ObamAid Drinkers: Leave Obamessiah Alone!

Dr. Asten: Hell, no!

I recently got in a heated discussion with an Obama supporter, over a status on Facebook which called on people to stop criticizing President Obama, since he believes they patted President Bush on the back for eight years. When asked to clarify the Obamist's status message, it turned into the typical left versus right debate we were exposed to during the Bush Years, where the liberal would engage in attacks ad hominem and the conservative would try to engage in substantive debate. Any person who followed the news coverage of the Bush Years knows that the Obamist's statement is a misspeak, if not a lie. If anything, the media metamorphosed from being the "government watchdog," to the "government lapdog." The media tried their damndest to keep President Bush from being reelected, and made it a point to form their coverage to make him look like the "Imbecile-in-Chief." I reminded him that Republicans and conservatives were all over President Bush for runaway spending, illegal immigration, McCain-Feingold, and bungling Iraq. Hell, several self-described conservatives were arguing against the US invading Iraq.

Those facts proved his theory wrong, but he wasn't letting up. In a move that showed his intent was to empty the punch bowl, and follow the media's line hand over foot, the ObamAid drinker tried to come after me using the line we heard in the beginning of the Obama Administration, giving Obama time to "fix George Bush's mess." I reminded him that the economy grew after Bush's tax cuts in 2001, we were privileged to have 52 months of economic growth, which began to decline the year the majority in Congress switched to the Democrats. I also told him that if President Obama was serious about fixing the economy, he would have allowed both Republicans AND Democrats in on crafting the legislation which culminated in the Porkulus law. I also noted that Obama doesn't want the electorate to look at his US Senate record, where the supposed fiscal conservative Obama supported both TARP and the bailout of Bear Stearns. I explained that Obama is at least culpable for our current economic situation, and that he's not blameless. The Obamist claimed that he was one vote in a sea of 535, against a lone President Bush. I rejected that line for exactly what it was...its lameness.

Clearly, the Obamist was feeling frustrated that his theory was falling like a house a cards, he went into a tirade against McCain, asking me if I believed had McCain beat Obama, if the economy would be "hunky dory," to which I said "No," with the caveat that McCain would have better vetted his Treasury Secretary, and not allowed a tax cheat to dictate tax policy. I believe McCain would have called on a bipartisan bill to emerge from Congress that would have actually "jumpstarted the economy," instead of scaring the shit out of people declaring this money is needed now, and waiting until next fiscal year to spend a bulk of the funds. By this time, the ObamAid drinker was in sputtering rage, most of his words were indeterminable. I also told the Obamist that while he is content on allowing Obama to quadruple the deficit, and continue to blame President Bush, his talking point is in the minority.

In getting me to say that McCain's policy probably would not make everything "hunky dory," the Obamist declared "victory." I admit, his bar for victory must have been low, if all he wanted me to do was say something bad about Republicans. His larger point was refuted over and over again, yet he continued to ignore it and was sputtering at me because I would not jump on his bandwagon. He did claim that he's willing to give Obama another year before he will say the economy belongs to Obama. I say by that point, most Democrats would have distanced themselves from Obama, and this ObamAid drinker will still be drinking from the punch bowl wondering why he's all alone. It's a shame the ObamAid drinker I was "debating" was my own brother...

Gateway Pundit shows us the all familiar chart that shows how much the Obama Administration plans to increase the deficit. There's also a story on Yahoo! that says that tax cheating US Secretary of the Treasury, lil Timmy Geithner, has not ruled out tax increases for the middle class, and I suppose ObamAid drinkers will invoke the cynic card, claiming all politicians lie. It doesn't occur to them that their cynicism, in the face of Obama blowing up the deficit, will have a perilous effect on us in the future. The Porkulus jive was an excuse to pander to his political donors and rationale to enact his disastrous agenda on the nation. 2010 and 2012 can't get here fast enough.

This weekend, I also had the privilege, I guess, to read Gwen Ifill's Obama puffery, "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama," more on that in a later blogpost...

Have a great day...

Obama: Don't look at my record, only my words...

Gay Community: That's why we have a problem...

I can't say that I have too much sympathy for members of the GLB"t" community who supported Obamessiah, knowing his stance on gay issues. I wait for the day when the GLB"t" community and blacks come to the realization that at the heart of outright discrimination, lies a Democrat. They've been doing it since the founding of the nation and don't plan on stopping any time soon. That's not to say the GOP hasn't had its moments of racial and homophobic faux pas, as Democrats and liberals make everyone aware of them. The gay community has yet to learn that they are political tools used by Democrats to achieve their ends. It was evident in the Election of 2004, when liberals were outraged that states began banning "gay" marriage, without focusing on the reasoning behind it, Democrats who felt that the courts were a better avenue for making it possible, rather than the legislature. It was evident in 2008, when Democratic-leaning groups decided to bypass the voters and used the courts to trump them. It was even evident before then, when in 1993, President Clinton and a Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee reached a compromise called "don't ask, don't tell." Oh, and let us not forget Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO)...

Undeterred, gays overwhelmingly continue to support Democrats. Since President Obama took office, over 260 members of the GLB"t" community have been drummed out of the military, one of which appealed to the president, in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief, to put a halt to the policy. Obama, in a reply to another request, said that he has to consult with Congress on the matter, thereby punting the issue. The President has the authority to suspend charges of homosexuality without congressional action. The president should concern himself with readiness, not his political capital. According to research from the Palm Center, 24 foreign militaries allow gay members to serve openly, and they have not indicated that the inclusion of gay members adversely affects military readiness, unit cohesion, and morale. In my experience in the military, the average member doesn't give two shits about whether their friends are gay or straight, let alone members in their units.

I don't mean to rope all Democrats as being anti-gay, as New York Senator, Kristen Gillibrand (D), has tried to convince members of the Senate Armed Services Committee to hold hearings concerning the repeal of DADT, despite Obama's rhetoric. Steve Benen has more. I am one of those who came around on DADT, although the policy is selectively enforced, I felt that straight men (and women to some extent) would feel threatened by having a known gay servicemember standing beside them. The fact that the policy is used as a bludgeon against gays, used by some members as retaliation, is yet another reason, and a chief one at that, for the policy to be rescinded. Right now, the military is in dire need of Arab linguists, and other hard-to-fill jobs, and DADT has been one of the reasons why the military continues to face difficulty in finding qualified people to fit those billets. Military readiness is the key in achieving victory in any mission.

I am deadset against discrimination based on sexual orientation. I believe, and will continue to believe, that more protection needs to be extended to members of the GLB"t" community, because some people will use their wrong-headed perception of gays in their efforts to harm them. I understand that some oppose gays for what they believe are moral reasons. Those reasons should not be used to deny a qualified gay person a service or position they deserve as a US citizen.

Have a great day...