The Right of a Nation

Once again Barack Hussein Obama shows his true colors.

“It is a vital national security interest of the United States to reduce these conflicts because whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower, and when conflicts break out, one way or another we get pulled into them,” Obama said.

This is mentioned in a story by the AP under the title “Palin taken aback by Obama ’superpower’ remark,” but who in their right mind isn’t “taken aback” by this comment?  It certainly isn’t just Obama that is stunned.

Honestly, there really isn’t anything else to say – he said it all right there.  He and his administration are obviously unhappy with the fact that America is a dominant military superpower.  And that helps to explain a lot of his actions as President so far, as everything he has done so far has only weakened America’s standing in the world.  So it looks like despite the fact that he is able to unhappily admit that America is still on top, they plan on doing whatever they can to change that unfortunate fact.

This quote could basically be the theme of Obama’s presidency.

All of a sudden, the criticism of President Obama is becoming too “harsh,” “incendiary,” and “demonizing” according to Democrats, namely Bill Clinton.

It’s interesting that after years and years of complete disrespect for President Bush and ridiculous displays of Hitler comparisons, effigies, and masked individuals at protests, all of a sudden the groups of people protesting Obama (many of which are fairly normal looking citizens, many actually middle aged and older people) are set to be to blame whenever someone possibly attempts an act of violence towards a member of the government.

Clinton is quoted as saying “the words we use really do matter,” as if words that an Obama protester uses is somehow going to be to blame for pushing a lunatic over the edge and causing them to commit an act of violence.  I’m not going to lie, when a powerful politician “predicts” or “foresees” a political enemy of theirs causing a “potential” or “future” problem, I get suspicious/worried.  Democrats have already proven that they will completely fabricate scenes of supposed violence performed by the Tea Party members in an attempt to decrease their legitimacy.

Also, one of the more stupid things that Clinton (believe me it was hard to pick) said is

“One of the things that the conservatives have always brought to the table in America is a reminder that no law can replace personal responsibility. And the more power you have and the more influence you have, the more responsibility you have.”

So according to Clinton, personal responsibility means watching what you say because it may cause someone else to do something that they supposedly otherwise would not do.  Did he not even sense the stupidity in that when he said it?  What about the “personal responsibility” for these imaginary villains that he is creating?  If one is to be “personally responsible,” that means they are responsible for their actions and do not blame others for them.  I thought the phrase was fairly self-explanatory.

Anyway, it seems like a waste to spend this much time on such stupid comments, but they are just another example of liberals trying everything they can in order to get rid of the Tea Party movement (and all Obama opposition in general).

According to Breitbart, black people that support or are a part of the Tea Party movement are taking a great deal of heat, especially from their fellow African-Americans.

“I’ve been told I hate myself. I’ve been called an Uncle Tom. I’ve been told I’m a spook at the door,” said Timothy F. Johnson, chairman of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, a group of black conservatives who support free market principles and limited government.

“Black Republicans find themselves always having to prove who they are. Because the assumption is the Republican Party is for whites and the Democratic Party is for blacks,” he said.

In addition, Clifton Bazar, a freelance photographer and conservative blogger said

“You have to be honest and true to yourself. What am I supposed to do, vote Democratic just to be popular? Just to fit in?” asked Clifton Bazar, a 45-year-old New Jersey freelance photographer and conservative blogger.

David Webb, an organizer of New York City’s Tea Party 365 said “I’ve gotten the statement, ‘How can you not support the brother?’”

To me this story is pretty hilarious.  Tea Party groups are accused of being racist, but whites and blacks who insist that all black people must think the same way or else be ostracized are supposedly members of a so-called open-minded, enlightened liberal group.

If a person were to make an outlandish statement such as “all black people dress the same” or “all black people talk the same,” they would be accused of stereotyping and being racist.  But apparently, suggesting that black people are expected to all think alike is somehow socially acceptable.

Also, there’s this cool little story-

Among the 37 black Republicans running for U.S. House and Senate seats in November is Charles Lollar of Maryland’s 5th District.

A tea party supporter running against House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Lollar says he’s finding support in unexpected places.

The 38-year-old U.S. Marine Corps reservist recently walked into a bar in southern Maryland decorated with a Confederate flag. It gave his wife Rosha pause.

“I said, ‘You know what, honey? Many, many of our Southern citizens came together under that flag for the purpose of keeping their family and their state together,’” Lollar recalled. “The flag is not what you’re to fear. It’s the stupidity behind the flag that is a problem. I don’t think we’ll find that in here. Let’s go ahead in.”

Once inside, they were treated to a pig roast, a motorcycle rally—and presented with $5,000 in contributions for his campaign.

Politico has a story up concerning CBS News’ recent hard-hitting Obama interview in which Harry Smith played basketball with the President.

During the interview, this is what Obama had to say about some of the criticism of his actions as President:

“I do think that everybody has a responsibility — Democrats or Republicans — to tone down some of this rhetoric, some of these comments.…It used to be that someone who said something crazy, they might be saying it to their next door neighbor or it might be on some late night AM station at the very end of the radio dial and now with the blogs, it ends up getting a lot more attention and you guys end up covering it a lot more. It’s not as if there haven’t been a lot of crazy things said out and about over the years, it’s just that it gets much more magnified much more quickly.”

First of all, Obama has changed a lot about the way this country works in his short time as President, but so far he hasn’t been able to get rid of the First Amendment, so I think that hear is going to hear a lot of comments of “kiss my ass” in response to this suggestion.

Second of all, he couldn’t be more wrong with his comments that severe criticism of America’s President used to only be whispered among neighbors, and not widely publicized.  Harsh criticism and outright vitriol directed at our President has been occurring since America’s founding.

In fact, John Adams was highly bothered by some of the outrageous comments made about our nation’s Presidents during his time, and in response he was widely lambasted as being a lover of monarchy.  Adams’ problem was that he sacrificed so much in order to help gain independence for America, that he often times felt that all that him and the other founders had fought for was being belittled by these criticisms of the President.

Anyway, point being, Americans are not going to stop criticizing our Presidents and if Obama wants us to he is going to have to try his damnedest to find a way to physically stop us.

According to ABC News, the White House is once again making multi-billion dollar efforts to help out “troubled borrowers” who have mortgages that they can’t afford.

Remember when we were all laughing at Peggy Joseph when she said that she can’t wait until Obama is elected so she doesn’t have to worry about paying for her gas and mortgage anymore?

Anyway,

“The administration wants to help two groups of borrowers at risk of losing their homes: the unemployed and the underwater — who owe more on their mortgage than their home is worth.

Now lenders can reduce the payments for unemployed homeowners for a minimum of three months and a maximum of six months while the borrower looks for work.

Underwater homeowners will also receive help from the White House. As housing prices have plummeted, millions of homeowners have ended up underwater, owing more than the value of their homes. Under the new plan, lenders would reduce a homeowner’s mortgage balance by at least 10 percent to get within 15 percent of the new real value of their home, refinancing into loans backed by the government’s Federal Housing Administration in an effort to make the loans more affordable.”

Before I get to the heart of my post, I’d like to say that I really don’t understand why people who are “underwater” on their house need help. Being underwater, as it said above, is when you owe more on something than it is worth. I understand that it is not a desirable position to be in, but how exactly does living in a home that you are underwater on hurt you? Just don’t sell the house and you will never know you’re underwater, right? Anyone who buys a new car is immediately underwater on their car, sometimes for a few years.

Anyway, in my state, Carolina Live went around interviewing people about this new mortgage assistance bill, and the responses were pretty surprising.

Many local homeowners still have some questions, ones that they’re already answering.

“Who’s gonna pay for this? Me and you, we’re going to pay for this,” asked, then answered Drexel Mixson, who owns a home in the Southgate community in the Carolina Forest area.

Mixson bought his home two years ago.

“My house is worth $70,000 less than what it was when I bought it, but my taxes keep going up. When does it stop?” continued Mixson.

Apparently this homeowner is more concerned about lowering taxes than getting the country more in debt in order to help people like him out.

“I think the government has helped too much already,” suggested Brian Mahaffey, a homeowner in The Farm, another community in the Carolina Forest area.

Mahaffey recently sold a home where he took a bit of a loss, telling NewsChannel 15 he reluctantly sold his home in a short sale. As a result, he has first hand experience of the struggling housing market.

Mahaffey says he’s currently working three jobs to pay his mortgage and adds that people need to take personal responsibility.

“If people got into a mortgage they couldn’t afford, they knew what they were getting themselves into at the time and unfortunately the money they’re proposing to help these people out has to come from somewhere,” continued Mahaffey.

Now, where I’m from, this is what you call a “grown-ass man.”  Apparently he got a house that was maybe a little bit much for him, and then when he realized that, the housing market had gotten worse and his house was now worth less.

So what did he do?  Did he pout and cry and then get angry and smash up the walls and destroy the fixtures in his home and walk out on his mortgage?  Did he shout from the roof tops about the injustice that has been done to him, and demand assistance from a bunch of people he’s never met in Washington, DC?

No, he sold the house because of the fact that he no longer could afford it, he took a loss on that house, and he picked up as much extra work as possible in order to cover that loss and pay for his new mortgage.  And just like he said, that is called taking “personal responsibility.”

This type of attitude in a person is what has made America great from its very beginning, and unfortunately it seems to be getting harder and harder to find.

“There’s way too many people (in foreclosure) and through no fault of their own… so, anything to keep people in their home is a great thing,” countered John Winzenried, a local real estate agent with 843Realtors, sees the good in the assistance program.

Maybe this guy is right too, but unfortunately he doesn’t mention any of the ways that people buy houses they can’t afford without knowing it.  I know the job market is pretty crappy, and even if you bought a house that you could afford at the time and lost your job, you probably can no longer afford it.  Anyway, it’s not surprising that a Realtor is supportive of the government giving people money that will help them to be able to continue to buy houses.

“I think it’ll be a good thing. Anything that our government can do to help out local residents that are in trouble with their mortgages is a step in the right direction,” said Winzenried, who is also a homeowner in The Farm.

I’m sure this guy had more to say than that, but on the surface it basically looks like another comment representative of the “oh, free money from the government, I’m cool with that” type of thinking.