Obama’s Bluff

We have not written much lately on the news regarding health care because there is really not much of substance to write about.

There is some to and fro from Senate committees and House committees on this and that but so far no “plan”, as we have understood the word prior to the debut of Chicago’s Barack Obama.

Obama however, contrary to what he denounced and demanded during the election campaigns, has made a threat to use a parliamentary procedure called “reconciliation” to dictate a solution.

Will the parliamentary procedure called “reconciliation” work?
We’ll clarify the matter today.

First, here is the current situation:

President Barack Obama may rely only on Democrats to push health-care legislation through the U.S. Congress if Republican opposition doesn’t yield soon, two of the president’s top advisers said.[snip]

House Democrats today unveiled legislation totaling about $1 trillion that would expand health care to millions of Americans over the next decade by raising taxes on the wealthiest households. The Senate has yet to agree on a bill as Democratic lawmakers struggle to get Republican support. [snip]

Analysts and some veteran political practitioners have inveighed against a partisan approach on such a contentious issue.

They include two former Senate majority leaders — Robert Dole, a Republican, and Tom Daschle, a Democrat, who is a close White House adviser on health-care issues.

During a joint appearance in June as the two unveiled their own bipartisan health-care proposal, Dole said he believed Democrats could pass a bill by a party-line vote, even as he expressed disapproval of such a tactic.

“I hope it doesn’t come to that,” Dole said. “If there’s not a Senate Republican vote for the package, then the American people are going to be very skeptical.”

The Democrats have 60 votes in the Senate to 40 for the Republicans, and have a 255-178 advantage in the House, with two vacancies.

Daschle said he “couldn’t agree more” with Dole’s warning about the political fallout from a partisan vote.

Moreover, he expressed doubt that Democrats alone could prevail, because that scenario “assumes unanimity” he said, and that isn’t the case.

Tom Dashle, was supposed to be the Obama “Czar” on health care but apparently he cannot swallow the Obama prescription and even he is calling Obama’s bluff.

The Obama bluff:

Time is running short for the House and Senate to pass the legislation before their August recess, the deadline Obama has set. In entertaining the possibility of a party-line vote on health care, Emanuel cited “reconciliation,” a parliamentary procedure that a dominant party can use to prevent the other party from blocking legislation.

“It’s not the first priority, or the second priority, or the third priority. We think we can get it done without it,” he said.

Yet reconciliation “exists as an alternative vehicle, Emanuel said. “That’s what it was created for.”

In a lucid, illuminating, and therefore overlooked article, Mort Kondrake of the Capital Hill newspaper Rollcall, explains why “Reconciliation rules won’t work:

Liberal health reform advocates have talked about ramming a reform plan – including a Medicare-like public insurance option – through the Senate with only 51 Democratic votes. But a leading Senate player says it won’t work.

If an attempt is made to pass health reform under “reconciliation” rules – requiring just a simple majority vote – Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) told me, the bill would be so pared down, “you’d be left with Swiss cheese.”

Conrad also serves on the Finance Committee, which will mark up its version of health care reform in July.

Reconciliation rules, he said, require that a bill be scored as deficit-reducing over six years and that any substantive policy change in it also have a fiscal purpose.

The result, said Conrad, is that “you’d be left with a dramatically reduced package” that would fall short of comprehensive health reform.

You would have a very hard time expanding coverage to the 46 million who don’t have it,” he said, and the “Byrd Rule” – requiring fiscal germaneness -could strip the bill of many of its policy provisions.

So, Conrad said, “health reform needs to be passed on a 60-vote basis, and that means it needs to be bipartisan.

Long gone are the days when Obama promised to pass laws with 80 votes in the Senate – those were just words he lied to the public with.

Conrad said he expected it will require up to six Republican votes to pass health reform in the Senate, but only one Republican – Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine) – has indicated she’d support any sort of public plan, and then only as a fallback. [snip]

But, Conrad pointed out, Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) have been absent from the Senate because of illness and at least two Democrats have publicly stated they won’t support a public plan.

They are Sens. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.). And, Conrad said, “there are probably more.

So, doing the math, even if Kennedy, Byrd and Franken were all present, Democrats would need two Republicans to break a filibuster – and would need more if moderates like Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) opposed the public plan.

Why are the “reconciliation rules” not going to work to force-feed “reform” and what is the history of the “reconciliation rules”?

The difficulty of getting to 60 is what has inspired liberals – and the Obama administration – to contemplate using budget reconciliation rules to pass health reform with just 51 Democratic votes.

Last week, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel reiterated, “We want to pass health reform under regular order … but reconciliation is in reserve.”

The rules were set up in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to ease the way for deficit-reduction measures to pass if authorized in Congress’s annual budget resolution.

This year’s resolution did allow for health reform to be considered under reconciliation rules – but Conrad said advocates of the strategy have not studied its difficulties.

The problems are two-fold,” he said. “Number one, everything has to be deficit-neutral – and actually have to produce $1billion in deficit reduction over six years.

Since one of the six years is this year, and this year will almost be over by the time we do it, it’ll have to reduce the deficit over five years and every year thereafter,” he said.

“In the alternative, using regular order, it only has to be deficit-neutral over 10 years. That’s a big difference in what kind of reform you write.”

The second problem with reconciliation rules, he noted, is the Byrd Rule, named for former Senate Appropriations Chairman Byrd, making any provision in the bill subject to being removed if it does not have a budget effect – and requiring 60 votes to sustain it.

When reconciliation was developed, it was solely for the purpose of deficit reduction. It was never intended for substantive legislation.

What would the health care Swiss cheese look like?

Conrad said that “all kinds of things would be vulnerable to striking, including insurance market reforms, all the changes designed to encourage wellness and prevention – all those kinds of things.”

A key player in determining whether an item were struck would be Senate Parliamentarian Alan Frumin, who’d be under enormous pressure from Democrats to find that provisions satisfied the Byrd Rule.

There’s no question in my mind that he’d call it like he saw it,” Conrad said. “He will not be giving liberal interpretations. He’s a stickler for precedent. … He’s impervious to pressure.”

Republicans have served notice that they would regard an attempt to use reconciliation rules for health reform as a “declaration of nuclear war,” leading to a procedural close-down of Senate business.

The Swiss cheese would not include the most important elements (wellness and prevention) needed for actual health care and instead would be a big payday for insurance companies.

“Nuclear war” over Swiss cheese. Obama is the mouse that roared.

“Mouse”? Try “Rat”.

Share

79 thoughts on “Obama’s Bluff

  1. Health “Reform” needs to die a very public and painful death in this Congress. Unless and until the issue of the involvement of Big Insurance is addressed, UHC that this country can possibly afford is hopeless. The insurance industry sucks $600+ billion per year off the top of the $2.4 trillion/per year spent for health care. Medical insurance company profits have increased almost 500% over the past decade. The insurance industry isn’t going to give up that cash cow without a major fight. With Obama and this congress, the bribes were paid early and often. The fix was in before the process started.

    I read about the “rules” of “reconcilliation” a month ago. Who are the Obots try to kid? Any regulatory restrictions on the Insurance Industry couldn’t be included and there is now way that any bill could pass the cost test.

  2. Health “Reform” needs to die a very public and painful death in this Congress. Unless and until the issue of the involvement of Big Insurance is addressed
    ——————————————————————————–

    SHV i agree.

    Did anyone receive a letter from Al Gore asking for money for the DSCC?
    I sent the letter back stating after the last election, what was done to Hillary i am no longer a Democrat. I said get it from Obama. Take me off your list.

  3. neetabug: yes, several days ago from Al and now also from Carville for the DCCC. Both will get an earfull from me along with a genuine Lipton tea bag – all in a bubble-cushion envelope. Costs between .88 to $1.20 something (depends on mail clerk serving me), but I’m happy to do it. Carville’s verbiage is particularly obnoxious: Are you going to stand with me and President Obama … or let the Republican Party of No and their bullies in the right wing media get away with their destructive and despicable political games?

    I’ve been doing the genuine teabag thing for awhile; thought for sure it would get me off their list – but I was mistaken. They really are listening to no one – just pushing their pre-arranged agenda AFAP.

  4. Why would anyone in their right mind want to see health care reform passed that garnered 80 votes. Bipartisan health reform is a disaster. Republicans don’t believe in anything but enriching health insurers, clearly Democrats are not too far from that belief themselves, but still. The only health reform I want passed is Medicare for All. This bill is the same scam they passed in MA. If you are not poor, it’s not going to do anything for you but mandate expensive insurance premiums. Really, politicians idea of what is “affordable” is laughable.

  5. As the Axelrod plan begins to unfold, we need to start the pushback. I wrote this a minute ago, and posted it at No Quarter. I am trying to get it posted in the local newspaper without the word uber corrupt.
    ———————————————–
    You will be glad to know that a new play is being offered this season in the political theatre of the absurd. A new play based on an old tired theme.

    The director is Emanuel,the producer is Axelrod, and the title is Hope, Change, and Bamboozle. The lead song is “razzle dazzle them, and they’ll never get wise”–from the Broadway play “Chicago”.

    Act I: a state which has the largest marine highway system in the country lacks suffient funds to maintain its ferry system. It is portayed as a crisis. Everyone is up in arms.

    Act II: the stimulus plan is passed and $230,000 of public money are allocated to fix the windows of the wealthiest club in the Pacific Northwest–whose patrons could well afford to pay for it themselves. Useless road projects to bedevil commuters. But no stimulus monies for the ferry system according to todays headlines. (Public outrage escalates).

    Act III: the incompetent governor of this state endorsed bambi, the dimocratic party orchestrated a potemkin village primary, and sent their luminaries to Washington to be part of his Administration. The corrupt governor is deeply disappointed and is working on the problem. Still, it does not look good.

    Act IV: (Catharsis) shortly before next years election, a miracle occurs. The corrupt governor succeeds! Bambi comes through! He says we must do what is right for this state! We will not allow red tape or Republicans to stand in the way of what is best for the state (even though they have been doin that all along).

    Suddenly, the stimulus funds are released! The ferry system is saved, the stimulus plan good and Bambis et al are heroes! After all, they saved the state–and its anxious commuters from this orchestated near death experience. He IS the messiah!

    Fade to black: from the distance the song, louder, louder and louder fortissimo with the full chorus “Razzle dazzle them. And they’ll never get wise”.

    Question: isn’t it high time that someone called the game on these uber corrupt people? Isn’t it obvious to everyone how we are being played? In the State of Washinton, I am afraid the answer is a foregone conclusion. Nevertheless, hope springs eternal.

  6. Clinton plans to visit Russia, Pakistan in fall

    WASHINGTON (AFP) — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced plans Wednesday to visit Russia and Pakistan in the fall.

    Clinton gave no exact dates when she announced her upcoming travel plans at a speech outlining her approach to foreign policy that includes diplomatic engagement with friends and foes alike.

    “In the fall I will travel to Russia to advance the bi-national presidential commission that foreign minister (Sergei) Lavrov and I will co-chair,” Clinton said during her speech at the Council on Foreign Relations.

    “As we proceed we must not forget that success in Afghanistan also requires close cooperation from neighboring Pakistan which I will visit this fall,” Clinton said.

    Clinton is preparing to travel to India on Thursday, but officials said she would not make a side trip to neighboring Pakistan at this time.

    google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gYImSSMePmAJ04Ucuv9ecUMqJUlA

  7. Clinton urges Arabs to make gestures now toward Israel

    07.15.09

    US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday urged Arab states to make immediate gestures toward Israel in a bid to improve prospects for Middle East peace.

    “We are asking those who embrace the (2002 Saudi-sponsored peace) proposal to take meaningful steps now,” Clinton said after urging the Arabs to “prepare their publics to embrace peace and accept Israel’s place in the region.”

    ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3747304,00.html

  8. Jul 14, 2009

    Has Obama Intentionally Relegated Hillary Clinton To Third-Class Status?

    Hill, we barely knew ye. So funny that Secretary of State Clinton is back in the news again, after what seems like a prolonged absence. I remember being offended when hearing that last month ABC News Sunday talk show host George Stephanopoulos asked her exactly what her portfolio was, or words to that effect, since V.P. Joe Biden and other Obama administration males have succeeded in carving up large, juicy parts of the international issues territory.

    Turns out he was right!

    Secretary Clinton has been all but invisible since ascending to one of the most visible cabinet posts, and one wonders whether this was done on purpose. She had to resort to carping about the length of time it’s taking to get her U.S. AID lieutenant in office in order to make headlines–that after her commander in chief globe-trotted back from Africa, Italy, and other parts of the world these past couple of weeks.

    It’s time for Barack Obama to let Hillary Clinton take off her burqa.

    Consider the president’s Moscow trip a week ago. In a cozy scene at Vladimir Putin’s dacha, the boys enjoyed traditional Russian tea and breakfast on a terrace. Sitting on Putin’s right was the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov. Where was Lavrov’s counterpart? She was back home, left there with a broken elbow to receive a visit from the ousted Honduran president, José Manuel Zelaya.

    I don’t put it beyond President Obama to have purposely buried Secretary Clinton and denied her visibility. He strikes me as a politician who will say or do anything to get himself elected in the first place and re-elected in the second place. So he cut a deal, quieted down the Clinton contingent, and then went on to consign her to not second- but third-class status in what is normally a high-visibility post. So what else is new?

    cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/15/usnews/whispers/main5161888.shtml

  9. Clinton doesn’t rule out compromise with Israel on construction

    US secretary of state evades question on possibility of finding middle ground that will allow Israel to continue building 2,000 housing units in West Bank, says she does not want to interfere with negotiations between Barak, Mitchell

    WASHINGTON – US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not rule out the possibility of a US-Israeli compromise that will allow the construction of several thousand housing units to be completed in a number of West Bank settlements.

    Taking questions after delivering a wide-ranging policy address to the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, Clinton was asked to comment on reports of a possible compromise that would eventually permit the construction of 2,000 units. The secretary would only say that she does not want to interfere
    with the negotiations between Defense Minister Ehud Barak and special US envoy George Mitchell.

    The secretary said that any decision would be announced publically.

    During her much-anticipated speech Clinton reiterated Washington’s demand that Israel cease building in the settlements and allow the conditions necessary for the establishment of a Palestinians state, but she also made clear that the Palestinians are expected to work towards ending incitement and violence.

    “For the last few decades, American administrations have held consistent positions on the settlement issue,” Clinton said. “And while we expect action from Israel, we recognize that these decisions are politically challenging. And we know that progress toward peace cannot be the responsibility of the United States – or Israel – alone. Ending the conflict requires action on all sides.

    “Arab states have a responsibility to support the Palestinian Authority with words and deeds, to take steps to improve relations with Israel, and to prepare their publics to embrace peace and accept Israel’s place in the region. The Saudi peace proposal, supported by more than twenty nations, was a positive step. But we believe that more is needed… By providing support to the Palestinians and offering an opening, however modest, to the Israelis, the Arab states could have the same impact. So I say to all sides: Sending messages of peace is not enough. You must also act against the cultures of hate, intolerance and disrespect that perpetuate conflict. ”

    Clinton noted that Hamas will not be party to the process so long as it fails to meet the terms set by the Quartet – recognizing Israel, honoring past accords, and abandoning terrorism.

    ‘Determined to prevent nuclear Iran’

    As for Syria, Clinton said the US views it as a critical player in the Middle East, and added that Washington intends to restore an ambassador to Damascus. However, she said, Syria will be judged by its actions, not its rhetoric.

    On Iran she said: “Neither the President nor I have any illusions that dialogue with the Islamic Republic will guarantee success of any kind, and the prospects have certainly shifted in the weeks following the election. But we also understand the importance of offering to engage Iran and giving its leaders a clear choice: whether to join the international community as a responsible member or to continue down a path to further isolation.

    “Direct talks provide the best vehicle for presenting and explaining that choice. That is why we offered Iran’s leaders an unmistakable opportunity: Iran does not have a right to nuclear military capacity, and we’re determined to prevent that. But it does have a right to civil nuclear power if it reestablishes the confidence of the international community that it will use its programs exclusively for peaceful purposes. “Iran can become a constructive actor in the region if it stops threatening its neighbors and supporting terrorism. It can assume a responsible position in the international community if it fulfills its obligations on human rights. The choice is clear. We remain ready to engage with Iran, but the time for action is now. The opportunity will not remain open indefinitely.”

    ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3747345,00.html

  10. In order to pay for the $1 trillion additional cost, in addition to tax increase, is a $600 billion to come from Medicare/Medicade. This has a similar “smell” as the Bush “privatize” part of SS. The amount of money remove from SS would have been a huge windfall for Wall Street, “management fees, etc.) Obama is trying the same scam with health care dollars. The current “overhead” for Medicare is in the range of 3%; ~97% goes for paying for health care. If that $6oo billion is now used for insurance based “reform”, the Insurance companies will suck off their “overhead” costs of 25-35%. What a deal!!!

    Obama = Bush III

  11. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/us/15insure.html?_r=1

    The new state budget in Massachusetts eliminates health care coverage for some 30,000 legal immigrants to help close a growing deficit, reversing progress toward universal coverage just as Congress looks to the state as a model for overhauling the nation’s health care system.

    The affected immigrants, permanent residents who have had green cards for less than five years, are now covered under Commonwealth Care, a subsidized insurance program for low-income residents that is central to the groundbreaking health care law enacted here in 2006.

    Critics of the cut, which would save an estimated $130 million, say it unfairly targets taxpaying residents and threatens the state’s health care experiment at a critical time.

    “It either sends the message that health care reform cannot be done, period,” said Eva Millona, executive director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, “or it opens the door to doing it halfway and excluding immigrants from the process.”

  12. President Hillary Rodham Clinton gave a speech today that should go down in our history as a work of art.It is available on C-Span complete video with the follow up question.There never has been another more informed and dedicated woman in our political system.No other has ever faced the complications of a nation under seige and on the verge of collapse by its own legislature and a power hungry cunning race baiter.Log on to the speech and then dare to marginalize and destroy Hillary.Is there anyone left in this country that will stand up and ask for impeachment for this foreigner.

    By ABM90

  13. http://www.diageohotlinepoll.com/documents/diageohotlinepoll/FDDiageoHotlinePollJulyRelease_071509.pdf

    The Diageo/Hotline Poll of 800 U.S. registered voters conducted by FD from July 9-13, 2009, finds that the percentage of American voters who approve of the job President Obama is doing has dropped nine points to 56%. The previous Diageo/ Hotline Poll, conducted from June 4-7, found that 65% of voters approved of the job he was doing.

    With 56% of voters approving of the job he is doing, the Poll finds President Obama’s job approval rating is at its lowest level recorded in the six monthly Diageo/Hotline Polls since President Obama took office.

    Interestingly, compared to June, the decrease in Obama’s job approval ratings is being driven primarily by decreases among male voters (-15 points), Independent voters (-15 points), and rural voters (-15 points).

    The Poll also finds that the percentage of voters who say that “things are seriously off on the wrong track” has increased 12 percentage points from a record-low of 43% in last month’s Poll to 55% in today’s Poll.

    Furthermore, recent shifts in the public’s confidence in Obama to “bring real change to the way things are done in Washington, D.C.” indicate a dip in confidence among voters. In the February Poll, a record-high of 70% of voters indicated that they were confident in Obama to bring real change, compared with 56% four months later in today’s Poll. This current confidence rating of 56% also represents a nine-point percentage drop since the June Poll (65%).

    Additionally, in looking ahead to 2012, the Poll finds that 42% of voters say they would vote to re-elect President Obama, while 39% say they would vote for someone else. The June Poll found that 46% of voters said they would vote to re-elect President Obama and 30% of voters would vote for someone else.

    The Diageo/Hotline Poll also finds a significant decrease in voter confidence in the stimulus plan passed in February. Specifically, the Poll finds only 39% of voters are confident the stimulus plan will be successful in turning around the economy, a decrease of 13 percentage points from the 52% of voters who expressed confidence in June.

    Commenting on the connection between the drop in President Obama’s job approval numbers and decreased confidence in the stimulus plan, Amy Walter, Editor-in-Chief of The Hotline noted that, “To revise the infamous Colin Powell ‘Pottery Barn’ rule, President Obama didn’t break the economy, but he now owns it.”

    In the context of decreasing levels of confidence in the current stimulus package, coupled with discussion about the viability of another one, the Poll shows very little support for a proposal for another stimulus package, with only 36% saying they would support such a proposal and 52% saying they would oppose it, with 40% saying they would strongly oppose it.

    At the same time, it is clear that concerns over the prospect of greater deficits trump concerns over economic recovery. When given the choice, voters would prefer a slower economic recovery that incurs smaller deficits than a quicker economic recovery with greater deficits.

    Specifically, 71% of voters say they would choose a slower economic recovery with a lower deficit, compared with 23% of voters who say they would prefer a quicker recovery with a higher deficit.

  14. “39% say they would vote for someone else.”

    ——————————-

    Admin,

    I really hope that change is coming…lol…and not bambi’s version either.

  15. A bittersweet love story that is only tangentially tied to health care:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/world/europe/15britain.html?hpw

    The controversy over the ethical and legal issues surrounding assisted suicide for the terminally ill was thrown into stark relief on Tuesday with the announcement that one of Britain’s most distinguished orchestra conductors, Sir Edward Downes, had flown to Switzerland last week with his wife and joined her in drinking a lethal cocktail of barbiturates provided by an assisted-suicide clinic.

    Although friends who spoke to the British news media said Sir Edward was not known to have been terminally ill, they said he wanted to die with his ailing wife, who had been his partner for more than half a century.

    The couple’s children said in an interview with The London Evening Standard that on Tuesday of last week they accompanied their father, 85, and their mother, Joan, 74, on the flight to Zurich, where the Swiss group Dignitas helped arrange the suicides. On Friday, the children said, they watched, weeping, as their parents drank “a small quantity of clear liquid” before lying down on adjacent beds, holding hands.

    “Within a couple of minutes they were asleep, and died within 10 minutes,” Caractacus Downes, the couple’s 41-year-old son, said in the interview after his return to Britain. “They wanted to be next to each other when they died.” He added, “It is a very civilized way to end your life, and I don’t understand why the legal position in this country doesn’t allow it.”

    Sir Edward, who was described in a statement issued earlier on Tuesday by Mr. Downes and his sister, Boudicca, 39, as “almost blind and increasingly deaf,” was principal conductor of the BBC Philharmonic Orchestra from 1980 to 1991. He was also a conductor of the Royal Opera House at Covent Garden in London, where he led 950 performances over more than 50 years.

    Lady Downes, who British newspapers said was in the final stages of terminal cancer, was a former ballet dancer, choreographer and television producer who devoted her later years to working as her husband’s assistant.

    “After 54 happy years together, they decided to end their own lives rather than continue to struggle with serious health problems,” the Downes children said in their statement.

  16. JanH, this one will make you smile too (Boren’s daddy was one of Obama’s big supporters):

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0709/Boren_goes_nuclear_on_Obama.html

    The first Congressional Democrat (to my knowledge) is now on the record declaring Barack Obama a political liability.

    Rep, Dan Boren (D-Okla.), one of the most conservative Dems in the House went OFF on President Obama in a scorching interview with the Oklahoma Gazette today — saying the president isn’t only “very unpopular” in his district but should be more centrist.

    Like Bill Clinton.

    The White House and House Democratic leaders have grown used to Boren bucking them, but this takes it to another level..

    Barack Obama is very unpopular,” said Boren, who represents Oklahoma’s 2nd Congressional District. “He got 34 percent of the vote statewide, and less in our district. If he were to run for re-election today, I bet it would be even worse.”

    Boren points out that he does support some of Obama’s initiatives, like the economic stimulus package. He has voted for Obama-supported bills 81 percent of the time, according to a recent Congressional Quarterly study. But despite this, he said the president is too liberal.

    “It would be a lot nicer if we had someone who was in the middle,” he said. “Bill Clinton won our district. A lot of people don’t remember that, but he, in 1996, carried this district. I think if you have someone who governs from the middle, who’s pragmatic, who works with both parties. President Obama talks a lot about bipartisanship. If you look at some of the legislation, he may have one or two Republicans.”

  17. Admin

    I read about that bittersweet love story yesterday, and although I throughly understand the situation that couple was in, I still felt a sadness.

  18. Admin,

    Do I detect some bitter rumblings behind the scenes in the dim party? Is their messiah not living up to their expectations.

    Oh dear…how sad…NOT!

  19. Reconciliation, now that is a concept that I had never heard before. Thanks, Admin for the education. It will be interesting to see how this works out. I almost think he is in a hole, as damed if he passes it and implements the tax, and increases the debt, and damed if he does not, as many of the lower level people need and want, and expected it.

    If I understood the lesson correctly, if he uses Reconcilation, in future years it is tied to a reduction of the debt.

    However, rules do not apply to O.

  20. As I see the derogatory stories out of the Dims camp increase, I know for sure that O is in trouble. It reminds me of an army fighting battles on two fronts. From what I know about military strategies (which is little), that is a failure position to be in. Hitler’s Germany failed when he started fighting on two fronts. If the economy continue to fail or recover too slowly, and the 2010 election bombs, It will be interesting to see if there are cracks in the walls of Os defense team.

  21. My congratulations to Boren also. He, obviously knows he must listen to his voters, which of course the Dimocratic Party knows that they do not.

  22. I especially liked Boren’s comments on Bill Clinton. It’s about time thos poisonous dims stopped lying about his accomplishments.

  23. JanH Says:

    July 15th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
    Admin,

    Do I detect some bitter rumblings behind the scenes in the dim party? Is their messiah not living up to their expectations.

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

    there must be a lot of them now behind the scenes after watching months of this guy with his teleprompter dependency and obvious shallowness…that must be asking themselves “is this guy for real?” how the hell did we get conned?

    …every time I see him on TV trying to look so in command and so in charge I cannot help but think that he looks small…like some ingenue…some novice trying to play a part…an imposter…I just cannot believe people are (still) falling for his act…

    the BRANDING trio…O, Axelrod and Emmanuel…how can anyone trust this axis of – – – -!

  24. HillaryforTexas Says:

    July 15th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
    Good for Boren! I hope more gather the spine to speak the truth.
    ***********************************

    He voted 81% of the time with the fool. Good for Boren if he stops talking out of his As* and stops voting with the enemy. Obviously his state NEVER supported the Fraud, so what the hell is he doing? Trying to salvage his As*….

  25. gonzotxm

    I understand that 81%, but part of that record was before his popularity slipped. He also will still support Dim efforts a majority of the time. But to seem him speaking out so publically, I really think is important.

  26. NewMexicoFan Says:

    July 15th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
    *****************************************

    Actions speak louder than words IMHO. The bills he supported are disastrous for this country. He is trying to save his butt.

  27. From ACE of SPADES…LEST WE FORGET
    ***********************

    Staff Sergeant Darrell “Shifty” Powers Of Band Of Brothers Fame, RIP
    —DrewM.
    He passed away last month. Apparently we were all a little to busy with Michael Jackson or something to notice.

    Lex has an email that’s gone viral on the net from someone who says he met Staff Sergeant Powers at one point. It’s worth the read.

    From his local newspaper story on his life and death….

    The world depended on them. They depended on each other.”
    That was the tagline for “Band of Brothers” – an award-winning 2001 HBO mini-series drama on the World War II experiences of Easy Company, a U.S. Army unit that fought bravely and fiercely across Europe.

    But for Bristol’s Margo Johnson – daughter of Darrell “Shifty” Powers, one of the soldiers depicted in “Band of Brothers” – two more lines could be added to describe her heroic father: “The world truly admired Darrell Powers. I absolutely adored him.”

    “I loved everything about my daddy,” Johnson said. “He never bragged about what he did in the war. And for a lot of years, he never even talked much about what he did – unless someone asked him about it.

    “But he truly was a hero to me,” Johnson said. “Just like he’d been to the people who know him as a soldier in a [mini-series].”

    Powers, a Dickenson County native, died earlier this week at age 86 following a battle with cancer. His funeral service will be held today in Clintwood.

    When I was a kid, WWI vets were a small number of frail old men who served in a long ago war. It’s hard to believe that now that WWII vets, my grandfather’s generation who were once everywhere, are looked at that way by kids. They may never fully understand what they and we owe to that generation but 60+ years after they came home, we are still reaping the fruits of their sacrifices and victory.

    Hopefully those dwindling few survivors take comfort in knowing that while the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq are worlds away from places like Normandy and Iwo Jima, their decedents are carrying the torch for them.

    Posted by DrewM

  28. gonzo,

    I understand where you are coming from. For me, I see little rumblings of discontent and that is a start. Whether he continues to support the bimbo indiscriminately or not, I will wait and see.

  29. Another good one. Laura Rozen’s coverage of Hillary is among the best around.

    thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/07/15/holbrooke_trumpets_clinton_leadership_after_address

  30. Why the timing of all the anti-Hillary stuff? I thought Brown was somewhat Clinton friendly? Doesn’t Hillary have one person (maybe Krugman) in the elite media who can stick up for her? Why is Bill still holding his tongue? He can at least attack these writers and thus indirectly Obama….this infuriates me.

  31. rgb44hrc Says:

    July 15th, 2009 at 10:39 am
    S Says:

    July 15th, 2009 at 3:44 am
    sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/12/BA9A18MCT5.DTL

    Willie Brown gets it…and now MoveOn is targeting Sarah –
    &&&&&&&&

    How MoveOn targeting Palin?

    They really have become meaningless. Should they not be directing their anger at Obama, for doing a false withdrawl from Iraq (”We’re all out…of the big cities…we are now deploying hundreds of thousands of troops just outside big cities’ city limits”) and for escalating in Afghanistan?

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

    here you go…

    moveon.org – supposedly they raised $100,000 in a day…

    for a group that wanted to ‘move on’ during the Clinton days…they sure are stuck these days…stuck in the politics of personal destruction…more hypocrisy from people that once seemed sincere…

  32. cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/15/usnews/whispers/main5161888.shtml

    Bonnie does not shy away from speaking out…she says:

    I don’t put it beyond President Obama to have purposely buried Secretary Clinton and denied her visibility. He strikes me as a politician who will say or do anything to get himself elected in the first place and re-elected in the second place. So he cut a deal, quieted down the Clinton contingent, and then went on to consign her to not second- but third-class status in what is normally a high-visibility post. So what else is new?

    Bonnie Erbe US NEWS

  33. admin Says:

    July 15th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
    March 9, 2009 – Whoopi Goldberg.

    Wonder what Whoopi will say about Obama now?
    ********************************

    SHE SUPPORTED THE WEALTH DISTRIBUTER…SHE CAN SUCK IT. LET ME GET MY VIOLIN OUT FOR HER, OH WAIT, I ONLY HAVE A CELLO. SORRY WHOOPIE, LOOKS LIKE YOU GOT WHAT YOU ASKED FOR!

    Sorry about the caps

  34. Why is Bill still holding his tongue?
    ********
    I think the Clintons are waiting to see how things evolve. The Obots and the Obot MSM can still inflict a lot of damage. If Hillary has possible plans for the future, then both she and Bill need to be the good soldiers until It is obvious to the majority of Dems that Obama was/is/will be a disaster for the Party. If the economy continues on the downward spiral and unemployment hits 11.5-12% by late 2010, the Dems will have their a**es handed to them in the mid-tern elections.

  35. JanH Says:

    July 15th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
    “Eclipsed by a globe-trotting president”

    —————————

    I am trying so hard not to laugh at that statement. Bambi trots…yep that is very true. But what kind of trotting does he do?
    ********************************

    Another word for the Shits when I was growing up. Seems to fit sense everything coming out of his mouth is just recycled from his ass.

  36. Google sponsored links

    Masters in Diplomacy – Earn a Masters in Diplomacy Online at Norwich University.
    http://www.Norwich.Edu/Diplomacy
    *********************************

    We need to sign up the Fraud
    ********************

    Basil, the Fraud was booed in Milwaukee? I was raised in Milwaukee. I am proud to say that!

  37. re: Edward Downes> I’m a big classical music fan and have a number of Downes’ recordings. I wish him and his wife peace. I’ve also read that some in the British government want to go after their children. Apparently there’s a law – never enforced – that prohibits travel for assisted suicide to other countries and some people want to go after the Downes’ children for helping their parents with travel arrangements. Let’s see how that progresses or if it’s just a lot of talk.

  38. MoveOn’s big beef with Hillary was that she wouldn’t agree to an absolute deadline for pulling EVERY soldier OUT of the country of Iraq. They went into snit fits over the idea that ANY sort of “security force” might have to remain even to police the damn borders, depending on the situation on the ground. Oh, no, Hillary was a neocon warmonger for saying that.

    And now the despicable fawning toadies don’t have SHIT to say that Bambi has “pulled out” even less than Hillary agreed to. Suddenly it’s prudent, not warmongering.

    They are as much mindless bleating zealots as any of Rush’s dittoheads EVER were, and most people know it.

  39. if the dems insist on these additional taxes on companies that struggle to keep people actually working in this economic climate…they will see those companies run for the borders to do their business outside of this country or many will reduce their workforce…there is only so much critical mass companies can sustain when they are at the brink…so many old stand bys – circuit city – linen and things – and so many, many more smaller businesses already long gone…

    and as for the individuals they want to hit up – do they not realize the value and equity that has been lost to REAL PEOPLE…the dems are living in a time warp that they think fits into the reality they now find themselves governing in…wrong place…wrong time…

    how tone deaf are the dems? the dems are acting like things are just fine…what is wrong with them? this is quickly becoming the party that is out of touch with the people…

    …just wait until all those Obots begin to realize the costs to them that comes attached to their hero…they think they are in for a free ride…ha!

  40. jobstonesfan, I think Tina Brown thought she was defending Hillary. The problem is, she bought into all the inside-the-Beltway conventional wisdom about her.

  41. Tina Brown’s “Let Hillary take off her burqa” is reminiscent of Campbell Brown’s “Free Sarah Palin” tirade.

  42. THE REAL GAME

    War is a game of deception. So too is politics.
    Consider the case of Obama. He presents himself to the world as one thing but he is really another. Consider the following:

    First, Obama claims to be the antecote for Bush. But if that is true, then how does he explain:his failure to end the Iraq War? his expansion of the war in Afghanistan? his expressed intention to create an army within the United States? his failure to investigate possible war crimes?

    Second, Obama promises to provide transparency in government. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his use of signing statements? his planted questions to the press?
    his serial threats toward super delegates and now
    Congress? his secret liasons with business lobbyists, including daily access by GE?

    Third, Obama claims to be a liberal. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his reversal on wire tapping? his plan to regulate the internet?
    his support for anti gay groups? his support of big business over constituents?

    Fourth, Obama claims to support private enterprise. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his tax program on small business?
    his protection of unions over investors? his takeover of detroit? 31 year old car czar? his pressuring solvent banks to accept TARP funds?

    Fifth, Obama presents himself as the Protector of The Constitution. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his exhoneration of the mayor of Sacramento who embezzled stimulus monies?
    his exhoneration of members of the New Black Panther party for voter intimidation? his refusal by the DNC to investigate 2000 cases of voter fraud and intimidation in the primary? his reliance upon and subsequent funding of ACORN despite its mutiple violations of election laws which are a matter of record. He speaks of holding power 14 years from now, despite the Amendment prohibiting same.

    Sixth, Obama presents himself as a Platonic guardian with superior judment, which trumps experience. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his constant change in policy positions?
    his excessive reliance upon a teleprompter?
    his promotion of policies which will bankrupt the country, and make us dependent on government?

    In sum, what we have here is a politican who pretends to be a fide liberal, the antecdote to Bush, the soul of transparency, supporter of small business and protector of the Constitution.

    The chasm between his words and deeds is wider than the Grand Canyon. Many people do not notice. They like the brand and that is as far as they go. Those who do notice, are disappointed, but they cannot bring themselves to repudiate him because he is black and is better than Bush.

    You can wait until the Republicans field a candidate who can compete with his celebrity. You can wait for Hillary to claim the role that was rightfully hers–and hope that this happens. You can spend your time talking about what he is not.

    Or you can talk about what he is. And that is the answer to everyones dilemma. Conservatives do not need to waste time levelling the false charge that he is a liberal. The liberals do not need to wrestle with their conscience over what he says vs what he does. And big media can begin asking the right questions, but that will be the last fort to fall.

    The pertinent question, then, is who is Obama–if not the carefully crafted figure we see. The answer to that question is the key to his defeat. Why? Because empires fall when their message no longer explains what is happening in terms of reality. Here are the material facts:

    1. Obama is a product of the Chicago Political Machine. The new paradigm is to see him through that lens rather than the false image which he projects through his big media complicit propaganda campaign.

    2. The Chicago Political Machine controls all aspects of political life down to the Ward level. Obama now controls state political parties through the DNC.

    3. The Chicago Political Machine runs on patronage and graft. It has it enforcers and its corrupt politicians. The machine protects them.
    By the same token, Obama has the New Black Panthers, the Mayor of Sacramento both of whom committed crimes and were let off the hook by his Attorney General Eric Holder.

    4. The Chicago Machine has its foot soldiers who corrupt the voting process. Obama has ACORN. And he has ensured that they have funding and will be involved in census taking. This gives his machine more information to take over.

    5. The Chicago Machine has its Ward Chairmen who control city government. They are fiercely loyal to the Mayor. Nothing moves without the Mayors say. Obama has set up a similar system with his army of 33 Czars who control all aspects of the economy. They exist over and above his cabinet, which has had only one meeting since he took office. Foreign policy is run out of the White House as opposed to the State Department.

    6. The Chicago Machine eliminates political competition, and allows big business, democrats and republicans to share in the graft. It is based on the old Commission model of LCN. The Mayor is the modern variant of Il Capo de tut de Capo. The Fitzgerald investigation may delineate. Meanwhile, Obama moves to neutralize Republican opposition by offering them seats in his cabinet and by promoting weak Republicans like Governor Crist as what as an example of how the opposition should behave, even as Crist pays homage and begs for a piece of the action. Finally, Obama has an open door to big business, the head of GE is one of his eight advisors, and GE is a major beneficiary of the CAP and Trade and Health Care iniatives in exhange for their media support during the campaign.

    I could go on but I think you have got the picture. Obama is the vehicle through which the Chicago Machine is going nationwide. That is the political model if you will. That is the single unifying explantion for everything you see.

    The downsides of this model are rather obviuous. As a student of the Mafia and someone who knows of their practices, I can tell you this: the problem with the Chicago model is it makes a mockery of patriotism, and is a parastic force which bleeds the people dry and reward corruption. If the people of this country cannot stand up against that, then our future is bleak.

    The way to stand up is to do what Emile Zola did: Jaccuuz! Barack Obama, you sir are a tool of the Chicago Machine and your goal is to take it national and reward the few at the expense of the many. This is not some rock video, this is reality, and by your actions not your words you have told us who you really are and where you are taking us.

    We will fight you because we know there are hopeful paths to the future, as Hillary proposed, and there are other paths which lead only to despair and from which no one ever returns.

    Finally, the public today has been so bamboozled by Obama and his bread and circuses that we must come up with an agreed to set of criteria by which the American People will evaluate their fitness for office, and future debates should center around these criteria, among them: i) a willingness to put country over party, ii) a proper regard for the separation of powers, iii) an insistence upon the separation of church and state, iv) a renewed appreciation for the inherent value of experience, vi) a proper balance between the private and public sector, v) a rejection big media which rejects the truth and censors relevant information, etc.

    If Obama is allowed to continue building this Chicago Machine nationwide, and disaster hits then anarchy will follow–sure as night follows day.

  43. This is off topic, but is Nancy Pelosi taking some kind of drug. I mean, have you ever listened to her try and make a speech. She is so ridiculous sounding. They say Palin needs help, but have they ever tried to listen to our speaker of the house, she needs work, bigwork.

  44. I would encourage everyone to listen to Hillary’s speech. I just did. It’s up at

    hillaryunleashed.wordpress.com the full video and full text.

    The video has a Q&A at the conclusion of her speech worth listening to as well.

    My first impression is Favreau had nothing to do with this speech, because it is comprehensive,detail driven body of work unlike the drivel we are accustomed to when listening to the Favreau penned fairytale promises in Obama’s speeches.

    Alls I can say is, Hillary’s speech was a speech of presidential caliber. Brava, Hillary!

  45. Mrs.Smith, it was truly a great speech. My personal opinion, is there now dragging Hillary out to fix the nagging notion that Obama and American is now weak. They need her to tell us we are still a very strong nation and that Obama is on the right path with his foreign policy.
    They need her to fix his “pansy appearance” across the U.S.

  46. BRINGING DOWN OBAMA

    War is a game of deception. So too is politics. Case in point: Barack Obama. He presents himself as one thing. In reality, he is quite another. And what people do not know will hurt them.

    At first blush, Obama appears to be a man of contradictions. For example:

    First, Obama claims to be the antidote for Bush. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his failure to end the Iraq War? His expansion of the war in Afghanistan? His expressed intention to create an army within the United States? These may be fine on the merits, but they are not at all what he promised.

    Second, Obama promises to provide transparency in government. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his use of signing statements? His planted questions to the press? His serial threats toward super delegates and now Congress? His secret liaisons with business lobbyists, daily access by GE?

    Third, Obama claims to be a liberal. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his reversal on wire tapping? His plan to regulate the internet? His support for anti gay groups? His support of big business over constituents?

    Fourth, Obama claims to support private enterprise. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his tax program on small business? His protection of unions over investors? His takeover of Detroit? 31 year old car czar? His pressuring solvent banks to accept TARP funds?

    Fifth, Obama presents himself as lord protector of the Constitution. But if that is true, then how does one explain: his exoneration of the mayor of Sacramento who embezzled stimulus monies? His exoneration of members of the New Black Panther party for voter intimidation? His refusal by the DNC to investigate 2000 cases of voter fraud and intimidation in the primary? His reliance upon and subsequent funding of ACORN despite its multiple violations of election laws which are a matter of record? His comment that he will be holding power 14 years from now, despite term limits.

    Sixth, Obama pretends to be a Platonic guardian of our country with superior judgment, which trumps experience. But if that is true, then how does one explain: His constant change in policy positions? His excessive reliance upon a teleprompter, and the profound wisdom of a 27 year old speechwriter? His promotion of foreign policies inimical to our security and economic policies which will bankrupt the country, and increase the risk of foreign control over our lives?

    The chasm between Obama’s words and deeds is wider than the Grand Canyon. Many people voted for him. Some of them have not noticed how far he has drifted. They like the brand and that is as far as they go. Those who do notice, are disappointed, but they cannot bring themselves to repudiate him because they voted for him, he is black and they hate Bush more than they distrust Obama. They rationalize this as harmless error, innocent mistake, moving to the middle, etc.

    Well then what should we do about it? We can wait for the Republicans field a candidate who can compete with his celebrity—but it may take awhile. We can wait for Hillary to claim the role that was rightfully hers–and hope that actually happens. We can spend our time talking about what he is not—but no one holds him accountable. None of that is productive at this point.

    Instead of talking about what he is not, let us take a hard look at what he actually is. For he is not at all what he appears to be. If we focus on that issue, then conservatives do not need to waste time leveling the false charge that he is a liberal. The liberals do not need to wrestle with their conscience over what he says vs. what he does. And independents will not be seduced by his words.

    Simply put, Obama is a product of the Chicago Political Machine and his blueprint is to take that system nation-wide. There is no need to invent conspiracy theories about him or to speculate on the subject. That is the single unifying theory that explains everything he has done up to this point. The incontrovertible facts are as follows:

    1. Obama is a product of the Chicago Political Machine. He went there right after college and returned again after law school. He joined the Trinity Church of Christ, and sat through 20 years of racist sermons from the pulpit. He was a community activist. He served on Education Boards with Bill Ayers. He was part of the Daley Machine. He served prominent money people in Chicago including Rezko. In sum, he is the surrogate of that machine.

    2. The Chicago Political Machine controls all aspects of political life and business life down to the Ward level. Obama now controls state political parties through the DNC. At the end of the primary, the DNC was moved to Chicago, and threatened the state parties whose voters supported Hillary overwhelmingly. They rigged the Convention.

    3. The Chicago Political Machine survives on patronage and graft. It has it enforcers and its corrupt politicians. The machine protects them. By the same token, Obama has the New Black Panthers, the Mayor of Sacramento both of whom committed crimes and were let off the hook by his Attorney General Eric Holder. By contrast, Obama fires Inspector General’s like Walprin who blows the whistle on them.

    4. The Chicago Machine corrupts the voting process. Obama used ACORN to steal the election in the caucus states of the primary. He has made empowered them to conduct the census which gives them access to personal information on the electorate. He has moved the census process from the Department of Commerce to the White House. ACORN is a corrupt organization, trained in Alinsky methods, which has been charged and convicted multiple counts of election fraud in Washington and elsewhere.

    5. The Chicago Machine establishes a shadow government. It relies on Ward Chairmen to control the city. They are fiercely loyal to the Mayor. Nothing moves without his say. Obama uses his 33 Czars to control government. Finally, the two kingpins who run the White House for Obama–Axelrod and Emanuel from behind closed doors are both scions of the Chicago Machine. It is seamless.

    6. The Chicago Machine leeches power from other branches. Likewise, Obama has undermined the power of his own Cabinet by appointing 33 Czars above them who are political hacs accountable only to him and unlike Cabinet officers cannot be subpoenaed by Congress. He claims the power to enact treaties without 2/3 Congressional ratification per the Constitution. Foreign policy is run by the White House rather than the State Department.

    7. The Chicago Machine eliminates political competition, and allows big business, democrats and republicans to share in the graft. It makes all seats safe seats and thus perpetuates itself. Likewise, Obama offers Republican opponents seats in is Cabinet which big media portrays as a Lincoln like team of rivals. He preaches unity and an end to partisanship. He promotes castrade Republicans like Governor Crist. He talks about retaining power for well in excess of the two term limit specified by the Constitution. And finally, he has an open door to big business, the head of GE is one of his eight advisors, and GE is a major beneficiary of the CAP and Trade and Health Care initiatives in exchange for their media support during the campaign.

    I could go on but I think you have got the picture. Obama is the vehicle through which the Chicago Machine is going nationwide. That is the blueprint. It is the single unifying explanation for most everything you see.

    The downsides of this model are clear. It is a parasitic force which bleeds the people dry and rewards corruption.

    Then how do we stand up to it? We must point up to everyone who will listen that Obama is a tool of the Chicago Machine and his goal is to take it national and reward the few at the expense of the many. That is the optimal angle of attack. Why? Because it rings true and most people would not want the Chicago Machine to take over.

    There are hopeful paths to the future, as Hillary proposed. There are other paths–those proposed by Obama, which lead only to despair and from which no one ever returns. Those paths will weaken our national defense, render us susceptible to terrorist attack, undermine our economy, destroy our middle class, and subject us to foreign economic control. Overspending at this time is a case in point.

    But we must not stop there. We must realize that the public mind is vulnerable to a bread and circuses act like his and will succumb unless it is given some structure by which to evaluate candidates of either political stripe. The criteria are as follows: i) a willingness to put country over party, ii) a proper regard for the separation of powers, iii) an insistence upon the separation of church and state, iv) a renewed appreciation for the inherent value of experience, vi) a proper balance between the private and public sector, v) a rejection big media which rejects the truth and censors relevant information, etc.

    The danger is that we do not recognize who Obama really is and what he has in mind for the country until it is too late. That is what the Chicago crew is counting on, and why they seek to distract us with irrelevant information. We must be smarter. How? By analyzing his actions in terms of the new paradigm, and evaluating all politicians starting with him on the basis of new criteria enumerated above. In short we must relearn the lessons of our forefathers who taught prior generations how to be patriots. Otherwise the future is bleak.

  47. In other words, this is not a war about liberals vs conservatives, democrats vs republicans–that is how the dimocrats want to define it. We must define it as a war between those who want to impose the Chicago Way on the rest of the country and the resto of us. If you state the issue that way, everything Obama has done which seemed enigmatic before, becomes clear and unambiguous. Futhermore you isolate him as he attempts to continue his game of bread and circuses. Pursuing this now, at a time when his poll numbers are declining, and by calling the game on him as I did with the stimulus plan this morning will help people who are not as fixated on the political scene as we are see the light.

  48. Good Morning All.

    I have to tell you every time I ready the comments to articles posted on the web, I am thankful I am posting here. They really go after each other. Here, we can have differences, but we treat each other with respect. We admit that we have a common interest, yes we listen to others.

    I really enjoy reading her everyday, and the place that you recommend. Admin, of course has super skills.

  49. I think Gov Paterson in NY should just say he aint gonna run for the Gov job next year. The latest polls suggest total wipe out.

    Next years Primary : Cuomo 61% – Paterson 27%.

    If he wants to be humiliated, carry on but i’d say go gracefully.

  50. # confloyd Says:
    July 16th, 2009 at 2:47 am

    Mrs.Smith, it was truly a great speech. My personal opinion, is there now dragging Hillary out to fix the nagging notion that Obama and American is now weak. They need her to tell us we are still a very strong nation and that Obama is on the right path with his foreign policy. They need her to fix his “pansy appearance” across the U.S.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    With basically our entire country unsure of where Obama is taking us, Hillary is the “one”, people continue to look to for reassurance and a plan. What is disturbing is the Tax situation in NY. It appears Obama is committed to destroy NY fiscal budget and any chance for the recovery and future growth of business in an economic recession.

    Obama has recommended a blood sucking Tax be placed on it’s residents and an egregious, debilitating Health Care costs on employers for their employees with hefty penalties if they OPT out of the plan. A double whammy that will do nothing but drive NY’ers and business owners out of the state eventually Bankrupting the state. This is a plan hatched in Hell.

    ” Congressional plans to fund a massive health-care overhaul could have a job-killing effect on New York, creating a tax rate of nearly 60 percent for the state’s top earners and possibly pressuring small-business owners to shed workers.

    New York’s top income bracket could reach as high as 57 percent — rates not seen in three decades — to pay for the massive health coverage proposed by House Democrats this week”.

    nypost.com/seven/07162009/news/regionalnews/dem_health_rx_a_poion_pill_in_ny_179525.htm

  51. # HillaryforTexas Says:
    July 15th, 2009 at 9:05 pm

    MoveOn’s big beef with Hillary was that she wouldn’t agree to an absolute deadline for pulling EVERY soldier OUT of the country of Iraq. They went into snit fits over the idea that ANY sort of “security force” might have to remain even to police the damn borders, depending on the situation on the ground. Oh, no, Hillary was a neocon warmonger for saying that.

    And now the despicable fawning toadies don’t have SHIT to say that Bambi has “pulled out” even less than Hillary agreed to. Suddenly it’s prudent, not warmongering.

    They are as much mindless bleating zealots as any of Rush’s dittoheads EVER were, and most people know it.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I don’t know anyone who is supporting Move-On anymore, not since they used their manpower to subvert the election process with their goons and thugs muscling voters. I think Move-On, like ACORN, is another shadow organization for Obama’s money funneling schemes, when he is in need of bribe money. Their latest claim is raising $100,000 in a day. Yeah, right, In an economic depression. pfffft!

  52. I think some organization or groups of people should start renting some billboards, showing in their area, such as New York, what Move On.Orge Said Then (a few choice words with a date), vs what Move On .Org is saying now. At the bottom it should state, something like,

    Which of these statements are a LIE, BECAUSE ONE OF THEM HAS TO BE.

    DOES MOVE ON.ORG REPRESENT YOU?

  53. Obama drops in another poll. Now 57 percent in McClatchy-Ipsos, down 7 points from last month.

    news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/3272692

  54. I just got an email about Letterman’s reference to Sara looking like an airline hostess, with a photo shown, below that was a photo of MO leaving Westminster Abby in a get up you would not believe. Now I don’t want to get into a discussion on how MO vs Sara Dresses, but Letterman’s bias on this issue is something women should be addressing. I really don’t care if they wear a potatoe sack, but to slam one, and totally ignore in my estimations the appearance of the other is crap.

    Treat women with respect, really leave their looks and fashion out of it, and believe me if you so chose to go there, the women should come down on them with steel stillettos until they shut up.

    I really don’t want to miss another Abraham Lincoln. In addition, Letterman, you have a lot of warts also. To begin with, you wear the same conservative tired outfits all the time, white sox (give me a break), and you always come out and unbutton your coal jacket, like you are doing us a favor.

  55. admin Says:
    July 15th, 2009 at 5:38 pm

    The Diageo/Hotline Poll of 800 U.S. registered voters conducted by FD from July 9-13, 2009, finds that the percentage of American voters who approve of the job President Obama is doing has dropped nine points to 56%. The previous Diageo/ Hotline Poll, conducted from June 4-7, found that 65% of voters approved of the job he was doing.
    &&&&&&&&&

    Through the latest groundbreaking polling technologies, the Nostradamus Poll Gazer, the RGB Times is able to bring you next year’s polling numbers for Mr. Obama:

    Strongly approve: -3%
    Approve: 4%
    Feh: 13%
    Disapprove: 20%
    Strongly disapprove: 66%

    Right Track/Wrong Track:
    Right Track: 2%
    Wrong Track 95%
    Horse Racing Track: 3%

    Using the same Nostradamus Poll Gazer software, RGB Times tried to look at results two years from now, but there were none. The most likely cause is impeachment and subsequent removal from office.

  56. The Chicago Way:

    1. establish a governent business cartel within a defined geographical area.

    2. obliterate all dissenting opinion.

    Result: rewards the few at the expense of the many.

    That is what he did in Chicago. It is how he is restructuring governent now.

    He used the press to do it to Hillary and Sarah during the campaing. And now as well.

    The companies who contributed to him in the primary are the beneficiaries of stimulus moneys.

    When people voted for Obama, did they realize they were voting for the Chicago Way?

    Once they realize it will they continue to be bambozled by his faux message.

  57. WATERMELON-CRANIUM WEIGHS IN

    Rove rips Obama

    online.wsj.com/article/SB124770231103148561.html

    The President Moves the Economic Goalposts
    ================================
    The stimulus isn’t working as originally advertised.

    JULY 16, 2009
    By Karl Rove

    So what’s a president to do when the promises he made about his economic stimulus program fail to materialize? If you’re Barack Obama, you redefine your goals and act as if America won’t remember what you said originally. That’s a neat trick if you can get away with it, but Mr. Obama won’t. His words are a matter of public record and he will be held to them.

    When it came to the stimulus package, the president and his administration promised, in the words of National Economic Director Larry Summers, “You’ll see the effects begin almost immediately.” Now it’s clear that those promised jobs and growth haven’t materialized.

    So Mr. Obama is attempting to lower expectations retroactively, saying in an op-ed in Sunday’s Washington Post that his stimulus “was, from the start, a two-year program.” That is misleading. Mr. Obama never said if his stimulus were passed things might still get significantly worse in the following year.

    In February, Mr. Obama said this about the goals of his stimulus package: “I think my initial measure of success is creating or saving four million jobs.” He later explained the stimulus’s $787 billion would “go directly to . . . generating three to four million new jobs.” And his Council of Economic Advisors issued an official analysis showing that the unemployment rate would top out in the third quarter of this year at just over 8%.

    That quarter began on July 1, and unemployment is now 9.5%, up from 7.6% when Mr. Obama took office. There are 2.6 million fewer Americans working than there were on the day Mr. Obama was sworn in. The president says now that unemployment will exceed 10% this year, and his advisers say it will remain high through much of next year.

    Earlier this year, Mr. Obama assured us that most of the stimulus money “will go out the door immediately.” But it hasn’t. Only about 7.7% of the stimulus has been spent in the six months since its passage, and more of it will be spent in the program’s last eight years than in its first year. So now the president claims he said something different. “We also knew that it would take some time for the money to get out the door,” Mr. Obama said in his weekly radio address on Saturday.

    One problem with Mr. Obama’s stimulus bill that is rarely talked about is that it will force a huge, and likely permanent, increase in discretionary, domestic spending. That portion of federal spending was $393 billion in President George W. Bush’s last budget. Democrats immediately raised it to $408 billion for this fiscal year and now face the question of whether to make the stimulus a one-time expenditure or a permanent spending increase.

    Federal education spending is a good example. As part of the stimulus, Mr. Obama nearly doubled education spending to $80 billion from $41 billion. If Congress adds that and other stimulus spending into the baseline for future budgets, discretionary domestic spending could mushroom to $550 billion or $600 billion next year. If that happens, Mr. Obama will have broken his pledge that the stimulus would be temporary spending.

    As is Mr. Obama’s habit, he has answered his critics by creating straw-man arguments. In last weekend’s radio address, he attacked detractors as those who “felt that doing nothing was somehow an answer.” But many of Mr. Obama’s critics didn’t feel that way. They offered — and Mr. Obama almost completely ignored — constructive ideas to jump-start the economy.

    For example, House Republicans offered an alternative recovery package of immediate tax cuts and safety-net measures that cost half as much as Mr. Obama’s stimulus program. Republicans have also calculated that their plans would have created 50% more jobs than the stimulus. They reached that estimate by using the same job-growth econometric model that the president’s Council of Economic Advisors used for the stimulus.

    While in Moscow recently, Mr. Obama answered questions on whether his administration had misread the economy by saying “there’s nothing that we would have done differently.” Let me suggest two things: He could have proposed pro-growth policies rather than ones that retard economic recovery with a massive increase in deficit spending. And he could fulfill his promise to speak to us honestly rather than selling his proposals with promises and goals he rapidly discards.

    In his 1946 essay “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell wrote about words used in a “consciously dishonest way.” “That is,” Orwell wrote, “the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different.” Americans are right to wonder if their president is using his own private definitions for the words he uses to sell his policies.

  58. I was surprised to read on No Quarter tha MSNBC was the only news source media to carry the entire Hillary speech.The work of art by a real President and the one that race bait Obuma tried to blot out by choosing the same time spot to spread more of his pathetic BS.Looks like our real president has hit one out of the park.

    BY ABM90 News made my day

  59. AND NOW A WORD FROM OUR…(BARF) “PRESIDENT”

    Rove referred to Obama’s lies committed to paper, as was published this Sunday in the WashPost.

    Not content to suck up all tv time and radio time, he is next working his way through the press. Next week, he’ll have a blog.

    My $$$ comments inserted here and there.

    washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/11/AR2009071100647.html

    Rebuilding Something Better

    By Barack Obama
    Sunday, July 12, 2009
    Nearly six months ago, my administration took office amid the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression. At the time, we were losing, on average, 700,000 jobs a month. And many feared that our financial system was on the verge of collapse.

    $$$ Ummm, yeah.

    The swift and aggressive action we took in those first few months has helped pull our financial system and our economy back from the brink. We took steps to restart lending to families and businesses, stabilize our major financial institutions, and help homeowners stay in their homes and pay their mortgages. We also passed the most sweeping economic recovery plan in our nation’s history.

    $$$ Oh, has it? What restart to lending? Banks don’t lend
    any more. The hope was there, but you didn’t enforce that. The banks would rather throw the bail out money back in your face than lend it to the “little people”. The rate of foreclosures is not reversing, it’s not leveling off, it’s not even keeping even, it’s increasing. Way to go!$$$

    The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was not expected to restore the economy to full health on its own but to provide the boost necessary to stop the free fall. So far, it has done that. It was, from the start, a two-year program, and it will steadily save and create jobs as it ramps up over this summer and fall. We must let it work the way it’s supposed to, with the understanding that in any recession, unemployment tends to recover more slowly than other measures of economic activity.

    $$$ If so, why are your poll numbers in a continued downward spiral, with the main complaint being the economy, and that the massive stimulus bill had at best a mini-impact? $$$

    I am confident that the United States of America will weather this economic storm. But once we clear away the wreckage, the real question is what we will build in its place. Even as we rescue this economy from a full-blown crisis, I have insisted that we must rebuild it better than before. For if we do not seize this moment to confront the weaknesses that have plagued our economy for decades, we will consign ourselves and our children to future crises, sluggish growth, or both.

    $$$ “Weakness that plagued our economy for decades”???? Oh, who could forget the bread lines of the Clinton administration!!!

    There are some who say we must wait to meet our greatest challenges. They favor an incremental approach or believe that doing nothing is somehow an answer.

    $$$Rove pointed out this is his straw-man argument.

    But that is exactly the thinking that led us to this predicament. Ignoring big challenges and deferring tough decisions is what Washington has done for decades, and it’s exactly what I sought to change by running for president.

    $$$ As president, you TALK about “Big Change”, but you DO “little or no change”. You sir, are a mirage.

    Now is the time to build a firmer, stronger foundation for growth that not only will withstand future economic storms but that helps us thrive and compete in a global economy. To build that foundation, we must lower the health-care costs that are driving us into debt, create the jobs of the future within our borders, give our workers the skills and training they need to compete for those jobs, and make the tough choices necessary to bring down our deficit in the long run.

    $$$ You are implying that you’ll fight for “Hillary Care”, but you won’t fight for it like Hillary would (will). You punt all legistlation down to Congress because you have no idea how a bill is passed. Eleanor Clift might say, “I knew LBJ, and you sir, are no LBJ”. $$$

    Already, we’re making progress on health-care reform that controls costs while ensuring choice and quality, as well as energy legislation that will make clean energy the profitable kind of energy, leading to whole new industries and jobs that cannot be outsourced.

    And this week, I’ll be talking about how we give our workers the skills they need to compete for these jobs of the future.

    $$$ Sounds like another speech… Poor teleprompter will be burnt out.

    In an economy where jobs requiring at least an associate’s degree are projected to grow twice as fast as jobs requiring no college experience, it’s never been more essential to continue education and training after high school. That’s why we’ve set a goal of leading the world in college degrees by 2020. Part of this goal will be met by helping Americans better afford a college education. But part of it will also be strengthening our network of community colleges.

    $$$ All those retraining programs are leading to people finishing them up, only to say, “Now I can’t find a job with my new skills, so I going for re-re-re-retraining”.

    We believe it’s time to reform our community colleges so that they provide Americans of all ages a chance to learn the skills and knowledge necessary to compete for the jobs of the future. Our community colleges can serve as 21st-century job training centers, working with local businesses to help workers learn the skills they need to fill the jobs of the future. We can reallocate funding to help them modernize their facilities, increase the quality of online courses and ultimately meet the goal of graduating 5 million more Americans from community colleges by 2020.

    $$$ Hey, is this a plan to throw money at municipalities and counties ahead of 2012?

    Providing all Americans with the skills they need to compete is a pillar of a stronger economic foundation, and, like health care or energy, we cannot wait to make the necessary changes. We must continue to clean up the wreckage of this recession, but it is time to rebuild something better in its place. It won’t be easy, and there will continue to be those who argue that we have to put off hard decisions that we have already deferred for far too long. But earlier generations of Americans didn’t build this great country by fearing the future and shrinking our dreams. This generation has to show that same courage and determination. I believe we will.

    $$$ More straw man arguments..”There are those who say sh*t tastes good, but I say, it doesn’t”. More soaring rhetoric that he is a man of action, only to be followed by…inaction.

    &&&&&&
    The writer is president of the United States.

    $$$ I did not know that.

  60. Clinton and Sotomayor Endure Man-Made Perils: Margaret Carlson

    Commentary by Margaret Carlson
    More Photos/Details

    July 16 (Bloomberg) — Hillary Clinton and Sonia Sotomayor have risen to the top of their professions being the best students in the class, homework always done, notebooks neat and conduct impeccable. They share the perils of their ascension: The world remains white and male and ready to put a high female achiever back in her place if given half a chance.

    No one spoke to Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Samuel Alito the way Senate Judiciary Committee members are speaking to Sotomayor. Two exchanges stand out. Senator Lindsey Graham, a smart lawyer and all-around good guy, had to show he was with the program to nick Sotomayor before confirming her.

    He asked her about her temperament as described by a number of anonymous people quoted in a Zagat-like review of judges. “She’s a terror on the bench,” she’s “a bully” and “abuses lawyers.” Said Graham, “You stand out like a sore thumb.”

    These are characteristics generally admired in men and needed on the bench to deal with lawyers who arrive unprepared yet full of bravado. She told Graham that she asks “hard questions” of both sides, in her usual calm and steady manner. She could hardly be a courtroom terrorist unless she’s been drugged for the last three days of hearings or subject to multiple-personality disorder.

    After he was done, Graham said, “I like you, by the way, for whatever that matters. Since I may vote for you that ought to matter to you.”

    ‘You Like Me!’

    Sotomayor demurred but I could hardly be the only person hoping that Sally Field’s cry at the Oscars, “You like me, you really like me!” didn’t jump into her head. Men just don’t talk to other men they respect that way.

    Equally jarring, Senator Tom Coburn told her the next day, “You’ll have lots of ‘splainin’ to do” after Sotomayor tried to respond to his pounding on whether there was a right to “personal self-defense.”

    Did any senator make “Godfather” jokes to Alito? Coburn’s racial stereotyping, drawing from a famous line in “I Love Lucy,” was wrong. He either thinks Sotomayor is Cuban, or Ricky Ricardo was Puerto Rican.

    While Sotomayor was testifying yesterday, Clinton moved to reclaim her spot as the country’s top diplomat with what her aides billed as a major policy address before the Council on Foreign Relations. But at the very moment she was giving this speech, the White House counter-programmed with the president.

    Seductive Material

    President Barack Obama, standing alongside representatives of the American Nurses Association, waxed nostalgic in the Rose Garden about the dedicated health-care providers who saw him and Michelle through the birth of their daughters.

    This was slightly more seductive material in a better setting than Clinton had to offer against a gray backdrop in a non-descript office building in downtown Washington. Obama’s speech was carried live. Clinton’s speech about treaty frameworks, debt forgiveness and the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review wasn’t carried at all.

    Clinton was arguably once the most powerful woman in the world. A new kind of professional first lady, she became a beloved one when a negative word from her would have ended a presidency. Rather than retreat to lick her wounds after the Monica ordeal, she won a Senate seat in a state she’d mainly visited as a tourist.

    She became the frontrunner for the presidency in 2008 until tsunami Obama came along. She parlayed her defeat into a premier cabinet appointment as secretary of State.

    Overshadowed Again

    And then, well — no one promised her the Rose Garden. After six months in the job, Clinton has been overshadowed by a president who is his own stellar diplomat, a vice president who has carved out Iraq for his portfolio, and by major players like former United Nations Ambassador Richard Holbrooke overseeing hot spots.

    On big trips, Obama travels solo. Vladimir Putin’s foreign minister was present at meetings during the president’s Moscow visit, but not Clinton. Last month, the president went to see Saudi King Abdullah without her.

    Some of her invisibility is the result of her breaking her elbow on June 17. Since then she’s canceled trips to Italy and Greece and worked from home. That’s no reason she should be relegated to a meeting with the recently ousted president of Honduras.

    Clinton doesn’t get to make her own appointments without interference; prize ambassadorships are doled out in the West Wing. Nor does she appear on the Sunday talk shows without clearance, which is rarely granted.

    No ‘Meltdown’

    If Sotomayor makes it through her grilling without what Graham called a “meltdown,” a female hazard if ever there was one, she will slip gently into that good quiet that is the Supreme Court, a perfect place for the best student, no worse for the wear and tear.

    Clinton’s fate will likely be different. Hers may have been a Machiavellian appointment. A potential enemy, she’s been brought far enough inside the tent to be seen as disloyal should she criticize the administration, but kept far enough from the center to be a diplomatic heavyweight.

    As an added bonus, Bill Clinton’s been neutered, having made concessions to dim his own global star to help his wife get the job.

    Hillary is set to leave for India today. If she gets any farther from the action, her tenure at State may end up more like that of Colin Powell than Henry Kissinger.

    (Margaret Carlson, author of “Anyone Can Grow Up: How George Bush and I Made It to the White House” and former White House correspondent for Time magazine, is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.)

    To contact the writer of this column: Margaret Carlson in Washington at mcarlson3@bloomberg.net
    Last Updated: July 15, 2009 21:01 EDT

    Email this article Printer friendly format

    Sponsored links

  61. 16.07.2009
    Much Ado About Hillary

    The recent fixation with Hillary Cinton’s place in the Obama administration strikes me as overblown, more a function of her ability to drive ratings and web traffic than any real political tensions. Clinton sees Obama regularly and she enjoys a strong link to the White House’s national security team. (Clinton’s deputy, Jim Steinberg, works extremely closely and collegially with the current deputy national security advisor, Tom Donilon, a former colleague from the Bill Clinton years.)

    Take, for instance, the data points in today’s New York Times story presented in support of the notion that Hillary may have been “shunted to the sidelines”: Middle East hand Dennis Ross has moved from Foggy Bottom to the NSC? That has nothing to do with Clinton but rather is about Obama’s White House staffing needs. Her failed effort to hire Sidney Blumenthal? A weird idea on her part, to be sure, but pretty minor in the scheme of things. Her candidate to lead USAID is caught up in a vetting process–but that’s a story about the madness of confirmation politics, not internecine administration feuds. She hasn’t been allowed to fill every ambassadorship at will, which would have been an extraodinary sacrifice of one of the most time-honored (if semi-corrupt) forms of presidential patronage. And then there is her broken arm, unfortunate fodder for metaphor-hungry writers, but almost not worth discussing otherwise.

    But.

    This was the hazard of choosing Hillary for the Secretary of State job. The media freak show won’t stop. The Clinton vs. Obama campaign storyline was so glorious that people can’t resist resurrecting it, interpreting every snafu–like the coincidental scheduling of Obama’s live remarks at the same time as Hillary’s speech yesterday–as evidence that Obama is out to get Hillary, or vice versa. Obama was to no small extent asking for this.

    Hillary’s camp isn’t blameless. The bid to hire Blumenthal was unwise, invoking the memory of her as a partisan take-no-prisoners political operator. One or more people on her State team seem to have been leaking to the press, in this case complaining about the White House’s political team and elsewhere touting her role in internal policy debates (more troops for Afghanistan, a harder line in Iran). I assume these leaks come from people frustrated at the chatter about Hillary being “sidelined.” But that sort of thing does not go over well in the West Wing, and there may come a time where such meta, non-policy-related issues, in a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy, do create a real problem.
    –Michael Crowley

    Posted: Thursday, July 16, 2009 7:11 AM with 5 comment(s)
    Co

  62. “YOU TALK TOO MUCH, YOU’RE BORING ME TO DEATH”

    Someone else noticing the yadda yadda yadda from “Speech Guy”.

    realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/16/what_is_the_point_of_obamas_speeches_97490.html

    July 16, 2009
    What is the Point of Obama’s Speeches?
    =============================

    By Daniel Henninger

    Can Barack Obama talk his way onto Mount Rushmore? He might. In fact, if just half of what Mr. Obama has said that he, we or the world should do comes to pass, he’s going straight to that mountain.

    More than any U.S. president, The Speech is the primary vehicle of Barack Obama’s politics. Web sites have been erected as shrines to his speeches. Obamaspeech.com offers the text of 100 Obama speeches back to 2002. The electronic library stops at January 2009, when the White House site takes over. Currently it’s up to 36 pages listing the titles alone of the president’s remarks and speeches.

    Six months into his presidency, with more surely to come, it is an appropriate moment to ask: What is the point and purpose of Barack Obama’s speeches?

    One answer — offered by students of talk from Aristotle through Alfred North Whitehead — is obvious: The purpose of the rhetorician’s art is to persuade. John Locke, watching democracy’s advance, had a darker view; rhetoric, said Locke, is an instrument of error and deceit. Or both: talking people into error.

    In our time, public remarks remain first of all a photo-op to make a president glow in public. Mr. Obama is taking it to another level, making the public speech the central act of his presidency.

    On his just-completed foreign trip, he gave a major address in Moscow reinterpreting the Cold War and another in Ghana laying out a persuasive path to prosperity for the African continent. In June he gave a major speech on Islam’s place in history and its relationship to the rest of the world, spoke the next day at length on the meaning of Buchenwald and a day later about D-Day at Normandy. He seems to be on TV every day, talking.

    The first thing to be said about this body of work is that it is astonishingly good. Even by the something-for-everyone standards of political speech, much of Mr. Obama’s somethings are strong and worth hearing.

    Here’s the problem: Mr. Obama is not the nation’s Speaker in Chief. He’s not a senator, and he’s no longer a candidate. He’s the president. A president’s major speeches are different than those of anyone else. That high office imposes demands beyond the power of a podium. Inspiration matters, but the office also requires acts of leadership. A U.S. president’s words must be connected to something beyond sentiment and eloquence. Too much of the time, Barack Obama’s big speeches don’t seem to be connected to anything other than his own interesting thoughts on some subject.

    Lincoln’s eloquence flowed from the pain of the Civil War. Washington’s Farewell Address, perhaps America’s greatest political speech, was a magisterial summing up after leading an army to victory in the Revolution and then the nation’s beginning. FDR’s remembered speeches were pushed into life by the Depression and then world war.

    Ronald Reagan’s great “tear down this wall” speech in 1987 at the Brandenburg Gate was just one piece in an elaborate Cold War endgame strategy.

    LBJ’s most famous speech, to a full session of Congress in 1965 a week after the violent civil-rights march in Selma, wasn’t just a reflection on civil rights in America but itself a central event.

    With one notable exception — health care — there is a disconnect between the scale of Mr. Obama’s ideas and his actions, and sometimes even reality, as when he says a U.S-Russian commitment to a world without nuclear weapons would be the “legal and moral foundation” for persuading the world’s rogues to do the same. What, exactly, comes after the moral foundation?

    The Russian “reset” isn’t a foreign-policy statement; it’s a sentiment. If you were the head of an Islamic nation, what policy conclusion were you supposed to take from that Cairo speech? All past administrations have been willing to talk to adversaries. When he speaks as president, Mr. Obama’s audiences have reason to expect that some concrete actions or policies will flow from seemingly major statements. Other than more diplomats talking, I don’t think much of anything is going to follow these. The Speech was pretty much it.

    Then there is health care. With characteristic eloquence, Mr. Obama defended his federal health-insurance entitlement for the middle class in a major speech to the American Medical Association. If enacted, Mr. Obama’s plan would be the most significant piece of social entitlement legislation since 1965, the year Medicare and Medicaid were enacted as the cornerstone of the Great Society.

    It may well be that this in fact is the foundation on which Barack Obama intends to build his own vast social vision. If so he will be doing it with no real event or trauma to drive a policy of this scale — no war, no civil-rights movement. Instead, he is trying to shape a presidency from the force of his own political personality carved out of a mountain of random eloquence. It might work, too.

  63. jbstonesfan Says:

    July 16th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
    Clinton and Sotomayor Endure Man-Made Perils: Margaret Carlson
    **************************

    Ah, the PLAGIARIST. Need we say more?

  64. NewMexicoFan Says:
    July 16th, 2009 at 1:50 pm

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    The outfit topping MO’s Westminister garish choice was the “in mourning” outfit, black veil and all, she wore for the audience with Pope Benedict. The kids should have been dressed in pure white, not the ‘nija’ outfits she chose for them.

  65. Did you guys know that Obama just “coincidentally” and at the last minute decided to make a health care speech in the Rose Garden at EXACTLY the time of Hillary’s major foreign policy speech? That’s one reason why hers didn’t get as much coverage – all the press ran over to the WH when he announced his “impromptu” speech. One network even started covering her speech, then cut away to his as “breaking news”.

    This is not something presidents have done in the past. They coordinate, and do not give speeches at the same time as their major cabinet members. It’s just not done.

    Obama is such a petty, narcissistic asshole, he could not stand to have the cameras on her and not him for 10 minutes. She still scares him to death, and as much as I want her expertise at State, I wish she’d pick a really opportune moment, when he was tanking bigtime in the polls, and WALK just to sink his ass.

  66. Maragart Carlson is useless…how can anyone care what she has to say
    **********************************************

    rgb44hrc Says:

    July 16th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
    “YOU TALK TOO MUCH, YOU’RE BORING ME TO DEATH”

    Someone else noticing the yadda yadda yadda from “Speech Guy”.

    realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/16/what_is_the_point_of_obamas_speeches_97490.html

    July 16, 2009
    What is the Point of Obama’s Speeches?
    =============================

    By Daniel Henninger

    Can Barack Obama talk his way onto Mount Rushmore? He might. In fact, if just half of what Mr. Obama has said that he, we or the world should do comes to pass, he’s going straight to that mountain.

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

    rgb44hrc…one correction…Daniel Henninger meant to say:

    What is the point of Obama reading all these speeches?

Comments are closed.