I watched this video, and found out that I’m a red hot, scalding, seventh circle of hell, racist.
Check out this video from Black and Right…
President’s Brother Turns to Conservative Author For Help With Medical Bills … Because Obama Refuses to Help
Does Barack Obama truly believe that he is his brother’s keeper? Listening to the Obama family speak, you would think so…
President Obama: “This sense of mutual responsibility – the idea that I am my brother’s keeper; that I am my sister’s keeper – has always been a part of what makes our country special.” (Weekly Address, Thanksgiving, 2011)
President Obama: “We believe that I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper — that everybody deserves a fair shot at the American Dream.” (Moving Forward Rally, Philadelphia, PA, October, 2010)
Michelle Obama: “… will we honor the fundamental American belief that I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper, and if one of us is hurting, then we’re all hurting?” (DNC Event, Tampa, FL, October 2011)
President Obama: “In difficult times, Americans are coming together — tackling our challenges instead of ignoring them — and renewing the principle that we are our brother’s keeper and our sister’s keeper.” (Presidential Proclomation, April, 2011)
Turns out however, that in difficult times, the President’s actual brother, George Obama, had to turn to a conservative author and the man behind the new film, 2016: Obama’s America, for help with his son’s medical bills. George, as D’Souza writes, apparently does not feel he can turn to the President for help, even in times of dire emergency.
A few days ago I received a call from a man I recently met named George. He was a bit flustered, and soon informed me that his young son was sick with a chest condition. He pleaded with me to send him $1,000 to cover the medical bills. Since George was at the hospital I asked him to let me speak to a nurse, and she confirmed that George’s son was indeed ill. So I agreed to send George the money through Western Union. He was profusely grateful. But before I hung up I asked George, “Why are you coming to me?” He said, “I have no one else to ask.” Then he said something that astounded me, “Dinesh, you are like a brother to me.”
Actually, George has a real life brother who just happens to be the president of the United States. (George Obama is the youngest of eight children sired by Barack Obama Sr.) George’s brother is a multimillionaire and the most powerful man in the world. Moreover, George’s brother has framed his re-election campaign around the “fair share” theme that we owe obligations to those who are less fortunate.
One of Obama’s favorite phrases comes right out of the Bible: “We are our brother’s keeper.” Yet he has not contributed a penny to help his own brother. And evidently George does not believe, even in times of emergency, that he can turn to his brother in the White House for help.
So much for spreading the wealth around.
Obama’s refusal to help George is especially surprising because George doesn’t just live in American-style poverty but rather in Third World poverty. He lives in a shanty in the Huruma slum in Nairobi. He gets by on a few dollars a month. Obama also has an aunt named Hawa Auma, his father’s sister, who ekes out a living selling coal on the streets of a small village in Kenya. She says she would like to have her teeth fixed, but she cannot afford it. Obama hasn’t offered to help her either.
What’s going on here? Why is President Obama so hesitant to help family members in need?
It’s not as if the President isn’t aware of his brother’s plight. George was interviewed in 2008 by CNN, an interview which showed him as living in poverty in Kenya. The video caption reads in part:
Barack Obama says he wants to take more money from the “rich” to make the tax code “fair,” but he won’t give one dime to his own half-brother who lives in abject poverty. Barack Obama claims he wants to help all Americans, but he will not even help his half-brother.
So why is the man who preaches about being our “brother’s keeper” clearly failing to live up to his own expectations?
Worse if you’re a liberal, how do you reconcile the fact that the President’s own brother had to resort to the kindness and generosity of a greedy, selfish conservative like Dinesh D’Souza? This simply doesn’t fit your narrative.
Actor Zach Galifianakis may be known for his less-than family-friendly sense of humor, but billionaires David and Charles Koch demonstrated Tuesday they don’t find him so funny.
The comedian is co-starring with Will Ferrell in the upcoming comedy, “The Campaign,” which features a pair of wealthy donors called the “Motch brothers,” played by Dan Aykroyd and John Lithgow.
Galifianakis, whose uncle served as a U.S. congressman from North Carolina, told the New York Daily News on Monday that it was “pretty obvious” the Motch brothers, a pair of wealthy donors who attempt to manipulate political campaigns, were crafted after David and Charles Koch, best known as the “Koch brothers.”
The Koch brothers are high-profile figures in the Republican Party who support conservative and libertarian causes. Backers of the group Americans for Prosperity, the pair of industrialists are expected to spend tens – if not hundreds – of millions on Republican causes this year.
In July, the Kochs hosted a fund-raiser for Mitt Romney in Southampton, which drew multiple protests from Occupy Wall Street crowds.
In the interview Monday, “The Hangover” star wasted no time expressing how he feels about the real-life industrialist titans.
“I disagree with everything they do. They are creepy and there is no way around that. It’s not freedom what they are doing,” Galifianakis said.
Today, the Koch brothers responded by ripping Galifianakis’ as a monkey-loving comedian who is for some reason, offering political commentary.
Apparently, the real Koch brothers weren’t so amused. A spokesman for the industrialist titans released a statement, chiding the actor’s comments.
“Last we checked, the movie is a comedy. Maybe more to the point is that it’s laughable to take political guidance or moral instruction from a guy who makes obscene gestures with a monkey on a bus in Bangkok,” said Philip Ellender, referring to a scene from the movie “The Hangover Part II.”
So who got the last laugh?
… But not for the reasons you’d expect.
The New York State Republican Committee is hopping mad over an apparent lack of focus toward matters of import by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand:
The U.S. Department of Labor reported yesterday that unemployment rates were lower in June than a year earlier in 328 of the 372 metropolitan areas across America, with only 32 metro areas registering higher unemployment.
Shockingly, each and every one of New York’s 13 metropolitan areas registered higher unemployment year-over-year with the state rate at 9.1% and a New York City rate at 10.3%. New York State accounted for more than one-third of all the areas nationwide that reported higher unemployment rates.
Senator Gillibrand’s answer?
Pass a budget? No!
Cut taxes and cut spending to allow job growth? No!
Get cosponsors for her own phony “jobs bills” and get them to the Senate floor? No!
Stand up for New York’s interests in Washington? No!
Gillibrand’s answer: Book Club!
Indeed, Gillibrand will be hosting a second online book club chat this evening for the web site “OffTheSidelines.org”, claiming the effort is about “bringing women’s voices to the forefront” and “focus(ing) on the issues and stories that are important to us”.
Wendy Long, candidate for U.S. Senate, responded to the out of touch event:
“Whether it’s Main Street or Wall Street, upstate or downstate, New Yorkers’ interests are being sold out, our future mortgaged, and our earning power taxed by a flip-flopping Senator who is a puppet of national special interests in Washington, instead of taking the initiative to help the economy and jobs for New Yorkers,” said U.S. Senate candidate Wendy Long.
Long added, “Kirsten Gillibrand says she’s ‘fine’ that Obamacare is a tax, she supports raising income taxes on small business owners and suburban and downstate voters, she opposes economic growth through her opposition to the development of shale gas, and she is crippling middle and entry-level financial sector jobs and consumer lending through her support of Dodd-Frank. As Senator, I will work to reverse each and every one of her job killing policies and implement pro-growth, pro-freedom policies instead. She is running from debates and holding book clubs because she can’t defend her record of failure to New Yorkers.”
There is however, a method to Gillibrand’s madness. The Off the Sidelines book club isn’t totally about books, or women’s issues for that matter.
It’s about campaign contributions.
Via Buffalo News:
Then there’s the “contribute” button — where every dollar women contribute goes not to any independent organization called OffTheSidelines.org, but to Gillibrand’s 2012 re-election campaign.
That last fact leaves advocates of good government thinking that Gillibrand has taken what her supporters call a noble and necessary cause — women’s rights — and converted it into yet another political fundraising opportunity.
“It’s not actually noble,” said Melanie Sloan, founder and executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, a nonpartisan good-government group based in Washington.
“I think it’s totally misleading,” Sloan said of OffTheSidelines.org, which never explicitly says dollars donated there go to the Gillibrand re-election campaign. “I think it’s technically legal, but I don’t think it’s OK.”
Perhaps New Yorkers would be better served reading the policies and platforms espoused by Kirsten Gillibrand, and contrast those advocated by Wendy Long. In the end they may just find Long’s common sense conservatism to be a better way to get women ‘off the sidelines’ than any stereotypical book club ever could.
Just wanted to thank everyone who has taken the time to stop in and read the news here at the Mental Recession. We’d love to hear more comments and/or suggestions on how to make the site better.
“I absolutely reject” the notion that the individual mandate is a tax.
“… for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.”
“That’s not a tax increase…”
“… you can’t just make up that language and decide that that’s called a tax increase.”
And now, the latest from Mister Smith Media…
In the ongoing battle against SWAT-ting and those forces who would like to quell free speech, conservatives just received major reinforcements.
Today, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), through Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, has announced that they too will stand against the harassing and dangerous tactics of domestic terrorist Brett Kimberlin and his ilk, and stand for the First Amendment and free speech.
Here is the press release:
ACLJ DEFENDS FREE SPEECH IN BLOGOSPHERE – REPRESENTS TOP CONSERVATIVE BLOGGERS TARGETED FOR HARASSMENT
(Washington, DC) – The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which focuses on constitutional law, announced today it is providing legal representation to a top conservative blogger and his organization that represents many other bloggers who are facing threats and intimidation tactics by those opposed to their viewpoint.
“Free speech is under attack,” said Jay Sekulow, ACLJ Chief Counsel. “Conservative writers are now facing threats against themselves, their families, and their livelihoods merely because they’ve aggressively investigated the history and funding of radical liberals. The ACLJ has a long history of successfully defending free speech, and we look forward to defeating this latest attempt to threaten and intimidate conservatives into silence.”
The issue involves targeting a number of conservative bloggers with a dangerous and illegal tactic that’s become known as SWAT-ing – (making false 911 calls sending police to the homes of bloggers, claiming a crime has occurred.) The tactic is used in retaliation for posts the conservative bloggers have written.
The ACLJ is representing Ali Akbar, a top blogger and president of the National Bloggers Club, a coalition of conservative bloggers which reaches millions of readers. Akbar has seen his mother’s home photographed and placed on the internet. He has also received formal notification that he may soon be sued for publishing truthful information about radical liberals and their wealthy donors.
“I’m grateful for the support of the ACLJ, and I’m confident we’ll defeat any and all legal challenges to our fundamental right to free speech,” said Akbar. “We will not be deterred in our quest for the truth.”
The ACLJ will aggressively defend the constitutionally-protected free speech rights of Akbar and his organizations.
The ACLJ’s representation of Akbar comes as Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) is calling on Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the SWAT-ting cases to see if federal laws have been violated. In a letter to the Attorney General, Sen. Chambliss wrote: “Any potentially criminal action that incites fear, seeks to silence a dissenting opinion, and collaterally wastes the resources of law enforcement should be given close scrutiny at all levels. . . Regardless of any potential political differences that may exist, threats and intimidation have no place in our national political discourse.”
Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice is based in Washington, D.C. and online at http://www.aclj.org.
Sekulow explains why his organization is jumping into the fray:
Free speech is under attack. Conservative writers are now facing threats against themselves, their families, and their livelihoods merely because they’ve aggressively investigated the history and funding of radical liberals …
… The ACLJ will be providing legal representation to Akbar and his organization of conservative bloggers who are facing threats and intimidation tactics by those opposed to their viewpoint. We will aggressively defend their constitutionally-protected free speech rights from these unwarranted attacks …
… The ACLJ has a long history of successfully defending free speech, and we look forward to defeating this latest attempt to threaten and intimidate conservatives into silence.
This type of support is invaluable, as most bloggers (as Kimberlin is well aware) find it difficult to sustain any lengthy and successful legal battles. Now however, they have an accomplished means to fight back in court.
To date, nobody has backed down to Kimberlin and the SWAT-ters. To the contrary, they are now escalating their defensive efforts.
These opponents of free speech have truly picked the wrong targets.
Thank you ACLJ!
At a meeting with 20 conservative Jewish leaders yesterday, President Obama laid claim to having more knowledge of Judaism than other previous President. What does the President cite for his breadth of knowledge?
He read about it.
By this logic, I once read the book What to Expect When You’re Expecting, thus apparently making me a zen master of all things childbirth.
The Weekly Standard reports:
“Obama … stressed he probably knows about Judaism more than any other president, because he read about it,” Haaretz reports. “[He] wondered how come no one asks Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner or Senate minority leader Mitch McConnel [sic] about their support to Israel.”
Similarly, he said to the group, “I [am] not going to tell you again how I even feel about Israel, but why [are] we still talking about it?”
He then suggested that he should not be questioned about his commitment to the Jewish state because “all his friends in Chicago were Jewish – and at the beginning of his political career he was accused of being a puppet of the Israel lobby,” Haaretz reports.
Do not question his commitment because his friends in Chicago were Jewish? He was also friends with Bill Ayers, should we not question his commitment to domestic terrorism. His pastor for decades was Jeremiah Wright, should we not question his commitment to anti-American racists?
And how do we know he read about Judaism anyway, did he take a college course on the topic? We’ll likely never know.
It’s a shame he didn’t read up more on basic economics or capitalism. Perhaps then he’d be an expert on those topics as well.
And we know there are many of you clamoring for such video…
While we’re aware that this was produced by an Obama supporter (h/t Ben), we simply had no choice but to share the video with you. Any time you can produce something that involves Mitt Romney singing Eminem’s Please Stand Up, then you’ve done something rather epic. This is, hands down, the single best video of the campaign season.
And now, without further ado, will the real Mitt Romney please stand up? Via The Margins of Error…
My dog is on the roof. My dog is on the roof.