Obama's smirk compared to Sheldon Cooper's haughty derision face

Obama's smirk,



reminded me of the classic Sheldon Cooper's haughty derision face,


and his "I look at you with an expression of exhaustion and ever so slight amusement" face-



Except, Sheldon Cooper would make a better president. Less arrogant too.

It's not "Morning in America" any more...

...it's dusk

Ronald Reagan Statue
"A statue of Ronald Reagan is to be unveiled in London's Grosvenor Square, as part of a year of celebrations to mark the 100th birthday of the former US president. The 10 foot bronze will be positioned on a pedestal close to the American Embassy, and stand alongside existing statues of two other 20th Century US leaders, Dwight Eisenhower and Franklin D Roosevelt. With the unveiling scheduled for July 4, US Independence Day, the Ronald Reagan Foundation has invited Margaret Thatcher and David Cameron to attend the ceremony. Condoleezza Rice, the former US secretary of state who worked for the Pentagon during Mr Reagan's presidency, will represent Nancy Reagan, 89, who will be following proceedings from her Californian home."

For those of you old enough to remember the 1980 Presidential election, Ronald Reagan ran as a conservative Republican. The oldest man to be elected to the position, may feared him and his principles, including myself, in which he "advocated reducing tax rates to spur economic growth, controlling the money supply to reduce inflation, deregulation of the economy, and reducing government spending. In his first term he ... took a hard line against labor unions..." These are all positions I believe in now. Back then, I was a twenty-year old liberal agnostic abortion advocate scared to death of a Reagan presidency but having an antipathy to four more years of Jimmy Carter and inflation. If I remember right, I voted for John Anderson even though he was conservative because I've always believed in working toward a third party candidate and the other two candidates were just awful in my opinion.

Of course, we all know what happened. Reagan was a great president. Those people who were not clouded by liberal thought knew he would be great from the beginning, and history bears this out.

Particularly estimable was Reagan and UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's relationship. Both politicians held the same philosophical outlook in governing. They furthered the close relationship that John Adams brilliantly and humbly set the course for back in 1785 when the victorious and newly formed United States met with our former Kin,g George III.

As I look on this Fourth of July holiday today, I can't help but be filled with melancholy. The bright future that won Reagan the re-election, "Morning in America: Prouder, Stronger, Better" came as an optimistic note after the dour and malaise-filled failed Carter Presidency. Reagan's staunch stand against communism was the force that caused it to fail and the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, shortly after Reagan left office. He had stood at Germany's Brandenburg Gate and challenged Russian President Gorbachev to "Tear down this wall!" It was a decade of US hegemony, respect, and where we did Good and were known to do Good in the world.

Twenty-one years later Obama (tried to stand) at the Brandenburg Gate and gave a speech apologizing for all of the above. With our current Oval Office occupier, we have lost the economy, lost our moral stand in the world, lost our way. We place Israel on the terror nation list and invite terrorists in the Muslim Brotherhood to the diplomatic table. Down is up and up is down.

I'm sad for the loss of solidity of the Constitution. It is a crumbling and increasingly transparent document now, being constantly chipped away at and outright ignored. It is a document that used to be a granite foundation for our country but now is simply a ghostly vapor. I miss the bright morning rays over the cornfields in the Morning in America campaign ads that I once was fearful of but know better now. I miss all that, but one important thing has changed with me since 'Morning In America' turned to dusk.

I am saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Though I mourn the place America used to be, I know that she is not my ultimate home. America fulfilled many promises in her work for the Lord, and even in these evil days she is still doing so. I've replaced the State of Liberty with the Cross as my most revered emblem. It might be dusk in America now, with only the bronze statue of Reagan across the sea to remind us of our once glorious days not so long ago, but in Jesus's heaven, every day is morning, bright and filled with His glory. My independence day is December 3, 2003, the day Jesus set me free from my bondage of sin. I became truly free that day and I hope as you celebrate this nation's Independence, that you ponder your eternal morning, and where you will spend it.

Party crashers make good point

Which one has Obama refused to met with?

This was (unfortunately) NOT from an American news outlet. It was in an Australian paper. I have a lengthy essay at The End Time regarding the media and how its misuse can skew the perceptions of an entire nation.

Joe Wilson, not a hero, just emotional

During the President's speech to both houses of Congress last night, at one point, when the President said that the health care bill would not cover illegal immigrants, Rep. Joe Wilson of SC shouted, "You lie!"

I believe President Obama is a liar and the father of lies. I think he has lied for so long he wouldn't know the truth if it hit him upside the head. I believe that there were lies in the Health Care speech and that Obama is happiest when he is lying.

The issue that Rep. Wilson (R-SC) shouted out to Obama over, at the moment in the speech where Obama said, "The reforms I am proposing would not apply to those not born in America," Joe Wilson is actually correct, that is a lie. Information here.

I can understand the frustration of a representative seeing the corruption from the inside, and the horror of living with the un-American machinations between and among fellow politicians, lobbyists, and corporations. I can imagine the turmoil of listening to an un-American President proposing decidedly un-American ideas. However, shouting epithets in the (once) hallowed halls of Congress is uncivil. The halls of Congress have an institutional decorum that has always been respected, and should be respected, no matter what.

FITS News of South Carolina, who is harder than anyone on their politicians, wrote that in finding his lungs, Joe revealed himself to be an unmitigated moron. From a political standpoint, FITS wrote, that with Obama’s poll tanking lately, the old adage that “Not interrupting your opponent when they are making a mistake” is a lesson Joe should have applied. I say that from a moral standpoint, it was not the time and it wasn't the way for Joe to make himself heard. Joe isn't a "hero" and he isn't "brave." And sinking to his opponent's level is never good.

Should Joe resign, be excoriated, called a moron? His wikipedia page was vandalized and his website crashed moments after the outburst. His home phone number was published on Twitter with commands to harass him at his home (which was terribly wrong since Joe is in DC and his family is at home). But no, Joe just made a mistake. It was not a months long purposeful "mistake" like SC Governor Mark Sanford's affair. It was not a years-long "mistake"(rape) of the American people a la Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank. It was not a decades-long trashing of the system for personal gain a la Gov. Rod Blagojevich. It was one emotional outburst in one moment of time. Immediately, the Congressman issued an apology:

"This evening I let my emotions get the best of me. While I disagree with the president's statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the president for this lack of civility."

Joe also called the White House and spoke with Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel to personally apologize. As he should.

Now it's over. Let it go.

PS: here is the look that Biden, Pelosi and Obama gave to Joe, LOL!:

Downing St. says Obama knew about Lockerbie bomber release every step of the way

No.10 turns on Obama and Clinton for criticising decision to release Lockerbie bomber

Downing Street has hit back at Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for attacking the decision to release the Lockerbie bomber. President Obama and the US Secretary of State fuelled a fierce American backlash against Britain, claiming Abdelbaset Al Megrahi should have been forced to serve out his jail sentence in Scotland – but a senior Whitehall aide said their reaction was ‘disingenuous’. British officials claim Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton were kept informed at all stages of discussions concerning Megrahi’s return. Read more

So sad. The UK sold their soul for oil. The US sold their soul for...what? Change? Now we just hope we can FIND some change.

Deconstructing a liberal's argument

I get comments to this blog but I delete most of them from the more extreme left. Not all liberals argue this way and I respect the ones who don't. However the worst are not honest comments and are unworthy of seeing the light of day, so I immediately delete them. To wit, let us deconstruct a long one I keep receiving. (When I delete, they send the same comment day after day, like they have nothing else to do, lol)

This commenter opened with the following in response to health care entries on this blog:

“You must be very lucky to have full coverage insurance. Most of the rest of us aren't so fortunate.”

This is a straw man argument; 'an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.' The commenter has no idea what level of health insurance I have, if any. However she or he presented this fallacy in the first sentence and built an opposing argument from it for the rest of the lengthy reply. Unfortunately it is entirely false. However, it is the most popular and well used of the fallacious arguments the liberal person of this ilk will use. Another straw man argument ensues in the next sentence, as if to cement it:

“My aunt had good insurance and lived healthy; then she was diagnosed with breast cancer. Three months later, the insurance company canceled her policy! This was when Bush was President and Republicans were in control.”

Assuming the commenter actually has an aunt who was sick with cancer, President Bush had nothing to do with her insurance company’s position, any more than any President Clinton or previous Presidents. The Government was not involved in private insurance at that point except for Medicare and that was in place long before Bush. It is only Obama who has his fingers in it.

“They didn't do anything!”

A liberal generally believes that government exists to intervene in the citizen's welfare from cradle to grave, hence this commenter's plaintive wail, 'they didn't do anything!' whoever "they" are. "They" are not specified. A conservative generally believes in personal responsibility. Where I live, neighbors, families, and churches help people in need. I believe the government does not exist to hold my hand from cradle to grave.

"Obama is the first politician at ANY level in a looooong time to do something we have almost never seen in Washington - follow through and do exactly what he said he would do!"

I think the President with the most promises kept goes to Reagan. Obama has not followed through with even one. As a matter of fact he has done the opposite on all of them. He said he would end the war but he expanded the front in Afghanistan. He said he would negotiate health care reform in public sessions televised on C-SPAN but instead he wants it pushed through without the House or Senate even reading the bill. He decried earmarks, then signed 9,000 of them.

One of the Democrats who voted for Obama wonders which promise she should believe: the 2003 promise when Obama said he wanted a single payer system? Or the 2009 promise that he does not want a single payer system? Senator Cornyn asked Obama that very question this week, and Cornyn is an Obama supporter! In actuality, Obama is the first president we have had in a looooooong time to be such a blatant liar.

“Why do they keep saying we need to "wait" and get it right? Republicans had 8 years...not only did they not get it right, they didn't even TRY to help my aunt or anyone else!”

This is the Appeal to Pity, or the Galileo Argument. Government does not exist to help Auntie recover from cancer. And ‘waiting’ to actually read the bill is just common sense. Or used to be.

“Just like our military protects ALL American citizens, we need FULL and COMPLETE health coverage for ALL Americans.”

This is known as Argument by Generalization, it is also Non Sequitur, 'something that does not follow'. I could just as easily say ‘Just like our military protects ALL American citizens, we need FULL and COMPLETE DVD libraries for ALL Americans.” It is a false premise.

“Bin Laden isn't the number one terrorist, diseases and insurance companies are the number one terrorists. Disease and insurance companies are responsible for more deaths in one month than for all American deaths due to terrorism EVER.”

I must have missed the bulletin where heart disease was re-classified as terrorism. To say “health insurance companies are responsible for more deaths in one month than terrorism ever” is just stupidity. Heaven forbid a person arguing in this manner should ever provide a fact, a link, or a reference. For example, there are 13,651 deaths every week in the US due to heart disease, or 54,604 per month. Are health insurance companies "responsible" for these plus all the other patients who die from kidney failure, car accidents, leukemia etc? No.

“Then again, many people died today thanks to our broken health care (non)system and insurance companies canceling them."

Fact? Reference? Link? Nope. Health insurance is called an “employment benefit,” meaning, it is a gift you receive, not a demand automatically met.

“How do you and others trying to defeat reform feel towards those tragic deaths that would have been prevented if only we had universal health coverage for all?”

In the world of fallacious arguments, this is called the “Appeal To Pity (Appeal to Sympathy, The Galileo Argument). Do what we say ... or children will DIEEEEE! It is not a solid argument and is often used when no facts are available. Appealing to emotion is done absent facts, making it an old standby of the list of fallacious arguments. The opposite of her argument would be; “once we have universal health care no one will die.” Which is not true of course. Government cannot save us from dying, nor can it save us from death due to our own lifestyle choices. A liberal of this ilk generally looks for someone else to blame rather than take personal responsibility. Think of the McDonald's coffee drinker who spilled hot coffee on herself and won her suit.

“Why is it OK for the govt. to provide education (and give you a job) but it isn't OK for the govt. to provide health care?”

This kind of fallacious argument is known as Changing The Subject (Digression, Red Herring, Misdirection, False Emphasis.) We are not debating education. We are not debating about my work. Secondly, the government does already provides health care: Medicare.

There was more but you get the idea of how these people argue. Ad Hominem, Galileo Argument, Straw Man, Appeal to Pity, etc. none of it is honest. That is why I DELETE these kinds of comments. They are not worthy of the light of day. Happy debating!

Obama the "hopenchange" president wants snitches

From the Weekly Standard

"The White House call for people to inform on anyone spreading "disinformation about health insurance reform" didn't sit well with a lot of people -- Obama isn't running a political campaign anymore, he's supposed to be running the country (and in the event even those who spread video clips of the president making statements on health care reform that are now impolitic have been targeted by the White House). Texas Senator John Cornyn has written a letter to the president politely asking if he could please put an end to the creepiness:"

“[T]the White House Director of New Media, Macon Phillips, asserted that there was “a lot of disinformation out there,” and encouraged citizens to report “fishy” speech opposing your health care policies to the White House. Phillips specifically targeted private, unpublished, even casual speech...“If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to xxxx@XXXXXX.

I am not aware of any precedent for a President asking American citizens to report their fellow citizens to the White House for pure political speech that is deemed ‘fishy’ or otherwise inimical to the White House’s political interests,” Sen. Cornyn wrote. “You should not be surprised that these actions taken by your White House staff raise the specter of a data collection program. As Congress debates health care reform and other critical policy matters, citizen engagement must not be chilled by fear of government monitoring the exercise of free speech rights. And I respectfully request an answer to the following:

· How do you intend to use the names, email addresses, IP addresses, and identities of citizens who are reported to have engaged in “fishy” speech?
·How do you intend to notify citizens who have been reported for “fishy” speech?
·What action do you intend to take against citizens who have been reported for engaging in “fishy” speech?
· Do your own past statements qualify as “disinformation”? For example, is it “disinformation” to note that in 2003 you said: “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan”?"

Way to go Sen. Cornyn! Obama is worse than Bush. Worse.

The left is pretty concerned with inaccurate details...

...while they ignore glaring ones. Obama's Certificate of Live Birth had many glaring errors on it, namely the use of the term "African," a term not used in 1961, but Negro was. Or the lack of folds on the paper that had been claimed to be mailed. Or the date "2007" bleeding through and visible. Or the fact that Hawaiian officials said they examined the real birth certificate in 2008, no wait, they destroyed all paper copies in 2001, no wait, we didn't mean that, the paper copies are still here after all. Now Hawaii even refuses to verify the COLB released to the public by Obama and the other one obtained by factcheck.org. Wat a mess.

Yet the left claims the document Attorney Orly Taitz uncovered is a fake because at the bottom it says "Republic Of Kenya" dated 2/1964 and the Republic was not declared until 12/1964. Would that they were so attentive to detail on the COLB!

First, Kenya declared independence in 12/1963, not 1964. Second, the area that Obama was likely to have been born was using the term Republic even prior to that, in a long-standing land dispute with Zanzibar that still runs today.

The left's squashing continues to no avail. You ever put your thumb on mercury? It squirts out in another direction. That is what happens to truth, it keeps popping up from different directions when you least expect it.

Birth certificate eligibility lies contradicting themselves now (UPDATED)

State of Hawaii official Statement October 2008-

Obama's Birth Certificate Verified By State
"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures," Fukino said.

CNN's Lou Dobbs is starting to wonder where the birth certificate is, and said so numerous times this week. This query prompted a vicious reaction from J. Richard Cohen, chief of the left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center who called for Dobbs's firing. In the ongoing "Shut up Lou Dobbs" campaign under obvious pressure, per CNN President John Klein in his response to the Letter:

"It seems this story is dead- because anyone who still is not convinced doesn't really have a legitimate beef." Klein asked CNN researchers to dig into the question of why Obama couldn't produce the original birth certificate. The researchers contacted the Hawaii Health Dept. and confirmed that paper documents were discarded in 2001 when the department went paperless. That reportedly includes Pres. Obama's original birth certificate.

So....how can Fukito have examined a document in 2008 that was discarded in 2001?

UPDATE: "Vital records (birth, death, marriage, and divorce certificates) for events that occurred in Hawaii are received and preserved by the Office of Health Status Monitoring, a unit of the Department of Health. Certified copies of these records may be issued to authorized individuals and used for such diverse purposes as school entry, passports, Social Security participation, driver’s licenses, employment, sports participation, survivor’s benefits, proof of property rights, and other needs."

1. Someone should tell the webmaster over in Hawaii to change that language about preserving the certificates. All the paper has been discarded when they went digital in 2001.

2. How can the Department issue a certified copy of a certificate that was discarded in 2001?

Townhall meeting erupts over Obama birth certificate

Rep. Mike Castle's town hall meeting erupted over the Obama birth certificate scandal:



Meanwhile people are starting to clue in that the first Executive Order Obama signed was to suppress release of his birth certificate. Probably a smart thing since Obama can't remember which hospital he was born in. Hmmm, was it Kapiolani? Or Queen's Medical? No matter, career soldiers are balking at deployment because they are charging he is usurper. Where will it end? The illegitimacy of his presidency seems to be gathering steam even as his poll numbers plummet.

Rethinking the Obama handshake snub

I posted a video that showed Obama extending his hand and in turn the line of men at the diplomatic function not shaking it. For all the world it looked like the Russians are snubbing him. That is what I, and most of the blogging world, thought.

Then I posted an entry describing my education regarding the depth of racial tension in Russia between whites and blacks. I thought maybe racial hatred could be the reason for the snub.

In looking at the video again from a different angle I think no such snub occurred. Sure, the Russians are suspicious of excessive adoration of new leaders proposing fascistic solutions. Sure they want to tightly control the crowds and disallowed the usual rock star raves at his entry and departure. But an outright snub? Look again, this time with the thought that he is introducing Medveded to his own entourage:



Therefore, this series of entries is called "evolution of a thought."

Russians reject Obama, snub shaking hands

Of course, this was not reported in America. The refusal to welcome Obama in the traditional manner was obviously deliberate, because they ALL refused Obama but they ALL shook Medvedev's hand, who was right behind Obama. Obama was visibly upset at the snub. A unified refusal to shake hands in diplomatic world is a huge signal. Just why the Russians were upset is to be determined...time will tell.

Obama eligibility case will be heard on merits

Dr. Orly Taitz was successful in getting heard. A justice in the US District Court in Santa Ana, CA heard the Obama eligibility case brought forward today and agreed it has merit. Today on her blog Dr. Orly said the following, that Judge Carter stated:

1. There will be a trial.
2. It will be heard on the merits.
3. Nothing will be dismissed on procedural issues.
4. The trial will be expeditious, and the judge pledged to give case priority.
5. Being a former Marine he realizes the importance of having a Constitutionally qualified POTUS/CIC.
6. Judge stated that if Obama isn’t Constitutionally qualified he needs to leave the White House.

Dr. Taitz was on the radio earlier this evening and confirmed the above. She also said that an LA Times reporter interviewed her for an hour and that an article will be appearing Tuesday or Wednesday (depending on how quickly they get the other side to comment). She has also been contacted by a mainstream radio personality for an interview.

The US Attorneys will be given time to formulate their research and to respond. Dr. Taitz said that it will likely be September when the docket is confirmed.

On June 26, 1998: Judge DAVID O. CARTER was appointed by the President to serve as a United States District Court Judge for the Central District of California. Judge Carter, of Laguna Beach, California, received his undergraduate degree in 1967, and his law degree in 1972, from the University of California at Los Angeles. Judge Carter served in the United States Marine Corps from 1967 to 1969, when he was honorably retired as a result of wounds received during service in Vietnam. Following law school, he served as an Assistant District Attorney for the Orange County District Attorney's Office from 1972 to 1981; and as a Municipal Court Judge on the Orange County Municipal Court from 1981 to 1982. Since 1982, Judge Carter has served as a Superior Court Judge on the Orange County Superior Court.

WND has an article tonight: here

Meanwhile, no rest for the weary, Dr. Orly will fly to Georgia on behalf of a case she is bringing for a soldier about to be deployed to Afghanistan, who claims that his deployment would not be legal if Obama is not Commander in Chief.

From Obama evil eye to Obama evil eye UPDATED

A few days ago we had this:
"Beware the Obama Evil Eye"














Now we have another evil eye: at the G8 no less. Looks like Sarkozy is gleefully enjoying Obama's faux pas.













Am I the only one embarrassed by this man?

Update: today it is revealed that the girl being lasciviously ogled by the Letch-in-Chief is only 16 years old. Gross. And double gross.

Robama preferable to Obama but in the end I want Nobama

Creepily lifelike. I remember the clunky Abe Lincoln from the Hall of Presidents from the 70s, lol, they have come a long way, But it's SO lifelike it is ... weird.

Well, alrighty, then

In a sobering holiday interview with C-SPAN, President Obama boldly told Americans: "We are out of money."

C-SPAN host Steve Scully broke from a meek Washington press corps with probing questions for the new president.

SCULLY: You know the numbers, $1.7 trillion debt, a national deficit of $11 trillion. At what point do we run out of money?

OBAMA: Well, we are out of money now.
full interview here. Start at 13.20 for this piece

-------------------------------
Well, the First World was fun.

The face of pure hatred

See the look on Obama's face. What does it say to YOU?


Senator Gregg Statement on His Withdrawal for Consideration of U.S. Commerce Secretary

Sen. Gregg stated, “I want to thank the President for nominating me to serve in his Cabinet as Secretary of Commerce. This was a great honor, and I had felt that I could bring some views and ideas that would assist him in governing during this difficult time. I especially admire his willingness to reach across the aisle.

“However, it has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me. Prior to accepting this post, we had discussed these and other potential differences, but unfortunately we did not adequately focus on these concerns. We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy.

“Obviously the President requires a team that is fully supportive of all his initiatives.

“I greatly admire President Obama and know our country will benefit from his leadership, but at this time I must withdraw my name from consideration for this position.

“As we move forward, I expect there will be many issues and initiatives where I can and will work to assure the success of the President’s proposals. This will certainly be a goal of mine.

“Kathy and I also want to specifically thank Governor Lynch and Bonnie Newman for their friendship and assistance during this period. In addition we wish to thank all the people, especially in New Hampshire, who have been so kind and generous in their supportive comments.

“As a further matter of clarification, nothing about the vetting process played any role in this decision. I will continue to represent the people of New Hampshire in the United States Senate.”

Ouch! Hill spurns Bill for Obama

Bill swoops in, all puckered up, and at the last second Hillary spurns Bill's kiss for...Obama! Li'l luv triangle would be cute if it wasn't so gross.

Even ABC News says TOO EXPENSIVE

Obama is a hypocrite. His hype: "With billions of people living on just dollars a day around the world, global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges and tragedies the international community faces," Obama said.

His reality: "The country is in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, which isn't stopping rich donors and the government from spending $170 million, or more, on the inauguration of Barack Obama."

His hype: "It must be a priority of American foreign policy to commit to eliminating extreme poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter, and clean drinking water. As we strive to rebuild America's standing in the world, this important bill will demonstrate our promise and commitment to those in the developing world."

His reality: "They are not the $20 and $50 donors who helped propel Obama through Election Day," said Massie Ritsch, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics. "These are people giving mostly $50,000 apiece. They tend to be corporate executives, celebrities, the elite of the elite."

His hype: "It matters little if you have the right to sit at the front of the bus if you can’t afford the bus fare; it matters little if you have the right to sit at the lunch counter if you can’t afford the lunch."

His reality: Obama's Inauguration has been financed partially by bailed-out Wall Street Executives

37.3 million Americans were living in poverty in 2007 and that number is much higher now. The country lost 21,000 jobs in one day. "Among the inaugural expenses: a Bruce Springsteen concert, the parade, large-screen TV rentals for all-free viewing on the national Mall, $700,000 to the Smithsonian Institution to stay open and, of course, the balls, including three that are being pitched as free or low cost for the public.

Meanwhile, back at the reality ranch, How much rice does it take to feed a person for a day?
In countries where rice is a staple part of the diet, WFP provides, on average, about 400 grams of rice per person, per day. That is intended for two meals that include other ingredients to ensure a minimum of 2,100 kilocalories per day. There are about 48 grains of rice in a gram. How many grams of rice would 165 million inaugural dollars buy? A LOT.

As the 'elite of the elite' dance the night away, and the bills for this expensive party come rolling in, think about how many grains of rice that party money could buy. Think about a president who ran on a platform of vowing to eradicate the tragedy of world poverty, yet is happily throwing the biggest and most expensive inaugural party of all time.



ABC NEWS: What Recession? The $170 Million Inauguration

more at the link. Much more. If you dare.