The Obama Death Threat Plots; The Who And Why Behind Them

Yesterday we discussed Barack Obama’s narcissism. Today we will discuss his dwindling band of enablers.

During August we all witnessed town hall protests. It was also a time when Obama supporters began to raise “threats” to Obama’s life as a concern. It was Obama supporters, mostly Dimocrats with Republican Obama “admirers” who began the narrative that Obama’s life was in danger. We’ll discuss WHO these people are below. More interesting is the WHY of the non-existent “death threats”.

* * * * *

The “Why” Of The Death Threats.

A superficial analysis, the pedestrian conclusion, about why the “death threats” became a big topic of public discussion by Dimocrats is that it was the equivalent of shouting “racist!”. At that superficial, but true level, it was clear that the goal was to shut down and shut up Obama opponents.

The goal of shouting “racist” or “death threats” was to de-legitimize Obama opponents. Shouting “racist” worked well for Obama and the Barack Obama Thugs (hereinafter B.O.T.s) during the primaries and general election. Shouting “racist” also worked in the early months of the year to shut down, or at least confuse or discourage, Obama opponents.

But shouting “racist!” had a diminishing return. Race-baiting was not working so well especially after Obama played the race card from the bottom of the deck by declaring Cambridge police “acted stupidly” in the Henry Louis Gates race-baiting episode. Obama’s poll numbers, especially among white Americans, took a hit as Americans began to see that Obama is not “post racial” but rather a race-baiter and a defender of his upper class supporters against “bitter” and “clingy” small-town and lower and middle class Americans.

As the “racist” card lost its currency a new strategy emerged to shut up Obama opponents: “death threats”. All of a sudden Dimocrats everywhere from Nancy Pelosi to what passes for Dimocratic intellectuals were all clutching their pearls and shedding crocodile tears about the non-existent “death threats”. As with “racist” it was all an attempt to shut Obama opponents up and de-legitimize them.

But the above is obvious and superficial. There is a much deeper meaning to the rise of the “death threat” narrative.

Here at Big Pink, we believe history is a teacher. We are also aware pop culture is a component of history. Pop culture often mimics real life history. Let’s briefly take a look at the original Star Wars Trilogy because it relates to the deeper meaning of the “death threats” strategy. We daresay that most everyone has seen the original Star Wars Trilogy. We recall this scene from Episode I, A New Hope:

“If you strike me down I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine” says the good guy Obi Wan to evil Darth Vader. And as we know, Obi Wan is killed (by his own volition) and becomes far more powerful in death than in “life”.

In our real life world we have seen how actual historical figures sometimes really do become more powerful in death than in real life. Whether it is John F. Kennedy or Martin Luther King or as far back as Spain’s El Cid or Evita Peron in Argentina, the veil of death can cast a magic spell making the dead more powerful than the quick.

We at Big Pink understand this reality and it is why during the primaries when an Obama plane (July 2008) had some very serious emergency trouble we were not happy. We did not want Obama to die a physical death. We understood that a dead Obama with all the fake “hope” attached to him by the Hopium addled would be more powerful in death than the bumbling boob he is in life.

No real Obama opponent wants physical harm to come to Obama or any president.

Obama opponents do indeed seek to send Obama and his B.O.T.s back to the filthy depths of Lake Michigan where they came from but only in a political sense. It is not only Obama but the lying stench which is his entire deceptive message and sickening coalition which must be destroyed, but only in a political sense. Our attacks on Obama are political, not physical.

Let’s piece this all together. What is the deeper meaning of Obama supporters creating “death threats” against Obama?

As Obama supporters witness the bumbling boobery of their Mess-iah, and as Obama supporters witness the lack of “change”, the SNL “Jack Squat” Obama, the Obama who has done nothing but betray them repeatedly, as Obama supporters see former allies angry with Obama for his lies and betrayal, the Hopium addled need a justification for their Obama worship.

By creating non-existent “death threats” against Obama, his former and current supporters want to justify in their minds that they were not wrong about their Mess-iah Obama. Obama supporters want to believe that they were right that Obama is, contrary to all evidence, a world historical figure, a transformational hero, a great man of history – so they desperately try to link Obama, via death and the non-existent death threats, to assassinated genuine world historical figures.

Obama supporters, witnessing the collapsing support for Obama, witnessing the lack of achievement, witnessing the lack of “hope”, witnessing the lack of “change”, have themselves created the “death threats” in order to assure themselves that Mess-iah Obama is a great man of history – so Obama supporters themselves and for themselves and their hero create non-existent death threats. It is necrophilia narcissism.

* * * * *

“Who” is making “death threats”.

Obama’s Olympic failure and the non-change in America’s standing in the world demonstrate the falseness of the Obama Mess-iah complex.

Congressional approval is also down (from 31% in September to 21% now) and Dimocrats increasingly prove themselves unable to lead. So much for the golden Dimocratic future.

Instead of dealing with failures Nancy Pelosi invoked Harvey Milk, who actually did something before he was killed, in order to shut down protests against Obama.

During the primaries Hillary was targeted by Obama supporters as some sort of Obama assasin because she discussed Robert Kennedy’s assasination as the sort of unexpected event that can derail expectations. During the primaries and the general election Obama constantly sought to tie himself with world historical figure President Abraham Lincoln and now Obama supporters continue the analogy – to the bitter end.

Obama supporters Joy Behar and Bette Midler warned of Rwandan style civil war in the United States because of talkers like Glenn Beck.

Obama enabler
Tom Friedman at the New York Times made a fool of himself by comparing Obama to genuine world historical figure Yitzhak Rabin:

But something very dangerous is happening. Criticism from the far right has begun tipping over into delegitimation and creating the same kind of climate here that existed in Israel on the eve of the Rabin assassination.

What kind of madness is it that someone would create a poll on Facebook asking respondents, “Should Obama be killed?” The choices were: “No, Maybe, Yes, and Yes if he cuts my health care.” The Secret Service is now investigating. I hope they put the jerk in jail and throw away the key because this is exactly what was being done to Rabin.

Obama is not Rabin, but Friedman and the Hopium addled want to justify their support of the flailing Obama by turning him into something other than the Chicago flim-flam Circus Clown of Corruption he is.

That widely circulated, by Obama supporters, facebook poll? It turns out it was a juvenile, not a threat, but of course it was Obama supporters trying to convince themselves that Obama is a world historical figure to justify their Mess-iah faith who publicized the poll:

The Secret Service has determined that a juvenile was behind the online survey that asked whether people thought President Barack Obama should be assassinated, an agency spokesman said Thursday.

No criminal charges will be filed against the juvenile or the juvenile’s parents, spokesman Edwin Donovan said. Donovan would not reveal the names of the child or parents or say where they are from.[snip]

The poll asked respondents “Should Obama be killed?” The choices: No, Maybe, Yes, and Yes if he cuts my health care.

After Secret Service agents met with the child and the child’s parents, they determined there was no intent to harm the president.

Case closed,” Donovan said. “I guess you could characterize it as a mistake.”

We do recall that Chris Huges, a Facebook co-founder, was a prominent Obama supporter. Nothing of course is said about the still functioning Facebook efforts to kill George W. Bush.

Oh, yes, George W. Bush, why aren’t Obama Dimocrats discussing those “death threats”?:

Facebook users and the national media are wringing their hands over the appalling poll that was posted on Facebook asking users if Barack Obama should be assassinated.

Facebook has since taken down the poll, created by a third party user, and now the Secret Service is investigating its source.

Case closed for Barack Obama, but should Facebook have offered the same courtesy to his predecessor?

Several groups on Facebook are dedicated to the demise of George W. Bush. Most of the dozen or so groups dedicated to killing him however, have only a few followers, but some of them have become quite popular.

For example there is a group named “We all Want To Kill George Bush” with 429 members, and LETS KILL BUSH WITH SHOES has 484 members.

Obama Dimocrats and enablers also point out the military coup against Obama scenario published by Newsmax. However, the article was written by John L. Perry, a Carter administration official. Again Obama enablers and the feeble minded wish to justify their support for boob Obama by turning him into a world historical figure so they themselves create military takeover scenarios.

Even Gore Vidal, who betrayed Hillary Clinton and now regrets it, seeks to justify his love of Obama by turning Obama into something of importance. Those like Vidal who think Obama is intelligent and respectable hope to erase their stupidity and gullibility by concocting plots against Obama instead of simply admitting they were taken in by a flim-flam confidence man from the Chicago Circus of Corruption.

Gore Vidal:

Last year he famously switched allegiance from Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama during the Democratic nomination process for president. Now, he reveals, he regrets his change of heart. How’s Obama doing? “Dreadfully. I was hopeful. He was the most intelligent person we’ve had in that position for a long time. But he’s inexperienced. He has a total inability to understand military matters. [snip]

Another notable Obama mis-step has been on healthcare reform. “He f***ed it up. I don’t know how because the country wanted it. We’ll never see it happen.” As for his wider vision: “Maybe he doesn’t have one, not to imply he is a fraud. He loves quoting Lincoln and there’s a great Lincoln quote from a letter he wrote to one of his generals in the South after the Civil War. ‘I am President of the United States. I have full overall power and never forget it, because I will exercise it’. That’s what Obama needs — a bit of Lincoln’s chill.” Has he met Obama? “No,” he says quietly, “I’ve had my time with presidents.” Vidal raises his fingers to signify a gun and mutters: “Bang bang.” He is referring to the possibility of Obama being assassinated. “Just a mysterious lone gunman lurking in the shadows of the capital,” he says in a wry, dreamy way.

Vidal now believes, as he did originally, Clinton would be the better president. “Hillary knows more about the world and what to do with the generals. History has proven when the girls get involved, they’re good at it. Elizabeth I knew Raleigh would be a good man to give a ship to.”The Republicans will win the next election, Vidal believes; though for him there is little difference between the parties. “Remember the coup d’etat of 2000 when the Supreme Court fixed the selection, not election, of the stupidest man in the country, Mr Bush.”

Vidal of course is channeling memories of JFK; Friedman channels Rabin: Pelosi channels Milk: others channel Seven Days In May military coups. But it is all for naught. They were fools. They were bamboozled by a master con man who only cares about himself, “his selfishness and careerism” and his narcissistic self-advancement.

* * * * *

Guns at Obama protest rallies are also a big point among Obama enablers, but they don’t like to discuss this when the gunman is African-American – that would not fit the narrative. Black on black crime would not work in this “world historical” scenario. That gun-owners and gun rights activists like to walk about with guns does not fit into the “world historical” scenario either.

There are surely real threats against the life of Obama. There are always unsubstantiated rumors that the Secret Service receives trillions of threats more against Obama than anyone else ever (Bush received 3,000 death threats a year; regarding Obama- other than the laughable Tennessee “plot” and the Somalia based al-Shabaab “plot” there is nothing). Oh, and a “pastor” prayed for Obama’s death and hates Obama, but that is hardly a death threat more like a death wish.

The “death threats” against Obama are yet another publicity stunt staged and circulated by Obama supporters.

Obama supporters don’t want to take responsibility for their gullibility and their historical mistake in siding with the flim-flam confidence man from Chicago. These irresponsible Obama supporters, instead of owning up and apologizing for this historic horror which they have inflicted on America and the world, create plots and myths to justify their love.

The “death threats” against Obama are the last resort of people who refuse to accept they have been swindled and in turn they have swindled America. So they try to swindle us again with concocted plots.

The non-existent “death threats” against Obama come from his supporters because they have nothing left except the reality of Obama as he drives the nation and the once proud Democratic Party further and further into the abyss.


284 thoughts on “The Obama Death Threat Plots; The Who And Why Behind Them

  1. I always felt that the early rumors about potential death threats – during the campaign were meant to give Obama a Secret Service early on (especially as Hillary had it. He always loved the accouterments of the job.

  2. Oh my god!!!!! it was a juvenile…..perhaps a kid who got fed up with “THE ZERO”….one who told his parents to vote for the MESS-ZERO

  3. Wow, Admin. Another TKO.

    “By creating non-existent “death threats” against Obama, his former and current supporters want to justify in their minds that they were not wrong about their Mess-iah Obama.”


    It’s the “everybody is just plain stupid but us” syndrome. They play high-school games, in order to try to change bambi’s dismal message, and think nobody will catch on.

  4. Oh yes!!!! THE BOTS wil do anything…even bltiz the ads on the internet..all freebies by the courtseys of the CEOs/owners:

    OBAMA asks MUMs to go back to school
    OBAMA supports refinance
    OBAMAsuports …asks…tellss etc etc etc..

    how about:

    OBAMA asks to go drown yourself!
    OBAMA tells you to go potty
    OBAMA urges yo to smoke POT
    OBAMA advices yout to skip school and plaigarise your homework


    The dollar’s value plunged Tuesday, while gold simultaneously hit a record high ($1,045 per ounce).


    So, o savvy Big Pinkers, is this a good time to dig out some old gold wedding bands and sell them?

    And how is a good way to get a good price?

  6. frankly I was always worried about BC…with all the enemies and the intensity of hate he had to deal with and with our country’s history I was thankful no harm ever came to Bill and he survived two terms…

    …during the primaries when the pundits were upping the ante on racism and the threats against O, I remember writing to a few pundits and saying if anyone had to worry about physical threat is was Hillary with the way the thugs were threatening riots and acting…

    Black Panthers carrying guns at voting places…black politicians being threatened for supporting Hillary…and then as admin says, the MSM ginning up that Hillary was suggesting assassination…all one had to do was look at any so called progressive website’s comments to see that if anyone was in danger, it was hillary, not O…


    Shorttermer…I recall hearing AnnaBelle’s name and perhaps read her elsewhere but never on that site…anyway she explained very complicated and tricky info in an easy way to understand…kudos to her…


    re: beck, cavuto, hannity…or any O opposition for that matter…I do not care who is in charge…our country is founded on free speech…we still have free will and our independence and opposition is HEALTHY…hearing and seeing things in different perspectives is what allows for and encourages critical thinking…

    what do the Dimocrats mentioned want? a bunch of Zombies? ‘yes’ people, a__kissers – a following that never has an original thought? no thanks…I also have evolved into an independent…a Clinton independent…

    …the MSM and dimocrats are so blind to the democrats that are off the reservation…they will never see it coming until it is too late…

    …and it is ironic when one finds oneself agreeing more with the opposition side these days…

    …actually, in some ways, I think it is because what was once our side is so boxed in…that few of them are allowed to think for themselves anymore…and just hearing something other than the constricted, repeated dogma of the current dims…especially when so many of them know they are lying…well, the opposition sounds down right refreshing and often like they are the ones exhibiting common sense…I have grown to find Cavuto endearing…and can now tolerate Beck…

    we need a complete breakout from what we have…that is what is underlying the disappointment of the O true believers…they thought O was going to be the anti-clinton…all new people in place – immediate attention to gay issues – stop the bank and wall st corruption – and really give us ‘change and hope’…la de da…

    INSTEAD…O recruited many Clinton people…named Hillary is SOS – tries to place nice with BC……KEPT the worst of BUSH’s policies…has thrown the gays under the bus…is sleeping with the wall st crooks…and has sold us out to the dreaded corporations — all of them…the drug and insurance co…the energy bill is a scam…

    the banks are continuing to screw us (hello, Mr Delaware credit card man) the homes are continuing to be acquired by the banks as assets and people thrown out on the streets – and jobs won’t be created until they can be equated with job creation results at mid term election time…

    …corruption at its best…deceptive and cunning…in sheep’s clothing…

  7. Dictators use high emotions to control and direct people. O has used emotion, for him, and against HRC, from day one. That is one of the few things he has managed to do from day one.

  8. Beck, had a good show today.

    Great article Admin, I hadn’t thought of that, of coarse when Kennedy was killed all his plans were put thru easily as the nation was in mournin for the President. This way they can get their agenda done and the one that O has been doing (a continuation of Bush polices) will not.

  9. CBO: Budget deficit hit record 1.4 TRILLION in 2009 (it has TRIPILED UNDER O )

    WASHINGTON — The federal budget deficit tripled to a record $1.4 trillion for the 2009 fiscal year that ended last week, congressional analysts said Wednesday.

    The Congressional Budget Office estimate, while expected, is bad news for the White House and its allies in Congress as they press ahead with health care overhaul legislation that could cost $900 billion over the next decade.

    The unprecedented flood of red ink flows from several factors, including a big drop in tax revenues due to the recession, $245 billion in emergency spending on the Wall Street bailout and the takeover of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Then there is almost $200 billion in costs from President Barack Obama’s economic stimulus bill, as well as increases in programs such as unemployment benefits and food stamps.

    The previous record deficit was $459 billion and was set just last year.

    The Obama health plan would be “paid for” with new revenues and curbs in spending. But the overhaul effort would eat up tax increases and spending cuts that could be used to bring the deficit down.

    Obama has attributed the nation’s dismal fiscal situation to the financial and economic crises he inherited. White House Budget Director Peter Orzsag is overseeing the administration’s efforts to tackle the soaring deficit next year.

    The huge deficits have raised worries about the willingness of foreigners to keep purchasing Treasury debt. The administration promises that once the recession is over and the financial system is stabilized, it will move forcefully to get the deficits under control.

    Economists worry that the deficits could place upward pressure on interest rates in future years as the government has to offer higher rates to attract investors

    Republicans pounced on the bad news.

    “This new CBO data makes it clear that our children and grandchildren will end up buried under a mountain of debt if we continue taxing, spending and borrowing at these dangerous levels,” House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said. “How many alarm bells have to be set off before Washington Democrats get serious about tackling dangerous budget deficits?”


    the damage O has done in less than one year – he will break our country

  10. Well I am really going to spoil myself this weekend. Snow is in the forecast and I just picked up “Clinton’s Tapes.”

    I can’t wait to start reading. 🙂

  11. admin said:
    During the primaries Hillary was targeted by Obama supporters as some sort of Obama assasin because she discussed Robert Kennedy’s assasination as the sort of unexpected event that can derail expectations.


    Mm, might check this. Hillary’s explanation was that she was pointing out that the primary was still being contested as late as June. She was citing RFK’s assassination as a DATE we all remember, a date in June.

    That’s quite different from holding out for some unexpected derailing event.

  12. This death threat thing has even spilled over at the UN when dictators said something about JFK and Obama/assassination. Could it be that they want to make Obama a martyr for their cause? Gee, I wonder what he thinks about that?

  13. Look at this:

    The Obamas hung this piece of art in the WH:

    Yep, you can’t stuff like this up.

    and the article:

  14. I can’t believe it Charlie Gibson had a whole story about Michelle’s slavery background with a white person in it. I guess this to counteract the video that is going round about her not wanting Obama to kiss any white woman.

  15. New White House helicopter could cost triple: lawmaker

    Wed Oct 7, 2009
    By Andrea Shalal-Esa

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Pentagon’s planned replacement for the canceled Lockheed Martin Corp VH-71 presidential helicopter would offer nearly the same capabilities, but could cost three times more and take longer to deliver, a New York lawmaker said on Wednesday.

    Starting from scratch with a new program would delay fielding of the new helicopters until 2024, seven years after the existing helicopters reach the end of their service life, said Rep. Maurice Hinchey, a Democrat from the state where Lockheed was building the new helicopters.

    The gap means the Pentagon would have to pay about $1.2 billion in needed upgrades to the current fleet of helicopters, money that could be saved if the department reversed its decision to cancel the Lockheed helicopter, he said.

    A document approved by the Pentagon’s Joint Requirements Oversight Council, Hinchey said, endorsed essentially the same capabilities identified for the Lockheed helicopter. The document also restated the same gaps in the current fleet that led to the choice of the Lockheed helicopter.

    “The Pentagon’s plan is beyond illogical,” Hinchey said.

    “It delays the delivery of a new presidential helicopter fleet until 2024 and wastes as much as $15 billion in taxpayer money on the construction of a new presidential program that will be nearly identical to the VH-71A program that’s been in development for more than four years and is close to delivering a set of new helicopters to the White House,” he said.

    Hinchey urged Congress to reverse the Pentagon’s decision to cut the VH-71 program.

    The House approved $485.2 million in the fiscal 2010 defense appropriations bill to continue funding development of the Lockheed helicopter, but the Senate version of the bill does not include such money. House and Senate negotiators meet next week to reconcile differences between the two versions.

    The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service earlier this year said internal Navy documents estimated the new helicopter program would cost $15 billion to $22 billion when factoring in $4 billion already spent on the canceled program and $1.2 billion to extend the service life of the existing helicopters.

  16. Oct 6 2009, 4:11 pm by Chris Good

    Democrat Russ Feingold Criticizes White House Over “Czars”

    Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) has organized a Senate Judiciary Constitution Subcommittee hearing on the administration’s “czars”–a topic that has drawn a lot of criticism in conservative sectors. Feingold previously sent a letter to the White House seeking details on the czars, and was rebuffed. As a liberal Democrat, Feingold isn’t a usual suspect for czar concern–a lot of the czar-related worry has been brought to prominence by Glenn Beck–but, while he reasons there’s fewer than 10 people among those popularly referred to as “czars” who actually hold any kind of special position in the administration, in his opening statement today he criticized how the White House has handled matters of czar concern:

    “The White House decided not to accept my invitation to send a witness to this hearing to explain its position on the constitutional issues we will address today. That’s unfortunate. It’s also a bit ironic since one of the concerns that has been raised about these officials is that they will thwart congressional oversight of the Executive Branch.

    The White House seems to want to fight the attacks against it for having too many ‘czars’ on a political level rather than a substantive level. I don’t think that’s the right approach. If there are good answers to the questions that have been raised, why not give them instead of attacking the motives or good faith of those who have raised questions?”

  17. bambi’s going ‘a-travelin’ again…

    Obama to make Asian debut tour next month: White House

  18. Barney Frank injects Holocaust into immigration debate

    October 7, 2009

    Stick with it or you’ll miss him explaining that dismantling Israeli settlements won’t do anything to win Hamas over, which is precisely why Israel should go ahead and dismantle them. Or something.

  19. JanH, I have only read a couple of chapters in the “Clinton Tapes”, it appears to be all positive so far. This guy was Bill’s college roomate and Bill asked him to chronicle the daily events of his Presidency for historical reasons. The author does comment on his take, but remember the guy is Bill’s friend as well as Hillary’s. They were roomies when Bill met Hillary so he knows of their early romance. It appears to be a good book a positive one at that. It shows just how smart Bill really is and how he is so above the pettiness of the senate and the congress.

    If you remember that nasty superdelegate from Oklahoma Boren, was is apparently a real jerk even in 1993. It also talks about Dole being a complete asshole as well as Newt, President Carter, Ted Kennedy, Reno. We now know all these folks are petty, pompous,misognistic assholes.

    I wonder if this was the book that Bill was talking about during the primary.

  20. I hope this bc thing makes headway. I think they are now saying that the date for the trial is set which is jan.26th, but they think the judge is getting scared. He’s probably getting threatened. I hope some folks that are interested in this can somehow protect him.

  21. WOW admin! Your post is superb.

    Necrophilia narcissim.

    This passage is especially wonderful;

    “Obama opponents do indeed seek to send Obama and his B.O.T.s back to the filthy depths of Lake Michigan where they came from but only in a political sense. It is not only Obama but the lying stench which is his entire deceptive message and sickening coalition which must be destroyed, but only in a political sense. Our attacks on Obama are political, not physical.”
    BTW – I audited a journalism class the other day at the local college and the professor quoted this from a comment Lincoln once made about a letter he had written; “If I had had more time, this letter would have been shorter.”
    Evidently BO never learned Lincoln was pro-brevity and favored conciseness.

  22. Thanks confloyd,

    It’s about time we got some positive spin on the Clintons instead of all the lies out there.

  23. If this book proves to be all positive about Bill and Hillary, it will put into question why Mathews who had its author on Hardball alluded that their maybe bad stuff about Bill in there??

  24. We mentioned Taylor Branch, the author of The Clinton Tapes, back in May 2007 (and several other times).

    Taylor Branch wrote the very good biography (in three big books) on Martin Luther King, Jr.

    Taylor Branch is one of the good guys who defended Hillary when Van Natta wrote that garbage book about her.

    It sounds like the Branch book on Clinton will be a must read and we would love to hear the full tapes someday.

  25. admin: When did this new book come out?? I can’t find out. I thought it was a new book.

    I just loved the part about Boren, I think at one this guy was over the DNC for a little while. He jumped on the Obama wagon early. I remember seeing him during the primary saying awful things about Hillary.I get mad just remembering it.

  26. I know what all this Bill hate is by the other politicians is, they are all jealous because he is sooo smart. He is and this book shows it.

  27. # JanH Says:
    October 7th, 2009 at 1:17 pm

    Mrs. Smith Says:

    October 7th, 2009 at 12:28 pm

    Mindboggling article. I am very impressed with Israel’s ability to uncover some of this strategic information, especially that of Russia/Iran. Well done.


    FWIW- I don’t agree with Friedman’s analysis 100%- He has the basics down right and the addition of Russia (which has to have ZBig Brzezinski jumping for Joy at the prospect of Russia’s self-inclusion leading to a war w/the US)

    Above all, Russia is by far the most skilled player in this Global chess game. Historically they have been there before and know what they are doing.


    “Whether this expertise came from former employees of the Russian nuclear establishment now looking for work, Russian officials assigned to Iran or unemployed scientists sent to Iran by the Russians is immaterial. Friedman says : “The Israelis — and the Obama administration — must hold the Russians responsible for the current state of Iran’s weapons program, and by extension, Moscow bears responsibility for any actions that Israel or the United States might take to solve the problem.”


    Yes, that is, if the Russians intentional involvement was to see Iran ultimately with nuclear weapons. I don’t believe that is their intent. What say, the Russians felt it better to be involved and supervising Iran’s progress or “non-progress” depending on how long the Russian scientists could bamboozle Ahmadinejad?


    “The Russian leadership appears to be playing “good cop, bad cop” on the matter, and the credibility of anything they say on Iran has little weight in Washington.”


    Here is where I differ with Friedman. He makes the assumption The Russians are deliberately helping Iran acquire nuclear weapons… He does and writes this without providing a shred of proof to back his assumption. I have not seen or heard any statements made by the Russians they want Iran to be a nuclear power. And this is where I believe he goes off the track.


    “Unless the two leaks together are completely bogus, and we doubt that, the United States and Israel are leaking information already well known to the Iranians. They are telling Tehran that its deception campaign has been penetrated, and by extension are telling it that it faces military action — particularly if massive sanctions are impractical because of more Russian obstruction.”

    I agree with his statement the leaks are genuine and have merit.

    Here Friedman goes off the track again-

    When has Obama ever supported Israel?

    How can Friedman assume the US has talked with Israel when there has been no mention of talks anywhere in news reports stating the US is backing Israel all the way on this?.. In fact, our discussions here have been about Obama’s lack of support to Israel.


    “It is not clear to us that the Russians or Iranians are getting the message yet. They have convinced themselves that Obama is unlikely to act because he is weak at home and already has too many issues to juggle. This is a case where a reputation for being conciliatory actually increases the chances for war. But the leaks this weekend have strikingly limited the options and timelines of the United States and Israel. They also have put the spotlight on Obama at a time when he already is struggling with health care and Afghanistan.
    History is rarely considerate of presidential plans, and in this case, the leaks have started to force Obama’s hand.”


    Here again, Friedman assumes what has been our traditional foreign policy with Israel is Obama’s policy; when he leaves out the prospect that Obama may dally too long in making a decision if Israel is threatened, forcing Israel to initially act on it’s own.

    I feel Obama needs to be carefully watched and it would be very sad for America’s prestige if Russia is seen as the new Super-Power who has taken over the role of global security preventing Iran
    from possessing weapons that would cause generations of harm in the hands of an insane dictator.

  28. admin Says:
    October 7th, 2009 at 8:10 pm

    We mentioned Taylor Branch, the author of The Clinton Tapes, back in May 2007 (and several other times).


    admin- youtube has quite a few short clips to get the flavor of what TB is like; if you enter his name and The Clinton Tapes in the youtube search box. You will find a small cadre of clips.

    I liked him very much after hearing him on the videos. He seems like an honest guy in awe of Bill Clinton’s abilities… 🙂

  29. confloyd Says:

    October 7th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
    admin: When did this new book come out?? I can’t find out. I thought it was a new book.

    You can find it on It has been out for a few weeks (I think), maybe longer.

  30. Speaking of the Iranians, Russians and the Nukes, I found this quiet interesting. I wonder who is leaking/feeding info to the press.

  31. Opps, I forgot to post it. LOL! Oldtimers kicking in!

    TEHRAN, Iran – The disappearance of an Iranian nuclear scientist on a pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia in June is raising questions about whether he defected and gave the West information on Iran’s nuclear program.

    Iran’s foreign minister on Wednesday accused the United States of involvement in the disappearance of Shahram Amiri, who reportedly worked at a university linked to the elite Revolutionary Guard military corps.

    In a sign of the sensitivities surrounding Amiri, Iranian officials have not even publicly identified Amiri as a nuclear scientist, referring to him only as an Iranian citizen. Amiri’s wife has said he was researching medical uses of nuclear technology at a university and was not involved in the broader nuclear program.

    Iran’s foreign minister took the unusual step of complaining to the head of the United Nations last week about the disappearance, at the same time raising the case of a former defense minister who vanished in Turkey in 2007, also believed by many to have defected.

    Amiri vanished several months before the September revelation of a uranium enrichment facility near the city of Qom, which the United States and its allies accuse Iran of building secretly. The timing has led experts to question whether Amiri may have given the West information on it or other parts of Iran’s nuclear program.

    The discovery of that facility was a coup for Western intelligence. Iran denied trying to hide the site, insisting it was not yet required to declare it to the U.N. nuclear watchdog. Still, it was put on the defensive as it entered landmark nuclear negotiations with the U.S. and other world powers last week, talks that have somewhat eased rising tensions between the two sides.

    U.S. officials have said multiple streams of intelligence — particularly spy satellites — were used to reveal the Qom site and its function, but they have not specified whether the sources included Iranians on the ground.

    The United States and its allies accuse Iran of secretly seeking to develop nuclear weapons, a claim Iran denies, saying its program is intended only to produce electricity.

    Little is known about Amiri, and his fate remains a mystery after more than four months.

    Iran has asked Saudi Arabia for information on his whereabouts but has received no reply, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hasan Qashqavi said earlier this week. Amiri’s relatives have demonstrated several times outside the Saudi Embassy in Tehran demanding information.

    The Iranians “may be concerned that the Americans were involved in luring him away,” said Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-born analyst based for the Middle East think tank, meepas. He raised the possibility Amiri was willingly offering information to the West, despite Iranian claims he was arrested in Saudi Arabia.

    “There’s the possibility he was taken away in a limousine rather than being shoved in the back of a car, meaning that he could have been a walk-in,” said Javedanfar, who is based in Israel.

    Amiri worked as a researcher at Tehran’s Malek Ashtar University, according to Iran’s state-run English language channel Press TV. The university has been cited by the U.N. in the past as a nuclear research site and is widely thought to be run by the Revolutionary Guard.

    One Iranian news Web site claimed Amiri had worked at the Qom facility and had defected in Saudi Arabia. The Web site, Jahannews, which is connected to Iranian conservatives, gave no source for the report.

    Amiri traveled to Saudi Arabia on May 31 for Omra, an Islamic pilgrimage to Mecca, his wife told the unofficial news agency ISNA. The last she heard from him was on June 3, when he called her from the holy city of Medina.

    She said he told her that during his arrival in Saudi Arabia, he had been questioned extensively by police at the airport — “more than any other passenger,” according to ISNA, which did not give the wife’s name.

    Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki raised the level of interest Wednesday, saying that Amiri had been arrested and accused the United States of a role.

    “We’ve obtained documents about U.S. involvement over Shahram Amiri’s disappearance,” Mottaki said, according to the semiofficial Fars news agency.

    “We hold Saudi Arabia responsible for Shahram Amiri’s situation and consider the U.S. to be involved in his arrest,” Mottaki said, quoted by the official IRNA news agency. “We regard Saudi government as responsible for Amiri’s condition and according to some documents available for us, we consider that the US is responsible for his detention.”

    ISNA, an Iranian student news agency, said Mottaki addressed reports that Amiri was on the staff of Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, saying “these are speculations discussed by western media and we pursue his case as an Iranian national.”

    There was no immediate comment from Saudi officials. In Washington, State Department spokesman Ian C. Kelly said he had no information about the matter. “The case is not familiar to us,” Kelly said.

    The Arab newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat, which is owned by Saudi businessmen, reported last week that Mottaki made a formal complaint to U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon about the disappearances of Amiri and several other Iranians in recent years, some of whom it feared may have provided nuclear information to the West. Qashqavi this week denied the complaint made any mention of the nuclear issue.

    In New York, U.N. spokeswoman Michele Montas said “the issue was raised at a tete-a-tete meeting” between Ban and Mottaki and she had no further details.

    Also on the list Mottaki handed over was Ali Reza Asghari, a retired general in the elite Revolutionary Guard and a former deputy defense minister, who disappeared during a private visit to Turkey in December 2007. Iran accused Western intelligence services at the time of possibly kidnapping the official, though other reports have said he may have defected.

    Another Iranian on the list was a man identified only by his last name, Ardebili, who was reportedly arrested in the Caucasus nation of Georgia recently. Qashqavi said Monday that Ardebili was a businessman and accused Georgian authorities of arresting him and handing him over to the United States. Asharq Al-Awsat identified him as a nuclear scientist, but gave not sourcing for the claim. A Georgian government spokesman in Tbilisi refused to comment.

  32. “The Israelis — and the Obama administration — must hold the Russians responsible for the current state of Iran’s weapons program”


    Well one out of two isn’t bad. I trust the Israelis to hold Russia accountable. I trust bambi to sleep through it.


    Great analysis, Mrs. Smith.

  33. IMO, the “Tea Parties” and Town Hall meetings were perceived by some to be racist….(see Jimmy Carter-I think Bill’s remarks were misinterpreted as he simply started some who protested were racists, but did not attribute the debate in and of itself to racism). In turn, MSM tried to portray the events as hateful and bordering on violent ….I think the White House used this as a political tool to try to portray some of these people as prone to violence and particularly towards an African American president. I don’t think that wa the case at all. Obama has not faced the unmitigated hatred that Bill and Hillary have for over the past 16 yrs….the attacks they faced were some of the most hateful politics we have ever seen. Obama’s critics, by and large, are simply outraged at his policies, but he is still well liked by a majority of Americans.

  34. JanH-

    “Well one out of two isn’t bad. I trust the Israelis to hold Russia accountable. I trust bambi to sleep through it.”


    Yes,thats just the way I see it. When Bibi went to Russia on Sept 7, is when he and the Russians aligned together. Obama and the US is left out of the loop and it’s him that will be held accountable for another Olympic failure marking his presidency.

  35. “Obama has not faced the unmitigated hatred that Bill and Hillary have for over the past 16 yrs….the attacks they faced were some of the most hateful politics we have ever seen.”


    Yes they were. And the fact that bambi and his misfits capitilized on this “hatred” is, to put it simply, both criminal and disgusting.

    I really their behaviors come back to haunt them. There is only so long that they can use reverse discrimination and get away with it.

  36. TB a real person, telling his personnel feelings, and no teleprompter. He comes through so real, honest, and no fake.

  37. Interesting article on the dollar

    Dollars by the Barrel
    Washington, not Riyadh, threatens the dollar’s stability.

    By Kevin Williamson

    The specter of “petrodollar warfare” is back in the news after an apparently exaggerated — possibly false — report by Robert Fisk, of London’s Independent, alleging that various Gulf oil emirates, the Chinese, the British, the Japanese, the French, and the Russians are conspiring to end the use of the dollar as the pricing unit in the world’s petroleum markets. Mr. Fisk, the Independent’s Mideast correspondent, is reflexively anti-American; he is also an occasionally sloppy reporter (and a buffoon). But he has, accidentally, performed a public service by inviting a closer look at the story he wishes to tell.

    There is no way to know with certainty whether Mr. Fisk’s story is false (the Saudis and the Russians, the world’s two largest oil exporters, say it is), and these “dumping the dollar” stories turn up about once a year. One of the more amusing examples was Tehran’s dramatic September announcement, also referenced by Mr. Fisk, that it would no longer hold U.S. dollars in its foreign-currency reserves. But Iran does not have a particularly large reserve stockpile of U.S. dollars, and the country has relatively little practical use for greenbacks, being the subject of an embargo that rather hinders its trading relationship with the United States. (Iran also routinely depletes its “reserves,” spending large chunks of them on gasoline, which the oil-rich nation cannot quite manage to produce.)

    But let’s undertake a thought experiment and assume that Mr. Fisk’s journalism is reliable: Imagine that our dear friends, doughty allies, and generous well-wishers in Riyadh have rented out Dr. Evil’s subterranean lair and convened a S.P.E.C.T.R.E.-type meeting with the Gulf Arabs, the Kremlin, the ChiComs, the fickle French, perfidious Albion, and the scheming Japanese, the purpose of which is to enact a technical pricing change in the world’s oil markets, such that the price of a barrel of crude would be expressed not in dollars but in euros, yen, a “basket of currencies,” or the proposed unified currency to be adopted by the Gulf Cooperation Council. This would be a remarkably trivial agenda to put before such an august gathering, because the net effect of such a change would be something indistinguishable from nothing.

    The petrodollar narrative holds that demand for U.S. currency in the world oil markets sustains the value of the dollar, and that a change in those markets would have devastating effects on the American economy. The petrodollar thesis is tied into various conspiracy theories that flourish with Cambrian vitality on the Internet: Saddam Hussein’s decision to trade oil in euros was the “real reason” the U.S. invaded Iraq; it’s the “real reason” we’re at odds with Iran; it’s the “real reason” behind our various beefs with Hugo Chávez. This is fanciful, but it is a story that some people want to believe, for ideological reasons, so they believe it: Iran’s decision to open up a euro-denominated oil exchange in 2006 was described by one economist as “the ultimate ‘nuclear’ weapon that can swiftly destroy the financial system underpinning the American Empire.” It turned out to be something less than that. The language — “American Empire” and all that — is indicative of the cast of mind at play here.

    What all these petrodollar-warfare stories neglect to account for adequately is that the oil market is not the only global market. There also exists a very large and robust trade in currencies. There is no rule or treaty that requires that the dollar be the go-to currency for the world’s petroleum markets. The dollar is used in those markets because the Saudis and the Russians don’t want to get paid in Kenyan shillings or Indian rupees or Chinese yuan (because they are not fools) or even in a relatively solid currency such as the Japanese yen. If the oil exporters decide they want to hold euros instead of dollars, there is nothing in the world stopping them from doing that right now: It takes one-thousandth of a second to turn dollars into euros in the FX market, and the cost of doing so is negligible. (Smart guys turn a profit on it.) OPEC already has a de facto euro trade in oil, and if dollars or euros aren’t your thing there exist all manner of contracts that allow you to trade crude in the currency of your choice: Just bebop on down to the Tokyo Commodities Exchange and grab yourself some yen-denominated crude contracts.

    The dollar is like any other commodity in that its price reflects the interaction of supply and demand. If you have a price tag on a barrel of oil that reads $70, and you replace that price tag with one reading €50 or ₤45, that does not really have much effect on the supply and demand for dollars. If oil is priced in dollars, Japanese buyers go to the FX market at the beginning of the day and trade yen for the dollars they need, and then trade whatever dollars they’re left holding back into yen, or euros, or Icelandic króna, Mexican pesos — whatever they want. If oil is priced in yen or euros, dollar-holders go into the FX markets and get whatever they need. (And they don’t even necessarily have to buy dollars at all: If a Frenchman wants to buy some Norwegian oil, he can trade euros for kroner, even if the price is advertised in dollars.)

    What matters, at the end of the trading day, is how many dollars people want to hold vs. how many yen or euros or króna or pork-belly contracts or pesos. It’s all fungible. The dollar-pricing of oil surely has a marginal effect on demand for dollars, but it is probably an infinitesimally small one. And commodities can be priced in more than one currency at once: Gold is priced in every major currency, and that fact has no impact on the price of gold or on the currencies in which gold is priced.

    There is nothing that requires oil exporters to hold dollars in their reserves: Iran exports lots of oil and holds few dollars. America’s largest foreign oil supplier, Canada, holds a fair number of dollars because the United States is its largest trading partner. Canada needs U.S. dollars to buy U.S. stuff, and Canadian oil exports to the United States are a handy source of those. But if Canada wanted to get paid for its oil in euros, it would still need U.S. dollars to buy U.S. stuff, and that is why the “petrodollar” scare is concentrated silliness. Likewise, China holds lots of dollars in its foreign reserves not because oil is priced in dollars but because doing so depresses the value of the yuan and benefits China’s exporters.

    Which is not to say that the dollar is not courting trouble. Supply and demand are real, and we’re monkeying around with the supply side of the equation in a dangerous way, printing money to fund dodgy stimulus spending, corporate bailouts, and the rest of Congress’s shenanigans. Instead of getting ahead of our looming entitlement crisis, we’re beclowning ourselves by flirting with another gigantic entitlement commitment in the form of health-care “reform.” Beijing probably thinks we’re going to pay for that by printing dollars and thereby devaluing our currency. They’re probably right.

    The threat to the dollar isn’t from decisions taken at secret meetings in Riyadh, but from those debated at public meetings in Washington. Who needs an exotic conspiracy when you’ve got home-grown stupidity?

  38. jbstonesfan Says:

    October 7th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
    IMO, the “Tea Parties” and Town Hall meetings were perceived by some to be racist….(see Jimmy Carter-I think Bill’s remarks were misinterpreted as he simply started some who protested were racists, but did not attribute the debate in and of itself to racism).

    I will always disagree with you here. He said it, BC and it did not bode well for him, especially coming after the Carter remarks. The FUD and co. always getting well known people to come out of the woodwork to say something …perfect timing…they must really have something on BC.

  39. admin Says:

    October 7th, 2009 at 10:19 pm
    Taylor Branch, discusses Hillary advice on special prosectuor.

    I’m not a lawyer but I said the same thing when it happened and I still can not understand his reasoning. He just must of thought he was smarter, well he wasn’t was he!

  40. admin Says:

    October 7th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
    Mrs. Smith, thanks for the information about the Taylor Branch clips.

    Interesting that the WH cats name was Socks…

  41. NewMexicoFan Says:

    October 7th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
    TB a real person, telling his personnel feelings, and no teleprompter. He comes through so real, honest, and no fake.

    Wrinkled shirt and all….


    October 07, 2009
    Ayers admits writing Dreams
    By James Simpson

    Last Friday we posted an article on these pages asserting Bill Ayers’ authorship of President Barack Obama’s ‘Dreams From My Father,’ based on claims made by Obama biographer Christopher Andersen. It is possible that we have now gotten direct confirmation of this from Bill Ayers himself.

    Anne Leary of Back Yard Conservative was passing through Washington, DC’s Reagan National Airport yesterday, and was surprised to come across Bill Ayers at Starbucks: “scruffy, thinning beard, dippy earring, and the wire rims, heading to order.”

    She struck up a conversation with him and snapped the accompanying photo. (I interviewed Anne about it, and thank her for permission to run the photo she took.)

    Ayers was in Washington, he told her, for a conference on education.

    “That’s what I do, education,” he said. “You shouldn’t believe everything you hear about me… You know nothing about me.”

    To which she responded, “I said, I know plenty–I’m from Chicago, a conservative blogger, and I’ll post this.”

    I bet his heart skipped a beat on that one.

    But he didn’t scowl, and didn’t run off as he has been known to do. Instead, unprompted, he blurted out: “I wrote ‘Dreams From My Father… Michelle asked me to.” Then he added “And if you can prove it we can split the royalties.”

    Anne responded, “Stop pulling my leg!”

    But he repeated insistently, “I wrote it, the wording was similar [to Ayers’ other writing.]”

    Anne responded, “I believe you probably heavily edited it.”

    Ayers stated firmly, “I wrote it.”

    Anne ended the conversation by saying “why would I believe you? You’re a liar.”

    Good for her. But we are left to wonder. Despite her parting shot, Anne was convinced Ayers was in earnest. He was making a public statement. He wanted this news out there.

    Was he, as she had asked, pulling our collective legs? Other sources report rumors that Ayers is very upset both about not getting any credit for helping Obama on ‘Dreams,’ and may also be put off by being summarily thrown under the bus along with Rev. Wright and everyone else who becomes an inconvenience to this President.

    My understanding of communists is that most would know better and keep their mouths shut. But Ayers is a bit different. He is, as he says, a “small ‘c’ communist,” but he is also, in a certain, slimy way, an entrepreneur, as we explained in Monday’s post. (Apologies in advance to entrepreneurs everywhere.) He grew up a very rich kid, used to getting everything he wanted. Even as an adult his career has relied on a hand up from his wealthy father. His past statements and radical activities also mark him as a megalomaniac. In youth he drew attention to himself by blowing things up. As an adult “educator” he merely attempts to subvert children. But that doesn’t seem to be going so well.

    He is under a lot of pressure, too. Ayers and his horrid wife Bernardine Dohrn are believed to have planned and executed the San Francisco Park Police Station bombing in 1970 that killed police sergeant Brian V. McDonnell and wounded several others. Efforts to bring them to justice have been underway for some time, as brought to light this past March in a National Press Club conference put on by Cliff Kincaid of America’s Survival.

    Cliff’s guests included Larry Grathwohl, the FBI’s undercover agent who penetrated Ayers’ Weather Underground and produced this stunning testimony about Ayers’ plan to massacre 25 million Americans, retired S.F. policeman James Pera, first on the scene at the bombing, and veteran researcher Trevor Loudon.

    Now, a recent exposé by San Francisco reporter Peter Jamison has revealed additional evidence, including testimony from other Weather Underground members, that Dohrn planted the bomb that killed Sgt. McDonnell.

    Maybe in his overstressed state Bill’s megalomania has just gotten the better of him.

  43. I agree Gontox that he should have come up with a better answer….He knew King would bring this up(King loves anti-Israeli Carter) and Bill could have answered it without getting into racial politics. It was the very same trick that caused him to hurt Hillary in SC.

  44. What a bloody double standard. The U.N. should just lock it’s doors and go home. Either that or move their homebase to Libya and take bambi with them.

    UN Security Council to Discuss Gaza Report Next Week

    By Margaret Besheer
    United Nations
    08 October 2009

    A divided U.N. Security Council will meet next week at the request of Arab countries to discuss a U.N. report on war crimes committed by both Palestinian militants and Israel’s army during last December’s conflict in the Gaza Strip.

    The Security Council’s monthly meeting on the Middle East was scheduled for October 20, but after a request from council member Libya that some western diplomat’s characterized as a bit of a “surprise”, the 15-member body agreed in closed consultations Wednesday to move up its session to October 14.

    A scheduling change is not usually significant, but this one comes just days after the Human Rights Council, the U.N. organ that commissioned document, called the Goldstone Report, decided Friday to postpone action on the report until March 2010. Some analysts said that was intended to give time for peace talks to be relaunched.

    But in the West Bank and Gaza the postponement created an uproar, with days of angry protests and some questioning the leadership of President Mahmoud Abbas. Some diplomats in New York speculated that those events were at least partly responsible for the Arab call to quickly put the report before the Security Council for debate.

    The report, released last month by an independent international fact-finding mission headed by South African jurist Richard Goldstone, accused Israel’s military and Palestinian armed groups of committing war crimes during Israel’s three-week long offensive against Hamas militants in Gaza that began December 27. More than 1,300 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed in the conflict.

    But the division in the council over the report is clear. U.S. Deputy Ambassador Alejandro Wolff told reporters that the Goldstone report is not the focus of next week’s meeting. “This issue is not before the Security Council. We have advanced the monthly debate on the Middle East from October 20th to October 14th,” he said.

    Wolff reiterated the United States’ position on the commission’s mandate, calling it “flawed, one-sided,” and “unacceptable” and added that the right venue for the report to be discussed is at the Human Rights Council in Geneva.

    But Arab ambassadors said they would make the report the focus of the debate and would call their supporters from Arab nations and the Non-Aligned Movement to attend the session. Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riyad Al-Maliki is also expected to attend.

  45. And again the U.N. proves how biased and useless it really has become…

    UN data show Afghan vote discrepancies –
    Wed Oct 7, 2009

    WASHINGTON, Oct 7 (Reuters) – Confidential United Nations data on Afghanistan’s disputed presidential election show the official vote count in some provinces exceeded the number of voters by 100,000 or more, the Washington Post reported on Wednesday.

    In southern Helmand province, where 134,804 votes were recorded, the United Nations estimated that just 38,000, and possibly as few as 5,000 people, actually voted in the Aug. 20 election, the Post reported, citing a U.N. spreadsheet obtained by the newspaper.

    The U.N. spreadsheet showed widespread discrepancies between turnout and results particularly in the volatile southern and eastern provinces where President Hamid Karzai won with large margins, the Washington Post said.

    Afghanistan’s Independent Election Commission reported that 212,405 valid votes were cast in Paktika province, including 193,541 for Karzai. The United Nations estimated that only 35,000 voters turned out, according to the Washington Post.

    At a news conference in New York, U.N. officials did not deny the existence of the spreadsheet, but said it was not possible to determine the number of participants in the election until an ongoing fraud investigation is completed. They said U.N. staff in Afghanistan on election day visited polling stations in some Afghan provinces and gathered information that was supplied to that country’s Electoral Complaints Commission.

    But the U.N. officials in New York said they expect that the final turnout of the elections would be revised down by election authorities from current official estimates after a recount of about 12 percent of the ballot boxes ordered by the complaints commission.


    “The review that is going on now is exactly to look at the issue of high turnout, and secondly high numbers of votes cast for one candidate or another,” said Craig Jenness, a senior electoral assistance officer at the U.N. political department. “So if people are saying, ‘Well, I know what the participation was’ … I have no idea how anybody would think that they know what the participation was in 26,000 polling stations.”

    The Post said Dan McNorton, the U.N. spokesman in Kabul, said the spreadsheet should be read with caution. “The information that you have is unsubstantiated raw data and should be treated as such,” McNorton said.

    Preliminary results showed Karzai with 54.6 percent of the vote. Karzai would face former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah in a runoff if an investigation lowered the incumbent’s share to below 50 percent.

    In the past week, two U.N. political officers in Kabul have resigned because of a lack of confidence in the leadership of U.N. special envoy, Kai Eide, the Post said, citing U.N. officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

    The departures were triggered by the dismissal last week of American Peter Galbraith as Eide’s deputy, the Post said. Galbraith had quarreled with Eide over the allegations of vote-rigging. The U.N. officials in New York gave strong backing to Eide’s handling of the election.

  46. Mrs. Smith, thanks for the tapes. I have enjoyed reading the book. BC is fantastic. Just so smart and Hillary is always able to correct him, gee, you wonder just how smart she is!!

    One thing this dumb Texan knows is that we need those two back in the WH, and not the Chi-town mobsters that are there now.

    Obama file has new news on the bc front.

  47. The UN is and remains the most blatantly anti-semitic political body ever to exist sans the Third Reich. Of course Israel will be found “guilty” of war crimes -the same war crimes we in America committed in liberating the world in WW2, liberating Iraq, and currently our war in Afghanistan. When a US drone accidentally kills 70 innocent people at a wedding, it is a tragedy and mistake-but not a war crime. When Hamas , cowardly bastards, use civilians, hospitals, Mosques, and heavily populated areas to launch terror on Israel, they are freedom fighters…Israel has and continues to lose brave members of the IDF in an abundance of caution when carrying out DEFENSIVE measures against an enemy bent on destroying her. The “wild card” here is whether BO, and his anti-Israel UN Appt. Rice, will get rid of this nonsense, stand silent and not defend Israel’s right of protection, or more lkely, endorse this Goldstone piece of shit report.

  48. Don’t you just love that hiding place, no one would have ever thought to look there, its so obvious. I can see Bill’s mind working on that one.

  49. Here’s an excerpt from the book about what Hillary said during her healthcare fight:
    “Doctors were models of free enterprise who professed not to care about money. Even the govt. may be less bureaucratic than insurance companies, which were efficient only when they denied coverage or told doctors what to do.”

    This is the cusp of what I have been saying all along, its all about money, greed from doctors, hospitals, insurance company and big pharma and BO is in bed with all of them. I bet later in history we find out they are the ones who got him elected.

  50. gonzotx Says:
    October 7th, 2009 at 10:54 pm

    October 07, 2009
    Ayers admits writing Dreams
    By James Simpson


    Wish she had it on tape.

  51. This is the cusp of what I have been saying all along, its all about money, greed from doctors, hospitals, insurance company and big pharma and BO is in bed with all of them. I bet later in history we find out they are the ones who got him elected.


    Of course, the special interests got him elected, along with the financial sector. Just go to Look under presidential contributions. It is all there. No big secret.

  52. birdgal, then we are s.o.l because he was put in for this purpose and this noise that the people are making is just a big bunch of crap. The insurance companies aren’t even worried, they bought and paid for this guy. They must really be enjoying all the commotion and the rethugs will phophet out of this mess. It certainly won’t be the American people.

  53. admin Says:
    October 7th, 2009 at 10:19 pm

    Taylor Branch, discusses Hillary advice on special prosectuor.


    You’re most welcome, admin- we’e just glad to see you are alive and well…


    “Paralyze your presidency”…ominous words, I wish we could transplant to the present.

  54. gonzotx Says:
    October 7th, 2009 at 10:42 pm

    admin Says:

    October 7th, 2009 at 10:19 pm

    Taylor Branch, discusses Hillary advice on special prosectuor.


    I’m not a lawyer but I said the same thing when it happened and I still can not understand his reasoning. He just must of thought he was smarter, well he wasn’t was


    The persecution by the Neocons was unrelenting. (I think Bill admitted the following somewhere) He was sure if he refused to give up his presidential “immunity” he would die a death of a thousand cuts from them and the media droning: “What has he got to hide?” over and over again for months on end.

    As we know, it was a mistake. We’ll never know what the Neo-con’s strategy would have been.. if he refused. Perhaps, we’d still be wondering today how the whole debacle would have turned out, if he didn’t. 🙂

  55. More lies and propaganda from the Obamanewsnetwork.

    WASHINGTON — The Senate Finance Committee’s health care overhaul effort got a boost Wednesday when the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that it would cost $829 billion and reduce the federal deficit by $81 billion over the next 10 years.

    That’s good news for the committee and President Barack Obama , since the CBO reported not only that the measure meets their cost and deficit goals but also that 94 percent of eligible Americans could be expected to obtain coverage under it, up from the current 83 percent.

    About 23 million people would buy policies through new insurance exchanges, or marketplaces, in which they could comparison-shop for coverage, the CBO said, and about 14 million more would enroll in Medicaid , the state-federal program for lower-income people, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program , as benefits and in some cases eligibility increased under the measure.

    About 25 million nonelderly people, about a third of them illegal immigrants, probably would remain uninsured by 2019, the CBO estimated.

    “The report, I think, is quite promising,” said Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus , D- Mont. Added Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , D- Nev. , “We are closer than ever before to delivering Americans access to quality, affordable health care in a fiscally responsible way.”

    Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky was less enthusiastic. “This partisan Finance Committee proposal will never see the Senate floor, since the real bill will be written by Democrat leaders in a closed-to-the-public conference room somewhere in the Capitol. The real bill will be another 1,000-page, trillion-dollar experiment that slashes a half-trillion dollars from seniors’ Medicare , raises taxes on American families by $400 billion , increases health care premiums and vastly expands the role of the federal government in the personal health care decisions of every American,” he charged.

    The CBO analysis clears the way for Baucus’ committee to take a final vote on its plan, probably later this week.

    If it’s approved — passage is expected, because the committee has a 13-10 Democratic majority — it would be the final preliminary step before the full Senate and House of Representatives debate health legislation.

    Each will consider one bill. Three House committees have written similar versions of the legislation, and Democratic leaders expect to meld them into a single version. All three bills contain a government-run alternative to private health insurance, commonly referred to as a “public option.”

    In the Senate , Democratic leaders have begun trying to combine the pending Finance Committee version with a different one that the Health Committee adopted this summer.

    The Health panel’s bill includes a public option, while the Finance version would create co-ops, or nonprofit, member-run companies.

    Baucus has said that he tried to craft a plan that can get 60 votes in the 100-member Senate , the number needed to clear procedural hurdles. His bill has many of the same features the others do, such as barring insurers from denying coverage because of pre-existing conditions, requiring nearly everyone to obtain coverage and giving financial help to those who can’t afford insurance.

    There’s been some Democratic grumbling in the Finance Committee over parts of Baucus’ plan, but the CBO apparently made his task easier.

    One concern of more conservative Democrats has been cost. The CBO found that revenue will come from several sources.

    The committee’s proposal for a 40 percent excise tax on most high-cost insurance plans would raise about $201 billion . Penalty payments by consumers and employers who don’t comply with coverage requirements could raise $23 billion , while other tax revenues and budget adjustments would reduce deficits by $83 billion . Each figure is a 10-year total.

    The CBO assumes billions in savings from changes in Medicare and other government health programs. The savings and tax revenues, the CBO forecasts, would more than offset anticipated costs for subsidies for those who can’t afford coverage and additional spending on Medicaid and the children’s health program.

    The CBO warned, however, that the committee’s work hasn’t yet been converted into legislative language. The panel works from conceptual language, with details to come later.

    Those details, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said, “could lead to significant changes in the estimates of the proposal’s effects on the federal budget and insurance coverage.”

  56. wait a minute, did it say it was going to cost 829 million, and it will reduce the deficent by 81 million in 10 years. Man, that is some fuzzy math. Voo Doo economics to me???

  57. I just found this little jewel, I did not know George Soros has opened a place 3 blocks from the WH.

    I wrote a post a while back entitled the Soros: The Wizard of Obama? where I pointed out that Soros is pulling the strings of the Obama puppet and his Obamanation. Well, he is no longer the wizard hiding beyond a secret little chamber. openly reports to the public:

    Three blocks from the White House, on the 10th floor of a sleek glass building, young workers pound at computers, with giant flat-screen TVs overhead. It has the look and feel of a high-tech startup.

    In many ways it is. The product is ideas.

    Thanks in part to funding from benefactors such as billionaire George Soros, the Center for American Progress has become in just five years an intellectual wellspring for Democratic policy proposals, including many that are shaping the agenda of the new Obama administration

  58. I found this definition of communism which to me sounds so much like the doctrine of George Soros “open society”. Check it out!

    The “state of communism” is described by Marx and Engels as the condition in which “the State” no longer exists and people live and work together in harmony in a society based on equality where the fruits of labor are shared with all members of society and no one is exploited.

  59. I had to search hard for this mission state of the Int. Council of the World Social Forum, which is a second degree offshoot of George Soro’s “Open Society”. THey actually work together and have some of the same ceo’s and supporters.It sounds so like my above mentioned definition.

    ” […] the World Social Forum process is NOT the latest attempt to create a monolithic “world revolutionary vanguard movement” nor is it a reincarnation of an international “united front” seeking to overthrow, one by one, governments around the world. Such a notion would be a complete negation of the very essence and concept of the World Social Forum as outlined in its Charter of Principles. […]
    Rather, the World Social Forum is, to use a Kiswahili word, a global Jukwaa, in other words, an international PLATFORM, to quote from the Porto Alegre Charter “an open meeting place where groups and movements of civil society opposed to neo-liberalism and a world dominated by capital or by any form of imperialism, but engaged in building a planetary society centred on the human person, come together to pursue their thinking, to debate ideas democratically, formulate proposals, share their experiences freely and network for effective action.” (Quoted from an archived version of the official website of the WSF in Nairobi 2007.)

    BTW, neoliberalism is actually conservatism or unfettered capitalism in the United States.

  60. I am sorry, but I want to show one more thing before I quit looking. Sometimes it like I hit an artery and the stuff just keeps coming out.

    One of the board member of the The New World Foundation, which is an offshoot of the “open Society” led me to discover another agency of Community Organizers in the South. Its called Southern Echo.

    Pls go to that site you will see that it is funded by the US govt and is in the planning stages for the 2010 census in the NY.

    here is the site h t t p: // so uthernecho .org /s/

  61. Does anyone know if Bob Dole is still alive?? If he is he is really going to hate BC worse than he already did. OMG, BC is so funny! Its really is sad what the rethugs did to him, but the way he coped with the daily onslaught of bs is quiet funny.

  62. jbstonesfan Says:

    October 7th, 2009 at 11:37 pm


    Bravo! I was very upset when I posted that article. You said everything I was feeling at the time in a nutshell.

    Thanks very much.

  63. “Thanks in part to funding from benefactors such as billionaire George Soros, the Center for American Progress has become in just five years an intellectual wellspring for Democratic policy proposals, including many that are shaping the agenda of the new Obama administration”


    And there you have it.

  64. Admin, do we have a back up plan should something happen to the site? That way, if something should happen, at least there would be a place we could go to check it out, and know what was happening (of course shared offline). I might be parinoid, but if there was a backup plan, it would have saved some of us some worry and effort.

  65. BREAKING – Dem Senators who Help Filibuster Health Care will have Chairmanships Revoked.
    MSNBC, Rachel Maddow Show

    Posted on Wednesday, October 07, 2009

    Rachel Maddow just said that Democrat Leader(s) in the Senate have told her that Reid will revoke chairmanships of any Senator that sides with Republicans in a filibuster.
    She’s discussing various strategies that the Democrats in the Senate are evaluating. But the first seems to be bullying their own leadership.


    Hairy Reid- grrr-

  66. NewMexicoFan Says:
    October 8th, 2009 at 8:34 am

    Admin, do we have a back up plan should something happen to the site?


    Good idea- NMF.. a virtual hideaway when man made catastrophe’s strike.

  67. JUst on Fox, they show a cabinet meeting discussing the Afganistan war. Biden was for the surgical strike, HILLARY”S WAS MORE LIKE MCKRYSTAL’s. That’s our girl, listening to the generals. They should listen to her. Bill said he should have listened to her many times.

  68. With any luck, Harry Reid will go down with huge embarassment in 2010. In the meantime, he should be charged with unethical and unlawful behavior. Maybe then we wouldn’t have to wait.

  69. Did you all see on Drudge they are saying the next threat will be in cyberspace. Yeah right!! They want to control it.

  70. JanH, Fox is saying that Reid is going to attach the healthcare bill to a bill that has already passed!

  71. Hi: Evelyn Pringle is a stand out Journalist and needs to be heard.She knows more about the making of Obama than we have been allowed to see and hear from our disgusting legislators and the last remnants of a fringe media that is driving itself over the last cliff and their death rattle is all but gone.I am psting a rather lengthy article by Evelyn but it is must read research on how we were duped
    and snookered by white traitors with a perfect naked emperor.

    -Evelyn Pringle: Clinton v Obama – Hillary Most Qualified for the Job – Part I

    Published on Mar 4, 2008 – 8:06:38 AM

    Email this article Printer friendly page
    By: Evelyn Pringle

    This election cannot be based on personal likeability. It matters not whether Barack Obama is a better speaker than Hillary Clinton or visa versa. Now is not the time or place for a popularity contest – the stakes are too high.

    This country is in the midst of the biggest downhill plunge of the 50 years and we need a President with a team of advisors ready to move into the White House with the most experience in every area of policy making the minute Bush leaves.

    As personable as he is, and despite his good intentions, the fact remains; Barack Obama does not have the qualifications or experience for the job he is seeking.

    Most importantly, his foreign policy experience is totally lacking, and for obvious reasons, this factor alone disqualifies him for the presidency at this time.

    John McCain is in lockstep with Bush on Iraq, even if it means staying there for 100 years. The fact that Barack is doing as well as he is has recently led to a nagging suspicion that the Republicans are somehow aiding his campaign behind the scenes, totally unbeknownst to Mr Obama, because they believe John McCain would have a better shot at beating him than Hillary.

    The country is in a do or die position in both Iraq and Afghanistan and we’re running out of money and second chances. Our soldiers have stuck in the senseless war in Iraq for five years, longer than either of the world wars.

    A new book entitled, “The Three Trillion Dollar War,” by Nobel laureate and former chief World Bank economist, Joseph Stiglitz, and co-author Linda Bilmes, a professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, reveals the outrageous cost of the Iraq war.

    Of course, in response to the book, the White House sent out a spokesman with the usual worn out mantra about 9/11 stating:

    “People like Joe Stiglitz lack the courage to consider the cost of doing nothing and the cost of failure. One can’t even begin to put a price tag on the cost to this nation of the attacks of 9/11.”

    In a broadcast interview with Democracy Now on February 28, 2008, the authors said the Bush administration has repeatedly low-balled the cost of the war in Iraq and a second set of records were kept hidden from the American public.

    According to Ms Bilmes, “right now we spend $12 billion a month in Iraq alone, $16 billion if you include Afghanistan.”

    “Which doesn’t include the cost down the line,” she said, “if you include just the cost that we’ve already incurred for veterans and replenishing equipment and so forth, it’s double that.”

    “It’s $25 billion a month,” she explained.

    During the interview, Ms Bilmes described what she called “really outrageous situations” when trying to get information about the war. Even today, she said, “if you go to the official DOD website, what you will find is a number around 30,000 wounded, but that is only the wounded in combat.”

    She explained that if the non-combat wounded in Iraq are counted, for example, soldiers who are injured when they’re driving vehicles at night, because it’s unsafe to drive during the day; or soldiers wounded when they are being transported from one place and another, who never would have been there otherwise, the number of wounded is more than double the number listed on the DOD website.

    “We had to use the Freedom of Information Act to get access to that number,” she said.

    Mr Stiglitz discussed how the government ripped off kids who were lured into joining the military with the signing bonuses and had to pay the money back if they were injured soon after going to Iraq. “They signed a contract to serve for three years,” he explained. “The fact that they get blown up after one month means they haven’t fulfilled their contract.”

    He noted that in the election campaign, people are looking at two issues: the economy and the war. “I think there’s one big issue,” Mr Stiglitz said, “and that’s the war, because the war has been directly and indirectly having a very negative effect on the economy.”

    He noted that there is not only an economic opportunity cost, but also a security opportunity cost and points out that while we were focusing on Iraq, “the problems in Afghanistan got worse, and the problem of security in Afghanistan is much worse than it was five years ago.”

    During the interview, Amy Goodman asked Mr Stiglitz, “Who is profiting from this war?”

    “Well, actually,” he replied, “there are two big gainers in this war and only two: the oil companies and the defense contractors.”

    “One of the big pools of wealth are in the Middle East,” he noted, “the countries that are the oil exporters.”

    “We are transferring hundreds of billions of dollars,” he said, “from American consumers, businesses, to the oil exporters.”

    Specifically the most money is going to Saudia Arabia, Iran and Venezuela.

    In an article in the February 23, 2008 Times Online, Mr Stiglitz and Ms Bilmes describe how government officials frequently talk about the lives of our soldiers as priceless. “But from a cost perspective,” they write, “these “priceless” lives show up on the Pentagon ledger simply as $500,000 – the amount paid out to survivors in death benefits and life insurance.”

    “In areas such as health and safety regulation,” they point out, “the US Government values a life of a young man at the peak of his future earnings capacity in excess of $7 million – far greater than the amount that the military pays in death benefits.”

    “Using this figure, the cost of the nearly 4,000 American troops killed in Iraq adds up to some $28 billion,” the stated.

    In conclusion, the authors note that their book represents the cost only to the US and does not reflect the “enormous cost to the rest of the world, or to Iraq.”

    As of today, 18 former admirals, generals, and senior defense officials are supporting Hillary. In a conference call with reporters on March 2, 2008, Brigadier General John Watkins, Jr, stated:

    “As I think about the challenges facing the nation and having been in uniform for almost thirty years, worked with a number of presidents to include the last four, I can’t think of a single person – those generals included – who is better qualified to walk into the Oval Office than Hillary Clinton.

    “I don’t make that statement very lightly. She is more qualified, in my view, than her husband Bill was when he entered the office.”

    General Wesley Clark said, “She has done her homework on national security and I know from my personal discussions with her and with many other friends that go in and brief her in her role in the Senate Armed Services Committee.”

    “She knows the facts, she knows the details, plus she has the big picture,” he stated. “She is a strategic thinker but she has the building blocks of the strategy in her personal knowledge.”

    “In this world that we face today,” says Admiral William Owens, “experience will be really at a premium, especially at the level of the Commander-in-Chief.” He explained that:

    “There’s not time to learn. The phone rings and you have to be ready. You have to ready with intuition, with experience and with skills.”

    He pointed out that, “this world will have the complexities that perhaps we’ve never before seen,” and “we need people with great judgment.”

    Admiral Owens says he thinks Hillary “brings the best of talent, intuition and experience to handle these unknown threats in the future.”

    According to Lieutenant General Frederick Vollrath, “we absolutely have to have a leader with the proven experience.”

    “America, in the area of national defense, must be successful and Senator Clinton has that experience to create change, to understand the risk, and to get the job done,” he said.

    On a personal note, Major General Paul Eaton said, “I have a Special Forces Captain son and a Sergeant Paratrooper both in Afghanistan and I find Senator Clinton the perfect choice to be their Commander-in-Chief and to display the loyalty to command our armed forces and to rebuild them after the conflicts in which we are engaged right now.”

    Lieutenant General Claudia Kennnedy stated: “I think she’ll rebuild relationships with other countries that have been suffering for the last seven or eight years; those relationships have really been strained beyond anything I would have anticipated.”

    The above testimonials provide enough evidence of her qualifications on military matters for this untrained military mind. Hillary, along with her top foreign policy advisor, former President Bill Clinton, offer the best hope for getting our soldiers out of the killing fields in Iraq in the shortest amount of time possible.

    The former President is admired all over the world. He is a natural-born diplomat and we also need him to help repair the damage done to our relationships with world leaders.

    As far as the economy, the country was in dire straights when the first President Clinton took office after the first Bush left and the economy was in great shape when the second Bush stepped in

    Hillary’s experience gained during the first Clinton Administration is verifiable. The country went from a deficit of $290 billion in 1992, to an expected surplus of more than $250 billion for 2001. Eight years earlier, the Congressional Budget Office had projected a $513 billion deficit in 2001. In 2000, the surplus was the largest in US history at over $200 billion.

    Economic growth averaged 4% per year, compared to an average 2.8% during the Reagan-Bush presidencies. Inflation was the lowest since the 1960s, averaging 2.5%.

    More than 20 million jobs were created and American workers saw double-digit earning growth, and the bottom 20% had the largest increase at more than 16%. Unemployment dropped to the lowest level in 30 years, from close to 7% in 1993, to 4% in November 2000. The country’s poverty rates were the lowest in 30 years.

    The homeownership rate topped 67% in the third quarter of 2000, the highest rate on record.

    With all that said, on February 4, 2008, USA Today warned that the “next president will inherit a deficit of about $400 billion, and maybe more,” which means the second Clinton Administration will take office faced the same financial disaster as the first time around.

    In fact, the country is now worse off then when the first Bush left. According to Department of Labor Statistics released on January 16, 2008, real weekly earnings increased only 0.9 percent nationally in 2007, but food purchased at the grocery store was 4.2% higher than in 2006. This increase was the highest percentage year-over-year increase since 1990. The price of bread rose 7.4%, eggs 29.2%, and milk increased 13.1%.

    The data shows college tuition and expenses increased by 6.2% in 2007, the cost of attending a technical or trade school was up 4%, and the fees for child care and nursery school increased 4.3%.

    Health insurance costs rose 10.1% in 2007, medical care increased 5.8%, and the price of medical-care services rose 5.3%. In August 2007, the US Census Bureau reported that the number of Americans without health insurance rose to 15.8% of the population in 2006, or 47 million people.

    On December 30, 2007, a report by Sam Zuckerman in the San Francisco Chronicle called 2007, “the year that the greatest housing boom of the post-war era turned into the greatest housing bust,” and explained:

    “It started with a rising tide of foreclosures among subprime borrowers – those who took out loans with loose documentation requirements or little money down. By the summer, losses among subprime lenders spread to big banks around the world that had invested in securities based on subprime mortgages.”

    “The result was one of the most severe lending lockdowns of recent decades,” according to the report in the Chronicle. “Banks stopped making loans, and when they resumed, they tightened requirements and jacked up rates for all kinds of customers, including other banks.”

    “As credit dried up,” Mr Zuckerman notes, “home price stopped rising and then lurched downward, while the number of sales plummeted.”

    When introducing former President Clinton for a campaign speech supporting his wife, at a Kirtland, Ohio high school, on March 1, 2008, Ohio’s Lt Governor Lee Fisher, summed up the best reason for sending Hillary to the White House in the following concise statement quoted in the Toledo Blade:

    “Bill and Hillary Clinton for eight years set this nation on a new course and we have now the best chance we have since then, not only to take that course and set it right again, but to take it to new heights.”

    Hillary can beat McCain and no offense to Mr Obama, but with her knowledge and experience in the White House she is the most qualified person for the job in 2008.

    (First in a series. Coming soon: Clinton v Obama. – Hillary Most Qualified for the Job – Part II)

    Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for YubaNet and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America

  72. Bring-It! ABM90

    We need all the insights you can find dealing with leaders suffering from gross malfeasance. I wish the Senators who are threatened would join together and Impeach Reid-

  73. confloyd Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 8:50 am
    JanH, Fox is saying that Reid is going to attach the healthcare bill to a bill that has already passed!


    Not surprised. bambi went out of his way to surround himself with crooks.

  74. ABM90, I think according to the “dean Plan” Obama is who Soros and his pals Zbig, Kissinger wanted a person like him with NO experience so they could bring in the China like economy.

    Mrs. Smith, I know your reading the Clinton Tapes, did you happen to notice on page 109 that BC said he had an idea that someday the Chinese would try and get a US President to undermine the Constitution and make our govt more like there’s??? It raised the hairs on the back of my neck.

  75. Reed and Pelosi says the healthcare will be attached and there will be no voting, its a done deal. Fox and Friends were asking if it was legal to do that??

    Well Obama is sure following is Bush’s footsteps, pushing the law to the limit.

  76. confloyd Says:
    October 8th, 2009 at 9:15 am

    Mrs. Smith, I know your reading the Clinton Tapes.


    It’s next on the list, confloyd.

    JanH, you mentioned snow yesterday- where is snow forecasted for today?

  77. confloyd,

    More on what you posted…

    New plan might allow Dems to slip public option through Senate

    By: Susan Ferrechio
    Chief Congressional Correspondent
    October 7, 2009

    Senate Democrats desperate to find a way to pass a health care bill that includes a federal insurance plan may have come up with a way to do it without putting moderate members who oppose it in political jeopardy.

    Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is weighing a plan to bring the final health care bill to the floor without a public option — making it much easier to get the 60 votes needed to prevent a Republican filibuster — and then adding the provision later as an amendment.

    The public option amendment would be there waiting, but the 60-vote test would technically be on a bill without the government plan. Then moderate Democrats could drop out for the vote on the public option, which requires just 51 votes for passage.

    “It’s brilliant,” said a top Senate Republican aide. “It gets you your votes on cloture for a package that does not include a public option.”

    Reid has not revealed whether he will use this tactic, but he’s considering it.

    “We haven’t made any decisions yet,” his spokesman, Jim Manley, said. “We have different options — that is one.”

    Senate aides suggest that after passage in the upper chamber, the Senate bill — public option included — could then be sent to the House, allowing the lower chamber to simply pass Reid’s legislation instead of taking up its own bill. That route would avoid a protracted and contentious battle to meld two different bills and might allow President Obama and Democrats to achieve their goal of passing health care reform by year’s end.

    Open-government proponents slammed the tactic, saying it would be a bait-and-switch gambit for the Senate to put forward a bill without a public insurance option, only to slip it in later.

    “You don’t lock out the American people from the process, and this is essentially locking out the American people,” said Brian Darling, director of Senate relations for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

    Senate Democrats may have little choice but to use this tactic if they are to pass a bill with a public option, as Reid has pledged.

    Senate Democratic Vice Conference Chairman Charles Schumer, of New York, said most Democrats backed some kind of public option but he was still four to six votes short of the 60-vote threshold.

    Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said she and other Democratic moderates feared that the proposal was simply too expensive.

    “We feel very strongly about doing this in the most cost-effective manner possible, and we make no apologies for that,” Landrieu told The Examiner. “We are making progress, but we are not there yet.”

    If the Senate decides to bring the public option into the bill as an amendment, Democratic leaders will have to reveal that plan before the initial vote, and that could cost them critical support.

    “My vote is not on autopilot,” said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., when asked if he would vote for a bill that would be amended with a public option. “There is a lot of apprehension, a lot of concern about the bill.”

  78. God must be laughing down at us… ( I switched the last paragraph (the most important in my opinion) to the top…


    Nobel Peace Prize coveted, but oh so controversialThe prestigious prize founded by Alfred Nobel has stoked anger, envy

    October 8, 2009

    Sarkozy, Obama among contenders for 2009

    Top contenders for the $1.5 million (Canadian) Nobel Peace Prize include Colombian peace broker Piedad Cordoba, Afghan rights activist Sima Samar and Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai. French-Colombian activist and ex-hostage Ingrid Betancourt, Jordanian interfaith dialogue advocate Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad and U.S. and French presidents Barack Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy are also contenders. The winner will be announced Friday.

    It’s the pinnacle of peace prizes, the heaven of humanitarian awards. But the $1.5 million Nobel Peace Prize, whose winner will be announced Friday, is also one of the most controversial and least understood.

    “Why does the world take such an interest in what a committee of five internationally relatively unknown Norwegians may decide about who has done the most for peace?” asks Geir Lundestad, secretary of the Norwegian Nobel Committee in the 1990s.

    Well he might ask.

    Since its birth in 1901 – the unlikely brainchild of millionaire Swedish dynamite inventor Alfred Nobel – the prize has burst into international prominence, and the wish lists of campaigners all over the world. Its laurels have decked the brows of gurus and gadflies, as well as politicians, pundits and physicians. It has buffed the images of the famous and catapulted obscure campaigners to instant celebrity.

    One of the winners, India’s Mother Teresa, was set on the path for sainthood, while former U.S. secretary of state Henry Kissinger, sparked so much anger during the war in Vietnam, that Norwegians slung snowballs at the American ambassador picking up his prize.

    The choice of former militant Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat infuriated some Israelis, dissident Andrei Sakharov, the Soviet government, and the Dalai Lama, the Chinese.

    But, says Metta Spencer, editor of the Toronto-based Peace Magazine, the prize may also help to keep dissidents alive in brutal regimes.

    “(Imprisoned Burmese pro-democracy leader) Aung San Suu Kyi can do nothing, and yet the prize given her is doing a great deal of good. The junta may have killed her outright, had she not been so highly regarded around the world,” says Spencer. “The Nobel Prize is the highest accolade that can be given as a gesture of respect.”

    The list of Nobel luminaries has also included Canada’s Lester Pearson, South Africa’s Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Iran’s Shirin Ebadi and America’s Rev. Martin Luther King.

    But there is one embarrassing omission – India’s Mahatma Gandhi, nominated a few days before his assassination in January 1948. Although committee members admitted Gandhi was nominated four times previously, they declined to give him a posthumous award.

    In spite of controversy, the prize has endured. Nobel himself planned to give it only a 30-year lifespan, according to Nobel scholar Irwin Abrams: if the world hadn’t been reformed by then it would be “headed straight back to barbarism.” But 108 years later it remains the prize of prizes.

    “If you stuck to Alfred Nobel’s original will – that the prize should go to people who work hardest to reduce standing armies, organize peace congresses and promote fraternity between nations – it wouldn’t have remained relevant,” says Scott London, a California-based Nobel expert. “But the committee has a much broader understanding of what peace is today, and how it’s applied.”

    In recent years, it has steered toward human rights and the environment, arousing the ire of some Nobel purists, who objected to the 2007 award to former U.S. vice-president Al Gore, representing the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

    Others complain the list is too short on women, only 12 of whom have walked away with the prize.

    But how the Nobel committee, made up of five people elected by the Norwegian parliament, decides its annual selection from up to 200 nominations is a closely guarded secret. The other four Nobel prizes are decided by Swedish panels.

    “It’s the world’s most prestigious prize,” says London.

    “It makes headlines that aren’t the usual stories of armed conflict. It ensures that we hear about the good work that has been done for humanity and peace.”–nobel-peace-prize-coveted-but-oh-so-controversial

  79. So how can it be a public option, and still leave 7-8% of the people not covered? I view this as a word smithing technique, like health care reform. Put all the key words in, but don’t really give them what they ask for. Where is the competitive Drug pricing, and what precisely is lost in medicare????

  80. JanH Says:

    October 7th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
    Well I am really going to spoil myself this weekend. Snow is in the forecast and I just picked up “Clinton’s Tapes.”

    Snow? What state do you live in?

  81. How in the world can anyone even consider BO for the Nobel Peace Prize? Based on what?????????????/ He hasn’t done anything.

  82. rgb44hrc Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 10:39 am


    I live in the western Canadian province of Alberta…lol…the only place where it can be 33C/91F a week and a half ago and then go to the minuses now. This is our first day of snow. Not too cold but still messy.

  83. # JanH Says:
    October 8th, 2009 at 10:12 am

    LOL…Canadian West.


    Beautiful country…thanks, Jan

  84. Back to yesterday’s cyber attack on this web site…

    (Admin, was it a DoS attack, or something of the viral nature taking down the system…or is it better that we not divulge things, just refer to it as “that unpleasantness”?).

    Any of the Obama Brown Shirts who want to stifle our voice of dissent / reason / opposition on this web site allegedly wanted Obama elected because he would restore presidential respect for the constitution and for individuals right to express themselves, as compared to “that horrible Bush regime”. That they cannot see that their “the ends justifies the means” approach completely violates their own purported priniciples.

    “Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”- Benjamin Franklin

    Thankfully, many former Obama supporters are now running away from The Failure. In cleaning out my emails yesterday, I came across various folks, who back in November and January were so rosy, “…Thank goodness Bush is gone…” “Let’s celebrate a new start…”, now are sounding exactly like they were when Bush was in power, “Act now to fight against this crazy war policy”, “Don’t let Obama get away with trampling civil rights”.

    Ummmmm, “Told you so!”

  85. birdgal Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 10:43 am
    How in the world can anyone even consider BO for the Nobel Peace Prize? Based on what?????????????/ He hasn’t done anything.

    Like always MONEY TALKS

    Just to have his name mentioned

  86. JanH Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 11:04 am
    Yes, but if bambi loses right on top of an Olympic loss, it doesn’t bode well for him.

    You are talking about bambi. He doesn’t care. As long as his name is mentioned.

    The man has an ego problem.

  87. Obama holds Afghanistan discussions

    (UKPA) – 11 hours ago

    President Barack Obama has met key members of his administration and the US army to discuss Afghanistan as the conflict entered its ninth year.

    Among those present at the closed-door session of the national security team were secretary of state Hillary Clinton, defence secretary Robert Gates, and head of US Central Command General David Petraeus.

    They were joined via videolink by General Stanley McChrystal, the US’s top military man on the ground.

    The meeting – the third of five currently scheduled – was said to have focused on neighbouring Pakistan’s role in the fight against al Qaida.

    Gen McChrystal, the US and Nato commander in Afghanistan, is calling for more combat troops to be deployed to Afghanistan to turn around fortunes in the flagging war.

    It is thought that President Obama has reservations over further increasing the number of soldiers in Afghanistan. Recent speeches have focused on making sure that the strategy is right before turning to the need for more personnel. On Tuesday, the president told politicians in Washington that finding a way forward in Afghanistan was not simply a choice between upping troop numbers or getting out.

    The president held a cross-party private meeting with 18 members of Congress as he continued to deliberate over Gen McChrystal’s report which is said to include a range of options, from adding as few as 10,000 additional fighters to as many as 40,000.

    Those at the meeting described tension, with some politicians reportedly airing concern that accepting the general’s recommendation would be costly in terms of both money and human life.

    Mr Obama is believed to have told those gathered that he will be rigorous and deliberate in his review of the current situation in Afghanistan. But he added that he understood the urgency of turning around the situation on the ground, according to a source from the administration.

  88. Obama to Consult with Biden, Clinton on Afghan Policy

    By VOA News
    08 October 2009

    U.S. President Barack Obama convenes a high-level strategy session on Afghanistan Thursday, the latest in a series of meetings reviewing the U.S. approach in the war there. He will meet at the White House with Vice President Joseph Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The talks come one day after President Obama met with his senior military and political advisors.

    The three-hour session on Wednesday – the eighth anniversary of the war – focused on neighboring Pakistan, a key component of Mr. Obama’s strategy. The White House says the administration believes the Pakistanis are stepping up efforts to deal with extremists.

    U.S. casualties in Afghanistan have risen sharply in recent months, amid more aggressive operations against the Taliban and other militant groups. Public opinion polls show the war is steadily losing support among the American public.

    The president, who held a session earlier in the week with members of Congress, convenes a meeting of national security officials on Friday.

    The White House confirmed Wednesday that Mr. Obama received a request from the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, for additional troops.
    McChrystal has warned the United States could lose the war if more troops are not deployed to Afghanistan. He is said to be calling for as many as 40,000 additional troops.

    But administration officials suggest Mr. Obama is considering a “middle ground” between McChrystal’s request and a proposal that would narrowly focus military efforts on al-Qaida militants. The proposal, credited to Mr. Biden, calls for an increase in air strikes against al-Qaida targets using unmanned Predator drones and special forces, while keeping U.S. troops at current levels.

  89. birdgal Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 10:43 am
    How in the world can anyone even consider BO for the Nobel Peace Prize? Based on what?????????????/ He hasn’t done anything.

    1. His World-apology tour, asking forgiveness for US behavior.
    2. For being nice to tin-horn dictators with nukes; don’t want to make them angry…
    3. For attempting to reduce the US nuclear arsenal, and letting Iran and NK get a few, so that there is “parity”.
    4. For finally aligning the US against Israel.

    The list goes on.

  90. FYI,
    I cover the COunty legislature for the local weekly and last night’s committee meeting was all about H1N1 and seasonal flu.
    The county has recieved money from Homeland Security, Public Health Emergency Preparedness and H1N1 Supplemenatal funding to vaccinate ALL 50,000 or so residents of the county.
    Extra money – $100,000 – A hige amount for this area, has been earmarked for staffing under the newly created position of Public Health Preparedness Planner and Public Health Emergency Response Planner.
    I have lived in this are almost 3 years now and I have never seen such quick mobilization for anything. I dunno – I just have a queasy feeling about this. That this teeny rural county is on even on the radar of the federal H1n1 program seems, well, unusual. If this is the case throughout the country – and if we’re being supervised and mandated I imagine the same is happening nationwide.
    Again – i dunno – it’s just unsettling.

    Thoughts? Feedback?

  91. Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

    Thursday, October 08, 2009

    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 29% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-six percent (36%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -7 (see trends). Thirty-one percent (31%) say the country is generally heading in the right direction.

    Most voter (55%) oppose a penalty for young and healthy people who decide not to buy health insurance. Fifty-nine percent (59%) favor changing the proposed health care plans so that no new taxes or fees are paid by those who earn less than $250,000 a year.

    Just 11% favor government regulation of blogs.

    Overall, 48% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance. Fifty-one percent now (51%) disapprove. Looking at the numbers on a Month-by-Month basis, the President’s ratings stabilized in September.

    In Louisiana, Republicans appear to be in good shape for the 2010 Senate race. The incumbent, David Vitter, and a potential challenger both hold double digit leads.

    The New Jersey Governor’s race is now a toss-up and a third of the voters say they could still change their mind before voting. Larry Sabato takes a look at the 2010 Statehouse races. Republicans hold a four-point edge on the Generic Congressional Ballot.

    Support for the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and Congressional Democrats is up to 46% this week. That’s a five point gain from a week ago.

  92. 1. His World-apology tour, asking forgiveness for US behavior.
    2. For being nice to tin-horn dictators with nukes; don’t want to make them angry…
    3. For attempting to reduce the US nuclear arsenal, and letting Iran and NK get a few, so that there is “parity”.
    4. For finally aligning the US against Israel.

    The list goes on.

    5. Bribing the Nobel judges to get the job done.

  93. 😳

    Meant to add that the coordination of Federal programs with this small county is jarring.
    Reading further through the literature passed out last night I see frequent references to the H1N1 PANDEMIC Influenza, SSN (Stretegic National Stockpiles and NIMS (National incident Mangement System).

    Has anyone else ever seen such widespread mobilization throughout the US except in the case of war? Just asking.

  94. basil,

    I was talking with the occupational health nurse at work this week. I told her my main confusion was not knowing whether the regular flu shot was detrimental to the swine flu shot if both were taken and also what the time lapse between both should be.

    She told me that I was spot on. The professionals don’t have these answers yet and it is a crap game out there. I asked her what her plans were and she said that she was going to take the regular flu shot and then wait and see. I think I am going to do the same. My only reaction to it is usually a little soreness in the arm. It won’t protect against swine flu but it is a proven remedy to regular flu so I am okay with that.

    As it is, we were supposed to get the shot at work last week but the provincial health bosses were procrastinating so it will probably be another week before we see the vaccine.

    As far as the swine flu shot goes, no decision has been made here, with the exception of giving it to high risk groups, i.e. young children, pregnant women, seniors. my niece is 7 months pregnant and is scared to death to take either shot.

  95. rgb44hrc Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 11:28 am
    birdgal Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 10:43 am
    How in the world can anyone even consider BO for the Nobel Peace Prize? Based on what?????????????/ He hasn’t done anything.

    1. His World-apology tour, asking forgiveness for US behavior.
    2. For being nice to tin-horn dictators with nukes; don’t want to make them angry…
    3. For attempting to reduce the US nuclear arsenal, and letting Iran and NK get a few, so that there is “parity”.
    4. For finally aligning the US against Israel.

    The list goes on.


    Don’t forget-He has put off talking to the Man of Peace himself, the Dahli Lama.

  96. As far as the swine flu shot goes, no decision has been made here, with the exception of giving it to high risk groups, i.e. young children, pregnant women, seniors. my niece is 7 months pregnant and is scared to death to take either shot.


    Jan, pregnant women are in a high risk category and the recommendation is for them to get the swine flu shot. They have been advertising on the radio and it is recommended by the HMO that I work for for pregnant women to get the vaccine.

  97. birdgal,

    I heard that also but the communication here has been so wishy-washy that she is nervous. It won’t be available until next month so I am hoping her specialist will talk to her about it when she goes for her check-up.

  98. Jan, the information here, has not been wishy-washy for pregnant women. Especially, since they are telling pregnant women to get the vaccine via radio advertisements.

  99. The H1N1 influenza virus is a new virus that appeared in April and May 2009. Since that time, the
    Centers for Disease Control (CDC) identified the groups of people most likely to be infected,
    hospitalized, or become seriously ill from H1N1 flu. These are called priority groups. They are:
    • Pregnant women because they are four times more likely to be hospitalized than other people
    who catch the flu. Vaccinating pregnant women can also help protect infants who cannot be
    • People who live with or care for children younger than six months old because younger
    infants are at higher risk of influenza-related complications and cannot be vaccinated.
    • Health care and emergency medical services personnel because they need to be healthy to
    care for others.
    • Children from 6 months through 18 years old because they are often in close contact with
    others in day care or school, which increases the chance that H1N1 could spread.
    • Young adults from 19 through 24 years old because H1N1 is more common in healthy young
    adults than regular seasonal flu and they are at risk for complications
    • Adults from 25 through 64 years old who have chronic conditions that make them more likely
    to develop complications from it (such as: asthma, diabetes, heart, lung, liver, kidney disease,
    cancer, immune deficiencies, etc.).
    Why aren’t the elderly on this list?
    The H1N1 virus doesn’t appear to infect people over 60 years old as often as younger people. There
    are fewer complications among people 65 and older than among younger people. In contrast to the
    H1N1 flu, the seasonal flu infects the elderly more frequently – 60% of people who are hospitalized
    by seasonal flu are 65 years or older. For this reason, Kaiser Permanente physicians and the CDC
    recommend that the elderly be vaccinated against seasonal flu.
    Is there enough H1N1 vaccine for everyone?
    Flu manufacturers have worked around the clock since April to produce the H1N1 vaccine. It takes
    many months to produce vaccine, and initial supplies will be limited. As time goes by, more vaccine
    will be produced so we can vaccinate more people at risk for complications from H1N1 flu.
    Who should be vaccinated first?
    The initial supply of H1N1 vaccine will be limited. Kaiser Permanente will follow CDC and California
    Department of Public Health (CDPH) guidelines to vaccinate as many people as possible in the
    priority list above. If initial supplies are not sufficient to cover everyone on that list, Kaiser
    Permanente will follow CDC and CDPH guidelines to vaccinate sub-groups on the list – the people
    who are most likely to get sick or be hospitalized.
    Should I be concerned if I can’t be vaccinated right now?
    The CDC has conducted extensive research to understand which people are at the highest risk of
    catching H1N1 flu or being hospitalized. Their guidelines are designed to protect people most
    vulnerable to the H1N1 flu. If you are not on the list for vaccination, there’s a reason – it’s because
    you are less likely to get sick or be hospitalized from H1N1 flu. More priority groups will receive
    vaccinations as more vaccine becomes available.
    For information about flu vaccine availability at your Kaiser Permanente facility, call 1-800-KP-FLU-11
    For additional information, please see these Web sites: or

  100. In addition, pregnant women should receive the injection not the FluMist (nasal spray).

    “FluMist is highly effective in children and cannot be administered to pregnant women or anyone with a chronic condition. Additional shipments will arrive each week.”

  101. hmmm…who do you think our Treasury is working for??

    Geithner’s Wall St. Confidants

    Perhaps he forgot to change Hank Paulson’s speed dial?

    The Associated Press obtained seven months of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s appointment calendars and says that the CEOs of Citigroup, J.P. Morgan, and Goldman Sachs appear to have a direct line to his office—during those seven months, he spoke to these men at least 80 times.

    Sometimes, he spoke to their CEOs several times a day. When faced with the imminent bankruptcy of G.M. in May, Geithner wrapped up his day with calls to Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein, J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon, President Obama, and then another call to Dimon.


    he talks to wall st and banks more than congressional leaders…he is against transparency at the fed…

    all the stimulus money has gone to the banks, a very, very small amount to the people…and the plans that supposedly are in place to make it look like the O admin is helping the people are constructed to fail and so caught up in red tape that very few people are benefitting…

    …are these the people you want in charge of your health care?

    rarely watch, but this morning Dylan Ratigan had stats and charts on the % rise of corporate profits from companies that got taxpayer money…

    and then showed all the other indicators are losing…that’s where you and me come in…

    very shocking and striking when you see it plainly…he also had Elizabeth Warren on and she clearly stated that the lobbyists for banks and, get this, the regulators, are fighting hard to weaken any protection for consumers…our congress and the O admin are not fighting back for us…


    the whole system is rigged…our congress and O admin are not doing anything to prevent the same old bank and wall st mess we are in from continuing or crashing again…

    I saw a comment on another site that hit a mark…it said “the baby boomer generation is the next insurance companies victims” (aided and abbeted by the O admin and dimocrat congress)

    …this health reform is targeted at capturing the baby boomer generation to be the forced guaranteed profit engine for the insurance and drug co…

  102. Clinton raps Russian failure to prosecute journalists’ killers

    By Lachlan Carmichael (AFP)

    WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton, set to make her first visit to Moscow next week as US secretary of state, on Wednesday rapped Russia’s failure to bring to justice the killers of journalists and rights activists.

    The State Department said Clinton, who issued the critical statement on the third anniversary of the unsolved slaying of journalist Anna Politkovskaya, would raise US concerns about such violence with her Russian interlocutors.

    Analyst Sarah Mendelson said meanwhile that President Barack Obama’s administration faces a hurdle to its goal of resetting ties with Russia because of what she called a “culture of impunity.”

    In her statement, Clinton expressed alarm about a trend in which she said the killers of only one of 18 journalists murdered in Russia since 2000 have been convicted. She mentioned the unsolved case of Politkovskaya, an investigative journalist for Novaya Gazeta newspaper, who was shot outside her apartment building on October 7, 2006, and that of Paul Klebnikov, editor of the Russian edition of Forbes magazine who was gunned down outside his Moscow office on July 9, 2004. She also mentioned the unsolved murder of Natalya Estemirova, a 50-year-old human rights activist, was shot dead after being kidnapped from outside her home in the Chechen capital Grozny on July 15.

    “The failure to bring to justice the killers of these journalists undermines efforts to strengthen the rule of law, improve government accountability, and combat corruption,” Clinton said.

    Her spokesman Ian Kelly told reporters that Clinton would visit Russia on October 13 and 14, with talks planned in Moscow with her Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov and probably President Dmitry Medvedev. He did not rule out a visit to another city.

    Philip Crowley, assistant secretary of state for public affairs, expected Clinton to discuss human rights during her trip in addition to the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea, US-Russian nuclear arms reductions, missile defense, and energy issues.
    “The secretary… will talk about human rights, the environment in Russia… our ongoing concern about violence against activists, our ongoing concern about intimidation of the news media,” Crowley told reporters. Crowley also expected Clinton to follow up efforts to promote cultural exchanges promised during President Barack Obama’s July summit in Moscow with his Russian counterpart Medvedev.

    Mendelson, a human rights specialist with the Center for Strategic and International Studies who attended civil society gatherings on the sidelines of the summit, says the unsolved murders set limits on a new relationship. “The Obama administration can work to reset the relationship but there’s a culture of impunity,” she told AFP. “It’s very hard to talk seriously about a reset as long as that happens.” Such murders are an international issue because some are being carried out in European capitals, not just in Russia, she said.

    On another practical level, it is difficult for the United States and Europe to enjoy full cooperation with Russia on counter-terrorism, if the Russian security and police forces remain “intensely corrupt,” she said. “It’s that kind of impunity that spills over into institutions that are in US national interests to function, that are not functioning,” Mendelson said.

  103. Health Care Speechwriter for Edwards, Obama & Clinton Without Insurance Now


  104. October 7, 2009

    Clinton: Bush Administration Should Have Rescued Lehman

    Former President Bill Clinton said the Bush White House should have rescued Lehman Brothers and it would have affected the economy and presidential election.

    “I feel more strongly now it was wrong,” said Mr. Clinton. “They decided not to facilitate a loan to Lehman Brothers. They thought Lehman Brothers was so much smaller than AIG or Bear Stearns, they could afford to let it fail. The problem is that Lehman Brothers had already paid. When they failed, all the rest of us paid. It led to a collapse of the stock market. Every bank in America that had mortgage investments it hadn’t sold off looked like it had bad loans.”

    He said the Lehman Brothers collapse also brought “stunning political consequence.” He notes presidential elections are always the first Tuesday in November but, “in 2008, we held our presidential election on Sept. 15. When the Bush administration decided not to help Lehman Brothers… McCain’s chances of wining an election went from 1-in-4 to 1-in-50. The election ended Sept. 15.”

    He acknowledged his support of Sen. Obama but said Sen. John McCain was also his friend. “I think it’s better to have elections on Election Day rather than determined by one single event. But that’s what happened.”

  105. Biden and Clinton seem to respect one another but disasgree on this Afghan strategy….I think Hillary needs to be careful as the MSM is already trying to portray her as pushing us into a quagmire like Vietnam. SHew should pooint out that she is following the Pres. own words in that Afghan is a war of necessity.,…and how many timnes can we go into a nation, tell the people we will help liberate them, but pull out way before the job is done….it left over 2 million cambodians dead.

  106. birdgal, jan,

    I am just leery of any federal program that has infiltrated the entire country with mandates for anything, especially untested vaccines such as H1N1.
    Why has the entire federal government been mandated to crank out these vaccines and yet there has been no attention to other catastrophes confronting the country, like joblessness?
    I am very suspicious about this. And like I said, for the small county where I live to be on the federal radar – i dunno – something is rotten in Denmark, I mean hopenhagen. And an interesting bit of info – the other day, one of the NYS medical people responsible for coming up with this dual vaccine mandate for health care workers was asked if he would take it or if he would recommend his family take it. Let’s just say he refused to give a straight answer.

  107. jbstonesfan Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 12:37 pm

    Well, ultimately the decision is BO’s, and only his. Other people may have input, ideas, and preferences, but the decision rests with him.

  108. basil9 Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
    birdgal, jan,


    Basil, I think the fear is for another pandemic like the 1918 influenza pandemic. Have ever read about it? I just started reading a book about it, and it is frightening. The H1N1 vaccine has been tested in clinical trials, but like everything else, side effects often show up, after a drug or vaccine has had more widespread use.

    In CA, the vaccine is highly recommended for certain groups, but it is not mandated. I do think NY is wrong for mandating the vaccines.

  109. birdgal,

    Is the U.S. saying whether there should be an interval between taking both shots? And if so, for how long. We are getting mixed signals on this part of it.


    Longtime Clinton political aide Ann Lewis emailed members of her new group, — formed from the remains of the Clinton campaign — that the Secretary of State will be speaking at the group’s first conference on
    November 6.

    It’s the first sign of Clinton feeding a real political operation that will be there for her when she leaves office, and perhaps contemplates a final bid for the White House.

    (Other speakers include Nancy Ann Minn Deparle, a key White House health care player, and Barney Frank, also known as Lewis’s brother.)

  111. Yes..this is the event I am trying to go to….the tickets are pricey for the VIP thing, but I think for the spech itself, they are reasonable…

  112. The group was formed last year by Ann Lewis. There have been several e-mails that have been sent out, but this is the first event, where Clinton will be speaking.

  113. JanH Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 1:04 pm

    Is the U.S. saying whether there should be an interval between taking both shots? And if so, for how long. We are getting mixed signals on this part of it.


    I think some of the confusion is stemming from, whether or not, the vaccine is lin a live or inactivated form.

    This is from the CDC. Note the recommendations are different for children.

    Can 2009 H1N1 vaccine be administered at the same visit as other vaccines?
    Inactivated 2009 H1N1 vaccine can be administered at the same visit as any other vaccine, including pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine. Live 2009 H1N1 vaccine can be administered at the same visit as any other live or inactivated vaccine EXCEPT seasonal live attenuated influenza vaccine.

    The age for two doses is different for seasonal (6 months through 8 years) and 2009 H1N1 monovalent vaccine (6 months through 9 years) in the package inserts. Does CDC recommend that clinicians follow the recommendation in the package inserts?
    CDC recommends that clinicians follow the guidance in the manufacturer package inserts. For 2009 H1N1 monovalent vaccines, that means that clinicians should administer two doses of 2009 H1N1 monovalent vaccine to children 6 months through 9 years of age. Persons 10 years and older should receive one dose.

    The interval between 2009 H1N1 monovalent vaccine doses, for children 6 months through 9 years, is stated as “approximately 1 month” in the package inserts. What does “approximately 1 month” mean?
    CDC recommends that the two doses of 2009 H1N1 monovalent vaccine be separated by 4 weeks. However, if the second dose is separated from the first dose by at least 21 days the second dose can be considered to be valid. If the interval separating the doses is less than 21 days the second dose should be repeated four weeks after the first dose was given.

    If seasonal live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) and 2009 H1N1 LAIV are given during the same visit, do either or both doses need to be repeated, and if so, when?
    There are no data on the administration of seasonal and 2009 H1N1 LAIV during the same visit. CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends that seasonal and 2009 H1N1 LAIV not be administered during the same visit. However, if both types of LAIV are inadvertently administered during the same visit, neither vaccine needs to be repeated.

    If seasonal and 2009 H1N1 LAIV are not administered during the same visit, but are separated by less than 4 weeks, do either or both doses need to be repeated, and if so, when?
    Seasonal LAIV and 2009 H1N1 LAIV should not be administered during the same visit, and should be separated by at least 4 weeks. However, if the interval between administration of LAIV and seasonal 2009 H1N1 vaccine is less than 4 weeks, neither vaccine needs to be repeated.

  114. Biden and Clinton seem to respect one another but disasgree on this Afghan strategy….I think Hillary needs to be careful as the MSM is already trying to portray her as pushing us into a quagmire like Vietnam. SHew should pooint out that she is following the Pres. own words in that Afghan is a war of necessity.,…and how many timnes can we go into a nation, tell the people we will help liberate them, but pull out way before the job is done….it left over 2 million cambodians dead.
    Counselor I agree. After reading General McChrystals dissertation I have come to doubt my own preliminary assessment of the situation. I do not think this is Viet Nam redux–an unwinnable war, against an implacable foe, with waning public support, and American soldiers left to die on the battlefield. Nor do I think this is the war of attrition that doomed Athens. We have a better army today than we did in Viet Nam, and counterinsurgency doctrine then was predicated on World War II meaning Windgate et al. and World War I Lawrence of Arabia–The Seven Pillars of Wisdom. Today, it is far more refined thanks to people like Patraeus and this man McChrystal. Thus, in keeping with Clausewitz, war is an instrument of policy, not an end to itself. And as I listen to the brilliance of Hillary and the words of McCrystal, I think he is on the right track. Here is what the man says, in his own words:

    “I do not underestimate the enormous challenge we face in executing this new strategy; however, we have a key advantage: the majority of Afghans do not want a return of the Taliban.”

    He then goes on to quote the words of the Afghan Defense Minister:

    “Victory is within our grasp provided we recommit ourselves to the lessons learned and provided we fulfill the requirements needed to make success inevitable. I reject the myth advanced by the media that Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires, and he US and NATO effort is destined to fail, even though that has been the major focus of the enemy’s propaganda campaign. Unlike the Russians, who imposed a government with an alien ideology, you enabled us to write our own constitution and choose a democratic government. Unlike the Russians who came to destroy our country, you came to rebuild.”

    Obama sees nothing and knows nothing. The question is whether his puppeteers see the light. I am disappointed in Jim Webb for trashing this man. I feel an affinity for Jim based on a number of factors, and supported in his campaign against George Allen out west. But his current comments I cannot support.

  115. Russia seeks new arms reduction deal with US


    Russia believes that a new strategic arms reduction deal with the US should be signed before cuts in tactical nuclear weapons are discussed, the foreign ministry said on Thursday.

    “As to tactical nuclear weapons, we share the view expressed by (US Assistant Secretary of Defence for International Security Affairs) Alexander Vershbow that the discussion of this issue is premature,” ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko said.

    “It would be more logical to finish work on a new agreement to replace the START treaty first,” he said.

    The next round of arms reduction talks between Russia and the US is due later this month when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visits Russia.

    President Dmitry Medvedev earlier said a strategic arms reduction treaty should be ready by December.

    According to a report published by the US State Department in April, as of Jan 1, Russia had 3,909 nuclear warheads and 814 delivery vehicles. This included ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBM) and strategic bombers.

    It said the US had 5,576 warheads and 1,198 delivery vehicles.

    The Strategic Arms Reductions Treaty (START 1), signed in 1991, makes it incumbent on Russia and the US to reduce nuclear warheads to 6,000 and their delivery vehicles to 1,600 each. The treaty expires Dec 5.

  116. October 8, 2009

    Barack Obama: Taleban can be involved in Afghanistan future

    President Obama is prepared to accept some Taleban involvement in Afghanistan’s political future and is unlikely to favour a large influx of new US troops being demanded by his ground commander, a senior official said tonight. Mr Obama appears to have been swayed in recent days by arguments from some advisers, led by Vice-President Joe Biden, that the Taleban do not pose a direct threat to the US and that there should be greater focus on tackling al-Qaeda inside Pakistan.

    The official, speaking anonymously to the press about Mr Obama’s internal discussions – a tactic that is causing dismay among some senior military officials – said the president’s final decision on his war strategy and troop levels is still at least two weeks away.

    Yet if Mr Obama fails to dispatch at least a significant number of the 40,000 troops requested by General Stanley McChystal, he will have ignored the wishes of his own ground commander and will face fierce attacks from Republicans back home.

    After two days of discussions on the critical role Pakistan must play if the US is to succeed in Afghanistan and the region, Mr Obama has been presented with conflicting arguments over whether Afghanistan would again become a safe haven for al-Qaeda if it fell to the Taleban.

    Mr Biden has argued for months that with the cooperation of Pakistan, which in recent months has shown a far greater willingness to take on militants in the lawless border regions, al-Qaeda can be contained and even destroyed inside Afghanistan. He is also arguing that the Taleban pose no direct threat to the US and therefore no more troops should be dispatched there and that, even if large swathes of the country fall under Taleban control, they will not provide an already weakened al-Qaeda with safe havens, as they did before the September 11 attacks.

    In a sign of how politically astute the Taleban has become in deciphering the debate raging inside the White House, the insurgents issued a statement on their website declaring that they have “no agenda to harm other countries.” It appeared to be a bid to persuade the West that they were no longer interested in working with al-Qaeda.

    Mr Obama, who is now holding his ground commander’s official request for up to 40,000 more troops in his hands, has spent the past 48 hours focused on that central question: whether the Taleban poses a direct threat to America. He is keeping his cards close to his chest but appears to be striving for a middle ground strategy between Mr Biden’s and General McChrystal’s, with the possibility of sending a smaller number of troops to help train the Afghan army.

    General McChrystal, together with Republicans and some moderate Democrats, insists that a full counter-insurgency strategy is the only option to avoid losing the war in Afghanistan, and that defeat will lead to the return of the terror network. Mr Obama’s lengthy reassessment of that strategy – which he announced in March – is triggering increased misgivings inside the military.

    Army officers who gathered at a convention in Washington earlier this week expressed dismay over thinly disguised rebukes given to General McChrystal last weekend by Mr Gates and James Jones, Mr Obama’s National Security Adviser, after the ground commander said in a London speech that a scaled-back war effort would fail. Others also expressed concern that the mission was still ill-defined, and that Mr Obama’s reassessment could damage the campaign by demoralising the troops and unnerving allies.

    On Saturday, Mr Obama holds his fifth meeting with his full war cabinet on Afghanistan, when he is expected – for the first time – to address the issue of troop numbers.

  117. Fears of third intifada as tension grows in Israel

    Israel is bracing itself for violent protests on a scale not since the second intifada after Palestinians officials gave warning of a mass uprising.

    By Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem
    08 Oct 2009

    After two weeks of mounting tension and sporadic clashes between Israeli security forces and Palestinian protesters, a showdown is expected when Friday prayers are called at the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem’s old city. Thousands of Israeli soldiers and policemen are being deployed around the site after the Palestinian Authority called a one-day general strike and a leading Islamic cleric in Egypt urged the Arab world to rise up in “a day of anger”.

    But what will worry Israel the most are mutterings in the occupied West Bank of a “third intifada”. The most recent intifada, or mass uprising, erupted in 2000 and lasted four years – resulting in the deaths of thousands of Palestinians and hundreds of Israelis. As tensions have risen in recent days, the rhetoric has grown more incendiary.

    Hatem Abdel Kader, a senior Palestinian official in the West Bank, told the Jerusalem Post: “Israel’s decisions so far have been very dangerous, and if they don’t want things to escalate, the Israelis should back away from this issue. “If not, we are afraid that the situation could lead to an explosion. It could lead to a third intifada.”

    As in 2000, the flashpoint of the simmering violence has been the al-Aqsa mosque, regarded by many Israelis as the location of the Jewish Temple the Romans destroyed in AD 70. An inflammatory visit to the site by Ariel Sharon, the former Israeli prime minister, nine years ago provided the spark for the second intifada.

    This time the violence was triggered by accusations that “Jewish right wing extremists” had been escorted by Israeli police into the al-Aqsa mosque compound, known as the Temple Mount by Jews on two recent Jewish holidays.

    Down the winding alleyways of the old city and into the Arab suburbs of east Jerusalem, word spread of a planned Jewish takeover of Islam’s third holiest site. Older grievances about Israeli archaeologists allegedly damaging the foundations of the mosque during excavation work quickly rose to the fore. Stone throwing Palestinian protesters clashed with police first in the old city, then in other parts of east Jerusalem. Anger was stoked even further as Israel restricted access to the mosque five days ago, conditions which apply on Friday.

    On a flat top roof outside the old city’s walls on Friday, dozens of Muslim men gathered to vent their frustration. “Our dignity is wounded,” said Zahy Nujeidat, spokesman for the Islamic Movement, an organisation representing Israel’s Arab population. “The al-Aqsa mosque is our fate, our history, our culture. Without it we have nothing.”

    Yet, as in 2000, the issue of the mosque hides deeper rooted issues. Some observers say the Palestinian Authority is taking advantage of the situation to deflect attention from its own unpopularity. At the same time, public frustration at Israel’s perceived obstruction of the peace process and the expansion of Jewish settlements in east Jerusalem and the West Bank is growing. There is deep suspicion of Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, and his right-wing government.

    “What we have here is a very volatile mix,” said Ghaith al-Omari, president of the American Task Force in Palestine. “Once incident, one shot fired and we could see an explosive situation in Jerusalem.”


    This may seem unreasonable to some, but I blame obama for the escalating unrest in the Middle East.

  118. birdgal,

    I talked to my niece and she is going to phone our family doctor tomorrow and then make a decision. Thank you for all the data. It really helped.

  119. Paula,

    I’ve read that she supports more troops if necessary. But she also said on CNN that she thought it was smart of obama to take some time to decide. It might have just been lip service though.

  120. Mc Chrystal: “I do not underestimate the enormous challenge we face in executing this new strategy; however, we have a key advantage: the majority of Afghans do not want a return of the Taliban.”

    Mr. Obama is prepared to accept some Taleban involvement in Afghanistan’s political future and is unlikely to favour a large influx of new US troops being demanded by his ground commander, a senior official said tonight.

    Therein lies the problem. Letting the camels nose under the tent. The fool does not understand. Dudge is taking Obama to the woodshed with an article saying troop morale is flagging.

  121. wbboei,

    what bambi knows about strategic military command is nil. How on earth can he be allowed to make a decision of this magnitude?

  122. JanH…this is what they (Palaestinian leaders) want as their people are used as pawns/martrys . It is sad , but as the Gold aMeir once stated sop poignantly:

    We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us.”

  123. What does Hillary advocate for Afghanistan? Does she back McChrystal’s plan?
    As I recall, she ducked the question in the Couric interview. I think she is serious about winning in Afghanistan. No withdrawal. However, there will come a point where Mr. Obama waffles on that as well. Right now, he is losing the morale of the troops. He had better tell his minions to stop taking shots at their general.

  124. jbstonesfan,

    That is an excellent interview. Couric asked some great questions and Hillary nailed each one.

    “As you know, Katie, I was a senator in New York when we were attacked on 9/11. I want to see us get, kill, or capture bin Ladin, Zawahiri. They attacked us. We cannot allow them to proceed with impunity. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that we have to make a commitment to try to transform a society that may not want to be transformed, that may not be ready for even wanting the kind of development and values that we represent. We need to make it clear to whoever is elected – and it looks increasingly like it’s going to be Karzai again – that our assistance to him and to his government come with expectations that we are going to look to have implemented.”


    And that is how a decisive potus would speak. I love how she capped everything she said by saying that ultimately it was the commander-in-chief’s decision. Oh yeah!

  125. “We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us.””


    I remember when I first read that statement that she had analyzed the situation in a nutshell. This remains as true today as it did then.


    Pelosi’s claim that this will be the most ethical and transparent Congress in history is looking pretty hollow.

    Is Rangel being protected because pols are afraid of offending a “certain voting bloc”???

    Just how many ethics violations is “too much”?

    Supposedly, they won’t ask him to step down because the Ethics committee has already been investigating a ton of other alleged improprieties…for over a year!!!

    Ethics Committee: “Just put this complaint in the big pile over there. We can’t get rid of him until every last complaint has been fully investigated…who knows how long that will take. So he’ll just have to stay in power until we make a determination”.

    October 7, 2009, 3:20 pm
    Democrats Block G.O.P. Move on Rangel

    By Carl Hulse
    House Democrats on Wednesday blocked a Republican effort to force Representative Charles B. Rangel from the chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee and instead referred the demand to the panel already investigating the New York Democrat.

    As expected, the House voted 246 to 153 to essentially table the call for Mr. Rangel’s ouster by turning it over to the ethics committee. Representative John Carter, Republican of Texas, had sought Mr. Rangel’s removal in a resolution that said national attention to a series of financial lapses by the chairman of the tax-writing committee has “held the House up to public ridicule.”

    Under rules governing consideration of such resolutions in the House, there was no debate on the proposal. But Democrats and a few Republicans said the House should take no action until the ethics panel reached a conclusion on Mr. Rangel’s belated disclosure of significant personal assets and initial failure to pay taxes on some income.

    Mr. Rangel sat in the front row of the House chamber as the nine-page resolution recounting news stories and editorials on his financial miscues was read twice in full – a process that consumed about 30 minutes.

    “All I can say is I voted for the motion to table and send it to the ethics committee,” said Mr. Rangel as he exited the chamber. “I have been waiting patiently for the ethics committee to make a judgment. That is where it belongs. It does not belong on the floor.”

    Republicans said they only wanted Mr. Rangel to step aside pending completion of the ethics review. Though they were defeated in their effort, they still obtained what they wanted in political terms – another vote they can attempt to use to suggest that Democrats and specifically Speaker Nancy Pelosi were protecting Mr. Rangel.

    Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader, said in a statement that the vote “is just the latest example of Speaker Pelosi breaking her promise to have the most ‘open and ethical’ Congress in history. Instead of holding Chairman Rangel accountable for his actions, House Democrats are once again circling the wagons and demonstrating their loyalty to a leader who faces serious questions about his official conduct.”

    The speaker’s office disputed his characterization, with Brendan Daly, a spokesman for Ms. Pelosi, saying that “today’s bipartisan vote sent a clear message that the independent ethics committee must be allowed to complete its work.”

    Whether Republicans can turn Mr. Rangel into a potent symbol of government misconduct remains to be seen, but they do believe that it can help them create an image of Democratic ethical problems in the run-up to the 2010 mid-term elections.

    Two Democrats, Representatives Travis Childers and Gene Taylor of Mississippi, voted with 151 Republicans in seeking to remove Mr. Rangel; six Republicans voted with 240 Democrats in sending the resolution to the ethics committee.

    Among the Republicans was Representative Peter King, a home-state colleague of Mr. Rangel. “I think it is a dangerous precedent to find someone guilty before the ethics committee has made a decision,” Mr. King said.

    Thirty-three House members, including members of the ethics committee, either did not vote or voted present.

    Democrats say they would like to see a prompt resolution of the year-long ethics inquiry. Mr. Rangel said the extended process “is a thing that bothers me and my family.”

  127. Paula Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
    What does Hillary advocate for Afghanistan?

    She advocate that it be the final crisis that broke Obama’s back.

  128. JanH Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
    October 8, 2009

    Barack Obama: Taleban can be involved in Afghanistan future

    President Obama is prepared to accept some Taleban involvement in Afghanistan’s political future and is unlikely to favour a large influx of new US troops being demanded by his ground commander, a senior official said tonight.

    Coddling tyrrants and terrorists…the new era in American diplomacy.

    When’s he going to have a picture taken bowing to Osama bin Laden?

  129. jbstonesfan Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
    Yes..this is the event I am trying to go to….the tickets are pricey for the VIP thing, but I think for the spech itself, they are reasonable…

    birdgal Says:

    do you have details….time, place, etc.?


    Clinton has not revealed how she is leaning in the sessions, according to aides. While she is broadly supportive of building up troop levels – although not necessarily in the bigger numbers favored by McChrystal – she also believes economic and other civilian efforts must be prominent parts of the plan too, said the aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to detail her views.

  131. Carol: is proud to announce our

    First Annual Public Policy

    Friday, November 6, 2009

    Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center

    1300 Pennsylvania Ave, NW

    Washington, DC

    Featured events include:

    An Address by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton


    A Conversation with U.S. Representative Barney Frank


    Conversations and workshops on today’s issues, including health care,
    the new media landscape and America’s leadership around the world

    The Conference is a fundraising event to benefit, a non-partisan, 501(c)(3) organization; contributions are tax deductible to the fullest extent of the law.

    Book your hotel soon – limited availability.
    Click here for hotel information. Feed | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service

  132. Seriously, what peace has BO made, he has America on the verge of a civil war. All foreign nations hate him. So if he wins he will get it for a speech that someone else wrote and he merely read it off the telepromter.

    If there has been headway in any peaceful situation it was because of Hillary Clinton and she should be getting it, not the usurper.

    The only way I will agree that he gets it is if he gets it and goes home to Chicago and lives happily ever after.

  133. I also wanted to say something about the Clinton Tapes. What a great gift Bill Clinton gave us when he decided to have his Presidency taped this way. This is truly an amazing account of what an American Democratic President that had to deal with the onslaught of republican hate while trying to get this country back on track after 12 years of republican control. I have to say that everything I ever thought of Bill Clinton that was formed mistakely by the republicans and the lefties has changed.

    This book should be on the best seller’s list and should go down in history. It is such a historical gift.

    Bill is such an interesting, smart and down to earth man that it is amazing. It also shows the pettyness of the republicans. They seem to think it is their right to govern the US and not the democrats. Well if that can’t do any better than Carter and Obama they shouldn’t, but this is why they went after Clinton, he wasn’t like them.

    Bill Clinton has more nobelity in his little finger than Ted Kennedy had in his whole body.

  134. Jan H, Hillary has that same ability to be another Golda Mier, but the lefties and the rethugs stand in her way. Its terrible!

  135. Another Evelyn Pringle comment on attempts to stifle any negatives about the Messiah.She must be a the real tough journalist that I have followed and trusted over the years.She is an avid Hillary supporter and we should all follow her pursuit of Rezko,MO and BO.

    –source writes:

    Kall sends his newsletter every day or so. [RBO has to confess, we don’t read it often — just too many things to read in the inbox.] Kall may be wanting to ingratiate himself with the Obama crowd since Obama looks like a lock.

    I guess Evelyn is no longer politically correct.

    Evelyn’s response to this was:

    I can’t tell you how pissed off I am right now. If this goes down, it would definitely damage my reputation as a journalist and I’ll most certainly will defend myself.

    The source’s response to Evelyn’s comments was:

    This thing about removing Evelyn’s articles was so spineless I figured he had gone round the bend so far that anything I had to say to him would be treated with contempt. I know it would be hard for her to be even-tempered in talking to him but she should do it. Being slapped around by Evelyn might bring him to his senses. Tell her to YELL AT HIM! straighten him out.

    Evelyn’s response was this:

    Yes I will yell if he takes my articles down. Mainly that he better not think I will be the next Dan Rather and not come right back at him and OpEd News.

    I stayed with OpEd because I thought it was a really decent internet daily. But if Rob proves me wrong I’ll go with one of the others and I’ll make sure people know the reason is that OpEd can’t be trusted to print the truth any more than the MSM.

    When I found out Obama was as corrupt as any Republican, I was not about to keep my mouth shut just because he was a Democrat. Believe me, I knew what might happen to me if I went public – but that was not reason enough to keep quiet either – at least not when you have a conscience like mine.

    The thought of the Illinois political mob running this country is the most disgusting thing I can think of at this point.

    Yeah I dislike McCain but I always knew the Republicans were corrupt bastards – Democrats were supposed to be different – well not anymore.

    There is no longer a lesser of 2 evils. I decided yesterday that I’m writing in Bobby Kennedy Jrs name on the ballot. As for the argument that my vote won’t count for anything – better it not count for anything than help put either of the two crooks running in office. At least I can honestly tell my foreign readers that I had no part in any of it, no matter which one wins.

    There you have it. Both my source and Evelyn Pringle gave RBO permission to post this. This is a serious situation, particularly since it does not bode well for freedom of speech in the future if writers, especially bloggers, cannot investigate and write about what they find regardless of whom they support politically. Will that be the new litmus test?

  136. Sounds like the usurper is going to screw Afganistan. I just can’t believe, all those women that are in school now will be taken to the football stadium and shot. This is so bizarre.

  137. Jan H, Hillary has that same ability to be another Golda Mier…


    Yes she does. And I honestly believe that it doesn’t matter what her enemies try to do, she will still soar in ways that obama could only ever imagine in his dreams.

  138. I was sitting here trying to find away to express what I was thinking. The only thing that kept coming to mind was what admin said many months ago….

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

    it realy sucks having to say I told you so.

  139. “Clinton has not revealed how she is leaning in the sessions, according to aides. While she is broadly supportive of building up troop levels – although not necessarily in the bigger numbers favored by McChrystal – she also believes economic and other civilian efforts must be prominent parts of the plan too, said the aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to detail her views.”


    She is keeping things close to her chest. No way does she want to be blamed for bambi’s potentially massive mistakes. And mark my words, the rancid media are always lying in wait to pounce on her every syllable. She also realizes that rebuilding a country that the U.S. and other allies have had to damage in order to push back the taliban is the responsible thing to do.

  140. She also realizes that rebuilding a country that the U.S. and other allies have had to damage in order to push back the taliban is the responsible thing to do.

    And to rebuild, security is vital, which means more troops.

  141. “And to rebuild, security is vital, which means more troops.”

    Yes it does. But only with a military strategy that isn’t piecemeal, which is bambi’s specialty. He has to let the experts around him come up with the details. He isn’t qualified to make the big decisions and never will be.

  142. JanH Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 7:40 pm

    Agreed. He is definitely not qualified to make that decision.

  143. I just read the Couric interview with Hillary. This sounds like an attempt at a ‘trap’ question.

    Couric “QUESTION: I love talking to you because it’s actually really great, because I think people will understand what you’re saying.


    QUESTION: Okay. All right, really quickly – okay, okay. The question I had – you alluded to it earlier, Secretary Clinton, but how can the U.S. stand behind a President who is so mistrusted by so many of the people in the country? Isn’t that a bad partnership? While reading the question, I was almost thinking she meant Obama and she was hoping to catch Hillary off guard. Ha- Hillary didn’t fall for it! 🙂

    SECRETARY CLINTON: Katie, we’re going to have to expect a lot more. And I have known and worked with President Karzai since 2003, I guess.

  144. “Ha- Hillary didn’t fall for it!”


    Personally, I have always liked Couric. But next to Hillary she is a novice-beginner’s level.

  145. Bill Clinton must be laughing tonight at the hypocrite (yes, National Enquirer, but what other publication has been so accurate of late?):

    David Letterman’s sensational sex scandal has triggered a $300 million divorce war between the 62-year-old talk-show host and his outraged wife Regina, say sources close to the star.

    The couple – who lived together for years before marrying March 19 – are fighting over everything from his extensive property holdings to custody of their son Harry, 6, according to insiders.

    “It’s become a real battle,” revealed a Late Show insider.

    “Regina is humiliated, and she wants to get even with David for his public admission he cheated on her repeatedly during their 23-year relationship.”

    Letterman stunned his fans when he confessed on-air to having sex with female employees and revealed he had become the victim of attempted blackmail.

    The ENQUIRER was told the kinky late-night host maintained a fully equipped love nest, likes to play “dress up” – and even had a girlfriend parade around with a set of pom-poms pretending to be a cheerleader.

    Letterman owns a very successful production company – ironically named Worldwide Pants – plus a fortune in real estate, and boasts an annual income of more than $45 million.

    Sources describe her as “mortified” that David carried on sexual relationships with a number of his female staffers – including former assistant Stephanie Birkitt.

  146. admin Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 10:27 pm

    Yes, Letterman is a hypocrite. People who live in glass houses, should not throw stones.

  147. admin Says:
    October 8th, 2009 at 10:27 pm

    Bill Clinton must be laughing tonight at the hypocrite (yes, National Enquirer, but what other publication has been so accurate of late?):


    Good for Regina- Letterman is an ass. He deseves what he gets from his wife. He has been degrading women on his show as long as he’s been on Late Night. Calling Sarah Palin’s daughter a slut.

    I hope Regina cleans his clock! Go Regina!

    I wonder if Dave is laughing now? moron!

  148. The group was formed last year by Ann Lewis. There have been several e-mails that have been sent out, but this is the first event, where Clinton will be speaking.


    The same Ann Lewis that marched with Sheehan in Crawford? I met her twice and took pics of her for her in Austin when we march there against the iraq war.

  149. This is so rich-

    Letterman has been dubbed by the Enquirer as the “phallic funnyman”… too funny!

    Katie Couric is a wannabe. She never was anything approaching a journalist. During the Primary, she never missed an opportunity to insult the Clintons or ask embarrassing questions. That whole nbc crew, especially Matt (Pee-Wee Herman) Lauer will be standing in the unemployment line soon when nbc is finally sold.

  150. They are messing with the site again. I still can’t get on from Yahoo and just now I could not get on to comment. It took several attempts.

    Couric, I can never forgive her for asking Hillary why the boys in high school called her refrigerator. How can you ask a former first lady that kind of a question on national TV?? She is a disgrace to womanhood!!

  151. Mrs. Smith,

    I don’t approve of Couric’s insults to the Clintons, but I did like her on the Today Show. LOL…sorry about that. 🙂

  152. Young Hamlet’s Agony

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, October 9, 2009

    The genius of democracy is the rotation of power, which forces the opposition to be serious — particularly about things like war, about which until Jan. 20 of this year Democrats were decidedly unserious.

    When the Iraq war (which a majority of Senate Democrats voted for) ran into trouble and casualties began to mount, Democrats followed the shifting winds of public opinion and turned decidedly antiwar. But needing political cover because of their post-Vietnam reputation for weakness on national defense, they adopted Afghanistan as their pet war.

    “I was part of the 2004 Kerry campaign, which elevated the idea of Afghanistan as ‘the right war’ to conventional Democratic wisdom,” wrote Democratic consultant Bob Shrum shortly after President Obama was elected. “This was accurate as criticism of the Bush administration, but it was also reflexive and perhaps by now even misleading as policy.”

    Which is a clever way to say that championing victory in Afghanistan was a contrived and disingenuous policy in which Democrats never seriously believed, a convenient two-by-four with which to bash George Bush over Iraq — while still appearing warlike enough to fend off the soft-on-defense stereotype.

    Brilliantly crafted and perfectly cynical, the “Iraq war bad, Afghan war good” posture worked. Democrats first won Congress, then the White House. But now, unfortunately, they must govern. No more games. No more pretense.

    So what does their commander in chief do now with the war he once declared had to be won but had been almost criminally under-resourced by Bush?

    Perhaps provide the resources to win it?

    You would think so. And that’s exactly what Obama’s handpicked commander requested on Aug. 30 — a surge of 30,000 to 40,000 troops to stabilize a downward spiral and save Afghanistan the way a similar surge saved Iraq.

    That was more than five weeks ago. Still no response. Obama agonizes publicly as the world watches. Why? Because, explains national security adviser James Jones, you don’t commit troops before you decide on a strategy.

    No strategy? On March 27, flanked by his secretaries of defense and state, the president said this: “Today I’m announcing a comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.” He then outlined a civilian-military counterinsurgency campaign to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan. And to emphasize his seriousness, the president made clear that he had not arrived casually at this decision. The new strategy, he declared, “marks the conclusion of a careful policy review.”

    Conclusion, mind you. Not the beginning. Not a process. The conclusion of an extensive review, the president assured the nation, that included consultation with military commanders and diplomats, with the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan, with our NATO allies and members of Congress.

    The general in charge was then relieved and replaced with Obama’s own choice, Stanley McChrystal. And it’s McChrystal who submitted the request for the 40,000 troops, a request upon which the commander in chief promptly gagged.

    The White House began leaking an alternate strategy, apparently proposed (invented?) by Vice President Biden, for achieving immaculate victory with arm’s-length use of cruise missiles, Predator drones and special ops.

    The irony is that no one knows more about this kind of warfare than Gen. McChrystal. He was in charge of exactly this kind of “counterterrorism” in Iraq for nearly five years, killing thousands of bad guys in hugely successful under-the-radar operations. When the world’s expert on this type of counterterrorism warfare recommends precisely the opposite strategy — “counterinsurgency,” meaning a heavy-footprint, population-protecting troop surge — you have the most convincing of cases against counterterrorism by the man who most knows its potential and its limits. And McChrystal was emphatic in his recommendation: To go any other way than counterinsurgency would lose the war.

    Yet his commander in chief, young Hamlet, frets, demurs, agonizes. His domestic advisers, led by Rahm Emanuel, tell him if he goes for victory, he’ll become LBJ, the domestic visionary destroyed by a foreign war. His vice president holds out the chimera of painless counterterrorism success.

    Against Emanuel and Biden stand Gen. David Petraeus, the world’s foremost expert on counterinsurgency (he saved Iraq with it), and Stanley McChrystal, the world’s foremost expert on counterterrorism. Whose recommendation on how to fight would you rely on?

    Less than two months ago — Aug. 17 in front of an audience of veterans — the president declared Afghanistan to be “a war of necessity.” Does anything he says remain operative beyond the fading of the audience applause?

  153. JanH, insulting the Clinton’s in the press and in Washington seems to be the blood sport that they all love to do.

    It absolutely work the opposite of how they would like it to work, because they have higher poll numbers than all the Potus’s and first ladies alive. They came from middle class families and ascended to the highest level possible in the US. There both are brilliant.

  154. Clinton trip comes amid debate on Afghanistan

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton embarks Friday on a six-day trip to Europe and Russia that comes at a crucial time in the Obama administration’s decision-making on a strategy for Afghanistan. She will depart one day after the inaugural flight of the “lethal transit” agreement, signed in July by President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, which allows transport of military personnel and equipment across Russia to support the U.S.-NATO mission in Afghanistan.

    On the trip, the secretary will confer with key allies about Obama’s emerging strategy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, said Phil Gordon, assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs. Meetings are planned with the French foreign minister, the British foreign secretary and prime minister, the Russian foreign minister and Medvedev. She also will discuss the next steps on Iran and North Korea and international efforts to have the two countries end their nuclear programs.

    Clinton also will highlight two enduring conflicts that have come or are coming to a close: one in Northern Ireland and the other involving Turkey’s relations with Armenia. In Northern Ireland she will underscore both the peace process and economic development. The United States now has an economic envoy to Northern Ireland and a U.S. delegation of business leaders will accompany Clinton to Belfast.

    In Zurich, Switzerland, she will attend a signing ceremony normalizing relations between Turkey and Armenia. Relations between the two were disrupted 16 years ago over Armenia’s occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh, an enclave in Azerbaijan. Gordon called the signing a “historic step” that will “contribute to peace and security throughout the region.”

    However, the parliaments of both countries still must ratify the agreement and a senior State Department official — authorized to brief reporters without attribution because of diplomatic sensitivities — said the situation remains “difficult.” “There’s opposition both in Turkey and in Armenia,” the senior official said, “but both governments realize ultimately it’s in their interest to have normalized relations and an open border after years of tension and the economic isolation, particularly of Armenia.”

    The centerpiece of the trip will be Clinton’s visit to Moscow. At the top of the agenda is working toward an agreement to take the place of the Start II arms control pact, which expires December 5, as well as the newly created bilateral presidential commission that is working on a broad range of issues, from arms control to health.

    A senior State Department official said the negotiating teams working on Start are “making good progress … but there is a lot of work that has to be done in a short amount of time.” The official said there are sticking points on delivery vehicles — the missiles that carry nuclear bombs — and the number of warheads.

    In Moscow, Clinton will meet with human rights and civil society supporters. The State Department official said she will raise the issue of recent slayings of journalists in Russia. She also will discuss Russia’s incursion into Georgia, an issue that he said “is not satisfactorily settled.” During a stop in Kazan, Russia, Clinton will highlight interfaith cooperation. She will solicit ideas from religious leaders, young Muslims, exchange students and others on how to bridge the divide between faiths. Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan, a majority-Muslim part of the Russian Federation.

    Her trip will begin in Zurich, then move to London, England; Dublin, Ireland; Belfast, Northern Ireland; Moscow and Kazan. She will return to Washington on Wednesday.

    According to the State Department, Clinton has visited 34 countries and flown 130,748 miles since becoming secretary of state.

  155. confloyd,

    When Couric’s husband died of cancer and she took up his cause, I admired her for being brave in light of how difficult it must have been for her and her family.

    There are times when I have liked celebrities and yet found certain things not to like about them. The same with people in my life. I don’t know if I am explaining this very well, but I did like her interviews on the Today Show for many years (not so much towards the end). I was never a Matt Lauer fan and am not a Meredith fan.

  156. JanH, of coarse, I agree. Hillary being cheated of her rightful place in the oval office is still fresh, I imagine someday we will all move on, but that is going to take some time, especially when we have to look at the thief everyday on the television spouting his usual lies.

  157. Letterman is on now-

    He’s trying very hard to be funny but it’s apparent he’s definitely affected by his wife’s view of the their situation. I was just thinking- Letterman always lobbied hard and promoted Obama on his show. His kissing up to Obama was enough to make one nauseous… when you make a deal with the devil there comes a time when you have to pay… Letterman’s arrived 6 mos after he tied the knot with Regina… as Regina heaves a sigh of relief…

  158. I don’t understand why the network never gives these clowns their walking paper. Is not supposed to be wonderful that he cheats on women and just to save himself as much as possible admits it to a national audience…which he wouldn’t have done if he’d had any choice.

    This continued “boys club” mentality makes me sick.

  159. I think Dave made a fatal error admitting his affairs publicly. Although he did it in the context of a joke getting a laugh… he meant it- Letterman will be his attorney’s worse nightmare…

  160. Re:
    JanH Says:

    October 8th, 2009 at 11:32 pm
    Young Hamlet’s Agony

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, October 9, 2009
    I respect Charles Krauthammer’s view. He has a thoughtful, logical, plain spoken approach; he says what he means and means what he says. And always spoken logic, without emotion.

    David Letterman is a sorry POS multiplied by a hundred. He bashed Palin’s young daughter/s; who has ever been young and not made a mistake? However, six years ago when Letterman had a child out of wedlock [a b@s_ _ _ _ no I won’t put that label on a sweet and innocent child, that label will be reserved for his father], he was HOW old????? Waaaay old enough and experienced enough to know how to prevent a mistake. Yet he hipocritically went after a young girl; I wonder what Regina thought of that when she had made the same mistake?
    Anyone else would have been charged with unlawfully using his superior boss status to coerce the female staffers into having sex.
    The network should relegate that POS a hundred times over to the unemployment line stat!!!!!!!

  161. Bill Clinton was on Letterman not to long before he confessed on TV. Bill made mention of Letterman’s 5 y.o. child.

  162. Why would the auto union have a flag like this?

    h t tp ://www.theobamafile .com/_ images/ Obama Flag Closeup. jpg

  163. OMG, Obama has won the nobel peace prize!!! Apparently for 2 speeches!! This freaking world has gone mad!!
    Only 3 sitting POTUS’s have won the award, FDR, Wilson, Carter.

    This corruption that elected this jerk must be worldwide!! He hasn’t even been Potus for 1 year yet. The crisis all over the world are worse. Iran is threatening to blow EARTH and dumbass gets a Peace prise. Omg, Omg Omg!!!

  164. Here again, the little jerk gets the award that Hillary should have gotten. The one she did get, the freaking press did not even cover. I want to move off this planet.

    Hillary is the one that has been flying all over the world to make the idiot look good. No wonder he said at the Clinton Global Iniative he said she was doing a great job, I guess so, to make the fool look good.

  165. A nobel peace prize for the asshole sitting on his ass while our children are being blown to pieces in Afganistan. Then he has the audacity to hang some painting in the WH, that makes a joke of his inability to make a freaking decision.

    Poor little Bambi, we must give him something to cover his ass after the stinging loss of the Olympics. Maybe had he realized the the 12 years he was an Illinois senator that people were freezing to death in his best friends (valerie Jarett’s) ghetto slum, maybe if he had cleaned up Chicago then maybe they’d got the Olympics.

  166. I just wonder if he held up the 40,000 troops to Afganistan to make sure nothing interferred with his winning this stupid award. Like the little mobsters really needs another million bucks. I suggest he gives to the people in the Chicago slums to pay for heat this winter.

  167. Feb.09 was the deadline for nomination for the nobel peace prize, the man had been in office for 6days. So how in 6 days did he actually win the nobel peace prize?? They saw it was because of his nuclear arms deal at the UN. This time frame doesn’t make sense.

    Looks like daddy Soros bought this award for his little Bambi, no doubt he was depressed over the loss of the Olympics.

    Sorry folks, but I am mad as hell!

  168. Everytime he falls there is someone to pick him up. Need a large barf bag. Recall however, that Committee also picked Carter. Look how that turned out.

    OSLO (AP) — President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” the Norwegian Nobel Committee said, citing his outreach to the Muslim world and attempts to curb nuclear proliferation.

    The stunning choice made Obama the third sitting U.S. president to win the Nobel Peace Prize and shocked Nobel observers because Obama took office less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline. Obama’s name had been mentioned in speculation before the award but many Nobel watchers believed it was too early to award the president.

    www dot

  169. ‘Peace Prize to Obama – big mistake by Nobel committee’
    It’s only words right now…
    raising eyebrows in Russia…
    almost farcical…
    hope to influence Obama’s ultimate actions…

    www dot

  170. How in the world do you do enough in two weeks on the job to earn a nobel prize??

    This is the most disgusting thing I have witnessed in years! I wonder who the nominees were??

    WTF, is he already KING OF THE WORLD??

  171. I think the Nobel award is definitely going to have controversy..I don’t think O is going to get a sudden outpouring of universal admiration.

    Even ABC radio this morning, which was relentlessly pro Obama during the campaign last year, talked about how the award was being mocked in Pakistan/Afghanistan and pointed out that other presidents have been nominated but only after being in office some time.

    I think this award could backfire on brings up all kinds of questions..

  172. The fact that Jimmy Carter won this award says it all to me. How sad that neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton, who have done extraordinary things for world peace AND prosperity, would be passed over for this fraud. Sure, he know about this “coronation”. This must have set Daddy Warbucks (Soros) back a pretty penny. Junior got his allowance in the form of another “title”. We are now REALLY the laughing stock of the world. This is like giving some B-list celebrity the Lifetime Achievement Award because she or he slept with the right directors/producers. Yes, I definitely feel the fix was in, and that’s why he jettisoned off for Copenhagen, which was also over-the-top – for the photo op – believing USA would at least capture the silver. Soros couldn’t play “Let’s Make A Deal” with the OIC. ABSOLUTELY this is designed to make us all “sit down and shut up” about a troop surge or dare to have an opinion about Iran’s nuclear threat. Like the other bloggers, I’m ready to move to Mars. I not only don’t recognize my country – I have lost faith in the entire world. Maybe we can join Limbaugh in New Zealand. Making my next trip to Ireland or Yukon. Who knows – maybe there’s gold in them thar hills…………………

    I’m telling you folks, Hal Lindsey reports the news too – and this is all playing out to scripture. Did someone say Antichrist?

  173. Since “All the world’s a stage” literally for The One, waiting any minute for the likes of Spielberg to have him walking on water with special effects. This also proves beyond a shadow of a doubt how the NWO is calling the shots for the decline of USA. This is all designed AND TIMED for us, the folks, to go quietly into the night like good little body-snatcher robots, and usher in this single-payer government-controlled deathcare.

    HELL NO! Legislators should see this latest farce – Nobel Peace Prize – for what it is. Talk about “pulling out all stops” to try and force this down our throats. Who are we lowly peasants to question “The One” about what’s best for us – with his Peace-loving self?

    All this should do is EMPOWER us, the ordinary citizens, and make us all madder than hell, causing us to RE-DOUBLE our efforts to shut him and his grandiosity down. Narcissism has been taken to a whole new level today folks. The dark forces of evil are upon this world…..and these truly are times of Biblical proportions, if you know what I mean.

  174. How much ya wanna bet the Nobel was hasitly arranged by back- scenes handlers when Chicago fell through?

    They had to use all that bribe money somewhere.


  175. confloyd:

    Had to be whoever Soros could buy off. Probably the entire committee. This whole thing REEKS of deceit. And it’s so obvious now the fix was in – look at the recent fiasco at the UN – the G20 summit – his PROMINENT role – ALL this was completely orchestrated for this now MEANINGLESS title. The ONLY rub was that the OIC couldn’t be bought off. There are undoubtedly SO many backgroung stories to this, that it would make Ian Fleming pause for thought.

    With the plummeting demise of the dollar and our entire country in general, he truly has been made the de facto leader of the NWO. confloyd – I truly am not some religious fanatic, but I truly believe we are marching not only into the abyss, but Armageddon.

  176. Good Morning. Nobel Peace Prize, hum, I wonder how much that cost. You are right 2 weeks in office? He sure is following in Carter’s footsteps. Lets hope so.


    Sometimes a Mother Theresa type gets the Nobel Peace Prize, like, Mother Theresa.

    Then there are the “controversial” ones.

    Where does this joke of a decision rank?

    Anyhow, opinion found online:

    From Times Online October 9, 2009

    Comment: absurd decision on Obama makes a mockery of the Nobel peace prize

    The award of this year’s Nobel peace prize to President Obama will be met with widespread incredulity, consternation in many capitals and probably deep embarrassment by the President himself.

    Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.

    Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.

    The pretext for the prize was Mr Obama’s decision to “strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples”. Many people will point out that, while the President has indeed promised to “reset” relations with Russia and offer a fresh start to relations with the Muslim world, there is little so far to show for his fine words.

    East-West relations are little better than they were six months ago, and any change is probably due largely to the global economic downturn; and America’s vaunted determination to re-engage with the Muslim world has failed to make any concrete progress towards ending the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

    There is a further irony in offering a peace prize to a president whose principal preoccupation at the moment is when and how to expand the war in Afghanistan.

    The spectacle of Mr Obama mounting the podium in Oslo to accept a prize that once went to Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi and Mother Theresa would be all the more absurd if it follows a White House decision to send up to 40,000 more US troops to Afghanistan. However just such a war may be deemed in Western eyes, Muslims would not be the only group to complain that peace is hardly compatible with an escalation in hostilities.

    The Nobel committee has made controversial awards before. Some have appeared to reward hope rather than achievement: the 1976 prize for the two peace campaigners in Northern Ireland, Betty Williams and Mairead Corrigan, was clearly intended to send a signal to the two battling communities in Ulster. But the political influence of the two winners turned out, sadly, to be negligible.

    In the Middle East, the award to Menachem Begin of Israel and Anwar Sadat of Egypt in 1978 also looks, in retrospect, as naive as the later award to Yassir Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin — although it could be argued that both the Camp David and Oslo accords, while not bringing peace, were at least attempts to break the deadlock.

    Mr Obama’s prize is more likely, however, to be compared with the most contentious prize of all: the 1973 prize to Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho for their negotiations to end the Vietnam war. Dr Kissinger was branded a warmonger for his support for the bombing campaign in Cambodia; and the Vietnamese negotiator was subsequently seen as a liar whose government never intended to honour a peace deal but was waiting for the moment to attack South Vietnam.

    Mr Obama becomes the third sitting US President to receive the prize. The committee said today that he had “captured the world’s attention”. It is certainly true that his energy and aspirations have dazzled many of his supporters. Sadly, it seems they have so bedazzled the Norwegians that they can no longer separate hopes from achievement. The achievements of all previous winners have been diminished.

  178. Some delicious follow up comments to the above timesonline opinion piece:

    ptere blake wrote:
    i always thought Obama was a joker and this is a joke on everyone.
    at least this will ensure this dumbed down politician only gets 1 term!

    Jane Baby wrote:
    I am not mean spirited and have great hopes for Obama – but that is it. I have GREAT HOPES – for the future. He does done nothing yet to deserve such an award – there is one every year, so what’s the hurry. Could have given it to him next year when he had actually done something. They must have been short of candidates. Would be interested to know WHO nominated him!

    Peter Lloyd wrote:
    The Nobel Peace Prize is already discredited. It was even awarded to Yassir Arafat, for heaven’s sake!

    Obama would do the world a service by telling them where to put their Prize until they sorted out their awards procedure.

    Paul Hedges wrote:
    Absolutely Shocking. I am a fan of Obama but what exactly has he achieved so far? There have been positive steps but with American Troops still in Afghanistan, Iraq, people dying on a daily basis and the problems in the middle east this only belittles what is meant to be a prestigious prize. In the past winners have been people who have achieved things. The nobel prize is a recognition of their successes. The only thing that would salvage any respect in my eyes is for him to politely refuse the award and this stage. If he does not then Obama will have lost all creditability in the eyes of the world.

    James David wrote:
    I displayed extraordinary effort in my last chemistry exam – am I eligible for the Nobel in Chemistry?

    A Smith wrote:
    This prize has been terminally devalued by this decision.

    Big Dave wrote:
    Oh dear. How embarrassing. I’m actually blushing for the Nobel committee.

    Giles Hamilton Bond wrote:
    How petty and ungenerous you are. He has given the world HOPE and that is worth a lot.

    ROBERT BOYD wrote:
    Obama should do the right thing and refuse to accept it.

  179. Yesterday when his name was on the list, I wondered why. I am beginning to think these awards mean nothing. In fact it is a way for the people who already make money to get more credentials. I have always hated the entertainers awards, as it feed their constant need for approval. Evem in that organization, the people who do the hard stuff never see the stage really, just the beautiful set, with a new set of haute couter gowns, and borrowed Jewels.

    The People awards, like the school teacher of the year, are the ones that mean something. They don’t do it for the money.

  180. This was Soros’ and the NWO’s way to make the pendulum swing against the tide of how comical Obama has become. Guess the Agony of Olympic Defeat, and the SNL skit made them put their master plan into fast-forward. While they’re cramming cake and the HB 3200 Deathcare down our throats, they levy this award to make McCrystal et al, to be portrayed as war-mongers. The level of disgust I feel grows by the hour. I sense a REVOLUTION folks.

  181. Jack Squat Prize Premature – just like him. grrrrrrrrrr……..

    No holds barred, here, from Russia TV.

    therealbarackobama dot

    Like I said, they had to find a home for all that freshly laundered Hopenhagen money.

    (ps – admin – can we make that hopenchangen?)

  182. Nailed it again, Curiosityhasme!

    ‘And it’s so obvious now the fix was in – look at the recent fiasco at the UN – the G20 summit – his PROMINENT role – ALL this was completely orchestrated for this now MEANINGLESS title.’

    Just how dumb do they think the world is? (never mind Americans – we have a lot to live down with having permitted this POS (s’election) – but, really!!!!
    10 friggin days in office and he’s nominated?????

  183. Hillary is on her way to Russia today to try and forment real diplomacy, what is Obama doing getting another award while she works her ass off.

  184. ROBERT BOYD wrote:
    Obama should do the right thing and refuse to accept it.
    He won’t. A little-noticed, but incredibly revealing comment by Obama during one of the Primary debates: I’ll take help from anyone.

  185. Interesting reaction from another poster via freedom fairy at RBO:

    “I just wonder if he held up the 40,000 troops to Afganistan to make sure nothing interferred with his winning this stupid award.”

  186. confloyd if he can keep his BC sealed, and his college records etc, what is a little thing like the nomination after t2 weeks for the Nobel Prize, once you are President.

    I would be nice to see the list of his accomplishments NOT.

  187. NMF, I think the reason there sealed is that there aren’t any accomplishments. I am sure the only reason he was President of the Harvard Law Review is that someone (?) paid for the honor for him. I heard he never even showed up for the work. Sound familiar??

  188. curiosityhasme Says:
    October 9th, 2009 at 8:31 am

    Try as they might, giving Obama legitimacy. Think of it this way-

    Obama was given the Nobel prize for the World’s biggest UNDER Achiever, achieving the “least” for the benefit of man during his presidency.

    Anyone who thought the Nobel couldn’t be bought, just had an epiphany.

  189. The spectacle of Mr Obama mounting the podium in Oslo to accept a prize that once went to Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi and Mother Theresa makes me literaly ill. THese people suffered to do good. THey were not flown around for nights out on the town in New York, flown in pizza from Illinois, bought $100. a pound of meat.

    He is not worthly to walk in their footsteps.

  190. Hi All, woke up this morning at 3.30am logged on to the Irish news to see what was going on in the Old country and saw the headlines, though I was dreaming went back to bed and pulled the covers over my head. Woke again and realized it’s not a dream that the whole fucking world has gone mad. Going back to bed and not getting up until 2012.

  191. …Obama, Global laughing stock:

    h… w..

    Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize to mixed reviews

    OSLO (Reuters) – U.S. President Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for giving the world “hope for a better future” and striving for nuclear disarmament, in a surprise award that drew both warm praise and sharp criticism.

    The decision to bestow one of the world’s top accolades on a president less than nine months into his first term, who has yet to score a major foreign policy success, was greeted with gasps of astonishment from journalists at the announcement in Oslo.

    The Norwegian Nobel Committee praised Obama for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” But critics — especially in parts of the Arab and Muslim world — called its decision premature.

    Obama’s press secretary woke him with the news before dawn and the president felt “humbled” by the award, a senior administration official said.

    When told in an email from Reuters that many people around the world were stunned by the announcement, Obama’s senior adviser, David Axelrod, responded: “As are we.”

    The first African-American to hold his country’s highest office, Obama, 48, has called for disarmament and worked to restart the stalled Middle East peace process since taking office in January.

    “Very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future,” the committee said in a citation.

    While the decision won praise from statesmen like Nelson Mandela and Mikhail Gorbachev, both former Nobel laureates, it was also attacked in some quarters as hasty and undeserved.

    The Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes a peace treaty with Israel, said the award was premature at best.

    “Obama has a long way to go still and lots of work to do before he can deserve a reward,” said Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri. “Obama only made promises and did not contribute any substance to world peace. And he has not done anything to ensure justice for the sake of Arab and Muslim causes.”


    Issam al-Khazraji, a day laborer in Baghdad, said: “He doesn’t deserve this prize. All these problems — Iraq, Afghanistan — have not been solved…The man of ‘change’ hasn’t changed anything yet.”

    Liaqat Baluch, a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, a conservative religious party in Pakistan, called the award an embarrassing “joke.”

    But the chief Palestinian peace negotiator, Saeb Erekat, welcomed it and expressed hope that Obama “will be able to achieve peace in the Middle East.”

    Nobel Committee Chairman Thorbjoern Jagland rejected suggestions from journalists that Obama was getting the prize too early, saying it recognized what he had already done over the past year.

    “We hope this can contribute a little bit to enhance what he is trying to do,” he told a news conference.

    The committee said it attached “special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons,” saying he had “created a new climate in international politics.”

    Without naming Obama’s predecessor George W. Bush, it highlighted the differences in America’s engagement with the rest of the world since the change of administration in January.

    “Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play.

    “Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts,” it said, and the United States was playing a more constructive role in tackling climate change.

    Obama laid out his vision on eliminating nuclear arms in a speech in Prague in April. But he was not the first American president to set that goal, and acknowledged it might not be reached in his lifetime.

    He is negotiating arms cuts with Russia, and last month dropped plans to base elements of a U.S. anti-missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. Moscow had seen the scheme as a threat, despite U.S. assurances it was directed against Iran.

    On other pressing issues, Obama is deliberating whether to send more troops to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan, and is still searching for breakthroughs on Iran’s disputed nuclear program and on Middle East peace.

    Israel’s foreign minister said on Thursday there was no chance of a peace deal for many years. Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told Reuters: “The Nobel prize for peace? Obama should have won ‘the Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians’.”

    At home, Obama’s popularity is flagging under the pressure of rising unemployment and a divisive, sometimes bitter debate over his healthcare reform plans.

    Abroad, he is still widely seen around the world as an inspirational figure.

    Zimbabwean Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, who had been tipped as a favorite for the prize, told Reuters that Obama was a deserving candidate and an “extraordinary example.”

    Obama’s uncle Said Obama told Reuters by telephone from the president’s ancestral village of Kogelo in western Kenya: “It is humbling for us as a family and we share in Barack’s honor… we congratulate him.”

    Obama is the third senior U.S. Democrat to win the prize this decade after former Vice President Al Gore won in 2007 along with the U.N. climate panel and Jimmy Carter in 2002.

    The prize worth 10 million Swedish crowns ($1.4 million) will be handed over in Oslo on December 10.

    (Additional reporting by Oslo newsroom, Kamran Haider in Pakistan, Mohammed Assadi, Nidal al-Mughrabi in Gaza; Mark Denge in Nairobi, Jason Webb in Spain; writing by Mark Trevelyan, editing by Janet McBride)

  192. Maybe he got the nobel for his efforts at bringing down the scourge of the world – America?

    You know, the blue-eyed white skin devils responsible for all the world’s problems?

    He said it in his book: White folks greed runs a world in need.
    Reparation times has begun?
    Sorry but i am in a FOUL mood this morning! 👿

  193. Well, let me think, Letterman’s been doing that show for how long? and no one else reported him. He had to have been disappearing, etc, and acting familiar. Yet, they just looked the other way because he was a star. Don’t get me wrong, Letterman is first and formost responsible, but there were people standing there watching him doing nothing, and even lying and covering up for him. But then I am sure there were people in the Govenors Office of what was it SC, who knew something was up, and did nothing or covered up, or Edwards office.

    Too bad it took a spurned lover to bring it out. I personnel don’t care, and I think this is his wife’s problem. But I do care about how hypocritical Letterman and the rest were, and that many people on their staff participated in covering this stuff up. I took a phone call from the wife of an office member one time who was on an overseas trip but was stopping in DC on the way back for personnel reasons. When she asked where he was, I told the truth. She came into his office and searched his desk. I hope she got the ammunition she needed when she divorced him.

  194. basil9:

    Agree….no remote or other nrews today…

    but it is being reported that the prize is for hope not action/results……yes it is much like “give the egoistic man his share of limelight and then we can manipulate him further to our advantage”!!!!

  195. “This was Soros’ and the NWO’s way to make the pendulum swing against the tide of how comical Obama has become. Guess the Agony of Olympic Defeat, and the SNL skit made them put their master plan into fast-forward.”




    He feels humble??? He actually allowed that word to come out of his crooked mouth? Contrary to his koolaid cult’s hopes, this will not be a game changer. This will just put more pressure on him to actually achieve something, anything, that actually speaks to furthering peace in the world.

    Does that seem like it will happen in his tenure? Can we really see the Middle East really solving all their problems diplomatically? Can we really see the Taliban laying down their swords and singing kumbaya with him/joining the Afghan government? Can we really be that naive to think that Russia and China are really going to play fair? North Korea?

    Let them spin this way out of control like they usually do. The proof will be in the pudding.

    And as far as the Nobel Committee goes, they have just brought lasting shame down on themselves for a decision that really is a joke of its worst kind. My condolences to the other nominees who really deserved and worked hard for this leaky prize.

  196. The prize was an award for “hope”?? That makes it look even more ridiculous in light of Obama’s recent list of non-accomplishments. Do they really think that people don’t have a clue by now that the “hope” Obama preached was nothing more than a campaign tactic…

  197. What a busy guy!
    October 8th, 2009

    Hoop Dreams: Obama puts on full-court press at White House

    Forget about Afghanistan, healthcare and the economy. President Barack Obama took time out on Thursday to indulge in his favorite sport as he hosted cabinet members and lawmakers for a round of pickup games on the White House basketball court.

    It was the biggest day of hoop dreams at the White House since Obama took office, and reporters disappointed at being kept away went one-on-one with Press Secretary Robert Gibbs before the opening tip-off. As for why were journalists being barred: “To protect the privacy and the statistics of any of those involved,” he quipped at his daily briefing.

    As for who would referee between political friends and foes: “I assume they call their own fouls, which I’m sure is a point of contention at any given point,” Gibbs said.

    As for why no women made the cut: “The point is well taken,” Gibbs said, conceding that as the father of two young daughters Obama would have to seek gender equality next time. The roster included Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Shaun Donovan, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and 11 members of Congress, including two Republicans.

    Earlier in the day, Obama also dropped by to watch a game on the White House court played by the Marine Wounded Warrior basketball team from the National Naval Medical Center. And it seems Obama’s still got game. Gibbs said while playing on a church court during a visit to New York last month the president repeatedly blocked the shots of his personal assistant, Reggie Love, a former Duke University forward.

    Obama had Love sign a photograph to prove his shot-swatting ability and had it put on display in the West Wing for his enjoyment as he walks to and from meetings, Gibbs said. It was brought into the briefing room as Gibbs recounted the story. Love, smiling uncomfortably, later slipped in and took it back.

  198. Friday, October 09, 2009 8:54 AM

    Nobel Prize No Cause for Celebration in the White House

    Katie Connolly

    America awoke this morning to the stunning news that President Obama had won one of the world’s most coveted distinctions, the Nobel Peace Prize. According to the Nobel committee’s citation, it was awarded for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” with particular emphasis on Obama’s “vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.” It’s a remarkable justification for the award, given he’s made so little progress in achieving either goal. After all, he’s not even been President for ten months yet.

    While presumably honorees grandly celebrate these kinds of awards (that is, when they are not being persecuted by oppressive regimes or being detained in their houses), it’s likely that the White House is eyeing the award with caution. It comes at a time when the President is weighing a possible escalation of the eight-year war in Afghanistan. Is this the international community’s way of telling Obama to proceed with caution? How problematic is it for a Nobel laureate to send more troops to war, particularly one with untold civilian casualties?

    Politically, this is a gold mine for Obama’s opponents. On the heels of his Olympics loss, critics will gleefully call the President undeserving, adding to a line of attack that began in earnest with the McCain campaign’s “celebrity” ad in August last year. Then, Obama was juxtaposed with images of flashy starlets like Paris Hilton, as a breathy announcer intoned “Barack Obama is the Biggest celebrity in the world?” The none-too subtle theme: Obama is all fluff and no substance.

    To detractors, the Nobel prize is proof in the pudding that the President seduces with words, while achieving nothing concrete. Privately, McCain and his aides always scoffed that in Obama’s short political career, he had never had to make tough decisions or sacrifices. Now, on the eve of one of the most important decisions of his young presidency – whether to risk another 40,000 American lives – he’s been prematurely awarded with a peace prize. Last year, the unexpectedly effective celebrity ad reportedly threw Obama’s crew. With that history still lingering in the minds of Axelrod and co., they’re no doubt cautioning Obama to be as humble as humanly possible. (Mickey Kaus is already calling for Obama to decline the award.) To appear too celebratory or self satisifed would be irksome to a public still worried about paying their bills and keeping their jobs.

    We’ll get to see for ourselves when the President speaks in the Rose Garden at 10:30am ET.

  199. When I woke up this morning and read email, I saw this Nobel Peace Prize thing and thought it was some sort of joke.

    After reading and seeing it on the news, I still think it’s a joke. What the hell?! I’d be embarassed if I were Obama. I think that’s beyond his scope, though.


    WASHINGTON – Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Michael Steele released the following statement today:

    “The real question Americans are asking is, ‘What has President Obama actually accomplished?’ It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights. One thing is certain – President Obama won’t be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action.”

  201. shenanigans Says:

    October 9th, 2009 at 9:51 am

    Amen! And I can just imagine how pelosi and reid are going to salivate over this one.

  202. I have a feeling the backlash generated from the anger of this farce… will do more damage to his image than if he actually didn’t receive it or refused to accept it. Wait and see-

  203. if an award needed to go to America, it should have gone to all the Americans and not THAT ZERO….
    but I guess anything goes…
    BTW: there are some awful comments on some sites on this topic so people are equally shocked to say why he got it.!!!

  204. curiosityhasme Says:

    October 9th, 2009 at 8:31 am
    This was Soros’ and the NWO’s way to make the pendulum swing against the tide of how comical Obama has become. Guess the Agony of Olympic Defeat, and the SNL skit made them put their master plan into fast-forward.

    Along the lines of what Mrs. Smith just wrote, this sham award will probably backfire. Backfire on the judges in the committee who awarded this joke to The Joker.

    And how much fun will satirists have with this theme? SNL doing skits like,

    “Obama has been named Honary King of the World”

    “Hey, says here Obama always wanted to play on the Chicago Bulls, so he’s now on their roster. He’s also been name player/coach!”

    “Barack Obama named Doctor of the Year, for his dedication to …to … aw shoot, just give him the prize money”.

  205. I agree with that Newsweek piece. This is an embarrassment for Obama. Someone on No Quarter posted a video of Joe Scarborough and Mark Halperin (who’s not anti-Obama at all) having a great time mocking this “award.” I don’t see how anyone can take this seriously. It looks like he’s simply being honored for not being George Bush.

    The smart move for him would be to turn it down, but I think he’s too narcissistic to do that.

  206. And the rationale from the Nobel committee doesn’t help, either. It’s so sad to see this award devalued. If Hillary had gotten the Nobel Prize less than a year into her tenure, unless she had a huge foreign policy accomplishment to her name, I also would’ve considered it very premature.


    After being given 25 mile head start, to atone for racism in the past against black people, and to atone for George W. Bush tenure, the President of the United States, won the marathon of the 2012 Olympics Games.

  208. Hmmmmmm………

    I heard an interesting analysis about this farce on talk radio, supporting curiosity’s theory the fix was in long ago, not only for the (s)election, but for the Olympic bid which, of course, turned out to be an epic fail.

    The analysis I heard goes something like this: Jack Squat’s handlers were convinced they would get the cap ‘n tax through congress, that the Muslim outreach would yield dividends, that him being the first prez acting as Chair of the UN Security Council would raise his profile, that Squat would have already passed his ambitious agenda based on the mass-marketing blitz.

    Now, without a single one of his grandiose plans having been implemented, the nobel, having long been preordained, was the only thing that came through and I’ll betcha axelgrease, deadfish and GS are wishing it hadn’t.

    This is so obviously fixed. No one will be fooled. This could be the last nail in the coffin (hopefully) for the unveiling of the Real Jack Squat.

    On another note – there was a discussion of the US dollar on talk radio as well and listen to these stats:

    The US is ranked 50th in terms of stability!



    After being given 25 mile head start, to atone for racism in the past against black people, and to atone for George W. Bush tenure, the President of the United States, won the marathon of the 2012 Olympics Games


    +50! 🙂

  210. 😳
    Is THIS why he’s been waffling on Afghanistan’
    Afterall, sending more troops before the Nobel announcement would have thrown a monkeywrench into the soup.

    OTOH, what if he now approves 40G more troops, like McCrystal requested? how’s that gonna look.

    Oh poor, poor, jack, he’s got no fat, his wife she got no lean. hahahahahaha.

  211. He and his insiders knew about it….

    I think that is why he gave that type of speech at the UN nations…leaving out the Iran nucleqar stuff out!!!!!


    Quote at the very end is worth notig:

    “…and I fear there will be a backlash to this announcement that may well lessen the significance this award has generally meant for well over a century.”

    Barack Obama, Nobel Peace Laureate:
    Whatever Happened to Awarding for
    Deeds Actually Done?

    am generally a supporter of Barack Obama. I voted for him and campaigned in print for his election. However, as I turned on CNN early this morning and saw the news that he’d been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, I actually gasped in disbelief. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube videos were destined to be in overdrive, not to mention the texts on millions of BlackBerrys.

    As the 2 a.m. PDT CNN commentator interviewed Norwegian experts and past Peace Laureates, just about all of them repeated the obvious: Obama was being honored for the hope of what he might accomplish as opposed to what he has actually achieved.

    The Nobel Peace Committee has been accused in the past of trying to make a political statement, and perhaps, because they admire Obama and his groundbreaking presidency, in addition to his earlier anti-war statements and recent speech to the Muslim world, they are, by this action, hoping to jump start his ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Why else give him the honor now? Whatever one might feel about Obama, he has not earned this singular award. Few American presidents have received it and of those who have it was bestowed after they’d been engaged in something special. Theodore Roosevelt had helped to negotiate peace in the Russo-Japanese War. Woodrow Wilson had tirelessly worked for the creation of the League of Nations — a struggle that was blamed for causing the serious stroke he suffered, which left him disengaged in the last years of his presidency.

    Jimmy Carter received the Peace Prize after he left office, but in the wake of huge achievements monitoring worldwide elections and in his efforts with Habitat for Humanity, building homes for the poor.

    Former Vice President Al Gore got the prize after years of working for the environment. And whether you appreciated Henry Kissinger’s getting the award it was in response to his efforts to effect a peace in the Vietnam War.

    So, at the moment, I believe it is enormously premature for Obama to be getting this great tribute, which to a certain extent cheapens the prior recipients and the work all of them performed over so many years.

    It is traditional for Nobel honorees to be named a long time after their achievements in the sciences and literature. Indeed, the winners announced this week in other categories performed their amazing work and discoveries decades ago. Obama’s designation is akin to giving an Oscar to a young director for films we hope that he or she will produce or for a first-time published author getting a Pulitzer for a book he is destined to write some day.

    The time has not yet arrived and circumstances have not yet evolved where Barack Obama is anywhere near the point where he has earned this prize. I don’t blame him for this capricious action; it was the Nobel Peace Committee which committed the offense, which no doubt has Alfred Nobel thumping his head against his casket.

    I only hope that President Obama takes this honor to heart to the extent that his policies and statements and deeds will someday make him deserving of this singular trophy. However, that time has not yet arrived, and I fear there will be a backlash to this announcement that may well lessen the significance this award has generally meant for well over a century.

  213. JanH Says:

    October 9th, 2009 at 10:58 am
    I am eagerly awaiting Admin’s commentary regarding this comedy of errors.

    Me too

  214. I would ordinarily be thrilled with an assignment I just got to take pics of a rare Argentina hawk along the Hudson River who seems to have gotten lost during migration.

    I haveta go cover it but this is just soooooooo delicious i hate to leave.

    Keep me posted everyone!

    BTW, something else I heard on talk radio – we all know that the oscars are fixed but at least the so-called winner has to produce a movie to justify the award.

    WTF has squat done? We all know the answer to that.

  215. BreakingNews (nbc)

    just broke in with a live speech from Obama about the award.. Soft peddling the notion he is worthy of an award for his PROMISES…

    He knows ding-dang well everyone from homeowners to soldiers fighting in the ME are going to be outraged at him receiving this award.Now he is soft peddling the notion he is worthy of an award for his PROMISES… cluephone: It won’t help you BO… please don’t insult our intelligence, you didn’t know you were going to receive it! You could have refused to accept it, but Soros demanded you play along!

  216. It a very sick world we live in when a do nothing, political hack, who has some above average oratory camapaign skills winsw this award..but hey, Carter and Arafat got one too.

  217. JanH Says:
    October 9th, 2009 at 10:26 am

    He really should turn it down.


    “I’m happy for my supporters, but really this should have gone to Beyonce.”

  218. I am appalled, disgusted and saddenned. At first, I thought this award would make it impossible to keep him from getting renominated, but after reading the posts here, I am not so sure.

    I hope and pray for a backlash.

  219. turndownobama

    I was wondering when someone was going to bring up Kenya or what ever his name is. Same old thing, they will riot and interrupt presentations, but no one dare take it away if they get the award for nothing, or bully, use terror, or fraud their way through and election.

  220. It’s crystal clear the elites are fumbling around trying to add some kind of gravitas to Obama’s Do Nothing image. Unfortunately their efforts will in the long run be self-defeating because World Leaders have him figured out as giving meaningless speeches back by Hot Air not Action.

    The BLOWBACK is going to be horrific for Obama.

  221. I’m not sure that Mother Teresa was all her supporters believed, either. Perhaps more image than substance.

  222. My electricity went out at seven am. I was pist. It is storming here. I could not keep up with latest crap from Bambi,INC. This is blatantly chicago arm twisting. This is why he has been dragging his feet with the war in Afganistan. I tell you if I had a kid over there, I would go over there and take him/her home. THis is the most ridiculous CIC I have ever seen in my lifetime and the people who own him could care less what the American people think about it either.

    I hope Glenn Beck is digging up who nominated him.

  223. usher in this single-payer government-controlled deathcare.


    Huh? I only wish that WERE true. What Congress has, Medicare for all … would be great.

    Single payer is what Obama has been throwing under the bus for … years, now.

  224. Al Gore said he was extremely well deserving. I just lost whatever respect for Al Gore I had left. There is NO way this guy deserves this award. His own country is on the verge of civil war, how could he win??

  225. I also heard he beat out some well deserving woman in Afganistan that has been working on women’s issues in that country which I might ad must have been at risk of death. Obama loves to knock women out of the running. I can’t even stand to look at the SOB.

  226. This is one of the people he beat out for the award.

    Sima Samar, women’s rights activist in Afghanistan: “With dogged persistence and at great personal risk, she kept her schools and clinics open in Afghanistan even during the most repressive days of the Taliban regime, whose laws prohibited the education of girls past the age of eight. When the Taliban fell, Samar returned to Kabul and accepted the post of Minister for Women’s Affairs

  227. The POS is going to leave this woman and many, many more to the Taliban. He is just so good at annilating women.

  228. Members, all of whom are former or serving deputies of the Storting, the Norwegian parliament, seek to reach a unanimous decision — normally by mid-September — but this has sometimes proved impossible and the choice is then made by a simple majority vote.

    Some have criticized the selection procedure as untransparent. The committee never announces the names of nominees and information about candidacies is only made public 50 years after the decision. “It is all done in secret, you don’t know what is happening and whoever sits on that panel is very susceptible to the tides of the moment,” said Philip Towle, an academic from the department of politics and international studies at the University of Cambridge.

    Even in Norway, where Mr. Obama enjoys huge popularity, the decision raised eyebrows among some. “It is just too soon,” said Siv Jensen, leader of Norway’s main opposition party, the Progress Party. “It is wrong to give him the peace prize for his ambition. You should receive it for results.”

    She said that the decision to bestow the award on the president was the most controversial she could remember and was one of a number that had moved the prize further away from the ideals of Alfred Nobel.

  229. “It is wrong to give him the peace prize for his ambition. You should receive it for results.”


    Someone should have informed the koolaid drinkers before they awarded him the highest post in the land and then, in space of less than a year, sought to tear it down brick by brick.

  230. Let me get this straight, the Nobel Peace price was given to OO because he brought such hope to the world, and to prevent him from sending more troops into Afganistan, a non peaceful act.

    In other words, the Nobel committee are really the ones doing something to broker piece, not OO. Yes, Alfred Nobel must be turning over in his grave.

  231. In 1920 the Nobel Prize was awarded to a man named Neut Hampson. On the odds, you have never heard of him. But during that decade, he was the toast of the literary world. Hemingway, Wolfe, Steinbeck, Dos Passos all revered him, and tried to write like him. His writing was harsh, unadorned and brutal in my opinion, but that is probably what appealed to all of them. A decade later he was a non person. That is because he and Ezra Pound were the two leading intellectuals in Europe who sided with Hitler. What is my point? Simply this: the Nobel Committee is hardly infallible when it comes to whom they award their jack in the box awards to and that is certainly true in this case. I could just as easily argue that when you push religion out of the public square entirely, people find secular gods to worship and sometimes you end up with Hitler.

  232. NMF,

    This is supposed to give him back his respect. He has been the laughingstock of other leaders for some time now and this is supposed to make them fall on their knees in wonder.

    Not going to happen. If anything, I think the rifts are going to become more bitter.

  233. Clinton to Conan: Drop Booker, Go Back to Mocking My Pantsuits

    Secretary of state tells Booker, Conan to stand down

    Fri, Oct 9, 2009

    The feud between Newark Mayor Cory Booker and “Tonight Show” host Conan O’Brien has gotten so heated that the nation’s preeminent master of conflict resolution — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — is staging an intervention.

    It turns out the former First Lady-turned-senator-turned-chief diplomat has a sense of humor – or at least someone in her office does.

    “I’ve been following the ongoing feud between Conan and Newark Mayor Cory Booker with great interest,” Clinton said in a video appearance on the “Tonight Show” last night. “And by this I mean, I haven’t been following this feud at all, but my staff just gave me the gist of it five minutes ago.”


    Clinton went on to say that since it’s her job to make peace between warring parties – whether they’re nations around the globe or a mid-sized American city versus a mildly amusing talk-show host – she had to make a point to tell everyone the top 10 reasons why Conan and Cory had to make up.

    Notice the play on Letterman’s regular “top 10” skit. Nice one, Hil!

    The battle between Conan and Booker started a few weeks ago when Conan made a joke about Newark that Booker didn’t appreciate.

    “Let’s just chalk it up to Conan’s head injury and be done with this whole mess,” Clinton said. Then Booker can go back to leading Newark to prosperity and growth and Conan can go back to “dancing around the stage and making lame jokes about my pantsuits.”

    “Thank you. And Conan, please don’t bother me again.”–63850377.html

  234. JanH Says:
    I’ve never been a Gore fan. This just adds fuel to my opinion.


    I am a Gore fan and imo he deserved his prize. However it’s possible that some of the committee might have given it for the wrong reasons: that Gore symbolized environmental thinking, and as a rebuke to Bush for stealing the 2000 election.

  235. Fran O’Sullivan: Clinton’s icing on the cake

    Saturday Oct 10, 2009
    By Fran O’Sullivan

    Hillary Clinton’s mojo was back in spades yesterday as she firmly spelled out she wanted New Zealanders to know the United States remains committed to Afghanistan. “We are committed in great numbers but we value deeply the contributions of New Zealand.”

    In Washington the fundamental question of whether President Barack Obama will commit more troops to Afghanistan, in line with the wishes of his top generals, dominates the wall-to-wall television news coverage.

    Many Americans are spooked that Afghanistan is turning into a Vietnam-style quagmire and want the troops extricated. The War on Terrorism – which Obama has since called the “war of necessity” – is no longer seen as compelling to a nation beset by more immediate domestic concerns such as the rising jobless and mortgagee sales.

    Clinton herself displayed considerable cool as she magisterially replied to her interlocutors during a one-hour television special this week – setting out the complex issues but stopping well short of outlining where she thinks Obama will come down.

    For instance, underwriting another “surge” with the 40,000 extra troops General Stan McChrystal wants, or a lesser commitment numerically, combined with smart strategies to deal with problems surrounding the ability of the Karzai Government to govern.

    It is a decision all New Zealanders have an interest in. But unfortunately it is not a topic which has sparked substantive debate in our country. It should. Particularly as the 70 SAS special forces that Prime Minister John Key committed to Afghanistan after receiving a personal telephone call from Obama this year have already been deployed. There is a fundamental question why New Zealanders should feel confident of the wisdom of this decision given the Obama Administration has still not made up its own mind on the extent of America’s future commitment.

    Clinton directly acknowledged the confidence issue when I put a question to her during a press briefing at the State Department in Washington DC yesterday. She reiterated that the US was committed to Afghanistan and characterised the review currently under way in the American capital as “taking a very hard scrub” to make sure the US was on the right track.

    She was clearly fired up when she told me: “We just want to be sure that when we send a young man or woman from New Zealand or the United States, we are sending them to Afghanistan with the maximum capacity to be successful – it is a vision that we share.”

    Much is still up in the air. But by the time Clinton makes her expected visit to New Zealand early next year, Obama will have made his decision and the Secretary of State will have to front Kiwis on its consequences.

    Given Clinton’s directness in responding to my questions, I have no doubt she will stake out the position in a similarly compelling way when she visits our shores, probably in January.

    While Afghanistan has clearly polarised the United States, it also poses substantial political risk for the Key Government. An exchange of letters between Obama and Key cover several issues vital to the bilateral defence relationship. The letters remain confidential. But joint-military training exercises will resume after a 25-year hiatus sparked by the ban on nuclear-capable ships visiting our shores imposed by David Lange’s Labour Government. Intelligence sharing is also being stepped up.

    The deepest irony is that the Obama Administration is now turning to New Zealand for advice on how to make the case on why the world should be rid of nuclear weapons – an issue that the two nations will discuss further.

    In Washington during the Helen Clark regime’s years, observers fixated obsessively on the small distinctions: Were we “very good friends” or was it “very, very good friends” – friends with a capital “F” or simply “f” ? The diplomatic semaphore that has permeated New Zealand’s relations with the US in recent years was necessary at the time, as both countries tried to rebuild a relationship which had become fractured at the very core level of trust.

    Particularly given former US Secretary of State George Shultz’s comment on the initial fracture: “We part company as friends, but we part company.”

    The State Department has gone to considerable trouble to get across the message that the bilateral relationship has been virtually normalised.

    Clinton’s comments are the icing on the cake.

  236. I didn’t listen to obama’s comments. Did he acknowledge that the bulk of this “achievement” should go to Hillary?

  237. Hi all….. alot is going on with me right now, haven’t been online in weeks and the first chance i get was today and damn if i don’t wish i hadn’t…. this Nobel Peace Prize BS has made me Ill beyond words!!

    after a bit of digging i have come across this that is posted on the NPP website on the “who can submit nominations” section I have not seen this section mentioned here or anywhere yet…

    The Nobel Committee makes its selection on the basis of nominations received or postmarked no later than February 1 of the year in question. Nominations which do not meet the deadline are normally included in the following year’s assessment. Members of the Nobel Committee are entitled to submit their own nominations as late as at the first meeting of the Committee after the expiry of the deadline.

    upon further digging, there are two new committe members added just this year!!

    while checking out who each of these members are a common theme run amok!

    I am sure there is more one could find out about them with proper resources and digging.


    who do they have a connection with??

  238. I believe this award is good news for the real patriots in this country.Thank goodness Hillary was spared this once meaningful and great honor for people around the world that have accomplished so much good for mankind.She would be the target of so much hate from political leeches.My take on this act of utter stupidity is that the awarders used it as a counter measure for the Race Card that they know is coming from the Messiah as he continues his drive to be the black leader of the world and he does not consider the presidency to be of and great value in reaching
    the goals that Soros has set for him.
    I am sure rhat Bill and Hillary have been well aware of this coming out soon.Just watch
    her shine and continue to devalute the presence of the benchwarmer as CiC.Fringe Media cannot avoid covering her present trip and the many world leaders that anxiously awating her arrival in their countries for very important meetings to establish world peace.
    The naked emperor doesn’t have a place to show off his award.I hope it is pin and not a ribbon.Glenn Beck could have a field day with this phoney baloney tony award.

    By ABM90. Great Day for Hillary and the country is getting closer.

    Yo Barack, I’m really happy for you and Ima let you finish but Dalai Lama is the best peacemaker of all time! OF ALL TIME!


    Aw, maybe that’s why Obama wouldn’t talk to the DL.

  240. Didn’t we attack the Moon today? 🙂 Maybe the peace prize is for stopping at one bomb. 🙂 (We’re just kidding NASA – we love you).

Comments are closed.