Now It’s Labor’s Turn To Cry: Hillary We Need You

The Obama treacheries pile up and the massive NObama Coalition we discussed in January continues to grow.

Now Big Labor is upset with Boob Obama and pining for Hillary. Big Labor is not alone. Hillary is more popular than Obama and every time Michelle Obama hears that she yanks off a sleeve.

The president’s current favorable rating of 56% is down 22 percentage points since January. Over the same time span, Clinton’s favorable rating has changed little, and now, at 62%, it exceeds Obama’s. [snip]

“Clinton’s current favorable rating ranks among her best in the 17 years Gallup has polled Americans about her.” [snip]

The current 40% unfavorable rating for Obama is his highest, and thus his most negative such rating to date.

M.O. with the help of B.O. has been yanking a lot of sleeves lately. Both of these creatures know the threat they face, the shadow that is blocking their Klieg lights, their spotlight, their limelight… is Hillary.

Initially, the Nobel boob prize lifted B.O.’s fortunes. But the notion of debasing the Nobel into a booby prize has had a comic backlash. The Gallup poll organization knew any upward boob “bump” would not last:

However, Gallup’s Jeffrey Jones explains why this brief respite from dwindling numbers won’t last, especially with discussion this week getting back to health care reform and Afghanistan.

“In fact, odds are the bump will not last, since the improvement in his rating from his term-low 50% early last week has come exclusively among independents and Republicans, who are less likely to stay loyal to the president,” Jones writes.

Michelle Obama is back to yanking off sleeves.

* * * * *

Yesterday we discussed how even Big Labor is drifting away from Boob Obama. Big Labor is beginning to agree with us that Obama is the Third Bush Term:

Labor groups criticized the Senate Finance Committee’s health-care plan Wednesday as “deeply flawed” for its lack of a government-run option and its tax on expensive health-insurance plans.

In ads in major newspapers, unions said a government-run plan is needed to provide competition for big insurers and keep costs down. The unions oppose taxing health-care benefits because they fear the expense will be passed on to members who have forgone higher wages in return for richer health-care packages.

“Unless the bill that goes to the floor of the U.S. Senate makes substantial progress to address the concerns of working men and women, we will oppose it,” said an ad that appeared in the Washington Post and Capitol Hill newspapers.

The ad was paid for by the AFL-CIO and several of its affiliates. The unions were supporters of President Barack Obama’s election effort. [snip]

Gerald McEntee, president of the AFSCME, another co-sponsor of the ads, said he is counting on the House, but voiced more frustration. “We worked like hell in 2006 to have the House go Democrat. We worked in all the other years for Democrats. Now we’ve got a Democrat in the White House and we expect some positive things. It looks like we catered to Sen. [Olympia] Snowe. My God, she’s a Republican, I thought we won,” he said.[snip]

It remains unclear whether unions will open a full-scale assault against any Democratic plans that don’t meet their criteria. But the union opposition could present another obstacle for Mr. Obama’s top domestic priority, at a time when labor leaders still want Mr. Obama’s support for items on their agenda, such as an overhaul of labor laws and trade policy.

McEntee was a Hillary supporter during the primaries and likely has built up resistance to Hopium which allows him to speak more honestly than the rest of Big Labor. But without a doubt Big Labor is realizing it helped elect a Third Bush Term:

Unions spent more than $400 million to support Mr. Obama’s presidential campaign and those of Democratic members of Congress. Mr. Obama has delivered on some promises — he recently imposed trade penalties on Chinese tires and has filled many regulatory jobs with pro-union staff — but unions’ top priority for this year was for Congress to pass the Employee Free Choice Act, a proposal that would make it easier for unions to organize new members and win contracts through binding arbitration. Now EFCA is stalled in the Senate because the current bill lacks 60 votes.

Big Labor should forget about EFCA and real universal health care and reform – that died in Denver in 2008. Barack Obama is Jack Squat.

Big Labor, now spurns the White House in public even when warned by thugs to keep quiet:

Twenty-seven U.S. labor unions defied White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and announced their opposition to the $829 billion health-care measure passed yesterday by the Senate Finance Committee.

The unions say in a full-page newspaper advertisement today that lawmakers need to make “substantial” changes to the bill or they will urge their members to seek its defeat on the Senate floor. Emanuel asked organized labor not to go public in opposition, said Gerald McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Why is Big Labor publicly saying “no”?

They oppose elements of the bill approved by the Senate committee, including a tax on the most-expensive insurance plans. Some union contracts provide health benefits costly enough to be affected.

The provision will become “a tax on the middle class,” who “through negotiations or otherwise, have employer-provided coverage,” Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said in an e-mailed statement.

The measure would impose a 40 percent excise tax on insurers of employer-sponsored health plans with benefits exceeding $8,000 for individual coverage and $21,000 for families.

Whatever the merits of the tax proposal, Obama promised not to raise taxes on the middle class. Big Labor, thugged by the White House remained quiet for a long time. Now we know why:

McEntee said Emanuel called him and AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka on a Sunday last month and asked them not to oppose the legislation while the Finance Committee was considering it. “We didn’t talk to any senators about our opposition,” he said.

Emanuel pressed labor again last week not to oppose the bill once it was approved by the committee, according to McEntee. “That was not the commitment we made,” he said.

Because of it’s own self-interest (millions of new “health care consumers” will require many new health care workers paying dues to SEIU) the Service Employees International Union is still fully on board with the Obama health care scam.

Big Labor is not alone. Dimocrats and Democrats are not happy either. Some are talking about the “Great Liberal Revolt”:

The star of this Fellini-esque film we call government controlled by Democrats is the president, who has betrayed his own rhetoric for the public option to try to kill it, surrender it, trade it away, leave it behind, talk it down and throw it out 10 different ways.

Make no mistake, the president has privately surrendered the public option to get a single Republican senator who will allow him to pretend this bill has bipartisan support. [snip]

Make no mistake, the president wanted to kill the public option from the beginning, to give it away, notwithstanding his rhetoric for it, to get Republicans to support the bill. I don’t know what is worse: that unlike LBJ fighting for Medicare the president would give away the most important provision for a fig leaf of Republican support, or the fact that the president is so focused on image and public relations that he will try to sell himself as getting a bipartisan bill, with only one Republican, a truth in advertising farce.

We feel sorry for Brent Budowsky, the writer of the above article. He should have read the Big Pink article The Obama Health Plan Obama Supporters Do Not Want To Discuss to avoid the surprise he now expresses.

More from surprised Budowsky:

Make no mistake, healthcare reform has been gutted and stripped by lobbyists from every interest group making a fortune from the current system. Universal coverage is dead. A mandate for coverage is dead. The major reforms to lower healthcare costs are dead. Backroom deals rule the day. Healthcare consumers will pay the price. Premiums will skyrocket and industry profits will shoot to the moon under this so-called reform.

Ho-hum, we knew this in August 2008.

We also knew that Dimocrats and Democrats would come to rue the day, in Denver, in 2008, when Obama was gifted the Nobel Democratic nomination. The Big Blog boys and Dean/Kennedy/Kerry/Pelosi/Brazile and other creeps are responsible for the Chicago monster they have unleashed.

Now Big Labor, Liberals, and anyone with a brain misses Hillary Clinton:

Where were you when you came to the panicky realization that Hillary Clinton was right?

For me, it was while driving to work one recent morning and talking with a colleague about the state of the health legislation. I was explaining how the Obama plan wasn’t really about universal coverage but rather cutting a deal with the insurance industry and then making it look good for liberals.

I paused, realizing that I had just repeated, almost verbatim, the lines that Clinton used to bludgeon then-Sen. Barack Obama during the Democratic primaries.

As they debated in Cleveland — the nastiest of their one-on-one matchups after John Edwards dropped out to spend more time with his families — Clinton charged that Obama wouldn’t play tough enough and would get rolled by the insurance industry.

Like Budowsky, Chris Stirewalt, the writer of this article, should have read the Big Pink article The Obama Health Plan Obama Supporters Do Not Want To Discuss to avoid the surprise he now expresses (or one of our many articles about Obama’s 15 Million Lies and how to fight them).

More Stirewalt:

Her words came back to me: “Senator Obama’s plan does not cover everyone. It would leave, give or take, 15 million people out.”

I expected to look into the rearview mirror and see her sitting in the back seat cackling and wearing that suit that looked like it had been plucked from the wardrobe trailer of “Star Trek: The Next Generation.”

I shuddered as I did the math. The plan backed by the White House would cover about 94 percent of Americans, leaving about 15 million without coverage. And as an added injury, under the Obama plan, the uninsured will now be paying fines for the offense of not being able to afford what will be more expensive coverage.

Stirewalt presumes that Hillary would not have adjusted her aims in light of current economic circumstances and calls Hillary’s proposals “real, honest socialism” with real universal coverage. Obama?

With the mumbling, accidental socialism of Obama, the insurance companies get richer and the middle class gets to pay more for less care. And what the working stiffs don’t pay, senior citizens will sacrifice in the form of Medicare cuts.

That’s why so many liberals are now remembering Clinton’s other line from the Ohio primary of March 2008: “Shame on you, Barack Obama.”

Stirewalt adds that most conservatives realized long ago that “Obama was completely out his depth” and can be beaten by them when it comes to policy and in 2012.

They believe that radical Islam and Vladimir Putin will prove to be tougher adversaries than the insurance industry and the senior senator from Maine. [snip]

But conservatives know that they never would have had a chance with Clinton. Where Obama has overfilled his plate like a kid at Thanksgiving dinner and now stares at an unappetizing mountain of cold mashed potatoes, Clinton would have taken measured bites and finished the whole feast.

By the end of her second term (oh, yes), Clinton might have undone the Republican Party for good, turning it into a marginal force that could occasionally block the majority but never really rule.

It is always amazing to us that Republicans and Conservatives can easily see long and short term what Dimocrats and some Democrats are incapable of seeing. Indeed Hillary and the FDR coalition would have destroyed the Republican Party by cementing Latinos and African-Americans to the White Working Class.

But had she won, there’s no doubt that she would have ground up the bones of her enemies and baked chocolate chip cookies with them. Obama, though, has proven to be the only person who could make the GOP look reasonable again after the misadventures of the Bush years.

Conservatives can console themselves with the thought of 2010 and beyond.

For liberals, though, the strange, sad longing for the woman they rejected has only just begun.

Hillary was not rejected. Hillary will still bake cookies with the above named odd ingredients.

Obama was gifted the nomination.

Now Obama has turned publicly poisonous and elements of the Democratic coalition are turning to reality… then to Hillary.


119 thoughts on “Now It’s Labor’s Turn To Cry: Hillary We Need You

  1. Confloyd posted this in the previous articles’ comments. Notice how Obama cites Robert Reich to defend himself and now Reich is complaining for exactly what Hillary was saying. Also, Obama’s comments on the insurance companies and mandates and the expense of his now “junk” insurance:


    Especially the thuggish SEIU and AFO/CIO who backed THAT ZERO and “who is my Daddy” edwards….thus creating the presenting situation.

  3. Admin, I love all your articles. This one is amazing. But seriously, how can we have her? She’s sitting there on the today show laughing and talking about retirement. She’s jet setting the world, while the heart of her whole life, health insurance, goes up in flames. And not a peep from her. I know she needs to be a good Dimocrat but seriously, we need her. If she doesn’t run in 8 years…and she retires, then what will we have? I see no bright star on the horizon, everyone is just kissing ass and toeing the party line. But she went rogue last year. She stood up for what she believed in and now it’s like they have a muzzle on her. I just don’t see any silver lining. We need her: now.

  4. Oh, they will Fold in NOT. Now this is what unions should be fighting for, and some are smart enough to understand that.

  5. Admin,

    Spot on as usual. One side of me says “go unions!” The other side of me says you bought bambi the Oval Office so suck it up. The unfortunate part is that those who fought against him from day one are also caught up in this mess.

    Then again, they are now saying that this is when the real policy will get done, completely behind closed doors, lots of extras they don’t need, lots of cuts they shouldn’t do, i.e. medicare, and the public option again thrown in.

    So maybe the union leaders are just flexing their muscles right now because they know their members are ticked off with them and leaving in droves. I see this as a public relations scam on their parts and on the parts of the dims. They have assuredly been told that bambi will take care of their needs but to keep it hush hush. This is their way of forcing him to honor his commitments to them.

  6. Chinese Premier hails cooperation with Iran

    Thu Oct 15, 2009
    By Chris Buckley

    BEIJING (Reuters) – China, reluctant to isolate Iran in its standoff with the West over its nuclear program, will maintain cooperation with Tehran and foster “close coordination in international affairs,” Premier Wen Jiabao said on Thursday. Wen made the comments to the visiting First Vice President of Iran, Mohammad Reza Rahimi, in Beijing for a forum of Central Asian states, the official Xinhua news agency reported.

    While the United States and European powers call for greater pressure behind demands that Tehran be transparent about its nuclear plans, Wen’s comments suggested Beijing remained unwilling to risk its oil and investment ties with Iran by backing such demands.

    Wen, quoted by Xinhua, said China was willing “to maintain high-level contacts with Iran, encourage mutual understanding and confidence, promote practical cooperation between the two sides and close coordination in international affairs.” Wen also said: “China is willing to continue playing a constructive role in promoting peaceful resolution of the Iranian nuclear issue.”

    Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu, speaking at a later news conference, gave no further details of any discussion between Wen and Rahimi about the nuclear dispute.

    But Rahimi said Iran hoped to keep expanding economic and energy ties with China, Ma told reporters.


    Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, also in Beijing for the meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, warned on Wednesday against intimidating Iran and said talk of sanctions over its nuclear program was “premature. Putin was speaking after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed to secure any specific assurances from Russia on Iran during talks in Moscow.

    Wen’s comments left little doubt that China wanted to keep at arm’s length possible Western demands for stiffer sanctions. “The Sino-Iran relationship has witnessed rapid development …and cooperation in trade and energy has widened and deepened,” Wen told Rahimi, according to Xinhua.

    Last month, Iran said it was building a hitherto undisclosed second uranium enrichment facility, drawing warnings from the West that Tehran had to come clean about its activities, which critics say could give it the means to assemble atomic weapons. Iran says its nuclear activities are for peaceful ends and that it complies with international nuclear rules.

    China has voiced concern about the enrichment plant, but urged nations to solve the latest flare-up through negotiations.

    Growing energy ties bind China, the world’s No. 2 crude oil consumer, and Iran, which has the world’s second-largest crude oil reserves but needs investment to develop them. Iranian oil made up nearly 12 percent of China’s crude imports last year.

    Beijing’s distaste for sanctions and appetite for Iran’s oil mean it could use its power as a permanent member of the Security Council to soften any proposed resolution on the dispute.

  7. Barack Obama: ‘Oh, did I mention I won the Nobel prize?’

    By Toby Harnden World
    October 13th, 2009

    The conventional wisdom is that President Barack Obama was embarrassed by the patently ludicrous award to him of the Nobel Peace Prize. And to be fair it did seem so when he accepted the honour (a term I use loosely) last Friday, quoting his daughter Malia as saying: “Daddy, you won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it is Bo’s birthday!” (call me a cynic but that’s a fabricated quote if ever I heard one).

    Since then, however, it’s become abundantly clear that Obama isn’t even faintly sheepish about the award. Yeah, there’s all the usual guff about him being humbled, it’s about us not him blah blah blah. But this can’t mask the fact that he’s as pleased as punch about landing the prize. He’s lapping it up and seems to view it – sadly and mistakenly – as a major validation.

    Apart from the clue that he’s going to skip over to Oslo to pick up the gong personally (great opportunity for a wonderful speech), consider the emails his White House is sending out. No opportunity to shoehorn in a mention of the Nobel prize is being missed.

    Yesterday, it was: “Earlier today, President Obama spoke with President Felipe Calderon of Mexico, President Oscar Arias of Costa Rica, and President Alvaro Uribe of Colombia. In addition to thanking each for their respective calls regarding the Nobel Peace Prize, the President…”

    The day before it was: “Late Saturday morning, President Obama returned Indian Prime Minister Singh’s phone call. Prime Minister Singh had called President Obama on Friday to congratulate him on having won the Nobel Peace Prize. The President expressed his appreciation for the call and congratulations. He noted that he was humbled and grateful for having received the Nobel, and that he saw it as a call to collective action on shared challenges.”

    Oh and on the day itself there was an email from “President Barack Obama” himself (his email is btw): “Toby – This morning, Michelle and I awoke to some surprising and humbling news. At 6 a.m., we received word that I’d been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.

    “To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who’ve been honored by this prize – men and women who’ve inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.”

    (I’ve always thought that when someone starts a sentence with the words “to be honest…” it’s a signal they’re about to lie).

    The email went on for a few more faux-humble paragraphs but we’d already got the point. Obama apparently sees the award of the prize as his biggest achievement so far, with the possible exception of his election victory. Well, it sure beats actually doing something.

    All in all, it’s a hilarious display of vanity and self-absorption masquerading ineptly as humility and selflessness.

    But there’s a serious question: What does it say about Obama’s character when such an empty symbol means so much to him?

  8. ‘Syrian long-range missiles in Lebanon’

    Oct. 15, 2009

    Syria has transferred nearly a quarter of its long- and medium-range missile arsenal to Hizbullah, the Kuwaiti al Jarida reported on Thursday.

    According to the report, security sources in Jerusalem told the paper that the missiles, now held by Hizbullah, could hit every part of Israel.

    cont. here…

  9. “To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who’ve been honored by this prize – men and women who’ve inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.”


    That is true-he is not deserving to be in the company of previous NPP winners. What a narcissist.

  10. great article, once again, admin!
    That Ohio debate shows it all so clearly! We get reruns of old sitcoms, and other shows…too bad we can’t get someone to repeat the primary debates…might wake up a lot more people…this Connie Francis song could be the theme song…
    h’s and w’s…

  11. A Bill Clinton quote…


    “Lili Smith was a beautiful girl..taken from her family and friends far too soon,” said former President Bill Clinton, who befriended the girl during the 2008 presidential campaign, in an email to The Chronicle Tuesday. “As Hillary and I got to know her…we were increasingly amazed at her endless capacity for kindness and generosity. An advocate and role model for other children living with disabilities, Lili never let her own disability keep her from living her life and touching the lives of others. She was a wonderful person who will be greatly missed.”

    Excerpted from: Former president Clinton lauds activist Lili Smith, 15, as “role model” for youth with her death this week

  12. Clinton and Biden go head to head on Afghanistan

    October 15, 2009

    The first rivalry on the team of rivals? It appears that Vice President Biden and Secretary Clinton, with the support of Defense Secretary Gates, are pushing very different strategies on Afghanistan with the President. Biden, former head of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has been advocating a troop decrease, and a refocus of US efforts on key Taliban and al-Qeada targets, and on the Af-Pak border. Biden also prefers an increase of drone fighters and surveillance tactics. It seems, however, that the State and Defense Departments are looking entirely the other direction. The unity between Sec. Clinton and Sec. Gates should come as no surprise. Both are centrist moderates with a record of cautious hawkism, and have come together on multiple issues since the start of the Obama Administration. VP Biden is under pressure from the left to continue supporting the anti-war effort, with poll numbers showing a dramatic decline in popular support for the war. Huffington Post liberal heavy-weight Ariana Huffington is even going so far as to say Biden should resign as vice president if Obama agrees to a troop surge. Huffington clearly believes Afghanistan will become the new Iraq, and says that “generations to come” would remember and honor Biden for making such a bold move. With the generals on the ground in Afghanistan calling the situation “desperate” and the spate of increased violence over the last two weeks pressing the situation, it is likely the president will make a decision soon, and it will not involved a decrease in US presence. If the reports of tensions between Clinton and Biden are true, it is the first time, as the two have been working together very well on foreign relations, passing the portfolio back and forth with ease. Although even Biden was quoted to say that Hillary Clinton is Obama’s “go-to person” on “just about everything,” the Secretary herself downplayed that assessment, stressing that it is always a cooperative effort.

    Secretary Gates gave the president a troop request last week, while withholding his own opinion. And, during the same week, Secs. Clinton and Gates both appeared together in joint press conferences defending Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s assessment of the war, and appearing to support increased troops and increased involvement. NATO also weighed in on the situation, urging Russia and other US-NATO allies to send additional support.

    As decision time approaches it appears that the Pentagon and the National Security Council may be looking into a “middle path.” The LA Times reports: Measures under consideration include closer cooperation with local tribal chiefs and regional warlords, using CIA agents as intermediaries and cash payments as incentives, said current and former officials who described the strategies on condition of anonymity.

    Other steps would concentrate U.S. and allied troops in cities, pulling out of Afghanistan’s widely dispersed rural areas. At the same time, the allied forces would push ahead with plans to intensify training of Afghan troops, officials said.

    None of the strategies envision troop reductions, but officials said they would not require the 40,000-troop increase preferred by Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the U.S. and allied commander. A number of White House officials favor sending fewer than 20,000 additional troops.

    International response to the Afghanistan war is mixed. Russia and their Central Asian allies have begun military exercises to train for Afghanistan, including a new policy which would allow for a nuclear first strike response. At the same time, Japan has informed the US that it will withdraw its naval support in Afghanistan. And, China has announced that it will continue Afghani reconstruction projects, and encourage increased diplomatic ties with the county. Spain, responding to NATO’s call to arms has asked for a time line of the Afghanistan war before committing resources.

  13. I wonder what the actual statistics are, but my guess is that, notwithstanding the rationality of the obvious preference of Hillary over Sir Barksalot, the union officers are panicking royally over huge losses in membership due to enormous unemployment among governmental entities (read schools and non-essential services as a result in crippling property tax shortfalls) as well as the ongoing and accelerated losses in manufacturing. Unless they rise up now, they will be irrelevant. In addition, they are probably sick over what could have been, a resurgent infrastructure and new economy which I am sure Hillary would have heralded. It is difficult to deny tragedy for long.

  14. ‘Hillary is more popular than Obama and every time Michelle Obama hears that she yanks off a sleeve.’
    That visual of sleeve-yanker MO is hands down my fav bigpink visual and I crack up every time i read it!
    It reminds me of a trailer of some upcoming movie where a highly neurotic New Yorker can’t open a plastic bag and he takes a knife to it.
    Bet that’s what MO does every time HRC gets positive attention.

    OTOH – much as i despise JINO’s (journalists in name only) Budowsky fnally gets this part right;
    “Make no mistake, the president has privately surrendered the public option to get a single Republican senator who will allow him to pretend this bill has bipartisan support.”

    Yup, you f***ing a$$wipe. Took ya long enough.

  15. Why are the dims giving Snow so much input and regard? One lone Republican doesn’t count very much for bipartisan support. Her trigger option is a joke.

  16. liliam,


    I heard Gov Patterson on radio today calling for an immediate $1 billion across the board cut to all NYS agencies, includng public schools. Another $1 billion is planned for next year.

    Just imagine how all the union idiots who voted for jack squat are gonna feel when they’re riffed (RIF = Reduction in forces).

  17. JanH@1:01, Lets see can I spell Armagadden. THis is awful, they are allowing all of the countries surrounding Israel to become more armed than ever before. Its down right scary!

    I don’t think Obama has ever been for the public option, its all a hoax to get the left’s votes. Soros is investing in big pharma, medical devices and all things medical and all things oil. I have to give it to George Bush, he is coveting all the water in Brazil.

    Shall we say all the kings are gathering gold to see who has the most.

  18. I think I am going to download and burn those 08′ debates to cd’s before Axelrove scrubbs them off the net. They look like Hillary knew Obama was bs and everything she said is coming true.

  19. confloyd,

    FYI – apparently, a 2004 AP article about jack squat’s senate bid recently discovered begins with this; “Kenyan-born BO . . . . ” and later says when asked about his citizenship (by Alan Keyes, I believe) Squat said – “it doesn’t matter coz i’m not running for POTUS.”

  20. basil9 Says:

    October 15th, 2009 at 3:51 pm

    Snow Job is a camera hog, IMHO.

    The dims stupidlyy believe her vote proves bi-partisanship.



    Seems that way. Sigh.

  21. birdgal,
    Caught this on Howard Kurtz, who used to host a decent show!!!
    Saint Olympia is getting the full media treatment.
    ‘By providing the only Republican vote for Obamacare, she is being hailed as a courageous statesman (stateswoman?). Charlie Gibson interviewed her live on “World News.” She made the morning TV rounds, mapped strategy in the Situation Room, played Hardball. Dana Milbank’s tribute to her political skill (and gibes at her studied indecision) landed atop The Washington Post’s front page.’

    Her comment “When history calls, history calls” is one for the history books, no? 😈

  22. Her comment “When history calls, history calls” is one for the history books, no?


    I can think of something else to say.


    In what may be the ultimate job rating, 43 percent of voters say that they would vote to re-elect President Obama if the 2012 election were held today, down from 52 percent six months ago, from April 22-23, 2009.

    Obama’s job approval rating comes in at 49 percent this week. That’s down just one percentage point from late September, but it marks a new low approval for the president — and the first time the Fox News poll has measured his approval below 50 percent.

    Moreover, the number of Americans saying they would vote to re-elect President Obama has dropped. If the election were held today the poll finds more voters say they would back someone else in the 2012 election than would back the president.

    Despite winning the Nobel Peace Prize last Friday, the latest Fox News poll finds the president’s ratings on foreign issues are lower than his overall job ratings. All in all, 49 percent of Americans say they approve of the job President Obama is doing and 45 percent disapprove. His average approval for the term so far is 58 percent.

    On Afghanistan, 41 percent of Americans say they approve of the job Obama is doing and 43 percent disapprove. For his handling of Iran, 44 percent approve and 43 percent disapprove.

    On the president’s handling of the economy, voters are almost equally split: 48 percent approve and 49 percent disapprove. On health care, some 42 percent approve of the president’s performance and half disapprove, 50 percent.

    Among Democrats, 78 percent say they would vote to re-elect President Obama, down from 87 percent in April. For 2008 Obama voters, 81 percent say they would vote to re-elect him — that’s a slight up tick from the 79 percent who said so previously. [snip]

    Upon winning the Nobel Peace Prize, Barack Obama said, “To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many transformational figures.” Most Americans agree with the president — 65 percent say he did not deserve to win, while 29 percent say he did.

    Furthermore, a slim 54 percent majority of Democrats think Obama did deserve to win, while 38 percent disagree. For independents, 19 percent think he deserved it, while nearly three-quarters, 74 percent, say he did not. Among Republicans, almost all — 91 percent — say he did not deserve it. [snip]

    Looking ahead to the 2010 Congressional election, for the first time this year the Republicans have the advantage: 42 percent of voters say they are more likely to back the Republicans to provide a check on President Obama’s power, while 38 percent say they would vote for the Democrat to help the president pass his policies.

    Finally, in a rare example of bipartisan agreement, majorities of Democrats, 53 percent, Republicans, 78 percent, and Independents, 61 percent, agree the country is more divided these days. All in all, 64 percent of Americans think the country is more politically divided today — that’s more than twice the number who say it is not more divided, 31 percent.

  24. Stirewelt finally gets it, too?

    These guys must have started reading bigpink. 👿

    ‘With the mumbling, accidental socialism of Obama, the insurance companies get richer and the middle class gets to pay more for less care. And what the working stiffs don’t pay, senior citizens will sacrifice in the form of Medicare cuts.’

    He forgets to mention how healthy 20 somethings will also be forced to fork over money to pay for senior care.

  25. The American Medical Association might be next to move:

    The AMA’s wobbly support of the moment is rooted in its recent effort to find common ground among the increasingly splintered interests of the nation’s 800,000 physicians, whose loyalty to organized medicine has ebbed for decades. It stems, too, from differences in how the several bills before Congress treat a matter of paramount importance to many doctors: the amount the government pays them to treat older Americans.

    Last month, in a letter to President Obama and members of Congress, the AMA called for “critical” changes to the health-care system, including health coverage for all Americans; reducing insurers’ power to determine patients’ treatment, require cumbersome paperwork and deny coverage to people who already are sick; promoting improvements in medical quality and prevention of disease; and lessening doctors’ risk of getting sued for malpractice.

    But according to health policy specialists on Capitol Hill and beyond, the real linchpin to the AMA’s support involves its controversial — and expensive — goal to persuade Congress to eliminate reductions in doctors’ pay through Medicare that lawmakers tried to set in motion a dozen years ago. Those reimbursement rates carry enormous stakes: Medicare, the federal program for people 65 and older, accounts, on average, for nearly one-third of U.S. doctors’ income, and its rates often influence how much private insurers will pay.

    The reductions in Medicare fees were part of a 1997 law intended to eliminate the budget deficit. Since then, Congress has relented repeatedly. Each year’s deferral translates into deeper cuts the following year, so that Medicare is now scheduled to lower doctors’ payments by 21 percent in January.

    In their health-care bills, House committees have devoted $228 billion to keep doctors’ payments from falling for a decade. It is the only provision for which House members have not found a way to pay. In the Senate Finance version, however, the reductions would be deferred just one year, as Congress has done before, at a cost of about $10 billion. A senior Senate aide said that Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) would like to eliminate the pay cuts in theory but found “it’s hard to get [everything] into the shopping cart.”

    The AMA on Thursday began a television ad campaign, trying to place pressure on the Senate to repeal the pay reductions.

  26. SInce I’m currently going through medical treatment I get GIGANTIC dupicate bills from my insurance company and the cost for chemo drugs for 1 visit can be as high as $10 G while the doctor’s fee is less than $300.

    I don’t blame the Dr.’s for fighting medicare cuts. Without them, there would be no one to prescribe and administer these drugs.

    It is a disgrace.

    (BTW – just sharing the good news I’ve had an 80% reduction in lymph nodes and I have only 1 treatment to go. My condition is not curable but is eminently controllable – as long as I still have health insurance).

  27. (BTW – just sharing the good news I’ve had an 80% reduction in lymph nodes and I have only 1 treatment to go. My condition is not curable but is eminently controllable – as long as I still have health insurance).


    Yeah! Keep up the good work.

  28. Update | 6:07 p.m. The 6-year boy, Falcon Heene, was just found alive, according to reporter Dan Frosch, who is at the boy’s house in Fort Collins, Colo. A Larimer County Sherrif’s deputy said that he was found in a box in the family’s garage.


    Glad he is alive, but what in the heck was he doing in a box in the family’s garage? Was he afraid that he would be in trouble??

  29. Congratulations Basil9. It’s good to be reminded of the consequences on people of the current health care mess.

  30. Apparently the little socialists are changing the pre emptive strike rule they have at the Pentagon. They are also funneling money off the wars for pet projects. Check out the Obama file for a full rundown.

  31. admin Says:

    October 15th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
    It appears to be a hoax Birdgal. Another family that loves publicity and will do anything to be on TV.


    Well, hopefully, the family will have to pay for this hoax. It is very expensive to have aircraft doing search and rescue operations.

  32. wbboei, Here is the connection between Ginsberg and Soros. It is also the first meeting of the Shadow Party.

    h t t p ://w w w .newswithviews .com/Betty/Freauf147.htm

  33. October 16, 2009

    UN row threatens to sink Middle East peace plan

    The Middle East peace process was on the brink of collapse last night as Britain and other European countries failed to back Israel in a key vote at the United Nations.

    A furious Israel threatened to pull out of peace talks if the UN Human Rights Council endorses today a controversial report condemning the Jewish state for war crimes during the Gaza offensive in January.

    Britain is planning to abstain, prompting a heated telephone call between Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, and Gordon Brown on Wednesday night. Mr Netanyahu urged the Prime Minister to oppose the resolution, saying that it could derail the peace process. During what officials described as a “robust exchange”, Mr Brown said Israel could avoid censure if it held its own inquiry into the Gaza offensive.

    Today’s vote in Geneva could prove a major headache for President Obama, who has made Middle East peace a pillar of his foreign policy.
    The resolution endorses the controversial Goldstone report, which accuses Israel of targeting civilians in the offensive against Hamas, in which 1,000 Palestinians and 13 Israelis died. The report also criticises the conduct of the militant group, but lays greater blame on Israel. It calls for both sides to conduct their own investigations within six months — or face referral to the International Criminal Court. Mr Netanyahu, however, has made it clear that no Israeli soldier or official will be prosecuted for war crimes over the offensive, telling the Knesset this week: “Israel will not take risks for peace if it can’t defend itself.” Talks about the wording of today’s resolution continued late into the night, but barring the inclusion of Israel’s right to self-defence, Britain and other EU countries are poised to abstain.

    US officials said last night that as the resolution stood, they would vote against it. With no state in the 47- member council holding veto power and the majority lined up behind the Palestinians, the resolution looked set to sail through.

    British officials said that London’s abstention was calculated to bolster Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Prime Minister. Mr Abbas had been so weakened in the Arab world by his prevarications over the report that his authority, and thus the peace process, was now in serious jeopardy, they said.

    Yigal Palmor, the Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman, told The Times that adoption of the resolution would wreck the peace process: “It will make it impossible for us to take any risks for the sake of peace. What sort of peace process will there be?”


    “British officials said that London’s abstention was calculated to bolster Mahmoud Abbas”


    Sure why not support a well-documented terrorist over the democracy of Israel. Why not support the enemy who bombarded Israelis with missiles and bombs and have never been called on it.

    This makes me thoroughly sick. I hope they do halt the peace talks. They are a mockery anyway. They are bambi’s bloodfest legacy. Good luck to him.

  34. I wonder if he wants some cheese with his whine.

    In New Orleans, Obama fires back at critics

    Oct 15, 2009

    By Matt Spetalnick

    NEW ORLEANS, Oct 15 (Reuters) – President Barack Obama fired back on Thursday at critics who say he has few accomplishments of note in his nine months in office and declared he was just getting started.

    In recent weeks, Obama has faced criticism both from liberals who want him to do more to advance causes such as gay rights, and conservatives who accuse him of taking too long to decide whether to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan.

    A comedy skit on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” program a couple of weeks ago drew attention to the issue. An actor playing the president said, “When you look at my record, it’s very clear what I’ve done so far, and that is: Nothing. Nada. Almost one year, and nothing to show for it.”

    The criticism was magnified after Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize a week ago when even some commentators sympathetic to the president said it seemed premature.

    Obama, making his first trip as president to see efforts to recover from Hurricane Katrina in 2005, opened a town-hall meeting by saying his work had led to some improvement in the U.S. economy and brought an overhaul of the U.S. healthcare system within reach this year.

    “Now, just in case any of you were wondering, I never thought any of this was going to be easy,” he said. “You know, I listen to sometimes these reporters on the news (who say) ‘Well, why haven’t you solved world hunger yet?'”

    As the crowd laughed, he said: “Why hasn’t everybody done it? It’s been nine months. Why? I never said it was going to be easy. What did I say during the campaign? I said change is hard. And big change is harder.” In what seemed a reference to Republicans opposed to Democratic healthcare proposals, Obama accused them of “trying to stand in the way of progress.”

    “Let me tell you: I’m just getting started,” Obama said.


    The town-hall meeting showed evidence of the partisan divide in America. When the Democratic Obama introduced Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, a rising star in Republican politics, some in the crowd booed until Obama settled them down and hailed Jindal as a hard-working politician.

    At the end of the event, a young schoolboy named Terence Scott asked Obama, “Why do people hate you?”

    “Well, now, first of all, I did get elected president, so not everybody hates me now,” Obama replied. “I got a whole lot of votes.”

    “But you know, what is true is if you were watching TV lately, it seems like everybody’s just getting mad all the time,” Obama said, blaming the climate in part on politics and on concerns among Americans about losing jobs or their healthcare. “And when things are going tough, then, you know, you’re going to get some of the blame, and that’s part of the job. But you know, I’m a pretty tough guy,” he said.

  35. Cannot understand how Bambi is back up to 56% ….Most Americans still prefer an incompetent boob who has done more damage in 9 month than Bush 2 did in 6 yrs..

  36. Have you all seen this from the DEVKAfile;

    According to an unconfirmed report in the French Le Canard Enchaine of Wednesday, Oct. 14, Israel is preparing to bomb Iranian nuclear sites and pro-Iranian targets across the Middle East after December 2009. The prestigious satirical weekly reports that the IDF has notified special forces reservists abroad to get ready to return home in November for immediate drafting to the military operation against Iranian nuclear facilities. The weekly further reports Israel has ordered combat rations from a French firm for these reservists to stay on long-term missions far from home.

    French military sources said that Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi met secretly in France with US armed forces Chief of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen and French Chief of Staff Gen. Jean-Louis Georgelin, to inform that Israel planned to attack Iran after December, when it became clear that the talks between the six powers and Tehran had failed to produce any benefit.

    According to Le Canard Enchaine, Ashkenazi said Israel would not attack Iran by air but rather use ground forces in coordinated operations on several Middle East fronts.

    DEBKAfile’s military sources add that if the information leaked to the newspaper from French joint staffs sources is correct – and not a red herring to disguise the impending attack’s real nature – the IDF may be expected to branch out from Iran’s nuclear facilities to target its allies too, such as Syrian air force and missile batteries, Hizballah bases in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

    Le Canard Enchaine is not alone in predicting an Israeli attack on Iran after December. A former Israeli deputy defense minister, Efraim Sneh, commented to US and British media several times in the past week that if the US fails to rally fellow powers’ support for toughened sanctions against Iran by Christmas, Israel will have to attack its nuclear installations. It may be assumed that Sneh was not just guessing on his own initiative.

    Another sign of the growing military tensions surrounding the Iranian nuclear program was a phone conversation late Wednesday night between President Barack Obama and French President Nicola Sarkozy. The two discussed Iran. After Hillary Clinton failed to swing Russian leaders round to supporting sanctions, when she visited Moscow Tuesday, DEBKAfile’s Washington sources report that Obama has decided to work with the French president for efforts to stop Iran’s nuclear program

  37. JanH Says:

    October 15th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
    ‘Syrian long-range missiles in Lebanon’

    Israel will strike and I imagine VERY soon

    Great news Basil

    Great article Admin

  38. I dont believe he has 56% fav

    all lies, we know that, and what retarded comments he makes (to the school boy) without his telly. Jesus this guy is dumb

    If you remember Admin that u-tube that was shown of him @ a town hall meeting where he looked like he has Alzheimer’s? I will try to find it if it hasn’t been scrubbed

  39. confloyd,

    Is that article a set up? Is it just speculation or an attempt to manipulate the Israelies into specific military behavior? Obviously the Israelis aren’t going to give away their military plans ahead of time. That would be political suicide. A leak of this magnitude would suggest that even if this manoevre was in the planning stages, that the Israelis will now have to completely change strategy.

    This just seems too pat to me.

  40. And given the knife in the back behavior at the U.N. right now regarding the Goldstone Report, I have to think that the timing of this very unconfirmed report in the French Le Canard Enchaine is very suspicious.

    The Arab nations already want to bloody Israel’s reputation with as many condemnations and black marks as possible. They want to destroy Israel’s reputation until it is in shreds. So publishing a report like this at the same time serves only to fuel their hate and bias.

    I think it’s a set up and a disgusting one at that.


    I am not sure but this may be the one

  42. I’m so happy for you basil. So much stress and fear at times like this. I’m glad things are looking more positive for you at last.

  43. jbstonesfan, Obama’s favorable rating tends to exceed his job approval rating. 56 percent is actually quite a bit down from what it was months ago in Gallup.

    Obama from Kenya, archived report says
    Revives worry about president’s eligibility for office

    October 15, 2009
    By Bob Unruh
    © 2009 WorldNetDaily

    An archived article from 2004 on Barack Obama’s run for the U.S. Senate in Illinois describes the relative political newcomer as “Kenyan-born,” providing further fuel for speculation over the president’s eligibilty for office.

    WND has noted various news reports that have either stated or implied Obama’s birthplace is not Hawaii, as he has claimed, but Africa.

    The issue is significant, since there are a number of lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility that argue if he was not born in the U.S., he does not meet the requirement in the Constitution that the president be a “natural born” citizen.

    WND further has reported on the disagreement among those documenting Obama’s presidency over which Hawaii hospital was his birth place.

    Now have come a flood of blog questions and e-mails regarding the apparently archived article from the Sunday Standard in Kenya.

    The report starts out, “Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack (sic) Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.”

  45. Here is the 2004 article:

    Sunday, June 27, 2004

    Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate

    Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations. The allegations that horrified fellow Republicans and caused his once-promising candidacy to implode in four short days have given Obama a clear lead as Republicans struggled to fetch an alternative.

    Ryan’s campaign began to crumble on Monday following the release of embarrassing records from his divorce. In the records, his ex-wife, Boston Public actress Jeri Ryan, said her former husband took her to kinky sex clubs in Paris, New York and New Orleans.

    Barrack Obama

    “It’s clear to me that a vigorous debate on the issues most likely could not take place if I remain in the race,” Ryan, 44, said in a statement. “What would take place, rather, is a brutal, scorched-earth campaign – the kind of campaign that has turned off so many voters, the kind of politics I refuse to play.”

    Although Ryan disputed the allegations, saying he and his wife went to one ‘avant-garde’ club in Paris and left because they felt uncomfortable, lashed out at the media and said it was “truly outrageous” that the Chicago Tribune got a judge to unseal the records.

    The Republican choice will become an instant underdog in the campaign for the seat of retiring Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald, since Obama held a wide lead even before the scandal broke.

    “I feel for him actually,” Obama told a Chicago TV station. “What he’s gone through over the last three days I think is something you wouldn’t wish on anybody.”

    The Republican state committee must now choose a replacement for Ryan, who had won in the primaries against seven contenders. Its task is complicated by the fact that Obama holds a comfortable lead in the polls and is widely regarded as a rising Democratic star. The chairwoman of the Illinois Republican Party, Judy Topinka, said at a news conference, after Ryan withdrew, that Republicans would probably take several weeks to settle on a new candidate.
    “Obviously, this is a bad week for our party and our state,” she said.

    As recently as Thursday, spokesmen for the Ryan campaign still insisted that Ryan would remain in the race. Ryan had defended himself saying, “There’s no breaking of any laws. There’s no breaking of any marriage laws. There’s no breaking of the Ten Commandments anywhere.”

  46. Jan H, lets be honest..there is a world wide conspiracy against Israel that has found a kapo in Goldstones report to add credibility to their blood libels. From Sweden to Britain, the things said and printed about Jews and Israel are exactly what pre-WW2 Germany did with a guy named Adolph. The Euros are already Islamasized and their centuries of anti-Jewness has reached it’s zenith once again. The difference now, and what puts Israel’s ability to survive in real jeopardy, is that under the anti-Israeli administration in Washington, for the first time since 1948, Israel cannot depend on the US to help them…Indeed, Obama has taken a direct collision course with the Jewish state and imo is more than willing to let her be destroyed in return for the embracement of over 1.5 billion muslims.
    Israel , make no mistake, is in real jeopardy. The older US Jews are dying out, the younger ones don’t care, anfd the elite upper clasds actually agrees with ZObamam and could care less aboutr Israel or w.
    Whereas Bill and Hillary were tough on Israel, it was with an overriding understanding that no matter what , they would defend her (see Hillary’s commenbts in primary if Iran attacked Israel).
    Unfortunately, Hillary and BUIll do not have the power to control Obama’s hate of Israel, and while they may try to help Israel clandestinely, they arer in a very wesak position given the people Obamam has put into place like Rice, Powers, Jarrett, Brizinski, and the self hating Jes like Emanuel and Axelrod.
    Netanyahu sees this and has remained very quiet as he hopes against hope that they (Israel) can make it for another 3.3 yrs and that America will realize the mistake they made. I do not, however, feel that they will be able to hold out that long witha nuclear iran on their doorstep. They are facing rockets in Lerbanon and Syria which can hit any target in Israel, Russain subs off the black sea that can hit at any moment, and off ciourse iran, which could strike the minute the weaponize …This is a very scary petime for Israel and I am afraid that she will not be able to sustain much longer as the noose it being wrapped around her tighter and tighter every day.
    (sorry for all typos as I can’t see anything I am typing).

  47. Last evening’s NJN news reported that Obama, Biden, Bill Clinton and … HRH Caroline Kennedy will be at various locations in NJ next week on the stomp for Governor Jon Corzine’s re-election bid.

  48. Glenn Beck did a good job yesterday uncovering the White House’s Communications Director. Here’s is the link. I will let you decide for yourselves. Admin, you might want to embed.

    h t t p ://w w w .youtube .com/watch?v= TkK1keMOjsY

  49. Fox and Friends this morning is discussing Hillary’s popularity and how its still holding because America wants a decisive President. I almost choked on my morning Diet Pepsi. Fox is going to take this POTUS down, just hide and watch. THey are digging up so many communists and maxists in his administration that its amazing. I do wish they would spend some more time taking down Soros and his buddies, I think we have a special place in Gitmo for these crooks.

    I almost got a virus last night trying to find information about the relationship between Allen Ginsberg and George Soros aka Georgy Schwartz.

  50. Morning confloyd.

    I hope you’re right about FOX but hannity is still bashing HRC every chance he gets. Last night he showed a blurb from an upcoming segment on a ‘fib’ he claims she made – anyway – i switched the channel.

    Just when i think I can tolerate SH or RL, they dig into their Clinton bag of trix and start wailing on them. i can’t stand it.
    BTW – did you hear CAIR is being investigatged coz of trying to infiltrate the WH? (COuncil for American-Islamic Rewlationships) And another tidbit – whaddayathink of this – Squat’s new pastor is considers it a violent religion??????

  51. 16/10/2009
    By Yoel Marcus

    Is the ‘Obama effect’ turning the world against Israel?

    The cancellation of the international air exercise with Turkey is no big deal. It harms the strategic interests and international standing of Turkey more than Israel. Even when Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan explains his decision by saying the Israel Air Force killed children with phosphorous bombs during Operation Cast Lead, he is harming his country’s security interests more than Israel’s.

    During the battles against the Kurds in southern Turkey, to say nothing of the Armenians, the cruelty involved would not put Turkey on the list of candidates for the Nobel Prize in Mercy. But don’t expect any television series on this subject in Istanbul.

    The NATO air drill, with the participation of the American army, is first and foremost of benefit to Turkey’s security and its drive to join the European Union. But Turkey’s rapprochement with Syria brings it closer to the Axis of Evil than to the EU. If Erdogan’s intention is to weaken the supreme authority of the Turkish army and its ability to defend democracy in that country, it may be wise to tell him now that he shouldn’t mess with Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s heritage – which entrusted the army with guarding both democracy and the secular nature of the regime.
    Ataturk would turn over in his grave were he to find that the republic he founded is on its way to becoming part of the Axis of Evil.

    Over the past year, Israel has found itself having to fight for its honor and reputation, and has become the world’s doormat. As if Israel’s history of wars (about one every six years), two intifadas and many terror attacks on its civilian population were not enough suffering, Hamas rained Qassam rockets and mortar shells on the communities in the south of the country for eight years.

    No one spoke out against this, and no one’s conscience was pricked, not that of Erdogan or of any other bleeding hearts, wherever they may be.

    Moreover, Hamas fighters carried out a massacre of Fatah supporters in Gaza and the entire world watched as the functionaries of Fatah were tossed to their deaths from the rooftops. Not one Islamic country demanded Hamas stop the massacre. How is it that no Goldstone panels were set up to examine the destruction Hamas sowed in Gaza or the murderous attacks that the terrorist organizations perpetrated on women and children in the heart of Israel?

    Just as Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak is busy arranging an agreement and turns out to be the most level-headed leader in the region, King Abdullah of Jordan suddenly warns us that he is planning to recall his ambassador to Amman.

    With all due respect to his majesty, he should be more restrained in view of the constant threat that the Palestinians will flood his kingdom. He also has no reason to rejoice over the connection between Syria and Turkey. It was via Syria that Iran transported the missiles and weapons it sent to Hamas and Hezbollah. And it was Israel’s ultimatum that prevented a Syrian invasion of Jordan during Black September.

    But now Israel finds itself having to defend its honor and reputation. What has happened? Is the whole world really against us once again?
    In my opinion, only one thing has changed. It is the emergence of the “Obama effect,” similar to the theory that when a butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil it can cause a tornado in Texas.

    In the eyes of Israel’s enemies, the election of Barack Obama has turned what was considered the unwavering American support of Israel into something that is not taken for granted any more. And when the nuclear-producing Ahmedinejad calls the Holocaust a lie, it is clear whom he is threatening.

    The “Obama effect” is encouraging Iran. Dialogue? Go for it. The Iranians are known for their salesmanship – when someone asks the owner of a carpet store the time, he will end up buying three rugs before getting an answer.
    Anyone who expected Obama to put Israel at the top of his priorities made a mistake. After eight months in the White House, one can see that his emissary George Mitchell has drawn a blank.
    But Obama has no intention of subduing Israel. He is a president who believes in dialogue but who can be resolute when necessary. For Israel’s good.

    Netanyahu took a giant step forward when he proposed two states for two peoples. But that is not enough for them and they want more and more. To be more accurate, they themselves do not know what they want. Gaza will be just Gaza? And the West Bank will be just the West Bank? And will there be no union between them?

    The problem is that there is no Palestinian leader today who can speak in the name of a Palestinian state. When they were at Camp David, Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat some 97 percent of the territories, and Arafat was the only person who had the authority to decide.
    But instead of holding talks, he initiated the second intifada during which he himself died under mysterious circumstances.

    Go to Washington, Bibi was advised time and again. He went and he came back; he went and came back and offered them what he had proposed during his speech at Bar-Ilan University.

    Mahmoud Abbas is acting out of anger. The more we help the West Bank to flourish and to take care of its security, the more he bad-mouths us, and the same holds true of what he has done in the wake of the Goldstone report. Still, the fact that the Palestinians are once again missing an opportunity does not free Netanyahu of the need to do everything possible to implement his plan for two states for two peoples. That is the only way for him to be recognized as Israel’s leader.

  52. basil9, I never watch Hannity. I do watch Glenn Beck as long as he isn’t bashing Hillary. Fox and Friends were talking about her popularity, but a few minutes later that had Napolitano on talking about the Clintonista’s. They are horrible. I am merely watching to see what they get on the Fraud, after that I won’t watch them again.

    Yes I saw that about CAIR and did you see where I posted that a Chinese General is coming to look at our military basis?? I can’t imagine why this is happening. I hope you watched the video of the WH communications director loving her some MAO. This world is upsidedown and insideout.

  53. Well wouldn’t you know Anita Dunn worked for Jimmy Carter, Bill Bradley, all those that are against the Clinton’s. It’s just amazing.

  54. This is the WH communications director in May 08.

    May 31, 2008 8:57 PM

    ABC News’ Teddy Davis and Karen Travers Report: The Obama campaign is not worried about the tempest that erupted at a Washington, D.C., hotel on Saturday when top Clinton adviser Harold Ickes threatened to take the fight over Michigan’s delegates all the way to the convention.

    “He said ‘reserve the right,’ not that he was going to do it,” said Obama adviser Anita Dunn. “They have to get through the next three days. I’ve been there before.”

    Now that the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee has decided what to do with the Florida and Michigan delegations, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is 68 delegates away from clinching the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, according to the ABC News delegate estimate.

    Obama’s campaign expects to win around 38 delegates in the final three contests of Puerto Rico, South Dakota, and Montana. If he hits that mark, it would leave him 30 superdelegates away from his party’s nod.

    The Obama campaign is pushing superdelegates to come on board by Tuesday so that Obama can claim his party’s presidential nomination when he speaks that evening at the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul, Minn.

    The site was chosen because it is the same place where Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., will formally receive the GOP’s presidential nomination in early September.

    Asked if Obama would wait to get a concession call from Clinton before claiming the nomination, Dunn said the onus was on Clinton now that the Democratic Party has firmed up the number of delegates needed to claim the party’s nod.

    “He’s not going to wait by the phone like a high-school girl waiting for a date,” said Dunn. “That’s not Barack Obama.”

    “After Tuesday,” Dunn added, referring to the final contests of South Dakota and Montana, Clinton “can decide how united she wants this party to be.”

    May 31, 2008 in Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User

  55. confloyd,

    yup – i saw the article about the Chinese general.

    BTW – since you’re a Soros sleuth – did you read that he was one of the buyers of the NFL team and he got rid of Rush??????

    I’ve also been reading about FEMA drills in the south involving troops from other countries! meanwhile, 45G more US soldiers are rumored to be deployed soon to Afghanistan. And the clips of Squat telling Keyes it doesn’t matter whether he’s an NBC doesn’t matter coz he’s running for Senator not POTUS is a hot button issue. Has the shark been jumped? Is Squat on his way down? I read elsewhere that the December CClimate Summit is intended to create a ‘new world order’ with the US paying ‘climate debt’ to third world countries. heard anything about that?

  56. Dual personalitys.dual color,forked tongue speech patterns.Uses Harvard accent on when he uses the teleprompter and the black accent for his townhalls.
    I heard him called an Oreo and that pretty well describes this man without a country.Yesterday speaking to high school kids he switched to the .
    Plantation owner accent and delivery.

    By ABM 91. How Soon Oh Lord!! Your Country needs
    you now HILLARY.

  57. Basil9

    I really hadn’t looked up Soros’s getting RUsh out of the buy, but I don’t doubt it. I thought it was the players, most of them black and supportive of the POTUS. It is so disgusting what they did to Rush, this is suppose to be America, if Rush had the money he shouldn’t have been thrown out of the buy. I hear he is suing, and if he does, this might help blow the lid on SOros. I hope Rush gets a real good lawyer.

    I haven’t seen the video of Obama telling Keyes that, I went to the site you posted but couldn’t find it. I don’t doubt that they will do this to bring our country down. I have seen quotes of Soros saying he knows what is going to happen to America, but he would say what it was!! We need him out asap.

  58. Search: Angry Americans

    Whether you blame it on unemployment, lost homes, health care scares or other issues, America’s psyche is showing signs of wear:

    Signs of the times: A key measure of people’s confidence surprised experts by falling. And more Americans are calling these hotlines for help.

    The recession: It has led to increased violence worldwide, a study found. Some Americans, meanwhile, have become riled up over issues, including:

    *Gun rights: Sales have surged since President Barack Obama took office. (What’s behind that?)
    *The latest topic of debate: Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize win.

    Health care
    *Town Halls: Meetings to discuss proposed health care reform turned hostile, with a bloody incident, out-of-control crowds and weapons.
    *Congress: Rep. Joe Wilson’s shout-out during President Barack Obama’s speech incited a backlash, but his outburst had a silver lining.

    The economy
    *Housing: Foreclosures, triggered in part by the subprime mortgage crisis, turned homeowners into protesters.
    *Bailouts: Companies’ billion-dollar bailouts, courtesy of the American taxpayer, also led to protests. Some executives took bonuses, earning them a public scolding.

    Coping: Two emotions usually precede anger. Feeling immobilized and unable to make decisions are warning signs. Having panic attacks? Here’s some advice.

    Week in Search

  59. admin: However, Gallup’s Jeffrey Jones explains why this brief respite from dwindling numbers won’t last
    Enter today’s Rasmussen Pres. Trckng: minus 11
    Spot on, admin.

  60. The GOOD 100: Hillary Clinton

    Danielle Pergament
    October 16, 2009

    Blonde Ambition
    How the polarizing politician has successfully reinvented herself. Again.

    Whatever you think about Hillary Clinton, you no doubt think something. Whether you want to pat her on the back or turn your back to her, the woman elicits powerful reactions. She also elicits respect on the world stage, and when she doesn’t get it, she demands it. That is one of the things that make her best suited for her job. (But we’ll get to that.)

    Modern America loves its female secretaries of state—maybe the “softer sex” is seen as better suited to issues of diplomacy. And while Condoleezza Rice and Madeleine Albright both brought tremendous experience to the job, neither packed a house like Hillary Clinton. She just brings a bigger microphone to the job, commanding the attention and respect of people and world leaders due in part to her high profile, sure, but also because of her resume. She was the first former First Lady to run for public office, the first female senator from New York, and the first woman to have a real shot at the presidency. She’s also been to more countries (80) and met with more heads of state (exact number unclear, but it’s a big one) than we have space to list. And that was all before she became our chief diplomat.

    Clinton took over the State Department at a moment when entire continents seemed to hate the U.S. government. It was also a time when the world had any number of wars that needed ending, peace agreements that needed negotiating, and deals that needed brokering. Her to-do list includes stopping nuclear proliferation in Iran, halting the Islamic insurgency in Pakistan, promoting civilian projects in Afghanistan, getting us out of the quagmire that is Iraq, and alerting the world to the humanitarian crisis in Congo—to name only a few.

    She has worked overtime on those relationships that are either tense or outright disastrous. She made nice with Russia, spoke publicly about Kim Jong Il’s successor, told India that climate change is its problem, too, and she quietly and successfully led 33 countries to set binding conditions for Cuba’s re-entry into the Organization of American States. To get all those jobs done, she persuaded the Obama administration to increase the foreign-affairs budget by 10 percent, boosting aid and bringing aboard more diplomats. And it’s only been nine months.

    Here’s a theory: All the things about Clinton that rub people the wrong way—her candor, her outspokenness, her gumption, her ambition—are the very things that now make her so good at her job. To put it bluntly, she’s not full of shit. This could not have been made clearer than in that incident in Congo, when a young man asked the secretary of state, “What does Mr. Clinton think through the mouth of Mrs. Clinton?” Hillary was pure Hillary. “My husband is not the Secretary of State. I am. If you want my opinion, I will tell you my opinion. I’m not going to be channeling my husband.” And in one brilliant and honest moment, the point of her entire trip promoting women’s rights was made manifest. It’s not a slogan or a policy speech, it’s the necessity for men and women to be treated equally.

    Finally, Clinton is a patriot. Not in that my-patriotism-is-bigger-than-your-patriotism sort of way. She’s the kind of patriot who believes America is an exciting, inspiring country that can be and has been a force for good in the world.

    For decades it was as easy to argue against Hillary as it was to argue for her. But in her brief tenure as Secretary of State, a new Hillary Clinton has emerged—a highly intelligent, uncommonly thoughtful, and profoundly erudite leader who grasps the complexities of foreign affairs in a way that honors the job description.

    “There is a hunger for the United States to be present again,” Clinton has said. And that’s the best thing about Hillary Clinton—she has a way of making sure everyone knows she’s there.

  61. NMF,

    Not sure if you are aware of this…

    Denish rented Clinton campaign list

    By Matthew Reichbach

    According to Politico, the gubernatorial campaign of Lt. Gov. Diane Denish rented the campaign list of Hillary Clinton. Clinton, now Secretary of State, ran for President in the Democratic primary last year. According to the Federal Election Commission report, the Committee To Elect Diane Denish, Inc. paid $1,431.40 for the list of e-mail addresses for Clinton supporters in New Mexico.

    Denish supported Clinton and was the chairwoman for Clinton’s New Mexico campaign. Clinton won the caucus in New Mexico during the Democratic primary.
    Denish is currently the only announced Democratic candidate for governor.

    Denish was not the only candidate to rent the e-mail list, according to Politico:

    Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota; Reps. Artur Davis of Alabama (a candidate for governor), Paul Hodes of New Hampshire (who’s running for Senate) Mary Jo Kilroy of Ohio; New Mexico Lt. Gov. Diane Denish (who’s running for governor), Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter and Houston Mayor Bill White (who’s raising money for a Senate bid).

  62. Yes, she was a great supporter of HRC during the campaign. One of the campaign workers stayed with her, she was front and center all the way to the convention. I am getting regular emails from her. She has started her campaign for Gov, and she immediately accquired the number of signature for her petition to run. In fact she got 3 times the amount needed very quickly.

    I will support her in her bid to become the first Women Gov of NM.

  63. confloyd,
    The video seems to have been scrubbed and now here’s an all points out bulletin looking for anyone who taped the c-span version which ran twice back in 2005, i believe.

    Here’s some more info from a poster at another blog.
    ‘I went over to C-Span and searched around. Came a cross this video and there are many more. The article that you posted states that the unedited version was played in the spring / March of 2005. I did not see that one. But at the end of this one the ‘reporter’ guys says they will continue the debate back stage after the taping stops …???

    www dot c-spanvideo dot org/program/184143-1

    BTW, about Soros, I read he was among the pool of buyers for the NFL team and he helped coordinate the effirt to get RL out.

    Anyway, this isn’t going down well with football fans many of who are boycotting NFL games and TV sports coverage over this.
    It doesn’t look good for AA football players to be complaining about WTF is funding them considering their astronomical salaries.

  64. The only thing I don’t like is the rumored selection for her LTG. He looks like an OO person. I would prefer she select someone else that went to the wall for HRC, and we have them.

    However, if she is to get the Dims OK her, I think she will have to make decisions that I would not like to make.

  65. Thousands protest during Obama visit

    Friday, October 16, 2009

    video at:

  66. Yikes!

    So many spelling errors!

    What I wouldn’t give for a review option before hitting submit.

    Anyway – Squat’s new pastor thinks ISLAM is a violent religion.

    What an irony? Or is it deliberate?

  67. LOL…bambi’s on the road again spewing garbage…New Orleans…Chicago, San Francisco..

    Makes me think of this song…

  68. basil,

    Everything from health care to Afghanistan to broken promises of “hope and change.”

    They kept the crowds back and snuck him in another way so he didn’t even see them.

  69. I don’t know much about Amy Siskind but since this excerpt is originally from the HuffPo I guess she’s a koolade drinker.

    Not so much now.
    Check this out. What we’ve known all along. Sucker!

    There’s a sign going up at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It reads: “Boy’s Club: Girls Not Allowed.”

    Despite much talk of hope and change, President Obama seems largely tone-deaf to women and women’s issues. Post-racial country — yes. Post gender inequality — not so much.

    Were we sold a brand that touted diversity, yet delivered a president with a woman problem?

    Earlier this week, CNN interviewed me for a segment on President Obama called Where are the women? Good question. Where are they?

  70. U.S. regulators should consider breaking up large financial institutions considered “too big to fail,” former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said.

    Those banks have an implicit subsidy allowing them to borrow at lower cost because lenders believe the government will always step in to guarantee their obligations. That squeezes out competition and creates a danger to the financial system, Greenspan told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

    “If they’re too big to fail, they’re too big,” Greenspan said today. “In 1911 we broke up Standard Oil — so what happened? The individual parts became more valuable than the whole. Maybe that’s what we need to do.”

  71. I could SCREAM!!!!!!!!!! Where the F*** were these women during the trashing of HRC?
    What did they expect from an administration that applauded Favreau’s fratboy beer party pic groping a cardboard cut-out of HRC?
    Where was the outrage when Squat continually insulted HRC, from “she’s lokeable enough” to scratching his cheek with his middle finger?
    More from the Siskind article.
    ……Obama’s White House basketball game for Cabinet secretaries and members of Congress. Not a single woman was invited to the game.
    Neither do women on the White House staff participate in the basketball games Obama’s male staffers, including David Axelrod, have on weeknights.
    Obama’s women problem is not confined to sports. When Obama held his highly publicized beer with Skip Gates and Sargeant Crowley, the Editor at MORE asked: Would Obama Talk to Women Over Beers?. Here’s the answer: no! Obama took the opportunity to speak out for Skip Gates, admittedly before knowing all the facts, as a teachable moment on the issue of race. Yet Obama, tone-deaf to women’s issues, was strangely silent when Rihanna was almost strangled to death by Chris Brown. Where was the teachable moment for violence and against women and teen dating violence — both epidemics in our country?
    Women’s representation in Obama’s administration is also shockingly low. Of President Obama’s 35-40 czar picks, only 3 are women. Read: over 90% of Obama’s inner circle is composed of men!
    And the scant representation of women might explain why women’s issue are seemingly non-existent with this administration. The healthcare bill is especially disturbing. Where is the dialogue on healthcare issues impacting women?
    ……..we as women have nothing to show. Yes, Obama did create the White House Council on Women and Girls and appointed Valerie Jarrett to lead it – a notion that I applauded in an op-ed at The Daily Beast. But Jarrett quickly exited stage left to work on Chicago’s 2016 Olympic run, and frankly we have heard bubkas from the council.
    So what do we do?
    It is time for women’s advocacy groups to take the lead from what the gay rights groups have learned so well. Unite and speak out together. Challenge President Obama on his campaign promises and shockingly low representation of women. Call him out on his women problem and ask him how he plans to address it.
    And it is finally time for women’s organizations to end their decades long cold war with Republican women. Women’s organization need to master a skill so inherent to men: negotiation. The Republican Party has promising stars ahead of 2012 including Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina and Sarah Palin. Leaders of women’s organizations should be making our case to both sides of the aisle.

  72. I cannot understand the women’s group. Are they defective, that they would believed what he said over the actions. I am convinced that HRC was not given her positon, as she had somethings that forced him to give it to her.

    The culture he came out of, just does bot foster men who think women are equals.

  73. for Basil9, Amy Siskind was not a koolaid drinker to my knowledge. She formed a website, The New Agenda, to fight for women rights after seeing the way Hillary was treated in the primary.

  74. NMF,

    I’ve always thought that he asked Hillary to be SOS because he had no choice. The numbers/votes were hers. Her supporters would not forget the way he cheated his way into the WH. I think his handlers were stupid enough to believe that this would pacify the masses who know the truth.

  75. Here it is, Obama is in Texas with HWBush joining in with the “New World Order”.

    SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — President Barack Obama is joining former president George H.W. Bush at a volunteerism summit near the elder Bush’s Presidential Library.

    It’s a bipartisan gesture, saluting the senior Bush’s groundbreaking “Thousand Points of Light” campaign, first mentioned in his 1989 inaugural address. Obama will say his “United We Serve” campaign builds on a foundation first laid by Bush.

    Obama is also asking his Democratic base for patience and trust.

    At a pair of party fundraisers in San Francisco last night, Obama said he hoped the enthusiasm his candidacy raised “was not just a fad.”

    He’s also telling those who may be disenchanted with aspects of health care overhaul that any bill that gets through will help millions of uninsured Americans.

  76. His “new world order” will consist of doctrination that will amount to little soldiers drinking koolaid and chanting Hosanna to their mighty king. This isn’t about volunteerism. This is about setting himself up to storm into a 2nd term of office no matter how dismal his records are.

  77. JanH

    I don’t think she got SoS because he wanted her there. You are right, it could have been for those reasons also But I guess I tend to think with his ego, there had to be something definite they had on him, as he felt everyone would fall in line and just love him unconditionally. After all, he had been groomed and promoted as soon as the Dims decided he was it. They had taken care of everything in the past, from bussing in, to strong arming the Unions in Nevada.

    Maybe someday we will know.

  78. You can now get an upgrade to 2 vip tickets if you buy 2 regular tickets for the no limits Hillary speech Nov 6th….I am waiting as I am on a trailo docket but plan on attending if I get out….Is anyine else from the group attending???

  79. Huffington, imo, is tryiong to portray this as a Biden v. Hillary thing and will blame Hillary no matter what the decision…The woman is a witch,

  80. JanH Says:

    October 16th, 2009 at 11:20 am

    I’ve always thought that he asked Hillary to be SOS because he had no choice. The numbers/votes were hers. Her supporters would not forget the way he cheated his way into the WH. I think his handlers were stupid enough to believe that this would pacify the masses who know the truth.

    Well. it worked, didn’t it. Most of her supporters voted for him and still support him. i saw a poll that show his support among dems at 78%.

  81. He is copying Clinton on everything…now trying to become old man Bush’s friend to show bi-partisanship as he rams his far left agenda down our throats behind closed doors.

  82. The Biggest Disappointment of the Obama Presidency

    By Eugene Robinson | October 16, 2009

    President Obama’s brief display of drive-by compassion Thursday in New Orleans was, for me, by far the worst outing of his presidency thus far — and the biggest disappointment.

    I covered Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath — the flood in New Orleans that drowned a great city, the storm surge in Mississippi that erased whole communities, the devastation, the agony. For weeks afterwards, I had trouble sleeping. I couldn’t forget the scenes I’d witnessed or the stories I’d heard.

    More than a year later, I covered a Senate subcommittee hearing in New Orleans on the lagging reconstruction effort. I watched as a young senator who was thought to be considering a presidential run — that would be Barack Obama — used his Harvard Law skills to eviscerate Bush-era officials for not doing enough to rebuild and revive the Gulf Coast region.

    So it was strange and disheartening that Obama would wait nine months to make his first visit to New Orleans as president. It was stunning that he would spend only a few hours on the ground and that he wouldn’t set foot in Mississippi or Alabama at all. But worst of all was the way he seemed to dismiss the idea that his administration could and should be doing much more.

    I know that local officials say the Obama administration is more responsive and more effective than the Bush administration, but that’s not saying much. What says more is that New Orleans still doesn’t have an operational full-service hospital. And that an adequate flood barrier is still not in place.

    “I wish I could just write a check,” Obama said. If that was his message, he should have stayed home. We now know that our government can make hundreds of billions of dollars available to irresponsible Wall Street institutions within a matter of days, if necessary. We can open up the floodgates of credit to too-big-to-fail banks at the stroke of a pen. But when it comes to New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, well, these things take time.

    I doubt these are the priorities Obama wants to be remembered for

  83. Ani,

    i wasn’t sure coz it was originally posted at huffpo.

    Confloyd, gonzo, birdgal and other health care workers.
    Here’s one for the team.

    NEW YORK (CBS) ―

    Health care workers in New York will no longer be forced to get the H1N1 swine flu vaccine, CBS 2 has learned.

    A state Supreme Court judge issued a restraining order Friday against the state from enforcing the controversial mandatory vaccination.

    Three parties – the Public Employees Federaion, New York State United Teachers, and an attorney representing four Albany nurses – challenged the order and for now the vaccination for nurses, doctors, aides, and non-medical staff members who might be in a patient’s room will remain voluntary.

    New York was the first state in the country to initially mandate flu vaccinations for its health care workers, but many health care workers quickly protested against the ruling. In Hauppauge, workers outside a local clinic screamed “No forced shots!” when the mandate came down at the end of September.

  84. 😳

    Sorry for the extra stuff.
    Here’s the relevant part.

    A state Supreme Court judge issued a restraining order Friday against the state from enforcing the controversial mandatory vaccination.

    Three parties – the Public Employees Federaion, New York State United Teachers, and an attorney representing four Albany nurses – challenged the order and for now the vaccination for nurses, doctors, aides, and non-medical staff members who might be in a patient’s room will remain voluntary.

    New York was the first state in the country to initially mandate flu vaccinations for its health care workers, but many health care workers quickly protested against the ruling. In Hauppauge, workers outside a local clinic screamed “No forced shots!” when the mandate came down at the end of September.

  85. basil,

    I’m getting the seasonal flu shot on Monday. I get it every year because I’m considered to be in the “high-risk” group and it is highly recommended by my doctor. I haven’t decided yet about the N1H1 shot that is set to be distributed in Canada in early November. My doctor is highly recommending that one as well.

    Our Prime Minister was on the news the other night talking about the flu season. He told us that they plan on having the testing completed prior to release of the N1H1 shot and that the distribution process has been carefully planned. I hope he’s right.

    Has Obama talked to the nation about it yet?

  86. I’m not usually a Byron York fan but this article put a smile on my face.

    Lefty Anger Splits Dims.

    www dot washingtonexaminer dot com/politics/Lefty-anger-splits-Dems–and-may-sink-them-8393293-64453502

  87. Jan,

    I’ve gotten the seasonal shot, too, and have no problem with it as I’ve gotten it for the past 2 decades.

    I am very wary about the swine flu shot and, to answer your question, as fr as i know Squat hasn’t talked about it.

    Glad you’ve got a PM ready to address the issue.

  88. basil,

    I’m waiting to see the results of our testing here in Canada and then will make a decision. Our Prime Minister admitted that he though Canada was a little better organized this time around than the U.S….and I don’t think he was bragging, just trying to reassure us that things were on track. Again, I am praying it’s not just lip service.

    I know in the past, U.S. citizens have come up to Canada to get their shots. I wonder if that will happen this time around.

  89. Did anyone see Michelle Bachman’s interview where she said something to the effect that she had 5 kids and 20 something foster kids and she wanted to be able to hand the mantle of freedom down to them.

    Now that is a true patriot, imho.

  90. The Age Of Fake. It turns out the father of the “balloon” boy hoax has called Hillary a “reptile” in a not funny video. Another Obama scam artist.

    The YouTube is here:

    Some of the comments we like, such as this one: “You should all be ashamed of yourselves. I cried for your kid when I thought he was in danger. You suck. I hope Hillary Clinton eats you.”

  91. hehehehehehe, admin.

    Confloyd, this one is for you. In searching for info about a local mover and shaker and his endless grants I came upon this.

    You might find it interesting. I did.

    www dot fedspending dot org/fpds/tables.php?tabtype=t2&subtype=t&year=2005e

  92. confloyd at 11:32 am: Obama is also asking his Democratic base for patience and trust.
    hope he’s not holding his breath.

  93. Clinton counsels patience on health care, Afghanistan troop decision

    by Foon Rhee, October 16, 2009

    Hillary Rodham Clinton — former first lady, presidential contender, and now secretary of state — knows painfully first-hand how difficult a lift health care is. So she counsels patience as Congress and the White House tries to come up with a bill that can pass — and that can work.

    “I’m very encouraged by the action that’s going on in the Senate. But I think I, probably better than anyone, know how difficult this is,” she said in an interview aired on CNN today. “But we’ve made a lot of progress in the last nine months. And I’m very optimistic we’re going to get a health care plan that will really improve the lives of the American people,” added Clinton, who led a White House health care task force in 1993-94 that submitted a detailed bill to Congress that was derided as “Hillarycare” and went nowhere.

    In the interview, Clinton also preached patience on Obama’s decision whether to dispatch more US troops to Afghanistan, saying that “it’s to the president’s credit that he has had the patience and the persistence to really force the process without responding prematurely.” The president, she said, needs to closely scrutinize the broad view of what the US mission in Afghanistan should be and how best to accomplish it, citing a recent strategic review. “It was quite remarkable that the report came in with two big ideas that had not, in my view, been fully either explored or certainly implemented in the prior eight years,” she said. “One was you’ve got to look at Afghanistan and Pakistan together. Now, that may sound self-evident. But that wasn’t what was being done previously. And you have to have a much greater integration of the civilian and the military efforts.”

    The full transcript of Clinton’s interview with CNN’s Jill Dougherty, as provided by the network, is below:

    JILL DOUGHERTY, CNN FOREIGN AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Secretary Clinton, thanks very much for taking out the time to talk with us. Afghanistan, let’s talk about that. Afghanistan’s electoral commission is coming out with its report. The Afghan ambassador says that that commission is likely to order a run-off election. Should President Obama wait for the results of that run-off election before he makes his decision on troops for Afghanistan.

    HILLARY CLINTON, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, Jill, first let me say we’re not positive what the election commission will recommend, but clearly whatever their recommendation is I believe should be followed. And if that requires a second round that is what should happen. I think that the president is well aware of all the permutations of what can happen in the election. It is likely that they will find that President Karzai got very close to the 50, plus 1, percent. So, I think one can conclude that the likelihood of him winning a second round is probably pretty high.

    But I think the ballots have been printed and certainly the military, through NATO and through our own troops, is looking at how you would secure such a second round. But I think that we have taken into account every possible outcome as we have engaged in our strategic analysis. And I think the president is expecting to make a decision on his own timetable, when he is absolutely comfortable with what he believes is in the best interest of the United States.

    DOUGHERTY: Could that run-off election be carried out, do you think, if it happens within a month? And what if it stretched on into the spring? Could Afghanistan survive without a legitimate government until then?

    CLINTON: Oh, absolutely. First of all, I think it could be carried out since, as I said, the ballots are printed and certainly some planning has been done. It could absolutely be carried out, within the next few weeks, before the snows come. We have problems in the south, as you know, because of the intimidation from the Taliban and al Qaeda, at every turn, trying to prevent people from participating. But I think it could be, but we won’t know. We have until the decision is made because certainly I don’t want to prejudge or pre-empt whatever the election commission itself is going to determine.

    But I also think that the decision that the president has to make is looking at how we can have a different and more effective relationship with the Afghanistan government, whoever is the final victor. But not only with the government in Kabul but with governors throughout the country, with what they call sub-national, regional, local leaders and there’s been a lot of thought given as to how we would do that.

    DOUGHERTY: But the decisions in the administration right now, looking at President Karzai, there are numerous allegations of corruption, fraud, et cetera. Is he really damaged goods? Because, after all, the administration says they need a reliable partner -that the whole strategy is pinned on having a reliable partner. Is he a reliable partner?

    CLINTON: Well, I think that – let’s wait and see how this election turns out. Let’s determine what the winner – assuming it is President Karzai – commits to do and the measures of accountability that can be put into place to more effectively guarantee the outcomes that we’re seeking. I think, unfortunately, over the last eight years there wasn’t the kind of expectations that should have been set for what the United States and the international community expected to be delivered, but we’re going to change that and we are in the process of working through the best ways to do that.

    But let me just put this into a context, because I certainly am concerned about fraud and irregularities any time they occur, in any election, anywhere, but this is one of the most carefully vetted elections. The fact that there is this check and balance through the Election Commission process is unlike what we see in most countries where elections are held, results are announced, we all roll our eyes, you know, the ruling party gets 98 percent and everybody knows that that’s either because they have effectively limited or eliminated their opposition or because they have committed fraud.

    We had a real election. Now, were there irregularities? Yes. And has there been an accounting of those irregularities? Yes. But the fact that an election was held in a conflict, as terrible as this one is, in many parts of the country, that it was a real election with rallies and platforms and a number of people did quite well, the two predominant winners, we know, President Karzai, Abdullah Abdullah – I think should be also recognized. So we’re trying to be realistic here and not blow too hot or too cold. In fact, I think that, you know, the prior administration was too unrealistic in the way that they treated both our involvement and the number of troops that we put in to achieve our goals and the relationship they built with certain leaders in Afghanistan. So we’re trying to recalibrate this, and I think we’re well on the way to do that.

    DOUGHERTY: The deliberations that the president is having about Afghan policy, troops, et cetera – you’ve been in, obviously, on all of them. You were on one when we were coming back from Moscow, in the plane…

    CLINTON: Right.

    DOUGHERTY: … and yet you said in an interview this week that you haven’t given him your — offered your best advice to the president. Why not? Why not yet? When are you going to do it, and what are you going to tell him?

    CLINTON: Well, the process that we’ve pursued, which I really believe has been not only useful but quite informative to all of us is leading up to where we will give our best advice. But it would have been premature because we wanted to examine every assumption. There were no questions or topics off limits. Everybody came to the table with all of their – you know -concerns were laid out. I think we’ve done a thorough job of analysis, and now we’re moving into the decision phase, and I’m sure that the president’s going to be asking all of us what is our advice to him, and then when he makes a decision what is it we are all going to contribute to actually executing his decisions.

    DOUGHERTY: So give us a little peek into those meetings. Is he actually saying let’s discuss this, what’s the information, and, you know, not asking for your advice? Is it all going toward him?

    CLINTON: Yes, yes. And it’s been very — I think we’ve all learned a lot. I think the president has been extremely skillful in probing and asking all the hard questions. We’ve had the benefit of not only our military commanders — some at the table like Admiral Mullen and General Petraeus — but some by video civets (ph) like General McChrystal plus our two exemplary ambassadors, Ambassador Eikenberry in Afghanistan, Ambassador Ann Patterson in Pakistan.

    We’ve had just the most thorough scrubbing. And, you know, here in the State Department, you know, we are mostly responsible for the civilian, the political, the diplomatic development side of this. And, you know, we’ve spent intense times — Richard Holbrooke’s team, Deputy Secretary Jack Lew. have, you know, really put together our presentations and then on the front lines answering the questions from everybody. This is the way government should work. But given, you know, the political and the media environment in which we live, it’s understandable people want us to walk out of a meeting where we may have focused on the military side or we may have focused on the governmental side and say, “OK, fine, what have you guys decided?”

    And I just think that it’s to the president’s credit that he has had the patience and the persistence to really force the process without responding prematurely so that when he comes out — remember, this was really foreshadowed back in the spring because when he got into office, there was a pending troop request. And he asked for a report about how we should think about what we were doing.

    It was quite remarkable that the report came in with two big ideas that had not, in my view, been fully either explored or certainly implemented in the prior eight years. One was you’ve got to look at Afghanistan and Pakistan together. Now, that may sound self-evident. But that wasn’t what was being done previously. And you have to have a much greater integration of the civilian and the military efforts.

    And the president said at that time, OK, we’re going to send these additional troops. Afghanistan has been under-resourced from the beginning. I have said that since 2003 when I first went to Afghanistan and an American soldier met me by saying welcome to the forgotten front lines in the war against terrorism. And I took that very personally because having been a senator from New York, that is where the attack against us was planned.

    The attention was shifted to Iraq. Everybody knows that. We’ve never had the kind of military or civilian commitment that our mission had been, you know, really needing.
    So the president is doing what he said he would do. And we’re going to proceed on his timetable.

    DOUGHERTY: Have you personally made up your mind, and especially about this part that is so important — in order to have State Department put people, USAID, out in the field. They need protection. Can you actually carry out the mission, the State Department mission, without adding extra troops?

    CLINTON: Well, Jill, I, you know, am certainly going to give the president my best advice. I’m not going to do it before, and I’m not going to do it in public. I think he’s owed our best advice. But I take very seriously the safety and security of our troops and our civilian employees. It’s — it’s dangerous for either the military or an aid worker. But the military at least has the capacity to defend itself. You know, they get to carry guns. Our agronomists or our economic advisers, you know, are pretty much out there dependent upon the security environment that can be created by the military.

    DOUGHERTY: Just a few months ago — on Pakistan — just a few months you said that Pakistan is in danger of falling to the terrorists. Now we’re having attacks every single day. Are you sure that that government is able to really keep control over the country?

    CLINTON: Well, I’m very impressed with the commitment that the Pakistani government, both the civilian leadership and the military have made. When I said what I said some months ago, there was not the full commitment of going after those who were threatening territory and authority inside Pakistan. There is now. And I think the military in Pakistan has proven its effectiveness in going into Swat. From what I read in the paper, they’re very much focused on also going into the heartland of where the Pakistani Taliban and al Qaeda are located and where these plots and these attacks are planned and directed.

    So, I think that they understand that there is a direct threat to them, which they are addressing, which I think is all for the good.

    DOUGHERTY: We don’t have a lot of time, so I want to ask you a question about health care reform.

    CLINTON: Yes.

    DOUGHERTY: I covered the White House back when you were carrying out your — your plan on health care reform. It’s very dear to your heart. As you look at the debate going on right now, don’t you wish you could kind of jump into it? Express your viewpoints?


    CLINTON: Well, I care deeply about this issue, as you know, and have for many years. And, you know, I’ve been asked for my viewpoint by some of the leading participants in this debate, and I have freely offered it. But I have a different role now. And I’m going to cheer from the sidelines as an American citizen with the hope that finally, we’re going to get this done. I’m very encouraged by the action that’s going on in the Senate. But I think I, probably better than anyone, know how difficult this is.

    But we’ve made a lot of progress in the last nine months. And I’m very optimistic we’re going to get a health care plan that will really improve the lives of the American people.

    DOUGHERTY: Let’s look at this Gallup poll that just came out. You are more popular than the president. President Obama, 56 percent, Clinton, 62. Why do you think that?

    CLINTON: Oh, I have no idea. You know, I — I see the polls. They go up, they go down about me, about others. But I think that in general, the people in our country approve of what the president is doing in his leadership.

    But it’s hard. You know, I mean, look. Being the president is hard. I know that from having watched it closely. And certainly, the change in tone that we’re trying to bring to foreign policy — we are very pragmatic about this. I mean, this is — this is a clear-eyed approach at trying to engender greater support for the decisions we think are in the best interest of the United States, and apparently, the people in our country think we’re on the right track.

    DOUGHERTY: And you have talked this week — there have been a couple of questions coming to you about your next mission after the State Department, how long you would stay. Do you want to stay — let’s say that the president gets reelected — would you stay, you think, for another term? And also, retirement. I mean, after this trip, I guess, to Moscow, I’m thinking…


    CLINTON: Well, you and I been around a long time, Jill!

    DOUGHERTY: We’re about the same age so I think it’s time to start thinking about this. What do you think? What does retirement look for — look like for Hillary Clinton? What would you want to do?

    CLINTON: Well, I have no idea, because I’ve never had the opportunity to do that. But I love my job. I love representing our country. I’m very pleased by the relationship I have with the president, the vice president, you know, the White House national security team. So, it’s a great joy. But it’s also extremely demanding. And — I mean, I’ve been on a very fast track for most of my life, but particularly for the last, you know, 17 years. So, at some point, I think it would be time to, you know, maybe have a little more space to reflect and write and relax. But I have no idea when that will be.

    DOUGHERTY: Here’s one last question. In Moscow, you were asked what book had influenced you the most? And you were talking about the “Brothers Karamazov” and the fact that some people –the most dangerous thing, I guess you were saying, people who really think they know it all.

    CLINTON: Right.

    DOUGHERTY: That they are right. Is there something – since you’ve begun this job, where you were suddenly forced to look at it in a completely different fashion? That perhaps you had been wrong about it? Is there something that changed?

    CLINTON: That’s a really interesting question. I mean, what I was talking about, of course, at Moscow State, was the need, you know, to be open. To be more humble in our own opinions and our own views of the world to try to see how others see it. And it is an important message, particularly for Russia, for Russia’s young people. Because, you know, I know that there are still those in Russia, just like there are in our country, who have these Cold War mentalities and this enormous amount of distrust. That doesn’t mean we’re going to agree with Russia all the time. It doesn’t mean that they’re going to go along with us, or we with them. But I think we’ll go further together if we, you know, just look more openly and realistically about where we stand and not get burdened by ideology.

    Well, similarly you can see people who have strong religious beliefs, who think that they have the only truth that exists. And so I’m always asking myself, well, how do other people see that? And Americans, we get impatient with people who are tied to the past. We think, oh, come on, let’s move on. Because we’re such a nation of tomorrow; we’re always planning and looking toward the future.

    And I said in Northern Ireland, you know, leadership requires us not to have an allegiance to a past we cannot change. But a commitment to a future we can shape. So I’m always asking myself, what can I do to kind of make sure that I’m not carrying attitudes from the past that will interfere with getting to a better future for my country. And, you know, I care about the rest of the world as well, but my obligation is to make sure that I do the best job I can for the United States.

    DOUGHERTY: Well, thank you very much, Secretary Clinton.

    CLINTON: Thank you.

    DOUGHERTY: Appreciate the time with you.

    CLINTON: Good to see you.

  94. Clinton’s absence hurting Healthcare Reform in Senate

    October 16, 2009

    They say a band without a leader is just a collection of un-melted brass and with the passing of Teddy Kennedy and the absence of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic caucus truly represents a leaderless band.

    No fire, no brimstone, no pounding fists in this fight for health care reform. Liberalism is held silent by its last remaining advocates, Senators like Harry Reid and John Kerry, men who speak in whispers, calmly, with the impact of a windblown willow or in Kerry’s case like the creaking wood of an old rocking chair that never, ever, stops.

    Instead the Democratic message has been crafted by the likes of Ben Nelson, Max Baucus, and Byron Dorgan. A message even a Democratic President seems to distance himself from at times. A message constantly on the defensive from or courting the support of a louder minority party that knows how to convince even when they are wrong, and knows the brief political value of bi-partisanship.

    While Hillary Clinton has done a fine job as Secretary of State (and in a recent gallup poll, 62% agree), raising the profile of American diplomacy and been an able adviser and advocate for the President, the reality is that a “Public Option” would be more then a progressive wish if she was elbow deep in this fight rather then an ocean away. A legislator with the rare ability to both invite and repel those on the other side of the aisle as well as galvanize her own caucus behind an ideal, Senator Clinton seemed the ideal candidate to carry on the Kennedy mantle as Liberal Lion of the Senate, a Kennedy in style rather then in name.

    Sadly it seems, that will never be. Neutered by shrill Conservatives that demonize and Moderate Democrats that ignore, American Liberalism will suffer absent a leader, absent a lion for a good long time.

Comments are closed.