Pathological Liar Obama Now Claims Father (Who Was 9) Fought In WWII. Expect MSM To Jump On This… Not.
I hope FoNews asks Gibbs about it at the new WH Presser. It would be fun to watch him try to explain this one.
It just amazes me that this fool gets away with this sort of crap. We can’t even expect the MSM to call him out on the most pathetic and transparent lies.
When the Manchurian Moonbat’s mouth is in gear, the preposterous lies just don’t stop. Here he is claiming that his father served in World War II:
The Kenyan communist Barack Obama Senior, born in 1936, was 9 years old when WWII ended.Obama lies about father serving in WWII
Maybe Barry meant his adoptive father, Lolo Soetoro. But the Indonesian Soetoro was 10 years old when WWII ended.
Some say that the reason Obama has spent a fortune to keep his birth certificate from the public is that his actual father was his childhood mentor, the communist, rapist, and potential enemy agent Frank Marshall Davis. Born in 1905, Davis was plenty old enough for WWII. But he never in a million years would have fought for this country, any more than Obama would.
We can only conclude that Comrade Obama was actually referring to his uncle, who supposedly helped liberate Auschwitz and therefore must have fought in the Soviet Red Army.
Incredibly, there are still people foolish enough to believe anything that comes out of this clown’s mouth.
Or not… 71% of Missouri disagrees.
Let me repeat that. 71% of Missouri votes to stop Obamacare. 71% of Missouri told Obama to get bent!
It looks like Missouri made it perfectly clear:
- WE HATE OBAMACARE
- Republicans are a lot more fired up than Democrats
- November is going to SUCK for Dems if Republicans come out to vote 2-1 like they did for this vote.
Thank you Missouri. We are glad you stepped up and said “WE ARE NOT A SOCIALIST NATION”. And the rest of you, look at this and realize that we need to win in November.
One meme had materialized over the last couple of weeks that ObamaCare had begun to get more popular with voters. Using a couple of carefully-selected media polls, the White House had started this claim and the press seemed willing to ignore the avalanche of other polling showing that solid majorities favor repeal of the overhaul and the candidates who argue for repeal. That meme died in Missouri, where almost three-quarters of the voters who came to the polls cast votes for a largely symbolic measure repudiating one of ObamaCare’s key provisions:
Missouri voters on Tuesday overwhelmingly rejected a federal mandate to purchase health insurance, rebuking President Barack Obama’s administration and giving Republicans their first political victory in a national campaign to overturn the controversial health care law passed by Congress in March.
“The citizens of the Show-Me State don’t want Washington involved in their health care decisions,” said Sen. Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield, one of the sponsors of the legislation that put Proposition C on the August ballot. She credited a grass-roots campaign involving Tea Party and patriot groups with building support for the anti-Washington proposition.
With most of the vote counted, Proposition C was winning by a ratio of nearly 3 to 1. The measure, which seeks to exempt Missouri from the insurance mandate in the new health care law, includes a provision that would change how insurance companies that go out of business in Missouri liquidate their assets. …
ObamaCare Already Working To Cut Costs. Like Making Sure Hundreds Of Thousands Of Kids Can’t Get Insurance.
Obama’s need to make sure that we all live in his version of Socialism fails once again.
See, ObamaCare requires that an insurance company that offers individual health care for children provide it as soon as a kid is sick. No questions, no choices, no caps, no limits. So, when a child comes down with some horrible disease and his parents didn’t have them covered, ObamaCare will step in and pay for it, right? Of course not. The insurance companies are required to pick them up at the same cost as a healthy kid and suck it up.
Well, they are looking at those odds and came up with a solution: Stop offering individual plans for kids.
Nice job, Obama.
I know, you lefties out there are saying “well that’s cruel and wrong”. No it’s not, you morons. Insurance is a bet. You place a bet with the insurance company that you will not get sick. The insurance company bets you will stay healthy or at least well enough that they will come out ahead. ObamaCare stacks the deck. Imagine going to a blackjack table where the dealer gets to pick out an ace and a jack for himself before the hand starts. Would you play?
ObamaCare goes after the one group that has the knowledge and ability to run healthcare and destroys them while protecting groups that make a MUCH higher profit margin, like pharmaceutical companies and does it while ignoring every consequence of its own actions.
Barack Obama has been mighty keen on rolling out the most positive aspects of ObamaCare first in order to protect vulnerable Democrats facing voters angry over the bill’s passage. One of the big wins for Obama in the bill was the mandate for insurers to allow parents to carry their kids on policies until their 26th birthday. However, that intervention has created a rather perverse set of incentives that will see fewer children insured:
Some major health insurance companies have stopped issuing certain types of policies for children, an unintended consequence of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul law, state officials said Friday.
Florida Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty said in his state UnitedHealthcare and Blue Cross Blue Shield have stopped issuing new policies that cover children individually. Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner Kim Holland said a couple of local insurers in her state have done likewise. …
The major types of coverage for children — employer plans and government programs — are not be affected by the disruption. But a subset of policies — those that cover children as individuals — may run into problems. Even so, insurers are not canceling children’s coverage already issued, but refusing to write new policies.
Big hat tip to Gateway Pundits for this find.
DON’T BE FOOLED–
Shirley Sherrod is no saint. Andrew Breitbart and Big Government released video earlier this week showing former Ag employee Shirley Sherrod admitting that she did not assist a poor farmer as much as she could have because of his “attitude” and race. You know the rest of the story. She said it was years ago, she said she learned from her experiences, she said blah-blah-blah… The democratic-media complex slammed Andrew Breitbart and FOX News for showing only a segment from her speech.
Earlier today an anonymous reader sent me this damning video revealing the buried racist remarks from the rest of Sherrod’s NAACP speech.
Of course, the state-run media does not want you to see this:Sherrod’s Race Baiting NAACP speech
Shirley Sherrod and the state-run media owe Andrew Breitbart an apology.
Of course the NAACP won’t say anything, because it was women and minority owned dealerships that were protected when Obama’s Government Motors started closing dealerships. Welcome to the real racism in the US.
Racism, promoted and pushed by the Obama administration and his friends.
The difference between private-sector decisions on business consolidation and those under government supervision gets exposed in a portion of Neil Barofsky’s audit of the government-driven closures of GM and Chrysler auto dealerships during the $62 billion bailout. There may be a question of whether the automakers needed to consolidate in order to shed poorly performing dealerships at all, but we’ll get back to that. The plan to consolidate dealerships that resulted from the push by the car czar and TARP used rational, objective measures to select the target outlets. In practice, those often got ignored in favor of politics, according to the audit:
GM determined that dealerships with a DPS Score of 100 were average performers; those below 70 were considered poor performers and would not be retained. SIGTARP noted, however, that GM did not uniformly apply the phase one criteria to the entire network. For example, our analysis found that two of the wind-down dealers did not meet either criterion. Furthermore, we found that, of the dealerships that met only one of the two criteria:
GM retained 355 (or approximately 41 percent) of the 858 dealerships that had a DPS score below 70.16
GM retained 9 of the 394 dealerships that sold fewer than 50 new vehicles in 2008.17
An additional 10 dealerships with a DPS score below 70 were in phase two wind-downs.
GM officials attributed these inconsistencies primarily to a desire to maintain coverage in certain rural areas where they have a competitive advantage over import auto companies that are not typically located in rural areas, although ultimately close to half of all of the GM dealerships identified for termination were in rural areas. Other dealerships were retained because they were recently appointed, were key wholesale parts dealers, or were minority- or woman-owned dealerships (emphasis mine).
Now, they make an interesting excuse. The company that sold and can service the ship are located in Rhode Island. They say it has nothing to do with avoiding the taxes.
Of course, in 6 months, he will have avoided the tax and can move the yacht back to Nantucket without concern for taxes. I guess we will know in 6 months if he is telling the truth or not. Write it on your calendar.
John Kerry, who fights on behalf of the little people on whose backs the rich get richer by avoiding taxes most Americans can’t afford to dodge, is seeing to it that the little people aren’t burdened by an extra $500k in his home state’s tax coffers.
From the Boston Herald:
Sen. John Kerry, who has repeatedly voted to raise taxes while in Congress, dodged a whopping six-figure state tax bill on his new multimillion-dollar yacht by mooring her in Newport, R.I.
Isabel – Kerry’s luxe, 76-foot New Zealand-built Friendship sloop with an Edwardian-style, glossy varnished teak interior, two VIP main cabins and a pilothouse fitted with a wet bar and cold wine storage – was designed by Rhode Island boat designer Ted Fontaine.
But instead of berthing the vessel in Nantucket, where the senator summers with the missus, Teresa Heinz, Isabel’s hailing port is listed as “Newport” on her stern.
Could the reason be that the Ocean State repealed its Boat Sales and Use Tax back in 1993, making the tiny state to the south a haven – like the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and Nassau – for tax-skirting luxury yacht owners?
“Never Let The Truth Ruin A Liberal Ideal”: NYT Blames Fox News For Sherrod Firing… Except That Fox Reported On Her AFTER She Was Fired.
Don’t worry Times. No one expects you to be truthful or accurate anymore. Just look at your sales numbers and you can see that. Don’t let the facts get in the way of your story.
The only thing that they like more than making up a story is outing a top secret program to harm our security and put our people in danger.
Final question: How did the main story here get lost? (Yeah, I know, the MSM buried it) Does anyone notice the nodding in agreement from the NAACP audience as she explains how she treated a white man with vapid racism? Are their cries of disgust or boos? No. Its general agreement. The NAACP had the audacity to accuse the Tea Party of racism when they are the obvious racists.
The New York Times on Thursday picked through the sordid saga of Shirley Sherrod, fired from her post at the U.S. Department of Agriculture after a clip of a speech to a gathering of a rural chapter of the Georgia NAACP appeared to show her hostility toward a white farmer seeking assistance.
A full version of the speech shows that was a set-up to Sherrod’s tale of racial reconciliation, though there are questions of how far her racial reconciliation really goes. That same speech reveals Sherrod accusing Republicans of being racist by opposing Obama and Obama-care, and Sherrod has gone on to accuse Fox News of using her as a "pawn" for its own reactionary, racist purposes.
Fox News didn’t run a report on the controversy until after Sherrod had resigned under White House pressure and after the NAACP had issued a press release condemning Sherrod. Yet in "For Fired Agriculture Official, Flurry of Apologies and Job Offer," reported by Sheryl Gay Stolberg, Shaila Dewan, and Brian Stelter, and written by Stolberg, the Times chose to blame a cabal of "right-wing Web sites" and Fox News for fostering the Sherrod scandal which led to her dismissal. As if Fox forced Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to do its right-wing bidding without every actually running a single story on Sherrod until after her firing, when the point became moot.