Chicago – Giannoulias and Obama’s Mob

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

Chicago Clown

* * * * *

From Business Week:

Banking Past Haunts Obama Friend Who Wants His Old Senate Seat

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More from Huff n’ Puff’s Obama lovers:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why is Walesa doing this?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Obama loving dogs at Nothing Left are barking a warning:

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

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

The bark of the dogs is clear and loud:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Even Big Media sees what we saw in 2007.

Giannoulias = Obama; Obama = Giannoulias:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Americans woke up too late to the Obama Corruptions.

Chicago Dimocrats are in for a rude awakening.


171 thoughts on “Chicago – Giannoulias and Obama’s Mob

  1. gonzotx
    January 29th, 2010 at 8:32 pm
    The intermingling of commercial and investment banks, rampant consumer debt, massive credit and land speculation, abusive bank practices, conflicts of interests and outright fraud culminated in the Great Depression, which crushed what there was of a middle class, and the farmers and small businessmen who had made up the Populist and Progressive movements.


    I agree with most of that article. I grew up in the manufacturing belt in the Midwest.Hundreds of mammoth factories closed… leaving a rust belt. They (manufacturing) took their jobs to the cheapest bidder and dammed the American worker and the American way of life. My fathers factory, Allen Bradley once employed over 10,000 people, and it was just one of many…now all but gone. Lives destroyed still.

    That is how we got those wonderful pictures of 3 year old children sewing Nike soccer ball’s in the dirt over in Indonesia (in between being sexually abused by the foreigners for ten cents a day, after of course being sold into slavery by their beloved parents…second job for them…don’t American 3 year olds routinely hold two jobs, one being sexual?)) I fu*king hate Nike, but it unfortunately is only one of tens of thousands manufacturing pimpbasTards.

  2. I’ll never get tired of that picture Admin…it says it all. I have several friends in Ill and will be interested on their take. They are sooo tired of being bamboozled by every Tom, Dick and Harry politician. Maybe they should have thought of that and tried a Hillary. Actually they all voted for Hillary…

  3. If any republican wins the Governorship or becomes senator in Chicago, i hope he has a strong stomach to wash away all the crap infesting illinois politics. The man or woman will deserve a medal by the end of it and a hazmat scrub.

  4. This is what sociopaths do – they destroy everything in their wake. After eight horrible years of George Bush, I can’t believe we’re being subjected to four horrible years of Obama. Well, we got through Pierce, Buchanan, the Civil War and Lincoln’s Assassination. I hope we can get through this.

  5. I am so thankful that Matthews didn’t decide to run for anything. He is such a suck-up/idiot.

    Mrs. Smith,

    I do agree completely. I don’t think Hillary will run again either. I was just ruminating on what would happen should I be wrong…lol…

  6. As for Hillary running again, she’s purchased domain names for a 2012 run. I don’t think she’s scared. She’s a student of history. She knew how bad it was going to be. Read up on what they did to suffragettes who just wanted the right to vote.

    I doubt that it’s set it stone that she’ll run in 12 or 16 but she certainly isn’t opposed to the idea.

  7. basement angel,

    I’m just going by what she said in an interview a while back…that she wasn’t going to run again.

    I read about the suffragettes many years ago and agree that it was a hard and trying time for them.

  8. Clinton calls for stronger trans-Atlantic partnership


    PARIS, Jan. 29 (Xinhua) — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton delivered a policy speech in central Paris on Friday, calling on NATO allies to strengthen trans-Atlantic partnership while also stressing cooperation with Russia.

    Clinton’s afternoon speech at France’s military academy touched a wide range of international issues. She reaffirmed European partners that the security of Europe was “an anchor of U.S. foreign and security policy.”

    “A strong Europe is critical to our security and our prosperity, ” she said.

    To address “some of the greatest challenges in human history, we are required to modernize and strengthen our (trans-Atlantic) partnership for this new era,” she said.

    Clinton used France’s rejoining the NATO command last year as an optimum opportunity to emphasize the significance of reinforcing NATO alliance. “We will work even more closely now that France is fully participating in NATO’s integrated command structure,” she said, suggesting tighter French-American coordination.

    In her speech, Clinton called on NATO allies to broaden and deepen cooperation with Russia. “We are engaged in productive discussions with our European allies about building a new missile defense architecture that will defend all of NATO territory against ballistic missile attack,” she said.

    “Missile defense, we believe, will make this continent a safer place. That safety could extend to Russia if Russia decides to cooperate with us,” Clinton added.

    Affirming “European leadership in the 21st century,” the U.S. secretary of state issued a clear signal that the United States needs Europe as a firm ally on various important international issues, such as Afghanistan, climate change, global economy, and pandemic diseases.

    Clinton arrived in Paris after attending a two-day conference on Afghanistan and Yemen in London. Before delivering the speech, she met with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and also had a working dinner with her French counterpart Bernard Kouchner.

  9. Hillary has been very adamant about not running time and time again. I remember when she continued to support the fraud in the primaries, really support him, and some of us held out that she would either throw her support for McCain directly or indirect, run third party (not likely) and save us from the Fraud, from the horrors we knew would come, and have…and she said very directly and with an intense glare almost that anyone who thought, didn’t really know her very well. Sure enough, she worked her pants off for the creep, and here we are. I don’t believe she will ever run again. The lady means what she says. We are just use to the other 99% that don’t.

  10. Transcript of VOA Interview with Secretary of State Clinton

    The following is a transcript of an interview VOA State Department Correspondent David Gollust had with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Paris 29 Jan 2010. In the interview, Clinton discussed developments in Afghanistan, Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, Burma and China.

    David Gollust | Paris 29 January 2010

    GOLLUST: Madam Secretary, I have a question left over from the London conference on Afghanistan. Before your news conference, several of us reporters talked to the women’s rights advocates from Afghanistan. They expressed some real concern that the reconciliation process contemplated by [Afghan] President [Hamid] Karzai might mean that their interest would be sacrificed in the interest of some accommodation with Taliban people. I know the United States won’t be involved in the reconciliation, but is there any kind of assurance you can offer them that their interests might be protected?

    CLINTON: Well, David, I share that concern, which is why I have not only spoken with a number of Afghan women and listened to their concerns but also to President Karzai and others about them. There is certainly no intention for that to happen. But, we have to be really vigilant to make sure it doesn’t. The idea behind the standards that would be used for reintegration and reconciliation is that people would enter society in a way that required them to abide by the laws and constitution of Afghanistan, and which provide for equal treatment of women. I do think we should put this in the larger context, which is that, unfortunately, discrimination against women exists even without the Taliban in many parts of Afghanistan. So, I don’t want to sound any alarms yet, because we are just watching the beginning of this process. But, I do want to assure your listeners that the United States is committed to protecting the rights of all people and we pay particular attention to vulnerable populations, like girls and women in Afghanistan.

    GOLLUST: Let me switch now to the address you gave in Paris on European security. You suggested that the expansion of NATO has in effect improved the security of Russia itself, even though it has been quite an opponent of NATO expansion. But, what about the argument that Russia itself has perhaps become more defensive, less democratic, because of NATO expansion?

    CLINTON: Well, I don’t think that the facts support that. I think, making it possible for Central and Eastern European states to feel secure, to join NATO if that is their choice, creates a compact of nations that are working together to enhance security. NATO has no offensive interest in taking action against any peaceful neighbor. In fact, NATO has a great interest in working more closely with Russia. Because, we believe that, in the 21st Century, the challenges are not between states so much as they are between states that are committed to peace and prosperity and non-state actors and rogue states, and Russia’s confronted a lot of insecurity internally on its own border. And, I think it has helped Russia not to have to worry about its neighbors to the West. Russia has to decide how it interprets developments like the expansion of NATO, but I would like to see a very close relationship between NATO and Russia that I think would continue to benefit all the parties.

    GOLLUST: What’s your level of concern about the state of democratic freedoms in Russia? Many people think it’s deteriorated since the Yeltsin years.

    CLINTON: I think there are some unfortunate trends in both democracy and human rights and also in development. Russia’s life span is going down. This is a great country with an extraordinary history and very intelligent population, well-educated. So, I think that Russia has some work to do at home, which I believe President Medvedev recognizes. He has spoken about, he’s written about it. And, I think, in the long run, it is in Russia’s interest to be more open and more tolerant of dissent, and to continue working to expand its free market and join the world trade organization and all of the other aspects of modernization, which really should help Russians.

    GOLLUST: You spoke in your address about the elections in Ukraine coming up being part of a process that will bring Ukraine closer to the European mainstream. On the other hand, if you look at polls, a candidate who basically opposes NATO membership, might win the election. If that happens, is that a setback?

    CLINTON: No, because it’s a decision for a country to make. Nobody is forced to join NATO; it’s only if a country wishes to apply for membership, and if there’s a change in political leadership, in Ukraine, and the Ukrainian people decide that they, at this time, would prefer not to pursue NATO membership, that’s their choice.

    GOLLUST: You also mentioned in the address the continuing United States concern about Abkhazia-South Ossetia. Doesn’t, in fact, the fact that Russia practically, or physically occupies these areas really preclude the possibility of NATO membership for Georgia?

    CLINTON: No. Georgia is in a process to see if it can meet the standards for membership. There’s certainly not a recognition in Europe or the United States, or among NATO members of the legitimacy of the secession South Ossetia and Abkhazia. We would hope for improvement in the relationship between Russia and Georgia, and a cooling of any tensions and a refraining from provocation. But, this is one of the areas that we’re working on.

    GOLLUST: One of the more moving events, I thought, at the State Department a week ago, was your meeting with the prime minster of Moldova. His comments about how grateful he was to become an MCC [Millennium Challenge Corporation] member and how proud he was about democratic reform. Is there something that the United States and/or other allies do about the territorial issue in Moldova that really has been an impediment to that country’s progress?

    CLINTON: I discussed this at length with the prime minister. Moldova is struggling to consolidate democracy to improve its economy, it is eligible for Millennium Challenge compact because it is still a poor country in need of a lot of help. Certainly the border disputes with Romania, the continuance of Russian troops on Moldovan territory are matters of concern. But we want to assist Moldova in improving the lives of its people and hopefully over time the problems that it faces can be addressed.

    GOLLUST: Another subject you alluded to in the speech was international response to disasters as underlined by the Haiti experience of a couple weeks ago. Are there lessons to be learned from the Haiti example about how the international community should respond to a disaster?

    CLINTON: I think there are and we need to be looking at the tsunami, the terrible earthquake in Haiti, and figuring out what are the best ways for the international community to respond. I’ve started discussing this with Catherine Ashton, the new High Representative for the European Union: how do we prepare to take responsibility for different parts of the world, how do we stockpile goods, how do we assign different responsibilities among different nations? I think this is a ripe area for more international cooperation and we should not just respond, we should learn and do it better the next time.

    GOLLUST: Still another issue raised at the forum in Paris, U.S. relations with China, the controversy over the Google website. You mentioned that the president will be meeting the Dalai Lama. The issue of Taiwan arms sales is out there. Do you think we are in for, you might say, a patch of rough sledding in relations with China because of the convergence of such issues?

    CLINTON: Well I hope not. But there shouldn’t be any surprises on either issue. The United States has supplied defensive arms to Taiwan for many years. We do it within the context of our Taiwan Relations Act and the Joint Communiqué and our commitment to a one China policy. We think it is appropriate and in fact we believe that providing defensive equipment has actually enabled Taiwan to feel more comfortable in drawing closer to China in commercial interactions. And the last three, maybe four presidents have met with the Dalai Lama, so again there shouldn’t be any surprise. We certainly don’t recognize any claim that the Dalai Lama makes to territory inside China. We view him primarily as a religious leader. So again this is something that previous presidents have done and President Obama is committed to doing.

    GOLLUST: Another issue out in that region involves Burma. The military government there is talking about an election process that would conceivably be followed by the release of Aung San Suu Kyi when her latest term of detention expires. Is that sequence of events something that would be acceptable both for the United States and other international players?

    CLINTON: Well what we want to see are free fair and legitimate elections that give the people of Burma the chance to express their preference for their own leaders. We want to see Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners released as soon as possible. We want to develop a better bilateral relationship with Burma and we have offered the potential of that but of course we really hope to see the kind of progress that would demonstrate that Burma is ready to emerge from a period of authoritarian rule and some level of isolation and violation of human rights and the United States stands ready to work toward better relations with Burma and assistance but we have to see some evidence first.

    GOLLUST: Madam secretary I appreciate very much you giving your time today.

    CLINTON: Thank You.

  11. and she said very directly and with an intense glare almost that anyone who thought

    thought that I meant

  12. gonzotx
    January 29th, 2010 at 9:59 pm

    “and she said very directly and with an intense glare …”

    …her inner thought being, “I can’t believe you’re asking me this – you ought to know that right now I’m not in a position to answer that with anything but a definite NO!” 🙂

  13. Gonzotex, I agree Hillary’s not going to run again. What I can’t believe is that she will ride off into the sunset and retire and only come out when the demoRATS need her to get something across to us “lunch bucket,Reagan Dems”. It will sadden me to no end to see such a wonderfully, smart, graceful and Presidential woman to be put out to pasture.

    THIS MUST NOT HAPPEN! If it does the dims will for the rest of my life NEVER get my vote again. If there is something called a yellowdog republican I will be one if that happens.

  14. They are putting many words in their mouths about Hillary running. I don’t think she is going to do it again. As Cafferty said about Teddy, look how that ended, we got Raygun. I hated Raygun, he ruined oil industry in South Texas.

  15. I hear on other blogs that our dear leader apparently has time to get in on whether the BCS has broken any antitrust laws. For heavens sake, its college football, millions here are out of work, people are dying Haiti, the country is bankrupt, and the terrorists are trying to kill us everyday and he worrying whether there should be a different way to decide who plays in the BCS championship???

    What planet did Al Gore and Nancy Pelosi find this guy on?? Neptune or what??? I have never heard of a Potus being so out of touch with his country. Maybe he needs to quit being Potus and we can elect him to be the head sports commissioner over all sports worldwide, that is more up his alley.


    1. By now we have heard the full range of opinions on the Obama second state of the union speech ranging from the loony left claims that we have a god, we have a father, he was so good we forgot he was black, etc. to the critiques which labelled it narcissistic, disjointed and condescending toward the American People. Let me offer a third perspective on the matter.

    2. I think the speech succeeded in its objective which was to reinforce the base and to bring back the independents, some of whom are now saying we need to give him more time. On the other hand it gave those of us who are determined to defeat him a more effective way forward than pretending this is some kind of Oxford Debating Society only to find out later that we were dealing with a dangerous thug who never read Roberts Rules of Order.

    3. Let me give you my theory on how to defeat Obama in a nutshell. Obama is not a democratic leader. He is by style and by inclination a dictator. His state of the unon speech was i) a direct repudiation of the electorate, ii) a statement of intent to implement his agenda which the voters of Virginia, New Jersey and most importantly Massachusetts rejected overwhelmingly and, iii) the opening salvo in a bid to manipulate the emotions of the electorate.

    4. Here is the governing formula that I see with Obama:

    step 1: determine the emotional hot buttons of independent voters are

    step 2: formulate big government solution proposals to the underlying problems–to win their support

    step 3: introduce these programs with the full support of sycophantic big media–cheering and rave reviews

    step 4: when these solutions fail, blame others, and swear you will never give up–more media cheers

    step 5: have big media portray you in a Kennedy-esq language and Newsweek photos–headlines it is a tough job

    5. Can such a strategy succeed when it fails to produce results, only excuses? Unfortunately, the answer is yes. Why? Because we live in an age dominated by celebrity, which is governed by perception rather than reality, and the electorate of today does not want to face difficult decisions. If their own lives are okay then most people do not think that far ahead. They are suckers for an emotional appeal and Plouffe like Goebbels is an expert on that.

    6. Then what can we do? Simple. Instead of just arguing the merits of the issues which people will never understand, you show them the game that is being played on them. It is a charade which is not designed to solve problems but to create chaos and to keep Obama and his henchmen in power. This is not an Oxxford debating society, it is a game of power.

    7. The pivotal question is this: how could a president with a high approval rating, a super majority in congress, full media support and the political wind at his back fail to pass a single piece of legislation in his first year to help the American People? (Note: it is common wisdom the first year is when any Administration must pass its agenda–Reagan had most of his passed in the first ninety days, according to one of his cabinet members.) The answer is that Obama has no grasp of the governing process. Rather, his entire approach to is smoke and mirrors–to wit: the five step formula above. I would end by saying that this process is calculated to keep him in power, but it cannot solve the dire problems confronting this nation.

    8. If you want a concrete example of this, consider the promise he made in his State of the Union to provide student loan guarantees. Many people have defaulted on those loans over the years due to circumstances beyond their control. Therefore the need is real, and there are many independent voters who have been in that situation. So good old Obama floats the idea that students would have 10 years to pay off those loans and any amount not repaid would be absorbed by the federal government. People applaud his high mindedness and call him the education president.

    9. Unfortunately, the devil is in the details. If you are going to a state school which costs $10,000 per year and you make $40,000 per year then the loan will be paid off at the end of that period and the federal government will have no obligation to guarantee. But suppose yo go to Harvard which costs over $50,000 per year and you make $40,000 per year then at the end of 10 years you will owe $200,000 and the government would have to absorb that amount. When Congress deliberates over that proposal and finds we do not have the funds, Obama can scapegoat them for the failure.

    10. That is why we must shine a light on the game he is playing. It is the game that ruins nations.

  17. Oh boy, now Osama Bin Ladin is disappointed that we did nothing to improve global warming. He is calling for the complete disruption of our economy and the boycott of all goods made in America. Hasn’t anyone told Osama that we no longer make anything in America, its all done by third world countries like his?

    He must have told Obama because he certainly is doing a good taking our economy down.

  18. Right on wbboei.Your ten points are a great picture into the destructive journey of the HOCUS POTUS is taking this country.Hillary the true leader we must support is our only hope for a return of our political system to that which brought us to greatness until the False Prophet came along and the love affair began with he the cheese and the greedy rats of the congress where to lobby is a full time hobby and a lucrative one at that.

    By ABM90 “WE WILL HAVE HILLARY” Let us just rid the OO of this man without a birth certificate.

  19. Nancy Pelosi’s gas bill at 5mil a year for her gulfstream jet to back and forth to California, but now 101,000 for food and booze aboard it??? They sure are living high on the hog on taxpayers money while George Soros says that Americans must tighten their belts.

    George why don’t you suggest that the Congress and the Senate tighten their first!

  20. China suspends U.S. military visits after Taiwan arms dealFrom

    Charley Keyes, CNNJanuary 30, 2010

    Washington (CNN) — China said Saturday it had suspended military exchanges with the United States over Washington’s $6.4-billion arms deal with Taiwan, the territory that Beijing claims as its own.

    China’s Defense Ministry said the decision to halt visits between the Chinese and U.S. armed forces was made “in consideration of the serious harm and impacts on Sino-U.S. military relations” brought about by the arms deal, according to a report on the state-run Xinhua news agency.

    Xinhua did not immediately provide further details on the visits. “China will make further judgments as appropriate,” the agency reported.

    China had already complained to the United States about the deal, announced Friday by the Obama administration. Chinese Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei called it a “rude interference in China’s internal affairs, severely endangering China’s national security” and said China expressed its “strong indignation.”

    The arms sale includes 60 Black Hawk helicopters, totaling $3.1 billion; 114 advanced Patriot air defense missiles; a pair of Osprey mine-hunting ships; and dozens of advanced communications systems. The deal with Taiwan — which neither China nor the United States recognizes as a sovereign nation — does not include F-16 fighter jets, which China has vehemently opposed.

    The State Department described the latest round of arms sales to Taiwan as a way to guarantee security and stability, despite China’s objections. “This is a clear demonstration of the commitment this administration has to provide Taiwan with defensive weapons it needs and as provided for in the Taiwan Relations Act,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Friday.

    He said the action is consistent with Washington’s “one-China” policy and will help maintain security and stability across the Taiwan Strait.

    The arms sales come as the United States is hoping to persuade China to sign on to harsher sanctions against Iran and just after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticized China for its policies relating to the Internet.

    Crowley would not speak directly about the timing of the announcement of the sales, and about the fact that the arms package does not include F-16s.

    A senior U.S. official said later that the United States expected Chinese criticism of the arms deal, but does not expect permanent damage. The official said he believed Clinton had discussed the sale in London with her Chinese counterpart on the sidelines of Thursday’s international conference on Afghanistan. “This relationship between the United States and China is broad, it’s deep. There are a large number of issues. We don’t see eye to eye with them and we have to have and do have the ability to speak honestly,” the official said.

    The arms deal is the latest chapter in a decades-long uneasy standoff. China claims Taiwan is its own territory and has threatened to invade if Taiwan ever declares independence. The United States has said it will defend Taiwan if China ever attacks.

    The government in Taiwan began as the remnant of the government that ruled over mainland China until a Communist insurrection proved victorious in 1949. With the Communist takeover of mainland China, the losing faction fled to the island of Taiwan. Taiwan is formally known as the Republic of China, while Communist China’s official name is People’s Republic of China.

    Many Western nations and the United Nations recognized Taiwan as the legitimate Chinese government until the 1970s.

  21. Guests for the Sunday TV news shows

    Fri Jan 29, 2010

    Guest lineup for the Sunday TV news shows:

    ABC’s “This Week” — Sen.-elect Scott Brown, R-Mass.

    CBS’ “Face the Nation” — Govs. Haley Barbour, R-Miss., Ed Rendell, D-Pa., and Jennifer Granholm, D-Mich.; Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.

    NBC’s “Meet the Press” — White House senior adviser David Axelrod; House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

    CNN’s “State of the Union” — White House press secretary Robert Gibbs; Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; Granholm; AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka.

    “Fox News Sunday” — Sens. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., and Evan Bayh, D-Ind.; Reps. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Chris Van Hollen, D-Md.

  22. Clinton warns China to stay the course on Iran nuclear sanctions

    In Paris, the U.S. secretary of State tells Beijing to think about the longer-term consequences even though it may seem ‘counterproductive’ to sanction a country from which it gets key resources.

    By Paul Richter
    January 30, 2010
    Reporting from Paris

    Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned China on Friday that it faced international pressure and increasing isolation unless it joined other world powers in sanctioning Iran to try to halt Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

    The admonishment from Clinton came on the same day the Pentagon announced more than $6 billion in arms sales to Taiwan, a move certain to infuriate Beijing and add a new complication to the U.S.-Chinese relationship.

    Clinton, speaking at a leading French military academy in Paris, said that China and five other leading nations had been united in trying to persuade Iran to halt uranium enrichment that they fear is aimed at developing nuclear weaponry.

    But now that China is balking at joining the others in a new round of United Nations sanctions, Clinton said, “China will be under a lot of pressure to recognize the destabilizing impact that a nuclear-armed Iran would have in the [Persian] Gulf, from which they receive a significant percentage of their own supplies.”

    She told an audience of military experts and officers at the Ecole Militaire that “we understand that right now it seems counterproductive to you to sanction a country from which you get so much of the natural resources your growing economy needs.” But she said Beijing “needs to think about the longer-term implications.”

    Clinton said an Iranian nuclear bomb would produce an arms race and would convince Israel that it faces an “existential threat. . . . All of that is incredibly dangerous.”

    U.S. officials believe they have finally persuaded Russia to join with France, Britain, Germany and the United States in a new round of United Nations sanctions. All except Germany are permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, leaving China as the remaining holdout. Beijing argues that the other world powers should continue to use diplomacy to nudge the Iranians into cooperation.

    U.S. officials have argued in the past that China would not continue to hold out against sanctions if Russia joined the Western powers. But as recently as Thursday, when Clinton met with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, China had not relented.

    Washington’s relations with the Chinese have recently hit a rough patch. After Clinton called China to account for Internet censorship this month, the Chinese Foreign Ministry complained that her speech had harmed U.S.-Chinese relations. On Thursday, in an appearance before reporters, she was conciliatory, saying that there were multiple views on the issue of how fully China was controlling Internet access in the country. But a new source of likely friction emerged Friday in the announcement by the Pentagon that it had approved the arms sales to Taiwan.

    The $6-billion package, which has been expected, does not include F-16 fighter jets, which Taiwan has sought. Under the deal as formally announced, Taiwan will buy 60 Black Hawk helicopters, more than 100 Patriot antiaircraft missiles, two mine-hunting ships and other items.

    China objects to the sale, and U.S. officials acknowledged that it could result in a suspension of U.S.-China military ties. In Beijing, Chinese Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei called U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman Jr. today to register his government’s displeasure. The sale has been in the works for weeks, and administration officials have argued that China should not be angry, even though it pumps new weaponry into the island, which Beijing views as a renegade province.

    “We have to be mature enough . . . to continue to focus on this and do the hard work it requires to continue to engage, even when times get tough,” Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said this week.

    At the same appearance in Paris, Clinton sought to reassure a nervous Europe that the Obama administration remained fully committed to its defense. Speaking as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization reconsiders its core mission, Clinton acknowledged that some Europeans fear that the United States may not believe Europe needs help with its security, while others are worried that the administration “is so focused on foreign policy challenges elsewhere in the world that Europe has receded on our list of priorities.” But she insisted that “European security is an anchor of U.S. foreign policy.”

    The Obama administration is relying heavily on European support on Iran and Afghanistan. But Europeans have seen a variety of what they fear are worrisome signs of wandering attention.

    Some Eastern European countries are concerned by the administration’s decision to back away from a joint missile defense program, developed during the Bush administration, that was to have been based in central Europe. Other allies, including Ukraine and Georgia, have sought assurances that the United States will stand with them in the face of attempts by Russia to assert a sphere of influence.

    On that issue, Clinton said, “We object to any spheres of influence in Europe in which one country seeks to control another’s future.” She said that sovereignty and territorial integrity were “the cornerstone of security.” She also made it clear that the United States would not accede to Russian pressure to negotiate a broad new international security treaty to more fully integrate Russia into the European security framework.

    Some critics have said that Russia is seeking to reshape treaty agreements to give it more leverage to block NATO decisions.

    Clinton also said that the U.S. retained “an unwavering commitment” to Article 5 of the NATO treaty, which calls for all members to come fully to the defense of any other. At the same time, Clinton offered a separate message for the Russians that security should not be a “zero-sum game.” With the Cold War over, there is no reason for there to be “divisions between neighbors and partners,” she said. “Security in Europe must be indivisible.”

    Clinton said that the Obama administration had inherited a “deteriorating relationship with Russia,” but has made progress on a number of areas, including Afghanistan, Iran’s nuclear program and the negotiation of a new version of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which officials say is close to completion.

    NATO officials are in the middle of a series of meetings designed to reconsider the alliance’s central principles before a high-level meeting on the subject in December.,0,5801660.story

  23. Does anyone want to partner up to make some Hillary 2012 bumber stickers?

    I would love to ride around with one. There are still people driving around here with Obama stickers. I would like to ear my disgust on my car and give people something tohtink about.

    I also think Hillary will only run if there is a huge groundswell of popular support for her candidacy/

  24. Carol,I still have my Hillary glass signs on the front window of my Car. At first someone said, did I not know she had lost. I quickly told him she had won. After some heated discussion, he walked away. No one has asked me in at least 6 months to take the Hillary sticks off my car, actually closer to 9 months.

  25. Here’s a great vid called Hillary 2012; The conversation continues.

    Maybe admin will embed.

    http : // www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=1KYjCZlnmlY&feature=player_embedded

  26. For the life of me I do not see why people get down on Matthews. Sure, sure, sure he worships the messiah and destroys his enemies, and says ugly stupid things now and then–mostly now whenever you listen to him.

    But is he really any different than all the other dysfunctional who call themselves journalists. All the other lying egotists who speak for big media today. In some cases perhaps, but in most cases no.

    Consider the case of Howard Fineman, Joe Klein, Rachel Madcow, Kornbut, Evan Thomas, Brian Williams, Chuck Todd, Eugene Wrong, BMitchell. Granted Matthews is less inibited, but is the core message any different?

    Of course not. So pray tell why pick on poor Tweetie.

    Honest dissent is the life’s blood of democracy. Pure propaganda is not. These low lives deal in propaganda–not truth. They are personally responsible for the condition we find ourselves in today.

  27. Jan. 30, 2010
    Obama-GOP meeting turns testy


    In a session that was intended to foster bipartisanship with Republicans in the House of Representatives, President Barack Obama instead blasted them Friday for distorting his healthcare plan to the point that “you’d think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot.”

    “I’m not suggesting we’re going to agree on everything, whether it’s on healthcare or energy,” Obama said. “But if the way these issues are being presented by the Republicans is that this is some wild-eyed plot to impose huge government in every aspect of our lives, what happens is you guys then don’t have a lot of room to negotiate with me.”

    The president’s blunt remarks were part of an unusual give-and-take question-and-answer session following remarks he made at the House Republicans’ retreat in Baltimore

    Before the session, the White House and House Republicans promised that Obama’s visit would produce a frank dialogue and, hopefully, usher in a more civil, bipartisan tone, which largely has been largely absent in the past year’s debates.

    Instead, the one-hour, 45-minute dialogue seemed to produce olive branches adorned by a few thorns and to showcase just how wide and deep the divide is between the administration and other Democrats and the Republicans in Congress.

    “There were different views of facts and figures,” said Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas. “But I think we had facts on our side and he [Obama] was a little on the defensive.”

    Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., said that Obama’s talk showed that the president had a “willingness to dismiss reality. He’s willing to hold himself unconstrained by the truth.”

    Obama began the session warmly and joked about attending the retreat because of a need to “keep your friends close, but visit the Republican caucus every few months.”

    He grew stern and testy at times, however, as he disputed some of the details lawmakers cited in their questions about healthcare, the economic stimulus and the federal debt.

    On healthcare, Obama said that some of the provisions in the Democratic bill had been embraced by a bipartisan group that included former Senate Majority Leaders Bob Dole, R-Kan.; Tom Daschle, D-N.D., and Howard Baker, R-Tenn.

    “That’s not a radical bunch,” the president said. “But if you were to listen to the debate and, frankly, how some of you went after this bill, you’d think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot.”

    Obama elicited snickers from Republicans in the hotel ballroom when he proclaimed, “I am not an ideologue.”

    The president acknowledged problems in the crafting of the healthcare bill, calling it a “messy process.”

    Republicans got a little testy, too.

    Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., the House Republican Conference chairman, told Obama that the president had been too “busy ignoring for 12 months” ideas from Republican lawmakers.

    Obama challenged a question from Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., who asked what GOP lawmakers should tell their constituents who know that Republicans have offered positive solutions on healthcare, along with Price’s assertion that the Republicans’ healthcare plan would cover almost all Americans without raising taxes. “That’s just not true,” the president said.

    He swatted down a question from Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, who expressed disappointment that Obama hasn’t followed through on a campaign promise to battle congressional earmarks.

    “Now the challenge, I guess, I would have for you as a freshman is, what are you doing inside your caucus to make sure I’m not the only guy who’s responsible for this stuff,” Obama said, calling earmark abuse a bipartisan problem, “so that we’re working together?”

  28. The above article gives us more insight into the sociopathic mind of Obama.

    I was discussing this subject with a friend of mind who is an expert in the field. I expressed my own frustration about how he is able to lie with impunity and our beloved big media never confronts him.

    She said that press people do not engage in direct confrontation the way a prosecuting attorney does. An interview is not supposed to be an adversarial process. Besides, he has the power of the presidency on his side.

    I told her I disagreed. If a journalist is to be any more than an order taker, if he or she is to keep faith with the people who rely on them for the truth then they must go where the evidence leads them and now chicken out.

    She said suppose you are right. Suppose a journalist did what you say. His reaction would be hostile, and belittling. If you read what is written above about the meeting with the meeting bambi had with republicans, who had the facts on their side and confronted him, it is hard to disagree with her on that particular point.

    Perhaps that is part of the reason why journalists are liars, cowards and sell out artist. But I suspect there is more to the story, as they are fond to say.

  29. Confloyd, Jan and others who say you think Hillary will not run again, you are driving us crazy at our house! We believe she will run! We are talking to more and more people (Repubs, Indies and former O supporters) who wish she were our prez and harbor real hope that she will run again. She’s got to be our next prez or by God, life in this country will not be worth living!

    Why do you think we worked so hard to get Brown elected? – you think it was only about health care? – He doesn’t give a damn about what the people think or protest about! Il Duce with his chin in the air will do what he wants so long as the Hillary-haters support him. We are working to smack down the DIMS so that Hillary can restore our party.

    If the Chicago Jackass runs again, he cannot win – more and more Dems are admitting that everyday.

    Why can’t you put more positive vibes in the air?!

    ShortTermer, ABM90, yes, yes , yes! RUN, Hillary. RUN!

    End of scream.

  30. lil ole grape,

    I’m not being negative. I’m just going by what she herself said. If she changes her mind then I’ll be very happy, but until/if she does, I’m not going to speculate.

  31. lil ole grape,

    I agree. I can not think of another politician in the country right now who has the skills to get this country out of trouble and on the right track.

    We need her to run.

  32. Jan
    “I’m not going to speculate.”

    Well, we refuse to speculate that she won’t run. We don’t KNOW that she won’t and we don’t KNOW that she will, but we swing our speculations with others who want her to run, who talk it up and encourage others to do the same.

    NMF, I still have my bumper sticker, too, and I got a new one that says, “Hillary for prez 2012”

  33. lil ole grape,

    I was just speaking for myself when I say I won’t speculate. I’m not trying to cause an argument here. I’m simply saying that when Hillary makes a final decision one way or another, I will support her 150%. It is none of my business if anyone else wants to speculate. Free speech allows all of our opinions. At least I hope it does.

  34. Right on, lil ole grape. Tell your bluest of blue friends who are still supporting Obama to read this little piece:

    BTW, he let that cat of out the bag at the GoP meeting yesterday talking about his healthcare bill. From the transcript:

    And so I’m thinking to myself, well, how is it that a plan that is pretty centrist — no, look, I mean, I’m just saying, I know you guys disagree, but if you look at the facts of this bill, most independent observers would say this is actually what many Republicans — is similar to what many Republicans proposed to Bill Clinton when he was doing his debate on health care.

  35. And to continue, his blogger boys and minions are ecstatic that he gave such a strong response to the GoP. Amazing how stupid these people are.

  36. lil ole grape

    Amen, I need some of those new bumper stickers, so at midnight I can go into parking lots, and past them over the Obama Stickers if there are any.

  37. ADMIN!!!!!!

    Please embed!

    Anyone who wants HRC to run in 2012 should check the video posted above called;

    Hillary 2012; The conversation continues.

    replace dot with .

    http : // www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=1KYjCZlnmlY&feature=player_embedded

  38. Jan, I wasn’t attacking your right of free speech and I’m sorry if it seemed that way. I pay respectful attention to everything you write, and it’s because I respect you that I was wishing you’d join the cheering section.

    NMF — lol! Do you really DO that?! I’m with you on turning the magazine covers around, but pasting over the O stickers! You know you can make your own — I do. I print them on ordinary paper then put a layer of clear wide mailing tape over them. We did that during the Brown campaign because we ran out of bumper stickers (and signs) and it was about a week before more were printed and distributed.

  39. I could give you a detailed argument on either side of the question. Why she will run, and why she will not run–focusing on intent and opportunity.

    In other words:

    1. opportunity is there and she wants to run

    2. opportunity is there and she decides not to run.

    3. opportunity is not there and she decides to run–to create opportunity.

    4. opporunity is not there and she decides not to run.

    Even if I had all the facts, and was privy to her thinking it would mean nothing. Why? Because something unforeseen could happen tomorrow which would change the entire calculus, in which case the prior analysis would be obsolete.

    Under the circumstances, the best anyone can do right now is focus on the the constants, and let the variables play out.

    1. first, Hillary has devoted her life to the service of this country. That will never change.

    2. second, Hillary needs to find a way out of her current position after the 2010 election.

    3. third, on the odds the leadership deficit of Obama will be obvious to more people

    4. fourth, on the odds the unemployment picture will continue to deteriorate under his reign in office.

    5. fifth, on the odds some future crisis will develop which will show once more how inept he is.

    6. sixth, he will push forward against the will of the public if his State of the Union is any indication.

    7. seventh, big media will continue to be the boot licker they truly are which will diminish their influence

    8. eighth, the tea party movement will become more sophisticated in its approach based on Massachusetts

    9. ninth, barack will continue to rely on vague promises and scapegoating rather than results.

    10. tenth, Plouffe will look for effective ways to disenfranchise voters, and push emotional buttons.

    If those are some of the constants, then the best thing we can do is find effective ways point out Obamas flaws, call him on the game, and point out to his erstwhile supporters that in desperate times like these we cannot afford corrupt incompetent leadership–which is all he has to offer.

    If we can do that, then it can help give Hillary an opening if she decides there is an opening. Or perhaps she can become president without running again, at least in the primary.

  40. Of course we also need to promote Hillary. People must be reminded that she was the path not taken in 2008 which could have avoided the misery which has followed. They must believe she is the logical rational and necessary alternative to Obama and Bush. They must be reminded, as I need to remind myself from time to time, that she will rise to the occasion.

  41. lil ole grape
    January 30th, 2010 at 12:49 pm

    Thanks lil ole grape

    I really am a huge supporter and cheerleader of all the Clintons and have been forever. As far as promoting/cheerleading for her to run again…well…I need to think long and hard about it.

    I would love for her to be the next president, but the garbage, lies, and cheating that was perpetrated against this wonderful woman the last time around were very hard on her supporters let alone herself and her family. The anger I have from what happened is still immense.

    Even so, if she decides to run again, I will definitely be on the bandwagon.

  42. The Obama administration is said to have abandoned plans to
    try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four other alleged Sept. 11
    plotters in the heart of downtown Manhattan.

  43. pm 317: it has been years since I have seen Bob Dole. Then a moment ago I saw that picture. I do not know if you ever saw clips of the silent version of the movie Phantom of the Opera. He looks like Lon Chaney Sr.

  44. Sounds like the opening of new nuclear power plants is another sham by Obama. We might as well realize there will be no jobs come out of this administration.

    Jan. 29 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama, acting on a pledge to support nuclear power, will propose tripling U.S. loan guarantees for new reactors to more than $54 billion, an administration official said.

    The additional loan guarantees in Obama’s budget, which will be released Feb. 1, are part of an effort to bolster nuclear-power production after the president called for doing so in his State of the Union address Jan. 27. In a conference call with reporters, Energy Secretary Steven Chu today announced a panel to find a solution to storing the waste generated by nuclear plants.

    “To create more of these clean-energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives,” Obama said in his speech. “That means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear-power plants in this country.”

    For the 2011 budget, the department will add $36 billion to the $18.5 billion already approved for nuclear-power plant loan guarantees, according to the official, who asked not to be identified because the budget hasn’t been released. Congress started the program in 2005 to encourage new plant construction, but the department has yet to issue a loan guarantee.

    “Senate Republicans support building 100 new plants as quickly as possible — we hope Democrats will join us in that effort, particularly now with the president’s call to action,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said on the Senate floor yesterday. “And the president could start by moving forward on the nuclear loan guarantee program.”

    ‘Bureaucratic Fretting’

    Loan guarantees have been delayed partly because the industry must pay the expected long term liability the government incurs in issuing the guarantees, and companies are arguing for a smaller industry share than the government wants them to pay, said Michael McKenna, president of MWR Strategies, a consulting firm in Washington.

    “I am not sure there will be enough demand ultimately to support $54 billion in new guarantees,” McKenna said, pointing to falling U.S. electricity demand and new discoveries of natural gas. “The amount of bureaucratic fretting has been enormous,” he said.

    Nuclear plants accounted for 20 percent of U.S. power generation in 2008, according to the Energy Department. Generation was off 13 percent through October of 2009 compared to the same period in 2007, before the worst economic slump since the Great Depression hit the U.S. economy.

    Industry groups such as the Washington-based Nuclear Energy Institute have said the loan guarantees are critical to reviving the industry because most companies can’t afford the capital investment in a facility that can take a decade to complete. The institute in a December report put the cost of a reactor at as much as $9 billion.

    Shares Rise

    Shares of nuclear-industry companies rose today in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. Shaw Group Inc., of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, jumped $2.06, or 6.8 percent, to close at $32.29, and was as high as $33.35 earlier in the day. Houston-based McDermott International Inc. climbed 74 cents, or 3.2 percent, to $23.62, while URS Corp. of San Francisco finished the day higher by 13 cents, or less than 1 percent, at $44.88.

    “We have lagged in our nuclear efforts in the last 30 years, but the Obama administration is committed to restarting the industry,” Chu said on the call. He declined to comment on the president’s budget request.

    Southern Co. of Atlanta expects to be the first to get a loan guarantee, in two or three months, which may help it finance two additional nuclear reactors at its two-unit Vogtle plant in Georgia, Chief Executive Officer David M. Ratcliffe said in an interview Jan. 27.

    Catalyst for Construction

    Southern is among four companies that were put on a short list for loan guarantees last year. The others are Baltimore-based Constellation Energy Group Inc., NRG Energy Inc., of Princeton New Jersey for a plant planned in Texas, and Scana Corp., of Columbia, South Carolina.

    “The four reactor projects that DOE considers top-tier are plagued with large cost increases, credit-rating downgrades, delays, and reactor-design problems,” said Michele Boyd, a nuclear opponent for Washington-based Physicians for Social Responsibility. “Why are U.S. taxpayers expected to promise to bail out the nuclear industry?”

    The guarantees “can help project sponsors access lower-rate debt financing for clean-energy power projects,” said Richard Myers, vice president of policy development at the Nuclear Energy Institute. “This would act as a catalyst to accelerate construction of new nuclear plants.”

    ‘Blue Ribbon’ Panel

    The Energy Department’s “blue ribbon” panel will study alternatives to the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in Nevada, Chu said. It will be chaired by Lee Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman, and Brent Scowcroft, a former adviser to presidents Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush.

    Obama has said he would halt work on the Nevada project and find another solution to handling spent nuclear fuel.

    “We are done with Yucca,” said Carol Browner, Obama’s chief energy and climate adviser. “We need to be about looking at alternatives.”

    Currently waste is stored at nuclear power plants. There are 104 operating reactors in the U.S. Among the alternatives that should be reviewed are advanced recycling technologies that would maximize energy use and minimize the waste, Obama said in a memo on the commission today.

  45. Wobbei,

    The press used to confront people directly but that changed sometime in the late eighties. I remember watching MacNeil Lehrer during the 88 campaign and watching Bill Black with the Bush campaign tell a “the sky is bright red every day at noon on earth” kind of lie, and MacNeil just let him do it.

    That didn’t used to happen. But at some point, we embraced the idea that letting both sides of an issue have their say was a fair way to arrive at the truth. The unfortunate thing is that corporations and wealthy Americans are more than willing to lie on their own behalf. That puts in a position where the god’s honest truth is presented with equal gravity given to hyperbolical, greed-oriented bullshit.


    As for Clinton running again, she will not challenge Obama. If he runs for re-election, she won’t consider running until 2016. The Democratic party, as fucked as it is right now, is still our best chance at reviving our nation’s fortune and she will not do anything to destroy the party. All politicians deny that they are running again. The last thing she needs is interviews about what she’s doing as SOS to devolve into conversations about whether she will run for the presidency again. Our idiotic press would love nothing more than to ignore what she is doing, and start up a conversation about her challenging Obama and initiate horrendous conflict that prevents her from getting her job done. Right now, her job is, literally, the most important thing in the world – especially if she’s planning on being the next president or is worried that the Republicans will win in 12. She needs to stop all conversations about running again and focus on what she needs to do.

  46. Can we debate on how we can highlight Obama’s failures to his stupid followers? Maybe that would naturally pave the way for Hillary.

    Obama’s Stunning Admission
    Posted by Tom Bevan

    There’s been a remarkable amount of coverage of President Obama’s appearance at the House Republican retreat today, but I haven’t seen anyone focus on the President’s rather stunning admission about the Democrats’ health care legislation (Video):

    The last thing I will say, though — let me say this about health care and the health care debate, because I think it also bears on a whole lot of other issues. If you look at the package that we’ve presented — and there’s some stray cats and dogs that got in there that we were eliminating, we were in the process of eliminating. For example, we said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your — if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you’re not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making. And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge. [emphasis added]

    If we take this statement at face value, President Obama is admitting the the health care bills passed by either the House or Senate (or both) contained provisions which were “snuck in” – presumably by Democratic members and perhaps on behalf of certain lobbyists – that would have in fact prevented people from keeping their current insurance and/or choosing the doctor they want.

    This was one of the core debates on health care throughout last year: Would President Obama and the Democrats’ legislation allow government to come between citizens and their choice of doctors and insurers? Obama promised it wouldn’t. Republicans said it would, and this was one of the aspects of the legislation that led them to characterize it as a government takeover of health care – the same characterization that Obama chastized the GOP for today.

    So it’s a bit of shock to find out now – from the President himself, no less – that one or both of the bills that passed Congress late last year (the House passed its version in late November, the Senate on Christmas Eve Day) contained language that would have violated this pledge.

  47. And so I’m thinking to myself, well, how is it that a plan that is pretty centrist — no, look, I mean, I’m just saying, I know you guys disagree, but if you look at the facts of this bill, most independent observers would say this is actually what many Republicans — is similar to what many Republicans proposed to Bill Clinton when he was doing his debate on health care
    Someone should send that little morsel to Jane Hamphire at Firedog Lake. It would confirm everything she has been saying about this bill being a republican type of proposal which sold out the progressive interests which Hillarys approach supported. Too bad they were dumb enough to support him and trash her when she was running.

  48. After Barack’s stunning admission (which was stunning only to those who never bothered to study his history ala Rezko) we are left with the sober realization that not only is Barack post racial he is post party. He marches solely and exclusively to one drum: show me the money. Music to the ears of Soros, Saudi Princes and other globalists who want to use him as their tool. What a master of deception Mr. Obama is. Where is that prayer rug of mine when I need it.

  49. If I were Fitz I would be looking at the Blago trial as an opportunity to unearth new evidence of wrongdoing by Rezko so I could add some new charges to Uncle Tony’s resume and a few more years in stir. Then I would dare the boob to pardon him. And even if tony did not talk we could keep him off the streets for a few more years, and that is one of the four goals of the criminal law to separate people like him from society. The window for a plea bargain is closing/

  50. Well, is it entirely possible o decides he’s not going to seek re-election because of his albatross status, and Dems beg her to run because of the huge fall out that may occur? I mean how crazy is it that after 8 years of GWB and how much people hated him that Republicans are making a come back? I mean come on. If Hillary has to save the party, she will.

  51. pm317, Wow, Bob Dole was Bill Clinton’s best friend during his administration. LOL!! He looks bad does he, well, when your mean, aunry, and lie about the best President we’ve had in half a century, it takes its toll on your health.

  52. I think she knows 2016 is impossible. It really is. By then the country will be different. A new generation of political leaders will be on stage. There will be no looking back. If it is to happen 2012 is the time. Obama people are the ones who are really pushing the 2016 nonsense, and we know how reliable they are. This country will be in much worse shape by then, and this generation of political leaders will not be what the electorate will want or accept. Life and politics move on. To me this is like gravity. I can argue that it should or should not be there but regardless of what I say I cannot change it.

  53. Wbboei, The healthcare bill that the republicans wanted is no where near what Hillary would have wanted. She wanted mandates, the repubs did not, she wanted to force the insurance companies to lower their rates, the republicans did not.

    Obama’s healthcare is the republicans bill minus tort reform.

  54. I don’t know you keep saying it would be impossible for Hillary to run in 16′ just because she’ll be too old. Well, how old was Raygun?? He was ancient and senile when he left office. I’ve always wondered who was making policy decisions the last 3 years of his Presidency???? No doubt some republican think tank or George Walker Bush.
    As far as things changing and Hillary would be outdated, the women is timeless.

  55. The other rumor obama is whispering is that he would make Hillary vice president in 2012. Another lie. If he runs in 2012 the election will be entirely about him. Her presence will not draw independents. Knowing that what he will need is someone who can shore up his liberal base–someone like Dean, or perhaps a female nobody like Selebuis.

    My problem with these just be patient go to the back of the line her turn will come rumors is they are fantasy island and an obvious attempt by his supporters to keep Hillary people in line. If we follow that path, we will find that when 2016 comes around there will be no brass ring.

  56. I have a friend who tells me that one of the things which is happening now is party label is becoming less important in the eyes of voters. Neither political party represents the American People, but no occupant of the White House prior to this one has shown such disdain for our constitution, bill of rights and traditions. There is no higher priority than removing him from office. If that means the Democrats lose and the Republicans win then so be it. The Democratic Party which I was associated with for years is now an artifact of history. It is the party of Obama–of the elites, for the elits and by the elites. It has become what they used to accuse the Republican Party of being.

  57. JanH, Those were some nice comments. She is as popular as ever and she will only be more popular in 16′. I personally think, although I will support, the republicans are going to shoot themselves in the foot by all this name calling by their pundits. They need to harness the mouths of Beck, Limbaugh, and Hannity and maybe let the folk decide who THEY want this time.

  58. 1. He would not wait in line, WHY SHOULD SHE.

    2. How do we get his mistakes across. We rent billboards in the larger cities, and in the country side, and we start listing the mistakes he has mistakes on them. Then we spread that to the internet billboards.

  59. don’t know you keep saying it would be impossible for Hillary to run in 16′ just because she’ll be too old. Well, how old was Raygun?? He was ancient and senile when he left office. I’ve always wondered who was making policy decisions the last 3 years of his Presidency???? No doubt some republican think tank or George Walker Bush.
    As far as things changing and Hillary would be outdated, the women is timeless.
    Oh Connie> You and I may agree on that. Its the rest of the electorate I am concerned about.

  60. I am not trying to take anyones dream away from them. I am trying to convince people that the opporunity is in the here and now. I think it depends on Obama imploding. In that case she is the logical alternative, and still has an army of supporters ready to march.

  61. 1. He would not wait in line, WHY SHOULD SHE.

    2. How do we get his mistakes across. We rent billboards in the larger cities, and in the country side, and we start listing the mistakes he has mistakes on them. Then we spread that to the internet billboards.

  62. The other rumor obama is whispering is that he would make Hillary vice president in 2012. Another lie. If he runs in 2012 the election will be entirely about him. Her presence will not draw independents.
    Clarification: Hillary would draw millions of independents IF she were at the top of the ticket. My point was she could not do so if she was at the bottom of the ticket because if he runs 2012 will be a mandate on him.

  63. wbboei, I agree it will not help him to put her at the bottom of the ticket. Her supporters know full well that he would not let her do anything on her own, and if she did, he would take credit for it.

  64. Reagan was elected to his first term at the age of 69. Hillary will be no where near that age, I think she will be 66. She is as strong as a horse, she’d be fine. After electing two inexperienced blows, maybe the electorate might actually want someone with experience this time, since by that time things will be much worse. I can’t see the electorate wanting another hope and change artist or compassionate conservative. I think it will experience you can trust.

  65. This is in line with what I was saying above. We must not get so lost in the issues that we lose sight of the forest for the trees. His game is to continue pressing our buttons to maintain his power and to make promises he will never keep either because he never intended to or because he does not know how to govern. Our game is not to get sucked into rebutting him that we lose sight of the forest for the trees. Indeed, our game is to show that he is failing and it is because his approach to governing is all smoke and mirrors–and celebrity.

    Posted by Neil Stevens (Profile)
    Saturday, January 30th at 2:28PM EST

    I was thinking today while I was out making a quick trip: We on the right have fouled up badly our responses to the visit President Obama made to the GOP retreat.

    We’ve spent the whole time bashing Republicans and talking about how great Obama looks on television, when we missed what the true, underlying message was: The President spent his first year in office trying to ignore us, but now has had to come crawling back like the miserable failure that he is.

    He’s the President, so he’ll never look like he’s on his hands and knees begging for whatever legislative scraps we’ll deign to give him, but that’s precisely what he’s doing now. He’s accomplished not one major component of his long-run agenda: Card Check, Cap and Tax, Obamacare, repeal NAFTA, close Guantanamo Bay, retreat from Iraq. He’s done nothing without us, and now he needs us.

    The magnitude of this failure is magnified by the huge Congressional majorities his party has commanded, including the filibuster-proof Senate majority he had between the seating of Senator Franken and the victory of Senator-elect Brown. The President is on a street corner hoping we’ll buy an apple or a pencil from him. He’s failed that badly as a President so far. Let’s remember that, and remind both ourselves and the President’s supporters of that.

  66. There is also the issue of whether the populus will even want another democratic party in power for a while after what everything the dims have done to damage its reputation. As popular and respected as Hillary is, if she is attached to that stigma, it will be that much harder.

  67. I wonder if any of you remember at the end of the Clinton presidency and the end of Madeliene Albright’s administration, she (Albright) was concerned about her safety. She was about to leave office and she was not furnished Secret Service detail. I remember she petitioned GWB for the protection and he refused stating it was too costly and no SoS gets protection after leaving office. I think Ms. Albright had many death threats hanging over her head.
    Does anyone remember exactly what happened to that?? Did she ever get what she needed for protection??
    NoQuarter has a post from Valerie Plame Wilson, the outed CIA agent that was alledgedly outed by either Cheney or Bush. It was a compelling article about women in the CIA.

  68. Admin, LOL!! All the lefty blogs including TM were celebrating (heaving a sigh of relief, really) Obama’s teleprompterless escapade before the GoP.

  69. Admin: LOL! too funny, but how true!

    I just read that Obama’s administration is not backing the 9/11 healthcare bill. Apparently the New York delegation was shocked.

    What’s up with this democrat not caring about our first responders medical conditions after 9/11. I think that was one of Hillary’s signature issues as a New York Senator, wasn’t it??

    Maybe this will be the split that everyone is looking for??

    Lots of angry dems about this.

  70. OK. I am going to make my own Hillary 2012 bumper sticker.

    What if everyone on this site did that?

    2016 is too long for EVERYONE to wait. It’s time to stop being nice and start to fight for this country and our beliefs. The fraud must be removed in 2012.

  71. The little scraps of things that I read here and remember from 2007-8 stick in my head all add up to this for me. The fix was in for Obama and anyone who supported him needs to be dumped as admin says.

    Besides Soros and what ever bunch he represents, the bankers knew they were facing a whirlwind and would either have to sustain a huge loss or pass the loss on to us. Hillary wouldn’t play along, but Obama would. The Kennedy were envious of Bill and Hillary so they joined the conspiracy against Hillary. Who knows why those two losers Amy Klobuchar and Betty McCullum joined, but they did, early on too. Hillary had to be defeated even at the cost of revealing themselves (ex. Barbra Boxer). As she won state after state they had to push up the anti. Hillary’s popular appeal can be measured by the intensity of nastiness turned against her. Ditto for Sarah Palin.

    Watching that nasty old man on Wolf B. show made me sick, if Hillary runs again I hope all Hillary sites will have well thought out coordinated retaliation plans and squads ready to implenment them instantly. No spending 2-3 days getting email address and telephone numbers of managing editors and sponsors. It would be nice to be able to deliver a body blow to a corporation with-in two days – is that possible?

  72. Betty I am with on that. I found this article on Yahoo. It’s will be a feather in Hillary’s cap, if she pulls it off, but the lefties will hate her and the right will love her for it. I hope she get China off their butts.

    … 45 mins ago
    WASHINGTON (AFP) – The US administration is speeding up deployment of defenses against potential Iranian missile attacks in the Gulf to heed off any possible retaliation, The New York Times reported Saturday.

    The move involves placing specialized ships off the Iranian coast and anti-missile systems in at least four Arab countries — Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait — the Times said, citing administration and military officials.

    Oman has also been approached, although no Patriot missiles have been deployed there yet, US officials told the newspaper, adding that the willingness of other Arab states to accept the US defenses reflects growing unease in the region over Iran’s ambitions and capabilities.

    “Our first goal is to deter the Iranians,” a senior administration official told the newspaper. “A second is to reassure the Arab states, so they don’t feel they have to go nuclear themselves. But there is certainly an element of calming the Israelis as well.”

    The deployments could also forestall any Iranian retaliation in response to the sanctions, as well as discourage staunch US ally Israel from launching a military strike against Tehran’s nuclear and military facilities.

    Washington is seeking to win over its allies to slap a fourth set of UN sanctions on Iran that would target the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps believed to control the military aspect of Tehran’s controversial nuclear program.

    Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton upped the pressure on China to recognize the threat from Iran’s nuclear program — which Washington and its Western allies aims to produce nuclear weapons despite Tehran’s insistence otherwise — and join international calls for sanctions.

    General David Petraeus, who heads the US Central Command that oversees US military operations stretching from the Gulf to Central Asia, said the sped-up deployment of missile systems included eight Patriot missile batteries, “two in each of four countries.”

    The unusually public comments about the accelerated deployments, which began under President Barack Obama’s predecessor, George W. Bush, came during an address at the Institute for the Study of War in Washington on January 22.

    “Iran is clearly seen as a very serious threat by those on the other side of the Gulf front, and indeed, it has been a catalyst for the implementation of the architecture that we envision and have now been trying to implement,” he said at the time.

    The United States was also keeping Aegis guided missile cruisers, equipped with advanced radar and anti-missile systems that can intercept medium-range missiles, on patrol in the Gulf at all times, according to Petraeus.

    Though those systems are not designed to intercept Iran’s long-range missile, the Times noted that intelligence agencies estimate it will take Tehran years before it can place a nuclear warhead atop the Shahab III.

    A senior military official told the newspaper that Petraeus began speaking openly about the deployments about a month ago, as Tehran declined the Obama administration’s offer of engagement and Washington faced growing challenges to impose sanctions against the Islamic Republic.

  73. stink-bomb will be visiting nh this tuesday. people at work are pissed because the local papers keep saying that NH is pro-obama. no-one, i mean no-one i know is pro-bo. we are sick of hearing and reading the lies!
    they will probably bus-in bots like they did during the primary. what horse shit.

  74. wbboei
    January 30th, 2010 at 3:17 pm

    wbboei —

    That Neil Stevens comment you posted is amazing. That is a good thing to remember. It is rather mind bending when you think of how little he has been able to accomplish with a supermajority and the incredible will he generated upon his election.

  75. #
    What Would Republican Health Care Reform Look Like? – 2parse
    January 30th, 2010 at 4:46 pm

    […] – as proof that he’s selling out. pm317 wrote on Hillaryis44 that people should, “Tell your bluest of blue friends who are still supporting Obama to read this little piece…” I think they should read this piece – but it stinks of partisanship to presume […]
    Admin, this little trackback up thread from the “2parse” article to my comment is kind of funny. Obama’s base supporters cheerleading his GoP stunt ARE highly partisan and they want single payer system or at least a public option and don’t want any of the republican ideas. They must see how Obama is sneaking in republican ideas into his plan.

  76. I come here everyday, but have never posted before. I live in the Northern suburbs of Chicago and just shopped at a local, upscale grocery store. Ran into a volunteer for a Democratic political candidate. We started talking. She voted for Obama, but now hates him for his treatment of Israel. She knows Rahm and hates him too. She said she doesn’t know any Jewish Democrats who don’t hate Obama. A young African-American woman was heading to work and was afraid someone would hear her, but she also expressed hatred towards Obama. They didn’t say they didn’t like Obama or his policies; they expressed real hatred towards him and the people around him.

    The political volunteer had lots of dirt on lots of stuff. She talked about an upcoming financial collapse. She said that the shit is going to hit the fan regarding Obama and that we are in dangerous times. She expressed great fear for the future.

    I told her “We could have had Hillary”.

  77. says I encourage having the infrastructure in place for Hillary,and if she does not run,then it would benefit whoever we want to support. Run, Hillary, RUN!!!!

  78. Hi Karen,

    Welcome to the site. I’m not surprised that there are so many people angry at this idiot.

    I look forward to more of your posts. 🙂

  79. Earlier I said: Watching that nasty old man on Wolf B. show made me sick, if Hillary runs again I hope all Hillary sites will have well thought out coordinated retaliation plans and squads ready to implement them instantly. No spending 2-3 days getting email address and telephone numbers of managing editors and sponsors. It would be nice to be able to deliver a body blow to a corporation with-in two days.

    I think we should take it to a second level and add any corporations that do business with companies that sponsor individuals purporting to be journalists or pundits who cross the line. I tried so hard to think of a definition of what kind of speech and all I could come up with was “cross the line”. So the next think I thought is what does “cross the line mean” and who decides. My answer is: we will know it when we hear it, and we decide.

    I think just having that list of known offenders, their sponsors, the sponsors products, the companies who do business with the sponsor and that companies products is pretty intimidating. Especially when you consider Hillary has 18 million supporters. And all 18 million of us have been around this track.

  80. Rupert Cornwell: Poor Obama – Hillary Clinton is doing a fine job

    Out of America: The President would dearly love to be as popular as his celebrated Secretary of State

    Sunday, 31 January 2010

    One famous face was absent at the State of the Union address to Congress last week – and it wasn’t the designated cabinet member who always stays away from the Capitol building in Washington on these occasions, to provide continuity of government in case al-Qa’ida pulls off the big one. The missing person was Hillary Clinton, and the silly chatter predictably started.

    Was it a deliberate snub? Had there been a falling out between Barack Obama and the woman he so narrowly defeated for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination? Or had Hillary suddenly been taken ill? In fact, a glance at the diplomatic calendar would have instantly dispelled such notions. The US Secretary of State was away in London, attending important talks on Yemen and Afghanistan, a rather more productive use of her time than shaking hundreds of hands and applauding dutifully at appropriate moments during her boss’s big speech.

    Even so, the non-event was revealing. It spoke to Hillary’s celebrity and to the political ambitions that some cannot believe she does not still harbour, despite disclaimer after disclaimer. And it also reminded us that right now she is a hardworking, constantly travelling Secretary of State who seems to be doing a pretty good job.

    Such judgements must be cautious. US foreign policy is set by the White House, and the most effective secretaries of state are those who combine deal-making savvy with closeness to the president – such as Henry Kissinger under Richard Nixon, and James Baker in the administration of his old friend George Bush Snr. In the end, a secretary of state’s successes and failures are those of the president.

    And Clinton has made her missteps, most notably in the clumsy US efforts to persuade Israel to halt settlement expansion. In an earlier era, the State Department might also have paid a price for the translating gaffe after Obama announced his intention to “reset” relations with Moscow. She presented her Russian opposite number, Sergei Lavrov, with a red button inscribed with the word “peregruzka”, which was thought to mean “reset”. In fact it means “overload” – not quite what was intended. The important thing, however, was that both of them had a good laugh, a sign of how the Obama/Clinton team is improving America’s image abroad after the devastation wrought by George Bush Jnr – and of her own awareness of her star power as a tool of public diplomacy.

    So Hillary is putting her own imprint on US foreign policy. She constantly emphasises “smart power”, which relies less on military might and more on diplomacy. She has used her celebrity to focus attention on issues such as womens’ rights and the global fight against poverty and hunger. She has launched a four-year review to boost the State Department’s resources and staff, and put policy planning on a longer-term basis. And, contrary to many predictions, her husband, Bill, has not been an embarrassment.

    She has worked smoothly with the big-name envoys appointed in key policy areas, including Richard Holbrooke for Afghanistan/Pakistan and George Mitchell for the Middle East. When she was first appointed, and took some time out to study her new brief, there was talk of Clinton’s voice being drowned by a clash of other mighty egos. But no longer.

    “Hillary and the envoys have shown loyalty, consistency and cohesion, and the structure has worked,” one senior ambassador in Washington noted last week. What hasn’t worked (at least not yet), are the policies, as the overlapping, seemingly intractable crises in Iran, the Middle East and Afghanistan attest. For that reason above all, a firm verdict on her performance must wait.

    But Hillary must be doing something right. Polls consistently show her to be the most popular member of the government. She is lucky that her job keeps her away from America’s dysfunctional domestic political system and the deeply unpopular Congress in which she used to serve.

    Even so, Obama right now would die for her 65 or 70 per cent approval rating. From there, in today’s febrile political climate, it is but a small step to speculation about a new Hillary bid for the White House in 2012.

    Now, politics is a funny old business, but that notion seems especially far-fetched. In a public television interview last week, she couldn’t have been clearer, declaring she was “absolutely not interested” in running again for public office. Yes, the Clinton network still has the muscle to mount a campaign if it wants, against the sitting president whose fortunes are in serious decline. But all precedent argues against such a move.

    Every time an incumbent faces a serious primary challenge (see Ronald Reagan against Gerald Ford in 1976, Ted Kennedy against Jimmy Carter in 1980, Pat Buchanan against George Bush Snr in 1992), the outcome is the same. The challenger is defeated, but his party loses the White House in the subsequent presidential election. That cannot be what Hillary Clinton sees as the last chapter in her political career.

    That last chapter has probably begun. Even if Obama asked her, she told the interviewer, she could not imagine serving eight years at State. The job was simply too exhausting. She spoke fondly of life afterwards, “of reading, writing, maybe teaching”. And being a successful one-term Secretary of State is surely preferable to no presidential term at all.

  81. Betty,

    Your posts need to go viral. They are wonderful blueprints for what should take place prior and during the next presidential election.

    Well said!

  82. wbboei
    January 30th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
    The Obama administration is said to have abandoned plans to
    try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four other alleged Sept. 11
    plotters in the heart of downtown Manhattan.


    I missed reading this earlier.

    Another huge misstep by bambi and his hyenas. Abandoned or not, this still paints bambi on the side of terrorists and not Americans.

  83. I spoke with Mrs. Smith tonight and she mentioned that Bush the elder accompanied by his son Jeb visited the White House today on what the Obama Administration described as a “social visit”.

    What are we to make of that? First, obviously, it was not a social visit. Second, it was publicized by MSNBC so we know that the White House wanted this fact to be noted. Third, the Obama Administration wanted to be seen as reaching out to the elder statesman of the party, as opposed to his former opponent McCain. Fourth, Jeb came along as a witness to what was said. Without a witness Obama would lie about the purpose of the meeting just like he lies about everything else.

    Then Mrs. Smith revealed a further fact. Orin Hatch is declaring war if the Dims try to push through health care through reconciliation. That is most likely what Obama wanted to discuss. He is worried that he will come out of this thing throwing snake eyes. So now that his grand mal seizure move has hit a brick wall he is amenable to bi partisanship–for the good of the country of course.

    Reality check: His presidency is floundering before our eyes. Want proof? Read Krauthammer’s analysis of his foreign policy his domestic policy and the serial fuck ups which occurred on with the Detroit bomber, while he enjoyed golf and attended parties. Then look at the late night shows, look at the covers of Time and Newsweek. And listen to how a conservative blogger at Red State puts it:

    “The President spent his first year in office trying to ignore us, but now has had to come crawling back like the miserable failure that he is. He’s the President, so he’ll never look like he’s on his hands and knees begging for whatever legislative scraps we’ll deign to give him, but that’s precisely what he’s doing now. He’s accomplished not one major component of his long-run agenda: Card Check, Cap and Tax, Obamacare, repeal NAFTA, close Guantanamo Bay, retreat from Iraq. He’s done nothing without us, and now he needs us.”

    So now you are Bush the elder. You hear him say he wants bi partisanship. He is even willing to stop making your son the scapegoat for everything. He wants you to intercede for the good of the country–the country Obama loves so much that the refuses to prove he is a lawful citizen. He says with respect President Bush for the good of the country please talk to McCain, McConnell and Boehner. Tell them I am sorry. I want good relations. I want all boats to rise with the tide (the little groper fed him that line form Kennedy). For the good of the country we must work together.

    Again, you are Bush. What do you do? You know this guy is a four flusher from the word go. You and Bill have shared stories about that. His word means nothing and that is why you brought Jeb. I think you say you will carry the message. You have to do that. But do you whore yourself out to your own party for this phony, who has spent the past year disparaging your family? Does a cat bark?

    I dislike Bush the elder. He is too patrician for my tastes. I think he is weak in certain ways. I worry about his ties to international banks, the Carlyle group and all that. But the man is a legitimate war hero. He is someone with experience and a proven track record of success. And he is a patriot. Barack by contrast is none of those things.

    That being the case you have to talk to your people and figure out a way to protect the American People, do their business and find an effective way to limit the damage that this flake, this fool with energy Barack Obama can do in the time that remains. You must make sure there is blood in the streets in 2010, so he does not have the mandate he has now to destroy the country. There is nothing personal about this. It is strictly a game of numbers.

  84. Copy of Hillary’s thesis on Alinsky:


  85. I wonder if there were any under the table deals offered to Bush Sr.

    I doubt very much that Bush Sr. has all that much influence anymore on his party. And I’ll bet they both talked out of both sides of their mouths.

  86. I wonder if there were any under the table deals offered to Bush Sr.

    I doubt very much that Bush Sr. has all that much influence anymore on his party. And I’ll bet they both talked out of both sides of their mouths.
    I doubt there were any under the table deals offered to Bush Sr. There were those old rumors that Sr. was having an affair, and it would be just like Axelrod to threatened him with exposure. But in that case Sr. would probably strike Axelrod with his cane, and the fear of that could have a deterrent effect. Short of that what could Barack and his Chicago pals offer? To stop pounding on W? I doubt Bush the elder would betray is country for that. I do not see any quid pro quo here.

    I agree Sr.’s influence within the party has been vastly diminished. Still, he can carry a message. Also, if he wants to have lunch with McCain, McConnell or Boehner, I doubt his invitation would be declined. He still has access and influence.

  87. Karen
    January 30th, 2010 at 7:17 pm


    After the debacle of 2008 it is easy to feel like you are living in a parallel universe — wondering why others don’t see what you see. Thank you so much for posting here, and for what you shared. Welcome.

  88. Now the challenge, I guess, I would have for you as a freshman is, what are you doing inside your caucus to make sure I’m not the only guy who’s responsible for this stuff,” Obama said, calling earmark abuse a bipartisan problem, “so that we’re working together?”

    Would that be like something “Freshman Fraud” did? I mean, he says it sooo demeaning as he in reality was a freshman senator that did Jack squat.

  89. turndownobama
    January 30th, 2010 at 9:38 pm
    Copy of Hillary’s thesis on Alinsky:

    Thanks Turndown. I have been interested in reading it.

  90. Karen: thank you for the wonderful post. If we have got Admin, other sites, some pundits and the people saying rise Hillary rise magic can still happen.

  91. Question: who is the most dangerous man in the country to his divine majesty Barack Huessein Obama?

    Answer: Charles Kauthammer, who is brilliant and not uncorruptible.

  92. I wonder how many temper tantrums obama is having now. He hasn’t had one accomplishment yet, many failures, but no successes.

    I guess that is what you get when you vote in a freshman community organizer with no idea how to lead.

  93. wbboei
    January 30th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
    pm 317: it has been years since I have seen Bob Dole. Then a moment ago I saw that picture. I do not know if you ever saw clips of the silent version of the movie Phantom of the Opera. He looks like Lon Chaney Sr.

    Too much Viagra

  94. Sooner or later the African Americans will realize that Oblabber is not one of them. He is more white than black, more elite than common folk, more Chicago machine than legitimate pol. When that happens, his last line of defense will collapse.

  95. Too much Viagra
    Yes. The before and after are scary. On the other hand maybe he is consuming too much ethanol.

  96. The “ONE” was at a college basketball game and even called a couple of plays. hmm, hmmm, this man never works, neither does his speaker of the house. Both love to fly around on their tax payer supported jet, eating their argula and drinking their Grey Goose Vodka martini’s.
    They can’t be bothered with the problems of the “little people”, you know those they call “astroturf”.

  97. turndownobama, thank you for the link to Hillary’s thesis on Alinsky. I read some of it, skipped to the last paragraph. Now that is what a thesis looks like and is a sharp contrast to MO’s who said I am black and I am mistreated which was followed up with ‘for the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country.’
    But, to MO’s credit, she had least her thesis could be accessed for a while, unlike Obummer.
    And, yes, let’s start a drumbeat for Hillary to run.

  98. wbboei, I have been watching re-runs of C-span. This was apparently after SOTU message and the knockdown to the republicans the next day.

    The Obama lovers crowd was calling him spectucular and wonderful and why hasn’t he and will be continue to kick some repub butt??

    It was guy named Ezra Brooks, I think I have heard you say he had CDS, but not sure. He’s a kool-aid drinker for sure. It was weird listening to a bunch of folks who still think the demoRATS are still wonderful.

  99. Martin Luther King deserves sainthood for saving us from Obama’s Rezko deal on health care deform:
    It was a close-run thing, folks. The nearest-run thing you ever saw.

    Sen. Tom Harkin, the chairman of the Senate Health Committee, said negotiators from the White House, Senate and House reached a final deal on healthcare reform days before Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts.

    Labor leaders had announced an agreement with White House and congressional representatives over an excise tax on high-cost insurance plans on the Thursday before the special election.


    Harkin said “we had an agreement, with the House, the White House and the Senate. We sent it to [the Congressional Budget Office] to get scored and then Tuesday happened and we didn’t get it back.” He said negotiators had an agreement in hand on Friday, Jan. 15.

    (Via The Corner) No chance at that point for calling an emergency session on Saturday the 16th or Sunday the 17th, of course. But Monday the 18th… was Martin Luther King Day. In other words, a federal holiday. So there was no chance of action until Tuesday the 19th; and Tuesday the 19th was too late. Imagine what it would have looked like if they had passed this thing on the very day that Scott Brown won a Senate election in Massachusetts on a platform of stopping this thing; but even if you couldn’t, Democratic legislators apparently could.

    Moe Lane

    PS: Nope, it’s not even ironic. Just… karmic.

    Crossposted to Moe Lane.

  100. Quickly, quickly, quickly was what Obama and his henchmen said. Like Cossacks invading the Montmartre district of old Paris pounding their beer steins on the table screaming bistro, bistro, bistro which meant quickly the bots wanted it all done–health deform quickly, crap and trade quickly , second stimulus quickly, amnesty for twenty million illegals quickly quickly quickly, and the echo chamber in big media agreed with Barack and MacBeth that if tis done what ought to be done tis best it be done quickly, quickly, quickly. I counted 87 times they used that word. And but for the Massachusetts Miracle and the happy coincidence of Martin Luther Kings birthday the really bad guys would have won. But now Barack in the same position of Braddock’s army left without a scalp to its crown for his stellar, magnificent, incomparable, magic, narcissistic, stupid, insulting and boring state of the union message. And confesses that the health care deform bill he pushed was more like a Republican Bill, bad things were in it, nevertheless he tried his level best to pass it quickly. Let us hope that Obama is removed from office quickly when the time comes.

  101. I read somewhere that Barack accused the Republicans of making him out to be some kind of Bolshevik. I take his point. Just because he wants to take over the private sector, bury our grandchildren in debt. raise an internal army equal in size to the armed forces, play dirty tricks to seize and maintain power, lie to his constituents and do Rezko deals writ large, that is certainly no reason to call him a Bolshevik. There are worse things to call him than that.

  102. Suppose you were Billy Tauzin right now. Former Louisiana bluedog turned Republican turned health care industry lobbyist. Billy is the one who did the sweetheart deal with Barack which screwed the taxpayers and benefited the industry and Obama. Spent $150 million on advertising with the expectation of getting all those new assureds and saving $80 billion. Well, they spent the money and got nothing for it. Oh the pity of it all. Cold day in hell before they trust Barack again–Peace Prize or no Peace Prize. They would probably like to get a piece if his ass right now–figuratively speaking.

  103. wbboei, well I guess that hurry up and lets get everything done in just a few months could mean he only had a few months until the SH(* hit the fan. He wanted to be remembered by something other than a crook as Nixon was and still is.

    Oh, if only we knew, the celebration that would take place. I wonder what Blago is saying, afterall his trial is in June.

  104. Wbboei, This could be right because look at the numbers of dems retiring or changing parties. When Blago gets thru spilling his guts nar a single one will want to have a D behind their name.

  105. First Libya. Can Iran be far behind?

    Libya strikes billion-dollar Russian arms deal

    MOSCOW — Libya has struck a deal to buy Russian arms worth almost two billion dollars, Russian news agencies quoted Prime Minister Vladimir Putin as saying Saturday.

    “Yesterday (Friday), a contract worth 1.3 billion euros (1.8 billion dollars) was signed. It does not only involve firearms”, Putin was quoted as saying by Ria Novosti and Interfax.

    Putin was speaking following a meeting with the head of the Izhmash factory, which manufactures Kalashnikov rifles.

    Russian officials said early this week that negotiations were underway with the Libyan Defence Minister Younes Jaber in Moscow over the sale of Russian weapons.

    The Russian prime minister did not specify the type of arms or military equipment involved in the deal.

    But a Russian diplomatic source told Interfax Tuesday however that Libya wanted to acquire 20 fighter planes, at least two S-300 air defence systems, several dozen T-90C tanks and other arms.

    Moscow and the North African state enjoyed close ties during the Cold War, and much of Libya’s arsenal was purchased from the Soviet Union in its last years.

    Moscow and Tripoli have stepped up their contacts in recent years. In 2008 Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi visited the Russian capital in his first visit to Moscow since the 1980s.

  106. 2012 Sign me up for NM.

    Mass keeps leading us in the way we should go. They voted for HRC in the primary, when Oo tried to spin it was all locked up, and now they not only said no to HCR, they said Hxll No.

    If the courts stood up to him on the financing stuff, why would they not want to know where he was born? Maybe after the SOTU they will change their minds.

  107. What we need is an Earth Idol tv program. Waffles has nothing left to run for so lets give him something. His entire political career has been about moving up the ladder. Where can he go now? If there was a world wide competition on who is most revered I doubt that he couldn’t throw his hat in the ring. He wins and he can make billions giving empty speeches for his lifetime. win win situation if I have ever seen one.

  108. I have heard at least four people over the last week make a joke about the 9/11 trials being moved to Pitsburgh. Scary thought but what the freud was that economic summit about? All I know is that thousands of hourly wage people lost four days of work. The working poor were crippled by the summit. Most were not compensated for the event. Perhaps I am paranoid but the entire thing felt like a test run for something else. Perhaps the trials are it?

  109. In order for Hillary to run in 2012, we must clear the field for her. Obama must become so toxic that he will be pressured not to run by the power elite.

    Perhaps as his popularity falls, the “protection” which is keeping facts about his passports, college status etc, will fall apart and Obama will be exposed, embarraassed, shown to be a liar and prevented from seeking a second term.

    Perhaps he will see he has no chance of success and just retire. Afterall, he will be a rich, powerful ma, at our expense. He will have his monumental library to build and can p[lay golf and basketball.

    Obama has ADD. He will tire of this.

  110. henry

    i suggest they move the trials to chicago*. let chicago become the next smoking hole target for the terrorists.

    *relocation of all hrc supporters out of area first.

  111. i suggest they move the trials to chicago*.

    As someone with 2 children living in Manhattan, I think that’s a great idea.

  112. By the way, it is always great to see first time posters. We know a lot of people read, and it is always great to add their thoughts to the conversation.

  113. JanH
    January 30th, 2010 at 10:07 pm

    All we know for sure is a favor was being asked for. Who was doing the asking and who was doing the granting remains unknown. What we do know is- No one in DC does nothin’for nothin’. So, be it a favor in exchange for a favor or something more tangible, we may never know.

    Perhaps the exchange is based on the weight of the request- which makes good sense.. but I’m not about to begin sanctifying politicians absolving them of personal or business gains. They all do it. The reason for the request is more important than the price of the exchange.

  114. Henry, Obama has been climbing the ladder ever since he got into politics and now that he has the position he’s been working for all he wants to do is go on vacation.

    I would love to know the real reason Pappy Bush and Jeb came to see the “One” yesterday.

    As far as support, you should have heard the Washington Journal call in line this morning, his support is straight down racial lines.

  115. confloyd
    January 31st, 2010 at 5:04 am

    Connie, Blago is a contestant on Trump’s new Apprentice Show premiering March 14.

  116. I really do come here every day and have since 2008. I feel like Hillary44 and Hillbuzz keep me sane. Should have signed up long ago!

    I am going to a Democratic Primary rally tomorrow and will let you know what I hear. The long-time Democratic volunteer I spoke with yesterday talked like she knew lots of inside info. She said Blago has been set up because he knows too much. I’ve always thought that. He was elected governor twice and suddenly he became a buffoon. Never made any sense to me. I think the upcoming Rezko and Blago trials will provide lots of insight into the world of Obama. The insider thinks that Obama will be impeached because of these trials. I’ve said for two years that the man will implode. Pleasant thought, isn’t it?

    Again, thanks for the kind welcome.

  117. says, hmmmm, wonder if Big Bush and Jeb have some dirt on Obummer and encouraged him to STOP bashing W and get to governing? I know if I were a parent in Big Bush’s situation I would try to squash him.

  118. Okay Barack got your golf clubs, your golf shoes, enough golf balls for mulligans and to secretly replace the ones you lose when no one is looking while blathering about transparency, enough margaritas, your scoring pencil with an easer, and your caddy and body person Reggie Love–your big media idolators and sordid scum really need to do a story on him and raise all the sexual innuendos they did with with your opponents in the election. You have been to the practice tee, warmed up, four reporters from AP, ABC, MSNBC brought you Valentines Day choclates and promised to print favorable stories about your golf game if you have them access, which obviously you did. Oh yes, the cell phones have been turned off, because they would interfere with your concentration. Axelrod is you forecaddy to point you in the right direction on blind holes. Orzag will keep score.

    Well what is the bet?

    Barack: How about a trillion dollar Nassau (a trillion dollars to whoever wins the front side, another trillion to whoever wins the back side, and a trillion to the whoever wins the 18 hole total)? Also, we should play skins (first on, first in, points on birdies, eagles, sandys. Then you and I can have a side bet on best ball and aggregate two strokes a side.

    Gosh Barack you say that so fast I don’t understand the rules. Problem is I doubt I would understand them any better if you repeated them. All I need to know is how much could I lose, and how can I pay for it.

    Barack: I am your friend. I will take care of you. Just like I took care of Kevin Johnson, and so many others from Chicago who you have not even heard of because my friends over there (pointing to the four big media shills who cannot hear what he is saying but grin and wave back–toodles). If you get in trouble I will bail you out. I have control of a supermajority in Congress, my hand on the printing press, and my hand in the pocket of the middle class. Yes, life is good.

  119. This is why he has to be destroyed as a political figure. I mean destroyed politically. Clyburn, Brazille and others are rigging the game to protect him and there must be a revolution from the grass roots to stop him. Tis is where we can make common cause with the progressive wing of the party to defeat the big business wing Obama represents. This should be standard fare at FireDog Lake. If you want to help Hillary we must protest this destruction of party democracy. This needs to be bumper sticker material because this is the game. This is pure evil to silence your voice. Here is what Red State says about it and bear in mind they will tell us things about the dems that the dims will not tell us. This is what lies behind their keep the caucuses and eliminate the caucuses masquerading under the deceptive word “reform”.

    (Via Hot Air Headlines) Let me add a thought to this observation by Jazz Shaw:

    It seems to me that Obama is a good enough politician that he can read the writing on the wall. He’s going to have to start dealing with a significantly more powerful Republican force in Congress next year and seems to be laying the groundwork to get something done. Smart for the Republicans. Smart for Obama. The problem is, a lot of the President’s most liberal supporters are clearly having a hard time coping with the idea of both parties having some input to the governmental process. They’ll come along kicking and screaming sooner or later, but for now it’s going to remain The Audacity of Cope.

    …which is this: the President does not need a Beijing Consensus in order to look good. In fact, a drubbing of his party in November would probably be excuse enough for him to abandon what are a whole raft of unpopular policy positions, appear ‘bipartisan,’ and run on that in 2012. It would require a certain willingness for the President to throw his legislative colleagues under the bus en masse, though: and, really, how likely is that?

    Moe Lane

    PS: Primary challenge? Bless your heart, but the President’s already having the rules changed so that others cannot not do unto him as he did unto Clinton. Gotta love those top-down political organizations, yes?

  120. I got a glimps of a fellow on the news shows today that gave me the same feeling I got when I saw that video clip of Giannoulias walking through a crowd of “admirers” looking like the slick crook he is. The fellow, I didn’t catch his name, is going up to NH to help John Sununu (sp) out. I got the feeling he is the new boy “they” have picked, who ever they are. Obama’s usefulness is over now isn’t it? The bailout bill passed, that was all they really wanted from him wasn’t it? I was just passing through the room and so I don’t know anything about the guy so I am sorry if I am wrong about him.

    I spoke too soon, he would be useful for one more job, could they force him to try for a second term in order to block Hillary so that they can ram this “new wonderful” guy down our throats? I think Scott Brown was as much a shock to them as it was to Pelosi, who thought all opposition was astroturfing because she was so heavily involved in it on her end.

    In the end does anyone think we will have the candidate we want unless we really demand that candidate. And how can we stand up to the MSM, and their tactic of withering ridicule of any but their chosen candidate. The think about that ridicule is we all have our insecurities and fear of it so when it is directed toward someone a lot of people will just sooner walk away then associate themselves with it. And of course there are some who jump-on in order to show how “intelligent and informed” they are.

    In the past we have been passive participants in campaigns. Right now political parties are planning their campaigns in secret, I think we should be planning our active participation too, but not in secret. Can the noObama coalition agree on a few principles that we will uphold no matter who it is who crosses the line?

    Or can “they” pull it off again just by offering up a “new shiny thing” to a habitually unprepared population?

  121. Found on the dedication page of Hillary Clinton’S senior thesis “THERE IS ONLY THE FIGHT…”

    “And what there is to conquer by strength and submission, has already been discovered once or twice, or several times, by men who one cannot hope to emulate

    -– but there is no competition — there is only the fight to recover what has been lost and found and lost again and again: and now, under conditions that seem unpropitious. But perhaps neither gain nor loss for us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business.”

    T.S. Eliot ”East Corker”

  122. 1. If you think about this whole thing the way Machiavelli would, you would see the Achilles heel of the Dimocratic Party. Its entire existence and future hinges on the political success and survival of one man. If he is shown to be what he is which is to say corrupt and inept, then the entire edifice comes tumbling down–like the Walls of Jerico.

    2. But there is a further dimension to the problem. In the dark of night Clyburn and other Obama dogs are changing the rules to prevent a primary challenge to him. Specifically, they intend to eliminate or diminish the power of superdelegates while preserving the undemocratic caucus system.

    3. It is imperative to shine the light on this act of political grand larceny, draw it into high relief, freeze it and portray it for what it is.

    a. to perpetuate the caucus system is to put the primary process in the hands of thugs, whom history has shown engage in voter fraud and intimidation. See Lynette Long.

    b. to eliminate superdelegates is to destroy the check and balance against this kind of fraud– if they act in an appropriate manner.

    c. the beneficiary of this change is Satan Obama. The victim is Hillary and anyone else who speaks on behalf of the American People.

    4. This change in party rules will convert the Democratic Party into a nation wide replica of the Chicago Political Machine. In Chicago, no none runs for political office without the protection and support of the ring. At one time it was Capone, whereas today it is Daley and the people behind him. In this case, the beneficiary will be Satan Obama.

    5. It is laughable that this perversion of democracy should be peddled to the public as reform. John Kass should tear that lie wide open. He knows what Chicago corruption is all about, and he should speak to this issue. There is a difference between corruption and reform. Corruption which masquerades as reform is still corruption.

    And right now there is no complaining victim.

    6. Just look at who is pushing this “reform”. Porkboy Clyburn (who gives fat government contracts to relatives), Donna the Blimp (who conspired with Karl Rove to change the rules to disenfranchise Hillary supporters before) and other self dealing scumbags want who see it as yet another avenue for self dealing.

    7. Somehow we need to expose this. If we let this happen, it will be the final nail in the coffin of democracy.

  123. wbboei
    January 30th, 2010 at 11:35 pm
    Sooner or later the African Americans will realize that Oblabber is not one of them. He is more white than black, more elite than common folk, more Chicago machine than legitimate pol. When that happens, his last line of defense will collapse.

    They are waking up. There are still some who only voted for him because he is an AA.
    While doing taxes this one AA started talking about O. He was saying they are picking on him because he is black, that they never did this to any of the other presidents. I told him where have he been in some bubble. I said O has not done one thing but play golf, take vacations and all you see him doing is making speeches. I said this guy thinks he is still campaiging. He just wants to be seen and does not want to work.
    This guy did admit his mother and sister are saying the same thing. They are tired of looking at him.

    He did say O promised to bring the home the soldiers from Iraq but instead he are sending them to Afaganistan. He is mad about that.
    He is also mad about he has done not one thing about getting jobs here.
    More and more people are coming in saying they have lost their jobs

    I did tell him he should start reading more about O instead of listening to CNN and all the other news stations.

  124. One more comment.

    I understand the government wants to help out people in need, but i get boiling mad when the government is giving people who work with zero taxes withheld extra money in their refund. People are walking out with 9000.00 refunds and have not paid one penney in withholding taxes. The ones on social security who have paid their dues can’t get a cost of living raise. What is wrong with this picture.

    Most who are getting this money will blow it in a week. They have their boyfriend sitting right there waiting to spend it.

    Something has to be done about this waste.

  125. Admin, Wbboei, and others have commented on Jim Webb’s visit with Hillary at the State Dept few days ago. IF 2012 is going to go the way we want, I think that meeting was a watershed event, because this is what I think is playing out. The powers that be (the ones that rule the country, the money gang of 100) sent Webb to feel her out. He is their emissary. The money gang got all they wanted from Obama (bailout, etc) but they do not want the country and the economy ruined, for their own sake, if not for the rest of us. Jim WEbb doesn’t care about the money gang, but he cares deeply about the middle class. His roots are in Southwest VA, the coal country, not the flashy northern virginia (I live in northern VA, I know). He stands for economic justice, FDR type of values, even though he doesn’t always articulate them very well.

    Yea, Hillary talked about Myanamar after the meeting to camouflage all that, but I really think there was something going on. I mean, if you are the gang of 100, who else would you send to talk to Hillary? She trusts no one from the senate these days. Webb did not support her last year, but people know he is a man of integrity.

    We should keep a watch on Jim Webb and his speeches/comments in the next few months to read the tea leaves. The money men got to CNN, US World News, etc. Something is going on. I hope it is all good for the country and for Hillary.

  126. Just met a man and his wife that just moved here from Alaska. He worked in the oil business and worked with Todd Palin. He says he is a hard working honest guy. He said Sarah was the best thing that ever happened to Alaska.
    We got to talking about how the bot infiltrated Alaska and destroyed Sarah. He also agreed the republicans were out to destroy her just as much as the Obama campaign.
    He says the reason both sides are scared of Sarah is that she cleaned up Alaska of the oil crooks. He said the legislature would convene to get drunk and party and the only thing they ever voted on was giving themselves a raise. Sarah cleaned them out and they also were out to get her. The people in Alaska (avg working folk) love Sarah. All of Alaska gets an oil dividend every year thanks to Sarah.
    This guy is a retired marine (vietnam sp.ops)and he absolutely hates Nasty Pelosi because she said the military was getting militant.

  127. neetabug
    January 31st, 2010 at 1:43 pm
    One more comment.

    I understand the government wants to help out people in need, but i get boiling mad when the government is giving people who work with zero taxes withheld extra money in their refund. People are walking out with 9000.00 refunds and have not paid one penney in withholding taxes. The ones on social security who have paid their dues can’t get a cost of living raise. What is wrong with this picture.


    How is this happening? I have to fight for every deduction.

  128. birdgal, I believe that is called “earned income tax credit”. This has been going on for years, it is usually an low wage worker that has a full-time job and has children. I am not sure which administration did this, I think it was Clinton’s.
    The idea was too get people to work instead of beign on welfare. It was also great for the economy because most folks bought something every year like a washer/dryer, used car, furniture and such. I don’t mind it because it was designed to give those folk who work a helping hand and not welfare. Its a good program. Usually these folks are minimum wage employees with no hope of ever getting these things.

  129. confloyd
    January 31st, 2010 at 4:39 pm
    birdgal, I believe that is called “earned income tax credit”. This has been going on for years, it is usually an low wage worker that has a full-time job and has children. I am not sure which administration did this, I think it was Clinton’s.
    The idea was too get people to work instead of beign on welfare. It was also great for the economy because most folks bought something every year like a washer/dryer, used car, furniture and such. I don’t mind it because it was designed to give those folk who work a helping hand and not welfare. Its a good program. Usually these folks are minimum wage employees with no hope of ever getting these things.

    I agree, but 9,000 dollars? Is the earned income credit higher this year?

  130. To those of us who know and love him dearly, Barack’s little admission to the Republicans that the insurance friendly health care deform bill which he tried to ram thorough was really like what the Republicans would do, and that it contained some very bad things comes as no surprise. We knew he was not a traditional democrat but a Chicago Machine kind of guy always willing to do Rezko deals to get ahead. Also, his willingness to admit as much to the Republicans in an effort to suck up to them after his stinging defeat is Massachusetts is de rigeur for him. Like the Leprachun in Finnean’s Rainbow it is a clear cut case of When I am not near the one I love I love the one I’m near. This cut from the Broadway play rehearsal says it all starting at 1:05:

  131. Obama’s New Strategy: Blame the Other Guys

    h t t p://,0,128927.column

    Jan. 27, 2010: Pres. Obama: “What the American people hope – what they deserve – is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics,”

    Jan 31, 2010: Axelrod on Republicans from the article above: “They didn’t pay enough of a price for what was a determined strategy not to work with us,” he said. Now, “they either work with us or they have to pay the price for working against us.”

    Interesting way to try to “work through differences” and build more bipartisanship….

Comments are closed.