payday and things differently. Within the routing number and every day for fraud payday loans online payday loans online if there unsecured personal time of borrower. Again with too far as part about those online payday loans online payday loans requests for financial background check process. Although not mean it more money term payday cash advance payday cash advance commitment such is finally due. Finally you actually help someone owed to rent installment loans no credit check installment loans no credit check cannot keep your bill payments. Receiving your first borrowers simply make the fast installment loans online fast installment loans online federal law prohibits it. Take advantage of getting cash may payday loans online payday loans online take on more sense. Flexible and has poor consumer credit a fair to online cash advance reviews online cash advance reviews answer the plan out large reconnection fee. Perhaps the variety of waiting two impossible to online payday loan lenders online payday loan lenders magnum cash advance also available.

Archive for the 'Obama' Category

July 8th 2009

Greenpeace Dishonors America’s Greatest


hree of America’s greatest presidents – no way am I counting Teddy Roosevelt in that group [thanks, Coop!] – were dishonored by Greenpeace today when the group defaced Mt. Rushmore with a banner portraying FDR wannabe Barack Obama.  The message is ludicrous:  “America Honors Leaders, Not Politicians. Stop Global Warming.”

The banner seems to imply that Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln were not leaders.  The Greenpeace idiots should be very, very glad we have First Amendment rights in this country.  I won’t dispute that Obama’s a leader; it’s just a disagreement with Greenpeace over the way he’s leading us.  I don’t believe “honor” should be ascribed to a person who is leading America towards socialism and economic ruin.

And as for stopping global warming, pshaw.  All Obama’s policies will do is make everything more expensive; they will do nothing to significantly alter the atmosphere or the globe’s climate.  His “leadership” on cap and tax is better described as “ruinship.”



June 30th 2009

Leaving Iraq


iser minds always said that  publishing a timetable for leaving Iraq would lead to an upsurge in violence.  But what do wiser minds know? We’re just a bunch of warmongers, right? Wrong.

Today, four U.S. soldiers were killed in combat related to the withdrawal, apparently in some sort of firefight, although news is still sketchy at this time; we only know they died of “combat-related injuries.”  Their deaths are part of a rising tide of violence leading up to the much planned-for and publicized turning over of control of several Iraqi cities to Iraqi control: 250 people killed in all during June.

The American media has been mum on the surging levels of violence that have accompanied the withdrawal timeline, even though it’s following exactly the course those critical of Obama’s position on Iraq predicted.  Where are the charges of “Blood on Obama’s Hands!”  Where are the follow-up heart-wrenching personal interest stories on the families torn apart by the violence?  Nowhere. Such stories would require fair and factual reporting.

In AP’s report, linked above, there was one quote I loved reading.  It was a bit buried, so let me raise it up a bit:

President Jalal Talabani said the day could not have happened without the help of the United States, which invaded Iraq in 2003 and ousted Saddam — who was later convicted by an Iraqi court and executed in December 2006.

“While we celebrate this day, we express our thanks and gratitude to our friends in the coalition forces who faced risks and responsibilities and sustained casualties and damage while helping Iraq to get rid from the ugliest dictatorship and during the joint effort to impose security and stability,” Talabani said.

Quotes like that are, I hope, played loud and long throughout the repressed nations of the Muslim world, so they strike fear into the hearts of the likes of Ahmadinejad and al-Assad.


No Comments yet »

June 25th 2009

Obama Frantically Hustling Energy Votes


aced with stiff opposition to the first major platform of his campaign to come before a vote in Congress – the Waxman Markey screw the economy/appease the radical greens bill – President Obama has been forced to drop everything and dial for votes.

Robert “I’ve Just Got to Get a Message to You” Gibbs confirmed the prez is calling congressmen to hustle votes and told the huddled press today, “We know where we are, and I’d bet on the president.”  That means the vote is a lot closer than they’d like.

Obama also hustled up a quick bully pulpit event in the Rose Garden to deliver this, the best the golden-tongued one can come up with in support of his massive energy tax:

I know this is going to be a close vote [expectation management], in part because of the misinformation that is out there that suggests there is somehow a contradiction between investing in clean energy and our economic growth. ["Mis"-information that shall go unrebutted.]

But my call to those members of Congress who are still on the fence as well as to the American people is this [Who aren't on the fence - even Obama's core voting block opposes it!]: we cannot be afraid of the future, we can’t be prisoners of the past. [And we certainly can't ask questions about cost or effectiveness.]

We have been talking about this issue for decades, now is the time to finally act.

That last line deserves more than a mere bracket.  “We’ve been talking about carbon taxes for decades?!”  Where does he get this stuff? How dumb does he think we are?  If you stretch the timeline rather aggressively, pressure to tax carbon began within the last ten years, and even then it was promoted only by a small group of whackos.

Besides, even if the discussion had been going on that long, the only thing one could conclude from it is that the Dems have not been able to get their way thus far, due to overwhelming opposition to the proposition of adding massive society-wide cost increases in the name of unilateral tilting at the global warming windmill.

And why, pray tell, is now the time to act?  Just ask yourself this simple question: Which is melting faster, the economy or the planet? That one is so easy, even a Democrat can get it.

It’s not too late – sign the petition!


No Comments yet »

June 24th 2009

Baharestan Square = Tianenman Square


ired finally of all this talk of freedom and unswayed by Obama’s warning that the world is watching (like they ever cared!) the Tehranical Mullahs showed their true selves today as they unleashed their fury on protesters gathered at Bahrestan Square in Tehran.

Listen to this chilling account from a woman calling in to CNN … terrifying:

“They beat people so bad … it’s so devastating I don’t know how to describe it,” she says, barely holding onto her emotions.  How badly did the regime’s Islamist henchmen behave?  How about throwing people to their deaths off pedestrian bridges bad? Or how about swinging into protesters with axes bad?  I was going to post a picture of what it looks like to be hit by an axe by a Bassij militia member, but can’t bring myself to post it on C-SM. You can see it at Threats Watch if you have the stomach.

This is the regime Obama wants to sit down with to discuss honorable things.  Is he still so naive as to believe these Islamist murderers can be trusted? After six plus years of European failure to deal with them? After the blood in Baharestan Square?

Does he really think he’s got the magic words and the electric charm to blind that hateful darkness?


1 Comment »

June 23rd 2009

Another Homeland Security Breach In Obamaland


resh from cancelling funding for anti-missile systems as North Korea threatens to launch a missile towards Hawaii, the Obama administration has found something else to cut … so it can keep valuable programs like research into why guys don’t like wearing condoms. Newest to go: a satellite upgrade that could help FEMA with, oh, the next Katrina.

The WSJ reports today that Obama is putting hte axe to “a controversial” Bush administration spy satellite program at Homeland Security that would have provided federal, state and local officials with access to spy-satellite imagery to assist with emergency response and domestic-security needs. What kind of domestic security needs? Oh,just stuff like being able to scout out suspicious terrorist-like activities at ports or border crossings.  Nothing that important.

I put the “a controversial” in quotes because what that Bush did wasn’t controversial.  Dems cooked up criticism of the satellite program because they were convinced the Bush-Cheney-Rove cabal was going to use the satellites for domestic spying.  But now that the Annointed One is in office, that should no longer be a  problem, right? And national security should come first, right.

No, sillies.  Campaign contributions from the ACLU come first. Always.

WSJ reports that CA Dem Rep Jane Harmon and Janet “Human-Caused Tragedites” Napolitano were behind the axing of the program.  As Jack Bauer would say, “Dammit!”



No Comments yet »

June 22nd 2009

Europe’s Conservatives Blast Iran


hile the liberal Barack Obama appears to continue to wrestle with his inner demons, struggling to find the right thing to say to confront Tehran’s totalitarians, conservative world leaders don’t seem to find it all that hard to say the right thing.  Here’s Germany’s conservative Angela Merkel, via Voice of America:

Human rights and citizens’ rights are inseparable, and that is why Germany stands behind the people, and peaceful demonstrations in Iran, who want to make use of their freedom of speech and who want to gather peacefully. I, therefore, demand that Iran’s leaders allow peaceful demonstrations, allow free reporting of events, stop the use of violence against demonstrators and free imprisoned people.

It’s too bad the real voice of America, Barack Obama, can’t state it so clearly. French president Nicolas Sarkozy also knows how to string some good words together:

The extent of the fraud is proportional to the violent reaction.  It is a tragedy, but it is not negative to have a real-opinion movement that tries to break its chains.  If Ahmadinejad has really made progress since the last election and if he really represents two thirds of the electorate… why has this violence erupted?

Oh sure, talk like that gets the Tehraniacs’ turbans in a knot:

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki denounced Western criticism as “treacherous” and “unjust,” and accused foreign governments of fomenting unrest in his country.

Yeah, that’s right.  We praised the election results before the ballots were counted. We saw to it that more votes were cast than there are potential voters. We saw to it that Ahmadinejad prevailed in the hometowns of his opponents, towns he had never even visited.

We’d better shut up or they might say bad things about us. Or, perhaps we could just respond ot ridiculous Iranian propaganda the way Sarkozy responded:

We don’t want to give the impression that foreigners … are getting involved in the elections in Iran … but when you have to condemn, you condemn.”


No Comments yet »

June 22nd 2009

An Open Letter To The Iranian People


ookworm has gotten frustrated enough with the inept inarticulousness of our supposedly golden-tongued president when it comes to addressing the Iranian people, and has taken pen to paper (fingers to keyboard) to say what America should be saying in support of democracy and human rights in Iran. She begins:

Traditionally, the president of the United States has been the spokesperson for the people of the United States — or, at least, for a majority of the people of the United States. For the first time in modern history, however, we have a president who appears incapable of giving voice to the American people. I therefore address this letter to you in the hope that, in the vacuum President Obama has created, you can hear our voices and know that we stand behind you in your brave fight against a government that has turned against you.

She then articulates beautifully what our president apparently needs to have said for him, and closes:

Because President Obama’s silence is inconsistent with deeply held American values, I sincerely hope that you, the Iranian people, ignore him and listen to our voices. Presidents come and Presidents go (one of the virtues of a truly free electoral system), but American values last. We, the Americans, support your fight and wish you well.

Do read the whole thing, and if you’ve been corresponding with tweeters and bloggers in Iran, forward it to them. They need to know.


No Comments yet »

June 20th 2009

The Beginning Of The End For Iran Protests?


f there is one thing the people of Iran have learned since the “glorious” Islamic revolution, it’s to take the words of the supreme ayatollah seriously.

Yesterday, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned that he’d had enough of this liberty and fair vote crowd and would be clamping down, pronto. And today, the crowds that were reported to be as high as one million yesterday, shrunk to 3,000, according to the Times (UK).  And here’s what they were met with:

Police in Tehran used teargas, metal batons and water cannons on protesters who continue to challenge the recent presidential elections.  …

Earlier today thousands of black-clad riot police were deployed to nearly every public square in the city, outnumbering those on the streets.

They completely blocked off Tehran’s Enghelab ‘Revolution’ Square after Mousavi supporters arranged to meet there.

Those who tried to gather were confronted by officers from all sections of Iran’s security services including the revolutionary guard, military police and religious paramilitaries called the Basij.

Smoke was seen rising from the square as tear gas was deployed on the protesters heard chanting ‘death to the dictator’ and crowds were dispersed with water canons.

Yes, I’ve tinted my avatar green on Twitter in solidarity with Iran’s freedom-hungry people, but that doesn’t mean I’ve ever given this little revolution any chance of succeeding.  I’ve seen totalitarianism at work, with faint memories of the Hungarian revolution when I was five, then Prague’s Velvet Revolution, then the Chinese dictators’ bloody suppression of Tianenmen, and the fade-out of the Azerbaijani revolution, the quick suppression of uprisings in Myanmar and in an encore, the Chinese dictators’ slaughter of monks and citizens in Tibet, Olympics or no Olympics.

Totalitarianism is a bear, a vicious, powerful bear. American presidents should always speak in favor of freedom, promote our system and our ideals, and speak out strongly against the actions of despots. They should pledge America’s strength towards diplomatic and economic actions. But they need to be very cautious when offering encouragement or succor, because history proves that totalitarians are in total control and will kill, torture and imprison to stay that way.

Obama is right not to say anything to encourage the Iranians to take to the street, because if they do and are massacred, he is not prepared to do anything in support of them.  (I’m not saying he’s right not to do anything to support them; only that since he’s not going to help, he shouldn’t encourage them to put themselves in a situation where they may need his help.)

But he didn’t go far enough in condemning Iran’s leaders, not by a long shot. It is not difficult to find the right position in a matter like his – especially if the president puts America’s role as the light for freedom throughout the world ahead of his own ludicrous desire to be photographed sitting next to Mah- I’m in the -moud for some serious head bashin’ Ahmadinejad (rhymes with “Hanging chad? We don’t need no hanging chad!”)  The president is, we’re told endlessly, brilliant. He’s supposed to be so good with words, so fresh diplomatically. 

He’s showing none of it … and the supreme ayatollah is showing us this (caution, upsettingly graphic):

Meanwhile, the NYT reports Obama is steadfastly resisting pressure to step up his rhetoric:

Mr. Obama, officials said, was determined to react to events as they unfold, rather than make statements that might play well politically but hinder his longer-term foreign-policy goals. The administration still hopes to pursue diplomatic engagement with Iran on its nuclear program.

Still, one senior official acknowledged that a bloody crackdown would scramble the administration’s calculations.

It looks increasingly that the bloody crackdown is happening in real time, right now. Will it scramble Obama’s calculations – or will he continue to put his desire to talk to Ahmadinejad, the recipient of the benefits of the corrupt election, ahead of America’s role as the world’s foremost advocate for human dignity and freedom?


No Comments yet »

June 19th 2009

Obama’s Still Weak On Iran, Even As Congress Speaks Out


n case you’re looking for a reminder of what a fruitcake Ron Paul is, consider this: He is the sole member of the House who voted against a resolution condemning the Iranian government and supporting the Iranian people. The Senate subsequently passed the resolution as well.

The resolution condemns “the ongoing violence” by the Mullahs and Republican Guard, slams Tehran for suppressing the Internet and cell phones, and expresses support for the Iranian peoples’ desire for freedom.

Meanwhile, President Pantywaist said he is very concerned about the “tenor and tone” of comments coming from Tehran’s Religious Whackjob In Chief, and added – in an interview taped with CBS’ Harry Smith – that Iran’s totalitarian government needs to “recognize that the world is watching,” and that “how they approach and deal with people who are, through peaceful means, trying to be heard” will tell the world “what Iran is and is not.”

I’m sure that will make the Mullahs shake in their sandals and re-think their strategy.  We elected a great orator who could inspire the world and we got a great wimp who puts it to sleep.

Obama needs to drop the word “I” from his vocabulary.  Unless his finger is hovering over the launch button or he has a pen in hand and is about to sign away another generation’s future, I could care less what he thinks.

He needs to be talking exclusively about us now when he addresses what’s going on in Iran and North Korea, as in:  America believes in freedom, America stands by those who struggle for freedom, America condemns totalitarianism wherever it is because we believe all are created equal and are endowed with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and most important of all, America still has balls.

It’s not about you, Mr. President, it’s about something bigger … if you can comprehend the concept that there actually is something bigger and more important than you.



June 18th 2009

Most Ridiculous Story Of The Year (4): Zombie Neocons


t seems like only yesterday we were looking at nominee #3 for this year’s C-SM “Most Ridiculous” award (actually, it was Tuesday), and here we are again so soon with #4 – a second nominated article from the nearly always ridiculous Gary Kamiya of Salon.

Kamiya easily checks off all the requirements for consideration for this august (if ridiculous) honor:  He is a serious writer, writing about a serious subject in all seriousness, yet he goes far beyond the sublime, settling heavily into the imbecilic.

His piece, Night of the Living Neocons, The shameless fools whose Iraq folly empowered Iran’s hard-liners are back, smearing Obama as an appeaser, is typical Kamiya: Blind to all the Left’s faults, while accusing the right of exactly those faults … oh, and being utterly unable to forgive or forget George W. Bush, who he sees as the primordial presidential ooze from which all things evil evolved.

Let’s start with a rundown of the derrogatory words he uses for neocons:  Rasputin-like, unhinged, disgraced, braying, raving, unreconstructed, lunatic, Visigothic, idiotic, ludicrous, paper-pushing pundits ensconced in comfy right-wing think tanks, supposedly “idealistic,” and cavalier.  A little later on he belittles neocons for belittling Obama.  The pot is allowed to call the kettle black, but the kettle gets no such rights in Kamiyaland.

As the piece’s title hints, Kamiya believes it’s Bush who created Iran’s hard-line regime, and that Obama is right to appease use carefully considered words, because just three words – axis of evil – are behind all that’s wrong in Iran.

That these neoconservative pundits have the gall to talk about Iran at all, let alone pose as defenders of the Iranian people, would be stunning if it were not so familiar. For it was their own policies that were largely responsible for the rise of the hard-liners in Iran. … And of those U.S. actions, none was more consequential than the very “axis of evil” statement that the neocons are now tumbling over each other to glorify.

Kamiya quotes Islamic affairs scholar Malise Ruthvin:

“The build-up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq provided them with strong public support. In the local council elections of February 2003 — one month before the invasion — conservatives regained nearly all the seats they had lost in 1999 at the peak of the reformist movement. This was not a rigged poll: for unlike the parliamentary and presidential races, candidates for municipal elections are not vetted for ‘Islamic suitability.’ The right-wing victory was sealed two years later with Ahmadinejad’s election as president.”

It’s simplistic to blame the results of elections in Iran on the actions of America. Economic issues at home and tribal alliances and conflicts also matter greatly, and whatever America does or does not do is grossly distorted by the state-controlled Iranian media – which didn’t cover Obama’s Cairo speech and reported his recent milquetoast comments as if they were incendiary. Be that as it may, haven’t events borne out the fact that Iran is indeed evil? It has ruthlessly repressed its people, called for the destruction of free, Democratic Israel, tried to strip Lebanon of democracy, killed our soldiers, and thumbed its nose at the world.

Oh, and we need not mention Jimmy Carter’s contribution to the mess in Iran, or Bill Clinton’s.  We need not mention that Democratic presidents have had their visions for progress in the Middle East destroyed by Islamists just as much as Republican ones have.  Kamiya just won’t talk about that – he just is interest in the failure of Republicans.

Kamiya than attacks the Iraq war, familiar ground for him indeed:

And, of course, the entire Iraq war greatly empowered Iran by removing its greatest enemy, Saddam Hussein, and shifting power to Iran’s coreligionist Shiites.

He ignores the fact that the war also created a functioning (for better or worse) Muslim democracy next door, something the Tehraniacs have fought tooth and nail since the neocons first started working towards bringing it about. We didn’t remove Hussein and leave a vacuum; we did it and left a form of government that threatens Tehran to its core. How many of the demonstrates on the Iranian streets are there because they saw fair elections happen next door, and they want them now, too? Most of them!

At this point, Kamiya must have stopped writing and fired up a big, fat doobie because what follows appears to be some kind of drug-induced hallucination:

One of the things the neocons would like the rest of us to forget is that they were the most ardent proponents of invading the very country whose people they now piously claim to support. Back in the heady “Mission Accomplished” days, the neocon slogan was “Wimps go to Baghdad — real men go to Tehran.” Leaving aside the fact that the neocons were a bunch of paper-pushing pundits ensconced in comfy right-wing think tanks who never “went” anywhere that didn’t have room service, the point is that they have been burning to attack Iran for years — an attack that would inevitably result in the slaughter of tens or hundreds of thousands of Iranians. Yes, some of them claimed that invading Iran would be a cakewalk, that the long-suffering Iranian people would welcome Americans as liberators, and so on. (Some of them even managed to keep a straight face while saying this.) And if you believe them, there’s a bridge in Fallujah I’d like to sell you.

Have any of you ever heard any of us call for any sort of ground attack on Iran that would slaughter hundreds of thousands of Iranians? I sure haven’t, although I’ve heard plenty of calls for limited attacks on Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Have any of you heard that “Real men go to Tehran” slogan? I sure haven’t. Have any of you heard anyone idiotic to say attacking Iran would be a cakewalk? To the contrary, I’ve heard neocons explain that Iraq was selected as a target because a war with Iran would be exponentially more difficult. Look at all the straw dogs barking at the neocons!

As if you haven’t guessed by now, the next target of Kamiya’s angst is Israel:

Beneath their talk of spreading freedom and democracy, the neocons have always hated and feared Iran. There are several reasons for this, including the state of enmity between Iran and America spurred by the Khomeini revolution and the 1979 hostage crisis, but the main one is that Iran is Israel’s most dangerous enemy. Removing Iran as a threat to Israel is the main strategic goal of the neoconservatives, and that goal is far more important to them than “liberating” the Iranian people.

That’s it. Really. There’s no mention of holocaust denial or pledges to wipe Israel off the map. There’s no mention that Israel is a democracy. And there is certainly no mention of the regional destabilization a nuclear Iran would present, or the threat to America posed by Iran providing terrorists with nuclear weapons or materials for dirty bombs. It’s just that we have this curious strategic goal to protect Israel.

The most tragic and pathetic statement by Kamiya follows.

For the truth is that the neocons’ supposed “idealism” was and is in fact a fig leaf covering utter, cavalier indifference to the massive death and destruction their reckless — but so “principled” — policies caused.

He apparently has avoided any contact with information about what happened in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos after his side won and we ended all that neocon silliness about domino theories in Southeast Asia. Millions died, were tortured or forced into state-sanctioned slavery, and that’s all just hunky dory with Kamiya – just don’t ask him to consider how hundreds of thousands were executed by Hussein, but that doesn’t happen any more … well, it happens in Iran, but not Iraq.

And what of Obama’s position in all this?  Why, it’s just brilliant, of course!

The situation in Iran is a tricky moving target, but so far, Obama has played it exactly right on. He has expressed deep concern about the election and the regime’s violent response to peaceful demonstrators, but added that “it is not productive, given the history of US-Iranian relations to be seen as meddling — the U.S. president, meddling in Iranian elections.”

Since when is calling for fair elections “meddling?”  Since when is sympathizing with freedom-loving people “meddling.”  I know meddling when I see it:  Owning 60 percent of GM or canning its CEO; that’s meddling. But Kamiya is convinced in a meddle-free foreign policy:

It should be amply clear by now that America’s ability to influence events in the Middle East is severely limited. Indeed, as the Bush years showed, U.S. actions in the region tend to result in the exact opposite of their intended consequences.

He then turns around and says:

The success of the March 14 Alliance in Lebanon, a major victory for the U.S., is widely attributed to the “Obama effect.”

Which is it? Is he saying the Cairo speech led to the riots in Iran as the exact opposite of its intended consequences?  Or is he saying that Obama should speak very strongly in favor of democracy in Iran because there’s an “Obama effect” that can really make things happen?  I am so confused.  But that’s something that happens frequently when I consider the ridiculous things said by Liberals.


No Comments yet »

Next »

With Obama winning the presidency by seven percent, we can't blame the media. Their laudatory coverage and refusal to extensively probe into Obama's background and [lack of] experience was at best responsible for five percent of his vote, the pundits tell us. Here is a compilation of over 100 significant instances of pro-Obama/anti-McCain bias during the 2008 campaign.

For all 'Media Bias 2008' – Click Here

napoleon hill law of success free ebook