Our Dictator In Chief (Part II)

The Obama administration leaks national security information so long as it makes him look good in the media. Obama is a propaganda machine using liberal outlets such as the NY Times to influence the American public to look upon him favorably.

The biggest dictator move by Obama and Democrats was ObamaCare. To move the entire US healthcare system under federal law provides the executive branch much more power. In fact, the seedy and untrustworthy IRS will be enforcing the ObamaCare law. To make matters worse, Obama thinks he has line item veto power to enforce and enact this law. The administration has issued waivers (once again to companies and organizations who support the administration), and has changed dates when certain provisions of the law go into effect. If all of this is not bad enough, with the help of the Supreme Court, the legality of ObamaCare has now given the government the authority to force individuals and companies to purchase any product they see fit (and they can simply call it a tax). Those who think ObamaCare is unraveling are sadly mistaken. This law is here to stay and Obama can mold it anyway he sees fit or anyway that pleases him (in other words anyway which gives him more power).

Obama has also failed to recognize laws such as the one for providing foreign aid to countries whose government was overthrown by a coup or military intervention – Egypt. Obama also failed to recognize laws such as DOMA before the Supreme Court struck it down. Dictators feel they are above the law. Hence, only a dictator can pick and choose which laws they will or will not enforce.

Instead of helping states deal with issues, such as illegal immigration, the administration instead sees fit to file suit against their laws – to keep states power at a minimum.

Obama has given enemy combatants (terrorists) more constitutional rights than our military troops. Obama has sided with non-democratic states over democratic ones (for instance Palestine over Israel). These are dictatorial actions to change foreign policy.

The above actions by Obama have provided the federal government and our president with much more power at the expense of individuals. Of course Democrats feel Americans are too stupid to think for themselves and therefore feel they must interfere and make decisions for us. This may be true for most liberals, but it is not the case for most Americans – especially conservatives. And what makes all of the above decisions by Obama even tougher to swallow is he has routinely promoted individuals tied to scandals and other mischievous activity in a quid pro quo fashion (Susan Rice, IRS leaders). Hail our Dictator in Chief.

Our Dictator in Chief (Part I)

The classification of Obama being a socialist is not completely accurate; he’s a dictator who happens to be a socialist. Think about it! No President has expanded the power of the executive branch or federal government more than Obama. First, there were dozens of Czars appointed to powerful positions without any congressional oversight. Secondly, there was the stimulus package which poured nearly 100 billion dollars into green energy – unfortunately, Obama was using the money to pick winners and losers in this market. Those companies who garnered federal grants contributed to the Obama campaign creating a vicious cycle of money. This is a lot of power, yet Obama calls the Citizens United decision a travesty – talk about hypocrisy.

Obama moved unilaterally, without congressional consent, on many important and controversial issues. Obama went to war in Libya (and we see how that turned out – the weapons we provided to protesters to oust Qaddafi were used to attack Western sites in Northern Africa including our Libya embassy). Obama provided amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants who met certain requirements. Obama is currently moving unilaterally with the EPA to enforce climate rules, regulations, laws, and mandates. Obama wants to unilaterally move on gun control laws (a violation of the second amendment and yes, this is the same President whose DOJ lost track of the same types of guns they want to ban in the Fast and Furious program which killed hundreds of people).

Obama railed Bush over the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, but Obama kills unarmed terrorists (including Americans) and civilians with his drone program which has expanded exponentially under his command. In fact, drones are being used in the US. This is a lot of power only a dictator would have.

Obama is a master at manipulating the system. He used the DOJ to influence pro Trayvon Martin protests. Yes, our federal government (not just the media) was turning this tragic event into a race war pitting Americans against Americans. This is exactly how dictator masterminds polarize and divide the masses. This is deception at its best. It takes American eyes off the things that matter such as the economy and the scandals that riddle this administration.

Obama talked about how the Bush era of NSA spying was unconstitutional – an infringement on the first amendment rights of Americans. But Obama has not only expanded these programs he has implemented dozens of more programs in a very non-transparent manner.

Obama’s campaign has used metadata analysis (with the help of Google) to identify voters. This has nothing to do with national security – Obama is spying on Americans to win elections. This is a first amendment violation. How is this any different from dictators manipulating the ballot boxes to win elections?

Obama’s EPA, IRS, and DOJ are targeting their enemies (conservatives) to win elections. Yes, Obama and company have an enemies list. The EPA is targeting conservative farmers, the IRS is targeting all conservative groups seeking tax exempt status, and the DOJ is targeting conservative journalists in a very Nixonian way.

Obama's Generalized Statements on Race are Wrong

Here is one paragraph of generalized statements made by the President in a recent speech about the Trayvon verdict: "There are very few African American men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me," Obama continued. "There are very few African American men who haven't had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me — at least before I was a senator. There are very few African Americans who haven't had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often."

Yes, there are racists in our country, but what these generalized statements do not include about the situation may be misleading: Were the blacks in the above scenario suspicious looking; where they intoxicated; did they have gang tattoos; was there more than one; was the neighborhood in a high or low crime area; was the neighborhood in an area with higher or lower minority populous; do these same White people act differently when in the company of suspicious looking Whites or Hispanics? Maybe these people’s actions were warranted and prevented a future crime or maybe their actions were unwarranted. We teach people to be vigilant in order to prevent crime. I still lock my car doors and home even though I live in a low crime area. Better to safe than sorry – it is how everyone is brought up.

About one in every 33 black men was a sentenced prisoner and the rate for white men was about one in every 205, for Hispanic men about one in every 79; and national victimization rate for crimes committed against the person for whites age 12 and older was 20.9 per 100,000 people, while the victimization rate for blacks was 28.7 per 100,000.

What do these statistics suggest? First, that black on black crime is high and should garner greater attention. Secondly, all people should be more cautious in the presence of suspicious looking blacks. Hence, people may be overreacting in the President’s hypothetical statements, but the data suggests they have every right to.

Instead of placing blame on white people potentially overeating to a situation when confronted with a black and calling them racists – maybe the President and civil rights leaders should acknowledge that until blacks commit less crime people may have every right to be cautious in their presence.

Blaming the issue of race on one ethnicity for being vigilant and cautious while assuming the other ethnicity has no culpability in the solution is wrong and misplaced facts. In fact, if blacks did their part and were involved in fewer crimes than Whites and Hispanics would be less cautious in their presence.

Usually when there is friction or issues between two parties – there must be some sort of compromise to resolve the problem. Until blacks hold up their end of the race debate, there will always be people cautious in their presence. When the U.S. was on high alert for terrorist activity, government and local authorities tell people to be vigilant on be on the lookout for suspicious behavior. How is this any different from how people are reacting in Obama’s generalized statements? In fact, most terrorist plots have been thwarted by vigilant Americans. We cannot stop asking people to be vigilant against crime and openly welcome a suspicious looking black male when there is a 3% chance they are criminal. Whether civil rights leaders, Holder, or Obama admit it or not, race is a two way street and they have the power to lower black crime by increasing employment and rewarding responsibility instead of irresponsible and unaccountable behavior in the black community.

It is sad that White’s react the way they do, but instead of blaming them of being racists only suggests that black leaders around the country are oblivious and ignorant to the real problems facing blacks around the country. If Obama’s solution to racism is to suggest that all whites who have looked at a black man suspiciously are racists, then Obama is a race agitator and baiter. Obama is being a problem creator and not a problem solver. To guilt white people into black acceptance does nothing to solve the root cause of the problem – high black unemployment, high black crime rates, high black dropout rates, and high rates of fatherless families.

Climate Change 101 for Dummies (Part IV)

Obama’s climate change plan proposes “The Fiscal Year 2014 Budget continues the President’s commitment to keeping the United States at the forefront of clean energy research, development, and deployment by increasing funding for clean energy technology across all agencies by 30 percent, to approximately $7.9 billion.” Remember the stimulus which included nearly 100 billion dollars in so called “green” investment? This means less than 5% of government green spending goes into research and development. Therefore, this proves the administration is spending most of its green investment monies not on new technology, development, and research, but on companies who use existing and expensive technologies that cannot compete globally. Hence, dozens of companies folded including Solyndra. This administration is wasting taxpayer money on picking winners and losers in the green energy market and not on developing new and cost effective technologies. In fact, most of the stimulus money goes to companies who contribute to the Obama campaign – the vicious cycle of money.

Here are some other areas the administration will attack with its climate change power grab: “Hydro fluorocarbons (HFCs), which are primarily used for refrigeration and air conditioning, are potent greenhouse gases. In the United States, emissions of HFCs are expected to nearly triple by 2030, and double from current levels of 1.5 percent of greenhouse gas emissions to 3 percent by 2020. Also, curbing emissions of methane is critical to our overall effort to address global climate change.” Methane can be found in landfills and is created through the breakdown of vegetation. My biggest pet peeve is the wasting of food and if people simply did not waste food methane levels would go down. Interesting, organic items waste much faster than non-organic items making them more likely to release methane. I am waiting for the day the EPA issues flatulence monitors for all citizens to wear. I would love to see those readings from Obama and Gore since they are full of a lot of hot air – carbon emitting oxygen thieves.

Obama: "Martin Could Have Been Me 35 Years Ago"

Obama is most narcissist man on earth. It was just a matter of time before Obama made the death of Trayvon Martin about him. Everything has to be about Obama. Obama is supposed transcend race, instead he and his Attorney General, Eric Holder, are race baiters. Race was never brought up as an issue in the Trayvon Martin trial, but Obama suggests the trial outcome would have been different if Martin was White (Let’s face it, if Trayvon were White his death would have been unnoticed – it would have received no media attention). Obama claims “Martin could have been me 35 years ago.” Meanwhile, this administration has blood on its hands because protests following the verdict have led to over a dozen deaths nationwide along with millions of dollar in damage.

Obama and Holder comments since the Martin verdict only reinforce what I have suggested in past posts about this trial – they made it political for a variety of reasons. First, they wanted to rouse their base for the 2012 election. Secondly, they successfully used the media to divert attention from several administration scandals (IRS, EPA, and DOJ targeting) to this trial by simply making it about race. Obama and Holder also introduced the Florida “Stand Your Ground” law into the debate – even though this had nothing to do with the trial. Besides, it is important to note that both Black and White’s fare equally as defendants under the Florida “Stand Your Ground” laws.

The FBI investigated George Zimmerman intensively after his arrest and found no evidence he was a racist or bigot of any kind. Yet the DOJ is considering a civil suit against Zimmerman even though there is no evidence to support a case. What happens if the DOJ loses this case – will more people needlessly die in more protests? Why don’t people affected by the Martin trial protests sue the media and this administration over the needless death of American citizens and the destruction of property? After all, the media and administration have falsely baited the American people into believing this trial was about race and the Florida “Stand Your Ground” law.

Oh, by the way, I feel so sorry for Obama and Holder – they were given advantages only because they were black (affirmative action). I grew up poorer than Obama and Holder and I am lucky to be alive today because I was abused – but I was given no special treatment to earn a college degree by government bodies because I was White. Is this fair? No, we need to treat everyone as equal and maybe this will finally end race spectacles such as the Trayvon Martin trial.

Climate Change 101 for Dummies (Part III)

The US government is using climate change as a way to not only interfere in the lives of every American, but every global citizen. Obama’s climate change plan says the following: “That is why it is imperative for the United States to couple action at home with leadership internationally.” Climate change is a hoax and a means to fear monger Americans to comply with government interference, power, and bureaucracy.

So how does the President and liberals plan to “curb” and “cut” greenhouse emissions: “President Obama has set a goal to double renewable electricity generation once again by 2020. In 2012 the President set a goal to issue permits for 10 gig watts of renewables on public lands by the end of the year.” That is right, renewable energies are our saviors! First, let’s point out renewable energies and energy efficient appliances are not necessarily environmentally friendly. Solar and Wind farms take up huge land masses disturbing the earth’s plant and animal life. In fact, it would take a solar and wind farm the size of the state of Rhode Island to generate the same amount of energy a five reactor nuclear plant creates (and Obama’s climate change plan blames deforestation on wild fires and wants to increase forest sizes to curb CO2, but at the same time Obama and liberals want to open up more public and private lands for solar and wind farms – this makes little sense). Solar are wind farms are generally located far away from the power grid costing billions in new infrastructure. Also consider the fact the sun is present less than 40% of the time in desert climates and winds blow with verbosity only 35% of the time in windy areas. Wind farms are also notorious for freezing up in cold weather and killing thousands of birds each year. Hydropower is responsible for depleting our natural salmon and other fish sources. The real problem with renewable energies is that they rely on our weather and climate. And if we really believe the climate is changing and weather patterns are changing then why would we want to convert most of energy to these sources? After all, a windy corridor can turn calm and a desert can turn rainy and cloudy rendering our renewable energy sources useless. For example, a volcanic eruption can render a solar farm useless.

Electric cars are more than likely charged using dirty energy sources. Besides a Chevy Volt battery weighs 600 pounds. Do you know how much energy is used to mine 600 pounds of lithium, cobalt or other metals to manufacture this monstrosity? And do you know what is done with these toxic batteries once they are dead? It is enough energy to drive a gas guzzling SUV over 15,000 miles. Lighter cars designed to meet gas standards are less safe and lead to more traffic deaths. Washing and dishwashing machines which use less water fail to get items clean and therefore have to be cleaned multiple times. The Obama climate report states: “Energy efficiency is one of the clearest and most cost-effective opportunities to save families money, make our businesses more competitive, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Department of Energy established new minimum efficiency standards for dishwashers, refrigerators, and many other products.” This is simply not true. There are laws and regulations including home owner association rules that prevent people from placing solar panels on their roofs or wind turbines on their properties even in liberal areas such as Denver. Liberals want renewable energies so long as it does not affect their lifestyle and these eyesores do not block their views.

Climate Change 101 for Dummies (Part II)

If liberals are so afraid of climate change and rising waters then why are shore areas the most densely populated areas in the country? Then why rebuild New Orleans after Katrina – a city which resides at -10 feet elevation? Then why rebuild the New Jersey shore after Sandy? These areas have been hit with hard storms in the past and it will happen again in the future.

As for the claim that last year was the warmest ever in the contiguous United States does not really mean much because climate change is a global phenomenon – not a US one. This is especially true in terms of stating 12 of the warmest years in the US have come in the past 15 years. This means very little especially if global temperatures are normal – in fact, this refutes climate change claims. I remember getting summer heat waves of 100 degree heat lasting for weeks in the 1970s in New Jersey. My point is that 100 degree heat waves have happened and can happen in most areas around the country.

And finally what “progress” has been made on climate change? Liberals measure climate change by CO2. After all, Obama’s climate change plan makes the following statements: “The Obama Administration is putting in place tough new rules to cut carbon pollution – just like we have for other toxins like mercury and arsenic.” And: “To accomplish these goals, President Obama is issuing a Presidential Memorandum directing the Environmental Protection Agency to work expeditiously to complete carbon pollution standards for both new and existing power plants. This work will build on the successful first-term effort to develop greenhouse gas and fuel economy standards for cars and trucks.” According to the NOAA CO2 levels in the atmosphere have passed another milestone – 400ppm. In fact, CO2 levels go up a few points every year and they never retreat. If that is case, and global temperatures are related to CO2, then global temperatures should rise each year and not retreat if they are directly related (this is not the case). I remember when liberals proclaimed the earth was going to end once CO2 levels reached 300ppm. Interestingly, the area of the planet that should be mostly affected by CO2 induced climate change should be areas closest to the equator. Why? Because the earth’s gravitational pull is strongest at the equator. For the same reason barometric pressures (oxygen levels) are higher at the equator then so should CO2 levels. Yes, it is true, equator climates are generally warmer but that has more to do with distance and angle to the sun. In fact, there is no data to suggest that temperatures, weather, storms, and climates are changing for the worse at the equator.

Obama and liberal plans on climate change are to “curb” and to “cut” carbon emissions. If liberals are right and climate change is being exasperated by CO2 then Obama’s plan will not work because it does not “stop” and or “reduce” carbon emissions already in our atmosphere. The liberal plan is spend trillions to merely put off a cataclysmic climate change event that will end life on earth. This is exactly how liberals attack any problem – they use tons of money for a temporary fix. What if I told you there is a way to stop and reduce CO2 without taxing corporations and individuals to disturb the economy. In fact, there is a way do this without interfering in the livelihoods of American citizens one bit. Americans can continue to use fossil fuels without any worries of its impact on the earth. Carbon scrubbers proposed by Klaus Lackner and David Keith (see links below) could solve the problem:

http://www.columbia.edu/~kl2010/members_lackner.htm

http://www.ucalgary.ca/news/september2008/keith-carboncapture

Trayvon Martin Case: No One Wins

I find it utterly disgusting and extremely disappointing that everyone in the nation has taken sides on the Martin-Zimmerman case. This is exactly what the media and administration hoped what would happen. And wouldn’t you know it the sides happen to be along political lines – Republican vs. Democrat; Right vs. Left; Conservative vs. Progressive; Pro-gun vs. Anti-gun; White vs. Black; Hispanic vs. Black. This is just what our country needs, another wedge to polarize and divide Americans. Our media loves to throw gas on a fire especially when it comes to issues such as race. The media turned this case into a spectacle about race even though that was never the issue at hand. In fact, Zimmerman is a man of color – Hispanic. To counter this fact some media geniuses referred to Zimmerman as a White-Hispanic (since he is also White – Liberals have in the past changed the definition of words to fuel their ideology arguments and now they want to create a new ethnicity to support their pro-Trayvon argument). Well, why don’t the media refer to Barack Obama as a White-African-American? Heck, Barack is more white than black since he was only raised by his white mother. But the media wanted an African-American president so that is how they will tell the story. But in reality what does it matter what color Obama, Martin, or Zimmerman are! Would Obama lead differently if he were White? No! Most accounts say the crime scene was so dark you could not see 2 feet in front of you – then who would have been able to identify the ethnicities of Martin or Zimmerman? No one, including Martin and Zimmerman! In fact, the prosecution never used race as a reason for the incident!

There is evidence to suggest that a small group inside the Department of Justice (DOJ) called the Community Relations Services (CRS) was deployed to Florida to protest against Zimmerman following the death of Trayvon. Yes, the DOJ was politically active to influence and pressure local police to file a murder charge against George Zimmerman. The DOJ said the CRS was there to mediate between opposing sides. First of all, it was not necessary to waste taxpayer dollars on what should have been a non-issue. Secondly, the DOJ has shown its true colors in past on cases such as the 2008 Black Panther election case or the targeting of conservative journalists. Thirdly, this DOJ has already been shown to have a propensity to lack transparency, lie, and cover up. Why would any administration get involved in such a case? The DOJ must have known their involvement would only result in division and polarization? Yes, the DOJ did know this and they did not care. After all, shifting media focus to such a high profile case would result in very favorable political implications for the Obama administration. First of all, this action creates passion within the liberal base during an election year. Secondly, it shifts media and citizen focus from other things such as administration scandals and the stagnant economy. In fact, IRS, EPA, and DOJ targeting scandals all took a back seat to the Martin-Zimmerman case. People forgot about the Benghazi attack and the Fast and Furious debacle. Also taking a backseat was the administrations inept reaction to the Egyptian coup.

What is even more disgusting is that George Mason University (GMU) is offering a 3 credit class on Trayvon Martin in sociology and anthropology. I cannot even come up with any words to describe how disturbing this is.

Sure, I have an opinion on this case, and that is no one wins when there is a tragedy of this magnitude. Trayvon is dead, and even though Zimmerman was acquitted his life will never be the same and I am sure he will face civil suits. It is up to the justice system to sort out the facts and make a decision – and we all have to live with that whether we like it or not. Instead of being happy we live in a democratic society based on laws, some of us feel it appropriate to protest the outcome if we do not like the decision.

If people want to protest (especially minorities), why don’t they protest the super high unemployment and underemployment rate for African-Americans? Why don’t they protest the high poverty rate and decaying inner cities? Why don’t they protest GMU’s offensive class on Trayvon? Why don’t they protest the high black on black crime rate in this country? Why don’t they protest the President’s NSA spying programs on all Americans?

Sure this country probably has it fair share of bigots and racists, but the true racists do not even know it. These are the people who create and display this race illusion on social medium. These are the people (DOJ, GMU, media) who incite race battles and fuel the minds of racists and bigots.

Climate Change 101 for Dummies (Part I)

Here is Obama’s argument for his climate change policy which he plans to enact unilaterally - bypassing Congressional approval: “While this progress is encouraging, climate change is no longer a distant threat – we are already feeling its impacts across the country and the world. Last year was the warmest year ever in the contiguous United States and about one-third of all Americans experienced 10 days or more of 100-degree heat. The 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15 years. Asthma rates have doubled in the past 30 years and our children will suffer more asthma attacks as air pollution gets worse. And increasing floods, heat waves, and droughts have put farmers out of business, which is already raising food prices dramatically. These changes come with far-reaching consequences and real economic costs. Last year alone, there were 11 different weather and climate disaster events with estimated losses exceeding $1 billion each across the United States. Taken together, these 11 events resulted in over $110 billion in estimated damages, which would make it the second-costliest year on record.”

I will use the opposite argument and agree what Obama proclaims in the above paragraph is statistically accurate (although there are many others that would refute these claims).

Let’s tackle a few of these claims one at a time. First, the cost for national disasters would normally go up due to inflation, hence any data without adjusting disaster costs for inflation over the course of US history has no meaning. And let’s begin with the most likely reason disaster costs are going up – population increases and sprawl. For instance, the area destroyed by Colorado Springs and Conifer Colorado wild fires last year did not have one home located in these areas two decades ago. Less than 50 years ago the population of Moore Oklahoma was less than 2,000 people and today it approaching 65,000. Heck, it is likely that 40 years ago we would have never known a tornado hit the city of Moore without the climate technology and population sprawl we have today. For this reason, it is impossible to say if fire, tornado, hurricane, and other natural disasters are worse today than a few decades ago. Keep in mind natural disasters in other countries such as Canada or across Europe are no worse than they were decades ago. In Europe this is easy to explain because population and sprawl are on the decline. And finally, on this point, it is important to remember more people also means more infrastructure (homes, roads, etc.) which means the absorption of more heat - making the planet feel warmer. Interestingly, the Obama climate change plan calls for more infrastructure and heat conducting sources: “Moving forward, the Obama Administration will help state and local governments strengthen our roads, bridges, and shorelines so we can better protect people’s homes, businesses and way of life from severe weather.” The plan also says: “Upgrading the country’s electric grid is critical to our efforts to make electricity more reliable, save consumers money on their energy bills, and promote clean energy sources.” Unfortunately, upgrading the electrical grid means expanding it to reach clean energy sources which tend to be far removed from our national grid (For example, solar farms can be found in the desert and other remote unpopulated areas). This means more infrastructures which not only means warmer surface temperatures, but higher costs, not lower ones. This is a massive expense. Remember when then US Energy Secretary Steven Chu said this: “The world should try to have white roofs everywhere to help fight climate change.” This is an admission that warmer climates have nothing to do with CO2, but more to do with infrastructures conducting heat.

Obama's Twisted Presidency (Part II)

When Obama found out about IRS targeting of conservative groups he called it “outrageous” and the administration will hold those “accountable”. Obama fired the temporary head of the IRS who only had one more week on the job, but other than that the administration has done little to help find the truth. As IRS officials hide behind the “fifth amendment” and fail to forward documentation to Congress, Obama placed the IRS official who led the tax-exempt organizations unit when Tea Party groups were targeted in charge of the IRS office responsible for ObamaCare. The EPA has also been accused of targeting conservative groups and using fake email accounts to hide information, still the administration is not cooperating to get to the bottom of this scandal.

The administration has claimed ignorance into the DOJ’s targeting of media outlets to try to find a national security leak. However, the DOJ failed to target New York Times reporters who routinely leaked national security information which made the President look staunch on defense. Odd, yes, especially since this administration has failed to hold anyone accountable for this serious first amendment violation. One credible CBS reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, who routinely reported about Benghazi and other Obama scandals, found out her computer had been compromised and hacked. Just another coincidence? Maybe, but this revelation came shortly after learning the Obama administration’s NSA was not only snooping on US citizen phone calls and emails, the programs have been vastly expanded under Obama. Yes, this is the same Obama who wanted to investigate Bush for civil liberty violations for his less evasive NSA eavesdropping program. The difference here is that Bush was transparent and up front with his program, Obama is always working in secrecy.

If there are roadblocks for Obama implementing his agenda, he moves unilaterally to enact it – Immigration, gun laws, Libya War, climate change and so forth. These are huge issues that should require bipartisan support. But face it; there is nothing bipartisan about Obama. He only wants to enact massive legislation influenced by liberal lobbyists riddled with earmarks and pork.

Obama has looked the other way as HHS head Kathleen Sibelius begs like a common street corner homeless person for funding to implement ObamaCare.

And finally, let’s not forget that our economy still has well over 7% unemployment, the labor force has shrunk to 1970 levels, and the underemployment rate is also at historic high levels.

So why is it that Obama’s John Banner defense “I see nothing, I know nothing” defense working in the public eye? Do people realize he is in over his head and does not know how to lead our country and just give him a pass? Do people realize that our government is just too big and vast for the President to be on top of everything? Or are we really that naïve to think that when good things happen Obama is in the know, but when anything bad happens Obama is oblivious towards the event? If this is the case, and the President is innocent than why has no one been held accountable for all these acts – in fact, culprits are being rewarded with job promotions? Is it really a coincidence that all these scandals only appeared after Obama won his second term? It seems Obama will do anything to circumvent the law to get what he wants – he is not interested in being President, but he is a thug willing to manipulate the system and grow his powers to get his way.

Obama's Twisted Presidency (Part I)

Each day that goes by, the Obama Presidency becomes a little more unbelievable. It’s almost as if Obama’s job of running the nation gets in his way of seemingly more important things such as campaigning, partying, playing golf and hoops. This past week was another stark example of Obama’s lack of leadership. When asked about traitor Edward Snowden, who has revealed US national security information to China and Russia, Obama had this to say: I am not "wheeling and dealing" to get Snowden extradited back to the United States. "I'm not going to be scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker," Obama said of Snowden at a press conference in Senegal, Africa. Obama also said that he has not spoken to China President Xi Jinping or Russian President Vladimir Putin about Snowden's extradition. "I have not called President Xi personally or President Putin personally," Obama said. "And the reason is because, No. 1: I shouldn’t have to." So let me get this straight, Snowden was classified as a major national security risk by Democrats Diane Feinstein (Head of the National Intelligence Committee) and John Kerry (Secretary State), but Obama says he is just a hacker. If it is not Obama’s job to talk with foreign leaders to resolve a national security crisis than whose job is it?

If all this is not bad enough, Obama’s National Security Council hosted Sheik Abdullah bin Bayyah for a West Wing chat, where the radical Islamist asked for more support for Hamas and Syrian "rebels," i.e. al-Qaida terrorists. Bin Bayyah works for Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who supports suicide bombings and issued a fatwa calling for attacks on U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Al-Qaradawi, who happens to be the spiritual leader of the radical Muslim Brotherhood, also once vowed to "conquer" America. The US is also in talks with the Taliban in Afghanistan. Since the US was not able to defeat the Taliban before Obama’s timeline for withdrawal, Obama is also negotiating with this terrorist group. So it is okay to negotiate with terrorists, but it is not okay for the President to talk with the leaders of Russia and China because it is beneath his ego? We have seen this favoritism and willingness to cater to terrorists in the past. Major Nidal Hasan massacred 13 of our troops at Fort Hood and is being treated as a normal citizen and not a terrorist. Hasan has received a civilian trial in which he can face the people he injured and worse yet, given him a forum to spew his Islamic hatred towards America in a media sideshow. If the Fort Hood shooter would have been of any other ethnicity or creed, they would have been subject to a military tribunal. If all of this is not bad enough, the Obama administration lied and covered up a terrorist attack against the US embassy in Benghazi that took the lives of four Americans. In fact, Obama was too busy attending a Las Vegas fund raiser to do his job as Commander in Chief to try to save these people’s lives and secure the crime scene. And if all that is not bad enough, Obama promoted the administration’s story teller about the Benghazi events to head of national security at the White House.

None of this should come as a surprise since the President routinely claims ignorance when it comes to any of his scandals. Obama and DOJ head Eric Holder knew nothing about the failed Fast and Furious gun walking program that was responsible for hundreds of murders including a border agent. If they knew nothing about these events then why are they hiding behind executive privilege? Recently, a government report said hundreds of US park ranger guns are unaccounted for across the country. Yet, Obama wants to take gun rights away from responsible citizens when the government cannot even track its own weaponry arsenal. In fact, the DOJ has only prosecuted less than 1% of all persons trying to obtain guns illegally because they failed background checks.