There is nothing Obama has done of any significance during his 19 months in office that would warrant this characterization.

Well, maybe.

He has so galvanized America against his radical, ineffectual and anti-American policies and actions that what would have been thought to be impossible at the time of his election now is a strong possibility: a Republican landslide in November and retaking of both houses of Congress.

We can think of a few appropriate terms that describe Obama well:

Arrogant.

Delusions of Grandeur.

Each of these alone should disqualify one from becoming President.

We definitely have a disaster for a President!

How 'Brilliant' Can President Obama Be?
Jeffrey S. Howard     08/27/2010

Every person, newscaster and commentator always prefaces any, even the mildest criticism, of President Obama's policies with some statement about how dazzlingly brilliant the man is. Liberals, conservatives, independents — it never changes. Why is this? And most important of all, is it true?

What and where is the proof that Obama is such a sharp fellow? The recorded evidence is unavailable since his academic records, and test scores from three universities are sealed at his demand. Sure, he graduated from Harvard, but so did George Bush, who earned an MBA but is still pilloried by some as dumber than dirt.

We shall have to examine Obama's performance and make our own assumptions based on observations.

Obama selected advisers and Cabinet heads who have basically no experience in the private sector. He relies heavily on them to tell him what to do about the sick economy. Their knee-jerk responses are Keynesian (borrow and spend), based on a dubious theory popular 70 years ago, and proved unworkable in the past.

They sold us the stimulus ("porkulus") package of spending.The result? Rising unemployment and falling home sales prove that "recovery summer" is going down the tube without touching the sides. The president retains his economic Rasputins. Is loyalty to failure a sign of a great mind?

Obama farmed out the stimulus, omnibus budget, financial reform, cap-and-tax and health care bills to Congress — allowing it free rein. He did not exercise leadership and instead abdicated to the whims of Nancy Pelosi, David Obey, Harry Reid and Chris Dodd.

Trillions are borrowed and spent on the public sector while real jobs evaporate. Banks invest in bonds instead of businesses.
Impending and threatened mandates, regulation and tax increases choke off entrepreneurial ambitions. Does this activity indicate a high level of intelligence, or just managerial ineptitude?

The president is unable to string a cogent sentence together without a pair of Teleprompters working perfectly. He can deliver a mesmerizing speech but can't even remember who is standing beside him when the tape runs off the tracks. His most often used extemporaneous word is "um."

This may be a clue as to why he has granted fewer press conferences than any president in memory. Can such performances be equated to "brilliance"? Not in my book.

Stepping in the political equivalent of a doggie dumpling seems to bring out the worst in Obama. Why and how could he pop off with everything from "The Cambridge Police acted stupidly" to flip-flops on the New York mosque issue, and everything in between? His inane mumblings about the skivvy shorts bomber, the public trial of the 9/11 plotters, the fanatic major who gunned down 13 soldiers, the Arizona immigration law and "saving or creating" jobs belies any vast reservoir of intelligence.

Sharp presidents do not dive into lose/lose situations with such gusto.

How is Obama's foreign policy working out? The U.S. needs strong allies to defeat monstrous enemies. Dissing the British, scolding Israel, canceling the missile shield in Eastern Europe and groveling to foreign royalty do not bode well. Our enemies, from Iran to Venezuela, smell weakness and timidity. Ignoring cold reality and dreaming that personal charisma is the solution to international tensions is probably on the daft side of the intelligence continuum.

The "4 million green jobs" mantra espoused by the president is a canard when examined closely. Renewable energy technology exists only due to huge government subsidies. Ethanol is inefficient, raising the prices of gasoline and corn. Wind farms produce intermittent power that flummoxes the grid and requires conventional power plants to run continuously as backup. The net carbon reduction is miniscule.

Both schemes are massive misallocations of resources better used elsewhere. An astute president would inform himself on both sides of the issue rather than blatantly parrot a load of poppycock from the Van Jones crowd.

A Republican president who parties far more than he works would be trashed by every media outlet in the land. But Obama is a Democrat who enjoys the media's deep support. He escapes any serious questions about his busy golf schedule, multiple vacations, endless fundraising and campaigning, constant banquets and concerts in the White House, and his obvious detachment from the people he supposedly leads.

He appears more of a dilettante than a leader. A smart fellow would move to de-emphasize his privileged lifestyle instead of flaunting it in front of a nation mired in a recession.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, maybe Obama is smart. Then again, Jimmy Carter was intelligent but proved to be the worst president of our lifetimes — up to now.

Howard, a Redmond, Wash.-based real estate developer, appeared on this page Aug. 20 with an "Open Letter To President Obama."

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/545302/201008271806/How-Brilliant-Can-President-Obama-Be-.aspx

The results?

The most severe, protracted and painful economic “Recession” since the Great Depression. The actual situation is far more severe than most are aware because both the federal government and the news media have suppressed much of the damning information.

What the Obama Administration is doing to combat our disastrous economic milieu is the antithesis of what would actually work. In other words, they are exacerbating and needlessly prolonging the agony rather than curing it, just like the errors perpetrated by the Franklin Roosevelt presidency. Even worse, if Obama was a student of history, he should learn from these mistakes.

But he is not learning nor does he show substantive concern … except when it comes to playing golf and taking a multitude of vacations.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and head of the National Economic Council, Larry Summers, must be fired or resign.

And, of course, Obama must also be removed from office.

Fire the Job Killers
by Newt Gingrich     09/01/2010

On Monday we will celebrate Labor Day, a holiday to commemorate and give thanks for the contributions of the American worker to our nation’s strength and prosperity.

This year’s holiday is a particularly opportune time to reflect upon that message.

America’s unemployment rate stands at a stubborn 9.5%.  If you include those who are underemployed (working part-time but seeking full-time work) that number is closer to 18.4%.

Last week, the Labor Department revised second quarter economic growth down from 2.4% to 1.6%.

Sales of existing homes are at the lowest level since 1995.

The small business confidence survey is at the lowest level since the survey began in 2003.

Overall, it has been 31 months since the recession started and the economy is still losing jobs.

This Labor Day, ask yourself: If America’s strength is indeed a product of the strength of the American worker, what does it tell us about America’s prospects when so many Americans are not working?

In other words, can America work if Americans aren’t working?

John Boehner was right: Geithner and Summers Must Go

Last week, House Minority Leader John Boehner called on President Obama to ask for the resignations of Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Larry Summers, the head of the National Economic Council.

John Boehner is exactly right.  While President Obama cannot be blamed for causing the recession, it was the actions of his administration (and his accomplices in the Democratic Congress) which have artificially extended the length of this recession and caused more pain for the American people.

John Boehner has good standing to lead the charge for a change in direction in our economic policies.

In addition to being a small business owner himself, John was the fourth ranked conference chair when I was Speaker of the House from 1995-1998. Two weeks ago, in this newsletter, we reviewed the record on job creation of the Gingrich Congress versus the Pelosi Congress.  By controlling spending and cutting taxes under the Gingrich Congress, job creation soared while the budget was balanced, leading to over $600 billion of federal debt being paid.  John remembers these principles well.

In the speech, Boehner rightly targeted the out-of-control spending, a tax code that is too complicated and has become a tool for special interests, and big “government run amok” as some of the chief culprits behind our prolonged recession.

The big government stimulus bill, the tax increases of the health bill, the plan to let the 2003 tax cuts expire, and the massive growth of government under the Obama Administration are all actions directly attributable to this administration which have killed jobs.

President Obama must be willing to hold his administration officials accountable.

The Worst Decision of All?

A few weeks ago in this newsletter, I cited a study by Robert Barro which estimated that without the extension of unemployment benefits to 99 weeks, the unemployment rate would be 6.8% instead of 9.5%.

Barro had an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal this week that echoed Leader Boehner’s call for the President to replace his economic team, and outlining why the Obama Administration’s policies are directly responsible for the unnatural long life of this recession.

In the piece, Barro points out that the extension of unemployment insurance to 99 weeks was unprecedented compared to previous extensions during economic downturns, which averaged around 40 weeks.  For instance, during the 1982 recession, the unemployment rate was even higher—10.8%.  Yet, we did not have anything close to a 99-week extension for unemployment benefits.

Borro notes that during the 1982 recession, the peak mean duration of unemployment was 21.2 weeks and the share of long-term unemployment (those unemployed more than 26 weeks) was 24.5%.  Contrast those figures with those of the current recession, where mean duration of unemployment last month stood at 35.2 weeks and the share of long term unemployment was 46.2%.

Borro writes, “The dramatic expansion of unemployment-insurance eligibility to 99 weeks is almost surely the culprit.”

This decision, too, lies squarely on the back of the Obama Administration.

It is even more embarrassing considering that Larry Summers had previously written that welfare payments and unemployment insurance are a significant cause of long-term unemployment.

Geithner and Summers must go.

“Our fresh start needs to begin now”

As Boehner said in his speech:

“Now, this is no substitute for a referendum on the president’s job killing agenda.  That question will be put before the American people in due time. But we do not have the luxury of waiting months for the president to pick scapegoats for his failing stimulus policies. We’ve tried 19 months of government-as-community organizer.  It hasn’t worked.  Our fresh start needs to begin now.”

Even Democratic Congressman Tom Perriello has called for Geithner and Summers to be fired.

There could be no stronger signal from President Obama that his economic policies have not worked and that it is time for a change in direction than by replacing his economic team to get new ideas and new perspectives into the Oval Office.

Mr. President, Geithner and Summers must go.

Consider it a Labor Day gift to the American people.

http://content.eaglepub.com/?largpZ5p.WRHIegnooqNljglqZWsuNgRl

One more egregious and inexcusable action (or inaction) by the United State’s worst “president?”

AZ Governor Learned News of Obama’s UN Human Rights Report on Internet

What are these goals? Severe curtailment and iron fisted control of the oil industry.

Jobs Knowingly Killed And Destroyed
Investor’s Business Daily     8/25/2010

Unemployment: A damning memo shows the administration knew its oil drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico would kill tens of thousands of jobs but did it anyway. We're the ones getting drilled.

There's a law known as the law of unintended consequences. It's invoked when you try to do the right thing but overlook other events and occurrences set in motion by your actions. In the case of the drilling moratorium, the consequences were intended.

In June, U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman struck down Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's original moratorium, saying it was overkill based on flawed reasoning. "If some drilling equipment parts are flawed, is it rational to say all are?" Feldman asked in his ruling. "That sort of thinking seems heavy-handed and rather overbearing."

So the administration went back, rearranged a few words and a few deck chairs, and reissued its moratorium. Last week, the Justice Department filed more than 27,000 pages of documents in a New Orleans court in the latest round of litigation over the moratorium.
Among them is a memo detailing how the administration knew the job losses its drilling moratorium would cause and simply chose to ignore them and the people and communities affected.

The July 10 memo shows how Michael Bromwich, new director of the Minerals Management Service, told Salazar that a six-month halt in deep-water drilling would result in "lost direct employment" affecting 9,450 workers and "lost jobs from indirect and induced effects" affecting 13,797 more.

Nevertheless, the blanket moratorium was continued because Interior felt it couldn't trust the offshore oil industry or its own Minerals Management Service.

"Are all airplanes a danger because one was? All oil tankers like Exxon Valdez? All trains? All mines?" Judge Feldman asked in his ruling. The administration's answer still seems to be yes, as offshore oil rigs find their way to other shores, and communities dry up along with the oil business that sustained them.

President Obama, battered by a jobless recovery after a failed stimulus, may have an October surprise, according to Michael McKenna, president of MWR Strategies, an oil industry consulting firm in Washington.

He tells Bloomberg that Obama may agree to an October lifting of the moratorium ahead of a proposed Nov. 30 date, claiming credit for the oil spill cleanup efforts of others while promising the jobs will come back. The moratorium may be lifted, but the jobs won't come back, as new regulations keep remaining rigs idle until perhaps mid-2011.

"Lifting the moratorium is almost unimportant," McKenna said in the interview. "It's how difficult the regulatory regime is going to be afterward. The endgame here is to make it a very, very difficult and time-consuming regulatory process."

These regulations don't apply only to deep-water drilling; they already have affected shallow-water exploration. Only two permits for new shallow-water wells have been approved since new safety regulations were issued June 8, according to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, the Interior unit that oversees offshore drilling. The fewest permits issued last year in one month was eight.

As damaging as the Deepwater Horizon disaster was, the administration's actions aren't about drilling safety. They're about drilling not at all and slowing things down until an oil and natural gas industry that supports 9.2 million workers nationwide and generates 7.5% of U.S. gross domestic product withers away.

A recent study by Science Applications International Corp. shows that failure to exploit our domestic and offshore resources will mean $2.3 trillion in lost-opportunity costs over the next two decades.

The American Petroleum Institute estimates that exploiting these resources would generate nearly 160,000 well-paying jobs and $1.7 trillion in federal, state and local revenues, with $1.3 trillion from offshore drilling alone. Now that's a stimulus package.

The jarring part is that, starting with the Gulf moratorium, it will all have been done on purpose.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=544944

With this backdrop, Obama refused outright to meet with Texas Governor Rick Perry during his recent trip to Fort Bliss in the state. The nature of the conversation was to be over the alarming, dangerous and violent situation along the border with Mexico.

Obama would not make the time for even a brief meeting. But regarding his golfing, parties at the White House and weekly vacations – there is plenty of time.

“United States be damned” he is conveying.

Didn’t his racist, hateful, anti-American religious leader, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, spew the same vitriol?

He listened to and learned from this hate monger but refuses to listen to the American people.

OBAMA MUST BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE ASAP!
Perry Offered Consolation Meeting After Request for Obama Face Time Denied
August 31, 2010    FoxNews.com

The White House apparently offered a consolation meeting to Texas Gov. Rick Perry after he was denied face time with President Obama on his trip to Fort Bliss Tuesday.

The Republican governor's spokeswoman said Perry's request for a presidential meeting to discuss border security was rebuffed. According to Perry spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger, White House aides said the president would not be available for such a meeting.

Instead, White House spokesman Luis Miranda said Perry "was offered but declined" a meeting on border security with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and counterterrorism adviser John Brennan.

"Today, the president is at Fort Bliss to honor the troops who so bravely serve our country, but if the governor wants to have a meeting about the border, the White House has made that possible," Miranda said in a written statement.

Cesinger later said the governor was just looking for a meeting with the president, not his advisers.

"The governor does not need additional briefings about what is occurring on our border. What we need is an immediate deployment of additional resources," she said.

Perry was one of the first people the president saw when he stepped from Air Force One during an Austin visit on Aug. 9. On that occasion, Perry hand-delivered a letter to Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett, warning about the "dire threat" from drug violence along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Miranda noted that the president has "directed unprecedented resources to the southwest border since launching the Southwest Border Initiative in March 2009" and signed into law $600 million in supplemental funds for border protection, law enforcement, 250 additional National Guard for Texas and a new Texas-based Predator drone to enhance surveillance to personnel on the ground.

Fox News' Major Garrett and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/31/aide-texas-gov-perry-denied-meeting-obama-visit-fort-bliss/

Isn’t the President supposed to support and positively represent this country?

If he was so incensed with Arizona’s law, why didn't the federal government’s lawsuit against the state mention racism or abridgment of rights?

Even more reprehensible, he had the audacity to allow such a specious report to be submitted to an organization that is saturated with vile human rights abuses.

Interestingly, he also had the suit adjudicated in a District Court in Arizona where the judge was a known liberal appointed by Bill Clinton. This approach is constitutionally not legal and the ruling should be nullified.

Why? The US Constitution enumerates specifically that in cases where the Federal government sues a state, only the Supreme Court can hear and rule on such matters.

This is all part of Obama’s radical agenda to denigrate and destroy America and render it mediocre at best.

OBAMA MUST BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE!

Brewer condemns State Department for mentioning Arizona law in human rights report to UN
August 27, 2010 Associated Press

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer demanded Friday that a reference to the state's controversial immigration law be removed from a State Department report to the United Nations' human rights commissioner.

The U.S. included its legal challenge to the law on a list of ways the federal government is protecting human rights.

In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Brewer says it is "downright offensive" that a state law would be included in the report, which was drafted as part of a UN review of human rights in all member nations every four years.

"The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a state of the United States to 'review' by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional," Brewer wrote.

Arizona's law generally requires police officer enforcing other laws to investigate the immigration status of people they suspect are illegal immigrants.

Critics say it would lead officers to target Hispanics. Supporters, including Brewer, say the law prohibits racial profiling and other human rights abuses.

The U.S. Justice Department sued to block the measure, arguing federal law trumps the state's authority to enforce immigration laws.

A federal judge in July sided with the Justice Department and blocked enforcement of the law's most controversial provisions a day before it was scheduled to take effect.

In its report, the State Department does not specifically allege that Arizona's law would lead to racial profiling.

"A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world," the report says. "The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined."

A State Department spokesman had no immediate comment on Brewer's letter.

Brewer, a Republican, is running for election in November. Her popularity in Arizona and her national profile have soared since she signed the immigration measure in April.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/27/brewer-condemns-state-department-mentioning-arizona-law-human-rights-report/