Well, do you think we, the taxpayers owe enough money?

Since President Barack Obama was inaugurated in January 2009, the Federal Reserve’s holdings of U.S. government debt have quintupled, according to the Fed’s official monthly balance sheet.

On Jan. 28, 2009, a week after Obama’s nomination, the Fed owned $302 billion in U.S. Treasury securities. On April 25, 2012, the latest date reported, the Fed owned five and a half time that much in U.S. Treasury securities–$1.668 trillion.

That is an increase from January 2009 of $1.366 trillion—or 452 percent.

Wow! And wasn’t Obama the guy who accused Bush of being “unpatriotic” for running up debt that he, the hopeful changer, has already surpassed?

Wow!

Under Obama, the Federal Reserve has become the single largest owner of U.S. government debt. When Obama entered office, entities in the People’s Republic of China were the largest holders, followed by entities in Japan. At the end of January 2009, China owned $739.6 billion in U.S. government debt and Japan owned $634.8 billion.

By the end of March 2012, China’s holdings of U.S. debt had grown to $1.1699 trillion and Japan’s holdings had grown to $1.083 trillion.

Together, the Federal Reserve, China and Japan had increased their holdings of U.S. debt by $2.2445 trillion since Obama took office.

The total U.S. government debt grew from $10.6179 trillion to $15.6233 between Jan. 28, 2009 and April 25, 2012. Leaving out the intragovernmental debt—which the federal government owes itself—the publicly owned part of the U.S. government debt has climbed from $6.2955 trillion to $10.8607 trillion, an increase of $4.5652 trillion.

Now we’re talking real money!

The $2.2445 trillion of that new publicly owned U.S. government debt that was purchased by the Fed, China and Japan equals 49 percent of all the new debt the U.S. government has sold to the public since Obama took office.

Here’s a president who truly needs to be voted out come November, because we simply can’t afford him anymore.

In my various and sundry meanderings through the news this morning I ran across a column by Rich Lowry that bears reading by anyone who even dreams that most of the remnants of our once (long, long ago) great and reasonably fair/ impartial news media are even worth the time to peruse them, let alone pay for any of their publications.

Remember how the MSM and that “Hope and Change” presidential candidate, Barack Obama, criticized (nastily and mercilessly) Prersident George W. Bush for every last thing he decided regarding the handling of terrorists that didn’t fit into our own judicial system’s policies of prosecuting criminals (like purse snatchers, dope dealers, litterbugs, drunk drivers and those who tore the “do not remove” tags off their new bed mattresses)? How waterboarding, raising a voice to or otherwise not providing every murderous terrorist with every courtesy of a visiting VIP was a dastardly event?

Well, here we now have good ol’ “Barry” Obama, the good, all American hypocrite-next-door, firming up his own assassination policies.

“This,” he and his assassination czar will now decide, “is whom we’ll have killed…”

Killing has never been so discriminating, so urbane, so cool.

The New York Times and Newsweek both ran long, largely admiring articles on how President Obama selects individual terrorists to terminate with extreme prejudice. The administration’s “smart power” isn’t working out so well, but smart killing is a smash success.

Obama’s national-security team — as well as his top political adviser, David Axelrod — gather on “Terror Tuesdays” to go over an expanding “kill list” that the president examines with the aid of capsule biographies of the terrorists, or “baseball cards.” Then the president decides who lives and who — if we get him in our sights — dies.

Needless to say, had Dick Cheney consulted “baseball cards” to decide in weekly meetings attended by Karl Rove who deserved to have close encounters with drone-fired missiles, Nancy Pelosi would have drafted the articles of impeachment herself.

The Obama killings vindicate the core premises of the Bush War on Terror: This is a war, and the protections of our criminal-justice system don’t apply to the enemy.

In light of the kill list, it’s a wonder anyone ever objected to Bush-era detentions or interrogations. If we can pick someone off a roster of names and sentence him to death without due process, surely we can capture and hold that same person.

If we can execute someone — and any of his associates who happen to be in the vicinity — from on high, surely we can keep him awake at night and otherwise discomfit him should he fall into our hands.

The Times notes that “Obama’s record has not drawn anything like the sweeping criticism from allies that his predecessor faced.” True enough. It hasn’t been subjected to a highly politicized assault at home and abroad by people desperate to put it in the worst possible light and even make it a war crime.

As they say, SNIP!

For most of the left, the highest principle of just war theory is licet si Obama id faciat — it’s OK if Obama does it. This is how Gitmo, formerly a standing repudiation of all that we hold dear as a nation, becomes an afterthought when it is owned and operated by one Barack H. Obama.

As it happens, the president holds exactly the same Obama-centric view. So long as the kill list is overseen by him as judge and executioner, it’s beyond reproach.

The press tends to agree. Newsweek reports, “The choices he faces are brutally difficult, and he has struggled with them — sometimes turning them over in his mind again and again.”

Really? He thinks about who he is deciding to kill? The nation is blessed to have such a scrupulous leader.

The Times maintains that the president parses the kill list as “a student of writings on war by Augustine and Thomas Aquinas.” If no anecdotes have yet emerged about Obama justifying a particular kill with reference to the Summa Theologica, it’s probably only a matter of time.

In authorizing the strikes, Obama is to be commended for his coldbloodedness, although no tactic is perfect or without costs. The war in Yemen is sliding the wrong way’ relations with target-rich Pakistan are at a low ebb. But there should be no doubt now that the commander in chief possesses fearsome powers in the War on Terror. All it took for Democrats to accept that was for President Obama to begin exercising them.

I wonder when Barack Hussein will write an executive order commanding that all people refer to him as Obama Rex…

I know, that’s a terrible thing to say about our president, but let’s face it, this gentleman sitting incumbently in the Oval Office is rare…unique…singularly individual in nearly every way among U.S. presidents: He is the antithesis of what the leader of our country is supposed to be. All that he stands for is in direct opposition to that which the founders of this nation employed as the building blocks of our great and free society.

There were reasons why the U.S. Constitution was written as it was, and two subsequent centuries of adherence to that document made America THE nation among nations, a prosperous, powerful and free nation to which people from all over came, often at peril and hardship, to enjoy the liberty, the opportunities presented to build a good future, to worship and opine according to ones beliefs without hindrance from oppressive, micromanaging government…

This is the country that opposed communism and stood by those around the world who were willing to put their lives on the line for freedom…

And until now, with perhaps the exception of the peanut farmer in the late 1970s whose name we won’t mention (though even he wasn’t as offensive to patriotic American sensibilities as the subject of this post), U.S. presidents have shown themselves to be….well, Americans.

Today we have Barack Hussein Obama, whose every philosophy, political, moral, you name it seems to be the direct opposite of our former chief executives.

This man is so profoundly opposite what a President of the United States is supposed to be that even a lot of members of his own party are becoming disgusted with him.

Sure, you’ve got your basic die hard kommies “progressives” who see Obama as a messiah and who either believe (as anti-American as it may seem), as he does or are just so commited to having a left winger in the White House that they’ll support any lie, accuse anyone telling a negative truth about the president’s policies of being a racist, a fascist, a Christian right winger, whatever it takes to ignore the truth and strive to keep their icon in office.

The mainstream media is the same way.

Unfortunately, there are apparently quite a few Dewmocrats out there who, like us right thinkers, have had a bellyfull of this president dragging down the country, demeaning America under the guise of trying to “save” it, and, well…

From FOX News

Four in ten Democratic voters chose someone other than President Obama on Tuesday in primaries in Arkansas and Kentucky.

In Arkansas, John Wolfe — a perennial, long-shot candidate — took 41 percent of the vote in the Democratic primary, with 71 percent of precincts reporting. Obama came in just under 60 percent. The Associated Press did not call the race for Obama until close to midnight.

And in Kentucky, 42 percent of Democrats chose “uncommitted” rather than cast a vote for the incumbent president. Obama took 58 percent, with 99 percent of precincts reporting.

SNIP!

When you have a failed president on your hands and a re-election just a little over five months away, it’s easy to panic and rationalize and do everything you can to convince yourself the problem isn’t your candidate but instead anything and everyone else. After a Texas inmate took close to 42% of the primary vote against Obama in West Virginia a couple weeks ago, desperate Democrats screamed racism at their own. Last night, Obama was humiliated by similar numbers in both Arkansas and Kentucky, a trend so troubling that even the Washington Post is looking beyond race but not at the President’s real problem: a lack of enthusiasm in his own party:

It’s pretty obvious that the media is desperate to avoid narratives surrounding Obama’s glaring problems with his base. After all, with the economy going in the wrong direction and all the very public Bain Capital rebellion (the centerpiece of Obama’s re-election strategy) from his very , Obama has enough problems.

But the media covering up this narrative doesn’t mean it’s not playing out in real time in the real world. Obama’s sole focus has been on securing his base for weeks now and a large number of self-identified Democrats are obviously eager to register their unhappiness with their candidate. The media ignoring how serious this all is doesn’t mean it’s not serious. And if Obama had an “R” after his name, you can bet these primary showings would create the narrative of his candidacy, at least throughout the summer.

The media might not be able to dismiss reality forever though. Should unknowns and “uncommitted” continue to do well in the upcoming primaries, the media might find it has no choice but to start talking about a sitting President who’s looking like a loser.

Let’s hope he’s more than looking like a loser, this country simply cannot afford four more years of Obama. If the smarter and more reality aware members of his own party “sit this one out” or vote for someone else, and it helps old Barack Hussein lose this November’s election, well…

What’s bad for Obama will be good for America.

Sorry, sometimes I can’t help but get a little bit silly, but perhaps that’s because when our country’s so-called “leaders” expect me to believe a load of silliness as justification for a senseless act on their part, I get to feeling, well, silly.

I mean…

From Weasel Zippers

Bring Out Your Dead! Obama Regime Launches National Drive to Counter Voter-ID Laws

President Obama’s reelection campaign launched a national drive Friday to counter new restrictive voter-access laws, which advisers said threaten his electoral chances in November.

Organizers will fan out in key swing states this weekend to teach volunteers and voters how to navigate a series of laws passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures imposing stricter identification requirements, limiting early voting and making it harder to organize voter-registration drives.

It is the beginning of a months-long effort, campaign officials said, to combat what they described as a Republican effort to stifle voting among young people and minorities, two groups that traditionally tend to vote Democratic. . . .

This is downright dumb, not to mention as transparent as a freshly cleaned window.

Anyone who is legally in America has a way to obtain identity documents, whether we are talking about a driver’s license, a state ID, a passport, a green card, some sort of legal picture ID that proves who he or she is.

Even homeless people, tattered and dirty on the streets, pushing shopping carts, begging on corners, sleeping in alleys, have to have some definitive way to prove who they are, or they couldn’t obtain such benefits s welfare, food stamps and whatever else they get (I looked into this before posting, and yes, people who dwell on the streets can get most of the same benefits as poor people living in subsidized housing and so forth), but THEY HAVE TO HAVE ID, regardless of race, religion, birthplace and other such statistics. Therefore, all those undomiciled people who receive government benefits of one kind or another don’t seem to have a problem obtaining ID.

Getting back to the issue at hand, so to speak, THE VOTE, through which we in this nation elect our leaders, constitutes a right whose eligibility extends solely to American citizens.

The Democrats, who champion the cause of illegal immigration, know that because of this illegal aliens would vote for them in a heartbeat if they could get to the polls.

“Bummer”, they can’t vote because they’re not eligible.

Despite the fact that whenever Democrat politicians are caught abusing their positions, cheating or blatantly violating other ethical rules of thumb or outright federal laws their proponents say “both parties do it”, the fact is that Democrats do it more, something like 90% - 10%.

Just look at any list of politicians caught committing corrupt practices, for example, and this will stand out like a beacon.

“So,” you inquire, “What’s yer pernt?”

My point is that casting votes using the registrations of people who have passed on, as they say, to their rewards, is more in line with the Democrats’ “win at any cost” campaigning philosophy than with that of the Republicans, who tend to respect the rule of law and accept it for what it is: The Law.

So, yes, the transparent silliness of Obama and the rest of those clowns over there on the left side of the aisle in expecting any intelligent person to believe their motives herein are to prevent Republicans from being able to “stifle voting among young people and minorities” and the way the liberal media supports them as though they, too, were as dumb as they evidently believe we, the people are is just… silly.

Is that pitiful, or what?

The Obama campaign’s “weekend of action” is part of a field effort that in 2008 helped identify, register and turn out millions of new voters. Those new voters gave Obama wins in unlikely places, including North Carolina and Virginia, where young and minority voters helped make the difference. Turning out those voters again this year is key to the president’s reelection strategy, but it is also more challenging this year in part because of the new voting laws.

Right.

“Over the past century, we expanded this fundamental right, making sure no one’s race, gender or economic status is ever used to deny this fundamental right,” said campaign strategist Michael Blake in a call with reporters Friday afternoon. “Unfortunately,” he added, “Republican-controlled legislatures in many states have been taking us backward, not forward.”. . .

You mean, Republican-controlled legislatures in many states have been preventing Democrat voters’ engaging in voter fraud.

According to Project Vote, a voting-rights advocacy group, about 15,000 people voted without identification in Virginia in 2008.

And how do we know how many of these were legally eligible to vote?

We don’t!

From Godfather Politics

In a speech the other day in Youngstown, Ohio, Vice President Joe Biden screamed at the audience, “They just don’t get us! They don’t get who we are!”

“They,” of course, means you and me, conservative types who are just too dim to understand all the wonderful things the Obama Administration is doing for the country.

The accusation came after a rant about how jobs are “coming back” and how there were “signs of life” in the Heartland because of the administration’s hard work and economic policies.

It was a typical liberal shoutfest where the louder you yell something, the more true it becomes. I’ve heard it numerous times from some of my educated friends who should know better: “You’re blaming the guy driving the firetruck for starting the fire.” For liberals, it’s we conservatives who look crazy.

So it’s helpful once in a while to do a reality check. A little self-analysis, as with confession, is good for the soul. I mean, if you were to go crazy, wouldn’t you at least want to know that you were?

In the case of political views, side-by-side comparison of liberal vs. conservative views on President Obama is one illuminating technique.

Anyway:

President Obama as a person

Conservative: Obama comes from a highly suspicious background in which he was raised and schooled around numerous anti-American socialists and communists; vital records such as schooling, medical history and selective service remain not only unavailable but deliberately kept under wraps; there is evidence that suggests Obama could have used false identities and been involved in fraud; even his birth certificate appears to have been forged.

Liberal: He’s black. He’s cool.

President Obama’s economic performance

Conservative: President Obama’s stimulus packages have shown no effect in improving the economy; there is ample evidence to suggest that most of the money was used as payback to supporters; he has turned auto and other companies into essentially state-run businesses; jobs have not come back in any significant way since Obama took office, and any statistical “gains” have mostly been attributable to large numbers of Americans simply giving up any hope of finding a job, thus shrinking the number of people counted as “jobless”; three years into it, Obama is still blaming President Bush for the economy.

Liberal: President Obama says the economy is getting better, and I believe him. He’s black. He’s cool.

Obama’s foreign policy

Conservative: Obama negotiates from weakness; he began his administration by apologizing to many countries that have been our enemies and bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia; he told the Russians over an open mic that he is essentially willing to cave to their demands that we remove missile defenses in Europe; he has tacitly and overtly encouraged violence in the Middle East, even engaging in military actions against Libya without informing Congress; he has weakened America’s standing in the world and pursued a policy of having America follow the crowd rather than lead.
Liberal: Obama says we are stronger than ever, and I believe him. He’s black. You’re a racist. He’s cool. You drool.

Obama’s domestic policies

Conservative: Obama has appointed an unprecedented number of “czars” who are not subject to any scrutiny or approval by Congress or voters; his TSA is out of control, violating the privacy of travelers under the pretense of airport security; the Department of Homeland Security and the IRS have been allowed to target conservative groups for harassment; Obama’s cabinet members and czars have shown repeatedly they are willing to go around the law by quietly creating “policies” for their respective agencies that were rejected as laws by Congress; the administration has demonstrated a culture of disdain for constitutional limits on presidential power; the president himself has tried to unconstitutionally decree that religious institutions must buy into a health insurance policy with abortion and contraceptive provisions that violate religious conscience.

Liberal: Obama knows best. You’re racist. I’m going to report you. You should be on a watch list. Shut up.

This is soooo accurate!

So, in summation, the reason conservatives know we aren’t crazy is that we actually pay attention to what’s coming out of Washington and draw logical conclusions. Could we be wrong on any given issue? Of course. All humans are fallible.

Liberals on the other hand seem to base their beliefs solely on the fact that someone in authority “says it’s so.” So liberalism is in essence just irrational faith.

A memo to our liberal friends: The next time you go to some online site to complain about how stupid and dangerous you think conservatives are, try looking in a mirror first.

AMEN!!!!

From Liberty Extra.

Weapons of Mass Distraction -
Barack Obama Has No Clothes

From 2nd paragraph

Each week, the Obama administration (which has become indistinguishable from the Obama campaign) becomes more reminiscent of the old children’s story, “The Emperor’s New Clothes,” with the national media elites playing the members of the king’s fawning court, pretending that the president is not naked, that he is, in fact, resplendent in the best finery, and that his ever more absurd pronouncements are somehow credible. The latest issue is same-sex marriage.

Ever since Vice President Joe Blabbermouth, America’s second biggest national embarrassment, was dispatched to announce that he now favors the radical redefinition of marriage, followed in short order by his boss admitting that his position on the issue also has “evolved,” the political chatter on the left has been ridiculous. It reminds me of the snooty townswomen of River City doing their cheep-cheep-pick-a-little number from “The Music Man.” And it brings to mind the question, why now?

The answer seems obvious to those of us who keep our focus on the one topic that will ultimately define the fall campaign (whether the president likes it or not): the nation’s teetering economy. As a committed leftist, Barack Obama should be proud of his record. He has done some very profound things in his three-and-a-half years as president. He should be proud of his multi-billion dollar government bailout of the United Auto Workers, his trillion dollar “stimulus package” (which seems to have stimulated nothing other than his friends and campaign bundlers in the nation’s public sector unions and the industry known laughingly as “solar energy”), and, of course, his crowning achievement, Obamacare.

Read On.

I couldn’t agree more!

This president truly does not share a single American value with those of us who cherish our nation as the founding fathers intended it to be, does he?

Marriage wins, Obama sulks

No, I don’t suppose he does.

Traditional, biblical marriage is now constitutionally protected in North Carolina — and President Barack Obama says he is “disappointed” about that.

On Tuesday, 61 percent of voters approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage solely as a union between a man and a woman, making North Carolina the 31st state to protect traditional marriage. Thirty-nine percent voted against the amendment.

However…

Obama’s campaign says the president is “disappointed” with the result…

Good. Let him be disappointed.

It’ll give him practice for November.

It’s really something the way “progressive” ways of doing things, even after they’ve been proven wrong, dumb, suicidal, bone-headed, complete failures leading unerringly, ultimately to future disaster, always seem, rather than teaching a “what not to do, let’s learn from past mistakes” lesson, merely set a precedent for “what to do next time, and the time after that”.

The United States has for several years been secretly releasing high-level detainees from a military prison in Afghanistan as part of negotiations with insurgent groups, a bold effort to quell violence but one that U.S. officials acknowledge poses substantial risks.

As the United States has unsuccessfully pursued a peace deal with the Taliban, the “strategic release” program has quietly served as a live diplomatic channel, allowing American officials to use prisoners as bargaining chips in restive provinces where military power has reached its limits.

But the releases are an inherent gamble: The freed detainees are often notorious fighters who would not be released under the traditional legal system for military prisoners in Afghanistan. They must promise to give up violence — and U.S. officials warn them that if they are caught attacking American troops, they will be detained once again.

See what I mean?

Look at all the terrorists the Israelis have released as elements of “peace” agreements with the Palestinians, who have launched thermselves right back into terrorism.

Look at the significant percentage of GITMO detainees released who have later been found to be back in Afghanistan killing U.S. troops.

In this case,

There are no absolute guarantees, however, and officials would not say whether those who have been released under the program have later returned to attack U.S. and Afghan forces once again.

“Everyone agrees they are guilty of what they have done and should remain in detention. Everyone agrees that these are bad guys. But the benefits outweigh the risks,” said one U.S. official who, like others, discussed the issue on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the program.

Despite the above, however, we must remember that President Obama epitomises the idiocy “wisdom” of liberal reasoning.

The releases have come amid broader efforts to end the decade-long war through negotiation, which is a central feature of the Obama administration’s strategy for leaving Afghanistan. Those efforts, however, have yielded little to no progress in recent years….

(my italicising, there)

…which of course doesn’t seem to matter, since while Obama’s idea of negotiating with the Republicans is “my way or the highway”, his approach to negotiating with terrorists is somewhere on the cusp of “your wish is my command….”

…. In part, they have been stymied by the unwillingness of the United States to release five prisoners from Guantanamo Bay — a gesture that insurgent leaders have said they see as a precondition for peace talks.

How a president can place our people unnecessarily in danger as our side of “peace” talks by freeing murderous terrorists committed unto their version of God to kill Americans is as far beyond me as is Obama’s war on U.S. energy independence, but that’s another story entirely.

The entire WaPo article is here. Even a “progreesive” publication like the Washington Post can’t make the administration’s policies regarding releasing these terrorists sound any kind of sane.

No, no limit to how low our despotic esteemed commander-in-chief will go to achieve his ends, whatever they are. All we can be certain of is that those “ends” bide nothing remotely resembling anything to do with the Constitution, liberty (except his own) or anything intended by America’s founding fathers.

In his latest display of his full USA federal government dictatorship over both the American people and the former co-branches of government, Dictator Obama is warning the Supreme Court to either rule in his favor or face severe consequences.

Fox News’ Martha McCallum advised Thursday that the Obama Administration has been quietly sending missives to the Supreme Court threatening that if it doesn’t rule in his favor on ObamaCare, Medicare will face disruption and “chaos.” Therefore, if SCOTUS rules in favor of the US Constitution, Obama & Co will begin its campaign to either destroy Medicare or make those on it suffer greatly. The Obama syndicate is said to be threatening to hold off Medicare payments to doctors and hospitals if SCOTUS does not comply with Obama’s demands and submit to him.

That sounds almost like stalking!

But “Barry’s” latest antics, in addition to his executive order on White House authority to seize any and all private resources in an emergency, include:

As an additional example of Obama’s illegal and (I believe) highly treasonous behaviors, on 1 May and 2 May Obama issued two additional unconstitutional and illegal Executive Orders. The first E.O., issued 1 May 2012, makes the USA subject to “international regulations” as opposed to looking to and following the US Constitution. Also, with this new E.O., the US FDA will now be able to be bypassed by International committees—thus, replacing the FDA with any international group which may be chosen. In essence, Obama is quickly eliminating US Sovereignty and selling the USA to the international “community.”

The second E.O. issued in 2 days was signed by Obama on 2 May 2012. This E.O. instructs the USA to bow to international regulations instead of the US Constitution and Businessweek reports: “Obama’s order provides a framework to organize scattered efforts to promote international regulatory cooperation, the chamber’s top global regulatory official said today.

“Today’s executive order marks a paradigm shift for U.S. regulators by directing them to take the international implications of their work into account in a consistent and comprehensive way,” Sean Heather, vice president of the chamber’s Center for Global Regulatory Cooperation, said in an e-mailed statement.” This also brings the USA closer to becoming a “North American Union” and—also—eliminating its sovereignty—in toto.

Does this mean, one wonders, that the U.N. will finally realize its dream of suborning the United States of America and we, the people herein?

Does it mean a shortcut to their collecting of a separate income tax from all U.S. citizens as they’ve been trying to do for some time, mediation of our federal elections and oppressive gun control policies, all of which that corrupt and incompetent international circus has tried to pull on us?

This guy at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, if he has his way, will indeed be our dictator, answerabe only to his masters at the U.N., with the Supreme Court becoming his panel of yes-people. {shudder!}

Gosh, I hope not!

The linked article.

Just all lows, all the time.

Forget the brave U.S. Navy SEALs who went into a hostile and dangerous place to rid the world of Osama bin Laden, it was and is all about Barack Obama and Barack Obama only, right?

That he should use the event as a political tool in his attempt to further disgrace the White House shouldn’t come as a surprise. After all, he also had the contemtible gaul, in his long obvious hatred of the Jews and Israel, to try and sneak a Nazi war collaborator and supporter of Hitler into the honors list for the White House proclamation of Jewish History Month.

Nazi collaborator and American artist Gertrude Stein was among Jewish Americans praised in a White House announcement yesterday proclaiming Jewish Heritage Month.

The inclusion, noted by Algemeiner.com, in its original released form read, “Their history of unbroken perseverance and their belief in tomorrow’s promise offers a lesson not only to Jewish Americans, but to all Americans. From Aaron Copland to Albert Einstein, Gertrude Stein to Justice Louis Brandeis.”

Stein was a supporter and collaborator with the Nazis’ Vichy regime in France, according to Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who has criticized a current Stein art exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum in New York.

According to Barbara Will, author of “Unlikely Collaboration: Gertrude Stein, Bernard Fay and the Vichy Dilemma,” Stein survived the Vichy regime because she was a strong supporter of the Nazis, publicly proclaiming her support of Adolf Hitler and proposing him for a Nobel Peace Prize in the mid-1930s.

She considered Gen. Phillipe Petain, the Nazi puppet who deported thousands of Jews, to be a French hero, and she volunteered to write an introduction to an English translation of his speeches so Americans could see the virtues of the Vichy government.

Dershowitz adds, “Stein’s closest friend, and a man who greatly influenced her turn toward fascism was Bernard Fay, who the Vichy government put in charge of hunting down Masons, Jews and other perceived enemies of the State. … After the war, when the horrendous results were known to all, Gertrude wrote in support of Fay when he was placed on trial for his Nazi war crimes.”

Ooops, caught out before the list could be released. So…

A White House official said the proclamation issued yesterday was an early draft that was mistakenly released. That was replaced with a new version that does not mention Stein, but the original remained on the White House website for several hours.

SNIP!

Or is this another example of the White House’s blind eye?

In a regime strongly sponsored by George Soros, whose first job was delivering eviction notices to Jews for the Nazis, it would not be surprising. According to the Ottawa Sun, as a teen Soros worked for the Judenrat, the Jewish council set up by the Nazis to round up Jews for the trains to the concentration camps. Asked by Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” if he had any regrets about those activities, Soros replied, “There was no sense that I shouldn’t be there. If I wasn’t doing it, somebody else would be taking it away anyhow. Whether I was there or not. So I had no sense of guilt.”

Indeed.

Since taking office, President Obama has often been notably cold toward Israel and openly sympathetic toward the Palestinians and other Muslim groups that would see Israel wiped off the Earth if they had their druthers.

Perhaps the proclamation praising Stein was just a mistake, or perhaps it was a case of “trickle-down” racism.

A good slogan for Obama’s reelection campaign, to replace “Forward!”, would be:

Barack Obama: A president today for a Third World tomorrow!