A Trough Of Boobery, Bribes, Deals, And Loopholes

It’s one full week into the new year and Americans have already been subjected to a decade’s worth of boobery.

In actual show business we have had the boobery of NBC and the return of Jay Leno. On the actual sports business front, we have biracial celebrity boobery, with the Tiger Woods gay sex story growing like John Edwards’ turgid National Enquirer scandal.

But in matters of pseudo show business, pseudo sports, pseudo celebrity and real life flim-flam scams Barack Obama is truly “the one”. What vast talent for boobery this Chicago thug has!



Barack Obama claims he “takes responsibility” but Obama style “responsibility” is only in the sense of a teenager who steals a car, drives while drunk and high on drugs, rams the car into pedestrians and trees, gets arrested, “takes responsibility” then imperiously takes the family car keys from dad along with a bottle of Scotch. Barack Obama claims he “takes responsibility” as if words are enough – but where are the firings of the incompetents? Brennan and Napolitano should clearly go but they are protected.

Instead of concern and duty to country, Obama’s “parents” with the Scotch and car keys, continue to protect the wayward teen and his irresponsible friends:

Democrats worried about protecting the homeland in wake of the Christmas Day terror plot are also working to protect one of their own: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

With at least seven congressional committees investigating the failures behind the terror plot, Democrats are carefully gaming out the testimony of Napolitano to spare her from the worst of the GOP criticism.

Obama’s Dimocrats, instead of ferreting out the truth and meting out punishment, prefer to preserve and protect – themselves. Obama’s Dimocrats will “shield” Napolitano from tough questioning sure to come if she appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Great pressure is coming from the White House, not to protect “the homeland” (we truly hate that odious phrase which reeks of the 1930s), but to make sure Joe Lieberman and the Homeland Security Committee (“Homeland Security” is another 1930s sounding title) protect Napolitano, not the “homeland”.

They want to look tough and demand responsibility from the White House, but they don’t want to do any serious political damage.

Charles Hurt, a long-time Hillary hater, today echoed Big Pink:

Turns out Hillary Rodham Clinton was right all along.

During the nastiest battle of the entire 2008 presidential race, she aired an alarming television commercial warning voters that they would come to regret nominating Barack Obama to occupy the White House.

If — in a national security crisis — the “red phone” rang at 3 a.m., the ad intoned, Obama would not hear it. [snip]

In any case, an Obama White House would so diminish the threat of terrorism that the government’s focus would shift away from the harsh and determined tactics used to protect the homeland.

Instead, Obama would turn his attention to becoming more popular in the world and stress negotiations over hardball tactics.

This attitude from the commander in chief would trickle down to every corner of the federal government responsible for national security.

Obama lashed out at Clinton, dismissing her and accusing her of desperation and playing upon people’s fears.

Sen. Obama says that if we talk about national security in this campaign, we’re trying to scare people,” replied Clinton, appropriately mystified.

Well, yesterday those chickens came home to roost.

On a day when the administration desperately hoped to calm America’s fears that a soft-headed, bumbling raft of politically correct peaceniks had taken over and fallen asleep at the national security switch, there wasn’t much to see in the White House other than bungling of previous bungles.

Hillary hater Charles Hurt is practically republishing one of our old articles. Ed Koch, who helped bamboozle the Jewish community to vote for Obama, is only beginning to glimpse the damage he has done:



And damage there is. And it’s only one week into 2010.

Democratic Governor David Paterson of New York (the one Obama is trying to get rid of) addressed the New York legislature this first week. The legally blind and African-American Governor angered Obama and Dimocrats by not appointing Caroline Kennedy to the U.S. Senate. Two years ago Paterson was a hero who replaced Eliot Spitzer (due to Spitzer’s Tiger Woods style problems along with a hypocritical history of attacking the sex industry and its customers). Governor Paterson demanded “ethics” from Albany Dimocrats. The Albany Dimocrats responded with cold silence and eyes filled with hate.

The governor entered the packed chamber with nary a handshake for the hundreds of lawmakers and other officials who had assembled to hear him speak, and did not crack a single smile during his 30-minute address. Instead, he issued calls for tougher ethics oversight, the abolition of programs he called wasteful and a cap on state spending, often drawing on Biblical language.

Prosperity hides all manner of sin, but no longer,” Mr. Paterson declared. “We have to rise to the highest expectation of our people and bring them the lasting change they have long, long fought for and desired.”

“Prosperity hides all manner of sin” said the governor. But American prosperity is gone. No wonder Dimocrats increasingly hate Paterson. Surely the talk about “change” did not help Paterson with Dimocrats, nor Obama.

Obama talked “change” and “hope” in the same way he now talks of “talking responsibility”. It’s all meaningless. It’s a bunch of words without actions or history to back them up. It’s all a flim-flam.

When a flim-flam man promises you a ten dollar investment will gain you a million dollars do not expect a million dollars – it’s a flim-flam to get your ten dollars. Obama said what he had to do to flim-flam voters and Democrats. Now the flim-flam man has your ten dollars and his promises are nowhere to be found.

The Washington Examiner this week reminded us of another Obama flim-flam we have written repeatedly about:

White House visitor logs dumped late in the week between Christmas and New Year’s Eve show that Billy Tauzin, the top lobbyist for the prescription drug industry and once a favorite target of Barack Obama, visited the White House at least 11 times in Obama’s first six months in office.

The White House’s open door for Tauzin, whom candidate Obama attacked as the embodiment of the revolving door and the corrupt collusion between politicians and industry, further dismantles the myth of Obama as the scourge of special interests. It also bolsters the conclusion that health care “reform” has become a boondoggle for the health industry, especially pharmaceutical companies.

During the presidential primary, in the spring of 2008, Obama ran a campaign ad aimed directly at Tauzin, chief executive officer of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. In the ad, titled “Billy,” Obama tells a small gathering of seniors:

“The pharmaceutical industry wrote into the prescription drug plan that Medicare could not negotiate with drug companies. And you know what, the chairman of the committee who pushed the law through went to work for the pharmaceutical industry making $2 million a year. Imagine that. That’s an example of the same old game-playing in Washington. I don’t want to learn how to play the game better. I want to put an end to the game-playing.”

But Obama has played the game, and Tauzin was one of the first players he picked for his team. White House visitor logs show that between Feb. 4 and July 22, Tauzin visited his office an average of once every 15 days — about as frequently as Tauzin probably collects that generous paycheck candidate Obama derided. We don’t know how often Tauzin visited after July, because of the ad hoc nature of White House visitor log releases.

Here is the candidate Obama flim-flam attacks on “Billy”:



Obama was forced, by lawsuits, to reveal the White House visitor lists – so much for “transparency” let alone C-SPAN transparency. Obama needed Tauzin to come to the White House secretly in order to make the sweet deal for Big PhaRma.

It is no wonder then, that the last Republican to support Obama’s health care scam, the boob from California, is no longer supporting Obama’s health care scam.

Now Congress is about to pile billions more onto California with the new health care bill.

While I enthusiastically support health care reform, it is not reform to push more costs onto states that are already struggling while other states get sweetheart deals.

Health care reform, which started as noble and needed legislation, has become a trough of bribes, deals and loopholes.

You’ve heard of the bridge to nowhere. This is health care to nowhere.

California’s congressional delegation should either vote against this bill that is a disaster for California or get in there and fight for the same sweetheart deal Senator Nelson of Nebraska got for the Cornhusker State. He got the corn; we got the husk.

Schwarzenegger comes too late to the battle. The scams of the flim-flam man are everywhere now:

MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the leading academic defenders of health care reform, is taking heat for failing to disclose consistently that he was under contract with the Department of Health and Human Services while he was touting the Democrats’ health proposals in the media.

Gruber, according to federal government documents, is under a $297,600 contract until next month to provide “technical assistance” in evaluating health care reform proposals. He was under a $95,000 HHS contract before that.

The scams of bribery and flim-flams have spread from the top down.

The flim-flams are growing but the jobs are few and far between.

The flim-flams are spreading and growing but Democrats Alice Rivlin is saying that U.S. Debt Scolds Can’t Be Ignored Much Longer.

In the first week of 2010 Americans have experienced a decades worth of flim-flams, boobery, bribes, deals and loopholes – from Barack Obama and his Dimocratic thugs.

Share

154 thoughts on “A Trough Of Boobery, Bribes, Deals, And Loopholes

  1. Please, we do live in fearful times but remember, “The Buck Stops Here” President and his administration is in charge of our freedom and our safety both physical and economic. So I ask, who should we be fearful of? He is soft on terrorism, not much interested in the hard things that will promote and protect the welfare of the citizens, his appointees call American citizens Terrorists [Napolitano]and worse yet, they ‘fail to connect dots’ that were already established to aide in connecting the dots. So, citzens like confloyd and myself are now afraid to fly. He is soft on muslim and Islamic terrorist while USA citizens will be required to relinguish more civil liberties as a result of the attempts to kill our citizenry. And they would not even wake him up for THE 3:00 am call – they likely have the same opinion of his fortitude, ability and attitude as I do. All that while the counterterrorism appointee went skiing. Nice work, Brownie!
    As for me and my household, I am not served well and am more fearful with the Mackerel President in charge of our safety both economically and physically [thanks wbboei, mackerel in moonlight, shines but stinks!].

  2. Admin: this statement by Patterson sounds like one that our valient leader Mrs. Clinton would say.

    “Prosperity hides all manner of sin, but no longer,” Mr. Paterson declared. “We have to rise to the highest expectation of our people and bring them the lasting change they have long, long fought for and desired.

    Great article! It makes you think why would he lie about every single thing he campaigned on and have the audacity to walk on stage like he is trying to give us what he promised. There is just something not right here. No politician I have ever seen has lied this much, not even tricky Dick. I can’t imagine what his handlers are thinking would happen when the people figured it out?

  3. Admin: another tremendous post. The lead video records Obama’s katrina moment.

    I like Ed Koch. I met him one time at the law office he worked at for awhile after he term as mayor expired. He being interviewed about something or other. He was a Hillary supporter and I really like him for that. He warned us that Obama was leaning on the super delegates, and encouraged us to write to the undecided superdelegates, which of course we did.

    Koch makes sense when he indicts the Administration for its dogmatic refusal to confront the issue of terrorism. He makes less sense when he says he is a big supporter of this corrupt Administration. On the other hand, maybe he does. Maybe he thinks they are educable. The weight of the evidence however suggests otherwise.

  4. There have been some recent airplane “situations” being reported. One in the United States had jets scrammed. At Healthrow Airport there reportedly have been arrests on a Dubai bound plane. More details as they come in.

  5. I am noticing something important. Maybe it was there all along and I was too dumb to see it. CBS is playing it straight. Sure you have little idiots like Katie Couric. But there are others in that shop who are real deal journalists. Bob Sheifer is a good example. He is in the Cronkite Sevarid mold. Not like those jackasses at NBC and ABC like Brian Dudley Do right Williams or the little greed (the “r” is silent) at ABC who are to use the polite word suggested by admin–courtesans to Obama.

  6. There have been some recent airplane “situations” being reported. One in the United States had jets scrammed. At Healthrow Airport there reportedly have been arrests on a Dubai bound plane. More details as they come in.

    ——————————-
    If it walks like a duck. If it looks like a duck. If it quacks like a duck. Then it is probably not a police action. It is probably a war. And if it is a war then a different set of rule apply. Your adversaries are enemy combatants. Sometimes, they have information in their care, custody and control that can save the lives of your soldiers and innocent human beings. If you treat them as criminal defendants and let them lawyer up then you will not get that information in time to save lives.

    Obama has painted himself–and all of us into that corner. It is enough to make you take off the bumper sticker now isn’t it?

  7. As always, Admin, I thank you kindly for your straight shooting and depth of information. And the visuals accompanying the ‘straight talk’ have to hit home with at least some of those who are still on hopium.

  8. Clinton vows to start Mideast talks ‘without preconditions’

    WASHINGTON — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday said she was working to restart peace talks between Palestinians and Israelis “without preconditions.”

    “We are working with the Israelis, the (Palestinian Authority), and the Arab states to take the steps needed to relaunch the negotiations as soon as possible and without preconditions,” she said.

    Clinton made the comments at a joint press conference with her Jordanian counterpart Nasser Judeh, who is Washington for talks.

    The top US diplomat expressed hope that Israelis and Palestinians could agree “on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state… and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders.”

    Peace talks have been stalled for over a year, with US efforts so far failing to bring the two sides to the negotiating table.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g_bOBKhO0yg9DGud4G9rVZ0SogZw

  9. Clinton to meet Japan FM as base row simmers

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will meet her Japanese counterpart in Hawaii next week amid a row over a U.S. airbase that has strained relations between the two allies, officials said on Thursday.

    The State Department said Clinton would meet Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada on January 12 in Hawaii, where she is stopping on the way to visit Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea.

    State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said the disagreement over relocating the Marine’s Futenma airbase in Okinawa would likely be discussed. “I wouldn’t be surprised if the issue of Futenma comes up,” Crowley said, adding that the talks would also likely touch on other security issues including the U.S.-led war against Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan.

    The Obama administration wants to move ahead with a plan agreed in 2006 to shift the Futenma base to a less crowded part of Okinawa, but many local residents say it should be moved off the island entirely, a view Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama backed during his election campaign.

    Hatoyama has pledged to decide by May how to proceed on the base issue, which is increasingly seen as an example of new strains in the U.S.-Japan relationship under his government’s leadership.

    Residents of Okinawa, 1,000 miles south of Tokyo and reluctant host to about half the 47,000 U.S. military personnel in Japan, have long resented what they see as an unfair burden in maintaining the U.S.-Japan security alliance. The plan to move Futenma is part of a broader realignment of U.S. troops in Japan against a background of China’s rising role and an unpredictable North Korea.

    Marine Corps Commandant General James Conway said in December that the dispute could complicate the plan to move Marines to Guam by 2014.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60640020100107?type=politicsNews

  10. I have wondered where the proponents for Christians are, and why they are not screaming bloody murder over the Christmas Day ‘almost’ incident? If that attempt had been on another day associated with other religions, say Ramadan or Hunakkah, would there not have been an outcry from their leaders and those believers? Why not an outcry from Christians that they were targeted for death? With all the other attempts to get rid of the religion of the Christians – why the deafening silence now?

  11. Jan–do you think the fruition of Iranian efforts to acquire a nuclear weapon increases or decrease the incentive to reach a Settlement in the Middle East Peace Process–all other things being equal. I think it may enhance the process somewhat because it poses a threat to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, but I am not sure. They are in a position to offer guarantees financial and otherwise to the parties, and have a common interest in stability. I think that would be true if they had confidence in America. I am sure they have confidence in Hillary and equally sure that they have no confidence in her goofy boss. Who in their right mind would. Fourrrrrrrrrrrrrre!!!!!!!!!!!

  12. Jason Liebman.CEO and co-founder Howcast, co-founder of Alliance of Youth Movements

    January 8, 2010

    Facebook, Twitter and YouTube Are Tools For Diplomacy

    Last night I was honored to attend a small dinner with Secretary Hillary Clinton hosted at the U.S. State Department, which included a great list of notable guests, including Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Twitter Founder Jack Dorsey, Mobile Accord CEO James Eberhard, Microsoft CSO Craig Mundie, Cisco CMO Susan Bostron, NYU Professor Clay Shirky, and Personal Democracy founder Andrew Rasiej, to name a few.

    Secretary Clinton has a great deal of interest in technology and how it can drive engagement around the world. Kicking off 2010 with a two-hour discussion with technology leaders about 21st-century statecraft shows that she is serious about this.

    She realizes that if U.S. diplomatic policy is going to encourage civil society development, and fight violence and oppression, 21st-century tools like Twitter, Google, and YouTube are going to be key. It’s all part of her 21st-century statecraft strategy: harnessing the power of technology tools to promote diplomacy around the globe. Yesterday, Senator Lugar wrote a great piece on these efforts.

    At dinner, we discussed how to harness technology for diplomatic and development goals. She went around the room asking everyone for concrete ideas. This brainstorming session with active participation from the group resulted in some great ideas, which included:

    1. Finding ways to incent global citizens to build applications that can advance these goals

    2. Finding creative ways to ensure that Internet access is always freely available

    3. Building better public-private partnerships and making it easier for start-ups that have great ideas to be able to present them more effectively to the U.S. government

    4. Ensuring we can better communicate leveraging language translation tools

    5. Discovering ways to train people — especially those who are new to the online world — how to use all these tools effectively

    6. Leveraging the mobile channel for anonymous crime reporting for greater transparency

    Jack Dorsey, James Eberhard, and I told her first hand about our experience on our recent tech delegation trips to Iraq and Mexico, which she was very excited about. We also spoke about the success and momentum of the Alliance of Youth Movements, a nonprofit organization I helped start which is looking to advance grassroots movements seeking positive social change using the tools of 21st-century technology.

    As a result of the dinner, Secretary Clinton declared in an e-mail to her staff: “We are using all tools at our disposal to practice 21st-Century Statecraft…harnessing the power of technology.”

    I was impressed with Secretary Clinton’s engagement in the discussion and her genuine excitement to not only learn, but also make sure we act. From organizing a technology delegation to Iraq last April to sending Google CEO Eric Schmidt to Baghdad last month and hosting this dinner discussion, it’s clear that the U.S. State Department is strongly supporting and encouraging digital diplomacy. By working with government and private-sector leaders, we’re all banding together to figure out the most effective means to leverage digital technology tools to promote diplomacy around the world.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-liebman/perspective-on-digital-di_b_416876.html

  13. wbboei
    January 8th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
    Jan–do you think the fruition of Iranian efforts to acquire a nuclear weapon increases or decrease the incentive to reach a Settlement in the Middle East Peace Process–all other things being equal.

    ———————-

    I go back and forth on this with my friends. On the one hand I think it just might increase the incentive, given than none of the Arab countries want Iran to hold that much power/lord it over them. Then again, the idea of going back to the table without preconditions is poison to them, especially where Jerusalem is concerned.

    It will be interesting to see if Abbas gets thrown under the bus for the greater good.

  14. International Women’s Health Coalition (New York)

    Africa: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s renewed commitment to sexual and reproductive health is welcome news for the world’s poorest women

    8 January 2010

    In a keynote address this evening given in Washington DC, marking the 15th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development (1994), US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton renewed US support for universal access to reproductive health worldwide.

    Leading global family planning and reproductive health agency Marie Stopes International issues the following statement in response to the Secretary of State’s address: “Secretary of State Clinton’s address will bring renewed hope to all those people in the world living in poverty, but particularly to the women of the developing world, who simply by dint of their sex are among the most marginalised, poor and discriminated against on the planet.

    “Both the Secretary of State – who has long been a champion of this cause – and the US administration itself are to be congratulated for providing leadership on this issue. We urge all 179 country signatories to International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action to follow this lead.

    “The renewed commitment to family planning and sexual and reproductive health – which are so fundamentally important to the health and wellbeing of nations – bring these issues back to centre stage as international priorities after years of neglect at the hands of ideological zealots. “With the US taking a lead for the first time in a decade, the 200 million couples worldwide who want to control their fertility but are unable to access modern contraception methods may now find the means to do so; and we may begin at long last to see some real reductions in the intolerably high numbers of women – over half a million every year – who die as a consequence simply of being pregnant. These tragic deaths are unnecessary, because they are so easily preventable.

    “Ms Clinton’s statement is especially timely ahead of the 10th anniversary of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) next year. The fifth MDG (MDG 5), which aims for a 75% reduction in maternal mortality rates, has seen the least progress of all. Without significant commitment to, and investment in, family planning there is little chance of reaching MDG 5. “As one of the world’s leading family planning agencies, Marie Stopes International stands ready to work with the governments around the world to meet the challenge of achieving universal access to sexual and reproductive health, which with this new impetus is now far more likely to be met than ever before.”

    http://allafrica.com/stories/201001080947.html

  15. Secretary of State Clinton on plane bomb blame

    January 8/10

    (NECN: Washington, D.C.) – Echoing the tone of other top Obama administration officials who spoke Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is taking responsibility for the role the State Department played in allowing would-be bomber Umar Abdulmultallab to make it on an international flight in to Detroit on Christmas day.

    One day after a report on the Christmas day terror attack was delivered to the president, Mrs. Clinton said the State Department is fully committed to accepting responsibility for its mistakes. Clinton spoke in Washington during a joint appearance with the foreign minister of Jordan.

    “I think that the president made it very clear in his remarks, both before and again yesterday, that we all are looking hard at what did happen in order to improve our procedures to avoid human errors, mistakes, oversights of any kind,” Clinton said. “We are, in the State Department, fully committed to accepting our responsibility for the mistakes that were made, and we’re going to be working hard with the rest of the administration to improve every aspect of our efforts.”

    http://www.necn.com/Boston/Nation/2010/01/08/Secretary-of-State-Clinton-on/1262980861.html

  16. I can see the use of technology to develop societies, but the global citizen designation makes me queezie.

  17. Basil, on the previous post, you asked about “Cadillac” plans and why they will end up costing workers more money. The tax is on large employers that offer comprehensive plans over $8500 for an individual and $23,000 for a family of four. The tax will be applied on the amount over these limits. Employers are not going to absorb such a huge increase in tax, but will in all probability, pass along the tax in the form of decreased coverage, higher co-pays and deductibles, and may drop insurance all together, since the fine is less than providing comprehensive coverage. This means that we all will have crappy, junk insurance. The other problem with this plan, is that it is not indexed for inflation or age, so in 5 years more people will be caught by this tax (think AMT) and older people will be paying much more for insurance coverage.

    For example, I am a union employee who has comprehensive medical coverage through the HMO that I work for. My employer is not going to absorb this cost and my co-pays will increase and my medical coverage will lessen, which is a problem as I get older. The cost of my plan is higher due to my age than my younger neighbor with a child. Thus, I will be ensnared by the limits, before she will be. I was shocked at how much less expensive her coverage is for herself and her 10 y/o son. She is well under the limit for a family, but I am over it. The only difference is the age factor.

    Anyone who doesn’t believe that this a huge tax on the middle class is delusional. One of the factors contributing to the high cost of medicine, is the cost of caring for people with chronic conditions, which I feel is more of the cause than over utilization of services, especially in the HMO that I work for. The focus is on preventive care, chronic care/case management, and caring for people on an out-pt basis.

    The senate bill wants to tax the middle class, but eliminated the tax on higher income people. Now, what is wrong with this picture???

  18. Obamaeconomics combines the worst aspects of spreading the wealth and trickle down theories. Bending the laughing curve.

  19. Jan- I do not know what to make of Hillary’s statement. My understanding was that the Embassy passed on the information to three intelligence agencies in a timely manner. Most likely the Ambassador was an Obama appointee.

  20. January 8/10

    (NECN: Washington, D.C.) – Echoing the tone of other top Obama administration officials who spoke Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is taking responsibility for the role the State Department played in allowing would-be bomber Umar Abdulmultallab to make it on an international flight in to Detroit on Christmas day.

    One day after a report on the Christmas day terror attack was delivered to the president, Mrs. Clinton said the State Department is fully committed to accepting responsibility for its mistakes. Clinton spoke in Washington during a joint appearance with the foreign minister of Jordan.

    “I think that the president made it very clear in his remarks, both before and again yesterday, that we all are looking hard at what did happen in order to improve our procedures to avoid human errors, mistakes, oversights of any kind,” Clinton said. “We are, in the State Department, fully committed to accepting our responsibility for the mistakes that were made, and we’re going to be working hard with the rest of the administration to improve every aspect of our efforts.”

    http://www.necn.com/Boston/Nation/2010/01/08/Secretary-of-State-Clinton-on/1262980861.html
    ——————–

    Looks like BO told Bill C & Hillary to get this statement out…..unfortunately not very happy to hear it from Hillary……She needs to say what exactly is the mistake the State Dept made and then and then only take responsibility for that alone….it makes her look like BO with this vague statement.

  21. wbboei,

    I think she is taking responsibility for the visa mixup that falls under state department responsibility.

    Personally, I think this is a “the buck stops here” moment even though it isn’t necessary.
    The state department issued a warning about him but it didn’t lead to revoking his visa.

  22. Maybe so Jan. But take a look at this: http://video.foxnews.com/g3963581/thompson-gorton-rate-security-review?category_id=86858

    Let me interpet for a second. First you have Big Jim Thompson who is a former Republican Governor who had presidential ambitions and then dropped out of sight. He is most likely Illionis Combine so I do not trust him any further than I could throw him which aint far. He starts off by calling this the first terrorist incident we have had since 9/11, which fails to recognize what occurred at Fort John Bell Hood. Then he complains that once the father delivered the information the visa should have been revoked by the state department sua sponte–on its own motion and placed on a no fly list. That statement, if true, would place responsibility on the State Department.

    But the we hear from Slate Gorton who has four times the brain power of Thomson. He was the Republican Attorney General of Washington and later its Senator. He is cold as a fish but brilliant. Hiss family owns the seafood business Gortons of Glouster. He contradicts Big Jim Thomson and says UNDER THE RULES THAT EXISTED AT THAT TIME the visa could not have been revoked or the target put on a no fly list. In other words, State was not responsible. Furthermore they contacted three different agencies. Thus whatever mistakes were made at that time were de minimus. Nothing like hanging out at a golf course and pretending nothing happened.

  23. Didn’t HIllary’s earlier statement say they had followed the procedures but were now reviewing the procedures (with an eye to tightening them up)? And that in future they would follow up on any such warnings they send, to make sure the next agency heeds them (tho this wasn’t required by their rules).

  24. If you think about it these guys on the 9/11 commission are on the hot seat now too. They have a clear incentive to say the right recommendations were made but they have not been implemented.

  25. It seems like Jim Baker and Lee Hamilton–what a disappointment he was in the primary, as co chairmen of the 9/11 commission should be saying something relevant right about now.

  26. Didn’t HIllary’s earlier statement say they had followed the procedures but were now reviewing the procedures (with an eye to tightening them up)? And that in future they would follow up on any such warnings they send, to make sure the next agency heeds them (tho this wasn’t required by their rules)
    ——————————–
    Yes. So where is the mistake. If the procedures were inadequate to deal with the situation, which is the thrust of what Gorton says, then compliance is no a mistake.

  27. wbboei, there was someone from the 9/11 commission on air talking about their recommendations.It was on one of the Fox News shows. I do not recall his name, but I thought his analysis was credible.

  28. P. S. if I were Hill, I would tell the Mackerel President that I will gladly accept the blame as soon as I get the responsibility for implementing the procedures and that I would sure as God made little green apples answer the 3:00 am calls. IOW, when I am POTUS.

  29. wbboei
    January 8th, 2010 at 10:28 pm

    ———————

    I agree so where does that leave us? Are all the departments involved taking responsibility so obama can look like the hero he isn’t? Why do I think that his procrastination on everything is one of the reasons that this happened? He is so flippant about terrorism it isn’t funny. Here is a man who rushed from a golf game because a friend’s child had cut his chin. Here is the same man who did less than nothing on a terrorist plot inside America no less for how long?

  30. wbboei,
    I read your post downstairs asking me if I knew how you could get in touch with Andrew Breitbart. Sorry, I don’t have his email address or any contact info. I know he’s on Twitter. You could also look for a contact link at Breitbart.com.

  31. I agree so where does that leave us?
    ——————————–
    I don’t know. I was hoping you might.

  32. confloyd
    January 8th, 2010 at 8:19 am
    Gonzotex, No doubt Colt would have kicked some Alabama bottom. The few plays he was in they were scared out of their minds.

    Your daughter sounds beautiful, I too would of liked a match up with my daughters, Colt McCoy is a class act. I feel it in my bones, he’s the next Troy Aikman. Lets hope he heels quick. I will be watching for the draft in April to see where he goes, hopefully somewhere where he will play. I would like to see him go to Minnesota and work under Favre for a year or two. Whatever happens Colt will be a legend.
    ***************

    Never Farve…I am a Packer fan BIG time but over the years his arrogance and entitlement became unbearable. The last two years he was with the Packers he even had a separate locker room it got so bad. He may be able to throw a ball, but his behavior has been a disaster in three clubs now, Packers, Jets and now Minnesota.

  33. wbboei
    January 8th, 2010 at 11:56 pm
    I agree so where does that leave us?
    ——————————–
    I don’t know. I was hoping you might.
    *****************

    Up a creek….without a President

  34. Sobering up on Arab-Israeli Peace
    After a bruising first year, Barack Obama is realizing that the Middle East peace game is much tougher than he imagined.
    BY AARON DAVID MILLER | JANUARY 7, 2010

    Big decisions should never be made after a night of hard drinking or on the basis of wishful thinking.
    Almost a year into his presidency, Barack Obama has begun to sober up. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the administration’s policy on the Arab-Israeli issue, where a series of tactical mistakes (none fatal) have left the president and his team battered but wiser when it comes to what’s possible and what’s not.
    Life’s for learning, as the song goes, and I’m not counting Obama out by any means. His commitment to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is deep. But his greatest challenge will be how to reconcile his own risk-readiness and sense of urgency with regional leaders who simply don’t appear to be that ready or that much in a hurry. This unhappy set of circumstances, in which regional leaders don’t own their own peace process, has never been ideal for success in Arab-Israeli peacemaking.
    First, a word of caution and perspective for all you Arab-Israeli addicts out there. FDR’s quip about Lincoln — that he died a sad man because he couldn’t have everything — is a political law of gravity in Washington. Governing is about choosing, setting priorities because presidents just can’t do everything.
    COMMENTS (7) SHARE:
    Digg

    Facebook

    Reddit

    More…
    Even in the seemingly wondrous and miraculous age of Obama, that’s true.
    This administration has ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in which Americans are being killed and wounded, an intelligence/homeland security defense that has been proven profoundly wanting in the wake of the abortive Christmas terror attack against an American passenger airliner bound for Detroit, and a set of domestic priorities that include a still-dangerous jobless recovery and still-unfinished and controversial health- care legislation.
    All of this will get worse (or better) in 2010 against the backdrop of midterm congressional elections in which the Democrats, already lacking a secure popular base of support beyond their own party stalwarts (and they’re unhappy too), may well suffer significant losses. None of this precludes a major effort on Arab-Israeli peacemaking but it makes the risk or success (ensuring a tough fight with the Israelis and their supporters here) or failure (meaning the administration has stumbled badly) all the more consequential politically.
    It’s not that Obama doesn’t care about the Arab-Israeli issue. But it’s not the fulcrum of his foreign-policy agenda. If he succeeds in preventing another attack on the continental United States before 2012, avoids serious American casualties in Afghanistan, reduces unemployment significantly, and Americans begin to see the future with a bit more optimism, he’ll likely be reelected. He doesn’t need Arab-Israeli peace to be considered a consequential president.
    That said, in his first year, the president came out harder, faster, and louder on the Israeli-Palestinian issue than any of his predecessors. Appointing the talented and tenacious George Mitchell as special envoy and talking tough against Israeli settlements, and in a very determined manner about a two-state solution, won him great praise initially.
    Unfortunately all of this was played out without much regard for an overall strategy or much sensibility to the political needs of either the Israelis or the Palestinians. The misreading of the Israeli scene was particularly inept. By publicly calling for a comprehensive settlements freeze including natural growth, a position no Israeli prime minister — even one with the most pro-peace credentials — could ever agree to, the administration undermined the freeze it eventually did get (minus Jerusalem of course). The president then had to back down and was left with no freeze acceptable to the Arabs and no negotiations.
    By year’s end, the administration was left with three big “Nos”: the first from Israel on settlements; the second from the Arab states on partial normalization with Israel, and the third from the Palestinians about returning to the negotiations. President Mahmoud Abbas was particularly hurt by administration pressure to distance himself from the Goldstone report and by the looming prospect of a prisoner exchange between Israel and Hamas. All of this, of course made America seem weak and feckless — never a good place if you want to be a credible mediator.
    In fairness to the Obama administration, the United States faces a very tough situation. Weak leaders, divisions within the Palestinian national movement, big gaps on the core issues (Jerusalem, security, and refugees) and an unwillingness on the part of both sides to pay the price make a conflict-ending accord doubtful.
    There’s always the chance of something less on the Israeli-Palestinian track or even the resumption of Israeli-Syrian negotiations. But to get anywhere, Benjamin Netanyahu, Syrian President Bashar Assad, and Abbas will need to make big, tough decisions.
    The coming year may well bring a resumption of negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians. The Obama administration is working hard to bring this about, and is reportedly working on letters of assurance that might enable both sides to stay at the table once they get there. But if Mitchell’s comments Wednesday are any indication — he told journalist Charlie Rose that he expects negotiations, once begun, to take two years to complete — Team Obama now understands the difficulties much better than it did a year ago.
    In a strange way, both Israelis and Palestinians may need talks to resume: Abbas to show that he’s still relevant, particularly if Hamas pulls off the prisoner exchange with the Israelis, and Netanyahu, who wants to show that he’s a peacemaker and has options.
    The core question is not “Do they want to start?,” but “Can they finish?” Resumption of negotiations and a collapse would be a disaster, so everyone will look to the Obama administration to keep the process alive and headed credibly in the right direction, including by putting its views on the table.
    If the president succeeds in getting this started, he’ll only have two choices: deep or deeper involvement. But even if he’s prepared to do his part, both sides will have to come to own the talks and to invest in them. If they don’t, no matter what Barack Obama wants, you might just as well hang a “closed for the season” sign on the prospects of a two-state solution for now and for the foreseeable future.
    PREVIOUS 12
    Save over 50% when you subscribe to FP.
    Mark Wilson/Getty Images

    Aaron David Miller is a public-policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, where he is working on a new book, Can America Have Another Great President? (Bantam)

  35. Obama and the White House Chicago Boys

    http://tinyurl.com/yz8pqtf

    ~Long but worth the read~

    Small snip

    Tellingly, the Obama team has killed off disclosure rules mandating that unions reveal how they spend the billions of their members’ union dues. These, in turn, are often poured into “front groups” and other “funds” each year. Anyone care to wager whether these funds will flow to help Democrats? Thanks to Obama, we will never know. So much for transparency. But we do have change.

    The second item that sparked my interest was Obama’s move to ditch the superdelegates’ role in nominating Democratic candidates for the presidency.

    These superdelegates include Democratic members of Congress, national party figures, and established leaders of the Democratic Party. They vote at the nominating convention. The system was established in the wake of the 1972 Democratic Party nominating process, when anti-war radicals seized control of the party and ended up nominating George McGovern. The superdelegates were supposed to ensure that radicals did not take over the party’s nominating process. Well, apparently that sort of restraint does not appeal to Obama, who now has taken steps to shape the nominating process to play to his preferred territory: the caucuses, where his brand of populism holds sway. The Wall Street Journal noted the trick:
    One reason for the superdelegates in the first place is the disproportionate role of activists in states like Iowa, which rely on caucuses rather than primaries. Mrs. Clinton held in her own in the primary states but Mr. Obama crushed her in the caucus states where his supporters found it easy to dominate proceedings where older and frequently busier people weren’t able to invest the time to counter them. Take the case of Texas, which has both a caucus and a primary: Mrs. Clinton won the state’s primary in which 2.8 million people voted, but Mr. Obama so controlled the caucuses where far fewer people (some 800,000) participated that he ended up with more delegates overall. The new rules, if approved, would likely mean even more of the same.

    Since Obama’s policies are sacrificing the careers of Democratic congressmen to fulfill his agenda, these politicians may withhold their support at a future nominating convention. What is the solution? Remove them from the equation by stripping their vote. Out they go, joining the ever-increasing number of bodies under the bus.

    Of course, the boys who earned their stripes in the rough-and-tumble world of Chicago politics (where the phrase “vote early and vote often” should be the city’s motto) will not stop there in their drive to win.

    Why should they? Customs, rules, ethics, and traditions were thrown under the bus to get ObamaCare bills passed by the House and the Senate. Why stop there when there are so many ways to skin Americans? Skullduggery comes naturally.

  36. No Surprise: Judge Tosses Out Bulk of Evidence Against Terrorist/Former Gitmo Detainee Now On Trial in Civilian Court
    —Ace
    No surprise. Either the courts must accept — and bless as Constitutional — the extraordinary treatment due to these vile monsters, and thus bless such treatment for all criminal suspects in the United States (plainly a hateful conclusion), or they must toss out all the evidence against them and set terrorists free.

    It is the left’s hateful agitation against all things Bush, plus Obama’s delicately theoretical comprehension of the real-life flesh-and-blood world, that has brought us to this point.

    And it will get worse.

    A federal judge has tossed out most of the government’s evidence against a tarrorism detainee on grounds his confessions were coerced, allegedly by U.S. forces, before he became a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay.
    In a ruling this week, U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan also said the government failed to establish that 23 statements the detainee made to interrogators at Guantanamo Bay were untainted by the earlier coerced statements made while he was held under harsh conditions in Afghanistan.

    However, the judge said statements he made during two military administrative hearings at the U.S. detention center in Cuba, where he was assisted by a personal representative, were reliable and sufficient to justify holding the detainee.

    Musa’ab Omar Al Madhwani allegedly engaged in a 2 1/2-hour firefight with Pakistani authorities before his capture in a Karachi apartment in 2002.

    The detainee says that after five days in a Pakistani prison, he was handed over to U.S. forces and flown to a pitch-black prison he believes was in Afghanistan. He says he was suspended in his cell by his left hand and that guards blasted his cell with music 24 hours a day.

    He said that he confessed to whatever allegations his interrogators made and that harassment and threats continued after he was moved to a different prison in Afghanistan.

    Al Madhwani said that interrogators at Guantanamo Bay on multiple occasions threatened him when he tried to retract what he now claims was a false confession.

    The judge said he was particularly concerned that interrogators at Guantanamo Bay relied on or had access to the coerced confessions from Afghanistan made by Al Madhwani.

    Military tribunals were created to square this circle, and to ensure basic fairness and reliability while still recognizing the difference between illegal combatants and run of the mill criminals (and also to keep US civilian courts untainted, to keep them from having to bless extraordinary measures as perfectly Constitutional as regards regular criminal citizens), but of course the left and their champion Obama has rejected them as insufficiently prissy and pristine.

    So here we go.

  37. ACE
    8888888888

    Democratic Alligned Polling Firm: MA Senate “Has Become A Losable Race For Demcorats”
    —DrewM.
    Democrat connected polling firm (that was credible in VA and NJ races) says Coakley v. Brown is a real race.

    The firm, Public Policy Polling, says they will release their numbers over the weekend but they are dribbling out some information on their blog.

    According to their info, a plurality of those planning to vote oppose the health care bill and Brown’s favorables are better than McDonnell’s and Christies were prior to their races.

    Bottom line.

    This has become a losable race for Democrats- but it could also be easily winnable if Coakley gets her act together for the last week of the campaign. Complacency is the Democrats’ biggest enemy at this point and something that needs to be overcome to avoid a potential disaster.
    Jim Geraghty spoke with Brown this morning.
    A taste.

    “People know I’m the only person who can stop the debate on this monstrosity of a health-care bill and make them go back to the drawing board. I’ve had a lot of people tell me this isn’t JFK’s party anymore. They’re all about more taxation and more spending and not looking out for everyday workers. I’m for lower taxes and less spending, and I think the best way to stimulate the economy is across-the-board tax cuts. It was true in JFK’s time, it was true for Ronald Reagan, and it’s true now.”
    The question is, is that what people in one of the most liberal states want in a replacement for one of the most liberal senators in history? So far the answer is, they seem to be considering it.

    There’s just over a week until the election (1/19)…visit Brown’s website to donate and/or volunteer.

  38. To parse out what Miller said:

    If Obama succeeds in

    (i) preventing another attack on the continental United States before 2012,

    (ii) avoiding serious American casualties in Afghanistan,

    iii) reducing unemployment significantly, AND

    iv) Americans begin to see the future with a bit more optimism,

    then (and only then) he will be reelected.
    ——————————–

    Perhaps. But that is damned near impossible. Maybe one or two of those things could happen. But not all four.

  39. this isn’t JFK’s party anymore. They’re all about more taxation and more spending and not looking out for everyday workers
    ——————————-
    That is well put. It is no longer the party of the middle class. It has become the party of lifestyle and has adopted some of the worst aspects of the other party–thanks to people like Rohatyn, Soros, Dean, Kerry, Pelosi and the reigning jackass Obama. These people are not legitimate liberals. They are limousine liberals. They are joined at the hip with big business. That is what we are fighting against. At one time, they were identified strictly with the other party.

  40. The nominal head of an organization sets its priorities and shapes its culture–for better or for worse. In subtle and overt Obama sent the message internally and externally that fighting terrorism was not a priority. The laxity that permeates the system, the demoralization of the CIA, the unresolved conflict between Blair and Panetta, the interference of White House staff in State Department Affairs are all symptomatic of that attitude. Terrorists are like any other predator. If they smell weakness then they will instinctively attack. And where Obama is concerned they know he is a trembling tower of tapioca.

  41. I was disappointed in the article by Ed Lasky detailing Obama fraud. It is easy enough to state the problem. The challenge is how to solve it. The article says nothing about that part. If Gingrich were running the party, they would have an answer. But Micheel Steele is running the party and gentlemen do not read other peoples mail, etc. In the end, Obama will be the one who destroys Obama. The question is how many innocent Americans will he destroy along the way.

  42. I think the Administration did a post mortem on the incident and discovered multiple failures. Initially, the plan was to start throwing people under the bus to divert attention away from Obama who is ultimately responsible for it based on the legal doctine of respondeat superior and his personal failure of leadership. Recall they promised to reveal something shocking and then revealed nothing. Also, the Chicago Boys in the west wing leaked the story to the Los Angeles Times that a security official who stayed on the ski slope would be blamed but that did not happen either. In other words, they changed their tactics at the last minute for some reason. Bill Clinton and Hillary both met with Obama separately on that day for what purpose we can only speculate. However, when they did meet it is possible that Bill told Obama that the country sees him as a buck passer and he needed to refute that notion by words and deeds, hence the statement and the refusal to scapegoat. It is also possible that. It is also possible that even though the procedures were followed more was required at the time of issuance or the time of revocation. We do not have sufficient facts to say, but the acknowledgment of mistakes was noted. This may be a case of the entire administration circling the wagons for the senate investigation where people like Graham, Kyle, Hatch and other former prosecutors on the other side of the aisle will ask searching questions, in which case the acknowledgment was anticipatory. Whatever the Administration found they were unwilling to disclose and it would not be discoverable by the other side. We know for a fact, thanks to Politico, that they are keen to protect Neopolitano, not because her testimony is probative, but because she is slow witted and is susceptible to headline producing gaffs so they are trying to minimize her appearance and exposure. They know this is an election year and the other party is determined to paint Obama as soft on terrorism, and he has fostered that impression himself up til now. I think this will be rough sledding for all concerned. But the worst image of all will be of Obama running a dynsfunctional security sytem from the back of a golf cart so perfectly that but for the courage of pssengers–le deluge.

  43. i know i will be drawn and quartered for this, but i want brown to win in massachusetts. this will create the tsunami necessary to destroy all dimocrats in 2010.

    HRC can thank coakley for her loyalty with a cabinet position in 2012.

  44. Alcina, I can’t blame you, after all these years under the kennedy control, I image a breath of fresh air is needed. Yes, that would be great to award Coakley with a cabinet position.

    Wbboei, I’ll call you later today your time. I am going to the big city today, so it will be from my cell.

    This does appear Fox is going work this visa thing for all its worth. I have read on other blogs that the State Dept. was given a stand down to black muslims. I am not sure if its true, given Obama’s muslim day at the Capitol and his love of never calling the murdering of Americans by muslims terrorism, I believe it.

  45. Obama and the White House Chicago Boys

    http://tinyurl.com/yz8pqtf

    ~Long but worth the read~

    The second item that sparked my interest was Obama’s move to ditch the superdelegates’ role in nominating Democratic candidates for the presidency.

    These superdelegates include Democratic members of Congress, national party figures, and established leaders of the Democratic Party. They vote at the nominating convention. The system was established in the wake of the 1972 Democratic Party nominating process, when anti-war radicals seized control of the party and ended up nominating George McGovern. The superdelegates were supposed to ensure that radicals did not take over the party’s nominating process. Well, apparently that sort of restraint does not appeal to Obama, who now has taken steps to shape the nominating process to play to his preferred territory: the caucuses, where his brand of populism holds sway. The Wall Street Journal noted the trick:
    One reason for the superdelegates in the first place is the disproportionate role of activists in states like Iowa, which rely on caucuses rather than primaries. Mrs. Clinton held in her own in the primary states but Mr. Obama crushed her in the caucus states where his supporters found it easy to dominate proceedings where older and frequently busier people weren’t able to invest the time to counter them. Take the case of Texas, which has both a caucus and a primary: Mrs. Clinton won the state’s primary in which 2.8 million people voted, but Mr. Obama so controlled the caucuses where far fewer people (some 800,000) participated that he ended up with more delegates overall. The new rules, if approved, would likely mean even more of the same.

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

    This is what I’ve been saying. The pattern in caucus vs primaries was the same in all states that had both.

  46. Elsewehre I saw a link that purports to show Obama using the word ‘terrorism’ many times. I haven’t tried to play it.

  47. Admin: Please post this new video from Pastor Manning. It tells us why Obama is Bush III because whose has always been in bed with the Bush’s?? The Saudi Royal family!!!

    h t t p ://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws-sBVZeitI

  48. Elsewehre I saw a link that purports to show Obama using the word ‘terrorism’ many times. I haven’t tried to play it.

    It would help if I posted the link, wouldn’t it. Duh.
    h/w
    dailykos.com/tv/w/002463/

  49. Here is some more scary crap! All things are about to come to a head. Please read!

    h t t p : //market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/1830-401kIRA-Screw-Job-Coming.html

  50. I think the lid is about to blow off the administration’s health care plan, who plan is really in play here, who designed, who is being paid by it. The people of this country are speaking out. I just hope the boobs who voted this idiot in pay the highest price for their mistake and not the folks that voted the other way and I am not talking about the general election. THe people who made this guy the nominee should reap the benefits of his administration the most.

  51. BIRDGAL,(8:03)

    What a great explanation! Thanks very much.

    (Although I still don’t get the concept of an ‘excise’ tax. WTF is that?)

  52. Well if this new video doesn’t get Pastor Manning arrested then he won’t be. The WH will not be happy about his allegations. I think soon he will reveal his source. He’s from Harlem, he probably has many sources especially since many black folk are waking up.

  53. confloyd,

    While personally I find Manning amusing and I agree with much of what he says he is an entertainer whose schtick is bombasting BO. (He’s an ex-con who found religion).

    Now, I happen to love it but I don’t think he has much influence.

    BTW, I don’t have time to watch the clip. What’s the main point?

  54. “Almost a year into his presidency, Barack Obama has begun to sober up. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the administration’s policy on the Arab-Israeli issue, where a series of tactical mistakes (none fatal) have left the president and his team battered but wiser when it comes to what’s possible and what’s not.”

    ———————-

    What, you mean obama’s Chicago thug tactics with Israel didn’t work? His obvious love of anything Arab and distaste of anything Israeli/Jewish didn’t win him any friends in Israel?

    His heavyhandedness and steadfast belief that he only has to speak and it shall be done has made him a laughingstock world over.

  55. wbboei
    January 9th, 2010 at 3:15 am

    ———————

    Well said. A complete communication breakdown between Blair and Panetta does not bode well at all. It would appear that obama can’t take care of business after all.

  56. The expanding Fed. Another viewpoint:
    The office market in Washington, D.C., is poised to topple New York as the nation’s most expensive, reflecting the declining fortunes of the nation’s financial center and the government expansion under way in the U.S. capital. snip
    “The financial crisis hit New York hard, which is why it’s down so much, whereas the government is one of the few sectors that has actually added jobs,” said Robert Bach, chief economist for Grubb & Ellis, a Santa Ana, Calif.-based brokerage firm. snip
    Washington’s ascent may be shortlived, Mr. Bach notes. While Washington may remain strong relative to other cities, Mr. Bach said the city has a large amount of new construction under way, which could depress the market eventually. snip
    In the past, usually after recessions that shrink business and expand government, Washington has moved ahead. But this time, the gap has narrowed sharply and quickly. As recently as two years ago, average rent in midtown Manhattan was $61 per square foot, nearly $20 per square foot higher than the average in Washington’s prime downtown area. According to most commercial-real-estate brokers, the gap has nearly disappeared. snip
    Much of the demand comes from an expanding federal government and contractors and companies that need close access to the government. Of the 16 largest leasing transactions in Washington last year, 10 were by government agencies, according to tenant-brokerage firm Studley. In the fourth quarter of 2009 alone, the Department of Agriculture leased 330,000 square feet in southwest Washington, and the General Services Administration, which handles leases for government agencies, added 1.4 million square feet of new leased office space last year, bringing its total in Washington to 8.4 million.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126291211587420679.html?mod=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular

  57. If I were one of Obama’s handlers (take me Lord I am ready!) the one I would fear far more than FOX would be Charles Krauthammer. Why? Because he is a first rate intellectual with undeniable credentials who is always on target. and for those reasons he highly regarded and listened to by the intellectual class as well as everyone else. In that sense he is what George Will aspired to be when he grew up. When an attorney is asked to handle a case one of the first questions he asks is who is the attorney on the other side. Sometimes representation is accepted or declined on that basis. The same is true in a political contest. Who is on the other side you ask. And when it is someone like Krathammer who your own supporters like Ed Koch praise for his thorough cogent analysis and you know he is coming after you like a heat seeking missile (as well he should) you worry. And if you think he is through talking about the Detroit bound airplane you are absolutely mistaken.

  58. I came to the blog to post exactly what alcina and basil9 posted re Brown v Coakley in MA. I viewed Brown speaking, and I really like not only what he said but how he said it. The fact is that with Brown’s election the 60 vote majority will be broken. Let’s help make it happen. Sorry to speak out against Coakley, but country before party.

    I watched Jay Leno on ddr and he had Brian Williams as a guest. Is this guy just plain weird or on something? He forgot to remove the toilet paper fromt he bottom of his shoe. He went on and on about ‘big prom night’ for he and his attending the state dinner at the White House. He is a total and undeniable flake, and does not do well without a teleprompter.

  59. To put a finer point on it, Beck for all his goofiness can move the needle on public opinion, whereas Krauthammer can move the needle on intellectual opinion. And it is the intellectual class who are Obama’s center of gravity.

  60. Lee hamilton was/is absolutely crap !!!!!!

    He can add no value to his words anymore by saying that BO would be ok on security!!!!

  61. jbstonesfan, it will be in the teens here in Central FL; it had snowed when we got up this morning. Yikes!!! We thought we moved away from that kind of weather. So much for global warming. lol

  62. Re Coakley:
    We (in MA) hadn’t seen too much of her till lately, so it was hard to tell what sort of stuff she might be made of, but Birdgal asked me some time ago (Sept 4 or 5th?) what I thought of her and this is what I said:

    “Well, we could do a review of all her neat qualifications, but what I really feel is …
    I wish she had passion. I wish I could believe she is not more at ease shuffling paper than communicating and listening, and I can’t visualize her as strong enough to refuse to toe the party line. (Regardless of her loyalty to HRC) I’m afraid they would just use her, make her a good soldier. I think she has had a very tidy career, been very efficient at her job, etc, but we really need someone with an independent spirit who has a sense of mission. I want to support women, but I look for what we see in Hillary, in Ferraro, in Palin, in Shirley Chisholm etc I’m very tired of smooth talkers who say all the right words, but when they get to Washington simply fall into line with the status quo. I could be dead wrong about her, so I wouldn’t have said this if you hadn’t asked me, but that’s how I view her.”

    Since then, I learned (from a Boston judge and also from a longtime MA convention delegate) that the deck has been stacked in her favor for some time and that O’Reilly, the Dem whom I favored, chose not to run because he knew it. That makes her look all the more like the good team player for the DIMS. Furthermore, her campaign pitch is an echo of DIMness. Recently, as we see more of her on TV, friends are telling me they think my original assessment was correct, though they disagreed with it at the time. And they DO like Scott Brown very much. Coakley supports the health care reform disaster and of course, Brown is strongly agin it.

    My money is on him. Then, we have to get rid of Duval Patrick, Kerry, and Barney Frank.

    I’m speaking from Martha’s Vineyard, where disillusionment is much more viral than the flu. Only a small desperate pocket of AAs are still swearing allegiance to their half-bro prez… along with an up-island nest of old hippies. The wealthy summer folk are far away. Us pissed-off retirees and working class types are the true island core.

  63. I heard on NPR news this morning that Sec. of State Clinton giving a speech on how Sudan needs to honor some peace agreement. She always sounds confident, assertive, reasonable, and dare I say it, presidential.

    It also seems that as bumbling and lazy Obama is, Hillary is extremely busy and capable in dealing with world politics, and ensuring the the US is on the correct side of a political issue.

    voanews.com/english/news/africa/Clinton-to-Sudan-Threats-to-Peace-Deal-Are-Real-81008357.html

    Clinton Says Sudan Peace Efforts at ‘Critical Juncture’
    ================================

    U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Friday Sudan is at a critical juncture as parties prepare for elections in April that could consolidate peace between north and south. U.S. envoy for Sudan Scott Gration plans Sudan-related travel in Africa later this month and a pre-election visit to Sudan in February.

    In a statement marking this week’s fifth anniversary of Sudan’s north-south peace accord, Clinton credited both sides for the progress in the implementation process thus far but said it is not yet enough to secure lasting peace.

    Appearing alongside the administration’s Sudan envoy Scott Gration, Clinton said the parties now face a choice between reverting back to a “dark era of conflict” or moving forward together toward a lasting peace. “The parties of Sudan cannot afford to delay, and there can be no backtracking on agreements already reached. The risks are too serious – renewed conflict between north and south would prolong human suffering and threaten stability and peace throughout the greater region. Because Sudan is at a critical juncture after almost a half-century of conflict, we hold all parties accountable if progress is impeded,” she said.

    The 2005 Comprehensive Peace Accord or CPA provides for Sudan’s first national elections in 24 years to be held in April, and a referendum in the mostly-Christian and animist southern region early next year on whether it will break away from the Muslim-led Khartoum government and become fully independent.

    Clinton urged the ruling National Congress Party government in Khartoum to safeguard freedoms of speech and assembly in the run-up to the April voting, and suspend elements of existing public order laws incompatible with free elections.

    She said strong leadership is required on both sides and said the former southern Sudan rebel movement, the SPLM, must tackle growing ethnic and tribal violence in the vast, oil-rich region.

    “No matter the outcome of the referendum, southern Sudan must increase its institutional capacity and prepare to govern responsibly, whether as a semi autonomous region within Sudan or a newly independent nation. I’ve been tracking the increasing inter-ethnic and tribal violence in the south over the course of 2009. And I share the concerns raised by recent reports that highlight the death of more than 2,500 people and displacement of more than 350,000. These stark figures illustrate the need for the government of southern Sudan to improve governance and security,” she said.

    Clinton said implementing the CPA, and bringing peace to Sudan’s troubled western Darfur region, “must be seen in tandem” and that the United States continues to push for full access to the area by aid groups and U.N. peacekeepers.

    Sudan envoy Gration, a former U.S, Air Force general raised in Africa, said he will begin a pre-election diplomatic push later this month with visits to Kenya, Uganda and Ethiopia for the January 31st African Union summit in Addis Ababa. He said he plans his next Sudan trip in mid-February with a focus on Darfur. “My focus will be on security in Darfur because I believe that if we can fix the security, the lawlessness, the banditry, the car-jackings, the hijackings – if we can get that hat kind of thing taken care of the rest of the issues that have to do with humanitarian access, eventual voluntarily return (of displaced persons) and the other issues that are looming out there can be taken care of. But they cannot be taken care of with the current situation that we have, where local rule of law is not sufficient, and where local criminal elements rule the day,” he said.

    Gration said while he will continue to engage officials of the Khartoum government, he will not interact with Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, who faces Darfur-related international war crimes charges.

  64. Good luck Short Termer….I guess the up side is the lines at Disney World are probably short today..:)

  65. COUP DE VILLE HEALTH CARE

    For a good analysis about the bogus arguments for the tax on “Cadillac health care plans”, see my post with link from yesterday afternoon.

    Agreed, one of the big problems is that the limit is not going to be price adjusted for inflation. As the insurance company drives prices higher (at a faster rate than normal perhaps), hitting that limit will be easier.

    Also, I am sure that there are variations in the country of health care costs, just as there are for say wages, housing, etc. A job in NYC at 100k might buy the same bunch of stuff as 55k in Mississippi. A house worth 250k in a wealthy CT suburb is probably worth 110k in Alabama.

    So parts of the country might be in very little danger of eventually hitting that “Cadillac” limit, but wealthier regions more so. And the poorer people in those wealthier regions would be affected by that region’s economics.

    The use of an eye-catching phrase like “Cadillac plans” is a red herring, and an attempt to misconstrue the real situation. Just like “Death tax” was a bogus argument to protect ultra-millionares’ piles of cash.

  66. confloyd
    January 9th, 2010 at 6:38 am

    Alcina, I can’t blame you, after all these years under the kennedy control, I image a breath of fresh air is needed.

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

    Why would Coakley not be a breath of fresh air? She opposed Ted Kennedy by supporting Hillary, she is pro-abortion (I think), etc etc.

  67. ShortTermer
    January 9th, 2010 at 12:18 pm

    I came to the blog to post exactly what alcina and basil9 posted re Brown v Coakley in MA. I viewed Brown speaking, and I really like not only what he said but how he said it. The fact is that with Brown’s election the 60 vote majority will be broken. Let’s help make it happen. Sorry to speak out against Coakley, but country before party.

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

    First let’s find out if Coakley might be willing to break the 60 votes in the other direction: hold out for abortion rights, public option, etc — with a threat of actually voting against the bill.

  68. ShortTermer
    January 9th, 2010 at 1:15 pm

    jbstonesfan, it will be in the teens here in Central FL; it had snowed when we got up this morning. Yikes!!! We thought we moved away from that kind of weather. So much for global warming. lol

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

    Seattle hasn’t had a real snow all winter, and it looks a lot like spring already. All the cold weather is going to new places this year: DC, Florida, etc.

    Suuuure nothing’s disrupting the weather….

  69. From “Bay Windows” LGBT site

    http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=100127

    Brown said that Massachusetts “needs an independent thinker” when he announced in September his intent to run for Kennedy’s seat. Neither Brown’s campaign Web site nor his legislative history display LGBT issues as a priority for the would-be senator.

    Martha Coakley made history in July 2009 when she filed a lawsuit challenging DOMA on a federal level. According to the suit, Congress had “overstepped its authority, undermined states’ efforts to recognize marriages between same-sex couples, and codified an animus towards gay and lesbian people” by enacting DOMA. Coakley received praise from the HRC and from Arlene Isaacson of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus for her actions. She has since been endorsed for Senate by MassEquality and by Gunner Scott of the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition.

    Coakley’s Web site carefully specifies the LGBT issues that still need work (a full repeal of DOMA and ’don’t ask, don’t tell,’ the military’s ban on gays and lesbians serving openly, as well as protection against hate crimes and ending housing discrimination), acknowledging that the struggle for equal rights and equality is far from over.

  70. wbboei,

    About your ‘tragic view.’ If I wait to make a really thoughtful reply it will get lost in my shuffle and I’ll never do it.

    I agree your ‘tragic view’ describe where many conservatives seem to be coming from. It fits with ‘zero sum’, ‘gold standard’, etc.

    I’m not sure about your description of liberals … which on a quick read seems like they’re on a slippery slope to cronyism (which sure does fit Obama and his Daley-esque Chicago crowd at their best if they have a best).

    Personally I tend to reject the ‘zero sum’ way of looking at things, in favor of the Clinton/Gore ‘third way.’ Rather than fight over who gets more of a zero sum pie, invent a better pie.

    This approach isn’t tied to either party or lib/cons side. Clinton 90s had it, so does Huckabee.

    Personally rather than zero sum, I see situations as much more liquid, able to change in many directions. We are growing several blades of grass where one grew before. Now we’re eating yoghurt, maybe next decade it will be something grown in orbit where there’s plenty of sunshine. MRI’s now are expensive like Xeroxes used to be; instead of rationing them, make them mass produced and cheaper. Etc.

    I wouldn’t call mine something opposite to ‘tragic’, as there will always be problems. It’s just the zero sum rock bottom sort of view I’m sceptical of.

  71. On a woman’s right to choose…

    http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/04/abortion_stances_of_brown_coakley_not_so_easily_defined/

    “Brown’s record is far more nuanced. He has angered abortion-rights groups with acts like his cosponsorship of the Women’s Right to Know Act, which would require a woman to wait 24 hours before having an abortion and to review pictures and information detailing the developmental progress of her fetus.

    Indeed, Brown, a state senator from Wrentham, picked up the support of the Massachusetts Citizens for Life in this race, based on his position on issues including abortion, stem cells, and federal health legislation. He also opposes federal funding for abortion, supports strong parental consent rules for minors, and supports the ban on what opponents call partial-birth abortion.

    “We’re behind him,’’ said John Rowe, chairman of the group’s federal political action committee. “The pro-life vote is very important at this point. It can make a big difference.’’

    The group did not support Brown in 2004, when, during his campaign for state Senate, he noted his support for Roe v. Wade. But Rowe said he believes that Brown’s position has evolved. “We always welcome people coming over to our side,’’ he said.

    Brown declined requests for an interview to discuss his views on abortion, instead issuing a statement through a spokesman.”

  72. Sorry, turndownobama, I will support Scott Brown. And as lil ole grape said above, then work on ousting Kerry, Frank, and and Obummer’s twin Patrick. Brown is what the nation needs to thwart ‘JUST WORDS, JUST WORDS: I swear to defend and protect…”

  73. Turndown, Coakley has said that she supports the health insurance bill and will vote for it, if she is elected. As a new senator, she isn’t about to go against the dimocratic party. So much for women’s rights.

  74. When I tried to copy from this story about Coakley and Brown on abortion, my system hung up. Don’t have time to troubleshoot but its gist on Coakley was that she has been long and strong for abortion and at one point in the primary had said she would vote AGAINST the HC bill with the anti-abortion language it had at that time. Later the language changed and she changed her position. This is one small dent in a very good pro-choice record. She’s also good on gay issues, see another recent post here.

    Her record sounds pretty courageous to me, holding out for Hillary for instance.

    Do we want to give Brown 6 years just for this one thing? Can’t we find some other way to take that 60th vote? Or try to persuade Coakley to hold out on the HC abortion thing again, as she planned in the primary? ON other abortion issues she will be good during her 6 years; Brown will always be anti-abortion as the post above shows.

    TheRealist
    January 9th, 2010 at 2:28 pm

    On a woman’s right to choose…
    h/w
    boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/04/abortion_stances_of_brown_coakley_not_so_easily_defined/

  75. U.S. Envoy: Aid to Israel Could Be Cut if Peace Talks Fail

    Saturday, January 09, 2010

    Mideast envoy George Mitchell has threatened that the U.S. could freeze aid to Israel if the country fails to advance peace talks, YNetNews.com reported.

    Mitchell said the U.S. can legally cut its support for aid to Israel and that all options must remain open, YNet reports, though he clarified on PBS that the U.S. wants to put pressure on both sides in Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.

    The remarks come on the eve of his trip to Israel, aiming to bolster a peace process that failed to get back off the ground during the first year of the Obama administration.

    “We think that the negotiation should last no more than two years,” Mitchell said in an interview on PBS’ “Charlie Rose.” “We hope the parties agree. Personally I think it can be done in a shorter period of time.”

    Mitchell’s comments also come days after Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas signaled he may participate in a U.S.-backed summit with Israeli and Egyptian leaders this year.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582665,00.html?test=latestnews

  76. To put an even finer point on it, Beck for all his goofiness can move the needle on public opinion, whereas Krauthammer can move the needle on ELITE opinion. And it is the ELITES (or ruling class as Coward Dean refers to them) who are Obama’s center of gravity. They are the same people who got us into this mess. In their own personal these people could not pour piss out of a boot if it had the instructions on the bottom side but that does not stop them from lecturing to the rest of us.

  77. Scott Brown is another anti-abortion, anti-gay Republican.

    Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face.

  78. turndownobama
    January 9th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
    __________________________________________

    it’s not just “one thing” and it’s not personally martha coakley. i am sure she is a good woman. however, these times call for a severe beating of the current jack-asses in charge. a real take-out-behind-the-barn whuppin’.

    i applaud coakley’s record regarding women’s reproductive rights and the LGBT community, but i also ( bitterly ) recall how the current dims-in-charge shit-upon another champion of women’s rights.

    my feeling is they (dims) must be smacked-down hard. without mercy. and if it means coakly as the sacrificial lamb, so be it. it’s what’s known as “tough love”.

    i hope you understand.

  79. la democrat

    this current president has done NOTHING for gay rights and NOTHING regarding a woman’s right to choose.

  80. Today I figured out the difference between NAIVE and STUPID in a political context:

    NAIVE: is to vote for Obama believing a Chicago politician with no experience and shady connections could unite this country and lead us to the promised land.

    STUPID: is to support Obama as president when he breaches every campaign promises he made to you and assumes you are too dumb to notice.

  81. Mideast envoy George Mitchell has threatened that the U.S. could freeze aid to Israel if the country fails to advance peace talks, YNetNews.com reported.
    ——————————
    WTF

  82. Mideast envoy George Mitchell has threatened that the U.S. could freeze aid to Israel if the country fails to advance peace talks,
    ———————————
    If I were Bibi I would make him do it. I would not give up its sovereignty or security under threat that the aid would be frozen. I would raise an equivalent amount from other sources and call Muslim loving Obamas bluff. I would go forward with negotiations without that sword hanging over my head. And I would revisit security arrangements I had with the US, now that a muslim is President.

  83. wbboei,

    I think Mitchell’s days are numbered or should be given his incompetence in the peace process.

    It isn’t enough that obama has tried and failed over and over again to tighten Israel’s noose all in favor of giving everything including the kitchen sink to the PLO. I pray that Bibi stands strong.

    I do find it interesting though that Hillary is requesting the talks to start again and “without” pre-conditions. Abbas has worn himself out with his ridiculous demands/preconditions.

  84. As far as voting out Democrats in 2010, how does this work? Do you vote in Republicans in their stead? Then what happens?

    With each party being incompetent and greed ridden, what is the answer? I’m not trying to be a simpleton here. I know this is about votes and taking away the majority, but what do you plan to do when the big elections come around next time? Who do you vote for then?

  85. my feeling is they (dims) must be smacked-down hard. without mercy. and if it means coakly as the sacrificial lamb, so be it. it’s what’s known as “tough love”.

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

    Voting down even the good Democrats (who supported Hillary in Denver, is strong on abortion and gay rights, etc) is not a clear message. Those votes may be seen as coming from GOP or rightwingers, or uninformed people.

    THe clear message is if ALL the anti-Hillary Dims lose, and ALL the pro-Hillary Dims WIN.

  86. “The clear message is if ALL the anti-Hillary Dims lose, and ALL the pro-Hillary Dims WIN.”

    ———————

    Now that makes a lot of sense to me.

  87. I see Kennedy’s old seat is in trouble…its possible the Dems lose this, or…………….

    What if Dems deliberately want to lose this senate seat?

    What if the plan is for to get 41 senators for the GOP who will then derail the Health Care bill, so they are let off the hook in the Nov elections by then claiming that Republicans killed it driving the Dem core and latino vote back to them.

    However i would just fall about laughing if it was Ted (I reformed Helathcare as my life mission) Kennedys senate seat that did kill off Bambi’s Healthcare reform, it would just too hilarious, ironic and delicious to watch.

  88. Could it be that Bambi’s lot do not want Coakley to win, after all she was Hillary’s girl in 08, so i’d imagine Pelosi and that ilk would hate her to win, i’m betting there is a lot of internal politics over this one.

  89. The MSM are once again trying to help their darling Potus sagging poll numbers by pushing this “Game Change” book with very negative quotes towards BO allegedly from Bill and Hillary among others….Ironically, Harry Reid already has issued an apology for a offensive remark he made about Obama.

  90. jbs, all i can say is “ferrets in a sack” biting each other and creating merry mayhem, the democratic age of Obama was a con and its exploding in their rather smug mugs.

  91. My understanding is that Martha has not been campaigning, Brown has been campaigning ad Martha is still 11 points up.

    The conservatives are talking about a rising tide of anger in the electorate. They are right about that. They believe it is strictly against Democrats. They are wrong about that. The anger is against incumbents– many of whom are Democrats. I think. Obviously, if the target of the public wrath is incumbents then Martha has nothing to worry about. Regardless of what the Republicans say, I think Martha will win by 10 points. The fact that she stood with Hillary when the going got tough tells me she is well worth supporting. At this moment she cannot go against the party–too junior.

    I feel differently however about the incumbents who support health care deform aka Obamacare. They took an oath and have forgotten what it means. The American People are unalterably opposed to this program. They are supposed to represent the American People. The party needs to undergo shock therapy to break Faustian pact it has with Obama. The catalyst will be defeat at the polls in 2010. If Hillary is to rise again presidentially that must happen before 2012. 2016 is unrealistic.

  92. This explains a lot.

    -Brown has eye popping numbers with independents, sporting a 70/16 favorability rating with them and holding a 63-31 lead in the horse race with Coakley. Health care may be hurting Democratic fortunes with that group, as only 27% of independents express support for Obama’s plan with 59% opposed.

    -Because he’s basically been untouched so far, Brown’s favorability spread is a remarkable +32, at 57/25. For some perspective on how good those numbers are, Bob McDonnell was at a +20 spread with Virginia voters in our final poll there before going on to a 17 point victory.

  93. The New York Post is claiming:

    Jan. 9, 2010, 8:50 PM

    Schumer recruited Bam before he backed Hillary Clinton: claim

    By MAGGIE HABERMAN

    Sen. Charles Schumer played both sides of the fence in the lead up to the 2008 presidential primaries — actively recruiting Barack Obama to run as an alternative to Hillary Clinton even as he signaled that “home-state decorum” would prohibit him from publicly opposing his fellow senator if she decided to run, an explosive new book claims.

    And Clinton had no idea that Schumer and her other Senate colleagues were actively plotting her downfall — learning months later, when it hit her like a ton of bricks, according to Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime, an inside dish on the 2008 race by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann.

    Schumer’s people vehemently denied the book’s claims today.
    “This is ridiculous. Senator Schumer did have conversations with then-Senator Obama long before Senator Clinton announced and told him he would be a good candidate. But he told Senator Obama at the time, should Clinton announce, which was expected, that he would fully back her. From the day she announced to the day she withdrew, he was a full and complete supporter of then-Senator Clinton and gave no help to the Obama campaign,” said Schumer spokesman Josh Vlasto.

    Schumer and Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid were part of a band of senators who thought Clinton would spell trouble for the Democratic ticket if she were the nominee at a time when they were frantic to reclaim the White House from the GOP, the book reveals.

    A spokesman for Secretary of State Clinton said they didn’t know what was in the book and had no comment on it.

    Other revelations in the book include a private conversation Reid had about Obama’s racial appeal.

    Reid said he was neutral in the presidential race, but according to Game Change, he privately said the country was ready for a black presidential candidate, especially a “light-skinned” African American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” In a statement released Saturday, Reid said, “I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words. I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African Americans for my improper comments.” Reid personally apologized to Obama today, which the President said he accepted “without question.”

    “Harry Reid called me today and apologized for an unfortunate comment reported today,” Obama said in a statement. “I accepted Harry’s apology without question because I’ve known him for years, I’ve seen the passionate leadership he’s shown on issues of social justice and I know what’s in his heart. As far as I am concerned, the book is closed.”

    Other juicy reveals in Game Change include:

    * Hillary Clinton nearly jumped into the 2004 presidential race at the last minute, based on favorable poll results from Iowa and New Hampshire done by her favorite analyst, Mark Penn. The Clintons held a family pow wow in Chappaqua, and Chelsea Clinton came out against the idea.

    * A trio of Clinton’s closest advisers in 2006 felt that Bill Clinton was having a sustained romantic affair with someone and feverishly tried to devise a plan to handle the fallout if it became public knowledge.

    * Sarah Palin’s behavior had her advisers sending worried messages to John McCain’s headquarters about six weeks before Election Day. Palin wasn’t eating, seemed depressed and didn’t want to practice for her debates, they said. McCain responded by moving her debate training to Arizona, and flying in her family from Alaska to cheer her up.

    *Aides continued to worry about Palin’s memory as she prepped for an interview with ABC News. She couldn’t recall the purpose of the Federal Reserve, explain why North and South Korea were separate nations, and said that Saddam Hussein had attacked the nation on Sept. 11, the book says.

    *John Edwards affair with then-campaign worker Rielle Hunter was known to several senior Edwards staffers, and several confronted the Democratic contender about it long before it became tabloid fodder, the book says. At least three campaign aides resigned because of the affair long before the national media got on the story.

    *The book says Edwards insiders find his cancer-stricken wife Elizabeth to be an “abusive, intrusive, paranoid, condescending, crazywoman.” The couple often fought about his affair with Hunter in front of campaign aides. Once, the book says, Elizabeth was in such a rage she deliberately tore her blouse and revealed herself to her husband, screaming “Look at me,” as they fought in the parking lot of the Raleigh, North Carolina airport.

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/schumer_backed_bam_as_he_supported_bK9BQ1d3VnnsP166gs36QN

  94. Bill Clinton to visit Mass. to stump for Coakley
    January 9, 2010

    BOSTON –Bill Clinton is headlining a final rally for Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley.

    The former president will speak Friday on behalf of the Massachusetts attorney general. She is locked in a competitive race with Republican Scott Brown to succeed the late Sen. Edward Kennedy. The special election is Jan. 19.

    Massachusetts was among Clinton’s most supportive states during his two terms, and he previously taped an automated call on Coakley’s behalf.

    Sen. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, will also break away from hip surgery recovery to speak at the rally. Democrats deny they are concerned about Brown staging an upset.

    Kennedy died Aug. 25 of brain cancer. Businessman Joseph L. Kennedy, a Libertarian unrelated to the famed political family, is also mounting an independent Senate candidacy.

    http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/09/bill_clinton_to_visit_mass_to_stump_for_coakley/

  95. I agree that Hillary and Bill had no idea how their so called allies were working behind their backs to defeat them and bring Obama into power…

  96. I was at the grocery store today and wandered into the health foods section. There was a young man standing there playing with a computer with a sign and a bunch of business cards. I asked him what his game was and he told me bio feed back and controlled breathing. Is that really desirable I asked. He hastened to assure me that it was and hit me with an avalanche of unwanted information like most people take 20,000 breaths a day. I listened while hacking away with this wonderful cold virus I have right now. In fact I was coughing so hard my chest hurt in the area where I think the hear is located. Watching me wince he hit me with the real humdinger: most people who experience heart attacks are about your age and they never see it coming. And when they experience the heat attack 50% of them die. I told him I had never heard that one before and asked him what his credentials were. He said he was a chiropractor, a practitioner of wholistic medicine and a diagnostician–thanks to the computer program. Before I could say anything more I was all hooked up through an alligator clip to the computer. Then suddenly he proceed to run the computer program to prove how much I needed whatever it was that he was trying to sell. As the graphs were popping up on the screen he told me even though you feel okay you may not be. He offered up the example of TIM RUSSERT (of all people) and told me the day before his fatal heart attack he had a stress test and was also evaluated on this very computer program. Then the next thing they knew he was dead. Then he went Socratic on me and asked what does that prove to you? I told it proves one of two things: either his computer program wasn’t worth a shit or the Lord works in mysterious ways. He did not understand my answer. Probably a simple minded bot.

  97. wbboei, the new ppp poll today has Brown up 1, 48/47. So who knows
    ————————————–
    Wow. The poll I saw was an internal democratic poll which I got to through Red States.

  98. turndownobama
    January 9th, 2010 at 6:51 am
    Elsewehre I saw a link that purports to show Obama using the word ‘terrorism’ many times. I haven’t tried to play it.
    ****************

    He only uses it in context of talking about “Christians”.

  99. I would vote for Brown. We HAVE to get rid of the 60 majority and this is the earliest we can do it. Nov may be too late.

  100. ELEANOR CLIFT NEEDS HOPIUM DETOX

    In her piece where she tries to defend and making excuses for Obama, Eleanor Clift winds up reinforcing many of the accusations against him.

    My $$$ comments inserted.

    newsweek.com/id/229880

    Eleanor Clift

    Obama Finds His Inner Outrage

    Voters want to know that Obama is angry and determined.

    The ferocity of the criticism of President Obama for the failed Christmas Day bombing offers a glimpse into what might happen if a real attack occurred.

    $$$ A “real attack” did happen. The bomb didn’t go off.

    At least half the country—those with political allegiance to red-state America—wouldn’t rally around the president the way everybody did on 9/11, despite President Bush’s considerable shortcomings, in the chaotic hours that followed the attacks. It would be another chance to score political points.

    It took Obama 72 hours to calibrate his response and get past the images of playing golf and eating snow cones.

    $$$ That’s right. Maybe Hillary was right about the 3am phone call.

    Democrats are always put on the defensive by Republican attacks when it comes to national security, and it didn’t help that Obama was sequestered at a rented place on the beach in Hawaii, out of range of most of America.

    $$$ He’s out of range even when he’s in the Oval Office.

    The bellicose words of former vice president Dick Cheney filled the void, evoking nostalgia for the tough talk of the Bush era. The charge that a distracted Obama had dropped the ball on terrorism gained traction.

    The security system that failed on Christmas Day was put in place by the Bush administration, but facts don’t matter as much as perception in today’s overheated partisan climate.

    $$$ Lame attempt, Eleanor, to pawn that off. He’s been in office since Jan. 20. He campaigned that he’d be effective, and protecting the country was going to be something he would do.

    By the time he returned to Washington, Obama was making up for lost time, sounding more outraged and determined than he usually does, promising to figure out how to fix the system and to report back within days to the American people on his plans to do so.

    Even so, the intensely personal attacks on Obama are cause for concern.

    $$$ Every president gets vitriolic rants and even death threats. Didn’t Obama know that when he was weighing whether to run in 2007???

    Howard Gardner, a developmental psychologist based at Harvard who studies leadership, has a theory that Obama’s troubles stem from the fact that people don’t have a clear sense of what he would go to the mat for, that he’s been defined more by the compromises he’s willing to make than his core convictions.

    $$$ He doesn’t have convictions, and is not even good at compromising. Hillary has convictions AND she knows how to work a compromise.

    By way of example, Gardner cites the movie Invictus, in which everybody tells Nelson Mandela that he shouldn’t support the national all-white rugby team, which was associated with everything the new South Africa hated. But Mandela saw what was needed to bring the country together. In playing Mandela, Morgan Freeman knows how to listen and be respectful, but the steel comes through. Obama likes to set in place orderly processes to navigate tough issues, and that’s great, but the voters want to know what he feels in his marrow. “Right now, they think he doesn’t care enough about the things they care about. They want to see the passion, even if they don’t agree with him,” says Gardner.

    He cites President Reagan and Sen. Ted Kennedy as models of conviction in their respective parties. Each conveyed a strong ideological grounding that gave them enormous leeway. Reagan raised taxes, or what he called “revenue enhancers,” 13 times during his eight years in the White House, yet conservatives never doubted that his heart was with them. When Kennedy compromised to achieve a legislative goal, he could silence liberal critics in a way Obama cannot. Kennedy had championed liberal causes for decades; nobody questioned his commitment. Obama is new to the national scene, and on health care, he’s been careful not to stake out any positions from which he can’t retreat, which is why he’s on the verge of getting a bill passed, something that eluded his most gifted predecessors.

    Achieving health-care reform should be a moment of celebration, yet polls show the legislation is less popular with voters than the troop buildup in Afghanistan, a tribute to the Republicans’ negative framing of the issue and a consequence of Obama’s leadership style. Gardner doesn’t doubt that Obama has core beliefs. The president’s idealism and pragmatism are threads through his books. But his failure to convey his principles while he makes the necessary compromises lessens his ability to take credit for what he’s accomplished. He’s seen as an agent of compromise, someone who has no skin in the game aside from scoring political points. There’s virtue in being the chief mediator, but it has to be balanced by action.

    Each president tends to be an antidote to the one before. Bush was a man of action who reacted with his gut and never compromised. Obama is an intellectual who likes to muse his way through problems and who instinctively recoils from the confrontational style of his predecessor. The kind of change that Mandela brought to South Africa and that Obama’s election promised to millions of Americans takes time to bring about. Obama thinks of himself as a good closer, a clutch player who performs when time is short. During the campaign, there were long stretches when it looked like Obama was more of a bystander than an active participant, and then he would suddenly spring to life.

    In the arc of his presidency, it’s already late in the game. Fortunately for him, and for us, this is the week when Obama found his inner outrage.

    $$$ You can see how feeble her argument is. Not even worth thrusting the sword in to finish her off. I’ll let her bleed out…

  101. Sen. Charles Schumer played both sides of the fence in the lead up to the 2008 presidential primaries — actively recruiting Barack Obama to run as an alternative to Hillary Clinton even as he signaled that “home-state decorum” would prohibit him from publicly opposing his fellow senator if she decided to run, an explosive new book claims.

    And Clinton had no idea that Schumer and her other Senate colleagues were actively plotting her downfall — learning months later, when it hit her like a ton of bricks, according to Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime, an inside dish on the 2008 race by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann.
    ———————————————————————————–
    Every time there was a public event in New York they were there together–Hillary and Schumer. He encouraged her to run for the Presidency. He was there at the Convention to keep her steady and console her when she gave her votes for Obama. He helped her fall on her sword for the party. She chose him to sit beside her at the Senate Confirmation Hearings where she received almost universal support.

    Is this true? Rest assured I am no fan of Mark Halperin. He is a Republican attack dog and was the Chief of Staff of Bob Dole who lost to Bill Clinton. He wrote scathing attacks on Bill Clinton in the Wall Street Journal during the succeeding years. He works for ABC News which is controlled in part by Soros, and that network has a financial interest in Obama. Finally, the information is hearsay, and I doubt the source or sources are disclosed.

    Nevertheless, I tend to credit this story. The reason I say that is whatever his shortcoming and biases might be Halperin is a credible investigative journalist. This story is so big that it could divide the party. It could destroy Schumer. We may take shots at people on the blogs based on suspicion and circumstantial evidence etc. But if you are going to say something this significant you had better have the stuff to back it up, and there is no doubt in my mind that he does.

    If this is true about Schumer what are the implication? First, I have not read Dante lately but surely there is a place in hell for someone like Charles Schumer. One rung below Judas Iscariot. This is the same man who makes jokes about what he steals from the American People in the form of pork–calls it little piggies. He is also the man who laughed in the face of the American People when they raised objections about health care reform. My late friend served in the House with Schumer on the opposite side of the aisle. There was no one in congress she detested more, and it went far beyond partisan differences–2nd Amendment and all that. I have buried those feelings myself because I saw the adoring glances he gave to Hillary and how he appeared to come to help her in times of crisis. Evidently, it was all an act. This also means I was wrong defending him when others said he was not loyal to Hillary. And what it means to Hillary is third party.

  102. moononpluto
    January 9th, 2010 at 9:28 pm
    -Brown has eye popping numbers with independents, sporting a 70/16 favorability rating with them and holding a 63-31 lead in the horse race with Coakley. Health care may be hurting Democratic fortunes with that group, as only 27% of independents express support for Obama’s plan with 59% opposed.

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

    If that’s true, maybe we can influence Coakley to go back to her initial plan to vote against the HC bill.

  103. Okay,here’s the quote I couldn’t get earlier. Coakley did say she would vote against the HC bill with the earlier anti-abotion language, so we might persuade her to vote against it after all.

    h/w
    boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/04/abortion_stances_of_brown_coakley_not_so_easily_defined/?page=1

    [ Coakley said ] she would reluctantly accept a Senate health plan that restricts abortion funding – she retains the endorsements of national abortion rights groups for her history of advocacy of reproductive rights. [….]
    Abortion rights advocates said Coakley, the attorney general, has used whatever position she is in to advance their cause – and that her work predates her time in politics. Before she joined the Middlesex district attorney’s office in 1986, for example, Coakley was a private lawyer who volunteered her time to help minors get court orders for abortions when they could not get their parents’ consent.
    [….]
    As a district attorney, she called on the Legislature to create a stronger buffer zone between protesters and abortion clinics. As attorney general, she enforced and successfully defended the law against a legal challenge. In 2007, she was also one of seven attorneys general who sued the Bush administration over regulations allowing health care providers to refuse to provide abortion or contraception on moral or religious grounds.
    [….]
    That same year, Coakley spoke out strongly against a ban on so-called “partial birth abortion,’’ [….]
    In the primary race for the Senate, Coakley, typically a cautious campaigner, took an unusually bold campaign stance by declaring that she would rather vote down a national health care bill than accept new restrictions on abortion. Hailed nationally by abortion rights groups, she was cast as a leading crusader for their cause. But that uncompromising stance threatened to alienate some voters. At an event in Hyannis three days before the primary election, two female supporters urged Coakley to better articulate her position. They said their friends believed she was demanding federal funding for abortions.
    “People have accosted me about her stand,’’ said Maria Connolly, 68, of Falmouth, who said some friends were “really angry.’’ [….]
    And then Coakley softened her stance, coming out in support of the Senate bill that also contained some restrictions on abortion. It represented a rare break with abortion rights groups, her longtime allies, who lambasted a bill they said will undermine choices for women.
    Andrea Miller, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts, said the group’s endorsement of Coakley stands despite her shift because, over the years, Coakley has been a “true leader and a true champion of choice.’’
    “Time and again on the issues . . . she has been crystal clear,’’ Miller said.

  104. Eleanor Clift does not understand the difference between being naive and being stupid

    NAIVE: is to vote for Obama believing a Chicago politician with no experience and shady connections could unite this country and lead us to the promised land.

    STUPID: is to support Obama as president when he breaches every campaign promises he made to you and assumes you are too dumb to notice.

    I have seen her walking around Washington in tennis shoes that do not match, any more than the left side and the right side of her brain match. But she does a great imitation of a screech owl at cocktail parties or when hailing a cab or when Buchanan says something she does not agree with on the McLaughlin Report or . . .

  105. I read the article gonzotx posted the link to:

    Scott Brown swearing-in would be stalled to pass health-care reform

    http://tinyurl.com/yavnkju

    I do not like what I read about the swearing in and about where Coakley stands on the HCR bill; and that she failed to comment about stalling the swearing-in as promoted by one of her supporters.

    I do not like it, not one I0TA!

  106. wbboei,

    Of all the people who seemed to be loyal to Hillary, I don’t want to believe that Schumer was a traitor.

    I just don’t know what to think about this.

  107. Another hammer to the head by the late Ted Kennedy as told in Halperin’s book:
    The forceful 2008 endorsement of Barack Obama by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy – and Kennedy’s sudden break with the Clintons – was caused in part by a racist comment made by Bill Clinton to Kennedy over the telephone, according to a new campaign book.
    Get the new
    PD toolbar!The book, Game Change, by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, asserts on page 218 that after Obama won the Iowa caucuses, Clinton called Kennedy to press for an endorsement from the influential Massachusetts liberal. But the call backfired, according to the authors, and left Kennedy deeply offended.

    The day after Iowa, he phoned Kennedy and pressed for an endorsement, making the case for his wife. But Bill then went on, belittling Obama in a manner that deeply offended Kennedy. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.

    politicsdaily.com/2010/01/09/bill-clinton-to-teddy-kennedy-in-new-campaign-book-obama-should/

  108. Sen. Ted Kennedy as models of conviction in their respective parties?????????????????????????
    —————————-
    No the professor from Harvard has got it wrong Eleanor. Scrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrch! Okay let me explain. First Teddy went to the PARTY. Second he got drunk as a skunk–not the first time or the last. Scrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrch! Please Eleanor let me continue. Now as I was saying, he went to the party, got drunk, got in the car with a young lady who was sweet on him, drove into a body of water, let her drown, saved himself, hid out, lawyered up and was never convicted. Scrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrch! So you see Eleanor Teddy was a man of no conviction.

  109. wbboei and JanH, every time I hear Schumer’s name the visual pops into my head of Schumer and others marching Hillary down the aisle Gestapo style. That picture will stay with me always…him and Rangel and others.

  110. Bullshit! Bill Clinton would never have said anything like that!

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

    The day after Iowa, he phoned Kennedy and pressed for an endorsement, making the case for his wife. But Bill then went on, belittling Obama in a manner that deeply offended Kennedy. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.

    politicsdaily.com/2010/01/09/bill-clinton-to-teddy-kennedy-in-new-campaign-book-obama-should/

  111. Books written by CDS Republicans need to be taken with a grain of salt. Seems like hearsay. CDS people need to get another life rather than trying to continually bash the Clintons.

  112. Frankly, I believe actions, not words. I believe that Kennedy was part of the group that was encouraging Obama. What ever happened during the primary was a smoke screen and he used any little thing against Hillary as justification for his support of Obama. Blah, blah, blah.

  113. The day after Iowa, he phoned Kennedy and pressed for an endorsement, making the case for his wife. But Bill then went on, belittling Obama in a manner that deeply offended Kennedy. Recounting the conversation later to a friend, Teddy fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.
    ———————————-
    That is a dammed lie.

    Q-1: Did Bill say this to Teddy?

    A-1: No. It cuts against everything he has stood for during his lifetime.

    Q-2: Why would Teddie lie about this?

    A-2: Because he was a rummy seeking to excuse a bad decision.

    Q-3: Who is the source of this information?

    Q-3: Undisclosed

    Q-4: Would that source have an incentive to lie, embellish or stretch the truth?

    A-4: If it was someone like Kerry then clearly yes

    Q-5: Why should we believe the story presented to a partisan journalist by an unknown witness who had a political axe to gind concerning a conversation which he was not privy to but was related to him by an alcoholic senator who was looking for an excuse for a bad decision he made.

    A-5: I agree. The statement is trash.

    the statement of an unknown source with unknown biases as to what an alcoholic senator who murdered a young woman claimed Bill Clinton said which is inconsistent with the Bill Clinton we knew

    A-5:

  114. I don’t even believe T. Kennedy said it. Imo the writer (or the friend) made it up.

    Ted may have been looking for excuses not to back Hillary, but why wouldn’t Ted have told it more widely if he were telling it at all?

  115. What is also suspect, is that nothing negative about Obama is reported, and we all know that there are plenty of skeletons in his closet. Why doesn’t any of this get reported?

  116. I am in agreement with Birdgal. When the Mackerel President is experiencing some discomfort,have you ever noticed how ‘stuff’ comes out on Hill and Bill? wbboei, could Bill have grounds for a lawsuit against the author and/or publisher?

    Mackerel and his minions ought to have learned by now, as my mama would say, the more you stir sh!t, the more it stinks. Alinsky methods at work again.

    Wooowhoo, if there were funding from somewhere, some of us peasants should file lawsuits against those in the administration.

  117. I do not think he should dignify it with a lawsuit. If I were him I would say something like this:

    Do you really believe that I would say something like this? After all I have done to fight racial discrimination and to advance people of color? Does that seem plausible to you?.

    Do you wonder why this false story did not come out until after Kennedy died. Could that be because if he were living today then he would deny it just as vehemently as I do now?

    Who is this witness who has no personal knowledge of this matter, but merely whispers in Halperins ear that Kennedy told him this? If Halperin told us who this liar is then we might know why he is spreading this story.

    And who praytell is Mark Halperin? Oh, thats right he was Chief of Staff to Bob Dole when he ran against me in 1992. Well now isn’t that interesting. Could there be an element of partisanship at work here? It has been known to happen.

  118. : ) wbboei.

    I googled MA senate race and read the ppp article and the comments. The comments were so interesting; it seems citizens like us have the same opinion of the ObamaCare as it is called over there. ROFLMAO

  119. I don’t even believe T. Kennedy said it. Imo the writer (or the friend) made it up.
    ———————————
    Turndown: I think Teddy made this up myself. He probably told the same lie to other people to assuage guilt in not supporting Hillary and to puff up his own civil rights cred.

    Contrary to popular myth Teddy had feet of clay. Thrown out of college for cheating, killed one woman, drove another to the brink of suicide, drunken orgies with Dodd, lived for power and never measured up to his older brothers. Not even close.

    Would a man with those deep and enduring character flaws deign to tell a lie? As Sarah would say: you betcha.

  120. ShortTermer: oh yes. And they speak from experience–meaning the health deform law that everybody hates but little Deval is so proud of.

  121. I hope this thing is sustainable. This public revolt. We need to drive every incumbent who supports legislation harmful to the American People out of office, and we need to replace them with people who will enact public financing of elections. That way there is accountability and control over money.

  122. Captain Watson COME ON DOWN and claim your prize as winner of Bob Barkers Animal Jihad. He is so good he should be working for Carol Browner at EPA as crap and trade czar.
    ——————————————————

    Posted by Vladimir (Profile)
    Saturday, January 9th at 11:48AM EST
    101 Comments

    To call “Captain” Paul Watson an environmental extremist would be a gross understatement. Paul Watson was a founder of Greenpeace, but was booted out in the ’70s — for being too extreme!

    “Captain” Paul Watson proudly claims to be the inventor of “tree spiking”, a technique designed to maim loggers. He’s also served on the board of the Sierra Club, commonly thought of as a more “mainstream” environmental organization.

    “Captain” Paul Watson calls himself “captain” because of his command of a fleet of pirate ships that ply the rolling main, intent on harassing and disrupting commercial fishing fleets, and in particular, the Japanese whaling fleet. Harassing, as in intentionally ramming vessels on the high seas with the intent of sinking them.

    Whale Wars: How was the Sea Shepherd’s new ship sunk?

    The reaction of Paul Watson, the controversial leader of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, to the destruction of the crown jewel in his tiny anti-whaling fleet on Wednesday was swift. But Watson also managed to get a plug in for his reality TV show, “Whale Wars.”

    Early Wednesday the Ady Gil, a $2.5 million carbon-fiber trimaran that his organization has been using to harass the Japanese whaling fleet in the Southern Ocean, was abandoned to sink after it was sheared in half by a collision (see video just below) with a much larger, steel-hulled boat running security for the Japanese fleet.

    These wackos are actively supported by Hollywood celebrities, such as Richard Dean Anderson, Pierce Brosnan, James Cromwell, Rutger Hauer and Martin Sheen (surprise!), but perhaps none more significantly than former host of the “Price Is Right” daytime game show Bob Barker. Barker’s recent $5 million contribution to the society was rewarded by the naming of a ship, a converted Norwegian whaling vessel, in his “honor”.

    So, who is this “Captain” Watson, and what does he believe? Let’s let him speak for himself:

    Does humanity have a future?

    We are presently living in what conservation biologists refer to as the Holocene extinction event. This is the sixth global mass extinction event in last 439 million years.

    The previous five extinction events wiped out between 50 to 95 percent of species each time. The most recent event was 65 million years ago at the end of the Jurassic period, a cataclysmic occurrence that exterminated the dinosaurs, the dominant group of species at of that period.

    …In a way, the Holocenic extinction event could also be called the “Holocenic hominid collective suicide event.”

    After all, we Homo sapiens are the last survivors of the hominid line, a group that has been on its way out for some time. The beetle family, for example, has some 700,000 species by comparison. Odds are many of the beetle species will survive the event, whereas we will not.

    But the reality is that what is happening now is the result of the collective actions of us hominids. We are the ruthlessly territorial primates whose numbers have soared far beyond the level of global carrying capacity for the deadly behavioural characteristics that we display.

    … Primitive hominids were well-organized, efficient, slaughter crews. As they advanced, the mammoth, sabre-toothed cats, cave bears, giant sloths, camels, horses, and wholly [sic] rhinos fell to their stone weapons and deliberately set fires. The extinction of all of these great mega-species is directly attributable to “primitive” human hunters. The hunting down of the mega-fauna was followed by the advent of agriculture and the domestication of selected animals. Domesticated cows, goats, sheep, and pigs grew in numbers and denuded large areas of grasslands. Irrigation systems began to toxify land. Then agriculture was followed by industrial activities, and finally, by the burning off of vast amounts of fossil fuels. …

    The planet’s ecosystem is a collective living organism and operates very much like the human body. Water is the blood of the earth. It provides the same function in the body as it does for the earth. Water transports nutrients to the land and transports waste to the sea or more specifically the estuaries and salt marshes that function as the liver for the earth, cleansing the water of the toxins. Water circulates through the ecosystem from the sea into the clouds falling back onto the land and returning to the sea again. It is pumped by the energy of the sun, the heart of the earth. It’s a continuous cyclic movement of nutrient bearing, waste removing action that keeps the land fertile.

    …Humans are presently acting upon this body in the same manner as an invasive virus with the result that we are eroding the ecological immune system.

    A virus kills its host and that is exactly what we are doing with our planet’s life support system. We are killing our host the planet Earth.

    I was once severely criticized for describing human beings as being the “AIDS of the Earth.” I make no apologies for that statement. Our viral like behaviour can be terminal both to the present biosphere and ourselves. We are both the pathogen and the vector. But we also have the capability of being the anti-virus if only we can recognize the symptoms and address the disease with effective measures of control.

    Had enough? Read on, this is where Capt. Paul gets really whacky:

    We should not be living in human communities that enclose tiny preserved ecosystems within them. Human communities should be maintained in small population enclaves within linked wilderness ecosystems. No human community should be larger than 20,000 people and separated from other communities by wilderness areas. Communication systems can link the communities.

    In other words, people should be placed in parks within ecosystems instead of parks placed in human communities. We need vast areas of the planet where humans do not live at all and where other species are free to evolve without human interference.

    We need to radically and intelligently reduce human populations to fewer than one billion. …

    We need to stop burning fossil fuels and utilize only wind, water, and solar power with all generation of power coming from individual or small community units like windmills, waterwheels, and solar panels.

    Who should have children? Those who are responsible and completely dedicated to the responsibility which is actually a very small percentage of humans. …

    Curing a body of cancer requires radical and invasive therapy, and therefore, curing the biosphere of the human virus will also require a radical and invasive approach

    It won’t be easy but then it’s better than the alternative.

    I recommend you read the whole thing to see a picture of a man’s descent into insanity. Quoting can’t do it justice.

    This guy makes POL POT look like the President of your local Kiwanis Club.

    So, Bob Barker, I’m on board with the whole “spay and neuter your pets” thing, but how’s about a public statement in endorsement of the wild extremist beliefs and terrorist actions of this kook?

    H/T dennism

    Sphere: Related Content
    Share on: Facebook | | Reddit Category: Bob Barker, Capt. Paul Watson, Eco-Freak, Eco-Terrorism, Environmental Jihad, Environmental Terrorism, Linda Blair, Martin Sheen, Piracy, Rutger Hauer, Sierra Club

    RSS feed | Trackback URI

  123. wbboei, I see there’s a new tell all about the 08′ election. Its probably all lies. Who is Marc Ambinder?? He’s probably another Obama slime out for sympathy for his boss, or maybe he is a rethug out for blood and has CDS.

    I’m sick of this crap, the country is in a mess, can we just all get some work done in D.C. instead of allthis back stabbing and finger pointing.

  124. Watson is right. Good for him.


    In other words, people should be placed in parks within ecosystems instead of parks placed in human communities. We need vast areas of the planet where humans do not live at all and where other species are free to evolve without human interference.

    We need to radically and intelligently reduce human populations to fewer than one billion. …

    We need to stop burning fossil fuels and utilize only wind, water, and solar power with all generation of power coming from individual or small community units like windmills, waterwheels, and solar panels.

    Who should have children? Those who are responsible and completely dedicated to the responsibility which is actually a very small percentage of humans. …

  125. Harold Ford is running in New York, I thought he was from Tennesee. I can’t remember, is he a Obama shill?

  126. wbboei, Who is Harold Ford’s campaign manager? I think there is a major power struggle going on in the Dem party. It’s hard to disseminate who’s who cause some have changed sides.

  127. #
    birdgal
    January 10th, 2010 at 12:03 am

    Frankly, I believe actions, not words. I believe that Kennedy was part of the group that was encouraging Obama. What ever happened during the primary was a smoke screen and he used any little thing against Hillary as justification for his support of Obama. Blah, blah, blah.
    &&&&&

    Kennedy better have it on tape about what Bill said about O that was “racist” in that phone call. Bill might have said, “Obama’s using reverse racism…”, and TK could then say, “Aha!!! that is the moment I knew I would support Obama”.

    And forgive me, but in private, god knows what offensive terms (racial, sexist, etc.) Obama, Kennedy, or any of the other Judas “purists” might use. The “C” word??? “Whitey”?

    Get my drift?

Comments are closed.