Gay Patriot Header Image

The Hypocrisy at the Heart of the Obama Administration:
Flooding the Washington Swamp While Claiming to Drain it
A Review of Michelle Malkin’s Culture of Corruption

In his successful bid for the White House, Barack Obama promised “throughout the campaign” (to borrow one of his expressions) to be a new kind of politician, more transparent than the then-incumbent.  He would post each bill that lands on his desk online so that we the people would have “five days to look” at it before he signed it.  And he assured us that he had “done more than any other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists“:

They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president.

His campaign promises notwithstanding, he has not been more transparent than his predecessor nor has he excluded lobbyists from his Administration.  Within days of taking office, he had already broken the promise to post bills online.  By April 9, Jim Harper had found, “Of the eleven bills President Obama has signed, only six have been posted on Whitehouse.gov. None have been posted for a full five days after presentment from Congress.

In her book, Culture of Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies, blogress Michelle Malkin shows that despite Obama’s pledge, lobbyists are running rampant in Obama’s White House, having “made seventeen exceptions ot his no-lobbyist rule” just in the first two weeks of his Administration.  It’s not just lobbyists.  Numerous other Administration officials have have failed to pay their taxes or worked closely with corrupt individuals and associations.  It almost seems as if the only members of the President’s cabinet without ethics problems are Education Secretary Arne Duncan, VA Secretary Eric Shinseki and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a Bush Administration holdover.

In short, the candidate who ran against Washington has staffed his White House with Washington insiders, with a cabinet made up mostly of longtime denizens of the nation’s capitol.

Any many of those note from Washington have political roots in the machine politics of Chicago, even his wife, whose father was a cog in the Daley machine.  Mrs. Obama has learned from her father’s patron; her salary “nearly tripled” right after her husband was elected to the United States Senate in 2004, a cost the University of Chicago Medical Center might have better have been able to defray with a federal earmark he helped secure.

And like many who cut their teeth in Chicago politics, Michelle Obama had numerous shady associations as did her husband’s other Chicago cronies, including Valerie Jarrett and Rahm Emanuel.  Both worked closely with since-mpeached Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, the latter elected in 2002 to Blagojevich’s House seat.  Emanuel pocketed at least $100,000 for Freddie Mac stock he received when serving on the Board of that government-sponsored enterprise (GSE).  While the GSE cooked its books during Emanuel’s tenure, the Admnistration’ transparency pledges notwithstanding, “White House officials,” Malkin reminds us “refused to fulfill the [Chicago Tribune‘s] request for public documents related [to] Emanuel’s tenure as a Freddie Mac director.” (more…)

Does the term, “Heterosexist,” Sound a Tad too PC?

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 7:30 pm - August 20, 2009.
Filed under: Gay America,Random Thoughts,Sex Difference

Just received an e-mail promoting something called the 2009 Anti-Heterosexism Conference to be held this November in West Palm Beach, Florida.  My first thought was that this was some kind of spoof, but then I looked at their agenda and saw that it was not.

While some of the language describing the conference sounds like PC gibberish, “The goal of the conference is to explore and begin undoing the heterosexist attitudes that exist on personal, interpersonal, institutional and cultural levels,” they do address at least one issue which merits greater attention, the “scientifically unsound” methods of “reparative” theory (you know that stuff that’s supposed to cure us of our homosexual inclinations).

Beyond that, in the panels yet to be developed (they have issue a call for “workshop presentations”), I fear that the organizers seeks to label as “heterosexist” anyone who dares suggest there is a difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality, that is, that gender does make a difference in the way we relate to one another.

I do wish our blog had a significant source of outside income so I could attend the conference and report back to y’all on its proceedings.

What Obama Calls “Cynicism,” We Call Freedom

In one of the best essays I’ve read on the President Obama’s attitude toward those who oppose his plans for a government overhaul of our health care system, Katherine Mangu-Ward dissects the Democrat’s words, notably his op-ed in Sunday’s New York Times, concluding When it comes to health care reform, Obama doesn’t believe reasonable people can disagree.

Mangu-Ward finds that even before this past Sunday, Barack Obama was eager to deride those who opposed further government control of health care as cynics:

Back in the misty days of January 2007, he warned the Democratic National Committee about us. The “cynics,” he predicted, would fight health care reform. “With such cynicism, government doesn’t become a force of good, a means of giving people the opportunity to lead better lives; it just becomes an obstacle for people to get rid of. Too often, this cynicism makes us afraid to say what we believe. It makes us fearful. We don’t trust the truth.” He blended together his own health care plan, government as a force for good, and truth into a delicious rhetorical smoothie, and they ate it up.

Sorry, Mr. President, it’s not cynicism which prevents me from seeing government as a force of good, but experience, experience with the efficacy of the free market and experience encountering the obstacles of state-run services.   That’s not just my own experience, it’s also that of countless others who have seen the failure of government endeavors to improve out lot, initiatives which succeeded only in impeding the efficient delivery of services and slowing (if not blocking) innovation.  Such experiences have reaffirmed the commitment of many who now oppose Obamacare to a principle, the idea of freedom.

Based on this principle, this idea, many have put forward reform proposals to improve our health care system different from those Democrats have offered.  Yet, the President ignores our proposals, suggesting that since we don’t want to fix things the way he believes they should be fixed, we want to do nothing and so preserve the status quo, leaving Mangu-Ward to conclude:

Obama’s path is so clearly illuminated by the light of his own reason, he simply can’t entertain another possible way of being, a different set of beliefs, held by an intelligent person who is well-informed and well-intentioned—or so his language about cynicism, fear, and lies strongly implies. His assumption of bad faith or idiocy on the part of his opponents is done, it seems, with a pure heart.

As Glenn who alerted me to this essay might say, just read the whole thing.

Obama’s Presumption:
Unless We Favor a Greater Government Role in Health Care,
We’re Neglecting Our Ethical Obligations

The more I ponder the President’s comment yesterday to religious leaders that we Americans are “neglecting to live out” the call to the”ethical and moral obligation [to] look out for one another,” the more it troubles me.  It sounds more like the a preacher’s admonition to a wayward flock to mend their selfish ways lest they suffer fire and brimstone than of a President’s appeal to act in the national interest.

Victor Davis Hanson finds the invocation of at the “moral argument comes at the eleventh hour” somewhat “creepy,” asking, “isn’t the use of religion as a political tool precisely what Obama and others have objected to in the Christian Right?”

Indeed, Obama’s religious appeal doesn’t seem to trouble those ever ready to denounce his predecessor for letting his faith guide his politics and for hobnobbing with socially conserative religious leaders.  Now, no one seems concerned that Obama is attempting to enlist more socially liberal religious leaders in his push for greater government control over the economy, even asking Reform rabbis to address the subject in their High Holy Day sermons.

It is this creepy mixing of religion and politics which really troubles me, a political leader defining a government program in religious terms, asking us to turn to government to fulfill our moral obligations to our fellows.  And his presumption that we’re neglecting to act out of that obligation, effectively ignoring the abundant examples of charitable good works done everyday by citizens across the political spectrum and holding a variety of political beliefs.

UPDATE:  Commenting on the same interview I reference above, Ann Althouse writes, Obama would like you to see government as religion (h/t Glenn).

Another Democrat Limits Attendance at “Townhall” Meeting

My brother just forwarded me e-mail reporting that Ohio Democratic Congressman Steve Driehaus has decided to pack his August 26, 2009 townhall meeting with his supporters, making the event, according to the Hamilton County Republican Party,  a “‘ticketed’ affair and handing out tickets only to political friends in the Democratic Party.”

This is particularly rich coming from a man who boasted to the Cincinnati Enquirer that he helped delay a vote on a health care overhaul to solicit the views of citizens:

Health care reform is a complex task that requires input from all those affected. That’s why I joined with other moderate Democrats in delaying a vote on health care reform until the fall. Before we move forward, we need to have these conversations so that every voice is heard and every viewpoint is considered.

Guess this guy wants to go back to Washington and vote with with his party because, well, that’s what he heard when he was back in Cincinnati since he only listened to his fellow partisans.

This guy, Driehaus, who represents the district where I was born, seems a lot like the guy who represents the district where I currently reside.  Henry Waxman had a “public” meeting while back in his district, but didn’t advertise it to the public.  I only found out about it because I called his office to ask if he would be available, during the recess, to take questions from his constituents.

Oh, and you had to register online for the Waxman forum.  When I tried to sign up, there was already a waiting list.

No wonder people are angry.

FROM THE COMMENTS:  Rusty points out that one Republican is borrowing a page from her Democratic colleages:

While U.S. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R) travels across Eastern Washington discussing health care reform, one of her only stops in Spokane was a closed affair Wednesday .

Just because the Democrats are doing it doesn’t make it right.  Like Driehaus and Waxman, Rodgers should be wiling to listen to those at odds with her point of view.  Despite the intense astroturfing of Obamacare advocates, there are people who genuinely favor increased government control; they too have a right to be heard.

Obama LIVE: Webcast on Healthcare Reform

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 2:58 pm - August 20, 2009.
Filed under: Post 9-11 America

I’m watching and Twittering the latest Obama babble on the web.  Join in and watch…. just try not to get brainwashed.

LINK HERE FOR THE ORGANIZING FOR AMERICA OBAMA HEALTHCARE FORUM

Follow me live on Twitter too: 

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Obama: Government Can Help Us Fulfill Our Moral Obligations

Trying to “retake the upper ground in this month’s healthcare debate,” President Obama, in a “conference call with religious leaders” cast reform as a “moral conviction”:

The one thing that you all share is a moral conviction . . . .  This debate over healthcare goes to the heart of who we are as American people… This is part of an ethical and moral obligation that we look out for one another.  In the wealthiest nation on Earth, we are neglecting to live out that call.

He’s right that we have an ethical obligation to look out for one another, but he’s wrong to suggest that the government must be the agency which helps us fulfill that obligation.  Many people, including yours truly, donate to organizations and institutions which provide medical services to the less fortunate (the issue at hand in the current conversation).  Some doctors, including very conservative ones, waive their fees for patients unable to pay.  Individuals volunteer their time to help in hospitals and clinics at home and abroad.

So, he’s wrong, we are not neglecting that call.  Far from it.  To say as much dismisses the charitable work and liberal giving of millions, if not tens of millions, of Americans.  Given that generosity, when the president accuses his fellow citizens of neglecting that call, Obama believes that for us to truly fulfill our moral obligations to one another, the government must step in.

And that is a very dangerous attitude for a politician to have, particularly in a country with the history and ethos of ours.

(H/t GatewayPundit and Greta’s show on FoxNews–which I had on as background while sorting some stuff on my desk.)

(more…)

Obama and Off-Shore Drilling:
Paying a Brazilian Company to Do What Americans Cannot
(because of his fellow partisans’ policies)

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 8:50 am - August 20, 2009.
Filed under: Energy Independence,Liberal Hypocrisy,Obama Watch

While Bruce has been quite busy with work, he frequently forwards links he receives via Twitter, he alerted me to former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s note on Facebook about the President’s decision to grant $2 billion in loans to “to lend billions of dollars to Brazil’s state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil’s Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro.

So, while Democrats (and a smattering of Republicans) have blocked attempts to exploit resources off our own shores, the Democratic President is helping a foreign country exploit its resources.  If his predecessor had done this, liberals would be screaming how he was polluting a third world country in order to secure profits for his cronies in the oil industry.

If we can help subsidize Brazil’s efforts to extract its natural resources, why can’t we allow private companies to exploit our own on their own dime?

Considering this conundrum, Ed Morrissey offers:

Let American companies do what Obama is paying Brazilian companies to do — drill offshore.  We won’t have to pay them money or float them any loans to do it, either.  In fact, we will make money off of the leases, while the effort creates hundreds of thousands of high-paying jobs in the US, creating more tax revenue rather than emptying out the Treasury.

Michelle speculates about a Soros connection.

Holding Obamacare Advocates to the Maddow Grassroots Standard

Yesterday evening while doing my cardio at the gym, I had the good fortune (though some of our readers might say misfortune) to catch a bit of The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC. And boy was it an education.   I gotta give Ms. Maddow credit, unlike the guy who precedes here (you know the angry fellow who draws between one-third and one-half of his nemesis’s audience), she has a pleasant demeanor and doesn’t seem like she’s about to bite someone’s head off, but then again, maybe she just comes across that way without sound.

Well, last night, she had a segment, Reading the fine print on grassroots groups to try to show that some supposedly grassroots rally on energy was just a staged shindig ginned up by the (evil) oil companies.  She did, believe it or not, made some interesting points about people being bussed in and waving pre-printed signs.

So, as soon as the transcript is up, I’m going to take down her tips on seeing through such shenanigans to see the astroturf that lies beneath and apply them to the folks bussed in to rallies and town halls to agitate for ObamaCare.  (And also something about handing our posters, you know, like the unions packing Obamacare do.)

When I review the transcript*, we’ll see what she says about large organizations funding these gatherings.  What was also interesting was how she segued from “proving” that this energy rally was astroturfed to discussing health care with Vermont’s Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders, suggesting perhaps that the health care rallies were similarly staged events.  Given Miss Maddow’s record of misinformation on those rallying against Obamacare, no wonder she’s decided to turn her attention to another industry.

* (more…)