Terror Trials And Lobbyists And Mulligans

In a way this is a follow-up, a Part II, to our “Mulligan Man” article from January 22, 2009. After a major piece of boobery, Obama usually tries for a “mulligan” (a do-over in golf terms). This past week the major acts of boobery came by the bushel and Obama wanted a mulligan on them all.

The Kooks and Nutroots and Obama enablers in print and cable are in a swoon because Obama spoke to the Republicans on Friday. “Glory Be!” they shout. But we’ll explain the boobery of the Friday Mulligan today. We’ll also explain the boobery of the terror trials. And we will explain the failure of the State of the Union publicity stunt.



* * * * *

Let’s start with the boobery publicity stunt which was the State of the Union speech, on Wednesday. Why was that publicity stunt such a failure? This question can be disposed of quickly:

During his State-of-the-Union address Wednesday night, President Obama spoke about a deficit of trust between the American people and political leaders. New Rasmussen Reports polling on the president’s speech shows just how deep that trust deficit has become.

The president in the speech declared that his administration has cut taxes for 95% of Americans. He even chided Republicans for not applauding on that point. However, just 21% of voters nationwide believe that taxes have been cut for 95% of Americans. Most (53%) say it has not happened, and 26% are not sure. Other polling shows that nearly half the nation’s voters expect their own taxes to go up during the Obama years.

The president also asserted that “after two years of recession, the economy is growing again.” Just 35% of voters believe that statement is true, while 50% say it is false.

Obama claimed that steps taken by his team are responsible for putting two million people to work “who would otherwise be unemployed.” Just 27% of voters say that statement is true. Fifty-one percent (51%) say it’s false. [snip]

Regarding another initiative detailed in the speech on Wednesday night, just nine percent (9%) of voters believe the president’s proposed freeze on discretionary spending will have a big impact on the deficit.

In short, Obama promised he would bring trust – but now the distrust has spread and infects all elected officials. Very short:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Republicans know Obama is Poison:

A tactic that would have seemed far-fetched a year ago, when the new president was sworn in with a 67 percent job approval rating, is now emerging as a key component of the GOP strategy: Tie Democratic opponents to Obama and make them answer for some of the unpopular policies associated with the chief executive.

* * * * *

Let’s discuss the Friday boobery which is so hailed on the Big Blogs. Obama knows he bumbled in front of 48 million people on Wednesday. So on a slow Friday dump day he chose to take a chance and visit triumphant Republicans. Big Blogs Boys that enabled Obama whooped and hollered about how great Obama was – that is always their first instinct before they realize they have been punked, again. Here is what the garbage scow, Maureen Dowd, wrote about Fabulous Friday:

The Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz picked up on the president’s line in the State of the Union about “a deficit of trust.”

“We didn’t create this mess, but we are here to help clean it up,” the freshman member said, before ticking off a litany of things that have soured many Americans on the president who came in trailing fairy dust.

“When you stood up before the American people multiple times and said you would broadcast the health care debates on C-Span, you didn’t,” he said.

And another good one: “You said you weren’t going to allow lobbyists in the senior-most positions within your administration, and yet you did.”

And another: “You said you’d go line by line through the health care bill. And there were six of us, including Dr. Phil Roe, who sent you a letter and said we would like to take you up on that offer. … We never got a call.”

And this rousing finale: “And when you said in the House of Representatives that you were going to tackle earmarks and in fact you didn’t want to have any earmarks in any of your bills, I jumped out of my seat and applauded you.”

What normal Americans and real Democrats, like those at Big Pink saw, and what the happy Kooks and Nutroots saw, differ greatly. The Kooks and the Nutroots have allies at Politico (Politicoo-coo). The Politicoo-coos want more speeches, more speeches, as if that would help boob Obama:

What his advisers are trying to do — first with the State of the Union and more dramatically with Friday’s event — is make clear that he wants to work with Republicans and that the minority party deserves blame, too.

By that measure, Friday’s event was a home run. It also showed Obama’s determination to ditch a Rose Garden strategy that pinned him down, month after month, in fruitless White House wrangling over heath care.

Expect more of Friday’s Obama, his aides say, with the president out on the road, liberated from messy legislative process, taking scores of questions from friends and foes.

Expect monthly meetings with Republican leaders.

Expect a campaign.

“Expect a campaign” applaud the Politicoo-coos. Isn’t that the problem? Americans complain because Obama has talked too much and done nothing for them so Politicoo-coos think the answer is more publicity stunts. The Hopium deliveries must arrive daily at Politico headquarters.

On Wednesday, Big Media, the DailyKooks and Nutroots saw their god, the rest of us saw a boob. A boob that cannot be trusted.

How shall we put it politely? Perhaps this:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

* * * * *

What about the terror trials? What happened there? For a full answer to that question read our recent article Terror Trial – Chuck Schumer with a 2×4. In that article we explain the danger to Schumer in particular and Democrats in general. For the lazy here is a video which explains the politics:



But what specifically happened in New York with the terror trials? One word: Lobbyists. You remember those lobbyists that Obama denounced in 2008, 2009 and last Wednesday? It was the Lobbyists that finally persuaded pal Obama. From the New York Times:

The Obama administration on Friday gave up on its plan to try the Sept. 11 plotters in Lower Manhattan, bowing to almost unanimous pressure from New York officials and business leaders to move the terrorism trial elsewhere.

“I think I can acknowledge the obvious,” an administration official said. “We’re considering other options.”

The reversal on whether to try the alleged 9/11 terrorists blocks from the former World Trade Center site seemed to come suddenly this week, after Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg abandoned his strong support for the plan and said the cost and disruption would be too great.

But behind the brave face that many New Yorkers had put on for weeks, resistance had been gathering steam.

The gathering steam was not the angry populace. No, it was powerful business interests that spend millions on lobbyists. Ordinary New Yorkers protested in the streets against the trials, but the rich and the powerful had access and willing ears in the White House:

After a dinner in New York on Dec. 14, Steven Spinola, president of the Real Estate Board of New York, pulled aside David Axelrod, President Obama’s closest adviser, to convey an urgent plea: move the 9/11 trial out of Manhattan.

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly had laid out his plans for the trial: “blanketing a swath of Lower Manhattan with police checkpoints, vehicle searches, rooftop snipers and canine patrols.”



Mayor Bloomberg finally realized his support for the five accused September 11 plotters was foolish and the cost exorbitant. Mayor Bloomberg pulled his support. Perhaps this was a clever trap to hurt Senator Schumer who supported holding the trials in Manhattan. But Chuck Schumer, via the miracle of google alerts or regular readership saw the peril to himself. Chuck cut the cord, “It is obvious that they can’t have the trials in New York,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, New York’s Democratic senior senator.

Citizen protests did not dissuade Obama. Lobbyists however had his ear and devotion.

The story of how prominent New York officials seemed to have so quickly moved from a kind of “bring it on” bravado to an “anywhere but here” involves many factors, including a new anxiety about terrorism after the attempted airliner bombing on Christmas Day.

Ultimately, it appears, New York officials could not tolerate ceding much of the city to a set of trials that could last for years.

“The administration is in a tricky political and legal position,” Julie Menin, a lawyer who is chairwoman of the 50-member Community Board 1 that represents Lower Manhattan, including the federal courthouse and ground zero, said of President Obama and his Justice Department. “But it means shutting down our financial district. It could cost $1 billion. It’s absolutely crazy.

Citizen protests did not matter. Families of the dead did not matter. Public uproars were not heard. Lobbyists’ whispers were heard loudly:

The breakdown of support for the trials in New York might have actually been assisted by the way New York officials were first notified by the Obama administration.

Mr. Holder called Mr. Bloomberg and Gov. David A. Paterson only a few hours before his public announcement on Nov. 13; and Mr. Kelly got a similar call that morning from Preet Bharara, the United States attorney in Manhattan, whose office had been picked to prosecute the cases.

But by the time those calls were made, the decision had already been reported in the news media, which was how Mr. Bloomberg learned about it, according to mayoral aides.

One senior Bloomberg official, speaking on condition of anonymity so as not to antagonize the White House, said: “When Holder was making the decision he didn’t call Ray Kelly and say, ‘What do you think?’ He didn’t call the mayor and say, ‘What would your position be?’ They didn’t reach out until it got out there.”

Obama and his thugs ignored elected officials and did not bother to consider the people of New York. The lobbyists are another matter. Obama listens to Lobbyists:

Soon, though, New York real estate executives were raising concerns with the Obama administration, according to Mr. Spinola, president of the Real Estate Board of New York.

Mr. Spinola said he had received calls and e-mail messages from the board’s members. Residential real estate brokers were “going berserk,” as he put it, worried that they would no longer be able to sell apartments downtown.

Commercial brokers feared they would not be able to lease office space.

On Nov. 20, the Friday before Thanksgiving, the real estate executive William C. Rudin held a meeting at his office to talk about issues with Jim Messina, a deputy White House chief of staff, according to Mr. Spinola.

The meeting was not on the topic of the trials, but the executives pressed their case anyway.

Mr. Spinola said that he told Mr. Messina, “I hope that the White House was going to put a ton of money into it.”

A turning point came when Mr. Kelly spoke before a large business crowd at a New York Police Foundation breakfast on Jan. 13.

After addressing the year’s highlights in crime reduction, he turned to the 9/11 trials, offering a presentation that was direct and graphic.

“Whatever the merits of holding the trial in Lower Manhattan,” he said, “it will certainly raise the level of threat.” He said that “securing this area and the entire city for the duration of this event promises to be an extremely demanding undertaking.”

He offered a detailed account of his department’s security plan, with inner and outer perimeters, unannounced vehicle checkpoints, countersniper teams on rooftops, and hazardous-materials and bomb squad personnel ready to respond. And he cited the hundreds of millions it would cost to protect the city.

“The entire audience issued a collective gasp when it became clear that this was an event that could go on for years,” said one guest, Kathryn S. Wylde, president and chief executive of the Partnership for New York City.

The unhappiness grew. During the Real Estate Board of New York’s annual gala, held on Jan. 21, Mr. Bloomberg dropped by, and Bloomberg officials said they got “an earful on that” from real estate executives, all of whom were angry about the plan.

A week later, his public opinion had changed, and so, it seems, had the ultimate destination of the trials.

New York politicians know when they need office space for campaigns they get reduced rates from these real estate moguls. In years past, when office space was needed, “Call Lew” (Lewis Rudin) was the reply. Now it is “Call Bill”.

Lobbyists and those Obama needs for his self advancement always have access to Obama’s Jumbo ears. Ordinary citizens, Obama does not hear.

Obama’s terror trials in Manhattan will not happen. Terror trials will go to where the lobbyists do not live.

Obama boobed up this past week. The latest polls indicate Obama helped himself with those whose help he does not particularly need. Independents, however, are sick of the boobery. Independents now, Just Say NO.

Obama will be given endless mulligans from the gullible. The wise have had enough.

Chicago – Giannoulias and Obama’s Mob

Put on your toxin resistant black rubber gloves and your waist high mud boots. We’ll quote today from websites deep into Obama love. If you thought the Massachusetts senate election was a disaster, we have one word, one name: Chicago.


Chicago Clown

* * * * *

From Business Week:

Banking Past Haunts Obama Friend Who Wants His Old Senate Seat

“Bankers don’t need another vote in the United States Senate — they’ve got plenty,” Obama said Jan. 17 in Boston, signaling a broader strategy to tie Republicans to Wall Street greed.

In the (Illinois) race to fill Obama’s old Senate seat, the banker in question is a Democrat, Alexi Giannoulias, a presidential friend whose family’s bank once held deposits for an Obama campaign committee…

Giannoulias, 33, a former senior loan officer and bank vice president, now serves as treasurer of Illinois…Giannoulias said he now owns 3.6 percent of the bank…

The $1.2 billion community bank, founded in 1979, has been part of Giannoulias’s public profile since he won election in 2006 because it made loans to a bookmaker as well as convicted Illinois influence peddler Antoin “Tony” Rezko.

Here at Big Pink we wrote about Obama’s Mob back in 2007. The mob chickens are coming home. We wrote about Alexi Giannoulias and Michael “Jaws” Giorango in 2007, but few in Big Media listened. Now, even the Obama lovers see the connections and they are worried.

From the fourth Gabor sister’s website, Huff n’ Puff (keep those gloves and mud boots on):

CHICAGO — If the Massachusetts special election was a kick in the shins for President Barack Obama, the political turmoil in Illinois, his home state, is a pain in the neck that never seems to go away.

His former Senate seat, already stained by an ethics scandal, is a major takeover target for Republicans. So is the governor’s office.

Going into Tuesday’s Illinois primary, the first of the 2010 campaign season, Democrats are in disarray, with no political heavyweights in their lineup for the Senate seat that Obama gave up for the White House.

Losing it would be a bigger personal embarrassment for the president than Republican Scott Brown’s upset victory in Massachusetts, which took away the late Edward M. Kennedy’s Senate seat.

The front-runner for the Democratic Senate nomination in Illinois, state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, describes Obama as his mentor. He is only 33 and hasn’t served a full term in office, and his only previous experience was working for a family bank now in financial trouble.

More from Huff n’ Puff’s Obama lovers:

“Massachusetts was more of a referendum on Obama. In Illinois, it’s going to be a referendum on Democratic incompetence,” said Pat Brady, chairman of the Illinois Republican Party.

In Massachusetts, Brown made his opposition to Obama policies, particularly health care overhaul, a centerpiece of his campaign. Obama had little choice but appear there two days before the special election on behalf of Brown’s Democratic opponent, state Attorney General Martha Coakley.

Since then, Illinois Republicans have mentioned the Massachusetts upset at every opportunity.

“I believe Illinois is ready for a Scott Brown experience,” Adam Andrzejewski, one of six contenders for the GOP gubernatorial nomination, said in a recent debate.

The great hero of the Polish revolution and the workers’ Solidarity Union, Lech Walesa, will campaign for Andrzejewski.

A Polish politician who spearheaded the movement that led to the fall of communism in Poland is taking a stand in Illinois politics.

Lech Walesa, the former polish president, is endorsing Polish-American Adam Andrzejewski in the Republican race for governor.

Walesa an iconic figure of Poland’s rise from communism but today Lech Walesa is hoping to give Adam Andrzejewski a lift in the race for governor. he two men joined together for an event at the Union League Club of Chicago.

Why is Walesa doing this?

“I have good political nose,” told ABC7 through an interpreter.

Walesa says his endorsement is about more than merely sharing Polish heritage. He believes the Hinsdale businessman would bring a new honest approach to Illinois government.

“Because he has no baggage. He is open. He can put things in order. Clean house,” said Walesa.

The former Polish president is well aware of the stain of corruption in Illinois politics. He joked, tongue-in-cheek, that he won’t need to visit his chosen candidate in prison.

“He doesn’t depend on anyone and this is his greatness,” said Walesa.

“We’re gonna defend the taxpayers of Illinois. We’re gonna bring good governance to Springfield. This is a new era of governance that we can work on together,” said Andrzejewski.

In Massachusetts the Kennedy clan thought they were the Polish communist regime which oppressed the people. Walesa is not afraid that his candidate is the underdog:

Andrzejewski doesn’t seem to mind the underdog status and neither does Lech Walesa.

Nobody gave us a chance to win over the communists. Nobody. And we proved them wrong,” said Walesa.

There are freedom fighters in Chicago. A website called Alexi the Unelectable will fight corruption’s courtiers in the Illinois Senate race.

Obama loving dogs at Nothing Left are barking a warning:

The story broke on January 26th, the day after both PPP and Rasmussen completed their polls on the campaign. As such, any polls showing Giannoulias performing better in the general election than his two main rivals, David Hoffman and Cheryle Jackson, are now out of date.

Being caught in a banking scandal is always bad. Being caught in one during this political environment is practically a death sentence to a campaign. If Giannoulias were to win the primary, Democrats would be extremely hard pressed to keep the seat in November. Even worse, having a prominent Senate candidate–the Democratic nominee for President Obama’s old seat–personally involved in a banking scandal like this could hurt Democratic chances in many other elections, too.

The bark of the dogs is clear and loud:

However, if Illinois Democrats either ignore this scandal, or give Giannoulias some sort of sympathy vote for being targeted, this Senate seat is probably gone. Many others will become endangered, too.

These barking fools have been so wrong, for so long, most recently in the Massachusetts race that ordinarily they can be ignored. But we have been writing about Chicago Corruption since 2007 and every day we have been proven correct.

No bigger dog that the Paul Hackett hater and Hillary hater and Obama lover David Sirota is busy barking:

Illinois’ U.S. Senate Democratic primary is coming up in less than a week, and it poses a potentially enormous problem for the Democratic Party, in Illinois and therefore nationally. That “therefore” is important: Because President Obama is from Illinois, and because Republicans have invested so much time and resources trying to nationalize the concept of the corrupt “Chicago politician,” whoever ends up the Democratic nominee for Obama’s old seat will likely be made by the GOP into a face of the Democratic Party as a whole.

That’s why the candidacy of Illinois Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias is so problematic. Holding a slight lead in the polls against other Democratic challengers, he has become a poster child for everything that is wrong with the American economy – everything that the Republican Party’s right-wing populism desperately needs to find traction.

Sirota is so worried about the politics, but not a word about the Obama Chicago Culture of Corruption. Sirota blames Republicans for the fight against Corruption. Corruption, Corruption, Corruption – Chicago.

Sirota and the Hillary haters are worried about the loss of a senate seat. The worry is political, not a cleansing of Obama Chicago Corruption. Sirota writes, “Bloomberg News shows just how mortally dangerous to the Democratic Party Giannoulias would be if he wins the nomination“.

Real Democrats, not the Obamination Dimocratic Party care about cleansing the system of Obama Chicago Corruption. Independents too, not just Republicans want to cleanse the system of Obama Chicago Corruption:

As these stories make clear, if Giannoulias is the winner, we can expect to hear for the next year about how the Democratic Party is so corrupt it is now promoting a scandal-plagued banker to fill Obama’s old Senate seat. While Giannoulias leads likely Republican nominee Mark Kirk in one early poll, you better believe those polls will change in a general-election battle that focuses in on this banking theme.

Thus, if Giannoulias, it would be a clear disaster. He is literally the walking personification of all that the public clearly despises right now – an Establishment politician closely connected to the industry that has destroyed the economy.

With him as the nominee, Democrats could lose yet another senate seat, and more broadly, they could lose any national high ground they need to reclaim. At a time when the Democratic Party desperately needs to reclaim the populist economic mantle and prevent Republicans from being able to mount their own right-wing populist campaign, Giannoulias would become the face of a Democratic Party that has already become increasingly synonymous in voters minds with the most hated aspects of the financial industry.

Sirota and the Nothing Left, DailyKooks crowd have destroyed the Democratic Party and even these Leninist “vanguard of the proletariat” “creative class” clueless clowns know the Dimocratic Party will be destroyed just as they destroyed the Democratic Party:

I’m not endorsing any of the other candidates, and I have absolutely no personal stake in the outcome of this primary election, other than hoping it doesn’t destroy the Democratic Party I’ve worked with and for over the last decade. Maybe that party I once worked with and for is already totally destroyed – I have a sneaking suspicion that it is. But maybe not. That’s precisely why I write this: To point out that if this particular candidate becomes the new face of the Democratic Party, the “maybe not part” could easily disappear.

Even Big Media sees what we saw in 2007.

Giannoulias = Obama; Obama = Giannoulias:

The front-runner for the Democratic Senate nomination in Illinois, state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, describes Obama as his mentor. He is only 33 and hasn’t served a full term in office, and his only previous experience was working for a family bank now in financial trouble. [snip]

Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn is in danger of losing in the primary because of his association with disgraced former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who was expelled from office.

Quinn twice ran as lieutenant governor on the same ticket as Blagojevich. He has also taken heat for proposing a tax increase to clean up the state’s financial mess and for working with Obama to move terror suspects from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to an Illinois prison. His effort to cut costs by letting some nonviolent inmates out of prison turned out to include releasing violent offenders — some of whom have been accused of serious new crimes.

Obama is Poison. Obama is Poison, even in Illinois:

In Massachusetts, Brown made his opposition to Obama policies, particularly health care overhaul, a centerpiece of his campaign. Obama had little choice but appear there two days before the special election on behalf of Brown’s Democratic opponent, state Attorney General Martha Coakley.

Since then, Illinois Republicans have mentioned the Massachusetts upset at every opportunity.

I believe Illinois is ready for a Scott Brown experience,” Adam Andrzejewski, one of six contenders for the GOP gubernatorial nomination, said in a recent debate.

Republicans would love for Obama to go to Illinois to campaign for his mob. Republicans repeatedly send out the message that Obama can help his Dimocrats in Illinois. But Republicans know that Obama is poison.

Even at Huff n’ Puff the Obama stink is smelt:

Recently I spent a lot of time with some relatives and old friends, so when the president’s happy or frowning visage came on the tube I could gauge the gut-level reactions.

My family and friends run the gamut of the political spectrum, so they form my own little focus group. The moderates and conservatives are both Republican and Democrat, and most of them actually voted for Obama, convinced by the candidate’s soaring rhetoric and his elderly opponent John McCain’s creaky appearance that the first black president in American history should be given a chance. Yet when Obama’s face came on the tube, every one of them reacted negatively.

Some shook their heads, kind of smirking. Others were more visceral in their grimaces and body language. [snip]

Interestingly, when I pointed out that the Congressional Republicans seem dead set on opposing anything Obama does, most of them agreed. But they were interested in results, not excuses. And the man they had voted for to solve the nation’s problems was bogged down in the swamp of Washington DC. “We elected him to figure this out,” said one. “He hasn’t figured out anything, and the country is going downhill.”

Oh yes, “the country is going downhill”. Even liberals who shamed themselves into voting for the African-American to prove they were so enlightened, ignored the content of base character and instead voted for the color of skin – are now disgusted:

The reaction of the liberals in the family was even more surprising. Most of them were even more visceral in their disgust with Obama than the conservatives. Having been ecstatic when Obama was voted in, having felt themselves part of a historical wave that had elected what they thought was a transformative figure like Franklin Roosevelt, now they were deeply suspicious.

“I can’t believe a word he says,” said one. “He completely duped us. On the campaign trail he showed us one face, and now as president another.”

Liberal and real Democrats who were duped into joining the Obamination we call the Dimocratic Party are awake:

Despite all of Obama’s soaring oratory about pulling together as a nation to solve deep economic, health care and global warming crises, they all felt Obama is not delivering. Whether his inabilities are related to personal shortcomings or the defects of America’s antiquated political system, they were not much interested. All they were interested in was results. And a year into his presidency, Obama was failing to produce much of those.

So when seeing Obama on their TV screens, nearly every one of them shook their heads, grimaced, snorted or chuckled, and then quickly changed the channel. I don’t recall George W. Bush reaching this point in his presidency until near the end of his first term. If that’s a bellwether, then Obama is in trouble. His post-election mandate is gone, his 60 votes in the Senate are gone, and what’s left is the tough slog ahead of modest accomplishments. Unfortunately, the country needs much more than that. Fasten your seatbelts, we are in for a long ride.

Alexi and Obama are Poison. Obama is poison in New York. Obama is poison everywhere.

Americans woke up too late to the Obama Corruptions.

Chicago Dimocrats are in for a rude awakening.

State Of The Union: IPad Versus IPoo

Last night Barack Obama waterboarded the nation with another baroque flood of words. We immediately thought of the abused citizens of Indonesia who want to rid themselves of the very recently (only a month) placed statue of the “One” (termer). Those Indonesians sound very like Americans:

Members of the “Take Down the Barack Obama Statue in Menteng Park” group on Facebook say Obama has done nothing for Indonesia.

“Barack Obama has yet to make a significant contribution to the Indonesian nation. We could say Obama only ate and s (expletive) in Menteng.

People of Menteng, we Americans sympathize. To us Barack Obama has only poo’ed on the American nation too.

* * * * *

Last night Obama delivered a degenerate campaign speech. Consider the idiot Gay-Americans who voted for Obama and continue to give the boob and his Dimocrats money. When it is to squeeze money from Gay-Americans Obama employs direct, declarative language:I will end ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’.”

Last night however, Gay-Americans got this campaign promise kinda, sorta: “This year I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.”

That was it. Gay-Americans who foolishly trust Obama to actually repeal the law they hate, better get to parsing Obama’s words. Obama is not going to do anything you Gay fools. Obama, one year in, will possibly “work” with Congress/military to, in a thousand years, repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law. “Work” to Obama means the speech he gave last night. His efforts are already over. Keep giving him money you fools.

Gay people who trust Obama are fools deserving of all the misery he delivers. Straight people who trust Obama are fools deserving of all the misery he delivers. Ditto, black people, ditto white people, ditto all colors of people and all mixtures of people. All genders, all ages, all religions, all political affiliations, all geographies – you are fools deserving of all the misery delivered to you by Obama if you trust Obama.

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

All Obama promises last night – none of them are going to get done. All that lobbyist talk? Right after the flood of Obama flowery words – private briefings for lobbyists. If you believe Obama will actually accomplish something (health scam, employment, tax and trade, immigration, financial reform, education initiatives, student loans, schools, ice cream delivery….) then you are a fool.

All the Obama campaign promises of retreating oceans and breakout of world peace hives are now shown to be all talk. After all the campaign promises of transformation and realignment and a thousand year reich and celestial choirs and rose petal scented rain, now Obama says “I never suggested that change would be easy….”; ‘I never promised you a rose garden, change will be hard hard work y’all.’



The Associated Press and others today published “fact checks” on Obama’s speechifying. AP mocks the toothless gimmick which is the supposed bipartisan deficit commission as well as Obama’s claims in regard to the “freeze” in spending, the health scam, the lobbyist scam, employment scams, transparency scams, arms control foolishness, and terrorist bumbling.

The facts are against Obama. After last night’s spending freeze TALK, today, every single Dimocratic senator voted to raise the debt limit to $14.3 trillion.

Last night there were plenty of distractions. “Tingle” Matthews proved again he is a bigot and a Big Media boob. Justice Alito mouthed words against Barack Obama. John McCain also mouthed quietly (“Blame it on Bush”). Howard Fineman on MSNBC talked Mouth Mount Rushmore for Obama. We ignore these distractions what matters is jobs, good paying long-term employment private sector career jobs.

* * * * *

Yesterday a much more important event occurred than Obama’s word flood. No, we are not talking about Hillary Clinton presidential talk or her appearance on the premiere of Tavis Smiley’s new show. We are talking about Steve Jobs and the iPad.

Steve Jobs (wanna bet Barack Obama would love to have that as his name?), the technology god to many, yesterday introduced a new product called the iPad.



Whatever the merits of the new gizmo, there is no doubt that Steve Jobs has actually accomplished a great many worthwhile works in his life. The new iPad will create jobs, “jobs” as in employment, not just a name, not just a word. Income will be generated. Tech geeks and others will be happy. The oceans won’t recede, but many of our techno geek friends will be happy with their new toy.

Steve Jobs does not just talk. Steve Jobs creates gizmos and jobs.

Barack Obama talks. Barack Obama does not create gizmos or jobs. Barack Obama only talks. and talks. and talks.

There is another thing that Obama does though. Obama did that last night. It’s what he did in Menteng.

Obama yesterday introduced the iPoo on the State of the Union.

Steve Jobs – “I Pad”.

Barack Obama – “I Poo”.

State of Obama State of the Union – The One Becomes A One-Termer

Update: Excerpts from Obama’s shameless speech can be read HERE. “Credibility Gap” indeed. Shameless, Shameless, Shameless.

———————————————————————————
[Join us tonight at 9:00 (EST), as we retch and guffaw, then spill out laughs – yup, it’s another Obama publicity stunt we will subject ourselves to.]

The State of the Union speech used to be a serious report on the status of the country from the chief executive of the country. Tonight it will be another TelePrompTer powered publicity stunt by a desperate flim-flam man aware the police are just about to break down the door.

Expect a lot of fast talk, a lot of “I”, a lot of grins, and a lot of bunk. The audience will be full of smiles, but the atmosphere will be so cold even Michelle will have sleeves on.



Ted Kennedy’s bulk will threaten over the proceedings like a sword of Damocles, or is it the Blue Whale at the American Museum of Natural History? Banquo’s ghost will speak with a Boston brogue at the Mackdaddy’s table. “It will have blood: they say blood will have blood. Stones have been known to move and trees to speak. He is afraid of what he has brought down upon himself, and begins to believe that his evil actions will have consequences.”

The star of the evening will not the the corpse reading the TelePrompTer. The star will be one of the non-mourners at the state funeral – Scott Brown. Scott Brown’s light will shine and a glow will be cast over the minority which has tripped the huge boob majority. At every opportune moment the camera will alight upon a smiling Brown then a scowling Michelle, feverish with loathing and envy.

Republicans will not interrupt the proceedings with insults at the boob, they will smile like Cheshire cats at a scrawny, elongated mouse. Republicans will talk of “terror trials” and ignore the one termer’s flowery but directionless words. “`Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?’ `That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,’ said the Cat. `I don’t much care where–‘ said Alice. `Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,’ said the Cat. `–so long as I get SOMEWHERE,’ Alice added as an explanation.”

Via videotape, Hillary will be on the Tavis Smiley premiere tonight. More importantly, Hillary Clinton will put an ocean of distance between herself and the arsenic that is Barack Obama. A wise Hillary will be in Europe, as giggling European heads of state watch the Three Stooges Hour unfold in the once proud American capital. A real president, Bill Clinton, will be laughing his two-term ass off as he watches Obama truly become “the One” – as in One-Termer.

For Barack Obama the revelatory “state of the union” is the sacred night he united with and became a made member of the Chicago thug machine. For Barack Obama “the union” is the unholy perfidy when he secretly became the establishment candidate of Teddy, Plousey and Reid – and the stooge of the Big Media Party. “Blood will have blood.”

For Americans “the state of the union” are the rusty hinges barely holding together these red/blue United States of North America. Americans tonight will see a flim-flam scam man once again try the ol’ Razzle Dazzle. The wasted year on a hated health scam, the hated Dimocrats increasingly hated, and the Razzle Dazzle buffoonery to convince Americans to “stay the course” after the obvious failure of leadership, will be tonight’s circus entertainment.

But Americans tonight will drink Boston Tea as they sit, clenched jawed, by their televisions and remember the long train of abuses and usurpations inflicted on them in the past year and the previous eight.

Obama will talk of pay freezes for White House workers. But Michelle will not let go of her nail polishers, her foot buffers, her pillow fluffers, the vast army of assistants all, who make her Antoinette existence bearable after the garden pretense. Obama will talk, more words, of fake budget freezes after oceans of spending and wasting and corruptions. But Obama will not release one of his courtiers from the public payrolls – let others suffer, not he.

Americans tonight will see the state of bamboozlement – Obama before the work became “hard”. Obama before the Oceans retreated and the Planet healed. Words, words, words, with necessary profound humility, care for the sick, good jobs for the jobless, the moment the wars ended, America’s image was restored, when we came togetherbut they’re just words, as we warned over and over and over again:



As Hillary warned – Hillary before the planet healed and the oceans retreated and the celestial choirs and Scott Brown:



For many a year we have said:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Now, Obama can’t be trusted says Evan Thomas alongside the venomous Colbert King who is the ugliest of Hillary Haters and the most wicked of race-baiters. Now, after he called Obama a “sort of God”, Evan Thomas declares that Obama is “Not Fundamentally Honest” on health care.



Colbert King, the viper of the brood, still defends Barack Obama. Obama and Colbert are increasingly in the minority and not on the basis of skin color. Colbert King is a snake defending a snake. We knew that all along. Even before Obama became a one termer.



Tonight we will see the de-fanged snake coil.

Tough Times Ahead For Hillary Clinton Supporters

As we wrote yesterday, there will be tough times ahead for Hillary Clinton supporters. The tough times will come because in order to do what is best for the country and to resurrect the now dead Democratic Party of FDR and Hillary Clinton we will have to assist in the destruction of the Obama Dimocratic Party.

Lifelong Democrats will find the purposeful destruction of a party disguised as the Democratic Party a difficult decision to make. We saw that in the Brown versus Coakley race in Massachusetts. Good people, even in our comments section, advocated for Martha Coakley. Good people, advocated for Martha Coakley on the grounds that she was a staunch Hillary Clinton supporter and deserved our support in her hour of need. Good people, also advocated for Martha Coakley on the grounds that she is a woman and we need more women in positions of power. Good people, also advocated for Martha Coakley on the grounds that she was closer to our issues positions than the male Republican candidate, Scott Brown. We found those arguments insufficient because the election in Massachusetts became a referendum on Barack Obama and his many scams, particularly the health scam which is a mass transfer of wealth to Big Insurance and Big PhaRma.

We supported Martha Coakley in the primary because she was a staunch Hillary Clinton supporter and the establishment power represented by the Kennedys and Nancy Pelousy opposed her. Also, in the primary, Martha Coakley made a strong argument against the Obama health scam and distanced herself from the entrenched Kennedy power that has proved so detrimental to the people of Massachusetts and the people of the United States. We recall how “green” Ted opposed energy projects because they would ruin his great views from the Hyannis Port Kennedy compound. We also recall how the Massachusetts establishment played fast and loose with the the law of senatorial appointment – “for” a special election and against gubernatorial appointment when it was convenient in 2004 and yet flip-flopping for a gubernatorial appointment when it was convenient in 2008. This was not respect for the rule of law but for the manipulation of law to convenience the establishment.

In November the Martha Coakley choice will be multiplied a hundredfold in elections for every house seat and in many gubernatorial and senate seats, not to mention myriad local elections. What are Hillary Clinton supporters to do? We still believe that in order to bring sanity to the process we must make sure that the Obama Dimocratic Party suffers devastating defeat in election after election after election.

Recently the FDL website was under attack when they saw the wisdom of a united front with Republicans to defeat the Obama health scam. FDL was denounced by Obama websites. Now some of the very “creative class” clueless see the wisdom of that strategy. Even that petty Lenninist Obama supporter at Nothing Left had this to say:

If Bernanke is defeated, it will be because around ten progressive Senators joined with most Republicans. Such Progressive – Republican alliances are pretty rare, but successfully forging one would be big news. [snip]

Over the summer, we tried this Progressive Block strategy to get a public option in the health care bill. When the moment of truth came, and the public option was stripped from the bill, the strategy collapsed.

Even the Obama enablers now see the sheer stupidity of their approach – Obama love. We saw this stupidity before Obama became the nominee in Denver. Obama had emitted a great many words against FISA but when it came time to vote Obama voted for FISA (Hillary Clinton voted against FISA). That July 2008 we wrote:

Hillary Clinton voted AGAINST FISA.

Obama supporters do not care about the issues. If Obama supporters cared about the issues they would vote for Hillary.

Obama and his supporters did not care about the issues. It was all about the election of their precious Obama. Now their precious Obama has proven to be fools gold.

The day after our FISA article, Jesse Jackson had crude but honest things to say:

Yesterday, an angry Jesse Jackson threatened to slice off Obama’s testicles. Jesse Jackson apparently does not realize that Obama has no “nuts” to cut off.

Obama is a political eunuch who will never stand his ground. Rather, Obama will cower across the aisle and submit to Republican demands.

It’s a day like yesterday that we at Big Pink know beyond dispute that we are right and the incense burners are wrong. Democrats want a Democratic President who will fight for Democratic values.

It is not only Obama who lacks testicular/ovarian fortitude. It is Obama supporters who are getting the leader they deserve. Obama supporters deluded themselves with a creature of their own creation. Now, Obama supporters lack the fortitude to do what needs to be done to rid us of this Chicago flip-flop-flim-flam contortionist.

We have known all along that:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Those 5 simple sentences are now beyond dispute. Without meaningful rejection, Obama incense burners will prove themselves to be political eunuchs too.

As long as Obama “supporters” persist in supporting the unqualified, flip-flop-flim-flam Obama, any threat, even a Jesse Jackson type colorful threat will be empty.

We ended our Jeremiad with:

A New York Times commentor reminded us of Benjamin Franklin’s warning to a young nation: “Those willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither security nor liberty.”

Those who persist in supporting Obama now have no excuse. They can no longer claim they did not know. They can no longer say they have not been listening to Obama. We have warned them enough.

Now the treacheries foreshadowed by Barack Obama’s entire career come home to roost and the Obama enablers whine and scheme against the very “One” they so clamored, and so protected. The Nutroots and the establishment Dimocrats in power share the blame. We cannot support these creatures.

To these Obama enablers, issues became a “red flag” not a conviction. They waved that red flag to try to get Hillary supporters to go against reason and support the flim-flam scam man from Chicago. We rejected that “issues” red flag argument:

After trashing the FDR coalition in favor of His “new” Democratic? Party Obama is now trying to bamboozle voters he is finally realizing determine elections. But the “red” flag campaign will not work this time because we’ve been fooled once too often. Women’s rights and respect do not begin and end with the usual Democratic? red flags.

We quoted some wise words:

The point I’m trying to make is that if women really care about their reproductive rights, then they’ll start demanding more from Congress then simple appeasement. By going into the voting booth every four years and pulling the lever for a Democrat out of habit, then you aren’t doing anything more than agreeing to let the Male dominated legislature control your sex organs for another four years. If you don’t start demanding something more for your vote, if you simply give in again because the Dems are dangling that damn abortion carrot as a threat, if you don’t demand that they do something to protect your rights other than paying lip service every four years, then this cycle will continue to play out from now until eternity. But at least you can still watch Oprah.

We believe the United States needs a fully functioning Democratic Party, a fully functioning Republican Party, as well as third party efforts which seek to move both major parties. Right now, we are devoid of a Democratic Party. What we have is a mockery posing as the once great Democratic Party.

The strategy we proposed in 2008 began with Massachusetts:

A bigger than expected vote for Ed O’Reilly in Massachusetts will send terror sweats throughout the unDemocratic Party. The election is this Tuesday, September 16. Hillary Clinton won the Massachusetts primary despite Kennedy, Kerry and Patrick. Let’s make some noise in Massachusetts this Tuesday as the first step to reviving the FDR coalition truly Democratic Party.

We utterly failed with Ed O’Reilly, but Scott Brown, showed the wisdom of our strategy. We distilled our strategy for the general election in our article called Voting For Hillary Clinton Or Voting “Present”

This election cycle is about the character of the Democratic Party as well as about its core principles. [snip]

Mothers are wise. Perhaps you have heard a parent say, or you yourself have said “If your friends jump off a cliff, (or out a window) will you jump too?” All our respect for Hillary guarantees is that when Hillary speaks, we listen. But we are not lemmings, we are not automatons, we do not live in dens filled with Hopium. We make up our own minds on who gets our votes.

If there was a mechanism whereby Hillary supporters could support the eventually nominee, whether that is Hillary or Obama or anyone else, and yet also have a way to remove those who stoked the race-baiting, gay-bashing and woman-hating of the primaries; a way to reject the ugly New Democratic Party Obama wants to create – perhaps then an argument could be made for voting for the Democratic nominee no matter who she or he is.

But that mechanism does NOT exist.

Dean/Obama/Brazille/Pelosi believe they have Hillary supporters by the ovaries. Dean/Obama/Brazille/Pelosi think there is no where else to go – that women and all Democrats will have to vote Democratic, that Democrats will have no choice but to support the Democratic nominee no matter what ugly deeds, however much cowardice, however many insults and injuries they authored.

McCain was swamped when George W. Bush became a focus of national attention during the financial crisis just before the November elections in 2008. So scared and fearful were American voters that they put aside their qualms about Obama and decided to take a leap of faith, fingers crossed. They jumped from the frying pan and into the fire.

We still think our strategy is correct. But some good people question our “devastating defeat” strategy:

I know that many disaffected Democrats want to punish the party for its gutless congressional behavior over the past three years, for its kowtowing to Wall Street and the health insurance industry, and for its death-grip embrace of a cult of personality centered around a Chicago huckster. But in our zeal to punish, are we going to abandon principle?

The obvious riposte is “what principle?” How does a vote for a Dimocrat who mouths the words we like help? It’s not about “bitter, clingy” punishment as an end, it’s about punishment as a strategy.

The example cited against the “devastating defeat” strategy is that of Barbara Boxer. Barbara Boxer we are told “married into Hillary’s family.” But we remember the Barbara Boxer who announced she would support the winner of the California primary (who many believed would be Barack Obama) but when Hillary Clinton won overwhelmingly, Barbara Boxer was silent. Silent. Boxer, along with the Dimocratic establishment wanted Hillary Clinton out and Barack Obama in. How can we reward such a creature?

The argument is we must support Dimocrats who stabbed us in the back. Where does that get us? Where has that argument gotten the Nutroots?

Issues? We supposedly have overwhelming majorities of “our” people in congress and one of “our” people in the White House. What has that gotten us? Must we repeat “Obama is the Third Bush Term”? What have “our” overwhelming majorities produced? What has “our” Dimocrat in the White House produced?

Hundreds of military careers have been destroyed on his watch for no valid reason. The country has been deprived of the talents of these service members and has wasted millions of dollars on their training.

Many wonder when their president will show the same kind of concern for the constitutional rights of gay American service members as he has for enemy combatants held at Guantanamo Bay. Many wonder what the administration’s willingness to treat gay Americans as second-class citizens says to Uganda and other countries that are considering laws that would subject gays to imprisonment and even death.

Gay Americans have been among the president’s most ardent supporters. Their enthusiasm, and that of their families and friends, could be crucial in this year’s elections. The president’s action—or inaction—on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell will be noticed.

What has voting for “ours” produced? Bailouts for the nefarious schemers of Wall Street, attempted massive transfers of wealth for Big Insurance, death to real universal health care reform with secret deals with Big PhaRma, election year slush funds for Dimocratic elected officials, FISA, Guantanamo, higher war budgets, triumphant Big Media Obama enablers gliding into Obama jobs, debt and more debt, a not so secret war against “mediocre” Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, Fox News as truly “fair and balanced” and Big Media an Obama protection mob, a never ending campaign of fakery, Bush “terrorist” policies joined to weakness, unemployment, threats to Social Security, not socialism not capitalism but opportunism, gut cuts to Medicare, Red state Massachusetts, fake deficit cuts, shrinking incomes, TelePromTer “leadership”, publicity stunts, shifting sand “deadlines” on Iran, unqualified “heckofajob Brownies”, tax cheats, a back door away from the cameras for anti-Democratic base lobbyists, vacations for the sleeveless, parties and gardens and playhouses for the Rezko financed, scams, scams and more scams, – that is what “ours” have produced.

We’ll let a bamboozled independent explain:

I am a registered Independent. I voted for Barack Obama. And for that, I am sorry.

I’m not sorry for you. I’m sorry for me. Because I voted for Obama for me, not for you. I voted for hope and change and all the intangibles that Obama was peddling in the wake of the financial crisis, Sarah Palin, Sept. 11 and all the other ills that shook our country in the last decade. I wanted something new. Something different. What I got was, I suppose, exactly what I voted for – a spin doctor. And not a very good one at that. [snip]

He is smart enough to seek counsel. I’m just outraged at the counsel he’s seeking these days. Key financial leaders who are tax cheats come immediately to mind, but as the recent terror attack made clear to me, the idea that a president of the most powerful nation in the world could think it was OK to have a Homeland Security chief with such a loose grasp of what terrorism is and how it works is troubling.

I was right there laughing when George W. Bush struggled with the names of countries around the world early in his tenure. And while my knowledge of foreign policy is limited, I thought Bush’s was lousy, too. But after Sept. 11, I saw a man with no charisma step up and fight for this country, its citizens and its freedom. Bush became a leader.

Seven years later, I am ashamed to say that I was blinded by charisma. Obama was so convincing that I stopped caring about what he knew and started getting caught up in the euphoria. Imagine having a president who came from a broken home, who had money troubles, who did grass-roots community service? A young father. The first black president. It pains me to admit I got caught up in the hoopla.

Where were “our” Dimocrats – enabling Obama.

But I believed that Obama would try to level the playing field between big business and small, between thieves and honest business people, between greed and moderation. Instead, he bailed out the most wicked and left the rest of us fail.

I watched with horror as Obama followed Bush’s lead in bailing out banks, auto makers, insurance companies, all of those companies deemed “too big to fail.” What does that mean? My small company got thrown under the bus and my savings were ravaged – perhaps Wall Street is using them for bonuses this year.

Not to mention President Obama is recklessly spending our country’s future into oblivion.

It was clear after just 90 days what a mistake I’d made. My taxes have gone up and my quality of life has gone down. Hope has given way to disgust and I see now that change is simply a euphemism for “big government.”

Where was Boxer? – and Reid, and Kerry, and Dodd, and Pelousy, and Schumer, and Feingold, and every one of “ours”? In bed with Obama looting the economy and enjoying the perks of power while hiding from and deriding “teabaggers” who expressed with vivid force the anger “we” felt. Who is on whose side?

Hence the spectacular rise of the “tea-party” movement, an alliance of ordinary people who are spooked by the huge amount of debt that is being racked up on Mr Obama’s watch. For Democrats to deride such people as “tea-baggers”, a term referring to a sexual practice involving testicles, is political stupidity of a high order.

Support these “ours”? No. “Ours” must be punished with the only currency Americans, Democrats, have left in the Obama economy -votes.

We’ll have to be very judicious, but the default position must be “devastating defeat”.

There will be tough times ahead for Hillary supporters because we will have to, once again, do what is right. We’ll have to choose sides that are as confused as Borgia Italy. We’ll have to choose sides and strategies to resurrect the Democratic Party and to benefit the nation. We’ll have to choose sides with cold, clear logic, not red flag emotion.

Whose side will you be on?

Delusional Obama And The NObama Coalition 2010

This country cannot afford another 3 years of boobery and corruption. Barack Obama must go.

Barack Obama must be pushed out. Failing that Barack Obama must have his hands politically cut off, just like a Muslim pickpocket subject to Sharia law.

This week we will discuss the “State Of The Union”. Our “union” is the NObama Coalition (we wrote about the NObama Coalition a year ago). All this week we will discuss the NObama Coalition and where we all go from here. “Here” is “Brown America” – America after Massachusetts. “We” is not only Hillary supporters but Tea Party members, and Republicans, and Independents – the NObama Coalition.

This week we will lay out the difficult future for Hillary supporters. This week we will lay out the need for the Left and the Right to come together to remove the Obama blight.

The future for Hillary supporters will be difficult because we will have to advocate for the defeat of Dimocrats on a nationwide basis. The Left and the Right will have to unite to remove the Obama blight – Republicans will have to accept the powerful Secret Weapon, and those of us who still consider ourselves Liberals/Progressives/Democrats will have to accept the need to defeat the Obama corruption called the Obama Dimocratic Party – even if those we agree with on the “issues” are included among the devastated. We’ll have more on all of this during the week.

The NObama Coalition is strong, and stronger every day – every time Obama plugs in the TelePrompTer. It’s not only the Obama health scam that is in trouble:

In the wake of Republican Scott Brown’s stunning victory in the Massachusetts Senate race, Majority Leader Harry Reid and the White House have struggled to win over moderate Democrats in order to increase the Treasury Department’s borrowing authority. Thirteen Democrats — including five up for reelection in November — have defected from the White House and joined a Republican effort to end the Troubled Asset Relief Program. And grumbling Democratic senators have created a scare over Ben Bernanke’s confirmation for a second term as chairman of the Federal Reserve.

The Dimocrats in opposition to Obama do so out of fear. Fear is the motivator, not the good of the nation. But, we must acknowledge and accept the driftwood that now joins the NObama Coalition.

Obama and his Dimwit Dimocrats still believe in the Obama Trinity for their salvation. On August 2, 2007 we laughed our belts off when we heard Obama say “to know me is to love me”. [For real, he really did say “to know me is to love me”, check out the last paragraph.] Obama, as we later wrote, “is a harmful narcissist”.



The Obama narcissism is still recycled by Obama’s incense burning acolytes. The chief boob himself believes he is loved. “I am the light and the way” says the Corrupt Clown King from Corrupt Chicago-town. “I am the light and the way, I am the resurrection and the life” says Obama the Clown:

Arkansas Democrat-Gazette [no link, subscription only] offers a warning to moderate Democrats and border state moderates — warning of a midterm bloodbath comparable to the 54-seat D-to-R swing in 1994.

But the jaw-dropper is Berry’s claim that President Obama personally dismissed any comparison between Democrats now and under Bill Clinton 16 years ago — by saying his personal popularity would bail everybody out.

The retiring Berry, who doesn’t say when the remarks were made, now scoffs at Obama’s 50-or-below approval rating:

Writes ADG reporter Jane Fullerton:

em>Berry recounted meetings with White House officials, reminiscent of some during the Clinton days, where he and others urged them not to force Blue Dogs “off into that swamp” of supporting bills that would be unpopular with voters back home.

“I’ve been doing that with this White House, and they just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.” [snip]

“I began to preach last January that we had already seen this movie and we didn’t want to see it again because we know how it comes out,” said Arkansas’ 1st District congressman, who worked in the Clinton administration before being elected to the House in 1996… “I just began to have flashbacks to 1993 and ’94. No one that was here in ’94, or at the day after the election felt like. It certainly wasn’t a good feeling.”

1994 was due more to the Culture of Corruption of congressional Democrats than failure to pass the health care bill, but that is an argument for another day.

The Dimocratic Culture of Corruption is back. The corruption will only add to Obama Dimocratic destruction.

Americans know the corruption is the prime motive for Obama’s actions.

Nearly three out of four Americans think that at least half of the money spent in the federal stimulus plan has been wasted, according to a new national poll.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Monday morning also indicates that 63 percent of the public thinks that projects in the plan were included for purely political reasons and will have no economic benefit, with 36 percent saying those projects will benefit the economy.

Twenty-one percent of people questioned in the poll say nearly all the money in the stimulus has been wasted, with 24 percent feeling that most money has been wasted and an additional 29 percent saying that about half has been wasted. Twenty-one percent say only a little has been wasted and 4 percent think that no stimulus dollars have been wasted.

“One reason why the economic stimulus bill is no longer popular with the American public is the perception that a lot of the money has been wasted. Six in 10 believe that the projects in the stimulus bill were included for purely political reasons,” said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

But don’t worry Dimocrats, Obama will save you. Ask Bo, er, Beau:

Vice President Joe Biden’s eldest son, Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, dealt another body blow to the flailing Democratic Party on Monday, announcing that he will not run for the Senate seat long held by his father. [snip]

Some political observers believe there was more to Biden’s decision than staying true to a 2006 campaign promise to crack down on child predators.

“As always, they tell part of the truth, but not the whole truth,” said University of Virginia political analyst Larry Sabato. “This is going to be a very tough year for Democrats, and that would have included even Beau Biden in Delaware.”

Child predators will soon have a better chance of election than an “Obama Dimocrat”.

The NObama Coalition must defeat Obama Dimocrats nationwide in 2010 if we are ever to resurrect the now dead, once great, Democratic Party.

No amount of propaganda, chicanery, and tricks will rescue the corrupt from an awakened citizenry.

Obama must be politically removed or neutralized politically. The times ahead, to borrow from Tom Paine, will try men’s and women’s souls. The NObama Coalition must be ready. The NObama Coalition is on the march.

The Barack Obama Apologists In Retreat

We will likely publish another installment from our series “Mistake In ‘o8” this week. We do not publish articles which look back on the primaries and the general election to toot our own horn. We reference in many articles what we have written in the past in order to demonstrate that our objections to flim-flam scam man Obama are not transitory, not made to suit the present circumstance. It is also important to examine what happened because the past is prologue. Barack Obama’s history and character are keys to understand what will happen and what is happening now.

For years we have made a character argument in addition to our “Obama lacks the experience, Obama is NOT qualified, Obama is a race-baiting, and gay-bashing, and woman hating, flim-flam man whom we will not support” argument. Our years long, oft repeated catechism, on Barack Obama’s character is:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

We have also made, for years, the argument that the once great Democratic Party, because of treacherous leaders, destroyed the once great alliance with the white working class in order to create the gibberish clown outfit which is the Barack Obama Situation Comedy Coalition. This Borgia treachery, by the Democratic “establishment” for the benefit of Barack Obama, has destroyed the party for generations.

Unless the Democratic Party rank and file uproot and throw out all those who committed the crime against the Party there will be no worthy opposition party. Scott Brown understood the abandonment of the white working class and he took full advantage of it. Massachusetts, true blue bluest of the blue Massachusetts, cheered Scott Brown on to victory. The result has been the disaster we have predicted long ago for the Obamination we call the Obama Dimocratic Party.


Chicago Clown

* * * * *

A year ago we lambasted Obama’s scams as “Sleeveless, Clueless, Truthless, Hopeless, Penniless“. We rejected Obama’s scams until we got answers. We wrote on February 27, 2009:

Americans need to know what Obama plans in regards to stabilizing banks and restructuring the finance system BEFORE considering budgets or taxes or new or better programs. Was it our imagination that there was a major economic crisis that needed to be addressed immediately?

We published article after article, some with videos, in which we showed that FDR and Bill Clinton had a rational program, explained their vision, and examined options. We wrote (in The George W. Obama Economy Stinks): “It’s the economy stupid!”

We repeatedly noted this (in Why We Trust Clinton Economics and Not Obama) lack of a plan:

We have opposed the Obama flim-flam “stimulus” scam as well as the Bush/Obama TARP crap. Our central objection has been that the so-called “stimulus” is not SMART. None of what Obama is doing is well thought out or coordinated with economic reality. What Obama is doing makes little economic sense but only political life-saving sense for Dimocrats in 2010 and 2012.

Dimocrats on Big Blogs and in Congress are ignoring economic reality (and the Japanese lessons). To these Dimocrats huge spending is the solution no matter how wasteful the spending is, no matter how precarious the American economic house is. These Dimocrats will not discuss how there will be any sources of credit for the private sector as the government sucks up with massive deficits whatever credit sources are available.

Bill Clinton in in his first address before a joint session of Congress focused on the economy and economic policy. Bill Clinton focused on “four fundamental components” in his comprehensive economic plan.

Bob Herbert of the New York Times, attacked those of us who said Obama is not explaining what he is doing. Frank Rich attacked anyone who questioned Obama and who wanted answers. One year later, Bob Herbert and Frank Rich are belatedly saying what we said one year earlier.

First Frank Rich in today’s New York Times makes excuses for Obama then echoes what we said:

And yet Tuesday’s special election was a dire omen for this White House. If the administration sticks to this trajectory, all bets are off for the political future of a president who rode into office blessed with more high hopes, good will and serious promise than any in modern memory. It’s time for him to stop deluding himself. Yes, last week’s political obituaries were ludicrously premature. Obama’s 50-ish percent first-anniversary approval rating matches not just Carter’s but Reagan’s. (Bushes 41 and 43 both skyrocketed in Year One.) Still, minor adjustments can’t right what’s wrong.

Obama’s plight has been unchanged for months. Neither in action nor in message is he in front of the anger roiling a country where high unemployment remains unchecked and spiraling foreclosures are demolishing the bedrock American dream of home ownership. The president is no longer seen as a savior but as a captive of the interests who ginned up the mess and still profit, hugely, from it. [snip]

If the tea party right and populist left agree on anything, it’s that big bailed-out banks have and will get away with murder while we pay the bill on credit cards — with ever-rising fees.

You read right. Now Frank Rich is finally showing respect to the Tea Party movement instead of his usual “teabaggers” sexual innuendo (of which Frankie-boy knows a great deal). We understood the Tea Party movement from the outset. Dimocrats, Nutroots, Olbermann, Matthews, and the rest laughed and cried and mocked “teabaggers”. Rich and friends are no longer laughing after Scott Brown and Massachusetts. Now Rich is concerned and saying what we said one year ago and before:

Obama has blundered, not by positioning himself too far to the left but by landing nowhere — frittering away his political capital by being too vague, too slow and too deferential to Congress. [snip]

Worse, the master communicator in the White House has still not delivered a coherent message on his signature policy. He not only refused to signal his health care imperatives early on but even now he, like Congressional Democrats, has failed to explain clearly why and how reform relates to economic recovery — or, for that matter, what he wants the final bill to contain. Sure, a president needs political wiggle room as legislative sausage is made, but Scott Brown could and did drive his truck through the wide, wobbly parameters set by Obama.

Ask yourself this: All these months later, do you yet know what the health care plan means for your family’s bottom line, your taxes, your insurance? It’s this nebulousness, magnified by endless Senate versus House squabbling, that has allowed reform to be caricatured by its foes as an impenetrable Rube Goldberg monstrosity, a parody of deficit-ridden big government. Since most voters are understandably confused about what the bills contain, the opponents have been able to attribute any evil they want to Obamacare, from death panels to the death of Medicare, without fear of contradiction.

Frank Rich will take a year to understand what we have written: Obama can’t be trusted. Obama worked deals with the pharmaceutical companies in January and February 2009, not because he needed to, but because he wanted to. It’s what Obama did in Illinois. In any fight between the powerful and the powerless, Obama will side with the powerful (while emitting sounds favoring the powerless). It’s the way Obama has always advanced HIMSELF. It’s what Obama always does. Obama is a stooge of the powerful and the establishment forces but Frank Rich can’t bring himself to write that solid truth.

Mullah Bob Herbert in March 2009, damned anyone who questioned his “Black Jesus”.

This intense, impatient, often self-righteous, frequently wrongheaded and at times willfully destructive criticism has come in waves, and not just from the right. Mr. Obama is as legitimate a target for criticism as any president. But there is a weird hysterical quality to some of the recent attacks that suggests an underlying fear or barely suppressed rage. It’s a quality that seems not just unhelpful but unhealthy.

Now Mullah Bob has joined the “self-righteous”, belatedly:

How loud do the alarms have to get? There is an economic emergency in the country with millions upon millions of Americans riddled with fear and anxiety as they struggle with long-term joblessness, home foreclosures, personal bankruptcies and dwindling opportunities for themselves and their children.

The door is being slammed on the American dream and the politicians, including the president and his Democratic allies on Capitol Hill, seem not just helpless to deal with the crisis, but completely out of touch with the hardships that have fallen on so many.

While the nation was suffering through the worst economy since the Depression, the Democrats wasted a year squabbling like unruly toddlers over health insurance legislation. No one in his or her right mind could have believed that a workable, efficient, cost-effective system could come out of the monstrously ugly plan that finally emerged from the Senate after long months of shady alliances, disgraceful back-room deals, outlandish payoffs and abject capitulation to the insurance companies and giant pharmaceutical outfits.

The public interest? Forget about it.

With the power elite consumed with its incessant, discordant fiddling over health care, the economic plight of ordinary Americans, from the middle class to the very poor, got pathetically short shrift. And there is no evidence, even now, that leaders of either party fully grasp the depth of the crisis, which began long before the official start of the Great Recession in December 2007.

Mullah Bob sounds hysterical, almost like one of the “crazed women” of the Hillary campaign he and his ilk excoriated. What a difference Massachusetts makes. Wait until November 2010 when we will be in the streets cheering Mullah Bob and Teabagger Rich as they imitate stockbrokers in 1929 and take the fast way down.

Mullah Bob is only now worried about the working class so easily discarded by Barack Obama and his disgusting Dimocrats. Mullah Bob is now worried about the poor after helping foist an inexperienced boob, stooge of the powerful, on the American people. Too late Mullah Bob, you’re one of those to blame.

Even the garbage scow called Maureen Dowd is grinding her high heels in the stinking Obama carcass.

On the cusp of the special election for Kennedy’s seat, when I interviewed Arnold at his favorite Beverly Hills lunchtime haunt, Caffé Roma, the governor was already confident that Martha Coakley was going down.

This is a major disaster — the Democrats are in a major panic mode,” he said, chuckling with satisfaction, leaning back in his black sheepskin-lined jacket and smoking a big stogie. “They’re going in the dead bed. It will be a punishing blow for the Democrats in 2010.”

About the cinematically handsome Brown, who campaigned in a GMC pick-up truck and once posed in the buff in Cosmo, Arnold ruminated: “In acting, they always tell you, ‘Don’t just talk. Don’t just let words come out of your mouth. Go and get inside the heart.’ I think the guy has that ability.” [snip]
Obama “up against the little guy no one has ever heard of before, the guy who is with his truck, driving around and shaking hands and really has new vision and energy. People look at that and say, ‘We’ve got to help the little guy.’ ”

Tea-party-style voter revolts are just part of “the rhythm” of American politics, he said.

Now it’s “Tea-party-style voter revolts” from Scow Dowd. No longer is it “teabaggers”. Fear can change vocabulary.

Fear can change thought too.
The Washington Post attacked anyone who questioned Obama’s pusillanimous response to the Christmas bomber barely failed attack. We wondered “Where’s Obama?“.

Now the Washington Post has changed it’s mind, supposedly because of new facts. The Post reflexively protected Obama without a thought to the facts. After Massachusetts, the Post has second thoughts:

We originally supported the administration’s decision in the Abdulmutallab case, assuming that it had been made after due consideration. But the decision to try Mr. Abdulmutallab turns out to have resulted not from a deliberative process but as a knee-jerk default to a crime-and-punishment model.

In testimony Wednesday before the Senate Homeland Security Committee, Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, and Michael Leiter, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, all said they were not asked to weigh in on how best to deal with Mr. Abdulmutallab. Some intelligence officials, including personnel from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, were included in briefings by the Justice Department before Mr. Abdulmutallab was charged. These sessions did provide an opportunity for those attending to debate the merits of detention vs. prosecution. According to sources with knowledge of the discussions, no one questioned the approach or raised the possibility of taking more time to question the suspect. This makes the administration’s approach even more worrisome than it would have been had intelligence personnel been cut out of the process altogether.

Big Media is at least one year behind American public opinion when it comes to Barack Obama. Big Media is at least three years behind Big Pink opinion when it comes to Barack Obama.

At some point, we believe that will be after November 2010, Big Media and the American public will realize that Obama can’t be trusted. He simply can’t be trusted. Obama is a boob, when it comes to work. When it comes to self-advancement Obama is indeed a malignant genius. On the economy, Obama is a dishonest bankrupt stooge of the establishment. We have made this analysis long ago. We were attacked when we published the truth.

We will continue to advance our arguments against Obama and the perfidy of Obama Dimocrats. We will continue to advance. The Barack Obama apologists will continue to retreat.

Scott Brown Is Man Of The Year

Time magazine’s “Man of the Year 2008” and “Man of the Year 2009” are in Chappaquiddick-like brackish waters due to Scott Brown. As of January, Scott Brown is without doubt “Man of the Year 2010”.

Time magazine’s love struck editors (“Obama is a god!” exclaimed Newsweek‘s Evan Thomas) chose their idol, Barack Obama, as “Man of the Year” in 2008. It was not seemly to display their Obama love so openly in 2009 yet again so Time magazine’s love struck editors in 2009 chose Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke (and Obama looter of the economy) as the “Man of the Year”. In January 2010, both zero-8 and zero-9 are in trouble due in no small part to Scott Brown 2010.

The authentic seeming Scott Brown, triumphed over the fake Obama in this high year of The Age of Fake.

* * * * *

We were alone when we wrote Obama Is the Third Bush Term. Now Obama = Bush III is repeated over and over. But it is still a shock to compare Obama’s trajectory to the Bush presidency and see how similar their first year trajectories are.

The second Bush term is almost exactly a template for the Obama Obamination thus far. The first Bush term has some comparative value to Obama but it is the second terms which is eerily similar. In the first Bush term, George W’s poll numbers drooped all year long until “W” was politically “rescued” by the attacks on the World Trade Center. Bush did well all the way to his reelection with high poll numbers.

George W. Bush began his second term badly and never recovered. Bush won reelection but soon thereafter things went very badly. In 2005 George W. tried to “reform” Social Security and such was the opposition that he failed. The Social Security failure was followed with increased bad news from Iraq. Hurricane Katrina finished George W. politically. From January 2005, until the last month of economic disaster, George W. Bush had a miserable second term.

Likewise, Barack Obama began his first year in post election glow and huge ambitions to rewrite all history with his glory. The Golden Calf president sought to persuade Americans he was indeed “the One”. But after a massive directionless waste of money, inexperienced Obama took on a woman’s job – health care.

Obama’s “health care reform” was in reality a massive transfer of wealth from the taxpayer to Big PhaRma and Big Insurance. Obama was always the enemy of meaningful health care reform. That Obama worked out his Big PhaRma deal at the height of his popularity demonstrates the bogus commitment he had to health care. What Obama wanted was to sign anything so that his glory could be made manifest. We Hillary supporters know that along with the Democratic Party, true Health Care Reform Died in Denver in 2008.

Scott Brown came along and the Golden Calf found itself shattered. No glory was there for the hapless boob from Corrupt Chicago.

* * * * *

After Scott Brown even simple tasks are backbreaking toil for the hapless boob and his congressional boobettes. Barack Obama, Man of the Year 2009, is fighting to save Man of the Year 2009 Bernanke.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke may be Time magazine’s Man of the Year — but he hasn’t convinced senators he’s the man for the job.

In the wake of Tuesday’s Massachusetts stunner, Bernanke’s chances of returning for a second term as head of the Fed were thrown into doubt, as a pair of liberal Democratic senators Friday jumped on the dump-Bernanke bandwagon.

It was no idle threat. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he’d call a vote next week but couldn’t say for sure Friday that he has the 60 votes to confirm Bernanke by the time his term expires Jan. 31.

That raised the prospect of a fill-in Fed chief, which would shock a skittish stock market that already dipped 5 percent in three days.

And a Bernanke defeat would be a stunning blow to President Barack Obama, who interrupted his Martha’s Vineyard vacation to reappoint Bernanke over the summer and now is forced to salvage a nomination that once seemed a shoo-in.

Blame the Scott Brown brushfire.

Obama was in the Vineyard, along with Harvard buddy Gates when he interrupted his pleasures to get some work done. Now the true blue voters of the Vineyard want Scott Brown to send Obama into permanent vacation.

The soon to be on permanent vacation, Harry Reid, waited for a Friday dump-bad-news-day to endorse Bernanke. Such courage! Big Money and the hated lobbyists of yore rallied to establishment Obama’s side:

Wall Street lobbyists in Washington said they were quietly making the case for Bernanke on Capitol Hill but were hamstrung by the politics. Because Bernanke has been criticized as too close to Wall Street, they said, the surest way to seal his fate would be for financial lobbyists to make a full court press to save his nomination.

Three months ago, we thought this was a slam dunk,” said one financial services executive. “And today people think this may not even be a layup. There’s lots of concern in the markets that the politics of the Senate might derail him.”

Downtown Scottie Brown has game and he is the one who blocked the “slam dunk”.

The boob that likened himself to basketball star Lebron James, that boob (“I’m Lebron, baby, I’ve got game.”) is these days seen more as a deflated and discarded basketball. But Obama won’t go gently. Obama has decided to call out his thugs.

President Obama is reconstituting the team that helped him win the White House to counter Republican challenges in the midterm elections and recalibrate after political setbacks that have narrowed his legislative ambitions.

Mr. Obama has asked his former campaign manager, David Plouffe, to oversee House, Senate and governor’s races to stave off a hemorrhage of seats in the fall. The president ordered a review of the Democratic political operation — from the White House to party committees — after last week’s Republican victory in the Massachusetts Senate race, aides said.

In addition to Mr. Plouffe, who will primarily work from the Democratic National Committee in consultation with the White House, several top operatives from the Obama campaign will be dispatched across the country to advise major races as part of the president’s attempt to take greater control over the midterm elections, aides said.

“We are turning the corner to a much more political season,” said David Axelrod, a senior adviser to the president, who confirmed Mr. Plouffe’s role. “We are going to evaluate what we need to do to get timely intelligence and early warnings so we don’t face situations like we did in Massachusetts.”

The Obama team of thugs and worshipers will not help doleful Dimocrats. They ran a terrible campaign but the Big Media referees were on their side. Now, after a year, even Big Media is tired of their bumbling stooge.

Yet improving the tactical operations addresses only one part of his challenge. A more complicated discussion under way, advisers said, is how to sharpen the president’s message and leadership style.

The reinforcement of the White House’s political operation has been undertaken with a sense of urgency since Tuesday when a Republican, Scott Brown, won the Massachusetts Senate seat that had been held by Edward M. Kennedy. The White House was caught off guard when it became clear that Democrats were in danger of losing the seat, and by the time alarm bells sounded from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, it was too late.

The president summoned Mr. Plouffe to the Oval Office hours before the polls closed in Massachusetts and asked him to assume the new role because of the implications the midterm elections hold.

Obama’s audacious dreams are going nowhere. It’s time Obama woke up from the hallucinatory dreams of his wayward, Edwards-like sperm donor, father and wake up to his own boobery. Obama will soon bore the nation with yet another speech and more silly dreams of self-glory.

“His first chance to reconnect in a big way will come when he delivers his State of the Union address.

Rather than unveiling a laundry list of new initiatives, advisers said, the speech will attempt to reframe Mr. Obama’s agenda and how he connects it with public concerns. In particular, he will focus on how his ideas for health care, energy and financial regulation all fit into the broader economic mission of creating what he calls a “new foundation” for the country, the key words being “rescue, restore and rebuild.”

While presidents typically experience rough patches, this one is particularly challenging for Mr. Obama. Liberals have grown disenchanted with what they see as his unwillingness to fight harder for their causes; independents have been turned off by his failure, in their view, to change the way Washington works; and Republicans have become implacably hostile.

Just go away. After one year Americans just want Obama to go away. Permanent vacation. Go golf. Go.

Scott Brown, instead of golfing, was a conduit for tee’d off voters. Now Obama will not have dreams, but nightmares:

At the end of Barack Obama’s worst week since taking power a year ago, the US president’s fortunes look set only to deteriorate over the coming days. Following the shock defeat of the Democratic candidate in Massachusetts on Tuesday, a move that deprived the president of his 60-seat super-majority in the Senate and left his legislative agenda in tatters, Mr Obama has just four days to reboot the system.

The US president had originally delayed next week’s State of the Union address to Congress in the hope he would get his signature healthcare reform bill enacted in time. That prospect, already waning, was killed dead by the voters in Massachusetts. A growing number of Democrats believe the nine-month effort could collapse altogether.

The death of the healthcare effort would rob Mr Obama of what he had hoped would be the centrepiece of his first State of the Union message.

No glory for the glory hound. Obama now faces the one thing he has never done and the one thing he fears the most: work.

All the promises of a changed planet, are now, as we always said they were: words. Words, words, words. No gay rights agenda, no immigration done, no cap and trade, no nothing. Nothing. It was all just words to gull the gullible.

However, even a more modest agenda looks tough for Mr Obama now. [snip]

“My advice would be that he pick up the phone and ask for Bill Clinton’s advice on how to recover from a situation like this.”

Nor can Mr Obama rely on unity within his own party, which has been in disarray, if not panic, since Tuesday. For example, Mr Obama’s more populist tack on Wall Street re-regulation failed to attract endorsement from Chris Dodd, chairman of the Senate banking committee, even though he was present when Mr Obama made the announcement.

Bill Clinton loved to say that if you find a turtle on a fence post you can bet it did not get there by itself. Someone had to do it. Bill Clinton had to do a lot of work for the American people. Obama wants to vacation and have parties and bathe himself in glitter and perfumes.

Scott Brown knocked the glitter out of Obama. Foolish Dimocrats who believed Obama was popular and would save them in November now must realize Obama is a hapless boob:

Cool and confident, President Barack Obama basked in applause as he promised jittery Democratic lawmakers a coast-to-coast health care victory tour to sell the bill’s benefits upon its passage.

It seemed like a foregone conclusion at that point, just over a week ago.

Scott Brown knocked reality into some Dimocrats last week. The great savior Obama is an anchor on Dimocratic necks.

Scott Brown did America a great favor last week.

Hillary Clinton’s turn to do America a great favor is coming up at the end of this year. It will make her “Person of the Year”.

Scott Brown Aftermath: Hillary Clinton Beats Barack Obama

It’s almost like the scene in the movie “Pleasantville” when a whole world goes from black and white to vivid color. In this case, the world has gone PINK. Big Pink.



Ah, the power of change. Not fake change, which bamboozles temporarily, but real change which sweeps clean like a fast moving punch wave of water.

* * * * *

The lesson? After Massachusetts, permission has been granted by the “high information”, “liberals”, and “not racists” of the Bay state to politically open fire on the flim-flam scam man from Corrupt Chicago. Obama is now under attack by people he fooled, tricked, for votes. Big Media reports note that Obama will attempt to grab the anger and frustration from Scott Brown. But the old tricks no longer work. Reuters reported the story of Obama’s latest flim-flam, and Politico did the analysis:

Reuters reports that Tim Geithner may have, as it were, pulled a Goolsbee — letting bankers know that President Obama’s populist posturing is, more or less, just that:

President Barack Obama’s newest Wall Street crackdown was met with hesitation from Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who is concerned that politics could be sacrificing good economic policy, according to financial industry sources.

Goolsbee, during the campaign, allegedly mentioned to a Canadian official (accurately, if he did) that Obama didn’t really plan to mess with Nafta. But while there isn’t much in the way of left-wing populism inside the Obama administration, there is a strain — represented by Volcker and Goolsbee — of economic thinking that has far less affection for Wall Street, and faith in the Street’s warnings of calamity, than do the people who have run policy to date, Summers and Geithner.

They call it “posturing” we call it what it is, “flim-flam scam”. Who’s right?

Charles Krauthammer sees the flim-flam, just like we do:

After Coakley’s defeat, Obama pretended that the real cause was a generalized anger and frustration “not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”

Let’s get this straight: The antipathy to George W. Bush is so enduring and powerful that . . . it just elected a Republican senator in Massachusetts? Why, the man is omnipotent.

And the Democrats are delusional: Scott Brown won by running against Obama, not Bush. He won by brilliantly nationalizing the race, running hard against the Obama agenda, most notably Obamacare. Killing it was his No. 1 campaign promise.[snip]

Brown ran on a very specific, very clear agenda. Stop health care. Don’t Mirandize terrorists. Don’t raise taxes; cut them. And no more secret backroom deals with special interests.

Obama and Obama Dimocrats snubbed voters, particularly the white working class, and now they want Americans to believe they represent those they snubbed. Krauthammer again:

The reason both wings of American liberalism — congressional and mainstream media — were so surprised at the force of anti-Democratic sentiment is that they’d spent Obama’s first year either ignoring or disdaining the clear early signs of resistance: the tea-party movement of the spring and the town-hall meetings of the summer. With characteristic condescension, they contemptuously dismissed the protests as the mere excrescences of a redneck, retrograde, probably racist rabble.

You would think lefties could discern a proletarian vanguard when they see one. Yet they kept denying the reality of the rising opposition to Obama’s social democratic agenda when summer turned to fall and Virginia and New Jersey turned Republican in the year’s two gubernatorial elections.

The evidence was unmistakable. Independents, who in 2008 had elected Obama, swung massively against the Democrats: dropping 16 points in Virginia, 21 in New Jersey. On Tuesday, it was even worse: Independents, who had gone 2-to-1 Republican in Virginia and New Jersey, now went 3-to-1 Republican in hyper-blue Massachusetts. Nor was this an expression of the more agitated elements who vote in obscure low-turnout elections. The turnout on Tuesday was the highest for any nonpresidential Massachusetts election in 20 years.

One of the top Kooks at DailyKooks appears to admit we have been right about the historic mistake made by Democrats in 2008. We’ve talked about how Obama’s Dimocrats threw out the winning FDR Hillary Clinton coalition in exchange for the “situation comedy” coalition. A Kook at Huff n’ Puff, too late, now sees what we saw so long ago. Here’s what the slowly awakening Kook says:

Political observers surprised by the Democratic Party loss in the Massachusetts Senate election last night should take a second look at the trouble Barack Obama had attracting so-called “lunch-bucket” voters in the 2008 presidential primaries. The problem that once plagued the campaign of candidate Obama has now metastasized to the whole party of President Obama. It took one year for that to happen and the consequences could be dire for the Democrats.

The Kook does not want to actually acknowledge “white working class” voters. The euphemism is “lunch bucket”. But have no doubt, the white working class voters Obama purposefully snubbed in 2008, are now in full snub mode:

But remember it they should, because the story of Obama’s failures in presidential primary states like Pennsylvania and Massachusetts was remarkably similar to the story coming out of last night’s loss in the Senate race.

Reporting in March of 2008, NPR’s Mara Liason observed, “Sen. Barack Obama, who has built his string of victories with the support of upscale affluent voters, is now trying hard to win support from the so-called “lunch-bucket” Democrats.” Liason then when on to quote one voter in particular who summed up this “lunch-bucket” perspective on Obama in 2008:

She just seems more in touch with people than Barack Obama does,” he says.

The “she,” of course, was Hillary Clinton, who won her way into the hearts and minds of white working-voters with a few shots of whiskey and a relentless focus on Main Street issues. Try as he might, Obama never managed to become a symbol that lunch-bucket Democrats took as their own. While the impact of that vote was diminished in the fray of the national election against McCain, the x-factor of the lunch-bucket Democrats remained in play.

We wrote repeated that Republicans should learn the lessons of Hillary Clinton and benefit from those lessons. That obvious fact is clear even to the Kooks:

If the right-wing should be credited with one accomplishment in 2009, it is turning the lunch-bucket albatross of one Presidential campaign into the symbol of the entire Democratic Party. That transformation was bound to happen eventually, but News Corp made it happen in under twelve months.

As a result, when lunch-bucket voters looked at Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts Senate race, they saw a symbol of elites who speak for vested interests rather than working families. They saw, in other words, the same candidate they did not trust in the 2008 Presidential primaries. And seeing that symbol, they either stayed home or flocked to the opposition’s “anti-government” anger. Either way, the lunch-bucket voters were the decisive factor in the Coakley loss.

The Kook thinks the credit belongs to News Corp which shows the limits of the “creative class” boobs to acknowledge the intelligence of the white working class. The bottom line is that the Democratic Party made an historic mistake when its establishment gifted the nomination to Obama and attacked Hillary Clintonthe champion of the working class and specifically the white working class.

The Kook prescribes more deficit spending and more, much more, publicity stunts. It won’t work. Obama snubbed the white working class and the white working class is snubbing right back.

Patrick Buchanan understands the potency of what we have been writing about for so long. Scott Brown understood what we have been writing about for so long.

What explains the white surge to the GOP?

First, sinking white support for Obama, seen as ineffectual in ending the recession and stopping the loss of jobs.

Second, a growing perception that Obama is biased. When the president blurted that the Cambridge cops and Sgt. James Crowley “acted stupidly” in arresting black Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates – a rush to judgment that proved wrong – his support sank in white America and especially in Massachusetts, where black Gov. Deval Patrick joined in piling on Crowley. Deval is now in trouble, too.

Buchanan notes that Hillary Clinton “clobbered Obama in the 2008 primary, though the Kennedys were in Obama’s corner.” Buchanan then goes to our argument once again:

The Scott Brown Democrats were the Hillary Democrats were the Reagan Democrats.

But if McDonnell, Christie and Brown could roll up large enough shares of the white vote to win in three major states McCain lost, why did McCain lose all three?

Answer: In 2008, the working and middle class had had a bellyful of the Bush-McCain Republicans. They were seen as pro-amnesty for illegal aliens and pro-NAFTA, when U.S. workers had watched 5 million manufacturing jobs disappear in a decade – and reappear in China. They were willing to give Obama a chance because Obama had persuaded them by November he was not just another big-spending utopian liberal.


Scott Brown Democrats, Hillary Democrats, Reagan Democrats – also known as the FDR winning coalition.

D.K. Jamaal harvests a comment from the Huff n’ Puff post and CQPolitics. D.K.:

At the Huffington Post, blogger and MSNBC analyst Craig Crawford rocked the boat with a cross posted article provacatively titled ‘What If Hillary Had Won?

One of the comments from a PUMA: “Would it have made a difference if an inexperienced unqualified pilot had landed in the Hudson instead of Sully? Of course it would have made a difference.”

Craig Crawford asked a question he knows the answer to. Craig answered his own question:

I’ll admit it. I was a bit wimpy in posing this post as but a question. Truth is I totally believed that Democrats were utterly foolish to choose a political neophyte they barely knew.

Craig Crawford was a regular on television before the primaries, before he let on that he was not a Hopium guzzler. Craig Crawford did not guzzle the Hopium, so Craig Crawford disappeared.

Even the gossip mongers know Hillary beats Obama any day of any year:

And my political strategist, by the by, is also not only fully aware I voted for Ms. Clinton in the primary, she also appears to be seeing why I was such a fan of H.C. in first place:

“I totally agree with you. If Hillary had been elected, people could at least agree or disagree on something, because the woman makes decisions, not just a bunch of bulls–t talk and jibberish that speechwriters turn out to make him oh-so-dreamy and hopey-changey.”

We called Barack Obama “balloon boy” and now Obama enabler Mort Zuckerman borrows from us:

The air is seeping out of the Obama balloon. He has fallen to below 50 percent in the poll approval ratings, a decline punctuated by his party’s shocking loss in the Massachusetts special election.

Why?[snip]

His promiscuity on TV has made him seem as if he is still a candidate instead of president and commander in chief. He—and his advisers—have failed to appreciate that national TV speeches are best reserved for those moments when the country faces a major crisis or a war. Now he faces the iron law of diminishing novelty.

Despite this apparent accessibility, Obama’s reliance on a teleprompter for flawless delivery made for boring and unemotional TV, compounding his cerebral and unemotional style. He has seemed not close but distant, not engaged but detached. Is it any wonder that the mystique of his presidency has eroded so that fewer people have listened to each successive foray? The columnist Richard Cohen wryly observed that he won the Pulitzer Prize for being the only syndicated columnist who did not have an exclusive interview with the president.

Poor results. But Obama’s problems are more than a question of style. There is doubt aroused on substance. He sets deadlines and then lets too many pass. He announces a strategic review of Afghanistan, describing it as “a war of necessity,” only to become less sure to the point that he didn’t even seem committed to the policy that he finally announced. As for changing politics in Washington, he assigned the drafting of central legislative programs not to cabinet departments or White House staff but to the Democratic congressional leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, the very people so mistrusted by the public. Who could be surprised that the critical bills—the stimulus program and healthcare—degenerated under a welter of pork and earmarks that had so outraged the American public in the past?

One year ago Obama promised to close Guantanamo prison (during the campaign it was ‘close Guantanamo in 100 days’). Guantanamo is still open. Obama promised to meet without preconditions, anytime, anyplace, with dictators. Thanks to Hillary that naive foolishness was not accomplished.

Peggy Noonan, who did her best to destroy and libel this website, now agrees with us:

In 2008, the voters went for Mr. Obama thinking he was not a Nut but a cool and sober moderate of the center-left sort. In 2009 and 2010, they looked at his general governing attitudes as reflected in his preoccupations—health care, cap and trade—and their hidden, potential and obvious costs, and thought, “Uh-oh, he’s a Nut!”

Another Big Pink hating website, Politico, now sings the praises of Bill Clinton and sees Bill as the light and the way:

WWCD: What Would Clinton Do?

That’s not a question that President Barack Obama and his team of loyalists from the 2008 campaign are prone to ask, because they don’t much care about the answer.

It is an irony of the Obama administration — given that it is staffed with so many people with high-level experience during Bill Clinton’s presidency, including one Cabinet member named Clinton — that its basic attitude toward Clinton-style governance is hostile.

Obama and White House aides are courteous to the 42nd president when he calls, but in private many of those aides sound very much like George W. Bush’s advisers in disparaging the Clinton years.

The people around Obama are romantics. They dream of Obama as a transformational figure, looming large on history’s stage. They see Clinton as at best a transitional figure, whose poll-tested pragmatism and incremental policies loom small.

Imagine the level of stupidity that thinks of Obama as “transformational” or “looming large on history’s stage”. Pre-teens, tweens, and early teen-agers have more sense. Or maybe not, but they can be excused for youthful naive inexperience. Vote enfranchised adults cannot be excused.



The Scott Brown victory in Massachusetts has exposed the Democratic Obama foolishness in 2008. There will be Hell to pay for that foolishness in the generations of Novembers to come.

Terror Trial – Chuck Schumer With A 2×4

Obama and his Dimocrats remain stubborn and will try to ignore Massachusetts and Scott Brown. Obama and his Dimocrats need to be politically hit on their heads, repeatedly, with a 2×4.

There is a lot of Obama boobery and skulduggery today but we want to talk Chuck Schumer and his potential defeat in true blue New York State.

Items in today’s news we will not focus on (today) include: John Edwards, like Darth Vader, belatedly admits his paternity. Barack Obama will try to bamboozle the American public today with fake populist talk about bad Big Banks – but Obama won’t discuss his mob banker friend (and Illinois U.S. Senate candidate) Alexi Giannoulias nor Michael “Jaws” Giorango (which we will continue to discuss). The Obama economy continues to lose jobs and more jobs. Obama wants to bust the debt up by $1.9 trillion. And the Supreme Court has opened up the money gates which will ensure Republicans will have plenty of money to rightly destroy Obama Dimocrats this November.

Let’s get back to Chuck Schumer. Think Chuck is invincible in New York State? Guess again:

The poll had Schumer’s negative rating at 42 percent, where it has been for months in Marist — but his approval rating was at 51 percent, one of his lowest in that survey in recent years, and down from 58 percent in September.

We’re seeing some general erosion in his numbers,” said Marist pollster Lee Miringoff, “from what’s been a consistent mid- to high-50s. This is an electorate that’s increasingly unhappy.” [snip]

“There is a sense that …. his focus has shifted to Washington,” said one longtime New York Democratic insider. The insider acknowledged that Schumer is still doing as many small-bore Empire State pressers as he used to, but said there’s a growing sense that he’s focused on national issues.

New York’s senior senator is the No. 3 Democrat in the Senate, and some believe he’s eyeing a higher position.

Longtime Schumer watchers were surprised his pro-Martha Coakley email to supporters calling his now-colleague Scott Brown a “teabagger” last week, using the dismissive term used for the conservative Tea Party activists by hard-core Dems. And he’d long shied away from fights like the one he’s now locked in to bolster Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand by pushing back hard on potential primary rivals.

51% is not good. It’s enough to squeak by, but it is not good. If a Republican challenger arises, Schumer is vulnerable. Massachusetts proved that every Obama Dimocrat is vulnerable. Chuck Schumer is very vulnerable in the deep blue state of New York. The New York State race will be a tough race. Kristin Gillibrand, a stranger to statewide politicking will likely make novice mistakes. Governor Paterson is a dead duck not helped by his latest budgets of cuts and taxes. Mario Cuomo has bad blood from past campaigns yet he is supposed to be the savior for New York Dimocrats.

Chuck Schumer’s poll numbers are already wobbly before a punch is thrown. There is also a little discussed lesson from the Scott Brown Mass-acre of Dimocrats in Massachusetts. We noticed, and questioned the wisdom of the many Dimocratic ads which attacked Scott Brown on the issue. What was the issue? Here’s our earlier discussion:

In advertisements Coakley allies and the Coakley campaign are tagging Brown as “pro-torture” because he wants military imprisonment for terrorists, not trials in civilian American courts. Whatever the merits of those positions as policy issues, the reality is that most Americans, even those in Massachusetts agree with Scott Brown. Why is Coakley’s campaign making this an issue? Is it to get out the alleged Democratic base? How does that work when a sufficiently significant part of the base too agrees with Brown? How does that help? The Coakley campaign needs a refresher course in the Paul Tully message box.

On terrorist trials 65% of Massachusetts voters agree with Brown. How does that help Coakley to make this an issue?



If this issue worked so well for Scott Brown in Massachusetts, what could it do to Chuck Schumer in New York? Senator Schumer has flip-flopped on the issue of terror trials in New York. Schumer supports Obama on the issue now. All Schumer has said is New York should be paid for hosting the terrorist extravaganza. Chuck Schumer is vulnerable on this issue.

At his victory speech Brown said:

And let me say this, with respect to those who wish to harm us, I believe that our Constitution and laws exist to protect this nation — they do not grant rights and privileges to enemies in wartime. In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them.

This is a potent issue for Republicans against Chuck Schumer:

It was health care that nationalized the special election for what we now know is the people’s Senate seat. But it was national security that put real distance between Scott Brown and Martha Coakley. “People talk about the potency of the health-care issue,” Brown’s top strategist, Eric Fehrnstrom, told National Review’s Robert Costa, “but from our own internal polling, the more potent issue here in Massachusetts was terrorism and the treatment of enemy combatants.” There is a powerful lesson here for Republicans, and here’s hoping they learn it.

Like Barbara Boxer and just about every other Dimocratic incumbent, Chuckie Schumer is vulnerable. Perhaps Chuck needs to take a ride with the Chappaquiddick Chauffeur and concoct more Hillary Hate plots from the grave.

We discussed Chuck Schumer’s key role against Caroline Kennedy last year. Barack Obama and Baby Jane Caroline have learned that what Chuck will do FOR you he will do TO you as well.

Traitor Chuck Schumer and Barack Obama and the back-stabber Dimocrats have a lesson to learn. This from HillaryForTexas in our comments, a quote from the DailyKooks:

Q: Where are the other potential Dem collapse areas this Nov?

A: Almost precisely the places Hillary carried in the 08 prez primary”

Larry Sabato has an incomplete list of “more shocks on the way” for Dimocrats.

* * * * *

Is Chuck Schumer a treacherous beast? We need to definitively find this out. Recently we wrote about the book Game Change: Gossip is pernicious and vicious because you cannot tell truth from fiction because there usually is some truth in the fiction.”

We also wrote this about Chuck Schumer.

We have tangled with Chuck Schumer in the past so it is possible that our views are colored by that past. We’ve had friends who have tangled with Schumer too so our views are most definitely colored by that past. We hope Hillary is right and that Schumer did not stab her in the back as so many others have. But we wonder…

Many questions about Chuck have been raised.

Game Change” by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin revealed that Schumer and other powerful Dems urged Barack Obama to run – knowing that Clinton planned to. The pair wrote that Schumer even told Obama pal Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) to “take a two-by-four” to Clinton in 2007.

Our days of doubt are near an end. We increasingly believe Schumer acted dishonorably and treacherously on behalf of Barack Obama and against Hillary Clinton.

Chuck Schumer must answer the questions raised about his alleged back-stabs and treacheries. We must know, and soon, whether it is true or we must begin our moves against Chuck Schumer:

The book reported that many of Clinton’s Senate colleagues — including some who nominally supported her, such as New York Sen. Chuck Schumer — were secretly offering aid to Obama all along.

We demand a clear and compelling and honest answer Chuck. You must answer whether this report from Game Change is true, Chuck:

His friend and Illinois counterpart, Dick Durbin, was urging him to run, but that was to be expected. More intriguing were the entreaties he was receiving from New York’s Chuck Schumer. Schumer’s relationship with Hillary had always been fraught with rivalry and tinged with jealousy; though she was technically the junior member of the New York team in the Senate, she had eclipsed him in terms of celebrity and influence from the moment she arrived on the Hill. [snip]

The political handicapper in Schumer was fascinated by Obama’s potential to redraw the electoral map, a capacity Clinton surely lacked. In conversations with other senators and strategists in 2006, Schumer would make these points over and over. He made them to Obama as well, and repeatedly; in one instance Schumer even double-teamed him with Reid. Although Schumer was careful to signal that home-state decorum would prohibit him from opposing Clinton publicly—“You understand my position,” he would say—he left no doubt as to where his head and heart were on the question.

Senator Charles Schumer of New York, and many other Dimocrats up for election in 2010, are going to hear and feel the whack of a 2×4. It will be administered by Hillary supporters – nationwide. Barack Obama will be next.