Barack Obama’s Flim-Flam “Stimulus” Scam

We are going to continue our discussion of the Barack Obama flim-flam-“stimulus”-plan today.

We are tempted to address Hypocrite Obama signing onto pay equity for women now but not practicing pay equity in his own campaign and Senate office; Hypocrite Republicans complaining about what they defended during the George W. Bush years; Hypocrite Obama supporters complaining that Obama is doing stupid “unity” nonsense which they defended during the campaign and attacked “celestial choirs” Hillary Clinton for mocking; Hypocrite Democrats complaining about the looted economy during the Bush years but now looting the economy themselves; Hypocrite Obama officials threatening Republicans who “must” cooperate whether they want to or not; Hypocrite Obama hiring lobbyists; Hypocrite Obama supporters defending Hypocrite Obama hiring lobbyists; and last but not least, Hypocrite Illinois politicians removing Governor Blagojevich for the very corruption they themselves engage in.

We’ll resist the temptation to rail against the hypocrites and persist with our dissection of the Obama flim-flam-“stimulus”-plan.

* * *

Barack Obama is the Third Bush Term. Same tactics, same results: Demonize opponents in order to rush through a scam. Garbage in, garbage out.

The $825 billion plan to pick up the U.S. economy and revise how issues are considered in the future should be split, a former budget director says. [snip]

In testimony before the House Budget Committee Tuesday, Alice Rivlin, budget director for former President Bill Clinton, suggested lawmakers implement the stimulus section now and take a slower approach to build the longer-term spending components.

Such a long-term investment program should not be put together hastily and lumped in with the anti-recession package,” Rivlin testified.

A respected and competent Democrat, Alice Rivlin is sending out as polite a warning to thinking progressives and fellow Democrats as possible. It is not easy for Democrats to speak out about Barack Obama’s biggest scam. But Alice Rivlin has taken out the red flag and is waving it, politely, for all to see.

Smart Democrat Alice Rivlin has some understanding of the mess which is Obama’s Flim-Flam “Stimulus” Scam:

Republican criticism of the stimulus package that the House will vote on tonight has focused on its soaring price tag, but some Democrats on Capitol Hill and other administration supporters are voicing a separate critique: that the plan may fall short in its broader goal of transforming the American economy over the long term.

President Obama, who promoted the $825 billion package at the Capitol yesterday, says the proposal serves two functions — creating jobs and stimulating the economy in the short term, and laying the groundwork for overhauls in energy, health care and infrastructure that would be felt for decades. But some administration supporters say that while they appreciate Obama’s intent, the two goals are competing with each other, and that the package could end up missing both targets.

Wake up real Democrats and Real Progressives! It’s not Rush Limbaugh vs. Obama – it’s Real Democrats who want to protect Social Security and secure the economy vs. Barack Obama and his flim-flam “stimulus” scam.

In testimony before the House Budget Committee yesterday, Alice M. Rivlin, who was President Bill Clinton’s budget director, suggested splitting the plan, implementing its immediate stimulus components now and taking more time to plan the longer-term transformative spending to make sure it is done right.

Such a long-term investment program should not be put together hastily and lumped in with the anti-recession package. The elements of the investment program must be carefully planned and will not create many jobs right away,” said Rivlin, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. The risk, she said, is that “money will be wasted because the investment elements were not carefully crafted.”

For some House Democrats, the problem is less a matter of balancing the short and long term than a shortage of focus and will on the part of the administration. Their disappointment centers on the relatively small amount devoted to long-lasting infrastructure investments in favor of spending on a long list of government programs. While each serves a purpose, the critics say, they add up to less than the sum of their parts, and fall far short of the transformative New Deal-like vision many of them had entertained.

It will take a lot of courage for the emerging NObama coalition to speak up and vote against the Hopium addled and other Social Security looters. Barack Obama and his crimelords are attacking the elderly and the young. The elderly Obama will target with inflation and an attack on Social Security, the young Obama will attack with a debt they will inherit.

Every penny of the $825 billion is borrowed against the future of our kids and grandkids, and so the question is: What benefit are we providing them? What are we doing for the country? It’s the difference between real investment that will serve the nation for 30, 50 years and tax cuts, and that’s a very poor tradeoff,” said Rep. Peter A. DeFazio (D-Ore.). “I go to my district and people say, ‘Yeah, I can use 10 extra bucks a week, but I would rather see more substantial investment.’ We’ve gone through a couple bubbles that were borrowing and consumer-driven. We want a recovery that’s solid and based in investment and productivity, and that points us at building things that will serve us decades to come.”

This is not a “stimulus” bill. It is a political money waste designed to influence the 2010 elections.

Republican John L. Mica of Florida laughs at Obama’s flim-flammery: “They keep comparing this to Eisenhower, but he proposed a $500 billion highway system, and they’re going to put $30 billion” in roads and bridges, he said.How farcical can you be? Give me a break.”

This is not a “stimulus” bill. It is a political money waste designed to influence the 2010 elections. Long-term, well thought out programs will take time to plan for, design, and implement. Well thought out plans will take too long to have a dramatic impact on the economy by 2010. So Obama wants to drench the economy with dollars immediately, knowing full well the money is going down a rat hole and will later bring an ugly inflation – but for Obama politics comes first.

Real Democrats and Real Progressives must know that after wasting trillions, resistance will grow to doing what actually needs to be done. “After this initial rush . . . a lot of people are going to begin to wonder about whether we’re pushing the limits of our borrowing capacity here, and I’m afraid that when it comes time to do more robust investment . . . it will be ‘pay as you go,’ ” DeFazio said.

Energy experts are also weighing in on the trumpted energy programs. But they, too, worry that spending rapidly in search of a stimulative effect — and without sufficiently educating consumers — could keep the technology from meeting its full potential.

Republican Representative Ron Paul is usually someone we don’t pay attention to or heed. But Ron Paul has been around and he sees the old Chicago Razzle Dazzle and the old Bush Bushwa:

This week the House passed an $819 billion economic stimulus package. In reality, this bill is just an escalation of a government-created economic mess. As before, a sense of urgency and impending doom is being used to extract mountains of money from Congress with minimal debate. So much for change. This is déjà vu. We are again being promised that its passage will help employment, help homeowners, help the environment, etc. These promises are worthless. This time around especially, Congress should know better than to pass anything of this magnitude without first reading the fine print. There are many red flags that I have found in this bill.

Ron Paul has a list of questionable appropriations (“expanding the police state and the war on drugs“) that bear examination. The request for examination of appropriations is reasonable and usually considered a congressional responsiblity.

The Rivlin and Paul warnings are not unreasonable. The Razzle Dazzle Rush Rush is a flim-flam man’s favorite tool to part a fool from his or her money.

Imagine that. The most expensive social experiment in American history — one that will cost taxpayers more than both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined — was allotted less then a single day of debate in Congress.

How many speed-reading whiz kid representatives do you think slogged past their own pork to read the entire 647, or so, pages of the “stimulus” menu? [snip]

According to a new Rasmussen poll, 42 percent of the nation’s likely voters support the president’s plan, while 39 oppose it and 19 are undecided. The public’s support for the plan is down 3 points in a week — and this, without even having any time to chew on the specifics. Obviously, there is no time to waste.

George W. Bush engaged in the similar scare game when pushing through his $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. But whereas Bush looked like a third-grader asking mom for an advance on his allowance, Obama has awe-inspiring confidence to pretend he actually can fix a recession.

Something is being fixed, but it’s not the economy.

The nation’s budget deficit will soar to an unprecedented $1.2 trillion this year, congressional budget analysts said yesterday, a startling tide of red ink that could dampen enthusiasm on Capitol Hill for some of President-elect Barack Obama’s most ambitious priorities.

In the first official estimate of the damage done to the nation’s finances by a weakening economy and various financial-sector bailouts, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported that the gap between government spending and available revenue will exceed 8 percent of the overall economy by the end of September, a chasm not seen since the end of World War II.

The news drew a grim reaction from Congress, where the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), called the figure “jaw-dropping.” While lawmakers said they expect to dig this year’s hole even deeper by approving a massive stimulus package aimed at pulling the nation out of recession, Conrad and his House counterpart, Rep. John M. Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.), said they have warned Obama to limit the package to temporary measures that will not add to the deficit in future years.

Again, the polite red warning flags are waved by those who fear Obama. The dangers in the Barack Obama flim-flam “stimulus” bill are real. Shouting down gasbags like Rush Limbaugh and Hypocrite Republicans who cheered George W. Bush’s irresponsibilities is a distraction meant to rally thinking Democrats and thinking progressives from actually thinking about the dangers of this mess of a flim-flam “stimulus” bill.

The two Democratic budget leaders also cautioned Obama to find ways to pay for any other initiatives he pursues after taking office later this month, including expensive promises to expand access to health care for the uninsured, develop new sources of alternative energy and offer a bevy of new tax cuts to middle-class families.

“We should be very skeptical about any policy changes that add to the deficit and the debt that are permanent in nature,” Conrad said told reporters. “It is a mistake to do things that add to the deficit and debt beyond the period for economic recovery.”

Real Democrats and Real Progressives should keep first principles in mind:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Obama cannot be trusted and his target, like George W. Bush’s is Social Security:

Obama once again declined to say how he plans to eliminate the growing budget gap, which is projected to narrow somewhat as the economy improves but explode again as the retiring baby boom generation sends the cost of the entitlement programs — Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare — skyrocketing. Obama said he will offer “very specific outlines” for addressing short- and long-term deficits when he submits his first budget proposal to Congress next month.

“We are beginning consultations with members of Congress around how we expect to approach the deficit,” Obama said. “We expect that discussion around entitlements will be a part, a central part, of those plans.”

So far, however, Conrad said Obama’s team has been cool to requests to establish a bipartisan task force that would reexamine the entitlement programs, as well as the nation’s tax system, and develop a long-term plan for bringing costs and revenue in line.

Real Progressives and Real Democrats must wake up and realize Obama cannot be trusted. Obama is planning a great betrayal Social Security Treacherythat is why Obama wants to rush through this ill-conceived flim-flam “stimuls” plan before he reveals his treacheries. Universal Health-care is already betrayed (as Jim Clyburn revealed) Social Security is next.

The treachery will be masked as “necessary” by flim-flam man Obama in order to benefit his donors and Chicago crime lords:

Meanwhile, Spratt said Obama’s team is pressing for a new tax cut for working families in the stimulus package that would be made permanent in Obama’s first budget.

I keep telling them to defer judgment: Don’t do anything permanent now,” Spratt said. Otherwise, “how do you get rid of a deficit of this magnitude?”

Spratt said he got “sticker shock” when he opened yesterday’s CBO report.

The picture it paints is bleak: The CBO predicts that the recession that began in December 2007 will extend well into this year, driving unemployment to more than 9 percent by early 2010. (The unemployment rate is currently 6.7 percent.) Plummeting home prices, which touched off the panic in financial markets last year, are likely to fall another 14 percent by 2010, and foreclosure rates are likely to remain high. As a result, federal tax collections are expected to drop by $166 billion this year.

Government spending, meanwhile, is expected to skyrocket to nearly 25 percent of the economy, the report says, “a level exceeded only during the later years of World War II.” One of the biggest expenses will be the estimated $240 billion to incorporate mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into the federal budget. The twin firms were taken over by the government in September.

There is only one place to get money: Social Security.

The scam called TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program) which bailed out the gamblers is costing American taxpayers $700 billion. Those costs, combined with falling tax collections, are expected to drive the deficit to $1.2 trillion this year, or 8.3 percent of the overall economy — the largest budget gap as a percentage of gross domestic product since 1945. Next year’s deficit is projected to drop to 4.9 percent of the economy, or $703 billion.

But the worse is yet to come. Both figures substantially understate the problem, however. If Congress approves Obama’s request for nearly $800 billion in spending and tax cuts, this year’s deficit could easily soar to $1.6 trillion.

This year’s budget deficit can easily top $1.6 trillion. Obama sees trillion dollar deficits in the future too. The money will come from Social Security.

Even if the package of spending and tax cuts helps restore the nation’s immediate economic health, Obama said, the government is likely to be left with “trillion-dollar deficits for years to come” unless policymakers “make a change in the way that Washington does business.”

“We’re going to have to stop talking about budget reform. We’re going to have to totally embrace it. It’s an absolute necessity,” the president-elect told reporters a day before the Congressional Budget Office is set to release its outlook for the coming year.

Obama faces the twin challenges of managing the deficit, the annual gap between tax revenues and spending, and the swelling national debt, the amount of money that the government has borrowed to finance years of deficits. His task is made all the more difficult because new spending is widely viewed as the best way to pull the nation out of the recession. While Obama has declined to say how he intends to deal with such challenges, an economic adviser said yesterday that the president-elect plans to unveil “major initiatives” designed to eventually bring the deficit under control as part of his first budget proposal, which he will submit to Congress next month.

That is as clear as flim-flam man Obama ever speaks. Trillions in budget deficits will be spent this year, which adds to the national debt, and trillions more in budget deficits will be spent in years ahead. Obama also says he will submit a plan, after the flim-flam “stimulus” is passed – “major initiatives” designed to eventually bring the deficit under control. In other words, loot Social Security.

Republicans, ever eager to destroy Social Security will assist Obama. That is why Obama is courting Republicans.

Real Democrats and Real Progressives must wake up and oppose Barack Obama’s Flim-Flam “Stimulus” Scam.


The Emerging Coalition Against Barack Obama’s Flim-Flam Stimulus Bill

There is an emerging coalition (first mentioned HERE) against the Barack Obama flim-flam stimulus bill. This emerging coalition has had one significant victory already. Don’t forget these numbers: 270-155 and 244-199 (we’ll explain below). Tonight the House of Representatives will have the first of several key votes. Meanwhile real Democrats and real progressives who oppose Barack Obama’s flim-flam stimulus bill are falling into a trap.

Today we discuss further the emerging coalition against Barack Obama’s flim-flam stimulus bill and the significant victory already achieved by that coalition. We’ll also discuss the trap real Democrats and real progressives are falling into. But first we will provide a glimpse of our future discussions against the Barack Obama flim-flam stimulus bill.

* * *

We believe that history is a teacher. We also believe that when analyzing policy we should look to first principles. We further believe that when analyzing a Barack Obama proposal we should look to first principles.

First Principles about Barack Obama and any Barack Obama proposal:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

This “Obama can’t be trusted” principle when ignored leads to traps. Many real Democrats and real progressives are falling into an Obama trap when discussing the flim-flam “stimulus” bill.

The Obama trap is to get us to argue and debate the details of his flim-flammery instead of focusing on the fact that the whole concept and execution is a flim-flam. Real Democrats and real progressives are falling into a trap when they object to the “shiny objects” such as the contraception sub-flim-flam for instance, and forget first principles.

The trap is prolonged discussion of the obvious failure of the Obama post-partisan nonsense as well as prolonged discussion of specific items in the Obam flim-flam “stimulus” bill. Obama wants to distract us with discussions of his meetings with Republicans and what the Republicans say or want and how the Republicans will or will not vote for the flim-flammery. Obama wants to distrct us with discussions of who is getting what – that is why Obama and his flim-flammers will have a website wherein a zipcode can be entered and all the money that zip code area will receive is detailed. Obama wants to shift the argument from the wisdom of the “stimulus” bill, to “what am I gonna get?”. It’s a flim-flam and we should not fall into the trap.

We’ll discuss the nuts and bolts problems with the Barack Obama flim-flam stimulus bill in days to come as the pivotal votes in the U.S. Senate approach. For now, there are certain economic first principles we are looking at.

We accept, as should all or most common sense Americans, that the proper response by government to recessions is cuts in interest rates, increased spending and possibly tax cuts. Interest rates are so low at the moment that they are irrelevant to the discussion. Tax cuts are a dubious tool. We are left with increased government spending as the logical tool to soften recession.

Notice, we wrote “soften” recession, not end recession. Recessions are part of the economic cycle. Recessions are painful. But recessions are useful.

Recessions are part of the economic cycle. Our lives have cycles. Our lives are not always rosy. It is during the downturns in our lives that we learn. It is during the downturns in our lives that we resolve to do this or that, or never again do this or that. We learn the most during the downturns in our lives.

In the downturn phase of the economic cycle – recession – we also learn a great deal. We learn what economic practices we need and which economic practices we don’t need. In our personal economic lives, we learn what services we need as opposed to what services we want, as well as what products we need as opposed to what products we merely want. In downturns we re-learn that nutricious food we need, expensive chocolates we merely want.

During recessions therefore the economy discards companies and investments that are not profitable. Well run business which provide good products or services survive the economic downturns. These “creative destruction” principles of capitalism were described by Joseph Schumpeter.

As stated earlier, we will discuss recessions and “creative destruction” in future articles in opposition to the Barack Obama flim-flam stimulus bill. We’ll discuss Alice Rivlin. We’ll discuss the first principles danger of inflation when trillions of dollars are dumped into an economy. We’ll discuss the weakened dollar if the flim-flam stimulus bill passes.

Today, we want to discuss the emerging coalition and a big victory which was achieved but rarely discussed because too many are falling into the Obama -focus on the shiny object – trap.

* * *

The Barack Obama flim-flam “stimulus” bill will get the first of several key votes tonight in the House of Representatives. The Barack Obama flim-flam “stimulus” bill will get a vote because House Dimocrats have dumped “pay as you go” rules for spending. But there is a big victory on the pay-as-you-go economic responsibility doctrine which will in future impair Barack Obama’s flim-flams and hare-brained schemes:

House Democrats won a key procedural vote Tuesday on the stimulus after a last-minute promise from the Obama administration to return to “pay-as-you-go” budget rules after the stimulus is approved.

In a 224-199 vote, the House approved a resolution allowing the stimulus bill to come to the floor for debate. Twenty-seven Democrats – 24 of them members of the conservative Blue Dog Coalition – bucked their leadership and voted against the measure.

The vote of 224-199 is impressive. Remember that other number – 270-155 (we wrote about it HERE)? That was the vote total when the House rejected the Obama TARP crap. We wrote at the time: Consider: the bailout bill was the #1 priority of Barack Obama and Obama lobbied relentlessly for the money and yet the House of Representatives with all those newly elected Democrats overwhelmingly told Obama to shove… er… off.

The latest vote of 224-199 is yet another big slap at Obama’s face from the House of Representatives and foreshadows future victory for the emerging NObama coalition:

But according to Democratic leadership sources, the number was almost much higher – and could have been high enough to hand the Republicans a monumental victory – had it not been for a letter from President Obama’s budget director Peter Orszag.

The letter addressed to House Appropriations Committee Chairman David promised to return to “pay-as-you-go budgeting,” and stressed that the stimulus was an “extraordinary response to an extraordinary process” and thus subject to different rules. [snip]

“Moving forward, we need to return to the fiscal responsibility and pay-as-you-go budgeting that we had in the 1990’s for all non-emergency measures,” Orszag continued. “The President and his economic team look forward to working with the Congress to develop budget enforcement rules that are based on the tools that helped create the surpluses of a decade ago.

Watch out emerging NObama coalition: Obama will promise to return to pay-as-you-go budgeting but his caveat is “for all non-emergency measures”. The Obama flim-flam will be to declare everything an emergency measure.

The Obama letter is a flim-flam but nevertheless a major victory for the Emerging NObama Coalition.

Though addressed to Obey, Democratic sources said copies of the letter were distributed in a last minute flurry to Blue Dogs, many of whom were already on the floor and ready to cast their votes. The centrist group already was ruffled by the fact the package included far more spending than Obama had called for, and were prepared to vote as a block against the resolution, Democratic sources said.

If eight more of the 52-member Blue Dogs had voted against the resolution, it would have been defeated, ending any hope that Democratic leaders had of passing – or even finishing debate on – the stimulus bill this week.

Blue Dog Co-Chair Charlie Melancon (D-La.) said sweet words but Barack Obama has to know that Melancon and others are aware of his flim-flammery.

“In his letter, Dr. Orszag’s reference to restoring the pay-as-you-go requirements we had in place in the 1990’s is a clear and direct signal that President Obama is willing to make the tough decisions necessary to put our country back on a path to fiscal responsibility,” Melancon said after voting for the resolution. “After years of reckless deficit spending, the members of the Blue Dog Coalition are very encouraged to see that our new administration is serious about bringing responsibility and accountability to the federal government.” [snip]

Many of them were weighing their consciences against a pledge they had received from Obama and their leaders in the House to enact statutory pay-go in the coming weeks and work toward a tangible entitlement and long-term spending and budgeting reform proposal.

But many, too, were aghast at some of the spending proposals that were added during House committee markups, including language to fund a re-sodding of the National Mall.

The emerging coalition against Barack Obama’s flim-flam stimulus bill must not get distracted. Real Democrats and real progressives must not get distracted.

Obama wants to get us all fighting against each other: ‘State X is getting more than State Z. This proposal is getting cut and that proposal is getting added – that’s not fair.” We will avoid these distractions.

The Barack Obama flim-flam “stimulus” bill is not an economic bill but rather a political bill designed to prevent Dimocratic election losses in 2010 – at the cost of huge yearly deficits, massive inflation, and a looting of the economy for Obama friends and donors.

The Barack Obama flim-flam “stimulus” bill is a make work bill, not a jobs bill.

The Barack Obama flim-flam “stimulus” bill has a strong possibility of passing but there is a slight chance to defeat it.

The defeat of the Barack Obama flim-flam “stimulus” bill will benefit the United States and weaken the flim-flam politics of Barack Obama.

The fight continues.


Breaking News: New Hillary Clinton Scandal Shakes State Department; Others Implicated

Update: Additional developments documented on Campbell Brown show tonight – see below. Developing…


Breaking News: Top aides to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are implicated in subpoena’s issued by a federal prosecutor in pay-to-play allegations about her former Senate seat!

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has previously discussed and commented on the pay-to-play allegations – but Secretary of State Hillary Clinton never revealed the subpoenaes from federal prosecutors about her top aides! The lack of transparency and candor from the Secretary of State have heightened already heightened suspicions. The top aides to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are long term operatives of the Clinton machine and have helped guide her career! Some of the top aides to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have previously been involved in troubling real estate deals.

The revelations about the subpoenas to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s are now commanding full coverage on all cable networks. MSNBC and CNN as well as all the major news networks have full teams staked out at the homes of not only Secretary of State Hillary Clinton but all her top aides as well.

The New York Times, USAToday and the Washington Post will devote their entire front pages to the scandal. The newspapers will also feature huge headlines on their front pages about the latest developments in a scandal which has also enveloped New York State Governor David Paterson. Governor Paterson is facing impeachment and removal from office.

The troubles of Governor Paterson however are merely a side issue of a scandal which threatens to bring down the Hillary Clinton headed State Department as well as her many friends throughtout the federal government.

Internet websites too, especially those focused on crime have ceased discussions about Sarah Palin’s mother-in-law and are now also writing exclusively about the Hillary Clinton scandal.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has held many news events recently but has been unable to escape the relentless questions regarding her lack of candor regarding the subpoenas of her top aides. The new Hillary Clinton scandal threatens to destroy the State Department and its mission in an especially perilous time for the United States and foreign policy.

News media analysts have stated that it is important to know whether the Secretary of State is a crook and therefore the round-the-clock investigations and reports on broadcast news outlets and print media are justified.

* * *

The above is just a mild example of what would have happened if the latest news was about Hillary Clinton. Instead the subpoena news is about Barack Obama and his Chicago thug machine.

Sweeping federal subpoenas of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s administration include requests for records involving David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett, senior advisers to President Barack Obama.

Among 43 subpoenas released by the Blagojevich administration Friday, one from Dec. 8 seeks notes, calendars, correspondence and any other data that relate to Axelrod, Jarrett and 32 other people and organizations.

[December 8, 2008] That was the day before the FBI arrested Blagojevich, a two-term Democrat, on charges that he tried to trade his appointment to replace Obama in the Senate for campaign contributions. Wiretapped conversations show Blagojevich thought Jarrett was interested in the seat and he wanted campaign money or a high-paying job in return, according to a sworn statement.

Obama’s staff released a report in December that said his staff had no inappropriate contact with the governor’s office about the Senate seat, nor was anyone aware of any dealmaking. Axelrod, a Chicago political strategist now in the White House, was not mentioned in the report.

The information regarding the subpoenas was obtained because of a Freedom of Information Act request.

The 43 subpoenas released Friday under the Freedom of Information Act, plus seven previously disclosed, cut a wide swath through the beleaguered administration, demanding everything from complex hiring records to Patricia Blagojevich’s appointment calendar. [snip]

The Better Government Association, a Chicago-based public watchdog group, fought a two-year lawsuit over release of the subpoenas, which it won late last month when Blagojevich’s office turned over five subpoenas BGA sought under FOIA. [snip]

The government also has demanded information on Blagojevich appointments to boards and commissions and documents that show “favors, official action or any other benefit” promised to people who were potential donors and records related to anyone who contributed $25,000 or more to his campaign.

The subpoenas sought information on, among others, Antoin “Tony” Rezko, Valerie Jarrett (Valerie Jarett real estate deals information HERE), David Axelrod, the Service Employees International Union, Tom Balanoff, SEIU Illinois president, and Change to Win, an SEIU-affiliated activist group.

Prosecutor Fitzgerald is casting a wide net:

“It’s clearly beyond matters in the criminal complaint, which was sweeping in its own right,” said Jay Stewart, executive director of the Better Government Association, whose legal fight forced Blagojevich to make the subpoenas public late Friday. “It demonstrates the feds have been looking for a long time. And, up to a relatively recent time, they’ve been gathering more information.”

Blagojevich and the Obama thug machine should be investigated.

As Campbell Brown said today, Blagojevich was the first Governor to endorse Barack Obama. Note, Blagojevich also stated on the Campbell Brown program tonight that Obama made recommendations to him regarding appointments which Blagojevich complied with “every single one”.

Investigate, investigate:

At the same time, Blagojevich said “some national figures like Harry Reid,” the U.S. Senate majority leader from Nevada, “are frankly covering their own backside” by asking him to step down because of their discussions with him over the Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama. Blagojevich is accused of trying to peddle the seat for an Obama administration post, a high-paying job or other favors.

“And for me to just quit because some cackling politicians want to get me out of the way because there’s a whole bunch of things they don’t want known about them and conversations they may have had with me ….. would be to disgrace my children when I know I’ve done nothing wrong,” Blagojevich said in a transcript of the interview.

Blagojevich also maintained that some of the state senators who will decide his political fate don’t want him to present defense witnesses.

“Let me say there are some of those that are sitting in on judgment of me on Monday in the state Senate that were on telephone calls with me during that period of time” when his phones were tapped, Blagojevich said.

Blagojevich, said (on Campbell Brown this evening) that he as a new governor he Obeyed Obama’s possibly corrupt will when it came to appointments. Investigate, investigate, investigate:

And he went so far as to pressure President Barack Obama by demanding he be allowed to call the president’s political operatives as witnesses, which the legislature has denied him as per the request of U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald, so as not to damage the pending criminal case against the governor.

And the politicians, dropping enough hints about the road builders and so on to let them know he’s now dangerous and about to go nuclear.

These are not the calculations of a madman, but a governor hinting at the corruption of his fellows, and for this they call him cuckoo. [snip]

Sure, they’ll hang him, and cut off his political head and pour holy water down his neck. That’s a given. His fellow Democrats want him gone.

He exposed the plan of the Senate to remove him and install Lt. Gov. Patrick Quinn, who will preside over a whopping income tax increase backed by House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Lisa), so Madigan’s daughter, Atty. Gen. Lisa Madigan, can replace Quinn as governor and have all the state treasure she needs to maintain power.

Blagojevich might sing. Sing, Blago, Sing:

He stayed on message, that he’s the innocent victim. He also lobbed a few warning shots toward the Obama White House, saying he could prove his innocence, if only the Illinois Senate would allow him the right to question the president’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, about discussions concerning appointments for Obama’s old Senate seat. [snip]

On “The View” he issued a threat to his estranged father-in-law, Ald. Dick Mell (33rd), the man who made him. The governor said his political problems began after he blocked an illegal landfill supported by Mell. That may have slipped past all the pretend Chicago political experts, but it didn’t slip past Chicago politicians. They know a threat when they hear it.

On page 14 (of 647 pages) of the “stimulus bill” Governor Blagojevich is mentioned:

SEC. 1112. ADDITIONAL ASSURANCE OF APPROPRIATE USE 2 OF FUNDS. -None of the funds provided by this Act may be made available to the State of Illinois, or any agency of the State, unless (1) the use of such funds by the State is approved in legislation enacted by the State after the date of the enactment of this Act, or (2) Rod R. Blagojevich no longer holds the office of Governor of the State of Illinois. The preceding sentence shall not apply to any funds provided directly to a unit of local government (1) by a Federal department or agency, or (2) by an established formula from the State.

Corrupt Blagojevich is being threatened by other corrupt officials. Blagojevich can fight back. Blagojevich can sing.

Antoin “Tony” Rezko once accused federal prosecutors of trying to get him to spill the beans on Blagojevich and Barack Obama. Rezko stated he would never cooperate with the prosecutors. Rezko is now cooperating with the prosecutors.

Rezko is singing.

Blagojevich can fight back. Blagojevich can sing.

Sing, Blago, Sing.

If Blagojevich “flips” and cooperates with federal prosecutors against Obama – will Big Media inform the public or continue to protect Obama?

Big Media would blare headlines if Blago sang a sour note directed against Hillary (or indeed, Sarah Palin).

Will Big Media cover a Blago recital directed at exposing Obama?

Sing, Blago, Sing.


Kirsten Gillibrand And The Emerging NObama Coalition, Part II

The Hopium narco-traffickers and their fellow Hopium addled addicts are angry at those of us who not only predicted but also advocated and agitated against Caroline Kennedy’s appointment to the U.S. Senate. The Hopium addled addicts are now making threats which we do not believe should be taken seriously.

The Hopium addled are correct about one thing: they and their religion, the Church of Obama, have suffered a defeat. How big that defeat is remains to be seen but it is potentially a very big defeat that portends even greater defeats in the short and long term. The Hopium addled are shaken and fearful and in denial about 2010. They might not know exactly why they feel the way they do but they are right to have a sense of dread about what is coming. We’ll ‘splain it to them today.

As promised, today we will discuss Kirsten Gillbrand and the possibility of defeat for the fake Obama “stimulus” bill as well as the emerging NObama coaltion; Senator Schumer’s role in the swatting of Caroline Kennedy; and the unlikely but possible primary revolt against Gillibrand and Paterson in 2010.

* * *

Two strong Hillary supporters, new Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and new Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire might be the backbone the U.S. Senate needs to bring responsibility to the congress and restrain the drunken spending of Barack Obama and block the looting called the Obama “stimulus” bill. The looting “stimulus” bill will likely pass, it is almost a “done deal”. But now there is a possible chance to stop the looting if Gillibrand sticks to her principles.

Lawrence O’Donnell wrote in that Huff n’ Puff website about our two Women Jedi in the Senate:

The governor obviously has no idea that this means he has just delivered a Democratic senator who is committed to voting against the first Obama bill to come her way–the stimulus package that will push the federal budget at least 800 billion dollars farther away from balance. Indeed, the Gillibrand simple-minded devotion to balancing the federal budget above all else means that she must oppose everything on the Obama agenda. Everything President Obama wants to do costs money, money that the federal government doesn’t have. Obama, as he made crystal clear in the campaign, plans to do it with deficit spending, something that Congresswoman Gillibrand opposes and something we now discover the governor of New York opposes even though New York state will be one of the biggest beneficiaries of that spending.

To her everlasting credit, Kirsten Gillibrand voted in the House (on January 22, 2009) against the looting of the American economy. She voted against the $350 billion which benefits the gamblers who gambled and now want to be bailed out. She voted against the second $350 billion of the $700 billion Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). Kirsten Gillibrand voted for sanity and non-release of the funds.

The money will unfortunately be spent because the U.S. Senate had earlier voted to release the second $350 billion in TARP loot. But our heroine in the other congressional wing, Senator Jeanne Shaheen, sensibly voted “no”.

The vote in the House of Representatives was 270 NO – 155 yes. Consider: the bailout bill was the #1 priority of Barack Obama and Obama lobbied relentlessly for the money and yet the House of Representatives with all those newly elected Democrats overwhelmingly told Obama to shove… er… off.

Barack Obama did not do much better with the big Dimocratic majority in the U.S. Senate. Obama pummelled Senators to give him the loot of the bailout bill. The Senate voted to give Obama the loot, but the numbers are not very impressive -52 YES, 42 no.

Obama huffed and puffed to get the money, and barely managed to get a majority vote in an overwhelmingly Democratic Senate. Senator Merkley of Oregon proved to be a hypocrite or a liar or both in this vote. Merkley campaigned a few months ago against the bailout bill but his vote was to surrender the money. Merkley lied to his constituents.

Democrats voting against giving Obama the TARP loot were: Bayh of Indiana, Cantwell of Washington, Dorgan of North Dakota, Feingold of Wisconsin, Lincoln of Arkansas, Nelson of Nebraska, Shaheen of New Hampshire, Wyden of Oregon and Bernie Sanders the Independent who typically votes with Democrats from Vermont.

Kristen Gillibrand will now join the Senate and quite possibly join with Jeanne Shaheen (maybe add Hillary friend Blanch Lincoln of Arkansas) to block Obama’s looting of the American economy in the same way George W. Bush looted the American economy.

Kristen Gillibrand will have to run for election in 2010 to finish Hillary Clinton’s term, then seek a full term for herself in 2012. Gillibrand will win in 2010 if she sticks to her stated principles and votes against the looting of the American economy. If Gillibrand becomes a hypocrite or a liar and votes flop-flips like hypocrite and liar Merkley, she will deserve to lose – and likely will lose.

Gillibrand might become the light saber wielding fighter against Obama and a leader in the emerging NObama coalition.

* * *

Let’s deal with the nonsense of a primary revolt against Governor Paterson and Senator Gillibrand in 2010.

Governor Paterson and Senator Gillibrand (as well as all Democrats) do face potential defeat in 2010 because of the economy. But if defeat comes to Paterson/Gillibrand it will be in the general election not in the primaries.

The Hopium addled threaten that New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, son of former Governor Mario Cuomo, has sufficient support and popularity as well as a strong fundraising operation, and will challenge Governor Paterson in the Democratic primary. This is foolishness.

Because of Obama’s race-baiting during the 2008 primaries, African-American politicians know they now can have friends and allies shout “racism” when in trouble and thereby defeat their white opponents. These fake shouts of “racism” in the age of fake demean the long and well documented history of racial bigotry. But like Obama and Burris the “racism” shouters (some like Bill The Bomber Ayres shout “racism” to scare off scrutiny and they are not even African-Americans) know they will not be punished for their bogus, politically motivated, claims of racism.

Andrew Cuomo knows he cannot run against a black man in a Democratic primary. Andrew knows this, not because of Obama’s race-baiting during the 2008 primary, but because Andrew has been there, done that.

But as we’ve mentioned here before, that line of analysis seems to ignore the impact of Cuomo’s disastrous 2002 challenge to Carl McCall for the Democratic nomination. Aside from running an immature campaign, Cuomo’s decision to try to take the nomination away from a longer-serving official striving to become the first African-American elected governor in NY was badly received from the start.

Challenging an incumbent in a primary involves the same kind of too-much-in-a-hurry chutzpah. Challenging an African-American appointed incumbent who is trying, again, to become the first black man elected governor would arouse the same resentments.

A Paterson vs. Cuomo primary would devastate Cuomo. First of all there is no love between the Kennedy Dynasty and the Cuomo Dynasty, what with that messy divorce business. Second, Paterson will most likely have the African-American community united behind him. More importantly Paterson would have Cuomo’s former vanquisher, Carl McCall, doing whatever “work” needs to be done. McCall is on board with Paterson and has recently defended him.

H. Carl McCall, the former state comptroller and a Democratic candidate for governor in 2002, defended Mr. Paterson’s handling of the appointment, pointing out that Ms. Kennedy’s own uneven performance and the intense worldwide scrutiny of her bid were factors beyond the governor’s control.

“I think that to look at his governorship in the light of this situation would be terribly unfair,” said Mr. McCall.

As to a potential Gillibrand challenger, she already has one. Carolyn McCarthy, the Long Island Representative who ran for congress as a gun control advocate because her husband was killed on the Long Island Railroad in 1993 is running against Gillibrand. Other than on the gun issue McCarthy is to the right of Gillibrand so her candidacy makes no sense on the issues balance test.

Recall that McCarthy was a Republican. Her congressional representative, Dan Frisa, voted to ban a ban on semiautomatic firearms. McCarthy wanted to run as a Republican against Frisa but was rebuffed by the Republicans. McCarthy turned to the Democrats in the Republican district and beat Frisa by 17 percentage points.

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, yet another male from New York City, is weighing a challenge to Gillibrand. The usually sensible Stringer appears to be losing his sense – as others have. The usually sensible Michael Tomasky is not making much sense either:

She’s an odd choice. Two years in Congress, against all those members of the state’s House of Representatives Democratic delegation with many years experience? In these cases, one smell test that ought to be passed is that a governor should be able to say “X was the best person for the job” with at least some degree of plausibility. I don’t think Paterson can do that here. Even Blago could say that about Roland Burris, kinda-sorta. She was an obviously political choice: woman and upstater. Those are fair considerations of course, but when it’s this obvious, it invites trouble.

Now they worry about experience? Has Caroline Kennedy ever won an election? Gillibrand has won an election in a difficult district. Gillibrand is a woman. Gillibrand is not from Manhattan but rather from upstate New York which brings some balance to a downstate exclusive Democratic ticket. Is diversity relegated to the dumpster now?

McCarthy needs to remember that the Democratic Party she won election to has all but abandoned gun control as an issue. The successful Republican strategy of God, Guns, and Gays caused the Democrats to abandon, or rather embrace God (Obama kissey kissey Rick Warren), ignore Guns, and hide Gays. This is not the Democratic Party you remember Carolyn.

McCarthy and Stringer and any other potential challengers also have to consider Senator Schumer.

We revealed in December what others are writing about now in late January – that Chuck Schumer was either A factor or THE determining factor taking the appointment from Caroline Kennedy and giving it to Gillibrand.

Senator Schumer:

And Schumer is not the same senator he was nine years ago. He has amassed real and undeniable power in the chamber after two incredibly successful cycles as the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Senators elected on his watch are indebted and loyal to him. He is a trusted adviser to majority leader Harry Reid, whose job Schumer is often discussed as eventually being in line for.

McCarthy, Stringer and the rest will have to fight Chuck Schumer if they want to replace Senator Gillibrand. And whatever Schumer thinks of them Chuck Schumer does not want to again be the senior senator from New York that lives in the shadow of the junior senator from New York – no matter if that name is Caroline, Stringer, or McCarthy. That “shadow” factor helped Gillibrand greatly in the Paterson primary:

“She won’t really present a threat to him in any way,” said one former Schumer staffer, speaking on background. “She’s new. She’s young. She’s not going to start out with any profile as opposed to a Cuomo or a Kennedy. She will give him no competition. I’m sure she’s going to be deferential.” [snip]

“Chuck will respect the fact that she beat Sweeney and that she is a brawler,” said another former Schumer staffer, referring to the Republican incumbent Gillibrand took out in 2006.

One of the staffers also said that Gillibrand’s strong contacts in New York City, where she worked as a lawyer for several white-shoe law firms, made her a more attractive addition to the 2010 ticket because of her ability to raise money. That’s a skill that Schumer especially prizes.

Howard Dean, like Gillibrand received an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association. Gillibrand’s position on gay issues is much for socially progressive than gay-bashing Obama, for all his flowery words.

Democrats in 2010 have to fear increased Republican turnout. Contrary to what the Hopium addicts believe, it was low Republican turnout that determined the results of the 2008 election. It is likely that in the 2010 off year elections, Republicans will be motivated and the Hopium addicts will be in political methadone clinics.

In The Mess-iah Complex we explained the 2008 election results. What Democrats have to really worry about in the 2010 elections is the B.O., stinky, economy.

Governor Paterson will be particularly hard hit. On January 1, 2009 New York State’s unemployment funds ran out – too many claims, no money. New York State is borrowing $90 million a week from the federal government to pay unemployment checks. Imagine what the economic landscape will be as Democrats run for election or reelection in 2010.

It was not the Hopium brigades that determined the 2008 election. In 2010 “historical electoral patterns suggest that Republicans could pick up a passel of Senate and House seats”. It was not a “wave of black voters and young people” that determined the 2008 presidential election.

More importantly, “you see a heavy influx of moderate to conservative members in the incoming freshman Democratic class, particularly in the House.” Democrats who want to loot the economy along with Obama might not be as easy to find as we suppose.

The fact that roughly a third of the Democratic House majority sits in seats with Republican underpinnings (at least at the presidential level) is almost certain to keep a liberal dream agenda from moving through Congress. The first rule of politics is survival, and if these new arrivals to Washington want to stick around, they are likely to build centrist voting records between now and 2010.

* * *

We will be writing with great frequency about the upcoming looting bill which might be as high as $900 billion.

If Paterson and Gilibrand want to win in 2010 they should fight for economic justice and not the looting of the American economy by Barack Obama, the Third Bush Term.

There is a future for the emerging NObama coalition.


Kirsten Gillibrand And The Emerging NObama Coalition, Part I

Gosh darn it, we at this pure, sweet, innocent, pink, website are heartbroken that so many wish us ill and say such mean things about us. In the past we have never commented on the mean and hurtful things said about us on websites or even on Big Big Media TV, but we are so overcome, we just might speak out about what is causing our tears now.

We’ve shed so many tears our ShamWow towels have lost absorbency.

The trouble started with our polite, ahead of the curve analysis, on December 14 as to why Caroline Kennedy should not be a U.S. Senator and how her campaign was “running out of air”.

Later we began a series (as of yet no Part II, but perhaps it is still timely to publish and there is still interest) about our privately heard information, again before the curve, that Senator Chuck Schumer is A, if not THE, secret hand against the Caroline power grab and why Hillary Supporters and Upstate New Yorkers would prevent Caroline Kennedy becoming the appointed U.S. Senator. The Schumer rumors have now been confirmed, after the beheading, by Big Media outlets.

For these mild efforts at explaining why Caroline should not be Senator and her Lack of Judgment in endorsing the unqualified, race-baiting, and gay-bashing, and sexist, Barack Obama, we were rebuked by the Hopium addled.

The Hopium Narco-traffickers blamed us for the defeat of Barack Obama/Ted Kennedy’s schemes to gift Caroline the Senate seat from New York. The Hopium addled Narco-traffickers saw a big defeat for Obama in Caroline Kennedy’s going over the bridge. They are right in that. It was a big defeat. One of many to come for Obama. We innocents were accused of causing the Caroline train wreck.

We are indeed happy Caroline has so much free time again. We also do admit we are beginning to really like Kirsten Gillibrand. We like how when Obama tried to worm himself in and hog the spotlight to inflict himself on New Yorkers with a phone call to Senator Gillibrand during her televised appointment announcement – Obama was told to call later – Kirsten Gillibrand was busy.

We like how as a Congresswoman Representative Gillibrand voted “NO” on the scandalous $350 Billion TARP bailout. We like Kirsten Gillibrand’s close friendship and alliance with Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton. We like that Kirsten Gillibrand is a strong woman from Upstate New York who is able to get elected in a Republican area.

But for some of the Hopium addled addicts, being a good public official is the kiss of death. The Hopium addled addicts don’t like good representation. To the Hopium addled addicts a qualified candidate is like wolfbane to a vampire. The noive of Kirsten Gillibrand to be a good Senator for the people of New York.

I also don’t doubt that she’ll be effective, compelling and popular, and may turn out to be a very good senator for New York. I just don’t know that she’ll be an especially good senator for Democrats.

But we are getting ahead of ourselves. Let’s start at the beginning. Oh, and here is a real train wreck for the Narco-traffickers to play with:

* * *

The rabid response of Obama’s Hopium addled addicts to the appointment of Kirsten Gillibrand shows how big a defeat this is for Obama and his dreams of conquest. Many of the Hopium addled wanted Caroline Kennedy because she would not represent New Yorkers, but rather be Obama’s lapdog. To some, including apparently top Obama strategists, Caroline Kennedy was to be promoted from lapdog to president once Obama left office.

As unbelievable and demented as it sounds some Obama strategists actually thought that they would neutralize Hillary Clinton, by removing her from the Senate and politics generally, then appoint Caroline Kennedy to the New York U.S. Senate seat. Caroline Kennedy, after Obama served two terms (they are truly demented), would swoop in and become the next president.

We’re not kidding. They really believe this. Our ShamWow is soaked again.

Those demented Obama delusions are now no longer because Caroline Kennedy has no political future. Like Ozymandias, the mighty Caroline lies shattered to bits in a political desert. The list of problems with taxes, hubby, and lord knows what else, mean that Caroline Kennedy cannot fill out the 63 question vetting forms for a goverment job. Forms she herself helped prepare. Obama could not get a job if he filled out the 63 page vetting form either, but that is beside the point to our narrative.

Here is the Caroline Kennedy as Senator-then-President story from the respected Steve Clemons at The Washington Note:

But the question that is legitimate and remains is what machinations drove Kennedy to reach for this Senate seat. What was she thinking — and how did this fit into the game plans of two of America’s biggest political kingpins, Barack Obama and the ailing Ted Kennedy? And did she end up getting derailed by the Clinton machine? [snip]

Most writers limited their attention to the surface explanation she provided when she announced her interest in the Senate appointment. Kennedy said that her work for the Obama campaign stirred in her a desire to do more — and doing more for the public was what the Kennedy family operation had always, in her words, committed itself to. She said that she was ready in this phase of her life to move to a new career and that she was comfortable moving out of the shadows and into the public spotlight — though this was difficult to tell in her tightly scripted early press events in New York that couldn’t help but remind of the over-handled, over-scripted roll out of Sarah Palin.

But other machinations may have been at play as well.

Obama started with the Daley franchise in Chicago and then built into that the Daschle franchise, followed by the Kennedy franchise, and is now working very hard to absorb the Clinton political machine which is larger and more potentially dangerous to Obama than any of the others. [snip]

There is a saying that “those who supported Obama got a President and those who supported Hillary got a job” — as many of her loyal followers are popping up with key positions throughout the government while many of those who helped Obama from the beginning of his candidacy are still in the cold. And then there is Kennedy — and that big family brand that connects with so many in the country, particularly in labor union America. Ted Kennedy will soon die — and Obama (and many other of the Kennedys) want to see Caroline in the political game in a high profile way to provide leadership for the tens of thousands of capable political hands that Kennedy’s machine has produced to be loyal both to her stewardship of the family operation and then loyal to Obama.

Clemons writes that the information in his article comes from the Ted Kennedy inner circle. Clemons writes that Ted Kennedy’s loyal retainers have conveyed to me privately that the Senator aware of approaching death wanted Caroline Kennedy to take over the family and fulfill the plan.

But the plan Ted “may have had”, they say, had little to do with the New York Senate seat. It had to do with succeeding Obama in 2016.

Clemons details the plans:

The game plan — whether real or fantasy — is intriguing. It goes something like this. Caroline Kennedy would be appointed now to the Senate. She would perform well above the very low expectations many had for her and win handily the seat in the 2010 mid-term race in which that Senate seat needs to be contested again. She would then be in place until 2016. Ted Kennedy’s view “may be” that Caroline would instantly out-shine Hillary Clinton in the eyes of New York voters and in the American political scene and that in 2016, Caroline Kennedy would be 59 while Hillary Clinton would be 69.

I have no idea whether Ted Kennedy owned this narrative. All I know is that his friends and many key pillars of Kennedy Land believed that something along these lines is what animated Ted’s highly strategic approach to Caroline’s political future.

Clemons indulges in his own fantasy by suggesting that tax dodger Caroline -we presume after dumping her marriage blanc husband and publicly taking up with her New York Times concubine – accept appointment as ambassador to England or France. Afterwards, presuming we suppose that Americans forget her tax dodging and political ineptitude, Caroline can return from exile and accept her sceptre and crown swathed in ermine to rule.

The threat to Caroline, according to the Hopium addled, is of course Hillary Clinton. Hillary, who remains politically viable as long as Bill Clinton continues to campaign for candidates for public office. Hillary, who amasses more kudos in foreign policy while Obama stumbles domestically and has nowhere to go but down.

The Obama and Ted Kennedy ploys and plots to neutralize Hillary Clinton and begin the succession of Caroline I have blown up. Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton have not been neutralized. Hillary Supporters have not been neutralized. Instead of Hillary-land, we now have Hillary World-Wide, operatives everywhere, and supporters unrelenting and accepting no substitutes.

And while Hillary Clinton, the woman Caroline tried to succeed in the Senate, is now Secretary of State — it is clear that Obama still has some work to do to get the keys to the Bill/Hillary political franchise — and that this derailment of Caroline Kennedy removes for the time being a threat to Hillary’s longer term political interests.

Obama and Barzini Uncle Ted, along with the Hopium addled, suffered a big defeat because of Caroline K. It’s not an unusual defeat. History teaches us that sometimes the children don’t live up to the accomplishments of the parents. Idiot princes are plentiful in history.

The hare-brained Obama schemes have our heads shaking from side to side. Our faces are drenched. Our ShamWow is soaked. To borrow from Bob Dylan, the tears on our cheeks are from laughter.

[Still to come: Scheumer’s role in Lèse majesté, the unlikely but possible revolt against Gillibrand and Paterson in 2010, Kirsten Gillbrand and the possibility of defeat for the fake Obama “stimulus” bill, and the emerging NObama coaltion.]


Caroline Kennedy’s Lack of Judgment And The Age Of Fake

The age of contempt for experience and adoration of fake change and fake hope, exemplified by Barack Obama, is here.

The fake hope and the fake change are poses struck by a fake Democrat and fake president. The age of fake was introduced by the fake music that was played at the fake inaugural with its fake oath.

Today is day 3 of the age of fake. Today the New York Times, peeved because Obama has refused to provide it with an interview, has taken revenge by revealing that the “live” music at the “inaugural” on Tuesday was recorded and played as if it were live – fake.

No disclaimer of the fake music was provided to Americans. In the age of fake, live or “Memorex“- it’s all the same. More Milli-Vanilli from fake Barack Obama.

* * *

On day 2 of the age of fake, we also received more news of the fake supposedly “done deal” appointment of fake Caroline Kennedy.

We did not think it was a “done deal”. On December 14, 2008, before the age of fake became official we wrote about the supposed “done deal”:

The Caroline Kennedy power grab is running out of air due to the resistance from Hillary supporters and because of the stench fouling out from Chicago. [snip]

Caroline Kennedy will not be the next senator from New York. Upstate New York opposition will prevent Governor Paterson from naming her as will the influence peddling stench from Chicago.

If not for strong oppostion from Hillary Supporters and upstate New Yorkers Caroline Kennedy would be a Senator – this is the age of fake afterall.

Hillary Supporters and upstate New Yorkers will not oppose the Governor Paterson appointee Kirsten Gillibrand, from upstate New York. If Caroline Kennedy was the appointee, Hillary Supporters would have opposed not only Caroline Kennedy but Governor Paterson in 2010. Fortunately Governor Paterson displayed some wisdom and judgement while Caroline Kennedy displayed none.

Caroline Kennedy displayed a lack of judgment, stupidity and cupidity, – when she endorsed Barack Obama.

Caroline Kennedy displayed a lack of basic decency and manners when she conspired with Uncle Ted to backstab Hillary Clinton and endorsed Barack Obama. Americans were badly served by Caroline Kennedy and her endorsement which if given today would be utterly worthless.

In the age of fake Caroline Kennedy expected to be appointed Senator then run for election in 2010 and for a full term in 2012. But Caroline Kennedy could not win an election. We remember Caroline Kennedy did not convince the citizens of New York or Massachusetts to join her in her lack of judgment and her backstabbing during the primaries – Hillary Clinton won both states easily.

In the age of fake Caroline Kennedy insulted the memory of her murdered father by favorably comparing the fake Barack Obama to the real real John Fitzgerald Kennedy. JFK was real and experienced, not fake.

John Kennedy won the presidency before passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. Kennedy was young but had a great deal of experience in political life. Kennedy toured Europe, the Soviet Union and the Middle East in the fateful year 1939. On the day before Germany invaded, John Kennedy was in Poland. Kennedy’s Harvard senior thesis completed in 1940 was “Appeasement in Munich”. Kennedy by the end of the war was a war hero. Kennedy served with regular Joes in the U.S. Navy. Kennedy saved the lives of his crew. John Kennedy from the elite schools and elite background was loved by working class whites and blacks. John Kennedy was no egghead.

JFK was real, not fake. But his daughter confused Americans by equating fake Barack Obama with real JFK.

In the age of fake, Caroline Kennedy shares shameless audacity with fake Barack Obama. Our commentor Birdgal dared say the following: Ms. Kennedy was part of the vetting process for VP. Doesn’t that seems hypocritical? No wonder, Richardson’s difficulties seemed manageable.

In the age of fake, those like Caroline Kennedy and Barack Obama demand ethics from others, question others with long questionnaires they themselves refuse to answer because the answers would prove self-destructive and impede their career advancement.

The fake Caroline Kennedy, like the fake John Edwards is alleged to have an affair with the publisher of the New York Times. The many New York Times articles and columns published to glorify Caroline Kennedy and get her a Senate seat never mentioned the affair. It is hard to believe that Hillary Hater and New York Times gossip of imaginary conversations, Maureen Dowd, was not aware of the affair her publisher friend and fake Caroline Kennedy were having. Dowd and the other Times “writers” kept quiet. Little wonder that Americans are turning away from these fake news outlets.

Fake Caroline Kennedy has tax and other problems which preclude her fake friend Barack Obama from gifting her a job without a complete rejection of ethics rules and laws. Unlike fake Barack Obama, Caroline Kennedy did not receive the Big Media protection (except for the New York Times) that she expected to receive.

Caroline Kennedy has embarrassed herself, annoyed the people of New York, and humiliated and damaged Governor Paterson, and demonstrated that her judgment, particularly her primary endorsement of Barack Obama, is not to be trusted. The realization that Caroline Kennedy’s judgment is not to be trusted comes too late for America -and for Americans who valued Caroline Kennedy and her family sufficiently to trust their word when voting.

* * *

In the age of fake even Big Media is discovering what a fake their tool Obama is.

Fake Obama has made a great show with fake gestures. Obama trumpted religion and the Lincoln Bible at his fake first oath with the fake music but in private he showed his disdain for the Bible. The Bible is not necessary to take an oath, but Obama made a great show of the Bible in public. In private Obama discarded the Bible like a cheap paperback – it reminded us of Obama in San Francisco mocking “bitter” Americans from small towns while campaigning in small town Pennsylvania.

Obama made a great show on day 2 of fake “close Guantanamo” executive orders , but Big Media says the “close Guantanamo” orders are fake:

There may be less than meets the eye to the executive orders President Obama issued yesterday to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay and prohibit the torture of prisoners in American custody. Those pronouncements may sound dramatic and unequivocal, but experts predict that American policy towards detainees could remain for months or even years pretty close to what it was as President Bush left office.

Fake Obama can’t be trusted… he simply cannot be trusted by friend nor foe.

Here are a few of the delays, caveats and loopholes that could limit the impact of Obama’s orders:

1. Everyone has to follow the Army Field Manual—for now… [snip]

However, the order also created an interagency commission which will have six months to examine whether to create “additional or different guidance” for non-military agencies such as the CIA. One group that represents detainees, the Center for Constitutional Rights, deemed that an “escape hatch” to potentially allow enhanced interrogations in the future. [snip]

2. Obama ordered a 30-day review of Guantanamo conditions—by the man currently responsible for Guantanamo. [snip]

3. Obama vowed no torture on his watch, but force-feeding and solitary confinement apparently continue at Guantanamo for now. [snip]

The Bush administration has argued that the feeding is humane and that the solitary, at least as practiced now, is not the kind of total isolation that amounts to torture. “There’s an important distinction to be made between isolation and separation” from other prisoners,” Waxman said. [snip]

4. The vast majority of detainees in American custody may see no benefit from Obama’s orders

While Obama ordered a case-by-case review of the 245 prisoners held at Guantanamo, the 600 prisoners held in indefinite American custody in Afghanistan and roughly 20,000 in Iraq won’t get such attention. [snip]

5. The orders downplay the possibility that some prisoners might be set free in America. [snip]

6. Military commissions are shut down…. for now [snip]

But the Obama administration is not ruling out returning to some sort of military forum to deal with some of the prisoners.

Addled by Hopium, many Obama supporters still believe in the fake changes by the fake Obama. Obama still has many Hopium addled supporters in Big Media but some are waking up now that their livelihoods are threatened:

A growing media frustration with Barack Obama’s team spilled into the open at Thursday’s briefing, with reporters accusing the White House of stifling access to his oath re-do and giving Obama’s first interview as president to a multi-million dollar inauguration sponsor.

Veteran CBS newsman Bill Plante was one of the most vocal critics, questioning the White House’s handling of Wednesday night’s second swearing in – which was covered by just a four-reporter print pool that didn’t include a news photographer or TV correspondent.

He also asked new press secretary Robert Gibbs why ABC, which paid millions to host the DC Neighborhood Ball, was granted the only inauguration day interview with President Obama – a move he equated to “pay to play.”

Pay-to-play. We could not have said it better ourselves Bill Plante.

Big Media is wary of their tool Barack Obama. Obama has additional plans to slip off their leash and has signaled that they plan to shake up some of the old traditions of White House coverage, some of the longest-standing – and most jealously guarded – in town.

Obama talks a flowery game but he and his words are fake. Transparency? No:

Before Gibbs took the podium, reporters were given a background briefing under an agreement to only attribute information to “senior administration officials”—a policy some news organizations object to as a matter of policy.

Big Media is learning that Obama really does not like to answer questions:

President Obama made a surprise visit to the White House press corps Thursday night, but got agitated when he was faced with a substantive question.

Asked how he could reconcile a strict ban on lobbyists in his administration with a Deputy Defense Secretary nominee who lobbied for Raytheon, Obama interrupted with a knowing smile on his face.

“Ahh, see,” he said, “I came down here to visit. See this is what happens. I can’t end up visiting with you guys and shaking hands if I’m going to get grilled every time I come down here.”

Pressed further by the Politico reporter about his Pentagon nominee, William J. Lynn III, Obama turned more serious, putting his hand on the reporter’s shoulder and staring him in the eye.

“Alright, come on” he said, with obvious irritation in his voice. “We will be having a press conference at which time you can feel free to [ask] questions. Right now, I just wanted to say hello and introduce myself to you guys – that’s all I was trying to do.”

The president was quickly saved by a cameraman in the room who called out: “I’d like to say it one more time: ‘Mr. President.’ ”

Thug Obama does not want to be questioned about his lies on rejecting lobbyists. So thug Obama threatens. Thug Obama also tells the nerds in the Big Media room he will not hang out in their frat house if they ask him questions. A Big Media cameraman demonstrates how fake our Big Media is.

* * *

In the age of fake their are some genuine diamonds.

Here’s what a real president looks like: A real president who knows and values the importance of experience; who knows she can engage in debate and come out a winner; who will not tolerate division but will demand full authority not disputed by know-nothings on Pennsylvania Avenue or at the Pentagon.

Here’s what a real president looks like [full Transcript HERE] :

Hillary Clinton is a genuine diamond in the age of fake.

The morning after she was easily confirmed by the Senate, Mrs. Clinton was greeted by a crowd of more than a thousand State Department employees, cheering and whooping like a campaign gathering.

“This is going to be a great adventure,” Mrs. Clinton said to employees in a lively 10-minute address, as people craned to see her from a balcony in the flag-lined lobby of the State Department.

Mrs. Clinton said she sought a “sense of openness and candor in this building,” and invited people to “think outside the proverbial box,” which drew a yelp from a man in the crowd. She promised “robust diplomacy” and “effective development” to restore America’s standing overseas.

Caroline Kennedy is a fake who endorsed fake Barack Obama. Barack Obama is a race-baiting, gay-bashing, sexist Chicago thug.

Hillary is a genuine diamond and the only genuinely bright jewel in the American Future.


Blind Hope Hits A Wall – The Mulligan Man On Day 1

Well, we knew he wouldn’t be ready on Day 1 – but, really, an oath-taking boo-boo in the very first minute?

Followed by another oath-taking boo-boo on the first full day?

Followed by Caroline Kennedy given the boot quitting?

Not to forget the wardrobe misjudgments, the Guantanamo broken promises, the latest preacher problems, and the absent celestial choirs.

And a Big Media outlet breaking ranks and issuing warnings that the celestial choirs might not sing at all?

And the television home to the Hopium addled addicts, the Daily Show, kinda sorta agreed with us that Obama is the Third Bush Term.

Oh, dear. Blind Hope hit a wall called Reality on Day 1.

* * *

Ordinarily we would not bother to mention some new Obama boobery. But the Hopium addled addicts are really making a big deal of the Obama boobery during the inaugural oath. The Hopium addled addicts expected to produce YouTube videos by the thousands mashing the oath ceremony with computerized celestial choirs. Thwarted, they forlornly walk into walls, unable to utilize the great video moment, because it is marred by Obama boobery.

Big Media cooperated in the Obama boobery cover-up by targeting Chief Justice John Roberts as the culprit. But the video speaks for itself, and it is Obama who mucks things up. Imagine, Obama the Harvard graduate, neither his grades nor his writings available, mucked up the few words that George W. Bush, the ridiculed as a boob George W. Bush, was able to repeat – without mistakes or boobery. Oh, dear.

The Obama boobery with the oath, led to a second oath. But the Bible, like the once disdained flag lapel pin, was nowhere to be seen. Expect a third oath when bitter small town gun and Bible toting America finds out. Here’s what happened:

Don’t worry, the White House says: Obama has still been president since noon on Inauguration Day.

Nevertheless, Obama and Roberts went through the drill again out of what White House counsel Greg Craig called “an abundance of caution.”

This time, the scene was the White House Map Room in front of a small group of reporters, not the Capitol platform before the whole watching world. [snip]

No TV camera crews or news photographers were allowed in. A few of Obama’s closest aides were there, along with a White House photographer.

Roberts put on his black robe.

“Are you ready to take the oath?” he said.

“Yes, I am,” Obama said. “And we’re going to do it very slowly.”

Roberts then led Obama through the oath without any missteps.

The president said he did not have his Bible with him, but that the oath was binding anyway.

The original, bungled version on Tuesday caught observers by surprise and then got replayed on cable news shows.

It happened when Obama interrupted Roberts midway through the opening line, in which the president repeats his name and solemnly swears.

Next in the oath is the phrase ” … that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States.” But Roberts rearranged the order of the words, not saying “faithfully” until after “president of the United States.”

That appeared to throw Obama off. He stopped abruptly at the word “execute.”

Recognizing something was off, Roberts then repeated the phrase, putting “faithfully” in the right place but without repeating “execute.”

But Obama then repeated Roberts’ original, incorrect version: “… the office of president of the United States faithfully.”

Craig, the White House lawyer, said in a statement Wednesday evening: “We believe the oath of office was administered effectively and that the president was sworn in appropriately yesterday. Yet the oath appears in the Constitution itself. And out of the abundance of caution, because there was one word out of sequence, Chief Justice John Roberts will administer the oath a second time.”

The Constitution is clear about the exact wording of the oath and as a result, some constitutional experts have said that a do-over probably wasn’t necessary but also couldn’t hurt. Two other previous presidents have repeated the oath because of similar issues, Calvin Coolidge and Chester A. Arthur.

Such boobery reminds one of the maligned Dan Quayle spelling “potato”. As to the lack of a Bible, Obama could have called one of his many preacher friends to ask for a Bible. Obama could have gone to a hotel to get a Gideon Bible, or maybe there is a Bible in the White House library.

Perhaps, instead of an Abe Lincoln Bible, so useful as propaganda when millions were watching, Obama could have requested the Coolidge or Chester Arthur Bible.

But Obama is as cavalier with Bibles apparently as he is with documents and flag lapel pins. We usually wouldn’t mention the Bible and flag lapel pin missing but Obama makes such a display of them these days we don’t want him to think we are careless.

Obama and the Hopium addled addicts are not cavalier or careless about protecting Obama however. Big Media, continues to blame the Chief Justice and exonerating Obama. Joe Biden joined in the blame game too:

This time, the recitation jibed perfectly with the prescribed oath and took 25 seconds. Obama raised his right hand and kept his left at his side. There was no Bible, Lincoln or otherwise. [snip]

The re-inauguration came just a few hours after Vice President Joe Biden mocked Roberts for his misstep.

My memory is not as good as Justice Roberts,” Biden said at the swearing in of White House staffers Wednesday afternoon.

The staffers in the room laughed, but Obama stood stone faced and visibly annoyed.

Obama does not like to be reminded of his boobery even when someone else is blamed. Obama also almost voted for Chief Justice John Roberts but eventually cast a “no” vote instead of being absent – because it would not look good in a Democratic primary. Obama also realizes that John Roberts, as Chief Justice, is not exactly helpless nor useless. Roberts could legally hurt Obama in more ways than one.

* * *

On Day 1 we also waited for an apology, or some sort of action from B.O., for the remarks by a preacher, not Rick Warren, at the inaugural.

The Rev. Joseph Lowery, a leader during the civil rights movement and former president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, delivered the inaugural ceremony’s benediction Tuesday on the west front of the U.S. Capitol.

“We truly give thanks for the glorious experience we’ve shared this day,” Lowery, 87, said in delivering the prayer.

He asked that Americans cling to the spirit of fellowship embodied at the inauguration.

“We ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to give back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right,” Lowery said.

Obama who spoke pretty words asking for an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics has yet to say a word about Reverend Lowery’s hurtful words. Reverend Lowery is a good man with a long history, but at the inaugural he was much too low. When will Obama speak out against Lowery’s petty grievances, recriminations, and patently false anti-white diatribe? On Day 2?

* * *

The Obama Drama surrounding Caroline Kennedy ended the day. It’s too painful to recount. A story published in the New York Post stated that Caroline Kennedy had been told by Governor David Paterson that she would continue to have lots of free time.

Then NBC, with its typical low standards and misinformation, informed the nation that Caroline Kennedy was still chasing the fox with her hounds. She was still in the hunt. She had not quit before getting fired. Around midnight, “for personal reasons” as believable as her ability to do the Senate job, Caroline put a feather in her cap and called it Macaroni. Caroline, in other words, drove over the bridge, quit.

* * *

The finger bowl crowd in Washington, D.C. hated the Clintons. People like Caroline and Ted Kennedy merely bided their time to stick a knife in the backs of Hillary and Bill Clinton. One favorite and silly line of attack was Bill Clinton’s love of do-overs when playing golf. A do-over in golf is called a “mulligan”. Obama on Day 1 became the Mulligan Man.

Obama was not ready to even take an oath consisting of a few words. Perhaps he should have employed a TelePrompter. Instead, a mulligan was taken. Caroline, well, it turned out she was no Roland Burris. Caroline has had plenty of mulligans in her life.

Obama is also taking a mulligan on Guantanamo. We thought so. We wrote so. The Third Bush Term. In classic doublespeak Obama is saying ‘I will shut down Guantanamo and keep it open.’ Ohhbama can’t be trusted. The Center For Constitutional Rights is wringing its hands. Reality is Reality and Blind Hope has hit a wall.

It was always to be expected it would turn out this way. Only the Hopium addled, Obama lava lamps burning, did not know.

Here are seven reasons to be skeptical of Obama’s chances — and the Washington establishment he now leads:

1. The genius fallacy

There is no disputing Obama has built a Cabinet of sharp and experienced public officials. His staff, especially on national security and economic matters, is often praised as brilliant — and that’s by Republicans.

But recent history teaches us to be wary of the larger-than-life Washington figures supposedly striding across history’s stage. Consider the economy. Everyone seems to agree Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner are smart, vastly qualified to manage and repair the economy.

Everyone was saying the exact same things about the two economic geniuses of the 1990s: Robert Rubin and Alan Greenspan. Now Rubin has been reduced to making excuses for his involvement in high-risk investments and for helping oversee the demise of Citigroup, which lost $10 billion in the past three months alone. The onetime oracular Greenspan has admitted to Congress that his once-revered economic philosophy had “a flaw,” and many blame him for turning a blind eye to the housing bubble. [snip]

The reception of the Obama economic team recalls the reception of President George W. Bush’s foreign policy team eight years ago. Many Democrats applauded the experience of Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell.

As Bush named his national security team in 2000, The New York Times editorialized: “Putting superstar players on the court does not always guarantee harmony or success.” In retrospect, that was an understatement, indeed.

Need we mention that it was two Harvard men who could not get a simple oath right?

2. The herd instinct

Some of Washington’s biggest blunders occur when the government moves to do big things with big support. Bush won the much-regretted Iraq war resolution of October 2002 with strong Democratic backing.

The current economic crisis produces similar pressure to get on board the train — never mind for sure where it’s going. [snip]

First up is the stimulus package that could top $900 billion. It is a mind-numbing number rarely contemplated in U.S. history — and yet it might not work. There are no guarantees people will spend money the government doles out or that it will be enough to offset miserable economic performance elsewhere.

The history isn’t encouraging.

Rewind just a few months back. Republicans and Democrats alike said the best of many bad options was to approve $700 billion to prop up banks, mainly to thaw the credit freeze and juice the economy. Half the money is gone now. Many banks took the cash and sat on it. Some used it increase lending. But much of it was wasted or unaccounted for. Now Washington wants to spend the rest of it.

Did we mention we opposed the bailout bills last year? Hillary Clinton knew what to do. Obama? Not a clue.

3. We are broke. [snip]

One month from now, Democrats will likely have passed the massive stimulus bill and Obama will have signed it into law. The new Treasury Department will be well on its way to spending the second $350 billion chunk of the $700 billion bank bailout fund.

After this rush of activity, the ability to spend during the balance of Obama’s first term — never mind if there is a second — will be sharply constrained.

Instead, the new administration and lawmakers on Capitol Hill will awaken to another first: the prospect of the national deficit approaching $2 trillion. For most, these numbers are simply too big to ponder. But ponder this: This country has never reckoned with deficits like these.[snip]

Social Security’s surpluses “begin to decline in 2011 and then turn into rapidly growing deficits as the baby boom generation retires,” according to one recent report. “Medicare’s financial status,” the report said, “is even worse.”

Basically, the government needs more money than ever at a time when people are losing jobs, income and confidence.

A lot of people want their pockets filled with that Social Security money that does not belong to them. Social Security is not in crisis no matter how many times Obama and Big Media say so. Stop looting Social Security and all is well. The problem is the crimelords from Chicago want that money.

4. Words, words, words

Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, though starkly different men, both viewed the presidency as pre-eminently a decision-making job. Clinton often waved away speech drafts bloated with lofty language by saying: “Words, words, words.”

Obama seems to have a different view of the presidency. He thinks that the right decisions can be reached by putting reasonable and enlightened people together and reaching a consensus. He believes his job as president is to educate and inspire, largely matters of style. [snip]

We don’t know yet how justified Obama is in his self-confidence — or how naive.

But he is almost certain to face many tests, probably imminently, in which the test will be Obama’s ability to act quickly and shrewdly — and not merely describe his actions smoothly or impress people with nuance. And an unlike a governor — who must decide what’s in a budget and what gets cut, or whether a person to be executed at midnight should be spared — Obama has not made many decisions for which the consequences affect more than himself.

Now they tell us that Obama has only done for himself; that Obama just might be naive; that he has never done anything but talk, talk, talk.

5. He rarely challenges the home team. [snip]

In fact, there are few examples of him making decisions during the campaign or the transition that offended his own party’s constituencies, or using rhetoric that challenged his own supporters to rethink assumptions or yield on a favored cause.[snip]

This is not a good sign. By Obama’s lights, the national interest usually coincides with his personal interest. Back to you, Church Lady.

Now they tell us. It’s what we have been writing since April 2007 and getting attacked for saying. Now they echo us.

6. Everyone is winging it.

No matter how much confidence Obama or other politicians project, the reality is the current economic crisis has totally scrambled the intellectual assumptions of almost every policymaker. People who used to bemoan deficits want to spend like crazy. Improvisation is the only proper response. But the chances that improvisation will take the country to exactly the right destination — without some serious wrong turns along the way — seem very slight.

Did we mention Obama is not qualified to be president, does not know what he is doing; that Obama is a flim-flam man who brings with him the looting crimelords of Chicago?

7. The watchdogs are dozing.

The big media companies that once invested in serious accountability journalism are shells of their former selves. The Tribune Co. — in other words, the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune — has slashed its Washington staff by more than half. Newspaper chains such as Cox are fleeing D.C. altogether.[snip]

Think back eight years to the pre-Iraq war reporting and consider the words of Scott McClellan in his otherwise humdrum book.

“The collapse of the administration’s rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise,” McClellan wrote. “In this case, the ‘liberal media’ didn’t live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served.”

Rigorous reporting is even more important when you have one-party rule in Washington. Democrats, like Republicans, are simply less likely to scrutinize a president of their own. The end result here: Don’t expect the Democratic Congress to investigate the Obama administration or hold a bunch of tough oversight hearings. That means the only real check on Obama is the same one it’s always been — the voters.

Big Media will not investigate their tool – Barack Obama. The economy will be looted. Obama will be the Mulligan Man forever.

The voters will eventually fight back.

But for the next few months, the rats will loot and feed.


Celestial Dirge

We opened up our windows today to let in the sounds from the celestial choirs and the peaceful murmurs heralding the end of partisanship. We waited and listened for indications that there was an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics (such as civil rights, women’s rights, gay rights, and economic justice).

What we heard instead was crashing sounds from Wall Street and Hillary Hate in the Senate.

Regarding Hillary Clinton and the Senator Cornyn silliness of holding up her confirmation vote, we were not too exercised. Yes, Cornyn is a Hillary Hater and his is an ugly partisan example of hate and irrational loathing of Hillary of the sort we have witnessed by Dimocrats, but on the other hand we like votes. We are not fond of votes cast by intimidating mobs, whether in caucuses or under the cover of “unanimous consent”. We are not fond of forced unity or fake consent. We like voting. We like open voting by our representatives.

Hillary will be confirmed after the U.S. Senate votes. The Hillary Hate will be exposed. Cornyn will look the clown. The Hillary Haters and Traitors will have to vote for Hillary or face ridicule. We like votes. Unlike the Obama Dimocratic Party – we like votes.

* * *

The Wall Street choir sang Obama’s arrival in a minor key. The choir there was more a screech. Wall Street greeted Obama with the worst inauguration day selloff in history.

We doubt the selloff on Wall Street (but maybe the selloff on Main Street) was only due to the dud Obama speech. That rambling mess of samples from previous speeches taken from truly great men showed no signs of mature understanding of the words and triggered buyers remorse. But markets go up and down and the economic cycle goes up and down. That cycle is something to remember. History is a teacher.

A review of history should warn the new policy makers away from the disasterous course they are on. We opposed repeatedly the late 2008 bailouts. We recognize that conventional economic policy does suggest lower taxes and raised spending during a recesssion. But adding trillions of dollars in each yearly budget to an already large debt and additional obligations for a short lived “stimulus” attempting to repeal the economic cycle is dangerous. That is the type of advice a flashy, rarely seen uncle, gives when he says to bet the family fortune on a racetrack horse he has a tip on.

These days the solid mother and father waving off the foolish advice of a flashy uncle are derided as “deficit hawks”. We’ll see. We do note that in previous economic downturns neither the debt, the deficit, the increasing and already great economic obligations, as well as the international challenges and potential natural disasters loomed so large as they do now.

We’ll look to history for answers.

* * *

Last year, on September 19, Kevin Phillips spoke about the historical moment. Phillips was interviewed by Bill Moyers. Not many took note of the interview. We did. History is a teacher. [Section 3 discusses Obama, the Dimocrats and the Ripublicans. The complete original video with better quality is HERE.]

Transcript of the Bill Moyers interview of Kevin Phillips excerpts:

BILL MOYERS: If you read only one book on the route to this financial meltdown, I recommend this one: BAD MONEY: RECKLESS FINANCE, FAILED POLITICS, AND THE GLOBAL CRISIS OF AMERICAN CAPITALISM. The author, Kevin Phillips, has a history of being way ahead of the curve. As a young man working for Richard Nixon, he wrote THE EMERGING REPUBLICAN MAJORITY, a book that uncannily predicted how the GOP would regain power in Washington. Kevin Phillips saw our current crisis coming a long time ago. And in one book of historical insight after another, laid out the clues he was tracking. As recently as last spring in the AMERICAN PROSPECT magazine, Phillips wrote that what he thought was about to happen would be “unusual and potentially tragic.”

In the preface of his book, he has written that these things usually come to fruition in August and September. And sure enough, here we are coping in September with the effects of bad money. Kevin, it’s good to see you again.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Nice to be here.

BILL MOYERS: Is there any consolation in being right when the conditions are so bad?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, I guess there is in one narrow, little niche. But I do have the feeling that this is going to be a big one, that I hate to use the term “innings.” But let’s say I don’t think we’re too far into the ballgame. I think we have more of a ballgame to go than we’ve had. So, yes, I think it’s going to be a real problem.

BILL MOYERS: In a ballgame, there are referees. There are umpires. Who are the referees now? Who are the umpires in this critical game?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, in a sense, I think some of the umpires are investors. Some are people overseas who wonder what they have to think of the United States. Do they want to keep investing here? Do they want to support the dollar? Do they believe in the government here and know what it’s doing?

But Americans, ordinary Americans don’t have much of a role in this partly I think because they don’t really know the dimensions of what’s involved here. This is the denouement of the 25-year debt buildup which was undertaken mostly by the financial sector putting themselves on steroids to get bigger and bigger and bigger. And we’ve finally gotten to the point where the bubble isn’t sustainable anymore but a lot of Wall Street is dedicated to minimizing the spattering of thebubble, so to speak.

BILL MOYERS: Give me a quick definition of “bad money.”

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, “bad money” has a triple connotation. The first is “bad money” in the sense of bad capitalism drives out good capitalism.

BILL MOYERS: That’s sort of a historical-

KEVIN PHILLIPS: That’s right. We’ve had-

BILL MOYERS: I don’t understand why it is. But-

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, because you have to compete with sleaze. Get a little more sleaze in your own operations. And you look at all these lies, these deceptions, these frauds that have been going on. But, I mean, there aren’t too many people that would say back two or three years ago that the way to prosper more was to do less of the cheating. You had to do what the others were doing. And that’s the way these things — it was true in the Twenties. It’s been true in plenty of other bubbles. You have to do it. So just the question of what’s been bubbling here and the hugeness of the problem hasn’t been revealed to people.

BILL MOYERS: You say it’s the greatest story never told.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, the greatest story never told in several senses. The first sense and when I do bad money, it’s bad capitalism and bad money in the sense of the dollar and bad money in the sense of bad dog, bad Wall Street. But what’s here that doesn’t get the attention is the United States in the last 20 years undertook an enormous transformation of itself with no attention paid. And what it means is and what makes all this so frightening is the country is at risk because of the size of the financial sector that has never been graded on its competence and behavior in any serious way. They are the economy at this point. And we are now seeing what happens when a 20 to 21 percent of GDP financial sector starts to come unglued.

BILL MOYERS: But there are people, Kevin, who disagree with us, who say that this financial industry has created great wealth for America in the last 25 years.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Oh, it’s created great wealth for a small slice of America. But if you go back and we remember the manufacturing heyday, the auto workers in Michigan had fishing cabins up on the lake. And the middle class had been fattened by the rise of the blue-collar middle class. Well, there’s no rising blue-collar middle class now. The middle class is shrinking.

The pie in a financial economy goes to the one or two percent — or even less- that have capital skills and education. We have never had so much polarization and wealth disparity and just groaning wealth right at the top of ladder as we have now under finance. [snip]

BILL MOYERS: You’re very hard in here on Alan Greenspan’s tenure at the Fed.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, I know Alan from the Republican campaign back in 1968. He was always a very scholarly, data-driven guy. But I think, for some reason or other, his chairmanship will be remembered as turn on the spigots.

BILL MOYERS: Turn on the spigots?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Turn on the spigots. He started in 1987 with a crash that was a wicked one in one day in 1987. And he turned on the spigots. And they had the huge growth of the tech bubble in the 1990s. And then right after the tech and the stock market bubble blew up in 2000, you had 9/11. So there was a need for more stimulus. And they ginned up the stimulus again hugely.

And the upshot is that during Greenspan’s tenure from 1987 to 2006, what they call total credit market debt in the United States quadrupled, quadrupled from about $11 trillion up to $44, $45, $46 trillion. And finance got the great bulk of it. And Greenspan would do nothing to disturb finance.

He wouldn’t puncture a bubble. He wouldn’t crack down on the exotic mortgages. He really wouldn’t do much of anything except give obscure speeches in which, you know, he mumbled the different directions so nobody would know what he meant. But basically he gave finance what they wanted.

BILL MOYERS: And you write also that during this period the Clinton Administration aided and abetted this kind of speculation. Bill Clinton’s economic advisor, Bob Rubin, who later became Secretary of Treasury — wanting to fuel this, right?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: It’s been a bipartisan phenomenon. You can go back to the 1980s and say Reagan and George Bush, Sr., got a bubble started. Clinton got in and got an even bigger bubble going. And then George W. Bush with the biggest bubble of all. But it’s not that the Clintonites didn’t play. They did. Bob Rubin as Secretary of the Treasury — I mean, if he was a Hindu and he was being reincarnated, he’d come back as a pail because this guy bailed out everything you can imagine. They had the Mexican loan bailout. They had the long-term capital management bailout, the Russian Southeast Asian currency bailouts.

BILL MOYERS: All of which, however, kept them from coming into this economy, into our economy, coming to our continent.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, except that a lot of the liquidity they created and the momentum and the borrowed money produced the implosion of the bubble in 2000.And a lot of what was imploding was the $2.5 trillion in new debt that was tied to energy and telecommunications, that’s Enron, WorldCom, and Global Crossing. So there was a lot more of a bubble blown up there.

Rubin was also central — Democrats more than Republicans in a lot of ways with the Clinton Administration — in getting rid of Glass Stiegel, was the old restriction that the banks couldn’t tie up with brokerage firms and insurance companies. Well, basically after they made their reform led by Clinton and by Bob Rubin, you had like four-color linguini here in a bowl. It’s all mixed up together.

BILL MOYERS: So you have it — for this disaster has bipartisan parentage.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Absolutely. [snip]

BILL MOYERS: But as we speak, central banks are pouring billions of dollars into the global economy. Is this a palliative or is this a panacea?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Oh, I think it’s a tricky game. In one respect, they want to make a lot of money available to make it easier to get lending unfrozen. The second thing they want to do is support the dollar, which is under enormous pressure now because people say it’s not a store house of anything. If you want to keep your money safe, put it in gold. So they’re worried about the huge rise that gold had in this week.

So I think what we’re looking at here is an attempt really like a drunk will feel better and get over his hangover better sometimes just by having more liquor. And I think what we’re seeing with the actions of the Federal Reserve Board is the people who are the arsonists, the people who pumped it all up, who blew up the bubble are now racing to show up in firemen’s hats and say, “We’re gonna solve it. We’re gonna take care of all this. Oh, and by the way, we’re gonna keep pumping in the gasoline that we pumped in before that made a good flame.” But, you know, nobody knows that.

BILL MOYERS: Are you suggesting that the best thing to do is let the house burn down and build it over again?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: I would say, first of all, you never should have blown the bubble this way. If we could invent a time machine and go back and cure it that would be the best economics of all. Having blown it up, I think the case is that they should have accepted more of the tough medicine beginning last year and not tried to rescue every stray tentacle of the financial octopus

BILL MOYERS: But they didn’t. We don’t have a time-

KEVIN PHILLIPS: They didn’t. No.

BILL MOYERS: So here we are. Where are we?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Where we are, in my opinion, is about halfway through. Halfway through the serious part.

BILL MOYERS: Halfway to the bottom?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: It depends what you use in terms of bottom. I mean, in some ways, real estate prices were lower in 1936, ’37 than they were in 1929 or ’30. So I’m not sure exactly what you use as the measurement, real estate, the stock market. But it’s a package which Americans have to understand is going to be awful. We’re probably going to wind up nationally losing 20 to 30 percent of the average value of homes.

The stock market will — right now it’s in the middle 10,000s. The people who were nervous but not super bears expect that the Dow will go back down into the 9,000s. But what people have to remember is that in 2000 the Dow was 11,700. If you take off where it’s lost since then and you adjust for inflation, you’re looking at a 30 to 40 percent decline. So houses are matched in a way by what’s happening in stocks.

BILL MOYERS: So we’re all going to be poor? Well, not all-

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, we’re not all going to be poor because there are people in Wall Street who’ve used all this new technology basically to bet the other way. I mean, one of the things that finance can do now, it can bet on anything. It’s like Las Vegas merged with insurance and real estate people. And they have figured out new ways to gamble. And they can gamble on how many people in Ohio are going to lose their shirt.

BILL MOYERS: So who do you trust anymore? I mean, you write in your book that the most worrisome thing is the extent of official understatement and misstatement, the preference for minimizing how many problems there are and how interconnected they are.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, just to give you an example of how many there are, Alan Greenspan has finally decided to admit, you know, this may be one of those once-a-century biggies. Well, what makes it fascinating is that I sometimes use the description “seven sharks.” There are seven sharks in the tank with the economy.

And the first is financialization because we’re so dependent on this industry that’s sort of half lost its marbles. The second is that you have this huge buildup of debt, absolutely unprecedented anywhere in the world. The third is you’ve now got home prices collapsing. The fourth is you’ve got global commodity inflation building up.

The fifth is you’ve got flawed and deceptive government economics statistics. The sixth is that you’ve got what they call peak oil where the world is, to some extent, running out of oil. So it’s not just commodity inflation, it’s a shortage of oil. And then the last thing is the collapsing dollar. Now, whenever you get this sort of package in one decade, you got a big one. And when Greenspan says it’s a once a century, I think it’s another variation but on a par with the Thirties. [snip]

BILL MOYERS: No, I was going to say Obama’s trademark rhetoric of inspiration seems to desert him when he talks about economic affairs.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: He doesn’t seem to have anything very specific to say. That’s part of the problem. A second problem is, for me at least, you know, just as I can’t believe that John McCain ever wanted to get his economic advice from Phil Gramm. I mean, Phil Gramm, a former Texas Senator, appalling. He and his wife were known as Mr. and Mrs. Enron because they were so flagrant, that’s McCain.

But then you’ve got Obama with Bob Rubin and he doesn’t have any problem with the hedge fund types. I mean, one of the Chicago people was a major financer of his. He gets a guy to pick his vice-president. Turns out to be somebody who was part of the Fannie and Freddie mess.

So I don’t exactly see Obama as this fellow riding in on a horse who represents all kinds of reformism. It’s an important thing probably to have to change from the Republicans but I don’t see that he is free of the ties to finance and Democratic Party financial types.

BILL MOYERS: I’ve known you a long time. Are you reaching the point where you’re leaving yourself and us despairing?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, I’m not despairing because one of the things, as you know, when you get to be more or less our age, you’ve got grandchildren you can feel young with. But I’m sick of Washington. It really deserves the fact that 81 percent or 85 percent of the people think we’re on the wrong track. I mean, we are on the wrong track. I wish I could say that there’s a blueprint that would get us back on the right track. But my sense of histories previous goes to the one or two percent leading world economic power is you don’t get back on the right track.

BILL MOYERS: So what happens?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: You go through a painful adjustment process. The British were absolutely top dog in the world in 1914. Two world wars and 35 years later, they were having, after World War II, they were having food rationing, the pound sterling crashed, dukes were giving guided tours of their castles because they couldn’t afford to maintain them otherwise. Doesn’t take long. And I’m afraid the United States is coming right into that period which marks a couple of decades coming up that are going to be very difficult for America.

BILL MOYERS: You wrote in that AMERICAN PROSPECT piece that some people, particularly in the reform community and among progressives, see this as a great opportunity for returning to the New Deal regulatory period instigated by Franklin Roosevelt in the pits of the Depression. You don’t think that’s happening.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, I mean, there’s several difficulties here. First of all, at this point, what you’ve got are the Democrats are the party right at this point that’s getting most of the financial money. When Franklin D. Roosevelt won in 1932, we know he wasn’t getting most of the financial money.

The second thing is I don’t think we’re more than partway through. The Democrats think it’s going to be another 1933, they get in there, they can do all the New Deal stuff. My feeling is that they’re coming in halfway and they’re going to have to make hard decisions that are going to eat the Democratic coalition like a bologna sandwich. They’re going to start civil wars

BILL MOYERS: How come? What do you mean?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, if you’re going to bail out Wall Street while you’re saying oh, the Social Security recipients, maybe they don’t even need that money. A lot of people in the financial community basically want to push Social Security on some sort of voluntary basis and needs test it and get rid of it. Now, a lot of Democrats in the labor movement are very nervous about Obama. They put out press releases talking about Rubin-nomics because they see that the flesh of the Democratic Party carries a lunchbox. But the new soul of the Democratic Party wears a pinstripe suit.

BILL MOYERS: And the Republicans, what do they do?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, they’re-

BILL MOYERS: More of the same? I mean-

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, different flavors. I can’t imagine anything worse than having another four years of George W. Bush. I think he’s probably the biggest disaster at the worst period of time that we could ever have a disaster in modern history. But could the Republicans be different and better? Oddly enough, I think they might have a small bit of integrity as opposition people, whereas subordinate to Bush and all the people that control national Republican politics, the Republicans were a waste of time.

But, for example, Senator Grassley of Iowa was ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee. He opposed the Fannie/Freddie Bill and said it was a payoff to Wall Street and K Street. That’s the lobbyists in Washington. You now have the Senator of Alabama, Shelby, who’s the ranking Republican on Senate Banking, totally opposed anymore bailouts. We’ve got to let the markets do it. Well, the National Republican Party doesn’t believe that for one minute.

BILL MOYERS: Because they get their money from the same people.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: That’s right. The same money goes to the Democrats.


KEVIN PHILLIPS: But what these people develop a bit more of a sense of ordinary Americans and live up to some of your 4th of July speeches if they don’t have a Republican White House, yes, I think they — some of them might be helpful in talking about how the Democrats just want to move in and get the money so that, you know, they can get the bigger checks.

BILL MOYERS: So we at least finally have an election about something, don’t we? I mean, with the Fed and the economy at the heart of the debate now?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: The people who have the connections with the lobbies and the big donors have absolutely no problem with all these bailouts and rescues. But they don’t dare admit it because who’s rescuing the laid off worker? Nobody’s rescuing them. The fact that the Democrats don’t want to talk about what they’re going to do if they get the chance, that’s dishonesty. But the Republican Party is thoroughly dishonest in the same way.

BILL MOYERS: But we are going to have a new president in January, no matter how despairing people may be about that. What is the first thing you would find convincing if he did it to meet this meltdown, this issue, this crisis?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, I guess I would without talking out of school particularly, Obama told me one time he read some of my books. So I would be very interested and impressed if he in January started to say something has really gone wrong in this country. And I’m not sure that I or anybody else can turn it around. But we borrowed so much money.

We’ve let this Las Vegas version of what used to be ordinary banks in our ordinary hometowns go berserk. Our currency is having enormous problems. People are losing their homes. We’ve got to face up to what our problems are and talk about how this happened. Who did it? Why? Who made the money?

Well, I think if he were to start talking about I’d take him seriously. But I think half of Washington would have a problem in their stomach needing quick relief, let me put it that way. Cause you don’t rock that boat. You pretend that it’s a sound economy. And if it’s not sound, it’s nothing that the old Democratic elixir can’t fix, you know? Old New Deal in a bottle. We’ll have a couple of swigs and you’ll be happy again. I don’t expect him to level.

BILL MOYERS: But is it conceivable to you that a John McCain might have gotten the message now to see what’s at stake in the presidency that he would hold if he is elected and that he might actually turn out to be a reformer?

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Well, I think there’s some element there in contrast to what you’ve sort of osmose at the Harvard Law School, what you osmose in a naval family I think would be much less sycophancy toward Wall Street and the money crowd. So I think McCain has that. On the other hand, he doesn’t have any knowledge. Anybody who thought that Phil Gramm was somebody who could instruct you in fairness to ordinary people and your — this is the guy, “Nation of Whiners” remember Phil.


KEVIN PHILLIPS: So I’m very dubious. I think part of McCain would probably feel like his father and grandfather, the naval officers. But, you know, he’s a Republican. He’d have a Republican package.

BILL MOYERS: The book is BAD MONEY: RECKLESS FINANCE, FAILED POLITICS, AND THE GLOBAL CRISIS OF AMERICAN CAPITALISM. And as I said at the beginning of this interview, if you have to read one book, this is the one to do it. Kevin Phillips, thanks very much for being with me.

KEVIN PHILLIPS: Good to see you.

The Dimocratic Party made a disasterous selection when it selected Barack Obama. The Hopium addeled addicts fell for the razzle dazzle and cared not to look at the issues. Hillary intended to protect Social Security and keep Social Security away from the gambling houses on Wall Street.

Hillary knew her husband had made some mistakes but Bill Clinton saved Social Security and Hillary knew how to avoid the economic traps and mistakes from earlier years. Obama is and was prepared to hand over Social Security to the robber barons. As Phillips notes it is difficult to stop a country when it is determined to commit suicide. We noted earlier, before the Denver funeral, that it is difficult to stop a Party when it is determined to commit suicide.

The United States needed a president with courage and experience and knowledge of who is who and what is what. That was the way to avoid an even greater disaster than George W. Bush. Hillary was the way to get back on the right track.

But my sense of histories previous goes to the one or two percent leading world economic power is you don’t get back on the right track.

Martin Luther King in 1963 when he was a very young man said:

Success, recognition, and conformity are the bywords of the modern world where everyone seems to crave the anesthetizing security of being identified with the majority.

It would do well for the currently Hopium Happy majority to take heed of “deficit hawks” and those they deride. It would do well for the currently Hopium Happy majority to recognize how severe the problems are and how fatally flawed Barack Obama is, who his friends are, and what his history is.

History is a teacher. In the current case, History is singing a celestial dirge.


Barack Obama Inaugurated – The Dream Comes True

As he stumbles with the oath of office: It’s a dream come true.

It’s the opposite of Martin Luther King’s ‘character, not color’ dream. But it is a dream come true alright. It’s a dream come true for the unqualified, race-baiting, and gay-bashing, and woman hating, Barack Obama.

For long-suffering Americans the good news is that George W. Bush is gone, gone, gone. The heart-breaking news for long-suffering Americans is that Barack Obama, sold by his Big Media masters as change, is The Third Bush Term.

In today’s laugh riot, dream come true article we cover The Godfather‘s Hyman Roth; the foolish Gay-Americans who voted for Barack gay-bashing Obama and the BHO HBO Robinson snub and how this all is connected to Caroline Kennedy’s dream; the TV show 24; Obama’s view of the seasons, the Big Media triumph, Rick Warren and much more.

* * *

Last night on the TV show 24 the woman president said this: “Presidents don’t make new friends, they just lean on old friends.” So watch out America, if you judge Obama by his friends, watch out.

The long-time Obama friends, those of twenty years or more, still have to remain hidden. Of course Antoin “Tony” Rezko can’t make it to Washington because he is awaiting sentencing in Corrupt to the Core Chicago.

One big Obama friend who will be in Washington is Rick Warren. Rick Warren, another Obama friend who is a homophobe – who equated gay relationships to incest and child abuse, who is trying to destroy the Episcopalian Church, was given a prime spot at the inaugural to puff up his prestige quotient, and sell more books by giving the invocation today. This caused flim-flammed Gay-Americans and their supporters to protest.

Because of the protests, Obama had to try another of his flim-flams.

The flim-flam from gay-baiter Obama was to add a Gay-American, Bishop Eugene Robinson (Episcopalian – the church homophobe Rick Warren is trying to destroy) to a concert program in honor of Obama. But a funny thing happened on the way to the forum.

Eugene Robinson and Gay-Americans and their supporters got flim-flammed again. It’s is almost fun to watch gay Obama supporting blogs whine as they try to explain away the flim-flam and why it’s all good:

HBO says it was Obama. Obama throws it back at HBO in this statement I just received:

“We had always intended and planned for Rt. Rev. Robinson’s invocation to be included in the televised portion of yesterday’s program. We regret the error in executing this plan – but are gratified that hundreds of thousands of people who gathered on the mall heard his eloquent prayer for our nation that was a fitting start to our event.” — PIC communications director Josh Earnest

At least the Obama people think it important enough to weigh in, and that’s a good thing. A lot of good people were disappointed by this.

But other Hopium blogs get messed up trying to explain away the flim-flam:

Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson just addressed the issue on NPR’s Talk of the Nation. He said he had been in interviews all morning and no one — certainly not Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC — mentioned the snub. “I know very little about it,” said Robinson before telling host Neal Conan how he learned the news: “I had a delightful day meeting all the other participants in the program. … A little later in the morning I happened to see a schedule,” and it showed him giving the invocation at 2:25 and HBO cameras going live at 2:30 p.m. [snip]

As you will read below, HBO officials made it clear that they had nothing to do with the scheduling. Also, a caller to “Talk of the Nation” called in to confirm that NPR did not air the invocation, either. [snip]

Wait, it gets worse: Turns out half the crowd that had gathered around the Lincoln Memorial and could see Bishop Robinson give his prayer couldn’t hear him. “A malfunction in at least one massive speaker tower on the south side of the memorial left tightly-packed crowds on pins and needles chanting thunderously, ‘We can’t hear. We can’t hear,'” reported a blogger at

What a lucky malfunction for Obama.

This advice to Obama came from a gay supporting blogger, full of Hopium, was stark:

As I see it, the Obama campaign has three options when the outcry (which has already started) comes to a boil later today:

1. Claim it was a technical glitch, jumping on the Times blog item. This would not only be a cowardly route, but it would be quickly disproven by one of several possibly gay executives at HBO or a viewer who could point out that the show began precisely and glitch-free at 2:30 p.m. ET.

UPDATE: Option 1 is off the table. An HBO spokesperson told TVB, “The PIC (Presidential Inaugural Committee)made the decision to put Bishop Robinson’s invocation in the pre-show.”

2. Come clean and admit that they never intended for Robinson to be seen on national TV. Which would mean admitting that Obama cooked up an extremely cynical ploy to pacify gays — and straights like me who support gay marriage — with a press release. Well, it failed. Perhaps Team Obama will claim it had no idea Robinson would not be seen giving the invocation. But then what does that say of Team Obama’s vaunted preparation, planning, and chesslike working of all the angles?

3. Admit they screwed up and should’ve included Robinson on camera. If HBO had — for some reason — objected to having a gay bishop welcome all of America to “We Are One,” then the invocation could have been pushed until after the entry of the presidential entourage. Well, it would not be the first time Team Obama had underestimated a controversial clergyman … or the second. (How many presidents have gotten into hot water over their ministers three times before they even took the oath of office??)(

Whatever excuse the Obama people choose, exactly zero Americans saw Bishop Robinson on TV welcoming America to a day celebrating a president who is supposedly, to quote Colin Powell, a transformational figure.

And 150 million people will see Rick Warren do the same thing on Tuesday.

Some transformation.

BHO HBO seems to be in the news quite a bit lately. HBO is a good friend to Barack Obama and Caroline Kennedy.

Yesterday the New York Times published a new masterpiece in the shilling genre. The beneficiary of the shilling was Caroline Kennedy. The article portrayed Caroline Kennedy as a goddess with the common touch whose feet actually touch the ground. Caroline, we were told must have greatness thrust upon her because she is so demure and wonderful. We were informed (seriously, we are not making this up) that the demure Ms. Kennedy made a few forays into the field of self-promotion, which does not come naturally to her.

The quotes in the article are mostly from close Caroline Kennedy friends even as we were assured that Caroline Kennedy had nothing to do with the article. We suspect her paid flacks dictated the article and the New York Times merely published it, which technically might make the claim true.

Ms. Kennedy was neither surprised nor deterred by the initial “roughness of the politics, which might have made others dive under their beds,” her close friend Nicole K. Seligman, general counsel of the Sony Corporation, said. Still, she once again withdrew from the public eye and declined to be interviewed for this article.

We were further informed that Caroline Kennedy was a diligent student in law school who afterwards never practiced law but wrote pop books about law instead. Good friend Paul Kirk (yes that Paul Kirk of the Kennedy Library as well as the Presidential Debates Commission – you know the Commission that had most of the primary debates in Obama friendly sites like Chicago, or Howard University, and many many many African-American targeted debates and fora but not one debate specifically geared towards women) says it was Caroline Kennedy who “spotlighted” soon-to-be Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis.

Close Caroline Kennedy friend Nicole K. Seligman, of Sony Corp., clues us in on how Caroline got that $90,000 job (the one she then worked for free because she did not want to reveal her finances as common city workers do). Nicole, it turns out, is married to Joel Klein who became chancellor of New York City schools. The job interview consisted of a visit by Joel to Caroline Kennedy and a walk on the beach in Martha’s Vineyard – the way common city workers get interviewed for $90,000 jobs.

But the article also provided some clues for Obama supporting Gay-Americans and their fellow Hopium addled addict friends.

“I think she’s constitutionally modest and constitutionally not a bloviator, and the ‘look at me’ part of politics is so antithetical to what she is,” said Richard Plepler, a friend who is co-president of HBO. “But don’t confuse that with a lack of passion or talent for making her case cogently and effectively.”

HBO is one of many Big Media outlets that has shilled for Obama for years. HBO did what it had to do to help Obama and screw his opponents. Bishop Robinson and Gay-Americans got screwed by both Obama and BHO HBO.

* * *

Like any adept flim-flam man Obama does not want his past examined to closely, if at all. Obama wants us to forget what he did during the primaries. But it is difficult to examine Obama without looking at the primaries and general election campaigns because he has such a thin history to examine. Obama does not want us to remember nor discuss what he did or said during the campaign.

But what is even healthier and more necessary is the recognition that after the season of campaigning has ended, each of us in public life has a responsibility to usher in a new season of cooperation built on those things we hold in common. Not as Democrats. Not as Republicans. But as Americans.

Nice flowery words, but what happened during the campaign is not a seasonal breeze to be forgotten. The campaign defined Obama. The campaign defined Obama as unqualified, race-baiting, and gay-bashing, and woman hating. We won’t forget as if it were a seasonal snow. We know and will remember that

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

* * *

Michelle Obama, in her inaugural gold empire waist dress, along with Barack Obama can expect a Big Media lovefest. Big Media got its man in. Barack Obama is Big Media’s tool. But the American public won’t be as lovey-dovey, even with Big Media shilling for Obama.

“I think Obama can count on a very long honeymoon,” said Mr. McKinnon, who also advised President Bush on media strategy. “I think he’s got about six months, which is about five and half months longer than usual.”

Our own AmericanGal provides much less, if any, time

You know, as Obama takes the oath of office I will be thinking that as President we will now have…

A man who has never held a serious decision making, executive office in his life, and yet will have been given the most challenging executive position in the world.

A man who in 1995 willingly started his state senate campaign in the living room of a famous domestic terrorist.

A man who 4 years ago completed a controversial and ethically questionable house purchase with the help of an individual under federal investigation (later convicted on other politically related misbehavior)

A man who served in the senate less than 4 years—two years of which was entirely spent running for President.

A man who just 12 months ago was a loyal twenty year member of a bigoted, politically extremist church

A man who just 11 months ago called his political opponent racist numerous times to win votes.

A man who just 9 months ago amassed the largest amount of political donations in history, many highly suspicious, and in amounts that are blatently illegal.

A man who just 8 months ago said “George Bush and John McCain have a lot to answer for” but less than one month ago now says “George Bush is a good guy”.

AmericanGal is clearly not happy with the coming nightmare. Martin Luther King would not have been happy with the race-baiting Obama and those who put color above character in judging whom to vote for. Martin Luther King did not have this dream, it was his nightmare.

Hyman Roth, a semi-fictional character in a Godfather film, would have thought today was a dream.

If I could only live to see it, to be there with you. What I wouldn’t give for twenty more years! Here we are, protected, free to make our profits without Kefauver, the goddamn Justice Department and the F.B.I. ninety miles away, in partnership with a friendly government. Ninety miles! It’s nothing! Just one small step, looking for a man who wants to be President of the United States, and having the cash to make it possible. Michael, we’re bigger than U.S. Steel.

The crime lords from Obama’s corrupt Chicago are now in charge – their dream has come true.


Martin Luther King, Yes; Pretender Barack Obama, NO

To those of us with a knowledge of history Barack Obama is a pretentious flim-flam man and graffiti “artist”, who scratches and defaces the memorials built to honor truly great men. Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King (today is Martin Luther King day) were not pretenders, they were great men worthy of the honors and respect paid to them.

Abraham Lincoln, as we have written since April 2007, was a man fully engaged in the issues of his time. Whether on tarriffs, the Mexican War, slavery and its abolition, new states admitted to the Union, and economic development of the nation growing into an eventual continental power, Abraham Lincoln was fully engaged and fully experienced well before he ran for president. Abraham Lincoln was elected president because he participated fully in the debates of his day and cared about the ordinary American.

Martin Luther King was also fully engaged in the issues of his time. At 27 years of age, Martin Luther King initiated the Montgomery bus boycott which led to the desegregation of that public transportation system. At 35 Martin Luther King became the youngest Nobel Peace Prize laureate.

Martin Luther King was assasinated as he campaigned for labor rights and economic betterment of sanitation workers in Memphis, Tennessee. Economic bondage in a city named “Memphis” echoed from the Egyptian Memphis, the ancient land of captivity.

Even as he sacrificed to make the lives of sanitation workers in Memphis better, Martin Luther King was also organizing the Poor People’s Campaign. The Poor People’s Campaign continued King’s great engagement in the issues of the day.

Barack Obama has had no concern nor engagement in the issues of the day. Barack Obama’s involvement with the poor is best defined by his contempt for his freezing constituents and his courtship of the callous and corrupt powerful.

Many Democrats, like us, never accepted the legitimacy of George W. Bush due to the, yes, stolen election in 2000. Many of our fellow Americans did accept George W. Bush as legitimate regardless of how the Supreme Court twisted the results in Florida. We suspect those are the very same Americans who will celebrate or shrug in resignation tomorrow. At the time of our dissent George W. Bush stood in high standing with Americans hopeful for the future.

We will not be celebrating tomorrow nor will we shrug in resignation, nor will we cease to point to history, particularly the primary election history of Barack Obama. After all, we believe that History Is A Teacher.

So today, and tomorrow, we will stand side by side with Dr. Martin Luther King – in dissent.

And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak.

Dr. King spoke regarding a distant war but his was a call to engagement and action. We as Americans will remain engaged in the issues of the day.

Hillary Clinton was one of those that decades ago heard Dr. King and fully engaged in the issue of the day. On Saturday the Martin Luther King Center honored Hillary Clinton.

U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton was lauded as a champion of social and racial justice at the King Center’s “Salute to Greatness” dinner Saturday in Atlanta. [snip]

“It’s not just remembering and celebrating; we must also act,” Clinton told the audience of 1,000 people. “Until every vote is counted and every American has health insurance and jobs, then it is up to all of us. As we commemorate MLK Day, we are called upon to treat this day as a day of service. We all have a part to play.”

Isaac Farris Jr., president of the King Center, lauded Clinton for her leadership, humanitarianism and “as a champion of needed social reforms.”

“Sen. Clinton has worked tirelessly throughout her career to advance racial justice, child welfare and health security for all Americans and human rights worldwide,” Farris said in prepared remarks.

Hillary Clinton has chosen to continue on her lifelong path to better the lives of Americans. We wish her well.

Hillary Clinton remains fully engaged in the issues of the day and Americans are increasingly grateful for her hard work on our behalf.

Hillary Clinton, like Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King before her, has led a fully engaged life on behalf of ordinary Americans.

As in 2000, many Americans will shut down their critical faculties tomorrow, shrug in resignation and accept the unacceptable.

Joyfully, for us Hillary is 44 – we’ll accept no substitutes.