If you are a fan of President Obama, you probably should not read this. I have never thought well of the
man, as my website attests. On the basis of his misrepresentations of the US Constitution in his book,
“The Audacity of Hope” (New York, Three River Press, 2006) and his platform of the Marxist ideals of
change and political consensus, I called him a Marxist before his election. (See No. 12, "God Help Us,
The Man Is A Marxist.")

After Obama's election, because he spoke repeatedly of the "Holy" Koran and the (no adjective) Bible
and he mocked and misrepresented the Bible in a speech, I accused him of being a closet Muslim
masquerading as a Christian. (See No. 107, "The Koran And The Antichrist" and No. 108, "Slavery,
Shellfish, Stoning and Swords; A Reply To Barack Obama.")

I am no friend to Barack Obama. This week I wrote that I believe that Barack Obama has an agenda which
is destructive to America. This article explains how I came to that conclusion.

First and foremost, I don't like the way Obama is treating our closest allies.

Take Britain for example. Here is a list of ten ways Obama has damaged the special relationship
American has historically had with Britian. (America's Founding Fathers were Englishmen before they
were Americans, our laws and culture are greatly influenced by our English heritage.) The list was
prepared by Nile Gardiner, one of the Telegraph's US correspondents. A Washington-based foreign
affairs analyst and political commentator, Nile appears frequently on American and British television and
radio. I have commented on his list.

1. Siding with Argentina over the Falklands. (The Falkland Islands are an internally self-governing British
Overseas Territory, with the United Kingdom responsible for defence and foreign affairs. Argentina
claims them and invaded in 1982. The British defended the Falklands successfully. The Argentine claim
has been rejected by the islanders.)

2. Calling France America’s strongest ally. (Historically, this has been Britain.)

3. Downgrading the Special Relationship. (See comment on No. 9.)

4. Supporting a federal Europe and undercutting British sovereignty. (Obama's policy is to push Britain
to remain in the European Union.)

5. Betraying Britain to appease Moscow over the New START Treaty. (According to a Wikileaks document
the Obama Administration “secretly agreed to give the Russians sensitive information on Britain’s
nuclear deterrent to persuade them to sign a key treaty.”)

6. Placing a “boot on the throat” of BP. (Obama was perceived as harsh in his demands after the Gulf oil
spill from a British Petroleum deep well. BP stock fell sharply, hurting British retirees.)

7. Throwing Churchill out of the Oval Office. (One of Obama's first acts as President was to send a
bronze bust of Winston Churchill back to Britain.)

8. DVDs for the Prime Minister. (DVDs don't work in Great Britain.)

9. Insulting words from the State Department. (A senior state department official reportedly said,
"There's nothing special about Britain. You're just the same as 190 other countries in the world. You
shouldn't expect some special treatment.")

10. Undermining British influence in NATO. (The lead role has been given to France.)

Israel is another key American ally. Obama has offended Israel several times.

"A day before the arrival in Washington of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, Mr. Obama
declared that the prevailing borders before the 1967 Arab-Israeli war — adjusted to some degree to
account for Israeli settlements in the West Bank — should be the basis of a deal." (Mark Landler and
Steven Lee Myers, "Obama Sees ’67 Borders as Starting Point for Peace Deal," The New York Times,
May 19, 2011).

""The Israeli government immediately protested, saying that for Israel to return to its pre-1967 borders
would leave it “indefensible.” Mr. Netanyahu held an angry phone conversation with Secretary of State
Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday before the speech, officials said, in which he demanded that the
president’s reference to 1967 borders be cut."" (Ibid).  

A little history is revealing. Israel controlled the Gaza Strip from the Six-Day War in 1967 to 2005, when
they unilaterally withdrew. In January 2006, the terrorist organization Hamas took over 50% of the seats
in the Palestinian parliamentary elections. A small civil war ensued. By June, Hamas fully controlled the
Gaza Strip. Israeli sources say that by the end of January 2008, 697 rockets and 822 mortar bombs had
been fired at Israeli towns from the Hamas controlled Gaza Strip. (Gaza Strip, Wikipedia). This is hardly
the sort of experience that would recommend further ceding of territory.

Imagine how you would feel about a demand that the US give up Alaska and Hawaii. Israel is a theocracy,
a nation ruled by the Old Testament Law of God. Not only was this land promised to Israel by their God in
the Old Testament, it has been in their possession for almost 45 years and it is their
duty to keep it.
Added to that, giving up territory has aided terrorism and cost many Israeli lives.

Obama has also snubbed Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on several occasions because his
administration wants the Israelis to make a number concessions to appease the Arabs and bring them
back to the bargaining table. Particularly, Obama wants Israel to stop building in East Jerusalem, which
the Palestinians held prior to 1967.

At the G20 summit, Obama insulted Netanyahu, speaking into an open microphone. ""Mr. Obama, who
pointedly snubbed Mr. Netanyahu on his last visit to Washington, trumped the French president when
he replied: “You’re fed up, but I have to deal with him every day.”" (Paul Koring, "Worldview: Obama,
Sarkozy trade gripes about Netanyahu in open mic gaffe," The Globe and Mail, November 8, 2011).

Obama simply has no right to determine the internal policies of any other nation. By any measure, the
missiles that the Arabs keep lobbing into Israel are an act of war. Demanding that a nation cede territory
and sovereignty to aggressors is hardly the act of an ally.

Obama has offended Mexico.  

Operation Fast and Furious began in the fall of 2009 and continued into early 2011. During the operation,
the federal government allowed suspected gun smugglers to purchase guns at federally licensed
firearms dealers in Arizona. Over 2000 guns, including assault rifles were allowed to "walk."

A number of reasons for Fast and Furious have been given, building a case against "straw purchasers,"
who resell the guns to criminals is the main one. On the other hand, a Forbes contributor has set the
scandal in a political context that implicates Obama as the force behind the guns "walking" south.

""For political context we now need to step back to April 16, 2009 — four or five months before we think
Fast and Furious began. On this day President Barack Obama was visiting Mexico. While there he said,
“This war is being waged with guns purchased not here but in the United States … more than 90% of the
guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States, many from gun shops that lay in our shared
border"... (But) reporters determined that only 17% of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been
traced by the ATF to the U.S."

”Now, because President Obama used the made-up 90% figure to push political positions — he was
using the statistic to argue that the U.S. needs more gun-control laws — it’s difficult not to sniff politics
in what happened next.

"Later in 2009 the ATF started the Fast and Furious program by allowing firearms to be smuggled from U.
S. gun stores into the arsenals of Mexican criminal gangs. As these guns wouldn't be seen again until
they resurfaced in crimes (there were no tracking devices installed or other means to trace these
guns), the only purpose for letting these guns “walk” seems to be to back up the president’s position
that guns used in Mexican crimes mostly come from the U.S. Also, given the cover up that has ensued
since Fast and Furious broke, it doesn't seem like a conspiratorial leap to conclude that politics mixed
with policy to create this crazy program." (Frank Miniter, ""Fast And Furious" Just Might Be President
Obama's Watergate," Forbes, Sept. 28, 2011). Frank Miniter also has written the books; "Saving the Bill
of Rights" and "The Ultimate Man’s Survival Guide."

By any measurement an operation that arms one's enemies is a "crazy program." And if Obama started
this program (which his administration denies), whatever his reason, it is clear that he did not concern
himself with the safety of our Mexican allies. They are justifiably outraged.

The only American ally that Obama actually seems to get along with is Canada, although Obama is
currently engaged in a controversy with Prime Minister Stephen Harper over when and if the Keystone
XL oilsands pipeline will be built from Alberta, Canada to Steele City, Nebraska. The environmental lobby
has been very vocal in its opposition to the project, giving Obama at least a good excuse for his policy.

"The Keystone XL issue has become a source of persistent friction between Harper and Obama over the
past year. But that tension became more pronounced last month when the U.S. announced it would
delay a final ruling on whether the project could proceed until after the 2012 presidential elections."
(Sheldon Alberts, Postmedia News, "U.S. to conduct 'very rigorous process' before ruling on pipeline,
Obama tells Harper,", December 7, 2011).

I also fault Obama for running up the National Debt, creating a situation which threatens America's
future as a super power. When President Obama took office the National Debt was $10.626 trillion. Now it
is over $15 trillion, and it has exceeded 100% of the GDP. When National Debts exceed 90% of GDP they
depress a country's economy. (See No. 140, "The Debt Dilemma" for details.)  

I will admit that Obama had the help of Congress in running up this level of debt, but I believe that he
shows a lamentable lack of leadership. Here are some examples.

Obama has both continued the Bush tax cuts and followed a policy of stimulus spending to improve the
economy. Neither of these approaches work, because these days the rich are investing overseas and
because America has lost a great deal of her industrial base to China. Not only do tax cuts and stimulus
spending no longer work, Obama is ignoring proof that they do not work, and he's still lying to the
American people about the benefits of stimulus spending. (For the numbers, see No. 132, "Jobs And
Failed Policy.")

And then there is Goldman Sachs and the rest of the fraudsters. Despite rampant misrepresentation of
securities, Obama never called for indictments. No one did.

I realize that this is because the untraceable bribe has been perfected. The results are found in the
stock portfolios of Congressmen, who are apparently handling their investments on the basis of a
whisper here and a warning there.

""Four university researchers examined 16,000 common stock transactions made by approximately 300
House representatives from 1985 to 2001, and found what they call "significant positive abnormal
returns," with portfolios based on congressional trades beating the market by about 6 percent annually...
The report speculates, but does not conclude, it could have something to do with the ability members of
Congress have to trade on non-public information... A study of senators by the same team of
researchers five years ago found members of the higher chamber even better at beating the market --
outperforming it by about 10 percent, an amount the academics said was "both economically large and
statistically significant." (Dan Froomkin, "Members of Congress Get Abnormally High Returns From Their
Stocks," The Huffington Post, May 25, 11). Dan Froomkin is senior Washington correspondent for The
Huffington Post.

"The study found some significant difference based on party membership and seniority, with the
Democratic sample beating the market by nearly 9% annually, versus only about 2% annually for the
Republican sample. And representatives with the least seniority considerably outperformed those with
more seniority... The researchers suspect need had something to do with it." (Ibid).

How lucrative is the 6% or 10% edge? I found a calculation in another article based on a 6.6% edge. Like
compound interest, over the years, it really adds up.

"So how lucrative can the 6.6 percent advantage be for Senators and Representatives? A portfolio of
$100,000 getting average stock market returns of 11 percent over a 17 year period would have grown to
$589,000. If you were a member of the United States House of Representatives, though, enjoying the
advantage that inside government information can bring you, your portfolio would have reached
$1,573,000." (John Ransom, "How to Go to Congress and Become a Millionaire,", May 26,

Getting back to Goldman Sachs and the other fraudsters, now you understand why they are not in jail.
Nobody kills the goose that lays the golden nest eggs.

The crisis in America calls for leadership, since taking office Obama has let things get worse instead.
There is no question that the Obama agenda is bad for America. The only question that I have: Did
Obama plan it that way?

Amo Paul Bishop Roden