Lindy’s Blog: Where Mom is Always Right

January 24, 2009

Governing by threats and intimidation, UPDATED

Filed under: abortion,politics — by lindyborer @ 8:30 am
Tags: , , , ,

I think SOMEONE is getting too big for his britches.  And his name is Barack Obama.  Hey, Barack:  You’re the President of the United States, not the dictator of the USSA. 

Not only is the One getting off to a blazing start by killing Pakistanis, dismantling a prison that houses the terrorists who killed thousands of our own people on 9/11, and expanding abortions for the poor overseas, he’s also starting his administration by intimidation and boasting of his win to the representatives that you and I elected to Congress.  What happened to “post-partisanship,” Barack? 

Yesterday, he told Republican representative Eric Cantor, “I won,” supposedly trying to put the matter at hand to rest once and for all.  Cantor had simply dared to raise an objection to Obama’s spending orgy, and his stimulus plan that is set to reach 1 trillion dollars.  Yes, Cantor made the mistake of not marching in lock-step with the new administration, and was haughtily called down for it.

Obama also warned Republican lawmakers to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh if they want to get things done.  Well, at least Obama recognizes the most salient threat to his liberal agenda; Limbaugh is the last man standing among the media who is actually examining the president’s actions on their own accord.  I suppose I’d revile the only one who wasn’t engaged in sycophantic drooling over me, as well.  (Actually, I wouldn’t.  I’m not that narcissistic.)  No opposition allowed during an Obama administration, apparently.

See, Barack, that’s the thing about being POTUS:  You don’t always get what you want, and sometimes you have to share with and listen to others.  Try not to throw any more fits.  It’s smacks of childishness.  And remember you chided against such things in your Inaugural?  What happened to “setting aside childish things”, Barack? 

You know, the indication of a good leader is someone who knows how to handle criticism.  So far, you’re not anywhere close to the leader that GWB was.      

 The real message here?  Half of the country didn’t vote for Obama and his radical agenda.  Most of these people are staunch conservatives (like Limbaugh).  These are the people who are standing in his way.   I say, LET’S KEEP IT UP!  We’re the only ones left who will keep our country from the brink of stagnant European socialism.  Rush is making Obama uncomfortable.  He must be doing something right. 

By the way, I predict Rush’s ratings to go through the roof as a result Obama’s comment.  Way to go, Obama—you’ve done something right!  

More on the “sore winners” here.

Regarding BO’s executive order yesterday revoking the Mexico City Policy, Ed Morrissey had this to say:

This isn’t exactly a Profile in Courage.  Actions get taken on Friday afternoons when people want the media to ignore it.  By noon, the broadcast networks have their evening news well planned, and Americans as a rule go out to socialize.  It’s not called the graveyard of news cycles for nothing.

It seems significant that the first such Friday afternoon news cycle of the Obama administration gets used for authorizing American tax dollars for abortions abroad.  We’re spending a trillion dollars that we don’t have now for an economic stimulus that will likely make the economy worse as we pull capital out of the markets.  With the federal budget deficit exploding to three times its previous size, thanks to the bailout, why should Americans pay for abortions overseas?

At least the shame Obama appears to show in signing this dreadful act can give pro-life activists a little hope.  Perhaps if Obama realizes that he has to bury this in a Friday-afternoon news cycle, the Freedom of Choice Act won’t get much attention later in this Congressional session.


Gateway Pundit has more:  Because 42 million global abortions are not enough…Obama will use taxpayer $$$ to pay for more

Michelle Malkin:  A few questions about President Obamas first airstrike

Good question of the day, “How can you spend hundreds of millions of dollars on contraceptives—how does that stimulate the economy?”

Poor Barack.  The guy can’t even handle a substantive question without getting irrated.

UPDATERush Limbaugh responds to Obama.  Brilliantly.  Accurately.

More on this:  From Just One Minute, Rush to Judgement:

Third, can Obama be foolish enough to cite Rush as Obama Enemy Number One and then try to revive the Fairness Doctrine?  Dumb, de dum dum.  If it is a bad idea to get in an argument with a person who buys ink by the barrel, how smart is it to get in a verbal contest with someone that sits behind a live mike three hours a day?




  1. Uh huh. Thank God for Rush. He made Tuesday a little easier.

    Comment by Erin — January 24, 2009 @ 10:12 am |Reply

  2. Lindy, what a long blog… two comments… (1) there are 240 or so prisoners in Guantanamo… the Chinese detainees for sure had nothing to do with 9/11… How many more do you think might be there for false reasons? (2) MCP speaks to lifting poor people out of the cycle of poverty. It is far more “christian-like” than the policy of those who wish to outlaw all abortions…

    Comment by zukunftsaugen — January 24, 2009 @ 5:50 pm |Reply

  3. See, Barack, that’s the thing about being POTUS: You don’t always get what you want, and sometimes you have to share with and listen to others.

    And which of the Presidents in the past 30 years are you advocating as a model of good POTUS-like behavior for Barack Obama? Just checking: see, the most obvious thing about the previous President was, after all, that he didn’t appear capable of sharing with or listening to others. Is it Bill Clinton you’re thinking of as a model for Barack Obama to follow? George H. W. Bush? Jimmy Carter? (I don’t think Ronald Reagan counts: he had Alzheimers.)

    Comment by jesurgislac — January 24, 2009 @ 7:40 pm |Reply

  4. Come on, Lindy – you know the media isn’t suppose to ask Barack the tough questions. I would be irritated as well – I’m king for God sake is what Obama is thinking. Sean Hannity’s new show and Glenn Beck’s new show have been off the charts as well. I’m sure Fox News is sitting pretty. Major Garrett has been asking some great questions of Press Secretary-ah-um-I’m-not-sure-I-better-uh-um-ask-Gibbs as well. This actually would be alot of fun for all of us if it didn’t mean the slaughter of innocents and the death of the Republic of America.

    Comment by dsgawrsh — January 24, 2009 @ 10:33 pm |Reply

  5. Zukunftsaugen: 1) The Chinese detainees (the Uigers, prounounced “wee-gurs”) at Guantanimo are still there because they fear torture if they’re returned to China, and up to the point it has been a question of whether or not they should be granted larger due process so that they could be granted entry into the US, and whether or not they need to apply through the Homeland Security dept, which is in charge of US immigration laws.

    Furthermore, although they were being held without charges, I for one am not naive enough to believe that they are as pure as the wind-driven snow, and neither are the people in charge of keeping our country safe. The Uigers were trained at terror camps in Afghanistan. In other words, I don’t think that these men just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time–they were training at a terrorist camp, for crap’s sake. I don’t feel too keen on accepting them into my backyard. “False reasons”? These men just hadn’t gotten around to blowing themselves and other Americans up.

    There are dozens of practical problems with closing Gitmo, as well. Problems that the ideological left don’t think about, such as “Where are these men supposed to go?” Their countries won’t take them back in in many cases. BO will now have to face these problems.

    2)In regard to your understanding of the MCP: That is the most interesting description I’ve ever seen applied to such a policy. Um, HOW would pushing abortion on women lift them out of poverty? Abortion has devastating physical and psychological effects on women. I think you need to lay off the whisky and do a little more research.

    As for your contention that trying to help women in more productive ways than just offering her the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to kill her unborn child is less Christian? I don’t even know how you could type that in all seriousness. Allow me to wholeheartedly disagree. I refuse to accept your premise that somehow to be pro-life is to support poverty by default. Now you’re just being silly.

    Comment by lindyborer — January 25, 2009 @ 8:42 am |Reply

  6. Jesurgislac: You must not have completely read my post. GWB put up with the unfair treatment by the media for eight years and hardly turned a hair. Trust me, there have been so many times I said, “Stand up for yourself a little bit!” But, he had that quality of humility that is so important in leaders. A good leader knows how to listen to his opposition without partisan attacks, though (a la Obama.)

    Obama, on the other hand, displays nothing but ego and narcissism. Who but a narcissist could already have penned two autobiographies in their lifetime at his age?

    Some presidents are more “eloquent” than others, yes. GWB was not “smooth” behind the mic. I don’t tend to base my assumptions about quality leadership on a person’s ability to speak prettily. Bush senior was similarly less smooth. Clinton, on the other hand (which the left loves) was smooth, esp. with the ladies. Of course, I don’t think great leaders—esp. of the free world—should lie under oath and to the faces of Americans. I’m not old enough to remember Carter; Reagan had the knack, as well. (And he didn’t get Alzheimers until well out of his presidency.)

    To answer your question, in dealing with his opposition, I think BO could stand to emulate GWB.

    Comment by lindyborer — January 25, 2009 @ 9:02 am |Reply

  7. GWB put up with the unfair treatment by the media for eight years and hardly turned a hair.

    Unfair treatment? George W. Bush was coddled by the US media. And he avoided all interviews by journalists from outside the US where they wouldn’t treat him with the deference to which he was evidently accustomed.

    But, he had that quality of humility that is so important in leaders.

    What humility? This is the President whose reaction to even the mildest criticism – and this was before his first and greatest failure, 9/11 – was “Who cares what you think?” This is the President who, three weeks into the war in Iraq, had himself photographed under a “Mission Accomplished” banner. This is the President who, when asked to name the mistakes he’d made (back in 2004) actually couldn’t think of any – not even, it appeared, the mistake of listening to a briefing about an al-Qaeda attack on the US planned for September 2001 and doing nothing more than tell the staffer “All right, you’ve covered your ass, now” – let alone the mistake of the aggressive attack on Iraq claiming that Saddam Hussein still had WMD. (Which, even if we presume that Bush was lied to, rather than was aware that his administration were giving him lies to tell, was known by 2004 to be a mistake.) This is the President who couldn’t, in his final press conference, admit to more than “wishing he’d done things differently” about the federal reaction to Hurricane Katrina. “Heckuva a job, Brownie”.

    A good leader knows how to listen to his opposition without partisan attacks

    Then Bush was never a good leader. He never listened to his opposition, and the partisan attacks he/his administration made on his opposition included, as we know now, the outing of a covert CIA agent, Valerie Plame, to punish her husband for presuming to voice his views in the NYT.

    If Bush is your standard for “good leader”, Obama has already surpassed Bush to become superlative leader – and it’s not even his first 120 hours in office.

    If you liked the arrogant, stupid, partisan governance of the Bush era, and regard that as good governance when it’s Republican attacking Democrat – well, obviously you’re going to hate Obama. Got nothing to do with his abilities or his leadership: just because it’s obvious that Republican arrogance, stupidity, and partisan governance isn’t going to stand.

    Comment by jesurgislac — January 25, 2009 @ 11:49 am |Reply

  8. Sigh. I highly suspect that you, jesurgislac, probably believe 9/11 to be an inside job, fire can’t melt steel, the levees in New Orleans were rigged to break, and that Bush purposely lied to everyone to go to war in Iraq. (for what…I don’t know, either.) I usually don’t waste my time engaging in arguments with such people, seeing as how if the above were actually TRUE, then I’d have to go on to believe that the earth is flat, GWB is the antichrist, Obama is the second coming of the Messiah, and reports citing Elvis lunching with Bigfoot and Tupac at the local Cracker Barrel are actually substantiated. But I’ll oblige this once.

    How was 9/11 “Bush’s greatest failure?” What should he have done differently? Sent little diplomatic notes of apology to the terrorists for existing? I’m sorry, but I don’t ascribe to this kindergarten view of the world, and the real and constant threat that militant Islam has for America and the west, who seek our complete annhilation. But perhaps you, jesurgislac, believe they are justified in this endeavor?

    As for your claim that the media “coddled” Bush, I actually kind of find it hard to believe you could write that with complete intellectual honesty. No doubt more shoe-throwing was warranted, right?

    Plame? Wilson? I think you might do a little more research, here. Do you recall hearing a man by the name of Richard Armitage? No? Here’s a news release of him admitting he’s the one who outed Plame: Here’s another excellent link relating to the story.
    And check this out (read it all here

    “Actually we have not gotten a “never mind” out of the mainstream media yet in the case of Valerie Plame. The mainstream media will probably never tell the true story behind Joe’s grand frog marching fantasy. It is an incredible story really — amazing that so many in the media regurgitated Wilson’s conspiracy theories as if they were fact. It is amazing that the story took off at all in spite of contradictory statements from Bob Novak from the beginning, who claimed that Plame’s identity did not come from a partisan gunslinger and was only offered in response to his question about why Wilson might have been chosen for the Niger trip. […]

    Democrats have a page in their playbook that they use often and it works almost every time. Make an assertion, even when it is contradicted by facts (in this case by Novak’s statement from day one) and then repeat it over and over again until it becomes conventional wisdom. When the facts emerge and it is clear that most, if not the entire thing, was a liberal fantasy, the damage will have been done and since the media was so instrumental in spreading the misinformation, they will call very little attention to the correction.” Read the whole thing, here:


    Ah, Katrina. What an awful tragedy. I feel for the victims of Katrina, who lost everything (some their lives). What I don’t understand is how some persist in scapegoating the Bush administration for it. The bottom line about Katrina: The worst victims are those who were duped by the liberal entitlement mentality that government should do each and every little thing for them. (Including evacuating before an impending Cat. 5 hurricane.) They’re the victims of a party who depends upon their continued victimization in order to hold and/or retain power. Instead of telling them, “yes, you can” they say, “No, you most certainly can’t. Unless, of course, the government steps in and helps you.”

    As for the whole mission, accomplished thing: The last time I checked, the mission in Iraq IS most definitely accomplished. And, by the way, Bush was right about the surge, something that Obama and Biden were not. They would have pulled the troops out of Iraq in defeat, to the detriment of the Iraqi people. (And, correct me if I’m wrong, but there were a lot of Democrats who voted, with Bush, to move into Iraq.) Even one of America’s top liberals can admit that the surge worked:

    It must have been hard for you to find the snopes bit about Bush telling that a-hole, “Who cares what you think?” Finally, he did stand up for himself! Awesome.

    Again, I know it’s really tempting to believe in conspiracy theories. I’ve found over time that one is better off leaving the tin foil in the drawer by the plastic wrap and taking everything they hear (esp. from the media) with a healthy grain of salt. You might try it sometime.

    Comment by lindyborer — January 25, 2009 @ 4:31 pm |Reply

  9. Here’s some more reading regarding Bush and the war on terror:

    “Here again few detractors maintain much vigor on the question of the war in Afghanistan. The war was conducted swiftly and with low casualties on respective sides. The Taliban were removed from power, elections were held, a constitution was put in place and Al Qaeda was damaged and on the run. That war was significant in removing one of the most profoundly misogynist governments in human history that showed a peculiar delight in assassinating alleged female adulterers in the soccer stadium at Kabul. The Taliban government had a habit of interfering with international food aid deliveries to such an extent that tens of thousands of people died of hunger under their rule. Many thousands more were in danger in the winter of 2001 until President Bush removed the Taliban government and restored the flow of American and international food aid.

    Of course the main contention to claims of failure is the Iraq war. The war is argued to be founded upon false claims about weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, the war was poorly conducted and killed too many innocent people. The WMD claim misses and deceives the public into believing that Saddam Hussein never had WMD. In fact, Saddam used WMD on his own people when he committed a policy of genocide against the Kurds of northern Iraq. Little is said of how from the moment of the invasion, the northern Iraqi Kurds indeed greeted the US invasion as liberation and welcomed the end of the genocidal tactics exerted by Saddam Hussein. Dozens of older WMD were found in Iraq despite media claims to the contrary. The disappointment for the Bush administration was a failure to find an active and contemporary program building the weapons today. Older dangerous weapons were in the Iraqi arsenal and those details can easily be found in the Duelfer report…

    …President Bush’s critics tagged him as too prone to war and unwilling to use diplomacy. His list of diplomatic achievements is arguably more impressive than his war record: the return of a US spy plane and pilots shot down over China, the containment of North Korea in six party talks that Hillary Clinton has confirmed will continue as US policy, the removal of Libya’s chemical weapons program, the end of genocide in southern Sudan that killed more than 2 million people in the 1990s, the removal of the murderous Charles Taylor from rule in Liberia and replacing him with the first female president on the continent of Africa, pulling Pakistan and India back from the brink of nuclear war in 2003, the coordination of more than 60 nations in global interdictions of illegal arms trade, improved bilateral relations with the second largest nation in the world– India.

    Each of these diplomatic achievements accentuates overall successes in bringing the electorates of foreign nations closer to the American political orbit. This success again stands in sharp contrast to allegations of his critics. Elections in all of the following countries removed leaders opposed to President Bush and replaced them with leaders more sympathetic with Bush’s foreign policy: France, Germany, South Korea, Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, Albania, Lebanon, Australia, Canada and Italy. The populations of more than 350 million people moved closer to the American orbit of politics not further away while President Bush was in office.

    None of these nations can match the affection for President Bush found on the continent of Africa where again detractors are hard pressed to dispute the astounding successes of the President. He increased foreign aid to the continent more than any president in history. His emphasis on AIDS and malaria reduced harms of two epidemics that have decimated the continent. Rarely noted in the press, his work on the continent of Africa may be his most lasting international legacy.”

    Comment by lindyborer — January 25, 2009 @ 4:53 pm |Reply

  10. Jesurgislac: I’m sure you are a fine, upstanding, law-abiding American. Forgive me for disagreeing with you. I think we both feel quite strongly in our respective positions.

    Comment by lindyborer — January 25, 2009 @ 9:29 pm |Reply

  11. […] Help out the Internet snitch brigade: Report on fishy health czar office ● More on Censorship ● Governing by Threats and Intimidation ● Tom Maguire ● Gateway Pundit ● Inside the world of Google censors ● Google’s […]

    Pingback by OBAMA’S CENSORSHIP & CONTROL…ulterior desire of all leftists « FactReal — August 4, 2009 @ 6:56 pm |Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: