Failed Obama Stamp?

The Postal Services created a stamp with a picture of President Obama.

The stamp was not sticking to envelopes.

This enraged the President, who demanded a full investigation.

After a month of testing and $1.73 million in congressional spending, a special Presidential commission presented the following findings:

1)The stamp is in perfect order.

2)There is nothing wrong with the adhesive.

3)People are spitting on the wrong side.

Gaffetastic... Obama Confuses Right From Left

CNN reports that, "Obama is so busy these days dealing with pressing foreign policy issues like Iran and North Korea, that he can't seem to tell his right from his left."
Huh? He hasn't done anything.
He hasn't even condemned the killer regime in Tehran!
What do they mean busy?

gatewaypundit.blogspot.com

ABC: The All Barack Channel

ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA

ABC News should be required to register as a federal lobbyist.

On June 24, Drudge reports, the network will broadcast from inside the White House to air a propaganda special for Obamacare.

Opposing voices will reportedly be excluded. ABC News says “thoughtful” and “diverse” points of view will be allowed. In other words: Shills of all colors!

ABC: The All Barack Channel.

Rush calls ‘em our state-run media.

I call it government-controlled stenography.

Sharpen your pencils, boys and girls, and look spiffy when Dear Leader comes to greet you.

michellemalkin.com

Obama Flip-Flops on Medicare-Medicaid Cuts

This is what Obama said this weekend about cuts in Medicare and Medicaid in his internet address:

Obama has proposed trimming more than $600 billion from Medicare and Medicaid by 2019 -- including more than $300 billion in cuts unveiled in his Saturday radio and Internet address.

And, here he is attacking John McCain during the campaign for cutting Medicare and Medicaid:



gatewaypundit.blogspot.com

Obama’s Americorps scandal — and the First Lady’s meddling

President Obama is hoping you won’t notice his abrupt change of inspectors general over at Americorps, the government-run, taxpayer-subsidized “community service” boondoggle (which Republicans helped expand as part of the $6 billion GIVE/SERVE Act in March despite its wasteful track record. Thanks, Republicans).

With intervention from Michelle Obama, the Americorps inspector general was given the boot and replaced — for doing his job too well, it seems, and uncovering squandering of funds by favored contributors, educational institutions, and left-wing groups.

This Associated Press article only scratches the surface:

President Barack Obama plans to fire the inspector general who investigates AmeriCorps and other national service programs amid a controversy between the IG and Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, who is an Obama supporter and former NBA basketball star.

The IG, Gerald Walpin, was criticized by the U.S. attorney in Sacramento for the way he handled an investigation of Johnson and his nonprofit group, St. HOPE Academy, which received hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal grants from the Corporation for National Community Service. The corporation runs the AmeriCorps program.

On Thursday, Obama said in a letter to Congress that he had lost confidence in Walpin. Neither the president nor deputy White House press secretary Josh Earnest would give details. The president must give Congress 30 days’ notice before removing Walpin, who is being suspended with pay for the 30 days. Earnest said, “The president will appoint a replacement in whom he has full confidence as the corporation carries out its important mission.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, in a letter to Obama, pointed to a law requiring that Congress be given the reasons an IG is fired. He cited a Senate report saying the requirement is designed to ensure that inspectors general are not removed for political reasons. Grassley said Walpin had identified millions of dollars in AmeriCorps funds that were wasted or misspent and “it appears he has been doing a good job.”

In fact, there’s much more.

This little-noticed story in Youth Today yesterday points to another example of Walpin blowing the whistle on fraud:

The inspector general (IG) of the Corporation for National and Community Service is being removed by President Barack Obama, a week after the IG questioned the eligibility of the largest and most expensive AmeriCorps program, and while the IG was contesting the “propriety” of a settlement made with a mayor for alleged misuse of AmeriCorps funds.

…Funding for the largest AmeriCorps program - the Teaching Fellows Program, run by the Research Foundation of the City University of New York - is in abeyance pending resolution of widespread problems identified in a recent audit. Although Walpin recommended that funding be curtailed and that previous funds (perhaps as much as $75 million) be repaid to the corporation, the corporation has said it will take no action on that matter.

Walpin concluded that nothing was being gained by the grants to CUNY and that the money was simply being used to subsidize an existing and funded program.

I highly recommend that you head over to the Americorps’ inspector general’s report site here. You can find the entire CUNY report here. Let me repeat what the IG found: Waste, duplication, ineffective spending, criminal background check lapses, and repeated violations of the grant rules. And they’re not doing anything about it. Just a snippet from the executive summary:

The Office of Inspector General (OIG), Corporation for National and Community Service (Corporation), contracted with Cotton & Company LLP to perform agreed-upon procedures to assist the OIG in grant cost and compliance testing of Corporation-funded Federal assistance provided to The Research Foundation of the City University of New York (RFCUNY). The Corporation awarded two Education Award Program grants to RFCUNY that were categorized as Professional Model grants.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

As a result of applying our procedures, we questioned education awards of $16,152,414 and draw downs of $773,254. In general, we questioned the education awards for members whose eligibility was not established in accordance with grant requirements for criminal background checks. Draw downs were questioned mostly for fixed fees related to members whose eligibility we questioned and also for drawing down in excess of fees earned. In addition, our compliance findings when taken as a whole indicate pervasive problems of eligibility, timekeeping, and documentation. A questioned cost is an alleged violation of a provision of law, regulation, contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other agreement or document governing the expenditure of funds or a finding that, at the time of testing,
includes costs not supported by adequate documentation.

…Participants who successfully complete terms of service under AmeriCorps grants are eligible for education awards and, in some cases, accrued interest awards funded by the Corporation’s National Service Trust. These award amounts are not funded by Corporation grants and thus are not included in claimed grant costs. But at the time that a grant is awarded, and due to the grant award, these amounts become immediate obligations of the National Service Trust. Therefore, as part of our agreed-upon procedures, and using the same criteria used for the grantee’s claimed costs, we determined the effect of our findings on AmeriCorps members’ entitlement to education and accrued interest awards.

The following is a summary of grant compliance testing results…

1. RFCUNY drew down more funds than it was due.

2. RFCUNY did not follow certain AmeriCorps Provisions.

3. The supervisory signature on members’ timesheets was not the members’ supervisor, or that of someone with direct knowledge of hours served by the members.

4. Members did not always record actual service hours on their timesheets.

5. Some members’ timesheet hours were not accurately recorded in the Corporation’s Web-Based Reporting System.

6. RFCUNY did not require its members to timely submit their member contracts, forms, and timesheets.

7. RFCUNY used preprinted member documentation and did not ensure that all member documentation was completed, signed, and dated.

8. RFCUNY did not maintain documentation to demonstrate that each member’s evaluation complied with AmeriCorps Regulations and the Member Agreement.

9. RFCUNY did not maintain documentation to demonstrate that members received criminal background checks and that any background checks conducted complied with AmeriCorps Provisions.

10. RFCUNY entered incorrect member start dates in Corporation systems and in member contracts.

11. Some members worked beyond their contract-end date.

Another recent IG report on Americorps waste by open-borders lobbying group, La Raza (”The Race”) spotlighted its failure to complete background checks and institute secure financial controls. And on and on and on.

And guess who’s meddling in these affairs? Yep, First Lady Michelle Obama:

Some decisions about CNCS are being made by First Lady Michelle Obama, according to service advocates (who asked not to be named). Last week, Mrs. Obama announced that her chief of staff, Jackie Norris, would move to CNCS as a senior adviser. Officials said yesterday that Norris is scheduled to arrive on June 22.

Who’s looking out for you now? Cronies, that’s who.

More on the First Lady’s role in installing Norris and intervening to help pick the next Americorps CEO:

First Lady Michelle Obama’s chief of staff, Jackie Norris, is being sent to the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) in what is both a White House shake-up and an indication of the first lady’s sway over the corporation that oversees AmeriCorps, Serve and Learn and the Senior Corps.

Observers believe Norris, whom Obama came to know early in the Iowa caucus campaign, was forced out of the White House so that long-time Obama friend Susan Sher could take over. But those same observers see her appointment as senior adviser to the corporation as an overall win for CNCS, believing that Norris still will have a straight line to the White House.

CNCS remains without a CEO after the withdrawal last month of Nike vice president Maria Eitel, even before her nomination went to the Senate. Although the corporation’s CEO must be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, Michelle Obama reportedly has taken the lead in selecting the nominee.

This stinks. Shades of Travelgate, anyone?

The more things Change…

***

Ed Morrissey: “Will Congress stand up to the executive branch and protect the Inspectors General? Or will they roll over and allow Obama to accrue even more power to protect his buddies and to allow corruption to run rampant?”

***

Flashback on the Americorps/ACORN fraud history, circa 2004:

Although ACORN’s projects run a wide gamut, the group claims as its purpose helping low- and middle-income Americans — through initiatives ranging from improving urban public schools, to providing counseling on how to avoid “predatory lending,” to increasing the availability of “affordable housing.” Most of these programs are conducted locally, by state-level ACORN organizations — which are often set up as 501(c)3 nonprofit entities distinct from the national ACORN umbrella, a 501(c)4 lobbying organization. Sounds benign enough — except that, according to Bob Huberty, executive vice president of the Capital Research Center, these tax-exempt 501(c)3s “have no reason for existence other than to get grants from the government and foundations.” They are, essentially, an ACORN front for asking Uncle Sam to subsidize political activity.

Ask ACORN does — and it definitely receives. Take, for example, the most recent tax information from one of ACORN’s subsidiary nonprofits: the ACORN Housing Corporation, Inc., based out of the organization’s national headquarters in New Orleans. For the tax year beginning July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2003, ACORN Housing Corp.’s 990 Form shows a total of $1,710,203 received in government grants (the year before, the total was $1,977,306).

The nominal purpose of those millions is to “provide low rent housing & loan counseling services to low income individuals.” But if the government is funding the actual, legitimate work of ACORN at the local 501(c)3 level, it means that the national lobbying organization can dedicate more of its unrestricted resources to electioneering. Furthermore, explains Craig Garthwaite, director of research at the Employment Policies Institute, “The funding is not only fungible in that if they receive money for X, they can spend more on Y.” He cites one particular example of money-rerouting malfeasance: the crooked dealings surrounding an AmeriCorps grant in 1996. According to an EPI study, when the ACORN Housing Corp. applied for the grant, they denied any connections to the main ACORN lobbying group (the grant is not for political advocacy). But the AmeriCorps inspector general discovered that “not only was AHC created by ACORN, engaged in numerous transactions with one another, and sharing staff and office space — but it utilized the AmeriCorps grant to increase ACORN membership, a violation of federal guidelines.” (ACORN charges membership dues, much as labor unions do; thus, by exploiting AmeriCorps funding to inflate its membership rolls, ACORN used government resources to bring in even more money — money with no restrictions on its political use.)

***

And another relevant flashback on Michelle Obama’s interest in government-directed “service,” via IBD last fall:

Barack Obama was a founding member of the board of Public Allies in 1992, resigning before his wife became executive director of the Chicago chapter of Public Allies in 1993. Obama plans to use the nonprofit group, which he features on his campaign Web site, as the model for a national service corps. He calls his Orwellian program, “Universal Voluntary Public Service.”

Big Brother had nothing on the Obamas. They plan to herd American youth into government-funded reeducation camps where they’ll be brainwashed into thinking America is a racist, oppressive place in need of “social change.”

The pitch Public Allies makes on its Web site doesn’t seem all that radical. It promises to place young adults (18-30) in paid one-year “community leadership” positions with nonprofit or government agencies. They’ll also be required to attend weekly training workshops and three retreats.

In exchange, they’ll get a monthly stipend of up to $1,800, plus paid health and child care. They also get a post-service education award of $4,725 that can be used to pay off past student loans or fund future education.

But its real mission is to radicalize American youth and use them to bring about “social change” through threats, pressure, tension and confrontation — the tactics used by the father of community organizing, Saul “The Red” Alinsky…

michellemalkin.com

1,000 Protesters Greet Obama In Green Bay

This didn't make many headlines yesterday.
Hundreds showed up to protest Barack Obama in Green Bay where he held a rally to promote his government takeover of health care.

Video:

One thousand protesters showed up to rally against Obama and nationalized health care.

As the president's motorcade passed by many people booed and offered a thumbs down.

FOX 11 WLUK reported on the protest:

Organizers said about 1,000 people lined the east side of Packerland Drive Thursday morning to protest President Obama's stop in Green Bay. Stretching four blocks long, the protest parked itself along the motorcade route between Austin Straubel Airport and Green Bay Southwest High School.

Most of the protestors were part of a grassroots movement that calls itself "The Party of Know." Jerry Bader, a conservative talk show host on WTAG 1360, helped organize the rally. Most protestors said their purpose Thursday was to let President Obama know just exactly how they feel about a government backed health care system.

"It doesn't work," Dawn Papapetru said. Papapetru said she feels an obligation to speak out. She now lives in Green Bay but was born and raised in Canada, a country that provides universal health care for its citizens.

"I know what the free health system is all about. It's wrong. Taxes will go up, gas will go up and the lines get longer in hospitals," Papapetru said.

President Obama has said he wants to model American health care reform after the Canadian system. The plan is designed to extend health care coverage to millions of uninsured Americans by offering a government backed health insurance option.

"The government has no need to get involved in my health decisions. I don't want a government board telling me when and how and if I'm going to get health care," Peter Soransen, of De Pere, said. Soransen was one of the hundreds of people who showed up hoping to have his voice heard.

Free Republic had this photo from the protest:


gatewaypundit

More Obamacare Posters

From michellemalkin.com

Obamacare

From michellemalkin.com

Newsweek’s Evan Thomas: Obama Is ‘Sort of God’

If they're not bowing to Obama or dreaming about sleeping with him, the media is now talking about Dear Leader being some "sort of god."
NewsBusters recorded this interview of Newsweek editor Evan Thomas on MSNBC:

Newsweek editor Evan Thomas brought adulation over President Obama’s Cairo speech to a whole new level on Friday, declaring on MSNBC: "I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."

Thomas, appearing on Hardball with Chris Matthews, was reacting to a preceding monologue in which Matthews praised Obama’s speech: "I think the President's speech yesterday was the reason we Americans elected him. It was grand. It was positive. Hopeful...But what I liked about the President's speech in Cairo was that it showed a complete humility...The question now is whether the President we elected and spoke for us so grandly yesterday can carry out the great vision he gave us and to the world."

Matthews discussed Obama’s upcoming speech marking the 65^th anniversary of D-Day and compared it to that of Ronald Reagan. He then turned to Thomas and asked: "Reagan and World War II and the sense of us as the good guys in the world, how are we doing?" Thomas replied: "Well, we were the good guys in 1984, it felt that way. It hasn't felt that way in recent years. So Obama’s had, really, a different task We're seen too often as the bad guys. And he – he has a very different job from – Reagan was all about America, and you talked about it. Obama is ‘we are above that now.’ We're not just parochial, we're not just chauvinistic, we're not just provincial."

Thomas elaborated on Obama as God, patronizingly explaining: "He's going to bring all different sides together...Obama is trying to sort of tamper everything down. He doesn't even use the word terror. He uses extremism. He's all about let us reason together...He's the teacher. He is going to say, ‘now, children, stop fighting and quarreling with each other.’ And he has a kind of a moral authority that he – he can – he can do that."

By Kyle Drennen

Related:

Oil Prices Doubled Since Inauguration, Will Media Blame Obama?

Virtually every time oil and gasoline prices rose when George W. Bush was in the White House, his policies and/or his connections to folks in the oil industry were blamed by newsrooms from coast to coast.

Yet, even though oil has doubled in price since Inauguration Day, with retail gas prices up $0.75 a gallon, you'd be hard-pressed to find reports blaming these spikes on President Obama or anything he's done since taking office.

Why?

Before you answer, take a look at the following crude oil chart:

On January 19, crude was $34.78. On Friday, it closed at $68.44, a virtual doubling in only four and a half months.

Although oil prices certainly rose during the Bush years, there was never such a fast doubling as what we've seen since Inauguration Day.

As for prices at the pump, the national average was $1.85/gallon on January 19. Today's average is $2.60.

But that doesn't tell the entire story, for the wholesale gas price was about $1.10 before Inauguration Day. With its $1.95 close on Friday, Americans could be seeing $3 at the pump soon; we in California already are.

With this in mind, given the constant lambasting Bush used to get concerning rising energy prices, will Obama and his policies be similarly blamed?

Or will this be another thing the Obama-loving press gives him a pass for?

By Noel Sheppard - newsbusters.org

Barack Hussein Obama: US "One of the Largest Muslim Countries in the World"

It is important to note that "if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world".

So says President Barack Obama. Or I should say: Barack Hussein Obama.

That's right: Barack Hussein Obama. Say it proud. Say it out loud. The middle moniker that dared not speak its name during the election campaign is now front and centre of the US president's attempt to woo the Muslim world, the theme of his visits to Riyadh on Wednesday and Cairo on Thursday.

Petrified of the potential political fallout of being branded a Muslim, Candidate Obama - a practicing Christian - never used the name "Hussein" and its use was frowned upon as a forbidden code for the nutty accusation that he was some kind of Islamic Manchurian candidate.

No more. To say Barack Hussein Obama - BHO for short - now appears to be the height of political correctness.

As I argue in this analysis for the Telegraph dead tree edition, Obama is seeking to return to a Middle East policy based on realism - buttressed by the bona fides of his own multi-cultural (including Muslim) background.

In Strasbourg two months ago, the president tried out his full name. Days later in Ankara, he was introduced to the Turkish parliament by his full name.

As ABC's Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller astutely outline here, the Obama administration is embracing the new president's inner Muslim, as it were. Deputy national security adviser stated that Obama had "experienced Islam on three continents...growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father -- obviously Muslim Americans [are] a key part of Illinois and Chicago".

So that's once, twice, three times a Muslim?

Just in case the Arab world hasn't yet got this message of inbuilt tolerance, Mr Obama himself has gone a step further. In an interview with France's Canal Plus released on Tuesday evening, he suggested that the United States might be a Muslim country.

Obama said he wanted to "create a better dialogue so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what's happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians".

So far, so blah - President George W. Bush often expressed much the same sentiments.

But then, as is his habit , Obama turned the concept around. "Now, the flip side is I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam.

"And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. And so there's got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples."

Obama said in Turkey that Americans "do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation". John McCain was criticised in 2007 for saying the US was "a Christian nation", later amending this to "a Judeo-Christian valued nation".

Of course, the concept of separation of church and state, which derived from the First Amendment to the Constitution, means that the US is not officially a Christian nation or a nation of any other particular religion. Which means, I suppose, that the US is as much a Muslim nation as a Christian one.

It's a bold - some might say audacious - turnaround by the president.

It's also a classically Obamaesque move.

During the 2008 campaign, he skillfully made himself, through his life story, the personification of change.

Now, implicitly contrasting himself with the born-again, evangelical Bush who pursued a post-9/11 "crusade" against terrorism, Obama is presenting himself to the Islamic world as the personification of a new, tolerant - and, yes, partly Muslim - America.

UPDATE: The excellent Don Surber crunches the numbers and points out that Obama's claim is highly dubious. According to Surber, the US has an estimated three to eight million Muslims, less than one per cent of the world's total and less than at least 23 other countries.

The average claim for the US Muslim population is about six million. The precise figure is difficult to get because it's not included in US census data and many put the figure at much, much less.

But even if we assume there are six million Muslims in the US, that makes it only the 34th biggest Muslim country in the world - behind Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Nigeria, China, Ethiopia, Algeria, Morocco, Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Tanzania, Syria, Malaysia, Niger, Senegal, Ghana, Tunisia, Somalia, Guinea, Kenya, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Burkina Faso and Tajikistan.

UPDATE 2: Debbie Schlussel cites a reputable survey by Pew that puts the number of Muslims in the US at 1.8 million. This would make it the 48th biggest Muslim country, after the above list plus France, Libya, Jordan, Israel, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritania, Germany, Kuwait, Oman, Eritrea, Lebanon and Serbia and Montenegro - and just above Britain, which would be the 50th.

telegraph.co.uk

Easily Amazed? Brian Williams Finds It 'Unbelievable' to Watch Obama Eat M&Ms Inside the White House

NBC anchor Brian Williams has never been shy about how amazed he is by Barack Obama. But it is really "unbelievable" to be in the White House hallway while Obama walks by munching on M&Ms? In a brief Monday Washington Post article by Howard Kurtz promoting NBC’s latest Inside the White House special with the candy-munching president, Williams couldn’t keep the gush in check:

"There's stuff we've never seen of how the White House operates," he says. "We were pretty stunned at how much we were able to record and how natural events seemed to be."

He recalls "walking through the West Wing and Secretary Clinton drops by to see the president. To be in the hallway when the president walks by with a handful of M&Ms, popping them in his mouth as he goes to visit his chief of staff -- it was unbelievable. I don't think the expression 'took up residence' is hyperbolic." He also spent time with Michelle Obama and went out for burgers with the president.

Such specials are part of a 40-year NBC tradition, but Williams had to make the sale, a lobbying effort that began before the election. Chief of staff Rahm Emanuel allowed the network to record some senior staff meetings but, says Williams, "Rahm closed the door in front of our crew eight times."

While such behind-the-scenes programs tend to be positive, Williams hopes to highlight the sacrifice involved in the demanding jobs so viewers "will see White House aides as people. There's emotion in it, pathos, personality."

NBC’s previous hour-long specials inside the White House have been generally greeted with more skepticism, that NBC is selling out its independence a bit to gain access. See how much more skeptical both Kurtz and Tom Brokaw seem in the Post of January 21, 2002, when George W. Bush granted access:

Tom Brokaw knew George W. Bush was putting on a show.

"It goes without saying that they don't wake up and say, 'Oh, my God. NBC is coming!' " Brokaw says. "They obviously arranged a very full day for him."

Brokaw spent last Thursday hanging with Bush, Dick Cheney, Condi Rice and the gang for an NBC special that was supposed to have been taped Sept. 18. Events intervened, and the anchor got to see the White House on a war footing -- which, as it turns out, helps explain why the president chose this moment to let the NBC crews in.

"They're concerned about the public drifting away from the mission of the war," Brokaw says. "This was an opportunity for them to kick-start it, to keep the country refocused."

George Bush may be no Martin Sheen, but he knows how to play to the cameras. "Inside the Real West Wing," which airs Wednesday night before the fictional version, will show Bush "in a pretty commanding fashion," Brokaw says.

What happens in these ventures might be best described as mutual manipulation. NBC needs access to assemble an hour-long narrative that can be sold to advertisers; the White House team gets to reach millions by staging day-long events while pretending that the camera operators and sound technicians aren't there.

Kurtz noticed that Bush was pressed on the notion that the press had gone easy on him:

Bush laughed at the notion that the press has gone easy on him during the war, arguing that he got roughed up over civilian casualties in Afghanistan and the initial lack of military progress, Brokaw recalls.

The political war over Enron was also a hot topic. "They were not overly defensive," Brokaw says of administration officials. "They've obviously got their message and they're working on it."

At the time, Brokaw praised the White House for being "very well run," which isn’t quite as positive as finding M&M munching an "unbelievable" sight.

—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.