Republican Lessons For The Dimocratic Left Creative Class

Update II: We received this picture from a friend (taken with a phone camera so the quality is not great).
Discount Obama

The store is Time Machine located at 207 West 14th Street in New York City for those in the area that want to take a look.

The sign says:

Obama Comics Special Sale
Price – Job Performance Poll Number
Today’s discount: 54% off

The discount tag is apparently replaceable. If Obama’s approval numbers keep dropping we expect the comics will soon be close to free.


Update: Music video added below.


Some top Republicans and many regular Republicans are acting like free love Hippies lately. This Republican activity comes even as Barack Obama trys to benefit himself by calling Republicans “robots”. [Warning, video below is of Obama at his usual annoying speechifying.]

Obama thinks he can benefit himself by calling regular Democrats “an opinionated bunch”. It’s a fancy way of saying “shut up”.

Obama also said Republicans “do what they are told” along with oh-so-hip robotic movements. ‘Shut Up and do as I say’ Obama says to Democrats and Dimocrats.

Here at Big Pink we have learned when Obama is moving his lips, he is lying. Are Republicans currently “doing what they are told”? Are Republicans currently “robots”? Hardly. If anything, it is Democrats and Dimocrats who are “doing what they are told” and following Mess-iah.

Look at what Republicans are up to lately:

Some of the most prominent names in national Republican Party politics are lining up against the GOP nominee in a key upstate New York House special election, the latest being former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, who weighed in Friday.

In endorsing Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman in the Nov. 3 contest, Santorum joined former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, Minnesota Rep. Michelle Bachmann, former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, and former presidential candidate Steve Forbes, all of whom announced their backing for the conservative third-party candidate this week.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty suggested Friday that he might be the next well-known Republican to break with the party establishment and support Hoffman.

Who’s the robot now? Big Pink readers will recall our laughter when Obama Dimocrats (these fools were outraged when Joe Wilson correctly called Obama a liar while Obama was speechifying) sent hundreds of thousands, then over a million dollars, to a Blue Dog Democrat after spending months attacking Blue Dog Democrats. We wrote:

Dimocrats have been whining and moaning lately about Blue Dog Democrats. Instead of placing the responsibility on Barack Obama, for the disaster which is the health care insurance company rescue scam and the deals Obama has made with the pharmaceutical companies, Dimocrats avert their vision and their few morals in order to blame Blue Dog Democrats. Immediately though, these dumb-ass (is there another word for such stupidity?) Dimocrats cheer and fist-bump themselves because they have raised hundreds of thousands of dollars – for a Blue Dog Democrat! These are truly stupid people.

Who’s the robot now? Here’s more on what Republicans are up to:

While Scozzafava can point to many other prominent conservatives who support her bid—including former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Republican leaders on Capitol Hill—this week’s surge of leading conservatives to Hoffman’s camp is a troubling sign for her campaign and the national GOP establishment since several of the recent Hoffman endorsers have significant followings and represent the most energetic part of the Republican base.

“I would prefer to not have to go up to New York to endorse and campaign for the conservative candidate. But Republicans lost the race when they nominated Dede,” Armey told POLITICO.

“It’s the first really great chance for small government conservatives to present themselves as attractive candidates in opposition to Obama,” he said. “We treat this is as an important opportunity for conservatives to win the race. We wish Republicans had picked a conservative.”

Asked why Palin, Thompson and the others joined him this week in endorsing Hoffman, Armey responded: “They see the need for us to make the point that policy positions of small government conservatives are what is needed for us to win this race. They understand how important this race is and that’s why I think they endorsed.”

Republican strategist Mary Matalin added that Hoffman’s endorsers “speak for all of us who came to the party in support of the fundamental/constitutional principles it represented.”

“We can disagree or compromise on marginal issues, but not freedom-quashing, government-grasping ones, like tax increases, anti-democratic card check, etc. Holding on to a seat won on those principles is worse than losing it,” she said. “Conversely, losing seats to articulate, conservative Democrats has proved to be the best defensive line holding back Obama’s expansive ambitions.”

In her endorsement of Hoffman Thursday night, Palin sounded a clear anti-party tone, writing that Hoffman was the candidate that “stands for the principles that all Republicans should share.”

Political parties must stand for something. When Republicans were in the wilderness in the late 1970s, Ronald Reagan knew that the doctrine of ‘blurring the lines’ between parties was not an appropriate way to win elections,” Palin wrote in a statement on her Facebook page. “Republicans and conservatives around the country are sending an important message to the Republican establishment in their outstanding grassroots support for Doug Hoffman: no more politics as usual.

Obama Dimocrats threw out all core Democratic principles, the core Democratic principles Hillary Clinton has fought for all her life, to gift the nomination to an unqualified, race-baiting, and gay-bashing, and woman hating, Barack Obama. Now these same lemming Dimocrats blame everyone except the blameworthy Obama for the lack of Hope and Change.

As pro-choice, pro-gay rights Democrats we oppose Republicans, but, we applaud the Republicans who will not allow their party to be turned over to someone who does not represent their values. These rebellious, unRobotic Republicans fight for core Republican principles (and contrary to the propaganda, real Republicans, not the Bush W. worshipers, actually do have core Republican principles) and will not sacrifice those core principles in order to win an election.

Hillary supporters like those at Big Pink did not sacrifice core Democratic principles at the alter of party unity. We wish Hillary and Bill had refused to have anything to do with Barack Obama after he was gifted the nomination and they were called racists. We understand however that if Hillary and Bill are ever to return the party to its senses they have to be loyal to the party or risk future attacks of “disloyalty”.

Grassroots Democrats have no need to vote for Dimocrats who violate core Democratic principles, such as respect for the will of grassroots Democrats to choose their nominee, not have the party establishment belittle us and call us “bitter” and “clingy” and force feed an Obamination on us.

Now Republicans in upstate New York, like Hillary Democrats, are doing the right thing.

The conservative star power rallying behind Hoffman has done more than generate buzz for his candidacy—his campaign reported raking in more than $100,000 in the 24 hours since Palin’s endorsement. [snip]

In defending his endorsement of Scozzafava to the National Review, Gingrich warned conservatives that “if you seek to be a perfect minority, you’ll remain a minority.” [snip]

One top Republican official in Washington said that many within the party’s establishment are worried by the support Hoffman has been able to attract, but don’t believe it’s indicative of any broader party fissures.

“It is a little surprising. [Scozzafava is] not the person I would have nominated, but she is still the party’s nominee,” said the insider.

In past years, when the nomination process was determined by voters, not party leaders, it was proper for Democrats (and Republicans) to fight the fight in the primaries and then come together when the people spoke and the nominee was chosen. As long as the nominee is not someone who is so unqualified that a vote demands putting party over country, the appropriate process is for party members to support party nominees fairly chosen who will do well for the country and the party.

In the 23rd district this year, many Republicans do not believe the Republican nominee represents their core Republican values. The Republican in that very Republican district is a pro-choice, pro-gay rights Republican so these rebel, non-robotic Republicans are correct in their opposition.

Rebel, principled, non-robotic Republicans in the 23rd congressional district of New York are teaching a valuable lesson to their party leaders and to the Republican grassroots.

More importantly the rebel, principled, non-robotic Republicans in the 23rd congressional district of New York are teaching a valuable lesson to the robotic, compliant, prostrate, unprincipled Obama-worshiping kooks who style themselves as “the creative class” Dimocratic Left.

The lesson is: stick by your principles.

Long ago Shakespeare said the same thing “This above all: to thine own self be true. And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou cans’t not be false to any man ” Or woman.


68 thoughts on “Republican Lessons For The Dimocratic Left Creative Class

  1. A justifiably hard-hitting post, admin.
    Does anyone else see the Bush smirk in the video there? It shows even before you play it, and is pervasive throughout.
    I’m betting that The Big Dog mentioned that (repubs do what they’re told/repubs don’t think) recently when he was with BO, cause I remember BC saying that back when he was pres.
    BO thought it was neat – as I did once upon a time – and used it.
    I’m thinking O opened a b-i-g can of worms with that statement: republicans do what they are told.
    Because the Repubs are not the only ones doing what they are told. All Dems still capable of thinking have to do is look to Denver last August.

  2. HoldThemAccountable: Bill Clinton once said “Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line.” Not so much anymore for Republicans. It is the Dimocrats who are falling, in line.

  3. This article is very long but I think it is a must read.
    —ClintonBamboozling the American electorate againStrategy involves G.O.P. crossover voting to take out Clinton, marketing newcomer Obama, strippingbattleground delegates, inciting a convention riot and (if necessary) declaring martial law beforeNovember’s general election. Meanwhile, revelations about the Illinois senator’s ties to Chicago politicalfixer Tony Rezko and his Iraqi billionaire friends are downplayed by the press. For their part, DemocraticParty leaders persist in efforts to circumvent the nominating process, even as Karl Rove emerges as aplayer at Rezko’s trial.Revised and updated May 10, 2008Evidence of a covert campaign to undermine the presidential primaries is rife, so it’s curious that many withinboth the Democratic and Republican parties have ignored the actual elephant in the room this year. That wouldbe Karl Rove. Long accused of rigging the two previous presidential elections, this master of deceit would haveus believe that he’s gone off to sit in a corner and write op-eds this time around.Not so. According to an article in Time magazine last November, Republicans have been organized in manystates to throw their weight behind Senator Barack Obama, hoping to deprive Senator Hillary Clinton of theDemocratic nomination. While Rove’s name isn’t mentioned in the story, several former fundraisers andstrategists for President Bush are identified. Together, these gentlemen helped flush Obama’s coffers with cashearly on in the race, something the deep pockets had not done for any candidate in their own party. Withreceipts topping $100 million in 2007, the first-term Illinois senator achieved a remarkable feat, given thatmost Americans only first heard of him in 2005.To expedite the strategy, a website and discussion forum called Republicans for Obama formed in 2006, whilethe Obama camp launched its own “Be a Democrat For a Day” campaign a year later. A video distributed by itssatellite offices explained the procedure to voters in Florida, Nevada, Vermont and elsewhere. In addition,many states nowadays hold open primaries, allowing citizens to vote for any candidate, regardless of their partyaffiliation. In Nebraska, for example, the mayor of Omaha publicly rallied Republicans to caucus for Obama onFebruary 9th. In Pennsylvania, Time reported on March 19th that Obama was running radio ads in Pittsburghand Philadelphia asking Republicans to register as Democrats and then vote for him in the state’s April 22ndprimary.The tactic, called crossover voting, allowed Obama to capture the delegates in nearly all the red state caucuses,while trimming Clinton’s delegate haul in the blue state primaries enough to keep her trailing. Republicans for
    Obama, for one, was not bashful in making its case in an
    email appeal linked to its home page before the March4th contests. “Since Texas has an open primary,” the appeal read, “Republicans and Independents should signin at their polling place and request a Democratic ballot. They should then vote for Barack Obama… Just think,no more Clintons in the White House!” Rove undoubtedly prepared well for 2008. Even with the full monte of election-scamming tools available tohim – phone bank sabotage, fake polling data, swiftboating, waitlisting, electronic voting equipment, NormanHsu, etc. – the neoconservative base he represents would be hard pressed to eclipse Clinton in November, nomatter what ticket the the G.O.P. puts forward. The former First Lady and member of the Senate Armed ServicesCommittee has promised an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq, along with a massive New Deal type jobsprogram to address the country’s economic woes. Thus, all the vote-rigging ingenuity known to man probablywon’t make a difference if the contest isn’t close. Several influential Republicans admitted as much in aFebruary 11th story for Politico. If, on the other hand, Obama wins the nomination (or even the VP spot), Rove’s prospects brightenconsiderably. Largely unvetted by the press, the senator carries considerable baggage from his stint as a statelegislator, particularly his 17-year relationship with Chicago slumlord Tony Rezko, currently on trial for fraud.Until the controversy over his pastor broke in March, most journalists had paid lip service to the particulars ofObama’s past. And major media outlets continue to portray him as a fresh new face in American politics, acandidate whose speeches call to mind MLK and JFK, even Abraham Lincoln. For her part, the author of theNovember Time article, Jay Newton-Small, offered the following explanation to account for the bizarre loveaffair G.O.P. voters say they’re having with an African American senator on the other side of the aisle. “It seemsa lot of Republicans took to heart Obama’s statement in his rousing speech at the 2004 Democratic NationalConvention that ‘there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States ofAmerica.'”Is she kidding? The conservative publication National Journal claims Senator Obama’s voting record is themost liberal in Washington. Not everyone agrees with that assessment by a long shot – he supported the 2005Cheney energy bill, for instance – but it’s nevertheless hard to picture the voting pattern Newton-Small implieshere: Nixon – Reagan – Bush – Dole – Bush – Obama. Still, this through-the-looking-glass rationale is widelypromoted by journalists, pundits and politicians across the political spectrum. Many advance the equallysuspect position that Clinton, the first-ever viable female candidate for president, represents the past.It’s what people in the news business call “spin”. Last year, at the same time she commanded a huge lead in thenational polls, political analysts and professional strategists retained by CNN and other broadcast networksbegan hammering across the notion that “the voters don’t like her”. The adjectives “unlikable”, “divisive”,”polarizing” and “untrustworthy” have been repeated over and over in connection to Clintonin the samemanner that “biological warfare” and “weapons of mass destruction” were employed in the lead-up to the IraqWar. In the week before the key Indiana-North Carolina primaries, the term “panderer” saturated the air waves,effectively demolishing Clinton’s impressive polling numbers by the time voters reached the ballot booth. Theuse of such buzzword terminology traces back to a cadre of right-wing, neoconservative ideologues who havekept the studio seats warm at the Fox News Channel since its inception in 1996. “There is no candidate onrecord, a front-runner for a party’s nomination, who has entered the primary season with negatives as high as shehas,” Rove told Reuters last August. In February, Bush’s former senior political advisor joined Fox as a part-time election analyst.Obama himself invariably recites Rove’s “high negatives” comment in press interviews whenever discussingClinton. His often bitter criticism of her, along with other “Washington insiders”, who he says want to “boil andstew all the hope out of him”, represents a staple of his core political message. The other half of the stump
    speech, known as the I’m-a-uniter-not-a-divider pitch, is reminiscent of the Bush 2000 campaign, which Rovemanaged. Perhaps that’s not surprising when you discover that one of Obama’s speechwriters is Ben Rhodes, thebrother of Fox News VP David Rhodes. (Marisa Guthrie, of
    BC Beat, reported this connection.) You may recallthat on election night in November 2000, it was Fox that called Florida for Bush, even though the othernetworks declared Gore the winner after citing the exit polls. How Fox knew the polls were wrong in advance ofthe vote count has never been explained.And the G.O.P. links to the Obama campaign don’t end there. The Times of London reported on March 2nd thatObama is interviewing conservative Republican lawmakers like Senators Chuck Hagel and Richard Lugar forkey positions in his cabinet, if he’s elected in November. “Senior advisers confirmed that Hagel, a highlydecorated Vietnam war veteran and one of McCain’s closest friends in the Senate, was considered an idealcandidate for defence secretary.” the story revealed. “Some regard the outspoken Republican as a possible vice-presidential nominee although that might be regarded as a ‘stretch’.” Lugar is being evaluated as a potentialsecretary of state.Presidential Race or Next American Idol?On the G.O.P. side, presumptive nominee John McCain still has to be confirmed at the convention inSeptember, which follows the Democratic meeting in August. Curiously, even after reaching the delegatethreshold in the primaries, McCain’s fundrasing fortunes floundered until just last month, when he struck anarrangement that gives the Republican National Committee the bulk of his receipts. It’s possible that KarlRove’s angling to replace the maverick senator on technical, health or some other grounds once the conventionstarts and the Democrats have their nominee.Meanwhile, Republican crossover voting in the Democratic primaries continues. Shortly before Texaco andOhio, radio talk show hosts Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham both encouraged their listeners to vote forClinton. Since the two are long-standing critics of the senator and her husband, the unorthodox move may havesimply provided cover for the larger operation on behalf of Obama. McCain himself spent the weekend beforehis last contested primaries at home in Arizona, perhaps in deference to the crossover initiative.Equally ominous for the Clinton camp is the Madison Avenue-style publicity campaign that’s allowed her rivalto gain a seemingly intractable foothold among voters under thirty. Once an unknown quantity, Obama is nowconsidered a cult icon, or a sort of Starbucks equivalent of Gandhi. Free videos touting the candidate’s rock starstatus began appearing on You-Tube in 2007, including the infamous “Obama Girl” clip, which features abikini-clad actress gyrating her bottom as she lip-synchs lyrics of veneration to the candidate.Even a cursory review of Obama’s record does not bear out the changemaker hype. During an MSNBCinterview in February, Austin State Senator Kirk Watson, an Obama endorser, was unable to list a singleaccomplishment of the candidate when asked. A week later, a Q and A session with a focus group for the Foxprogram Hannity and Colmes uncovered the same knowlege gap. (A CNN focus group yielded similar results inlate April.) None of those voters supporting Obama could identify any past achievement. It was Obama’spresent-day venture that fascinated them, the historic nature of his quest to become the country’s first African-American president, along with his inspirational oratory. (Regarding Obama’s time in the U.S. Senate, the NewYork Times published a background piece on March 9th. An article probing his Chicago years was publishedMay 11th.)In addition to the merchandising angle, nobody would have predicted a few years ago that progressivejournalists would join in an unholy alliance with Fox News Channel in promoting this novice politician withthe peculiar proximity group. Yet here we are. Ari Berman, a writer at The Nation, was seen in March popping
    up on Fox programs he and his staff once regarded as 24/7 campaign commercials for the Republican Party.And editor Katrina vanden Heuvel has been using CNN to promote Obama’s allegedly squeaky cleancredentials, claiming he gets no support from lobbyists or corporate special interests. While, the assertion isdisputed by the Center for Responsive Politics’ website,, and an article appearingin the Boston Globe, CNN’s “best political team on television” has never challenged vanden Heuvel on thepoint. In addition, the fact that the senator is known to have watered down legislation requiring nuclear giantExelon to disclose its radiation leaks to the public doesn’t seem to trouble his left-wing backers in the least.Exelon employees were among Obama’s major contributors in 2006, while oil company executives andemployees continue to send in donations each month. (See the New York Times article for more on the leakscontroversy.)In a blog posted on her website the morning after the Iowa Caucus, Adrianna Huffington lauded the Illinoissenator as practically the Second Coming. Like others of her stripe, she didn’t have much to offer in the way ofspecifics, and spent the bulk of her remarks railing at Bill Clinton, who she said had conducted himself in aninterview as “arrogant and entitled, dismissive and fear-mongering”. Huffington was one of several politicos swindled by the California recall referendum in 2002, which removed aDemocratic governor from office. In his place, Enron’s Ken Lay successfully installed Hollywood action heroArnold Schwarzenegger and catapulted the state’s old guard of Reaganites back to power in this predominantlyliberal state. Candidate Huffington dropped out of the race a few days before the election, conceding the entireaffair had been a set-up to divide the vote.That she would allow herself to be bamboozled a second time is astonishing. With a few clicks of a mouse, shemight have easily learned that former Speaker Dennis Hastert and the Illinois G.O.P. fielded an ill-qualified,non-state resident named Alan Keyes to run against Obama for the U.S. senate in 2004. Keyes replaced JackRyan, the candidate who officially won the G.O.P. primary, after Ryan was embarassed in an alleged sexscandal involving his ex-wife, actress Jeri Ryan. Jeri played “Seven of Nine” in the television series Star TrekVoyager, and the charge against Ryan was never corroborated. Regardless, Alan Keyes went on to pick up astaggering 27 percent of the vote, effectively handing Obama the seat.According to the Chicago Tribune, the candiate himself “knows his way around a ballot”. The newspaperpublished an article documenting several successful efforts by Obama to disqualify challengers in his two statesenate elections by filing legal challenges against them. The Tribune has also published an in-depth reportabout his time in the Illinois legislature, while Newsweek offers a comparison of Obama and his rival asmembers of Congress.Rezko AffairHere’s a little more history you won’t find at HuffPost or The Nation: At the time of his U.S. senate run, Obamawas a relatively minor player who had lost a congressional race against African American incumbent BobbieRush in 2000. Obama’s first significant campaign donor in the 1990’s was Antoin “Tony” Rezko, a Chicagopower broker and developer who he met while still in law school. After leaving Harvard, Obama hired on with acommunity nonprofit agency called Project VOTE, where he helped organize voter registration efforts. He laterjoined the law firm Miner Barnhill & Galland, whose clients included Rezko, and taught constitutional law atthe University of Chicago.As an attorney, Obama worked on a low-income senior housing project in which Rezko and a partner firm runby Obama’s boss, Allison Davis, charged a fee of $855,000 for their services. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, “In addition to the development fees, a separate Davis-owned company stood to make another $900,000
    through federal tax credits.” According to a January 28th
    overview of the Rezko/Obama connection, in 1994,the City of Chicago sued Davis’s firm, Woodlawn Preservation & Investment Corporation, for maintainingslumlike conditions that included no working heat in the apartments. Obama represented the landlord in court.Later, as a state senator, Obama wrote endorsement letters on behalf of Rezko to government agenciesallocating funds to build other housing projects, even though he nowadays insists he never did his friend anyfavors. A 2007 Chicago Tribune article said that Rezko’s firm got contracts to rehab 30 buildings, including 11in Obama’s state legislative district on the South Side. Edward McClelland, writing for, states that”Rezko, after all, built part of his fortune by exploiting the black community that Obama had served in the stateSenate, and by milking government programs meant to benefit black-owned businesses.”While it may be unclear why Obama would continue his relationship with Rezko after this point, it’sindisputable that he did. In 2005, Obama approached Rezko for help in purchasing a $2 million Georgian-revival home in the historic Kenwood neighborhood of Chicago. The property deal involved splitting the landinto two lots, with Rezko buying the large side yard for $625,000, allowing Obama and his wife Michelle toacquire the parcel that included the mansion for $300,000 off the asking price. The Chicago Tribune reportedthe details of this unusual arrangement in November 2006.Although no laws were broken in the transaction, Obama’s entanglement with Rezko will surely represent ahuge hurdle to his presidential aspirations if he goes on to become the Democratic nominee. The New YorkTimes has also reported that the Obama property deal may have been an attempt by the developer to shieldassets from creditors in several individual lawsuits pending at the time. Even more hair-raising, Rezko receiveda mysterious $3.5 million loan in April, 2007 from a longtime business associate, Nadhmi Auchi, a London-based Iraqi exile and one of the world’s richest men, according to Forbes. The Pentagon has identified Auchi isa former moneyman for Saddam Hussein, the Sun-Times reports. Rezko is originally from Syria. According to The Times of London, “Mr Auchi was convicted of corruption, given a suspended sentence andfined £1.4 million in France in 2003 for his part in the Elf affair, described as the biggest political andcorporate scandal in post-war Europe.” Rezko and Auchi are current partners in a major 62-acre landdevelopment in Riverside Park in Chicago. The Times also reported on February 26th that Auchi lent Rezkoadditional funds shortly before the purchase of the Obama property. “Under a Loan Forgiveness Agreementdescribed in court,” according to The Times, “Mr Auchi lent Mr Rezko $3.5 million in April 2005 and $11million in September 2005, as well as the $3.5 million transferred in April 2007.” Interestingly, Auchi (the billionaire) visited Chicago in 2004, where a reception in his honor was attended byboth Rezko and Emil Jones, president of the Illinois state senate. Jones was a crucial ally in Obama’s 2004 U.S.senate bid, according to a CNN report. In particular, Jones added the candidate’s name to a slough of bills thatpassed through the legislature that year, often over the protest of the bill authors. Obama himself attended theAuchi gathering, held at the posh Four Seasons hotel, but says he doesn’t recall meeting the man. A prosecutionwitness at the Rezko trial that’s underway in Chicago testified on April 14th that Obama and his wife Michellemet Auchi during a party at Rezko’s home April 3, 2004.The details concerning this international intrigue remain sparse. At first describing his relationship with Rezkoas amounting to no more that “five billable hours” of law work at his firm, Obama later admitted the estate dealwith Rezko was a “boneheaded” mistake. He insists, however, that he’s never done any favors for Rezko, andexplained at a March 14th meeting with reporters from both Chicago dailies, “This is an area where I can seesort of a lapse in judgment, where I could have said ‘No, I’m not sure that’s a good idea.'” Past campaigncontributions from Rezko and his circle would eventually lead Obama to donate some of the money to charity.
    Even here, his story continues to change. Initially, the Sun-Times put the figure of tainted cash at $168,000. InFebruary, the senator agreed to surrender about half that amount, but only as an “abundance of caution”, asenior staffer said. However, when NBC Nightly News broadcast a story about the finances, the entire sum wasdonated. On March 14th, the Obama campaign annouced it would surrender additional funds following aninvestigative report by ABC News that uncovered another $100,000 linked to Rezko associates. A March 3rdanalysis by the Los Angeles Times added that Obama’s various campaigns over the years were financed in partusing “straw donors”, individuals who take money from other sources and contribute it to the candidate undertheir own names. It’s unclear if his current fundraising has been audited for irregularities.And the skeletons continue to pile up in the closet. Another Iraqi ex-patriot connected to Obama, AihamAlsammarae, posted more than $2.7 million in property as collateral to help spring Tony Rezko from jail inApril, according to a story in the Sun-Times. This was a rather odd development, since Alsammarae is wantedby Interpol for the theft of $650 million in Iraqi reconstruction funds. He is the former Minister of Electricity inthat country, the New York Times asserts. Newsweek reported that Alsammarae’a son sent several faxes toObama’s office in Washington prior to his escape from a Baghdad jail in December, 2006. The fugitive nowresides in Illinois, apparenly without incident, and donated online to the candidate in January, February andMarch. (See the website RezkoWatch for more on the tale of the two Iraqis.)But here’s the strangest twist of all in the Rezko affair (so far): the federal prosecutor in the Rezko case isPatrick Fitzgerald, the former special counsel in the Valerie Plame C.I.A. leak case. If you remember, a muchanticipated indictment against Karl Rove never materialized in that earlier episode. Instead, Vice PresidentDick Cheney’s chief of staff Scooter Libby was tried and convicted on four counts of lying under oath. (Thesentence was later commuted by President Bush.) Whether Fitzgerald is delaying indictments of Chicago Gov.Blagojevich and Sen. Obama on orders from the Bush Administration is a matter of speculation. However, onApril 23rd, Rove’s name came up when a witness testified that in 2004, G.O.P. heavyweight Robert Kjellanderlobbied Rove to replace Fitzgerald in the case, according to a report ABC News posted on its website.Rezko trial records have turned up a scheme in which Kjellander was allegedly paid $3.1 million by theCarlyle Group in connection with the Illinois Teachers Retirement System pension fund. (The Carlyle Group isthe infamous high-finance firm whose investors included both the Bush and Bin Laden families at the time ofthe Sept. 11th attacks.) In other trial developments, on March 10th, Obama was identified as a participant in thecrafting of legislation to reduce the number of members on the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board from15 to 9, according to the Sun-Times’ Rezko Blog. The prosecution alleges that in 2003, the Planning Board wasstacked by Rezko in order to steer contracts his way. In another development reported on the CBS Newswebsite, the government’s principle witness, Stuart Levine, acknowledged in sworn testimony that AllisonDavis (Obama’s former boss) acted as go-between in the shakedown of a Hollywood financier working with astate pension fund. The trial is expected to run through May.For more background on the Rezko/Obama relationship, read the March 2nd article in the New York Times andthe investigative series in the Sun-Times. For a deeper probe into Rezko’s various corporate and politicalconnections, check out Evelyn Pringle’s three-part series on the subject.OutFoxing Fox NewsUntil a Saturday Night Live skit blew their cover, most national broadcast networks appeared to be activelyfavoring the Obama candidacy in their reporting of the primaries. Newscasters have adopted the journalisticdevice of shrewdly shifting most negative revelations about him onto Clinton. For instance, shortly after shefirst raised the Rezko matter during the South Carolina debate, the Today show’s Matt Lauer confronted the
    New York senator with a photo taken in the1990s. It showed her and President Clinton posing with Rezko.
    Lauer provided no evidence that either husband or wife had any history with the indicted developer andClinton told him that she’s appeared in thousands of courtesy photos during her two decades of public life.Regardless, Lauer’s terse questioning and skeptical demeanor suggested a sinister intent on the part of Clinton.NBC repeated the maneuver when reporting on Obama’s plagiarism of a speech he gave in Wisconsin. NightlyNews dug up separate video clips showing Clinton and her husband both reciting the same two-line passagefrom the bible. This was offered as evidence that Obama’s uncredited use of his friend’s “Just Words” speech in2006 reflected a standard practice among politicians.A few other examples of media bias are worth noting. On the night before the New Hampshire primary, anchorBrian Williams accompanied Obama on the campaign trail, flashing a Newsweek cover of the senator anduttering superlatives about his meteoric rise to political stardom. In fact, Williams acted like someoneundergoing a spiritual epiphany. During the same broadcast, Andrea Mitchell derided the Clinton campaign asbroke, desperate, and ablaze with in-fighting. She continued along these lines the following night, assuringviewers that the senator’s initial three-point lead in the vote tally would eventually evaporate. It didn’t.A common trick used by political hacks, this attempt to cast doubt on one candidate’s viability while creating abandwagon effect for another has become a regular feature of the 2008 election coverage. Shortly before SuperTuesday, both Mitchell and Meet the Press host Tim Russert claimed that the leadership of the DemocraticParty was “mad as hell” at Bill Clinton and lining up to back the Illinois senator. No sources were offered tocorroborate this bombshell allegation. Russert went on to explain that Ted and Caroline Kennedy’s recentendorsement of Obama represented a sea change in the election, adding that because Ted’s brother BobbyKennedy had been friends with Cesar Chavez, founder of the United Farmworkers, the endorsement shouldpave the way for Obama capturing the Latino vote.What NBC’s crack team of reporters failed to mention was that three of Bobby Kennedy’s own children, as wellas the son of Cesar Chavez and the United Farmworkers union itself had already endorsed Clinton. In Nevada,Latinos in the 60,000-strong Culinary Workers Union defied their white male leadership’s endorsement ofObama and helped Clinton win the caucus there. Yet while the Florida primary was showing Clinton with a 15point lead in the polls, over at CNN, fill-in anchor Jim Acosta was declaring the Obama campaign a “runawaytrain” after its big South Carolina victory.On February 10th, two days before the Maryland-Virginia-D.C. primaries, CBS anchor Katy Couric joined theClinton-bashing extravaganza with a 60 Minutes segment spiced with multiple questions about how thecandidate would deal with losing the election. The contentious exchange followed a Steve Kroft piece onObama that seemed like an instant replay of the Williams New Hampshire epiphany. At the time CBS ran thetwo segments, Obama was still trailing Clinton in delegates.To wit, if there’s a runaway train in this race, it isn’t either of the candidates. For the past 20 years, media outletshave become increasingly consolidated into chains owned by multinational corporations. In consequence, overtime the news, entertainment and advertising divisions have become increasingly indistinguishable from oneanother. The NBC/MSNBC network, which has come under fire for the mysoginist undertones of some of itscable newscasters, is owned by the energy company and defense contractor General Electric. (It seems TonyRezko obtained a $10 million loan from General Electric Capital Corp. for a chain of pizza restaurants a fewyears ago, according to a recent Sun-Times story.) For her part, Clinton critic Andrea Mitchell is married toformer Federal Reserve chief Alan Greenspan, the man many economists blame for the current meltdown onWall Street.
    There are a few journalists who admit off-camera that Clinton has not been treated fairly in the course of thecampaign. In December, Howard Kurtz published an article in the Washington Post that first exposed thewidespread media bias favoring Obama. “The Illinois senator’s fundraising receives far less press attention thanClinton’s,” Kurtz offered as an example of the phenomenon. “When the Washington Post reported last monththat Obama used a political action committee to hand more than $180,000 to Democratic groups andcandidates in the early-voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, the suggestion that he mightbe buying support received no attention on the network newscasts.” Fear of Flying novelist Erica Jong offersher take on the situation in Hillary vs. the Patriarchy, published in early February, also in the Washington Post.Unlike her big Florida victory on January 29th, the news of Clinton’s New Hampshire win was not blacked outfrom coast to coast the next day. Her detractors quickly rushed to fortify their positions, concerned thatmomentum from the dramatic comeback after losing Iowa would soon turn into an electoral tsunami. In the twoweeks leading up to the South Carolina primary, Obama surrogates argued that New Hampshire’s white votershad betrayed their publicly declared support of the black candidate in the secrecy of the ballot booth; hencethe discrepanct between pre-election polls and the actual tally. Later, when Senator Clinton made a speechtying Martin Luther King’s efforts to President Johnson’s signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, highlighting therole of Johnson, the Obama camp pounced. A South Carolina staff person sent out a four-page memorandumurging spokespeople to slam her for disrespecting Dr. King.If you tracked the coverage of the ensuing feud, you would never know that it was this document that sparkedthe episode. Before it surfaced on the internet, Obama insisted to reporters that neither he nor anyone on hisstaff had accused Clinton of any impropriety in her speech about Johnson. He said he was “baffled” by hersuggestion that they were somehow involved. Democratic strategist Donna Brazille later came to his defense,railing at what she termed inexcusable slurs by former President Clinton who in a speech described Obama as a”kid” whose presidential bid amounted to a “fairy tale”. (To be sure, Clinton stated that Obama’s position on theIraq War was a fairy tale, not his candidacy.)On the heels of the Brazille accusation, South Carolina Congressman Jim Clyburn claimed Bill Clintons’remarks had compelled him to renege on an earlier promise to the Democratic National committee not toendorse a candidate before his state’s primary. A few days later, Clyburn retracted his endorsement of Obama,but the damage was done. Black voters converged on election day to back the senator from Illinois in hugenumbers. Now that the Clintons were being barbecued in the press for “playing the race card”, Obama would nolonger have to worry about the African American vote. (Princeton Professor Sean Wilentz wrote a long piece onthis subject in The New Republic in Februrary 27th.)In February, the Obama campaign took up the call by neoconservatives that Snator Clinton and her husbandreleases their tax returns for the last several years (even though he hadn’t released many of his own), as well asrecords pertaining to her eight-year stint in the White House. On March 19th, the National Archives releasedthe former First Lady’s appointment calendar. The Clinton tax returns were published two weeks later. Bycontrast, CBS News reports that Obama himself has produced no documents regarding his own two terms in thestate senate. “Obama’s statement that he has no papers from his time in the Illinois statehouse — he left in 2004 — stands instark contrast to the massive Clinton file stored at the National Archives: an estimated 78 million pages ofdocuments, plus 20 million e-mail messages, packed into 36,000 boxes,” according to the article. The Clintoncampaign said it found “the dog ate my homework” excuse unacceptable, especially coming from a candidatewho has made such a huge deal out of transparency.
    Clinton Unplugged Before the presidential primaries, Hillary Clinton historically shied away from responding to personal attacks,whether it comes from sexist Manhattan firefighters or Chris Matthews’ daily disparagement of her on MSNBC’sHardball. Her campaign briefly cut off relations with NBC when another MSNBC reporter, David Schuster, saidthe Clintons had “pimped-out” daughter Chelsea as part of their election strategy. Over the course of severaldebates, however, her political reflexes sharpened to the point where nowadays, no personal attack has goneunpunished. (Accusations involving racebaiting seem to be an exception.) During a contentious April 8th radiointerview, Clinton took NPR reporter Michele Norris to task for asserting that she was trying to “win ugly”.Yet Clinton has demured so far in implicating Karl Rove as one of the brains behind the G.O.P.’s covertoperation to help Obama defeat her. After being targetted with offensive direct mailers in Ohio, she accused herrival of tactics “straight out of the Rove playbook”, but has never mentioned the impact of the crossover votingscheme in the red states, part of the reason her opponent is still far ahead of her in the delegate count. As for therest of the Bush Administration, all Clinton has mustered to date on the subject is her oft-repeated statement,“They’re not going to surrender the White House voluntarily.” Last spring, she suggested that another terroristattack against the United States would inevitably play into the hands of the G.O.P.Vague as they sound, those last two remarks may prove prophetic in the event the Obama strategy fails and shegoes on to win the Democratic nomination. The implications of a female president for American foreign anddomestic policy are profound, especially when the candidate has promised greater oversight of corporations,federally sponsored job programs and improving women’s human rights around the world. Such initiativescreate jitters not only for Wall Street concerns but for the Pentagon, the CIA and the State Department. Officialsaccused of breaking U.S. laws or violating the Geneva Conventions could ostensibly be arrested andprosecuted by a Clinton-run Justice Department. And if that’s not enough to keep Bush appointees lying awake deep into the night, their long-running wink-wink with the ayatollahs in Iran, the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence and the Saudi royal family wouldlikely be curtailed if a woman were to take over in the West Wing. The Saudis especially have reason to fretnow that they and their counterparts in Kuwait and the U.A.E. have started buying up huge stakes in U.S.banks. In the eyes of the oil producing countries, Condolleeza Rice and Nancy Pelosi are one thing, a ClintonWhite House quite another.Last year, President Bush himself may have implemented a back-up plan to a possible Clinton AdministrationPart II when he signed National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51. This executive order ostensiblyallows him to suspend the constitution without prior congressional approval if he declares a state of emergency(i.e. martial law) in the event of a major terrorist attack or other “decapitating” incident against the UnitedStates. According to the language in the directive, the attack need not even take place inside the country. Under NSPD 51, the President can cancel elections, padlock the Capitol dome and send the Supreme Courtjustices home. The directive also assigns his homeland security assistant – a low-level position exempt fromsenate confirmation – to administer what has been dubbed the Enduring Constitutional Government. (Here’sthe text of the directive.)Michigan and Florida, Delegates and the Conventions Assuming we are still living in a free country next August, the Democratic Party’s 796 superdelegates may getto decide the nomination. Most are members of Congress, state and local public officials. The rest are
    Democratic National Committee personnel, its committee members, and evidently 75 “at-large” delegatesappointed by DNC Chairman Howard Dean and other party officials. The specter of all these individualsdetermining the ticket in November at first set Obama surrogates and pundits on their haunches. Many arguethat a “brokered convention” decided in “smoky back rooms” will destroy the party. (The local fire marshallmay have something to say about this as well.) While initially it was thought that two-thirds of thesuperdelegates were pledged for Clinton, more recent surveys suggest the situation is fluid.
    Dean has called on all superdelegates to state their candidate preference before July 1st. Senate MajorityLeader Harry Reid has echoed the sentiment, saying “things will be done” to make sure a nominee is namedbefore the convention. (See the various statements.) However, the extent of their authority to subvert theDemocratic process is unclear. Clinton has been under pressure from Obama supporters to quit the race, since aprotracted battle (they say) is hurting the Democratic Party. Some pundits and journalists have also raised theprospect of violence at the convention should the nominee not be resolved beforehand. Both CNN and Foxwere already using this “there will be blood” scenario in their election-reporting title graphics on the night ofthe Texas/Ohio primaries. While the rules don’t require Clinton to cede the nomination before the ballots arecast at the covention, the pressure on her to do so continues.Regarding those intensifying calls, Sarah Churchwell of the Independent (U.K.) wrote on May 8th,”A similarargument was advanced in 2000, pressuring Gore to concede the presidency to Bush, or risk a ‘constitutionalcrisis’ – American code for ‘rip the country apart’. He was told he couldn’t win, that the people had spoken, thathe should concede graciously and let the system work – the one the Republicans were busy rigging. So heconceded. That turned out well, didn’t it?” Eric Boehlert of Media Matters posted commentary examining otherclose primary contests and found that the calls for Clinton to withdraw are unprecedented in U.S. history.A resolution of the nominee before the convention would derail Clinton’s plan to support a floor fight to seatthe delegates from Michigan and Florida, as well as her option to try and lobby both Obama’s pledged andsuperdelegates to jump ship. This approach was employed without incident in 1984 as candidates Gary Hartand Jesse Jackson competed against frontrunner Walter Mondale in San Francisco. “This is a convention, not acoronation,” Jackson quipped at the time. Meanwhile, a huge protest rally against U.S. military aid to CentralAmerica raged outside, yet no one voiced any particular concern that the contentious atmosphere mightdamage the party. In fact, legally no determination of a nominee can carry any legitimacy until the first ballotis taken in August. That, after all, is what a convention is for.Adding to the drama, global warming crusader Al Gore, who says he’d like to be president, may be jockeying toenter the fray as a “draft” candidate at the proceedings in Denver. There is also John Edwards, who refuses toendorse either Clinton or Obama. In Gore’s case, he has avoided the scrutiny of a protracted primary battle thisyear, not wanting voters to be reminded that while vice-president under Bill Clinton, the Nobel prizewinnermade no real effort to press for senate ratification of the Kyoto Treaty, issuing a press release instead. In his roleas president of the U.S. Senate, Gore was also criticized (as noted above) for blocking challenges from a dozenAfrican American congressmembers in certifying the vote in the 2000 presidential election. That episode isrecounted in painful detail at the beginning of Michael Moore’s documentary film Fahrenheit 911.Meanwhile, the January primary votes by Florida and Michigan (the country’s 4th and 8th most populousstates, respectively) remain unresolved. Both states’ pledged and superdelegates were stripped by theDemocratic National Committee for holding primaries before February 5th. Clinton won 50 percent of Florida’spopular vote, Obama 33 percent, and John Edwards 16 percent. The state’s party officials explained to the DNCrules committee in August, 2007 that Florida’s Republican-controlled legislature set the date for the primary,not them. The change was attached as an amendment to a popular bill requiring all electronic votingequipment to include paper receipts. A December 17th article in The Nation suggests that Howard Dean and the
    DNC unnecessarily antagonized voters by refusing to an grant exemption to the early primary date. Morerecently, investigative journalist Wayne Barrett published a
    detailed analysis of the behind-the-scenesmaneuvering to move up both elections.Clinton said in an interview with U.S. News and World Report on March 6th that she wanted the Floridadelegation to be credentialed at the convention and rejected Obama’s proposal that a caucus be held instead. “Iwould not accept a caucus. I think that would be a great disservice to the 2 million people who turned out andvoted. I think that they want their votes counted. And you know a lot of people would be disenfranchisedbecause of the timing and whatever the particular rules were. This is really going to be a serious challenge forthe Democratic Party because the voters in Michigan and Florida are the ones being hurt, and certainly withrespect to Florida the Democrats were dragged into doing what they did by a Republican governor and aRepublican Legislature. They didn’t have any choice whatsoever. And I don’t think that there should be any do-over or any kind of a second run in Florida. I think Florida should be seated.”Michigan held its primary on January 15th. Since Obama, Edwards and Biden voluntarily pulled their namesfrom the ballot beforehand, the votes for Clinton cannot be said to represent a mandate. However, there’s moreto this story than the mainstream press has reported. According to an October 11th article by LyndaWaddington of the Iowa Independent, “The campaign for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, arguably fearing a poorshowing in Michigan, reached out to the others with a desire of leaving New York Sen. Hillary RodhamClinton as the only candidate on the ballot. The hope was that such a move would provide one more politicalobstacle for the Clinton campaign to overcome in Iowa.” And the plot thickens. In the case of Florida, strategist Donna Brazille, an African American superdelegate andpaid analyst for both CNN and ABC, had also served on the DNC rules committee when it stripped Florida andMichigan of their delegates. It was Brazille who argued forcefully in August, 2007 for this draconian measure,even after Florida’s party chairwoman painstaking described to the committee the Republican legistalure’sscheme to move up the primary date. With its high percentage of Hispanic voters, New York retirees andrelatively low percentage of African Americans, Florida could have been forecast early on as problem state forthe Obama campaign. In Michigan, the candidacy of native son Mit Romney precluded the possiblity of a largecrossover vote of Republicans on the candidate’s behalf. Thus it, too, would have favored Clinton. Had theDNC not sanctioned these states, she would therefore have hauled in the lion’s share of over 300 delegates upfor grabs, reversing the delegate count and adding to her momentum going into Super Tuesday. Arguably, therace would have ended as originally expected on February 5th.Soldiering on, the Clinton campaign pulled together $10 million in private funding to redo the primary inMichigan. When Senator Obama refused to endorse the plan, however, the state legislature declined toschedule a new vote. Meanwhile, Florida is in the midst of swapping out old voting machinery around the stateand installing new machines, making a new primary there logistically impossible. Wary of ballot tampering,the Florida congressional delegation has so far refused to back a vote-by-mail proposal and insists the record-breaking turnout of 1.75 million democrats there on January 29th speaks for itself.Without the contested states in her column, Clinton may be unable to catch up with her opponent in eitherpledged delegates or the popular vote. She has pledged to put up a credentials fight in August, and ElizabethEdwards, wife of the former candidate, recently backed the idea of an “open convention”. As Obama’s image hasbecome tarnished in the eyes of white, working class voters, it’s possible that many pledged delegates willdefect at the convention and vote for Clinton. Still, the road to the White House remains an uphill climb for theonce inevitable female candidate. Thanks to Karl Rove and his friends in the shadows, the Democratic nomineemay ultimately be determined by the G.O.P., with a big assist from the mainstream media, the Democratic Partyestablishment, and the left.
    If the plot line here sounds vaguely familiar, that’s because playwright Henrik Ibsen envisioned it long ago inhis classic Enemy of the People. For an even longer opus on the subject of political chicanery than the oneyou’ve just read, check out the play. The parallels between fiction and reality may surprise you.- Rosemary Regello Note: Activated links for articles cited in this story are available only from website.(Thanks to everyone who has sent in links to additional story sources, identified errors, posted this article onblogs or emailed it to friends.) Copyright 2008—————————————————-

  4. Admin, I get yourpoint but I’m not sure I agree with you re the republicans. If we are not going to have a viable third party then I would like to see the Republican paarty morph into something more centrist. I barely recognize the dem party any more. I will never vote for Obama, so I am hoping for another pro life, pro environment candidate to vote for.
    Of course, if my prayers are answered, BO will be unable to run for a second term. But, if not…….

  5. Re: Obama second term

    Me thinks that talk of Bauer (Dunn’s husband) replacing Greg Craig is a sign of further circling the wagons. Bauer is attorney with most knowledge of BHO’s purported lack of eligibility/qualifications to serve in presidency, and has so far been successful in hiding COLB and college/university records. Safer to communicate “down the hall” than via (possible) wireless communication?

    Supposedly SS spread too thin. Wonder who is making hourly sweeps to search for bugs? Their increased paranoia and revved up Chicago-style thuggery may necessitate Bauer and original documents both be within arm’s length?

    OTOH may be watching too many movies. Art imitating life?

  6. BTW, that USA Today poll that has Obama’s approval rating at 50 percent also says 61 percent think he didn’t deserve the Nobel Prize.

    That Joan Walsh article in the last thread also explains why the media treated Hillary so awfully in the primaries. Their anti-Clinton bias just never abates.

  7. Carol, the Democratic Party used to be a vehicle for the white working class – what politically correct phraseology termed “lunch-bucket” Democrats. These “lunch bucket” Democrats are socially conservative and also fiscally conservative (although evolving on the social issues).

    The Republicans are and should be the conservative party. A conservative party can manifest itself as economically “prudent” and wary of big government. In our view the Republican Party is on the wrong side of history when it comes to social issues. However, as the British conservative party, the Torys, demonstrate it is possible to be “liberal” on social issues such as gay rights while still maintaining the character of the party. It is the struggle Republicans have – to reshape themselves on social issues or be beaten as the population grows more comfortable with socially liberal policies.

    We wish that the Republicans will take some cues from their cousins in Britain and adjust on the social issues. But those are the issues they are winning on after having abandoned fiscally responsible policies during the Bush W. years.

    That “centrist” party you desire will be the product of the two parties honestly clashing honestly on economic policy and producing “centrist” policy.

    Our point in the article is that the Republicans that are endorsing Hoffman over the Republican candidate are looking at policy, not party, as the determining factor in their endorsement. It’s country and policy, not party label that should determine support for a candidate. This is true even with “Democrats” like Joe Lieberman who have long since broken with the party on policy but still consider themselves Democrats. Arlen Specter is another example. If Democrats had been true to core Democratic values last year and not been bamboozled into a cult of personality candidate Obama would not have been gifted the nomination.

    The “creative class” idiots invested in the cult of personality and now they are still propping up Obama instead of denouncing him as an apostate and imposter. They have not been true or honest when it came to choosing a candidate last year and now they see, like Bush supporting-Republicans that their candidate is retrograde to their interests. But it is too late. Obama is the creature created by the “creative class” – he is their Frankenstein monster.

  8. That clip of BO was nauseating. He reeks of arrogance and condescension, and his attempts at being “folksy” are so artificial. I can’t stand him.

  9. My daughter in law came into town. I went with her to her friends house in another town. Some of her friends from college came over.

    We were just talking in general. One of her friends ask me why did our city go for Hillary. My daughter and daughter in law tried to stop her from asking me anything about Hillary, they both know how i feel about O. I said our city was the smart city. We voted on experience, not on the skin type. I told them if they had read up on both the candidates instead of listening to the lying media they would have voted for her also. I also said some other things i want mention here.

    I told them O is jack squat. Instead of him doing any kind of work at the white house. His but is jet setting all over the states and world.

    I let them know the campain is over with it is time for the lazy bum to get to work.

    They didn’t want to hear what i had to say, i did not care.

  10. Great article, Admin.

    Personally, I don’t think either party has any principles anymore. It seems that if you give them a little power they become corrupt. Thinking that the GOP is a better choice makes no sense to me. Neither the GOP or the present dim party have stellar histories.

    These are scary times indeed.



    Bravo! Once again you stood tall!

  11. When you look @ all the connections it is so depressing. Will we ever get America bacK? I am actually terrified it is too late without civil war, and who would fight? It looks like the blue hairs mostly, me being close to that age. Jesus, what a sight that would be.

  12. These people have to be voted out!. Found @ BP

    Democrats Vote To Give ACORN Regulatory Authority Over Financial Institutions

    WASHINGTON – During consideration of H.R. 3126, legislation to establish a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA), Democrats on the House Financial Services Committee voted to pass an amendment offered by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) that will make ACORN eligible to play a role in setting regulations for financial institutions.

    The Waters amendment adds to the CFPA Oversight Board 5 representatives from the fields of “consumer protection, fair lending and civil rights, representatives of depository institutions that primarily serve underserved communities, or representatives of communities that have been significantly impacted by higher-priced mortgages” to join Federal banking regulators in advising the Director on the consistency of proposed regulations, and strategies and policies that the Director should undertake to enforce its rules.

    By making representatives of ACORN and other consumer activist organizations eligible to serve on the Oversight Board, the amendment creates a potentially enormous government sanctioned conflict of interest. ACORN-type organizations will have an advisory role on regulating the very financial institutions from which they receive millions of dollars annually in direct corporate contributions and benefit from other financial partnerships and arrangements. These are the same organizations that pressured banks to make subprime mortgage loans and thus bear a major responsibility for the collapse of the housing market.

    In light of recent evidence linking ACORN to possible criminal activity, Democrats took an unprecedented step today to give ACORN a potential role alongside bank regulators in overseeing financial institutions. This is contrary to recent actions taken by the Senate and House to block federal funds to ACORN.

    A recent inquiry into bank funding of ACORN activities by three House Committees found that institutions that would be regulated by the CFPA have provided millions of dollars to the organization in the form of direct donations, lines of credit, cash, and other assets over the last 15 years.

    The amendment passed on a vote to 35-33. Click here to view the vote.

  13. US News poll

    What grade would you give Barack Obama on his presidency so far?
    21.42% A+
    9.35% B
    4.43% C
    6.86% D
    2.34% E
    55.6% F-

  14. Jon Meachum won’t say what is obvious. We wrote about this fake Fox hunt earlier.

    For these progressive true believers, the White House’s recent attack on the channel as a partisan machine is a welcome signal of a feisty, fighting Obama administration.

    Liberals should savor the moment, because the Ailes bashing may be about all they get. As Anna Quindlen notes in our cover this week, the left is frustrated with Obama, believing him too quick to compromise on progressive principles and too open to staying the course on George W. Bush’s policies, particularly on national security. A year after Obama stood in Grant Park, a figure of history, he has not brought about a liberal kingdom of God—or even a “public option.”

    From Guantánamo to gays in the military, the Obama administration has surely not been progressive in the way we have understood and used the term for two generations. A Democratic president who is not pushing for mandated universal health care and has no apparent interest in engaging issues of gay marriage and gun control is not the traditional liberal’s long-expected messiah.

    Which puts the Fox News affair in an interesting light. To the base, the White House looks tough, willing to hit back—all while the base is getting few of the substantive reforms it has fought for. I am not suggesting that the Obama administration has staged the Fox protest as a bread-and-circuses ploy in order to give otherwise dissatisfied Democrats something to cheer, but no matter what the intention, the contretemps has made the White House seem more progressive than it is.

  15. Keep the faith:

    Democratic Party encounters ‘Obama hangover’ in state, local elections

    …With an off-year election fast approaching, Obama is stepping up his commitment to Democratic candidates in hopes that an infusion of campaign charisma might pump up turnout. What the party is finding, though, is that the electricity of 2008 is tough to recapture. Some Democratic candidates running for local office around the country call the phenomenon the “Obama hangover.” It is proving tougher to recruit volunteers and get people to vote….,0,2220266.story?track=rss

    Nevertheless, O is headed back to NJ for a third time to help Gov. Corzine. BTW. Picture at link above includes HRH Caroline in the front row.

  16. Anyone else worried about the national Emergency Squat declared?
    Anyone else remember hearing he would do just this as long as 6 mon this ago?
    From another site:
    ‘I first heard about Obama declaring a national emergency due to the H1N1 flu this morning as I was driving down the highway. I was warned many months ago that the flu was coming and that Obama would use it as an excuse to exercise more power over the American public. One of the people that warned me of this, in March of 2009, before the public awareness of a coming flu, a retired military officer, just sent me some information.
    October 24, 2009, approx 7:50 PM ET.
    “Obama declares swine flu a national emergency”
    And there you have it, in black and white. I make no determination as to whether H1N1A is truly the public threat they are presenting, although there have been deaths of children at a concerning rate, even here in Michigan – the fact is, the Stafford Act allows the Federal Government to strip away all your rights. While this National Emergency is in effect, this gives the Federal Government carte blanche to use this declaration for whatever it pleases. Rights have been now officially suspended.”

  17. This is all too friggin coincidental for me, just like everything else about Squat – his (s)election – his immaculation by the DNC – everything has been pre-ordained and those of us without blinders on have known about things months before they happen.
    Now the swine flu declaration of emergency.
    I’m too suspicious to think the emergency is just a means of funneling profits to big-pharma as this author surmises.

    From obamafiles

    Where’s The Emergency?

    Even though the H1N1 pandemic appears to have peaked out, Barack Obama has now declared a national emergency over swine flu infections. The reasoning behind such a declaration? According to the White House, it’s designed to “allow hospitals to better handle the surge in patients” by allowing them to bypass certain federal laws.

    That’s the public explanation for this, but the real agenda behind this declaration may be far more sinister. Did you know that emergency powers trump the Bill of Rights?

    Declaring a national emergency immediately gives federal authorities dangerous new powers that can now be enforced at gunpoint, including:

    • The power to force mandatory swine flu vaccinations on the entire population.

    • The power to arrest, quarantine or “involuntarily transport” anyone who refuses a swine flu vaccination.

    • The power to quarantine an entire city and halt all travel in or out of that city.

    • The power to enter any home or office without a search warrant and order the destruction of any belongings or structures deemed to be a threat to public health.

    • The effective nullification of the Bill of Rights. Your right to due process, to being safe from government search and seizure, and to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination are all null and void under a Presidential declaration of a national emergency.

    The only emergency I can see is the emergency fabricated by Big Pharma to sell more vaccines. By declaring a national emergency over the H1N1 pandemic, Obama is playing right into their hands.

    I find the timing of all this curious. Two days ago, New York gave up on its efforts to require mandatory vaccinations of health care workers. This was designed to defuse a large number of planned protests from health freedom-conscious people who don’t want government-mandated chemicals pumped into their veins.

  18. So, if this has become a National Emergency, when are they going to get the vaccine out. We still hardly see any of this in our state. There is suppose to be another flu peak after the first of the year.

    Why is it taking so long to get this vaccine produced in the US, when I have heard from a french friend that France has enough H1N1 vaccine for everyone in the country, and they had it ready at least 2 months ago.

  19. admin at 8:59: We’ve been saying – after the Hopium comes the hangover.
    Yes, yes! And now, like winter snow, it’s sticking….

  20. Manna from Heaven: Hillary and her Leslie Gelb 24hr day article is the front page Photo and gives the complete story.There are 21 great photos as well.This is what we have been waiting for so let us make the most of it.Parade Magazine,an insert for the Sunday editions has a fantastic circulation record.
    My friends the tide is turning against BO and we must continue to keep Hillary out front of the news and show how much she cares for us and for our country.I must get out and buy up some copies for my family and friends.

    By ABM90 Oh! what a beautiful Morning. Oh what a
    wonderful Day. SHE WILL BE BACK.

  21. birdgal Says:
    October 25th, 2009 at 12:08 pm

    I don’t think anyone will be forcing people to receive a vaccine. There isn’t even enough to go around.



  22. Another pathetic journalist who is still making excuses for Obama. There is however this nugget of truth in Anna Quinlan’s garbage article for Newsweek:

    Transformation is within his grasp, in a pen, a signature, an executive order.

    Why has that not happened? One reason may be the president’s essential character, which is at odds with the persona that developed during the campaign. Perhaps because of his race and his age, much of the electorate, especially those of us who are liberals, succumbed to stereotype and assumed that he was by way of being a firebrand. A year in, and we know that we deceived ourselves.

    The above “revelation” still does not stop Quinlan from making more excuses for Obama (she thinks he is “cerebral”) instead of admitting she and her cohort have been and willingly are flim-flammed.

  23. A few laughs at sleeveless Michelle’s expense (she’s whooping it up at our expense):

    Michelle Obama decided to go all in. Ever since her husband took office in January, the first lady has been cautious about the causes she embraced. But with her hometown of Chicago vying to host the 2016 Olympics, Michelle boarded a plane to Copenhagen last month to make a personal appeal. She brought along Oprah Winfrey, worked her sleeveless charm on the assembled dignitaries, and even lunched with the Queen of Denmark. Her efforts culminated in a passionate televised speech to the International Olympic -Committee—-perhaps her most high-profile advocacy ever. Then it all fell flat. Rio won the Olympic bid; Chicago never made it to the final round.

    Friends say Michelle was heartbroken by the surprise defeat.

  24. “Her sleeceless charm” had no effect…..
    God forbid she tries to take it further and “use her near naked charm”….

    You just never know “that zeroine”

  25. “Friends say Michelle was heartbroken by the surprise defeat.”


    I wonder how many sleeves she yanked off after that fiasco.

  26. Hey Admin,

    Not sure I agree with you on the article. I think Republicans need to form a more centrist party….IE stay AWAY from the social issues. But if that’s how Sarah Palin wants to be seen as, a complete Republican conservative, which is not reflective of her record or what she has said, then I feel very sad.

  27. Agree 100% with this article….sorry not as active lately but we are 3rd on Nov calender call for trial docket set for 3 days. Thus, I am swamped with trial preparation the next week and a half and “on call” if cases ahead of us settle. Seems like very little new “News” but that this public option seems to have risen from the dead and looks like he will get some form of it in whatever the ultimate bill looks like. I did watch Bill Moyers give time to Mr. Goldstone and his obscene so called “war crimes ” report. It was as biased as expected and Moyers , carefully, yet skillfully, allowed Goldstone to once again cast Israel as a villian amd Hamas as a victim..

  28. I’m around, just reading. Tired and in a poor mood over the country. His fucking ratings should be down to ZERO right now, just what he is. Some people are just so stupid.

  29. admin Says:
    October 25th, 2009 at 1:15 pm

    A few laughs at sleeveless Michelle’s expense (she’s whooping it up at our expense):

    Friends say Michelle was heartbroken by the surprise defeat.


    admin, I know you feel as badly as I do the Olympics will not be held in Chicago. Amazing, Michelle didn’t feel the surgeon’s knife inserted into her backside by Dr Soros while she campaigned heavily for the event to be in the hood. Hmm must be all that insular padding accumalated from so many Papa Johns and Ben & Jerrys.

  30. hello everyone…. finally getting a chance to come back to big pink.

    I came across this ( surfing for news.. and didn’t see anything about it posted here yet.

    President Obama’s school age daughters have not been vaccinated against the H1N1 flu virus. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says the vaccine is not available to them based on their risk.

  31. LJ Says:
    Not sure I agree with you on the article. I think Republicans need to form a more centrist party….IE stay AWAY from the social issues. But if that’s how Sarah Palin wants to be seen as, a complete Republican conservative, which is not reflective of her record or what she has said, then I feel very sad.


    Me too. I’m sad to see Palin appearing in another position than “Palin governed from the center.”

  32. Hilarious – Netanyahu sticks 2 fingers up at Obama administration.

    Washington caught off guard by Netanyahu visit – Bambi had no idea he was coming.

    Israel says PM did not consult Obama ahead of trip because meeting on peace process unnecessary.

    WASHINGTON – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s intention to visit Washington for the annual UJC General Assembly has surprised many on Capitol Hill and was apparently not coordinated with the Obama administration.

    An American source told Ynet Sunday that news of the visit had been received with reserved astonishment.

    The Obama administration has not yet responded to questions of whether a meeting with Netanyahu was forthcoming due to their surprise over the unscheduled visit. On the other hand, failure to invite Netanyahu to the White House may be perceived as a diplomatic crisis.

    Sources in Jerusalem say Netanyahu did indeed decide to attend the GA without first consulting President Barack Obama, but that since the latter would also be present at the event the two may meet in any case.

    The sources say a summit between the two leaders would be superfluous at this point in the peace process, and for this reason an official meeting has not been scheduled.

    An official statement regarding Netanyahu’s visit is scheduled to be published soon in the US, and an unofficial oral announcement has already been given by the Jewish Federations’ leaders. The prime minister’s visit is scheduled to take place on November 8-10.

  33. Good for Bibi for not kow towing to the most virulent anti-Israeli president (sans Jimmy Carter post presidency). Obama went to Cairo but did not have the time , apparently, to stop next door and pay a friendly visit to the only democracy in the middle east. He tacitly approves of the Goldstone report, while ignoring the barbaric war crimes committed by Muslim upon Muslim everyday, particularly on Muslim woman. To top it off, he legitimized Iran’s eight to nuclear energy, which we all very well know will ultimately and assuredly lead to the weaponize said nuclear energy.
    The damage this man has done in 9 months is irreversible and when he wins re-election, and has no political concerns holding him bback, the really scary stuff will just beginning.

  34. Hillary Clinton ‘won’ in 2008, says local author Nichola Gutgold

    October 25, 2009
    By Kelly Frazee

    When current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that she would seek the Democratic nomination for president she faced many obstacles. Many people already disliked her based on her time as First Lady. Then there is the fact that she was a woman running for an office that was never before held by a woman.

    Yet Clinton came close to winning the nomination, becoming the first woman to be a real contender for the highest office in the land.

    Nichola Gutgold, associate professor of communications, arts, and sciences at Penn State Lehigh Valley, writes about Clinton’s remarkable achievement in her fourth book ”Almost Madam President: Why Hillary Clinton ‘Won’ in 2008.”

    ”Since America is heralded the world over as a beacon of freedom and opportunity it is perplexing to note that American hasn’t had a woman president,” writes Gutgold, noting that women around the world have become presidents and prime ministers.

    Gutgold says she wrote the book because there was so much focus on the fact that Clinton lost, but her accomplishments deserved more attention.

    In a way, the book is a followup to Gutgold’s 2006 book ”Paving The Way For Madam President” in which she looked at five women — Chase Smith, Shirley Chisholm, Patricia Schroeder, Elizabeth Dole and Carol Moseley-Braun. She notes that while each woman’s race was important and symbolic, none had a chance of winning. She holds that Clinton however, was different. She was able to redirect attention away from such things as hemlines, hair, and, her husband.

    She had ”rhetorical elasticity,” says Gutgold, referring to the superior communications skills that helped Clinton make the huge transition from First Lady to United States Senator to presidential contender.

    Still, she faced another major obstacle — the fact that Obama was African-American. ”The country was even more swept away by the historic nature of electing an African-American than they were a woman,” Gutgold says.

    Ultimately, Clinton secured 18 million votes and Gutgold argues that if Obama had not secured the grassroots support that he did, Clinton would have won.

    Although Clinton did not win the nomination, she certainly ‘won’ for women, opening many doors and bringing the office of the Presidency within the reach of future women, says Gutgold. This is an enormous step, she contends, given America’s anxiety over women in positions of power.

    Gutgold hopes that readers will come away with a better understanding of what Clinton’s campaign truly accomplished. ”I would wish that they would feel as though they’ve relived some of the election and I hope that they would understand the skill that was needed to accomplish as much a Clinton did.”,0,1098110.story

  35. The very idea of obama talking/being invited to talk to the UJC makes me sick.

    Either way, he will just drone on. Bibi will be the more interesting speaker by far.

  36. Just imagine if Hillary had a book written for her by a homegrown terrorist, sa , Tim McVey (sp) comes to mind…just imagine…But then, no one vetted a damm thing against this FRAUD…FRAUD…FRAUD!!!!

    Obama Comes To The Mainland
    By Jack Cashill

    For more than a year I have been making the case that Bill Ayers played a major role in the authorship of Barack Obama’s acclaimed 1995 memoir, Dreams From My Father.

    And for more than a year the hundreds of literary and political critics in the major media have refused to even glance at what is arguably the most consequential literary fraud of our time. Astonishingly, not one of the myriad reviewers of Christopher Andersen’s bestseller Barack and Michelle even commented on the six pages he dedicates to confirming my thesis.

    If analyzing the several Ayers and Obama books in question is too much of a bother, I would recommend these critics wander through any two pages of Dreams and concentrate on the nuggets of fraud and falsehood they can find without even looking hard.

    As an example, let us take a look at the two pages of Dreams (144-145 in the 2004 paperback) in which young Barry Soetoro first visits the mainland. The date of the visit is specific: “during the summer after my father’s visit to Hawaii, before my eleventh birthday.” This was 1972. Traveling around the country on Greyhound busses with his mother, grandmother and baby sister, the ten-year old Obama and his family “watched the Watergate hearings every night before going to bed.”

    Of course, Obama took this trip a year before the Watergate hearings, which actually began in the late spring of 1973. This is not an isolated misrepresentation. From the flow of these two pages, I suspect that Ayers took the raw data of Obama’s life and improvised as he saw fit. He does this throughout the book to score ideological points and make the case for Obama as political prodigy.

    Much more @ link

  37. By the way, the Fraud’s daughters have NOT been given the H1N1…

    From the people who brought us the swine flu vaccine shortage – Government-run health care! UPDATED

    By: Mark Tapscott

    President Obama’s late-night declaration of a nationwide public health emergency last night shouldn’t be allowed to obscure the most important lesson of the developing swine flu crisis – The same government that only weeks ago promised abundant supplies of swine flu vaccine by mid-October will be running your health care system under Obamacare.

    On Sept. 13, Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, told ABC’s This Week program that the government was on schedule to deliver an “ample supply” of swine flu vaccine by mid-October:

    “We’re on track to have an ample supply rolling by the middle of October. But we may have some early vaccine as early as the first full week in October. We’ll get the vaccine out the door as fast as it rolls off the production line.”

    But here we are five weeks later and news reports are coming in from across the nation of long waiting lines of people wanting the shot, but being turned away because of grossly inadequate supplies. The typical explanation from public health offiials is that the swine flu vaccine requires more time to be cultivated than seasonal flu vaccine.

    That’s no doubt true, but did federal public health officials just discover that fact? These are the same government officials who will be in charge of your health care under the government-run health care system being sought by Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress.

    And the president’s declaration contains this statement that is rich with irony in the context of the debate on health care reform: “The foundation of our national approach to the H1N1 flu has been preparedness at all levels — personal, business, and government — and this proclamation helps that effort by advancing our overall response capability,” according to Fox News.

    The declaration will allow waiving of federal regulations on a case-by-case basis. But how will we waive an entire government-run health care system?

    Here’s something else to think about: How will Obama and congressional Democrats seek to take advantage of this public health crisis? This is, after all, the administration that never lets a good crisis go to waste, right?

    UPDATE: H.L. Mencken would understand instantly

    Ralph Benko reminds us of these words of wisdom from the old Baltimore curmudgeon: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

    UPDATE II: Vaccination line Hell

    Theblogprof reports from Oakland County, Michigan, where the vaccination wait was 5-7 hours. Don’t miss the video. As theblogprof notes: This is “a prelude to what will happen under Obamacare.”

  38. We’ll be doing some site upgrades soon and the website might become unavailable for a period of time. We expect the upgrade to be completed quickly.

  39. These are the same government officials who will be in charge of your health care under the government-run health care system being sought by Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress.


    You lie. We’ll be lucky to get even a little puny public option. The insurance companies will be running the whole Obamacare.

  40. TurnDownObama, we redecorated the place a bit and upgraded a bit too. It might appear too “busy” today due to our extra banner to celebrate the day. We’ll be testing all day long to make sure the links are working and the new gizmos are up to par.

  41. The renovation, Big Pink, is beautiful. And thanks for the assuring information when I tried earlier to access you and could not.
    Some humor for this day from an article entitled “Fox News relishes Obama administration scorn:”
    A senior administration official said the White House had not told Treasury to exclude Fox, and Gibbs told correspondent Major Garrett it had been a mistake.
    www dot,0,3686223.story
    A mistake? Yes indeed.

  42. admin, Everything looks great! I love the new look! So today is Hillary B-day, heres wishing her a very happy one!

  43. holdthemaccountable, I do believe they are backpeddling, realizing they’ve made a mistake. LOL! I hope Fox continues to pour it on, HEAVY. Beck is suppose to be real good today.

  44. I have to believe that the Parade news supplement yesterday is goimg to have a profound affect on the increase in Hillary performances in her schedule as SoS.This morning FOX had Mark Penn on and discussed her possibe run for 2012.Looking encouraging for her and trouble for O.

  45. US Congress says Goldstone Report biased

    House to vote on Republican-Democrat motion urging President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton to negate UN’s report on Gaza war, rule it a mirror of body’s one-sided position against Israel

    WASHINGTON – The US Congress stands to vote on a bipartisan bill calling on US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to categorically negate the UN’s Goldstone Report on the Gaza war.

    The Republican-Democrat motion is the brainchild of Congressmen Howard Berman (D) chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Congresswoman Illeana Ross-Lehtinen (R).

    It was backed by Democrat Congressmen Gary Ackerman and his Republican college Dan Barton, who hold senior positions on the House Subcommittee on the Middle East.

    The bill noted the Goldstone Report’s one-sided call to probe alleged human rights violation by Israel, while completely ignoring “thousands of rocket attacks on Israel,” by Hamas and other Gaza groups for the eight years prior to the Israeli offensive in Gaza.

    The motion further quotes Richard Goldstone himself, using excerpts of an interview he gave the Jewish daily Forward, in which he admits that the report’s findings are inadmissible in court.

    The joint motion finds that the Goldstone Report negates Israel’s right to self-defense and that by failing to determine that Hamas and other terror groups are also to blame for war crimes, it was de facto swayed by the Islamist group’s misrepresentation of the facts.

    The House is expected to vote in favor of the bill and rule the Goldstone Report as a “mirror of the UN’s one-sided position against Israel,” and as one used by Israel’s enemies to excuse their operations.

    Israel is under tremendous international pressure to further probe the events of Operation Cast Lead. Special US envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell claims the Goldstone Report is one of the main reasons the Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations have yet to resume.,7340,L-3794666,00.html

  46. Monday, October 26, 2009

    How Is Hillary Clinton Doing As Secretary Of State?

    The conventional wisdom at the beginning of the year was that Hillary Rodham Clinton might be sidelined by all the strong personalities among President Obama’s “team of rivals” and his special envoys to the Middle East and Afghanistan/Pakistan. Some analysts have said that doesn’t seem to have happened.

    Clinton has taken charge of relations with great powers China and Russia, and is a key player in reinforcing Obama’s multilateral approach to international issues, one of the things that the Nobel committee cited in giving him the Peace Prize. People give her credit for giving this administration some spine. And she certainly is getting more resources for the State Department. David Rothkopf, a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote a piece in the Washington Post in August saying that Clinton is “rethinking the very nature of diplomacy and translating that vision into a revitalized State Department, one that approaches U.S. allies and rivals in ways that challenge long-held traditions.”

    But we would like to know what you, the experts, think about Hillary’s performance so far, what she has accomplished, and what more she could or should be doing. So what kind of report card do you give Hillary Rodham Clinton so far as secretary of State? Was she a good, or bad, choice as the nation’s top diplomat?

  47. For her birthday, huffingtonpost did a Photo History of Hillary Clinton


    I think the changes look great, and I like the rolling section of what HRC is doing (ABM90 see Admin does pay attention).

    However, I am having a problem with the next article. For some reason, and old article is posted where the next article should be. I went to it, thinking you had done something new. Found out it was old, and got into this loop, and had to go to to get back to this article.

    Thanks for making Today Special, because it is.

  49. A
    happy Mirthday to Hillary and her performance as the SoS is now becoming a subject of positive discussions on the Fringe Media.I have a vision of the Messiah curled up in the fetal position with a wrinkled thumb in his smile behind the couch in the Oval Office,while she spends her Birthday like the following.

    -Daily Appointments: Daily Appointments Schedule for October 26, 2009
    Mon, 26 Oct 2009 07:41:03 -0500

    Daily Appointments Schedule for October 26, 2009

    Washington, DC

    October 26, 2009


    11:00 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, in the Treaty Room at the Department of State.
    Pre-set time for cameras: 10:30 a.m. from the 23rd Street entrance.
    Final access for print journalists: 11:00 a.m. from the 23rd Street entrance.

    2:15 p.m. Secretary Clinton will hold a Special Press Briefing on the Release of the 2009 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom, in the Press Briefing Room at the Department of State.


    10:30 a.m. Deputy Secretary Lew will hold a Special Press Briefing on the Progress Made in Civilian Hiring in Afghanistan, in the Press Briefing Room at the Department of State.



  50. The Usual Suspects And The Obama Flim-Flam On Health Care

    This is the article listed as new article in the right hand corner. It is an old article. Please give the title of the new article.

  51. ABM siad: .This morning FOX had Mark Penn on and discussed her possibe run for 2012.


    Ooooh! And what did Penn say about that?

Comments are closed.