Month: March 2009

Obama is Starting to Sound Like McCain

Maybe it’s just me…

but Obama is starting to sound a lot like John McCain these days.

This week, President Obama said, “if we are keeping focused on all the fundamentally sound aspects of our economy, all the outstanding companies, workers, all the innovation, and dynamism in this country, then we’re going to get through this. And I’m very confident about that.”

It seems like ages ago, but when John McCain came out in September and said the “fundamentals of the economy are strong” candidate Obama responded furiously, in what became a defining moment of the campaign.

Here is a video of  Obama’s  response to McCain’s  statement that the “Fundamentals of the Economy are strong”

Now we have Obama come out and say basically the same thing…

During the presidential campaign, then candidate Obama pilloried Republican nominee Sen. John McCain when he made similar remarks on the state of the economy. Back in September, John McCain expressed confidence in the nation’s economy, saying that the fundamentals of the economy were, “strong.” Obama attacked McCain for the remark, saying that it showed just how out of touch the Arizona Senator was with the struggles of average Americans.

But by almost any measure, the economy was in better shape in September than it is today. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is off more than 3,000 points since McCain made his remarks on September 15. Unemployment is up two percent from 6.1% in September to 8.1 percent today, including more than 650,000 jobs lost just last month. Consumer confidence stands at a near record-low of 25.0, down from 64 in September.

President Obama has been criticized for talking down the economy. Given all the bad economic news of late, his sudden shift from being the harbinger of economic bad news to the economy’s cheerleader-in-chief can be nothing but pure political posturing.

As far as that is concerned…I am sick of this political posturing going on in Washington.  The double standard that is given to Obama and his policies  is unbelievable.

I can’t wait until 2012.

Buy then again, maybe it’s  just me.

One Man Band

While I am having a serious case of writers block….I thought I would post a few videos for your entertainment.

51% of Democrats Wanted Bush to Fail

Maybe it’s just me…

but don’t you think it so hypocritical that…

51% of Liberals wanted Bush to Fail in 2006


The left is apoplectic because Rush Limbaugh dared to say that he hopes Barack Obama’s policies fail, and the media is driving this story into the ground. Yet, where were they when the liberals wanted George W. Bush to fail? Hypocrites!

Remember, in the case of Bush, this wish for failure involved a war with the lives of our troops on the line. Yet, a majority of Democrats were chomping at the bit for Bush and the war against terror to be an utter failure. Also, consider this factor: if the liberals wanted “Bush’s” war against terror to fail, who would be the winner? The terrorists, that’s who. Talk about treasonous!

Read from Hot Air about a 2006 poll regarding whether Americans wanted Bush to succeed or fail:

Guess who also wanted a president to fail?;  And the military?

“Patterico dusts off a 2006 poll from Fox News that plumbs the history of wishing failure a little more thoroughly than the media seems to want to do on their own. The question of wishing success or failure is not new; Fox explicitly asked that very question to its survey respondents. Fifty-one percent of Democrats wanted to see George Bush fail:


Even 34% of independents said they wanted to see Bush fail. This came after Katrina and in the middle of the deluge of sectarian violence in Iraq, and not long before Bush’s second midterms. Three months later, Republicans lost Congress and Donald Rumsfeld got the boot. Bush was not terribly popular then, and it didn’t get better for him afterwards.

We didn’t hear screams of outrage in the media when this survey showed a majority of Democrats wanting “our President” to fail. Nor should we have; our democratic republic uses competing political interests as its own check on extremism. Some people had a legitimate policy interest in hoping that Bush would fail, and some had less legitimate reasons, but few screeched “TREASON” at these results. No one in the media found the idea that an opponent of Bush might wish him failure particularly noteworthy in 2006, either.

Now the 51% of Democrats who wanted Bush to fail in 2006 suddenly get the vapors when the tables turn and the hero of Hope and Change is in the White House.  Maybe they’re just not used to having to play defense. The way they act, they won’t have to play it for long.

I recently was blasted by one of my co-workers because I was not being a “good” American because I was not supporting the President.  This well meaning individual asked me why I had to be so negative and that now was the time for all of us to show unity.   I told him that actually I was more Patriotic now than ever…because I was able to state my own opinion… and I asked him where his “unity” was 2 years ago when all he did was bash Bush.  Like most Democrats I know, he really did not know how to respond to that.

The bottom line is this… I want America to succeed… America is not Obama.

Last I read…our Constitution says, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Here is a link to the Constitution

It states “We the people…” not “President Obama”.

Obama’s success is irrelevant just as Bush’s success or failure was irrelevant.

Like it or not Obama is the President, but that doesn’t mean I have to want him to succeed.

This is indeed America…I will continue to voice my opinion and I will give others the same opportunity.  But I have NO obligation to show unity nor show support for a President that is leading us down a path of a Socialistic form of government.

But then again,  maybe it’s just me.