Tinkerbell In Trouble

Guzzle the Hopium! Fire up the Hope! Jingle the Change! Tinkerbell Obama is in Trouble!

Do you believe? If you believe, applaud! Keep applauding, Tinkerbell Obama is in Trouble!

If you really, really believe, applaud! Louder! Tinkerbell Obama is in Trouble!

Do you believe? Oh, Please, please believe! If you believe, wherever you are clap your hands! Clap! Clap! Don’t let Tink die!



* * * * *

There are more of us than there are of them. Today, Gallup joins other polls with empirical evidence that Tinkerbell Obama’s light is fading. .

The latest Gallup Daily tracking results show 49% of Americans approving of the job Barack Obama is doing as president, putting him below the majority approval level for the first time in his presidency.

Although the current decline below 50% has symbolic significance, most of the recent decline in support for Obama occurred in July and August. He began July at 60% approval. The ongoing, contentious debate over national healthcare reform has likely served as a drag on his public support, as have continuing economic problems. Americans are also concerned about the Obama administration’s reliance on government spending to solve the nation’s problems and the growing federal budget deficit. Since September, Obama’s approval rating had been holding in the low 50s and, although it has reached 50% numerous times, it had never dropped below 50% until now.

Unlike the heroic and deserving Tink of Barrie, Obama’s light is flickering, fading, and not to return.

Gallup suggests that most presidents dip below 50% but then recover and sometimes get reelected. However, Obama’s looting economic policies, foreign policy dithering and applause seeking, and domestic scams and flim-flams are sure to continue a downward trend no matter what momentary bobs up and down occur. The downward trajectory is clear.

So clear is the downward trajectory that even Obama’s Big Media masters continue to turn on him. Indeed the current rebukes of Obama by Big Media are ones that strike at the very idea of Obama. The current Big Media assessment of Obama is deadly because, like Big Pink has written since our first publication date, the problem with Obama is his character, history, and friends.

Obama’s professed policies scams are bad enough but the problem with Obama is his character, history, and friends.

Renown longtime Washington, D.C. fixture and regurgitator of conventional wisdom Elizabeth Drew delivers the bad news to the D.C. Big Media clan. Elizabeth Drew is agitated about the Greg Craig backstabbing by Obama.

Yes, Elizabeth Drew is making excuses (“we didn’t know” cried the Germans as the ovens darkened the skies) for Big Media not investigating Obama and selling Obama to Americans. Yes, Sarah Palin’s book gets 11 Associated Press “fact checkers”. Yes, Obama’s books get no fact checking and when mis-truths and fictions galore arise Big Media prepares excuses.

But let no one doubt, Elizabeth Drew is attacking Obama’s character, history, and friends in an unprecedented manner. Drew draws the Obama portrait:

President Barack Obama is returning from his trek to Asia Thursday to a capital that is a considerably more dangerous place for him than when he departed.

While he was abroad, there was a palpable sense at home of something gone wrong. A critical mass of influential people who once held big hopes for his presidency began to wonder whether they had misjudged the man. Most significant, these doubters now find themselves with a new reluctance to defend Obama at a phase of his presidency when he needs defenders more urgently than ever.

This is the price Obama has paid with his complicity and most likely his active participation, in the shabbiest episode of his presidency: The firing by leaks of White House counsel Gregory Craig, a well-respected Washington veteran and influential early supporter of Obama.

Elizabeth Drew does not forget, nor does any serious observer, that there are a lot of Hillary supporters “bitter” and “clingy” and not forgetting the misogyny and sexism of Barack Obama. Drew does not blame us Hillary supporters for Greg Craig’s demise. Drew instead does the innocent “we didn’t know” routine to explain the traitor Craig’s demise:

The people who are most aghast by the handling of the Craig departure can’t be dismissed by the White House as Republican partisans, or still-embittered Hillary Clinton supporters. They are not naïve activists who don’t understand that the exercise of power can be a rough business and that trade-offs and personal disappointments are inevitable. Instead, they are people, either in politics or close observers, who once held an unromantically high opinion of Obama. They were important to his rise, and are likely more important to the success or failure of his presidency than Obama or his distressingly insular and small-minded West Wing team appreciate.

This Drew critique is an entirely different timbre and quality of attack. Now, Obama and his team are “insular” and “small-minded”. Too bad Americans never heard that analysis from Big Media when it mattered. We called Obama and his “team” what they really are, “thugs” in a Chicago Circus of Corruption long ago, so it is not a new set of facts that we see Big Media Drew finally acknowledge. Something deeper is going on. Drew also describes Obama’s character and lack of integrity:

The Craig embarrassment gives these people a new reason – not the first or only reason – to conclude that he wasn’t the person of integrity and even classiness they had thought, and, more fundamentally, that his ability to move people and actually lead a fractured and troubled country (the reason many preferred him over Hillary Clinton) is not what had been promised in the campaign.

Elizabeth Drew belatedly signals to her cohort clowns in Big Media that Obama lacks integrity and class, and is basically a creep. Isn’t that what we have been saying all along? Yup! Youbetcha!

Elizabeth Drew correctly details the treachery and foolishness committed by Greg Craig. Greg Craig lent credibility to Obama and his Chicago thugs and also hurt Hillary’s credibility. Greg Craig can go to hell as far as we are concerned. In fact, hell is the White House these days and Craig got deservedly burned. Rot in your personal hell, Judas Craig

Craig, who had known the Clintons since they were all at Yale Law School together, had served as a senior adviser to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, but in 1998 gave up that job to help defend Bill Clinton against impeachment. Yet in 2008, he supported Obama for the nomination – not so much a turning against Hillary Clinton as being impressed early, as were some other prominent Washingtonians, by the then-state senator but would-be U.S. Senate candidate at a fundraiser held by Vernon Jordan, seeing Obama as the first potentially inspiring Democratic figure since Robert Kennedy. In the course of the campaign, Craig wrote a highly publicized memo questioning some of Hillary Clinton’s claims of foreign policy experience, such as coming under enemy fire in Tuzla, Bosnia. During the campaign, Craig coached Obama for the debates (playing McCain), and praised him highly. Craig’s imprimatur helped the neophyte Obama in certain influential circles.

Go to Hell Greg Craig and take Rezko Obama with you. (“someone is nervous about what is going on” says another “influential to the American Spectator..

It’s clear from the Elizabeth Drew article that the source of the article is Greg Craig himself. Craig is the one who is now acknowledging that Obama is a creep. It is Craig who tries to excuse his betrayal of Bill and Hillary Clinton with an “I was fooled” defense. It is Craig who provides hitherto unknown details of his firing and the events that have led to disaster in the Obama out house. Craig provides detail after detail to defend himself. Drew and other “influentials” will weep at the sad song Craig sings. “Go to Hell Greg Craig” is what we say.

Drew and Craig defend Craig by calling into question, in an unprecedented degree by Big Media, Obama’s Chicago Circus of Corruption:

But along the way, Craig fell out of favor with the president’s political aides and, apparently, the president himself. Whether he was simply being made the fall guy, or the tight circle of Chicagoans in the White House didn’t care for this outsider, or he committed some unknown errors, suddenly, in August, leaks began to surface that his job was in danger. Non-denial denials were issued from the White House. The leaks became a pattern, a systematic, anonymous, tipping off of reporters that Craig would soon be gone. [snip]

But the leaks continued, and Craig decided that his situation was untenable, and he had to leave.

To make sure he did, he was leaked his way out, up to the day before he planned to resign. [snip] Even some Hillary Clinton supporters, who still hold no brief for Craig, think he was treated shabbily.

Not us. Go to Hell Greg Craig.

“There’s a lot of concern among a lot of lawyers in this town, especially those who were supporting Obama, that somebody this bright, this respected, this good, and with this integrity, was treated in such a way.”

Yes, we knew, or should have, during the campaign that the supposed idealist Obama had a bit of the Chicago cut-throat in him, but there was little sign that he could be as brutal and heedless of loyalty as he was in the Craig affair. An unexpected climate of fear emanates from the Obama White House.

Go to Hell Greg Craig. You were the one who vouched for Obama. Now you, via mouthpiece Elizabeth Drew, call Obama a “cut-throat” who is “brutal” and “heedless”. Go to Hell Greg Craig.

Drew draws out the Chicago Thugs, now that it is too late:

The incident underscored worries that several had held about the Obama White House for some time: that it was too tightly controlled and narrowly focused by the Chicago crowd; that it seemed from the outset to need an older, wiser head, someone with a bit more detachment.

The current crowd displays a certain impulsiveness and vindictiveness that do it no good – as in the silly war-let on Fox News that it is now trying to back out of. Even if Craig was making a hash of his job – and there’s no independent evidence of this – it just wasn’t smart to treat someone widely held in such high respect in this manner; once again, the impulsiveness backfired. [snip]

The Obamas themselves hang tight with a small Chicago crowd. Yes, he talks to others, and yes, a president’s time is very limited, but the Obama’s themselves seem as closed-off and unto themselves as does his inner White House circle. (Is this a coincidence? What is all this wariness about?) When the Obama’s go to someone’s house for dinner, almost invariably it’s to that of Valerie Jarrett, the old friend from Chicago who serves as a counselor and whom they see all day. Old Chicago friends fly in for weekends frequently. Old friends, who had helped launch him, helped them personally, have been left behind.

Don’t miss that parenthetical comment by Drew. “What is all this wariness about? writes Drew. What Drew is signaling is that something very wrong, something very Chicago, something very Rezko, something very slippery is underfoot.

One of the biggest mistakes ever in the annals of treachery is when Tom Cruise dumped his agent, the woman who created Tom Cruise (Pat Kingsley). Soon thereafter a lot of stories and hidden truths began to emerge about Tommy boy. Tom Cruise never recovered. Greg Craig knows where some of the Obama bodies are buried and Craig along with a lot of those other Obama “Old friends, who had helped lauch him, helped them personally” have stories to tell and have begun to tell them.

Drew is obviously seeking to resurrect her “journalism” career by committing journalism. Drew is talking to some “influentials”:

At the same time as the Craig imbroglio happened, many people who had defended Obama against charges that he wasn’t what he’d been cracked up to be were now becoming concerned themselves: though it was a relief to have a president who thought through crucial decisions about sending the country’s young to war, it was taking him awfully long to make up his mind about what to do about Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the decision-making was bafflingly leak-ridden (was this a deliberate airing of ideas or a loss of control over the process?); that the health care debate had in fact careened out of his control and it seemed less and less likely that, having used up almost a year of his presidency on it (his “deadlines” had become irrelevant, and so, in a way, had he), he would end up with a bill, if at all, that did enough net good. [snip]

He’s been lucky before; maybe he’ll get lucky again. Meanwhile, serious people who had a lot of hope about him and who defended him are more worried than ever, and in this if anything over-communicative society the White House can’t write them off as “a bunch of Washington insiders.” So meanwhile, there’s a palpable mood change in Washington that could signify that Barack Obama is in deeper trouble than he was even a week ago.

Tinkerbell is in trouble. The Hopium dispensers are getting fired and the Hopium is running out. Obama must be run out of Washington and a 2012 candidate for the Hillary Clinton coalition must be nominated.

Tinkerbell Obama’s light is out.

Share

73 thoughts on “Tinkerbell In Trouble

  1. Great Admin.We need your posts to overcome the depression that comes with the assault of subversive activities that :Emperor Bones: and his band of bros are inflicting on the good people of this country and the world.He must be driven from office and an immediate drive for the support of our National Treasure.HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON.

    FOX and its paid assassins of characters,I have a message for you Take a flashlight and a ton of batteries.It is going to be dark where the sun never shines.

    BY ABM90 Bon Voyage Mr BO and followers.

  2. November 20, 2009

    Apology ideas submitted to Obama’s Speechwriter

    Lee Cary

    Jon Favreau
    White House Speechwriter
    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
    Washington, D.C.

    Jon,

    Recently, President Obama solicited “demonstrably good ideas” on how to improve the economy. In the spirit of offering good ideas in general, and assuming that you, David Axelrod and Rahm Emanuel are instrumental in proposing opportunities for the President to apologize for America as he travels abroad, I herein offer several demonstrably good ideas for additional Presidential apologies. Perhaps you’ll pass them on to David and Rahm.

    If used, you need not credit me with any of these, Jon. If fact, I prefer you not credit me, since some come recommended by persons who will remain anonymous. Here’s a short list.

    Presidential apologies are in order…

    • …To the Barbary Pirates (BP) for being intimidated by U.S. Navy Commodore John Rodgers who, during the First Barbary War, threatened to remove Tripoli’s pasha from his throne and replace him with his brother if the BP’s continued to attack U.S. ship and demand tribute. It was an unjustified and hegemonistic intrusion into the affairs of a sovereign Muslim nation.
    • …To the people of the former West Germany for our having participated in the imputation of a political system on that portion of Germany at the end of World War II. In doing so, we usurped their legally elected government led by the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.
    • …To the Russian government for taking advantage of their need for money and low-balling the purchase price we paid for Alaska.
    • …To the French government for our taking advantage of their need for money and low-balling the purchase price we paid for the Louisiana Purchase.
    • …To the North Korean government for our having meddled into the affairs of the Korean peninsula by coming to the aid of South Koreans when attacked by freedom fighters from the North.
    • …To the world community for our having been environmentally insensitive during our visits to the moon where we space trash without thought to those who will follow us there and clean-up.
    • …To the Empire of Japan for our provoking them into an attack on Pearl Harbor that eventually led to two events that the President would certainly like to apologize for, but just can’t bring himself to mention yet – the dropping of A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    Jon, this is only a short list. I can easily expand it to, say, 100 more, including apologizes to Mexico for the War of 1846, to native Americans who were tricked into selling Manhattan Island for what a medium-priced lunch in a three star restaurant costs there today, to Somalia for recently murdering three of their pirates in cold blood without a trial…and many more. But the list above should be sufficient for a few weeks.

    Keep up the fine speechwriting, Jon. America has much for which it needs to apologize.

    Sincerely,
    Dr. Lee Cary

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/11/apology_ideas_submitted_to_oba.html

  3. All I have to say, is that all of a sudden media knives are being sharpened agains the idiot. It’s about time.

    —————–

    Obama’s total failure on almost every front owes a big thanks to the Founders

    November 20th, 2009
    Dan Calabrese

    I was going to write a column about how stunningly ineffective President Obama has been at governing, pretty much since the day he took office. But as I went to construct my argument, I realized that what it actually demonstrates is how well the Constitution works, and how smart the Founders were.

    Consider: The only significant bill Obama has signed has been the $787 billion stimulus package. In other words, he persuaded a Congress controlled by massive Democratic majorities to spend a pile of money. How much skill does that take?

    And that one piece of legislation has – to say the least – not accomplished its purported purpose, since the economy remains weak and unemployment is still rising.

    Obama’s other main priority, health care reform, still looks a long way from passing, which is pretty amazing considering he has huge majorities in both houses of Congress – including a filibuster-proof one in the Senate.

    And the big executive order he signed on Day One? To close Guantanamo Bay? That’s now not going to happen because Obama has realized that when he made that promise, he didn’t know what the hell he was talking about.

    Any way you look at it, Obama has been an ineffective president who has accomplished nothing of substance – in spite of the huge congressional majorities his party controls.

    This is a hell of a good system we have. When the 2008 election results became clear, conservatives began preparing for Armageddon. With Democratic majorities that big, and a president as liberal as Obama, surely we would see socialized medicine. Surely we would see a massive expansion of the welfare state. Surely we would see the introduction of nefarious new regulations and controls on business. Surely taxes would be raised through the roof.

    And on the international front, we would surely face the quick withdrawal of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the surrender of our sovereignty to the United Nations on foreign policy and on the nonsense of global warming.

    Not much of this has gone anywhere. The Democrats have certainly blown a hole through the federal budget, and this year’s budget was indeed full of tax increases.

    But health care? Cap and trade? New entitlements? Surrender abroad? The closing of Gitmo?

    Obama isn’t close to getting a single one done.

    That is, to be sure, largely attributable to the fact that he has no experience governing or making executive decisions, and as such doesn’t have the slightest idea what he is doing. There’s no substitute for incompetence! But it also has to do with the beauty of the American system of governance, and how effective it is in beating back tyranny, even on the part of a huge and determined majority.

    The Democrats barely passed Nancy Pelosi’s health care bill in the House, and they only did so by making promises to anti-abortion Democrats that they probably won’t be able to keep if a bill ever passes the Senate and comes back to them from conference committee.

    In the Senate, even with 60 seats, the Democrats don’t appear capable of holding together their caucus to stop a filibuster. This is because certain congressional districts are willing to elect Democrats, as are certain states in the case of the Senate, but they’re not willing to put up with it if these Democrats go too far in supporting ultraliberal legislation.

    As much pressure as the Blue Dogs may get from Pelosi and Harry Reid, they listen in the end to their own constituents, because they have to if they want to survive politically. Whatever Pelosi and Reid may promise them doesn’t matter if they’re voted out of office.

    And it’s not for no reason that Pelosi and Reid keep scheduling these health care votes on Saturdays. If they really thought the public wanted this bill, they would take the vote during a prime part of the news cycle to get maximum coverage. They would wait until their members go spend some time in their districts and hear from their constituents about how much they want it. And they would, above all else, pass the bill during an election year, so all their members could go back home and run on having voted for health care reform. They could watch the Democratic majorities grow.

    But that’s obviously not what’s happening. Democrats know that, the closer they get to November 2010, the more suicidal it is to vote for this turkey. That’s why, if they don’t get it passed this year, it’s dead – just as Cap and Trade is probably dead already.

    Good thing the Founders decided to put the entire House and a third of the Senate up for re-election every two years, eh? They understood that we might get a Congress bent on some pretty horrible ideas, and that it could really come in handy to have an election right around the corner at all times.

    This is not to say that Obama and the Democrats have done no damage. They’ve done a ton of it, mainly in the realm of spending and out-of-control debt. But considering the size of the majorities they have, their failure to do much, much more is rather stunning. We can be grateful for their ineptitude, from Obama on down through the ranks. But we can also be grateful for the framers of the Constitution, who knew we might end up with a crew like this at some point, and devised some pretty brilliant safeguards against them.

    Thanks to them, if we ever do elect serious leaders again, the mess they have to clean up won’t be nearly as bad as it otherwise might have been.

    http://www.northstarnational.com/2009/11/20/obamas-total-failure-front-owes-big-founders/

  4. Obama takes over. Lynn Sweet says 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. looks like the 51 st Ward in Chicago. Dumkoff Craig gets a shiv in the back to the sound of fleeting footsteps on the wet pavement and the theme song Mack The Knife. No Camelot here.

    How could it be otherwise?

    And all the blue blooded swans of Georgetown stir about in the rushes. This wasn’t supposed to happen. Relax. This isnt the end. It isnt the beginning of the end. It is the only the end of the beginning.

    Sic transit glorious traitors. Craig.

  5. wbboei
    November 20th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
    I’m not so certain the Senate will pass the bill
    ————————-
    Hope you are right.
    ******************

    He has the votes, I am sure. This really upsets me.

    Question. If this Fu*ked up mess does pass, if there are major Repub wins next year, can it be undone by say, not funding any of it?

  6. http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2009/11/20/gallup-obama-below-50-percent/

    In legislative terms, a president is only as powerful as he is popular. Public approval rating is the metric for that popularity.

    Below 50, a president can no longer claim the majority’s support. His political arsenal depletes. A president’s political opposition has powerful, though nebulous, new ammunition.

    Obama’s fraught reality will immediately impact the health care debate, albeit intangibly and perhaps only slightly. It will be more difficult for the White House to pressure moderate Democrats.

    Obama owes most of his decline this year to independents’ souring opinion. But Obama’s newly weak standing is also due to the loss of still-more Republicans and some Democrats.

    The physics of Obama’s approval rating generally reflect George W. Bush’s in 2004, when he first dipped below 50 (high 80s with his party, low to mid 40s with independents and high teens with the opposition). Bush below 50, however, maintained slightly stronger support within his base than Obama—possibly because 2004 was an election year.

    Clearly, Obama’s greatest issue is with the fickle middle. Obama’s fragile bond with independents has been visible for nearly the entirety of his young presidency. As early as mid March, this writer was wondering: Can Obama Hold the Center?

    Other recent polls, like Quinnipiac, have also for the first time tracked Obama below 50. But Gallup has unrivaled historical reach. Its findings carry unique symbolism. Obama’s RealClearPolitics average, the mean of major public polls, is at 50.6 percent.

  7. Its always dangerous to open the mail on Friday. You never know what you will find that will spoil your week end. It is a common practice among Admiralty lawyers with a case against a vessel to plaster it with legal papers on Friday so it cannot leave port on the weekend. If you are going to get sick and need a doctor it does not hit until after closing time on Friday. Same problem. Always.

    So this Friday I opened the mail and guess what I found. A love letter from the 60th vote himself. The not so illustrious Al Franken. No it is not addressed to me personally–it just says dear friend. What if you are not a friend do you read on or is that bad form. Big Al says to little no nothing me IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII didnt come to the Senate because IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII thought IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII had all the answers. I agree. He came to the Senate because of ACORN. But he goes on to say only Democrats are providing answers. To which I say yes. Thats right. And all of them are bad.

    And then he just before he slips the unsuspecting fool and soon to be contributor he waxes poetic. We want to look back on this day to a more prosperous more secure American and say……………………………………………When Glenn Beck, and the rest of the REPUBLICAN ATTACK MACHINE to support the Peoples Mandate for Change We will have their backs. If by we he means the White House then Greg Craig can tell them what happens when these clowns have their backs.

  8. The Demcare bribe list
    By Michelle Malkin • November 20, 2009 11:17 AM

    The Most Transparent Administration Ever won’t keep this list.

    The Most Ethical Congress ever won’t keep it either.

    So we’ll do the list ourselves and shine the light on the payoffs and last-minute backroom deals being made as Demcare heads for the first test vote tomorrow. (On a procedural note, Hill folks note that “Senate Republicans started floor debate today at 11:00 a.m. and will continue until 11:00 p.m. to discuss the $2.5 trillion, 2,074-page health care bill drafted in Senator Harry Reid’s office” ahead of the Saturday cloture vote. C-SPAN’s covering.)

    Here are the top five Demcare bribes. Keep an eye out on bribes/offers for Democrat Sens. Ben Nelson of Nebraska; Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas; and Evan Bayh of Indiana. Leave comments or e-mail any new info to add to the list.

    Here we go:

    1) MARY LANDRIEU AND LOUISIANA: $100 million via Jonathan Karl:

    On page 432 of the Reid bill, there is a section increasing federal Medicaid subsidies for “certain states recovering from a major disaster.”

    The section spends two pages defining which “states” would qualify, saying, among other things, that it would be states that “during the preceding 7 fiscal years” have been declared a “major disaster area.”

    I am told the section applies to exactly one state: Louisiana, the home of moderate Democrat Mary Landrieu, who has been playing hard to get on the health care bill.

    In other words, the bill spends two pages describing would could be written with a single world: Louisiana. (This may also help explain why the bill is long.)

    Senator Harry Reid, who drafted the bill, cannot pass it without the support of Louisiana’s Mary Landrieu.

    How much does it cost? According to the Congressional Budget Office: $100 million.
    2) CALIFORNIA: $300 million, via LA Times:

    Contained in the nearly 2,000-page House healthcare bill is a little-noticed provision — worth $300 million to California — that would increase federal Medicare payments to doctors in a wide swath of the state in response to complaints that low reimbursement rates have kept them from taking new patients.

    Rep. Sam Farr (D-Carmel) was able to include a reimbursement calculation fix in the overhaul legislation. It was a testament to California’s political muscle in the House, where its delegation is the largest of any state and includes Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D- San Francisco) and five committee chairs.
    3) AARP

    a) Via Philip Klein: $18 million in stimulus money

    b) The Medigap royalty/kickback scheme

    4) THE ABORTION LOBBY, via LifeNews:

    Two leading pro-life organizations that have analyzed the new 2,000-page government-run health care bill released by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid late yesterday say the legislation contains massive abortion funding and a fake amendment that does not truly ban it.

    The Senate health care bill does not contain the Stupak amendment the House approved that stops abortion funding under the public option and affordability credits.

    Instead, the measure contains a slightly-reworded version of the much-maligned Capps amendment, which a House committee approved on a partisan vote and which pro-life groups say is an accounting scheme to hide government-funded abortions.

    “Reid has rejected the bipartisan Stupak-Pitts Amendment and has substituted completely unacceptable language that would result in coverage of abortion on demand in two big new federal government programs,” National Right to Life legislative director Douglas Johnson assured LifeNews.com late Wednesday.

    “Reid seeks to cover elective abortions in two big new federal health programs, but tries to conceal that unpopular reality with layers of contrived definitions and hollow bookkeeping requirements,” he continued.

    Rep. Lois Capps, whose amendment was deleted when the House adopted the Stupak language, has applauded Reid’s language.

    “It appears that their approach closely mirrors my language which was originally included in the House bill,” she said in a statement.

    Johnson notes that Reid’s bill establishes the public option and authorizes (on page 118) the Secretary of Health and Human Services to require coverage of any and all abortions throughout the public option program.

    “This would be federal government funding of abortion, no matter how hard they try to disguise it,” he says.

    He also says the bill creates the affordability credits — new tax-supported subsidies to purchase private health plans — and that these government-funded credits can be used to purchase health insurance plans that directly pay for abortions.

    Attorney Mary Harned of Americans United for Life, has also examined the abortion sections of Reid’s new measure, which she says “provides for an unprecedented expansion of federally-funded abortion. ”

    “The bill includes pro-abortion language and mirrors the false compromise Capps Amendment from the House debate — it allows the public option to include abortion coverage and provides federal subsidies for private plans which cover abortion,” she said.
    5) BIG LABOR

    Via Houston Chronicle, Goodies for labor tucked away in health bill:

    While higher-profile aspects of health care reform drew attention, pro-union legislators slipped a variety of big benefits for labor into the proposed legislation. Quietly tucked among the proposals’ thousands of pages, these provisions have avoided much scrutiny.

    One provision epitomizes the nature of this ploy. According to research firms, unions are woefully short of funds to pay their retirees’ anticipated insurance claims. Thus, under the House resolution, union leaders who have mismanaged these plans for their members could receive up to $10 billion in taxpayer-funded bailout money, innocuously referred to as a “reinsurance program.”

    Unfortunately, this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

    Under the proposed public option, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius would wield tremendous discretionary authority to regulate participating health care workers. She and various federal panels, where the unions would have guaranteed seats, would take the lead in recommending health care policy. Thus, labor would have considerable influence over decisions affecting most doctors, nurses and patients.

    The House resolution establishes a scenario that would effectively exclude non-union employers from eligibility to work on program-funded contracts. It also requires participating health care providers to pay wages and benefits that have been collectively bargained or that union-friendly appointees determine are competitive. This is plainly a move toward coerced unionization. With guaranteed seats at the table, unions are poised to control many newly formed oversight posts and/or committees, formed in connection with new employer mandates and cooperative health care associations.

    Yet another provision would establish lucrative state training partnerships that contain little or no opportunities for non-union employee organizations. Provisions in Senate proposals would exempt union-negotiated health care plans from taxes on “Cadillac” health plans.

    These features all encourage more unionization. The unions know that under Canada’s nationalized system, union membership among all health care workers is 61 percent, compared to just 11 percent in the U.S.

    Increasing membership similarly in this country would swell labor’s coffers with as much as another $2 billion in dues.

    In fact, Senate proposals include language that could force home health workers into unions. Disgraced former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and former California Gov. Gray Davis used this approach to repay political debts to the SEIU in their states. They reclassified state-reimbursed home health contractors as state employees, thus forcing them to pay union dues. Again and again, it is apparent that these union-friendly proposals have nothing do with improving our health care system.
    From Mark Mix:

    In the heated debates on health-care reform, not enough attention is being paid to the huge financial windfalls ObamaCare will dole out to unions—or to the provisions in the various bills in Congress that will help bring about the forced unionization of the health-care industry.

    Tucked away in thousands of pages of complex new rules, regulations and mandates are special privileges and giveaways that could have devastating consequences for the health-care sector and the American economy at large.

    The Senate version opens the door to implement forced unionization schemes pursued by former Govs. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois in 2005 and Gray Davis of California in 1999. Both men repaid tremendous political debts to Andy Stern and his Service Employees International Union (SEIU) by reclassifying state-reimbursed in-home health-care (and child-care) contractors as state employees—and forcing them to pay union dues.

    Following this playbook, the Senate bill creates a “personal care attendants workforce advisory panel” that will likely impose union affiliation to qualify for a newly created “community living assistance services and support (class)” reimbursement plan.

    The current House version of ObamaCare (H.R. 3200) goes much further. Section 225(A) grants Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius tremendous discretionary authority to regulate health-care workers “under the public health insurance option.” Monopoly bargaining and compulsory union dues may quickly become a required standard resulting in potentially hundreds of thousands of doctors and nurses across the country being forced into unions.

    Ms. Sebelius will be taking her marching orders from the numerous union officials who are guaranteed seats on the various federal panels (such as the personal care panel mentioned above) charged with recommending health-care policies. Big Labor will play a central role in directing federal health-care policy affecting hundreds of thousands of doctors, surgeons and nurses.

  9. wbboei
    November 20th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
    **************

    I got one yesterday and sent it back with a few choice words!

  10. I wonder if the little groper wrote that letter. I do not think Al can read or write for himself, but neither could Coleman. The reason I suspect the groper is because it has the same kind of flower garish syntax and non seqiturs that Bambi himself is famous for.

  11. admin:

    “It’s clear from the Elizabeth Drew article that the source of the article is Greg Craig himself. Craig is the one who is now acknowledging that Obama is a creep. It is Craig who tries to excuse his betrayal of Bill and Hillary Clinton with an “I was fooled” defense. It is Craig who provides hitherto unknown details of his firing and the events that have led to disaster in the Obama out house. Craig provides detail after detail to defend himself. Drew and other “influentials” will weep at the sad song Craig sings. “Go to Hell Greg Craig” is what we say.”

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

    Excellent observation,admin- I was thinking the same thing… so many private details, so little time! In fact, all Craig had to whisper to get himself fired was “thats ill eagle”… or rephrased: “No I can’t do that, it would be seen as fraud/illegal/malfeasance/subversive/treason/…. and why he had to go!

    Yep, I agree- Craig knows where many of the bodies are buried but he must remember to wear a full bodied kevlar suit at all times in the event he is found with a bullet in the cranium and a suicide note nearby owning up to the shame he’s brought to his friends and family. pfffft!

  12. Obama is now going to save money. Amazing where is budget cuts will occur:

    http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0911/w_h_shrinks_hanukkah_party.html

    But another upcoming White House event will be smaller than in years past: The White House’s annual Hanukkah party.

    The guest list is expected to be shrunk by more than half, according to the Jerusalem Post. “Though several Jewish leaders expressed understanding for the economic and other reasons behind the cut, they acknowledged that it would likely help feed feelings in some quarters of the American Jewish community that the White House is giving them the cold shoulder.”

    The move comes on the heels of Obama’s cancellation of an appearance before the General Assembly of North American Jewish Federations last week.

    The White House’s decision is likely a response to tough economic times and a desire to keep the holiday festivities reasonable.

  13. Will Clinton’s gamble on Karzai pay off?

    By Kim Ghattas
    BBC state department correspondent, Kabul

    US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a political survivor who has repeatedly reinvented herself, used her visit to Kabul to appeal to Hamid Karzai – a leader whose image lies in tatters – to seize a window of opportunity and in essence reinvent himself by seriously tackling the corruption that plagues Afghanistan.

    “I think that it is clear that he really has turned his attention in a very focused way to what his legacy will be,” Mrs Clinton said in a BBC interview after Mr Karzai’s inauguration. He and his family have given 300 years of service to Afghanistan. He’s a real patriot and he wants to be the leader who has ushered Afghanistan in the modern age into a secure democratic future. Sometime it’s easier to say that than to do it.”

    Mrs Clinton struck a positive note and gave the impression that Mr Karzai could rise to the occasion. Whether she truly believes it is a different thing, but her approach appears to indicate she feels that public hectoring will not yield the best results.

    Instead, her approach is a combination of cajoling and friendly pep talks, firm but friendly public stances on corruption – a gamble that could pay off if Mr Karzai decides he wants to burnish his legacy.

    ‘Coaxing Karzai’

    Mrs Clinton is in a good position to do so because she has good relations with Mr Karzai. A number of US officials have had stormy exchanges with the Afghan leader, complicating the relationship. “ I’ve always tried to listen to him (Hamid Karzai) to hear what’s really on his mind, his concerns, how he views the problems he faces ”
    Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State

    In a sign of how much Mr Karzai values his rapport with a woman who is not only America’s top diplomat but also a world celebrity, he reportedly moved up the inauguration date several weeks to accommodate her travel schedule and make sure she could attend.

    “The secretary and [Mr Karzai] have a very good relationship, they can speak as politicians and they can talk in terms of not just the policy dimension of things but also the political ramifications,” said a senior US official travelling with Mrs Clinton.

    Mrs Clinton had dinner with Mr Karzai and some of his ministers on the eve of his inauguration. She then spent 90 minutes talking to him one-on-one. “She was making the case that for him all those things are not just good policy – they’re smart politics, both in the long-term and-short term,” added the official.

    Few people believe that Mr Karzai is a changed man and he certainly did not appear humbled by the experience of the chaotic process of an election mired by fraud.

    “ Hillary Clinton is emerging as possibly the only person that Mr Karzai is willing to listen to ”
    But all the foreign ministers attending the inauguration seemed to attempt to strike the same positive tone, seeking to encourage Mr Karzai and give him the benefit of doubt in the hope it might make a difference.

    It is an approach that is partly dictated by the fact that Washington and its Nato allies have no other choice but to deal with the facts on the ground – and this includes Mr Karzai, as president, regardless of misgivings about him or questions surrounding the legitimacy of his presidency. And to get Mr Karzai to work with them, it will be essential to coax him.

    Any leverage that can be used against Mr Karzai – such as withdrawing troops or withholding aid – is a doubled-edged sword that Washington will have to use very cautiously, if at all, because it could undermine the Obama administration’s strategy in Afghanistan.

    But US officials also said that if Mr Karzai did the job right then Washington would be generous with aid for Afghanistan, even after the day America starting withdrawing.

    ‘Not always consistent’

    Nato countries have demanded that Mr Karzai tackle corruption and the illicit drug trade. US President Barack Obama has urged him to set up an anti-corruption commission and hold officials accountable.

    Mr Karzai made some of the right noises in his inauguration speech, though the specific are yet to come. But Mrs Clinton also said it was important for Nato allies to do a better job and co-ordinate their military and civilian strategy, saying it was not only about making demands on Afghanistan.

    Observers point out acknowledging that there is work to be done by both parties, instead of only admonishing the Afghan government, could help bring Mr Karzai round to seeing his own failures and hopefully addressing them. “Mr Karzai and the secretary share the view that over the past year we have not always been the most consistent partners,” said the senior official, adding that there were “legitimate questions about how effectively we are helping them to help themselves”.

    Mrs Clinton, who has spoken to Mr Karzai several times about her own experiences as a politician, said: “I’ve always tried to listen to him to hear what’s really on his mind, his concerns, how he views the problems he faces, and then to be responsive but also to offer a perspective that is perhaps useful.” But along with the friendly words and the cajoling, the tough talking continues as well.

    In the BBC interview, Mrs Clinton said the Afghans knew there would be consequences if they failed to deliver. Without outlining those consequences, she said this had been made very clear to them.

    For the past several months, media reports abounded about Mrs Clinton having been overshadowed by the special envoys she had appointed, including Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke.
    But in the light of her trip to Kabul, she is emerging as possibly the only person that Mr Karzai is willing to listen to. It remains to be seen whether he actually feels inclined to do what she tells him.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8370176.stm

  14. Admin: Great article. I am so sad to see how badly things are turning out. Like I said before, I knew it was going to be bad, but not this bad. How right you were, all along. Sigh.

  15. Admin,

    maybe if bambi and meme would stop having weekly entertainment nights with top stars and huge costs, and maybe if bambi would stay home once in a while instead of using the White House as his holiday home and spending God knows how much taxpayer dollars campaigning all year long…well maybe then I would believe that he wants to be saving money.

  16. admin; great article! Poor Tinkerbell having to be called Obama.

    ABC news tonight said that Oprah’s talk show had lost 43% of her viewers due to Hillary democrats. Yahoo, we really made a difference with that Beoch, now we WILL bring the usurper down also. Is there anyway to get Brazoid too? Oh heck, lets just bring down the whole freaking CNN! She needs to be seen on the unemployment line.

  17. BTW, I imagine the cut back on the Hanukkah will be cut back due to the fact that he overspent on the Muslim appreciation dinner and day. He also isn’t fond of Jews.

  18. But in the light of her trip to Kabul, she is emerging as possibly the only person that Mr Karzai is willing to listen to
    ***************

    At least he knows a thoroughbred when he sees one. Think about the Afghan culture. A Woman held in such esteem. You won’t find our Media giving her her due.

  19. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/68603-conyers-im-getting-tired-of-saving-obamas-can

    President Barack Obama is “bowing down” to Republicans and corporate interests on health reform, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) said Thursday.

    Conyers, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and a longtime advocate of single-payer healthcare, blasted the president for a perceived weakness in leadership on health reform.

    “I’m getting tired of saving Obama’s can in the White House,” Conyers said on the liberal Bill Press radio show. “He only won by five votes in the House, and this bill wasn’t even anything to write home about.”

    “The only way he could have got it through was that progressives held their nose,” Conyers added.

  20. Let’s not be disingenuous, Mr. Conyers, Obama CAN’T campaign for something that resembles universal coverage because he attacked Hillary Clinton from the right and claimed that mandates were not needed. If he shows some “leadership” on the issue, the right will simply run his own campaign commercials against him and totally delegitimize him as president. The president is AWOL on leadership because he compromised his integrity to win the primary. Having won the primary, he cannot fight the battle he was elected to lead, because of the tactics that got him elected. Ironic, eh?

    Drew’s piece is one helluva an article. Thanks for connecting the dots. 🙂

  21. You hit the ball out of the park again, Admin. Your article put me in a good mood. The people and even the media are waking up. I honestly don’t think Ozero can bamboozle the public ever again the way he did in 2008. Oh, sure, there are still waaaaay too many obots. But as you said, Stinkerbelle’s light is fading.

  22. Tinkerbell might pull an LBJ and quit – which is what we aim to convince him to do:

    http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/20575

    In an interview with CNN in China, President Obama opened the possibility to not running for re-election in 2012 — something that no president has done since Lyndon Johnson.

    Here’s what he said:

    “You know, if – if I feel like I’ve made the very best decisions for the American people and three years from now I look at it and, you know, my poll numbers are in the tank and because we’ve gone through these wrenching changes, you know, politically, I’m in a tough spot, I’ll – I’ll feel all right about myself,” Obama told CNN’s Ed Henry.

    “I said to myself very early on, even when I started running for office, I don’t want to be making decisions based on getting re-elected, because I think the challenges that America faces right now are so significant,” the president also said.

    “Obviously, if I make those decisions and I think that I’m moving the country on the right direction economically, in terms of our security interests, our foreign policy, I’d like to think that those policies are continued because they’re not going to bear fruit just in four years.”

    But in the next breath the president quickly sounded like someone who would relish taking his case to the American people in 2012, saying he’s tackling big issues like health care and Iran that he’s confident will bear fruit in the future.

    How far-fetched is this. The quick answer: pretty.

    But consider that Obama was the most reluctant presidential candidate in modern times and that he has a young family.

    So, yea, there’s a slim possibility that he’s a no-go next time.

  23. actually basement angel…guess what…O did a flip flop, not only does he support the mandate now…he supports the fines…oh yes he does…he is on record supporting them:

    President Barack Obama says requiring people to get health insurance and fining them if they don’t would not amount to a backhanded tax increase.

    “I absolutely reject that notion,” the president said. Blanketing most of the Sunday TV news shows, Obama defended his proposed health care overhaul, including a key point of the various health care bills on Capitol Hill: mandating that people get health insurance to share the cost burden fairly among all. Those who failed to get coverage would face financial penalties.

    Obama said other elements of the plan would make insurance affordable for people, from a new comparison-shopping “exchange” to tax credits.

    Telling people to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase, Obama told ABC’s “This Week.”

    …etc, etc, etc

  24. yeah, admin…that’s why it is important to steal as much as possible as fast as possible…time could be running out…

  25. Basement Angel and Jen the Michigander, we suspect that Elizabeth Drew left a great deal out of her article. It’s a very tough piece coming from such an establishment figure. But the reason why we suspect there is a lot more she was told by Craig is the sharp attack on Valerie Jarrett and all the talk about Chicago. There seems to be a great deal of links missing in the article as to why Drew only now notices and comments on the Obama cut-throat Chicago style. Drew is not stupid and she must have noticed before now the insularity of the Obama thug machine. It’s almost as if the Jarrett/Chicago mentions are a separate article. Something is definitely up and some people are definitely nervous.

    The American Spectator article we also linked to (which OkieAtty bought to our attention in the comments from the previous article) has some additional information which brings more light to what is going on. In particular the fact that Bauer is the Obama personal attorney and now will be White House counsel is unprecedented. Further, the upcoming trials and plea dealings and the Rezko connections are subjects which Bauer has worked on.

    If we had to guess, Craig was privy to some of the machinations behind the scenes of episodes like the Jeremiah Wright response by the campaign as well as all the Obama moves when Rezko was in the headlines. Further, Craig is talking which led to the tough writing from Drew about Obama’s lack of integrity and class. Washington insularity and buddy-buddy relationships do not fully explain the tough words from Drew. It’s possible Craig will have more to say if the White House thugs continue to leak against him in retribution.

    Here’s the link to the American Spectator story which fills in additional blanks (we take the Hillary hating publication article with caution, but American Spectator’s Tyrell had some words of regret last year about how he and the magazine treated the Clintons in years past).

    http://spectator.org/archives/2009/11/16/obama-goes-to-the-mattresses

  26. Admin: You make a very good point about the Drew article. Bill and Hillary must be laughing themselves to sleep. Although I’m pretty sure they just exhausted. I hope they are taken down brick by brick. They need to be exposed just as they other corrput Dimocrats in office. How is it that Conyers sounds credible now when just a few months ago he said he couldn’t read a bill unless he had two days and two lawyers. The Rezko thing as well as the Palmer thing need to be exposed albeit only 2 years too late.

  27. Yes, Craig can GO TO HELL. And along with him the rest of the fcuking backstabbers who rode the best candidate EVER into the ground to support this POS that is now so incompetent that he can’t make any friggin decisions.

    Yes, they can all go suck eggs or dicks or whatever the hell else.

    I’m sick of them.

    GO HILLARY. Cut yourself loose from this loser and do it NOW

  28. ABC news tonight said that Oprah’s talk show had lost 43% of her viewers due to Hillary democrats.

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

    ABC admitted that?!?!?!?!

  29. I must laugh when I see the bewildered pubs tying to run a middle aged Barbie Doll against Hillary.Hillary out shines any political figure on the globe withe her knowledge compassion caring and concerns for all people everywhere.Palin claim to fame is purely based on fast talk and a tug of the strings by the scandal torn Ted Stevens and the one that got away in time Merkowski.Stupid is as stupid does as forrest,s mother used to say.HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON must be elected POTUS and much sooner than expected or this country is in real and desparate danger of becoming the newest and largest modern “Banana Republic”ever.
    This all needs immediate action or life as we know it will just be a past memory for we elders to
    cherish and long for and spare the new generation the ordeal of living in poverty for all of their lives.

    By ABM90 I am willing to fight on. Are you?

  30. The Oprah number gratifies me, because it validates that basic women of this country know what they believe in, and when they have been betrayed. They voted with their viewership. They also supported HRC in the Primary, when their own organizations did not. They know a leader when they see one, and they know when not to compromise on their cause. I am glad the this show is closing. I truely think that Oprah forgot what and where she came from, and who she was building up. One of these days there will be tell all books abut her from people that worked for her in the past and during this period.

    As to the second term, we all know that time must play on this. As I stated before, some health bill will pass. Then, we will actaully know what is in it. 2010 will be a leading indicator. With such a slow start, he would need to FINALLY bring forward some significant legislation, and take some significant military actions. If he loses the majority, this will be very hard to do. He would have to pull off the miracle that BC did. I really don’t think he can do that. BC had this charm, and most of his mistakes were seen as personnel. OO is a Messiah, and people real expected him to perform miracles, and quickly, especially in today’s world. They figured they could procrastinate, and get by with voting present, and a few pieces of legislations that really don’t get to, or do for the people what they expected.

    I still want to know what they are going to do with all the swine flu vaccine, which is in incubation, and no longer needed. I want to know why they had a miscalculation on the incubation, when France had a whole wharehouse full of the vaccine?????? Why would our vaccine have such a radically slow incubation period, when it is being used for the same flu bug. We have how many people DEAD nation wide, because of this miscalculation??? This may not be a hurricane in one concentration, but the administration error here has resulted in a high number of deaths. So where is the editorial running this to ground.

  31. NOVEMBER 21, 2009

    Strains in Party Threaten Democrats’ Plans : Lawmakers Feel Pressure to Respond to Voters’ Economic Pain as White House, Allies Focus Efforts on Passing Health Overhaul

    By PETER WALLSTEN and NAFTALI BENDAVID

    WASHINGTON — The Democratic Party’s broad ruling coalition is starting to fracture as lawmakers come under increasing pressure from the left to respond to voter anger over joblessness and Wall Street bailouts.

    Amid tensions within the Democratic Party, Congress is seeking to pass a bill in December aimed at creating jobs, although concerns about the deficit will likely keep it limited.

    Tensions boiled over this week, with an angry party caucus meeting Monday in the House, and black lawmakers Thursday threatening to block legislation in protest of President Barack Obama’s economic policies. Along the way, members of both parties grilled Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner over his ties to Wall Street, and some called on him to resign.

    The squabbling is turning up pressure on the White House and Democratic leaders in Congress to respond, a challenge when their focus is on passing a health-care overhaul. That appears less important to voters than finding solutions to economic woes, suggesting the weak labor market could overwhelm Mr. Obama’s domestic agenda. The dilemma facing party leaders: trying to keep core supporters excited without undermining more conservative members from right-leaning districts.

    “The 2008 election wasn’t about health care. It was about the economy,” said David Beattie, a Democratic pollster whose clients are running for office in competitive states including Colorado, Florida and Georgia. “But we’ve been addressing health care and energy. People are hurting, and they want something done to alleviate that.”

    Mr. Obama’s aides and his allies are scrambling to mollify supporters and minimize anxiety among independent voters who are fleeing the Democrats over economic issues. Congress is seeking to pass a bill in December aimed at creating jobs, although concerns about the deficit will likely keep it limited in scope. Congress is also looking to speed the much-delayed passage of a transportation bill, which could encourage spending on infrastructure projects.

    The strains represent a turnaround from earlier this year, when Mr. Obama enjoyed soaring approval from his base and White House aides spoke in sweeping terms about turning that loyalty into an enduring political force. “There’s tremendous concern about the lack of results on Main Street for all of the money that’s been borrowed and spent,” said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D., Ore.), one of the more liberal members of his party. Lawmakers representing one of Mr. Obama’s most loyal constituencies, the Congressional Black Caucus, have been vocal in their unhappiness.

    The White House has met privately with black caucus members. But officials have given no indication of a course change. Aides say passing health care and other agenda items will excite the political base. “What the American people need and expect from the White House is a continued focus on reforming health care, changing the outdated financial rules and doing everything we can to continue to grow the economy and put Americans back to work, which is exactly what we are focused on,” said spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki.

    Democratic pollster Peter Hart, a contributor to the Journal/NBC poll, said an improving economy would soothe party strife. “Do Democrats have to worry about turnout and voter intensity? You bet,” he said. “But it’s nothing that lowering unemployment by two points can’t solve.”

    The rough week comes on the heels of other disputes pitting Democrats against their leadership. Abortion-rights activists remain angry over the House health-care overhaul that would place limits on coverage for the procedure. Latinos and immigrant-rights activists are frustrated the White House has supported curbs on illegal immigrants participating in the health plan.

    Others complain the White House seems slowing its push for cap-and-trade legislation, hasn’t prioritized legislation making it easier for unions to organize, and looks to be on track toward a major troop escalation in Afghanistan. “People support the president, but I think most of them are just frustrated with the pace of change,” said Brian Melendez, chairman of the Democratic Party in Minnesota.

    The White House has geared some domestic policies around winning support in Congress from Democrats elected in conservative districts. That has frustrated liberals, who turned out in force to elect Mr. Obama. Asked by liberal talk-radio host Bill Press this week if Mr. Obama had shown enough leadership on health care, Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.), a key member of the black caucus, said, “Of course not.” He added: “Holding hands out, and beer on Friday nights in the White House, and bowing down to every nutty right-wing proposal about health care…is doing a disservice to the Barack Obama that I first met.”

    Surveys show Mr. Obama still enjoys strong support from such key constituencies as blacks and Latinos. Enthusiasm among working-class Democrats, a group Mr. Obama has struggled with, has slipped. In an October Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, 53% of Democrats without a college degree said the country is on the right track, compared with 64% in the spring.

    Contributing to the atmosphere was a third week of revelations about errors in reports filed by recipients of stimulus money, casting doubt on the number of jobs that can be credited to the $787 billion package. The chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, David Obey (D., Wis.), issued a statement Monday that called the errors “ludicrous” and demanded the administration work “night and day” to correct them. “Credibility counts in government and stupid mistakes like this undermine it,” Mr. Obey said.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125876581091558417.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird

  32. I think it is an insult and against women’s right to even attach the word “belle” to that zero!!!!!!

    THAT ZERO IS ALSO A STINKERBEAST!!!!!!!

  33. NewMexicoFan
    I think Oprah scammed everyone. We thought she was “post racial” but in fact she was all about race and getting a black president elected, regardless of qualifications. I actually think she has undone all of the could she did re race in America by promoting this boob.

  34. Carol

    The majority of women that watched Oprah is white. I know a lot of blacks who stopped watching Oprah a long time ago. They don’t like her.

    I am glad she is going off the air. She want be missed. She is a big phoney

  35. Has this been posted before?

    As Obama’s surprise (and reluctant) pick for Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton brings her star power and stamina to the global stage.

    Jonathan Van Meter reports. Photographed by Annie Leibovitz.
    It is a dreary morning in early October in Washington, D.C., and perhaps because Hillary Rodham Clinton is wearing a black Oscar de la Renta suit on such a colorless day, she seems somber. I had trailed her for nearly two weeks this summer in Africa and then again in New York during the United Nations General Assembly, and I had grown accustomed to seeing her in the vivid suits she favors. Africa is nothing if not colorful, and so not only did bright red or teal or periwinkle seem situation-appropriate, but her clothes somehow matched her demeanor, which was almost uniformly cheerful. Sometimes the color/mood connection was made overt: One morning, as her motorcade arrived at the U.N. for a panel on violence against women and girls, she stepped out of a shiny black luxury sedan in a red suit and was met by Esther Brimmer, her Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, also wearing red. “Good morning, Esther,” said Clinton. “I see you got the color memo.”

    the link…

    http://www.vogue.com/feature/2009_December_Jonathan_Van_Meter_Profile_of_Hillary_Clinton/

  36. TheRealist

    I really do think that HRC is sending signals by the colors and the way she dresses. I never wore Red when I was young. Now, when I want to make sure people notice I get out the red, and I flaunt it.

  37. oprah is quitting to get more involved with her television channel. At least that is her cover-up excuse for losing viewers in droves.

  38. admin said:
    h/ no w
    primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/20575
    In an interview with CNN in China, President Obama opened the possibility to not running for re-election in 2012 — something that no president has done since Lyndon Johnson.
    /snip/
    How far-fetched is this. The quick answer: pretty.
    But consider that Obama was the most reluctant presidential candidate in modern times and that he has a young family.
    So, yea, there’s a slim possibility that he’s a no-go next time.

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

    Well, anyone who thinks Obama was ‘reluctant’ must be full of koolaid — so if evan a koolaider thinks Obama might not run, that’s a good sign!

  39. How is it that Conyers sounds credible now when just a few months ago he said he couldn’t read a bill unless he had two days and two lawyers.

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

    Maybe Conyers was referring to the size of THIS bill?

  40. “What finally changed her mind? “Obama wouldn’t take no for an answer, and he was just very smart with her,” says one of her aides. “He talked about it from the right place in the right way, helping her imagine what it would be like. And she said, OK, well, let’s think about it some more. Eventually he was successful at convincing her. He would not let her off the hook. Knowing her and having worked with her—that button got pushed, that we-need-you-to-serve-your-country button.”

    That’s Hillary, she couldn’t refuse to serve our country when called upon…

  41. Vogue said:
    [Obama] Knowing her and having worked with her—that button got pushed, that we-need-you-to-serve-your-country button.”

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

    Pretty good article, except where Vogue is trying to give Obama the credit, and sounding like Hillary had no mind of her own.

    More likely, after a long talk she believed he would cooperate with her! (Or he promised to.)

  42. turndownobama

    sorry folks I do not buy that crap. She has something on him. Even if he was open to HRC in that position, his wife was not.

  43. A number of people have told me that they believe that Rahm Emanuel is the link to Soros. This avoids the petty annoyance of Obama and Soros communicating directly every day. That is a plausible assumption. I doubt very much they talk everyday. But I do not doubt that there is a common business plan for the country which they talk about at suitable points in the process. The further assumption is that inasmuch as Soros has worked closely with the CIA ( a proven fact–not an assumption), that other parts of the communication may also go through cut outs. Also, we know there was substantial communication between Obama and Soros lietenant Wolf (Swiss Bank–UBC) at the Kennedy funeral. My further assumption is that contrary to popular opinion, Axelrod is not the architect the way Rove was to Bush, but simply hired help. If all this is true, then it is further indication how far out of the loop big media is. They wile away their hours talking about scenarios that do not exist, with no idea of or courage to talk about those that do.

  44. What finally changed her mind? “Obama wouldn’t take no for an answer, and he was just very smart with her,” says one of her aides. “He talked about it from the right place in the right way, helping her imagine what it would be like. And she said, OK, well, let’s think about it some more. Eventually he was successful at convincing her. He would not let her off the hook. Knowing her and having worked with her—that button got pushed, that we-need-you-to-serve-your-country button.”

    That’s Hillary, she couldn’t refuse to serve our country when called upon…
    ——————————–
    You may want to look at this as an agreed upon story. But it is a story. It makes him look good for choosing her–thats true. But it makes her look good to those who are on the fence about her and it shuts up her critics. To supporters like us it is acknowledges something we already know, so it is easy for us not to see the advantage of that story from her standpoint.

  45. Also, you may wish to ask yourself whether it is believable that an egotist like Obama who wants the world stage for himself would voluntarily reach out a global celebrity like Hillary to be his SOS. Does that sound likely to you? But it is something that a hopium addled press corp would believe and repeat ad nasuem because it coincides with their false fundamantal misunderstanding of who he really is and what he is about.

  46. wbboei
    November 21st, 2009 at 12:37 pm

    Also, you may wish to ask yourself whether it is believable that an egotist like Obama who wants the world stage for himself would voluntarily reach out a global celebrity like Hillary to be his SOS.

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

    I’m skeptical too of Obama’s motives here.

  47. wbboei, Here in East Texas the news is talking how the FBI is revisiting all these cold cases as far back as 1950. These cases are racial cases. Cases where blacks were killed by whites. They are making news here. Also on CNN there seems to a Walmart case that involves a black woman inciting a riot in a small town. Its making national news….WHY??
    I think SOros is inciting racial rioting, I think this is what the plan is.

  48. wbboei, All they need is a few Rodney King’s in rural america and for the President come under fire for his birth certificate or his dirty dealing with the mob in Chicago. I bet this is the plan.

  49. A few thoughts stumbling around…

    If the polling for obama and the dims continues it’s negative spiral, what happens in the 2010 elections?

    What if the Repubs take back some very precious seats from the dims, add a few independents to the mix, have them fillibuster anything and everything the dims put forth? What if some dims continue to feel disenchantment with obama as well and this shows in their voting/support pattern?

    So 2012 rolls around and do obama and his thugs use the repubs sabotage of everything he is trying to achieve to create a new message “blame the repubs again?” Do voters have short memories? Will he get buy-in?

  50. From C-Span; It’s down to Lincoln…

    ” Senate Health Care Debate Continues, Cloture Vote at 8pm
    Today

    Debate continues in the Senate on the motion to proceed to health care legislation. Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) has announced that she will vote yes on the motion. According to news reports, 59 Democrats and Independents have indicated that they will vote to proceed. Sixty votes are needed and Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) has yet to announce how she will vote.”

  51. My theory about Oprah quitting is that she sees the writing on the wall which is that Obama will be a disaster (if not a disaster at least very unpopular), it can only go downhill for him the way things are going and she will be tied to his failures in an indirect way and she can only go downhill. So better to quit now than be forced out. Getting involved with Obama is the worst PR disaster for her. On a more frivolous note there was a NE article (I forget where I saw it, may be meme?) that said MO is blocking her access to Obama and the WH.

  52. About the Vogue article, it is hard to believe both sides of the story, more so of Obama that he wanted her badly as SoS. Looking at what he did to Craig and others, there is no way he would not have been ruthless in squashing both Clintons, especially Hillary for what she did to him during the primary. He knows that if she had quit sooner and thrown her support for him, he would be in a better shape now than otherwise.

  53. Wbboei, maybe ‘they’ said, “Don’t fight us at the convention and we’ll give you SOS.” Also, we won’t mess with Bill’s world mission providing he cancels that ‘tell-all about the primary’ book he’s promising to release in January before the inauguration. And ‘they’ probably believed that the brilliance of the Mac daddy when he strode the world stage would eclipse her. (‘They’ ALWAYS hugely and stupidly underestimated her real ability.) Furthermore, ‘they’ wanted to get her out of the Senate, where she could be a threat to their agenda.
    The one thing they could NOT do is ignore her.
    What I cannot accept is that it was HIS decision.

  54. turndownobama
    November 21st, 2009 at 11:55 am
    How is it that Conyers sounds credible now when just a few months ago he said he couldn’t read a bill unless he had two days and two lawyers
    ———————————–

    Refresh my memory, did O not say he could only concentrate on one thing at a time also?

    Were America not listening?

  55. Anyone hear anything more about Rev. Manning? Has he been arrested? Maybe an update was posted here and I missed it.

  56. By Christian Boone
    The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
    Saturday, November 21, 2009

    Fort Hood-style attack threatened at Georgia base

    The Army Times is reporting exclusively that an anonymous note threatening a massacre similar to the Nov. 5 attack at Fort Hood, Texas, was discovered Thursday — along with a box of 20 hollow-point bullets — in a motor pool area at Columbus’ Fort Benning.

    The discovery coincided with a visit from Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. Central Command, who was in town for Officer Candidate School graduation. The threat prompted a criminal investigation and greater police presence on the Army base, the Army Times reports.

    According to a witness on the scene, a box of 20 hollow-point shells and a handwritten note were found under the 197th Infantry Training Brigade.

    “The note said ‘tell the commanding general to call off all charges or there will be a re-enactment of Fort Hood,’ ” a witness told Army Times. Army psychiatrist Nidal Hasan is charged in the Nov. 5 shooting deaths of 13 fellow service members.

    The newspaper, which serves an audience of Army personnel, active and retired, said military police acted quickly on the threat, cordoning off a 20-foot perimeter around the box.

    “They’re talking with anyone with a pending [Uniform Code of Military Justice] charge and people who are getting chaptered out to see if they can find out who it is,” the witness told the Army Times.

    Fort Benning officials refused comment on the specifics of the letter but confirmed “an ongoing investigation into a general threat at Fort Benning.”

    “A suspicious package and note were found,” post spokeswoman Elsie Jackson said. “The soldier notified a noncommissioned officer, who alerted 911. The area was secured as is normal in these types of incidents.”

    Soldiers in the unit are being questioned about the threat, the witness told the Army Times. The Kelley Hill area of Fort Benning was on lockdown for part of the day Friday, according to the witness, who noted an increase in military police patrols on the post.

    The Fort Benning spokeswoman said “appropriate force protection measures are in place while an investigation is underway to determine if this is a viable threat.”

    http://www.ajc.com/news/fort-hood-style-attack-207757.html

  57. Having worked with Conyers in years past, our last memory of him is Conyers grinning at the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting that stole Hillary delegates to give to Obama. That grin is never to be forgotten. Now, he complains and does not grin.

  58. Here’s Glenn Beck latest where he discusses the rethug plan of letting us go into a depression so we can come out better. Oh yeah, Glenn, that way the repugs can lower the wages, right!! Dont fall for this crap!

    h t t p : / / w w w.youtube.com/watch?v=2JPyDAwM7mA

  59. I tell you this conspiracy is wide and deep against the American people. GWB started the spending, Obama finishes spending all America has, then we get Glenn Beck telling us that is better we have a depression so we can come out better on the other side, while the elites in this country get fatter. Oh yeah, lets do just that. This is why they wanted Bill and Hillary out, because there was a way to fix it without all this bullshit.

  60. New Mexico Fan,

    What Hillary has on Obama is hundreds of affadavits, signed under penalty of perjury, attesting to rule breaking and law breaking in the Texas Democratic primary – and not all of those affadavits come from Clinton supporters. A former head of the Texas Democratic party walked into the caucuses an Obama supporter and walked out a Clinton supporter. In addition, there is physical evidence in their hands of vote fraud in Indiana where underage high school kids were bussed to voting sites, given palm cards instructing them who to vote for, and after voting, were fed lunch and given an Ipod. Clinton has a copy of the palm card. Then there’s Iowa, where rural precincts were overwhelmed with young voters that no one had ever seen in the neighborhood before – this is significant because in rural precincts the local politicos frequently know everyone who participates in the caucuses.

    That’s just a small sample of what she has on him.

  61. basement angel, If she has that on Obama, she also has this on Soros because he bankrolled the operation. So that why she gets nasty comments on Time magazine.

  62. Making Israel disappear

    By Vincent Carroll
    11/22/2009

    If you sit down with Itamar Marcus, you had better brace yourself for a jarring refresher course on Mideast reality. That’s especially true if you tend to think like the current administrationif you believe, for example, that the Israeli-Palestinian impasse is all about borders and settlements and that the construction of 900 housing units in southern Jerusalem “could end up being very dangerous,” as President Barack Obama said last week.

    If it’s “very dangerous” to construct Jewish housing in a city that Israel will never, ever relinquish, what should we call the effort to brainwash children into believing that Israel itself doesn’t exist?

    How should we describe the claim that not only East Jerusalem — captured by Israel in the 1967 war — belongs to the Palestinians, but that every other Israeli city, from Haifa to Ashkelon, belongs to them, too?

    “In the world inhabited by Palestinian children,” Marcus tells me, “there is no Israel.” And if you give him time, the director of Palestinian Media Watch (palwatch.org) in Jerusalem will subject you to a barrage of depressing evidence for his contention. He’ll show you snippets from TV quiz shows for Palestinian kids predicated on the non-existence of Israel.

    Host: “Which mountain is the tallest in Palestine? …” Child contestant: “Mount Meron (in Israel).”

    On another show, a host asks, “Which Palestinian city is called ‘the flower of Galilee’?” and then names three Israeli cities!

    Then Marcus will show you school geography lessons that use maps on which Israel is missing. Do any Palestinian textbooks acknowledge the existence of Israel, I wonder. “No,” Marcus replies.

    The anti-Israeli content of Palestinian textbooks has been a longstanding concern for anyone who yearns for a permanent political settlement, but surely those books have improved since Yasser Arafat’s death in 2004. Not really, says Marcus. If anything, he says, they devote more space than ever to depicting conflict with Israel as a solemn religious duty aimed at liberating a Muslim land.

    Remember, we’re talking about textbooks chosen by the Palestinian government led by the allegedly moderate President Mahmoud Abbas, not the overtly jihadist Hamas. The Palestinian Authority media, meanwhile, are full of similar Islamist references that offer no room for compromise, and that honor terrorists and suicide bombers as national heroes.

    No less ominous is what Marcus describes as the Palestinian Authority’s “infrastructure of hate,” the relentless depiction of Jews as sinister and evil — as conspirators spreading AIDS, for example, or undermining the very foundations of the Al-Aqsa mosque.

    Naturally, Jews poisoned Yasser Arafat, too — or at least that is what children are told. In a TV tribute to Arafat earlier this month, one youngster unconsciously presented the essence of this paranoid vision: “He died from poisoning by the Jews. Well, I don’t know what he died from, but I know it was by the Jews.”

    “In 2008,” the State Department boasted this summer in a press release, “the U.S. was the single largest national donor to the Palestinian Authority . . . committing more than $600 million in assistance . . . .”

    And the fruits of this investment? A Palestinian public that remains in resolute denial about the reality of Israel more than 60 years after its founding. Surely that should worry us more than the expansion of a Jewish neighborhood in a capital whose Jewish roots extend back several thousand years.

    http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_13827921

Comments are closed.