They aren't angry because most of them are sheep- CNN tells them Obama is doing a good job, and they believe it.

What hit it home with me about Obama's spending was the fact that he has spent more money in the last 100 days than Bush did in eight (8) long years! What if I were to say that he's spent more than all other US Presidents combined?????

What in the hell is wrong with that picture?

I seem to remember Obama promising to veto any new bill with earmarks and yet, his budget proposal along with the "Shamulus" Bill is full of em.


Another tidbit, as for Obama's approval rating, read this....

Obama's Poll Numbers Are Falling to Earth - WSJ.com


Over the past three months we have witnessed some truly amazing movements by the Obama administration. He has proposed more spending than all Presidents in history combined; he has trampled the Constitution by allowing the Treasury to take on a dictator style infringement on private companies, and now the democratically lead Congress has proposed the “Pay for Performance Act” which passed Thursday with even some Republican Congressman voted for it.

This bill essentially allows the Treasury to define “fair pay” for all employees, at any level. Worse, the Treasury would like to be able to take over any company it deemed as important enough to take over regardless of whether or not it had accepted bailout funds. Worse still, the Serve Act proposes to make volunteering for the government mandatory (with pay, of course). Last time I looked, working for pay was called A JOB.

The scariest part of the bill is that while you’re serving as a “volunteer,” you’re prohibited from participating in worship and church activities, political rallies and being involved in a union. In short, your essential freedoms are gone. I keep hearing about Obama being a socialist but, I have to disagree. Based on these measures he appears to more like a person pursuing Communism or Fascism.

Let’s face it; if you wanted to tear down the Republic and install a Communist Oligarchy you would first have to take over all major industries where corporate power resides, then you must get the wealth away from the rich — but how would you do that? Well, you create an even larger economic crisis so the country thinks your massive debt spending is a way to help the country when your real plan is to incur so much debt that the only way to prevent the country from bankruptcy is to impose a tax system that depletes the wealth of the top 1% until we’re all equally “wealthy.” …Well, except for those wealthy people who helped you get there. You know the ones I’m talking about. I don’t mean to HARPO on the subject, but we seemed to have forgotten what we’re protecting. What about the Republic? Is it already gone?

When the government ignores legal contractual obligations because they judge someone’s bonus as unfair the law has been ignored, which means it was violated and this violation occurred at the highest level of government. I’m not saying the AIG bonuses weren’t excessive. My point is, we don’t know what these people did to deserve or NOT to deserve them because this was never mentioned or examined. Maybe some of those people brought in a billion dollars of business and their bonuses were based? Maybe the CEO is the main reason the company is failing? Does that mean that some guy who worked hard to bring in that billion dollars in business shouldn’t be rewarded? But Obama needs a way to regulate pay and the bill proposed doesn’t even stop at executives, it doesn’t even stop at dollar amounts. In fact, it has no specification whatsoever.

So we can all look forward to government cars, government jobs, paid civilian volunteers who watch our every move and the the loss of our ability to reach for our dreams. The sad part is that Obama told us exactly what he was going to do and 52% of you refused to hear what he said. In fact many of you cheered at these things. Let’s remember just of few of the things he said.

1. The Constitution is fundamentally flawed. It only protects the rights of the people but does not allow the government to do anything on your behalf.
2. He wants a civilian Army as large as our military, and as well funded ($650 billion annually).
3. He wants to “spread the wealth.” Oh, don’t pretend you don’t remember Joe the Plumber.

And let’s not forget good ole Reverend Wright whose teachings about America being evil and unequal ring in Obama’s ears. Funny … It’s equality that got Obama elected. Change? Oh yes, there’s change and if we don’t act soon the meaning of hope will have a very different meaning.


Pay For Performance Act

OpenCongress - U.S. Congress - H.R.1664 Grayson-Himes Pay For Performance Act of 2009


Give/Serve Act

Michelle Malkin » GIVE/SERVE Act updates; Senate version passes, 79-19



The end of liberty as we know it with the thunderous sound of applause coming from Obama supporters.

1)No one should ever put a mic in front of that lady again.

2)Obama has inherited some extremely unique problems.

3)Investing in infrastructure is not a bad way to address some of those problems.

4)The economy is quite a bit more complicated than our own personal finances.

5)None of this is any excuse for attaching ridiculous amounts of pork to these bills.

6)He should justify every cent.

7)As ludicrous as it is to suggest that tea-party goers are just a bunch of racist rednecks, it is equally so to think that race has no influence whatsoever.

8)Who the hell watches MSNBC and why?

I'll agree that racism will probably always be an issue on the right, if you agree that that works both ways. I don't see leftists throwing their hands up and saying a demonstration was worthless because there were a minority of zealots spewing hate. Honestly, the tea parties were very orderly. No one overturned a car, or destroyed other people's property (that I'm aware). The same can't be said for some liberal demonstrations.

However, I really don't think that the majority of people at those parties had a problem with his race. My issue with your inclusion is that it is way overstated and used as a means to diminish the core intent. Also, please show me any sign or indication that racism was the issue. It may have been, I don't think it was, but it's certainly possible. Because, as far as I've heard, even people that were polar opposite of the spirit of the demonstration were allowed their ground.

hey 'Neo'-con, enough with the phony outrage about Obama's overspending. you want us to get mad at him for his stimulus, but i'll bet you had no qualms whatsoever about W putting 2 wars on a credit card and you no doubt voted for the guy who wanted to extend the war for 100 years at $10bn./month with an expansion war in Iran thrown in for good measure.

i'd have more respect for you if you just admitted you don't like Obama because he's a Democrat.

its like arguing w/children

STICK TO THE POINT, MUGG

First of all, McCain said for all he knew the war could last for 100 years, not that he necessarily wanted it to.

Second, didn't Obama talk about invading Pakistan during some point of the election campaigns?

You know.. I just realized that Obama isn't even a black president. He's just as much a white president as a black one. So, to remove the race card from further conversations I'm going to call him the 44th white president, which I think is just as fair as him being called the 1st black president.

So you were upset at Bush's war spending and not Obama's "stimulus" spending? You're just as hypocritical as your political adversaries!

I don't know what you're talking about. Racism works both ways? Well, yeah. No problem for me or anyone with the slightest bit of common sense to admit as much.

And in the second 'graph, you again seem to be making some counter-point to a point that I never made. I don't think racism was the issue or primary motivation behind the rallies. I simply think just as you yourself do in that I don't believe "that the majority of the people at those parties had a problem with his race." The problem lies in that we tend to look at things from our respective corners in the political spectrum, or race, or whatever. We see them as either a bunch of redneck racists or completely free of any racists thoughts whatsoever. It should be easy enough for any of us to believe that just like most other places, there were likely some of both.

Jeanine Godawfulo is an intolerant bigot.

My mistake. I misunderstood your point that "as ludicrous as it is to suggest that tea-party goers are just a bunch of racist rednecks, it is equally (ludicrous) so to think that race has no influence whatsoever."

Since I hear the left screaming racism at every turn and in almost every debate, I'm getting hyper-sensitive about it.

That's what the Left does. Scream it throughout the land that racism is bad, then call anyone who disagrees with them on ANY issue a racist. They are an incredibly intolerant bunch.