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.