Right Wing Dog

The FIGHT for The RIGHT!

Barack Obama has shown his ROOTS in Politics are based on Chicago Style Thugery!

Barack Hussein Obama has finally brought out in the open the style of politics he learned while under the titelage of such Democratic greats in Illinois as Mayor Daley, Larry Walsh, Emil Jones, Little Dickie Durbin, Michael Madigan, Rod Blagojevich, Rahm Emanuel (who Daley sent along to Washington to keep an eye on Obama and tell him the orders from the BOSS).

OBAMA IS OPENLY BUYING VOTES! No other way to call it! OBAMA IS OPENLY BUYING VOTES!

He recently unveiled a program, A SELECTIVE PROGRAM, for the Government to fund a $1.5 Billion Dollar housing Bailout! Sounds good does it not? Well here is the part that our smooth talking, shifty, Chicago taught President doesn’t speak about. He picked five states, Arizona, California, Florida, Michigan and Nevada to be the states he is helping. I listed the states in alphabetical order BUT I am sure that Nevada should be the first state, then maybe Michigan followed by Florida and/or California and Arizona. It really makes no difference because he selected these states all for the same reason. THEY HAVE SENATORS WHO ARE UP FOR ELECTION AND A FEW CONGRESSPERSONS AS WELL, WHO ARE IN TROUBLE IN FOR THE NOVEMBER ELECTION. He is using OUR MONEY to help shore up votes for these Democrats losers. He is also, in reality campaigning again with all these alleged one on one with the public “Town Hall Style Meetings” he has started up. Those meetings are costing American taxpayers dearly. His flight costs, the salarries for all the staff people whoi go with him, the time he spends away from what he is supposed to be doing etc.

This is corruption in its purest form. This is bribery. This is theft of our monies by Obama by using deceptive practices.

I am amazed, disgusted and feel like I am always being lied to by this president.

RWD

Advertisements

February 21, 2010 Posted by | 2010 elections, 2012 Elections, America, Blogroll, Chicago, Congress, corruption, Democrat, Durbin, election, House, Liberal Democrat, Michelle Obama, NOBAMA, Obama, pelosi, Political, POLITICS, President, Presidential Candidate, Rahm Emanuel, Republican, Senator, Socialist, stimulus package, Voting | , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

OBAMA and PELOSI – New Word Choices instead of B.S etc

A New word for our vocabulary:  When I sometimes used unsavory
language, I often used the expression “Bull Sh*t”   As I grew up and
discovered it was not necessary to use such crude language, that
expression became “BS”.  Q. What did I really mean when I used those
expressions?  A. I meant that something was ridiculous, or idiotic or a
half truth (or no truth – lies) or just plain stupid.  The dictionary
defines it as: nonsense; especially: foolish, absurd, insolent talk.  I
have decided that I no longer will use either BS or any of the above
expressions. When I have the need to express those feelings, I will use
the word  “Pelosi” or the word “Obama”.  Allow me to use it in a sentence.  “That is just a
bunch of Pelosi, or That is only a load of Obama”.  I encourage you to do the same. They are such  good
words. They really pack 
 a punch. I am no longer being vulgar (or maybe I
am), but it clearly expresses feelings.  If enough of us use them, maybe
we can get the words in the dictionary. That would be an excellent and
fitting legacy for the present Speaker of the House and Senator Barack H. Obama.

Try it – You will feel better

Send this to your friends and associates–unless you thnk the whole idea is bunch of OBAMA!

RWD

October 30, 2008 Posted by | 2008 Election, Blogroll, Democrat, Liberal Democrat, Obama, Political, POLITICS, President, Presidential Candidate, Senator | | Leave a comment

Democrats– A Party of Lawyers. Obama is another and so is his wife!

This was sent to me by another blogger, I do not know where is comes from but it makes complete sense.

THE PARTY OF LAWYERS……

The Democrat Party has become the Lawyers’ Party. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are lawyers. John Edwards, the other former Democrat candidate for president, is a lawyer, and so is his wife, Elizabeth. Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate). Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school. Look at the Democrat Party in Congress: the Majority Leader in each house is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different. President Bush and Vice President Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen. The leaders of the Republican Revolution were not lawyers. Newt Gingrich was a history professor; Tom Delay was an exterminator; and, Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not a lawyer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976. The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work. The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.

The Lawyers’ Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And, so we have seen the proc ession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers’ Party, grow. Against whom does Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.

Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other A m ericans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming. Some Americans become “adverse parties” of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Li bby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too great. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

What about the recent Supreme Court decision that gives constitutional rights now to terrorists, who are not U.S. citizens living here under the rule of our Constitution, but who are murderous thugs, enemies during a time of war who are trying to destroy our country, our people and the Constitution!!!

We CANNOT expect the Lawyers’ Party to provide real change, real reform, or real hope in America. Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by the lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.

And you know what they say, “If you shake hands with a lawyer, count your fingers”!

RWD

July 22, 2008 Posted by | 2008 Election, Blogroll, Democrat, Liberal Democrat, Obama, Political, POLITICS, President, Presidential Candidate, Senator | , , , , | 7 Comments

Nancy Pelosi just can’t get it right! Last in a series

Ms. Pelosi just can’t seem to get it straight!This is the third and last article in my series on the first year anniversary of the Democratic (read Liberal) control of the House of Representatives lead by none other than The Queen, Nancy Pelosi!The question she was asked was: “What will Congress do to fix healthcare? This is a big topic on everyone’s agenda.The answer was typical Pelosi! “We sent the SCHIP Bill (State Children’s Health Insurance Program) to the President and HE vetoed it. It would have provided health insurance to 10 million more children”.What Ms. Pelosi forgot to mention was that the President vetoed the SCHIP Bill because:

·         There were no safeguards that YOUR tax money wouldn’t be spent on ineligible people

·         There were no limitations that illegal aliens or even ADULTS would benefit from SCHIP

·         The bill contained an additional funding mandate for $35 million more over five years

·         The bill also mandated adding four to six million more children in the next five yearsPresident Bush countered with a proposal to add $5 billion in funding and add 800,000 ELIGIBLE children to the program.

The Democrats (read Liberal’s) wanted absolutely nothing to do with his compromise. They wanted it their way or no way! They will try again to get this passed after the November 2008 elections. You may wonder WHY they are so adamant in passing a giveaway bill like the one they proposed. The reason is that IF they covered more people who were not eligible in the first place (such as illegal’s or those working with income levels greater than allowed? they would have more voters to help keep them in office.

As an aside to the above but still, I believe pertinent, I offer the following:

Does anyone recall the “relaxed” immigration rules that were ordered by the Clinton administration prior to the election for Bill Clinton’s second term? This is when the waiting times were shortened and the background checks were dispensed with and the United States got undesirables (including the worst possible criminal types) with no jobs and large families that ended up on welfare rolls and Bill Clinton got elected! Who paid for all of this? It wasn’t Hillary, it wasn’t Bill, IT WAS YOU! 

 RWD

January 26, 2008 Posted by | 2008 Election, Blogroll, Bush, Clinton, Congress, Democrat, Hillary, House, Liberal Democrat, pelosi, Political, POLITICS, President, RIGHTWINGDOG | , , , , | 1 Comment

Nanacy Pelosi on HER first year as Speaker of The House, The 2nd in Series

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives

One Year in Charge of Congress

 

In speaking about the first year of the Democrats in control of Congress, Nancy Pelosi who was chosen Speaker of The House of Representatives answered some questions about the happenings in her initial year in office. This is the second in a series where the answers to the questions are hers and the comments are mine.

She was asked about the infighting in the last year between the Republicans and Democrats in Congress and if she felt that is why there was such a Congressional “deadlock”. Can the two parties get along?

Her answer was “that almost 75% on the Democrat agenda in the House was passed with broad bipartisan support. It’s critical to outline where the differences are, but I live by the adage that we will find common ground where we can and we will stand our ground where we cannot”. (In other words, THEY will not cooperate but expect the Republicans to consent to do so)

The agenda that the Democrats publicized when elected would be passed in the first 100 hours has not for the most part come to fruition. First, let me say that the “first 100 hours” is NOT 100 hours as you and I know it, it is 100 Congressional hours or probably 3 or 4 weeks.

One of the big- issues was pay as you go spending or if you spent money it was to be offset with a similar spending cut. Earmarks were to go away. In reality the earmarks have not gone away and possibly they have increased in number and dollar amount. In a previous article I noted that Hillary Clinton was the earmark queen with $500 million worth requested at year end 2007. Some of the most flagrant abusers of earmarks according to Concerned Citizens Against Government Waste are current Presidential candidates such as Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Kucinich and even Edwards when he was a Senator. 

In Pelosi’s own House of Representatives, CCAGW has labeled the following 8 Democrats as “Porkers” in 2007: Peterson, Minn., Farr, Ca. Murtha, Pa., Baucus, Mont., Feinstein, Ca., Oberstar, Minn., Clyburn, S.C., and Lincoln, Ark. There were 2 Republicans named and 2 House Subcommittees as well. CCAGW defines their label of “Porker” as one who willfully neglects proper use of tax monies and sheer arrogance of their conduct. I guess this is evidence that Nancy Pelosi’s “pay as you go” policy and her elimination of earmarks mean absolutely nothing when it comes to application by fellow Democrats.

Of the 75% of the Democratic agenda bills that she claimed were passed with “broad bi-partisan support”, many were changed or diluted so the Republicans would vote for them. Then they went to the Senate where the Democrats did not have the 60 votes needed to pass a bill in most cases. Here they were again modified and if passed sent to the President who, in many cases either simply did not sign the bill or he vetoed it. I would ask the question of Ms. Pelosi; Of the 75% of the bills that you claim passed with “broad bi-partisan support”, how many ACTUALLY became law?

RWD

January 23, 2008 Posted by | 2008 Election, Blogroll, Congress, Democrat, Edwards, election, House, Liberal Blog, Liberal Democrat, pelosi, Political, POLITICS, Republican, RIGHTWINGDOG | , , | 1 Comment

Nancy Pelosi on HER first year as Speaker of The House!

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives

One Year in Charge of Congress

In speaking about the first year of the Democrats in control of Congress, Nancy Pelosi who was chosen Speaker of The House of Representatives answered some questions about the happenings in her initial year in office.

When asked what she considered to be her greatest achievement in office in 2007 she responded as follows:I believe it was the energy security bill. Congress has finally increased the fuel-economy standards for motor vehicles. This alone could save drivers as much as $1000.00 per year and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Let’s look at that for a moment:

The operative word COULD, makes the saving of $1000.00 per year on fuel costs questionable. It also leaves questions on how much fuel would be saved and therefore the reduction of dependence on foreign oil is an unknown as well.

What was not addressed was the cost per vehicle increase to allow manufacturers to comply with the new governmental regulations. While this is an unknown, we know it will be passed on to the consumer. WHERE IS THE SAVINGS HERE?

In addition the mandate in the energy bill that incandesant light bulbs are phased out beginning in 2012 and continuing to include all bulbs by 2014. The new bulbs are the “cork screw” type fluorescent bulb that are supposed to be an energy saving alternative. It is touted to last longer and save electric use dollars. Well, I certainly hope it does save users some money because the cost to purchase the new money/energy “saving” bulb in the stores in my area is around $3.00 to $4.00 per bulb. Immediately next to those bulbs are the incandesant bulbs of comparable lighting size that we have used for years at a cost of 2 for a $1.00.

I had purchased several of these new bulbs last summer and replaced perfectly serviceable bulbs with them to see how they worked out. In my opinion the lighting quality was less (causing eye strain) and for a fact instead of lasting for the number of hours stated on the package, they burned out in a matter of months as opposed to the incandesant bulbs in the same sockets that were used for the same length of “lighting time” that would last over a year. WHERE IS THE SAVINGS HERE? In other words, her greatest achievement in office was to pass legislation that will ultimately cost the American public more money and enrich the manufactures bank accounts. I did not touch on the increased governmental tax collections due to increased costs.

There is more to come,this is the first in a series. The answers are hers and the comments are mine.

RWD

January 22, 2008 Posted by | America, Blogroll, Change, commentaries, Democrat, Energy, House, Liberal Democrat, pelosi, Political, POLITICS, RIGHTWINGDOG | , , | Leave a comment

Start your Day in A Better Way!

HOW TO START EACH DAY WITH A POSITIVE OUTLOOK 
 
1. Open a new file in your computer. 
 
2. Name it ‘Hillary Rodham Clinton’ 
 
3. Send it to the Recycle Bin. 
 
4. Empty the Recycle Bin. 
 
5. Your PC will ask you. ‘Do you really want to get rid of ‘Hillary Rodham Clinton ?’ 
 
6 Firmly Click ‘Yes.’ 
 
7. Feel better. 
 
PS – Tomorrow we’ll do Nancy Pelosi
 

I feel better already!

January 17, 2008 Posted by | 2008 Election, Blogroll, Clinton, Hillary, Humor, Liberal Democrat, pelosi, Political, POLITICS, President, Presidential Candidate, RIGHTWINGDOG, Senator | , , , | 3 Comments