No Limits Lynn Forester

Today we woke up to a good commentary and a question that has us scratching our heads.

The article is written by the founder of “To Get Her For Us” Lady Lynn Forester De Rothschild. Readers of Big Pink know Lynn Forester from her courageous stand for Hillary Clinton when other Democrats chose to become Dimocrats.



Our question is: Why isn’t Lynn Forester speaking at the “No Limits” conference on November 6?

Instead of strong Hillary supporters “No Limits” is inviting people who should not share the stage with Hillary Clinton. Where’s Lynn? Why isn’t she invited to speak?

We know Lynn Forester did not support Obama in the election out of conviction but she is a prominent Democrat and someone who has recently attended events with Hillary, including an awards ceremony. Lynn Forester is a self-described Jersey “girl”, a long-time Hillary Clinton supporter and a strong woman who sees right through Obama’s flim-flam scams. Is that the answer?

Instead of Lynn Forester “No Limits” is inviting Congressman Barney Frank, Nancy Ann Min DeParle, Dee Dee Myers, and Maggie Fox, among others.

We understand that Barney Frank is the brother of Ann Lewis, President of “No Limits”. But Barney Frank has lately betrayed the Gay community to protect gay-basher Obama, is embroiled in dubious housing legislation and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s failures, and most recently is pushing through a noxious loophole-ridden mess of a financial reform bill as Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Why is Barney Frank invited and not Lynn Forrester?

We hope, but like Obama supporters whose hopes have been dashed do not expect our hopes to be realized, that invited Nancy Ann Min DeParle the head of the White House Health Care “Reform” Office does not use the “No Limits” opportunity to praise the Obamination which is the Obama health care scam.

Lissa Muscatine, will speak on “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights” as Senior Advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Director of Speechwriting. Good for Lissa Muscatine. But what about someone to speak about misogyny and sexism in the United States and the Dimocratic Party?

We have no quarrel with Kakenya Ntaiya (of Kakenya’s Dream) discussing “building schools for girls in Kenya” but what about attacks on girls here in the United States? What about sexism and misogyny in the United States? Kenya-believe-it? No discussion scheduled thus far about the horrors of sexism and misogyny in the United States, instead we’ll hear about Obama’s Kenya! Maybe Kakenya Ntaiya will address sexual abuse in schools built for girls, in Africa, by Obama friend Oprah.

There will also be a panel with Dee Dee Myers, wife of Hillary and Bill Clinton hater and smear artist Todd Purdum, called the “View from the Press Room”. How about a panelist that will discuss Todd Purdum’s attacks on the Clintons?

Also on the Big Media panel will be Dana Perino, the former George W. Bush Press Secretary. Maybe Dana will discuss Todd Purdum and the Boys on the Putrid Bus.

Also on the agenda is Maggie Fox, CEO, The Alliance for Climate Protection as a moderator for a panel called “The Climate Change Imperative”. We hope that Ms Fox will not try to sell the Obamination which is the Obama “Cap and Trade” filth.

The only, and worthwhile, reason to attend the conference appears to be the wonderful Hillary Clinton. But Hillary should not be on stage to lend legitimacy to dubious schemes and scams. We have supported “No Limits” and feature the organization in our “Hillary Saves The World” section for a long time (on the right hand column of this page). But in the same way we believe Obama dupes should speak out against Obama wrongs, Hillary supporters must speak out when we see something wrong about our own allies.

Where’s Lynn on the agenda of “No Limits”?

Perhaps readers of HillaryIs44 who are attending the conference will ask “Where’s Lynn?”

Why are Chris Kelly, a former Facebook Executive, and Thomas Gensemer of Blue State Digital invited instead of Lynn Forester? We recall Facebook as an Obama outlet and Blue State Digital is a Howard Dean inspired outfit.

Facebook founder Chirs Hughes was an early Obama supporter and Blue State Digital spawned Phil De Vellis who created an early video which attacked Hillary as a 1984 fascist “Big Brother”. Why are these people invited and not Hillary supporters like Lynn Forrester?

* * * * *

Lynn Forester might not be on the agenda at the “No Limits” conference but today she writes about Obama with accuracy and truth.

IN “The Audacity of Hope,” Barack Obama described himself as “a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.” This is a powerful tool in elections and explains why liberals, moderates, Democrats, Independents and Republicans joined together to give him 53 percent of the vote last November.

Since his election, this “blank screen” has been an asset, allowing the new president to maintain an illusion of progress, even as he has avoided the hard choices necessary for progress. But, as Americans ponder the unavoidable consequences of the president’s policies — particularly health-care reform — the illusion is wearing thin.

Few Democrats but Lynn Forester dare speak the truth and stand up for core Democratic values, not Dimocratic Obaminations:

The government has spent $3 trillion to prop up Wall Street and take over the big insurance and auto industries — yet the middle class and small businesses continue to suffer. Fifteen million workers remain without jobs; 32 percent of Americans’ homes are worth less than their mortgages — and a whopping 61 percent of Americans are living from paycheck to paycheck.

For these reasons, the American people have begun to judge President Obama on his record, not his rhetoric; on his policies, not his narrative — and on his ability to govern, not on his campaign machine.

The cool and reasonable candidate who gave hope to his voters, who promised to rise above the ugly politics and big money of Washington, is turning out to be as conventional a politician as any other. Indeed, as he runs a permanent campaign from the White House, he is proving to be more committed to protecting the vested interests of his party than standing up for actual change.

Lynn Forester is talking about the Obamination Party, not the once great Democratic Party when she rightly declares that Obama is “protecting the vested interests of his party”.

Lynn Forester describes a conversation with an immigrant from Haiti:

I asked him if he would not have preferred if our country had guaranteed him a job, a pension, health care and a college education for his children. He told me no — and gave three reasons.

First, he said, he takes pride in knowing what he has done for his family. Second, he knows that the government does not, cannot, know what he wants for himself and his family. Third, he knows that what government gives, it can take away.

Having lived the American dream, he realizes that the individualism at the heart of American democracy is what is actually at stake in the present debates over the president’s many policies.

The “can-do” FDR style Americanism Lynn Forester describes as in danger:

Immigrant or native-born, it’s written in the American DNA: A paternalistic government threatens our independence, our individuality and our right to self-determination. It’s why Jefferson sang praise to the yeoman farmer and Jackson to the common man. It’s the principle that Reagan placed at the heart of his presidency, and that Clinton built on by advancing policies that empowered individuals — not policies that made individuals beholden to the state.

Lynn Forester is undoubtedly talking about the welfare reform that Bill Clinton passed. Since Bill Clinton passed the welfare reform plan he has been attacked by PINOs but since Bill Clinton passed welfare reform we Democrats saw the Republican attacks on “welfare queens” disappear. Barack Obama threatens to provide Republicans with the “welfare queen” hatchet once again.

In contrast, President Obama’s praise for the free market and individual liberty just doesn’t ring true — because his record does not reflect his rhetoric. His actions show a fundamental disconnect with American values — a disconnect that won’t be dispelled with captivating speeches, no matter how masterfully delivered.

Lynn Forester should speak at the “No Limits” conference if DeParle speaks up for the Obama health care scam.

It is for this reason that so many Americans are uneasy about Obama’s health-care plan. The promised benefits don’t add up. It’s just not possible for the government to simultaneously a) provide care for 30 million more people, b) not increase the budget deficit and c) allow anyone who is satisfied with their health care package to experience no change.

In repeatedly insisting that he’ll deliver all three results at once, Obama has lost credibility: 80 percent of Americans polled said that his health-care reform will raise costs or diminish quality of care.

On the back of total federal debt that is already over 70 percent of our total GDP, and in light of $34 trillion of existing unfunded liabilities in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, the president’s lack of actual, as opposed to rhetorical, fiscal discipline further erodes his authority.

Hillary fought for genuine universal health care and has the scars to prove it. Hillary, no matter what DeParle might now say, was right when she denounced the Obama health care scam during the primaries. Hillary is a fighter for core Democratic values and Obama is just a flim-flam scam man who fights only to advance himself:

In light of all the political capital that true and sensible health-care reform would cost him, it is most likely that President Obama will accept legislation that fails in all but name. In such a case, the president will claim victory — but not solve our health-care problems. It will be another empty triumph of his “blank screen” politics.

And voters will find that they elected not another FDR, but another Jimmy Carter.

We know where Lynn Forester stands. Lynn Forester has lived a life of no limits.

Where does “No Limits” stand?

Share

100 thoughts on “No Limits Lynn Forester

  1. Admin,

    I’ve often thought that Lynn Forester would have made an amazing talk show host on political affairs, either that or a wonderful congresswoman. I remember that interview very well. She came forth at a time when most were afraid of the dims/bots revenge tactics.

    She should indeed be speaking with Hillary. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to listen to any of the other speakers at this event and she would have been a wonderful addition.

    Great article!

  2. Great article, it makes you wonder why she is not there. Seems like all those other speakers are Obama shills. Its just plain weird.

  3. Why not a quiet protest. When certain speakers rise to speak, signs in the audience could go up saying, “Where were you when they took Michigan from HRC” or “Where were you when HRC won the primary vote, but got robbed of the nomination” Of course you need to make them short.

    WHERE WERE YOU WHEN HRC NEEDED YOU
    WHERE WERE YOU IN MI
    WHERE WERE YOU IN FL
    WHERE WERE YOU AT THE CONVENTION.

    Of course Lynn Forester could reply, here right beside her.

  4. October 18, 2009

    76 days since request for more troops, Obama accused of stalling

    Christina Lamb in Washington

    IN Afghanistan they would call it a shura, the traditional tribal way of listening to elders’ views before reaching a consensus. In Washington, where President Barack Obama has now held five war councils, they are starting to call it dithering.

    With another council on the Afghan war scheduled for this week, US officials admit it could be November before a decision is finally taken on whether to agree to General Stanley McChrystal’s request for more troops. One participant revealed that the protagonists have not yet discussed troop numbers.

    Latest polls show a majority of Americans now disapprove of Obama’s handling of a war which may come to define his presidency. Many senior members of his own party are in open revolt.

    Senator Robert Byrd, at 91 a Democratic institution, was so incensed that he dragged himself from his hospital bed last week to make a 13-minute speech. “Does it really take 100,000 troops to find Osama Bin Laden?” he wondered. “And how much will this cost? How much in terms of more dollars? How much in terms of American blood?”

    Obama has kept his own views to himself, although he is thought to be leaning towards acceptance that more forces will have to be added to the 68,000 US troops already committed. But his professorial style of asking for position papers and hearing all views is leading to accusations of drift.

    “It has been 76 days since General McChrystal submitted his review to the administration requesting additional forces, and the clock continues to tick,” complained Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the senior Republican on the House foreign affairs committee.

    The slow pace, explained one adviser, is explained by the fact that each meeting focuses on a different part of the problem. “They are methodically going through all the information,” he said. “The discussion itself is not unexpected,” said a Pentagon spokesman. “It’s not as if we were expecting a rubber stamp.”

    The White House gives away little after each session, barely changing the adjectives used to describe them. The first was “rigorous and deliberate”, the second “comprehensive”, the next “robust” and the last “fairly comprehensive”.
    Behind the scenes a number of big personalities are jostling for power. The man said to have the president’s ear is Robert Gates, the steely defence secretary who served the previous administration of George W Bush and who believes more troops are necessary.

    Obama also respects the views of General James Jones, the national security adviser, for his on-the-ground experience of Afghanistan from 2003 to 2006, when he was Nato’s supreme allied commander for Europe. He is said to be wary of sending more men. “Afghanistan is a country that’s quite large and swallows up a lot of people,” he said recently.

    The biggest tussle is between McChrystal and Vice-President Joe Biden, who argues against escalation. Biden, who wants more emphasis on Pakistan, pointed out in a paper entitled Counterterrorism Plus that the real threat is not the Taliban but Al-Qaeda, whose leaders have moved over the border. Biden, 66, seen as the in-house pessimist, has adopted a subtle campaign to make his case, with aides letting slip to journalists the extent of his influence over his inexperienced commander-in-chief.

    While McChrystal was slapped down for unwisely choosing a lecture in London to press his point, there has been no attempt by the White House to rein in Biden. Yet with Obama leaning towards sending more troops, the vice-president seems to be heading for defeat.

    Although Biden prides himself on his foreign policy experience, a key factor in his selection, critics point out that his judgments have proved questionable in the past. “When was the last time Biden was right about anything?” asked Thomas Ricks, a military writer affiliated with the Center for a New American Security, a think tank founded by Democrats. Biden voted against the Gulf war of 1991, voted for the Iraq invasion of 2003, proposed partitioning Iraq into three sections in 2006, and in 2007 opposed the troop surge that was later credited with turning Iraq around.

    Whether or not he succeeds in convincing Obama of his case, nobody can dispute that he has changed the nature of the debate. Biden reflects widespread scepticism among Democrats about investing more heavily in an eight-year war that the US and its allies seem to be losing.

    Jim McGovern, a Democratic congressman from Massachusetts, is pushing a bill that calls for an exit strategy. He argues that extra American troops will only antagonise the Afghans and help the Taliban win more recruits.

    Even some Republicans are beginning to question further military commitment. George Will, the conservative columnist, has advocated a reduction in forces, arguing that Washington should wash its hands of a country where travelling is “like walking through the Old Testament”.

    timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6879511.ece

  5. Barack Hussein Obama & George Soros To NFL: No Limbaugh!! by Doug Urschel
    Doug Urschel
    October 17, 2009

    The thought that Roger Goodell woke up one day and decided to prevent Rush Limbaugh from investing in a NFL team is just plain nonsense.

    Look at the clear and concise facts. Mr. Goodell knew of Mr. Limbaugh’s bid to buy the Saint Louis Rams, but said nothing. No one in the NFL said anything either. Then, suddenly, BAM, lightening struck as if from a “holy hand.”

    In a previous article (Roger Goodell: The Difference Between Opinions, Racists and Criminals) I wrote that “cowardice, a lack of stewardship, or personal prejudice entered into his decision to block the right of private ownership to an American.”

    Isn’t it odd, that Roger Goodell, a person with the background of working in America, would prevent another person from the same opportunities he had? It’s not odd at all. When the facts are known and the dots are connected, as easy as these are, it’s not odd at all.

    Now for the rest of the story.

    George Soros is one of the most influential people in the world. His billions of dollars allow him to get into many nations and then into their economies. Money, access and ownership give Soros his bottom line desire to influence politicians and the politics of nations.

    How do I know this? How about from the writings of George Soros. He wrote a book titled “The Bubble of American Supremacy: Correcting the Mis-Use of American Power.” Mr. Soros has written about ten books, all having to do with the United States being a very bad nation. He wants to place people in power who agree with him.

    No one donates more money to the Democratic Party than George Soros. He gets around laws which place a limit on donations by having all of his holdings donate separately.

    Hillary Clinton met Soros in the former Soviet Union. Soros decided to place Barack Obama in the Oval Office and the race began. Clinton, though Soros liked her, didn’t have a chance against his large amount of money, influence and holdings.

    Guess who the one American citizen was that fought against Soros getting his tentacles into into another nation’s executive office? If you said Rush Limbaugh, you would be correct. Mr. Limbaugh and the Soros-controlled Media Matters have been battling since. Fox News and any other news organization that speaks out against Soros also gets slammed by Media Matters. Rush Limbaugh’s primary enemy is George Soros.

    The Soros’ machine needed a lawyer in Washington DC who would not only back Obama, but do the will of Soros. He selected DeMaurice Smith. Mr. Smith worked for the current U.S.Attorney General (Eric Holder) in the U.S. Attorney’s Office during the Clinton presidency.

    The Federal Elections Commissions recorded that Smith gave the Obama presidential campaign $3,300.

    Smith is also down for giving donations to:

    The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

    The Democratic Party of Virginia.

    The re-election campaign of the District of Columbia’s Democratic U.S. House non- voting delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton.

    Indiana’s Democratic Senator Evan Bayh.

    Note: He also contributed to the presidential campaign of John Kerry.

    In 2007 Mr. Smith was a lobbyist for Patton Boggs and Blow. They were very proud of their lobbyist Smith, when he was named one of the “Top Fifteen Black White-Collar Criminal Defense Attorneys” by Corporate Crime Reporter.

    Let me get this straight, was that the “Black” White-Collar Crime…? Isn’t that a bit racist?
    Now Mr. DeMaurice Smith is the Executive Director of the NFL Players Union. WOW!! Mr. fairness, no agendas, moderate, DeMaurice Smith sent this e-mail to the Players Union Executive Committee:

    “I’ve spoken to the Commissioner (Roger Goodell) and I understand that this ownership consideration is in the early stages. But sport in America is at its best when it unifies, gives all of us reason to cheer, and when it transcends. Our sport does exactly that when it overcomes division and rejects discrimination and hatred.”

    Well…OK! I guess that let everyone know their place on the pecking order.

    George Soros, Barack Hussein Obama and DeMaurice Smith despise Rush Limbaugh to their inner selves. Mr. Limbaugh is everything that the three of them aren’t.

    George Soros is now in the NFL. You may not agree, but just his dislike of Limbaugh caused Smith to threatened a strike with the owners. There was no vote taken. There was no meeting of the players, never mind a vote.

    bleacherreport.com/articles/273532-barack-hussein-obama-george-soros-to-nfl-no-limbaugh

  6. Duplicitous dose in Medicare cuts

    By Deroy Murdock
    Saturday, October 17, 2009

    As health care reform lurches forward in Washington, proposed legislation would chop nearly half a trillion dollars from Medicare. This is yet another example of greedy, cold-hearted, racist Republicans slicing Medicare so they can laugh as Granny shivers on a subway grate and nibbles her cat food with a broken fork.

    Just as candidate Barack Obama warned last October, Republican rule means Medicare cuts. “You’ll pay more for your drugs,” Obama prophesied. “You’ll get lower quality care. I don’t think that’s right. In fact, it ain’t right.”

    But wait . . .

    These massive Medicare cuts bear no Republican fingerprints. They are – gasp! – handcrafted by Democrats, the heretofore compassionate, caring party that handed Granny her knitting needles and hot cocoa as she rocked gently before a crackling, federally subsidized fire.

    Specifically, the various Democrat bills under consideration would fund a massive explosion in federal health care expenditures by extracting some $450 billion from Medicare through 2019.

    This includes “hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud” that President Obama breezily says can be trimmed from Medicare. Well if Medicare truly is this mismanaged, then government medicine is a model to avoid. If, however, government medicine lowers costs, Medicare should lack such budgetary blubber, leaving little to excise.

    Which is it?

    Democrats want to squeeze $113 billion from the Medicare Advantage program that satisfies 10 million seniors. Democrats also would slash Medicare reimbursements to doctors who see elderly patients. Medicare typically pays such physicians 80 cents per dollar of their usual prices. Curb those payments by another 25 percent, as the Senate Finance Committee proposes, and doctors will see even fewer Medicare patients.

    Had the GOP mulled even a fraction of these Democratic cuts, Republican National Headquarters would be a smoking ruin.

    Now, as Democrats attempt to enact these savings, the media slumber at their desks while AARP stands down. The staff of the elders’ lobby seems more excited about securing the socialist dream of government medicine than watching the backs of its 40 million mainly retired, dues-paying members.

    Things were far louder in late 1995 when the GOP Congress weighed 6 percent Medicare growth, rather than the 10 percent previously projected: As the late Sen. Ted Kennedy growled: “It is clear that there is a new meaning to GOP – Get Old People.”

    If Republicans “control the White House, the Congress and the federal courts,” predicted Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), “they will do everything they could to see that Medicare and Medicaid would wither on the vine.”

    The late, great Robert Novak reported in November 1995: “White House press secretary Michael McCurry said Republicans ‘probably’ would like to see senior citizens ‘just die and go away’ along with Medicare.”

    Democrats are in charge now, and they practically can taste the government medicine they covet. Thus, things are as eerily quiet as the pillow they have poised to stuff over Granny’s face.

    bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1205265&srvc=home&position=emailed

  7. We’re not surprised about another liar in the Obama dens:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/arts/design/18fairey.html?_r=1&hp

    Shepard Fairey, the artist whose “Hope” poster of Barack Obama became an iconic emblem of the presidential campaign, has admitted that he lied about which photograph from The Associated Press he used as his source, and that he then covered up evidence to substantiate his lie.

    Mr. Fairey’s admission, which he made public on Friday, threw his legal battle with the news agency into disarray.

    The A.P. claimed in January that Mr. Fairey owed it credit and compensation for using the photograph. But in February Mr. Fairey sued The A.P., seeking a declaratory judgment that the poster did not infringe on the agency’s copyrights and that he was entitled to the image under the “fair use” exception of the copyright law. The A.P. countersued in March, saying Mr. Fairey had misappropriated the photograph.

    Mr. Fairey told the agency — and his own lawyers — that he had used a photograph from an April 27, 2006, event about Darfur at the National Press Club in Washington where Mr. Obama was seated next to the actor George Clooney. Instead, the photograph he used was from the same event, but was a solo image of Mr. Obama’s head, tilted in intense concentration.

    Mr. Fairey admitted that in the initial months after the suit and countersuit were filed, he destroyed evidence and created false documents to cover up the real source. He said he had initially believed that The A.P was wrong about which photo he used, but later realized the agency was right.

    “In an attempt to conceal my mistake, I submitted false images and deleted other images,” Mr. Fairey said in a statement, released on his Web site. “I sincerely apologize for my lapse in judgment, and I take full responsibility for my actions, which were mine alone.”

  8. admin:

    I’m not sure I understand the message in your post. Are you saying Ann Lewis of “No Limits” is another traitor joining the Traitors Hall of Shame with Patti Solis Doyle and Marc Penn?

  9. Darfur activists feel the Obama treachery? The latest Obama Friday night news dump:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/17/world/africa/17sudan.html?_r=1

    The Obama administration has formulated a new policy for Sudan that proposes working with that country’s government, rather than isolating it as President Obama had pledged to do during his campaign. [snip]

    During his campaign, Mr. Obama criticized the Bush administration for doing too little to stop the killing. [snip]

    But the new administration policy is likely to inflame an already vociferous chorus of criticism.

    In advertisements and letters to the White House, legislators, activist groups and Sudanese rebel leaders have accused Mr. Obama of abandoning his promises to make Sudan a priority from his first day in office and to stand tough against President Bashir, whom the International Criminal Court indicted this year for crimes against humanity.

  10. Mrs. Smith, we are scratching our heads on this one. We are not calling names nor “traitor”, just questioning the tepid list of speakers for what should be a big event. We’ve made some calls, but ours is not the only head that is getting scratched. Where are the hard core Hillary supporters or even strong Hillary supporters that care about issues, not promoting Obama’s stinky proposals? Why Barney Frank, and the rest? Where’s Lynn? The event should be about Hillary, not Obama or Kenya.

  11. Re: Darfur and Sudan

    This is getting to be ridiculous. Somebody name me one promise obama made during the election than he hasn’t reneged on.

    Of all the promises he should have kept slapping Darfur in the face like this is not just inhuman but tragic.

  12. admin Says:
    October 17th, 2009 at 7:42 pm

    “Why Barney Frank, and the rest? Where’s Lynn? The event should be about Hillary, not Obama or Kenya.”

    I think you answered your own question. Ann Lewis has bowed to her brother just as Solis Doyle did to hers. The event should be boycotted Big Time with marchers holding placards:

    “WHERE ARE THE HILLARY SUPPORTERS?” for the reasons you just stated. Then replace Ann Lewis as president with Lynn Forrester.

    Feck these rollovers and get with people we can trust.

  13. Music to my ears!

    Squat now at 45% approval, down 4 points in the past month despite the Ignoble.

    From Harris;
    In September, U.S. adults were split almost evenly on the job the President has been doing – 49% gave him positive ratings and 51% gave him negative ratings. This month, the number giving him positive ratings drops to 45% while over half of Americans (55%) give him negative ratings. ….

  14. some more cause for celebration from the same poll:

    Otherwise, though, the numbers look pretty bleak. The percentage of voters rating Obama “excellent” peaked in April at 18%, but has now dropped to 10%. “Pretty good” has come in for a softer landing, from 42% in May to 35% now. “Poor” has almost doubled from April’s 15% to October’s 28%, while “only fair” has remained constant over the last seven months at around the current 27%.

    As the Harris summary mentions, the only age group Obama wins is the youngest (18-32), and only barely at 51%/49%, and only 10% of these think Obama has done an “excellent” job. He loses the other three age categories by wide margins, from 10 points to 22 points. Most troubling for Obama and Democrats as they close out their first year of single-party control of DC are the independents. Obama has a -20 favorability gap among unaffiliated voters, with only 6% rating him as “excellent” while 28% rate him “poor”.

  15. admin Says:

    October 17th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
    Mrs. Smith, we are scratching our heads on this one. We are not calling names nor “traitor”, just questioning the tepid list of speakers for what should be a big event.
    ————————————————————————————–

    When I first received the e-mail about the No Limits event with Hillary, I also scratched my head. The lineup didn’t make any sense to me and the speakers seemed more appropriate for BO. Strange.

  16. obama’s election tactics seem to be rubbing off internationally
    ————————-

    October 18, 2009

    Armed riots threatened as Karzai scorns election inquiry

    Jerome Starkey

    HAMID KARZAI, the Afghan president, has threatened to ignore the findings of an investigation into widespread fraud that made it appear he had won an election victory over his rival in August.

    The country’s Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) had been due to announce yesterday that Karzai’s share of the ballots was being cut from 54.6% to about 47% as a result of the inquiry, triggering a second round of voting. But the announcement was delayed amid diplomatic efforts to convince Karzai to abide by the decision.

    Karzai insists that he should be declared the outright winner and has dismissed reports of widespread fraud as “totally fabricated” and “politically motivated”.

    In a bleak assessment to foreign ambassadors in Kabul last night the head of the United Nations in Afghanistan, Kai Eide, warned that the situation was “very tense”.

    “He was encouraging the ambassadors to get their foreign ministers to call up Karzai and underline the importance of sticking to the constitution and accepting the ECC’s decision,” said an insider at the meeting.

    The American senator John Kerry met the president for the second time in two days to emphasise “the need for a legitimate outcome”, an embassy official said. French diplomats said a surprise visit by their foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, was also intended to defuse “tension created by the repeated delays in announcing the election results”.

    Gordon Brown, the prime minister, has telephoned Karzai twice in seven days, while Hillary Clinton, the American secretary of state, spoke to him late on Friday night.

    The final results have been delayed for more than eight weeks while investigators wade through more than 3,000 allegations of fraud, including almost 900 deemed serious enough to alter the result.

    Karzai’s aides claim the West is trying to change the outcome to be unfavourable to him. Diplomats fear that if he rejects the ECC’s findings, opposition supporters will riot and the country could be paralysed.

    Supporters of Abdullah Abdullah, the main opposition candidate, have threatened to hit the streets “with Kalashnikovs” if the president claims a victory in the first round.

    Both men still insist that they will never work together but their rhetoric has softened following the arrival of Zalmay Khalilzad, a former American ambassador to the UN, to negotiate. Some western officials believe a “programme of national consensus” may emerge, in which Abdullah’s ideas are incorporated into government policy even if he does not join a coalition.

    The ECC is expected to order the Independent Election Commission (IEC), which ran the election, to annul thousands of votes because of fraud. But western officials said the IEC was “frantically searching the electoral law” to avoid this.

    “It’s outrageous,” said a British official involved in the process. “Those orders are not optional.”

    A UN spokesman said more than 200 district officials were being replaced because of “corruption and incompetence” in the first round.

    In one district tribal elders have claimed that a brother of the president forged 23,900 votes after closing their polling stations and confiscating their ballot boxes.

    Preparations are under way for a second round. But the onset of winter means the first week of next month is the latest date a run-off could be held. “I think we’ll get a deal between the two candidates before we get to a run-off,” said a senior western election monitor.

    timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6879515.ece

  17. There is no way that obama’s people want an all pro-Hillary event to overshadow his majesty.

    It aint gonna happen.

  18. I feel like they have Hillary as a prisoner. They set these traps for her, like those bozo interviews, to see if they can catch ANY inkling of desire to be more than SOS, to have bitter feelings about the Fraud etc. Probably all set up by MoZilla and the evil Axelfraud

  19. gonzo,

    I saw that clip last night. That guy was great and Juan Williams wasn’t bad either.

    Sounded like Williams was crashing from his koolade high when he indignantly said that POS AA twerp the other night essentially called him a house N***a.

  20. I can’t believe i voted for this piece of SH*T
    **********************

    October 17, 2009
    Winter Soldier: Let’s Wait To Talk About Reinforcements (With Our Troops in the Field) To See How the Elections Turned Out
    —Dave In Texas

    This is truly despicable.

    And yet so true to form. Kerry’s MO for 40 years.

    “It would be entirely irresponsible for the president of the United States to commit more troops to this country, when we don’t even have an election finished and know who the president is and what kind of government we’re working in, with,” Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
    You know what’s entirely irresponsible? To dither and wag while we have soldiers in the field committed to battle. That’s what’s entirely irresponsible.

    I can’t believe we were within a whisker’s width of this sorry bastard becoming our President.

  21. I loved it!! He he he..
    Even leftist liberals are realising Obama is George Bush!!

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/17/opinion/17blow.html?_r=1

    Impatiently Waiting

    When, Mr. President? When will your deeds catch up to your words? The people who worked tirelessly to get you elected are getting tired of waiting. According to a Gallup poll released on Wednesday, Americans’ satisfaction with the way things are going in the country has hit a six-month low, and those decreases were led, in both percentage and percentage-point decreases, by Democrats and independents, not by Republicans.

    The fierce urgency of now has melted into the maddening wait for whenever.

    Take health care reform. Because of the president’s quixotic quest for bipartisanship, he refused to take a firm stand in favor of the public option. In that wake, Democrats gutted the Baucus bill to win the graces of Olympia Snowe — a Republican senator from a state with half the population of Brooklyn, a senator who is defying the will of her own constituents. A poll conducted earlier this month found that 57 percent of Maine residents support the public option and only 37 percent oppose it.

    She is certainly living up to the state’s motto: Dirigo. That’s Latin for “I lead.” And the Democrats have followed. For shame.

    When will the president take the risk of standing up for his convictions on health care instead of sacrificing good policies for good politics? (Or maybe not even good politics since a one-sided compromise is the same as a surrender.)

    And health care is only one example.

    On the same weekend that gay rights protesters marched past the White House, the president again said that his administration was “moving ahead on don’t ask don’t tell.” But when? This month? This year? This term?

    As we prepare to draw down troops from the disaster that was the war in Iraq, we may commit more troops to the quagmire that is the war in Afghanistan and the government may miss its deadline for closing the blight that is the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

    Obama pledged to stem the tide of job losses and foreclosures and to reform the culture of the financial sector. Well, the Dow just hit 10,000 again while the national unemployment rate is about to hit 10 percent. And the firms we propped up are set to dole out record bonuses while home foreclosures have hit record highs. Main Street is still drowning in crisis while Wall Street is awash in Champagne. When will this imbalance be corrected?

    Candidate Obama pledged to make the rebuilding of New Orleans a priority, but President Obama whisked into the city on Thursday for a visit so brief that one Louisiana congressman dubbed it a “drive-through daiquiri summit.” The president spent more time on the failed Olympic bid in Copenhagen than he did in the Crescent City.

    At the town hall in New Orleans, Obama appealed for patience. He said, “Change is hard, and big change is harder.” Is that the excuse? Now where have I heard that before? Oh, yeah. From George Bush.

  22. If anyone wants to take a look at how Dutch nationalist Geert Wilder is being treated in the UK, after the ban against him entering the country was finally lifted, check this out. you’ll see Fanatical Muslims holding up signs with slogans like ‘Shariah yes, Freedom, no’ and ‘Islam will dominate the World.’ It could happen here.

    www dot dailymail dot co dot uk/news/article-1220830/Far-right-Dutch-MP-Geert-Wilders-arrives-UK-winning-travel-ban-appeal.html

  23. gonzo,

    I’m beginning to suspect they had something on Chelsea – something HRC didn’t want to come out – something relatively innocuous for anyone other than a Clinton – Don’t know – just been wondering what it could have been that made HRC dive under the radar so fast – I doubt threats against her or Bill would have worked, but Chelsea?

    notice we haven’t heard much about her?

  24. # JanH Says:
    October 17th, 2009 at 8:21 pm

    There is no way that obama’s people want an all pro-Hillary event to overshadow his majesty.

    It aint gonna happen.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~
    I agree- By the same token, their ain’t no way Hill supporters will/should go to an event all about Bambarf. Someone has to get in the game and cancel the venue…

  25. from Ace of Spades…
    *******************

    Islamists in UK: “We have had enough of freedom!” (No, really)
    Well, in that case, I’m all in favor of taking most of your freedoms away…

    but what I suspect is that you really mean you have had enough of others having freedom, and you wish to rule them in your barbaric, backwards-ass Satanic fashion

  26. October 15, 2009
    UK Islamists to Protest Freedom, Democracy: “We have had enough of freedom!”
    Target rich environment?

    British news media have been reporting on the plans of a group in the United Kingdom to hold an October 31 march in London calling for the end to the “oppression of democracy and man-made laws”… stating “We have had enough of freedom”… and calling for Sharia law to replace democracy and freedom in the United Kingdom.
    This would be the same group we see over and over again in the UK spewing hate and nonsense — the followers of Omar Bakri Mohammad. Yes, the same people who brought you such classic protest signs as Behead those who insult Islam, Islam will conquer Rome, and Be prepared for the real holocaust.

    And yes, the same people seen pictured right using freedom of speech to condemn it.

    They say that they will have 5,000 Muslims out for the protest. I doubt that will happen. Expect a 100 or less. 100 is a far cry from 5k.

    But still, these guys once openly supported al Qaeda. Now they only covertly support them. So, no big deal, right?

  27. gonzo,

    I am by no means a Rush Limbaugh fan. But I have to say that this is huge. This speaks to cracks appearing, and huge ones at that, in the foundation of African Americans. This also suggests that the fear for them is concrete and real where Obama is concerned.

    The lady journalist was spot on when she talked about those who “do not conform” and what happens to them. Her comments about Geraldine and the Clintons were also to the point. But it has to be even worse and possibly dangerous for AAs who dare to talk back to obama and his herd.

    I do happen to be a Juan Williams fan. I don’t always agree with him, but I find him fair and well versed in his opinions. He has come out before against obama and for Hillary many times and vice versa.

  28. Basil,

    Those fanatical Muslims are just the beginning. The news out last week is that at some point there will be a majority of Muslims/Arabs in Europe and a minority of everyone else.

  29. JanH Says:

    October 17th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
    Basil,

    Those fanatical Muslims are just the beginning. The news out last week is that at some point there will be a majority of Muslims/Arabs in Europe and a minority of everyone else.
    *******************************

    That’s when I will buy a gun

  30. Soros’s other male protege’ Dunkenmiller is now buying the Steelers, go figure. Soros’s has his hand all over this. THis stink could get big. I hope it does. Soros’s needs to get put in jail for the thug that he is.

    Gonzotex, I have always felt it was Chelsea that they are protecting. She did work for a hedge fund on Wall Street. You never know they could have set her up. I am sure she is honest and has integredy that her parents gave her, but she could of been set up.

    I thought she went back to school, does anyone know??

  31. huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/17/paul-pelosi-buys-a-footba_n_324656.html

    Paul Pelosi busys professional football team

    Paul Pelosi, husband of Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif), is now the owner of a professional football team. The famously publicity-shy spouse of the current Speaker of the House bought the California Redwoods, a San Francisco-based franchise in the upstart United Football League. Pelosi has admitted that he’s not a big professional sports fan — he prefers recreational sports befitting of a successful businessman and political spouse: golf, cycling, and tennis. Pelosi says he paid $12 million dollars for the team because he deemed it a bankable investment. As he told the Washington Post:

    “This is a business, I look at it as a business. I’m in this because I think it is a very solid financial investment that is going to be very successful…I never wanted to own a sports team. It’s that old saying: Never say never.”

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

    twelve million here…twelve million there…what’s the difference when you are married to a woman who stands for ‘the little people’…

    ahhhh…the irony…

  32. admin: the code in your live feed to search engines contains errors… please check..

    Without A Shot Being Fired, A Dictator Has Taken Over the United States

    By Jerry McConnell Saturday, October 17, 2009

    Aided and abetted by imposters posing as authentic American citizens the United States of America has been taken over by an authentic dictator. How could so many millions of U. S. citizens just gently cede their heritage and birthright so easily; without more than a whimper?

    Assisted by genuine anti-American leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, actually elected by unknowing and uninformed lemmings, Barack Hussein Obama has surely seized the ultimate power of dictatorship and is making decisions not within the established authority of the office of President, which are opposed only by vocal chants from a gaggle of conservatives that are powerless to intercede.

    His campaign trail and even post election posturing as a savior of our country has all been a grandiose off-key trumpeting of his greatness. Years ago, H. L. Mencken, a famed American journalist and world watcher was quoted as saying about people like Obama, “The urge to save humanity is most often a false front for the URGE TO RULE.”

    This usurping foreigner of Islamic roots with a mixture of rebel-white blood from the distaff side of his parentage has ridden a wave of unintelligent popularity bordering on baseless divine worship mostly from those who are easily led. Even the Judicial Branch and the Supreme Justices of our government seem to be under the spell of his mystique by avoiding to rule by our own national Constitution requirements for presidential eligibility.

    Obama appears to have no particular loyalties to anyone or anything save for himself. He has proclaimed that in the case of adversity he would stand with the Muslims, which many took to mean that he was ruled by that faith. But in truth, his position was to solidify his hopes of being the modern day leader of that faith in order to use their willingness to kill without conscience when ordered to do so in the name of that religion.

    With an army of religious terrorists, now spread world-wide, his dreams of being the ultimate leader of the entire world is advanced with more certainty. But the first step is to completely subjugate the entire country of the United States, the most advanced and powerful state in the history of the world. With this prize under his belt, control of the United Nations would be like child’s play.

    Many of his initiatives are aimed in that direction; freeing the Islamic prisoners held captive at Guantanamo Bay by giving them the advantages of American jurisprudence; cap and trade, with industry killing legislation through the fallacious global warming scam proffered by the world’s leading oaf, Al Gore, leading to making the United States a truly second class nation; to name just two.

    His absolute failure in free trade leadership alone would be worth an effort to censure him for gallivanting around the world at taxpayers expense so he and his wife can go shopping while pretending to be on state business. Taking TWO jumbo jets to Stockholm in a failed bid to bring the 2016 Olympics to, of all places, Chicago the most corrupt and politically mismanaged city in America, where he got his training in deceitful and divisive backroom politics is another example of the drunken-sailor syndrome.

    Just this past week on October 15, 2009, online journalist and blogger Marion Valentine, a U.S. Navy Intelligence/Cryptologist (disabled), reported on the Minnesota Free Market Institute’s event featuring Lord Christopher Monckton, former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who showed the assembled group detailed data which in Valentine’s words, decimated the concept of global warming or any threat of significant climate change.

    Valentine also reported that of even greater importance to America was the issue of a treaty to be signed by Obama at the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, this December which will create a world government, also with likely approval of most of the third world countries along with most of the left-wing regime from the European Union.

    And even more recently on October 16, 2009 came the embarrassing and near lethal news that the European Union scooped Obama’s weak, dilatory and phlegmatic efforts to strike a free trade deal with South Korea worth $26 billion to both economies; but even worse for America, the loss of such a prestigious trade agreement that could have been ours quite simply with a more aggressive attitude from our chief international gadfly to tend to state business.

    It makes one wonder if this was all part of his plan to decimate the United States one more decisive step along the way to his assumption of the “Leader of the World” title. He and his family are having one grand ball at our expense while he lollygags instead of tending to our free trade business of state.

    And through it all, incredibly, there remains a corps of hardline supporters who are blind to all his faults. Fortunately, they will be the ones most hurt by his dalliances; the rest of us know what to expect.

  33. Admin:

    I am glad you posted this. while a few fols were excited to see hillasry at this “left leaning” nolimits event. I would not have paid to see even her. They are using this event for pushing BO’s agenda!!!

    Heroines like Lynn, Geraldine have been forgotten by some Hillary supporters.

  34. Mrs. Smith,

    It’s hard to take seriously anything from an article that refers to “fallacious global warming scam proffered by the world’s leading oaf, Al Gore,”

  35. Sunday, October 18, 2009

    Iran scoffs at US and its threats

    Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told the Sunday Times that any move to impose sanctions or militarily attack his country would fail because a new world order was emerging on the principle that right is might and not the other way. In an interview during his visit to attend the Asia Cooperation Dialogue in Colombo, Mr. Mottaki said the US must acknowledge it was in a self-imposed trap in Iraq and Afghanistan instead of trying to divert attention on non-existent dangers from Iran. Excerpts from the interview:

    Foreign Minister says countries like Sri Lanka and Iran are forming a new world order where right is might

    By Ameen Izzadeen

    Russia this week snubbed US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she tried to win Moscow’s support for fresh sanctions against Iran. Do you think that sanctions work?

    Not only Russia, but almost all countries are against sanctions. Sanction was the international political language of the 1960s and 1970s. It has lost its relevance and meaning today. My country has survived four years of sanctions. And we will survive. Sanctions have failed. So there is little meaning in trying to bring in fresh sanctions. According to an Iranian saying a wise man would not be bitten by the snake from the same hole twice. Many countries feel that sanctions — a failed formula — should not be followed. The West’s efforts are aimed at generating public opinion against Iran. Punishing a country that is trying to defend and pursue its legitimate right to nuclear energy cannot be justified.

    There is speculation of a military attack on your country either by the United States or by Israel. How prepared is your country to face any attack? And how safe are your nuclear facilities?

    I am not going to reveal our military preparedness or give any details about what we would do in such an eventuality. I think Iran has already delivered a message to those countries which may be mulling over a military attack. Our message is that Iran is ready to defend itself. But I believe the probability of an attack is close to zero. Yet, we won’t take any chances.

    Iran is surrounded by American bases and troops. US troops are in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Gulf. The Americans also have some radar facilities in Azerbaijan, their central command is in Qatar and they maintain close military ties with Central Asian republics. Won’t Iran feel threatened?

    Let me answer your question in a different way. The US came to the Gulf to besiege the countries in the region. But it has not succeeded. It is more or less trapped. There is a story about a war-hungry youth in Iran. It goes like this. The youth joined the army and wanted his commander to send him on a military expedition. The commander told him there was no expedition or operations planned. The youth told him that he was a specialist in taking captives. So he insisted on going to the front.

    The commander then sends him to the front. Days later, the young soldier wired to say that he had captured 200 enemy soldiers and called for reinforcements. The commander wired back to say he could not send reinforcements. The young soldier responded by saying that reinforcement was very important because he could not control the prisoners.

    The commander then told him to send the prisoners to headquarters. The young soldier said they were not willing to come. An angry commander then asked the soldier to report back to headquarters. The soldier responded, “Sorry sir, they are not allowing me to come.” The commander said, “They are not your captives, you have become their captive.”

    This is the US dilemma from which President Barack Obama is trying to extricate his country. He has said he is pulling out troops from Iraq. On this score, Iran is also of the same view. The US should also pull out its troops from other countries.

    One of the most formidable challenges the countries in the region face is how to evict US troops. The US military presence in the region has severely damaged its international image. President Obama came to office saying he would restore it. We hope President Obama would take a wise decision. Pro-US countries in the Gulf region, for instance, Saudi Arabia, are also concerned about Iran’s rise as a regional power. Do you think they are pressurizing the Americans to weaken Iran?

    I agree with 50 percent of your statement. Yes, Iran is a regional power. But if you look at Iran’s history, it has not posed a threat to its neighbours for the past 120 years or so. Iran believes in the principle of peaceful co-existence with all the countries. With regard to the Gulf countries, our common interests and commonalities run deeper and bind us together in a special brotherly relationship. Of course, we are aware that the Americans have been trying to disrupt this relationship by Iranphobia ideas. But we want to assure them that Iran is a brotherly country.

    Iran has been saying it has no intention to make a nuclear bomb. Yet it has failed to convince the West. Why?

    About two thirds of the countries in the United Nations support Iran’s position. But I agree with you that some countries in the West are not convinced. They are like the man who pretends to be sleeping. You can knock on the door and wake up a person who is asleep, but you cannot wake up a person who pretends to be sleeping. Unfortunately, the West has chosen not to see the real situation. As a result, it is facing the implications of its unrealistic attitude.

    Israel is said to be possessing 200 to 300 nuclear warheads. The United States and its Western allies do not say a word about these weapons or call on Israel to dismantle them. Cannot Iran tell the US to first deal with Israel before taking action to stop your country’s nuclear programme?

    Israel’s nuclear weapons are not going to help it. The wars in Lebanon and Gaza showed that these weapons were of no use. I strongly believe that the West should deal with Israel’s weapons. Israel is a doomed country. Its main problem is its illegitimacy as a country.

    Iran, of course, is for total global disarmament. The United States should first dismantle its nuclear arsenal and then tell its allies to do the same. Iran has a good track record of supporting global disarmament moves. In the 1990s, Iran spearheaded the campaign to ban chemical weapons. Similarly, we strongly call for and extend our support for a comprehensive convention on the elimination of nuclear weapons. We believe that nuclear disarmament should begin with the permanent members of the UN Security Council.

    Do you think that the International Atomic Energy Agency is a tool of the West and are you satisfied with Muhammad El Baradie’s role as IAEA chief?

    Mr. El-Baradie, when not under pressure, has held with Iran. Some years ago, the IAEA was about to close the Iran file, but the pressure from the war-mongering George W. Bush administration forced the agency to keep the issue alive. But no statement issued by the IAEA or Mr. El-Baradei says that Iran is diverting nuclear material to make weapons. We are cooperating with the IAEA. We are going ahead with our nuclear programme. It is our legitimate right. Even the West recognizes this. That is why it is suggesting alternate solutions.

    The demise of the dollar as international currency, especially in oil deals, is being predicted by some analysts. Your comments:

    Iran made the decision to ditch the dollar and use other currencies in international trade four years ago. The US dollar which has been imposed on the world economy has reached the end of the road. Billions of worthless dollar notes have infected the world economy. It is one of the underlying reasons for the economic recession. Haven’t you heard that some people say that the US dollar is not actually money but just a piece of paper? The replacement of the dollar as international currency is unavoidable.

    Do you think it is feasible for like-minded countries such as Iran, Venezuela, Bolivia, and may be Sri Lanka, to form an international political bloc to oppose Western hegemony?

    History shows that the downfall of powerful countries and the collapse of the edifice they built is largely due to their hegemonic policies. International public opinion is against such policies. In the unipolar world that emerged after the end of the Cold War, the United States tried to dominate the world. But world public opinion was against such domination. World public opinion recognizes logic and challenges hegemonic authority.

    A new world order shaped by countries like Iran and Sri Lanka is now emerging, challenging the old world order based on power. Power was the ultimate objective of the old world order which believed that might was right.

    Bretton Woods was established on this basis. Its logic was the more money you have, the more rights you should have. Such a system was a flagrant violation of the universal principle of equality. Many countries had accepted the principle that power prevailed.

    But our late leader Ayatollah Khomeini decided to defy the system and insisted that right was might. Any country that goes in the wrong direction is morally and spiritually weak and cannot be considered a power.

    US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has told the BBC that Russia now recognises the threat posed by Iran. Wrapping up a European tour in Moscow, Clinton said Russian leaders had in private said they were ready to act if Tehran did not meet its obligations. But Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, on a visit to China, said it was too early to talk about sanctions on Iran. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Tuesday that threats of sanctions were counter-productive.

    Mrs Clinton told the BBC on Wednesday that Russia in the past six months had “moved tremendously” to acknowledge the threat of Iran’s programme.

    She said Russian officials, in private talks, had recognised the need to act if diplomacy failed.
    “We are in total agreement on all of that,” Clinton told the BBC. “And we are also in agreement that if our diplomatic engagement is not successful then we have to look at other measures to take, including sanctions to try to pressure the Iranians.”

    As a permanent UN Security Council member, Russia would need to back any fresh sanctions against Iran.

    sundaytimes.lk/091018/News/nws_30.html

  36. Juan Williams on Fox News Sunday with CHris Wallace had interesting take on the Rush Limbaugh story this week. Juan says WHY are people kicking out Rush when they have Olberman who says horrible things about conservatives on a daily basis and then letting him announce the actual games.

    Juan was right on target.

    Looks like Valerie Jarrett is she getting her butt kicked this am on Meet the Press.

    Maria Shriver has written a book, my gut is the lefties want her to run for POTUS. SUddenly she’s on a political show, writting a book. SHe will be the one for the party of Soros aka democrats.

  37. Hillary Clinton vows fresh start for Darfur breakthrough

    Oct 18 2009

    HILLARY CLINTON has promised a new relationship with Sudan if the Khartoum regime end violence and humanitarian abuses in Darfur.

    The US secretary of state will tomorrow unveil her proposals to stop the six-year war in the region.

    The conflict began in February 2003 when ethnic African rebels took up arms against the Arab-dominated Sudanese government in Khartoum.

    United Nations officials say the war has claimed at least 300,000 lives. Some 2.7million people were driven from their homes and, from 2003 to2005, it was called the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

    sundaymail.co.uk/news/uk-and-international-news/2009/10/18/hillary-clinton-vows-fresh-start-for-darfur-breakthrough-78057-21756474/

  38. carol,

    Mrs. Smith,

    It’s hard to take seriously anything from an article that refers to “fallacious global warming scam proffered by the world’s leading oaf, Al Gore,”

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

    Lord Monckton has clearly screwed up his argument about this terrible treaty to be signed soon by dismissing Al Gore’s fight against Global Climate Change.

    He has a true and just argument against the treaty because it will enable the third world countries to charge the United States for its past and future carbon emissions. Carol, how can this country pay for anymore things, how can this country be hit with more taxes. WE ARE BROKE!! This treaty maybe sometime in future should be signed, but I say not right now, because are on the dawn of going totally broke. We just can’t keep putting out more money. I think this Lord is trying to say the very same thing, we will have to keep printing more money, borrow more money from other countries to pay for this. This will cause us to lose our soveignty. Lord Monckton should have just said the real truth without underscoring Gore’s life’s work on Global Climate Change.

  39. I hope everyone watches Fox NEws Sunday because there was a very good exchange between Terry McCalife and Karl Rove. It was hilarious!

  40. Obama’s mettle is about to be tested. As the Middle East slides towards renewed conflict, the president has to revitalise US efforts for a peace – or face humiliation

    Simon Tisdall guardian.co.uk,
    Sunday 18 October 2009

    It’s getting harder each day for the Obama administration to maintain the illusion of progress in Middle East peacemaking. The UN human rights council’s vote to condemn Israel’s January assault on Gaza, furiously rejected by the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, at the weekend, was the latest blow to US efforts to kickstart negotiations on a two-state solution. Across the region, all the signs point not to reconciliation but to renewed confrontation. As Washington talks about talks, the Arab world mutters ominously about the prospect of a third intifada.

    George Mitchell, Obama’s special envoy, will keep up appearances by holding more meetings with Palestinian officials in Washingtonon Tuesday. Susan Rice, US ambassador to the UN, will visit Israel and the occupied territories this week. After his embarrassingly unproductive summit with Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, in New York last month, Obama instructed his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, to personally deliver a progress report by mid-October. They are expected to meet after Mitchell’s latest talks. But what can she honestly tell him?

    On the Palestinian side, as Clinton cannot fail to be aware, attitudes are hardening as high hopes engendered by Obama’s promise of a brave new dawn fade. Abbas is probably politically weaker now than at any time since becoming president. Fatah officials admit his decision, under US pressure, to delay action on the Goldstone report on Gaza was disastrous. Although Abbas later reversed his position, his misjudgment was a gift for Hamas and other opponents who argue he is out of touch and increasingly dismiss him as a “collaborator”.

    In a defiant television address, and during a rare visit to Jenin last week, Abbas denied the charges while appearing to distance himself from US mediation efforts. He called on Mitchell to enforce Washington’s initial demand that Israel end all construction in Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, a demand that was bluntly rejected by Netanyahu and has subsequently been de-emphasised by Obama. He said recent clashes near the al-Aqsa mosque were a response to an Israeli effort to “erase the Arab and Muslim identity of Jerusalem”. And he suggested the Palestinians might increasingly look to the UN and other international bodies to advance their cause.

    Egyptian efforts to reconcile the rival Palestinian factions appear, meanwhile, to have stalled, partly due to US meddling. Officials in Cairo say the signing of an outline co-operation agreement between Fatah and Hamas, due on 25 October, has been postponed indefinitely. One reason is the row over the Goldstone report. Another, according to the Israeli newspaper, Ha’aretz, was an American veto. It said Mitchell had told Egypt that the proposed deal would harm the peace process. His objection appears rooted in the US and Israel’s ideological refusal to deal, however loosely, with Hamas.

    Hardliners on both sides are exploiting the deepening stalemate to reiterate rejectionist “told-you-so” positions. Speaking in Damascus, the Hamas leader, Khaled Meshal, said it was time for all Arab states to renew their drive for the “liberation” of Palestine “from the sea to the river” (meaning the destruction of Israel). Avigdor Lieberman, the hawkish Israeli foreign minister, has taken to repeating his view that peace is years way.

    More moderate figures, such as King Abdullah of Jordan, are expressing growing pessimism. “We’re sliding back in to the darkness,” he said in a recent published interview. “We are seeing problems in Jerusalem that will directly destabilise not only the relationship with Jordan … but will also create a tinderbox that will have a major flashpoint throughout the Islamic world.” Turkey, one of Israel’s few friends in the Middle East, has also angrily fallen out with Netanyahu over Gaza and related frustrations. From such gloomy trends arise the predictions of a third intifada, pitching new generations of Palestinian youth against the Israeli foe.

    If Clinton is frank with Obama, she will also tell him that Netanyahu, while insisting he is ready in theory to negotiate a two-state solution, is adopting an ever more inflexible line in practice. Addressing the Knesset last week, the Israeli leader completely ignored the settlements issue – a key US concern – and reasserted his demand that Palestinians must recognise Israel as a Jewish state if they ever want to have a state of their own. After Friday’s vote in Geneva, he is now claiming that the UN wants nothing less than the “de-legitimisation” of Israel and is actively encouraging global terrorism. Even by Netanyahu’s hyper-hawkish standards, these are extreme and confrontational positions.

    There can be little doubt that Netanyahu’s bullish confidence stems from the perception on the Israeli right that after a tense few months, he has “seen off” Obama and his naive peacemaking notions. US diplomats warn of a serious mistake. Obama is “a man of steel”, a senior official said – he would not give up on Middle East peace. As Clinton prepares to deliver her “progress” report, and with the region sliding apparently inexorably towards renewed conflict, this bold assertion is about to be tested.

    guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/18/obama-middle-east-peace-process/print

  41. Hi, all — just catching up:
    “Why isn’t she invited to speak?” — ADMIN re Lady D.
    —————————————————-

    Could it be because she publicly stated she did not like Obama? “I don’t like the man.” and she campaigned for McCain/Palin?

    The invitation to attend this No Limits event came from:

    Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 18:48:03 +0100
    Subject: SAVE THE DATE : NOVEMBER 6, 2009
    From: Lynn Forester de Rothschild <togetherforus@gmail.com

    But when I saw Barney Frank to be there, well, despite the presence of HRC as principal speaker, I said this smells bad. I went to the website and didn’t like that, either, though I couldn’t say exactly why.

    So, like ADMIN, I’ve been wondering what’s this is all ablout.

  42. For those who might wonder whatever happened re my pitch for Ed O’Riley for US Senate from MA, well, he decided not to run. Why? He offered a reason having to do with not neglecting his law practice, but I found out from a party delegate that Coakley’s advancement has been in the planning for quite a long while, so Ed most likely would not have had a chance.

  43. p.s. for anyone who might be interested, Lady D and her husband Sir Evelyn D are building a home on Martha’s Vineyard.

  44. Confloyd,
    I agree that the US should not be taking on more debt it can’t afford. Whether or not this treaty should be signed, however, is not the issue…which is whether global warming exits. Science says that it does.

  45. Carol, What I think this LOrd is trying to say is that if we go further in debt we will lose America as we know it. We will not be able to get out from under this treaty as it will supercede our constitution.

    We do need to do something about climate change, but to take on the whole world’s pollution should not be ours alone.

  46. NMF,

    I heard the idiot dad has been doing hoaxes like this for ages because he wants his family to become a reality show subject. In other words a quick rich scheme that this time has blown up in his face.

    I hope they throw the book at this creep complete with padded room.

  47. Interns praise Clinton’s support
    (UKPA) – 2 hours ago

    Students from across Ireland who served as interns in Hillary Clinton’s US office have praised her support for the island’s future.

    The US Secretary of State met up with the former students during her recent Belfast visit and encouraged young people to play a role in building a better future for all.

    Now former interns are celebrating the 15th anniversary of the Washington-Ireland Programme for Service and Leadership (WIP).

    google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hq28sLCKna7BSjylXkKXGdVYaSow

  48. 6 who will sell health care
    Squad’s moment has arrived as endgame begins

    By Peter Nicholas
    October 18, 2009

    — Peter Orszag, the White House official steeped in budget detail, is now so at home in the Capitol that he freely grabs Coke Zeros from the Senate Finance Committee’s private stash during health care discussions with aides.

    Nancy-Ann DeParle, who joined the administration after a career that included running Medicare and Medicaid, is routinely hooked into a nightly 9 o’clock conference call for legislative staff.

    And nearly every week, presidential aide Jim Messina eats steak and fries at the same table in the same restaurant with his old boss, Sen. Max Baucus — the man who crafted the centrist bill that will shape the final health care plan.

    Months ago, when President Barack Obama made health care his top domestic priority and picked the White House team to make it happen, he selected individuals for just this moment — not for the beginning or the middle of the campaign, but for the end of the fight.

    That time has arrived — for Obama and for the six people he chose. With deep ties to Capitol Hill, the team is designed for the inside game unfolding now in House and Senate offices. Their job includes gathering intelligence, assessing what lawmakers want and devising compromises.
    But most of all, their goal was and is to keep the process moving and on a practicable track. Letting it bog down or veer in some damaging direction even for a moment could doom the whole effort, they believed.

    The core group consists of chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, legislative affairs director Phil Schiliro, communications expert Daniel H. Pfeiffer, Orszag, Messina and DeParle. Each brings particular experience and skills to the task. And each is first and foremost an inside player, comfortable operating behind the scenes.

    The administration suffered some setbacks because of that insider focus, but it has paid off more recently. “The key factor in all major legislation, particularly health care, is momentum,” Pfeiffer said. “You have to keep moving the ball forward. Health care is a boulder: You’re either pushing uphill or downhill. We’ve reached the top, we’re headed downhill now and we want it to stay that way.”

    The mission is changing, however. Where the action was focused in committees, it’s now moving to the House and Senate floor. Obama’s crew will be literally at the table with lawmakers behind closed doors, crafting compromises to meet attacks from a determined Republican minority and well-financed industry groups.

    Obama himself will play an important role, phoning wavering legislators and coaxing them to vote yes. But success also hinges on the negotiating savvy of the team he put in place for this express purpose. “All of us are known,” Emanuel said in an interview. “We’ve been through a lot together. We don’t start from scratch, either inside or in dealing with the Senate and House. … You’re in a business of relationships: Knowing what people can and can’t do, explaining things and (ascertaining) what they care about.”

    None of this looks to be easy. The White House wants to pass a health care bill with a 60-vote majority in the Senate that would forestall a filibuster. It is up to Emanuel and company to hit that target. Though there is ample overlap, each member of Obama’s health care team has a different focus. Emanuel oversees the operation. A former congressman from Chicago, he describes himself as a negotiator, but he is also deeply involved in policy, political strategy and communication. As an illustration of his role, twice over the past month he spoke to union leaders and asked them not to publicly criticize the health care legislation advancing in the Senate. He succeeded the first time and was rebuffed the second.

    Orszag is the resident budget whiz. A congressional aide recalls watching him page through a fat, dog-eared copy of the U.S. tax code one Sunday in a Senate office, during a conversation about the critical and politically sensitive question of how to pay for the health care plan.

    DeParle, a former health care adviser to President Bill Clinton, has virtually embedded herself in the Capitol. When the president hired DeParle, he told her he wanted her to be the “point guard” of the health care team. She wrote Obama a private memo about how to navigate pitfalls on Capitol Hill. The goal seems to be ubiquity: blanketing Congress with White House aides. By her count, DeParle has met one-on-one with 135 people, as part of a strategy she mapped out with Schiliro. “We’ve been clear on some guardrails,” DeParle said. “We don’t want to increase the deficit, things like that. Otherwise we’ve given (Congress) some license to work within their caucuses.”

    Some contend the White House has given too much latitude. Both Schiliro and Messina consult with committee chairs to identify wavering members who should get a phone call or personal meeting with the president. Messina also dispenses advice. He shows up at meetings of senior legislative aides and shares poll numbers. The White House message is that if health care fails this year, that could spell trouble for Democrats in the midterm elections in 2010.

    Over the summer it seemed the Obama plan could fail too. “Frankly, we took some lumps in July,” Pfeiffer said.

    The White House Six are happier about where they stand now. Last week, at an initial meeting with Senate leaders to discuss merging the various bills, the differences did not seem daunting, said DeParle: “One of the senators present said, ‘Gee, is that all there is? I thought there would be a lot more issues.’ ”

    chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tc-nw-health-team-1017-1018oct18,0,6785827.story

  49. Secret meetings: Another broken Obama campaign promise

    October 18, 2009
    By DOUG THOMPSON

    President Barack Obama’s campaign promise of an open government disappeared shortly after he took office and the closed-door, secret negotiations on health care reform demonstrate all too clearly that politics in Washington remain “business as usual” in his administration.

    The secrecy that surrounds White House actions rivals that of the often-criticized administration of former President George W. Bush and key decisions on health care reform now are not being made in the open but in behind the scenes negations involving three Democratic Senators: Majority Leader Harry Reid, Christopher Dodd and Max Baucus.

    White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is also participating in the secret sessions along with other members of the White House health care team: A far cry from the open door government that Obama promised while campaigning for office.

    Washington Post staff writer Perry Bacon Jr. reports that the closed door sessions are “a setting that is anything but revolutionary in Washington.”

    Writes Bacon:

    The group will make such key decisions as whether to include a government-run insurance plan designed to compete with private insurance companies. The bill passed in July by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which Dodd led while Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) was ailing, included such a provision, but the legislation passed last week by Baucus’s Finance Committee did not.

    The secret sessions are a far cry from promises Obama made 90 days before the election when he said “I’m going to have all the negotiations around a big table,” adding that the negotiations would be “televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies.”

    Republicans, of course, are not happy with the secrecy:

    “This bill is being written in the dark of night,” House Minority Leader John A. Boehner of Ohio told the Post. “The president ought to keep his promise to the American people and open this process up.”

    Few in Washington expect that to happen.

    capitolhillblue.com/node/20043

  50. I’ve received a video link of Representative Mike Rogers, 5 term Republican representing MI’s 8th district, speaking on the House floor about the current hc legislation. It is 4 minutes long, and the congressman is well-spoken. www dot youtube.com/watch_popup?v=G44NCvNDLfc
    As far as I can tell, the email notification of this video is a true grass roots effort.

  51. Admin: I wonder if Lady Rothchild is one of those undercover democrats he is always talking about that is helping him uncover all the garbage in the Obama administration???

  52. Monday, October 19, 2009

    Hillary to head visiting US energy delegation

    * US secretary of state to discuss means to fulfil country’s energy requirements

    ISLAMABAD: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will head the delegation of energy experts due to visit Pakistan this month for discussions on how to fulfil the country’s future energy requirements.

    “Various options, such as establishing new power generation plants, capacity building of the current powerhouses and importing energy from Central Asian states, will be discussed during the interaction between US energy experts and Pakistani officials,” sources told Daily Times.

    They said Pakistan would seek US investment for the capacity building and renovation of the old powerhouses in addition to funding for the construction of new powerhouses. “The US has already promised $1 billion investment for the power sector to develop the Thar coal fields,” the sources said. They said the possibility of importing energy from the Central Asian Republics would also be discussed. “The government will also approach the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank and other financial institutions for help in this regard,” they added.

    The sources said Pakistan would also discuss enhancing the limit of lifeline consumers from 50 to 100 units per month to lessen the impact of the forthcoming increase in power rates on the poor. The government plans to increase the power tariff by 18 percent in two phases of 12 and six percent.

    dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009%5C10%5C19%5Cstory_19-10-2009_pg7_9

  53. White House Escalates War at Fox News
    Senior Obama administration officials took to the airwaves Sunday to accuse Fox News of pushing a particular point of view and not being a real news network.

    FOXNews.com
    Sunday, October 18, 2009

    The White House escalated its offensive against Fox News on Sunday by urging other news organizations to stop “following Fox” and instead join the administration’s attempt to marginalize the channel.

    White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN that President Obama does not want “the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox.”

    Obama senior adviser David Axelrod went further by calling on media outlets to join the administration in declaring that Fox is “not a news organization.” “Other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way,” Axelrod counseled ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “We’re not going to treat them that way.”

    By urging other news outlets to side with the administration, Obama aides officials dramatically upped the ante in the war of words that began earlier this month, when White House communications director Anita Dunn branded Fox “opinion journalism masquerading as news.”

    On Sunday, Fox’s Chris Wallace retorted: “We wanted to ask Dunn about her criticism, but, as they’ve done every week since August, the White House refused to make any administration officials available to ‘FOX News Sunday’ to talk about this or anything else.”

    The White House stopped providing guests to ‘Fox News Sunday’ after Wallace fact-checked controversial assertions made by Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, in August. Dunn said fact-checking an administration official was “something I’ve never seen a Sunday show do.”

    “She criticized ‘FOX News Sunday’ last week for fact-checking — fact-checking — an administration official,” Wallace said Sunday. “They didn’t say that our fact-checking was wrong. They just said that we had dared to fact-check.”

    “Let’s fact-check Anita Dunn, because last Sunday she said that Fox ignores Republican scandals, and she specifically mentioned the scandal involving Nevada senator John Ensign,” Wallace added. “A number of Fox News shows have run stories about Senator Ensign. Anita Dunn’s facts were just plain wrong.”

    Fox News senior vice president Michael Clemente said: “Surprisingly, the White House continues to declare war on a news organization instead of focusing on the critical issues that Americans are concerned about like jobs, health care and two wars. The door remains open and we welcome a discussion about the facts behind the issues.”

    Observers on both sides of the political aisle questioned the White House’s decision to continue waging war on a news organization, saying the move carried significant political risks.

    Democratic strategist Donna Brazile said on CNN: “I don’t always agree with the White House. And on this one here I would disagree.”

    David Gergen, who has worked for Democratic and Republican presidents, said: “I totally agree with Donna Brazile.” Gergen added that White House officials have “gotten themselves into a fight they don’t necessarily want to be in. I don’t think it’s in their best interest.” “The faster they can get this behind them, the more they can treat Fox like one other organization, the easier they can get back to governing, and then put some people out on Fox,” Gergen said on CNN. “I mean, for goodness sakes — you know, you engage in the debate.

    What Americans want is a robust competition of ideas, and they ought to be willing to go out there and mix it up with some strong conservatives on Fox, just as there are strong conservatives on CNN like Bill Bennett.”

    Bennett expressed outrage that Dunn told an audience of high school students this year that Mao Tse-tung, the founder of communist China, was one of “my favorite political philosophers.”

    “Having the spokesman do this, attack Fox, who says that Mao Zedong is one of the most influential figures in her life, was not…a small thing; it’s a big thing,” Bennett said on CNN. “When she stands up, in a speech to high school kids, says she’s deeply influenced by Mao Zedong, that — I mean, that is crazy.”

    Fox News contributor Karl Rove, who was the top political strategist to former President George W. Bush, said: “This is an administration that’s getting very arrogant and slippery in its dealings with people. And if you dare to oppose them, they’re going to come hard at you and they’re going to cut your legs off.”

    “This is a White House engaging in its own version of the media enemies list. And it’s unhelpful for the country and undignified for the president of the United States to so do,” Rove added. “That is over- the-top language. We heard that before from Richard Nixon.”

    Media columnist David Carr of the New York Times warned that the White House war on Fox “may present a genuine problem for Mr. Obama, who took great pains during the campaign to depict himself as being above the fray of over-heated partisan squabbling.”

    “While there is undoubtedly a visceral thrill in finally setting out after your antagonists, the history of administrations that have successfully taken on the media and won is shorter than this sentence,” Carr wrote over the weekend. “So far, the only winner in this latest dispute seems to be Fox News. Ratings are up 20 percent this year.” He added: “The administration, by deploying official resources against a troublesome media organization, seems to have brought a knife to a gunfight.”

    foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/18/white-house-escalates-war-fox-news-1925819282/

  54. The administration is behaving like officials did in the McCarthy era. ALL “news” channels are opinion based and often times run fast and loose with the facts. What a bunch of crybabies. The administration thinks KO is credible?? Fox fact-checked the administration and CNN fact-checked SNL. Which news station is more credible?? As if the administration doesn’t have enough to keep themselves busy, they have go after media that don’t kiss their butts.

  55. birdgal,

    It’s like they are a bunch of high school bullies who are shunning/froshing everyone who disagrees with them. I guess they want the media to be good little mindless soldiers.

  56. JanH Says:

    October 18th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
    ——————————————————————————————————-

    Must be the Chicago way. I hope that they are breaking off more than they can handle. Fox has a greater viewship than the other two stations, so more people will see and hear about the bullying and thuggish behavior. This administration proves more everyday that it is full of thugs.

  57. I am surprised that they have not called “FOX THE EACIST CHANNEL” but it is coming soon!!!!!

    After all that is their last resort card!!!

  58. At some point obama is going to make the U.S. more of a dictatorship/fascist regime than Russia and China combined.

  59. Have you all seen this?

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero last Thursday that talks between Israel and the United States over construction in the settlements on the West Bank had ended.

    “We solved the matter of the settlements with the Americans,” Netanyahu told his Spanish counterpart.

    “I cannot say more than that. If you are interested in hearing more details, ask in Washington,” added Netanyahu.
    Advertisement

    It is not clear what Netanyahu meant and what the details of the “solution” are, but this is the first time that Netanyahu has said that the issue of the settlements, which is the main bone of contention between the Obama administration and Israel, has been solved.

    Sources in Jerusalem said that Netanyahu spoke about the matter after his representatives Mike Herzog and Yitzhak Molcho reached agreements in Washington during their talks last week.

    Zapatero told Netanyahu of his visit to the White House two days before his arrival in Jerusalem. He said he was obsessed with Obama, and that there will never be another chance where a man who professes values such as his will be president, and everyone must help him realize his vision.

    Netanyahu responded to Zapatero, saying he was willing to start talks with the Palestinians without any pre-conditions.

    “The Palestinians should talk to us already,” Netanyahu said.

    Spain will assume the EU presidency on January 1.

    Molcho and Herzog returned last weekend after meeting with U.S. Middle East envoy George Mitchell and his staff. The central point of the discussions was the conditions for opening negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, as well as the how the talks will be conducted, their goals and schedule for reaching an agreement.

    Molcho and Herzog are expected to fly back to Washington this week for another round of talks. A Palestinian delegation headed by Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat will also be there at the same time.

    Mitchell and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will write their report to Obama after this round of talks has ended. Obama asked the two to report on the chances of the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, and Obama is expected to receive the report next week. After reading the report and consulting his staff, Obama is expected to make a speech announcing his next steps to advance the negotiations.

    Defense Minister: Israel, U.S. must draft Mideast peace plan

    PA: Advance peace talks or we’ll take Goldstone report to court

    Jerusalem sources: Peace talks with PA to resume very soon

  60. Apparently Jimmy Carter was a problem for President Clinton during the Haiti problem. I remembered that it was on the news that Clinton had to tell Carter to get his ass out of there before he got shot. Carter insisted on staying because he was so enamered with one of the generals wives!! hmm, hmm

  61. One step closer to Soros’s drug policy!

    Devlin Barrett, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 55 mins ago
    WASHINGTON – The Obama administration will not seek to arrest medical marijuana users and suppliers as long as they conform to state laws, under new policy guidelines to be sent to federal prosecutors Monday.

    Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state laws.

    The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.

    Fourteen states allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

    California is unique among those for the widespread presence of dispensaries — businesses that sell marijuana and even advertise their services. Colorado also has several dispensaries, and Rhode Island and New Mexico are in the process of licensing providers, according to the Marijuana Policy Project, a group that promotes the decriminalization of marijuana use.

    Attorney General Eric Holder said in March that he wanted federal law enforcement officials to pursue those who violate both federal and state law, but it has not been clear how that goal would be put into practice.

    A three-page memo spelling out the policy is expected to be sent Monday to federal prosecutors in the 14 states, and also to top officials at the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

    The memo, the officials said, emphasizes that prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which cases to pursue, and says it is not a good use of federal manpower to prosecute those who are without a doubt in compliance with state law.

    The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the legal guidance before it is issued.

    “This is a major step forward,” said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project. “This change in policy moves the federal government dramatically toward respecting scientific and practical reality.”

    At the same time, the officials said, the government will still prosecute those who use medical marijuana as a cover for other illegal activity. The memo particularly warns that some suspects may hide old-fashioned drug dealing or other crimes behind a medical marijuana business.

    In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or other crimes.

    And while the policy memo describes a change in priorities away from prosecuting medical marijuana cases, it does not rule out the possibility that the federal government could still prosecute someone whose activities are allowed under state law.

    The memo, officials said, is designed to give a sense of prosecutorial priorities to U.S. Attorneys in the states that allow medical marijuana. It notes that pot sales in the United States are the largest source of money for violent Mexican drug cartels, but adds that federal law enforcement agencies have limited resources.

    Medical marijuana advocates have been anxious to see exactly how the administration would implement candidate Barack Obama’s repeated promises to change the policy in situations in which state laws allow the use of medical marijuana.

    Shortly after Obama took office, DEA agents raided four dispensaries in Los Angeles, prompting confusion about the government’s plans.

  62. JanH Says:
    October 17th, 2009 at 4:15 pm

    turndown,

    What was your take on that article?

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

    I barely skimmed it. Here’s the link to Carville’s actual report:

    h…/..w

    democracycorps.com/focus/2009/10/the-very-separate-world-of-conservative-republicans/?section=Analysis

  63. Zapatero told Netanyahu of his visit to the White House two days before his arrival in Jerusalem. He said he was obsessed with Obama, and that there will never be another chance where a man who professes values such as his will be president, and everyone must help him realize his vision.

    Netanyahu responded to Zapatero, saying he was willing to start talks with the Palestinians without any pre-conditions.
    ————————————-
    Confloyd: this is beautiful.

    1. Bambi said in the name of Allah, cosmic justice and reverend wrong I demand that Israel stop west bank settlement–as pre-condition to negotiation! I will not budge!

    2. Bibi told Bambi–oh bambi, most gracious and wonderful bambi–fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

    3. Bambi said–you dont have to be so mean to me about it. As long as you feel that way I withdraw my demand for preconditions.

    4. Bibi fine. We will give you a headline of course. Everyone knows that is all youu are interested in.

    5. Bibi to his minister. Suppose you tell me that you just got back from Washington and were so impressed with him and there will never be another opportunity to deal with a man with these god like qualities. If you can say that with a straight face, then I will try to tell you with a straight face to proceed.

    5. To the minister: tell the newpeope

  64. Carol Says:
    October 18th, 2009 at 10:20 am

    Mrs. Smith,

    It’s hard to take seriously anything from an article that refers to “fallacious global warming scam proffered by the world’s leading oaf, Al Gore,”

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

    Damn right. After the Clintons, Gore is the best leader we could have had. He was damaged by the corporate media just as the Clintons and Palin were.

  65. “We solved the matter of the settlements with the Americans,” Netanyahu told his Spanish counterpart.”

    ————————–
    I read about this yesterday and smiled. If Netanyahu stays the course, he refused to give up Jerusalem and gave up a bit elsewhere.

    Abbas and friends will see this as a sign to start their next intefada (sp?) and bambi’s peace initiative, biased to begin with, will be out the window.

  66. October 19, 2009

    ‘Deadlock” as Karzai rejects UN fraud verdict

    President Karzai is refusing to accept the result of a UN-led probe into vote-rigging in Afghanistan’s presidential election and a senior aide said today that the crisis had reached a “deadlock”.

    Mohammad Moin Marastyal, an Afghan MP and leading member of Mr Karzai’s campaign team. said that the UN-backed Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) had twisted the facts in a deliberate attempt to trigger a run-off vote.
    “Effort has been made to lower Karzai’s vote to below 50 per cent,” Mr Marastyal said. “Now we are in a deadlock.”

    The election was tainted by allegations of widespread fraud and has fanned tension between Mr Karzai and his former allies in the West.

    The White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel warned yesterday that President Obama would delay a decision on whether to commit up to 40,000 extra American troops to the conflict until the election crisis pans out and it becomes clear whether there’s “an Afghan partner” worth fighting for.

    The ECC said that it would finally unveil its verdict on Afghanistan’s disputed vote later today after weeks of uncertainty. The official tally gave Mr Karzai about 55 per cent of the vote, enough for him to avoid a second round of voting against his former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah, but the ECC report is said to cut that to below 50 per cent.

    “Karzai is putting up resistance to accept a possible second round,” said a foreign diplomat close to the talks. “Abdullah is sitting back because at the moment, things are going his way.”

    Mr Karzai has long spoken out against a second round and has criticised the fraud investigation, which he hinted could have involved foreign meddling. Mr Abdullah has said he would accept the ECC decision if all fraud had been properly investigated.

    The ECC announcement, originally expected at the weekend, was delayed as Western powers sought to get Mr Karzai to agree to face Mr Abdullah in a second round. In a sign of continued diplomacy, the United Nations’ top envoy, Kai Eide, had been visiting both Mr Karzai and Mr Abdullah daily to persuade them to accept the ECC ruling, a UN official said.

    It was not immediately clear whether Afghanistan’s separate Independent Election Commission (IEC) – appointed by Mr Karzai – would accept the ECC ruling. Under Afghan electoral law, the ECC is mandated to instruct the IEC to announce the final result of the election based on its own findings but foreign diplomats said that it might not follow those instructions. The ECC has already ordered the sacking of more than 200 district election officials because of “corruption and incompetence”.

    In Washington, Mr Obama is due once again to meet his top advisers on Afghanistan policy although aides have made clear that no decision is imminment on troop numbers despite Republican calls for action. “I think it would be irresponsible and… it would be reckless to make a decision on US troop level if, in fact, you haven’t done a thorough analysis of whether in fact there’s an Afghan partner ready to fill that space,” Mr Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, said yesterday.

    Mr Emanuel’s remarks echoed criticisms voiced by Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a close Obama ally, during a trip to Kabul. chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and close Obama ally.

    The White House is mulling a request by the Nato commander on the ground, General Stanley McChrystal, to commit 40,000 extra troops to Afghanistan to step up counter-insurgency operations. But Mr Kerry said that he was “not yet convinced” about deploying more troops to the increasingly unpopular conflict, which has claimed the lives of more than 400 coalition troops this year. “We have a responsibility to make certain that the government here is a full partner in our efforts to be able to be as effective as we can be,” Mr Kerry said.

    “I think this is a moment for President Karzai to frankly step up and help to share with the world a better vision for how the government here is going to deliver and be a full partner.”

    timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6880658.ece

    ———————————-

    So yesterday’s news cycle had obama’s stick men and women repeating the same new mantra: it would be irresponsible for him to send more troops until the government is stable. This actually makes sense except for one thing. This argument should have been put forward at the beginning when McCrystal first asked for more troops. Instead he and his idiot advisors have waited three months, while the troops already on the ground became more endangered due to lack of support, to offer it.

    So now they are trying to spin the nations poor polling numbers on how obama is handling the war and making him look like one of the “wise men” after all.

    Too little and way too late.

  67. 19/10/2009

    Russians deal Lieberman ‘slap’ by endorsing Goldstone report

    By Barak Ravid

    Israel relayed a sharply worded protest to the Russian government following Russia’s vote in favor of adopting the Goldstone report at the Human Rights Council in Geneva Friday, according to senior Foreign Ministry officials in Jerusalem.

    Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman suffered a personal blow by the Russian vote, which went against the promises he received from his Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, days prior to the vote at the United Nations body.

    Russian officials clarified that Moscow would oppose any discussion of the Goldstone report by the UN Security Council, Israel Radio reported on Sunday night. Russia’s envoy to Israel met over the weekend with Foreign Ministry official Pinchas Avivi to hand him a letter of clarification from Lavrov about Russia’s vote at the Human Rights Council, according to Israel Radio.

    Sources at the Foreign Ministry, however, said that the Russians’ behavior was tantamount to a “slap in the face for Lieberman,” whose policy has been based on a “strategic dialogue” with Russia. Notwithstanding his disappointment, Lieberman was careful not to attack the government in Moscow publicly. Other countries who were critical of Israel, such as Sweden, Norway, Turkey and China, were slammed by Lieberman.

    However, Lieberman opted to keep a low profile, as he did earlier this year when Lavrov met with senior figures from Hamas. His office also refused to comment on this report.

    Following the vote in Geneva Friday, the Russian government sought to appease Israel and Lavrov sent a message to Lieberman clarifying the Russian stance in the vote. However, a source in the Foreign Ministry said that Lieberman refused to accept the Russian’s message. In the end the message was relayed by the Russian ambassador to Israel to the deputy director for Euro-Asian affairs at the Foreign Ministry, Pini Avivi.

    During the meeting with the Russian ambassador, Avivi relayed Israel’s protest on its vote with regards to the Goldstone report. He said that “you could have joined the group of countries who voted against or abstained,” adding that “we were very hurt by your behavior, especially following the assurances you had given us on the matter.”

    The Russian ambassador said that he had been asked by Lavrov to relay a series of messages regarding the Russian vote. He said that Russia voted in favor because it had no choice, and went as far as to blame the European Union. “We sought to moderate the wording of the resolution but we failed because of the stance of Western countries,” the Russian ambassador claimed.

    He also said that even though Russia supported the resolution on the adoption of the Goldstone report, it opposes the transfer of the matter to the Security Council or the commencement of legal action at the International Criminal Court at The Hague. The Russian diplomat added that Moscow believes that “Israel should investigate itself,” and reiterated that the most important things is for “the peace process not to be damaged.”

    The Russian ambassador also charged that the Goldstone report contains statements that “are unsubstantiated and are subjective.”

    Senior Foreign Ministry officials said that Lieberman had been personally insulted by the Russian vote. Since the release of the Goldstone report a month ago, Lieberman spoke some 10 times with Lavrov and asked that Moscow not support the report.

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also spoke prior to the vote with President Dmitry Medvedev.

    Senior Israeli officials said that other Russian figures relayed to Israel positive messages on the issue, and had even made promises on not voting in favor of the report.

    haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1122067.html

    ——————————-

    So what exactly is Medvedev doing? First he slapped the U.S. last week over an about-turn on Iran sanctions. Now he has done an about-turn on Israel and the Goldstone report.

  68. Clinton Says New Sudan Policy Can End Conflict

    By Janine Zacharia

    Oct. 19 (Bloomberg) — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the U.S. will seek to end “gross human rights abuses” in Darfur, ensure implementation of a peace deal that ended war between northern and southern Sudan, and make sure Sudan doesn’t provide a safe haven for terrorists.

    “We are approaching two key issues, Darfur and the comprehensive peace agreement simultaneously and in tandem,” Clinton said in describing the Obama administration’s new policy toward Sudan today.

    Clinton announced the policy at the State Department in Washington, speaking alongside Scott Gration, the U.S. special envoy to Sudan, and Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

    “There will be no rewards for the status quo, no incentives without tangible and concrete progress,” Rice said. “There will be significant consequences for parties that backslide or simply stand still.”

    In a statement, President Barack Obama said he will continue “tough sanctions” on the Sudanese government while holding out the prospect of unspecified incentives if the situation on the ground improves. “Sudan is now poised to fall further into chaos if swift action is not taken,” Obama said. The U.S. is seeking a “definitive end” to the conflict, he said.

    Rice said UN peacekeeping forces now deployed in Sudan will help supply information for the U.S. to assess whether conditions are improving for residents of Darfur.

    bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=almgS17_iCCY

  69. Sunday, October 18, 2009
    [Jay Nordlinger]

    Fox and CNN

    The White House communications director, Anita Dunn, contrasted Fox News with CNN: Fox News is just a Republican opinion outlet, she said, while CNN is a real news network. Of Fox, she said, “Let’s not pretend that they’re a news network, the way CNN is.” She said this on CNN, of course. (In the 1990s, conservatives used to refer to it as “the Clinton News Network.”)

    I got to thinking. Fox has some opinionists, such as O’Reilly and Beck. Fox also has news anchormen and correspondents.

    CNN has those, too. One of the CNN anchors is Anderson Cooper — he’s their star, as I understand it. The hurricane guy. When the “tea party” protests got going earlier this year, Cooper interviewed David Gergen. Gergen said, “They [Republicans and conservatives] still haven’t found their voice, Anderson. This happens to a minority party after it’s lost a couple of bad elections, but they’re searching for their voice.”

    Then Cooper said, “It’s hard to talk when you’re teabagging.” He said this smirkingly.

    He was referring to a sexual practice defined by the Urban Dictionary as follows: “the insertion of one man’s sac[] into another person’s mouth.”

    Would a Fox News anchor ever, ever say anything like this — ever? Can you conceive it? But that is what CNN anchormen do, apparently. When people tell you that CNN is a real news network, whereas Fox isn’t — I would just smile at them.

    P.S. It was Anderson Cooper, the mainstream news anchor, who started the derogatory references to anti-Obama protesters as “teabaggers.” Democratic pundits and politicians quickly picked it up. (I wrote about this in a recent issue of National Review.)

    P.P.S. Another CNN anchorman, Rick Sanchez, spread racist quotations allegedly from Rush Limbaugh. These quotes were fabrications, meant to damage Limbaugh. Do Fox anchormen engage in slander and defamation?

    P.P.P.S. Anita Dunn tried to pass off her tribute to Mao as something she once heard from Lee Atwater. Has Lee Atwater become the Democrats’ standard — the arbiter of Democratic discourse? What an interesting turn of events.

    corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjkzNjI5ZTIyM2Q3ZWY5YmY0ZDJkNDVlMWZkZjRkMDY=#

  70. From BP…if you go to the article there is a hilarious pic there.
    *************************

    Obamacare Is For the Peons… Congress to Keep Their Gold-Plated Health Care Plans

    Monday, October 19, 2009, 5:51 AM

    Jim Hoft

    Obamacare is for the peons and knaves.

    Our moral superiors have more important things to worry about.

    Congress will keep their gold-plated insurance plans as they force the rest of the country into a rationed health care government plan.
    Townhall reported, via Free Republic:

    Personal doctors on call 24/7. Coverage that knows no caps. No exemptions for pre-existing conditions.

    Those are the sorts of benefits members of Congress currently enjoy on the taxpayer’s dime, and the kinds of benefits Americans on a government-run public health care plan will never see if Obamacare passes.

    “One thing is certain: Congress will exempt itself from whatever lousy health care system it forces on we little people,” said Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute. “Congress will get better insurance than you do because politicians always get a better deal under government-run health care.”

    While it’s not news that Congressional health insurance plans are posh, CBS News recently uncovered the details of plans – right as the details of the Baucus health care bill are being hashed out.

    Members of Congress can choose from five different plans, and have access to both the VIP Bethesda Naval Hospital and a reserved spot Ward 72 at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, an elite division usually reserved for military members. Their everyday medical concerns can be taken care of at a doctors office located inside of Congress.

    Their premiums are the same as those of insurance plans with half the benefits, and the plans last a lifetime; not until Medicare kicks in do ex-Members or loose their Congressional health benefits. Congress has repeatedly voted down any provision that would switch their insurance plans to the lower-grade public option if Obamacare goes through.

    Helen Evans, the director of Nurses for Reform, a campaign for more consumer-led, sustainable healthcare systems in Britain, said that this sort of elite care for the bureaucracy – and low-brow care for the plebes – is the same thing that happens in the government-run British health care system.

  71. Official writes in to defend HRC

    A U.S. official writes to push back against an Al Kamen piece on Hillary Clinton and her “gatekeeper” chief of staff Cheryl Mills today. The latter “has made entry to Clinton’s suite something like penetrating the Green Zone in Baghdad,” Kamen writes. Though the official doesn’t want to be identified, it’s fair to say that he’s a policy staffer who was aligned with Obama’s campaign and is not part of HRC’s inner circle.

    “I trust you saw the piece this morning on complaints about Secretary Clinton maintaining a closed circle and the fingerpointing at Cheryl Mills. I wanted to push back on that. Secretary Clinton has gone out of her way to interact and engage with career State Department staff at every turn. She regularly takes turns to congratulate and praise staff on jobs well done — in late September, she spoke to the many Department staffers who helped out with the preparations for the UN General Assembly meetings, including the President’s chairmanship of an unprecedented UN Security Council session. Today, she is stopping by at an awards ceremony for staff in the Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs.”

    “More broadly, this Secretary has maintained an open door when it comes to soliciting outside advice. She regularly holds roundtables in her 7th floor offices with Department staff to hash through issues. She enjoys hosting dinners at her home where she can engage with outside experts and get a reality check.”

    “There are other, valid criticisms of the Secretary. Contending that she is a remote figure who has walled off the people working for her at State is unfounded and absurd.”

    More from Ben, who previously reported that “Mills been a hard-liner during the Clinton campaign, pushing for sharper-edged attacks on Obama. She brought some of that stance to State, where she fought tooth and nail in the early days of the administration to control mid-level staff jobs, like the agency’s White House liaison, and to ensure that those jobs went to ‘Hillary people’ rather than ‘Obama people.'”

    politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/1009/Official_writes_in_to_defend_HRC.html#

  72. So much for free speech;

    blasphemy laws
    Perhaps in an effort to rehabilitate the United States’ image in the Muslim world, the Obama administration has joined a U.N. effort to restrict religious speech. This country should never sacrifice freedom of expression on the altar of religion.
    By Jonathan Turley

    Around the world, free speech is being sacrificed on the altar of religion. Whether defined as hate speech, discrimination or simple blasphemy, governments are declaring unlimited free speech as the enemy of freedom of religion. This growing movement has reached the United Nations, where religiously conservative countries received a boost in their campaign to pass an international blasphemy law. It came from the most unlikely of places: the United States.

    While attracting surprisingly little attention, the Obama administration supported the effort of largely Muslim nations in the U.N. Human Rights Council to recognize exceptions to free speech for any “negative racial and religious stereotyping.” The exception was made as part of a resolution supporting free speech that passed this month, but it is the exception, not the rule that worries civil libertarians. Though the resolution was passed unanimously, European and developing countries made it clear that they remain at odds on the issue of protecting religions from criticism. It is viewed as a transparent bid to appeal to the “Muslim street” and our Arab allies, with the administration seeking greater coexistence through the curtailment of objectionable speech. Though it has no direct enforcement (and is weaker than earlier versions), it is still viewed as a victory for those who sought to juxtapose and balance the rights of speech and religion.
    A ‘misused’ freedom?

    In the resolution, the administration aligned itself with Egypt, which has long been criticized for prosecuting artists, activists and journalists for insulting Islam. For example, Egypt recently banned a journal that published respected poet Helmi Salem merely because one of his poems compared God to a villager who feeds ducks and milks cows. The Egyptian ambassador to the U.N., Hisham Badr, wasted no time in heralding the new consensus with the U.S. that “freedom of expression has been sometimes misused” and showing that the “true nature of this right” must yield government limitations.

    His U.S. counterpart, Douglas Griffiths, heralded “this joint project with Egypt” and supported the resolution to achieve “tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.” While not expressly endorsing blasphemy prosecutions, the administration departed from other Western allies in supporting efforts to balance free speech against the protecting of religious groups.

    Thinly disguised blasphemy laws are often defended as necessary to protect the ideals of tolerance and pluralism. They ignore the fact that the laws achieve tolerance through the ultimate act of intolerance: criminalizing the ability of some individuals to denounce sacred or sensitive values. We do not need free speech to protect popular thoughts or popular people. It is designed to protect those who challenge the majority and its institutions. Criticism of religion is the very measure of the guarantee of free speech — the literal sacred institution of society.

    Blasphemy prosecutions in the West appear to have increased after the riots by Muslims following the publication of cartoons disrespecting prophet Mohammed in Denmark in 2005. Rioters killed Christians, burned churches and called for the execution of the cartoonists. While Western countries publicly defended free speech, some quietly moved to deter those who’d cause further controversies through unpopular speech.

    In Britain, it is a crime to “abuse” or “threaten” a religion under the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006. A 15-year-old boy was charged last year for holding up a sign outside a Scientology building declaring, “Scientology is not a religion, it is a dangerous cult. “In France, famed actress Brigitte Bardot was convicted for saying in 2006 that Muslims were ruining France in a letter to then-Interior Minister (and now President) Nicolas Sarkozy. This year, Ireland joined this self-destructive trend with a blasphemy law that calls for the prosecution of anyone who writes or utters views deemed “grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion; and he or she intends, by the publication of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.”
    ‘Blasphemy’ incidents

    Consider just a few such Western “blasphemy” cases in the past two years:

    • In Holland, Dutch prosecutors arrested cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot for insulting Christians and Muslims with cartoons, including one that caricatured a Christian fundamentalist and a Muslim fundamentalist as zombies who want to marry and attend gay rallies.

    • In Canada, the Alberta human rights commission punished the Rev. Stephen Boission and the Concerned Christian Coalition for anti-gay speech, not only awarding damages but also censuring future speech that the commission deems inappropriate.

    • In Italy, comedian Sabina Guzzanti was put under criminal investigation for joking at a rally that “in 20 years, the pope will be where he ought to be — in hell, tormented by great big poofter (gay) devils, and very active ones.”

    • In London, an aide to British Foreign Secretary David Miliband was arrested for “inciting religious hatred” at his gym by shouting obscenities about Jews while watching news reports of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza.Also, Dutch politician Geert Wilders was barred from entering Britain as a “threat to public policy, public security or public health” because he made a movie describing the Quran as a “fascist” book and Islam as a violent religion.

    • In Poland, Catholic magazine Gosc Niedzielny was fined $11,000 for inciting “contempt, hostility and malice”by comparing the abortion of a woman to the medical experiments at Auschwitz.

    The “blasphemy” cases include the prosecution of writers for calling Mohammed a “pedophile” because of his marriage to 6-year-old Aisha (which was consummated when she was 9). A far-right legislator in Austria, a publisher in India and a city councilman in Finland have been prosecuted for repeating this view of the historical record.

    In the flipside of the cartoon controversy, Dutch prosecutors this year have brought charges against the Arab European League for a cartoon questioning the Holocaust.
    What’s next?

    Private companies and institutions are following suit in what could be seen as responding to the Egyptian-U.S. call for greater “responsibility” in controlling speech. For example, in an act of unprecedented cowardice and self-censorship, Yale University Press published The Cartoons That Shook the World, a book by Jytte Klausen on the original Mohammed cartoons. Yale, however, (over Klausen’s objections) cut the actual pictures of the cartoons. It was akin to publishing a book on the Sistine Chapel while barring any images of the paintings.

    The public and private curtailment on religious criticism threatens religious and secular speakers alike. However, the fear is that, when speech becomes sacrilegious, only the religious will have true free speech. It is a danger that has become all the more real after the decision of the Obama administration to join in the effort to craft a new faith-based speech standard. It is now up to Congress and the public to be heard before the world leaves free speech with little more than a hope and a prayer.

    Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAY’s board of contributors.

  73. From Ace of Spades
    *****************

    This Week’s Excuse For Delaying A Decision On Troops To Afghanistan Is…..
    —DrewM.

    If you had “Murky Election Results In Afghanistan” in the pool, you win!

    “We would love the luxury of this debate to be reduced down to just one question — additional troops, 40,000,” Emanuel told CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. “This is a much more complex decision.”
    “The question, though… does not come [down to] how many troops you send, but do you have a credible Afghan partner for this process that can provide the security and the type of services that the Afghan people need?” the chief of staff added.

    Yes, the Afghanistan election was filled with fraud and there’s talk that Karzi might not submit to a possible runoff after his provisional vote totals were lowered due to fraud.

    The question for Mr. Emanuel is…so what?

    Afghanistan, according to Obama,

    “…(I)s not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity,” Obama told the annual Veterans of Foreign Wars conference — cautioning that the insurgency would not be defeated overnight. “Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which Al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans.”
    Granted, all Obama statements come with an expiration date and the above is 2 months old, but winning a war of necessity has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the Afghan central government.

    Yes, COIN Operations should be done in support of an indigenous government but it doesn’t have to be a fully functioning and legitimate central government.
    There are regional and traditional governing bodies we can work with to provide security and use as a means to funnel construction project money. The idea that our national security is being held hostage to the purity of the Afghan elections is a laughable as it is scary.

    While Obama plays Hamlet on the Potomac, Al Qaeda continues to train terrorists who want to attack western targets.

    Of course, what our national security is actually being held hostage to is Obama’s desire to hold his left wing base together through the health care fight. Quite the profile in courage our Nobel Peace Laureate in Chief is.

    More: I’ve heard Mark Steyn point out that we are doing things backwards with our national building efforts. The national level government is usually the last thing that a real nation has. Government should not be imposed from the top down but built from the bottom up.

    Think of the US. We went from the towns and county government to state (colony), a loose federation to a more central national government (too much so in my opinion but that’s another discussion).

    This is isn’t some crazy hope that Afghanistan will develop along US lines but simply a way to point out what works in the real world. We are developing a central government there because it is easier for us to work that way, not because the Afghans necessarily want of need it.

    If we are going to have this ‘strategic pause’, I would hope that that’s the kind of thing Obama and his team are considering and not how to simply get the hell out of Dodge without paying a political price.

  74. White House aide says Barack Obama team ‘controlled’ the media

    Anita Dunn, a senior White House aide, has boasted of how Barack Obama’s presidential campaign managed to “absolutely control” the press during the 2008 election.

    By Toby Harnden in Washington
    19 Oct 2009

    The top campaign strategist who has shot to attention recently as President Obama’s main attack dog against Fox News, the conservative-leaning cable network, was speaking at a conference in the Dominican Republic in January.

    “Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn’t absolutely control,” she said. “We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it.”

    Footage of her remarks – which, ironically, include the advice that “thanks to YouTube, anything you say you should expect to be on YouTube” – have spread virally on YouTube, the video-sharing website, since first becoming public on Sunday.

    The comments were seized upon by Fox, whose host Glenn Beck – a big target of liberals – last week pilloried Miss Dunn for having once described Mao Tse Tung as one of her “favourite political philosophers”.

    Karl Rove, former President George W. Bush’s former chief political strategist said on “Fox News Sunday” that the White House was dominated by “Chicago-style politics” and that Mr Obama was afraid of tough questions. He compared Mr Obama to President Richard Nixon, who famously kept an “enemies list” that included reporters. “This is a White House engaging in its own version of the media enemies list. And it’s unhelpful for the country and undignified for the president of the United States to so do.”

    The White House has intensified its attacks on Fox after Miss Dunn’s opening broadside last weekend. David Axelrod, a senior Obama adviser, even urged other news outlets to shun Fox, telling ABC News that Fox was about opinion and was therefore not a news organisation. “And the bigger thing is that other news organisations, like yours, ought not to treat them that way, and we’re not going to treat them that way.”

    Although the Obama campaign received very favourable coverage from the American press, there are signs of discontent over what many reporters view as excessive attempts at controlling the news and a reflexive refusal to be open. Robert Gibbs, Mr Obama’s press secretary, has been withering in his criticism of the press, often focusing on foreign press reports. Last week, he berated the BBC over a report that Mr Obama could announce an Afghanistan troop surge of up to 45,000 troops.

    “I can be generalistic or I can be specific,” he said at a press conference. “I’ve seen the report. It’s not true, either generally or specifically.”

    When an American reporter joked that “it’s a good story, though”, Mr Gibbs responded: “And you know, and by God, don’t let the facts get in the way of it, just go with it.”

    Miss Dunn hit back at Mr Beck, who has that her citation of Mao was akin to his declaring admiration for Adolf Hitler. “The Mao quote is one I picked up from the late Republican strategist Lee Atwater from something I read in the late 1980s, so I hope I don’t get my progressive friends mad at me,” she told CNN.

    “The use of the phrase ‘favourite political philosophers’ was intended as irony, but clearly the effort fell flat – at least with a certain Fox commentator whose sense of irony may be missing.”

    telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6377910/White-House-aide-says-Barack-Obama-team-controlled-the-media.html#

  75. “the fear is that, when speech becomes sacrilegious, only the religious will have true free speech.”

    ——————————

    Only the Muslim religious and obama.

  76. “While Obama plays Hamlet on the Potomac, Al Qaeda continues to train terrorists who want to attack western targets.”

    ——————————————-
    Exactly!

  77. TheRealist Says:

    October 19th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
    ******************

    The whole world is insane and terifed of Islamfacist. They are willing to sell our very souls when they should be hunting them down as the murders they are hiding behind western law….

  78. Here’s more audacity; probably less unity, though:
    The White House is calling on other news organizations to isolate and alienate Fox News as it sends out top advisers to rail against the cable channel as a Republican Party mouthpiece.

    www dot foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/18/white-house-escalates-war-fox-news-1925819282/

  79. holdthemaccountable Says:

    October 19th, 2009 at 3:41 pm

    ——————————

    I think the White House is going to come out looking extremely bad over this. And if the other idiot media follow these orders, their ratings will tank even more.

  80. I was going to attend this speech Nov 6th if I can, but maybe I should back out after reading this article/ It’s just been a while since I saw Hillary in the fleshg diuring the campaign and I wouldlove to be able to have a brief moment with her, albeit I doubt she will be meeting us. The VIPs are for the congress memebers whom I could care les about. I have, however, always thought od Ms. Lewis as a great supporter of both Bill and Hillary….

  81. Anita Dunn is married to President Obama’s personal attorney, Robert Bauer, a partner at Perkins Coie who has been the general counsel of Obama for America since January, 2007

  82. (In the 1990s, conservatives used to refer to it as “the Clinton News Network.”)

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

    That was when CNN was owned by Ted Turner and Jane Fonda. Unfortunately for the 2000 campaign they sold out to new owners who supported Bush and trashed Gore.

Comments are closed.