SOTU Speech: Obama’s Finest Trickery

Stephen Goddard (Flickr)

On Tuesday, Barack Obama gave the most disgraceful State of the Union speech in history.

You could cut the air in the chamber as he attempted to call for civility in politics… which was quickly followed by him heckling the Republican Congress to their faces.

Obama’s “greatest” proposal is what some Republicans have called his “Robin Hood” package.

With tax revenue and spending at all-time highs, he still wants the government to get a bigger share of the nation’s revenue.

But remember, Robin Hood was a hero. And Obama isn’t fooling anyone…

The Tales of Robin the Hoodwinker…

Obama’s tax reform proposals wouldn’t be revenue neutral. Instead, he looks to increase taxes by $320 billion, aiming to fund a raft of new social programs. “Free” community college tuition is high on Obama’s “do-good” list.

But also taking precedence on the list are tax increases targeted at stock traders and investors. Obama wants to raise the capital gains tax rate from $0.20 to $0.28. He even had the audacity to say President Ronald Reagan accepted this high rate in the 1980s – forgetting to let his audience know Reagan wanted them lower.

On top of the new levy of capital gains, he wants to increase fees on America’s largest banks. These fees, like most corporate taxes, would flow on and be paid by the customers. (Read: average Americans struggling to make ends meet.)

Putting the nail in our economy’s coffin, Obama wants to raise estate taxes. This would hit small business and farmers hard.

Essentially, Obama’s hit list has been dubbed the “Robin Hood” tax package by Republicans. But this is the wrong rhetoric. You see, Robin Hood helped the poor against an overtaxing tyrannical state. Robin Hood fought the officials of the government.

Instead, Obama’s plan is more reminiscent of the Sheriff of Nottingham who abused the poor to fill the coffers of the greedy king.

More Tricks and Mind Games

Apparently, the idiots running the GOP communications operation don’t really understand how big government is strangling America.

Small businesses, the engine of a growing economy, are at an all-time low… and by the look of things, not many new ones are being created, either. After all, innovation and small business are what create jobs.

Plain and simple, the small guy gets hosed as Obama tells him everything that he’s doing is for him.

And while the Obama economy has favored the wealthy Obama donors who fill his campaign coffers, the number of billionaires is rapidly growing under his regime. You see, Obama’s stifling regulation kills competition against the big guys already in business. Therefore, the rich keep getting richer.

Sure, the president uses “class warfare” rhetoric; but it’s all a part of government doublespeak. It’s nothing but more Obama schemes and mind games…

Regardless of party lines, money talks. So when you hear that Obama’s plans are being called “dead on arrival,” don’t believe it. John Boehner and the Republicans could adopt many of Obama’s proposals in advance of the 2016 elections.

After all, they want to be liked, too… and keep in mind, Robin Hood was the protagonist of the story.

 

This commentary originally appeared at WallStreetDaily.com and is reprinted here with permission. 

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

A Foreign Policy Rebuttal To Obama’s State Of The Union

Obama Peace

President Obama’s foreign policy is a miserable disaster. The tone-deaf president negotiates from a position of weakness with enemies of the United States while turning on allies like Israel and France.

His foreign policy follies are notable for a series of bad decisions and miscalculations, beginning with:

1. Removing economic sanctions against Iran without any concessions or agreement to terminate their overall objective to become a nuclear state.

2. His unilateral decision to “normalize relations” with Cuba, a major ally of North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela and one of the biggest human rights violators in the world.

3. Labeling ISIS as a “JV team of terrorist.” He underestimated the threat posed by the Islamic State terrorists and relied on the corrupt and incompetent Iraqi army to combat them

4. He claimed that al Qaeda was decimated. But a recent report by the RAND Corporation tracked a 58 percent increase over the last three years in jihadist terror groups.

Obama’s do-nothing approach is aiding and abetting the enemy. Even Hilary Clinton has criticized the president’s handling of ISIS. She recently said: “Great nations need organizing principles, and ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle. It may be a necessary brake on the actions you might take in order to promote a vision.”

The president doesn’t have a plan to “destroy” ISIS, nor any serious consideration of what it might take to defeat them. His lead-from-behind philosophy has destabilized the Middle East and has alienated his allies to the point that not even James Taylor can convince them that they have a friend in the U. S.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Obama’s Bloody Yemen Disaster

Twitter/Onur Kaya

When President Obama declares something a “success story,” you know it has “TOTAL FAILURE” embedded in its DNA.

Four months ago, America’s King Midas in Reverse crowed about the fruits of his triumphant foreign policy in jihad-infested Yemen. A “light footprint” approach to counterterrorism operations, he claimed, was the most effective path to stability. In addition, Obama has shoveled nearly $1 billion in American tax-subsidized foreign aid to Yemen.

Four months later, Iran-backed Shia rebels seized a Yemeni presidential palace. The president and his entire cabinet tendered their resignations on Thursday, creating a vacuum that al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula is ready and eager to fill. ISIS is gaining its own Sunni foothold in the Muslim terror-breeding ground. And while the JV team at the State Department dithers with hashtag games and selfies, adults at the Pentagon want to evacuate U.S. embassy personnel and other Americans before it’s too late.

It would be bad enough if the current crisis were merely the result of incompetence and negligence. But Obama’s disastrous Yemen policy reflects his radical leftwing administration’s deep-rooted ideological sympathies for our enemies.

This is, after all, the man who wrote immediately after 9/11 that the well-funded and highly educated murderous hijackers’ hatred grew “out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.” Obama’s pussyfoot strategy against jihadists was a direct rebuke to the supposed “cowboy” approach of George W. Bush, whom progressives blame for radicalizing poor, oppressed Yemenis. President Huggy Bear won a Nobel Prize for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples” and outreach to the Muslim world.

But what the kumbaya crowd refused to acknowledge is this: The Yemen-based jihadist network, like the worldwide Islamic terror movement, has been at war with us for years — long before the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions, long before 9/11, long before the global onset of Bush Derangement Syndrome. This coming October, America will mark the 15th anniversary of the U.S.S. Cole bombing in the Yemeni port of Aden, which took the lives of 17 American crewmembers.

Fifteen years.

In February 2009, Obama met with Cole families and promised them justice. Then, he betrayed them by ordering the Justice Department to abandon the death penalty case assembled against al-Qaida mastermind and chief Cole bombing suspect Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri under the Bush administration. Only after a public uproar did Obama reinstate the charges. He’s dragged his feet on the trial ever since, but found the time to release five Yemeni Gitmo detainees just last week. Another half-dozen went home at the end of last year. And until this week, Obama had planned to fly another 47 back to their volatile homeland.

All this despite five years of revolving-door Gitmo recidivist activities in Yemen — and with knowledge of Yemen’s terror training of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the jihadist who attempted to bomb Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day in 2009.

The Yemen chaos didn’t happen overnight. The White House has allowed jihad to fester there from Day One. Reminder: In late January 2009, the U.S. Embassy in Yemen came under gunfire. American diplomatic staff had been warned of a pending attack. That same month, two former Yemeni Gitmo detainees, Said Ali al-Shihri and Abu Hareth Muhammad al-Awfi, released a video publicly recommitting to “aid the religion,” “establish the rightly guided caliphate,” and “fight against our enemies” after undergoing terrorism “rehab” in Saudi Arabia.

Why has Obama so wantonly aided and abetted our enemies? Appeasement of the international human rights crowd and agreement with the soft-on-jihad lawyers infesting his own Justice Department. As I’ve reported previously, Attorney General Eric Holder’s law firm, Covington and Burling, provided dozens of dangerous Yemeni Gitmo detainees pro bono legal representation and sob-story media relations campaigns. At least nine Obama DOJ appointees represented or advocated for Gitmo denizens before taking positions in our government.

By words and action, the Obama White House has demonstrated that its primary allegiance lies not with protecting Americans, but with coddling jihadists (with a drone killing tossed in here and there, of course, to ward off critics and maintain political viability). If the Obama administration exerted as much energy combating Yemeni jihadists as it did waging war on the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, the Yemen capital might still be standing.

Conveniently, the political football-spiking White House left any mention of Yemen out of the State of the Union address. This is Obama’s own version of DeflateGate. Pfffffffffft.

COPYRIGHT 2015 CREATORS.COM

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Obama’s Attempt To Turn The Page Undermined By Policy Failures

obamaSOTU

It’s not in the printed text, but the most revealing words in President Obama’s seventh State of the Union address came near the end. After the scripted line, “I have no more campaigns to run,” elicited Republican applause, Obama ad libbed, “I know, because I won both of them.”

Thus the last quarter of Obama’s presidency resembles the first quarter, when he shut off discussion with House Republicans by saying, “I won.” But his second winning percentage was lower than his first — the only American president of which that can be said — and the House now has a record and the Senate a near-record Republican majority.

The first half of Obama’s speech was a deft attempt to, as he said, “turn the page.” The year 2014, he said, was “a breakthrough year for America,” the economy was finally growing at a respectable rate and U.S. troop deployments in war zones are nearly down to zero.

He was playing on the uptick — a “small” but real uptick, as FiveThirtyEight put it — in his polling numbers and in positive assessments of the economy. To give it voice, he quoted, twice, a woman (a former Democratic staffer, it seems) in the gallery.

In contrast to previous Obama speeches, he took some care to cite accurate statistics. No mention of the discredited claim that one in five college women will be raped or the misleading claim that women’s earnings are only 77 percent of men’s.

He cheered America for being number one in oil and gas production — something his administration has tried to prevent. He boasted that wages are rising — though not by much. His brief allusions to Obamacare sparked applause from Democrats — but the law remains highly unpopular.

Obama’s policy proposals were small stuff. More tax cuts for child care — but discrimination against stay-at-home moms and taxes on 529 college savings accounts. Paid sick leave. Equal pay for women — on the books already for 52 years. A minimum wage increase. He’s all for infrastructure but, in deference to rich donors, will veto the Keystone XL pipeline.

Free community college — even though it’s already free to those in lower-income households, and despite the evidence from student loan programs that colleges and universities sop up all the federal dollars with little gain to students.

Democrats, after applauding loudly in the first half of the speech, stayed mostly mum during much of the rest. There was silence when he called for trade promotion authority and free trade agreements. There was little noise when he called for tax reform — not surprisingly, given that he has ignored plans Republicans have put forward.

There was silence as well when he turned to foreign policy. Obama received better ratings on foreign than domestic policy in his first term; it’s the other way around now.

America, he said, is “stopping [the Islamic State’s] advance,” is “opposing Russian aggression,” is ending a Cuba policy “long past its expiration date,” and “our diplomacy is at work with respect to Iran.” It is leading “not with bluster, but with persistent, steady resolve.” But not, as most in the chamber and watching on TV know, with much in the way of results.

Obama seems finally to have realized that his divisive rhetoric has meant he hasn’t delivered on the red-white-and-blue America vision of his 2004 Democratic National Convention speech. He devoted the last 24 paragraphs of his prepared text to addressing that criticism.

But not very convincingly. A president calling for big tax increases this Congress will never pass is not effectively seeking bipartisan accords. A president still blaming his predecessor — “bluster” — for foreign problems is not seeking unified support. A president who says “we stand united” with the marchers in Paris but didn’t go there himself isn’t forging united action against the jihadists whose cause he refuses to name.

It looks like Obama is trying to set a left-wing agenda for his increasingly leftish party and to box in Hillary Clinton. But he hasn’t come up with policy proposals that can withstand serious scrutiny. Just with sloganeering he can blame Republicans for opposing.

The bigger problem for Obama and the Democrats is that the perceived failures of the stimulus package and Obamacare have undermined the case for big government as much as the perceived success of the Reagan economic policies strengthened the case for cutting it back. “Because I won” is a look back to the past, not a formula for the future.

COPYRIGHT 2015 THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Cyber Security Proposals Threaten Privacy

Obama on Cuban Relations

In the name of fighting against cyber attacks, Barack Obama wants to change the rules that protect your personal data. You see, the real motherlode of data on Americans currently sits in private hands.

But Obama wants to move the data into the claws of law enforcement agencies.

The goal is to have private sector companies give even more information to the government, in exchange for protection against lawsuits for the misuse of data.

It’s a beneficial deal for the companies and the government, but what this deal implies for the consumer is downright frightening…

The leading privacy advocates were aghast at Obama’s latest moves against online privacy.

In a statement criticizing the Obama proposal, the Electronic Frontier Foundation said: “Introducing information-sharing proposals with broad liability protections, increasing penalties under the already-draconian Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and potentially decreasing the protections granted to consumers under state data breach law are both unnecessary and unwelcomed. The status quo of overweening national security and law enforcement secrecy means that expanded information-sharing poses a serious risk of transferring more personal information to intelligence and law enforcement agencies.”

The False Solution for a True Problem

Cyber security is a real problem, but the biggest threats are outside the country. Hackers from Russia and China are threatening private firms and public networks via the internet. Instead of beefing up security against these threats, the Obama team wants to broadly collect more data on generally law-abiding American citizens.

In the internet world, this is akin to having the TSA search your 85-year-old grandma at the airport. The focus is all wrong.

If you clearly analyze the myriad proposals affecting the internet from the Obama administration, they all have one common denominator: they give the federal government more control over private activity and citizens.

Another frightening proposal is pending at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), one that would declare data networks to be public utilities. Reason being, once again, to give the government (in this case, the FCC) dramatically more power over internet providers.

Adding insult to injury, a third proposal uses the FCC to strike down laws in the states that prohibit government agencies from building broadband networks to compete against private firms. Obama and his team love the idea of socializing the internet by putting networks in the hands of local governments.

Bottom line: Should these three proposals pass, they’ll dramatically change the way the internet works. Government as the guardian of your private data? Check. Government as regulator of all private internet providers? Check. And finally, the government actually providing your internet access.

A government in control of all cyber space is slowly taking shape. Consider yourself warned.

 

This commentary originally appeared at WallStreetDaily.com and is reprinted here with permission.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom