Barack Obama thinks "Austrian" is a language

So intellectual, so sophisticated, so cosmopolitan, so nuanced. No, in reality it's all fluff and teleprompter. In reality, it's . . . ah, it's an interesting question, ah, ah, I had already formed relationships, ah, ah . . . in Austrian is it called wheeling-dealing?

No Mr. Wheeler Dealer President. It's called German.

The G20 moves the world a step closer to a global currency

The world is a step closer to a global currency, backed by a global central bank, running monetary policy for all humanity
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Last Updated: 2:06PM BST 03 Apr 2009

A single clause in Point 19 of the communiqué issued by the G20 leaders amounts to revolution in the global financial order.

"We have agreed to support a general SDR allocation which will inject $250bn (£170bn) into the world economy and increase global liquidity," it said. SDRs are Special Drawing Rights, a synthetic paper currency issued by the International Monetary Fund that has lain dormant for half a century.

In effect, the G20 leaders have activated the IMF's power to create money and begin global "quantitative easing". In doing so, they are putting a de facto world currency into play. It is outside the control of any sovereign body. Conspiracy theorists will love it.

read the whole thing

the United States as we know it is rapidly disappearing

SOROS SEES END OF DOLLAR AS WORLD CURRENCY

Obama declares US not at war with Islam

AP to sue Obama's poster artist for copyright infringement
Obama probably doesn't care that his artist ripped off AP. Castro never believed in bourgeoisie capitalist intellectual property either. Hell Mr. President, we're only sharing the wealth like you suggest. We're just following your example. Yes we can, yes we can!

quote

"Most of our nation's great problems, including our economic problems, have as their root decaying moral values. Whether we have the stomach to own up to it or not, we have become an immoral people left with little more than the pretense of morality. ... Do you believe that it is moral and just for one person to be forcibly used to serve the purposes of another? And, if that person does not peaceably submit to being so used, do you believe that there should be the initiation of some kind of force against him? Neither question is complex and can be answered by either a yes or no. For me the answer is no to both questions but I bet that your average college professor, politician or minister would not give a simple yes or no response. They would be evasive and probably say that it all depends. ...[That] is because they are sly enough to know that either answer would be troublesome for their agenda. A yes answer would put them firmly in the position of supporting some of mankind's most horrible injustices such as slavery. After all, what is slavery but the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another? A no answer would put them on the spot as well because that would mean they would have to come out against taking the earnings of one American to give to another in the forms of farm and business handouts, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps and thousands of similar programs that account for more than two-thirds of the federal budget. There is neither moral justification nor constitutional authority for what amounts to legalized theft. This is not an argument against paying taxes. We all have a moral obligation to pay our share of the constitutionally mandated and enumerated functions of the federal government. ...[But] now that the U.S. Congress has established the principle that one American has a right to live at the expense of another American, it no longer pays to be moral." --George Mason University economics professor Walter E. Williams

half of us don't want a Fascist-Socialist USA

Partisan Gap in Obama Job Approval Widest in Modern Era
April 2, 2009 | Pew Research Center

For all of his hopes about bipartisanship, Barack Obama has the most polarized early job approval ratings of any president in the past four decades. The 61-point partisan gap in opinions about Obama's job performance is the result of a combination of high Democratic ratings for the president -- 88% job approval among Democrats -- and relatively low approval ratings among Republicans (27%).

read the whole thing

Obama to end capitalism - SNL

Why does he bash us?

April 5, 2009 Posted by Paul at 3:10 PM | Powerline

We've commented more often than we would have liked to about President Obama's constant bashing of the U.S before foreign audiences. Perhaps it's time to consider why Obama persists in doing this. Here are four possible reasons:

First, it's what Democrats do. Obama isn't the first Democratic president to "blame America first." Rather, he is following in the footsteps of Presidents Carter and Clinton. Both must somehow have thought, as Obama professes to, that our friends and adversaries would react to our self-abasement by embracing policies more to our liking. Both found out that nations and factions act as they do out of self-interest, not in reaction to American words. Obama caught a glimpse of this phenomenon in Europe last week.

But Obama has already done as much America-bashing in a little more than two months as Carter and Clinton did in their entire presidencies. Moreover, if memory serves, neither Clinton nor even Carter went hat-in-hand to our sworn enemies, as Obama has done with Iran. (Carter suggested that we had an "inordinate fear" of Communism, but I don't think he apologized to the Soviet Union for it). Thus, there seems to be more at work here than mere adherence to past Democratic wishful thinking.


read the rest

Obama wants total control over Internet

Can Obama shut down the Internet?
posted at 12:17 pm on April 4, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

When Mother Jones and Jules Crittenden agree, isn’t that a sign of the apocalypse? Both take a hard look at the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, S.773 sponsored by Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Olympia Snowe (R-ME). The bill addresses the need to protect vital networks from cyber attack, but it gives a lot of power to the executive branch — perhaps too much power. Mother Jones reports:

The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (PDF) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to the president.

The bill does not only add to the power of the president. It also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws.

read more shocking facts here

Obama Wants to Control the Banks

There's a reason he refuses to accept repayment of TARP money

APRIL 4, 2009 | Stuart Varney | Wall Street Journal

I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.

It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration's thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.

If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash -- which was often forced on them in the first place -- the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That's what's happening right now.

read the whole thing

h/t: Founding Bloggers