Posts Tagged ‘Obama’

This happened during “W”‘s Farewell Tour of Iraq. I think it pretty much sums up his “Legacy”.

In other news Politico.Com is reporting that former Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain has stated that:

“In a surprising rebuke to the warriors who fought for him through tough times, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Sunday sided with President-elect Barack Obama and scolded the Republican National Committee for fanning the Illinois corruption scandal. 

On ABC’s “This Week,” host George Stephanopoulos asked: “The chairman of the Republican National Committee, Mike Duncan, has been highly critical of the way President- elect Obama has dealt with this. 

“He’s had a statement every single day, saying that the Obama team should reveal all contacts they’ve had with Governor [Rod] Blagojevich. He says that Obama’s promise of transparency to the American people is now being tested. Do you agree with that?” 

“McCain replied: “I think that the Obama campaign should and will give all information necessary. You know, in all due respect to the Republican National Committee and anybody — right now, I think we should try to be working constructively together, not only on an issue such as this, but on the economy stimulus package, reforms that are necessary. And so, I don’t know all the details of the relationship between President-elect Obama’s campaign or his people and the governor of Illinois, but I have some confidence that all the information will come out. It always does, it seems to me.” 

Quick someone get another shoe.

Clint, Missouri Bushwhacker


From AFP News

“WASHINGTON (AFP) — Barack Obama’s personnel picks for his White House and cabinet are prompting political foes to claim he has dumped his promise of change for tired Washington insiders and Clinton-era retreads.After spending months feuding with former foe Hillary Clinton and casting veiled criticisms of her husband’s administration, Obama is poised to hand her the plum job of secretary of state, aides said.

Former senator Tom Daschle, a veteran of the partisan political wars Obama has vowed to end is set to become secretary of health and human services.

Eric Holder, a former Clinton-era Justice Department official is being lined up as Attorney General in the Obama administration.

Obama’s chief of staff is feared Rahm Emanuel, a sharp-elbowed former Clinton White House aide, who has warred with Republicans for years.

Clinton energy secretary Bill Richardson is being touted as commerce secretary.

Republicans, demoralized from their drubbing in the presidential and congressional election on November 4 claim this line-up shows Obama’s promise for “Change we Can Believe In” is hollow.

“Apparently, Washington outsiders need not apply in the Obama Administration,” said Republican National Committee spokesman Alex Conant.

“Barack Obama’s cabinet is starting to resemble a Clinton reunion. His appointments so far have been a disappointment for Americans hoping to see some fresh faces in Washington.”

The New York Post sarcastically dubbed names being floated as Obama appointees as Clinton era has-beens.”

“Congratulations to Hillary (and Bill) Clinton — who seem to have won the presidential election, despite the official results on Nov. 4,” the paper’s conservative editorial page wrote.”

Let’s not forget that he’s also picked Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security. Who according to Fox News was a Clinton-era appoinee for U.S. Attorney for the State of Arizona.

While everyone is complaining about the “lack of” CHANGE in the Obama cabinet picks, everone is missing the “big picture” about the change that really is coming.

According to Milwaukee, Wisconsin’s Journal Sentinel newspaper, Obama has been “studying” Lincoln and while the article talks about the various aspects of Lincoln there are several parts of the article that should concern everyone.

For instance, the Journal Sentinel states:

“Just what does his attraction to Lincoln say about Obama? What does Lincoln offer as a model? How relevant is that model today?

“I don’t think you can really imitate Lincoln,” historian Douglas L. Wilson said. But like other students of Lincoln, Wilson applauds the idea of aiming for “a kind of Lincolnian standard.” At the very least, he’s all for presidents making Lincoln an object of study.

Where that study leads is open to interpretation. Thanks in part to his literary brilliance, Lincoln is the most magnetic of presidents. But his appeal is in the eye of the beholder. One leading biographer, David Herbert Donald, wrote that a key to understanding Lincoln was the “essential passivity of his nature.” Another historian singled out Lincoln’s “ruthlessness” of purpose”

While the article details Lincoln’s {perceived} attempt at peacefully preserving the Union…

“Speaking on election night in Chicago, Obama quoted from Lincoln’s first inaugural:

“As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, ‘We are not enemies, but friends . . . though passion may have strained, it must not break, our bonds of affection.’ ”

But even while Lincoln was “assuring” the nation that North and South were not enemies it was an act of deception…

“While the ending of Lincoln’s first inaugural is celebrated for its conciliatory tone, Lincoln’s original draft concluded with a much darker warning to the South: “Shall it be peace, or a sword?” Seward advised him to soften his language. “.

We all know that Lincoln chose “the sword”. Lincoln was not elected by a vast majority of U.S. citizens, the South voted overwhelmingly for Kentuckian John C. Breckinridge, rather than vote for a “Black Republican”.

In 2008, the South (including Missouri) voted for John McCain a Republican rather than vote for a “Black Democrat”.

We can only speculate what kind of CHANGE is coming down the pike for us under an Obama administration, but we can make an educated guess that he’s reading Lincoln in an effort to learn how to best deceptively undermine the Constitution. The biggest question on many citizens minds is; Just what lengths is he willing to go to , in order to implement his CHANGE?

Will it be peace or the sword?

Clint, Missouri Bushwhacker

_uacct = “UA-2623786-1”; urchinTracker();

Eric Holder

Required reading for those Obama-ites who carried his message of “CHANGE”. If Obama is so change oriented, then why is he filling his cabinet with Washington insiders connected to the Clintons?

From the New York Post…

“WASHINGTON – President-elect Barack Obama’s aides have privately asked senators whether Washington attorney Eric Holder would be confirmed as the next attorney general, according to a person involved in the talks.

The talks suggest that Obama is deeply interested in Holder, who served as the No. 2 official in the Justice Department under President Clinton… the last day of Clinton’s term, Holder was asked whether the president should pardon Rich, a wealthy commodities dealer who had been spent years running from tax charges. Holder said he was “neutral, leaning towards favorable” on the pardon. Clinton later cited that as among the factors that persuaded him to issue the pardon.

Holder has publicly apologized for what he said was a snap decision that he should have paid more attention to. Had he taken more time to review the case, he would have advised against a pardon, he said.

A former U.S. attorney, Holder is among Washington’s most prominent defense attorneys. He would be the first black attorney general in U.S. history.

In the past week, Obama aides have asked Senate Republicans whether they would support Holder. In particular, the aides questioned whether Holder’s confirmation would be delayed because of his involvement in the 2001 pardon of fugitive Marc Rich by President Bill Clinton. “

Oh where to start. First of all a candidate of “CHANGE” doesn’t hire a Washington insider to be his Attorney General.

What is a Washington insider?  A Washington insider supports pardoning a wealthy tax evader, because the President wants him to.

So how do you gain support for a nominee who is a Washington insider, when you yourself ran as the candidate of “CHANGE”?

It’s easy, first you have to “package” the nominee as someone who will be remembered  for “historical purposes”, much like Holder was billed in the New York Post. Remember the “Post” stated that if confirmed, Holder will be the nation’s first Black Attorney General. (How fitting for the first Black President).

Of course it is ironic that Bill Clinton was considered the nation’s first “Black” President, but it is just as ironic that Holder will be considered the first Black Attorney General.


Because technically, there was already a Black Attorney General.

“Who”, you might ask, well ironically, it was (drumroll please)…. Eric Holder!

From Wikipedia.Org

“Holder served as Acting Attorney General under President George W. Bush for several weeks until the Senate confirmed Bush’s nominee, John Ashcroft

Hey just a quick question for you Obama {quick} CHANGE artists out there…

How come Holder wasn’t heralded as the nation’s first “Black” Attorney General under George W. Bush?

Who did Holder report to as Deputy Attorney General in the Clinton administration?

Janet Reno

 Good ole Janet Reno, and what was Janet Reno most remembered for?

The raid on the Branch Davidian Compound in Waco, Tx in 1993 which killed 76 people “including 21 children and two pregnant women”

Clint, Missouri Bushwhacker

_uacct = "UA-2623786-1"; urchinTracker();

I’ve been reading Pat Buchanan’s book, “The Death of the West”, and I came across something very interesting. On pages 46-47 Buchanan writes:

“The America many of us grew up in is gone. The cultural revolution has triumphed in the minds of millions an dis beyond the power of politicians to overturn, even had they the courage to try. Half a nation has converted. The party of working-class Catholics is almost 100% “pro-choice” and pro-gay rights. The party of the Moral Majority and Christian Coalition has thrown in the towel on the social issues- to go out an do the Lord’s work growing the Department of Education. Young people are not concerned about their souls; they’re worried about the Nasdaq. Most of the intellectual and the media elite are fighting allies of the revolution or fellow travelers, and many conservatives are trolling for the terms of armistice”

Obama hasn’t even been sworn in and yet his presidency is proof of this. One more nail in the coffin of America. One more chess piece of manipulation played in the “Death of the West” and the decline of European Culture.

Clint, Mobushwhacker

The Real Rahm

Posted: November 11, 2008 in Obama-bin-Biden
Tags: , , ,

I’ve got to admit, after learning that Barack Obama won the presidential election I toyed with the idea of starting a whole new blog dedicated to covering his actions.  But after careful consideration I thought I would just create a “category” on this blog which would accomplish the same goal.

Therefore, I am calling the new category on the Missouri Bushwhacker Blog… “Obama-bin-Biden”, I think you know where I’m going with this.

So, let’s just jump right in with the recent announcement of Rahm Emanuel as Barack Obama’s Chief of Staff, I thought that y’all should know “The Real Rahm” :

The November 8th, 2008 edition of World Net Daily reports that Emanuel supports Universal Civil Service…

“The official website of President-Elect Barack Obama ,, originally announced that Obama would “require” all middle school through college students to participate in community service programs; but after a flurry of blogs protested children being drafted into Obama’s proposed youth corps, the website’s wording was softened.


Originally, under the tab “America Serves” read, “President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in under served schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps.

“Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year,” the site announced…

Obama’s selection of an advocate for mandatory civil service, Rahm Emanuel, as his chief of staff has further worried bloggers that Obama’s plans may be more “requirement” than “encouragement.”

In his book, “The Plan: Big Ideas for America,” Emanuel writes: “It’s time for a real Patriot Act that brings out the patriot in all of us. We propose universal civilian service for every young American. Under this plan, all Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 will be asked to serve their country by going through three months of basic training, civil defense preparation and community service.”

Tuccille comments, “Emanuel and co-author Bruce Reed insist ‘this is not a draft,’ but go on to write of young men and women, ‘the nation will enlist them for three months of civilian service.’ They also warn, ‘Some Republicans will squeal about individual freedom,’ ruling out any likelihood that they would let people opt out of universal citizen service.”

Obama has also yet to clarify what he meant during his July “Call to Service” speech in Colorado Springs, in which he insisted the U.S. “cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set” and needs a “civilian national security force.”

Meanwhile Georgia Congressman Paul Broun is warning America of an Obama “dicatorship”. According to the Associated Press:

“WASHINGTON (AP) — A Republican congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship.

“It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he’s the one who proposed this national security force,” Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. “I’m just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism.”

Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.

“That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did,” Broun said. “When he’s proposing to have a national security force that’s answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he’s showing me signs of being Marxist.”

Obama’s comments about a national security force came during a speech in Colorado about building a new civil service corps. Among other things, he called for expanding the nation’s foreign service and doubling the size of the Peace Corps “to renew our diplomacy.”

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” Obama said in July. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

Broun said he also believes Obama likely will move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national police force.

Obama has said he respects the Second Amendment right to bear arms and favors “common sense” gun laws. Gun rights advocates interpret that as meaning he’ll at least enact curbs on ownership of assault weapons and concealed weapons. As an Illinois state lawmaker, Obama supported a ban on semiautomatic weapons and tighter restrictions on firearms generally.

“We can’t be lulled into complacency,” Broun said. “You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I’m not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I’m saying is there is the potential.”

Obama’s transition office did not respond immediately to Broun’s remarks. “

OK if Obama is Hitler, then who does that make Rahm Emanuel?

Ahh yes, Heinrich Himmler, Head of Hittler’s  SS ( his own private defense force)

We’ll keep you up to date as Obama makes additional appointments for his new Reich.

Clint, Missouri Bushwhacker