Women, Gays, Jews: WAKE UP!

Three targeted populations targeted by Obama for abuse are the first to begin to wake up now that we are almost six months since the inaugural.

These targeted population groups, betrayed by their leadership due to cronyism or incompetence or cowardice (often all three), are Gays, Women, and Jews. Our message to Gays, Women, and Jews is: WAKE UP! – Demand the leadership in your communities confront Obama forcefully.

* * * * *

Gay-Americans:

Gay-Americans are the targets of a particular hatred from Obama. That hatred is sometimes passive-aggressive. That hatred is sometimes disguised with sweet words. That hatred is sometimes overt. Because the hatred at times has been so overt Gay-Americans are the among the first to wake up from their Hopium addled state.

Gay-Americans can be proud that they were the most resistant Democratic base group in the general elections against Obama this past November. Still, Gay-Americans voted strongly for Obama. Now, a man who fought alone in his court case against “don’t ask, don’t tell” echos our mantra of,

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

James Pietrangelo II, now understands why we know Obama cannot be trusted:

When Barack Obama sought the presidency, he pledged to reverse the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy preventing gays and lesbians from serving openly in the U.S. military. Yet on Monday, the Supreme Court rejected a gay Ohio soldier’s challenge to the law — with the legal backing of none other than the Obama Administration.

James Pietrangelo II, the former Army infantryman and lawyer whose case the high court declined to review, reserved most of his ire for President Obama instead of the court. “He’s a coward, a bigot and a pathological liar,” Pietrangelo said in an interview with TIME shortly after the high court declined to hear his appeal. “This is a guy who spent more time picking out his dog, Bo, and playing with him on the White House lawn than he has working for equality for gay people,” he added. “If there were millions of black people as second-class citizens, or millions of Jews or Irish, he would have acted immediately” upon taking office to begin working to lift “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” Pietrangelo fought in Iraq in 1991 as an infantryman, and returned as a JAG officer for the second Iraq War, before being booted out in 2004 for declaring he was gay as he was readying for a third combat tour. He was representing himself before the high court.

We like James Pietrangelo, II – he speaks in the language the Gay “leadership” should speak in, but does not. The Gay leadership continues to betray Gay-Americans. The Gay “leadership” will not confront Obama on his anti-Gay bigotry.

Pietrangelo smells the B.O. coming from the White House and it is a disgusting smell:

Pietrangelo doesn’t buy the line from Obama aides — and the Pentagon — that they’re too busy grappling with a faltering economy and two wars to handle the gay ban right away. “It’s a complete lie that he has too much stuff on his plate — this is the guy who criticized Bush for not being able to multitask,” Pietrangelo says. “We have an old saying in the military — the maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters.”

For once Time magazine sets the record “straight” on Bill Clinton and “Don’t ask, don’t tell”:

Pietrangelo and others argue that Obama has leeway under the law that codified “Don’t ask, don’t tell” after the 1993 outcry when Bill Clinton tried to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly.

For the malicious or ignorant Obama supporters who call Bill Clinton “homophobic” (we kid you not, as we will explain shortly), Bill Clinton tried to help Gay-Americans when it was not a popular thing to attempt to do. Time magazine explains the difference in the times:

But Obama also has some ammunition that Clinton never had: a new Gallup poll finds that most conservatives — 58% — now support openly gay people serving in uniform (nationally, 69% support the change; when Clinton assumed office, a Gallup poll found 53% of those polled opposed lifting the ban). Perhaps even more surprising, 58% of self-described Republicans, and 60% of weekly churchgoers, also support gay men and women serving openly in uniform. “While the Administration to date has not taken action on the issue,” the polling firm reported last Friday, “the Gallup Poll data indicate that the public-opinion environment favors such a move.”

Pietrangelo is right when he calls Obama a “coward, a bigot and a pathological liar.”

Pietrangelo is different from the lowlife Gays on Big Blogs who defended Obama and ignored Hillary Clinton’s and Bill Clinton’s long record of accomplishment and work on behalf of the Gay community. Few PINO websites with a Gay readership were as loathsome as Americablog. Now Americablog is discovering that Obama cannot be trusted:

President Obama called the Defense of Marriage Act “abhorrent” on the campaign trail and won praise from gay rights advocates for promising to reverse the whole act, not just one section.

But for now, Americablog finds, his Justice Department is defending it as the law of the land — and defending it forcefully, with analogies to incest and child marriage.

Gay-Americans should not trust Americablog – a website which betrayed them during the primaries and general elections when the website was full of praise for the gay-bashing Obama even as they knew what Obama had done in South Carolina and his history of funding anti-Gay bigots.

Only now is that Obama praising PINO website is concerned about Obama’s anti-Gay bigotry:

We just got the brief from reader Lavi Soloway. It’s pretty despicable. And before Obama claims he didn’t have a choice, he had a choice. Bush, Reagan and Clinton all filed briefs in court opposing current federal law as being unconstitutional (we’ll be posting more about that later). Obama could have done the same. But instead he chose to defend DOMA, denigrate our civil rights, go back on his promises, and contradict his own statements that DOMA was “abhorrent.” Folks, Obama’s lawyers are even trying to diminish the impact of Roemer and Lawrence, our only two big Supreme Court victories. Obama is quite literally destroying our civil rights gains with this brief. He’s taking us down for his own benefit.

Only now does that PINO blog understand that Obama will destroy anyone’s civil rights “for his own benefit”. We have been wrighting [sic] that since April 2007. Michelle Obama knew Barack Obama was a selfish careerist years ago. Only now does Americablog wake up to the fact they are “Jews in Hitler’s army”.

Holy cow. Obama invoked incest and people marrying children.[snip]

Then in the next paragraph, they argue that the incest and child rape cases therefore make DOMA constitutional:[snip]

DOMA is good because it saves the feds money [snip]

DOMA is constitutional (thus screwing us on any future lawsuits):[snip]

“DOMA Is Consistent with Equal Protection and Due Process Principles.” This is important because it means that Obama wasn’t content to simply argue, based on technicalities, that this case should be thrown out. He went out of his way to argue that DOMA is actually constitutional, and then went into detail destroying every single constitutional argument we have for opposing DOMA in court. This will screw us on every lawsuit we file on every gay issue, in every public policy debate we have in the states on any gay issue.

DOMA Is Consistent with Equal Protection and Due Process Principles Plaintiffs further allege that DOMA violates their rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, including its equal protection component. [snip]

Gays have no constitutional right to marriage, or recognition of their marriages by other states:[snip]

Praises DOMA as “cautiously limited” [snip]

DOMA reflects a cautiously limited response to society’s still-evolving understanding of the institution of marriage.[snip]

Gays don’t deserve same scrutiny in court that other minorities get[snip]

Argues Republican position on how judges should review cases [snip]

DOMA is a good thing:[snip]

DOMA is rational and constitutional:[snip]

Provides legal argument against gays’ right to privacy:[snip]

It’s reasonable and rational for Congress to defend “traditional” marriage – in fact, DOMA was actual a very “neutral” law, rather than anti-gay:[snip]

DOMA is entirely rational [snip]

DOMA wasn’t motivated by a dislike of gays, silly. [snip]

Please don’t confuse the gays with the blacks, and other “real” marriages: [snip]

DOMA infringes on nobody’s rights[snip]

DOMA doesn’t discriminate against gays – all they have to do to get the benefits is get married… to someone of the opposite sex! (This is an argument Obama stole verbatim from the religious right.)

Please don’t compare gay marriages to inter-racial marriages [snip]

DOMA is downright reasonable [snip]

DOMA is reasonable and rational [snip]

We wouldn’t want the gays taking all of our money [snip]

Obama was doing us a favor [snip]

As soon as that legal analysis of Obama’s homophobia and anti-Gay bigotry was posted the Hopium addicts came out: “It was the homophobic Clintons who created DOMA and DADT in order to attack glbt people. We need to give Obama a chance. He is smart enough to know that right now if he were to defend our lifestyle, the Republicans would regain power. If we support Obama as he defends DOMA and discharged gay soldiers, he will eventually help us out in a few years. I think the people criticizing Obama are such bitter Hillary supporters who still can’t handle that they lost.”

* * * * *

Women:

Women have also been betrayed by mainline allegedly “women groups”. The misogyny and sexism are rampant but mainline women groups are useless. One liberal speaks up and denounces the “frat house media”:

If there was any question that a stubborn strain of old-school sexism persists in Obama’s America, one has only to look at certain leaders of what the right wing loves to call the “liberal media” but which is sounding and acting, recently, more like the frat-house media. There, like a virus hiding in the body before, perhaps, staging a comeback, misogyny has found a place to lurk almost undetected, at least by the usually sharp eyes of progressive feminists.

“Slutty flight attendant” is not just a sexual put-down; it’s a socioeconomic one.

Examine the symptoms of this infection, beginning with David Letterman’s comments (widely noted but insufficiently analyzed) about Sarah Palin “buying makeup at Bloomingdale’s to update her slutty flight attendant look,” as well as his joke about Palin’s teenage daughter: “Sarah Palin went to a Yankees Game yesterday … during the seventh inning stretch, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.” (Letterman insists he was talking about her 18-year-old daughter, Bristol, who actually had been, well, knocked up, not her 14-year-old, Willow, the daughter who attended the game.) A week before these remarks aired, there was an uglier outbreak of the contagion in the pages of Playboy — never a bastion of egalitarian forward thinking, but still — where writer Guy Cimbalo published a list of 10 conservative women he’d like to “hate fuck,” a term that various observers interpreted as rough sex, sex tinged by rage, or rape. (Gabe Winant wrote for Broadsheet about the “Hate Fuck” story, which has since been yanked by Playboy.) Worse than the violence of the general sentiment was the graphic specificity of the “Hate Fuck Rating” appended to each woman — a list that included Michelle Malkin, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Dana Perino and Laura Ingraham. On Hasslebeck: “You’d be better served sucking off Regis Philbin.” On Malkin: “Worse than fucking Eva Braun.”

Both cases were met with a tepid response from the left. Though Letterman apologized on Wednesday’s show (see video below), his tone was mock-serious, and his audience chuckled along.

The writer, Amanda Fortini, deserves credit for being a liberal who is waking up to the rampant misogyny and sexism [HERE, HERE, HERE] that writers like Hendrick Hertzberg refuse to recognize in themselves and their liberal brethren. Fortini continues:

Imagine if, say, Michelle Obama, or Rachel Maddow, or Nancy Pelosi became the target of similar invective. The outcry from the left would be deafening. Shouldn’t liberals exhibit the same sort of decorous treatment we demand for ourselves? Sexist comments like Letterman’s and Cimbalo’s also conjure a troublingly insular, clubhouse atmosphere in lieu of an inclusive political party. What’s more, the gender-based stereotypes they conjure are as stale and ignorant as any voiced by the old Neanderthal right: Pretty women are de facto stupid, sexually promiscuous and low-class. Indeed, it’s the latter slight that has been least remarked upon and is, perhaps, the most disturbing. “Slutty flight attendant” is not just a sexual put-down; it’s a socioeconomic one. Likewise, when Cimbalo says, of right-wing blogger Pamela Geller, “Even a Silkwood shower won’t get rid of the stench of Fascist divorcee and Elizabeth Arden’s Red Door,” the classist sentiment is unmistakable. It’s a combination of gutter misogyny and snobbery, a return to a 1950s kind of insult. This is like saying a woman has a “reputation,” that she’s “that kind of girl,” one from “the wrong side of the tracks.” Cimbalo seems to be holding his nose not at the smell of some supposedly déclassé perfume but at the stench of working for a living, of being middle-class or having middle-class tastes.

And what’s the problem with sexy women, anyway? The facile answer is to say that female sexuality is threatening in some visceral, primitive way. But maybe the deeper fact is that pretty women remind us that the world is essentially unfair — and if the world is unfair, then the progressive quest for fairness may be quixotic and unnatural. There is no more free market economy than your average singles bar. In any case, stern conservative strength in a woman has undone the left for ages: See Margaret Thatcher. Liberals would probably contend that these women present much to argue with, propounding odious views with real-world implications — they do, they do — but why not attack their ideas rather than insult them? Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh incite their share of leftist rage, but I have yet to hear Gingrich maligned as a bimbo, or Limbaugh as a slut (just a “big fat idiot,” to borrow a phrase from Al Franken, an impersonal and genderless slight). Partly, of course, this is because no such terms exist for men — another digression entirely.

Asking why it is that liberal women do not often take liberal men to task for these attitudes is well worthwhile. Maybe we don’t want to appear shrill and humorless, unable to take a joke. Or maybe it’s thought that conservative women are too ideologically reprehensible to merit a defense. But to challenge this kind of sexist talk is not the same thing as agreeing with a woman’s politics. If the left is allowed to remain a refuge for this sort of misogyny, if this virus in the body politic is allowed to flourish, then it is likely only a matter of time before it is once again directed at liberal women who are threatening in some way, as happened to Hillary Clinton. Call Pamela Geller racist for her anti-Islamic views, but leave her “top-heavy frame” aside.

Amanda Fortini makes many strong points which should be addressed by Hillary supporters in as many fora as possible. Fortini should know that the Dimocratic Party of Obama does indeed look down at white (and black too) working class Americans as “bitter” and not “creative class” enough for their new coalition.

Fortini rightly takes women (especially liberal women) to task for allowing the sexism and misogyny.

Fortini rightly reminds here readers of the misogyny directed against Hillary Clinton by the Democratic Left.

The mainline women groups have been useless in all of these matters. NOW released a statement about the Letterman attack on Governor Palin that is so tepid and weak it is not worth quoting (where are the women Pietrangelos with honest talk?)

It has been up to the website HillBuzz to lead the way and demand action be taken against Letterman (the new “nappy headed ho” Imus) HERE HERE and HERE for the sexism and misogyny in open display by Big Media (a.k.a. the Frat House Media).

We stand with Hillbuzz in this matter and remain shocked that it is now a conservative woman we have to look to for forceful denunciations of sexism and misogyny. Thank you Hillbuzz and thank you Governor Sarah Palin.



* * * * *

Jews:

Jews are at phase I in the waking up process.

We’ve made a strong case as to why Obama can’t be trusted by Jews and certainly not by Israel. Our support of Israel is not based on religion nor “Zionism”, nor “friendship”, nor anything but the simple fact that Israel and the United States have shared interests. We constantly quote Lord Palmerston and his admonition that nations do not have permanent friends or allies but rather interests.

Israel has been a good friend to the United States and Israel and the United States have shared interests in a region where allies shift like desert sands. Our main concern regarding the treachery displayed by Obama in quoting Arab propaganda against Israel, with a nod and a wink, is that Israel needs a partner who bargains in good faith if there is to be peace.

The Palestinians have not shown they are bargaining in good faith. To the contrary we have noted why Israel needs to be wary. The United States can help to bring peace but it takes two to tango and it takes two to negotiate – in good faith. Obama is not acting as a mediator but rather as a Palestinian ally trying to thug Israel into acting against its interests.

Caroline Glick makes some of our points:

Through their obsessive focus on Israeli building activities in Judea and Samaria, Obama and his advisers have sent regional leaders the message that they define their role here not as mediators, but as agents for the Palestinians against Israel. Consequently, far from giving the sense that they seek a peace deal that will be acceptable to Israelis and Palestinians alike, they have convinced the Israelis and the Palestinians – as well as much of the Arab world – that the US intends to coerce Israel into accepting a settlement that sacrifices Israeli security and national needs on the altar of maximalist Palestinian ambitions.

This is the view that Fatah leader and putative Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas expressed in his interview with The Washington Post last month ahead of his visit with Obama. As Abbas put it, the Americans “can use their weight with anyone around the world. Two years ago they used their weight on us. Now they should tell the Israelis, ‘You have to comply with the conditions.'”

Abbas added that he will “wait for Israel to freeze settlements,” and that until he receives this and other Israeli concessions, “we can’t talk to anyone.”

In other words, in light of the administration’s apparent hostility and uncompromising stance toward Israel, Abbas sees no reason to negotiate anything with the Israelis.

So, too, Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal made clear on Tuesday that he sees the Obama administration as a potential ally for his Iranian-controlled genocidal jihadist movement. Mashaal has four good reasons for viewing things this way. First, in his speech in Cairo, Obama accepted the Arab view that Israel is an alien entity to the Middle East which owes its legitimacy to the genocide of European Jewry by Europeans in Europe, and which has the moral standing of white slaveholders in the antebellum American South.

Second, Obama has pledged $900 million in US taxpayer funds to Hamas-controlled Gaza and is pressuring Israel to support Gaza economically in spite of the fact that Hamas continues to attack southern Israel with rockets and to expand and diversify its arsenals.

Third, the Obama administration is abandoning its predecessor’s bid to isolate Hamas by pressuring Fatah and Egypt to offer Hamas full partnership in a Fatah-Hamas unity government which would work to cement Hamas’s international legitimacy.

We all would love peace and quiet in the Middle East and a good outcome for all the parties in all the disputes (in all the world for that matter) and for everyone around the world to be happy and grievance free – but now in the Middle East that is a hope that can only be achieved by good faith negotiations between the main parties involved and living in the region. The United States cannot guarantee “good faith” on the part of anyone. “Good faith” bargaining comes from the parties themselves.

On Sunday we suspect Netanyahu will avoid a fight with the White House and its viceroys while not abandoning any of the pillars of Israeli security.

Many Jews are waking up slowly, ever so slowly to the fact that Obama is not a friend and that in either case neither friends nor foes can trust Obama.

Israel will likely need American assistance in order to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Whatever happens in the elections in Iran today, not much will change.

The outcome will have little direct impact on Iran’s key policies – such as its nuclear program or possible acceptance of Washington’s offer for dialogue – which are directly dictated by the ruling Islamic clerics. But Ahmadinejad has become a highly polarizing figure on the international stage with comments that include questioning the Holocaust and calling for Israel’s demise.



Iran might get a friendlier face with a better publicity photo but it will continue to oppose American and Israeli interests. [Already both sides in the Iranian election are claiming victory.]

American Jews must wake up to what Obama is up to and speak up loudly.

Women, Gays, and Jews all need to wake up and oppose Obama.

Share

137 thoughts on “Women, Gays, Jews: WAKE UP!

  1. Bush, Reagan and Clinton all filed briefs in court opposing current federal law as being unconstitutional
    ***********
    Admin..could you post the link if it becomes available??????? The bottom line Obot defense for this despicable behavior is , “they had to defend the law in Federal Court”. sounds like bullshit to me but refs. would be nice.

  2. Wow, admin, a real tour-de-force this time!

    “It’s a complete lie that he has too much stuff on his plate — this is the guy who criticized Bush for not being able to multitask,”

    &&&&
    ah, yup!

  3. The hyper links are all up SHV. We always link to our sources (the words in purplish color are the hyperlinks) when we write an article. In this instance the link goes to Americablog and their quote. We quoted extensive excerpts but the articles are long in their own right. Here is the full quote from Americablog:

    http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/obama-justice-department-defends-doma.html

    He actually argued that the courts shouldn’t consider Loving v. Virginia, the miscegenation case in which the Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional to ban interracial marriages, when looking at gay civil rights cases. He told the court, in essence, that blacks deserve more civil rights than gays, that our civil rights are not on the same level.

    And before Obama claims he didn’t have a choice, he had a choice. Bush, Reagan and Clinton all filed briefs in court opposing current federal law as being unconstitutional (we’ll be posting more about that later). Obama could have done the same. But instead he chose to defend DOMA, denigrate our civil rights, go back on his promises, and contradict his own statements that DOMA was “abhorrent.” Folks, Obama’s lawyers are even trying to diminish the impact of Roemer and Lawrence, our only two big Supreme Court victories. Obama is quite literally destroying our civil rights gains with this brief. He’s taking us down for his own benefit.

    They promise a follow up article on administrations filing briefs in court opposing current federal law. We’ll post it when it becomes available.

    BTW, a quick google has many cases like this. For instance:
    http://www.angelfire.com/az/sthurston/jhart.htm

    Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of Shaw v. Murphy, which raises the question of whether prisoners have a First Amendment right to provide legal assistance to other inmates. The United States (through the Clinton Administration’s Solicitor General’s Office) has argued that they do not. And the Bush Administration is, of course, unlikely to reverse this position.

  4. http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/12/iran.election/index.html

    President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was leading in early results from Iran’s presidential election Friday, the election chief said.

    With polls closed and about 20 percent of ballots counted, Election Commission Chief Kamran Daneshjoo said Ahmadinejad was ahead with just over 69 percent of the vote.

    Daneshjoo said Ahmadinejad’s chief rival, reformist candidate Mir Hossain Moussavi, had 28 percent.

    Both candidates, however, were claiming victory.

  5. Admin: what you are saying is wise and urgent. It put me in mind of the famous poem by a German which laments the shallow indifference of the German intellectual class to the rise of another messiah. The bio and the poem itself are instructive. This is from Wikkopedia:
    ———————————————————
    FIRST THEY CAME . . .

    CONTEXT: “First they came…” is a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. Martin Niemöller’s poem inscribed on a stone in the New England Holocaust Memorial.

    BIOGRAPHY: as you will see, Pastor Niemoller was a sentient being who had the courage to admit his initial reaction was wrong, and to proclaim what he later found to be true despite the personal risk it entailed. We must remind the hopium addled of this when the occasion arises. (This comment is mine, not Wikkopedia.)

    Martin Niemöller was a German pastor and theologian born in Lippstadt, Germany, in 1892. Niemöller was an anti-Communist and supported Hitler’s rise to power at first. But when Hitler insisted on the supremacy of the state over religion, Niemöller became disillusioned.

    He became the leader of a group of German clergymen opposed to Hitler. Unlike Niemöller, they gave in to the Nazis’ threats. Hitler personally detested Niemöller and had him arrested and eventually confined in the Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps. Niemöller was released in 1945 by the Allies.

    He continued his career in Germany as a clergyman and as a leading voice of penance and reconciliation for the German people after World War II. His poem is well-known, frequently quoted, and is a popular model for describing the dangers of political apathy, as it often begins with specific and targeted fear and hatred which soon escalates out of control.

    THE POEM: FIRST THEY CAME . . .

    When the Nazis came for the communists,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a communist.

    Then they locked up the social democrats,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a social democrat.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    I did not protest;
    I was not a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a Jew.

    When they came for me,
    there was no one left to speak out for me.

  6. SHV, as promised (with hyperlinks):

    http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/obama-doj-lies-to-politico-in-defending.html

    Ben Smith at Politico just reported the following statement from the Department of Justice over their brief, filed last night, comparing gay marriage to incest:

    As it generally does with existing statutes, the Justice Department is defending the law on the books in court. The president has said he wants to see a legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act because it prevents LGBT couples from being granted equal rights and benefits. However, until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system.

    Yeah, you see, that’s an outright lie. Fortunately for you, and unfortunately for Justice, Joe and I are both lawyers. We suspected this betrayal was coming, so we read up on the law. In fact, George W. Bush (ACLU et al., v. Norman Y. Mineta – “The U.S. Department of Justice has notified Congress that it will not defend a law prohibiting the display of marijuana policy reform ads in public transit systems.”), Bill Clinton (Dickerson v. United States – “Because the Miranda decision is of constitutional dimension, Congress may not legislate a contrary rule unless this Court were to overrule Miranda…. Section 3501 cannot constitutionally authorize the admission of a statement that would be excluded under this Court’s Miranda cases.”), George HW Bush (Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission), and Ronald Reagan (INS v./ Chadha – “Chadha then filed a petition for review of the deportation order in the Court of Appeals, and the INS joined him in arguing that § 244(c)(2) is unconstitutional.”) all joined in lawsuits opposing federal laws that they didn’t like, laws that they felt were unconstitutional. It is an outright lie to suggest that the DOJ had no choice.

    But it’s worse than that. Let’s just assume for a moment that the Justice spokesman didn’t lie to Politico, even though they did. Let’s just assume that Obama had no choice but to oppose the gay couple filing this DOMA lawsuit. Where in the law does it say that Obama was required to compare gay marriage to incest?

    And putting that little bit of religious right messaging aside, even if they “had” to file the brief against us, why didn’t they just file a brief that argued the technicalities about why the case should have been thrown out (e.g., the plaintiffs had no standing)? No, what Obama did was throw the legal kitchen sink at us in a brief that could have been written by Antonin Scalia. They argued that DOMA is constitutional. Worse yet, they argue that it was a reasonable, rational, good law that actually saves the government money. They argued that DOMA wasn’t motivated by hate. That DOMA doesn’t discriminate against gays one bit because, apparently, gays can get married if they want… well, if they want to marry straight people of the opposite gender. They invoked Loving v. VA, the miscegenation case, and argued how it doesn’t apply to gay marriage, undercutting the entire basis of our civil rights movement – saying that our civil rights are not akin, are not as worth, not as real, as the civil rights of blacks and other minorities. They went out of their way to try to diminish the legal impact of our two big Supreme Court victories, Roemer and Lawrence – that will have implications on every future civil rights battle we fight.

    No. The Obama administration didn’t just lie to Politico, Obama lied to our community, or he lied to the court. But you don’t publicly call yourself a “fierce advocate” for gay rights, and then compare married gays to incest. You don’t make your first official legal statement on gay rights an outright attack on the underpinnings of our entire civil rights.

    Our president had a choice. And he chose to throw us under the bus, and then knife us for good measure.

    PS And here’s another lie from the Justice spokesman:

    The president has said he wants to see a legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act because it prevents LGBT couples from being granted equal rights and benefits.

    In fact, Obama argued last night that DOMA does not deny gays any rights or benefits:Rights

    In short, then, the failure in this manner to recognize a certain subset of marriages that are recognized by a certain subset of States cannot be taken as an infringement on plaintiffs’ rights, even if same-sex marriage were accepted as a fundamental right under the Constitution…. DOMA, understood for what it actually does, infringes on no one’s rights, and in all events it infringes on no right that has been constitutionally protected as fundamental, so as to invite heightened scrutiny.

    Benefits

    [G]ay and lesbian individuals who unite in matrimony are denied no federal benefits to which they were entitled prior to their marriage; they remain eligible for every benefit they enjoyed beforehand…DOMA does not discriminate against homosexuals in the provision of federal benefits. To the contrary, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is prohibited in federal employment and in a wide array of federal benefits programs by law, regulation, and Executive order.

    You see, this is the problem with what Obama did to our community last night. He can talk all he wants about helping us get our civil rights (well, in fact, notice the Justice spokesman said nothing about Obama actually helping us get DOMA repealed), but the Obama administration’s own word will now be used against us, and against him, if he ever deigns to actually fulfill even one promise to our community.

  7. Wbboei, the poem you posted was considered for inclusion in the article – but the article was so long already – so thanks for bringing it all back home.

  8. Admin: appropos of your comments and those of Rabbi Pomerantz: The poem “First They Came”. (My first attempt did not seem to post.)

    This is the work of Martin Niemöller a Catholic cleric who first welcomed the Nazi messiah as the solution to germany’s problem, but later came to see him for the monster he was, confessed his error and proclaimed the truth at grave personal risk to himself.

    For that he was arrested and sent to Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps. He was liberated in 1945.

    But his immoral words, inscribed on the New England Holocaust Memorial live on and are a call to arms against the new messiah in our midst bararack hussein obama. Since human nature does not change, history has a bad habit of repeating itself in slightly different ways.

    This is a poem that people should share with bots in their midst to help them see the profound danger this man represents. It is multi level, and we need to pierce the velvet fog, hear the dog whistle, and watch what he does even more than what he says.

    FIRST THEY CAME . . .
    When they came for the communists,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a communist.
    Then they locked up the social democrats,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a social democrat.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    I did not protest;
    I was not a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a Jew.

    When they came for me,
    there was no one left to speak out for me.

  9. Let’s just assume for a moment that the Justice spokesman didn’t lie to Politico, even though they did.
    ——————————
    On that narrow point, turnaround is fair play. Politico has never been one to let a little thing like the truth stand in the way of their own serial lies, as we saw time and again in the campaign.

  10. I am sure Holder is sitting there in the office with his feet on the desk reading Dilbert Ben Smith’s hissy fit and saying what a gas bag. He should take lessons from a helium balloon like Tapper. But we digress . .

  11. SHV, as promised (with hyperlinks):
    **********
    Thanks for the follow up. Another excuse that I am seeing from the Obots is that the brief is the product of a Bush Admin. hold over and therefore Bambi can’t be responsible. I assume they are talking about W. Scott Simpson who is the last atty. listed and I assume did the “grunt” work preparing the brief. The lead atty., whom I assume supervised and approved it, is long term Obama supporter and fund raiser, Tony West. Mr West is the head of the DOJ’s civil rights division. What an irony for that brief to come out of the “best friend of the gay community ever” civil right division.

    Tony West

    ww.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=34943

  12. I think this matter under advisement and determined that we must expand the list of offenses that qualify for the death penalty to include public officials lying to politico.

    But in that case, it is reasonable to assume that the defense bar will argue that Obama lies to big media all the time and worship him for it–especially Tapper. Therefore, if the defense attorney is any good he will argue that it would be a violation of the equal protection clause to set this mental midget up with a date with Old Sparkey when all he was really doing was communicating Bambis/Holder party line.

  13. SHV, that excuse is too weak to bother with. If anything so many Bush appointees still with jobs shows that Obama is too busy preening on TV to make appointments. BTW, where was Eric Holder? Isn’t he in charge of the Justice Department?

    Also, even a Bush appointee follows directives and if the Justice Department asked him to rewrite a legal brief overnight most attorneys would do the job overnight. If not they could have asked for an extension from the court. It is clear that this is Obama policy and it is aimed at Gay-Americans (and Women and Jews in their turn too). The Obama Hopium addled are getting way crazy with their excuses.

  14. By the way, the reason I always bitch about Tapper is because I see him as a guy that has the ability to be a first class journalist, but lacks the balls to do it. He is far too deferential to Bambi, pulls his punches, and lets his personal biases affect what he reports and how he does it. I know he is the Chief White House Correspondent for ABC News. But that tells us nothing about how good of a jouralist he is. It is like saying a guy is a leader just because he happens to be the CEO.

  15. SHV, not to belabor the point, but… Imagine if a Gay president and a Gay Attorney General had filed a brief in court, one of many, which attacked African-Americans. You would hear the word “racist” from the entire Democratic Left. Ditto attacks like the one on Palin if it was on Michelle Obama or someone the Left approves of.

    Instead, two African-Americans in charge of all court filings attack Gay-Americans and the Obama Hopium addled come up with every ridiculous excuse. Black or White, Gay-Americans are under attack and the Left stays complicitly silent. Ditto attacks on women with liberals like Margaret Carlson blaming Palin. (link here: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-06-12/palin-cant-outsmart-letterman/?cid=bs:archive5 )

  16. This is a very good assessment of where we are. It is based on a colloquy between a management consultant and a university professor with insight into the current crisis and both at the top of their professions. This is the salient one third of a long article. It is still long, but worth reading. The political observations on who will take the hit and the rise of nazism, etc. are relevant to the current discussion.
    —————————————————–

    Weighing the US government’s response to the crisis: A dialogue
    In this second installment of a three-part series, Professor Richard Rumelt and McKinsey’s Lowell Bryan discuss the prospects for the economy, companies, and workers.
    JUNE 2009 • Allen P. Webb

    Source: Strategy Practice

    This conversation is one of three installments summarizing Lowell Bryan and Richard Rumelt’s reflections on the implications of the financial crisis. This second installment focuses on the public-policy response. The first examines the broad managerial implications of the crisis, and the third explores what it means for corporate strategy today.

    The government response to the financial crisis and its reverberations in the real economy have been extraordinary. Coordinated central banking interventions, direct injections of government capital into financial institutions, and massive fiscal stimulus are just a few of the actions that have taken place in recent months. The potential impact on business is enormous and still too nascent for anyone to fully comprehend.

    In the depths of the crisis, Lowell Bryan, a director in McKinsey’s New York office, and Richard Rumelt, a professor of strategy at UCLA’s Anderson School of Management, began reflecting on the tectonic shifts in government policy underway. Bryan’s “Leading through uncertainty” and Rumelt’s “Strategy in a ‘structural break’” appeared on mckinseyquarterly.com last December. In late April of this year, McKinsey’s Allen Webb went back to Bryan and Rumelt and asked them to take further stock of government’s response to the crisis since the fall of 2008. Bryan and Rumelt’s discussion of the economic and business implications of policy changes make useful reading for executives trying to make sense of the rapid shifts taking place in their strategic landscapes.

    The Quarterly: What do you think of the US policy response to the financial crisis over the past few months?

    Lowell Bryan: I sit and marvel at it. It was very hard for me to get used to the idea that the federal government—and I’m talking not just about the Federal Reserve but the Treasury—would be as quick to guarantee all the liabilities of the entire system: $16 trillion dollars or whatever it’s been.

    The reason I marvel is that we don’t know if this is going to be effective or not. We’re on a new course here. We have no idea what may come out the other end, in terms of potential inflation, double dips, the role of the US economy, the value of the dollar. We are undertaking as quick a fix as possible of something that took years and years to build up.

    There’s one of two outcomes from this. One is that the quick fix will work but not fix the fundamentals. And then I’m really concerned, because I don’t think we’ll have a foundation for good, sound growth. The other is that no matter what we do, we’re going to have a deep recession, which will give us time to fix the system—and we will fix the system. We will get leverage down to good levels. We will deal with our trade imbalances. And strategists and their companies will learn how to get by in this environment.

    What I’m most worried about now is that we may think it’s over before it’s over. Because if we don’t fix things that have gotten excessive and we’ve used up all of our gunpowder, it could be really ugly in about three or four years, as we do a big double dip or inflation gets out of control.

    Richard Rumelt: As Lowell pointed out, it’s been a surprisingly vigorous response, and we don’t know if it’s going to work. Spending money may or may not stimulate the economy. Quantitative easing may or may not stimulate the economy. There’s no certainty. The empirical evidence is very, very mixed. The Keynesians will tell you that the Depression was fixed by the spending on the Second World War. But that’s really a misreading of history.

    What happened during the Second World War was that ten million Americans were put into indentured military service at minimum wage. Consumers endured rationing. And the government rebuilt the industrial infrastructure with cost-plus contracts. After the war was won, it turned out that household balance sheets had been restructured back to almost zero debt. There was this huge pent-up demand to buy anything. And people went back to work at real salaries. To repeat that today, you’d have to take the ten million employees in financial services, draft them into some kind of—

    Lowell Bryan: Peace Corps.

    Richard Rumelt: —Peace Corps, and have them rebuild the highways for four years, at minimum wage. It’s an appealing prospect. But the sanctity of their bonus contracts probably prevents it.

    The Quarterly: Let’s come back to this notion you raised a moment ago, Richard, about the importance of addressing fundamental structural problems, the importance of resource reallocation. So far, is the policy response helping or hindering the reallocation of resources in the private sector?

    Richard Rumelt: Mostly, it hinders. The real economy boils down to what work people do. I believe we are now in a structural break and that the mix of work being done has to change. If things go right, we will find, in five years, that we are, on the whole, doing a lot less of some activities, and more of others. In my view, a good policy response helps individuals defray the costs of the shift. If you’re an auto worker, it’s not your fault. On the other hand, if we act to prevent the shift, if we prop up the institutions that have declined, that becomes a problem. If we start creating zombie car companies and zombie banks that are essentially propped up by the government, that’s a problem.

    The worst policy is to prop up people in jobs that are no longer necessary. The right policy, I think, is some balance where you help people deal with the costs of changes in employment rather than have the costs all privatized, which isn’t really fair, because someone’s benefitting from the change and someone’s losing. And very often, the employees aren’t at fault—they’re just part of the system and they ought to be helped. But they should be helped in a way other than guaranteeing them jobs doing what doesn’t need to be done.

    Lowell Bryan: I think there’s a potential that we go down the path of trying to protect people, and in the process we put in a lot more rigidities that make us fundamentally less effective at innovation. That migrates to Asia and we, basically, go down the European path. That would be sad for us and the world. But that’s a possibility. That’s one of the scenarios about how this plays out: we become a safer, poorer place, with less change.

    One of the interesting things I see, which is probably a healthy and good response, is government-funded R&D: things like clean energy, health care. Obviously, the military keeps doing R&D too. Behind an awful lot of the raw innovation that takes place, you’ll find some government program that’s invented something or caused something to be invented. Now, a lot of the R&D doesn’t help for a decade or more. But I think that’s an area where the government could help—just get the raw engine of research going.

    The Quarterly: How worried are you about a backlash that undermines the global system?

    Richard Rumelt: There’s an enormous amount of pent-up political anger that currently isn’t being expressed, because everybody is afraid that if you get too angry, one of these banks may keel over and die, and then we’re back in the soup, as with Lehman Brothers. It’s a very delicate and emotional political balance right now—you have institutions that are taking enormous amounts of resources and basically threatening everybody with their imminent failure in order to garner more resources. That has to be fixed. We can’t run a world economy with that kind of a relationship.

    Lowell Bryan: I’m a little more sympathetic to the people currently in charge of most of these financial institutions, because—not entirely, but for the most part—these people are feeling a lot of anger as a result of things that were done by their predecessors.

    Richard Rumelt: Fair enough. It’s people playing roles they are inheriting. But the history of depressions and significant downturns shows us that they produce political results that are very long-lasting. Look at the 1873 collapse and what happened in Europe after that. The rise of anti-Semitism and, eventually, Nazism comes out of this. And that’s the risk here—we get some fundamental political outgrowth that’s dysfunctional.

    Lowell Bryan: What I worry about, unless the US shows exceptional leadership, is that the role of the US in the world economy (which I think has been, overall, terribly beneficial since World War II) is at risk. Our ability to be the leaders of capitalism and democracy—our moral authority—has been severely weakened. Unless we work really hard at it, people are going to say, “Well, that was an interesting set of ideas, but I’m going to try this other different set of ideas.”

    Richard Rumelt: That’s exactly right. US intellectual and moral leadership in the world have been severely compromised. The very notion that our government is basically fair and has a certain degree of ability to balance competing claims and adjudicate them in some way—both internationally and locally—that’s at risk right now.

    Lowell Bryan: I will say that the current administration is moving in the right direction. But it’s not just about talking about it, it’s finding some real solutions to some of these global economic issues.

    My biggest worry is a quick fix leading to inflation, so that by 2011 the Federal Reserve is in a dilemma—either to let inflation get out of control, with all the adverse effects to the currency, or to tighten up and put us into a double-dip recession.

    Richard Rumelt: Which they’re not likely to do on the eve of an election.

    Lowell Bryan: But the issue is, neither one’s a good choice. One will cause us enormous external problems. And one will cause enormous internal problems.

    Richard Rumelt: We could have rip-roaring inflation.

    Lowell Bryan: If we have rip-roaring inflation, the problem is that all the people who are holding dollars as instruments of wealth say, “You just bagged us.” That can create enormous anger and it’s quite a real possibility.

    But I think the more likely scenario is that we’ll go through a deep recession, that we’ll get through it battered but remain resilient. I do think there’s a fair chance that we will fix the credit system, fix the capital markets and that global expansion and global integration will resume. I would say that’s more likely than the other scenario I gave you. But they’re both out there. And we really are going to depend upon a lot of good policy and a little bit of luck to get us through this.

    Richard Rumelt: I agree. I think the problems can be fixed. What the government needs to do—and only the government can do this—is to make decisions about who’s going to take the hit. Somebody is going to be worse off here, and right now it looks like the taxpayer. But there are bond holders, there are various equity holders, there are many, many, many interests out there, including national governments and sovereign funds. The system is frozen by the uncertainty about who’s going to be left standing when everybody else has a seat. That uncertainty has to be resolved to get the global system working again.

  17. JanH, Seniors we will address soon. Seniors were not a key component of the Obama base vote so there is less work to do with that population group. They seem to understand the problem with Obama already.

  18. Outstanding, Admin.
    Can you imagine how a gay Jewish woman feels right about now?
    Even Bill Maher is getting bored with

    “President Obama should just join the cast of “I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here!” It’s not that farfetched; he’s been on everything else.

    I’m still a fan, but there’s a fine line between being transparent and being overexposed. Every time you turn on the TV, there’s Obama. He’s getting a puppy! He’s eating a cheeseburger with Joe Biden! He’s taking the wife to Broadway and Paris — this is the best season of “The Bachelor” yet!
    I get it: You love being on TV. I love my bong, but I take it out of my mouth every once in a while. The other day, I caught myself saying to a friend, “Don’t tell me if he’s fixed the economy yet, I’m Tivo-ing it.”

    Remember during the campaign when John McCain attacked Obama for acting like a celebrity and we all laughed at the grumpy old shellshocked fool? Well, it turns out he was right.”

  19. Thanks Admin.

    And yes, basil, one strike against you is bad enough, you add two more and its a catastrophe in the making.

  20. Maher link:

    www dot latimes dot com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-maher12-2009jun12,0,7966784.story

  21. Bwahhahahahahaha!
    Admin, can you embed?

    Contessa Brewer gets punked by Ziegler.

    This is great! She isso flustered she says on air, “cut the mike please.”
    The interview is supposed to be about Palin and Letterman but Ziegler points out the sheer hypocrisy of her network and poor Contessa doesn’t know what to say.

    www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=g3qFsNAdM-k

  22. Is she a real countessa? She does not handle humor or a fast repartee very well. Her response was rather Nixonian. Thought Ziegler acquitted himself admirably. But I doubt he will be invited back.

  23. Countessa. . . brewer? Hmmmmmmmmmm. Wonder what royal family she is from. Wonder whether somewhere in her pedigree past a bitch jumped over the wall. (Dont blame me for that one. I was merely quoting Sir Thomas Moore).

  24. basil9 Says:
    June 12th, 2009 at 7:29 pm

    Women who are okay with being called a slut are the only kind of women MSNBC likes to hire.

  25. http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSEVA14340720090612?sp=true

    TEHRAN (Reuters) – State media declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner of Iran’s election but challenger Mirhossein Mousavi alleged irregularities and claimed victory for himself.

    The state election commission said early Saturday that Ahmadinejad, a hardline conservative, was ahead with 66 percent of the votes in Friday’s election after 21 million ballots were counted.

    Ahmadinejad’s main challenger, moderate former prime minister Mirhossein Mousavi, had 31 percent, according to the commission, which is part of the Interior Ministry. It said 61 percent of all ballot boxes had now been counted.

    The official news agency IRNA said: “Dr Ahmadinejad, by winning most votes at the 10th presidential election, has secured his victory.” It said results would be announced at 8 a.m. (0330 GMT).

  26. State media declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner of Iran’s election but challenger Mirhossein Mousavi alleged irregularities and claimed victory for himself.
    —————————–
    Well that settles that. Shall we appeal this decision to the Supreme Court of Minnesota. Thanks to Franken and Coleman they have some experience in contested elections.

  27. Women who are okay with being called a slut are the only kind of women MSNBC likes to hire.
    —————————-
    Well put. But why stop there. Why not expand the club to NBC, lest we forget Mrs. Greenspan. And why restrict it to women. I propose that we add Matthews, Olberman and Shuster the rooster. They are pretty slutty too. And last but not least, lets open the stall doors to the Protector of the Realm, Guardian of the Money Supply and Sworn Enemy of Irrational Exuberance Sad Alan, the Architect of Disaster.

  28. Another great article. I cannot believe the unmitigated crap this fraud is getting away with in the name of “change”. This is and shall remain the greatest power grab/ruse this nation has ever seen. You have got to be an ostrich with your head in the sand if you can’t read the writingon the wall….this country is being taken over by a force so committed to changing our basic form of democracy that if it were anybody else, impeachment hearing would be called for. When is this nightmare ever going to end……..?

  29. State media declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner of Iran’s election but challenger Mirhossein Mousavi alleged irregularities and claimed victory for himself.
    ————————————
    I am sure most westerners will see this as a negative result. The forces of democracy came close, but were turned back once again by the antediluvian ayotollas. If only they had won, then the lion and the lamb would have laid down together in blissful communion.

    In fact, this is not such a bad result. The election was closer than many thought. A large number of women turned out. There is no going back to the way it was before. The progress here is gradual. And the current government now knows as it must that it is subject to challenge, and may lose the next time around. That alone may make them more receptive to moderating their views.

    But Bibi cannot engage in that kind of speculation. He must take the situation as it exists, which means that he must address his policy response to the policies of the current governmnent. I do not expect him to let down his guard, especially not for Bambi. If the other side had won, there would be intense international pressure for him to do that to Israels peril.

  30. The Mullahs control everything in Iran….the outcome was predetermined. They just gave the people a little room to vent, but I don’t see much changing. Bibi must outsmart obama (very difficult to do as Hillary saw) but using his very words against him. lets in fact be honest explain why Obama appeases dictators who allow beheading of women or infidels, but scolds Israel for simply trying to live in peace with 1 billion hostile neighbors.

  31. If indeed Ahmadinejad has been reelected with the numbers projected it will strengthen Netanyahu. Netanyahu will be able to argue that the Iran nuclear program will go forward and that those nuclear facilities must be destroyed before there is a nuclear Iran.

    Obama can hope all he wants. Reality however asserts itself repeatedly.

  32. nuclear facilities must be destroyed before there is a nuclear Iran
    *************
    Probably too late..the main facilities at Natanz are underground and have been continually hardened since ~2004. In addition, the Iranians are digging large tunnels in the mountain near Natanz.

  33. ADMIN…a very powerful post…

    and thanks for that Amanda Fortini article because she is definitely in the minority while most of the so-called feminist/liberal/progressive women fall over themselves to defend the indefensible to score political points at the expense of girls and a woman they do not like…

    I have been commenting all over on this topic and the hatred and rationalization coming from the left defies decency and logic…it is embarrassing and shameful…the hypocrisy shatters all the myths about democrats and their support of women…all it takes is a few ventures into some of these sites on these topics to fully understand that this…is beyond any doubt…no longer the democratic party we once were…the dems are not only the mirror image of what we once hated and wanted to change but the party has lost basic core principles…

    sorry wbboei…if I sound negative…but all sense of fairness and reason is dissipating…the party is filled with base hacks and reactionaries with little empathy and less compassion…

  34. Zahra Rahnavard: Not Iran’s Michelle Obama, But Its Hillary Clinton
    Posted:
    06/12/09
    Filed Under:Iran, Woman Up
    1 Comments +
    Zahra Rahnavard, wife of Iranian presidential reform candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi, is by all accounts a stirring speaker, an energizing personal presence, a respected force in her professional field and someone who enjoys high approval ratings in Iran. For those reasons, many are comparing her to Michelle Obama. But they’re looking at the wrong first lady. Zahra Rahnavard is really Iran’s Hillary Clinton.

    A fierce advocate for women’s rights, Rahnavard has hit the campaign trail and hit it hard, becoming in many places much more visible than her husband, the candidate. Everywhere she goes, she calls for equal rights for women. And her own political resume is strong, independent of her husband. Prior to the campaign, Rahnavard was chancellor of an Iranian university, one of the centers of Iranian political life, and before that she was a political advisor for Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. So why not a cabinet post for this woman, or even a future presidential run, a la Hillary?

    It may not be that far away. A Gallup Poll released yesterday showed that in response to the question of whether women should be able to hold leadership positions in the cabinet and national council, 77% of Iranians responded yes.

    For many Iranians, Rahnavard and her husband present what NPR referred to yesterday as a “two-for-one package.” (Sound familiar?) But if Rahnavard is Hillary, Mousavi is certainly not Bill; reports often characterize him as soft-spoken and lacking in charisma.

    The results of this election remain up in the air, with both Mousavi and incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claiming victory. Reports of voting irregularities could mean a long road ahead in coming to a final determination. One thing I am sure of, though, is that we haven’t heard the last of Zahra Rahnavard.

  35. If indeed Ahmadinejad has been reelected with the numbers projected it will strengthen Netanyahu. Netanyahu will be able to argue that the Iran nuclear program will go forward and that those nuclear facilities must be destroyed before there is a nuclear Iran.

    Obama can hope all he wants. Reality however asserts itself repeatedly.
    ———————————————————-
    Amen. In international affairs, Bambi is out of his league. People are wise to him. On the economy, he is looking at snake-eyes, i.e. inflation or a second valley in 2010-11, according to the article above. Time for another 40k night on the town and a game of hoops. Pathetic.

  36. Zahra Rahnavard: Not Iran’s Michelle Obama, But Its Hillary Clinton
    ———————————————————–
    Correct. Hillary has the heart of a lioness. MOBO is a scowl.

  37. Agreed. I also agree that taking out the many nuclear facilities is not comparable to when Begin thankfully took out the Iraqi reacto in 81. However, a successful air strike could set back the program a few yrs and hopefully buy time.

  38. sorry wbboei…if I sound negative…but all sense of fairness and reason is dissipating…the party is filled with base hacks and reactionaries with little empathy and less compassion…
    ———————————
    S: I am with you all the way. I am just trying to be supportive.

  39. MO has done nothing to advance woman . She was provided the finest education, finest law firm jobs, etc, but her unyielding hatred for America is what always comes through loud and clear……..until her hubby became Prez..Now she is so happy and bubbly…

  40. wbboei Says:

    June 12th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
    Zahra Rahnavard: Not Iran’s Michelle Obama, But Its Hillary Clinton
    ———————————————————–
    Correct. Hillary has the heart of a lioness. MOBO is a scowl.

    **************************

    you brought a smile to my face…too much!

  41. The Mullahs control everything in Iran….the outcome was predetermined. They just gave the people a little room to vent, but I don’t see much changing. Bibi must outsmart obama (very difficult to do as Hillary saw) but using his very words against him. lets in fact be honest explain why Obama appeases dictators who allow beheading of women or infidels, but scolds Israel for simply trying to live in peace with 1 billion hostile neighbors.
    —————————-
    Are you sure you are not giving too much credit to bambi? It just seems to me that at the tactical level, i.e. the debates, Hillary drubbed him. At the strategic level I believe others were in charge, i.e. kennedy, the media, the dnc and an evil cabal of financial backers including Soros. I realize the bots would not like this, but thats too bad.

    I guess I see it in terms of the following analogy. In the weight room she had to bench press 300 pounds, while he had to bench press only 100 pounds. But that is all he could handle with those spindley arms and legs which Arnold commented about.

  42. MO has done nothing to advance woman . She was provided the finest education, finest law firm jobs, etc, but her unyielding hatred for America is what always comes through loud and clear……..until her hubby became Prez..Now she is so happy and bubbly…
    —————————————
    That is the exactly the point.

  43. The vile and creepy Dickie Morris was on Greta a few minutes ago to discuss the sexual harrassment of the Palin girls and Sarah. Of course, before it was all said and done, he just HAD to equate it with the sexual harrassment that Bill Clinton did to poor Gennifer Flowers and Monica Lewisinsky.

    Dickie was plugging his new book, however, I did not get to hear what it was about. The title is Catastrophy so going by the name of the book, I’m assuming that Dickie has written an autobiography.

  44. Morris was despicable…..talking about Letterman and taking typical cheap shots at Bill………I detest the sight of that man.

  45. Fox should be embarrassed to have Morris on the air. There are plenty of conservative pundits who aren’t laughing stocks the way he is.

  46. Absentee balloting in Iraq seemed to go to Ahmadinejad:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/13/world/middleeast/13baghdad.html

    “It is a religious duty to vote,” said Safar Ali Darwish, 55, who arrived at the Imam Khadhim shrine in Baghdad wearing a paint-stained shirt and pants.

    Mr. Darwish comes from a family of craftsmen in the Iranian pilgrimage city of Qum skilled in the art of gilding holy sites, and he was visiting Iraq as part of a charitable project to help restore the shrine’s golden dome. His vote went to the current president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. “He is the one who gave people services, and the one who gives people the services will win,” Mr. Darwish said.

    Almost every one of the dozen Iranians interviewed at the shrine seemed to support Mr. Ahmadinejad. One exception was Ali Sadiq, 21, who said he voted for the main opposition leader, Mir Hussein Moussavi. [snip]

    In Najaf, where election officials estimated that 12,000 Iranians voted, people thronged to two hotels favored by pilgrims, within walking distance of the Imam Ali shrine, where polling places had been set up.

    “Voting is a religious right, and I hope the next Iranian president will care about living conditions and the youth and how to develop Iran,” said Zahra Moussawi, 33, who had traveled from Tehran and voted as she left Friday Prayer.

    “I see Ahmadinejad as the one for this task,” she said.

  47. NYTimes from 38 minutes ago:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/13/world/middleeast/13iran.html?hp

    In a surprising turnabout, Iran’s state-run news agency said Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won Iran’s presidential election in a landslide just two hours after the polls closed Friday night. But his main rival, Mir Hussein Moussavi, announced defiantly that he had won and charged that there had been voting “irregularities.”

    “I am the absolute winner of the election by a very large margin,” Mr. Moussavi said during a news conference with reporters just after 11 p.m. Friday, adding: “It is our duty to defend people’s votes. There is no turning back.”

    An hour later, the state news agency reported that Mr. Ahmadinejad, the hard-line incumbent, had won the election with 69 percent and that Mr. Moussavi had 28 percent. As the election commission announced new totals throughout the night, the numbers changed slightly, but the wide lead by Mr. Ahmedinejad did not. The election commission said early Saturday morning that, with 77 percent of the votes counted, Mr. Ahmadinejad had won 65 percent and Mr. Moussavi had 32 percent, Reuters reported.

    The election commission is part of the Interior Ministry, which Mr. Ahmedinejad controls. Some lawmakers were already congratulating Mr. Ahmadinejad, and some of his supporters were celebrating in the streets, the agency said.

  48. It’s a Friday so there were a lot of news dumps we will discuss next week. With the stories of Obama firing an IG and the plan to bulldoze parts of cities and all the other crazy stories from all around the world we thought this would be a good way to end the day (it’s also digital TV conversion day to add to the confusion) – some things never CHANGE, just the actors:

  49. # S Says:
    June 12th, 2009 at 10:20 pm

    TM reduced to begging for $…ahhh!

    S: Wow. I haven’t visited TM in ages. Stopped by her site just not after seeing your comment. Yep, she’s begging people to meet her $600 donation goal in order to break even.

    In a way I feel bad for her bad luck. She basically lost her chance at stardom when Hillary bowed out of the race. Most of the people at her site were die-hard Clinton supporters and she was foolish enough to diss them by completely rejecting PUMA (which was at its peak right after the RBC fiasco and the Democratic National Convention in Denver).

    If she wasn’t so incredibly nasty to her loyal readers, she might still have some left today. If she had been more determined to call out the sexism, even when it was directed at Palin, she would’ve gained some of that respect back. But she chose to drink the kool-aid, betting that she might become popular with Obamanation once she supported Obama. News flash, TM: You’re no Rachel Maddow (who at least was listenable at one point when she was on Air America before she sold out to MSNBC. She is also a Rhodes Scholar which helps her credibility with the NE liberal elite). To Obamanation, TM is slightly better than Sarah Palin. TM comes from the South, is a female, and supported Hillary Clinton. That is enough to basically rule TM out from ever having a successful career in the mainstream “liberal” media like MSNBC.

    Too bad for her but she had a choice and she made the wrong one.

  50. CBS report on Obama’s treachery (on Gay rights today):

    http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/12/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5084948.shtml

    Here’s what the Human Rights Campaign, Lambda Legal, the ACLU and other groups said in a joint statement on Friday:

    We are very surprised and deeply disappointed in the manner in which the Obama administration has defended the so-called Defense of Marriage Act… The administration is using many of the same flawed legal arguments that the Bush administration used. These arguments rightly have been rejected by several state supreme courts as legally unsound and obviously discriminatory.

    We are also extremely disturbed by a new and nonsensical argument the administration has advanced suggesting that the federal government needs to be “neutral” with regard to its treatment of married same-sex couples in order to ensure that federal tax money collected from across the country not be used to assist same-sex couples duly married by their home states. There is nothing “neutral” about the federal government’s discriminatory denial of fair treatment to married same-sex couples: DOMA wrongly bars the federal government from providing any of the over one thousand federal protections to the many thousands of couples who marry in six states.

    It’s true that the Justice Department is generally tasked with defending acts of Congress. Then again, Bill Clinton’s DOJ refused to defend the abortion speech-related provisions of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, and a law mandating criminal penalties for giving paid Medicaid planning advice. Gay activist and Washington lawyer John Aravosis notes other examples of DOJ declining-to-defend.

    If Mr. Obama felt strongly enough, or Attorney General Eric Holder believed DOMA was execrable enough, the DOJ could have taken a similar position in court here. At least the president could have coupled his administration’s brief of DOMA with a speech calling on Congress to repeal it. [snip]

    This isn’t the first time Obama has drawn criticism from gay rights groups. His campaign platform said “we need to repeal the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy.”

    But the president has been silent on the topic since. Last month, The Atlantic blogger Andrew Sullivan wrote: “We are in the same spot as in every Democratic administration: the well-paid leaders of the established groups get jobs and invites, and that’s about it. Worse: we will get a purely symbolic, practically useless hate crimes bill that they will then wave in our faces to prove they need do nothing more.”

    A recent opinion article in the Wall Street Journal written by a gay man who served as an Army Ranger said: “He promised a full repeal of the ban if he was elected. But President Obama seems to be backing down from this pledge.”

    In hindsight, perhaps, it should be no surprise that Mr. Obama is shying away from this front in the cultural wars. He broke faith with liberal supporters over warrantless wiretaps, the repetition of the Bush administration’s arguments on “state secrets,” and the continuation of the Bush administration’s indefinite military detentions of terrorism suspects.

    The surprise should be that some supporters seem to have confused a politician’s campaign promises with his actual policies.



  51. An hour later, the state news agency reported that Mr. Ahmadinejad, the hard-line incumbent, had won the election with 69 percent and that Mr. Moussavi had 28 percent. As the election commission announced new totals throughout the night, the numbers changed slightly, but the wide lead by Mr. Ahmedinejad did not. The election commission said early Saturday morning that, with 77 percent of the votes counted, Mr. Ahmadinejad had won 65 percent and Mr. Moussavi had 32 percent, Reuters reported.
    —————————
    This is the second most corrupt election I have seen. The 2008 Democratic Primary was even worse. In both cases, there was fraud, voter intimidation and as Stalin famousl said ” it does not matter who votes; what matters is who counts the votes.

    As it does appear to be a case of voter fraud, intimidation and procedural irregularities, one might well ask if Gogzilla, Deano, Poopsie can account for their whereabouts during the the Iranian election.

    Given their recidivistic tendencies it is reasonable to assume that they were serving Mr. Ahmadinejad in this case. After all, he too has a Muslilm backround, disparages Israel and hates the United States.

  52. If Gogzilla is in charge of investigating complaints of voter fraud and initimidation in the Iranian election, then you can be sure that she will do everything she did to investigate voter fraud and intimidation in the 2008 primary election as co-chair of the DNC—which is to say she will do NOTHING. What a miserable excuse for a human being Brazil is.

  53. HighlyEducatedHillarySupporter : TM threw me off her site for just cause. She began defecting to Obama while Hillary was still in the race. At that point, Hillary supporters left and the varmits rushed in. Well, their posts were so poisonous that I had no choice but to do some target practice against their silly posts. None of my posts were not profane but still she did not like it because she had switched sides. I regarded it as an honor to be banned from that site when it turned bad. Mary Richards who used to blog here told me she went to a womens event in Los Angeles for Hillary and our girl made it a special point to thank Taylor for her work and shortly thereafter Taylor defected. No gratitude.

  54. “He promised a full repeal of the ban if he was elected. But President Obama seems to be backing down from this pledge
    ———————————————-
    “Promises are like piecrusts–made to be broken.”– VIadmir Lenin.

  55. I regarded it as an honor to be banned from that site when it turned bad.
    ***********
    TM aka Michelle Marshall, has always been a bottom feeder looking for her big break. She will never figure out that she is her biggest problem and will always looking for scraps at the bottom.

  56. HighlyEducatedHillSupporter and Wbboei…I do not feel bad for TM…she is very shallow…we probably all crossed paths there during the primary…and as we know she did a 180 degree turn and encouraged the bots to insult us and all the name calling etc…not only did she not defend Palin in any way, she led the charge to insult and demean her in degrading sexist tirades on a daily basis…she outdid the men in insulting another woman…right up to this week where she is cheering Letterman and still attacking Palin…I stopped going there when it became a waste of time after the primaries…big disappointment…

  57. We have got to get the word to Murdock that there are millions of Hillary supporters out there who despise his competitiors, i.e. MSNSC and CNN but will never come over to FOX as long as Morris is there, because they are deeply offended by his attacks on the Clintons. Murdock does not harbor those views, and Richard Mellon Scaiffe, who was a former adversary has relented. Rational people are starting to wonder whether Morris has a clinical problem. Quite frankly, it casts a long shadow over everything he says. Ultimately, it cost FOX alot of business. And because Dick Morris cannot control himself the only logical answer is to fire him.

  58. This is a great piece, admin. All of the signs were there, since way back in the primary. Any member of the LGBT community or anyone of the Jewish faith who supported Obama should have their head examined.

  59. It is ironic that African Americans would turn their backs on Hillary after she and her husband worked hard for their welfare throughout their careers. It is doubly ironic that they put all their hopes and dreams in a man who cares only for himself but happens to be half black. I hope the symbolism makes them happy but it will not put food on the table. Shame on those who bought into the Obama claim that the Clintons were racists. Clyburn can go to hell.

  60. This is a great piece, admin. All of the signs were there, since way back in the primary. Any member of the LGBT community or anyone of the Jewish faith who supported Obama should have their head examined
    ———————————————————
    Admin: from the beginning you have read this guy like a book. If enough people had bothered to listen and seen the threat which he represents we would not be in the perilous situation we are in now.

  61. Wbboei, – Boston 2004, Four Seasons Hotel with Obama. It was easy then to see what a low life he is. We also witnessed what surrounded him. From there it was easy to add 1 + 1. Some day we’ll tell stories.

  62. BTW, with all the news yesterday we should not miss the latest on Dodd and his deserved miseries.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0609/AP_Value_of_Dodds_Irish_cottage_doubles.html?showall

    Just when Chris Dodd thought his housing woes were behind him comes word from the AP that his controversial cottage in Ireland — purchased with a scandal-tainted New York financier — has doubled in value, Eyre’s economic collapse be damned.

    POLITICO’s John Bresnahan tells me that Dodd’s office, in fact, requested a three-day waiver to delay his annual financial disclosures.

    His office did released some details, apparently in response to the AP’s inquiry. And they happened to do so on a sunny summer Friday, just about the best time — short of Christmas Eve or during a hurricane — to drop crummy news.

    The AP:

    Records show the value of Sen. Christopher Dodd’s vacation cottage in Ireland has more than doubled to nearly $660,000.

    The seaside home, located in County Galway, is valued on Dodd’s new financial disclosure report at between $500,000 and $1,000,000. It was listed at between $100,001 and $250,000 on Dodd’s 2007 financial disclosure report.

  63. If Obama thought he would hear celestial choirs coming from Iran, he must be disappointed.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8098305.stm
    last updated at 09:13 GMT, Saturday, 13 June 2009 10:13 UK

    Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been re-elected as president of Iran with a resounding victory, the country’s electoral commission says.

    With more than 80% of results in, the commission said he won 64% support in an election marked by high turnout.

    His main rival, reformist Mir Hossein Mousavi, also claimed victory, calling the result a “dangerous charade”.

    Police have sealed off Mr Mousavi’s campaign HQ, preventing his supporters from holding a news conference.

    Mr Mousavi was hoping to prevent Mr Ahmadinejad winning more than 50% of the vote, in order to force as run-off election.

    However, the Iranian election commission said Mr Mousavi’s share of the vote was around 32%.

    Earlier, the state news agency Irna declared Mr Ahmadinejad the “definite winner”, and his campaign manager was quoted as saying “any doubts cast on this victory will be treated as a joke by the public”.

    Opposition confidence

    The BBC’s Jon Leyne, in Tehran, said police moved to prevent protests on the streets on Saturday, with few signs of celebration from Mr Ahmadinejad’s supporters and heavy security around Mr Mousavi’s campaign headquarters.

    There were reports that a rally for Mr Mousavi was broken up.

    Police increased security on polling day to try to head off trouble from supporters of the losing candidates and all gatherings have been banned until the official results have been published.

    The AFP news agency said police dispersed opposition supporters on Saturday morning, quoting a senior police official as saying: “The time of dancing and shouting is over.”

    Most of those backing Mr Mousavi were waiting to hear from their candidate before deciding whether to take to the streets and protest. Mr Mousavi has scheduled a news conference for Saturday morning. [snip]

    BBC Iranian affairs analyst Sadeq Saba says nobody expected the margin of Mr Ahmadinejad’s apparent victory to be so big.

    He says supporters of Mr Mousavi have expressed shock and disbelief.

    Overall, he adds, a victory for Mr Ahmadinejad would mean no significant change in Iran’s foreign and domestic policy.

    However, this election brought hope to millions of people that they could change the direction of the country through the ballot box, and those people are going to be deeply disappointed, our correspondent says.

    The hope for peaceful reform in Iran may die for a long time to come, he adds.

  64. More on Iran elections (we’d love to be a fly on the wall and listen to Netanyahu as he heard the news):

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/5522064/Iran-elections-Ahmadinejad-declared-winner-as-Mousavi-supporters-clash-with-police.html

    Iranian officials say Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has an unassailable lead in the country’s presidential elections, prompting angry claims of vote rigging from his reformist rival Mir Hossein Mousavi and sparking scenes of violence.

    In a statement on Saturday morning, the interior ministry said the incumbent president had won 65 per cent of the votes, with nearly 90 per cent of ballot boxes counted.

    That would put him clearly past the 50 per cent margin required to secure outright victory, and deal a devastating blow to the hopes of those who had backed Mr Mousavi, a former prime minister. [snip]

    Meanwhile, Iranian police and Mousavi supporters clashed in Tehran.

    “It is our duty to defend people’s votes,” he said, hinting that he might urge followers to challenge the verdict. “There is no turning back.”

    The apparent landslide victory by Mr Ahmadinejad comes despite widespread discontent among even his own followers over his dismal economic record and aggressive foreign policy. Polls had previously put him roughly neck-and-neck with Mr Mousavi, with some even predicting he faced a heavy defeat.

    Voter turnout, estimated at between 75 and 82 per cent, was also exceptionally high, something that most analysts had predicted would favour a Mousavi victory. “There is only one way this could have happened – fraud,” said Mohammad Hashemi, 26, a website worker and supporter of the reformist cause. “This is very bad news for the people of our country.”

    Last night, crowds of Ahmadinejad supporters were already taking to the streets to cheer victory, cruising central Tehran on motorbikes and chanting “Allah Akbar” (God is great).

    The official Islamic Republic News Agency also declared the president to have won a second term, although it issued its statement after just 19 per cent of the votes had been counted. [snip]

    Analysts are generally at a loss to explain the high showing by Mr Ahmadinejad. The absence of reliable polling in Iran has meant that no really accurate indicters of support have been available throughout the election campaign. It is believed, though, that while Mr Mousavi’s campaign in the cities captured much media attention, Mr Ahmadinejad courted large pockets of support in Iran’s rural areas. That “silent vote” could possibly have been far bigger than previously anticipated, but even so, few would have expected the landslide he has now been credited with.

  65. This disturbing comment as a response to the article written by Laura Rozen at foreignpolicy.com:

    http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/06/12/iran_elections_update

    You Americans are so stupid to even take this election seriously!!! i suggest everyone of you to come and visit here before offering opinions from your comfort zone in the USA.

    IT DOES NOT MATTER YOU IS SO CALLED “PRESIDENT”…since you Obama’s administration has come to power, Iranian Mullah’s have been emboldened and they feel they have won the war against America…

  66. admin, there was no way, a moderate reformist was going to “win” the election in Iran. That comment says it all. Here is the problem with 0bama (among many, :)) — he has (stupidly, IMO) shown all his cards to bad elements and that has perked up survival instincts in some and others want to take advantage of him. Ahmadinejad is a useful fool to those guys running the show from behind the scenes.

  67. Good Morning!
    Now THIS brought a smile to my face.
    (BTW – HEHS – WELL SAid! “Women who are okay with being called a slut are the only kind of women MSNBC likes to hire.”

    Republican New York State Assembly Minority Leader Brian Kolb has written CBS CEO Les Moonves asking the network chief to fire David Letterman for the talk show host’s crude jokes he made at the expense of Governor Sarah Palin and her daughter.

    Kolb said his letter condemns Letterman for his “shockingly inappropriate” jokes:

    “As the proud father of a daughter, and as a husband, I wanted Mr. Moonves to hear from me directly about Mr. Letterman’s disparaging remarks,” Kolb said in a written statement.

    “Firing Mr. Letterman would send a clear message that CBS will not tolerate any of its employees — even an established media figure like Mr. Letterman — making demeaning and degrading comments about women.”

    Kolbe joins his colleague Assemblyman Gary Finch, who also sent a letter to Moonvies (this one by personal courier) calling for the creepy comic’s ouster:

  68. And for those who live in NYC:
    HENRY – You’re in Philly, right? Maybe you can go?

    Update: A “Fire David Letterman” rally is being organized, according to an e-mail reported on FRee Republic. The event is scheduled to take place from 4:30 pm to 6:30 pm Monday June 15 outside the Ed Sullivan Theater, located at 1697 Broadway in New York City. The e-mail says that:

    “CBS has received so many negative comments about Letterman they have shut down the comments section of their website.”

  69. There IS still hope in the world, at least amopng the non-humanoid portion of its inhabitants.

    ADMIN! Please embed!

    Baby duck feeds carp! Adorable and a lesson for us.

    www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=xPxDw7ajfGEl

  70. Good Morning All.

    I felt that the commenT by the Gay response that O has done little but invite and appoint Gay’s to certain positions, and then really sat back and said that they need do no more is exactly what he has done for WOMEN AND AFRICAN AMERICAN’S.

    He has appointed them, but he had not ruled in their favor. Did you see an outcry about the closing of the clinic when the doctor got shot in Church? NO Did you see any comments when Palin was so badly treated by Letterman? NO

    The Blacks and Women in his administration know what is going on, and they protect them. I guess there is where I really have a problem. NOW has become ineffective. I wonder how their finances are.

    Do these groups realize they have become slaves and serfs of O. The only thing the O administration has done is shown the AA they can wear $500 tennis shoes to a charity event.

    But then the clues were there, and they ALL ignored it.

    At least Iran riots in the streets. WE DID NOTHING.

  71. They voted for him. They bought his phony rhetoric. And now they are up in arms because he lied and broke his promises to them?

    I am sorry for those groups who didn’t vote for him, but for those who drank the koolaid, including women, gays, and Jews, I have one thing to say.

    You get what you pay for!

    I’m sorry if that sounds harsh.

  72. “At least Iran riots in the streets.”

    It’s a shame, isn’t it? And we call ourselves democratic?

  73. Update: A “Fire David Letterman” rally is being organized, according to an e-mail reported on FRee Republic. The event is scheduled to take place from 4:30 pm to 6:30 pm Monday June 15 outside the Ed Sullivan Theater, located at 1697 Broadway in New York City. The e-mail says that:

    “CBS has received so many negative comments about Letterman they have shut down the comments section of their website.”
    —————————————————–
    I hope they do this in such a way that he cannot turn it into a joke. The state of mass culture today is such that he will not be punished for those comments. Mass culture promotes it and he can exploit it for money. But the one thing mass culture will not tolerate is hypocracy. If I were running the event, I would introduce an exhibit, right there on Broadway between 52nd and 53d. It would be a glass house, and the sign on it would read “Okay Letterman, Tell Us About Your Bastard Son”. That would be firing for effect–and I would have all the tabloids there to witness the event. And when they questioned this below the belt attack I would say, hey he was the one who put family in play and people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones–wouldn’t you agree. And then watch that fucking egomaniac cry and mope around in a further effort to milk the situation, and his untalented sidekick Paul could hold the kleenex box, and say these people have gone too far. But Letterman would hear about it back home again in Indiana.

  74. Jan–the idea is not to argue morality to an immoral man, but to make him into a human joke, so that people cannot think of him without envisioning that glass house, and whenever people see a glass house in a nursery or elsewhere they associate it with him. During the 1950s there was a celebrity by the name of Arthur Godfrey. You may not be old enough to remember him, but I am and I do. He went too far, and the tipping point was the time decided to buzz Teterburough Airport in his private plane. In Lettermans case, the joke would be his hypocracy and letting the world know who he really is. If the law will not reach this kind of slander, and if these matters are no longer settled by fistifcuffs, then they must be fought through a staged media event which diminishes his stature in the eyes of the sentient world. If people are unwilling to fight him on those terms then he controls the board. The spectacle would be the start, and from there the protestors would need to play off his next move.

  75. If it is done right, then he would soon realize that it is not in his interest to keep the issue alive, but the protestors should continue to press it in any event. The public would need to be reminded over and over and over again–in different ways.

  76. My comment from another site which attacks Obamas gameplan to unseat bibi. Blogger John, or something, I did not save it. Pundit, a commentor on that site disagrees and places all his marbles on Bambis high faluetin words. My reply was this:

    Pundit: what makes you believe that Obamas statements can be trusted? He has broken most of his promises. And because that is true, it is a non-sequitir to suggest that the truth can be divined from his words. They must be seen as propaganda, and we must develop a fine ear for the dog whistle he blows for the enemies of Israel and the United States, because sadly that is his game.

  77. More Islamic barbarism.
    Like i keep saying, ehen’s the last time anyone heard of Christians or Jews killing those who refuse to convert to their religion?
    And BTW, I hear Palaua, GB and Bermuda aren’t too happy about having Gitmo detainees released there. 👿

    A young Christian man was raped and brutally murdered in Pakistan for refusing to convert to Islam, and police are doing nothing about it, the victim’s brother and minister told FOXNews.com.

    Pakistani police reportedly found the body of Tariq “Litto” Mashi Ghauri — a 28-year-old university student in Sargodha, Pakistan — lying dead in a canal outside a rural village in Punjab Province on May 15. He had been raped and stabbed at least five times.

    “They have sexually abuse him, torture him with a knife on his testicle and genitals,” Ghauri’s brother, 24-year-old Salman Nabil Ghauri, said. “They have tortured him very badly, and after that they have stabbed five times with a knife and killed him.”

    The family believes Litto Ghauri was murdered by the brothers of his Muslim girlfriend, Shazi Cheema, after they found him in a compromising sexual position with their sister.

    The Rev. Haroon Bhatti, a Christian clergyman in the village and a friend of the Ghauri family, said Cheema’s three brothers came to Litto Ghauri’s house on May 11 and gave him an ultimatum: Marry their sister and convert to Islam.

    Ghauri agreed to the marriage but refused to accept Islam, and the brothers kidnapped him at gunpoint and drove him to a remote farmhouse, where they tortured and murdered him, the minister said.

  78. GREAT IDEAS, especially this: “Okay Letterman, Tell Us About Your Bastard Son”.
    And what about your “SLUTTY partner”…..I mean that is why you used those words for Palin.

  79. Israeli right-wingers ‘will topple’ Benjamin Netanyahu if he backs Palestinian state: Right-wing supporters of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu are threatening to bring down his government if he says “yes” to a Palestinian state in a speech on Sunday.

    By Dina Kraft in Tel Aviv
    13 Jun 2009

    “We will try to topple him,” Arieh Eldad, head of the National Union party, a coalition member, told The Sunday Telegraph. “We will work to recruit all those who are loyal to the Land of Israel. He cannot lie to his voters.”

    Against the backdrop of intense US pressure on Israel to make bold moves for peace, Dr Eldad’s comments underscore the opposing pressures on Mr Netanyahu.

    Will Benjamin Netanyahu fall out with Barack Obama?Some aides have indicated that Mr Netanyahu does intend to give guarded approval for Palestinian statehood in a speech that commentators are describing as a “moment of truth” for the the hawkish prime minister. He met over the weekend Israeli president Shimon Peres, the former Labour leader who was condemned last week by right-wing coalition partners Jewish Home and National Union for calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state.

    The speech follows President Barack Obama’s sweeping address to the Muslim world in Cairo in which he made it clear the United States expected Israel to accept a Palestinian state – a development against which Mr Netanyahu has been an outspoken opponent throughout career. Mr Obama also said Israel’s building of Jewish settlements in the West Bank – on land where the Palestinians plan to build their state – undermined peace efforts and must be stopped.

    In his speech, Mr Netanyahu faces the task of both placating the new US administration while fighting to save his government whose survival is dependent on nationalist parties. There are already indications that Washington is dissatisfied with what Mr Netanyahu plans to say. An Obama administration official said the message of the planned speech, the outlines of which they were informed of by US envoy George Mitchell, was”not adequate”.

    Meanwhile in Israel there have been reports of secret outreach efforts with potential rebels from the opposition Kadima party, many of whom are former members of Mr Netanyahu’s own ruling Likud party but support Palestinian statehood, in the hopes they might break ranks and join his government.

    One of the concerns among critics in Israel is even if Mr Netanyahu supports a Palestinian state, is that he might only do so only in what is perceived by them as the more sluggish framework of the U.S. and European-backed “road map” Mideast plan formulated in 2003 which calls for a gradual and conditional creation of a Palestinian state.

    Avishai Braverman, a Cabinet minister and member Israel’s Labour party, said he has recommended that Mr Netanyahu act boldly and accept the time has come for a Palestinian state, despite opposition to the idea from not just more hard-line nationalist parties but his own Likud. “The role of leader is to think what is right for future of our children and therefore what’s important is that he decides to embrace the Obama initiative and move forward. I think its an historic moment and if Israel does not move towards partitioning the Holy Land than it could be a call for one person, one vote and that could ultimately be the end of the Jewish state,” he said.

    Nitzan Horowitz, a lawmaker representing the Left-wing Meretz party, agreed. “There is a clear majority in Israel that supports the creation of a Palestinian state and the longer Netanyahu delays this and puts up obstacles, we all going to suffer. We expect him to acknowledge that and lead.”

    telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/5523244/Israeli-right-wingers-will-topple-Benjamin-Netanyahu-if-he-backs-Palestinian-state.html

    —————————

    Shaking my head here. Those who are thinking a two-state solution is the right answer are only fooling themselves. They are making the false assumption that all with be rosy and that the palestinians will bargain and live side by side in good faith.jmo

  80. I begged my 79 yr old Mom to stop canvasing her retirement community
    in Coconut Creek for Obama. My Mom wasa pioneer marching in the 60’s for equal rights, marching in the 70’s for ERA amendment, and a single Mom who raised me and had to work for 1/3 of her male co-workers. Never in my life , however, did I see her more passionate about working for this fraud to get elected. It go so bad, I walked out of our Passover meal at her house after getting into a Hillary/Obama /Jewish argument. Because 0of her health and pro-choice stance, I had to lie to her and say I voted for Obama b/c I think she would have stroked out knowing I voted for McCain /Palin which, quite frankly, was pain ful to do. So the other day, I ask her about Obama and Isrtael, and she says, “it’s unfortunate that Isrtael does not have a partner for Peace” . I said “you thibnjk”?

  81. jbstonesfan,

    It would appear that there are a lot of regrets after the fact. If I feel empathy for anyone, it is the seniors who honestly never thought he would throw them under the bus.

  82. JbStonesFan, we heard and participated in many conversations with Jews in the Northeast and it was always a wistful conversation about how someone they knew or they themselves participated in Freedom Summer, the bus rides, the whole civil rights struggle and it was almost a type of Jewish guilt that they had to vote for Obama even as intellectually they could see that Obama was neither qualified nor known in any way.

    Those that knew Obama could not be trusted walked out on many a seder because the emotions and near religious belief in having to vote for Obama could not be overcome by logic and common sense.

    The same was true for women and gays.

    Now, the chickens are coming home to roost and the excuses are still being mouthed but it is obvious that not so deep down the thought is “I was a sucker to believe in Obama and he can’t be trusted, how could I have been so foolish but in either case there was no alternative in November, but boy are we in trouble if what I sensed about Obama is true and he is as bad as I thought he could be – and what if he is worse than I think he could be – Oh, my God, I need to think about something else”.

    That is why we are so focused on Women, Gays, and Jews – they will be the first to have the fortitude to realize they made an historic mistake. Obama-youth will simply say “whatevah” and make snarky comments and cartoons and “mashups” to post on silly websites for gamers and such while continuing to insult and comment about the Clintons and other topics they know nothing about. Eventually the Obama-youth will hear of some cool anti-war march against Obama and will mindlessly join that and think they are in the vanguard of some new hip.

    Our job is to stay focused on Obama and make sure the atrocities of the 2008 primaries (and Palin) are never forgotten nor to ever forgive our Democratic Left brethren who engaged in race-baiting, jew-baiting, gay-baiting in order to worship their golden calf Obama. Our job is to stay focused on Obama and get rid of him and his ilk and their mentality from our institutions.

  83. Obama to outline $313 billion in Medicare, Medicaid spending cuts

    The president says his latest plan, which includes potential cuts to hospitals and pharmaceutical firms, will help curb costs as he seeks to expand healthcare coverage to the uninsured in the U.S.

    By Noam N. Levey
    June 13, 2009

    Reporting from Washington — Under pressure to pay for his ambitious reshaping of the nation’s healthcare system, President Obama today will outline $313 billion in Medicare and Medicaid spending cuts over the next decade to help cover the cost of expanding coverage to tens of millions of America’s uninsured.

    The proposal comes on top of more than $634 billion in new revenue Obama suggested reserving for healthcare in his February budget plan. The president, who increasingly is focusing on his healthcare agenda as Congress struggles to craft legislation, said his latest plan would help control the country’s skyrocketing healthcare tab.

    “I know some question whether we can afford to act this year,” Obama said in announcing the proposal in his weekly radio address. “But the unmistakable truth is that it would be irresponsible to not act. We can’t keep shifting a growing burden to future generations.”

    Yet the proposal — which includes potential cuts to hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and other providers — also underscores the political delicacy of the administration’s search for money for a massive healthcare overhaul that could cost more than $1.2 trillion over the next decade. Among the proposed policy changes outlined by the president are:

    * Reductions in payments to providers to reflect increased efficiencies in the system, which the White House estimates could save $110 billion over the next decade.

    * Cuts in federal subsidies to hospitals that treat large populations of uninsured patients, estimated to save $106 billion over the next decade.

    * Cuts in how much the federal government pays pharmaceutical companies to provide prescription drugs to seniors and others, estimated to save $75 billion over the next decade.

    The president described the proposals as “common sense changes” that could make the system more efficient. In briefing reporters, Peter R. Orszag — Obama’s budget director and a leading architect of the president’s healthcare policy — downplayed the potential lost revenue for healthcare providers by pointing to the millions of additional people who would get insurance under the plans being advanced by congressional Democrats.

    “This money is dedicated to financing, in a fiscally responsible way, expanded coverage,” Orszag said. “That expanded coverage will generate benefits for some of those industry groups, including for hospitals.” Orszag said the spending cuts also could extend the solvency of the primary Medicare trust fund by seven years to 2024.

    But the impact of such changes on the healthcare industry remains unclear. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office last year postulated that Medicare cuts could encourage hospitals and other providers to become more efficient. But the office also concluded the cuts could prompt some providers to lower the quality of the care they deliver.

    latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-radio14-2009jun14,0,6697465.story

  84. Cuts in federal subsidies to hospitals that treat large populations of uninsured patients, estimated to save $106 billion over the next decade.
    *************
    That is insane….Over all, the American Hospital system is in serious financial trouble….The plan to cut payment to hospitals that care for uninsured is immoral…where do these people go to get care?? I sounds like MO has been working with the health care plan. When MO was head of “Community Outreach” for U of C Hospitals, the center piece of her program was dumping uninsured patients out of the U of C hospitals.

    I don’t see any mention of removing the vast financial drain that Insurance Companies put on the American Health Care system. One recent estimate that I have seen says that processing of all of the many different insurance forms and the inefficiency of that system adds an additional $400 billion to the cost of health care. That doesn’t include the other admin. costs and profits. In 2008, the Cal. Blue Cross system sent close to a billion dollars in profits back to the parent company in Omaha. That was in addition to the profits retained by the local offices.

  85. Israeli right-wingers ‘will topple’ Benjamin Netanyahu if he backs Palestinian state: Right-wing supporters of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu are threatening to bring down his government if he says “yes” to a Palestinian state in a speech on Sunday.
    ——————————————————
    Is this the time and the place for a Japanese yes? I was just playing around with this not knowing what the hell I am doing:

    Mr. Obama: I trust you are aware of the election results in Iran. The regime change which peace loving nations in the region had hoped for
    did not materialize. The Iranian leader who is building a nuclear weapon and has called for the destruction of Israel is still in control, and thus able to pursue his genocidal ambitions.

    Mindful of this and all other threats to the survival of our nation and our people, this Admininstration would be WILLING TO CONSIDER the creation and recognition of a Palestinian State PROVIDED ALL Arab nations AGREE to certain pre-conditions as set forth below.

    1. First: all Arab States shall recognize the State of Israel as the Jewish Homeland.

    2. Second: all Arab States shall cease and desist in granting sanctuary to terrorist groups who advocate its elimination. (Failure to do so shall be deemed a violation of International Law and Treaty Rights actionable at the Hague, saving to suitors the right to engage in self help.

    3. Third: all Arab States shall boycott the nation of Iran until such time as it renounces its intentions to build a nuclear weapon and agrees to UN inspections.

    4. Fourth: Israel and America are each sovereign states. Historically, they have enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship. But neither nation can presume to dictate to the other what security provisions are deemed “adequate” for the defense of its nation and borders. Each nation had the sovereign right to decide that question for itself.

    5. Fifth: Israel settlements in areas located on the West Bank of the Jordan River as of a date certain shall be permitted to remain intact, and shall be treated as part of the sovereign state of Israel. This shall include organic growth*to those communities. Their status will be revisted in ten years, contingent on the results of the peace process.

    6. Sixth: if there is to be a Palestinian State, then the rights of Jewish citizens living in those lands must be guaranteed in the new Constitution and fully enforced by the civil authority. Failure to do so shall be actionable before the World Court.

    7. Seventh: further stipulations

  86. That is insane….Over all, the American Hospital system is in serious financial trouble….The plan to cut payment to hospitals that care for uninsured is immoral…where do these people go to get care?? I sounds like MO has been working with the health care plan. When MO was head of “Community Outreach” for U of C Hospitals, the center piece of her program was dumping uninsured patients out of the U of C hospitals.

    I don’t see any mention of removing the vast financial drain that Insurance Companies put on the American Health Care system. One recent estimate that I have seen says that processing of all of the many different insurance forms and the inefficiency of that system adds an additional $400 billion to the cost of health care. That doesn’t include the other admin. costs and profits. In 2008, the Cal. Blue Cross system sent close to a billion dollars in profits back to the parent company in Omaha. That was in addition to the profits retained by the local offices.
    ————————————
    I share your sense of indignation. He is protecting his own special interests (the insurance companies), and cost shifting. If he were a legitimate problemslover, he would be looking to reform the system along the lines of Porter, which you and I talked about. More chaos.

  87. wbboei, It doesnt speak very well of the United States if the government of Iran can have a free and fair election without thugs overpowering the older folks.
    Gee, I have always thought we were the model of democracy as far as elections. Anytime Chicago is in it they are not in the least bit fair!
    ———————————————————
    I have no doubt that there was voter fraud, intimidation and procedural irregularities in the Iranian election. Depending upon their scope they taint both the candidate and his presumed mandate.

    However, they are as nothing compared to the massive fraud, intimidation and irregularities which were perpertated against American voters in the context of the 2008 Democratic Primary.

    Two thousand complaints were sent to the Co-Chairman of the DNC, some of which were violent, fraudulent and eggregious. And not a single one of them was investigated.

    How then can the candidate selected through this corrupt process claim to speak for the American People? And how can he possibly presume to sit in judgment of the elections conducted in other countries, or the steps taken by other nations to protect themselves from terrorists like the ones he openly embraces?

    The man has no moral authority. His flaws will adversely affect the process of government as we are now seeing on all fronts. Anyone who claims otherwise has failed to do their homework. And they are ignorant as swans.

  88. # wbboei Says:
    June 13th, 2009 at 12:34 pm

    My comment from another site which attacks Obamas gameplan to unseat bibi. Blogger John, or something, I did not save it. Pundit, a commentor on that site disagrees and places all his marbles on Bambis high faluetin words. My reply was this:

    Pundit: what makes you believe that Obamas statements can be trusted? He has broken most of his promises. And because that is true, it is a non-sequitir to suggest that the truth can be divined from his words. They must be seen as propaganda, and we must develop a fine ear for the dog whistle he blows for the enemies of Israel and the United States, because sadly that is his game.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    wbb- After reading your reply made on another site. I have to ask you, are you the reincarnation of Winston Churchill?

  89. 100% correct administrator. My wife and I (whom are fiercely pro choice) both voted for McCain/ Palin despite our other liberal Jewish friends who could not believe what we were doing. While I am not a big Palin fan, I am a fan of women, and what the media has done to her and her family is disgraceful. Leave the lady and her family alone .

  90. 13 Jun 2009 02:32 pm

    More Reports Of Moussavi’s Arrest
    From NIAC:

    According to phone reports from inside Iran, there are rumors that Mousavi is under house arrest. Also, Mohsen Mirdamadi, the head of the Islamic Iran Participation Front has reportedly been arrested.

    About 200 police forces have surrounded the newspaper offices of Etemademelli and Green Word, holding at least 30 journalist inside. The fate of the journalists is not known. According to Mousavi’s website: On Friday evening Iran time, and in the middle of live internet coverage by Mowj-e Sevom (Third Wave), several officers without uniform and without a warrant attacked the office of Mowj-e Sevom in Gheytariyeh, Tehran and threatened the journalists and others who were there for interviews, beating them up and using tear gas. Protests are continuing in Valiasr, Tajrish and Vanak streets.

    There are rumors that four people have been killed so far. This has not been confirmed.

    andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/more-reports-of-moussavis-arrest.html

  91. # jbstonesfan Says:June 13th, 2009 at 8:43 pm

    100% correct administrator. My wife and I (whom are fiercely pro choice) both voted for McCain/ Palin despite our other liberal Jewish friends who could not believe what we were doing. While I am not a big Palin fan, I am a fan of women, and what the media has done to her and her family is disgraceful. Leave the lady and her family alone .
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    I did the same jbstonesfan- She has let them go on about her for so long, it may in the end, work for her and us.

    The unbridled insults and misogyny have reached a fever pitch where Letterman has seriously crossed the line. A 62 yr old man in all his arrogance, publicly attacking a minor female child with licentious innuendo has struck a cord with America because his comments are far and away beyond the pale.
    licentious

  92. wbb- After reading your reply made on another site. I have to ask you, are you the reincarnation of Winston Churchill?
    ———————————————
    Only in the sense that we both know a Hitler when we see one. And we both recognize a “Triump The Will” production when it crosses our field of vision. Fortunately, our leader (Admin) has been wise to Obama from the beginning and so were many others who contribute to this site.

    History warns us to be leery of men like Obama. As George Kennan noted: “History can help us identify the hopeful paths into the future, and to refrain from entering and pulling others along with us, on those paths at the end of which there is no hope and no one ever returns.”

    (Note: George Kennan (one of Roosevelts 4 wise men, Ambassador to the Soviet Union, founder of the Kennan Institute For Russian Studies at Princeton, my favorite writer.)

  93. About 200 police forces have surrounded the newspaper offices of Etemademelli and Green Word, holding at least 30 journalist inside. The fate of the journalists is not known.
    ———————————
    Journalists? Or instigators?? Makes you wonder. But it does seem that journalists are becoming targets now more so than in the past. My sense is that they are more arrogant and invasive than they used to be. I have a friend who is an Iranian doctor. I will get his read on the situation. He is Persian and is no fan of the arabs and their ayatollas.

  94. Admin, would you consider removing the Bush into Obama photos on the side? I just can’t stand looking at his face. As it is, I turn off the TV every time he’s on. I wonder if anyone else feels the ssame way?

  95. You are much too modest, wbb-
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~
    “History can help us identify the hopeful paths into the future, and to refrain from entering and pulling others along with us, on those paths at the end of which there is no hope and no one ever returns.”
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Keene’s quote is apropos of our time. Now if we could convert it to a bumpersticker-

  96. JanH:
    According to phone reports from inside Iran, there are rumors that Mousavi is under house arrest. Also, Mohsen Mirdamadi, the head of the Islamic Iran Participation Front has reportedly been arrested

    Does anyone follow Twitter? They are reporting a lot more going on right now in Iran than what is in the media including shutdowns of the internet, many arrests and protests, riots all over the place, and a report that a group of Ayatollahs has requested that the Iranian election be invalidated.

    And yet people are also reporting on Twitter that the MSM has barely reported any of this–just a short time ago they reported that CNN barely had coverage during the past hour. Is this due to the power of the internet where information can flow quicker that on the national networks or is there an attempt going on here to just not update the American people on the situation (hope I don’t sound paranoid).

  97. jbstonesfan, here it comes for India. US is pressuring (or is starting to) India to go for DMZ with Pakistan along the line of control in Kashmir. DMZ guarantees military security for Pakistan but weakens India. This is how — Pakistan nurtures surrogates (like the terrorists who attacked Mumbai recently, and they have many such terrorist groups) to wage proxy war in Kashmir and elsewhere in India, but India of course has no such groups. Imagine India’s plight if it becomes a soft border. Pakistan must like what the fraud is doing. In addition to pouring billions of aid into that country, now the 0bama wants to reward it for its terrorism.

  98. Admin, would you consider removing the Bush into Obama photos on the side? I just can’t stand looking at his face. As it is, I turn off the TV every time he’s on. I wonder if anyone else feels the ssame way?

    ————-

    I have given up watching or reading any media article when I see “that ZERO’s” face!!!!1

    NO WAY!!!!

    And ANY DEMOCRATIC person who even appears on Letterman show is a traitor to women bashing…..even hillary!!!! an apology may not be enough from Letterman!

  99. Jeebus…the situation is unstable in Iran and the lead story at CNN.com is about analog TV’s…I suspect that Ted Turner kicks himself everyday for what has happened to his former network.

  100. I have given up watching or reading any media article when I see “that ZERO’s” face!!!!1I have given up watching or reading any media article when I see “that ZERO’s” face!!!!1
    **********
    1+

  101. “Judge Rules Terrorist Can Sue Bush Administration Lawyer Over Torture Claim”

    “Like any other government official, government lawyers are responsible for the foreseeable consequences of their conduct,” wrote White, a Bush appointee.

    “White ruled that Yoo, now a University of California at Berkeley law professor, went beyond the normal role of an attorney when he helped write the Bush administration’s detention and torture policies, then drafted legal opinions to justify those policies.”
    ************
    Yoo was a POS middle level govt. functionary who says “Who me, I wasn’t responsible” Just like all of those Germans functionaries who used IBM data processing equipment to make sure the trains ran on time to the “processing centers”.

    Of course, “Death Squad” Holder’s DOJ want the ruling “set aside”. (Cynical?? Who me??)

  102. Yoo was a POS middle level govt. functionary who says “Who me, I wasn’t responsible”

    ===============

    Imo first they should go after the high level functionaries — THEN the middle level, too.

  103. Carol Says:
    June 13th, 2009 at 10:00 pm

    Admin, would you consider removing the Bush into Obama photos on the side? I just can’t stand looking at his face. As it is, I turn off the TV every time he’s on. I wonder if anyone else feels the ssame way?

    ===================

    If I didn’t already have Opera browser (free), I’d download it for the purpose. It is totally easy to toggle images on or off for each separate page, any time. The icon is always at the bottom of the screen.

  104. Good Morning all. It has gotten worse in Iran. Main stream media is reporting it. It must be worse or they would still be trying to hid it. People fighting for their democracy, and the rights of the popular vote, amazing. By the way, was Carter over there observing?

  105. If you aren’t a member of Twitter check out w w w.twitterfall.com. Choose #iranelection as the topic. You can watch all the incoming messages in real time. They are literally pouring in by the second. People also post links to new sites and other web places giving news and photos. It’s mesmerizing to watch.

  106. My opinion is if Iran is in that much turmoil after the election, NOW is the time for the U.S. and Israel to go in there and take out the Aytollas and the bad govt.

    We won’t though, but it would be a good time to do it.

  107. It’s a trifecta day for Obama: Ahmadinejad acting as a dictator, big speech in Israel (rumor it’s going to be a response to Obama’s recent pro-Palestinian one), and North Korea threatening nuclear war.

  108. I hope Netanyahu knocks it put of the park and wins bu 12 lengths, like Rachel Alexandra.

    When can we hear it in the US?

  109. Debka will surely carry a print report on it. There may be online Israel TV networks that are carrying it as well although I would hope CNN, Fox or some MSM outlet decides to carry it live.

  110. Poor little Bambi, its another Maalox morning for him. I hope he enjoying all the worldwide problems for his new One World Government Presidency!

  111. Not quite like a community organizer, so much multi tasking, and things were worse than I thought, and you really don’t expect me to figure this out from Day One.

    All you O voters who really thought he was what he said he was. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS. There was plenty in the campaign, which you ignored, or worse yet, you were given money to ignore (SuperDuds specifically), and you are now trying to explain all of this. AGAIN YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS.

  112. Here’s when we can hear Bibi’s speech in real time:

    Sunday, June 14 – 8pm Israel time.

    Our times:

    Pacific time 10:00 a.m

    Central 12 noon

    Eastern 1:00 p.m.

    at this link:

    w w w.biu.ac.il/live/

    Hope it’s translated into English.

  113. My heart goes out to all those individuals who are fighting for freedom in Iran today. I just wish we all would have had the balls to fight like this after the fraudulent primary. We should have done the same thing. Our govt. might not be in the shape it is in now had we fought like these youngsters are doing now.
    These brave young people are in my thoughts and prayers today!

  114. A picture in Jerusalem originally from AP I think..
    timesofindia.indiatimes.com/photo.cms?msid=4655287

  115. Twitter quote on Iranian election coverage that says it all:

    “@dcEmerald: short story: election went bad, Iran went to hell, media went to bed.”

  116. Pm317, that is a tough poster. Thanks for the picture link.

    AmericanGal, “preconditions’ – don’t forget Obama said he would hold those types of meetings the first year. Of course it was an Obama promise so not worth a penny.

  117. admin, thank you for being the first to draw the parallel between our primary and the Iranian election results. I have been thinking about the same thing like most other Hillary supporters have been for sure. America is like a rich family that sweeps their dirty laundry under the rug. Until we confront the daemons within we are going to go downhill. 2000 and 2008, could we have had riots like Iran? No, we are too genteel for that.

Comments are closed.