About Me

Name: neal abbott
Email: blognealblog@gmail.com
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Obamanation Of Desolation: Part I

Whenever you rate some head of state, there are many things to consider. Maybe beginning with his campaign might be a good start. What would you think of a candidate who based all of his popularity upon acceptance of the young? Who ran on promises of non-descript hope and change? Whose campaign had subtle undertones of racism and class warfare? And who laid the groundwork for his candidacy with an autobiography depicting the struggles of his short and provincial life?

It’s hard to thoroughly judge a head of state just from this image. It might seem harmless enough, but when you add what he did after being elected, you are horrified. Yes, that Adolf Hitler was a real bad leader. Oh, did you think I was talking about someone else? Someone a bit more recent? Someone like, Barack Obama perchance? Some might get upset that I would compare Obama to Hitler. To tell the truth, they are not the same. For instance, one was a ruthless dictator, and the other is trying to be. Still unfair? Think of all the unconstitutional power grabs Obama has made in such a short time.

Democratic Senator Robert Byrd criticized Obama’s appointment of “czars” to oversee federal policy, saying these executive positions amount to a power grab by the executive branch. Such czars include such departments as health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy & climate change. These by law are under the province of the senate, but that hasn’t stopped Obama from making these his own. Byrd said such positions “can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances.” These czars account neither to Congress, nor to cabinet officials, but solely to the president.

Another power grab by Obama was his plans to control the Cencus. This has always be a part of the Commerce Department. Obama wants a Commerce Secretary who reports directly to him. To this end, he nominated Republican Senator Judd Gregg for the position. Gregg eventually turned it down. He gave two reasons: one, he disagreed with how Obama forced his stimulus through the congress, and two, his refused to politicize the Cencus by making it a work of the White House.

Obama knows the particular kind of governmental sausage that he is making is difficult to watch being made, so he needs a Republican as a butcher. This way, when the people backlash, he can spread the blame and point to bipartisan efforts. Republicans need to keep the blood off of their hands and almost do the opposite of what Obama does so they are above censure. If Obama walks through the door, Republicans should climb through the window just to be different. If Gregg stayed on, Republicans on the whole can be partially blamed for the calamity that is to come. This method is similar of the way the Soviets recruited spied during the Cold War. They would get someone with access to classified information to perform some small act, then use it to force them to perform worse. If Republicans can be tricked or bribed into working with Obama for the sake of “bipartisanship” they can then be forced into far worse.

There is a simple reason why Obama wants to get his hands on the Cencus. If you control the Cencus, you control the money. Some think if the Cencus is completely scientific, then Obama cannot do anything to alter it, but this is not true. Obama wishes to use an illegal technique favored my minority groups known as “sampling.” You count the number in a small area and multiply. The number isn’t accurate, but considered close enough. How this can be manipulated is obvious. How much and where you sample leverages the outcome. Thus, anything that threatens the genuineness of the Census has profound implications. Not only is it the basis for redistricting, it provides the inforamtion by which government spending is determined. The Bureau of Labor Statistics also uses the Census. Bruce Chapman, former Cencus Director, said "The real issue is who directs the Census, the pros or the pols."

And lets not forget the latest Obama power grab when he basically made himself his own auto czar. When you consider great automotive magnates, what names come to mind? Names like Ford, Shelby, Iacocca, Delorean, … Obama? The White House just fired a private compny’s CEO. Has that sunk in yet? GMs former leader, Waggoner (odd name for a car man), was fired by the Presidnet. I hope that at least he gets his contractually obligated bonuses. Where does it end? Will Obama fire the CEO of McDonalds for contributing to obecity, and thus the health care crisis, which effects the economy? Will Obama oust Sarkozy for not wanting to spend more of the French government’s money on bailout efforts? Will Obama depose pope Benny for his teaching on abortion and homosexuality? It is goes as far as we let him.

People are so dizzy over the Waggoner firing, that they forget the shotgun wedding Obama forced on Chrysler by making them merge with Fiat (look up the verb fiat, and you will laugh at the irony). When the government forces a private business to merge with another, the government has gone too far. When Obama makes GM fade out pickups because they are not green enough, even though they are their best sellers, business choices are being made, not for market reasons, but for political. And I’ve gone too far by calling Obama a dictator? Maybe I shouldn’t have compared him to Hitler. Maybe I should have compared him instead to someone like Charlie Chaplin. What do these two have in common? There is one area in which they are almost similar. Chaplin played the part of a dictator …

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive