Obama demands Romney’s tax returns; why hasn’t Romney demanded Barry’s college records?

White House spokesman Jay Carney dismissed Donald Trump’s position earlier this week that should Obama keep insisting Mitt Romney release his tax returns, Romney should demand that Barry Soetoro, Barrack Hussein Obama, or whatever his name is, first make his college records public information.

Of course, rather than address the issue at hand, the administration consciously chose to launch into an Alinsky style personal attack on Trump. Carney called the suggestion “preposterous,” dismissing Trump as the “guy who insisted that he didn’t believe the president was born in the United States.”

Never mind that the current White House occupant signed an Executive Order hiding every last one of his personal documents from public view on his first day in office. For “the most transparent administration in history,” transparency is meant for everyone else, not themselves.

In typical Progressive “do as I say, not as I do” fashion, the White House has launched repeated attacks on the presumptive GOP presidential nominee over questions about the timing of his departure from private equity firm Bain Capital. One campaign spokeswoman even suggested that Romney committed a felony.

The White House and fellow Democrats keep insisting that several companies filed for bankruptcy and/or shipped jobs overseas under Romney’s Bain leadership. They’re obviously trying to create the theme that Romney only wants to help fellow millionaires, not working people.

Romney has maintained he is not responsible for many of those decisions because they took place after he took a leave of absence in February 1999 to oversee the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Winter Games. According to recently released documents, regulatory filings show that Romney was still in charge of Bain through 2002. However, Bain officials, including Democrats, say that he was not involved with the company’s day-to-day operations during that time.

The White House is also criticizing Romney for setting up offshore bank accounts and refusing to release additional information concerning his personal fortune, estimated to be as much as $250 million.

Romney countered this week that, “John McCain ran for president and released two years of tax returns. John Kerry ran for president, and his wife, who has hundreds of millions of dollars, she never released her tax returns. Somehow this wasn’t an issue. The Obama people keep on wanting more and more and more, more things to pick through, more things for their opposition research to try and make a mountain out of and distort and to be dishonest about.”

But Progressives keep insisting that Romney’s supposed secrecy goes to the “trust factor.” This is the absolute height of hypocrisy. When it comes to secrecy and the trust factor, how on earth can policy wonks who insist on hiding the Oval Office occupant’s entire past claim even a sliver of the moral high ground? Perhaps Progressives need a lesson on how trust is a two way street. They should start with answering the following:

Why was the “Affordable Care Act” passed without Congress reading it first?

Why weren’t the New Black Panthers prosecuted for the voter intimidation that was clearly documented?

Why did the NLRB sue Boeing?

Why has the administration stifled the production of cheap energy through EPA regulations and denial of permits?

Why has the administration abandoned national border security while suing States attempting to enforce federal law and granting blanket protection from prosecution for breaking immigration laws to millions of illegal aliens?

Why is the administration suing States that passed Voter ID laws intended solely to protect the integrity of America’s voting process?

Why has the counting of American votes in the November 2012 election been outsourced to a Spanish company?

Why does the White House continue insisting that average, everyday Americans are not being taxed by the “Affordable Care Act” when enforcement of the “penalty” falls to the IRS?

When did the IRS suddenly leave the Department of Treasury and move to the Department of Health and Human Services?

Why did so many millions of taxpayer dollars go to green energy companies whose executives just happened to have been big time Progressive bundlers for the 2008 Democratic presidential campaign?

Where is the justification for using Executive Privilege to hide the truth about Operation Fast and Furious which resulted in the murder of American Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry?

The White House calling for transparency from the Mitt Romney campaign might make more sense if Obama practiced what his administration has preached. But he has not. “The most transparent administration in history” has practiced anything but transparency. The American people won’t suffer this level of horrendous duplicity much longer.

************************

Michael Fell is a former MCA recording artist from the seminal punk rock era who toured America from coast to coast. Today, he’s a leading voice in the L.A. Tea Party movement, active since the February 2009 inception. Mr. Fell currently chairs the Westwood Tea Party, is a founding member of the L.A. Metro Tea Party Coalition, serves as the Vice Chairman of the Westside Republicans Club in L.A. CA, and is an elected Republican delegate to the L.A. 47th AD Central Committee. He’s been Campaign Manager for a primary winning Congressional candidate, as well as Santa Monica and L.A. City Council candidates. Mr. Fell is a contributing writer for https://conservativedailynews.com/, https://rightwingnews.com/, https://www.hollywoodrepublican.net/, https://beforeitsnews.com, https://www.redcounty.com/, https://www.uspatriotpac.com and, https://westsiderepublicans.com/. His opinions on today’s news events and political climate can be found on his blog: https://mjfellright.wordpress.com/

Photo credit: Chude

Obama’s Ramadan Message: “Islam is part of the fabric of our nation” (+video)

As the new crescent moon ushers in Ramadan, the President extends his best wishes to Muslim communities in the United States and around the world.

Each Ramadan, the ninth month on the lunar calendar, Muslims fast daily from dawn to sunset for 29 or 30 days. Fasting is a tradition in many religious faiths and is meant to increase spirituality, discipline, thankfulness, and consciousness of God’s mercy. Ramadan is also a time of giving and reaching out to those less fortunate, and this summer, American Muslims have joined their fellow citizens in serving communities across the country. Over the course of the month, we will highlight the perspectives of various faiths on fasting and profile faith-based organizations making real impacts in American cities and towns.

This month is also a time of renewal and this marks the first Ramadan since the President outlined his vision for a new beginning between America and the Muslim world. As a part of that new beginning, the President emphasizes that our relationship with Muslim communities cannot be based on political and security concerns alone. True partnerships also require cooperation in all areas – particularly those that can make a positive difference in peoples’ daily lives, including education, science and technology, health, and entrepreneurship – fields in which Muslim communities have helped play a pioneering role throughout history.

The President’s message is part of an on-going dialogue with Muslim communities that began on inauguration day and has continued with his statement on Nowruz, during trips to Ankara and Cairo, and with interviews with media outlets such as Al Arabiya and Dawn TV.

As this dialogue continues and leads to concrete actions, the President extends his greetings on behalf of the American people. Ramadan Kareem.

The foregoing is directly from WhiteHouse.gov.

And here’s Obama’s Ramadan video message:

Photo credit: sacmclubs

Media bias on steroids: Hiding utter GM Volt failure, channeling for Obama

The Jurassic Press is missing much in their reporting on the $50 billion bailout of General Motors (GM). The Press is open channeling for President Barack Obama – allowing him to frame the bailout exactly as he wishes in the 2012 Presidential election.

The President is running in large part on the bailout’s $30+ billion loss, uber-failed “success.” And the Press is acting as his stenographers. An epitome of this bailout nightmare mess is the electric absurdity that is the Chevrolet Volt. The Press is at every turn covering up – rather than covering – the serial failures of President Obama’s signature vehicle.

The Press has failed to mention at least five Volt fires, myopically focusing on the one the Obama Administration hand-selected for attention.

The Press has failed to mention that the Volt fire problem remains unsolved. Is it the battery? Is it the charging station? Is it the charging cable? All of the above?

GM and the Administration don’t know. And the Press ain’t breaking their necks trying to find out.

Read more from this story HERE.

Photo credit: visnup

Obama’s Friday Campaign Speech Reflects the Left’s Intellectual Exhaustion (+video)

Once in a while, a politician will say something that really offers you some insight into his state of mind and his worldview. On Friday, President Obama gave a campaign speech that included a portion that really repays close inspection. He made his usual case for raising taxes on the wealthy, and then he said:


The most interesting part of this may well be when Obama says “that’s the reason I’m running for president.” Throughout his campaign speeches, it seems he can really only get excited when he forgets that he actually is the president right now and thus manages to reclaim some of that 2008 excitement he clearly badly misses today.

But the larger theme here is fascinating too. It’s a huge and increasingly a central part of what the Democrats are saying (Elizabeth Warren got lots of applause on the left for saying basically the same thing a few months ago), and it tells us a great deal about what they think they’re up against and what they understand themselves to be championing.

The first thing to say about the president’s argument is that most of it is true, and is very, very obvious. No one would disagree with the specific things he says, except perhaps the vague and strange “If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” Who? But the president clearly thinks that some people do disagree with his more general point that everyone depends on society. It’s very evident from this passage and from a great deal of what he has to say about his opponents that Obama thinks he is running against a band of nihilistic Ayn Rand objectivists who champion complete and utter radical individualism. That weird notion is also behind the various attempts to link Paul Ryan to Rand, which are pretty amusing if you’ve followed Ryan (for what it’s worth, I would say Ryan thinks Ayn Rand is correct in her analysis of the left, which she believes has drawn the wrong lessons from the death of God, but is incorrect in many of her own prescriptions because she shares the left’s belief that God is dead, but that’s a story for another day…).

The president implies that his opponents don’t think government has any purpose at all, or that laws are necessary for free markets, and don’t recognize the fruits of any common efforts in American history. That’s just ridiculous. I’m sure there are many libertarians who wish Republicans really were radical individualists, but there’s just simply nothing in what Republicans have said or done in our time to support the idea that they are. The Ryan budget, which almost every congressional Republican has voted for, is an attempt precisely to focus the government on achieving what people can’t achieve on their own and on effectively helping the vulnerable and those who cannot help themselves. It envisions a very significant set of public entitlements and programs, in some cases larger than the ones we have now, but tries to bring them into line with the ethic and way of life of our free economy, to make sure they don’t crowd out civil society, and to make them far more efficient and effective than they have been lately. It is a different vision of American life, but not a radically individualist one. It makes for a smaller government on the whole, but it is built on a clear sense that government serves some very crucial purposes. And Republicans are proposing a very gradual path to that vision of America beyond the welfare state. The president would like to imagine that he’s running against radical individualism, but he’s running against some fairly modest reform proposals to avert fiscal catastrophe.

Read more from this story HERE.

Photo credit: Andrew Aliferis

Romney slams Obama’s pandering statement to Spanish TV that Chavez is no threat to US interests

Republican Mitt Romney chided President Barack Obama on Wednesday for playing down “the threat” posed by Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez as he sought to portray the Democrat as soft on national security, an issue that may resonate with Latino voters in November’s election.

Romney was reacting to remarks Obama made to a Spanish language television station that Chavez’s actions over recent years had “not had a serious national security impact” on America.

“This is a stunning and shocking comment by the president. It is disturbing to see him downplaying the threat posed to U.S. interests by a regime that openly wishes us ill,” Romney said in a statement. “President Obama’s remarks continue a pattern of weakness in his foreign policy, one that has emboldened adversaries and diminished U.S. influence.”

Pushing back, Obama’s campaign team accused Romney of playing into the hands of the leftist Venezuelan leader by granting him the international attention that he craved.

“Hugo Chavez has become increasingly marginalized and his influence has waned. It’s baffling that Mitt Romney is so scared of a leader like Chavez whose power is fading,” said Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt.

Read more from this story HERE.

Photo credit: William Hernández

Obama widens lead over Romney by six points in latest poll of registered voters

President Barack Obama expanded his lead over Republican challenger Mitt Romney to 6 percentage points in the White House race this month as voters became slightly more optimistic about the economy, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Tuesday.

Four months before the November 6 election, Obama leads Romney among registered voters 49 percent to 43 percent. In June, Obama held a slim 1-point lead over the former Massachusetts governor.

Obama’s improved standing was fueled in part by a slight rise in optimism about the future, with the number of Americans who think the country is on the wrong track dropping 5 percentage points to 58 percent.

Obama’s approval ratings ticked up 1 point to 48 percent and the number of Americans who disapprove of his job performance dropped 3 percentage points to 47 percent.

The shift follows a low point for Obama in June as economic worries deepened and Romney consolidated Republican support after clinching the party’s nomination to challenge him in November. Obama had led Romney by 7 points in May’s poll.

Read more from this story HERE.

Photo credit: DonkeyHotey

Gallup: Virtually no support for third party candidacy in 2012

U.S. registered voters show limited support for third-party candidates this year, with the vast majority preferring Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. A June 7-10 Gallup poll asked a special presidential preference question, listing three third-party candidates in addition to Obama and Romney. Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson is the choice of 3% of registered voters and Green Party candidate Jill Stein the choice of 1%. Another 2% volunteer Ron Paul’s name and 1% mention someone other than the listed candidates.

Gallup periodically asks a vote preference question during presidential election years, in which interviewers read the names of all candidates who will appear on the ballot in a large number of states, as one way of measuring third-party support. These findings reflect Gallup’s first such measurement in 2012. The resulting data suggest 5% of U.S. voters could vote for a third-party candidate this year, which could rise if Paul changes course and runs as an independent.

The standard presidential preference question included in Gallup Daily tracking mentions only Obama and Romney by name and finds a consistent 1% volunteering the name of some other candidate as their choice for president. The 1% is in line with the vote for third-party candidates in recent presidential elections when no high-profile third-party candidate (like Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996, and Ralph Nader in 2000) ran.

Prominent third-party candidates have tended to receive significantly higher support in polls taken earlier in election years than they wind up getting on Election Day. This is based on a comparison of registered voter preferences in June with the final election vote share in years when higher-profile third-party candidates were included in Gallup’s presidential preference questions. In general, the candidates wound up getting a fraction of their June estimated support — in most cases, less than half.

The drop in support during the campaign is likely due to two factors. First, historically, third-party candidates’ support typically drops as the campaign approaches Election Day, perhaps because voters realize the candidates have little chance to win. Second, generally speaking, support for third-party candidates tends to be higher in the broader pool of registered voters than in the smaller group of actual voters.

Read more from this story HERE.

Photo credit: ryenski

Obama is “fundamentally transforming” the US military

In “Lone Survivor,” a chilling firsthand account of the loss of 11 members of the Navy’s elite Sea, Air, Land (SEAL) Team and eight Army aviators, Petty Officer Marcus Luttrell describes the fateful decision that led to disaster for him and death for his comrades. It came down to a judgment call about whether to risk prosecution and jail time for doing whatever it took to complete their mission, or to allow three Afghan goatherds to rat out his unit to the Taliban.

Petty Officer Luttrell cast the deciding vote to turn loose the farmers who had stumbled upon him and three other SEALs shortly after they had been dropped behind enemy lines to take down a particularly dangerous Taliban leader. He describes the thought process:

“If we kill these guys, we have to be straight about it. Report what we did. We can’t sneak around this. … Their bodies will be found, the Taliban will use it to the max. They’ll get it in the papers, and the U.S. liberal media will attack us without mercy. We’ll almost certainly be charged with murder.”

Such concerns prompted Petty Officer Luttrell to make the call to release the goatherds, setting in motion calamity for his buddies and 16 others dispatched to rescue them from the massive Taliban assault that ensued. It turns out those concerns were well-founded, as was demonstrated most recently in a case before the U.S. Military Court of Appeals. By a 3-2 vote, the judges outrageously determined that an Army Ranger, 1st Lt. Michael Behenna, had no right to self-defense when he killed an Iraqi prisoner he was interrogating after the man threw a concrete block at him and tried to seize his firearm. Unless he is pardoned, Lt. Behenna will remain incarcerated for the next 12 years.

Unfortunately, under President Obama, service members’ rising fears of being prosecuted for acting to protect themselves and their missions are among many ways in which the military is being “fundamentally transformed,” to use Mr. Obama’s now-infamous turn of phrase.

Read more from this story HERE.

Photo credit: DVIDSHUB

Obama circumvents Congress again, giving $1.5 billion to Muslim Brotherhood

While President Barack Obama continually criticizes Congress publicly for not working with him, he rarely speaks of the times he just skips over their needed approvals to take actions in the international world.

Even though the United States Congress stopped any foreign aid via military aid to Egypt because the U.S. Congress has believed Egypt is not making progress on freedoms and human rights, Obama has allegedly granted $1.5 billion to the Muslim Brotherhood in that nation.

In spite of the fact that powerful persons in Egypt have spoken in very anti-American ways in the past, the president of the United States feels it necessary for the U.S. to assist them financially at a time when our country can obviously not afford to do so.

Since this story started making its way through the media months ago, of course, the Muslim Brotherhood has handily won the presidency in Egypt recently. The Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohamed Morsi is Egypt’s new president.

Though Obama did not publicly support a candidate in that election, his loyalties were clear. Washington insiders have suggested that Obama and his relation to the political powers in Egypt be scrutinized and monitored closely. Additionally, it has been repeatedly suggested – even by Obama’s own party members – that Obama’s free hand in giving handouts in the billions of dollars to foreign countries be monitored much more closely.

Read more from this story HERE.

Photo credit: Jonathan Rashad