Hillary Clinton – I Dreamed A Dream

Two years ago today, HillaryIs44 was born.

We have been right about the worthiness (not infallibility or perfection) of Hillary Clinton. We have been right about the con artist Chicago flim-flam man Barack Obama.

This past week the subject of much attention has been a British woman by the name of Susan Boyle. On a television show Susan Boyle sang a song that electrified the world. “I’ve never been given a chance before” said Susan Boyle.

Already Susan Boyle has been attacked by a “reporter” woman.

As a response to the article attacking Susan Boyle a reader asked a question Hillary Clinton supporters have asked themselves many times:

It is obvious Susan Boyle is the genuine article, a spinster who cared lovingly for her mother until her death at 91. What is it about such self sacrificing women that makes Mz. Callahan so uncomfortable she has to turn Susan into a suspected phony? That questions answers itself. My husband was at first worried that Susan could only sing that one song…so I played her version of ‘Cry Me a River’ for him. His eyes popped, and he is a jazz bassist. Susan is so gifted that she can outdo American jazz singers in their own accents and styles. The fact that she can perfectly interpret a ‘you dun me wrong’ blues song having never been kissed just shows how tremendously gifted she is. Yet women like Callahan have to despise the genuine article. A self sacrificing caregiver is now being given the chance her dying mother urged her to seek….Callahan has to say something cynical. That says far more about Callahan than it does Susan Boyle.

The lyrics to the song I Dreamed A Dream are about “lost innocence and broken dreams”. The heroine of the song is Fantine, a woman abandoned by her lover, gives birth to a daughter, Cosette, out of wedlock, is wrongly dismissed from a desperately-needed job, and forced into prostitution to survive and to support her daughter.

Fantine’s story is not particularly unusual. Her circumstances repeat throughout history. The names change but the story remains the same. The abusers’ names change but the shame remains.

* * * * *

We have been writing the truth that neither Republicans nor Dimocrats want to hear for two years now. When we started to publish we were completely alone. Now many websites are “Hillary supporter” websites. But even among the Hopium eaters our message now echoes.

The latest HillaryIs44 style article comes from Naomi Klein via Obama Hopium central The Nation and the vile cesspool which is The Huffington Post:

I was a bit concerned about posting my latest column on Huffington Post, for obvious reasons. But I have decided to do it anyway, in the hopes that HuffPo readers will submit additions and modifications to the Lexicon of Disappointment. Or, alternatively, just yell about how wrong I am.

The entire HillaryIs44 oeuvre is the foundation of the “Lexicon”. Klein, with whom we do not totally or even mostly agree, adds to our work as she explains the stench of B.O. from the viewpoint of the dupes and fools she knows from firsthand experience:

All is not well in Obamafanland. It’s not clear exactly what accounts for the change of mood. Maybe it was the rancid smell emanating from Treasury’s latest bank bailout. [snip]

Whatever the last straw, a growing number of Obama enthusiasts are starting to entertain the possibility that their man is not, in fact, going to save the world if we all just hope really hard.

This is a good thing. If the superfan culture that brought Obama to power is going to transform itself into an independent political movement, one fierce enough to produce programs capable of meeting the current crises, we are all going to have to stop hoping and start demanding.

The first stage, however, is to understand fully the awkward in-between space in which many US progressive movements find themselves. To do that, we need a new language, one specific to the Obama moment. Here is a start.

Klein, still does not get that the “superfan” culture will never become “an independent political movement”. Hopium addicts can at best end and then recover from their addictions and finally apologize to those who knew more than them but whom they belittled. Klein then lists words Hopium addicts should add to their Obama Lexicon:

Hopeover. Like a hangover, a hopeover comes from having overindulged in something that felt good at the time but wasn’t really all that healthy, leading to feelings of remorse, even shame. It’s the political equivalent of the crash after a sugar high. Sample sentence: “When I listened to Obama’s economic speech my heart soared. But then, when I tried to tell a friend about his plans for the millions of layoffs and foreclosures, I found myself saying nothing at all. I’ve got a serious hopeover.”

Hoper coaster. Like a roller coaster, the hoper coaster describes the intense emotional peaks and valleys of the Obama era, the veering between joy at having a president who supports safe-sex education and despondency that single-payer healthcare is off the table at the very moment when it could actually become a reality. Sample sentence: “I was so psyched when Obama said he is closing Guantánamo. But now they are fighting like mad to make sure the prisoners in Bagram have no legal rights at all. Stop this hoper coaster — I want to get off!”

Hopesick. Like the homesick, hopesick individuals are intensely nostalgic. They miss the rush of optimism from the campaign trail and are forever trying to recapture that warm, hopey feeling–usually by exaggerating the significance of relatively minor acts of Obama decency. Sample sentences: “I was feeling really hopesick about the escalation in Afghanistan, but then I watched a YouTube video of Michelle in her organic garden and it felt like inauguration day all over again. A few hours later, when I heard that the Obama administration was boycotting a major UN racism conference, the hopesickness came back hard. So I watched slideshows of Michelle wearing clothes made by ethnically diverse independent fashion designers, and that sort of helped.”

Hope fiend. With hope receding, the hope fiend, like the dope fiend, goes into serious withdrawal, willing to do anything to chase the buzz. (Closely related to hopesickness but more severe, usually affecting middle-aged males.) Sample sentence: “Joe told me he actually believes Obama deliberately brought in Summers so that he would blow the bailout, and then Obama would have the excuse he needs to do what he really wants: nationalize the banks and turn them into credit unions. What a hope fiend!”

Hopebreak. Like the heartbroken lover, the hopebroken Obama-ite is not mad but terribly sad. She projected messianic powers onto Obama and is now inconsolable in her disappointment. Sample sentence: “I really believed Obama would finally force us to confront the legacy of slavery in this country and start a serious national conversation about race. But now he never seems to mention race, and he’s using twisted legal arguments to keep us from even confronting the crimes of the Bush years. Every time I hear him say ‘move forward,’ I’m hopebroken all over again.”

Hopelash. Like a backlash, hopelash is a 180-degree reversal of everything Obama-related. Sufferers were once Obama’s most passionate evangelists. Now they are his angriest critics. Sample sentence: “At least with Bush everyone knew he was an asshole. Now we’ve got the same wars, the same lawless prisons, the same Washington corruption, but everyone is cheering like Stepford wives. It’s time for a full-on hopelash.”

Klein is not really over the Hopium addiction (or in her case, exploitation). Klein, like many Hopium addled addicts (or exploiters), is on the half step of Methadone. There is still not a sufficient understanding of what idiots they have been nor how damaging and warped their worldview is. The best that can be said of these recovering Hopium addicts is that they know the Hopium is not something they wish to continue to consume. But there is a long way to go before full recovery and full understanding of the damage they have caused and the foolishness of their world-view.

In trying to name these various hope-related ailments, I found myself wondering what the late Studs Terkel would have said about our collective hopeover. He surely would have urged us not to give in to despair. I reached for one of his last books, Hope Dies Last. I didn’t have to read long. The book opens with the words: “Hope has never trickled down. It has always sprung up.”

And that pretty much says it all. Hope was a fine slogan when rooting for a long-shot presidential candidate. But as a posture toward the president of the most powerful nation on earth, it is dangerously deferential. [snip]

Which brings me to the final entry in the lexicon.

Hoperoots. Sample sentence: “It’s time to stop waiting for hope to be handed down, and start pushing it up, from the hoperoots.”

It takes time for the detox to take full effect. The “hoperoots” are just another drug. Klein and others who believed in Obama or pretended to believe in Obama, in order to implement their foolish agendas, have a long way to go before full recovery.

We’ll be around to continue the detox.

For Americans who wanted real and realistic change, the Dream was Hillary. Every day, even to the Hopium addicts and the Hopium exploiters, Obama proves he is the nightmare.


108 thoughts on “Hillary Clinton – I Dreamed A Dream

  1. Thank you Admin.Your words are comforting and sorely needed by all of us here that support Hillary.Stay with us in this fight to save our great nation.

    By ABM90 Hillary will respond when she chooses the right moment in her fight for America.-

  2. Admin: Another great article. Thank you for the lexicon.

    Happy Birthday H44.

    ABM90: Thank you for your words of wisdom.

  3. Happy Birthday! It was the nature of your enemies that got me here in the first place. Your detractors are some of the most loathsome people I have encountered in the Democratic party.

    I wonder where the party goes from here. the poll watchers will tell you that the party itself is fine with overwhelming support for Obama. I don’t think that will be the case in 12. His turn out this time, with the sunny circumstances the Democratic faced, was underwhelming. The nation’s disposition won’t be so sunny towards him next time, regardless of whether the GOP sits it out or sides with Obama for a second time.

    I’m an FDR Democrat and a Clinton Democrat and there is still much work to be done.

  4. I don’t think the party is fine at all. I think the numbers supporting the party have fallen. So yes those still with it will support their circus messiah to the bitter end, but so many have become “independent” that those are the ones to watch in 2012.jmo

  5. Admin: Also, thank you for the tribute to Susan Boyle. You are certainly right; Boyle’s detractors say more about them than Susan. There is nothing phony about her. I have watched a few interviews with her, and she is the genuine article. She sang some brief excerpts from songs, a la acapella, when she was interviewed on Larry King, The Today Show, and GMA. She was superb, even without musical accompaniment. I hope she can go far.

  6. About Boyle….

    I haven’t seen the details of her life, but I wonder…. I saw Ethel Merman on a Tonight show (Paar?) and she said she had never had a singing lesson. Once she had gone to a teacher who told her never to go to any teachers, she was doing fine by herself, and she obeyed.

    Obviously Boyle must have done some study and practice by herself between nursing duties at home. Maybe that was better for her than struggling through schools where those who can’t, teach.

  7. Basement Angel, JanH, the Dimocrats will continue to make excuses for Obama for as long as they can in the same way Republicans and allies made excuses for George W. A great many Democrats who support Obama do so because they believe Big Media narratives such as “he is closing Guantanamo” and “ending the war” etc. But it will continue to get harder to keep the pretense going. We like these excerpts from the NYTimes today (which article is another example of making excuses for Obama):


    It was inevitable that Mr. Obama’s lofty pledge to change the ways of Washington would crash into the realities of governing, including lawmakers anxious to protect their constituents and an army of special-interest lobbyists. [snip]

    But his early willingness to deal or fold has left commentators, and some loyal Democrats, wondering: where’s the fight?

    “The thing we still don’t know about him is what he is willing to fight for,” said Leonard Burman, an economist at the Urban Institute and a Treasury Department official in the Clinton administration. “The thing I worry about is that he likes giving good speeches, he likes the adulation and he likes to make people happy.” [snip]

    Experts on the presidency say that Mr. Obama, after promising profound change during the campaign last year, may have no choice but to continue talking big.

    “If Obama is too timid, if the White House is too cautious,” said Robert Dallek, a presidential historian, “it is going to make him look too opportunistic. He made all these promises during the campaign, he talked so boldly, he stirred all our hopes, and now he is not following through.”

  8. Happy Happy Birthday, Admin, and many many Happy Returns!!!!


    And I am SO pleased you started this post off with a clip of my new heroine!

    Turnedown, Boyle DID have take singing lessons during her thirties.
    If I can refind the article about that I’ll post it here.

  9. Happy Birthday, Admin. We are so proud of you, as well as grateful to you.
    As for the detractors, of you and Susan as well as Hillary and Sarah, this we know: every phony feels threatened by the real article.

  10. This reminds me of a man I used to work with who during the work week went out of his way to be friends with everyone while ridiculing them unmercifully and very rudely when their backs were turned.

    He had so much hate in him that one day when I overheard him bragging about going to church every Sunday and being quite important there. I came up to him and asked him how he could treat people so cruelly during the week and then think all he had to do was go to church on the weekend and that would make him a great man.

    He looked at me as if I had grown horns.

  11. Happy Birthday Admin

    Many, many thanks.

    Someone from this blog came over to Hillary’s site during the campaign told us about Hillary is 44. Thanks to that person also. You can’t keep me away from here.

    Admin if you need help in keeping this site alive, please let us know.

    I am now Independent. No more Dem or Rep. The only way i would change back if Hillary ran for president.

  12. basil9 Says:
    Turnedown, Boyle DID have take singing lessons during her thirties.


    I’ll take your word for it. [smile]

  13. I heard that she took singing lessions for a few months only over a 2 year period. Either way, I heart this woman! 🙂

  14. turndown…

    morning news on fox… i believe it was bill hemmer interviewd susan boyle one day last week and she stated that she had taken voice lessons 2 days a week for 3 years……..but i don’t really care if she took lessons or not.

    her voice is still a natural wonder!


    ADMIN…….you’re too awesome for words!! 😀

  16. Happy Birthday Hillaryis44! This place has been a God send to me. I remember every day of April 2008 .. working our asses off in the last primaries. Daring to still believe she would go the distance, hoping the idiot sd’s would wake up from the hopium addiction and see the light. Alas, didn’t happen.

    America is in a shit wad of trouble. He’s bankrupting the country both morally and financially. Yes, those suffering from the hopelash and other hopeaddictions deserve to hurt.

  17. I want to add to that I think Admin has done an outstanding job with the blog as a whole.


    Today’s piece is priceless.

  18. hotair.com/archives/2009/04/19/video-zo-talks-sex-defends-palin-knocks-atheists/

    Now that’s what I’m talking about Brother!

    got the link @ Bitterpollitiz

  19. Another point of view…

    Apr 19, 2009

    The confrontation con game

    There are many people eager to see US President Barack Obama and his administration bash Israel, or predict that’s already happened. But the administration has yet to make significant direct anti-Israel actions or statements. Despite rumors and speculation, at this point there’s still no solid evidence. While, obviously, things could change at any time, I expect this widely predicted conflict isn’t going to take place.

    Let me emphasize the word “direct” from the first paragraph. Inasmuch as the US government gives up too much to Iran, Syria and radical Islamists, it hurts Israel’s interests, as well as those of most Arab governments and the United States itself. Still, what’s happened so far is being taken out of context by those who want a US-Israel confrontation because they hate either Israel or Obama. Contrast this alleged confrontation with the real but largely ignored conflict in US-Europe relations. Obama’s trip to Europe was a failure. To everything he asked – a parallel strategy for dealing with economic troubles, getting Turkey into the European Union or more help in Afghanistan – the Europeans said no. Then everyone proclaimed the visit a great success.

    With Israel, it’s the opposite. No confrontation happens but it’s presented that way. Let’s look at some examples:

    • Endorsing a two-state solution isn’t an attack on Israel’s government. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu doesn’t oppose a two-state solution – and hasn’t for 12 years – but emphasizes this would only happen if and when a Palestinian leadership proves its credibility and makes a decent offer. If the Obama administration says it’s going to succeed, so did its last three predecessors.
    This issue raises the most important single guideline for Israeli policy, which shouldn’t merely consist of saying, “We want peace and a two-state solution” 10 times a day. It should raise its own demands that the Palestinian Authority keeps its commitments and that any negotiated solution include Palestinian as well as Israeli concessions.

    Giving the Palestinians a state is conditional on that happening, not a blank check given whatever they do. There’s nothing wrong with demanding reciprocity. A strategy of offering everything and demanding nothing neither made Israel popular nor brought about a negotiated solution.

    • US engagement with Iran: While this is risky and will likely give Iran’s regime time to develop nuclear weapons, administration statements say engagement’s purpose is to stop that. I’m not sure a Bush administration would be doing much more. The key point will be whether the Obama administration ever concludes Iran’s regime doesn’t intend to change its behavior.

    At any rate, the administration has not made any material concessions to the Teheran regime. Undersecretary of the Treasury Stuart Levey, who managed financial sanctions against Iran during the Bush administration, is still doing so for the current government. Vice President Joe Biden’s and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’s statements opposing an Israeli attack on Iran, like the Bush administration stance, argued diplomacy should be given more time to work. Israel agrees. These positions apply to the present and don’t close off a US shift when Iran’s program is closer to success.

    • Obama’s endorsement of the Saudi plan as a positive element in the peace process is nothing new either.
    • The administration will boycott the Durban 2 hate-fest.
    • While talking about engagement with Syria, the administration hasn’t made concessions and the Syrian regime is visibly upset. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Jeffrey Feltman, her choice for assistant secretary of state for Near East affairs, are highly skeptical about Syria and Hizbullah.
    • Only one high-level presidential foreign policy appointment, White House advisor Samantha Powers, is clearly anti-Israel.
    • The administration appropriated lots of money for Gaza reconstruction but conditions on not giving it to Hamas seem serious and there’s no rush to send funds.

    AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT factor here is that in fact the PA and Hamas, not Israel, are the barriers to peace. An Obama presidency would be far more dangerous if there was a PA determined to say anything to get a state, get the US to pressure Israel to massive concessions, and then break its word. The same applies to a Hamas happy to pretend to abandon terrorism and genocidal rhetoric.
    But that’s not the case. The PA will criticize Israel but offer nothing. It won’t provide a moderate alternative program to Hamas, stop incitement, accept resettlement of Palestinian refugees in a Palestinian state,, make any territorial concessions or agree that a two-state solution permanently ends the conflict. And it won’t accept Israel as a Jewish state alongside a Palestine which – according to the PA’s own constitution – is an Arab and Muslim state.

    It’s predictable that the PA won’t give those who want to ram through a two-state solution, based only on Israeli concessions, the bare minimum they need to make such a strategy credible. The same point applies to Syria and the Golan Heights. Given that situation, there won’t be a serious broad collision with the United States over the peace process, whatever smaller storms erupt from time to time as they have done with previous administrations.

    Why are direct US-Israel relations relatively secure? Aside from the other side’s intransigence, which will inhibit US policy from giving it more, is the experience of the historically anti-Israel Obama himself. He learned in the campaign that he could insult large sections of the American people and abandon the most basic assumptions of American patriotism and get away with it. In contrast, he learned that it is politically costly to attack Israel. This isn’t to say there aren’t administration policies damaging Israel’s security, especially the strategy of futile engagement giving Iran’s regime time to get nuclear weapons. The administration’s approach also emboldens radical, terrorist, Islamist forces and demoralizes relatively moderate Arab regimes.

    The biggest loser from Obama’s policy, however, is not Israel but US national interests. Will there come a point when the administration realizes this and change course?


  20. PM Salam Fayyad seeks U.S. help in collecting Gaza funds

    By Akiva Eldar

    The Palestinian Authority has asked U.S. special Middle East envoy George Mitchell to use America’s leverage with the Arab states to convince them to make good on their financial commitments to the PA, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars earmarked for rebuilding the Gaza Strip. Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad was especially critical of the Saudi government, which pledged the largest amount at the Sharm el-Sheikh donor states’ conference earlier this year.

    Fayyad, who has said that he is resigning from his post, reported that he reached an agreement with several Gaza banks, according to which the funds will be sent to them directly, bypassing the Hamas government. Businesses and home owners who sustained damage in Operation Cast Lead would then be able to claim the money directly from the banks. According to Fayyad, there is an urgent need for $300,000,000 to continue the rehabilitation of the Strip.

    The prime minister also complained that Israel and Egypt are not allowing building materials into Gaza.

    The United States has also not yet transfered the $900,000,000 pledged by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Two-thirds of this donation are aimed at West Bank development, and the remainder for reconstruction of Gaza. The White House is still negotiating about the sum with Congress. Clinton has told European colleagues that Fayyad’s continued role as prime minister is a precondition for American aid to the Palestinians.

    In light of the stalemate in the Palestinian unity-government negotiations, officials in the PA said they believe Fayyad will soon withdraw his resignation and concede to Mahmoud Abbas’ request to form a new government.

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Mitchell that he is determined to assist Fayyad in building industrial and other structures in the West Bank. He related that he was also putting a special team in place in his office to streamline procedures for dealing with Palestinian economic initiatives. Nearly 80 states took part in the Sharm el-Sheikh conference, which concluded with pledges amounting to $4.4 billion over two years, to cope with the damages of the army operation. The Olmert government demanded at the time that an international supervisory mechanism be established that will ensure the money doesn’t reach Hamas.


  21. Only one high-level presidential foreign policy appointment, White House advisor Samantha Powers, is clearly anti-Israel.

    I don’t believe that

  22. While President Obama speaks of helping the people of Israel “search for credible partners with whom they can make peace,” Mr. Freeman believes, as he said in a 2007 address to the Washington Institute of Foreign Affairs, that “Israel no longer even pretends to seek peace with the Palestinians; it strives instead to pacify them.” The primary reason America confronts a terrorism problem today, he continued, is “the brutal oppression of the Palestinians by an Israeli occupation that is about to mark its fortieth anniversary and shows no sign of ending.”

    Here’s another

  23. John Bolton Says–> Team Obama Has Turned Anti-Israel

    How bad has Barack Obama been for Israel? It depends how you look at it. There have been a few “warning signs” the appointment of Samantha Powers to a National Security Council position, and the week long stupidity with the Durban II planning meeting (the Chas Freeman affair was Dennis Blair’s fault).

    When it come to the “Peace Process” Obama has been relatively close to the second term of President Bush . Both had the Israeli/Palestinian conflict way too high on the priority list, and called for a Palestinian State. Each pushed for the end of settlements, both promised/gave nearly a billion dollars to the Palestinians (Bush’s ended up in Hamas hands, Obama’s will). Perhaps the biggest difference in the two administrations is under Bush the president was Caucasian and the Secretary of State was African-American under Obama its reversed.

    The major shift between the two administrations is Iran. President Obama’s decision to “engage” Iran is part of appeasement of terrorist policy. While Obama is preparing to talk to Iran one more time, Iran is perfecting the technology to deliver a nuclear warhead to Israel. That is John Bolton’s major concern, but there are others:


    THE Obama administration is increasingly fixed on resolving the “Arab-Is raeli dispute,” seeing it as the key to peace and stability in the Middle East. This is bad news for Israel – and for America.

    In its purest form, this theory holds that, once Israel and its neighbors come to terms, all other regional conflicts can be duly resolved: Iran’s nuclear-weapons program, fanatical anti-Western terrorism, Islam’s Sunni-Shiite schism, Arab-Persian ethnic tensions.

    Some advocates believe substantively that the overwhelming bulk of other Middle Eastern grievances, wholly or partly, stem from Israel’s founding and continued existence. Others see it in process terms – how to “sequence” dispute resolutions, so that Arab-Israeli progress facilitates progress elsewhere.

    Pursuing this talisman has long characterized many European leaders and their soulmates on the American left. The Mideast “peace process” is thus the ultimate self-licking ice cream cone – its mere existence being its basic justification.

    And now the Obama administration has made it US policy. This is evidenced by two key developments: the appointment of former Sen. George Mitchell as special envoy for the region, and Secretary of State Hillary’s Clinton’s recent insistence on a “two-state solution” sooner rather than later.

    Naming Mitchell as a high-level, single-issue envoy – rather than keeping the portfolio under Secretary Clinton’s personal control – separates Israel from the broader conduct of US diplomacy. Mitchell’s role underlines both the issue’s priority in the president’s eyes and the implicit idea it can be solved in the foreseeable future.

    Obama and Mitchell have every incentive to strike a Middle East deal – both to vindicate themselves and, in their minds, to create a basis for further “progress.” But there are few visible incentives for any particular substantive outcome – which is very troubling for Israel, since Mitchell’s mission essentially replicates in high-profile form exactly the approach the State Department has followed for decades.

    When appointed, Mitchell said confidently: “Conflicts are created, conducted and sustained by human beings. They can be ended by human beings.” This is true, however, only if the conflict’s substantive resolution is less important than the process point of “ending” it one way or another. Surrender, for example, is a guaranteed way to end conflict.

    Here, Clinton’s strident insistence on a “two-state solution” during her recent Mideast trip becomes important. She essentially argued predestination: the “inevitability” of moving toward two states is “inescapable,” and “there is no time to waste.” The political consequence is clear: Since the outcome is inevitable and time is short, there is no excuse for not making “progress.” Delay is evidence of obstructionism and failure – something President Obama can’t tolerate, for the sake of his policies and his political reputation.

    In this very European view, failure on the Arab-Israeli front presages failure elsewhere. Accordingly, the Obama adminstration has created a negotiating dynamic that puts increasing pressure on Israel, Palestinians, Syria and others.

    Almost invariably, Israel is the loser – because Israel is the party most dependent on the United States, most subject to US pressure and most susceptible to the inevitable chorus of received wisdom from Western diplomats, media and the intelligentsia demanding concessions. When pressure must be applied to make compromises, it’s always easier to pressure the more reasonable side.

    How will diplomatic pressure work to change Hamas or Hezbollah, where even military force has so far failed? If anything, one can predict coming pressure on Israel to acknowledge the legitimacy of these two terrorist groups, and to negotiate with them as equals (albeit perhaps under some artful camouflage). The pattern is so common that its reappearance in the Mitchell-led negotiations is what is really “inevitable” and “inescapable.”

    Why would America subject a close ally to this dynamic, playing with the security of an unvarying supporter in world affairs? For America, Israel’s intelligence-sharing, military cooperation and significant bilateral economic ties, among many others, are important national-security assets that should not lightly be put at risk.

    The only understandable answer is that the Obama administration believes that Israel is as much or more of a problem as it is an ally, at least until Israel’s disagreements with its neighbors are resolved. Instead of seeing Israel as a national-security asset, the administration likely sees a relationship complicating its broader policy of diplomatic “outreach.”

    No one will say so publicly, but this is the root cause of Obama’s “Arab-Israeli issues first” approach to the region.

    This approach is exactly backward. All the other regional problems would still exist even if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad got his fondest wish and Israel disappeared from the map: Iran’s nuclear-weapons program, its role as the world’s central banker for terrorism, the Sunni-Shiite conflict within Islam, Sunni terrorist groups like al Qaeda and other regional ethnic, national and political animosities would continue as threats and risks for decades to come.

    Instead, the US focus should be on Iran and the manifold threats it poses to Israel, to Arab states friendly to Washington and to the United States itself – but that is not to be.

    President Obama argues that he will deal comprehensively with the entire region. Rhetoric is certainly his specialty, but in the Middle East rhetoric only lasts so long. Performance is the real measure – and the administration’s performance to date points in only one direction: pressuring Israel while wooing Iran.

    Others in the world – friend and foe alike – will draw their own conclusions.

    Former UN Ambassador John Bolton is an American Enterprise Institute senior fellow.

  24. Americanthinker April 19 2009

    The Worrisome Educator
    By Ed Kaitz

    Penn State University’s “Department of Counseling and Psychological Services” has a video presentation that should leave any decent American shocked, saddened, and yes, even enraged. Credit David French of National Review Online for posting what might be the most definitive four minute expose on the tragedy of higher education in America. Indeed, Penn State’s shameful video production of “The Worrisome Veteran” can provide all Americans some priceless insights into the kind of surreal institutions liberals create when left unchecked.

    “The Worrisome Veteran” is part of Penn State’s “Worrisome Student Behaviors” video series which is designed to provide faculty and students the ability to “minimize risk” when encountering problematic students on campus. Each video presents actors reenacting possible confrontations that may occur in various environments and suggests appropriate responses. The subtitle of the “Worrisome Veteran” presentation is: “I deserve a better grade or else . . .” In other words, to the progressive staff at Penn State, students who are veterans returning from the war in Iraq are simply potential criminals who’ve forgotten how to reason politely.

    How can conservatives learn something about our educational establishment from this awful video? Let me count the ways.

    First, as the performance opens the frightened English professor, a woman, is discussing the threatening student with her division dean, an African-American man. Within seconds then viewers are encouraged to conclude that the perpetrator is a conservative white male – the pariah of higher education. As the scene gently cuts away from the dean’s office to the professor’s classroom guess who the offending veteran is? A white male. The geniuses at Penn State know what a safe target is, and he’s not a woman or a minority. In other words, progressives own the moral high ground in education.

    Second, the female professor tells the dean that having the veteran in her classroom makes her feel “uneasy.” It seems that the veteran student’s term paper has not improved over the course of several drafts and he’s become somewhat threatening. The dean tells her to “get out” of the classroom “quickly” and “call the police” if he crosses an unspecified line. During the course of their conversation however the dean never asks the professor about the paper or its content. He never asks to see any of the drafts. He never asks her to defend herself and her low grades. Indeed, other than “poor grammar” the professor never offers any specifics about the standards she uses to measure performance.

    In short, the conversation between the professor and the dean turns into a twisted inquiry into the female professor’s “feelings” and not an examination of fairness and standards as they apply to the student. On the other hand, never once did either the dean or the professor consider the “unease” the student veteran, named Matthew, may have felt in combat or in watching a buddy die from his wounds. This is not relevant to his grade, but surely a “sensitive” faculty member, as an American too, might have shown more patience in the presence of this returning warrior.

    Third, it’s no wonder many veterans returning to college are angry. It has been my experience that the vast majority of collegiate faculty, especially in the social sciences and humanities, are progressive utopians who privately snigger at patriotism and the military. Many of these professors and their progeny earned their spurs throwing cold, insensitive insults at troopers returning from Vietnam decades earlier. They freely disparage America and the military in classrooms without considering the price that has to be paid for that freedom on the battlefield. I must admit that my favorite part of the video is when Matthew confronts the mushy professor about his grade – an unusual experience for her I’m sure.

    Fourth, when Matthew finally does confront his professor in the classroom he says the following:

    “You’ve made it very clear in your class how you feel about the war and you’re taking it out on me.”

    Surely Matthew cannot conclude with certainty that his poor grade is a product of his professor’s political views, but what the heck is his professor doing in an English class making “very clear” her views on the war? Would the dean be concerned if the English professor “made it very clear” in class that she opposed homosexual behavior? Or that she openly supported the war? Parents sending their children off to college this fall should know that a left-wing politicization of the classroom is endemic. That means in classes from English to Communications professors are less concerned with training students and more interested in displaying their hip ideology on their sleeves.

    Fifth, the female professor is portrayed as an innocent, vulnerable lamb being threatened by the white male wolf. It’s odd then that the timid professor would be pummeling her students in class with her blatant opposition to the war. The sensitive, progressive educator may not be a “little Eichmann” underneath but many are nothing more than “little Ward Churchills” — cold-hearted and self-centered ideologues who would welcome America’s demise.

    Sixth, I have found through experience that conservative professors are much less likely than liberal professors to grade a student down for his or her political views. Conservative professors are also more likely to entertain and encourage opposing viewpoints in the classroom. On the other hand, liberal students are also much less likely to welcome debate from conservative students than vice versa.

    For example, I remember lecturing once on the abortion issue. After a discussion of Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood I brought up the pro-life organization Birthright. When I tried to explain that Birthright encourages young women to have their babies and helps them with food, baby clothes, mentors, and adoption services several young women in the class shouted out: “This is propaganda, this is propaganda!” So much for sensitivity and tolerance.

    In conclusion, was Matthew the war veteran graded down for loving his country? Probably. As reported at American Thinker and elsewhere, a Department of Homeland Security report has targeted “disgruntled military veterans” as having the potential to “boost the capabilities of extremists – including lone wolves or small terrorist cells – to carry out violence.” The report says nothing however about extremist professors in the classroom who “boost the capabilities” of young radicals bent on undermining the pillars of American culture.

    About 2,300 years ago the Chinese philosopher Han Fei Tzu (sometimes dubbed the Chinese “Machiavelli”) recognized that radicals in the classroom are the most serious threat to a state’s existence. A state could not last long, said Han Fei, if its politicians and scholars were “giving ear to doctrines of universal love” during a time when national survival meant being realistic and suspicious about the intentions of its enemies. George Orwell said the same thing about British “pacifists” during World War II: their pacifism was more a product of their underlying anti-British feeling than it was of their purported anti-war sentiment.

    While Ronald Reagan was busy tearing down the Berlin Wall, leftist educrats were busy over here constructing a more lasting and, for America, harmful one. The future of conservatism depends on this more important project of liberation.

  25. Admin:

    Since I will no longer buy or read the NYTimes or turn on MSNBC and find CNN generally not watchable, I am now getting much of my news from this site and Fox….good balance there.

    This post was great. I enjopyed sending it to my hopium friends who still talk to me.

  26. Happy birthday “Admin”….

    You made sense when no others did! you brought sanity to me on tired, teary days of 2008……you keep on going like an “energizer rabbit” when I felt like giving in…..

    I still hope I get to see the face behind this site some day..

    Thank you for ONLY REAL JOURNALISM left in America….

  27. Analysis: Obama gores foreign policy ox
    Apr 19 05:51 PM US/Eastern
    Associated Press Writer

    WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama has gone abroad and gored an ox—the deeply held belief that the United States does not make mistakes in dealings with either friends or foes.

    And in the process, he’s taking a huge gamble both at home and abroad, for a payoff that could be a long time coming, if ever.


    Critics, especially those deeply attached to the foreign policy course of the past 50-plus years, see a president whose lofty ideals expose the country to a dangerous probing of U.S. weakness, of an unseemly readiness to admit past mistakes, of a willingness to talk with unpleasant opponents.

    “I think it was irresponsible for the president to be seen kind of laughing and joking with Hugo Chavez,” said Sen. John Ensign, a Nevada Republican. “This is a person along the lines with Fidel Castro and the types of dictatorship that he has down there in Venezuela and the anti-Americanism that he has been spreading around the world is not somebody the president of the United States should be seen as having, you know, kind of friendly relations with.”


    Obama brushes that aside:

    “One of the benefits of my campaign and how I’ve been trying to operate as president is I don’t worry about the politics—I try to figure out what’s right in terms of American interests, and on this one I think I’m right.”

    So thought Gorbachev. But being right is not always politically healthy.


  28. Happy Birthday H44! And thank you Admin for such a wise, informed and intelligent website!

    And also thanks to all who post here who are making sure we all know the truth and facts rather than just the fiction that is mainstream news these days…

  29. “I think it was irresponsible for the president to be seen kind of laughing and joking with Hugo Chavez,”


    Or laughing as he describes his job to 60 minutes. IT’S HARD YOU KNOW! This guy is just horsesh*t
    Obama’s 60 Minutes Interview a Laugh Fest
    By Mark Impomeni
    MarEconomy, Obama Administration

    President Barack Obama’s interview on 60 Minutes last night was characterized by the president’s bizarre behavior while discussing the trials and travails of the U.S. economy. The president routinely interrupted himself with chuckling and outright laughter while discussing the current state of the economy and the effects that the downturn have had on Wall Street.

    The president’s demeanor in discussing the economy was so noticeably inappropriate that interviewer Steve Kroft confronted him about it, asking if Obama was, “punch drunk.” (13:34) Obama explained his jokes at the economy’s troubles as, “a little gallows humor to get you through the day.”

  30. Student Aid Faces an Overhaul
    The Administration aims to cut middlemen such as Sallie Mae, Bank of America, and Citigroup out of the student loan game

    Last summer the government desperately wanted to keep private lenders in the student loan market. Now, President Barack Obama plans to cut out the middlemen as part of a sweeping overhaul of the federal loan program. While students stand to benefit from the switch, already-hobbled lenders, including Sallie Mae (SLM), Bank of America (BAC), and Citigroup, (C) would likely lose billions of dollars in profits.

    Currently, the government distributes education funds through two sources: private lenders and its own in-house program. Each school decides which of the options to make available to its students. Financial companies have been big beneficiaries of the system, collecting huge fees from the government; in the last school year private student lenders handed out nearly 80% of the $65 billion in federal funds. By lending directly to college-bound students, the U.S. figures it can save $94 billion over the next decade and reroute the extra money to needy student borrowers. “The proposal allows us to focus on what we do best, acquire capital for loans—and that saves taxpayers money,” says Robert Shireman, a senior adviser in the Administration.

    This change, which could take effect in 2010 if Congress gives the O.K., would be a major blow to student lenders. Private-label loans—those without the backing of the U.S.—have already dried up amid the credit crunch. This new proposal, part of the President’s budget, threatens the core of lenders’ profits. Student lending giant Sallie Mae, the nation’s biggest private player, disbursed $19 billion in federal loans last year, roughly 70% of its total volume. That’s why the industry is gearing up for a fight. “We believe there are alternative ways to reach the President’s education goals,” says Sallie Mae spokeswoman Martha Holler. Says Michael Reardon, a student lending executive at Citi: “Schools and borrowers will not enjoy the many critical benefits without private-sector involvement.”

    Analysts say the industry’s arguments may not carry much sway. Lenders insist that they provide valuable services, including running financial-literacy programs that help students budget payments. But the default rate for federal student loans made by private lenders is 7.3%, compared with 5.3% for direct federal loans, according to the Education Dept. Critics contend that the program is simply a freebie for private lenders. “This is the last vestige of Soviet-style capitalism,” says Barmak Nassirian, a director at the American Association of Collegiate Registrars & Admissions Officers, an education nonprofit.

    Already, private lenders are feeling the pinch as more schools decide they don’t need the middlemen. The trend gained steam after New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo investigated the cozy relationship between private lenders and financial aid officers a couple of years ago. Since the credit crisis, it has only accelerated. Some 1,624 colleges and universities now bypass the private lenders and go straight to the government for money, including Pennsylvania State University, Northeastern University, and Indiana University. That’s up from 1,075 last year.

    Michigan State University made the switch in the fall. After several lenders exited the industry, harried parents started calling the financial aid office, worried that their children wouldn’t get the necessary money. To assuage those fears, the school opted to deal directly with the government’s direct-loan program instead of working with private lenders. “Our students have peace of mind that they will get their loans,” says Val Meyers, associate director of financial aid at Michigan State. “We haven’t had any complaints.”



    collegeloanconsultant Apr 18, 2009 8:19 PM GMT “save $94 billion over the next decade and reroute the extra money to needy student borrower” That’s not exactly what they are planning. Everything would stay the same for the student borrowers. (Except their creditor would be the U.S. Department of Education.) Their interest rates would be exactly the same. The government is planning on taking this savings and putting it into Pell grants, not “loans to needy borrowers”.

  31. Happy Birthday!

    Unlike some of you ex-Democrats, I have decided so far to remain a Democrat. The reason is that every time there is a protest, it is assumed that it is wholly made up of Republicans.

    If, however, there is a credible Independent movement, I would rethink it but I think that even then, Dems and Reps supporting an Independent movement would have a greater impact than just already disaffected voters. If I’m wrong on this, I want to hear your thoughts.

    I think of it as the Hillary method. Fix it from the inside – until it becomes hopeless.

  32. djia Says:
    April 19th, 2009 at 8:53 pm

    Student Aid Faces an Overhaul
    Something needs to be done…a lot of money is being taken off the top. A few years ago, there were reports of college financial councilors taking kick-backs from the lenders.

  33. collegeloanconsultant Apr 18, 2009 8:19 PM GMT “save $94 billion over the next decade and reroute the extra money to needy student borrower” That’s not exactly what they are planning. Everything would stay the same for the student borrowers. (Except their creditor would be the U.S. Department of Education.) Their interest rates would be exactly the same. The government is planning on taking this savings and putting it into Pell grants, not “loans to needy borrowers”.

    The Majority of Pell grants go to AA population

  34. I think of it as the Hillary method. Fix it from the inside – until it becomes hopeless.


    Stick a fork in it!

  35. By Douglas Hagmann & Judi McLeod Sunday, April 19, 2009

    FBI spied on TEA Party Americans!Even as average Americans were planning to get out in towns and cities to demonstrate against Big Government and Big Taxes, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) surveillance was being unleashed upon them. In fact, unsuspecting Tax Day TEA Party participants were being closely watched during the demonstration planning stages in a covert operation that began on or about March 23, 2009.

    If you one of the estimated 750,000 Americans who attended one of about 600 TEA parties last week, you might have seen media cameras covering the event. Media cameras, however, were not the only cameras taking video at these events, something that has at least one current FBI agent concerned over the future of America. According to this agent – the same agent who provided the Northeast Intelligence Network (NEIN) exclusively the unreleased photographs of the 11 missing Egyptian students who were the subject of a FBI BOLO in August 2006–placed his concerns for true patriots of the U.S. over his own career when he confided that covert surveillance was “planned and performed” at each of the TEA parties that took place last Tuesday.

    “Listen to what I am saying,” stated the source during an interview with Doug Hagmann, founder (NEIN). “The Department of Homeland Security Intelligence Assessment that is receiving so much attention is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, and the true patriotic citizens of this country are on the Titanic. This is what bothers me. But is goes far beyond that assessment. There have been very significant changes made over the last few years that redirect the focus and assets of the intelligence community internally. These changes have greatly accelerated under this administration, and the threats have been redefined to include those who used to be patriots. It’s not only chilling but absolutely insulting to God-fearing Americans.”

    According to this unimpeachable source, a single-page confidential directive issued by the FBI headquarters in Washington, DC (FBIHQ) was sent to each of the 56 field offices located across the United States on or about March 23, 2009, instructing the Special Agents in Charge (SACs) of those offices to verify the date, time and location of each TEA Party within their region and supply that information to FBI headquarters in Washington. The source stated this correspondence termed the TEA parties “political demonstrations,” and added that the dissemination of the directive was very tightly controlled. “Not all agents were privy to this correspondence,” stated the source, who compared the dissemination to an older “Do Not File” classification.
    In addition to obtaining or confirming the location and time of each “demonstration,” each field office was instructed to obtain or confirm the identity of the individual(s) involved in the actual planning and coordination of the event in each specific region, and include the local or regional Internet web site address, if any. The information collected by region was then reportedly sent to FBI Headquarters.
    The source alleges that a second directive was issued on or about April 6, 2009 that reportedly instructed each SAC to coordinate and conduct, either at the field office level and/or with the appropriate resident agency, covert video surveillance and data collection of the participants of the TEA parties. Surveillance was to be performed from “discreet fixed or mobile positions” and was to be performed “independently and outside of the purview of local law enforcement.”

    Although the level of detail collected from each operation is unclear, the information was reportedly submitted to Washington, where, “at the level of the National Security Branch (NSB), this information was to “include the office of the Directorate of Intelligence (DI), and integrated with a restricted access database, one that reportedly is accessible to only two agencies” [of the 14 agencies that comprise the U.S. intelligence community, according to the source.

    “The implications to the citizens of the U.S. are ominous. It seems that there is a hostile political agenda coming from Washington that characterizes the supporters of our constitutional freedoms as threats to our domestic security, which is totally absurd. The redirection, the refocusing of domestic threats from al Qaeda cells to ‘flag waving right-wingers’ is something that has gone from a murmur a few years ago to a roar today.”

    Training government-issued cameras on ordinary citizens, many of whom brought their children to an estimated 600 Tax Day TEA Parties is a page torn out of George Orwell’s 1984 and makes the term “God Bless America” more meaningful than ever.

    The Northeast Intelligence Network and Canada Free Press expect the government’s denial of the surveillance of the TEA Parties to go viral as soon as this story is posted.


  36. freckles,

    I’m right there with you. I’m getting active in my local party again. I intend to help reclaim the Democratic party for Democrats.

  37. about the FBI at the tea parties……

    At my TEA party (sioux falls SD) local tv KTIV was there videoing , I have a photo of him there, but the news never showed a thing that night on tv! [bastards!]

    there was one other person with video camera, he was hired by the organizer, i know as i was talking with him about it.

    a helicopter was flying all over the area the entire time…….wondered what they were doing!!

    a hand full of police were there “observing” never noticed them direct traffic, nor talk to anyone other than themselves
    they did walk around a bit , mostly in the parking lot and on the outer fringes of the crowd.

    Plenty of people with camera’s……i have roughly 400 photo’s from the party, i am sure i have a shot of everyone there that day.

  38. basement angel

    good luck with that…. democrats are doing too much damage to ever be redeemed with in my lifetime.

    I will never be a democrat again, i will probably never vote for another democrat again [other than hillary] , and if i do they
    will have to pass a shit load full of scrutiny first.

  39. Happy birthday, happy Anniversary, I am not sure which. But what I do know is you have changed the say I an others gather our information, and for that I am grateful.

    I saw the Russell Crow movie tonight “State of Play”. I thoughly enjoyed it, and the plaHy between the newspaper and the blogs. Also the portrayal of the restrictions of news based on who owed the newspaper was interesting.

    I am thankful that you brought me intot he 21st century. People are eager for news not opinions. Even the Older people are looking blogging.

    Hillary is 44, who ever you are, you are a success. THANK YOU!

  40. I was at a Tea Party in Sheman Texas Pop. 36,000 we had 250 people at the first event at 10:00 am and about 200 at the 4:00 pm event. They told us we were being watched by our Goverment and we all knew it was true and could have cared less.

  41. “Some advocates believe substantively that the overwhelming bulk of other Middle Eastern grievances, wholly or partly, stem from Israel’s founding and continued existence.”


    Put very bluntly, the Palestinians, Iranians, et al won’t be happy until they have ridden the earth of every last breathing Israeli/Jew. And bambi is working hard to enable them to do so.

  42. djia Says:

    April 19th, 2009 at 10:07 pm

    I’m with u. Dem no more. it’s like burnt popcorn, throw it out

  43. lisaque

    I knew that someone would be watching, and i must say……. I HOPED THEY WOULD

    it’s evident that they did and it sits like a burr under the skin with obama and his ilk 😉

  44. gonzotx

    I actually am still register as a dem……….for now, it serves me well during the tea party & those to come yet this year

    but by the next election perhaps i will be independant? still not sure thought

    I almost want to have my “dem” vote go into the column for the GOP or a 3rd party if they can harness the TEA movement they may just have a shot…maybe?? time will tell

  45. This is from a paper I have written called Pirate Hostage Rescue Revisited. It speaks only to the area of foreign policy.
    5. THE IMPLICATIONS: Although it is early in the Obama Administration, a disturbing pattern has begun to emerge: i) a phobia against utilizing military or economic measures to defend strategic interests for fear of provoking an international incident (as typified by his reluctance to authorize a rescue of the hostage, his failure to confront the recent act of aggression by North Korea after the Security Council turned him down, and his apparent acceptance of a nuclear North Korea), ii) a compulsion to criticize the United States (in a manner reminiscent of Reverend Wright) and to apologize to foreign audiences for what Mr. Obama imagines to be our arrogance, culpability for the world economic crisis, policy mistakes, etc., and iii) an irresistible impulse to surrender critical aspects of our sovereignty to international bodies such as the regulation of our economy, the right to engage in self defense recognized by Article 51 of the UN Charter, etc. The pirate episode fits squarely within this pattern.

  46. Stick a fork in it? You mean the Democrats? It would seem so at the moment…but then what’s the solution? Opting out won’t do much. Voting out a few incumbents would. The easier place to do that is in the primaries. You have to be a Dem or Rep in many places to vote.

    Politicians pay a lot of attention to incumbent support. (See Sen. Dodd) In a few months we should all be making sure that no incumbent runs unopposed.

    My criterion for lending support is no longer a party or one issue, unless it is torture or something I cannot support under any circumstance. I give you again two examples of the ethics that matter. They have nothing to do with girlfriends or prostitutes with which I have zero interest.

    Truman found on his desk a book left by mistake of Dewey’s election plans. He shut the book and sent it back to Dewey. It was Dewey’s personal property and Truman knew the presidency didn’t excuse unethical behaviour.

    My husband shared a barber with Earl Warren and the founder of the Bank of America, AP Giannini. After Warren was elected Governor, Billy encountered AP Giannini. AP complained, “I helped Earl get elected and now he won’t even take my call.” Later, Billy asked Earl why. Earl replied, “He did help me but now I’m the governor of everyone and I can’t allow supporters to have special access for favors.” AP answered that he wnted nothing but to congratulate Earl. On that basis, Earl took the call.

    It is that personal integrity that is missing today. The ‘end justifies the means’, the justification for wrongs, the ‘I didn’t know’ excuses, and the ethical grading on the curve has me totally re-evaluating my political heroes. There are few left but I’m hoping that the public will insist we start with integrity and then worry about every issue. I’m happy to persuade a pro-lifer but not happy to debate corruption with the corrupt.

  47. freckles Says:

    April 19th, 2009 at 11:42 pm

    You can always vote. If you want to vote Repub one election, Dem the next. To me the Dem party is too corrupt. You are not going to get it back. Same with the repubs. I am Indie now and I will be forever after 39 years of voting Dem. It was a revelation to me, this election. Everything I thought it was, Dem party was just a mirage. People count. Character counts. Party is gone. Never again

  48. Al Gore will be out in Los Angeles this week and a friend will be attending the luncheon. He intends ask Gore some tough questions about WHAT IS GOING ON and he is just the guy to do it. He is an outspoken blue dog, former leader of a national union and member of Army Special Forces in Korea. He is around 80 which is the age when you have the freedom to say whatever you want. If he gets any insight beyond the mindless first black president crap I will let you know. The way my friend feels he does not care what color he is if he is leading us down the primrose path we must oppose him for the sake of our country.

  49. Freckles, we were just reading about your husband. You certainly have lived a fascinating life. When you write your book we will devour it immediately.

    The corruption which is now applauded contrasts vividly with the personal integrity you describe. Perhaps there was great corruption in the past, but it was at least publically repudiated, not celebrated as it is now.

  50. kinda a cool site to check out!!


    * Hookks are Citizen
    Reactions to the news.
    * Bite sized, tasty and
    * very tweetable.

    Got something to say?

    (It’s simple. No forms. No signup. No questions)

  51. freckles said:
    Truman found on his desk a book left by mistake of Dewey’s election plans. He shut the book and sent it back to Dewey.


    During the campaign of 2000, someone sent Gore’s campaign a copy of Bush’s debate notes. Gore’s people turned it over to the FBI without reading it.

    For constant personal anti-corruption, I nominate Palin.

  52. Boulton is right. Israel is our one true ally in the Middle East and Iran is our most dangerous adversary. Yet Mr. Obamas policy is to pressure Israel and woo Iran. That is insane.

  53. h…/…w

    Look how small Israel really is.

    I wish we could just BRING all the Israeli people over here and give them a county or two in California (somewhere east of Palm Springs) where they could get back to doing wonderful science and music. Or if CA is too close to Mexico, then maybe Utah.

  54. I want to thank Admin and the rest of you for your friendship and insightful comments over the past few years. I have learned a great deal from all of you. I think Admin is brilliant. I have never known a political leader I had more respect for than the Hillary we saw in the primary. I never voted for Bush and came to despise him sooner perhaps than most. But Obama is far worse and the country will not realize this until it is too late. I never vote for the party. I only vote for the individual candidate. And Hillary was always my choice.

  55. DO YOU ALL REMEMBER ME POSTING ABOUT THE GUY…. lt. Quarles harris Jr……he was the guy who had been cooperating with a federal investigators in the “passport gate” last year…and how he had been found shot a year ago march????

    I posted it here a month or so ago i think?? it didn’t get much discussion here really so i don’t doubt none of you will remember……well all of sudden blogs are exploding all over with this year old article that i posted here.
    I did a google news search tonight on his name….. and found nothing except that year old article!!!! NOTHING!!!! WHY????

    but a few of these blogs have NEW INFO, that i need to share here, but first a refresher (all this is nicely put together at atlas shrugs so am going to copy/paste it here)


    Key Witness in Presidential Passport Tampering Case Murdered in 2008, No Arrests

    OMG, they are killing people.

    Do you remember this curious story during the Presidential election? A couple of months before rumblings began about Obama’s birth circumstances and the discovery that BHO’s COLB (certification of live birth) was a forgery, a story broke in late March 2008 that State Department employees had tampered with the passport files of Barack Obama.

    At the time “State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the violations of McCain and Clinton’s passport files were not discovered until Friday, after officials were made aware of the unauthorized access of Obama’s records and a separate search was conducted”.

    The incidents raise questions as to whether the information was accessed for political purposes and why two contractors involved in the Obama search were dismissed before investigators had a chance to interview them.

    I always thought they rifled through Clinton’s and McCain’s to make it look like it was all three but it was Obama’s passport records that they accessed. Secondarily, almost as an afterthought, there were “violations” concerning Clinton and McCain. But who stood to gain from a tampering, and why?

    There is a video here of Obama’s response to the passport “breach” back on March 21, 2008. Watch it — I think it’s telling that he says, not that he has anything to hide, “not because I have any particular concerns” [minute -.23]. This is before the birth certificate scandal. Who would say that?

    Passport breach March 21.

    On April 8, 2008, Obama confessed to having taken a trip to Pakistan in 1981. Here is what Obama said – Jake Tapper was there:
    “So when I speak about having lived in Indonesia for four years, having family that is impoverished in small villages in Africa –knowing the leaders is not important — what I know is the people…I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college — I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.”

    Tapper was surprised and said:
    This last part — a college trip to Pakistan — was news to many of us who have been following the race closely. And it was odd that we hadn’t hear about it before, given all the talk of Pakistan during this campaign.

    Much speculation has been made about what national passport Obama used when he traveled to Pakistan in 1981.

    So Obama confessed to this trip two weeks after his passport was tampered with.

    Pakistan was in turmoil in 1981 and ruled of martial law. Millions of Afghan refugees were living in Pakistan, while the Afghan Mujahedeen operated from bases inside Pakistan in their war with the Soviets. One of the leaders that based his operation in Quetta, Pakistan was Usama Bin Laden (The Sheik).

    Pakistan was on the banned travel list for US Citizens at the time and all non-Muslim visitors were not welcome unless sponsored by their embassy for official business. (more here)

    UPDATE: This article is from April 2008 (thanks Slimguy) but I was unaware of the murder. I am just seeing the story. Needless to say – there have been no arrests a year later in this case.

    Key witness in passport fraud case fatally shot Washington Times

    A key witness in a federal probe into passport information stolen from the State Department was fatally shot in front of a District church, the Metropolitan Police Department said yesterday.

    Lt. Quarles Harris Jr., 24, who had been cooperating with a federal investigators, was found late Thursday night slumped dead inside a car, in front of the Judah House Praise Baptist Church in Northeast, said Cmdr. Michael Anzallo, head of the department’s Criminal Investigations Division.

    Cmdr. Anzallo said a police officer was patrolling the neighborhood when gunshots were heard, then Lt. Harris was found dead inside the vehicle, which investigators would describe only as a blue car.

    Emergency medics pronounced him dead at the scene.

    City police said they do not know whether his death was a direct result of his cooperation with federal investigators.

    “We don’t have any information right now that connects his murder to that case,” Cmdr. Anzallo said.

    Police say a “shot spotter” device helped an officer locate Lt. Harris.

    A State Department spokeswoman yesterday declined to comment, saying the investigation into the passport fraud is ongoing.

    The Washington Times reported April 5 that contractors for the State Department had improperly accessed passport information for presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain, which resulted in a series of firings that reached into the agency’s top ranks.

    One agency employee, who was not identified in documents filed in U.S. District Court, was implicated in a credit-card fraud scheme after Lt. Harris told federal authorities he obtained “passport information from a co-conspirator who works for the U.S. Department of State.”

    Oil of Immigration goes one step further:

    Comment: See my article about General Dynamics – the company used by the Obama campaign to tamper the passport. Tom Ayers (Bill Ayer’s Father) was on the board of General Dynamics. Also, right after Obama Usurped Office, GD was contracted to improve the security of the Passport system.


    Gets better ……….Tom Ayers served on board of General Dynamics. General Dynamics now wants “hackers” to work for the Government hat tip Denice

    Wanted: Computer hackers … to help government (snippet below):

    Federal authorities aren’t looking to prosecute them, but to pay them to secure the nation’s networks.

    General Dynamics Information Technology put out an ad last month on behalf of the Homeland Security Department seeking someone who could “think like the bad guy.” Applicants, it said, must understand hackers’ tools and tactics and be able to analyze Internet traffic and identify vulnerabilities in the federal systems.

    Tom Ayers, father of Obama friend, communist and unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, served on the General Dynamics Board. As head of the corporation’s finance committee, Northern Trust was the trustee of the corporation’s Salaried Savings Plan and the Hourly Savings Plan that was overseen by the committee along with fellow members Lester Crown whose son, Jim, and daughter-in-law, Paula, are $200,000 bundlers for Obama’s presidential campaign.

    Northern Trust Bank is also the same bank that gave Obama his below prime rate home loan for his current mansion.

    Many believe General Dynamics was also involved in the “security breach” or tampering with the Obama Passport before the election.

    Just after the election, the State Dept. awarded the same company that breached the initial passports to come up with a new Passport technology:

    (Source) The State Department awarded a $99.3 million, five-year contract today to a team led by General Dynamics Information Technology to print the passport card.

    The contract calls for one base year and five option years. State’s Logistics Management Office, Management Acquisition unit processed the acquisition.

    Research is pending on this, but you can already see disturbing

    Also disturbing is this analysis from Bahukutumbi Raman, a former Indian counterterrorism chief:
    Morbid thoughts CNS News (hat tip Randall)

    How much – if anything – the 19- or 20-year-old Obama knew about the Afghanistan jihad during that 1981 visit is unclear.

    But it’s precisely the shortage of details that worries some, like veteran security analyst Bahukutumbi Raman, a former Indian counterterrorism chief.

    Mulling how a President Obama would deal with each of South Asia’s historical foes, Raman said that as an Indian, he naturally felt troubled that Obama had not disclosed the Pakistan visit earlier.

    “Why did he keep mum on his visit to Pakistan till this question was raised?” asked Raman, who is the director of India’s Institute for Topical Studies. “Has he disclosed all the details regarding his Pakistan visit? Was it as innocuous as made out by him – to respond to the invitation of a Pakistani friend or was there something more to it?”

    Raman continued, “As I read about Obama’s visit to Pakistan in the 1980s, I could not help thinking of dozens of things. Of the Afghan jihad against communism. Of the fascination of many Afro-Americans for the jihad. Of the visits of a stream of Afro-Americans to Pakistan to feel the greatness of the jihad. Of their fascination for Abdullah Azzam …”

    Raman said although having such thoughts may seem “morbid,” it was “understandable when one has a feeling that one has not been told the whole story, but only a part of it.”

    “It is the right of the Americans to decide who should be their president,” he said. “It is my right to worry about the implications of their decision for the rest of the world, including India.”

    The Obama campaign did not respond to an invitation to comment on some of the speculation surrounding the visit to Pakistan or to provide further details about the trip.

    And this:
    According to published reports in Pakistan, Obama in 1981 also stayed at the home of a prominent politician, Ahmad Mian Soomro, in an upscale Karachi suburb, and went on a traditional partridge hunting trip north of Karachi. Soomro’s son, Muhammad Mian Soomro, is a senior politician who served as acting president before the appointment of President Asif Ali Zardari last September.

    Posted by Pamela Geller on Sunday, April 19, 2009 at 05:24 PM


  56. Yes Israel is a very small country in area. I have always wondered why the countries bordering it (all having been violent enemies at one time or another) have never been asked to contribute land to this Palestinian cause. There is historical data that shows that some of them housed the Palestinians within their borders at one time, some even limited their movements to specific woebegotten camps and were never criticized for it. None have ever treated this group as well as they could have and yet Israel is supposed to be burdened with being their saviors.

  57. djia Says:

    April 20th, 2009 at 1:08 am


    The “transparency” obama keeps bragging about applies to everyone but him!

  58. South Korea to Follow China in Buying U.S. Treasuries

    By Wes Goodman

    April 20 (Bloomberg) — South Korea will follow China and Japan in scooping up U.S. Treasuries following the biggest increase in its foreign reserves in almost three years, the country’s largest money manager said. The nation will have a current-account surplus of $18 billion in 2009, rising to the most in five years following a deficit in 2008, the central bank forecasts. International reserve assets climbed 2.4 percent in March to $206.3 billion, the largest advance since April 2006. It was also the first gain of more than 1 percent in 17 months.

    “The Bank of Korea will have to handle more dollar reserves,” said Sungjin Park, who helps oversee the equivalent of $46.6 billion as head of fixed income at Samsung Investment Trust Management in Seoul. “U.S. Treasuries are one of their best options.” Korean purchases would help maintain demand for Treasuries as China, the largest holder of the securities outside the U.S., buys fewer of them. U.S. President Barack Obama is courting foreign investors, who own about half of the nation’s debt, as he sells record amounts to try to combat the longest recession since the 1930s.

    South Korean investors increased their holdings of U.S. debt by 6.4 percent in February to $33.3 billion, the first increase since August, U.S. Treasury Department figures show.

    Any Treasury purchases that occurred as reserves rose in March will appear when the U.S. government reports the figures in May. Chang-Ho Yoo, who is in charge of U.S. Treasury investment at the Bank of Korea, declined to comment. China, America’s biggest creditor, boosted its investment in U.S. debt by 0.6 percent in February, the smallest amount in a year. Its holdings rose to a record $744.2 billion, the latest figures from the U.S. Treasury show.

    For Japan, the second-largest owner outside the U.S., holdings rose 4.3 percent to $661.9 billion in the same month.

    U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, visiting Beijing on Feb. 22, urged China to keep buying Treasuries, which she called a “safe investment.” Obama has increased the U.S. marketable debt to a record $6.27 trillion.

    South Korea’s foreign-currency holdings fell to the lowest in almost four years in November after authorities pumped funds into the banking system as the currency dropped and the global credit freeze made it more difficult for companies to refinance offshore debt. The Korean won fell 26 percent in the past year, the biggest loss among the 11 most-traded currencies in Asia, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. It rebounded in the last month with a 5.8 percent gain against the U.S. dollar.

    The London interbank offered rate for three-month dollar loans is falling as bankers gain confidence that the worst part of the financial crisis is over. Libor dropped to 1.10 percent on April 17, the lowest level since January.

    South Korean exports will probably fall this year because of the global economic recession, though imports will drop more after oil prices fell, with a net result of funds flowing into the nation, the central bank said in an April 10 report.

    Crude oil traded at $49.42 a barrel today, down from about $117 a barrel a year ago.

    Treasury bears warn that U.S. government and central bank spending plans to spur the economy may weaken the dollar and lead to inflation. The government and the Federal Reserve have committed $12.8 trillion, approaching the value of the U.S. gross domestic product. “If I were the Chinese government, or anyone, I won’t be buying U.S. dollars or government bonds,” said Jim Rogers, an investor and author of the book “Hot Commodities.” Rogers, who is based in Singapore, spoke April 8 in Beijing. The dollar has dropped 3.8 percent from its high this year set in March as measured against a basket of six major world currencies.

    The Bank of Korea will seek out Treasuries for the safety they offer during the global economic slowdown, Samsung’s Park said. “They will invest in the highest credit and the most liquid assets,” he said.


  59. Thanks, djia.

    This is just one more example of BHO’s lack of credibility. I have refrained from this website…not due to lack of interest, but rather from frustration that the fraud was elected, instead of HRC. I just took one of my Hillary ’08 bumperstickers off my car….not due to lack of support, but because it is now ’09!!!!

    Harold Ickes is my hero!!!

  60. Axlerod on fox dismissing the scope and integrity of the Tea Bag protests as just another example of misled and ill informed people in this new era of change for america.Who is he kidding?He owned a media research group that gathered and respun any snip and an news about the Clintons and the party.After editing and distorting along with absolutely lying the altered news clips were used by Obowma to effectively recruite blacks and white against Hillary with that infamous RACE card that he still waves as he drives this country deeper in debt and promises of restitution and retribution.With his plan in a ready mode he sold the company and severed ties to take a job in the admin.That folks represents the most heinous political coupe in our history and the edge of the precipce for our democracy.He will continue in office as long as Soros and the Arab oil interests need him and we become a third world toothless giant ready for the Changes that the messaih has promised.Read it and weep or get behind Hillary with every resource we have available to preserve this beacon of democracy called “AMERICA”.

    By ABM90 My words are not campaign fodder,they are from this old and still sturdy heart that has known dangers and dealt with them and knows a traitor when I smell one.Thank you all,

  61. April 20, 2009

    Israel protests as UN racism meet begins

    Philippe Naughton

    Israel recalled its ambassador to Switzerland today in protest at a meeting between President Ahmadinejad of Iran and his Swiss counterpart, Hans-Rudolf Merz. The two men met yesterday ahead of a United Nations anti-racism conference that opened in Geneva this morning, as Israel marks its annual Holocaust Remembrance Day.

    Nine Western nations, including Israel and the United States, are boycotting the conference over fears that Islamic countries will use it as a forum for anti-Semitism while blocking criticism of Islam. The Obama administration announced at the weekend that it would boycott the meeting because its draft declaration makes reference to a text agreed in 2001 at the UN’s first anti-racism conference in Durban, South Africa. That document was agreed after the United States and Israel walked out over attempts to liken Zionism – the movement to establish a Jewish state in the Holy Land – to racism.

    Britain confirmed yesterday that it would attend, although not at a ministerial level, and France will also attend, although it has threatened to walk out if anti-Semitic sentiments are expressed. Mr Ahmadinejad, who has called repeatedly for Israel’s destruction and suggested that the Holocaust never happened, is scheduled to address the conference at Geneva’s Palais des Nations later today.

    This morning, the Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, told his Cabinet that while Israel commemorates the six million Jews slaughtered by the Nazis, “in Switzerland, the guest of honour is a racist and a Holocaust-denier who doesn’t conceal his intention to wipe Israel off the face of this earth”. An Israeli Government official said that Ilan Elgar, the ambassador in Berne, had been “recalled for consultations” after the start of the Durban II conference and the meeting between Mr Ahmadinejad and Mr Merz, who holds Switzerland’s rotating presidency. “This is not a break in relations, but an expression of Israel’s discontent for the lax Swiss attitude towards Iran,” the official said.

    Opening the conference this morning, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon urged the world to rally against the threat of intolerance, especially given the global economic downturn. “I fear that today’s economic crisis, if not handled properly, could evolve into a full-scale political crisis marked by social unrest, weakened governments and angry publics who have lost faith in their leaders and their own future,” Mr Ban said. “In such circumstances, the consequences for communities already victimised by prejudice or exclusion could be frightening.” The UN chief said that he regretted the absence of the United States and eight other Western nations that have pulled out because of fears Muslim nations will dominate the conference with calls to denounce Israel and for a global ban on criticising Islam. “There comes a time to reaffirm our faith in fundamental human rights and the dignity and worth of us all,” Mr Ban said.

    The major sticking points in the draft final declaration prepared for the current meeting concern its implied criticism of Israel and an attempt by Muslim governments to ban all criticism of Islam, Sharia law, the Prophet Muhammad and other tenets of their faith.

    The American decision to boycott the meeting has been given extra weight by the fact that it was taken by the country’s first black president. Speaking in Trinidad yesterday after attending the Summit of the Americas, Mr Obama said that he would love to be “involved in a useful conference that addressed continuing issues of racism and discrimination around the globe” but wanted to avoid a reprise of the Durban conference during which “folks expressed antagonism toward Israel in ways that were oftentimes completely hypocritical and counterproductive”.


  62. With Republican and Democratic party registrations. in the 30% range, I believe there is room for a centrist independent party. I hope we can run a strong independent candidate in 12.
    If not, a centrist republican who used to be a democrt like Bloomberg would be a better choice that BO .

  63. Bin Laden deputy slams Obama plan for Afghanistan

    CAIRO (AP) — Al-Qaida’s No. 2 leader has ridiculed President Barack Obama’s plan to increase troop numbers in Afghanistan in a new Internet audio recording released Monday.
    Ayman al-Zawahri also urged al-Qaida in Iraq to “break the borders” of neighboring countries and liberate Jerusalem from the Israelis, whom he called “crusader invaders.”

    Al-Zawahri’s comments were posted on a militant Web site Monday and came as the Obama administration plans to increase troop levels in Afghanistan and start withdrawing forces from Iraq. “What Obama is doing by increasing the troops is adding more fuel to the fire that is already burning,” he said. Osama bin Laden’s top lieutenant also criticized Pakistan’s U.S.-allied government for its attempts to make deals with Muslim fundamentalists along its border with Afghanistan in hopes of draining support for extremists.

    He accused Obama of encouraging Pakistan’s government to make such deals, calling the strategy “a delusion.” “Obama is cheating you, the problem will not end there. It will escalate,” he said.

    The U.S. has expressed concern about the Pakistani government’s peace efforts in the region.

    Al-Zawahri also warned the Obama administration against any cooperation with Iran in both Afghanistan and Iraq. “The more you cooperate with Iran, the more hatred you will generate from Muslims,” he said. In the 41-minute recording, al-Zawahri also criticized Egypt’s mediation in talks between rival Palestinian factions. He said those talks are aimed at pressuring the Islamic Hamas group to accept peace with Israel.


  64. Gingrich raps Obama on Chavez summit greeting

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is criticizing President Obama’s performance at the just-concluded Latin summit, saying he bestowed a sense of legitimacy upon Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez.

    The Georgia Republican said in a nationally broadcast interview Monday that “enemies of America” are going to use the image of a smiling Obama shaking Chavez’s hand as “proof that Chavez is now legitimate, is acceptable.”

    Chavez has been one of the harshest critics of the United States in that part of the world. Obama, though, said Sunday that he didn’t think extending a cordial greeting to Chavez would be “endangering the strategic interests of the United States.”

    Gingrich appeared on NBC’s “Today” show.


  65. Good Morning All


    H stuff no ws. AOLs article on how upset people are with the handshake.

    Hope and Change, but for WHOM. He always said that he would meet with controverial leaders without conditions, and that is exactly what he is doing. So why does that surpise people.

    Yet has he restored the rights that were taken away from the American People? Not much.

    Also hearing that the run on guns and amo are at an all time high.

    Does it sound like American is coming together under this leader to you?

  66. I think what bothers me most about Durban II is the American response, or lack of response/shifting back and forth until the very last minute.

    I can’t help wondering if bambi really wanted representation there and fought hard to push it no matter the language, asking the State Department to do everything they could to make it possible.

  67. Admin, your blog has been a reliable resource for real news for two years now and I thank you and the posters here for that. I have referred many many people to this site. I don’t know if they actually come, but what one person can do is all that one person can do and I am working hard.

    Whoever said that the Republican and Democrat parties were the two wings of the same bird got it right! It is so liberating to unshackle the chains of party-dom. No more required allegiance to party with Independence!!! Now the parties have to get my vote the old fashioned way – they have to earn it!!! I am a strong believer in Country before party anyway. Voters who vote party lines aid in the destruction of our country that is just about complete now. I agree with gonzotx, the parties as such are dead to me. They may seek forgiveness but they are not willing to repent which means never doing the same act[s] again. And any party that props up the likes of oBOWma, Brazilla, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd et al are never to be trusted again IMHO.

    Happy Anniversary His44. Many many more.

  68. Here we go again…bambi’s new friend spews his garbage…

    APRIL 20, 2009

    Iran’s President Slams Israel

    GENEVA — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused Israel of being the “most cruel and racist regime,” sparking a walkout Monday by angry Western diplomats at a U.N. racism conference. The hardline leader’s appearance overshadowed the substance of the weeklong United Nations attempt to stamp out intolerance worldwide. The United States and eight other Western countries, expressing concerns about its fairness, were already boycotting the event.

    Protesters dressed with clown wigs and holding placards repeatedly interrupted Mr. Ahmadinejad’s speech with shouts of “Shame! shame!” and “Racist! racist!” throwing soft red objects on the podium. Later, about 100 members of mainly pro-Israel and Jewish groups blocked Mr. Ahmadinejad’s entrance to a scheduled news conference.

    Mr. Ahmadinejad, in a rambling speech, accused Israel of being the “most cruel and racist regime” and pointed the finger at the United States and Europe for helping to establish the country after World War II “under the pretext of Jewish suffering.”
    That prompted a walkout by some 40 diplomats from European countries such as Britain and France, which had threatened to leave the conference if it descended into anti-Semitic or other rhetoric harshly critical of Israel, which marred the U.N.’s last racism gathering. The boycotting countries expressed concern that Muslim countries would drown out many issues with calls for a denunciation of Israel and a global ban on criticizing aspects of the Islamic faith.

    “As soon as he started to address the question of the Jewish people and Israel, we had no reason to stay in the room,” said French Ambassador Jean-Baptiste Mattei.
    Speaking directly after Mr. Ahmadinejad, Norway’s foreign minister said the Iranian leader’s comments “run counter to the very spirit of dignity of the conference.”

    Mr. Ahmadinejad “has made Iran the odd man out,” Jonas Gahr Store said. Even before his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad polarized the meeting, which is intended to examine all forms of intolerance around the world.

    Israel recalled its ambassador to Switzerland earlier Monday to protest Swiss President Hans-Rudolf Merz’s meeting with Mr. Ahmadinejad late Sunday during which Mr. Merz pressed the case of a jailed American journalist in Tehran. “The meeting between the president of a democratic country with an infamous Holocaust-denier such as the president of Iran, who calls for Israel’s destruction, does not mesh with the values that Switzerland represents and that are supposed to be represented at the U.N. conference on racism,” the Israeli Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

    President Barack Obama said Sunday that the United States would communicate with Iran about journalist Roxana Saberi through its Swiss intermediaries, which have officially represented U.S. interests in Iran since the American hostage crisis that began in 1979. The Swiss government said it also took up other “unresolved cases” of U.S.-Iranian relations.

    Mr. Ahmadinejad’s attendance has provoked outrage from Jewish groups and Israel, as he has in the past questioned the Holocaust and called for Israel’s destruction.


  69. djia Says:

    April 20th, 2009 at 1:08 am

    I do remember. Seems people who have info on him end up not breathing.

  70. Firearm sales surging since Obama’s election: SALES SOAR | Fear that Obama eventually will restrict availability of firearms triggers a boom at gun stores

    April 20, 2009

    Across Illinois, people are sticking to their guns. Firearm sales have surged in the state since President Obama was elected, mirroring a national trend fueled in part by concerns over the new administration’s stance on gun control. Mark Diaz, manager of the Smoke ‘N Gun shop in Waukegan, jokes that “the president is the No. 1 salesman in the firearm industry.” “It’s like when your radiator blows or your pressure cooker boils, that’s the kind of spike we’re talking about,” said Mark Diaz, manager of the Smoke ‘N Gun shop in Waukegan. “The joke is that the president is the No. 1 salesman in the firearm industry.”

    Nearly 80 percent of active hunters and shooters believe firearm purchases would be “more difficult” with Obama and a Democratic Congress, according to a recent survey by Southwick Associates, a research firm that specializes in fishing and hunting statistics. Across the country, firearms sales in large retail outlets have jumped 39 percent this year and background checks rose 42 percent just in November, according to data from SportsOneSource and the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

    In Illinois, the number of Firearm Owners Identification card applications and Firearm Transfer Inquiry Program background checks rose during the first three months of the year compared with the same period last year. In November, when Obama won the presidency, the state received 30,304 applications for FOID cards, up about 31 percent from the previous November. Another 30,639 applications were received in December, nearly 73 percent more than were submitted in December 2007. Illinois gun manufacturers can’t keep up with demand as more “closet gun supporters” seek firearms, said Todd Vandermyde, the National Rifle Association’s Illinois legislative liaison.

    Vandermyde said Obama’s “track record” while a state and U.S. senator, along with Attorney General Eric Holder’s suggestion that the assault weapons ban should be reinstituted, have led some people to get guns. “When you tell people you can’t have something, what do they do? They go out and get it,” he said.

    Diaz noticed gun sales starting to pick up in September. But they really went through the roof — jumping 200 percent — on Election Day and the following day, he said. “I think there’s a paranoia that there’s going to be a lot more restrictions, what you can buy, when you buy,” said Craig Bricco, owner of 1st Class Firearms in Zion. “They’re buying everything they can get their hands on.”

    But gun shop owners say they don’t believe weapons are flying off the shelves solely because what some believe will take place on Capitol Hill. They say some people worry about their own safety as the economy worsens, about possible break-ins or violent attacks by laid-off workers. “People who never bought a gun before are coming in, talking about protecting themselves,” Bricco said.

    Said Diaz: “Sometimes, we hear the most ridiculous things from behind the counter, things that make you think, ‘I never thought of that one.’ Someone once came in and said they needed a gun because the world’s coming to an end.”



    Maybe they are just bitter and clingy….

  71. Stocks slide as investors dump financials
    04/20/09 10:29 EDT

    NEW YORK (AP) – Investors are having doubts about banks’ profit reports and wondering whether their better-than-expected performance mask larger problems with bad debt.

    Stocks fell sharply early Monday as investors sold financial stocks and locked in profits after a six-week rally. The major indexes slid more than 2.5 percent, including the Dow Jones industrial average, which fell 200 points.

    Worries about the financial industry overshadowed Oracle Corp.’s announcement that it would acquire Sun Microsystems Inc. for $7.4 billion and a $6 billion bid by PepsiCo Inc. to buy its two biggest bottlers.

    The news came at the start of the busiest week yet for companies reporting results from the first three months of the year. Investors are looking for signals that a rally from 12-year lows in early March can continue.

    Wall Street has been emboldened by early signals that the economy could be stabilizing, but after a 24 percent surge in the Dow Jones industrial average some investors are asking whether the market has risen too quickly.

    Joe Saluzzi, co-head of equity trading at Themis Trading LLC, said traders are now viewing bank earnings with more skepticism amid concerns that even the better-than-expected results are disguising problems. Income from trading and low-cost borrowing rates have boosted results but not erased more difficult problems with bad debt, he said.

    “They’re looking at bank numbers and are saying they are not that great,” Saluzzi said.

    In midmorning trading, the Dow fell 208.12, or 2.6 percent, to 7,923.21.

    Broader stock indicators also lost ground. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index fell 24.95, or 2.9 percent, to 844.65, and the Nasdaq composite index fell 51.04, or 3.1 percent, to 1,622.03.

    Concerns about the sustainability of bank earnings weighed on financial stocks. Bank of America earned more than expected in the first quarter but also set aside $13.4 billion to cover losses on souring debt. The stock fell 14.3 percent.

    Citigroup Inc. fell 12.6 percent, while JPMorgan slipped 4.1 percent.

    NEW YORK (AP) – Investors are having doubts about banks’ profit reports and wondering whether their better-than-expected performance mask larger problems with bad debt.


  72. I have been missing this site as my computer went down. I had to get a new one. Its nice to see everyone is still fighting the good fight.

    I can’t express how it feels to see our President hobnobbing with Hugo CHavez. President Pantywaist is too good a name for this buffoon!

  73. From Bitterpolitiz

    intervention in espionage caseposted at 10:54 am on April 20, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

    CQ Politics quotes two formal national-security officials in reporting that Jane Harman cut a deal with the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) to get two of its officials off the hook on espionage charges in exchange for lobbying help with Nancy Pelosi to get Harman the chair of the House Intelligence Committee. If true, the wiretap transcript could provide an explicit quid pro quo that could result in obstruction of justice charges and an ethics probe that could allow Pelosi to expel her California rival from Congress:
    Rep. Jane Harman , the California Democrat with a longtime involvement in intelligence issues, was overheard on an NSA wiretap telling a suspected Israeli agent that she would lobby the Justice Department to reduce espionage-related charges against two officials of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, the most powerful pro-Israel organization in Washington.
    Harman was recorded saying she would “waddle into” the AIPAC case “if you think it’ll make a difference,” according to two former senior national security officials familiar with the NSA transcript.
    In exchange for Harman’s help, the sources said, the suspected Israeli agent pledged to help lobby Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif., then-House minority leader, to appoint Harman chair of the Intelligence Committee after the 2006 elections, which the Democrats were heavily favored to win.
    Seemingly wary of what she had just agreed to, according to an official who read the NSA transcript, Harman hung up after saying, “This conversation doesn’t exist.”
    Harmon hotly denies the story; her spokesperson calls it a regurgitation of previous rumors over her ties to AIPAC:
    “These claims are an outrageous and recycled canard, and have no basis in fact,” Harman said in a prepared statement. “I never engaged in any such activity. Those who are peddling these false accusations should be ashamed of themselves.”
    For those who may not know the background, Harman had been the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee when the Republicans had the majority. When the Democrats succeeded to power after the 2006 midterm elections, Harman expected to automatically get the chair, as tradition would dictate. However, Pelosi wanted to pay back Harman for her support on the Iraq war and especially on Harman’s support for the Bush administration’s surveillance programs — a nifty little bit of historical irony. Initially, Pelosi picked the impeached federal judge turned Congressman Alcee Hastings for the chair, but after an eruption of outrage over that selection, settled for Silvestre Reyes, who has held the position ever since.
    This mess doesn’t end with Harman, either. According to CQ Politics, the probe got quashed by none other than Alberto Gonzales while serving as Attorney General. Gonzales, who later had to resign after botching the routine dismissal of political appointments at the DoJ, stopped the probe not because he thought the charges were baseless, but because he thought Harman was too valuable on the committee to put at risk. If true, it means that Gonzales — the man responsible for enforcing American law and a key member of the national-security effort — willingly turned a blind eye to espionage and obstruction of justice in order to protect a corrupt member of Congress.
    Specifically, according to CQ-P, Gonzales felt that the administration needed a Democratic voice to support the NSA wiretap program that the New York Times was about to blow open. He got what he wanted. Harman went to bat for the administration, defending the program and pushing back against the outrage voiced by Pelosi, Harry Reid, and a host of Democrats. In the end, Harman was vindicated by the eventual position of Barack Obama on the wiretap program, but too late to gain an appointment with the Obama administration on national-security matters.
    Now, the woman who defended the wiretaps may be undone by them. We’ll see how far Pelosi will go to satisfy her grudge against Harman, and whether Eric Holder will do better than Gonzales on this case.

  74. Well…Pelosi has done her fair share of “waddling” as well. I wonder why no one has ever investigated her doings.

  75. A follow up Re Harman

    April 20, 2009
    A Rahm Bomb for Jane Harman?
    James Lewis
    Congressional Quarterly just reported a highly secret National Security Agency wiretap report on Rep. Jane Harman.


    Before we get to the content of the wiretap, all you ACLU types should be hitting the ceiling in rage. Because NSA wiretaps are the most carefully protected, super-secret operations carried on by the Federal government. Even during the Bush Administration, when the CIA carried on an unconcealed war on the Bush policy in the War on Terror through selective and politically damaging leaks to the New York Times, no wiretap recordings were released. Wiretaps of Members of Congress are even more sensitive, especially prominent Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee.

    Keep that in mind as we go on.

    The news report quotes three or four sources (it’s hard to tell). But the release of an NSA wiretap transcript, in the absence of a court order or public court proceeding, is unprecedented.

    So this leak has to come from the top. If these sources are to avoid prosecution and/or loss of their jobs, they must have been assured that the Obama administration explicitly authorized it, and that Attorney General Holder would not prosecute. NSA presumably will not even complain about this leak of its top national security means, content and procedures. Without that top-level assurance, everybody involved in this report has to fear an instant subpoena from the Justice Department and from the House Intelligence Committee.

    The report maintains that Rep. Jane Harman talked by phone with a person identified as an “Israeli intelligence agent,” and promised to intervene with Nancy Pelosi on behalf of two people arrested in connection with an alleged collaboration between USG personnel and a Israeli government representative. That case is currently being in court.

    Which makes the NSF wiretap leak even weirder, because it involves an active prosecution that appears to be going against the government.

    I don’t know all the ins and outs. I don’t know how often Congress people actually talk to each other about these cases. I don’t know how often behind-the-scenes influence peddling affects Justice Department investigations into violations of secrecy laws. I do know that the US Government dribbled like an incontinent dog during the Bush years, exposing one secret after another, and nobody got prosecuted at the New York Times. Justice didn’t go after the legions of leakers — like Richard Armitage — but only after Scooter Libby, Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff, who was railroaded on a process crime by Patrick Fitzgerald.

    So the inside-the-Beltway question is: Who, high up in the administration, authorized the leak of a super-secret NSA wiretap against a sitting member of Congress, Rep. Jane Harman (ho also happens to be the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee) And how do the anonymous sources know they will not be prosecuted?

    Does the fact that Jane Harman agreed with the Bush Administration in significant ways come into this?

    I’ll bet it does.

    Who would have authorized it? If I had to bet, it would be the President or his Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, or the National Security Advisor.

    Why was the leak dropped at this moment in time? Because the anti-Israel forces are rising to power in the Obama Administration. They are dropping this Rahm Bomb to discredit pro-Israel members of Congress in general, and Rep. Jane Harman in particular.

    But Jane Harman was one of the few Members of Congress who seemed genuinely upset about the wholesale leaking against the Bush Administration by the CIA and other intelligence agencies.

    This is payback.

    It has to come from the top.

    It is politically timed.

    It’s a Rahm Bomb. Last week Rahm Emanuel came out in the press, telling the media that Israel would have to withdraw from Jerusalem and the West Bank in order to get US cooperation on the Iranian nuke threat. That was a direct threat to the new government in Israel, putting the cart before the horse. It makes no strategic sense, because all of Iran’s neighbors, including the Saudis, are shaking in their sandals about Tehran’s forthcoming nukes.

    All these events are closely related. The NSA leak bears the power-loving stamp of the radical Left, which could not care less about wiretaps, violations of privacy, and the super-secret status of the NSA.

    Shades of J. Edgar Hoover. We’re back to the FBI dropping political bombs to strong-arm LBJ.

    Civil liberties advocates take note. This is only the first such leak. There will be more.

    Combined with the DHS attack on “rightwing extremists” last week, it bodes ill for this administration’s respect for the rule of law, not to mention personal privacy.

  76. 51% View Tea Parties Favorably, Political Class Strongly Disagrees

    Monday, April 20, 2009
    Fifty-one percent (51%) of Americans have a favorable view of the “tea parties” held nationwide last week, including 32% who say their view of the events is Very favorable.

    Thirty-three percent (33%) hold an unfavorable opinion of the tea parties according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Fifteen percent (15%) are not sure.

    While half the nation has a favorable opinion of last Wednesday’s events, the nation’s Political Class has a much dimmer view—just 13% of the political elite offered even a somewhat favorable assessment while 81% said the opposite. Among the Political Class, not a single survey respondent said they had a Very Favorable opinion of the events while 60% shared a Very Unfavorable assessment.

    One-in-four adults (25%) say they personally know someone who attended a tea party protest. That figure includes just one percent (1%) of those in the Political Class.

    David Axelrod, a top adviser to President Obama, on Sunday characterized the protests in dozens of cities on the day federal income taxes are due as potentially “unhealthy.”

    Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Americans say they followed recent new stories about the tea party protests, including 32% who followed Very Closely. Forty-one percent (41%) say they didn’t follow the reports.

    Republicans were far more interested in the protests than others. Seventy-six percent (76%) of Republicans followed news reports, with 50% following Very Closely. By comparison, just 47% of Democrats and 50% of adults not affiliated with either major party say they followed the reports at least somewhat closely.

    Just 32% of the Political Class was following along. Among those with populist, or Mainstream, views, 68% were paying attention.

    While 83% of Republicans and a plurality (49%) of unaffiliated Americans have a favorable view of the tea party protests, only 28% of Democrats say the same.

    The Political Class and Mainstream classifications are determined by the answers to three questions measuring general attitudes about government.

    Most Americans trust the judgment of the public more than political leaders, view the federal government as a special interest group and believe that big business and big government work together against the interests of investors and consumers. Only seven percent (7%) share the opposite view and can be considered part of the Political Class.

    On many issues, there is a bigger gap between the Political Class and Mainstream Americans than between Mainstream Republicans and Mainstream Democrats. That was true on the tea parties, but Mainstream Republicans do express a more positive view of the protests than Mainstream Democrats. Still, a majority (54%) of Mainstream Democrats had a favorable opinion of the tea parties.

    While Americans are slightly more optimistic about the economy’s improvement in the short term, they are growing more concerned that the government may do too much to try to help things along.

    Forty-five percent (45%) of Americans adults now think most people get involved in politics to protect themselves from what the government might do.

    You would think from the headlines that 49% disagree…not so!

  77. Here’s a chance for a project on media creditility. (Will cc to Alessandro Machi of DailyPuma.com).

    Make a site where everyone can look up their LOCAL Tea Party and compare media coverage of it against reality: photos of it, and eyewitness accounts by local people.

    Including a list of local contact people, people who attended and/or organized it. Look through that list and if you recognize a name as someone you know and trust, you can contact them for a first hand report. (And, yes, get on their list for next time, if you want to.)

    This could become the hub for a network of trustworthy anti-BM news, bi-partisan, grassroots.

  78. Before we get to the content of the wiretap, all you ACLU types should be hitting the ceiling in rage. Because NSA wiretaps are the most carefully protected, super-secret operations carried on by the Federal government.
    I am am proud card carrying “ACLU” type and my money helps the ACLU sue the shit out of the govt to roll back the Bush/Cheney police state. No surprise the people here is that “Sociopath” Obama and “Death Squad” Holder are tightening the wiretaps even more. I may be the only ACLU member who didn’t vote for Obama but from the e-mails I get from the national organization, they are now seeing why I was right.

  79. You would think from the headlines that 49% disagree…not so!


    Yes, that’s distortion. The real split is 51% pro, 33% con. The 15% undecided should not be lumped with either side.

    Sounds like Ras was asking a lot of the right questions though.

  80. turndown,

    it is the same 33% that were on the other side with Bush. They will support the Fraud no matter what he does, fist pumping, ghetto handshakes, selling our Country down the river, they will love and support him all the way…nothing matters to them but the “One”

  81. gonzotx Says:

    April 20th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
    A follow up Re Harman


    You should post this far and wide!

  82. After 8 years of Bush and a lot of previous years of Reagan/Nixon and then a GOP Congress — I’d expect agencies like FBI, CIA, etc to be full of GOP holdovers. It’s hard for me to imagine them suddenly cooperating with HOlder and Obama to start persecuting rightwingers. More likely most of the holdovers would try to ride out the BO admin, keeping on the good side of the GOP, since BO will presumably replace many of them anyway when he gets around to it.

  83. gonzotx Says:
    April 20th, 2009 at 1:18 pm


    it is the same 33% that were on the other side with Bush.


    ISTR a similar pattern. Back for a decade, there always seems to be a hard core of about 33% supporting each side, regardless. (Though with Bill Clinton, that went to c. 67% job approval, each time a sex tape or the Starr Report came out! Ain’t democracy wonderful.)

  84. djia Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 9:45 pm

    Lou Dobbs Calls Janeane Garofalo a Hateful Appalling Human Being
    By Noel Sheppard | April 18, 2009 – 11:32

    Count CNN’s Lou Dobbs amongst the likely millions of Americans disgusted by Janeane Garofalo’s vitriolic attacks Thursday when she claimed the previous day’s Tea Parties “were about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks.”

    According to Barfolo, is there any way obama can be criticized without it being deemed a racial attack? Out of the thousands of protesters, she probably took CNN’s absolutely most provocative people and signs, and said “Whoa, there’s the proof”, that all these people and all the separate protests are nut jobs and racists.

    Why isn’t this bitch upset with obama for his fascist actions, by upholding the spying on our own people, the condoning of torture (while mouthing empty words to the opposite), etc.?

    Jeanine Barfolo, you want to know what’s funny? Some other comedian.

  85. From 3w dot reuters.com:

    REUTERS BLOG: FELIX SALMON: Plight of the overpaid. You thought that New Yorkers were all liberal Obamaphiles? Well, they were — until their seven-figure bonuses started coming under attack. Blog

    I’ve no idea who Felix Salmon is. However I am enjoying his premise.

  86. admin Says:
    April 19th, 2009 at 4:38 pm

    Basement Angel, JanH, the Dimocrats will continue to make excuses for Obama for as long as they can in the same way Republicans and allies made excuses for George W.

    Last night, around our campfire, our friend who support Hillary and then McCain said that as a former Navy guy, he thought “Obama did the right thing, in authorizing lethal action to free the captain held hostage”. I was more than happy to pop that balloon by explaining that it took an anonymous Navy insider to go on air Sunday morning to reveal that obama was a deer caught in the headlights, only reactively being frightened into action by the interview.

    He also thought the bank bailouts were going to help turn around the economy, until I disabused him of the fantasy, because banks were taking TARP dough and putting it under the mattress, and still not lending, which is the key to real stimulus.

  87. …but my above campfire story just goes to show, that “average Joes” who only get their “news” from crappy papers, mainstream tv and radio, are believing the fake news feeds, that “Obama is doing this, doing that, and 98% of the people love the new president, oh, and by the way, all leaders of the world are his friend and will listen to what he says (now it’s Chavez who is O’s best friend). The average joe is “nutritionally deprived” of real news sources, of critical thinking.

  88. Thnx, janh.

    Oh, and Happy 2nd anniversary to us all here at Big Pink.

    Hey admin, any coincidence that it was started on 4/19, the same day as the Shot Heard ‘Round the World? One of my favorite books is “April Morning”, by Howard Fast, an outstanding historian who excels in the “historical novel”. In this case, it was a fictional family living in Lexington, and how their lives were turned upside down in a period spanning just over one day. It really brings you into that era, and explores the issues surrounding the Revolution. It’s one of those short reads that you CANNOT PUT DOWN.

  89. rgb44hrc Says:

    April 20th, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    Boy thats scary, that your friend knew enough to support Hillary and then JM and now sees the Fraud making good decisions. Is he watching the obamatron news? It amazes me he could make that reach and it does scare me that more people than I thought may have gone over to the dark side after the election.

  90. US demands Iran end ‘hateful rhetoric’
    1 hour ago

    WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States called Monday on Iran to end its “hateful rhetoric” after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s attacks on Israel but said it still wanted talks with Tehran to mend relations. President Barack Obama “disagrees vehemently” with Ahmadinejad, who branded Israel a racist state, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters. He said it vindicated the decision by the country’s first African-American president to shun the UN conference on racism in Geneva. “This is hateful rhetoric. It’s, I think, one of the reasons why you saw the administration and the president determined that its participation in this conference was not a wise thing to do,” he said. But Gibbs added: “We continue to evaluate our policy and understand that from a larger foreign policy framework, doing things the same old way is not likely to bring about the change we need in our foreign policy.”

    State Department spokesman Robert Wood said Ahmadinejad’s “rhetoric is unhelpful, it’s counter-productive and it just feeds racial hatred.” “We want to have a direct dialogue with Iran, but Iran needs to do a number of things to get back in the overall good graces of the international community,” Wood told reporters. “If Iran wants a different relationship with the international community, it has to stop this horrible rhetoric,” he said.

    Addressing the UN conference earlier Monday, Ahmadinejad criticized the creation of a “totally racist government in occupied Palestine” in 1948, calling it “the most cruel and racist regime.” The remarks by Ahmadinejad — who has in the past denied the Holocaust — prompted 23 European Union delegations to walk out of the Geneva conference room in protest. The United States and Israel were among countries which had already boycotted the meeting, refusing to attend at all due to its anticipated tone regarding the Jewish state.

    Obama has sought to repair relations with Iran, which turned from US ally to arch US foe after its 1979 Islamic Revolution. Obama sent an unprecedented video appeal last month to Iranians for their New Year, hoping to turn a new page in relations.

    A US diplomat to the United Nations also denounced Ahmadinejad’s remarks, calling his speech “shameful” and saying it was a disservice to the Iranian people. “We call on the Iranian leadership to show much more measured, moderate, honest and constructive rhetoric when dealing with issues in the region and not this type of vile, hateful, inciteful speech that we all saw in the Ahmadinejad spectacle of this morning,” said US Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Alejandro Wolff.

    Ahmadinejad’s rabble-rousing speech came one day after a potentially conciliatory gesture to the United States — calling for fair treatment for an Iranian-American reporter convicted of spying. The hardline president said Roxana Saberi, a dual national, should be given the chance to defend herself. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton earlier Monday called on Iran to swiftly free the 31-year-old journalist, voicing hope that Ahmadinejad’s remarks would lead to action.


  91. Clinton urges release of US journalist in Iran
    1 hour ago

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton renewed calls on Monday for Iran to release an American journalist convicted of spying and sentenced to eight years in prison. Clinton said Roxana Saberi is innocent and should be freed immediately. She also said she hoped for positive action from the full investigation into the case ordered by Iran’s judiciary chief and a request from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Tehran’s top Tehran prosecutor to ensure she is allowed a full defense on appeal. “We believe she should be freed immediately, that the charges against her are baseless and that she has been subjected to a process that has been non-transparent, unpredictable (and) arbitrary,” Clinton told reporters at the State Department. “We hope that actions will be taken as soon as possible by the authorities in Iran, including the judiciary, to bring about the speedy release of Miss Saberi and her return home,” she said, adding that the Obama administration is continuing to work with Swiss intermediaries who represent U.S. interests in Iran to secure her freedom. “We are … hoping that these remarks lead to actions,” Clinton said, referring to Ahmadinejad’s comment on Saberi’s appeal.

    State Department spokesman Robert Wood said the administration was looking to the Swiss for “more details about the sentence” and “to make sure that she has been properly treated.” “She’s been wrongly accused,” he said. “There have been charges that she committed espionage. It’s absolutely without foundation.”

    Saberi, who was born in the U.S. and grew up in Fargo, N. D., was convicted last week after a one-day trial behind closed doors. President Barack Obama said Sunday he was “gravely concerned” about Saberi’s safety and well-being and was confident she was not involved in espionage.


  92. Clinton sees NATO release of pirates sending wrong signal

    Mon Apr 20, 2009 WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The release of pirates by NATO forces sends the wrong signal and the alliance must discuss ways that they could be brought to justice, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Monday.

    On Sunday, NATO forces foiled an attack by Somali pirates on a Norwegian oil tanker, and detained seven gunmen only briefly after hunting them down under cover of darkness, NATO officials said. A day earlier, Dutch commandos freed 20 Yemeni hostages and also briefly detained seven pirates.

    Speaking after meeting Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen, Clinton said the two agreed “it sends the wrong signal” to the pirates operating off the coast of Somalia.
    She said the United States and others would work to hold “these pirate-criminals” accountable for the actions, adding that the “Contact Group on Piracy Off the Coast of Somalia” would meet in New York in early May to discuss the issue. “We are going to have to determine the best way to bring pirates to justice after they are captured and there will have to be additional discussion of this at NATO, as well,” she said at a joint news conference with Verhagen. “The minister and I agreed that we will take this matter to NATO,” she added. “If the Dutch navy had been operating under the EU (European Union), they could have turned over the pirates for trial. NATO has not provided that authority so we need to coordinate this, we need to move very quickly to do so. … try to get this resolved,” she said.


  93. # gonzotx Says:
    April 20th, 2009 at 3:30 pm

    rgb44hrc Says:

    April 20th, 2009 at 2:39 pm

    Boy thats scary, that your friend knew enough to support Hillary and then JM and now sees the Fraud making good decisions. Is he watching the obamatron news? It amazes me he could make that reach and it does scare me that more people than I thought may have gone over to the dark side after the election.

    He’s not really into politics. He hears stuff at bars, and catches some news from the crappy local papers and tv. He didn’t want obama to be pres, but now that O’s squatting at 1600, my friend just wants him to succeed for the country’s sake. So he’s willing to hear “happy horseshit”.

  94. ABM90 Says:
    April 19th, 2009 at 1:13 pm

    Thanks all for your concerns and replies.I believe that As SOS she must be supportive of the administration or Obowma will fire her on the spot.He is her boss and and he knows his supporters will support him right or wrong.At that juncture she will be voiceless and powerless.World leaders love and respect her but she has too many detractors in the MSM RNC and the DNC along with AA that think he is the second coming.None of his critics critics like Begala and Carville are untouchables.Picture if you can the abscence of Hillary in this scary scenario.Horror Story….


    There you go! Well said. (I have been out of the country for several days and did not have internet access.) I’ve said it before, and at the risk of repeating myself again, I say this…”the people who supported Hillary from the get-go, beginning with the Primarys; not Edwards, not Biden, not Richardson, not Kucinich, (not Obama), who when their “favorites” dropped out, switched over to Hillary; as expected, they are not her strongest supporters.” How could they be, when they eagerly followed the pretenders until the pretenders were forced out or dropped out of their own volition.

    Enlightenment come with time. They haven’t followed Hillary long enough or know her well enough to know, it’s Faith and Discipline that wins the race every time. If we have to take up the slack for the doubters for the time being ABM, thats fine with me!

  95. Mrs Smith

    First of all, I supported Hillary from the get go, so there! I reserve my right to criticize her, as I do anyone. That is my right as an American. I will not have blinders on any longer about anyone, nor any party. You are making assumptions you can not back up.

  96. American Thinker

    No O’pology for killing three African youths?
    By James Lewis
    The pirate standoff was a classic Jack Bauer crisis: Either shoot the three nutters pointing AK-47s at Captain Richard Phillips, or watch him be killed. So Obama gave permission to use all necessary force should Phillips’ life be in imminent danger, and the Navy Captain in charge gave the order to kill the pirates when a gun was pointed at the hostage’s head.

    In the customary spin of the Leftist media — which we’ve come to know so well and despise so deeply — three innocent young black African teenagers were knocked over by a veritable White Fleet (as Teddy Roosevelt called it) using modern weapons and technology in billion-dollar war ships. And killing the pirates will not do any good; it’s just another pinprick against a Vietnam-type People’s Quagmire in Somalia, which is so poor that its young innocents will just go on volunteering to be pirates. All the rescue of Captain Phillips will do, as the Left always tells us, is to prop up the infamous Military-Industrial-Capitalist-White-Pig Complex.

    That’s what Jeremiah Wright would have said if George W. Bush had ordered the Navy to kill those pirates to save Captain Phillips.

    But the peacenik Left has been quiet. Where was Mother Sheehan in her Red Peasant Woman getup? Where was the Black Caucus? And all the Peace Marchers? Where was the New York Times pant-hooting its customary outrage against this racist American attack on 3 black youths? Shouldn’t the Left be out in force marching on the White House today?

    Or — is it OK for a black Democrat to kill African blacks? Have racial double standards gone this far?

    Barack Obama just released secret CIA interrogation documents regarding Al Qaida bad guys subjected to high-pressure interrogation. He has just embarked on yet another O’pology Tour, this time South of the Border, where he feels we have so much to apologize for. Although he doesn’t seem inclined to apologize for the Democrats in Congress today, who are keeping Colombia out of the NAFTA free-trade agreement. Apparently free trade doesn’t really count as a way to support our allies, even Colombians besieged by Leftist narcofascists.

    Funny thing about those O’pologies. They never seem to apply to Obama himself. They are always about George W. Bush, or about Wall Street, or other Bad White Guys. So President O can give the thumbs up for killing three black Somalis on the very day he is O’pologizing again for more of his country’s sins, such as they are.

    When Michelle O said that she was feeling proud of her country for the first time in her life when Barack won the Democrat caucus states against Hillary, she wasn’t just kidding. She must have been reflecting on a lifetime litany of “Shame on us!” outrage, which the Obamas have been repeating all of their adult lives. They live in shame for their country and overweening pride for themselves, because they are the Good Guys in this melodrama.

    The Pirates of Puntland may go down in history as the first time Barack Obama had to face reality and make a tough moral choice. Everything else in his life has been whistling in the wind, moral posturing without facing any of the dilemmas of real life.

    Barack Obama is easily the most self-righteous US president since the disastrous Jimmy Carter, who is still enraged today at his fellow citizens for denying him a second term in office. It bears repeating that it is Jimmy Carter and his foreign policy team who are still directly responsible today for nuclear proliferation among the most radical countries in world today: Starting with Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea, but, as we now know, also Syria. Once the rogues go down that slippery slope, so will all the others.

    If Jimmy Carter had supported the Shah in 1979 against Ayatollah Khomeini, the Iranian Army would have stopped the coup. Iran would be more like Turkey today — a reasonably tolerant and democratic country, far more prosperous and less corrupt than Iran is today, with a radical Islamist movement that may be threatening but is nowhere near nukes and missiles. Instead, we have Ahmadinejad playing Hitler all over again. Thank you, Jimmy Carter.

    Obama’s team has just issued a public threat to Israel that tells the Israelis to concede Jerusalem and the West Bank in return for American support against Iran. That’s pure Carterism. It puts the onus on the democratic State of Israel, and absolves the corrupt and tyrannical martyr movements of Hamas, Hezbollah and Fatah. It’s an interesting choice of friends and enemies.

    The Obama administration will be a great test of Israel’s sovereignty. Has Israel become too dependent on us? In the 1960s Israel’s closest ally was France, not the US. When De Gaulle took over in France, he embarked on the pro-Arab policy that has now turned Paris into a demographic colony of the Muslim Caliphate. So much for De Gaulle’s reverence for La Patrie.

    The United States at that time found Israel to be an important ally in the Cold War. Israel’s wars of self-defense were also proxy battles between the US and the Soviet Union. The United States ended up winning the Cold War in good part because we won those proxy wars, or at least limited Soviet expansionism. Which is why Egypt, for example, decided after its 1973 war with Israel that the US was a better ally than the USSR.

    The bottom line is that nations have permanent interests but no permanent friends, not if their survival is at stake. The Israelis cannot afford to be dependent on the good will of whoever happens to be US president, because it could well be Jimmy Carter again.

    Pakistan, the other Muslim nuclear power, barely escaped a military coup d’etat several weeks ago, and the government has surrendered six of Pakistan’s provinces to the Taliban Islamofascists. Caroline Glick of the Jerusalem Post is raising reasonable concerns about the stability of Pakistan, with its radicalized Islamist military and intelligence apparatus. What may be emerging therefore is an India-Israel and possibly a China-Israel alliance. Already Israel and India are cooperating on the vital project of anti-missile defense. If the Obama administration defaults on building an effect forward-located missile defense, the other high-tech powers will take the lead. They cannot afford to rely on a flabby American administration.

    Both India and China have almost a thousand year of being attacked and partially conquered by Islamist aggressors. They can’t pretend there is no aggressive jihadi ideology at work here, because they have suffered the consequences over the centuries. India still faces regular terror attacks from jihadis, and China worries about the Muslim Uigurs.

    Is Obama another Jimmy Carter? If he is, will he let the Iranians build their nukes, and maybe pretend, as Smilin’ Jimmy did, that the mullahs are saintly pacifists? Or is the reality-driven killing of those three pirates a sign of things to come? Because the real test of this administration is whether it can anticipate grave and very predictable dangers, like mullahs with nukes. The Left has far too many “experts” who are skilled in denial and rationalization. That is how the Leftist media managed to hang and quarter George W. Bush, who understood with the utmost clarity that terrorists with nukes must be prevented — because they may not be stoppable once they get their big toys.

    Bush was a foreign policy realist. Obama has made one realistic Jack Bauer decision. He hasn’t yet faced a single really tough choice.

    I don’t think Obama is mentally prepared to meet the challenge of mullahs with nukes. He is too stuck in false liberal fantasies about the nature of the world. If that is true, our allies would be better off acting on their own to stop the spread of nukes to terror regimes. India and China must prevent Islamic fascists from controlling Islamabad. Israel must keep the mullahs from getting the technology of Armageddon.

    Historically, Israel only fights when its back is against the wall. It is becoming increasingly likely that the Israelis may have to take on the mullahs by themselves, and Rahm Emmanuel be damned.

  97. # gonzotx Says:
    April 20th, 2009 at 5:40 pm

    Mrs Smith

    First of all, I supported Hillary from the get go, so there! I reserve my right to criticize her, as I do anyone. That is my right as an American. I will not have blinders on any longer about anyone, nor any party. You are making assumptions you can not back up.


    I’ve never worn blinders in my life. I wouldn’t know what it is to wear blinders. I TRUST Hillary’s judgement, maybe that is the difference between you and many of Hillary’s supporters. I would NEVER second guess her strategy. She has proven time and time again, she has a plan behind her actions. So, why create doubt, when you are not aware of all the facts.

    When you have ALL the facts then there is something to discuss, not merely point a finger and create uncertainty within the ranks.

Comments are closed.