I believe that in both cases that Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter were the real "Black Sheep" in each of those families.

Check out this website.  It will open your eyes to things that you will not get from any MSM of any kind.  Get involved in the process before this nation is destroyed from within.  The World Government movement is in full swing and has been for many years. It is being ramped up at an alarming rate.  Find and competely read some of the current and recently passed legislation going back over the last few years and 2 decades and you will see that our Constitutuional rights have been piece by piece removed.

We need to point the fingers at Congress and our so called government officals for the AIG mess.  They congress and others created it and now want point the figure at those recieving bonuses.  They have sent people out to threaten these people.  Our government officials are creating all these diversions, so that "We The People" will not see what our government is really doing behind our backs.  The AIG and all these other things are only diversions.  The real damage they are doing, you will not find out unless you do extensive research into what is really happening.  Go in and find all of these House and Senate bills, and read them thourghly.  There is extensive language in them that is taking away our freedoms and this is being ramped up at an ever increasing pace.  Many in our own goverment want to do destroy the constitution, especially the first and second amendments.  Check out this website.  You will find an vast array of things there, including links to these dangerous pieces of legislation. 

http://www.resistnet.com

We need to point the fingers at Congress and our so called government officals for the AIG mess.  They congress and others created it and now want point the figure at those recieving bonuses.  They have sent people out to threaten these people.  Our government officials are creating all these diversions, so that "We The People" will not see what our government is really doing behind our backs.  The AIG and all these other things are only diversions.  The real damage they are doing, you will not find out unless you do extensive research into what is really happening.  Go in and find all of these House and Senate bills, and read them thourghly.  There is extensive language in them that is taking away our freedoms and this is being ramped up at an ever increasing pace.  Many in our own goverment want to do destroy the constitution, especially the first and second amendments.  Check out this website.  You will find an vast array of things there, including links to these dangerous pieces of legislation. 

http://www.resistnet.com

 

 

Here is the latest move by Obama, to destroy the security of this nation.   http://bit.ly/2w77gj

Libra,

We have been so busy with our business, and we are now getting more involved with the grass roots movements, to rid this country of the dangerous evil Obama.  Every conservative and person who is concerned with this nations survival, should get involved with the Patroitic Resistance at the National, State, and Regional level, and be directly involved with the Tea parties that are scheduled in over 150 cities nationwide, and growing.  Use the Links I posted above for related sites and the direct link here. This is a great organiztion. http://www.resistnet.com/  I have also been recieving direct emails from many many conservative activivists and patriots, with a growing list of people attached that are recieving them.  The last printout the list of those recieciving them was nearly a page.  This list includes some very big conservative names in this country.

Cap…You got the wrong side…its sound bites from the left…such as the one i have heard for many years as anexample..."Tax Cuts For The Rich"  a for at least the last 20 years…and there are many more too numerious too mention hear…but have a nice life!!!  Ha Ha!!

Will Barack Obama end Britain’s special relationship with America? When Gordon Brown walks through the door of the Oval Office on Tuesday, he will be the first European leader welcomed by Barack Obama to the White House since he became president.

By Tim Shipman in Washington
Last Updated: 7:12PM GMT 28 Feb 2009

President Obama on Friday set a date of August 31, 2010 for the end of US combat operations in Iraq, and said he intended to fully withdraw all troops by the end of 2011 Photo: AFP/GETTY

In the marbled halls of the British ambassador’s residence in Washington, there is modest satisfaction that the prime minister has beaten his European counterparts - Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, and Angela Merkel, the German chancellor - to Mr Obama’s door.

But there is no undiplomatic crowing, and champagne corks have certainly not been popping. Instead, a quiet fear is calcifying. Hints from the White House machine suggest that the Age of Obama means a dramatic makeover not just for America, but for that old symbol of Anglo-American fealty, the Special Relationship.

To adapt Mark Twain, reports of its death are common and usually exaggerated. But word is spreading through political Washington that the new president wants to shake up the way the US government relates to its allies, which will leave little space for the sentiment of old ties.

There was a concrete clue when the White House announcement of Mr Brown’s trip was made last Saturday. Mr Obama’s mouthpiece Robert Gibbs declared: "The United States and the United Kingdom share a special partnership." Those familiar with the thinking of Mr Obama’s top team say that use of the word "partnership" rather than "relationship" is an important distinction - it illuminates Mr Obama’s belief in practical measures that work, not the old way of doing things.

A Washington official who is close to several members of Mr Obama’s inner circle said: "They craft every word for the stone tablets. Words are what they do. It is not a mistake.

"A partnership is a business arrangement based on what you can do for Obama, not a relationship like a marriage that thrives through thick and thin until death do us part. He’ll judge the specialness of a partnership with Britain on what he gets out of it." In return for concrete support, Mr Obama is expected to offer to listen more closely to British advice than George W. Bush did. But insiders say he will be ruthless in cutting adrift countries who do not cooperate with his global agenda, whatever their historic relationships.

A British official said: "I don’t think Obama is steeped in the tradition of the special relationship going back to Churchill and Roosevelt. Of course someone of his generation is going to look at it differently. I think what he looks at are the assets that are brought to the table and the expertise you have. This is a definite change of emphasis."

In the six decades since in which Winston Churchill first coined the phrase special relationship, successive American presidents have paid ritual obeisance to the notion that Britain should assume a place at the White House top table.

Now even allies of Mr Obama believe he intends to extract a higher price for access to the corridors of his power.

Steve Clemons, of the New America Foundation think tank, who has links with the higher echelons of the Obama administration, said that Britain would be expected to make sacrifices in return for influence.

Mr Obama’s approach was "all about putting a price on access and a price on the relationship," he said. "I think Obama does believe that this is a time of historical change. He wants to push reset on a lot of things. He thinks old patterns, old framings can get you into trouble, particularly when you’re trying to encourage different parts of the world."

Mr Clemons praises Mr Obama’s "respectful" attention to "legacy relationships" by inviting Mr Brown just a few days after the Japanese premier became the first foreign visitor to the Obama White House. But he added: "I was joking recently with the Japanese ambassador when they got the first visit. I said: ‘This is going to be fun for you guys, but the price is going to be huge.’"

For Mr Brown this is a big moment. He flies to Washington on Monday night and will have his audience with Mr Obama before lunch on Tuesday, but it promises to be a fairly brief affair with no White House dinner. It a far cry from the chummy golf cart romp around Camp David that George W. Bush laid on for Tony Blair.

The prime minister comes seeking substantive agreements on economic matters ahead of the G20 summit in London next month, and hopes also for a whiff of Mr Obama’s stardust to revive his poll prospects at home. His wife Sarah will have a separate audience with First Lady Michelle Obama later on Tuesday afternoon.

Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, has invited Mr Brown to address a joint session of congress on Wednesday, before a lunch with legislators. The 30 minute address will allow Mr Brown to lay out his conception of the special relationship and boost his leadership credentials at home.

But his own parlous political prospects may be a drag on Britain’s influence with President Obama, who is said to take an "unsentimental view" of the prime minister’s plight. That view is also coloured by the knowledge he might be dealing with Conservative leader David Cameron in 12 months time.

"Obama can read the polls the same as everyone else," said a political adviser who has worked on both Democrat and Labour campaigns. "He wants partners for the next four years and Brown may not be one of those." The conventional wisdom, which Mr Obama has done little to dispel, is that he is less anglophile than his predecessors. He hailed the resilience of America’s founding fathers against the British "enemy" in his inauguration speech and devoted 35 pages of his memoir, Dreams From My Father, to his grandfather’s torture under British colonial rule during Kenya’s Mau Mau rebellion.

This was seen by some as the motive force for his recent decision to return a loaned bust of Winston Churchill, prime minister during the insurgency, which George W. Bush had given pride of place in the Oval Office. Mr Obama has also admitted feeling "edgy, defensive and hesitant" when travelling in Europe.

Sir Nigel Sheinwald, the British ambassador in Washington has told colleagues he thinks the attention given to these remarks is "overdone" and that he has seen no evidence of reserve towards Britain during the half dozen meetings he has had with the president so far.

But there is growing anger among conservative supporters of the special relationship at what they say is Mr Obama’s determination to treat Britain the same as other Nato allies when it comes to demanding extra troops for Afghanistan. Britain’s participation in the war in Iraq, at the cost of 179 soldiers’ lives, cuts little ice with Mr Obama since he opposed the war in the first place.

Dr Nile Gardiner, of the conservative Heritage foundation and a former aide to Margaret Thatcher, said: "President Obama has never acknowledged the sacrifice of British soldiers alongside their U.S. allies in a major policy speech. The new administration seems to care little for what the British have contributed in Afghanistan or Iraq in the past; what matters now is simply how many more troops Brown is willing to pledge for the surge in Afghanistan. It’s a very hardnosed, short-term approach rather than one rooted in a sense of enduring alliance. My sense is that the special relationship is being significantly downgraded."

Mr Brown will indicate that he hopes to find another 1,800 troops for Afghanistan, but there is resentment that the president has not focused his requests more on other NATO nations, who have been criticised for only sending troops to parts of Afghanistan that are considered relatively safe.

The senior British official said: "The UK has the second largest contribution militarily to Afghanistan by far, but more importantly we are taking a very high proportion of the casualties. So I wouldn’t expect the United States to look to the UK first when it comes to the issue of burden sharing. There are many other allies who need to do more."

Nevertheless, there is a realisation among British diplomats that they will have to fight to earn their influence at Mr Obama’s side. In conversations with his senior aides they stress what they believe is strong British expertise on the president’s foreign policy priorities and a "very significant degree of convergence" on Afghanistan, Iran and climate change, all areas where there was an Atlantic of clear blue water between Labour and the Bush administration.

The British official added: "If you look across the issues where this administration wants to be active and successful then the UK has a very strong position as a global partner for the United States; primarily the international economy, but also Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and the middle east peace process." David Miliband, the foreign secretary and Sir Nigel, both of whom have negotiated with Syria and Iran have been quick to offer their insights into the leadership in Tehran and Damascus.

If this charm offensive does not work, others counsel that Mr Obama will eventually learn that Britain is America’s only reliable military ally.

Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution said: "He’s enough of a pragmatist to understand the importance of getting this relationship right. It helps that Britain is so committed to being successful in Afghanistan. Unlike all of our other European partners, who all say they love Obama but don’t really want to help him very much, you do want to help."

In the meantime, British officials are committed to winning their place at his table - for the first time - on merit as well as history.

 

Will Barack Obama end Britain’s special relationship with America? When Gordon Brown walks through the door of the Oval Office on Tuesday, he will be the first European leader welcomed by Barack Obama to the White House since he became president.

By Tim Shipman in Washington
Last Updated: 7:12PM GMT 28 Feb 2009

President Obama on Friday set a date of August 31, 2010 for the end of US combat operations in Iraq, and said he intended to fully withdraw all troops by the end of 2011 Photo: AFP/GETTY

In the marbled halls of the British ambassador’s residence in Washington, there is modest satisfaction that the prime minister has beaten his European counterparts - Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, and Angela Merkel, the German chancellor - to Mr Obama’s door.

But there is no undiplomatic crowing, and champagne corks have certainly not been popping. Instead, a quiet fear is calcifying. Hints from the White House machine suggest that the Age of Obama means a dramatic makeover not just for America, but for that old symbol of Anglo-American fealty, the Special Relationship.

To adapt Mark Twain, reports of its death are common and usually exaggerated. But word is spreading through political Washington that the new president wants to shake up the way the US government relates to its allies, which will leave little space for the sentiment of old ties.

There was a concrete clue when the White House announcement of Mr Brown’s trip was made last Saturday. Mr Obama’s mouthpiece Robert Gibbs declared: "The United States and the United Kingdom share a special partnership." Those familiar with the thinking of Mr Obama’s top team say that use of the word "partnership" rather than "relationship" is an important distinction - it illuminates Mr Obama’s belief in practical measures that work, not the old way of doing things.

A Washington official who is close to several members of Mr Obama’s inner circle said: "They craft every word for the stone tablets. Words are what they do. It is not a mistake.

"A partnership is a business arrangement based on what you can do for Obama, not a relationship like a marriage that thrives through thick and thin until death do us part. He’ll judge the specialness of a partnership with Britain on what he gets out of it." In return for concrete support, Mr Obama is expected to offer to listen more closely to British advice than George W. Bush did. But insiders say he will be ruthless in cutting adrift countries who do not cooperate with his global agenda, whatever their historic relationships.

A British official said: "I don’t think Obama is steeped in the tradition of the special relationship going back to Churchill and Roosevelt. Of course someone of his generation is going to look at it differently. I think what he looks at are the assets that are brought to the table and the expertise you have. This is a definite change of emphasis."

In the six decades since in which Winston Churchill first coined the phrase special relationship, successive American presidents have paid ritual obeisance to the notion that Britain should assume a place at the White House top table.

Now even allies of Mr Obama believe he intends to extract a higher price for access to the corridors of his power.

Steve Clemons, of the New America Foundation think tank, who has links with the higher echelons of the Obama administration, said that Britain would be expected to make sacrifices in return for influence.

Mr Obama’s approach was "all about putting a price on access and a price on the relationship," he said. "I think Obama does believe that this is a time of historical change. He wants to push reset on a lot of things. He thinks old patterns, old framings can get you into trouble, particularly when you’re trying to encourage different parts of the world."

Mr Clemons praises Mr Obama’s "respectful" attention to "legacy relationships" by inviting Mr Brown just a few days after the Japanese premier became the first foreign visitor to the Obama White House. But he added: "I was joking recently with the Japanese ambassador when they got the first visit. I said: ‘This is going to be fun for you guys, but the price is going to be huge.’"

For Mr Brown this is a big moment. He flies to Washington on Monday night and will have his audience with Mr Obama before lunch on Tuesday, but it promises to be a fairly brief affair with no White House dinner. It a far cry from the chummy golf cart romp around Camp David that George W. Bush laid on for Tony Blair.

The prime minister comes seeking substantive agreements on economic matters ahead of the G20 summit in London next month, and hopes also for a whiff of Mr Obama’s stardust to revive his poll prospects at home. His wife Sarah will have a separate audience with First Lady Michelle Obama later on Tuesday afternoon.

Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, has invited Mr Brown to address a joint session of congress on Wednesday, before a lunch with legislators. The 30 minute address will allow Mr Brown to lay out his conception of the special relationship and boost his leadership credentials at home.

But his own parlous political prospects may be a drag on Britain’s influence with President Obama, who is said to take an "unsentimental view" of the prime minister’s plight. That view is also coloured by the knowledge he might be dealing with Conservative leader David Cameron in 12 months time.

"Obama can read the polls the same as everyone else," said a political adviser who has worked on both Democrat and Labour campaigns. "He wants partners for the next four years and Brown may not be one of those." The conventional wisdom, which Mr Obama has done little to dispel, is that he is less anglophile than his predecessors. He hailed the resilience of America’s founding fathers against the British "enemy" in his inauguration speech and devoted 35 pages of his memoir, Dreams From My Father, to his grandfather’s torture under British colonial rule during Kenya’s Mau Mau rebellion.

This was seen by some as the motive force for his recent decision to return a loaned bust of Winston Churchill, prime minister during the insurgency, which George W. Bush had given pride of place in the Oval Office. Mr Obama has also admitted feeling "edgy, defensive and hesitant" when travelling in Europe.

Sir Nigel Sheinwald, the British ambassador in Washington has told colleagues he thinks the attention given to these remarks is "overdone" and that he has seen no evidence of reserve towards Britain during the half dozen meetings he has had with the president so far.

But there is growing anger among conservative supporters of the special relationship at what they say is Mr Obama’s determination to treat Britain the same as other Nato allies when it comes to demanding extra troops for Afghanistan. Britain’s participation in the war in Iraq, at the cost of 179 soldiers’ lives, cuts little ice with Mr Obama since he opposed the war in the first place.

Dr Nile Gardiner, of the conservative Heritage foundation and a former aide to Margaret Thatcher, said: "President Obama has never acknowledged the sacrifice of British soldiers alongside their U.S. allies in a major policy speech. The new administration seems to care little for what the British have contributed in Afghanistan or Iraq in the past; what matters now is simply how many more troops Brown is willing to pledge for the surge in Afghanistan. It’s a very hardnosed, short-term approach rather than one rooted in a sense of enduring alliance. My sense is that the special relationship is being significantly downgraded."

Mr Brown will indicate that he hopes to find another 1,800 troops for Afghanistan, but there is resentment that the president has not focused his requests more on other NATO nations, who have been criticised for only sending troops to parts of Afghanistan that are considered relatively safe.

The senior British official said: "The UK has the second largest contribution militarily to Afghanistan by far, but more importantly we are taking a very high proportion of the casualties. So I wouldn’t expect the United States to look to the UK first when it comes to the issue of burden sharing. There are many other allies who need to do more."

Nevertheless, there is a realisation among British diplomats that they will have to fight to earn their influence at Mr Obama’s side. In conversations with his senior aides they stress what they believe is strong British expertise on the president’s foreign policy priorities and a "very significant degree of convergence" on Afghanistan, Iran and climate change, all areas where there was an Atlantic of clear blue water between Labour and the Bush administration.

The British official added: "If you look across the issues where this administration wants to be active and successful then the UK has a very strong position as a global partner for the United States; primarily the international economy, but also Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and the middle east peace process." David Miliband, the foreign secretary and Sir Nigel, both of whom have negotiated with Syria and Iran have been quick to offer their insights into the leadership in Tehran and Damascus.

If this charm offensive does not work, others counsel that Mr Obama will eventually learn that Britain is America’s only reliable military ally.

Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution said: "He’s enough of a pragmatist to understand the importance of getting this relationship right. It helps that Britain is so committed to being successful in Afghanistan. Unlike all of our other European partners, who all say they love Obama but don’t really want to help him very much, you do want to help."

In the meantime, British officials are committed to winning their place at his table - for the first time - on merit as well as history.

 

RCP Poll President Obama Job Approval RCP Average: +37.0%Details Approve 64.2% Disapprove 27.2% Congressional Job Approval RCP Average: -26.5%Details Approve 31.8% Disapprove 58.3% Direction of Country RCP Average: -26.3%Details Right Direction 33.5% Wrong Track 59.8%

RCP Poll President Obama Job Approval RCP Average: +37.0%Details Approve 64.2% Disapprove 27.2% Congressional Job Approval RCP Average: -26.5%Details Approve 31.8% Disapprove 58.3% Direction of Country RCP Average: -26.3%Details Right Direction 33.5% Wrong Track 59.8%

Lady Gator…Agreed…and then he got on stage with Hanoi Jane!!  Also remember the medal he got for a scratch that the medic said he put a band aid on it.

S.j…we also give him a great big thanks for serving and protecting our freedoms, as well as all the rest of his unit and all the many men and women who are or have served to protect our nation.

Leslie…what would have happened if this country has tried to negoiate with Hitler…well actually we know the answer to that because Britian under Nevel Chamberlian tried it and Hitler just kept moving forward…We were negoiating with Japan, at the time that they attacked Pearl Harbor…the same is true today with all of the Rogue Regimes and Terrorists that the world is dealing with… you can’t reason with these people, because their sole purpose is to destroy us.

They haven’t called Pelosi a nutcase for nothing!!

Deber…remember that the Soviet Union spent I believe about 20 years in there and left with their tails between their legs in defeat.  That county has very mountainous terrian, so fighting a ground war there is very hard.