Where’s Obama?

Off on a two week Hollywood Hawaiian vacation Obama is busy taking care, as usual, of what benefits himself. The world is going to hell in a hand-basket, but Obama is too busy to care – presumably flashing his manboobs on sandy beaches and on the luxurious estate he now calls home.

We are thankful that finally we have a respite from the ceaseless Obama publicity stunt appearances, but many are asking “Where’s Obama?”

Still no word from the president about the failed Christmas Day terrorism attempt, but the White House did distribute a statement from him today on the death of Percy Sutton.

Obama called Sutton “a true hero to African Americans in New York City and around the country” whose “life-long dedication to the fight for civil rights and his career as an entrepreneur and public servant made the rise of countless young African Americans possible.”

The president also made time for a workout and some early-morning basketball today. On the guest list for a couple of games at the gym: Marty Nesbitt, Eric Whitaker, Denis McDonough, Bill Burton, Reggie Love, Pete Newell, Grant Campbell and Ben Finkenbinder.

Today, another incident on a flight from Amsterdam (another Nigerian it appears, on the same flight number) but Obama is busy – possibly watching Tiger Woods videos to improve his laughable golf game.

Where’s Obama? Certainly not thinking about the deaths in Iran.

Iranian police opened fire on protesters in Tehran on Sunday, killing at least four people, including a nephew of the opposition leader Mir Hussein Moussavi, as vast crowds of demonstrators flooded the streets of cities across Iran and fiercely fought security forces, according to witnesses and opposition Web sites.

The protests, taking place on the holiday marking the death of Shiite Islam’s holiest martyr, were the bloodiest — and among the largest — since the uprisings that followed Iran’s disputed presidential election last June, with hundreds of thousands of people thronging Tehran alone, witnesses said. There were reports of hundreds of injured people and numerous arrests.

In Tehran, thick crowds marched down a central avenue in mid-morning, defying official warnings of a harsh crackdown on protests as they chanted, “Death to the dictator!” They refused to retreat even as police fired tear gas, charged them with batons and discharged warning shots.

The police then opened fire directly into the crowd, opposition Web sites said, citing witnesses. At least four people were killed, the Web sites reported, and photographs circulated of a man with a bloodied head being carried from the scene.

One of the dead was Ali Moussavi, Mr. Moussavi’s 35-year-old nephew, the Parleman News Web site reported. He was shot near the heart at midday in Tehran’s Enghelab Square, the report said.

The Iranian people are rising against their oppressors. Obama however is busy flashing his manboobs and looking at the mirror and thinking “What a clever fellow am I.” For Americans it is a lost opportunity to express solidarity with a freedom movement filled with real Hope for real Change. But Obama is missing.

The day’s clashes showed an opposition movement that is becoming bolder and more direct in its challenge to Iran’s ruling authorities. Yet the protesters continued to reclaim Islamic symbols from the government, which has cast its opponents as anti-religious rioters. On Saturday, when protesters gathered outside a prayer hall where the reformist former president Muhammad Khatami was speaking, they chanted, “The family of the Imam are with us,” a reference to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of Iran’s 1979 revolution. Ayatollah Khomeini’s grandson, Hassan, is widely said to support the opposition movement.

Charles Krauthammer, before the latest bloodletting in Iran, called Obama “feckless”.

On Tuesday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not just reject President Obama’s latest feckless floating nuclear deadline. He spat on it, declaring that Iran “will continue resisting” until the U.S. has gotten rid of its 8,000 nuclear warheads.

So ends 2009, the year of “engagement,” of the extended hand, of the gratuitous apology — and of spinning centrifuges, two-stage rockets and a secret enrichment facility that brought Iran materially closer to becoming a nuclear power.

We lost a year. But it was not just any year. It was a year of spectacularly squandered opportunity. In Iran, it was a year of revolution, beginning with a contested election and culminating this week in huge demonstrations mourning the death of the dissident Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri — and demanding no longer a recount of the stolen election but the overthrow of the clerical dictatorship.

Obama responded by distancing himself from this new birth of freedom. First, scandalous silence. Then, a few grudging words. Then relentless engagement with the murderous regime. With offer after offer, gesture after gesture — to not Iran, but the “Islamic Republic of Iran,” as Obama ever so respectfully called these clerical fascists — the U.S. conferred legitimacy on a regime desperate to regain it.

Why is this so important? Because revolutions succeed at that singular moment, that imperceptible historical inflection, when the people, and particularly those in power, realize that the regime has lost the mandate of heaven. With this weakening dictatorship desperate for affirmation, why is the U.S. repeatedly offering just such affirmation?

Apart from ostracizing and delegitimizing these gangsters, we should be encouraging and reinforcing the demonstrators.

Poor Charles Krauthammer. He thinks Obama cares. Obama only cares for his comfort and his self-advancement. Why should he disturb his slumbers and the airing of his manboobs?

Obama is not about to rouse himself to denounce a privileged terrorist.

With his wealth, privilege and education at one of Britain’s leading universities, Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab had the world at his feet – able to choose from a range of futures in which to make his mark on the world.

Instead, the son of one of Nigeria’s most important figures opted to make his impact in a very different way – by detonating 80g of explosives sewn into his underpants, and trying to destroy a passenger jet as it came in to land at Detroit Airport on Christmas Day.

As he was charged by US authorities last night with attempting to blow up an airliner, a surprising picture emerged of the would-be bomber.

Abdulmutallab, 23, had lived a gilded life, and, for the three years he studied in London, he stayed in a £2m flat. He was from a very different background to many of the other al-Qa’ida recruits who opt for martyrdom.

Perhaps Obama viewed Abdulmutallab as a potential donor. In either case, Obama has gone missing even as Abdulmutallab’s father took steps which must be the most painful a father can ever take:

Abdulmutallab’s father, Umaru, is the former economics minister of Nigeria. He retired earlier this month as the chairman of the First Bank of Nigeria but is still on the boards of several of Nigeria’s biggest firms, including Jaiz International, a holding company for the Islamic Bank. The 70-year-old, who was also educated in London, holds the Commander of the Order of the Niger as well as the Italian Order of Merit.

Dr Mutallab said he was planning to meet with police in Nigeria last night after realising his son had joined the notorious roster of al-Qa’ida terrorists, and is said to have warned the US authorities about his son’s extreme views six months ago.

Dr. Mutallab, presumably in deep pain, did his duty and reported his terrorist son. But duty is not in the Obama vocabulary. “Self-advancement” and “careerism”, as Michelle Obama herself described Obama, are part of Obama’s life aims.

Where’s Obama? Ask his freezing constituents in Chicago. Ask those in Illinois when Obama killed universal health care from the state legislature. Ask those Obama bamboozled by pretending to oppose Exelon on radioactive leaks while really siding with Exelon.

Where’s Obama? Obama is on the side of what benefits himself. The concerns of ordinary Americans are not to be found in Obama’s mirror.

Where’s Obama? Like George W. Bush, Obama is on vacation when he should be on the job.


83 thoughts on “Where’s Obama?

  1. Admin,

    You nailed it on the head.

    Furthermore, how many bloody holidays does this worthless idiot and his equally selfish bimbo of a wife need in less than a year? How much money is this costing the already burdened taxpayer?

  2. December 27, 2009

    Horse-trading over health scars Obama: The deals struck to win support for his key healthcare reform have damaged the president as the fall in his popularity ratings shows

    Tony Allen-Mills in New York

    IT WAS once America’s most exclusive restaurant, a gilded salon where not even a president could book a table. Yet a new age of ferocious political enmity spawned by President Barack Obama’s bitterly contested healthcare reforms has put paid to the chummy comforts of the US Senate’s private dining room for senators only.

    In decades past the dining room served as a discreet venue for 100 Democratic and Republican senators to meet, chat and haggle without any outsiders present. The food was notoriously dull but the company was exceptional. “When I was here, 10, 15, 30 years ago, that was the place you would go to talk to senators,” mused Max Baucus, a veteran Democrat from Montana. “You could let your hair down, just kind of compare notes, no spouses allowed, no staff, nobody. It is now empty.”

    Rival senators who were once happy to set aside political differences over bowls of mushroom soup are now at each other’s throats. After last week’s crucial procedural vote on a sweeping $871 billion (£546 billion) reform package, Obama may pay a steep price for his advance on a longstymied Democratic dream of extending health insurance to more than 30m Americans previously unable to afford it.

    In one sense the president had plenty to celebrate. He may still be months away from signing the proposed new measures into law, but after decades of disappointment at the Democrats’ failure to reform a flawed and expensive system — most notably the collapse of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s healthcare effort in the early 1990s — there was no doubting that Obama had a rare legislative triumph in sight.

    Yet it was clear last week, as the president flew off to Hawaii for his Christmas break, that while the Clintons put defeat behind them and cruised to two full terms in the White House, Obama may never recover from a victory that has demolished his bipartisan aspirations and which his critics have already judged pyrrhic.

    It was a bizarre feature of the US healthcare debate that the longer it went on and the closer it came to a successful outcome, the lower Obama sank in opinion polls. By the time the last $100m incentives had been dished out to wavering Democratic senators last week, Obama was languishing at his lowest approval ratings of the year, with one poll showing that only 32% of Americans still think the healthcare plan is a “good” idea.

    For the president who had swept through successive primary and general election campaigns last year promising to change the way Washington did business — and pledging to usher in a new age of bipartisan co-operation — there was no easy explanation for the cynical political dealmaking that ultimately secured the Democratic majority, but which may leave permanent scars on his stumbling administration. Amid the 2,000 pages of small print added to the Senate’s healthcare bill are all manner of promises and pay-offs to senators protecting the special interests of their home states. Senator Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat who has led his party’s discussions of the bill, defended the deals with wavering senators as “the art of compromise … that’s what legislation is all about”.

    Yet the Democrats’ need to secure the votes of every one of the party’s 58 senators and two independents to foil Republican filibusters provoked a public display of such naked opportunism that senators on both sides of the aisle became alarmed by the message they were sending to voters. The biggest beneficiary of what one columnist dubbed “Harry [Reid]’s favour factory” was Senator Ben Nelson, a moderate Nebraska Democrat who insisted his vote was “not for sale”, but who later overcame his doubts about abortion and other issues when a clause worth $100m to Nebraska hospitals was belatedly inserted.

    Other big Democratic winners included Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, who successfully argued for subsidies that apply mainly to her home state; Senator Christopher Dodd, whose home state of Connecticut may land a new university hospital; Senator Bill Nelson, who won special exemptions for Florida pensioners; and Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, who fought off potentially punitive tax penalties.

    All this presented Republican critics with an arsenal of prospective abuse that was threatening to resonate much more loudly with voters than Obama’s solemn insistence that history is being made. “This process is not legislation. This process is corruption,” declared Senator Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican. Senator Lindsey Graham talked of “backroom deals that amount to bribes”.

    Republicans were thrilled when Congressman Parker Griffith, an Alabama Democrat, declared himself so disillusioned that he was switching parties. Yesterday there were fears in Democrat ranks that others might follow.

    It was the crushing collapse of the Clinton health reforms, derided as HillaryCare, that largely contributed to the so-called Republican “revolution” of 1994, when conservatives led by Newt Gingrich and his Senate allies seized control of both houses of Congress. The Democrat losses persuaded Bill Clinton to turn to Dick Morris, a shrewd political operator who steered the president away from the left of his party and encouraged him to focus on traditionally Republican virtues such as a balanced budget and toughness on crime. By the time Clinton delivered his state of the union address in 1996 he was able to declare the “era of big government is over”. He was re-elected at a canter later that year.

    Yet Obama has so far shown no sign that he plans a similar U-turn. Although polls show a substantial majority of voters remain suspicious of “big government” — an elastic term that most associate with higher taxes — the president insisted in interviews last week that he was “very enthusiastic about what we have achieved”.

    It scarcely helps that the healthcare debate will linger well into the new year as congressional officials meet to hammer out significant differences between the upper and lower house versions of the bill.

    Democrats on the left of the party have already warned they are unhappy with some of Reid’s compromises, notably over restrictions on abortion funding and the exclusion of a plan for the government to provide state-financed health insurance.
    Congresswoman Louise Slaughter of New York said the changes to the Congress bill approved a month ago made the Senate version “not worthy”. She added: “It’s time we draw the line on this weak bill and ask the Senate to go back to the drawing board”.

    That in turn may distract the president from what many voters perceive as his greatest failing — an economic recovery programme that has sent the federal budget deficit soaring yet has failed to generate many new jobs. Despite encouraging signs of a return to growth, a backlog of home repossessions and continuing restrictions on new debt continue to dog much of working-class America. Obama insisted last week that the financial rescue package he forced through at the start of the year was “the most important thing we did”, yet continuing rows over bankers collecting their Christmas bonuses have undermined the president’s claims to have introduced meaningful change.

    Perhaps most dangerously, the healthcare feuding has made a mockery of Obama’s repeated pledges to mend what he used to call “the broken system in Washington”. Obama owed his primary victory over Hillary Clinton in no small part to his depiction of the former first lady as one of “the Washington players [who] play the same old Washington game”. In his stump speech he routinely declared: “It’s time to end business-as-usual in Washington so we can bring about real change for the American people.”

    Obama insists that his healthcare reforms will transform the lives of millions of Americans. Yet the empty tables of the Senate dining room suggest a different and more ominous change.


  3. He’s always on holiday, makes you wonder if he’s just a rubber stamp Pres, wheeled out to sign and puff his gob, nothing else.

  4. Why oh Why is Kerry making overtures to visit Iran with the administration’s blessing? Isn’t this tone deaf and reckless? By making such a high profile visit by an American senator give credence and validity to the current regime? Kerry seems to be trying to increase his visibility even more than it already is. Angling for the SOS job?

  5. Admin: other lyrics also work

    So let down the gangway
    Here comes Eva Tanguay
    (An exotic dancer just like Bambi)
    Cause I don’t care.

  6. birdgal, he can’t be bothered with freedom, unless it’s to his benefit or the benefit of his moneybags puppetmasters. He ignores the protestors, but notice that when the House of Saud snapped their fingers, America came running lickety split and bombed some Yemenis for them.

    If you want to know what will and will not be “important” and “priority” to Obama and the Dims, follow the money.

  7. Birdgal, let’s encourage Kerry to go to Iran immediately
    Yes. He can throw his medals at the US Embassy. That will give him cache with the Iranian President. On his way he can give an inspirational speech to our troops in Iraq, about how they would not be there if they were smart like him. How about a hostage swap. They can keep him as long as they can stand him, as long as they release the hostages they are holding.

  8. The Obama entourage is clueles. The world is turning below their feet and they are so full of themselves that they do not notice. It is called being oblivious.

  9. David Gregory quoted Bill Clinton as saying that it was risky for the Republican Party to oppose this bill because when the bill takes effect people will like it. That is what I recollect him saying. If my recollection is accurate, then there is nuance in those words. Think about it.

    The alleged benefits of that bill do not take effect for several years. The costs commence immediately. The credit card mentality of the American Public is precisely the reverse. Buy now pay later. This is a case of pay now, buy a pig in a poke later. The American People will not like it. It will be the centerpiece of the Republican attack in 2010 and 2012. It will destroy the credibility of Poosie, Dirty Harry and Shaft. They were desperate to make a deal–any deal, rather than the right deal. I suspect they will try to find a compromise during reconcilliation, but the dirty deal Obama cut with the health care industry in secret prevents him from doing what the American People want and expect.

    This is the way Obama operates:

    Step 1> Crisis: select a problem or invent one. Characterize it as a crisis. Marshall false prophets of doom and phony statistics. Demand instant government action. Use big media to communicate all this.

    Step 2> Solution: meet privately with business interests. Let them suggest a remedy which lines their pockets. Trumpet their solution as the solution. Characterize it as a public private partnership. Pay people to endorse it.

    Step 3> Implementation: unveil that solution with great pomp and ceremony. Express personal commitment to its success. Characterize opponents as ignorant or malicious. Dismiss their arguments as flat earth enthusiasts, racists, people who lack intelligence and compassion. Preen before the mirror and the lens of an adoring big media.

    Step 4> Failure: as the looting occurs get your share of it. The high cost precludes the use of those monies for alternative approaches that would solve the problem. Ignore feedback from reality. When failure hits, find convenient scapegoats. Express personal disappointment. Pass another stimulus plan so you can repeat the cycle.

    (Note: to gain a deeper understanding of this, read The Vision of The Annointed by Thomas Sowell).

  10. admin
    December 27th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
    Birdgal, let’s encourage Kerry to go to Iran immediately.

    If we’re lucky, they just might keep him forever. This administration is totally clueless and tone deaf to what is going on with people in the U.S. and the protesters in Iran.

  11. Lets do a swap, they get Kerry, we take all the protestors who want out of Iran. Fair swap, we get the better deal out of it, poor iranians.

  12. My daughter flew out today for a trip. She is not looking forward to being confined to her seat and no iPod or book or anything for the last hour.

    What we NEED is airport security trained in PROFILING. Yes, I said profiling.

    All young male muslims should have a background check done when they buy a ticket. If there’s nothing there, fine. If there is anything concerning there, then they get a more intrusive search when they show up at the airport.

    The Israeli airport security profiles. They train their people to watch behaviors, and watch individuals of interest. Despite being a prime target, Israeli airlines have not had these incidents. Because they don’t try to uselessly “screen” everyone – they PROFILE, and don’t apologize for it. Sorry, but it’s not hateful, it’s just common sense.

  13. The thing is, why is it we all have to put up with our liberties lessened, its not us, its them, ffs.

    I dont see the sense of searching a 90 yr old woman and taking her jar of jam away.

  14. Wbboei, There’s lots of questions I would like to ask Reggie Love if he was under oath or given truth serum first!! LOL!!

  15. BRAVO, wbboei-

    you are waxing poetic today!

    noting Congress voted on a “LAY-A-WAY” Health Care Bill! Pay a HCR Tax for 4 years and you find out what you bought in 6 yrs. LAUGHABLE!

    Just another Ponzi scheme created to loot the PUBLIC and further indenture them to out of control deficits on the books for the next 100 years.

    Newt was right. A 2000 pg HC Bill that no one in Congress read but voted yes on is the centerpiece of the “Obama the feckless” presidency. The Republicans must be ROFLTAO at the easy pickins Obama delivered to them for taking back the senate and the house a few months from now.

  16. I’d like to know who approved his US visa (after the UK had already denied him one last year), and if he had a sponsor, and who that sponsor was.

  17. Marc Ambinder is still making excuses for Obama. Now, being “present” is all part of some grand strategy:


    In Fahrenheit 9/11, filmmaker Michael Moore juxtaposes images and words of a terrorist attack in Israel with President Bush’s first words about the incident, spoken to a press pool on a golf course, with him leaning casually against a tree. Today, as the nation’s law enforcement agencies respond to an attempted terrorist attack on U.S. soil, as the cable news channels and news websites pull in reinforcements to cover the incident from all angles, President Obama has been silent.

    In fact, he’s been golfing. He received a counterterrorism briefing early this morning, Hawaii time, and moments later, left for the gym. The president’s vacation activities might have become the subject of a fierce partisan fight — but really, the only carping is coming from the usual suspects on the right.

    There is a reason why Obama hasn’t given a public statement. It’s strategy.

    Here’s the theory: a two-bit mook is sent by Al Qaeda to do a dastardly deed. He winds up neutering himself. Literally.

    Authorities respond appropriately; the president (as this president is wont to to) presides over the federal response. His senior aides speak for him, letting reporters know that he’s videoconferencing regularly, that he’s ordering a review of terrorist watch lists, that he’s discoursing with his secretary of Homeland Security.

    But an in-person Obama statement isn’t needed; Indeed, a message expressing command, control, outrage and anger might elevate the importance of the deed, would generate panic (because Obama usually DOESN’T talk about the specifics of cases like this, and so him deciding to do so would cue the American people to respond in a way that exacerbates the situation).

    Obama of course will say something at some point. Had the terrorist blown up the plane, it’s safe to assume that Obama would no longer be in Hawaii. In either case, the public will need presidential fortification at some point. But Obama is willing to risk the accusation that he is “soft” on terrorism or is hovering above it all, or is just not to be bothered (his “head’s in the sand,” or “golfing comes first”) in order to advance what he believes is the proper collective response to a failed act of terrorism.

    Let the authorities do their work. Don’t presume; don’t panic the country; don’t chest-thump, prejudge, interfere, politicize (in an international sense), don’t give Al Qaeda (or whomever) a symbolic victory; resist the urge to open the old playbook and run a familiar play.

    In a sense, he is projecting his calm on the American people, just as his advisers are convinced that the Bush administration projected their panic and anger on the self-same public eight years ago.

    It’s a tough and novel approach — and not at all (as they say in Britain) party political — because the standard political script would have the president and his attorney general appearing everywhere as soon as possible.

  18. Kerry going to Iran with the obama government’s blessing is one step further in the U.S. legitimizing a corrupt and violent regime. It is a slap at the protestors and an even bigger slap at Israel.

    In the space of a few months, obama and his thugs have destroyed their country’s foreign affair reputation. And as Hillary as said time and again, this is his policy she is following.

  19. HillaryforTexas
    December 27th, 2009 at 5:01 pm

    I agree, H4T-

    Gingrich noted today, why hasn’t a label been created for these Muslim (Islam) extremists? He noted the Fort Hood Shooting, the 5 arrested in Iraq, the 4-5 arrested in Detroit. All Muslims- Yet, the little old grandma boarding a plane has her homemade jelly taken from her as a potential threat to Homeland Security.

    Tim Robbins must have gotten tired of hearing Susan’s lame excuses for defending the indefensible Obama and left his partner of 20 yrs for saner surroundings. He must have felt he was still on the set filming “Jacob’s Ladder” day in and day out listening to and living with the delusional Susan too proud to admit she was duped and separated from handsome, generous, donations to Obama’s campaign and therefore had made a mistake in a serious judgment call of Obama’s character.

  20. Ambinder is a child. His frontal lobes are still in the developmental stage. Mature judgement is not his strong suit. Harvard in 2001 did not help. He spares no hubris in his autobiographical description of himself. “Co-biblical status?” That is how he sees himself? That sounds rather delusional and self aggrandizing to me. No wonder he loves Bambi.
    Marc spent a year and a half at the Hotline, where he was the editor of “Hotline On Call,” a pathbreaking political news blog. He spent four years in the ABC News Political Unit as a reporter, researcher and a field producer, and was one of the founders of ABC’s “The Note,” which, for a time, achieved co-biblical status in Washington with the Hotline. Marc is an associate editor at the Atlantic, where he writes an award-winning daily political blog and contributes to the magazine. He is also a contributing editor to National Journal. In late 2007, he was named chief political consultant to CBS News. He’s a 2001 graduate of Harvard and lives in Washington, D.C.

  21. Kerry going to Iran with the obama government’s blessing is one step further in the U.S. legitimizing a corrupt and violent regime. It is a slap at the protestors and an even bigger slap at Israel.
    Jan–have they decided to bless this trip now? Before this they were doing what they do best–dithering. Iran may be looking to unload the hostages. We should tell old horseface, don’t come back until they agree to suspend their nuclear weapons program. In other words, don’t come back.

  22. wbboei,

    I saw a few headlines this weekend that suggested he had their blessing.

    I quite understand why obama is having such a torrid love affair with Ahmadinejad. They both cheated their ways up the ladder.

  23. H4T, You know it isn’t alcohol, but merely a mix up between his Ambein and Prozac and of coarse his Viagra. The senators do all sorts of things with this cocktail!

  24. LOL confloyd! I have no idea, but he really does seem very garbled and confused, keeps slurring. Maybe he talks like that all the time, I dunno, but he comes across as under the influence of SOMETHING to me.

  25. As time goes by, Bin Laden’s prediction of “the destruction of America will come from within” is becoming as obvious as the nose on your face.

    Penetration Even At The Pentagon: Muslim Spies Setting Muslim Policy

    The internal threat from Muslim extremists in the military extends to high-level Defense Department aides who have undermined military policy. In fact, one top Muslim adviser pushed out an intelligence analyst who warned of the sudden jihad syndrome that led to the Fort Hood terrorist attack.

    An honored guest of the Ramadan dinner at the Pentagon this September was Hesham Islam, who infiltrated the highest echelons of the Ring despite proven ties to U.S. terror front groups and a shady past in his native Egypt.

    As senior adviser for international affairs to former deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, Islam ran interference for the Islamic Society of North America and other radical fronts for the Egypt-based Muslim Brotherhood, the subject of my new book “Muslim Mafia.”

    For example, Islam persuaded brass to sack a Pentagon analyst, Stephen Coughlin, after he advised cutting off outreach to ISNA, which he accurately ID’d as part of a covert terror-support network in the U.S. — something the Justice Department recently confirmed in a major terror finance trial.

    Islam invited ISNA officials to lunch with the avuncular England, known by insiders as Gullible Gordon, who in turn spoke at ISNA confabs. Islam also helped set up a Pentagon job booth at one recent ISNA convention to recruit Muslim chaplains and linguists.

    Most disturbing, Islam met regularly with Saudi and other embassy officials lobbying for the release and repatriation of their citizens held at Gitmo. He in turn advised England, who authorized the release of dozens of Gitmo detainees. Some have resumed terrorist activities.

    No one really knew who Islam was when he was promoted — in fact, the Pentagon removed his bio from its Web site after reporters noted major inconsistencies in it — yet he was allowed to get inside the office of the Pentagon’s No. 2 official.

    “In effect,” a senior U.S. Army intelligence official told me, “we’ve got terrorist supporters calling the shots on our policies toward Muslims from the highest levels.”

    Meanwhile, politically incorrect prophets like Coughlin have been frozen out. After the betrayal at Fort Hood, the military could use his analysis of Islamic doctrine more than ever.

    I attended a private briefing by Coughlin in February. In a PowerPoint presentation, he detailed how jihadists use the Quran to justify their actions. Some of his slides matched almost word-for-word Hasan’s own PowerPoint slides extolling the virtues of jihad and martyrdom. Both, for instance, quoted from the same Quranic passage known as the “Verse of the Sword.”

    (in 3parts at the link)


  26. H4T, Wasn’t it Patrick Kennedy who said he got his Ambein mixed up with his antidepressant and it caused him to crash into to a barracade in front of the State House??

    This is what is wrong with our system. I was researching something and ran across this little jewel. BTW, Bill Clinton could not have vetoed the bill that disbanded the Glass-Stegall Act. This law won such support from both dims and rethugs that it would of overrided any Presidential Veto.

    Here’s is what is wrong with our country.

    After resigning as Treasury Secretary and while secretly in negotiations to head Citigroup, Robert Rubin helped broker the final deal to pass the bill.[4] He later became one of 3-CEO’s that headed up CitiCorp

    Isn’t that one the one we bailed out and now we know it wasn’t Bill Clinton’s fault it was the fault of the senators and congressmen of both parties who voted to repeal the Glass-Stegall Act. This act allowed for the crazy derivity market. It was the republicans who introduced and drove the bill. As a matter of fact it was Phill Gramm of Texas who introduced it. The Bushes pal.


    December 23, 2009

    Our snowflake of a president, Barack Obama, all David Axelrod design and little substance, got his present on Christmas Eve when the Senate voted to give him a holiday package neatly wrapped in lobbyist finery, the present inside alleged to be a health care reform package when the gift inside is nothing but a terrible fake.

    President Obama took his victory sleigh ride caroling to all gullible Americans what an achievement for them the alleged health care reform package is, a T’was the Night Before Christmas fish-tale of a story leaving Americans with visions of sugar plums and dreams of real reform dancing in their heads.

    On health care, on financial, on immigration, on pharmaceuticals, on Gitmo, on Global Warming, on jobs reform we will wait because Obama is the Inch Who Stole Christmas. Our president is an underachiever, a non-leader who will settle for an inch rather than go the extra green mistletoe mile for the citizens of America that he represents. To Obama life is not just a compromise; it’s a give an inch or two or three or five golden rings.

    The truth is America now has a president who refuses to take a Christmas tree stand on anything. Obama can tell a story all right, or left or whichever spirit of Christmas moves him at the moment, or is to his personal advantage. Can’t he just deck the halls with tales of holly-jolly-you-know-what!

    “Pooh-Pooh to the Whos!” Grinch was grinch-ish-ly humming. “They’re finding out now that no Christmas is coming! They’re just waking up! I know just what they’ll do! Their mouths will hang open a minute or two. Then the Whos down in Who-ville will all cry Boo-Hoo!”

    In Obama’s little town — the one called Washington not Bethlehem — all stopped being merry and bright a long time ago. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is no Santa Claus and Nancy Pelosi is surely not Mrs. Santa.

    Jingle and Jangle aka Obama’s Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel (O Come, O come Emanuel) and chief advisor David Axelrod, both pa rum pum pum Bums! have SLAY-belled their little rotten Democratic elves in Congress into buying the phony reform package even though the gift to the American people is missing an essential part: the public option once promised to compete with the naughty and not so nice insurance companies.

    God rest you merry gentlemen, you do nothing but dismay. Of course, it is hard to turn down gold, frankincense and myrrh is it not, Mr. Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska)?

    And what of Joseph Lieberman who hails from that land known as Connecticut? He has a higher calling than the rest of Congress…the insurance companies: on Hartford, on Aetna, on Signa on Blue Cross.

    Or Santa baby, Bart Stupak and his Pitt of an Abortion Amendment, hurry down the chimney tonight!

    Minority leaders Mitch McConnell and John Boehner away in the manger across the aisle; Do you hear what I hear? The Repugnicans are lacking a star, a star dancing in the night with a tail as big as a kite, but they sure do know how to fight. Sing: NO to the world, Obama Lord has come. Let us trick the King!

    While admitting that the health care industry in this country is in shambles, the Repugnicans would rather obstruct than construct a bipartisan solution to a devastating aspect of American society. Just in case you didn’t hear what I hear, not one ~ not ONE Republican voted for reform.

    Of course, they stood in the way of reform so that they wouldn’t have to vote for reform so that they can later say the bad reform package that they didn’t vote for was the Democrat’s fault. And so that they can say that you’d better vote the Socialist Democrats out of Congress in the mid-terms because they are the bad guys, not us!

    You better watch out, you better not cry, better not pout I’m telling you why. Santa Claus is coming to town. He’s making a list and checking it twice; gonna find out who’s naughty and nice. Santa Claus is coming to town tra la la.

    On December 24, 2009, Christmas Eve, the worst piece of legislation in years, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, passed. Notwithstanding the abhorrent tactics of the Democrack-Up Party and those of the I-have-no-shame-obstructionist-Repugnicans, bah humbug! the truth is that President Obama sang the glad tidings of the present of health care reform he has ordered up for his citizens this holiday season.

    But the ‘present’ man is really the ‘present’ man. He took his bows and bragged that he got health care reform legislation passed when even Bill and Hillary Clinton couldn’t. He said this even though those who follow politics closely know that President Obama was anything but present during the debate.

    As he did in the Illinois Senate when he avoided choice and voted ‘present’ 130 times, never once during this whole health care debacle did he put himself on the line for the welfare of the American people.

    In the end, the 60 Democrats who came around did not do so for their constituents but for their party (and themselves). With Jack Frost nipping at their noses, they were suckered into the bad deal by the reality that if the Dems didn’t pass the legislation, as the ruling party they were through, not to mention their questionable leader Barack Obama.

    Then all the reindeer loved him as they shouted out with glee, Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer, you’ll go down in history!

    The question remains, Present Obama, as what?


  28. admin- have not checked for the authenticity of this article. It looks and sounds authentic, links and all. I found this article at Atlas Shrugged. If this is authentic, as I think it is… Obama should own it on his way to removal from office.

    Obama’s Tree Festooned with Evil


    I could not help but smile to myself when I got a gander at Obama’s vile “Christmas” ornaments, defiled with images of history’s most evil men, like the murderer of untold millions and cultural executioner Mao Tse Tung.

    And it was hard not to laugh when Michelle explained the decadent ornaments away. She and O were unaware of the images, as the ornaments were decorated and sent to them from her various groups (clearly those of a seditious and conspiratorial nature). Do you notice how there were no accidents or mistakes like an image of Ronald Reagan festooned to the tree? How about George Washington, or General George Patton or any of the really exceptional human beings who walked among us that were not of the red variety, but of the red, white and blue schema?

    No. Evil hung from the Obama tree.

    This type of ugliness is not new. Obama’s cultural pollution is no accident. He uses his brand to market the most destructive and cancerous ideas in human history. It is important to point out this malevolent strategy of Obama. Obama uses proxies to get the most noxious narrative into the national dialog, the daily workplace, the minds of our youth. I have documented for years the unprecedented hate speech, bigotry, Jew hatred, and anti-American invective on Obama’s website both during the campaign and in its new transitional incarnation of mybarackobama.com – Organizing for America.

    In these terrible instances where first, as the candidate for the office of the President, and then as President, he provides a platform for monstrous hate speech and incitement to violence. He dismisses ownership with a wave of the hand. Others posted it, or in the case of Michelle Obama, others painted the monsters …. Does he recoil from the vulgarity? Does he stand up and shout down these haters? He appears not to have heard, or if he has, he shrugs his shoulders. This is how he chooses to lead by example.
    This is not moral equivalence. This is sanctioning evil, promoting it under his trillion dollar brand, Hope! Change! Murder!

  29. This talk about Kerry going to Iran has made me start thinking…

    We all know that if Hillary is to challenge That One is 2012, she needs an exit strategy from the State Dept. I’m beginning to think a very public disagreement with 0 over the situation in Iran would be the best way to go. She sympathizes with the protesters, whereas 0 does not.

  30. Just boggles the mind that American media is so owned they do not have the foresight to see the end game. They have been sooo used and in the end will suffer along with us. The lackys under the crowded bus were bought at one time and quickly discarded when they were of no more use. So it will be with them.

  31. Jen the Michigander
    December 27th, 2009 at 11:58 pm

    “We all know that if Hillary is to challenge That One is 2012”


    We do? We’re here alll the time and no nothing of the kind.. If you know, do tell-

  32. I said IF Hillary is to challenge Obama. I don’t know if she will or not. But IF she does, she will have to resign as SOS.

  33. #
    Jen the Michigander
    December 28th, 2009 at 12:20 am

    I said IF Hillary is to challenge Obama. I don’t know if she will or not. But IF she does, she will have to resign as SOS.

    Yes, I know you said “IF”… IF Hillary wants to retire, she will have to resign as SOS. She has said many times she likes her job and she is good at it. I don’t believe it is in the cards for Hillary to resign her position and run. If she did, she wouldn’t need an excuse such as you mentioned. She would be straightforward and upfront with her intentions, as she always is-

  34. Today on This Week With George Stephanopolous, Jake Tapper, filling in for George, asked Senator McConnell, “Do you think that Republicans running for Senate in 2010 should run on a platform of vowing to repeal the health care reform bill, should it become law? And will that be one of your first items should you regain control of the Senate, repealing what you guys call Obama-care?”

    Senator McConnell’s answer?

    Well, certainly, politically, it’s a big problem for them. They all kind of joined hands and went off the cliff together. Every single Democrat provided the vote that passed it in the Senate. You have seen what’s happened already with Congressman Parker Griffith in Alabama switching parties. There are rumors there may be others. There is great unrest in the Democratic Party. And the reason for that is, the surveys indicate the American people are overwhelmingly opposed to this effort to have the government take over all of their health care. It will be a huge political issue next year, and that’s why you hear the Democrats saying, let’s don’t tackle any more big issues. I mean, I was reading an article this morning indicating they don’t want to do cap-and-trade anymore, they’re nervous about financial reregulation. What they understand is the new administration and the new Congress has squandered its goodwill with the American people, leading to what could be a big setback for them a year from now.

  35. Please embed Admin…disturbing video in Iran. And the fool is in Hawaii tanning his man boobs as Rome burns…from BP

  36. Mrs. Smith, What do you think, will Hillary stay or go soon? My feeling if she stays much longer she will be tied to the sinking ship, although she is collecting good data to use against them if she decides to run.

    I sometimes think she will not run and sometimes I know she will. I just remember her statement at the U.N.

  37. December 28, 2009
    Iranian Military Moves to Support the ‘People’s Revolution’
    Jane Jamison

    In 24 hours, what has been labeled “street protesting” for new presidential elections has morphed into an earnest and violent revolution to overthrow the Muslim mullahs who rule Iran.

    It is difficult to verify, but factions in the Iranian military may be breaking rank to join the people’s cause. A group calling itself the National Iranian Armed Resistance Forces (NIRU) posted a news release on an Iranian protest website at the end of the day’s violence.

    We, a number of Officers, Soldiers and personnel of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, hereby declare our readiness for rise to the armed defense of our nation against the forces of the criminal, illegitimate, transgressing and occupying current Government of Iran, and hereby inform our brothers and sisters serving with the armed security forces of Iran, invite them to join us, request their support and ask them to provide cover for us in this moral & national act. A special request for support & cooperation goes to our brothers of the Military Police.

    The NIRU says it intends to secure Iranian radio and television stations, the Parliament,and the courts, will hold local elections and referendums within 3 months and new presidential elections within 9 months, will dissolve the murderous “Basij” plainclothes police and establish a new national police force.

    Protection and firepower from even a few factions of the military could signal a critical momentum change for the Iranian people, who by law cannot own weapons.

    Complete coverage will be sparse in mainstream media outlets, as western media are not allowed any kind of meaningful access to the country, and their coverage was anemic at best.

    PBS “Frontline” has a Tehran Bureau posting videos, picture and frequent updates, many of which are cell phone images sent via Twitter and immediately posted to Facebook pages and on YouTube. Videos showing protestors burning police cars, attacking police vans and releasing prisoners, breaking up sidewalks and throwing concrete at police are here. They are graphic.

    A young man died from a head wound during a huge crowd rally in Tehran Sunday.

    The bureau reports confrontations all Sunday in the cities of Tehran, Qom, Tabriz in northwest Iran, Isfahan and Najafabad in central Iran and Shiraz in the south:

    Iranian security forces opened fire on protesters during anti-government demonstrations on Sunday, killing at least nine people and arresting more than 300 demonstrators in what marked the largest and most violent anti-government protests in the Islamic Republic since the summer, according to witnesses, opposition websites and state media.

    Thousands of Basij militia forces, police and anti-riot forces armed with guns, batons, pepper gas and tear gas clashed with protesters in squares throughout the Iranian capital. Protestors fought back fiercely, at times tearing out slabs of concrete from city sidewalks and smashing it to hurl stones at security forces, witnesses said.

    One of the dead is reportedly a nephew of Mir Hossein Mousavi, the presidential candidate who is believed by the populace to be the true winner of the June presidential election.

    Amnesty International reported 3 weeks ago that “human rights violations in Iran are now as bad as at any time in the past 20 years.” The agency found Iran has been allowing rape, torture and murder of at least 4,000 jailed demonstrators since last spring. Some citizens were tracked through their computer IP addresses and cell phone numbers and rounded up long after the demonstrations had been brutally quashed by the government.

    The Sunday violence in Iran drew its inspiration from the heavy symbolism of the religious observance of Ashoura, coupled with the one-week anniversary of the death of a Muslim imam who was a harsh critic of the Iranian regime. If the Iranian military will get behind the brave people in the streets, this revolution may have a much better chance for success than it did last spring.

    In the meantime, the President of the United States is golfing and goofing in Hawaii, much too busy to give news conferences to address terrorism on American jets or Iranians murdered by their own police as they fight for democracy.

    The London Telegraph wrote Sunday evening: “Iranians are dying for Freedom—Where is Barack Obama?”

    Why dusting off his Nobel Peace prize of course! The above from American Thinker…

  38. Hmm, Hmmmm!

    Hmm… Israel Calls ALL Ambassadors Home For Special Meeting in Jerusalem
    Sunday, December 27, 2009, 9:44 PM
    Jim Hoft
    For the first time ever, Israel has called ALL of its ambassadors and consuls home for meetings this week in Jerusalem.
    The meetings opened today.
    MFA.gov reported:

    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, headed by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Liberman, will host a conference next week (27-31 December) for Israeli Heads of Missions. At the conference, Israel’s ambassadors and consuls general serving throughout the world will discuss broad diplomatic and strategic issues.

    This is the first time a conference for all of Israel’s Heads of Missions has been held. The idea is to facilitate direct dialogue with the country’s leaders, mutual updates on major diplomatic issues, and a discussion of action plans to deal with the challenges awaiting the State of Israel in the international arena in the coming year, including the Iranian threat

  39. Regarding the discussions of a Hillary resignation and this website’s current emphasis it might be appropriate to remind all that we have discussed these issues earlier. On a potential Hillary resignation, particularly the timing, it is worth remembering what we have written earlier.

    First, the posture of this website regarding Dimocrats. We wrote this in early October:


    Let’s be clear, Dimocrats must suffer shattering defeats in the 2010 elections (let’s not forget the few 2009 elections and what is really happening there) if we are to have a Democratic Party in the foreseeable future or ever. The Democratic Party modeled on the FDR winning coalition must be restored. Obama must be rejected. More importantly Obamaism must be rejected too.

    On a Hillary resignation we think this is our definitive answer (a frustrating one because it means we must wait a least a year for a resignation). But we think this is the wisest course (more discussion is available at the link):


    More recently we broached the topic of Hillary’s resignation. We know that Hillary needs to get out but we have not been sure of when. We wrote that Hillary could get out before the Obama mess gets even bigger or after the 2010 elections when the Dimocrats begin to see the bleak future if they stick by Obama and Obamaism’s Situation Comedy coalition.

    We now think that it is probably best for Hillary to wait for after the 2010 elections to resign. [snip]

    We therefore surmise that by remaining as Secretary of State until after the 2010 elections Hillary will be precluded from helping to campaign and therefore elect Dimocratic creeps. Bill Clinton will still travel the country selectively to endorse worthwhile Democrats who might assist any future endeavors.

  40. http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2009/12/this_weeks_economistyougov_pol_24

    Barack Obama’s first year in office is seen as about average. About a third (35%) say he has accomplished more in his first year than the average president does, and about the same percentage (37%) say he has accomplished less. Nearly twice as many Americans say he has accomplished “much less” than the average president as say he has accomplished “much more”. As you can see, the results are highly partisan:

    Look at the graph, he has lost the independents in a big way.

  41. “We all know that if Hillary is to challenge That One is 2012, she needs an exit strategy from the State Dept. I’m beginning to think a very public disagreement with 0 over the situation in Iran would be the best way to go. She sympathizes with the protesters, whereas 0 does not.”


    LOL…there are so many relevant issues piling up that Hillary could disagree on…”should” she want to walk away.

    The timing is important though. Anything less than a year in the SOS position could be taken negatively that she is a quitter, can’t handle the job, etc. The longer she stays, the more accolades she gathers and the better her polling. I agree with Admin that after the 2010 elections would be a good time.

  42. confloyd
    December 28th, 2009 at 3:31 am
    Hmm, Hmmmm!

    Hmm… Israel Calls ALL Ambassadors Home For Special Meeting in Jerusalem

    Two thoughts immediately come to mind:

    All eyes will be on Israel during this time waiting to see what if anything comes out of this meeting.

    Secondly, Israel’s enemies could decide to strike at this same time to make their own violent statement.

  43. I think that move may have more to do with Netanyahu calling for a “unity government” with Kadima which Livni is head of. By all accounts , Kadima shall reject said offer.

  44. JanH
    December 27th, 2009 at 3:42 pm

    The biggest beneficiary of what one columnist dubbed “Harry [Reid]’s favour factory” was Senator Ben Nelson, a moderate Nebraska Democrat who insisted his vote was “not for sale”, but who later overcame his doubts about abortion and other issues when a clause worth $100m to Nebraska hospitals was belatedly inserted.

    The senators’ votes are NOT FOR SALE. But you can rent them if the price is right.


    The Dems lost a seat in the House last week, and the Republicans gained one. And there wasn’t even an election…

    Blue Dog Alabaman becomes Red Pitbull

    December 22, 2009, 12:13 pm
    House Democrat Is Switching Parties

    December 22, 2009, 12:13 pm

    Representative Parker Griffith of Alabama, who had compiled one of the more conservative voting records among House Democrats since being elected in 2008, said on Tuesday that he was becoming a Republican.

    Mr. Griffith, 67, announced the move while at home in his conservative northern Alabama district, saying he felt compelled to stand up to “policies that burden our children with debt and threaten our economy.”

    An oncologist by profession, Mr. Griffith took particular aim at the Democrats’ efforts to overhaul the health care system. “I want to make it perfectly clear that this bill is bad for our doctors,” said Mr. Griffith, who voted against the House’s health care bill in November. “It’s bad for our patients. It’s bad for the young men and women who are considering going into the health care fields.”

    In addition to his health care vote, Mr. Griffith, who eked out a victory last year, also sided with House Republicans on the stimulus package and the major energy legislation the chamber passed over the summer.

    In all, Mr. Griffith has voted with Democrats a little more than 84 percent of the time so far, according to The Times’s database.

    In a statement, Representative Chris Van Hollen, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Democrats had “invested a great deal in working with Alabamans to bring Mr. Griffith to Congress.”

    “Mr. Griffith, failing to honor our commitment to him, has a duty and responsibility to return to Democratic members and the D.C.C.C. the financial resources that were invested in him,” added Mr. Van Hollen. (The D.C.C.C. spent more than $1 million on Mr. Griffith’s behalf in last year’s election.)

    For his part, Representative Pete Sessions, the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, cast the decision as “emblematic of the message that millions of concerned citizens have been trying to send to a Democrat Party that has become increasingly unwilling to listen.”

    “Whether Democrat leaders choose to pay attention now or wait for the electorate to send them a resounding message next November,” Mr. Sessions added, “Parker Griffith’s willingness to put the interests of his district first sends a positive signal to others who have grown just as disappointed with their party as the American people have.”

    Even with those kind words – and his voting record — Mr. Griffith may need to persuade some conservative skeptics during his 2010 campaign. Shortly after news of Mr. Griffith’s decision leaked out, for example, Erick Erickson of the conservative blog RedState wrote “we can pick this guy off and get a real Republican in that seat.”

    Mr. Griffith’s defection follows retirement decisions by four veteran House Democrats in potentially competitive seats.

    A former state senator, Mr. Griffith defeated Republican Wayne Parker in 2008, even as his district was giving Senator John McCain, the 2008 Republican nominee for president, 61 percent of the vote. He replaced former Representative Bud Cramer, himself a conservative Democrat who was at times rumored to be switching parties.

  46. And if you notice in the above, it was a doctor (oncologist) who changed parties, with the Dems’ handling of the health care debate at the forefront.

  47. A few years back there was a video series called Girls Gone Wild which depicted the hedonistic excesses of college kids who go to Ft. Lauderdale on spring break. Obama vacations have that same flavor to them. You might call his vacations Boys Gone Wild. The out takes would be fantastic. Manboobs splashing in the surf. Reggie Love chasing him in hot pursuit. Bill Burton stepping on poisonous jellyfish and blaming Bush. Gibbs sprawled on shore like a belching beached whale. The man who buried his birth certificate calling to say, I need more money. WashPo writers drooling over his abs in the sunlight (Q. What abs?). Michelle mad as hell, trapped with the two daughters in the master bedroom of the Louis XIV estate. The owner shouting of that humble abode screaming Hey Shaft you spend alot of time in Hawaii, my place is for sale and Soros has agreed to co-sign. Then suddenly trouble in paradise. Violent protests break out in Iran. Naughty Nigerian steps on a plane with one hell of a firecracker. A thousand other problems enveloping the country, adversely affecting the security of Americans. What to do oh messiah of mine? Turn the radio off, no cell phones, don t bother me I am on my vacation. Let them eat cake.


    After outsourcing the heavy lifting to Congress and watch them outsource it to Big Pharma and the health care industry, Obama now wants to provide “encouragement” and “last minute help”.

    Gee. Thanks.

    Quote from below: “My attitude is, if they are making these sacrifices to provide healthcare to all Americans, the least I can do is be around and provide them any encouragement and last-minute help,” he said.

    Hey, wait, did he just say, ALL AMERICANS???? I thought single payer and other 100% options were off the table, because he didn’t like Hillary’s idea of having to punish those who wouldn’t be coerced into buying health care that “they don’t need”.

    Oh, that was during the campaign.

    Never mind.


    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama said on Tuesday he would delay his year-end Hawaiian vacation to remain in Washington as a bill to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system makes its way through the Senate.

    “I will not leave until my friends in the Senate have completed their work,” he said after a meeting with community bankers at the White House.

    Obama had been expected to leave for Hawaii, the state where he was born and spent much of his childhood, on Wednesday.

    “My attitude is, if they are making these sacrifices to provide healthcare to all Americans, the least I can do is be around and provide them any encouragement and last-minute help,” he said.

    Obama’s fellow Democrats in the Senate cleared the second of three 60-vote hurdles early on Tuesday to move the landmark legislation — Obama’s top domestic policy priority — one step closer to passage by Christmas.

    Republicans, who have just 40 seats in the Senate, have vowed to use every tactic they can to delay passage of the measure, which has consumed Congress for months and inspired intense political brawling.

  49. …Terese Heinz — the widow of Sen. John Heinz, heir to the Heinz ketchup fortune — said she found out in late September that she had cancer in her left breast after having her annual mammogram. In early October, she underwent lumpectomies on both breasts at a Washington hospital after doctors also discovered what they thought was a benign growth on her right breast. That diagnosis was initially confirmed in postoperative pathology, but two other doctors later found it to be malignant.

    In November, Heinz had another pair of lumpectomies performed at Massachusetts General Hospital. Doctors also inserted titanium clips in the tissue of both breasts during the operations, and next month she will receive five days of targeted radiation aimed at improving her odds of a successful treatment to 95 percent.


    So Terese, soon to undergo cancer treatment, is urging women to continue mammo protocols as in the past. At the same time, hubby John Kerry is pestering to go to Iran.

  50. Wishing Ms. Heinz the best, but sadly, under this new plan, many women will not get the screening they need to detect this insidious disease early.


    Broder thinks William Daley’s op-ed is too focused on encouraging congressional Dems on taking a more moderate course. Broder thinks it is Obama that should take the helm in guiding the ship.

    David, David, David. Haven’t you learned? Obama doesn’t DO “leadership”.


    A Warning Obama Should Heed
    By David Broder
    December 27, 2009

    WASHINGTON — On the day before Christmas, President Obama found two presents under his tree. One was the health care reform bill passed that morning by the Senate, a historic measure so freighted with promise and problems that it could blow up.

    The other was an op-ed article in The Washington Post by William Daley, his fellow Chicagoan and one of the canniest Democrats I know, warning Obama that he is on the verge of losing his grip on the vital center of politics.

    Former Commerce Secretary Daley, who shares with his brother, Mayor Richard M. Daley, and their late father an iron grip on reality, cited all the signs of defection among swing voters whose support in 2006 and 2008 swelled Democratic ranks in Congress and elected Obama. He ticked off the losses Democrats suffered in the only two gubernatorial elections of 2009, in New Jersey and Virginia; the polls showing independents rejecting Democrats (and such handiwork as the health care bill); a wave of early retirements by marginal House members; and, last week, the party switch by Alabama Rep. Parker Griffith from Democrat to Republican.

    To be sure, there are counter-indicators not mentioned by Daley, including a string of special election congressional victories for the Democrats, culminating in New York’s 23rd District. The Republican civil war that enabled this upset is symptomatic of a growing GOP liability that could cripple the party’s comeback hopes.

    But this does not weaken the thrust of Daley’s main argument. His target is the left of his party — the grass-roots liberal activists who condemn the centrist Democrats sitting in marginal seats for blocking some provisions of health care reform, for example, and the leaders of organized labor who threaten to retaliate by withholding their support from the moderates.

    These same groups put heavy pressure on Obama to move his agenda to the left — even when a Congress with swollen Democratic majorities is balking at the measures Obama already has endorsed.

    The president is surrounded by people who share Daley’s grip on reality, none more important or better placed than Rahm Emanuel, the chief of staff and another fellow Chicagoan. But the picture is not so clear on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

    Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s inner circle is made up of long-standing veterans of gerrymandered House districts, virtually immune from Election Day challenge, just as she is. The wants and needs of “the Democratic base” count heavily for them, and Daley’s warnings may be resented or ignored.

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s home-state party in Nevada is as closely tied to the unions as Michigan used to be in the days of Walter Reuther, and Reid views the world from that perspective.

    As a loyal Democrat, Daley insisted in the closing paragraphs of his op-ed that his party is not doomed to ruin. It can still avoid anything more than a minimal setback in 2010, he said, if it will simply “acknowledge that the agenda of the party’s most liberal supporters has not won the support of a majority of Americans — and, based on that recognition … steer a more moderate course on the key issues of the day, from health care to the economy to the environment to Afghanistan.”

    I am not so certain. It will be up to Obama to steer the Democrats in that direction. No one on Capitol Hill is likely to lead such a change. The first test will come with the revisions of health care in the House-Senate conference, whether the White House insists on strengthening the cost-saving measures in the bills.

    The larger tests will lie in Obama’s 2010 State of the Union and budget messages — whether he fulfills his promise to start addressing the runaway budget deficits left in the wake of the recession. A presidential endorsement of the much-discussed commission empowered to slow the hemorrhage of red ink would signal to voters that Daley’s message has been heard.


    “I’m sorry, the president cannot be disturbed for two weeks. What’s he doing right now? Right now, he’s body surfing”.


    This Guy’s Been on Every Channel, Every Day for a Year. Now He’s Shy?

    Jim Geraghty
    Sunday, December 27, 2009

    Over at The Atlantic, Marc Ambinder explains . . .

    In his Farenheit 9/11, filmmaker Michael Moore juxtaposes images and words of a terrorist attack in Israel with President Bush’s first words about the incident, spoken to a press pool on a golf course, with him leaning casually against a tree. Today, as the nation’s law enforcement agencies respond to an attempted terrorist attack on U.S. soil, as the cable news channels and news websites pull in reinforcements to cover the incident from all angles, President Obama has been silent.

    In fact, he’s been golfing. He received a counterterrorism briefing early this morning, Hawaii time, and moments later, left for the gym. The president’s vacation activities might have become the subject of a fierce partisan fight — but really, the only carping is coming from the usual suspects on the right.

    There is a reason why Obama hasn’t given a public statement. It’s strategy.
    &&&&& END OF AMBINDER QUOTE &&&&&&&&&&&&

    So we’re now all in agreement, correct? Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 was a cavalcade of cheap shots, and Bush’s speaking from a golf course in no way indicated a casualness or lack of appropriate focus on the threat of terrorism, correct? Because it might have been nice to hear non-conservatives saying this, oh, five years ago or so.

    The fact that President Obama hasn’t spoken to the citizenry in the 48 hours or so since the incident is . . . unexpected. Strange. If the bombing attempt had not occurred on Christmas Day, his silence would be unthinkable, correct? Somebody tries to blow up a plane, and while his effort fell thankfully fell short, it sounds like it could have turned out terribly and tragically different with a little less luck and a bit more chemical reaction.

    The president’s silence is not necessarily a serious problem or crisis, and yes, we are getting lots of statements from administration officials about what TSA, FAA, and the rest are doing.

    Maybe this guy was a lone wolf, and no follow-on attacks are in the works, and we’ll forget about this in a couple of months, and life will go on without further incident. Or maybe it won’t. In retrospect, it’s rather amazing that President Clinton never visited the Twin Towers after the 1993 bombing, or visited the CIA for almost a year after a January 25, 1993, shooting attack at its entrance; it looks like the new president’s mind was elsewhere and on other matters.

    At some point, a strategy insisting that unsuccessful attacks are not worth presidential comment starts looking like whistling past the graveyard, or pretending that the incidents aren’t a big deal when they are.

  53. As a loyal Democrat, Daley insisted in the closing paragraphs of his op-ed that his party is not doomed to ruin. It can still avoid anything more than a minimal setback in 2010, he said, if it will simply “acknowledge that the agenda of the party’s most liberal supporters has not won the support of a majority of Americans — and, based on that recognition … steer a more moderate course on the key issues of the day, from health care to the economy to the environment to Afghanistan.”

    I am not so certain. It will be up to Obama to steer the Democrats in that direction. No one on Capitol Hill is likely to lead such a change. The first test will come with the revisions of health care in the House-Senate conference, whether the White House insists on strengthening the cost-saving measures in the bills.

    The larger tests will lie in Obama’s 2010 State of the Union and budget messages — whether he fulfills his promise to start addressing the runaway budget deficits left in the wake of the recession. A presidential endorsement of the much-discussed commission empowered to slow the hemorrhage of red ink would signal to voters that Daley’s message has been heard.

    Old jowls and spittle Broder is losing his mind–the one he never had.

    Bill Daley a loyal democrat? Give me a break. He is a machine politican, a fellow traveller in the Illinois Combine, in sum a thief.

    The test (of whether shaft will shift course to a more moderate direction) will lie in his State of The Union Speech? Are you senile? Have you learned nothing from the past year? Name me one promise he has made and then kept. Listen to me David: nothing the man says can be trusted.

  54. This Guy’s Been on Every Channel, Every Day for a Year. Now He’s Shy?
    Jim Geraghty
    Sunday, December 27, 2009
    Geraghty is right. Give Obama a pulpit and he will preach–like his mentor Wright. Give him a problem to solve and he is MIA. That is the proper response to pathbreaking co-biblical Ambinder. Only an idiot would describe himself in those words as Ambinder did. Pathbreaking cobiblical harvard 2001–a space oddessy.

  55. They used to call it Potomac Fever . . . Of course I lean to an even more cynical explanation, which is that the elites do not give a damn about the country as long as their little world is protected. For that they are perfectly willing to spend other peoples money on projects that advance their interests at the expense of the nation. In short the failure is a moral failure and they are unwilling to make sacrifices others do. When Shaft starts talking about shared sacrifices it will be a joke because he is a practitioner of lavish excess.
    A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 30% of voters nationwide believe the $787-billion economic stimulus plan has helped the economy. However, 38% believe that the stimulus plan has hurt the economy. This is the first time since the legislation passed that a plurality has held a negative view of its impact.

    This is it.

    The Political Class has a much different view than the rest of the county. Ninety percent (90%) of the Political Class believes the stimulus plan helped the economy and not a single Political Class respondent says it has hurt. (See more on the Political Class).

    If you’re wondering why the Democratic party’s leadership seems so determined to keep marching over the cliff: well, there you go. On the other hand, Rasmussen’s ‘Political Class’ designation is subject to criticism and controversy. On the gripping hand, that criticism and controversy is usually from people who either don’t want to be identified as elites, or resent not being identified as populists…

  56. “My attitude is, if they are making these sacrifices to provide healthcare to all Americans, the least I can do is be around and provide them any encouragement and last-minute help,” he said.”

    Did he choke when he uttered those blasphemous lies? “Sacrifice??????????” Would those be the pork barrel bribe sacrifices the idiot is talking about?

  57. “President Obama has been silent.”

    “Senator Obama voted present.”

    “MeMe Obama would have to think about voting for a “whitee/Hillary”

    What a stellar image these two are making……….NOT! I wish they would both crawl back under the Chicago cesspool of crime they came from and take Winfrey with them.

  58. Whom does bernanke really work for? The same people Obama works for. The banking interests. Kevin Phillips recounts a fateful decision made during the Reagan Administration which tilted the economy away from manufacturing and high tec and toward finance. Financial interests now control our economy and the political system.

    Here is an appropriate bumper sticker for next year: OBAMA = MIDDLE CLASS MELTDOWN

    Whom Does Ben S. Bernanke Really Work For?

    by Justice Litle, Editorial Director, Taipan Publishing Group
    The announcement of Ben S. Bernanke’s successful nomination for a second term brings forth a curious question. Whom does the Fed Chairman really and truly work for?

    In a notable bit of inside baseball this week, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve (Ben S. Bernanke) was officially locked in for a second four-year term.

    Breaking the news from an elementary school gym in Martha’s Vineyard – Mr. Bernanke by his side – the vacationing Prez was effusive. “Ben approached a financial system on the verge of collapse with calm and wisdom; with bold action and outside-the-box thinking that has helped put the brakes on our economic freefall,” President Obama gushed.

    Of course, there was no real mention of the serious Fed-induced problems that brought the financial system to the “verge of collapse” in the first place. Lest we forget, Bernanke stood shoulder to shoulder with his predecessor, Alan Greenspan, in regards to ignoring bubbles until they burst (“Bubble, what bubble?”)… injecting massive liquidity into the system post-crisis and leaving it there, reinflating new bubbles from the dregs of popped old ones… and, last but not least, in coming up with fanciful theories to blame fiscal imbalances on other nations (the infamous “global savings glut”).

    For the POTUS to touch on such things would have been a breach of protocol. Instead, the regulator who almost burned the house down was lauded for knowing how to use a fire hose.

    Bernanke “saved the world,” the Fed Chairman’s most enthusiastic boosters declare. Never mind that he saved it from the leverage-loving pyromaniacs (i.e. short-sighted greedy bankers) that were supposed to be under his watch in the first place.

    Who Is This Man’s Boss?

    In light of the Bernanke reappointment, now seems a good time to ask a curious question. Whom does the Fed Chairman actually work for?

    The obvious answers don’t quite jibe. The POTUS and Congress, for example, supposedly work for you and me. In theory, at least, they are held to account by the voting process and beholden to “the American people.”

    But the Chairman of the Fed is not exactly elected. He is more or less anointed by way of smoky backroom horse trading, in which there is a lot of whispering and assurance-seeking before the Chief Executive reluctantly agrees to endorse.

    Does the Chairman work for the president or Congress then? Not exactly… the Federal Reserve is a proud and unbending institution, fiercely protective of its cherished independence. There is definitely a kabuki dance of forged alliances, cultivated relationships, and so on. But a good Fed Chairman works the aisles up and down the Hill precisely so the Fed can maintain its vaunted independence, not give it up. Keeping Congress’ greasy mitts off the true levers of power is a top priority.

    So perhaps the Fed Chairman is like a Supreme Court judge – appointed by the president and vetted by Congress, but hypothetically free of political influence thereafter. That, in turn, would make the Fed a quasi-official “fourth branch” of government, giving us the Executive… the Legislative… the Judicial… and the Financial.

    The Supreme Court analogy hits uncomfortably close to home. The Fed no doubt despises any such “fourth branch” references, not because they are unflattering or inaccurate, but because such talk reveals too much. (Better not to give Congress any wild ideas, re, reining in the Fed’s power.)

    Follow the Money

    Yet there is something lacking in the Supreme Court analogy too. The black-robed nine spend their days solving thorny legal issues, handling landmark court cases gathered from across the land. To be a Supreme Court judge is clearly to be in thrall to American law, and to be in devoted service to an abstract ideal. The Fed has a far murkier agenda…

    If we look not to words but deeds, the picture becomes more clear.

    For instance Dennis Lockhart, the head of the Atlanta Fed, admitted in a Chamber of Commerce speech this week that the real unemployment rate is actually 16% (as opposed to the official July jobless rate of 9.4%). Such a number surely implies the Fed is not all that concerned about the working joes of this country.

    Yet another Fed head, James Bullard of the St. Louis branch, further admitted last week that the Fed plans to keep interest rates “exceptionally low for an extended period of time,” according to Reuters. “I don’t think markets have really digested what that means,” Bullard added. If anything it means the Fed is more concerned with pumping up paper assets than protecting consumers and businesses from nominal price hikes.

    Perhaps the question can be answered with a question. Who was the Federal Reserve meant to regulate? It is a paradox of government that the law-wielding regulators often find themselves kidnapped by the regulated… brain washed in a weird case of bureaucratic Stockholm Syndrome.

    From a power and money perspective, regulatory Stockholm Syndrome makes perfect sense, however, because so much of both – power and money, that is – is concentrated in the private sector. The top four banking behemoths all have deposit bases measured in the trillions, for example. Is it any wonder the Fed, Treasury and FDIC merely kowtow?

    Meanwhile, top Wall Street bank execs enjoy bonus-laden paydays in the tens to hundreds of millions. In stark contrast, the Federal Reserve Chairman’s 2008 salary of $191,300 is less than half the guaranteed minimum a rookie MLB relief pitcher would get… the Goldman Sachs equivalent of a waiter’s tip.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, We Have a Winner…

    When one considers the possibility that the Fed Chairman actually works for the banks, all the pieces begin falling into place.

    It’s only natural, after all, given that the original mandate of the Fed was to preserve banking stability. It is the Federal Reserve’s job, first and foremost, to make sure that the U.S. financial system (and by extension the executives who stride atop it) perseveres through all economic storms.

    In principle, the good of the country and the good of the U.S. financial system are supposed to be one and the same thing. In practice, the two can be at odds, sometimes dramatically so.

    The charade of pretending that the two considerations are one and the same, though, is a key aspect of the brilliant bait-and-switch job foisted upon us all. Whenever a Fed (or Treasury) official’s actions can be wrapped in the guise of “saving the system,” it is implied that said action was undertaken for the good of everyone. Ha!

    What’s more, not all bankers are created equal… as with seating arrangements in the king’s court, it is always better to be closer to the throne. Given their combination of heft, gravitas and “too big to fail” status, the top four banking institutions probably wield more power and influence than the next 40 combined. And beyond that, no man’s land. One can trace out the priorities of the Fed and Treasury in real time by observing how the giant money center banks get attended to hand and foot. The Bumbershoot Bank of Kalamazoo Kansas, meanwhile, is left to choke on prairie dust.

    $13,470 and counting…

    That’s how much money a small group of folks have had an opportunity to collect – simply by punching in Lee Lowell’s now famous “cash codes.”

    What’s more the money can just show up – like magic – in their trading accounts within seconds, prompting thrilled followers to write: “ I’m not a big investor, but I have collected $11,591 so far” or “In just a few months I have already collected $13,121.”

    To learn more – and how you can get on Lee’s “instant money code” list, please follow this link.

    Banana Republics and Dictatorships

    The main trouble with arrangements like this one is the way they tend to be favored by banana republics and dictatorships. When a small, concentrated “elite” class is consistently favored at the expense of everyone else, the long-run result is rarely pretty.

    A tendency to endorse “socialism for the rich, capitalism for the rest,” as James Grant and others have put it, is not the best recipe for sustaining and growing a free-market economy. Unfortunately, in granting semi-autonomous power to a “fourth branch” mainly beholden to the banks, that is pretty much what the United States has signed up for.

    Simon Johnson summed up the forward-looking concerns nicely in a recent Seeking Alpha piece, “Is a Two-Track Economy Emerging from the Rubble?”

    The United States has, over the past two decades, started to take on characteristics more traditionally associated with Latin America: extreme income inequality, rising poverty levels, and worsening health conditions for many. The elite live well and seem not to mind repeated cycles of economic-financial crisis. In fact, if you want to be cynical, you might start to think that the most powerful of the well-to-do actually don’t lose much from a banking sector run amok – providing the government can afford to provide repeated bailouts (paid for presumably through various impositions on people outside the uppermost elite strata).

    If we as Americans still have some true fighting spirit left in us – and enough of a grasp on revolutionary history to spark it – then perhaps Fed Chairman Bernanke will get more than he bargained for in the next few years.

    Warm Regards,


  59. Gonzotx: very graphic depiction of the atrocities going on in Iran while manboobs splashes with reggie love in a tropical paradise and contemplates purchasing a 5.4 million dollar castle by the sea. He ignores their cries for help, and the fact that protesters who want only democracy are shot and humg. Why? If you ask pathbreaking cobiblical Ambinder there is one logical reason: strategy. If you ask someone who lives in the real world, understands human nature, and is not burdened with a Harvard education class of 2001 on which the stars shown the answer is clear: Obama does not give a damn. There is such a thing as good and evil in the world. Obama can read those words on a piece of paper but they mean nothing to him. The only metric he is concerned about is himself. This is an abdication of leadership and all it breeds in the end is sycophancy.

  60. Mrs. Smith
    December 27th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
    Protesters Show Up Outside Obama’s Hawaiian Compound

    Video of peaceful protesters outside Obama residence speaking to the camera words we’re all thinking..

    Aaaaah. The delightful sight of MoveOn.Org types railing against the guy they (almost certainly) voted for.

    “Throw the bum out!”
    “Baby Killer”
    “I can’t believe I voted for him”

  61. Not only did they not build or do a darn thing with ground zero since 911 now i find out this!!!

    spread this news far and wide people! THIS MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN!!

    so that terrorists and their sympathizers don’t have a place to congregate and gloat next door to Ground Zero.



    Mosque At the World Trade Center: Muslim Renewal Or Insult Near Ground Zero

    by Youssef M. Ibrahim
    for Hudson New York
    December 16, 2009

    An identified group with unknown sponsors has purchased building steps away from where the World Trade Center once stood — to turn it into potentially one of the largest New York City mosques.

    At the moment the building, the old Burlington Coat Factory, already serves as a mini-mosque: an iron grill lifts every Friday afternoon for a little known Imam leading prayers a few yards away from where Osama Bin Laden’s airborne Islamist bombers killed nearly 3000 people back in 2001.

    The Imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf, told the New York Times — which put the story on its front page Wednesday — that he has assembled several million dollars to turn it into “an Islamic center near the city’s most hallowed piece of land that would stand as one of ground zero’s more unexpected and striking neighbors.”

    The 61-year-old Imam said he paid $4.85 million for it — in cash, records show. With 50,000 square feet of air rights and enough financing, he plans an ambitious project of $150 million, he said, akin to the Chautauqua Institution, the 92 Street Y or the Jewish Community Center.

    The origins of such monies are unexplained; neither are the countries or entity advancing such huge donations. Most US mosques, including many in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx are funded directly or indirectly by Saudi Arabia — the country to which 15 of the 19 hijackers who bombed the World Trade Center belonged. The UAE, Qatar and Iran are other major sponsors across the USA.
    The money trail is an important question that must be answered

Comments are closed.