The Age Of Fake

Two cable television stations performed a public service on the last and first day of the new year. AMC, for twenty four hours ran a Three Stooges marathon. Cartoon Network as its introduction to the new year broadcast a marathon of Looney Tunes cartoons. There was no better journalism or capture of the zeitgeist than those broadcasts.

The Stooges, Daffy Duck, Bugs Bunny are all emblems of the age, along with Barack Obama.

We first coined The Age Of Fake on January 23, 2009. Obama was in office for two days and it was obvious back then that Fake was the Age we lived in. Here’s why we first called this The Age of Fake:

The age of contempt for experience and adoration of fake change and fake hope, exemplified by Barack Obama, is here.

The fake hope and the fake change are poses struck by a fake Democrat and fake president. The age of fake was introduced by the fake music that was played at the fake inaugural with its fake oath.

The Age of Fake had its heralds. The Age of Fake was in the making for years. Barack Obama however is the culmination of all that is fake. The fake hammer-on-heads comedy of the Three Stooges has nothing on the flim-flam steal and deal antics of Chicago’s Barack.

The cartoon antics of Looney Tunes are modern day America in the Obama Age of Fake. Can anyone deny that the “balloon boy” charade of last year was not a plot line from a cartoon script? It turned out that balloon boy was all a ruse to scam a contract for a “reality show”. Reality is now a cartoon and “reality shows” nothing but a fake. It’s fake on fake.

Eminem’s (in reality a man named Marshall Mathers) outrage when an invented character named “Borat” fell onto him, bare buttocks touching Em’s face, we now know was scripted outrage. It was cartoonish fake characters outraged over a fake incident in which broadcaster MTV participated in the fake. It was Looney Tunes come to America.

So fake is the fakery in the Age of Fake that Norman Lear, the great liberal, attacked CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, NBC, ABC and CBS regarding the “balloon boy” story. Lear attacked the broadcasters for “creating a climate that mistakes entertainment for news.” Lear thundered that the climate created by the fake news broadcasters, “all but seduces a Richard and Mayumi Heene into believing they are — even if what they dream up to qualify is a hoax — entitled to their 15 minutes.” Lear launched his attack however at the fake progressive Huffington Post, with their fake Arriana and fake intellectuals, and love for the fake Obama.

But the massive frauds of “balloon boy”, “reality” shows, and “Borat” are nothing compared to the “balloon boy” in the White House. Obama’s cartoon antics and looney tunes budgets and spending priorities are the script for the Age of Fake. “Debt is the problem, so spend more”, says Obama. “Health care is a problem, so make cuts to Medicare”, says Obama. Only a cartoon could capture the cartoon fake which is Obama: “The only way to get out is to go in….The only way to save is to spend…The only way to help is to hurt…” The Fakes are in charge.

In the waning days of 2008, as Caroline Kennedy faked her way forward, SEIU financial scandals were revealed, Judas Bill Richardson found himself in hot water, and Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich was revealed as less than a “reformer”, Time magazine named Barack Obama as its Man of the Year. That December we made the connection between the con man named Barack Obama and the financial fraud Bernard Madoff. We wrote then,

It’s been a big year for flim-flam con artists. Barnard Barack Madoff Obama. It’s been a year of something for nothing. It’s been a year when Hopium became the drug of choice. The scams have been many.

Bernard Madoff flim-flammed billions. Obama flim-flammed trillions and promises to flim-flam trillions more.

Democrats used to denounce flim-flams but that was only in the days of “Mission Accomplished” George W. Bush. Now we get fake surprise from fake Democrats about the fake who is one of their own.

He’s more like George W. Bush that you thought

Barack Obama denounced the Bush administration time and time again on the campaign trail in 2008. But in 2009, he suddenly found a surprising number of ways to agree with his predecessor.

Obama initially invoked Bush-ian logic in rejecting a watchdog group’s request for a list of health care executives who had meetings at the White House — sounding a lot like the Bush administration fighting to keep its energy task force meetings secret. The Obama White House relented in part after being sued and released the names of several executives. Since then, Obama has begun to regularly release details on many of the people who visit the executive mansion.

On the campaign trail, Obama also bashed the Bush administration’s 2003 deal with the pharmaceutical industry that blocked the government from negotiating prices with the nation’s drug makers. But during the summer, his administration gave the drug makers the same deal if they’d back his health care plan.

And the president continued his George W. Bush impression when he announced a “surge” of forces in Afghanistan — just as Bush had done in Iraq just over two years earlier.

It was all a fake. It is also a fake to pretend we did not know that it was a fake. It’s fake on top of fake in the Age of Fake.

Happy New Year!



Share

139 thoughts on “The Age Of Fake

  1. 2009 was the age of fake, and by the end of the year, reality caught up with him. This is a new year and his adversary from now on will be reality, and those who deal in reality. You and Krauthammer have had the courage and insight to call the game on him. This will be the year for others to join. Big media is like the little boy with its feet and toes in the dike trying desperately to hold back the raging waters while it continues to spring leaks. A flood is inevitable.

  2. EXCLUSIVE: Obama Got Pre-Christmas Intelligence Briefing About Terror Threats to “Homeland”

    Mark Hosenball
    President Barack Obama received a high-level briefing only three days before Christmas about possible holiday-period terrorist threats against the US, Newsweek has learned. The briefing was centered on a written report, produced by US intelligence agencies, entitled “Key Homeland Threats”, a senior US official said.

    The senior Administration official, who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information, said that nowhere in this document was there any mention of Yemen, whose Al-Qaeda affiliate is now believed to have been behind the unsuccessful Christmas Day attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to bring down a transatlantic airliner with a bomb hidden in his underpants. However, the official declined to disclose any other information about the substance of the briefing, including what kind of specific warnings, if any, the President was given about possibly holiday attacks and whether Yemen came up during oral discussions.

    According to the senior official, the holiday threat briefing, one in a series of regularly-scheduled sessions with top counter-terrorism officials, was held in the White House Situation Room on December 22. Present were representatives of agencies involved in counter-terrorism policy and operations, including Attorney General Eric Holder, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and FBI Director Robert Mueller. The CIA and National Intelligence Directors Office were represented by deputy agency heads: CIA deputy director Steven Kappes, and David Gompert, the principal deputy to National Intelligence Czar Dennis Blair. Also present was Michael Leiter, director of the National Counter-terrorism Center, a unit of the Intelligence Czar’s office which was created after 9/11 to ensure that intelligence reporting about possible terrorist plots was shared quickly among all US agencies who might have some capability to do something about it.

    The senior official said that beginning in early December, based on reports coming in from intelligence agencies, policy-makers had begun tracking a stream of information which alluded to a possible holiday-period plot against the US orchestrated from somewhere in Pakistan. However, the official said, this reporting later turned out to be “garbled” and it was determined that the threat probably was a washout. The official denied that the White House received any report, representing the concensus of US intelligence agencies, warning that a Holiday-period plot originating in Yemen and targeting the US homeland could be in the works.

    continued:

    h t t p : / / blog.newsweek.com/blogs/declassified/archive/2010/01/01/exclusive-obama-got-pre-christmas-intelligence-briefing-about-terror-threats-to-homeland.aspx

  3. EXCLUSIVE: Obama Got Pre-Christmas Intelligence Briefing About Terror Threats to “Homeland”

    According to the senior official, the holiday threat briefing, one in a series of regularly-scheduled sessions with top counter-terrorism officials, was held in the White House Situation Room on December 22. Present were representatives of agencies involved in counter-terrorism policy and operations, including Attorney General Eric Holder, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and FBI Director Robert Mueller. The CIA and National Intelligence Directors Office were represented by deputy agency heads: CIA deputy director Steven Kappes, and David Gompert, the principal deputy to National Intelligence Czar Dennis Blair. Also present was Michael Leiter, director of the National Counter-terrorism Center, a unit of the Intelligence Czar’s office which was created after 9/11 to ensure that intelligence reporting about possible terrorist plots was shared quickly among all US agencies who might have some capability to do something about it.
    ————————————————
    Q: where was “President” Obama when this meeting was taking place?

    A: in Hawaii

    Q: why was he not in the meeting?

    A: because he has confidence in his people to get the job done

    Q: like Neopolitano?

    A: yes, his next appointment to the US Supreme Court–according to rat boy chuc todd

    Q: what was he doing in Hawaii while this critical meeting was going on?

    A: playing golf, splashing on the surf, and getting ready for New Years Eve

    Q: but he was in the loop was he not

    A: he can run the country from the back of a golf cart and gets briefings every hour

    Q: but wont that interfere with his ability to concentrate on his golf

    A: when it does, the country can wait

  4. MORE FAKERY, 2O10 THE AGE OF FAKE CONTINUES WITH FAKE NEWS BY WHAT IS BECOMING A FAKE NEWS OUTLET ON OUR FAKE ELECT FAKE SURFBOY IN CHIEF…

    AP big news : obama buys his daughters a snow cone while in hawaii, complete with photo’s of obama looking at the snow cone menu board over the top of his sun glasses and telling about how he was dressed in khaki shorts and sandles..

    mean while Rome burns…. HELL WITH IT, LET THEM EAT CAKE!

    breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9CVBKM80&show_article=1

  5. Happy New Year Folks.

    Guess we can file this one under “fake”.

    Some of it is beyond me in its complexity but overall it seems to me this $75B Obama Homeowner Aid was just a backdoor way of funneling even more dough to banks, while further torturing taxpayers – in this case TWICE.

    It’s from the lead story in the NYT and positively blood-boilng (though most of mine long ago evaporated).

    “Almost three-quarters of a million Americans now are benefiting from modification programs that reduce their monthly payments dramatically, on average $550 a month,” Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said last month at a hearing before the Congressional Oversight Panel. “That is a meaningful amount of support.”

    But mortgage experts and lawyers who represent borrowers facing foreclosure argue that recipients of trial loan modifications often wind up worse off.

    In Lakeland, Fla., Jaimie S. Smith, 29, called her mortgage company, then Washington Mutual, in October 2008, when she realized she would get a smaller bonus from her employer, a furniture company, threatening her ability to continue the $1,250 monthly mortgage payments on her three-bedroom house.

    In April, Chase, which had taken over Washington Mutual, lowered her payment to $1,033.62 in a trial that was supposed to last three months.

    Ms. Smith made all three payments on time and submitted required documents, Chase confirms. She called the bank almost weekly to inquire about a permanent loan modification. Each time, she says, Chase told her to continue making trial payments and await word on a permanent modification.

    Then, in October, a startling legal notice arrived in the mail: Chase had foreclosed on her house and sold it at auction for $100. (The purchaser? Chase.)

    “I cried,” she said. “I was hysterical. I bawled my eyes out.”

    Later that week came another letter from Chase: “Congratulations on qualifying for a Making Home Affordable loan modification!”

    When Ms. Smith frantically called the bank to try to overturn the sale, she was told that the house was no longer hers. Chase would not tell her how long she could remain there, she says. She feared the sheriff would show up at her door with eviction papers, or that she would return home to find her belongings piled on the curb. So Ms. Smith anxiously set about looking for a new place to live.

    She had been planning to continue an online graduate school program in supply chain management, and she had about $4,000 in borrowed funds to pay tuition. She scrapped her studies and used the money to pay the security deposit and first month’s rent on an apartment.

    Later, she hired a lawyer, who is seeking compensation from Chase. A judge later vacated the sale. Chase is still offering to make her loan modification permanent, but Ms. Smith has already moved out and is conflicted about what to do.

    “I could have just walked away,” said Ms. Smith. “If they had said, ‘We can’t work with you,’ I’d have said: ‘What are my options? Short sale?’ None of this would have happened. God knows, I never would have wanted to go through this. I’d still be in grad school. I would not have paid all that money to them. I could have saved that money.”

    A Chase spokeswoman, Christine Holevas, confirmed that the bank mistakenly foreclosed on Ms. Smith’s house and sold it at the same time it was extending the loan modification offer.

    “There was a systems glitch,” Ms. Holevas said. “We are sorry that an error happened. We’re trying very hard to do what we can to keep folks in their homes. We are dealing with many, many individuals.”

    Many borrowers complain they were told by mortgage companies their credit would not be damaged by accepting a loan modification, only to discover otherwise.

    In a telephone conference with reporters, Jack Schakett, Bank of America’s credit loss mitigation executive, confirmed that even borrowers who were current before agreeing to loan modifications and who then made timely payments were reported to credit rating agencies as making only partial payments.

    The biggest source of concern remains the growing numbers of underwater borrowers — now about one-third of all American homeowners with mortgages, according to Economy.com. The Obama administration clearly grasped the threat as it created its program, yet opted not to focus on writing down loan balances.

    “This is a conscious choice we made, not to start with principal reduction,” Mr. Geithner told the Congressional Oversight Panel. “We thought it would be dramatically more expensive for the American taxpayer, harder to justify, create much greater risk of unfairness.”

    Mr. Geithner’s explanation did not satisfy the panel’s chairwoman, Elizabeth Warren.

    “Are we creating a program in which we’re talking about potentially spending $75 billion to try to modify people into mortgages that will reduce the number of foreclosures in the short term, but just kick the can down the road?” she asked, raising the prospect “that we’ll be looking at an economy with elevated mortgage foreclosures not just for a year or two, but for many years. How do you deal with that problem, Mr. Secretary?”

    A good question, Mr. Geithner conceded.

    “What to do about it,” he said. “That’s a hard thing.”

  6. Blue Democrat
    January 1st, 2010 at 11:57 pm
    ************************************

    Blue Democrat…it is all a racket…the lenders and the banks suck in the people…and the govt even joins in with Fannie and Freddie…they squeeze every cent they can out of these people…and when they cannot squeeze anymore…they put them out on the streets and seize their homes in foreclosures…and then sell that property to the next sucker…

    …just the past week we were told that O admin, Geithner and Treasury will lift any limits on Fannie and Freddie so we are ready to start the same ‘FAKERY’ in 2010…lure them in, then throw them out and keep the property…who needs eminent domain…when they would have to pay the owner…no, this scheme is much better…they get paid to steal your property right from underneath you…and there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it…O, Geithner, lenders and banks have the whole game rigged…but O and Geither go out and talk the talk…but no one is walking the walk…

    and where is the dim congress in all of this? barney frank? chris dodd? nancy pelosi? they are all in on the rigged game and complicit…

    …no one has learned anything and they are ready to play it again…

  7. If you read William Machester’s book Goodbye Darkness which was the compelling autobiography of his return to the contested island of Guadalcanal fifty years later, you relive that nightmare and you hear stories of how US Marines would sneak out at night to drag back the bodies of marines killed in the days battles. Part of it was the cultural norm that Marines do not abandon their own, but part of it was to deny the enemy the satisfaction of seeing the results of his work. War is a game of psychology as much as tactics and logistics. It is not your power but how your power is perceived. Here again Obama has screwed the pooch and weakened the United States. There is a difference between campaigning and governing and he is oblivious to it. As such, he is incapable of leading this nation in a time of war.

    COULD THIS BE OBAMA’S DEADLIEST SCREW UP SO FAR?

    Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)
    Friday, January 1st at 10:12PM EST

    I missed the implications of this up front and I bet you all did too, but I am hearing from members of the American intelligence community and some on the outside closely connected to those on the inside who are raising a huge red flag right now.

    It appears Barack Obama inexperience and amateurishness has just started bonfires on the bridges connecting him to the American intelligence community and delivered a huge, HUGE psychological win to Al Qaeda.

    People tell me the President’s rush to acknowledge the attack on the CIA in Afghanistan and mourn the deaths openly, publicly, and via press release is a huge no no. The CIA and greater intelligence community would prefer not to have the attention put on them. Additionally, because the President took the time to draft a blanket statement focused on the CIA in general instead of individually and more privately focusing on the families of the victims, it acknowledges the CIA’s work in Afghanistan, acknowledges that the attack has an impact on the CIA, and gives the terrorists a new recruiting tool — “you too can cause America to publicly mourn the loss of their spies.”

    To you and me this may not seem like a big deal. But I’m told this is hugely significant and shows just how out of touch the Obama administration is with the intelligence community. I’m told that no other President has issued such blanket statements of public mourning directed toward an attack on the CIA and thereby having the White House itself confirming an attack on our intelligence community.

    The intelligence community is licking its wounds right now and Obama’s rush to confirm for the world that the community suffered such wounds has the intelligence community simmering tonight and Al Qaeda preparing a PR blitz with what they view as good news.

    UPDATED: Take the information above and couple it with this. The White House is subtly blaming the intelligence community for the failure to deduce the Delta/Northwest attack.

    Why?

    Presidential aides are concerned that Obama will somehow be unfairly accused of dropping the ball on the fight against terrorist in Yemen

    Because the President is worried about being blamed, the White House is trying to blame the CIA while at the same time undermining the CIA through a rush to publicize the Afghan attack.

    Either this White House is willfully trying to sabotage the intelligence community or they are rank amateurs. I pray to God in Heaven it is the latter.

  8. Clinton condems Pakistan suicide attack

    WASHINGTON — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton denounced the suicide car bombing Friday of a volleyball game in Pakistan that left at least 88 people dead.

    “The United States strongly condemns today’s terrorist attack on civilians in Pakistan, and we offer our condolences to the families of the victims and all the people of Pakistan,” Clinton said in a statement.

    Her comments come after a man detonated a vehicle packed with explosives as fans gathered to watch two teams face off at a volleyball tournament in the village of Shah Hasan Khan, near the Taliban stronghold of South Waziristan. “The Pakistani people have seen terrorists target schools, markets, mosques, and now a volleyball game,” she said.

    Clinton vowed to support the Pakistani people, as Washington urges Islamabad to do more to rout Al-Qaeda sanctuaries and dismantle havens of militants who cross the border and attack US and NATO troops stationed in Afghanistan.

    “The United States will continue to stand with the people of Pakistan in their efforts to chart their own future free from fear and intimidation, and will support their efforts to combat violent extremism and bolster democracy,” she said.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jainDTpQ4ZUyjdC7omiCZgdkvC9Q

  9. The Politics of Incompetence

    12.31.09

    On December 26, two days after Nigerian Omar Abdulmutallab allegedly attempted to use underwear packed with plastic explosives to blow up the Amsterdam-to-Detroit flight he was on, and as it became clear internally that the Administration had suffered perhaps its most embarrassing failure in the area of national security, senior Obama White House aides, including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod and new White House counsel Robert Bauer, ordered staff to begin researching similar breakdowns — if any — from the Bush Administration.

    “The idea was that we’d show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could,” says a staffer in the counsel’s office. “We were told that classified material involving anything related to al Qaeda operating in Yemen or Nigeria was fair game and that we’d declassify it if necessary.”

    The White House, according to the source, is in full defensive spin mode. Other administration sources also say a flurry of memos were generated on December 26th, 27th, and 28th, which developed talking points about how Obama’s decision to effectively shut down the Homeland Security Council (it was merged earlier this year into the National Security Council, run by National Security Adviser James Jones) had nothing to do with what Obama called a “catastrophic” failure on Christmas Day.

    “This White House doesn’t view the Northwest [Airlines] failure as one of national security, it’s a political issue,” says the White House source. “That’s why Axelrod and Emanuel are driving the issue.” Axelrod, who has no foreign policy or national security experience beyond occasionally consulting with liberal or progressive candidates running for political office in foreign countries, has been actively participating in national security briefings from the beginning of the administration. He has also sat in on Obama’s “war council” meetings, providing Obama with suggestions in both venues based on what he knows about polling and public opinion data, say several White House sources.

    “[Axelrod] isn’t sitting in the meetings telling the President, ‘Do this because the polling shows that,'” says one source. “But we know that in less public settings, or on paper, David does provide guidance to the President that gives him added context to the recommendations and information our foreign policy and national security teams give him.”

    Axelrod’s presence in the meetings has raised some eyebrows, as previous political advisers in the White House have typically not participated in such meetings. Bush Administration sources, for example, say that political adviser Karl Rove was not present at national security meetings.

    http://spectator.org/archives/2009/12/31/the-politics-of-incompetence

  10. The idea was that we’d show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could,” says a staffer in the counsel’s office. “We were told that classified material involving anything related to al Qaeda operating in Yemen or Nigeria was fair game and that we’d declassify it if necessary.”
    ——————————————————-
    These are really sick bastards. It is all spin. So what if they screwed up less than bush did? Did they learn nothing from his mistakes? Is the security of this nation material to them? Evidently not. This nation is not safe while Obama sits in the White House.

    This corroborates my earlier point that Obama and his handlers do not understand the difference between campaigning and governing. Therefore, they are utterly incapable of leading this nation in a time of war, which they refuse to acknowledge. Barack Obama is the best friend al Qaeda ever had, as illustrated by the Erickson piece posted above.

  11. Blue Democrat, I not sure but I think the Chinese own most of Chase Bank. So they sold it to themselves for 100.00, this is a crime folks. This is what is going to happen in 2010, nothing short of a revolution is going to stop it either. The folks in Washington, those folks who own and run the media need to be sent to Siberia so they can’t hurt anyone anymore. It’s greed, pure and simple.

    I think that Obama is the puppet the insurance companies and the Bushites sent to dismantle healthcare. So why again is he waiting to sign the bill into law til Feb.? Don’t get me wrong I don’t want the bill either, it will only serve to finish bankrupting the middle class.

    I also want to share with you folks that I have been noticing commercials that the main theme is that we Americans should be living within our means. I watched the college games tonight and sure enough AllState has a commercial discussing that topic. After what they did in Katrina, they are fine ones to talk.

  12. wbboei, Mrs Smith, I found this site and it has a wealth of information about how the banking industry is controlling everything and has since 1913 when the federal reserve was born.
    This is a must watch video, its kind of long but well worth the time.

    h t t p ://www.personalgrowthcourses.net/video/monopoly_men

  13. I also thought it was totally Soros that controlled Obama, but now have realized he only plays a small part, its this guy and of coarse the Rothchild bankers.

    Here’s another article to show you the depth of deceit by this guy.

    h t t p ://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard

  14. admin: you put the point across in a manner which cannot be denied
    wbboei @ 10:04 pm yesterday: great rallying cry!
    wbboei @ 12:30 am: Presidential aides are concerned that Obama will somehow be unfairly accused of dropping the ball on the fight against terrorist in Yemen
    ————————–
    Yes. Early this morning, the local ABC affiliate here edited in part of a speech Obama gave at some point, hoping the folks at home would think he was addressing the issue from Hawaii. Trouble is, he was spiffed up, in a suit, had the polished podium, standard flags display and curtain behind. No date was displayed.

  15. wbboei, the above video about the Carlyle group tells exactly who and why Obama was put in, and that was to get rid of Hillary. I have always said the Bush’s are the ones that put in Obama and I am right.

  16. Watch the video about the Carlyle Group and you will see why Obama bowed to the King. It was his money that got him the Presidency.

  17. Squat the Balloon Boy!

    hahahaha.

    Wbboei, your comparison of admin to Krauthammer is spot-on.

    Two brilliant fearless intellects.

  18. These congressmen and senators that are now switching to the republican party, are they freshman?? Does anyone have the list of those that are switching??

  19. With apologies for the length, here’s Ktauthammer on Squat’s despicable response to the Xmas day bombing.

    War? What War?
    The Obama administration refuses to admit that we are at war.

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Janet Napolitano — former Arizona governor, now overmatched secretary of homeland security — will forever be remembered for having said of the attempt to bring down an airliner over Detroit: “The system worked.” The attacker’s concerned father had warned U.S. authorities about his son’s jihadist tendencies. The would-be bomber paid cash and checked no luggage on a transoceanic flight. He was nonetheless allowed to fly, and would have killed 288 people in the air alone, save for a faulty detonator and quick actions by a few passengers.

    Heck of a job, Brownie.

    The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration’s response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to downplay and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face. Napolitano renames terrorism “man-caused disasters.” Obama goes abroad and pledges to cleanse America of its post-9/11 counterterrorist sins. Hence, Guantanamo will close, CIA interrogators will face a special prosecutor, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will bask in a civilian trial in New York — a trifecta of political correctness and image management.

    And just to make sure even the dimmest understand, Obama banishes the term “war on terror.” It’s over — that is, if it ever existed.

    Obama may have declared the war over. Unfortunately, al-Qaeda has not. Which gives new meaning to the term “asymmetric warfare.”

    And produces linguistic — and logical — oddities that littered Obama’s public pronouncements following the Christmas Day attack. In his first statement, Obama referred to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab as “an isolated extremist.” This is the same president who, after the Ford Hood shooting, warned us “against jumping to conclusions” — code for daring to associate Nidal Hasan’s mass murder with his Islamist ideology. Yet, with Abdulmutallab, Obama jumped immediately to the conclusion, against all existing evidence, that the bomber acted alone.

    More jarring still were Obama’s references to the terrorist as a “suspect” who “allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device.” You can hear the echo of FDR: “Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 — a date which will live in infamy — Japanese naval and air force suspects allegedly bombed Pearl Harbor.”

    Obama reassured the nation that this “suspect” had been charged. Reassurance? The president should be saying: We have captured an enemy combatant — an illegal combatant under the laws of war: no uniform, direct attack on civilians — and now to prevent future attacks, he is being interrogated regarding information he may have about al-Qaeda in Yemen.

    Instead, Abdulmutallab is dispatched to some Detroit-area jail and immediately lawyered up. At which point — surprise! — he stops talking.

    This absurdity renders hollow Obama’s declaration that “we will not rest until we find all who were involved.” Once we’ve given Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, we have gratuitously forfeited our right to find out from him precisely who else was involved, namely those who trained, instructed, armed, and sent him.

    This is all quite mad even in Obama’s terms. He sends 30,000 troops to fight terror overseas, yet if any terrorists come to attack us here, they are magically transformed from enemy into defendant.

    The logic is perverse. If we find Abdulmutallab in an al-Qaeda training camp in Yemen, where he is merely preparing for a terror attack, we snuff him out with a Predator — no judge, no jury, no qualms. But if we catch him in the United States in the very act of mass murder, he instantly acquires protection not just from execution by drone but even from interrogation.

    The president said that this incident highlights “the nature of those who threaten our homeland.” But the president is constantly denying the nature of those who threaten our homeland. On Tuesday, he referred five times to Abdulmutallab (and his terrorist ilk) as “extremist(s).”

    A man who shoots abortion doctors is an extremist. An eco-fanatic who torches logging sites is an extremist. Abdulmutallab is not one of these. He is a jihadist. And unlike the guys who shoot abortion doctors, jihadists have cells all over the world; they blow up trains in London, nightclubs in Bali, and airplanes over Detroit (if they can); and they are openly pledged to wage war on America.

    Any government can through laxity let someone slip through the cracks. But a government that refuses to admit that we are at war, indeed, refuses even to name the enemy — jihadist is a word banished from the Obama lexicon — turns laxity into a governing philosophy.

  20. Here you go a republican plant, a first year congressman ran as a democrat and now is seizing the opportunity to let his true affiliation come thru. Wake up people, this is what the republicans have done. The healthcare bill is a republican bill and so is everything else.

    Stay in TouchE-Mail Facebook Twitter Toolbar Inside Politics DailyPreemies, Health Care Reform and the Cost-Benefit ConundrumChaos Theory – The Airport of TomorrowSeven Important Political Books of 2009Top

    The Congressman explained his “difficult decision” at a press conference in his Huntsville district office.

    “I am pro-business, pro-life, pro-second amendment and have worked hard to support our space and defense programs and represent our Alabama values,” he said. “However, as the 111th Congress has progressed, I have become increasingly concerned that the bills and policies of the Democratic leadership are not good for Alabama or our nation.” He added that he needs to “stand with a party more in tune with my beliefs and convictions.”

    Griffith, who is in his first term in the House, has one of the most conservative voting records of any Democrat in Washington. He has voted against several of the Democrats’ signature issues, including the $787 billion stimulus, the controversial “Cap and Trade” energy bill, and health care reform legislation. In August, he said he would not vote for Nancy Pelosi to be speaker again, telling the Hunstville Times, “I would not vote for her. Someone that divisive and that polarizing cannot bring us together.”

    This is total bullshit it was a hard decision, he is a republican, I would like to see his voting record before he came into politics.

  21. We need laws to combat this party switching, it is wide open as a way to game the system. THe people vote for what they think is a democrat and low and behold the vote republican.

    I HOPE YOU ALL WATCH THE VIDEOS I HAVE POSTED AMD MAKE UP YOUR OWN MINDS.

    Admin: perhaps this is why you have always had GWB turning into Obama, because that is certainly what he has done.

    If we don’t do something about this we are going to lose our country.

  22. At this point I am told that there are 13 attorneys general who are looking into the Constitutionality of Obamacare aka health care deform. Obviously, the individual mandate will be one area of focus. Another area should be this perpetuity clause which has been compared to the kind of edicts seen in Nazi Germany.

    Those who are still smoking hopium should put down their pipes long enough to read and consider the implications, and whether there is any room for reality in their magic thinking. Once again, if they think for one moment that this kind of dictatorship will not affect them on some future issue at some point then they are not very bright, regardless of their level of education. Also, if they study his record they will realize that sooner or later everyone who supports him gets thrown under the bus when it becomes politically convenient or necessary to do so.
    ———————————————————————————

    On Sunday, Oct. 18, the Washington Post ran a story entitled “Small Group Now Leads Closed Negotiations on Health-Care Bill,” noting that despite Obama’s campaign promises to conduct negotiations on health-care reform legislation in an open, transparent manner—even televised on C-SPAN—three Senators and top White House officials were meeting behind closed doors to hammer out the final Senate bill. The Post noted that the White House team was being led by Rahm Emanuel, and it said that the tie-breaking votes would be cast by Reid and by Emanuel, the latter acting on Obama’s behalf.

    According to various accounts, this group met continuously up until Oct. 26. The Reid bill was first made public on Nov. 19, with many Senators, Democrats included, complaining that they were in the dark over the revised bill.

    While the news media and commentators fixated on the so-called “public option,” buried in the Reid bill was one of the most sinister provisions ever written into Congressional legislation: clauses asserting that the provisions concerning IMAB and its Nazi policies could never be changed by a future Senate or House of Representatives.

    Exemplary is a clause, part of Section 3403 creating the IMAB, that reads: “It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.” (Subsection (d)(3)(C)). Immediately preceding this, are two clauses stating that “It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, or amendment” that would repeal or change the IMAB legislation or an IMAB recommendation unless it meets the genocidal, cost-cutting criteria specified earlier in the bill. And any waiver of this requires a three-fifths vote of the full Senate. Who stuck this in?

    As EIR’s investigation has shown, these “perpetuity” clauses were not in the IMAB section as voted out of the Senate Finance Committee, although most of the language in the IMAB section in Reid’s bill was taken, often word-for-word, from the Baucus bill. The fingerprints of Obama, Emanual and Orszag are all over this unconstitutional, fascist provision. From the outset, Obama was promoting an expanded version of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), what Obama called “MedPAC on steroids,” as a means of slashing medical costs, or “bending the cost curve” as he repeatedly put it. Obama suggested this be modeled on the BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure) Commission, whose recommendations cannot be altered, only voted up or down by a joint resolution of Congress.

    In June, Orszag himself drafted legislation to create an Independent Medicare Advisory Commission (IMAC). On July 17, he sent his draft to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, along with a cover letter stating that either his version, or the approach being put forward by Sen. Rockefeller to expand MedPAC and make it an independent agency empowered to “improve efficiency and performance throughout the Medicare system,” would be acceptable. A senior Congressional source later told EIR that Emanuel and Orszag were hammering top House leaders and insisting that the IMAC issue was the only non-negotiable issue in the entire health bill, as far as the White House was concerned.

    Going into the Reid secret negotiations, the Senate HELP bill had no IMAC/IMAB provision, (nor did the House bill), and the Baucus bill had an IMAB section which was said to have closely followed the White House’s demands. But obviously it was still not enough for Emanuel, Orszag & Co. What emerged from the secret conclave in Reid’s office, is a moral and constitutional affront to our Republic and the American people.

    Briefed on the EIR investigation-to-date, Lyndon LaRouche observed that the “in perpetuity” language conformed to “what I’ve observed in Rahm Emanuel’s method of speaking. Only an impassioned illiterate would insert such an obvious British formula. It read more like a text that was dictated, than something composed. The illiteracy of the text suggested that Rahm Emanuel played a decisive role. I came to that conclusion, based on profile, even before the evidence was assembled.

  23. This is total bullshit it was a hard decision, he is a republican, I would like to see his voting record before he came into politics.
    —————————–
    I disagree Connie. I know a fine southern gentleman named Ralph Hall who was a conservative democrat from your own state. He was a died in the wool democrat and advanced through the party structure of the day. He was a judge before he became a congressman and was a fine example of a judicial temperment. He never left the party, but the party left him. People used to ask him why don’t you join the Republican Party your voting record and constituents have done so. They pointed to the fact that Billy Tauzin (lately the big pharman lobbyist) and other blue dogs have done so. He used to say I am very conflicted on this, because I have always been a democrat. I am to old to change parties. Eventually he did. It was not an easy decision.

  24. Krauthammer has some good points.

    Neopolitano says she was quoted out of context on “The system worked.” I’ve yet to see the full context. Women do get quoted out of context, especially a woman in a ‘man’s job’. (Imo that’s one reason Janet Reno was attacked.)

  25. Watch the video about the Carlyle Group and you will see why Obama bowed to the King. It was his money that got him the Presidency.
    ————————-
    Thanks Connie I will. If it proves what you say, then we need to share it with conservative sites who are as sick of the big money influence and control over our political system as we are. I am telling you they are livid at the Republican leadership. They are our adversaries in one sense but in another sense they can be our allies where the potential destruction of America is concerned. Someone needs to roll the rock over and expose these global elites for maggots they are. I will reserve further comment until I have seen the video. And remember what I told you Connie: I never ever voted for a Bush.

  26. Neopolitano says she was quoted out of context on “The system worked.” I’ve yet to see the full context. Women do get quoted out of context, especially a woman in a ‘man’s job’. (Imo that’s one reason Janet Reno was attacked.)
    —————————–
    Lets not forget who she is. She is the head of Homeland Security. The statement was absurd on its face. Moreover, it bespeaks a level of incompetence which cannot be ignored. The fact that she is a woman should be of no moment in this instance. One of the things we have objected to in the course of the campaign and now is how anyone who criticizes Obama on any issue for any reason is ipso facto a racist. I do not think that criticism of Janet for this statement is sexist. Think back to Brownie and you will see why.

  27. The idea was that we’d show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could,” says a staffer in the counsel’s office. “We were told that classified material involving anything related to al Qaeda operating in Yemen or Nigeria was fair game and that we’d declassify it if necessary.
    ——————————————-
    Jan–the bait has now been thrown in the water. Lets see which of the bottom feeders in big media take it and run with it. I bet it will be AP, NYT, USATODAY, NEWSWEEK and/or TIME. If all these bastards do is reprint White House talking points, it would seem that their presence as news agencies is superfluous.

  28. The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration’s response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to downplay and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face. Napolitano renames terrorism “man-caused disasters.” Obama goes abroad and pledges to cleanse America of its post-9/11 counterterrorist sins. Hence, Guantanamo will close, CIA interrogators will face a special prosecutor, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will bask in a civilian trial in New York — a trifecta of political correctness and image management.

    And just to make sure even the dimmest understand, Obama banishes the term “war on terror.” It’s over — that is, if it ever existed.

    Obama may have declared the war over. Unfortunately, al-Qaeda has not. Which gives new meaning to the term “asymmetric warfare.”

    And produces linguistic — and logical — oddities that littered Obama’s public pronouncements following the Christmas Day attack. In his first statement, Obama referred to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab as “an isolated extremist.” This is the same president who, after the Ford Hood shooting, warned us “against jumping to conclusions” — code for daring to associate Nidal Hasan’s mass murder with his Islamist ideology. Yet, with Abdulmutallab, Obama jumped immediately to the conclusion, against all existing evidence, that the bomber acted alone.

    More jarring still were Obama’s references to the terrorist as a “suspect” who “allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device.” You can hear the echo of FDR: “Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 — a date which will live in infamy — Japanese naval and air force suspects allegedly bombed Pearl Harbor.”

    Obama reassured the nation that this “suspect” had been charged. Reassurance? The president should be saying: We have captured an enemy combatant — an illegal combatant under the laws of war: no uniform, direct attack on civilians — and now to prevent future attacks, he is being interrogated regarding information he may have about al-Qaeda in Yemen.

    Instead, Abdulmutallab is dispatched to some Detroit-area jail and immediately lawyered up. At which point — surprise! — he stops talking.
    ——————————–
    The kind of stupidity Krauthammer objects to all stems from the central premise of the Obama Administration that this is a police action as opposed to a global war. That fundamental misunderstanding of reality will lead to a”man made disaster” sooner or later.

  29. BOMBER BLUE MOON
    (John Bachelor @No Quarter)

    Spoke Peter King, 6th NY, ranking on Homeland Security, re Flight 253, and he restated his positions of the last days.
    King declares that Abdulmutallab is an an illegal enemy combatant who belongs in military custody in order to be brought before a military tribunal, according to Congressional legislation, and after and during his interrogation in search of vital military information about his sponsors.

    Also, Attorney General Eric Holder erred badly in declaring Abdulmutallab a Federal prisoner, with lawyers appointed by the court and a presumption of innocence.

    Also, Peter King argues that the Obama administration makes a fundamental error to treat terrorists as criminals, and to regard the war as a policing challenge.

    Also, Peter King anticipates hearings by the Homeland Security Committee, chaired by Miss Democratic Representative Bennie Thompson. However in the past Bennie Thompson has refused to examine the issue of the closing of GITMO. Peter King argues that the fact that two or more of former GITMO detainees, who were returned by the Bush administration to Saudi Arabia, are now part of Al Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula that launched Abdulmutallab, means that Bennie Thompson must connect the dots.

    Peter King asserts that GITMO is a necessary and well-organized facility.

    Lastly, he is not yet calling for Janet Napolitano to step down after her bizarre performances on TV; but he says he is watching her closely. No comment on the NCTC (right).

    Obama Back-filling.

    News this cycle is that POTUS has heard the preliminary rounds (early spinning) of blame-shifting re the Flight 253 incident, reported to him over the phone by Napolitano and Dennis Blair of NTCT, among others.
    The White House team is shopping the idea that mid-level heads will roll and that this will satisfy POTUS and Congress.

    Fate is not cooperating. State has not yet provided answers about Abdulmutallab’s open Visa issued June 2008.

    No one has explained the report from London that Abdulmutallab possessed an Italian passport (?).

    There is more connection between Abdulmutallab and Hasan, according to London, which reports that Abdulmutallab has told the FBI that he trained with the New Mexico born op (so-called imam) Anwar al-Awlaki. Many dots to connect, more to discover.

    Abdulmutallab’s image is now prominent on jihadist websites.

    The Dutch are insisting that full body scan machines will be in place for all US bound passengers within the month, over the long-standing objections of the US. The two companies that produce full body scan equipment, OSI and L3 Communications, are both flying, finishing the year just off their 52-week high and headed much higher in January as the fast money piles on.

    The next big event in January will be the drama around the Congressional hearings. Dianne Feinstein and Kit Bond, chair and ranking of Senate Select Intelligence, name January 21 as the start of the partisan pitch-forking.

    Offense is Defense.

    B. Raman [a longtime friend and expert] argues that the only known effective defense from terror infiltration is counter-terrorism operations — taking the fight to the enemy.
    Ram argues that when the US took the fight against the Communist states that sponsored terror in the 1970s and 1980s (Moscow- KGB-sponsored Libya) that the terror networks retreated. Ram argues that the US must take the fight to the Moslem states that sponsor the International Front for Combatting the Crusaders and the Jews (IFCCJ).

    The Obama administration is fighting a proxy war in Afghanistan rather than a total war against the sponsoring states of Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pa

  30. Obama Back-filling.

    News this cycle is that POTUS has heard the preliminary rounds (early spinning) of blame-shifting re the Flight 253 incident, reported to him over the phone by Napolitano and Dennis Blair of NTCT, among others.
    The White House team is shopping the idea that mid-level heads will roll and that this will satisfy POTUS and Congress.
    —————————–
    Obama is the virtual president. A portrait of non leadership and when things go awry scapegoating.

  31. I also thought it was totally Soros that controlled Obama, but now have realized he only plays a small part, its this guy and of coarse the Rothchild bankers.
    ————————–
    Connie: Soros is their front man. That has been true since 1957 when he came to this country and went to work for their bank. I believe that relationship was initially formed while he was attending the London School of Economics and studying under the fabian socialist professor who espoused the open society which he advocates to this day. It calls for the collapse of national borders and a global economic order. I think the Carlyle thing is a minor premise, but well worth noting. I think the Brzezinski piece is important too. Most people do not want to dig that deep or believe that their leaders are in the bag. But in that case, how do they explain the things that are being done which are not in the interests of this nation. I guess most people are just not that curious about things like that. That is the trouble.

  32. This statement by conservative Moe Lane calls to mind a fundamental political truth of politics.

    *Time for some unsolicited advice to the netroots: I understand that none of you want to hear this, but if you want to be taken seriously, you have to start punishing your would-be representatives when they tell you one thing and do another. Bluntly? A particular senate candidate broke her word when she fell into line with Senate Democrats on abortion language. You know this. But you will go nowhere until your legislators fear you and yours more than they fear me and mine. In fact, I’ll tell you right now: they don’t fear you at all.”

  33. Obama’s Royal Scam and The Iron Fist Of Rahm
    by FireDogLake’s Bmaz
    Audacity To Hope
    Change We Can Believe In

    Rule of Law

    Accountability

    Freedom From Lobbyists and Special Interests

    Privacy

    Harm From Illegal Surveillance

    Constitutional Scholar

    Transparency

    Predatory Business Practices

    Closing Guantanamo

    Withdrawing From Iraq and Afghanistan

    These are but some of the major buzzwords, issues and concepts Barack Obama based his candidacy and campaign on to convince the American electorate to sweep him in to office. Mr. Obama, however, has gone significantly in the opposite direction on each and every one since taking office. As Frank Rich noted, there is a growing “suspicion that Obama’s brilliant presidential campaign was as hollow as Tiger’s public image – a marketing scam…”.

    Is there support for this allegation other than anecdotal evidence? Yes, and Micah Sifry has an excellent piece out detailing the basis:

    After all, the image of Barack Obama as the candidate of “change”, community organizer, and “hope-monger” (his word), was sold intensively during the campaign. Even after the fact, we were told that his victory represented the empowerment of a bottom-up movement, powered by millions of small donors, grassroots volunteers, local field organizers and the internet. …. The truth is that Obama was never nearly as free of dependence on big money donors as the reporting suggested, nor was his movement as bottom-up or people-centric as his marketing implied. And this is the big story of 2009, if you ask me, the meta-story of what did, and didn’t happen, in the first year of Obama’s administration. The people who voted for him weren’t organized in any kind of new or powerful way, and the special interests-banks, energy companies, health interests, car-makers, the military-industrial complex-sat first at the table and wrote the menu. Myth met reality, and came up wanting. …. Should we really surprised that someone with so much early support from Wall Street and wealthy elites overall might not be inclined to throw the money-changers out of the temple? …. When it came to planning for being in government, it turns out that Plouffe, along with David Axelrod, was a chief advocate for bringing in then Rep. Rahm Emanuel as Obama’s chief of staff. He writes, using a baseball analogy: “Rahm was a five-tool political player: a strategist with deep policy expertise, considerable experience in both the legislative and executive branches, and a demeanor best described as relentless.” (p. 372) Note that nowhere in that vital skill-set is any sense of how to work with the largest volunteer base any presidential campaign has developed in history. Rahm Emanuel came up in politics the old-fashioned way; organizing and empowering ordinary people are the least of his skills.

    It is an extremely interesting piece by Sifry, and I recommend a read of the entirety. For those that have not read David Plouffe’s book on the campaign, The Audacity To Win, or one of the other long form reports of the Obama 2008 campaign, Sifry lays open the hollowness of Obama’s “grass roots”. Use em and lose em appears to have been the Obama modus operandi. The American people were desperate for something to latch onto, and Obama and Plouffe gave them a slickly tailored package.

    As Digby notes, this line by Sifry really sums it up:

    Now, there is a new enthusiasm gap, but it’s no longer in Obama’s favor. That’s because you can’t order volunteers to do anything-you have to motivate them, and Obama’s compromises to almost every powers-that-be are tremendously demotivating.

    I think that is exactly right, and the needle in much of the activist base is moving from “demotivated” to downright demoralized and antagonistic. Yet Obama and his administration, notably Rahm Emanuel, indignantly continue to poke sticks in the eyes of the activist base and boast about it; and it is not from necessity, it is from design and pleasure.

    Quite frankly, the seeds of this should have been seen coming. I have never forgotten the shudders I felt when I read two interrelated articles by Matt Stoller and David Dayen discussing how, heading into the 2008 general election, Obama was not just benefitting from, but devouring and commandeering broad swaths of Democratic base activist groups and their power, and actively working to marginalize and cripple those that didn’t assimilate into his Borg.

    From Stoller:

    This isn’t a criticism; again, Obama made his bet that the country isn’t into ideological combat and wants a politics of unity and hope, and he has won at internally. In terms of the ‘Iron Law of Institutions’, the Obama campaign is masterful. From top to bottom, they have destroyed their opponents within the party, stolen out from under them their base, and persuaded a whole set of individuals from blog readers to people in the pews to ignore intermediaries and believe in Barack as a pure vessel of change. … All I’ll add is that it’s time to think through the consequences of a party where there is a new chief with massive amounts of power. I’ve been in the wilderness all my political life, as have most of us. The Clintonistas haven’t, and they know what it’s like to be part of the inside crew. We have a leader, and he’s not a partisan and he can now end fractious intraparty fights with a word and/or a nod. His opinion really matters in a way that even Nancy Pelosi’s just did not. He has control of the party apparatus, the grassroots, the money, and the messaging environment. He is also, and this is fundamental, someone that millions of people believe in as a moral force. When you disagree with Obama, you are saying to these people ‘your favorite band sucks’.

    And DDay:

    There’s nothing shadowy about this – it’s an extension of what the Obama campaign has been doing since he entered the race. He’s building a new Democratic infrastructure, regimenting it under his brand, and enlisting new technologies and more sophisticated voter contacting techniques to turn it from a normal GOTV effort into a lasting movement. The short-term goal is to increase voter turnout by such a degree that Republicans will wither in November, not just from a swamp of cash but a flood of numbers. The long-term goal is to subvert the traditional structures of the Democratic Party since the early 1990s, subvert the nascent structures that the progressive movement has been building since the late 1990s, and build a parallel structure, under his brand, that will become the new power center in American politics. This is tremendous news.

    However, despite his calls that change always occurs from the bottom up, these structures are very much being created and controlled from the top down.

    Stoller and DDay, although both seemed to have a nagging question or two, both thought that the gathering “Obama Nation” was a good thing and that once he took office the immense consolidated power and organization would, in fact, as Obama was jawing, be used to end the age old grip of corporate money and influence and propel good new and different policies into action. This pie in the sky was directly defied by passages in their own articles though. Not only was Obama consolidating Democratic power to serve only him from the top down, he was taking out people and groups that didn’t step in to his line.

    Stoller:

    I have heard from several sources that the Obama campaign is sending out signals to donors, specifically at last weekend’s Democracy Alliance convention, to stop giving to outside groups, including America Votes. The campaign also circulated negative press reports about Women’s Voices Women’s Vote, implying voter suppression. … He has bypassed Actblue, and will probably end up building in a Congressional slate feature to further party build while keeping control of the data. … The campaign has also, despite thousands of interviews with a huge number of outlets, refused to have Obama interact on progressive blogs. … I’m also told, though I can’t confirm, that Obama campaign has also subtly encouraged donors to not fund groups like VoteVets and Progressive Media. These groups fall under the ‘same old Washington politics’ which he wants to avoid, a partisan gunslinging contest he explicitly advocates against.

    DDay:

    But wresting away ALL the power and consolidating it is I think a misunderstanding of how inside and outside groups can be mutually reinforcing and part of a more vibrant cultural and political movement, and how the culture is moving toward more decentralized, more viral, looser networks to organize. Obama’s movement, based on unity and hope, is working because politics is of the moment, a fad, Paris Hilton. To sustain that, you must institutionalize engagement, civic participation, awareness and action, even in a non-horse race year, as a necessary facet of citizenship. And there’s no reason to shut down reinforcing progressive structures that can keep it fun and interesting and vital.

    Shutting down Democratic and progressive structures that do not toe his line is exactly what Obama and his right hand man, Rahm Emanuel, have done since the election. As Stoller and DDay noted, they actually started even before the election and accelerated after it. The deal was sealed when, immediately after the election, Obama chose the iron fist of DLC strongman Rahm Emanuel to lead his administration, immediately dumped Howard Dean and began shuttering Dean’s wildly successful fifty state apparatus.

    There was only one reason to do that, and it was not to germinate a new grass roots policy force; it was to consolidate power and kill off any other voices and/or authority within the party. As Micah Sifry demonstrated, consolidation and exclusion were always a part of the Obama plan. Almost more disconcerting than Obama’s singular cornering of all the power and movement is his refusal to use it to propel new policies. Not even on healthcare did Obama even attempt to truly energize and mobilize the vaunted Obama network, preferring instead to leave it up to the lobbyists, in the bag Congressmen like Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman and corporate interests.

    This is exactly what has made the progressive campaign and voice of Jane Hamsher, Cenk Uygur, Firedoglake and other awakening progressive movements so critical. It is crystal clear the Obama Presidency is less than it was advertised to be; the only route to correction is through power and action; assertion of independent power is the only thing they will respect and acknowledge. The change will not come through old school Washington politicians beholden to corrupt financial institutions, the insurance lobby and corporate interests. Politicians like Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel.

    © 2010 FireDogLake
    Bmaz is an attorney in Phoenix, Arizona practicing criminal defense, civil rights and civil trial law. He is a graduate of Arizona State University, both undergraduate and School of Law, and covers legal and political issues for Firedoglake and sister site Emptywheel. Bmaz is a fan of sports, music, automobiles and margaritas and can be reached at bmaz22@gmail.com
    E-mailPrintShareDiscuss
    11 Comments so farshow all

  34. A Sign Of Desperation. The deal WASN’T HIS IDEA! That is true. It came out of Emanuel and Axelrod. Call off the dogs? That is like asking Elliott Ness to stop persecuting a civic leader named Al Capone.
    ——————————————-
    CALL OFF THE DOGS–says senator Ben (everybodys gotta eat) Nelson– the hero of Nebraska.

    A Democratic senator from Nebraska who played a crucial role in getting health care legislation passed in the Senate last month has asked South Carolina’s top attorney to “call off the dogs” — a reference to the state official’s threat to challenge the constitutionality of the bill.

    In a phone call Thursday, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., urged South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster to reconsider, Politico reported. McMaster is the head of a group of 13 GOP state attorneys general who are threatening to file a lawsuit against the Senate health care bill.

    Nelson asked McMaster to “call off the dogs,” according to a copy of the memo sent by McMaster’s chief of staff to other GOP state attorneys general detailing the call and obtained by Politico.

    The attorneys general are challenging the constitutionality of a Medicaid provision in the bill that they say benefits Nebraska at the expense of other states.

    The deal Nelson cut with Senate Democratic leaders to gain his critical vote would exempt Nebraska from having to pay for the coverage of new enrollees into its Medicaid program and leave the tab with the federal government — a move expected to cost Uncle Sam $100 million over the next 10 years.

    But Nelson told McMaster that the deal wasn’t his idea and that the same Medicaid exemption would be offered to every state, according to the memo.

    McMaster told Nelson that the state attorneys were seeking to remove the Nebraska Medicaid provision from the bill and that “he saw no way that he — nor any of the state attorneys general ” will support extending the provision to every state, the memo said.

  35. If Emanuel and Axelgrease think THIS is what the country wants to hear, they are sadly mistaken. This is one battle they cannot possibly win, given the position they are in. This is not about hopes and dreams, it reinforces their public impression that Obama is not the man they thought he was and is a dirty Chicago politician. This is suicidal for them. And it will beget a ferocious response which will sweep republican moderates like McConnell and Hatch to the sidelines. This is Gingrich and Rove country, and it is no holds barred. The difference now is that Obama is in the saddle and he has trouble on the left. See article after this one.
    _________________________________________________

    Desperate for Edge in Election Year, Dems Turn to Old Strategy

    FOXNews.com

    House Democrats began an ad campaign in December assailing Republicans for opposing legislation restructuring federal financial rules and recalling the final days of the Bush presidency, when the economy tanked

    print email share recommend (5)

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, President George W. Bush, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid during a meeting at the White House, April 18, 2007. (AP)
    With the congressional GOP poised for a comeback in the 2010 midterm elections, Democrats are dusting off an old playbook, using George W. Bush as their boogeyman and castigating Republicans as cozy with Wall Street.

    House Democrats began an ad campaign in December assailing Republicans for opposing legislation restructuring federal financial rules and recalling the final days of the Bush presidency, when the economy tanked.

    “Remember? We all know we should never let this happen again,” the ad says. It lays into Republicans for voting “to let Wall Street continue the same risky practices that crippled retirement accounts and left taxpayers on the hook for $700 billion.”

    Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, who heads the House Democrats’ campaign arm, said his party wants to remind voters who was on their side at a difficult time. “The Republican Party in Washington today is no different than the Republican Party that ran the Congress before,” he said.

    But that was three years ago. Democrats have been in control since, and Bush is long gone. This is President Obama’s country now. Democrats tried to use Bush against Republican Chris Christie in the New Jersey governor’s race in November — and Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine still lost.

    Going into 2010, Democrats held a 257-158 majority in the House and an effective 60-40 majority in the Senate, including two independents who align themselves with Democrats.

    But they face an incumbent-hostile electorate worried about a 10 percent unemployment rate, weary of wars and angry at politicians of all stripes. Many independents who backed Democrats in 2006 and 2008 have turned away. Republicans, meanwhile, are energized and united in opposing Obama’s policies.

    The one thing that heartens Democrats is that voters also don’t think much of the GOP, which is bleeding backers, lacking a leader and facing a conservative revolt.

    But Democrats are dealing with their own fresh wounds.

    Four House Democrats from swing districts have recently chosen not to seek re-election, bringing to 11 the number of retirements that could leave Democratic-held seats vulnerable to Republicans. More Democratic retirements are expected.

    Over the holiday break, another Democrat, freshman Rep. Parker Griffith of Alabama, defected to the GOP. “I can no longer align myself with a party that continues to pursue legislation that is bad for our country, hurts our economy, and drives us further and further into debt,” said Griffith, who voted against Democrats’ three biggest initiatives in 2009: health care, financial regulation and reducing global warming.

    In the Senate, at least four Democrats — including Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and five-term Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd — are in serious trouble. The party could also lose its grip on seats Obama held in Illinois and Vice President Biden long occupied in Delaware.

    A top Democratic priority is minimizing losses among nearly four dozen seats the party now holds from moderate-to-conservative districts that Republican John McCain won in the 2008 presidential race. The most vulnerable in that group include Democratic Reps. Mary Jo Kilroy in Ohio, Harry Teague in New Mexico, Frank Kratovil in Maryland, Tom Perriello in Virginia and Travis Childers in Mississippi.

    Reps. Bart Gordon and John Tanner, both of Tennessee, were in that group until they chose to retire. So was Griffith, before he switched to the GOP. Retirement announcements from Reps. Dennis Moore of Kansas and Brian Baird of Washington put two more Democratic seats in swing-voting districts on the GOP’s target list.

    Democrats insist that Gordon, Tanner, Moore and Baird are leaving for personal reasons and are not the first ripple in a wave of retirements akin to 1994 when 28 Democrats chose not to run, and Republicans won control in part by winning 22 of those seats.

    Republicans don’t agree.

    “Democrats are beginning to see the writing on the wall, and instead of choosing to fight in a difficult political environment, they are taking a pass and opting for retirement,” said Ken Spain, a spokesman for the House GOP’s campaign arm.

    The GOP will be defending at least a dozen open seats because of retirements, with several lawmakers leaving the House to run for higher office.

    The situation for Democrats in the Senate is nearly as grim.

    Democrats crowed after six Senate Republicans — four from swing states Florida, Ohio, Missouri and New Hampshire and two from GOP-leaning Kansas and Kentucky — announced retirements.

    Spirited GOP challenges are now expected in all six states, and Republicans say they are optimistic they will retain the seats. An emboldened GOP also is looking to put a pair of senior Senate Democrats out of office.

    Reid, who is seeking a fifth term, is faring poorly in surveys in a hypothetical matchup with Nevada GOP chairwoman Sue Lowden, one of several Republicans competing for chance to challenge him.

    Dodd, the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee chairman who has taken heat for a discounted VIP mortgage loan he got from a subprime lender, has been consistently behind potential GOP challenger Rob Simmons in Connecticut polls. Simmons, a former House member, has his own challenger in World Wrestling Entertainment co-founder Linda McMahon, who also is seeking the Republican nomination for Dodd’s seat.

    Also vulnerable are Sen. Blanche Lincoln, a moderate Democrat in GOP-leaning Arkansas, and Sen. Michael Bennet in Colorado, who was appointed when Ken Salazar became Obama’s interior secretary.

    Republicans have high hopes for picking up Senate seats in Illinois and Delaware that were held by the president and vice president, respectively. Neither of their appointed successors is seeking election to the seats.

    Early polling shows GOP Rep. Mark Kirk leading among Republican candidates in Illinois. Veteran GOP Rep. and former two-term Gov. Mike Castle is running in Delaware. Biden’s son, Democratic state Attorney General Beau Biden, is considering whether to challenge Castle.

  36. In 2010, Obama Must Enforce Law or Be Impeached
    by Buzz Davis@ Common Dreams
    My first wish for 2010 is that President Obama will direct U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to begin federal prosecutions:

    of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney — for war crimes and treason against our Constitution.
    of 30 or so leaders of the largest banks and investment, insurance, accounting, bond rating and law firms responsible for the irresponsible home mortgage lending and fraudulent repackaging of bad mortgages into investment instruments that led to the housing crash — for crimes of purposeful lack of due diligence and any other crimes they perpetrated upon investors, including false balance sheets.
    of the high-level federal appointees at Treasury, the Federal Reserve and other agencies who were told by staff what was going on with the mortgages/investment instruments and what could be done about it, and who did nothing — thus violating their oaths of office and statutory authorities.
    My second wish for 2010 is that Obama wakes up and says, “My God, I am guilty of Bush’s ‘sins.’ ” And that Obama immediately orders the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan; orders the cessation of illegal attacks against alleged terrorists in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere; orders the FBI to draft criminal charges against suspected terrorists and presents these charges to federal courts and international police agencies, requesting the apprehension of such terrorists through police channels; orders the cessation of illegal spying on all Americans; orders the immediate closure of GITMO and moves all prisoners to the basement of the Pentagon to stand trial in federal courts; orders the immediate cessation of all actions considered torture under the Geneva Conventions; orders the termination of all agency heads and generals who told him to do all these things; and orders the prosecution of present and past agency heads and generals who advocated the above actions or implemented these actions in violation of U.S. law.

    My third wish is that Obama then goes to a large park in Los Angeles, invites the poor of all races and nationalities, and states he has seen the error of his ways. He asks for forgiveness from the American people and the millions of people in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan whose lives he has ruined, and he states he will not run for president in 2012 but will spend the last three years of his presidency working to eradicate poverty in America with public sector jobs and training so that Americans can: live with their families, have a job to go to each day, have food on the table, have a roof over their heads, not fear sickness because they have single-payer/Medicare-for-all health insurance, believe in the future because their kids will go to good, free public schools and higher education, and have a secure retirement due to an improved Social Security system.

    And lastly, if Obama does not act on wishes No. 1 and No. 2 above in the first few months of 2010, we regretfully and forcefully move to impeach and remove him from office.

    We have given Obama a year of hope and patience. He deserves no more. We must create a crisis — the crisis of impeachment — and remove from office the person who has violated his oath of office to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States and to uphold and enforce the laws of our nation.

    Just as America has been strong enough to withstand the massive personal, corporate and governmental corruption of the last 10 years, we are certainly strong enough to withstand the turmoil of impeaching our president.

    We must take action against the crimes Bush committed and Obama is committing, or we lose our form of government. We must punish those at the top who break our laws or we are finished as a nation ruled by law, not kings.

    Obama either protects our Constitution and enforces the laws, or we, as citizens, are duty bound to throw him out using the most powerful tool we have: impeachment!

    Buzz Davis of Stoughton is a former Army officer and elected official and a retired state government planner. He is a member of Wisconsin Impeachment/Bring Our Troops Home Coalition and Veterans for Peace.

  37. The public reaction to the attack Bush strategy will be shut the fuck up about this. He is gone from office. You were elected to clean up the mess. Instead of doing that you have continued his policies, buried us in debt, weakened our security and shown an aversion to hard work that we find unacceptable–to use a word obama has now latched on to. You can read speeches but you cannot govern. In the final analysis you are neither truthful nor competent.

  38. White House still refusing to answer Interpol Executive Order questions

    By: Mark Tapscott
    Editorial Page Editor
    01/01/10 10:46 AM EST

    New Year’s Eve passed without the White House providing a response to these followup questions posed by The Washington Examiner concerning the president’s Dec, 16, 2009, signing of Executive Order 12425 extending additional diplomatic privileges and immunities to Interpol, the international law enforcement agency.

    Earlier this week, White House spokesman Christina Reynolds told The New York Times “there is nothing newsworthy here” in response to civili liberties alarms raised by The Examiner, former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy of National Review, and other legal experts and bloggers on the right side of the Blogosphere.

    Yesterday, The Examiner addressed these followup questions to Reynolds but did not receive a response:

    * Why did the President conclude that it was appropriate to grant to Interpol, an international law enforcement agency, diplomatic privileges and immunities normally associated with national sovereigns or non-law enforcement international organizations?

    * Will there be additional guidance, either from the White House Counsel or the Justice Department, defining whether the activities of U.S. government employees working with Interpol within the Justice Department, or documents created by them or received by them in the course of their official duties are available to U.S. citizens under the FOIA or other statutes?

    All of the concerns raised by critics likely could be allayed with a credible White House response to this most basic question: What does President Obama think Interpol should be able to do within the U.S. with the added diplomatic privileges and immunities that it could not do in the U.S. without them prior to Dec. 16, 2009?

    washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/White-House-still-refusing-to-answer-Interpol-Executive-Order-questions-80467352. h t m l

  39. djia
    January 1st, 2010 at 10:48 pm
    EXCLUSIVE: Obama Got Pre-Christmas Intelligence Briefing About Terror Threats to “Homeland”

    Mark Hosenball
    President Barack Obama received a high-level briefing only three days before Christmas about possible holiday-period terrorist threats against the US, Newsweek has learned. The briefing was centered on a written report, produced by US intelligence agencies, entitled “Key Homeland Threats”, a senior US official said.

    The senior Administration official, who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information, said that nowhere in this document was there any mention of Yemen, whose Al-Qaeda affiliate is now believed to have been behind the unsuccessful Christmas Day attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to bring down a transatlantic airliner with a bomb hidden in his underpants. However, the official declined to disclose any other information about the substance of the briefing, including what kind of specific warnings, if any, the President was given about possibly holiday attacks and whether Yemen came up during oral discussions.
    **************
    Specfic warning …

    Title of Briefing was “Terrorist to take down US fights with bombs in their underwear”…no doubt!

  40. New Year’s Eve passed without the White House providing a response to these followup questions posed by The Washington Examiner concerning the president’s Dec, 16, 2009, signing of Executive Order 12425 extending additional diplomatic privileges and immunities to Interpol, the international law enforcement agency.

    Earlier this week, White House spokesman Christina Reynolds told The New York Times “there is nothing newsworthy here” in response to civili liberties alarms raised by The Examiner, former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy of National Review, and other legal experts and bloggers on the right side of the Blogosphere.
    ———————————————————————
    Whenever an Administration refuses to answer questions about something it has done by executive order, and tells the newspapers “there is nothing newsworthy here” you can be pretty sure there is something newsworthy and they are afraid to tell us what it is. Watch this one closely.

  41. This is where the dirty health care bill connived in the dead of night in the basement of the White House with big business interests has put their congressional colleagues, no matter how many times they utter the name of Saint Teddy.
    ——————————————————
    Posted by Dan Perrin (Profile)
    Saturday, January 2nd at 12:51PM EST
    10 Comments
    The reason that health care reform has previously never passed, is that the smart Democrats stopped themselves when the political costs of health care reform were weighed against their gains.

    But Crusaders do not measure the costs. They fight until they and all around them die.

    And the leaders of the Crusaders tell their own — ignore the costs! We must! We must! We must cram it down their throats! This is a moral battle.

    So, when Howard Fineman writes that uh, guys, by the way, the uninsured don’t vote, but those who do vote will see health care premium increases, you know that at least some of their own are warning the Democrats of the sacrifices they are making to their health reform God.

    The list of their sacrifices to this pagan God is long, here are but a dozen:

    1. The Dems will likely lose control of the U.S. House and lose between four and six U.S. Senate seats, mainly because they have enraged the public with their willful refusal to listen. (A public who wants Congress to do nothing, nothing at all on health care;)

    2. The Trillion Dollar President’s approval rating will keep tanking, and stay below 50% and its precipitous decline is due to principally only one thing — health care reform;

    3. The promise if you like your plan can keep it is another principle sacrificed on the altar of the God, so much so that Democrats don’t even repeat it for fear of ridicule; (The blow-back when employers start dropping coverage and putting people into the government run health care machine will be brutal.)

    4. Senior citizens — among the most strongly opposed to this plan — will turn out in very high numbers to vote against the Democrats. Senior citizens will get massive cuts to Medicare to subsidize the uninsured, all while they are sold out by their lobby, the AARP, who sacrificed their own members’ interests to the God of health care reform.

    5. Liberal Democrats will have sacrificed their principles for a single-payer system or a Medicare buy-in, in return for a plan that taxes Americans to pay their arch enemy, private health insurers;

    6. Liberal Democrats will have sacrificed their principles on their pro-abortion beliefs by restricting access to government funded abortions;

    7. Liberal Democrats will have sacrificed their main supporters, their grassroots activists and unions on the alter of health reform — by taxing union health care plans;

    8. Liberal Democrats will have sacrificed their support for illegal immigrants receiving health reform benefits on the alter of health reform by passing a bill that bans it;

    9. Liberal Democrats will have sacrificed their principles of being opposed to a government mandate to force Americans to buy insurance from private insurers;

    10. The Trillion Dollar President has sacrificed his moderate image in the eyes the American public, and convinced them that he is a radical Crusader who is arrogant and who is destroying his party to protect his Presidency. (Think the Joker — self-destructive arrogance.)

    11. The Crusade has convinced the public that there are no “moderate” Democrats — Senators Bayh, Webb, Lincoln, Landrieu, Nelson, McCaskill etc. have been exposed as big liberal, tax-and-spend enablers; and

    12. Every other initiative that the Democrats care about: Cap and Trade, Immigration Reform, Financial Services Reform are threatened now by the political environment that the Crusaders have put their fellow Democrats in — so that now, any event — like the underwear bomber — causes disruption to an unstable political party and coalition.

    Crusaders won’t listen. This we have seen writ large. They are on a mission from God — their pagan health reform God. On second thought, perhaps the Democrats are like health care jihadists — suicide bombers intent on politically killing themselves for their own health care God’s promise of moral purity.

    The reason they Dems can’t see this themselves is they just cannot believe that helping the uninsured is causing them to sacrifice so many of their principles. They think — it cannot be true! But it is true.

    They are killing off the chances of passing all of their other agenda items, and by sacrificing so many of their principles to the pagan health reform God, they have left their own supporters disgusted and listless.

    But to their opponents — the sacrifices made to the Pagan God have resolved them to do everything they in their power to stop these radical, dangerous people who have their hands on the public treasury and who are putting us deeper into debt — and who will not listen. It is a politically toxic combination.

  42. “But Crusaders do not measure the costs. They fight until they and all around them die.”

    ——————

    um are we now labelling the dimwitted dims and their equally dimwitted egotist leader “crusaders?”

    Please tell me this is a joke.

  43. um are we now labelling the dimwitted dims and their equally dimwitted egotist leader “crusaders?”

    Please tell me this is a joke.
    ——————————
    Jan–if you read this article in conjunction with the two others I posted which come from progressive sites, i.e. Firedog Lake and Common Dreams you see that the people leading this charge, namely Obama, Emanuel, Axelgrease, Reid and Pelosi are Crusaders for Obama and the business interests he represents.

    Now that pushes different buttons with different audiences. The conservatives see the sprecter of a government of our economy, high taxes and the loss of freedom. The progressives see a sell out to big business, a repudiation of their values and Bush III. Independents see a cure which is worse than the disease and are appalled by the bribery plus the constitutional ramifications.

    I think they are all right. To me it is yet another Rezko deal.

  44. hillary 2012 t-shirts are available at zazzle.com — i got mine today in the mail and can’t wait til it warms up to start wearing mine!

  45. wbboei, I think Zbig has more influence in the Wh than Soros, as you say he is the front man, he does the dirty work of selling monetary systems short so the big boys can make a forture. In essence, Soros still does what he did for Hitler, he still pick the bones of the people who are singled out for disposable.

    I come to this conclusion by reading the above mentioned articles and videos. THe connection from Obama to Bush is thru Zbig and Kissinger. You have to listen to the video to get the who crux of the situation. THese folks use both parties and will put one in power and the other out to achieve what they want. When the put in Bush they got the whole Christian and moral values thing going. When they put in Obama they put him in as antiwashington, people keep falling for the same old tricks. I can tell you they are extremely worried about us on the internet telling the truth and spreading the truth. It is causing them a bunch of grief. Read and watch the videos!

  46. wbboei,

    I’m not disagreeing. It’s just that I’ve always connected “crusaders” to being honest and heroic and that isn’t the case here. So I wish they would use a different label, i.e marauders, invaders, aggressors…

  47. FROM BP
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    death panels and rationing, here is comes.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aHoYSI84VdL0

    “”Dec. 31 (Bloomberg) — The Mayo Clinic, praised by President Barack Obama as a national model for efficient health care, will stop accepting Medicare patients as of tomorrow at one of its primary-care clinics in Arizona, saying the U.S. government pays too little.

    More than 3,000 patients eligible for Medicare, the government’s largest health-insurance program, will be forced to pay cash if they want to continue seeing their doctors at a Mayo family clinic in Glendale, northwest of Phoenix, said Michael Yardley, a Mayo spokesman. The decision, which Yardley called a two-year pilot project, won’t affect other Mayo facilities in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota.

    Obama in June cited the nonprofit Rochester, Minnesota-based Mayo Clinic and theCleveland Clinic in Ohio for offering “the highest quality care at costs well below the national norm.” Mayo’s move to drop Medicare patients may be copied by family doctors, some of whom have stopped accepting new patients from the program, said Lori Heim, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, in a telephone interview yesterday.

    “Many physicians have said, ‘I simply cannot afford to keep taking care of Medicare patients,’” said Heim, a family doctor who practices in Laurinburg, North Carolina. “If you truly know your business costs and you are losing money, it doesn’t make sense to do more of it.”

    cont…

  48. wbboei,

    I’m not disagreeing. It’s just that I’ve always connected “crusaders” to being honest and heroic and that isn’t the case here. So I wish they would use a different label, i.e marauders, invaders, aggressors…
    —————————–
    I agree with you. Crusader it is an odd word. Not the word I would use. To my mind, the word crusader implies a set of principles, which are pursued to the exclusion of all other considerations including common sense and the greater good.

    Obama and his cronies have no discernible principles. Therefore they cannot be crusaders as I understand the term. Obama Axelrod and Emanuel would strap their grandmothers in old sparky and flip the switch if it meant a few more dollars in their bank account.

    Political whores would be a better word than crusaders now that I think about it.

  49. POTUS DISCOVERS THAT WE ARE IN A WAR AFTER ALL.
    MY OH MY.
    John Bachelor at No Quarter.

    PGA class back-filling going on by White House messaging unit.
    POTUS weekly radio address is the first draft of the New-New Obama administration “War on a Far-reaching Network of Violence and Hatred,” soon to be summarized (fleetingly) as the “WFNVH.”

    POTUS is eager to remind us that there is already money going to Yemen, though not as much as there is money going to Pakistan, to combat WNVH.

    This is protection money for the kleptocrats and can be treated as business as usual. What may be new here is that the Obama administration is getting its lobbying wingtips off and its slogging GI combat boots on.

    “I am doing everything in my power…”

    POTUS seems to follow the logic that if he is doing something then we can be assured.
    POTUS represents one-third of the government, and a shaky one-third at that, since it comes and goes willy-nilly every two or four years.

    Therefore what he is doing or not doing is not of much interest. What the professionals charged with national security are doing is the point, and if he was telling us what they are doing in their power, it would be either disinformation or guesswork.

    Yes, he knows more than he can say. No, he cannot tell us what he knows. But still, telling us that he is doing something critical or useful or difficult about the usual suspects, such as Al Qaeda Arbian Peninsula, International Front for Combatting the Crusaders and the Jews, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen,Sana’a, Riyadh, Bin Laden, terror, Network of Violence and Hatred, North Waziristan, NCTC, DHS, DoD, CIA, USA, Saudia Arabia, Land of the Two Mosques, Land Between The Rivers, Taliban, Haqqani Network, is not clairifying or illuminating.

    In sum, POTUS is spinning us as much as he is spinning himself. POTUS was on vacation on an island in the Pacific, and he was asleep at noontime Eastern Time, when Abdulmutallab tried to rain people on Detroit.

    For three days afterward, POTUS kept playing golf and partying with his pals and flacks and servants. As a father and husband and citizen, you get a vacation if you can afford it and get away from the office.

    As POTUS, you do not rest, you do not drift, you do not hesitate, you are always on duty.

    What explains the seventy-two hour delay until the first statement about the “isolated” Abdulmutallab? What explains the additional twenty-four hours until the statement about “failure” and “unacceptable?”

    What explains the additional ninety-six hours until the Saturday remarks that Al Qaeda Arabian Peninsula ran the op with Abdulmutallab?

    (Still no mention that Hasan was in contact with the same al-Awalki who prepped and mesmerized the sorry character Abdulmutallab.) (Still no mention that the unnamed Somali who attacked Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard and his grand-daughter in Copenhagen is linked to Al Qaeda.)

    The answer to all these questions is the fact that there are these questions.

    It is not about what you are doing, Mr. Obama; it is about what POTUS needs to have already set in motion to light up his national security teams and find and destroy the enemy.

    Not what you do, POTUS, what NSC Jim Jones and Homeland Liason John Brennan and NCTC Dennis Blair and DCI Leon Panetta and JSOC and CENTCOM David Petraeus and DOD Robert Gates do.

    POTUS Veers to run-over Bush/Cheney Iraq.

    POTUS prepares the talking points for his return to action in Washington by swerving his escae car off the road to try, “….that’s why I end the war in Iraq, which had nothing to do with Al Qaeda…” It worked during the campaign of 2008, so perhaps it will work again.
    Mentioning Iraq is a warning sign that the White House messaging unit needs new brainpower.

    POTUS went to Cairo to apologize. POTUS ignored Baghdad. POTUS took seven months to figure out the surge in Afghanistan. POTUS reached out to the EU and UN and China.

    Nothing worked to change the fight with AQ. Now he must try to maintain a grimace while he pivots and mutates into George Bush/Dick Cheney goes to war.

    Already the comments in London are anticipating how quickly Obama/Biden will invade Yemen and Somalia.

    Launch on Warning.
    POTUS knows the partisanship will now launch cruise missile talk shows and blogs on the White House; and he alerts his team to prepare the bunkers for his return to the Oval office with a flurry of defensively flabby pleadings — especially irony laden from a politician who shows such skill in scorching the dull GOP when he has an opportunity:
    “As we go forward, let us remember this — our adversaries are those who would attack our country, not our fellow Americans, not each other,” Mr. Obama said. ”Instead of succumbing to partisanship and division, let’s summon the unity that this moment demands. Let’s work together, with a seriousness of purpose, to do what must be done to keep our country safe.”

    GITMO and Cartoons.

    Rasmussen’s New Year’s Eve poll on waterboarding is a fair guess at how the public will poll on the Obama administration and Flight 253, on GITMO, on Yemen, on Janet Napolitano, on “Are you safer now that you were under George Bush?”
    The number is blunt and no doubt still climbing, and this is before the new cycle begins in the new year on Sunday January 3 (Eastern Time) and pounds the connections between Al Qaeda, Abdulmutallab, Hasan, Khost Province FOB (CIA) Chapman, and now the Somali who attacked cartoonist Kurt Westergaard in his home in Amsterdam and who is linked to Al Qaeda:

    “Fifty-eight percent (58%) of U.S. voters say waterboarding and other aggressive interrogation techniques should be used to gain information from the terrorist who attempted to bomb an airliner on Christmas Day.
    Echo 0 Items

  50. Wbboei, I found a easier way to see this video of the Iran Triangle: The Carlyle Group Its interesting in the fact that Cynthia McKinney a State representative questioned the motives of the Bush and the defense industry and the next year she says the republicans ran black democrat against her, but in reality this person was a black republican.

    This could very well be what has happened to Hillary. Obama is continuing all of Bush’s policies so it begs one to investigate.

  51. Mrs. Smith, I hope your OK, last you said is that you have pneumonia. Hope your getting well. I am very sick with the flu myself. I am just too sick to look up this new area of interest. Its time we Americans turn over every stone to see what has been lurking underneath. If we choose not to and listen to BM, we are going to lose our country, our children will be paying more than taxes.

    The documentary I have posted above describes to a T, just how our govt. is being run by two different cartels. The Bush and the Zbig one.

  52. S & Confloyd,

    Thanks for weighing in on that banking story. it’s just incredible.

    Or, I should probably say, just incredibly bad shit.

    Props to Admin on Age of Fake. That one’s more than hitting it out of the park, it’s hitting it out of the parking lot too.

    Since the primaries I’ve thought of it as hyper-tech political bullshit,
    but fake just gets it there so much quicker!

  53. So the WH knew even what type of new bomb the terrorists where now employing and did nothing…Sounds like Bush3 and Condi all over again
    *****************8

    January 02, 2010
    White House advisor briefed on ‘underwear bomb’ in October
    Rick Moran

    Newsweek follows up its story on Obama being informed of a Christmas terror plot with the story that White House counterterrorism advisor John Brennan being briefed about the kind of bomb used during the holiday attack:

    White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan was briefed in October on an assassination attempt by Al Qaeda that investigators now believe used the same underwear bombing technique as the Nigerian suspect who tried to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day, U.S. intelligence and administration officials tell NEWSWEEK.
    The briefing to Brennan was delivered at the White House by Muhammad bin Nayef, Saudi Arabia’s chief counterterrorism official. In late August, Nayef had survived an assassination attempt by an operative dispatched by the Yemeni branch of Al Qaeda who was pretending to turn himself in. The operative had tried to kill the Saudi prince by detonating a bomb on his body, but stumbled on his way into the prince’s palace and blew himself up.

    […]

    U.S. officials now suspect that Nayef’s attempted assassin and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian suspect aboard the Northwest flight, had the same bomb maker in Yemen, intelligence experts tell NEWSWEEK. At the briefing for Brennan, Nayef was concerned because “he didn’t think [U.S. officials] were paying enough attention” to the growing threat from Al Qaeda in Yemen, said a former U.S. intelligence official familiar with the briefing. (A senior Saudi official told NEWSWEEK Saturday that “we don’t have any concerns that the U.S. government isn’t sufficiently concerned about Yemen. In the latter part of the Bush administration and in this administration, the U.S. has been very focused on the dangers emanating from Yemen.”)

    The more that dribbles out about the reaction of the administration to this threat, the more klutzy they look.

  54. The more that dribbles out about the reaction of the administration to this threat, the more klutzy they look
    ———————————-
    Obama is a dangerous incompetent. He is a spinner not at problemsolver. The management structure he has irrational. He has failed to fill key positions. On national security give him an F. No wait a minute an F-.

  55. This is one of my deepest concerns about Obama. He is weak, corrupt and incompetent. He is the worst commander in chief we have ever had in a time of war. He does not understand we are in a war. He fumbles the ball and blames others. He fiddles while Rome burns. He is corrupt, incompetent and petty. Let us hope he does not get more Americans killed. He and his friend Joan Walsh are the best friend AQ ever had.
    ———————————————————-

    Barack Obama’s Vulnerabilities Will Get Us All Killed
    Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)
    Saturday, January 2nd at 9:52PM EST

    “At the end of the first year of Barack Obama’s administration, there’s something moving in the shadows of Mount Doom. It wasn’t there while George Bush was in charge.”
    Within twenty-four hours of the terrorist trying to blow up the plane, the White House was giving briefings by a “Senior Administration Official” who mostly like was Obama, Axelrod, or Jarrett, pointing out that the terrorist watch list was created by the Bush administration.

    Then the White House Counsel’s Office sent out a memo demanding any and all documentation to show that the Bush administration had done worse.

    Then the White House decided it needed to look into the “systemic failures” of the operation that George Bush had put in place.

    234 days into George W. Bush’s first contentious year in office, four planes were hijacked and used as missiles to strike the United States. Shortly thereafter, Richard Reid tried to blow up another jet.

    George Bush never tried to disown 9/11 or Richard Reid. He never tried to say, “hey, it was Clinton’s problem.”

    After 9/11, George Bush didn’t spend his first day, second day, or third day blaming Clinton. He set out to destroy Al Qaeda. After Richard Reid, we’ve been pretty darn safe flying.

    In fact, under George Bush leading scholars and pundits declared Al Qaeda marginalized. By 2003, the pontiffs of miasmatic beltway wisdom were near unanimous that Al Qaeda was near dismantled.

    You really need to read this editorial in the London Telegraph by Toby Harnden. It really hits this point where it needs hitting.

    For a man who campaigned denouncing the politicisation of national security under President George W Bush, it is worth noting how intensely political Obama’s treatment of what might henceforth be known as Underpantsgate has been.

    His White House recognised its political vulnerability more readily than it comprehended the level of danger faced by Americans.

    That last bit is the most troubling part of this.

    At the end of the first year of Barack Obama’s administration, there’s something moving in the shadows of Mount Doom. It wasn’t there while George Bush was in charge. But Barack Obama is no George Bush. And the strategy of blaming Bush for being weak on terror will not work after eight years of blaming Bush for being too bloodthirsty.

  56. wbboei
    January 2nd, 2010 at 1:45 pm

    This statement by conservative Moe Lane calls to mind a fundamental political truth of politics.

    *Time for some unsolicited advice to the netroots: I understand that none of you want to hear this, but if you want to be taken seriously, you have to start punishing your would-be representatives when they tell you one thing and do another. [….] But you will go nowhere until your legislators fear you and yours more than they fear me and mine. In fact, I’ll tell you right now: they don’t fear you at all.”

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

    I had to read that twice to see who it was. It sounded like a diary at Kos by some ad opinion manipulator about the ad campaigns of Wall Street and Pharma etc.

    Same basic point. It’s not just loss of donations that the cringing politicians fear — it’s personal destruction, loss of career.

  57. Bush did try, falsely, to blame the 9/11 attack on Clinton.

    In fact Clinton and Gore had been warning for years in the 90s that the next threat would be terrorism — some smart terrorism that could get through the defenses current at that time.

    The Clinton/Gore admin had a program researching these dangers and watching out for such attempts. In early 2001 Bush shut it down as unnecessary and expensive. Some reports were still made, and Bush ignored them, in summer 2001 iirc.

  58. I had to read that twice to see who it was. It sounded like a diary at Kos by some ad opinion manipulator about the ad campaigns of Wall Street and Pharma etc.

    Same basic point. It’s not just loss of donations that the cringing politicians fear — it’s personal destruction, loss of career.
    ———————————-
    Are you seeing signs at that toxic site that they are willing to hold Obama accountable and work to defeat him for breaking his promises to them? I doubt it. I think they are the biggest bunch of Bush hates and Obama groupies there are, in which case they have no intention of holding him accountable when he breaches his promises to them.

    Lane on the other hand is telling them they need to do precisely that, or else they will be taken for granted. And he is doing that very thing with the party he would normally support. The criticism he leveled against the status quo Republicans who forget who their constituents are has been scathing. And rightly so.

    Somewhere in both parties we need to find a few people who will support the Constitution and the American People. Those who betray us should not continue to serve in public office. They should be honest about who they represent and become lobbyists, rather than serving those private interests under color of public office.

  59. Incidentally, I posted that quote by Moe Lane at the progressive site Common Dreams under the Fire Dog Lake article noted above to reinforce the points which the writer was making that Obama should be impeached.

  60. I never read Kos unless a diary is linked from somewhere else, and seldom even then. Dunno how I happened on that one from the ad guy, and of course he was trying to drum up business for himself.

    But the idea did make sense: same as what Moe said, basically. Some politicians who should know better , do bad things from fear of those who would destroy them personally, whether that’s the rightwing conservatives or the big money interests.

    It makes sense because it gives incentive for politicians to risk their voters’ anger, and for the attacks we’ve seen against the Clintons, Gore, and Palin (who threatened the big money interests).

  61. It ate my quote
    “This can be seen in the increasingly urgent political plight of Barack Obama. Though the American left and right don’t agree on much, they are both now coalescing around the suspicion that Obama’s brilliant presidential campaign was as hollow as Tiger’s public image — a marketing scam designed to camouflage either his covert anti-American radicalism (as the right sees it) or spineless timidity (as the left sees it). The truth may well be neither, but after a decade of being spun silly, Americans can’t be blamed for being cynical about any leader trying to sell anything.”

  62. As I was saying upstream, that commercials on the tube now are talking about us (middle class) learning to live within our means.

    This video that I found shows how these bureaucrats go into office when their party is in, they write laws or vote yes to ones they know will benefit them when they retire. So in essence they are just criminals allowed to write the laws so they can legally steal from the American taxpayer, perferrably the middle class. I might add most don’t like, we are to uneducated to them.

    I once had to xray a Senators mother, he was such an egotistical, rude individual, that I wondered who in the hell would vote him in, but he was a republican, what else can I say.

  63. Some jackass at one of the conservative sites telling another blogger to stop saying Obama is not his president and telling him that he will impale him if he starts any birther crap. I have been up half the night trying to sign up for that site and now that I finally did they wont let me post because I am too new. Here is what I was trying to post.
    ——————————————————————————————————————
    Barack Obama may be president of the United States by virtue of what occurred in the primary and general elections, but that does not mean he is my president. I take issue with your assertion to the contrary. The civics lesson response is belied by the facts. It was clear to me from the beginning that Obama had the backing of Soros and Wall Street, and would be big trouble if he was installed in the White House. Rove and others seriously misjudged the situation when they threw their support behind him on the assumption he would be easier to defeat than Hillary. I campaigned for Hillary in Texas, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and West Virginia and we stopped him in each instance. She won the popular vote but he won the delegate count. The Rules and By-Laws committee violated its own rules to award delegates to Obama. The Convention was a travesty where delegates were bribed and/or threatened causing a complaint to be drafted against Obama thugs by the Secretary of State of California. Thereafter, I advised the McCain campaign, and was told that my input helped him win the third debate.

    The reason I bristle at your suggestion that he is my president is because of how he played the race card and committed voter fraud and intimidation. Two thousand complaints were filed and not one of them was investigated by the DNC. Here is the testimony of a Democratic Party election observer who describes in detail the fraud which occurred in one precint in El Paso, while I was in Laredo. This was rampant across the caucus states. It tells you why I say he is not my president.

    “On election night in El Paso, it became obvious that the Obama field campaign was designed to steal caucuses. Prior to that, it was impossible for me to imagine the level of attempted fraud and disruption we would see. (snip) We saw stolen precincts where Obama organizers fabricated counts, made false entries on sign-in sheets, suppressed delegate counts, and suppressed caucus voters. We saw patterns such as missing electronic access code sheets and precinct packets taken before the legal time, like elsewhere in the state. (snip) In one example of fraud that I witnessed, one of my precinct captains, an elderly Hispanic woman, called me to report that BHO supporters had illegally seized control of the convention. During our series of phone calls, Mrs. “A.” reported that the Obama people took the convention materials and did not have a legal election of officers. Like nearly all of El Paso, BHO people would have lost such an election in this majority-Hillary, Hispanic, mostly elderly precinct convention.”

    “The Obama people ordered Mrs. A. to sit across the room during the delegate calculation, and excluded Hillary supporters from the process. Mrs. A. overheard an Obama supporter call in a false delegate count to Austin. In a 13 delegate precinct where Obama should have won approximately 4 delegates, the Obama supporters attempted to award 19 delegates to Obama. This was not innocent. During my attempts at cell phone diplomacy, the Obama “chair” hung up on me, and refused to talk to the ethical Obama organizer I was paired with at another precinct convention. As with all major attempts at fraud that we identified, this delegate count was rectified in private at the county TDP headquarters, according to TDP rules, but there were no public charges or sanctions. It is my opinion that people should be in jail, but there is not a mechanism for this sort of prosecution, certainly not within TDP rules.”

    “Although I have only volunteered in one state, virtually every Clinton staffer I have talked to has similar stories from other caucus states. While the Hillary field campaign operates and feels very much like typical Democratic campaigns, the Obama campaign is something new to Democratic politics.’–Pacific John

    As to the birth issue, Judge Carter has decided the case as a matter of law. But why do you think Obama spent $1.7 million dollars fighting against disclosure of a certificate of live birth which most people would gladly produce upon request? Does that not seem a bit odd to you? Perhaps not.

  64. If the birth issue should ever see the light of day, there are going to be a number of judges and courts that look foolish. Of course spending 1.7M is a smoking gun. Where there is smoke there must be fire.

    The American people deserve the truth on this issue, and have yet to see it treated as a serious issue. Every time the courts fail to pursue this, they are letting the American People down.

  65. Reports: Cartoonist Attacker Targeted Clinton

    Sunday , January 03, 2010

    media say the man who attacked an artist who depicted the Prophet Muhammad in a cartoon has previously been arrested in Kenya.

    The Politiken newspaper reported Sunday that Danish intelligence knew the 28-year-old Somali man was held in Kenya in September for allegedly plotting an attack against U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

    Citing unnamed sources, the newspaper said he was later released due to lack of evidence.

    But Denmark’s ambassador to Kenya, Bo Jensen, told the news agency Ritzau the man was arrested in Kenya for incomplete travel documents. He said Kenyan authorities never told the embassy he was suspected in any terror plot. Denmark’s PET intelligence agency would not comment.

    The armed suspect was charged with attempted murder Saturday after breaking into artist Kurt Westergaard’s home.

    http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,581801,00.html

  66. January 3, 2010

    For Shanghai Fair, a Famous Fund-Raiser Delivers

    By MARK LANDLER and DAVID BARBOZA

    WASHINGTON — In the hectic last week before she became secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton squeezed in a Bon Jovi benefit concert in New York, part of a frantic effort to pay off the debt from her presidential campaign. No sooner had she arrived at the State Department than Mrs. Clinton discovered she needed to start raising money all over again.

    This time, the cash-starved beneficiary was not her own campaign but the United States, which needed $61 million to finance the construction of a national pavilion at a world’s fair in Shanghai. Under federal law, no public money could be used for the project. And Mrs. Clinton, as a federal official, could no longer solicit private financial donations herself.

    So she turned to her well-established network of Clinton fund-raisers, and after negotiating with the State Department’s lawyers about what she could legally do herself to support the project, she mounted an ambitious fund-raising campaign that has netted close to $54 million in barely nine months.

    With multimillion-dollar pledges from PepsiCo, General Electric, Chevron and other American corporations, the United States is on track to open a sleek, 60,000-square-foot pavilion at the Shanghai Expo 2010, which runs from May through October.

    The prospect of the nation’s chief diplomat asking for money worried government lawyers, according to officials. Referring to the first secretary of state, one lawyer asked, “Would Thomas Jefferson do this?” They imposed strict limits on the kinds of calls or other contacts she could make, allowing her to promote the pavilion but prohibiting any one-on-one appeals for cash.

    Despite those restrictions, and a dismal economy, Mrs. Clinton is closing in on her $61 million goal. She is clearly proud of the effort, which staved off what could have been a rupture in American-Chinese relations. In a year in which she has mostly worked to prove herself a loyal member of the Obama team, the campaign also showcases her enduring political drawing power.

    “The idea, for many people, of raising more than $50 million would seem really daunting,” Mrs. Clinton said in an interview. “Maybe because I had participated in raising so much money in the past, I wasn’t daunted by it. I knew it was going to be hard under the circumstances.”

    By all accounts, the effort to build a national pavilion was near death at the end of the Bush administration. The near-collapse of the global economy, the proximity of the expo to the Beijing Olympics in 2008 and the general ambivalence of the State Department had left U.S.A. Pavilion, the nonprofit group in charge of the project, with little support or money. “There is a sense in the U.S. that Americans got disenchanted” with world’s fairs, said Nick Winslow, a former Warner Brothers executive who is the president of U.S.A. Pavilion.

    With deadlines passing, the Chinese advanced the Americans money to conduct technical work for the pavilion. They raised the issue with former President Jimmy Carter when he visited China last January.

    Enter Mrs. Clinton, who made her first trip as secretary of state to Beijing in February and was eager to talk about trade, climate change and the North Korean nuclear threat. Instead, she got an earful about how bad it would be if the United States did not have a presence at the Shanghai Expo.

    For the Chinese, the expo is a bookend to the Olympics. Shanghai is spending $45 billion to transform the city, even more than Beijing spent preparing for the Games. Nearly 200 countries have signed on to take part, leaving only the United States and minuscule Andorra as potential no-shows. “I was dumbfounded that so little attention had been paid to it,” Mrs. Clinton said. “Everyone knows China is going to be an enormously powerful player in the 21st century. They have an expo, which is a kind of rite of passage that countries like to do to show they have arrived. We’re not there? What does that say?”

    She said she did not relish the prospect of more fund-raising — “When would it ever end?” she recalled asking herself — but she promised Chinese officials that she would try to raise the money.

    There was little support within the State Department. So Mrs. Clinton turned to two major fund-raisers with long ties to the Clinton family: Elizabeth F. Bagley and Jose H. Villarreal.

    Mrs. Bagley, who is married to Smith Bagley, an heir to the R. J. Reynolds fortune, was ambassador to Portugal under President Bill Clinton. Mrs. Clinton appointed her to be the department’s special representative for global partnerships, a job that involves rounding up private support for public projects.

    Mr. Villarreal, a well-connected San Antonio lawyer, has raised money for Mrs. Clinton as well as for Mr. Clinton, former Vice President Al Gore and Senator John Kerry. In July, Mrs. Clinton named him the commissioner general to the expo.

    To kick off the effort, Mrs. Clinton held a conference call with 10 prominent chief executives. Chevron, PepsiCo and General Electric each pledged $5 million. Indra K. Nooyi, the chief executive of PepsiCo, made calls to other chief executives. Mrs. Bagley and Mr. Villarreal also opened their Rolodexes, calling companies with operations in China. Some obvious prospects, like banks, were off limits because they were receiving federal bailout money.

    “In the beginning, we had to use a patriotism argument,” said Kris M. Balderston, Mrs. Bagley’s deputy. “The second wave of argument was commercial diplomacy. All of a sudden the companies understood it would be good for them.”

    Although Mrs. Bagley is a State Department employee, she said she was advised that she could solicit contributions. She noted that every would-be donor also had to be vetted by lawyers.

    Fred Wertheimer, an advocate for stricter regulations for campaign fund-raising, said he was satisfied that the State Department had handled a difficult situation properly. “It would have been far better if the U.S. government was able to pay for the activity involved, but that does not appear to have been the case,” he said.

    While Mrs. Clinton was barred from soliciting individuals, she met with corporate sponsors in Shanghai in November, when she visited the expo site. Her experience in the political trenches made a difference, Mr. Villarreal said. “Any other diplomat would not have had the broad base of contacts,” he said.

    Mrs. Clinton said it was easier raising funds for this project than to pay off campaign debt. “I’m much better at raising money for other people and other causes than I am for myself anyway,” she said, adding, “Even though I’ve obviously raised a lot of money.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/03/world/asia/03clinton.html

  67. ADMIN!

    Just a heads-up. (I don’t see the link to email you directly).

    Several posters at other sites I visit have commented on the difficulty they’re having accessing 44.

    Here’s a sample.

    Just thought you would want to know.

    “I haven’t been able to read admins posts in almost 2 weeks every time I go to the site my computer shuts down…. it says loading and boom whole thing goes down. I have no problem anywhere else.”

    There were several other similar remarks.

  68. Trust Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, Barney Frank?
    By Larry Doyle on January 3, 2010 at 10:30 AM in Bailouts, Barney Frank, Current Affairs, Economy, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Housing & Housing Crisis, Larry Summers, Sense on Cents (Larry Doyle blog), U.S. Treasury
    Blank checks are the antithesis of good public policy.

    America can not allow the passage of time to lessen the outrage over the Obama administration’s Christmas Eve bonus to the financial sinkholes known as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Platitudes and posturing aside, the American taxpayer is being set up as never before.

    A blank check may serve to cover a host of past financial and legislative failures promoted by the likes of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, John Kerry et al, but who is monitoring and verifying the legitimate and proper use of these funds? Are we to blindly trust Treasury Secretary Geithner, White House economic adviser Larry Summers, and their respective staffs in this process? Are you kidding me? America needs to voice its outrage long and hard. In that spirit, I called yesterday to Audit Freddie and Fannie.

    In the same vein, I am heartened by initiatives launched this week by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), and Reps. Scott Garrett (R-NJ) and Spencer Bachus (R-AL) to pursue an investigation of this blank check.

    The Wall Street Journal reports, Lawmakers Want Probe Into Treasury Aid for Fannie, Freddie:

    The Treasury Department’s surprise Christmas Eve move to uncap the potential aid to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be investigated, lawmakers from both political parties said Wednesday.

    Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio) said his congressional subcommittee plans to investigate Treasury’s decision to lift the existing $400 billion cap on government cash available to the two firms. Separately, Reps. Scott Garrett (R., N.J.) and Spencer Bachus (R., Ala.) called for the House Financial Services Committee to hold a hearing on the matter.

    Mr. Kucinich, who chairs the domestic policy subcommittee on the House Oversight and Government Reform panel, said he is concerned about how the two government-controlled firms will use their new flexibility.

    “This cannot be used simply to purchase toxic assets at inflated prices, thus transferring the losses to the U.S. taxpayers and acting as a back door [Troubled Asset Relief Program],” Mr. Kucinich said in a statement released by his office.

    Messrs. Garrett and Bachus raised similar concerns in a letter to Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.), who chairs the Financial Services panel. The two GOP panel members decried what they called a “transparent attempt to hide the news from the American people” by announcing the news the day before a major holiday.

    I am not only concerned about Geithner’s and Summer’s influence over the allocation of the funds behind this blank check, but I am equally concerned because of the influence of that individual to whom Garrett and Bachus directed their letter. Barney Frank (D-MA), Chair of the House Financial Services committee, has always been in bed with Freddie and Fannie. I do not doubt for a second that Frank would use this blank check to cover his misguided policies and misappropriated funds supporting Freddie and Fannie over the years.

    Need I remind you of Frank’s “I want to roll the dice…” comment in regard to Freddie and Fannie’s support of sub-prime lending in 2003?

    America can not allow time and other issues to distract us from what may very well be the single largest misallocation and misappropriation of taxpayer funds in the history of this country.

    Trust Geithner? Trust Summers? Trust Frank?

    Put Sense on Cents in the verify camp!!

    How about you?

  69. pdxexplorer1973
    January 2nd, 2010 at 5:29 pm
    hillary 2012 t-shirts are available at zazzle.com — i got mine today in the mail and can’t wait til it warms up to start wearing mine!

    Are there bumber stickers….That is what I want!

  70. basil9: I have been having a difficult time of hooking up with 44 as well.The Internet Explorer has been calling it exsessive demand for Hillary information.The deeper our Bogus Potus sinks us into debt and mistrust by our allies ,the more of his followers that abandon him the greater our Big Pink followers swell.THE DELAY IS WORTH THE WAIT.What a great way to start out our new year.I enjoyed seeing Hillary picture in her new black gown at an affair last week.She was speaking to BO and MO.Hill looked Presidential while the standing next to the strange Kenyan couple from nowhere.

    Happy New Year to All ABM90

  71. 50 Million Frenchmen Can’t Be Wrong– or When It Comes To World Leadership POTUS Is TOASTUS.
    —————————————————————
    FRANCE’S SARKOZY IS NOW “ANTI-OBAMA”.

    Soon after Barack Obama won the White House, French President Nicolas Sarkozy referred to him as “my friend” and strove to become the first European leader to meet with the newly elected American.

    Now the honeymoon between the two leaders is over, according to The Financial Times.

    Sarkozy has now shifted to “an anti-Obama position,” said Jean-Christophe Cambadelis, a spokesman for the opposition Socialists.

    France turned down an American request to send more troops to Afghanistan, and Sarkozy has expressed frustration at what he perceives as Obama’s equivocation over Iran’s nuclear program and at the priority Obama has placed on the long-term goal of eliminating all nuclear weapons, the Times reports.

    In a sharply worded speech to the United Nations General Assembly in September, Sarkozy alluded to Obama’s disarmament goals.

    “We are right to talk about the future, but before the future there is the present, and the present is two major nuclear crises,” he said, referring to Iran and North Korea. “We are living in a real world, not a virtual world.”

    Jack Kelly wrote on the Real Clear Politics Web site that Sarkozy “was furious with Barack Obama for his adolescent warbling about a world without nuclear weapons” at a meeting Obama chaired of the United Nations Security Council.

    Sarkozy is reportedly still miffed over Obama’s refusal to attend an event with the French leader during his June visit to France to commemorate the D-Day landings, and has made disparaging comments about Obama’s decision-making and lack of prior government experience.

    “French frustration is aimed at Washington’s hesitancy or even weakness,” according to the Times.

    But Sarkozy could be stressing his differences with the U.S. for domestic purposes, one senior French official disclosed, adding, “On the fundamentals we are much closer to President Obama than we were to President Bush.”

    Editor’s Note:

    Obama: America’s Controller in Chief — Read Special Report

  72. I think giving the job of fundraising for the pavillion in China to Hillary was chicanery on the parts of bambi and his thugs. They were setting her up to fail by either being unsuccessful or using unethical means to achieve her goals.

    Message to you thugs: Hillary is not unethical. She doesn’t have to lie and cheat her way to achieving her goals. You expect her to work 24/7 with no breaks. You expect her to achieve the unachievable and all along you are just waiting with baited breath for her to fail so you can rub it in her face and cause her permanent downfall.

    Hillary works harder than any of you. She doesn’t need “vacations” every month like your master. She doesn’t whine that she is tired. She has her finger on the pulse of every foreign relations issue going on. And finally, her heart is in the right place no matter what.

  73. Cameras follow Hillary Clinton for reality special

    January 2, 2010

    The National Geographic Channel has been following Hillary Clinton’s every move for an upcoming special that shows her day-to-day duties as the U.S. Secretary of State.

    “Inside the State Department,” premiering this spring, follows Secretary Clinton and her team as they represent United States interests around the world, including her first trip as secretary of state to the United Nations, and visits to such countries as Pakistan (watch video below), Afghanistan, Jerusalem and Africa.

    “Our cameras were granted more access to the secretary and her team than any other camera crew ever has received, including press crews,” says executive producer Steve Hoggard, who filmed Clinton on her trips overseas. “We were literally flies on the wall, traveling from country to country, capturing conversations, witnessing interaction with head officials and experiencing moments behind closed doors.”

    Nat Geo cameras are also trailing Clinton’s advisers as they plan her agenda, brief her on each mission and strategize in the State Department Operations Center, which is filled with IMAX-size video screens showing satellite feeds from hot spots around the globe – tracking ongoing violence, attacks on embassies and even Secretary Clinton’s motorcade under way in dangerous locales such as Pakistan, notes Hoggard.

    Additionally, “Inside the State Department” details the intense security efforts to keep Clinton safe, insight from the state department press corps who travel with her on each trip, and a personal tour of the treasure vault where gifts given to the president, first lady and secretary of state are stored.

    “Our crew met the man in charge of the gift vault and filmed the gift preparation for the Islamabad-Morocco trip, including gifts for the king of Morocco and president of Pakistan,” Hoggard says.

    A specific airdate in the spring will be announced in the coming weeks. Beginning Jan. 7, visit natgeotv.com/state for more information.

    http://www.examiner.com/x-8357-DC-TV-Examiner~y2010m1d2-Cameras-follow-Hillary-Clinton-for-reality-special

  74. I’m laughing, see even they don’t want him.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/74113-iran-denies-entry-to-sen-kerry

    Iran denies entry to Sen. Kerry

    Iranian legislators on Sunday decided to not allow a visit from Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.), according to Iranian media.

    “Members of the Iranian parliament’s Foreign Relations Committee (a subcommittee of the parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission) voiced opposition to the request after studying the issue,” Hassan Ebrahimi, head of the committee, told the semi-official Fars News Agency.

    Several Iranian news outlets reported last week that Kerry had submitted an official request to visit Tehran in an emissary role.

    Kerry spokesman Frederick Jones told the Wall Street Journal before Christmas, though, that no trip had been scheduled. “Is he planning now on going to Iran? The answer is no,” said Jones.

    Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast said last week that “legislative officials are studying the case and they are in charge for providing a response.”

    On Saturday, Iranian legislators stepped up the rhetoric against the news that Kerry was considering traveling to Tehran with the blessing of the White House.

    “The Islamic Republic of Iran has no plans to negotiate with any American official, unless the country (the U.S.) changes its policies,” member of the parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Zohreh Elahian said, according to Fars News Agency.

    “Iran-US relations are not under such conditions that could produce results through a number of non-targeted meetings and talks,” rapporteur of the parliament’s Nationals Security and Foreign Policy Commission Kazzem Jalali told Fars on Saturday in response to a question about Kerry wishing to visit Iran.

    “Americans are more seeking to exploit the media and means of propaganda in a bid to gain an advantage,” Jalali said. “…A number of the high-ranking officials in the present U.S. administration sent letters for talks with Iranian officials when they served as senators.

    “The bills ratified in the US legislative bodies against Iran are examples of paradoxical behavior which we are witnessing from American statesmen towards Iran, and indicate that their policies on Iran are not honest,” he added.

  75. moon,

    Not only does this leave egg on Kerry’s face, it pre-empts his need to cut Hillary’s legs off at the knees just to prove he would have been the better choice for SOS. I can’t wait to see how the dims spin this and spin this they will. Except that they were sending him with their “blessings” so they look totally inept as well.

    Go Hillary!!!

  76. djia, What a look, not sure if the guy is drunk or just pist off at what Joe is telling him. Joe doesn’t look intimated so I doubt its a scolding, but for sure Obama doesn’t like what he is hearing. He is probably hearing that someone has stabbed him in the back.

  77. Admin>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I understand that last night Greta Van Sustern had Sarah Palin on her show and Palin had wonderful things to say about Hillary. That she is a great leader doing a great job and how she was a victim of sexism in the media. If there is some way to find a post of that interview it would be worthwhile and appreciated.

  78. Iran denies entry to Sen. Kerry
    —————————-
    Not even hostage material. Say what you will about those madmen in Tehran. In this case they are a good judge of horseflesh. Question: would you want old horse face blundering his way around your country, if you had a choice in the matter. He needs to be put out to pasture.

  79. confloyd,

    I’m really looking forward to seeing the special as well. As far as gearing up for a run goes, I think it is also that they realize how popular she is and that the ratings will be there for them.

  80. I think it was Newsweek’s Evan Thomas who proclaimed in a fit of delerium that Obama would have to step down to take the presidency because he bigger than the job and was by implication a greater than Thucydides.

    Thomas is known to have a tenuous grip on reality. In fact, he and Johnathan Alter are rumored to share the same psychiatrist, who now has his own psychiatrist. The truth is Obama has his head in the clouds so in that sense it would be good is he came down to earth. But that will never happen.

  81. wbboei, I hope you can find that and post it.

    Kerry not even hostage material…….ROTFLMAO!!!! That is a below the belt hit, wbboei. Not even the Iranians want someone who threw away their military medals. No one wants to talk to some one like that. How he is a Senator I will never know, other than he is rich. I think he needs to settle down and be happy being the CEO of EarthDay.

    I understand the people of Mass. want to elect some republicans for a change. Well, if I lived there I would too, seems like the whole state is sick of democrats. The Kennedy’s are going to be has beens very soon. The only ones who were any good, they assassinated, the rest of the Kennedy’s sponged off of those two names for the exception of the one that just died before Ted, I think Ethel was her name, she founded the special olympics. She would have been just as good a POTUS as JFK, but it was a different time.

  82. They still wont let me on the conservative blog. They are quoting tom keane who was head of the 9/11 commission who says Obama was not properly focused on security, because he was focused on health care, global warming and the economy. (Note: I beg to differ with the economy). I think the indictment is broader. This is what I tried (and failed) to post:
    ————————————————————————————————-
    If you look at the entire res gestae you that this was not merely a lack of strategic focus on the parrt of Mr. Obama. It was far more. Simply put, it was a case of what the law callls willful blindness–knowing the risk we are facing but not wanting to deal with it. In a white collar crime context, willlful blindness is actionable.

    It was not one thing, it was everything, from the politically correct dalliances, to the urging us not to jump to conclusions about what happened at Fort Hood, to treating this as a pollice action rather than a war, to providing constitutional protections to the mastermind of 9/11 to pretending he could run the country from the back of a golf cart, to his failure to respond for three days, to his perverse tendency to raise bush as an affirmative defense to his own negiligence and stupidilty, to scapegoating the CIA.

    Who was it iinsisted that this vain, lazy narciissitic man is “our “president. Granted, he is president as a result of what occured in the primary and general election, which was corrupt as hell, I know because I was there on the ground. and I for one refulse to take ownership off this fooll. As for the birth certificate issue, the legal question has been settled by Judge Carter with finality. The political question however remains, i.e. why would he spend $1.7 miillion in attorney fees to avoid disclosing a document which everyone else would disclose without objection?

    Republlicans, independents and true democrats must organize to defeat him and his cronies before they destroy the country. Time is short.

  83. I still waiting for HDR-Clinton. She IS the female version of FDR. Hillary Diane Rodham, thats pretty close to FDR. I bet there a many plots in the muslim countries to kill her, she is the icon women of the world look up too.

  84. Goodnight all, the dog is griping for me to go to bed, as she runs the house. So we will see you guys in the morning. Has anyone heard from Mrs. Smith???

  85. Has anyone heard from Mrs. Smith???
    ———————————-
    Connie–I spoke to her a couple nights ago and she was feeling pretty sick. I called last night and spoke to her mother. She checked into the hospital and was going to stay there overnight. That is all I know at this point. I know she misses all of us and is anxious to get back on the blog.

  86. Kerry not even hostage material…….ROTFLMAO!!!! That is a below the belt hit, wbboei. Not even the Iranians want someone who threw away their military medals. No one wants to talk to some one like that. How he is a Senator I will never know, other than he is rich. I think he needs to settle down and be happy being the CEO of EarthDay.
    —————————————-
    The inside joke about Kerry is when he went through the skull and bones ritual, they march in a circle naked with their thumb up the rear end of the one in front of them, and then they reverse directions they take that thumb at put it up to the mouth. The idea however is to retract the thumb, but Kerry never figured that out. What a guy. But for W he would have been POUSA. I think his father was some kind of diplomat and perhaps that is why he fancies himself SOS material. Very few people share that opinion however. But if Obama is willing to consider Janet Neopolitano for the Supreme Court notwithstanding the fact that she is dumb as a post, then I suppose anything is possible. Von Metternich is turning over in his grave.

  87. I’m really looking forward to seeing the special as well. As far as gearing up for a run goes, I think it is also that they realize how popular she is and that the ratings will be there for them.
    ——————————
    I keep saying it because it is true. Hillary is the best political leader of this generation.

  88. I have not listened closely enough. Has Obama ever used the word “jihad”? Does he understand what it is and what it does?

  89. I am sorry to hear about Mrs. Smith. It took my daughter several weeks to get over it. I myself am sick, if it gets much worse I guess I will have to pay the going price for a Dr. to look at me. It irritates the hell out of me to pay that much. I will try to be nice and not tell him exactly how much money he is making for a 10 second visit, which is about $8.50 a second. Maybe I can get him to just give me 2 seconds, I might could afford that.

    Things are getting so bad all over the world that I try and brace myself before opening up my computer, cause you never know what the hell has happened.

  90. I’m very sorry to hear about Mrs. Smith. I hope she has a speedy recovery.

    Confloyd, I hope you feel better soon as well.

    On a disturbing side note, I read yesterday that the Mayo Clinic in Arizona is going to stop treating medicare patients and only take cash.

  91. Yes, JanH that was on I think AOL yesterday. They are giving the shaft to medicare patients, as many doctors already do.

  92. VACATION INTERRUPTUS

    Yahoo story pities the poor overworked, beleaguered presidenty guy. Whatta hard workin’ man.

    If Obama finds the job too hard, he can just quit, take a six month vacation, and then go on book tours promoting His Historicalness.

    Can he possibly “hang in there” until 2012?

    news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_return_to_washington

    By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer Philip Elliott, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 39 mins ago
    HONOLULU – President Barack Obama ended a Hawaiian vacation to return Monday to the Washington he never really escaped.

    Obama and his family boarded Air Force One on Sunday evening for an overnight flight, capping off an 11-day trip that would be remembered more for an al-Qaida affiliate’s botched attempt to bring down a Christmas Day flight about to land in Detroit from Amsterdam rather than the hours spent on golf courses or at luaus. The failed terror attack refocused the president’s trip from R&R on the island of Oahu to a river of memos from homeland security aides.

    Even though it was called a vacation, the trip to Obama’s childhood home was hardly the holiday most Americans seek. Between golf outings, he phoned his homeland security secretary and counterterrorism adviser for regular updates. Rather than restaurant recommendations, the president was handed thrice-daily updates from the White House Situation Room. And an attack that killed seven U.S. intelligence officers put him on the phone with the CIA director before heading to the island’s North Shore for a party with high school friends.

    Such a hyped-up tone was exactly what officials sought to dodge.

    “I asked the president if he had any special message for you guys,” deputy press secretary Bill Burton deadpanned to reporters on the way to Oahu on Christmas Eve. “He would like for you to relax and to not anticipate any public announcements or news-making events.”

    It echoed almost exactly what Burton told reporters as they headed toward Obama’s summer vacation off the coast of Massachusetts. That trip saw clambakes interrupted with the renomination of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, recreation replaced with mourning the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.

    This week shouldn’t have come as a surprise, really. Presidents don’t truly get to leave behind 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

    One aide traveled back and forth between a makeshift White House complex — at a hotel on Waikiki — to Obama’s rented residence with secure memos. A third-floor room overlooking a sea of whitecaps had its curtains drawn while officials used it as a secure briefing room for the National Security Council. And officials — sometimes in sandals or gym clothes — visited reporters in a the hotel ballroom they used for workspace.

    “We reserve the right to screw up your day at a moment’s notice,” a smiling Burton casually told reporters seeking the president’s schedule one afternoon.

    There was plenty to keep the first-year president busy even without the attack on the Northwest Airlines flight. As Obama heads back to Washington, lawmakers from the House and Senate must resolve their differing versions of a health care overhaul that is squeaking toward passage. His departure was delayed until Christmas Eve, when the Senate voted on the White House’s top domestic priority.

    Financial regulations are on the verge of winning their own version of an overhaul. A State of the Union address to Congress is due during the first weeks of 2010. The escalating war in Afghanistan is not going to run itself and the intelligence community is not going to reorganize without a direct hand from the Oval Office.

    So even though Obama wore casual slacks on New Year’s Day when he took his daughters to see a 3-D version of the film “Avatar,” that BlackBerry on his belt wasn’t for fashion. For a wartime president who dodged dealing with a terrorist attack on Christmas, it’s just one reminder he’s never completely distanced from his job as commander in chief.

    Even when ordering popcorn.

  93. I think if they go cash, the people who can pay cash should get a discount. Its costs less to take care of the cash people. There no need for an army of people making out insurance forms and such. A Dr. friend of mine has no insurance and he got married and his wife was diagnosed with Lupus. He calls each and every place she goes and gets a professional discount and a discount for cash. Some don’t want to do it, but he is really pushy about it. He says it costs way too much to get medical care. What has happened with medical care is the same thing that happened to credit cards. People don’t look to see what they are paying because the insurance company pays for it. People in these times are going to have to shop around. In a large city you can, but where I live, they have price fixing. The insurance companies have turned into a visa and a mastercard and their rates have skyrocketed. THe Dr.s complain about lawsuits, but here in Texas they pasted that law the Dr.s are still ordering way to many tests because they are improperly trained. I prefer to see a Dr. that was trained in Canada, they don’t have all these diagnostic tests and they learn to be real Dr.s, not one that orders a list of items off a protocol sheet. I don’t want to get started on these Dr.s today.

  94. So obama is mouthing off again that he “insists” that Israel give back occupied lands from the 1967 war.

    I was just wondering how he felt about giving back California to the Mexicans…or all the land confiscated from Native Americans?

  95. DEBUNKING THE ILLUSION OF A SMOOTHING RUNNING OBAMA MACHINE

    In the many long months leading up to the primaries and general election, one of the MSM’s primary talking points was of the smooth running Obama machine, incapable of making mistakes, able to communicate and motivate…

    Aaaah, those days of yore.

    Plus, the writer brings out a new phrase: “Undie-bomber”.

    And there’s this little paragraph that nails the description of the health care bill fiasco:

    “But what the public heard instead is how Nebraskans aren’t going to have to pay for Medicaid like every other state because their senator negotiated a special deal. They also heard how the president and senate would like to cut hundreds of billions in Medicare spending for seniors and to tax companies that offer working and middle class people good health insurance plans so they’ll drop those plans in favor of lower-quality ones.”

    cnn.com/2010/OPINION/01/04/westen.obama.message.offbase/index.html

    Obama team fumbling the key messages
    ===================================

    By Drew Westen, Special to CNN
    January 4, 2010 6:36 a.m. EST

    Atlanta, Georgia (CNN) — Hopefully the President is returning rested from the closest thing to a vacation a President can get, which is not much.

    George W. Bush took vacations seriously (and often), even after the terrorist attack that defined his presidency. In that sense, there’s something deeply ironic about Republicans attacking the vacationing Obama for failing to prevent a Nigerian from blowing up his underpants in mid-air.

    There is, of course, plenty of blame to be shared between the two administrations, which have similarly handled both security (with a Swiss-cheese system that can’t stop a man whose own father warned American officials in advance) and averted disasters (with measures designed to prevent the last attempt rather than future ones, e.g., making us all take off our shoes when the next bomber can hide the explosives in his undies; forbidding the use of laptops in the last hour of a flight when the next terrorist can simply detonate his explosive five minutes earlier).

    But the response to the Undiebomber underscores a problem the current administration does not share with its predecessor, which not only “stayed on message” but largely controlled it for the first six years of Bush’s presidency: the ability to communicate a clear vision to the American people.

    Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano initially suggested, in a tone intended to reassure, that the failed terrorist attack proved the system works. A few days later, when that comment could no longer even pass through airport screening machines, the president reversed course, calling the event a systemic failure of catastrophic proportions.

    Napolitano’s gaffe (which, to be fair, she later sought to correct) was not an isolated incident. It is emblematic of a seat-of-the-pants approach to speaking with the American people about issues that really matter to them that is increasingly undermining the administration’s credibility (and with it, its poll numbers).

    Just two weeks ago, on the Sunday morning talk shows, one member of the White House economic team confidently asserted that the recession was over — a statement that was tone deaf at best to a nation in which one in six people is out of work or has given up looking and one in five families is in danger of losing its home. An hour later, a second senior member of the White House economic team responded on a different show that the recession is definitely not over.

    That two members of the president’s inner circle had obviously not discussed a key question they both knew they would be asked speaks to the same problem as Napolitano’s out-of-touch remark.

    The White House seems unable to convey to an anxious and angry electorate that has just lived through one of the most unsettling decades in American history that their leaders understand what they are experiencing and have a clear, shared vision of how to restore stability. President Franklin D. Roosevelt didn’t reassure a frightened nation that “we have nothing to fear but fear itself — or maybe we do.”

    It is difficult to find an issue on which the White House has offered a coherent, compelling message. Consider the administration’s stance on deficits, which will constrain every piece of legislation the president attempts to pass.

    President Obama never made a concerted effort to explain to the American people, in plain language, the most basic lessons of modern economics as to why deficit spending is essential to breaking a downward spiral in which major banks fail, the stock market collapses, businesses lay off employees, people who’ve lost their jobs can’t buy or pay their mortgages, more businesses collapse as consumer confidence and spending plummet, banks stop lending, and home foreclosures skyrocket, leading to further layoffs and decreased demand.

    When no one has the money to spend or invest, the only one left to do it is the federal government. Breaking that spiral (and beginning to reinvest in America) was the primary purpose of the “stimulus package”– something the president should have repeated dozens of times.

    Instead, the administration has been mixing messages — often in the same sentence — about the need for government spending and the importance of deficit reduction and making any new spending “deficit neutral.” To the average American, it’s difficult to see how those messages fit together, and with good reason: They don’t.

    The same has been true of the administration’s message on health care reform. Conservatives had a simple, clear, compelling story to tell:

    “Democrats want a government takeover of our health care system, which will increase costs, raise taxes on the middle class, reduce the quality of care for Americans who have insurance, and put a bureaucrat between you and your doctor.”
    &&&&&&

    The White House never offered an equally compelling story, even though they could have:

    “Over 40 million Americans lack health insurance, and we’re all one pre-existing condition, lost job, or catastrophic illness away from losing our life savings and our doctor. Why? Because insurance companies have doubled our premiums in the last eight years, refuse to cover people who are or have been ill (“pre-existing conditions”), and routinely cut off coverage to people when they get ill, even though they’ve been paying their premiums for years. The answer? Regulate insurance companies to make them treat people fairly, require them to compete with each other and with at least one plan they don’t get to pick, and tax the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans who got hundreds of billions in tax cuts over the last decade so people who work for a living can take their kids to the doctor.”
    &&&&&

    What would that story have offered? A description of the problem in terms everyone can relate to, an explanation of how it came about that people have seen with their own eyes, a clear plan for solving it that passes the “common sense” test, and an appeal to core American values like security, hard work, competition and fairness. I happen to know that message would have garnered 2 to 1 support for health care reform because I polled various versions of it during the election and have done so recently.

    But what the public heard instead is how Nebraskans aren’t going to have to pay for Medicaid like every other state because their senator negotiated a special deal. They also heard how the president and senate would like to cut hundreds of billions in Medicare spending for seniors and to tax companies that offer working and middle class people good health insurance plans so they’ll drop those plans in favor of lower-quality ones.

    Both of those happen to be true, and neither would have been necessary if the White House had told a coherent story that just made sense to the average American in the first place.

    President Obama has accomplished much in his first year in office, but paradoxically, the man who ran on hope has governed without it. He has listened too often to advisers who have counseled that the possible is impossible and that the path to success is the path of least resistance, making deals with the same special interests who have stolen the jobs, homes and hope of working Americans, and whose fingerprints are all over every major piece of legislation on the horizon — or not on the horizon.

    As the president moves into his second year, it is time for a course correction. As one of the most effective communicators in modern American history, he should heed the wise counsel of the president he most admires, Abraham Lincoln: “…public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it nothing can succeed. Consequently, he who moulds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions. He makes statutes and decisions possible.”

    It is time this president makes statutes and decisions possible, not by compromising at the outset with the people who dug the holes in which we find ourselves or staying “above the fray” as legislators and lobbyists work out the details, but by articulating clearly what he believes in and putting the power and prestige of his office and his presence behind it.

  96. Even GWB, never complained about the non-stop work and he went thru 9-11, This guy whines about every little inconvenience.

  97. Lets just face it and be honest and call the truth here.

    Obama is just one boneidol lazy bastard, in fact he is the American Bone Idol President, he makes the workshy welfare check claimers look busy.

  98. I don’t hear Hillary complaining about her workload, which I’m pretty sure obama keeps adding to nonstop so he can go golfing.

  99. I remember during the campaign his aids were afraid to tell him he had another stop for a hope and change speech. He is lazee!!

    Larry has a good article up at nq talking about the new travel restrictions in 14 countries where not one terrorist has flown out of. OMG! What the hell are these people thinking?? Now they also want to take the passport dept. out of the state dept and give it to big sis over at Homeland security. I think that is a good idea, but not with Janet Neopolitan Ice cream running the show. She is dumber than dirt.

  100. I’m sorry you’re offended by this but..IMHO he deserves to get done to him everything that was done to Hillary and Sarah

    Obama’s effigy in Pres. Carter’s hometown

    PLAINS, GA (WALB) – A doll found hanging off a Main Street building in Plains is causing controversy.

    Controversial enough to get the United States Secret Service involved.

    Witnesses say it was an image of President Barack Obama with a rope around his neck, and the display was found hanging in one of the city’s most recognizable sites dedicated to former President Jimmy Carter.

    A few people were able to snap pictures of the black doll before it was taken down.

    “I saw this stuffed thing hanging up,” said Alonzo Davis, Plains Resident.

    Davis is one of the people who saw the doll hanging off the brick building, he said a sign on the front had President Obama’s name on it.

    walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=11759669

  101. This is how a leader acts…

    Clinton says Yemen situation is global threat

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Monday that the situation in Yemen was a threat to both regional and global stability.

    “We see global implications from the war in Yemen and the ongoing efforts by al Qaeda in Yemen to use it as a base for terrorist attacks far beyond the region,” Clinton said after a meeting with the visiting prime minister of Qatar.

    Clinton said a decision on reopening the U.S. embassy in Yemen — shut for two days due to what it described as al Qaeda threats — would be taken “as conditions permit”.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6033EA20100104?type=politicsNews

  102. The following is an effort by one leftist to recover from the effects of hopium. In the next entry you will see the conservative response. In essence, it says that Obama is a Wall Street shill (brilliant deduction), that the left bought the hope and change meme not too little but too much, that the party machine wants no part of these petty ideologues, and life goes on except now the left is really mobilized, except they are demobilizing as exemplified by the implosion of Democracy for America. (Note: if this is true then two major planks of the Soros dream are taking a hard hit these days–the other one being the collapse which occurred in Copenhagen which was visible to all except the joseph goebel wing of big media typified by AP.

    Then I say the morning sky
    Hi ho the tale was all a lie
    The world it was
    The old world yet

    Except now the people in charge are incompetent and things are falling apart thanks to Obama
    ——————————————————————————————-
    The Sifry Disconnect: When cynicism kills hope
    by KAROLI on JANUARY 1, 2010

    If you haven’t read Micah Sifry’s latest (very long) post about liberal disappointment and wilting grassroots, please go read it first before you read this (very long) rebuttal.

    A short paraphrase: President Obama isn’t a recent sellout. We are seeing the Barack Obama that always was, is, and has been — corporatist sellout. Really, David Plouffe and Charles Axelrod did a stellar job of selling the appearance of a grassroots organizer while pulling the wool over the eyes of the grassroots movement that supported, and ultimately elected Barack Obama.

    The filter you should read Sifry’s cynical claims through is his own self-description:

    In case you haven’t noticed by now, I tend to be pretty skeptical of all politicians, and far more interested in small-d democratic self-empowerment as the best path to a better society.

    He and I agree on only one point in his entire post, but it’s an important one:

    The problem for Obama and the Democrats today, as they head into 2010, is that much of their activist base appears to have swallowed too much of the wrong half of the myth: they thought that Obama would be more of a change-agent, and never really embraced their own role.

    Strangely, I think Plouffe, Axelrod and President Obama would agree with him completely on this. It’s been a constant drumbeat from me, too. Every time I see Jane Hamsher or Markos Moulitsas react with disappointment that the President has “sold us out”, or they snark out something on Twitter about “yeah, there’s change we can believe in,” I can’t help but ask them exactly what they did to make that thing they’re complaining about any better.

    Hold that thought. Let’s debunk some of the falsehoods in Sifry’s screed first.

    Wall Street and corporations own the President

    Having spent the better part of August and September digging through and aggregating campaign disclosures for the first six months of the year (before the Sunlight Foundation and Open Secrets started doing it…), I’m calling bullshit to this:

    In terms of the early money that was raised by his campaign in 2007–and this is the most influential money in politics–more than one-third (36%) of his total came from the financial sector (compared to 28% for Hillary Clinton), reported campaign finance expert Thomas Ferguson. Between January and August 2007, according to the Campaign Finance Institute, 60% of Obama’s donations were in amounts of $1000 or more–a smaller proportion than Clinton, but still a majority of his crucial early funding. In terms of Obama’s overall funding, nearly half of his donations came from people giving $1000 or more.

    I call bullshit to it, not because it isn’t factually correct in terms of the source of early giving — it is — but because it suggests an implied degree of ‘ownership’ because early donors gave amounts of $1000 or more, with an upper limit of $2,300.

    Were bundlers involved in the beginning? Sure they were. No one — not God himself — gets elected in this country to any office without some money. Would campaign finance reform be something good for everyone? Yes. But it’s disingenuous to suggest that those early 2007 donors somehow represent corporate ownership of Obama, given that as the campaign progressed, grassroots fundraising took firm root and blossomed, yielding record contributions from individual contributors.

    Sifry asks:

    Should we really surprised that someone with so much early support from Wall Street and wealthy elites overall might not be inclined to throw the money-changers out of the temple?

    Sigh. I truly hate the term “elite”. But let’s look at the record and set the misconceptions straight.

    The breakdown of Obama’s overall contributions suggests that primary “ownership” isn’t corporate at all. For all the hoo-ha over Goldman-Sachs donations, they gave less than 1% of the total received. Far more came from university and tech donors. In fact, if Sifry’s theory of ‘ownership’ were valid, Microsoft ought to be pretty damn pissed off about the fact that the Obama administration opted for open source Drupal to power their websites over Microsoft-powered software. Google, too, for that matter. The highest percentage of donations came from retirees and lawyers , which is why Republicans had no problem pointing at lawyers as the catalyst for killing tort reform in the health care reform bill, despite the fact that tort reform covers a far broader spectrum than health care. Just on health care reform alone, those alleged ‘owners’ ought to be pretty damn ticked off at the total lack of return on their investment, given that they will now be watchdogged by the government, forced to insure people they don’t touch with a ten-foot pole now, and without limits on coverage. Yeah, that was a win for sure.

    The only way to get to a total from the financial sector that looks even a little bit significant is to aggregate finance, insurance and real estate into one category, and even then it doesn’t come close to the totals received from other sectors.

    Let’s get real about how the majority of OFA funds were raised. Fundraising events were attended by donors like GrandMOMocrat, and MOMocrat co-founder Glennia Campbell. People like me donated in small amounts every month until we found our donations exceeding (gasp!) $1,000.00. Unions donated a lot of money, particularly in the days just before the election when right-wing self-interested parties like Scaife, Murdoch, FreedomWorks, and Citizens United were throwing millions at smear ads running round the clock with recycled Reverend Wright footage.

    Does Sifry really believe that the President would veto progressive legislation so as not to ‘offend’ the corporations? Who does that legislation come from, anyway? Last time I looked, Congress legislates; the executive either signs or vetoes. Suggestion: If the goal is a legislative effort that includes progressive goals and methods, perhaps electing more progressive thinkers to Congress is a valuable tool.

    If Sifry really believes in ’small-d democracy’ he might take aim at the pending Supreme Court decision regarding corporate personhood and the right to anonymously slam candidates running for office with millions and millions of dollars in ad buys, but taking a cheap shot at the President without some facts in his hand? An ineffective and kneejerk reaction to a difficult and complex problem.

    “Grassroots supporters” were never highly regarded or given control

    According to Sifry, anyway.

    Nor, it is clear, was Obama’s campaign ever really about giving control to the grassroots. As Zephyr Teachout wrote here a while back, the campaign shared tasks with its supporters but didn’t share power.

    Hmmm. This article seems to contradict that assertion, as does this article on Rolling Stone’s site (posted in March, 2008, just before the Texas primary).

    And the volunteers who showed up won’t be micromanaged by Ukman or anyone else from the campaign. They’ll be able to call their own shots, from organizing local rallies to recruiting and training a crew of fellow Obama supporters to man their precincts on election day. To identify and mobilize Obama backers, they’ll log on to the password-protected texasprecinctcaptains.com, download the phone numbers of targeted voters, make calls from their homes and upload the results to Austin headquarters.

    There is one point where Sifry may be correct, but even Sifry leaves a door open for someone to contradict him.

    …there is no evidence that OFA is actually driven by anything but what its DNC-paid staff and White House advisers want. If Stewart, or Jeremy Bird or Natalie Foster or any of the other good people working for OFA want to refute this by sharing details of OFA’s governance structure and how the local leadership actually drives the organization, I’m happy to be proven wrong.

    From conversations I’ve had, it is true: there is indeed disappointment at the closure of field offices around the country. Sifry may be correct about the current organizational structure of OFA. In my view, it was a mistake to shutter the offices. I would go so far as to say that it was a mistake to merge OFA and the DNC, but for the fact that once President Obama was elected, he not only leads the country but also the Democratic party. On the other hand, duplication of effort at a central level made little sense either.

    I, too, would be interested to hear the reasoning behind the decision to close field offices and let those motivated and dedicated volunteers go. Is it possible they were burned out? Maybe. But again, there is nothing in the United States Constitution that says the grassroots who got a President elected needs to wait for any official go-ahead from that President’s official party to get things done. The organizational tools, the online tools, the network tools all remain. Could it be that this is one of those “We are the change” moments that the grassroots are failing to grasp? If leadership and ownership were at a grassroots level once (and they clearly were), then perhaps those leaders were also empowered to take hold of their moment to determine and advance their agenda and goals.

    Had they done so, they would be bucking the conventional wisdom claiming the party in power will lose seats in Congress in mid-term elections, because they would already be promoting qualified Congressional candidates. Yet in Texas alone, 13 open seats in Congress currently have Republican candidates running unopposed. Had WE been the change, WE would have been searching, screening, and raising money for viable Democrats to oppose those Republicans. Had WE been practicing ’small-d Democracy”, we would have campaign organizations ready at the local level to elect more progressives to Congress so that true progress can be made possible.

    This is the disconnect. On one hand, Sifry bemoans the central organization’s heavy-handedness to the grassroots and on the other, ignores the fact that if grassroots supporters are empowered (and they were/are), they would BE THE CHANGE.

    It fascinates me to see the tea party movement study every aspect of Obama’s grassroots effort in order to make their own. From social networks to stirring discontent among disaffected conservatives, their movement has risen out of once-convergent and now-divergent interests. FreedomWorks may act out of corporate astroturfers’ interests, but other factions are hard-core conservatives’ answer to grassroots efforts for Obama.

    Sifry can’t have it both ways. Either the grassroots were empowered and could have chosen to take that empowerment to the next level, or they were not empowered and had nothing to do with Obama’s election. It’s difficult for me to argue the latter with a straight face.

    The grassroots are dead; long live the grassroots

    Sifry’s final requiem is aimed at the Organizing/Obama for America (new/old iterations of the same organization). Sifry cites declining support and response to email initiatives as evidence that the grassroots have had weed killer poured on them.

    To that, I laugh a little. While it’s true that I haven’t clicked through an email this month, my reasons for that have little to do with a dead grassroots sense and far more to do with a crappy economy, the California EDD’s decision to suspend, reinstate, then delay my unemployment benefits for what is now creeping up on 10 weeks, and an unholy obsession with seeing this health care reform initiative to the end without seeing progressives eat liberals for dinner.

    In fact, my email box is flooded on a daily basis from interests ranging from MoveOn’s “kill the bill” initiative (which very nearly sent me into an apoplectic coma) to AlterNet’s year end fundraising to The Nation’s auction to raise funds, to the Howard Dean organization’s telephone call the other day asking me for a monthly donation to help them elect progressives.

    In other words, the different factions that came together to unite under the OFA umbrella when it was “Obama for America” have now retreated to their own fiefdoms, a fragmented and sometimes ragtag group of specific interests. I just counted: I had 152 fundraising requests from progressive/liberal/Democratic organizations in 30 days. Two were from OFA. The rest were from the DNCC, MoveOn, Progressive Change Committee, California Democrats, Alan Grayson, GlobalGiving, Common Cause, Sojourners, Equality California, Patrick Leahy, ActBlue, Chuck Schumer, Marcy Winograd, DonorsChoose, Change Congress, and Democrats.com, to name a few.

    My response to all of them? Pass health care reform and I can afford to donate again. Maybe. If I get a job I can afford to donate again, too. My lack of response had nothing to do with OFA or my feelings toward them. Indeed, when OFA asked us to make phone calls to Congress regarding health care reform, I did so. Their goal was exceeded in one day. 357,000 phone calls to Congress in 24 hours. I’d do it again in a heartbeat. Mostly, though, OFA sends emails to let me know what’s going on and keep me in the loop, just like David Plouffe said they would.

    That doesn’t seem like a disenfranchised group to me. At the same time, it is worth noting the overwhelming flood of donation requests from different groups that has splintered from the mothership. That would seem to me to be people taking hold of their local elections, representatives, congressional races and the like and ‘owning them’, the way good grassroots groups should. As 2010 progresses, I expect to see 500 of them a month in my inbox, and rightly so. We should ALL be supporting EACH OTHER, because WE ARE THE CHANGE.

    I have, however, severed ties with several organizations I had donated money to in the past. One is Howard Dean’s organization. Another is AlterNet. I may relent on Dean’s organization, but AlterNet is probably dead to me forever, because they rely on cynical pronouncements instead of encouraging their readers to BE THE CHANGE.

    Cynicism is the easy way out

    Without question, change is difficult, even when the change agents want it. There is too much change, too little change, change in the wrong direction, disagreements about what changes to make first. There is a hunger for change and a fear of it. There is disappointment that the change isn’t one viewed as best and most desirable, and nothing spells cynicism faster than a disappointed idealist.

    Hope is the more difficult road. Hope requires change to come at a pace that is possible rather than one that’s ideal. It sees smaller pathways that sometimes wind through unseen futures but usually emerge to merge on the other side with the road called “progress”.

    Cynics walk the road of criticism and sometimes even despair. Criticism, when constructive, is the healthiest road to true, lasting change. Criticism, when it’s personal, destructive, and defeatist is a road to cynical disconnects and non-participation.

    What Sifry and other “small ‘d” democracy promoters sometimes lose sight of is the value of being a positive catalyst for change — of fulfilling the promise that Barack Obama spoke throughout his campaign when he said this:

    “The more we can enlist the American people to pay attention and be involved, that’s the only way we are going move an agenda forward. That’s how we are going to counteract the special interests.”

    This is what I wrote nearly two years ago, after listening to then-candidate Obama’s New Hampshire primary concession speech:

    We’re tired of what the politicians say “they” will do and are ready to show this country what WE can do as a collective group of energized voices ready to put our wallets, our voices and our feet on the line.

    We are the new American majority. We have a voice. We walk streets, we make phone calls, we give what we can, even if it’s just $3.01 at a time. We are speaking for ourselves rather than waiting for someone to speak for us. We want our country back, and we want our standing back in the world. We’re tired of the naysayers who leave our fates in the hands of Wall Street and the Halliburtons, Diebolds and Blackwaters of the world. We are no longer going to stand idly by and have our lives and quality of our lives dictated to us by lobbyists and corporations.

    This is not hate. It is democracy.

    That’s right. WE. That means WE take ownership and quit taking potshots at the President WE elected.

  103. U.S. seeks to pressure Iran, revolutionary guards

    Tuesday January 05, 2010

    WASHINGTON, Jan 4 (Reuters) – The aim of sanctions on Iran would be to pressure the government and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps to curb Iran’s nuclear program without hurting ordinary people, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Monday.

    “We have already begun discussions with our partners and with like-minded nations about pressure and sanctions,” Clinton told reporters. “Our goal is to pressure the Iranian government, particularly the Revolutionary Guard elements, without contributing to the suffering of the ordinary (people).”

    http://www.forexyard.com/en/reuters_inner.tpl?action=2010-01-04T181136Z_01_WAT014000_RTRIDST_0_NUCLEAR-IRAN-USA-URGENT-PIX

  104. Requiem for a recovering bot . . .

    Then all of a sudden the music changed, so soft that you scarce could hear;
    But you felt that your life had been looted clean of all that it once held dear;
    That someone had stolen the woman you loved; that her love was a devil’s lie;
    That your guts were gone, and the best of you was to crawl away and die. ‘Twas the crowning cry of a heart’s despair, and it thrilled you through and through —

    The music almost died away … then it burst like a pent-up flood;
    And it seemed to say, “Repay, repay,” and my eyes were blind with blood.
    The thought came back of an ancient wrong, and it stung like a frozen lash,
    And the lust awoke to kill, to kill … then the music stopped with a crash,

  105. The Steady Ebbing Of A Tide
    by Moe Lane
    (Note: Moe was on CNN opposite our friend James Carvalle. Give Moe his due, he was very effective, as was James)
    (PS: this is the news is the one I have been waiting for)

    In the face of strong questioning from Melber about signs of declining support for Obama among young voters, and in the vastly lower counts he is getting on his Youtube video, Plouffe refuses to give out hard, checkable metrics on the health of the Obama base. Hearing Melber describe the disgusted reaction of uber-blogger Markos Moulitsas to a recent OFA fundraising email, Plouffe somewhat hotly replies, “It’s easy to take potshots, but I’m very closely in contact with the people who make up the heartbeat of the ground level of Obama for America, who are still out there.” (Telling that he says “Obama for America,” not “Organizing for America.”) He asserts:

    “We’ve had a couple million people out there volunteering for health care, quietly in communities, helping maintain support. It’s different from a campaign; you’re not out there saying, ‘Register eight voters today.’…. I quite frankly am thrilled that over two million people, which is a lot, have done something on health care, meaning: they’ve gone out and knocked on doors; they visited a congressional office; they helped organize a press conference. It’s happened in all 50 states, and we think it’s a small part of why health care will get done.”

    I’m sorry, but when two million people are in motion in favor of something, because they put themselves in motion, we know what that feels like. It’s called a movement. It started to happen in 2007-08, and it hasn’t happened since.

    In point of fact, we had a movement arise last spring – bottom-up, populist, self-generating, and over a million strong at this point. It’s just that it was called the Tea Party movement, and for some reason certain people apparently don’t want it to count. I don’t actually know if Micah Sifry is one of them, of course.

    Anyway: read the whole thing, as they say.

    Moe Lane

  106. In fact, Obama has put young people further behind the eight ball than when he started. I am not talking about inches here, I mean light years. He is just a lying sack of sh. . . That is where Hillary would have been their answer to a better future and they got conned into supporting a wall street hack. The reason fire dog lake and kos are retreating is because they were conned and they led their legions down the primrose path and sooner of later the zombies will figure it out. In one sense this is the biggest lie ever told, and the joke is on them.

  107. The Hard Cold Truth explained by Moe Lane. Frankly the tip off on this came early, when Obama and Grease (Axelgrease) breached their promise to appoint Obama campaign leaders from California as delegates to the convention, and gave those positions instead to fat cats and their mistresses. That was the tell for anyone who was paying attention.
    ———————————————————————————————————-
    Micah Sifry wrote a follow-up to his post on the withering of Obama Organizing for America, and it’s just as interesting as the first one was. More practically useful, in its way: anybody involved with building/maintaining a local Tea Party group, or other local conservative/libertarian/Republican grassroots organization should read it. But – again – there’s one particular passage that I want to address:

    …[A]nd heck, doesn’t the Democratic party want more local chapters[?]…

    Not in the sense that Micah means, no. They want their current local chapters filled with people who show up, swell the ranks, pay their dues, and perform whatever tasks the local chapter leadership expects of them. Which, for most local chapters, involves maintaining the status quo. Actually letting those wild-eyed activists do anything would give said local chapter leadership the galloping staggers.

    Anyway, read the whole thing, particularly if you’re a Right-grassroots organizer. But if you’re a progressive: read this, and tell yourself that nothing’s wrong, really.

    Moe Lane

    PS: What? No, the GOP has a different problem in that regard, which I have no intention at all of discussing in even a semi-public forum.

  108. I don’t hear Hillary complaining about her workload, which I’m pretty sure obama keeps adding to nonstop so he can go golfing.
    ——————————–
    What do you do when the boss is incompetent? You work around him.

  109. “But what the public heard instead is how Nebraskans aren’t going to have to pay for Medicaid like every other state because their senator negotiated a special deal. They also heard how the president and senate would like to cut hundreds of billions in Medicare spending for seniors and to tax companies that offer working and middle class people good health insurance plans so they’ll drop those plans in favor of lower-quality ones.”
    ———————–
    I do not think the people of Nebraska want any part of the vigorish that whoremonger Nelson negotiated with Obama before his wig slipped off.

  110. So obama is mouthing off again that he “insists” that Israel give back occupied lands from the 1967 war.

    I was just wondering how he felt about giving back California to the Mexicans…or all the land confiscated from Native Americans?
    ————————
    Inasmuch as Obama is a strong supporter of La Raza and La Raza advocates a breakup of a return of southern states to Mexico thus undoing the treaty ending the Mexican American War, I fully expect that Obama is on board. He may have a hard time getting it done physically, so the will do it through the immigration bill that he and Guiterrez from Chicago are secretly conspiring on.

  111. “(Note: if this is true then two major planks of the Soros dream are taking a hard hit these days”
    ———————-

    Good!

  112. If I am right Obama has now had his Katrina Moment. Once that happens, anything he fails to do, any excuse he makes for a lapse of security, or apologizing will draw an ah ha there he goes again response undermining the security of America for the gratification of his own ego. The fact that this happened while he was on vacation, the fact that he tried to downplay it, the fact that he did not issue a response for three days and the fact that he waited nearly a week to return home, while pictures of him on the golf course and comments like he can run things from the back of a golf cart and the failure of his director of homeland security to properly reassure the country, create the impression of someone who is not serious, and I think that impression will stick to him like glue from now on. The man is between a rock and a hard place, and does not know it. He is too arrogant to know it. I can make them believe anything I want them to believe is what he told one of his staff.

  113. Wbboei, I am convinced that the Bush’s put in Obama, otherwise why would Karl Rove be running around giving advise to Donna Brazoid. It was all a set up, and they even let him keep a little of his leftist leaning so people won’t realize he was bought and paid for by the Carlyle group. They did NOT another Clinton in, Clinton’s make the republicans look like dumb shits, and they just can’t have that. Of coarse they feed the media with calling him a Socialist, Marxist and what not. Oh to fool the dumbed down masses must be great fun. I bet they are laughing their asses off.

    THe republicans even did a dry run of this with McKinney. We all know the only way to beat a Clinton was to take the black vote away from them, what better way to do that than to put in a Chrismatic black man. THe republicans are smart. DId you watch the second video about the Carlyle group???

  114. wbboei,

    In a way, obama reminds me of Czar Nicholas II and his lack of leadership skills. Nicholas was blinded to the importance of what was going on with his people, i.e. revolts, starvation. He was shielded by a selfish group of advisors until it was too late. He and his family held lavish parties, spent much too extravagantly, sent ill-prepared soldiers to fight in a war he should never have gotten into…and on and on…

  115. THis is really good for the public to see how politics are our government has been operating because both side to quid pro co. I Think by the time this term of OBama’s is over every single American will know how our govt works and how both parties have been robbing the taxpayer blind for years. This is going to be good. They will know that all elections are controlled by the powers that own this country and they will know how its works to make those very same senators, governors, congressman make the very laws that will enrich them further and all the while voting to give themselves raises and the best healthcare that this country offers. Oh, its going to be good, because the truth is coming out, thanks to the internet. That’s why they want to stop it.

  116. Clinton on State Dept.’s visa policy

    January 04, 2010

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said today that she is “not satisfied” with the procedures that allowed Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to travel to the U.S., despite his father’s warnings.

    “We are not satisfied. We are conducting an internal review,” Clinton said during a joint press availability with her counterpart from Qatar.

    Clinton said that based on the information that she has now, the State Department “fully complied with the requirements set forth in the interagency process” about what should be done when information is provided about a threat.

    She added that they are now “looking to see whether those procedures need to be changed, upgraded.”

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/01/04/2165144.aspx

  117. Apparently obama is jetlagged from taking a vacation from his everyday vacation. So no soundbites/kodak moments from this Troy Donahue wannabe until tomorrow.

    Such a shame…NOT.

  118. Wbboei, I am convinced that the Bush’s put in Obama
    ————————-
    Oh yeah?? Well then the Bushs must be masochists, because Obama manages to blame them for everything that goes wrong and every problem he cannot fix which is just about every problem.

    But in the midst of all this trepidation about silly little things like security the economy and health care deform, you will be glad to know that during the past 11 days Obama shaved 4 strokes off his golf handicap with his glass shafted titanium reinforced 10 degree 46″— scoring pencil.

    His score keeping is about as reliable as the projections of his vaunted budget Director Peter Orazag–off by a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon we are talking about real money. It is higher math, not to be confused with cheating. Messiahs do not cheat. When they can solve any problem at will they do not have to cheat.

  119. MORE DISAFFECTED LEFTIES LEFT WANDERING

    Just a hunch, but wasn’t David Corn another “let’s make history with Obama” media type?

    If so, add another one to the pile:

    politicsdaily.com/2010/01/04/will-disappointment-on-the-left-hurt-obama-and-dems-in-2010/

    Will Disappointment on the Left Hurt Obama and Dems in 2010?

    Over the past few weeks — as I traveled abroad, attended holiday parties, and went through my appointed rounds — I kept encountering people who posed the same question: “What’s happened with Obama?” These were liberal Democrats, and they feel, depending on the person, somewhat, partially, or fully betrayed by the president whom they helped elect with their small donations and/or volunteer sweat. These people were truly troubled, some by the expansion of the Afghanistan war, some by the emasculation of the health care reform legislation, some by President Obama’s embrace of corporate-world advisers. (This means you, Larry Summers.) I know that my sampling is rather unscientific. But none of the worriers are bloggers or professional progressives who make their living fretting about a presidential drift to the center. They merely are foot-soldiers (or ex-foot soldiers) in Obama’s base, and now they find themselves quite perplexed and in desperate need of explanation. (I’m getting a steady stream of e-mails from readers expressing the same concerns.)

    Obama’s approval ratings have been falling steadily in the past few months. He appears to be having a tough time retaining the support of independents, who tell pollsters they are nervous about his health care reform initiative. Democrats as a group tend to be supportive of Obama and his efforts. Consequently, a White House following conventional rules would put its effort into winning back indies in time for next year’s mid-term congressional elections. After all, if the Dems take a beating, it will be Obama’s agenda that will suffer.

    Yet Obama and his aides should not ignore the spreading anxiety among his liberal fans. The folks who I’ve talked with — in conversations that often feel like counseling sessions — have said they are unlikely to hit the pavement for Obama and the D’s in 2010. They felt empowered by Obama’s campaign in 2008; they feel alienated from politics today. Disenchantment is not what you want in your base when you’re heading toward a tough mid-term election. Given that the congressional races are likely to be low-turnout affairs, any lack of passion on the Democratic side will enhance the advantage the Republicans will probably enjoy due to extended joblessness. (You want to scare yourself? Read this AP article on the economy, which notes that it could take at least five years to bring the unemployment rate to a “normal 5 or 6 percent.” By the way, another must-read is a Washington Post front-pager that notes there was zero net job creation in the just-ended decade, compared to 20 to 38 percent net job growth in each of the previous six decades.)

    And despite all the campaign hype, there isn’t much of an Obama Nation that the White House can mobilize for the coming elections. As Micah Sifry recently noted (picking up on a theme I poked at in the first months of the Obama presidency):

    This is the big story of 2009, if you ask me, the meta-story of what did, and didn’t happen, in the first year of Obama’s administration. The people who voted for him weren’t organized in any kind of new or powerful way, and the special interests — banks, energy companies, health interests, car-makers, the military-industrial complex — sat first at the table and wrote the menu. Myth met reality, and came up wanting.

    So what’s Obama to do? A former Clinton White House aide who has helped the Obama crew points out that the president’s big problem has been message development. He has let the health care muddle and his Afghanistan musing eclipse the progressive accomplishments of his first year in office: ending torture, withdrawing from Iraq, devoting $80 billion in stimulus money to clean-energy development, placing Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court, moving toward a Gitmo shutdown, increasing government transparency, declaring global warming gases to be pollution that must be regulated, even while cutting an unsatisfying deal at the Copenhagen climate summit. (Slate’s Jacob Weisberg argues that Obama has revived liberalism.)

    There may be something to this. But the issue is more than mismanaged PR. In recent weeks, Obama has not looked as if he’s fighting for anything. Sure, he’s working damn hard to get a health care measure through the obstacle-ridden Senate. Yet in this narrative, he’s bogged down with the negotiating ins and outs. To those people who don’t follow every twist and turn, it doesn’t look as if Obama is blasting away at powerful interests and recalcitrant Republicans. He seems to be playing chess in a mud pit. That may win him what he believes is the best bill possible. But such a victory could prove temporary if his natural supporters are not jazzed by it and the GOPers come roaring back to undo or block the reforms enacted.

    Obama needs to triumph in the legislative combat; he also needs to keep his troops together and energized. His hawkish decision on Afghanistan makes that all the more challenging. Yet he might still have a chance, if he picks the right targets and throws a punch or two. That may not be his style — and you should never advise a politician to adopt a course that is not in sync with his or her temperament. But as Obama handles a variety of complex matters — some with no easy answers — he will not whip up enthusiasm for his party by playing it cool, as he navigates the nuances of this or that policy dispute. And disappointment is not very empowering.

  120. Apparently he is jetlagged from taking a vacation
    ——————————
    It is not his fault. George Bush slipped a jet lag pill in his Dom Perigone. You will be glad to know that we have an eye witness. His name is Al Sharpton. However, there is some question as to his credibility. Therefore, we will need to produce a witness to corroborate him. Fortunately we have one. Her name is Tawani (have I got a hoax for you) Brawley. Unfortunately, we have been unable to ascertain her whereabouts. We have checked all the garbage cans in town and there is no sign of her. Meanwhile Bush is lawyering up like guilty parties always do. Associated Press has already convicted him.

  121. For those who do not recall, Tawana claimed she was raped by a white man who was a government lawyer. She claimed she was left in a garbage can. Al Sharpton and another lawyer took up the cudgel and the press incited public outrage had him convicted. Later it turned out it was all a hoax. I wonder how that guy got his reputation back. I think this may have been part of the basis for Tom Wolfes book Bon Fire of the Vanities. I may be wrong about that.

Comments are closed.