Why Rush Is Wrong On Obama Scandals

Rush Fox News 300x156 Why Rush is wrong on Obama scandals

Rush Limbaugh is taking a “whistling past the graveyard” approach to Barack Obama’s scandals. He is being very cautious about allowing himself to feel that some damage will be done to Obama when the dust from these scandals clears.

Rush even quotes James Carville’s liberal wishful thinking about this lasting “only 30 days” to help convince himself he’s right.  Nevertheless, Rush is wrong.

While there is no doubt that Obama won’t be impeached, as Rush allows that isn’t important. Saying there won’t be any damage to Obama his Party and their dangerous agenda is simply wrong.

These scandals will do the following:

When Rush is proved “right” and nothing “seems” to change, the fuse of a renewed TEA party revolution will be lit.

People will be reminded America isn’t supposed to be this way.

Democrats will remain on defense through the mid-term election cycle – you’re not winning when you are on defense.

More whistleblowers will come forward because those already out will be insulated from reprisals.  Fast and Furious can be revisited.  “He’s not a citizen” will get new life.  Conservative state legislatures will be embolden to pass more conservative laws and repeal  more liberal ones. Photo id to vote – think Boston bombing.  More sheriffs will sue Obama over gun control.  The IRS will be neutered.

It will force House Republicans to finally do their jobs or face an angry constituency willing to throw them out in many districts.  This will shift the leadership of Congressional GOP from RINOs to more conservative leaders.  It will set new standards for GOP candidates – collaborators need not apply.

This makes it far more likely the GOP will hold the House and regains the Senate.

It weakens Obama’s leverage to ram through his socialist programs.

It weakens Obamacare’s grip on us.

It will further infuriate average Americans being disadvantaged by Obama’s sequestration.

It will end gun control and immigration “reform efforts”.

It will make bringing the needed 5% of conservatives back to vote easier.

When most of Obama’s rank and file DO NOT turn on him the “us versus them” mindset needed for conservatives to stop pandering to Hispanics and Blacks, who will never vote Republican, will grow.

This will encourage “Atlas Shrugged” type passive resistance to government and more willingness to sue and fight the IRS giving rise to appeals of court losses to the IRS.

The coupling of the Gosnell case with the IRS attacks on pro-lifers on behalf of Planned Parenthood will cause these groups to redouble their efforts to stop abortions and enjoy previously unattainable successes in the courts and in public opinion.

These things will make having Obama around worth the trade.

Photo: Standard Compliant

University Of Texas Tower Sniper Killings: More Questions After 46 Years

University of Texas Tower 225x300 University of Texas Tower Sniper Killings: More questions after 46 years

After 46 years the Texas Tower sniper killings still raises important questions.

On August 1, 1966 Charles Whitman a 25 year old former Marine and college student started his day by killing his mother and wife. He then packed up a variety of guns and a large quantity of ammunition and drove to the University of Texas Austin campus took the elevator to the top floor and began to shoot people as they walked by 28 floors below.

When he was finished he had murdered 17 including an unborn child and injured another 32 innocent people.  For 1 hour and 45 minutes Whitman kept killing until he was gunned down by two brave Austin Police officers.

According to reports armed civilians arrived at the scene and helped the police by concentrating suppressing fire at Whitman. This kept his head down and likely saved lives until the police could get up to the observation deck and kill Whitman.

Armed citizens acting in the truest spirit of the Second Amendment helped the police stop a killing rampage in 1966 Austin Texas.  Is there any chance this could happen today?

Can anyone deny that if this were to happen today the police would video tape the civilians and arrest them after “talking” Whitman down?

Whitman did four years in the Marine Corps.  He spent 18 months at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina in the early 1960s. The government has admitted that during the same period those who were stationed at Camp Lejeune were exposed to several very dangerous chemicals in the drinking water provided to them.

Some of those who were exposed to these chemicals are now suffering from fifteen acknowledged maladies including various cancers. Among the dangerous chemicals was vinyl chloride which is linked to cancerous brain tumors. Whitman’s autopsy showed he had a glioblastoma brain tumor the size of a pecan. Was the tumor big enough to alter his behavior?

Did Charles Whitman suffer from brain cancer because he drank the chemicals the Marine Corps fed him? The government says just 30 days exposure is enough for them to cover treatment for fifteen serious illnesses with no questions asked.

Whitman’s suicide notes show he fought a losing battle to control urges to kill he could not understand. He asked for the autopsy. Shouldn’t Whitman’s murders be reexamined or does a possible finding that he killed because he was sick from government water make that impossible? How many other Marines committed unthinkable out-of-character crimes that might be traced back to Camp Lejeune water?

Did the poison water cause Charles Whitman to become a killer?

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/sites/lejeune/faq_chemicals.html

http://www.cedars-sinai.edu/Patients/Health-Conditions/Brain-Tumors-and-Brain-Cancer.aspx

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/25/frank-luntz-rush-limbaugh_n_3153614.html

http://www.coachisright.com/the-texas-tower-sniper-killings-still-raising-questions-after-46-years/

Why Obamacare Ruling Is Good For Tea Party

Obamacare Slam Dunk Supreme Court SC Why Obamacare Ruling Is Good For Tea Party

The TEA party movement was born of the threat Obamacare posed to us. It will send the enthusiasm on our side sky high. It will do very little to excite the Left – hey, they won, didn’t they?

The Supreme Court’s Obamacare ruling has placed the weight of pulling America’s wagon on middle class people. In the short run, Democrats will be delirious, and their cheerleaders in the media will be insufferable – in the short run. They will all act as if they have forgotten what happened in the elections of 2010 – but we will remind them in November.

In 2010, when Obamacare was originally passed with no Senate votes from Republicans, it became the driving force that propelled millions of Americas to stand and fight. We converged on Washington from all over the country demanding that something be done  “to fix this.” When it became clear that the way to “fix it” was to vote out the Democrats and vote in a conservative majority in the House and Senate, we rolled up our sleeves and, with rarely seen levels of enthusiasm, marched to the polls. That was BEFORE Obamacare was poured into concrete by Justice Roberts. That was before the absolute urgency of voting out every Democrat in the House and the Senate was staring us in the face.

This will do very little to energize the Left – Democrats will SAY we must elect Democrats to preserve what we have, but saving something that IS won’t fire up voters like changing something that has BECOME.

After a few weeks when the decision has been fully understood, the power of America’s TEA party movement will emerge. There will be rallies, and the spirit of 2010 will fill the air.  Those who would say “The TEA party movement is dead” will do so at their own political peril.

This decision keeps the assaults on religious freedoms in place.  Now, which side will THAT  fire up?

Follow Coach at twitter.com @KcoachcCoach

Photo credit: terrellaftermath

Related posts:

  1. Pelosi: Obamacare Is Good For Freedom! Remember when the leering, maniacal Nancy Pelosi told us that…
  2. Finally, The Truth About Obamacare Comes Out What was abundantly clear about Obamacare’s real costs, to those…

A Headline That Needs No Explanation

Obama Presidential Seal Podium Speech SC 780x1024 A Headline That Needs No Explanation

Last Friday, Rush read from a Real Clear Politics article called “Obama’s White Support Is Too Low to Win.” The message of the piece should have been clear enough, but some choose to nuance its message.

Saying Barack Obama doesn’t have enough white support to win doesn’t need a “Yeah but” attached to it, but of course it did. In this case, unfortunately, the “Yeah but” was: “electoral data indicates Mitt Romney has not yet attracted enough of these white voters to capitalize on Obama’s weakness.” Although this line was probably necessary to gain approval from a cautious editor, there isn’t much “there” there. It deliberately overlooks a huge white rhino in Mitt Romney’s campaign war room: of those who intend to pull a lever for Romney, probably more than half will be voting AGAINST Barack Obama, not FOR Mitt Romney.

There are few commenters who will say the truth about what is happening on our street corners and “meeting places” online.  Nevertheless, what they are ducking is that most people who want to get rid of Obama see Mitt Romney as the name on a commode handle they MUST pull down to flush Obama away and not much more.

Enthusiasm on the Right far outstrips that of the Left.  Barack Obama has brought about the return of the “broken glass conservative” – people who would swim through alligators then crawl through broken glass to vote against him. These voters don’t really care whose name is on the Republican line.

Yes, white people will vote against Obama, and yes, the Left will call that racism (although blacks voting 95% for Obama in 2008 were NOT racist?), but none of that means anything. Whites will vote against Obama for the same reasons 20% of blacks very well might vote against him and 40% of Jews will vote against him: because his polices are killing what is left of America, and they don’t like it one bit.

If anyone but Ron Paul had won the Republican nomination, it would likely be the same situation. As the old joke ends, “the dogs don’t like the food.”

 

Follow Coach at twitter.com @KcoachcCoach

Related posts:

  1. Poll: Most Of Our Readers Would Vote For Romney If He Won Nomination Last week, we put up a poll asking our readers…
  2. Why Hispanics Won’t Help Obama Win The Catholic Vote In it’s last survey, Pew found that among white Catholics, Barack Obama…

Obama’s Money Woes Speak Volumes

Barack Obama Phone SC Obama’s money woes speak volumes

We haven’t heard the boast that “Obama will have $1 billion to run on” for quite a while, but those who are hoping Barack Obama will be re-elected have to be shocked at the relative condition of his fundraising so far. Knowing how to count and read tells anyone Obama could not get to $1 billion at the rate he is progressing since last summer. Nevertheless, this fact is scarcely touched upon in the mainstream media, as if not speaking about it means his fundraising problems don’t exist.

Last week, Obama raised eyebrows instead of money when it was announced he was asking people who are getting married (or celebrating other events where monetary gifts are customary) to redirect the money to his campaign. Given this fact, how long will it be before legions of Obama’s sycophants stand on street corners shaking tin cans with “Forward” on them?

By any measure, Obama won’t even get to the $ 750 million he had to crush John McCain with after tricking (a common Muslim fighting tactic) the hapless Senator from Arizona by reversing his promise to take only public funding – surprise surprise, he lied!

So far, Obama has attended over 140 fundraisers, breaking all records for these events by a sitting President. He has abandoned any pretense that he is interested in governing. He spends his time going from one event to the other, only stopping to play golf at a record rate as well. Nevertheless, he is NOT getting the money from these events one would imagine he would pull in. His campaign is begging small donors for as little as $3.00, and his big donors are backing away. George Soros does not have the money Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers have.  The likely addition of Donald Trump’s contributions will further smother the few financial resources Obama will have.

The message here is clear: money has always equaled speech, and those who are speaking are saying they don’t want four more years of Barack Obama.

Money talks, and other things walk.

Follow Coach at twitter.com @KcoachcCoach

Related posts:

  1. Revealed By WikiLeaks: Obama Team Stole Election, Bribed Jesse Jackson And Took Russian Money In 2008 According to internal Emails circulated among the staff at Stratfor, an Austin…
  2. Obama Uses Your Money To Monitor The Media, Outsource Jobs, And Teach Kenyans Genital Hygiene The American people often complain that the government “isn’t listening.”…