U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will visit five Latin American nations next week, seeking to foster relationships with some newly elected leaders and cement ties with others.
Hillary Clinton was scheduled to visit Uruguay, Argentina (they have a woman President), then Chile.
Clinton will bid farewell to President Michelle Bachelet, Chile’s popular leader who will be leaving with high approval ratings for steering her country through the global economic downturn and promoting progressive social reforms. Under Chile’s constitutional term limits, a president cannot run for a second consecutive term.
Oh right, Chile has a woman President too. After Chile, it’s on to Brazil, Costa Rica (“which elected its first female president this month”), and the final stop in Guatemala. South America, maligned as having a “macho culture”, elects women throughout the continent. What does the electoral history of South America say about the big neighbor to the North, us?
* * * * * *
Remember in early April 2007 when Don Imus on MSNBC attacked some young women basketball players with his “nappy headed hos” comment? The attack on women was quickly turned into a mostly racist remark. All the women on the basketball team were women. Not all the women on the basketball team were black. But it became a racial issue, not so much a sexist and misogyny issue.
Jackson: “It’s not just Imus making a statement but when people like you appear on the show and Tim Russert and, and, and McCain and Harold Ford, you give, you’ve given credence to the show.“
Jackson then went in for the kill:
Gregory: “I’m sorry, Reverend Jackson, I just have to interrupt you here. I’m sorry, be very precise in what you are saying.”
Jackson: “All right.”
Gregory: “You are saying from, what, 3:00 to 12, because we do have African Americans who work at this company who are on MSNBC and NBC and I don’t want to detract from your point because you are entitled to make it, but I think you need to be accurate.”
Jackson: “All right. Name- Name- Name- Name- Name me a host of an MSNBC show.”
Gregory: “We’ve gone through this before. We did this a few days ago on the air. Alison Stewart is an African American host on MSNBC.”
Jackson: “So, does she host, does she host between 3:00 and 12?
After Imus was fired MSNBC promised reform. Joe Scarborough took over the time slot and for a short while there was a black sidekick by the name of John Ridley. Ridley has long been gone.
We mention this history because the Tea Party movement has long been under attack, just like Hillary supporters, as being racists. The Tea Party people hit back. They hit back with a video invitation to a meeting in Dallas today:
A tea party group is criticizing Keith Olbermann for suggesting the conservative grassroots organizations lack diversity, challenging the MSNBC host to attend an anti-tax rally on Saturday.
A 90-second web video posted on Monday by the Dallas Tea Party rebuts the liberal “Countdown” host’s attacks on the groups during his show.
“Let me ask all of you who attend these things, how many black faces do you see at these events?” Olbermann says during a clip highlighted in the video.
“Well, Keith, we see a whole lot more at our events than we see at MSNBC,” a narrator responds, as the video cuts to an image of the network’s mostly white lineup.
MATTHEWS: But isn’t that a challenge, because when it comes down to that final decision to vote for president, a woman president, a woman commander in chief, will be an historic decision for people. Not just men, but women as well. Elisabeth, you’re always thinking about these things.
BUMILLER: It’s Golda Meir, it’s Margaret Thatcher. I mean, we all remember these women. I, you know, I think we can get there.
MATTHEWS: But we’ve got Patton and John Wayne on our side
And of course there was the day when old Imus met the the latest Imus and discussed the “horny monster”:
IMUS: Can she be elected president?
MATTHEWS: You know, somewhere out in the Atlantic Ocean, I think there might be a giant, green, ugly, horny monster. A gigantic, gigantic monster of anti-Hillary, an anti-woman Hillary, anti-liberal woman Hillary, some real ferocious beast out there that says no matter what happens between now and Election Day, they’re not going to let her win. There’s men, some women, are just not going to let this woman, this woman win the presidency. I don’t know whether that monster’s out there. All men I meet are afraid to talk like that. You only hear criticism of Hillary from smart, college-educated women. They’re the ones that always have a problem with her now.
But something tells me this country hasn’t changed that dramatically. You know, a friend of mine pointed out the other day that we let African-Americans vote starting in the 1860s, at least under the law. It took us until the 1920s to let women vote. It’s easier for men to accept a black guy as president than a woman president, I think, historically.
So why’s everybody so happy about Hillary? Have we changed overnight? And that’s what I can’t get in my head. If we have changed overnight, that’s a big development. If we haven’t, we haven’t talked about it yet. But there’s something out there about having a woman president – it’s huge — and nobody wants to talk about it. Just the idea of a woman president. And nobody’s argued it. It’s always — it’s all this politically correct, careful discussion. And yet it’s there, and nobody’s debating it.
MSNBC and NBC eventually went to war against Hillary Clinton and the very idea of a woman president. South America’s “macho” men have elected women and the “horny” monster tsunami did not appear. It is in America, at NBC and MSNBC that the horny monster reigns. The horny green monster is in technicolor. It is on MSNBC.
Something important happened yesterday in the Hillary Clinton For President 2012 campaign. But that development will have to wait to be discussed (maybe tomorrow, maybe Sunday, for sure next week). Today is Friday and Friday is news dump day and get the garbage out day. The Friday news dump and get-out-the-garbage day this week started on Thursday. Under cover of the Barack Obama Health Summit Publicity Stunt, lots of dirty deeds started the Friday Dump Day Follies – on Thursday.
* * * * * *
Remember when we Democrats used to wear those cute buttons that said things like “This is not a Patriot Act”? We wore those to protest George W. Bush and the passage of the Patriot Act. Many of our compatriots at the time demonstrated passionately against the Patriot Act.We Democrats were angry and protested on issues such as privacy rights. Democratic leaders denounced George W. Bush and the Republicans and their “tyrannies”. Oh how we Democrats protested and stomped our feet and swore never ending hatred of what we denounced as the improperly named “Patriot Act”.
Yesterday, by a voice vote (which requires unanimous consent, meaning not a single Dimocrat objected to approve without having to record the vote so Senators could be held accountable) the overwhelmingly Dimocratic U.S. Senate voted to extend the Patriot Act.
In agreeing to pass the bill, Senate Democrats retreated from adding new privacy protections to the USA Patriot Act. The Senate approved the bill on a voice vote with no debate. It now goes to the House.
We must have missed the outraged protests from organizations such as Move-On and the defense bar of lawyers who yelled when it was Republicans passing the Patriot Act. Next time anyone, including Hillary supporters, says we must vote for those that are “with us” on the issues, tell them to stick it up their Patriot Act.
Let’s take a few moments today to laugh, mock, and fully deride Gay fools. Here at Big Pink we support civil rights for Gay-Americans. We wrote many, many articles warning Gay Americans about Barack Obama. But, just as with Black people and White people, some Gay people are the lowest of the low. We won’t “mince” our words in politically correct language. We will denounce, mock, totally spew disgust at Gay fools. And there are many Gay fools (just as their are many straight fools, black fools, white fools and fools everywhere. There are even “April Fools” every month of the year.). We won’t conduct a therapy session for Gay fools here, we intend to slap them awake.
We wrote “Women, Gays, Jews: Wake Up!” in June 2009. We quoted James Pietrangelo II, a Gay man who is no fool. Pietrangelo is worthy of respect, not only as a human being (everyone deserves that level of respect, even fools and gay fools) but because he understands the problem and is not afraid to tell the truth to Gay fools (via Time magazine):
“He’s a coward, a bigot and a pathological liar,” Pietrangelo said in an interview with TIME shortly after the high court declined to hear his appeal. “This is a guy who spent more time picking out his dog, Bo, and playing with him on the White House lawn than he has working for equality for gay people,” he added. “If there were millions of black people as second-class citizens, or millions of Jews or Irish, he would have acted immediately” upon taking office to begin working to lift “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” Pietrangelo fought in Iraq in 1991 as an infantryman, and returned as a JAG officer for the second Iraq War, before being booted out in 2004 for declaring he was gay as he was readying for a third combat tour. He was representing himself before the high court.
Gay-Americans are the targets of a particular hatred from Obama. That hatred is sometimes passive-aggressive. That hatred is sometimes disguised with sweet words. That hatred is sometimes overt. Because the hatred at times has been so overt Gay-Americans are the among the first to wake up from their Hopium addled state.
Last night Obama delivered a degenerate campaign speech. Consider the idiot Gay-Americans who voted for Obama and continue to give the boob and his Dimocrats money. When it is to squeeze money from Gay-Americans Obama employs direct, declarative language: “I will end ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’.”
Last night however, Gay-Americans got this campaign promise kinda, sorta: “This year I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.”
That was it. Gay-Americans who foolishly trust Obama to actually repeal the law they hate, better get to parsing Obama’s words. Obama is not going to do anything you Gay fools. Obama, one year in, will possibly “work” with Congress/military to, in a thousand years, repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law. “Work” to Obama means the speech he gave last night. His efforts are already over. Keep giving him money you fools.
Gay people who trust Obama are fools deserving of all the misery he delivers. Straight people who trust Obama are fools deserving of all the misery he delivers. Ditto, black people, ditto white people, ditto all colors of people and all mixtures of people. All genders, all ages, all religions, all political affiliations, all geographies – you are fools deserving of all the misery delivered to you by Obama if you trust Obama.
Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.
The chiefs of the US Army and Air Force also expressed doubts about lifting the ban at congressional hearings this week, saying they were concerned about putting the military under further strain in the midst of two wars.
But Conway went further, making it clear he opposed lifting the ban that requires gay service members to keep quiet about their sexual orientation or face expulsion from the military.
Gay fools will pray to Gay hater Barack Obama and sing “Someday My Prince Will Come” or the plaintive gay hopes anthem “Somewhere” from West Side Story. Gay fools will have plenty of time to sing because Obama is not going to do anything for them.
Obama loving Newsweeklost $28.1 million last year. The Obama love does not sell – at any price. Newsweek‘s troubles might be an one time accounting problem, after all, the nation’s bird cages still need papering.
Obama will focus on pushing his health scam because he does not know what to do about the economy and how to bring back jobs. That’s why Obama distracts. Distraction is the flim-flam man’s stock in trade. “Watch the birdee!’ fools, while Obama picks your pockets.
Obama supporters desperate for a rationale to continue the Hopium guzzling note that some items in the Obama health scam are popular and therefore the Obama health scam should be made the law of the land. Today we will instruct these Hopium guzzlers on the Edsel.
The Edsel was a car Ford Motor Company did a great deal of polling on, asking consumers “What would you like in a car?” before designing it. The Edsel was a dream car full of items consumers wanted, but “the word “Edsel” has become synonymous with failure.” Wikipedia has some of the Edsel history:
“The Edsel was introduced amidst considerable publicity on “E Day”—September 4, 1957. It was promoted by a top-rated television special, The Edsel Show, on October 13, but it was not enough to counter the adverse public reaction to the car’s styling and conventional build. For months, Ford had been circulating rumours that led people to expect an entirely new kind of car, when in reality, the Edsel shared its bodywork with other Ford models.”
Obama himself is an Edsel – he is not who he said in his books, he is. The Obama health scam is an Edsel too:
There is no single reason why the Edsel failed, and failed so spectacularly. Popular culture often faults the car’s styling. Consumer Reports cited poor workmanship. Marketing experts hold the Edsel up as a supreme example of corporate America’s failure to understand American people. Business analysts cite the weak internal support for the product inside Ford’s executive offices. According to author and Edsel scholar Jan Deutsch, the Edsel was “the wrong car at the wrong time.“
Do we need to draw clearer similarities between the Edsel and Obama’s health scam? A spectacular failure, bad styling, poor workmanship, “failure to understand American people, weak internal support, the wrong car health plan at the wrong time. More similarities:
The prerelease advertising campaign touted the car as having “more YOU ideas“, and the teaser advertisements in magazines only revealed glimpses of the car through a highly blurred lens or wrapped in paper or under tarps. Edsels were shipped to the dealerships undercover and remained wrapped on the dealer lots.
But the public also had a hard time understanding what the Edsel was, mostly because Ford made the mistake of pricing the Edsel within Mercury’s market price segment. [snip]
Not only was the Edsel competing against its own sister divisions, but model for model, people did not understand what the car was supposed to be—a step up or a step below the Mercury.
After its introduction to the public, the Edsel did not live up to its overblown hype, even though it did have many new features, such as self-adjusting rear brakes and automatic lubrication. While consumer focus groups had said these and other features would make the “E” car attractive to them as car buyers, the cost of the cars outstripped what the public was willing to pay. When many potential buyers saw the base price tag, they simply left the dealership, and others were frightened by the price for a fully loaded top-of-the-line model.
We’ve made many comparisons of Obama as “New Coke”. As Dimocrats face disaster in November 2010 many begin to see we were right about the “New Coke” analogy. Edsel Obama and the Edsel which is the Obama health scam have not lived “up to its overblown hype.” The Edsel Obama Edsel plan also “outstripped what the public was willing to pay.” And there is this:
One of the external forces working against the Edsel was the onset of the recession in late 1957.
Reconciliation is Obama’s “An Edsel in every garage” demand. American consumers and voters do not want Edsel Obama or his Edsel scam.
Republicans were ready and Obama fell into the trap. Yesterday, before the publicity stunt, this video was released by Republican allies:
Republicans pretended to be afraid of Obama’s vaunted, but not deserved, masterful Mess-iah style abilities. But it was a trap. Why are Republicans wisely participating in these Obama scams? Because every day that Obama annoys the American public with this more than dead health scam is another day there is no focus (another recently broken Obama promise) on jobs and the economy. “Let’s keep on talking about something that is not going to happen and waste more time, Barack” say the Republicans. Dimocrats, ever willing to be bamboozled, continue to play Obama’s game. Dimocrats will pay in November.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Obama has a “Plan B”. That “Plan B” will fail too. The used car salesman tried to sell an Edsel and now he wants to try to sell another clunker – the consumer will walk out of the dealership.
Barack Obama will continue his publicity stunts to distract Americans from the fact that he has done nothing and will continue to do nothing – other than big Wednesday night lavish spending on parties, sleeve removers for Michelle, and vacations.
Update II: Exactly two years ago, today, a real leader spoke the truth and was attacked for telling the truth by Big Media and the Big Media darling and the Big Media darling’s Hopium guzzlers:
Update: Good thing Hillary Clinton is far away from this Mess-iah mess:
It’s days like today, that confirm how correct our analysis has been and continues to be. We have written very little about “health care” strategy and issues after the primary elections because we know meaningful health care reform died in Denver in August 2008. We have instead focused on the ceaseless flim-flams and incompetence, and inexperience, and outright boobery of Barack Obama in order to force Barack Obama out of office and make room for a certain plucky blond lady who is ready on Day 1.
On a day like today the flim-flam is blatant, the boobery in flagrante delicto. The flim-flam confidence game is dependent on big promises (“Hope! Change!”) and rush rush talk. When a flim-flam confidence man inevitably gets in trouble the strategy is bigger promises, even faster rush-rush “buy it now in the next minute or the deal goes away”.
We are therefore not surprised that the Obama Chicago Thugs chose today to release an “Exclusive” to the always willing-to-be-used Politico. The “Exclusive” is a devoid-of-news flim-flam about how the “White House privately plots 2012 campaign run“. Don’t waste your time reading the full article, it has no news, and no insight. It does end with this hilarious paragraph:
The themes for Obama’s campaign are not yet chosen, but a top adviser said not to expect a radical surprise: “He knows who he is.“
We know who he is too: a flim-flam thug from Chicago who has never done anything for anyone other than himself his entire life.
While there is no news in the Politico stenography session, what is news is the appearance of such a story. As we wrote, it is no surprise to us because flim-flam confidence men when in trouble promise bigger and faster. The publication of the reelection article is the pimp exploiting his “ho” with promises of eventual marriage and children and a house with a white picket fence. There will be no marriage, but the wedding promise is bigger, faster, than the lucrative-for-the-pimp business relationship.
Our job for now is to continue to expose the pimp and educate the “ho”. In other words, our job for now is to get rid of Obama and make way for the plucky blond lady.
* * * * * *
Generally a reelection bid is a time to tout success in the first election term. But for Barack Obama, who ran for president with an utter lack of experience, the reelection bid will be a time to revel in the phenomenal failure of the first term. Elected with massive majorities not seen in generations by the Republicans in the House of Representatives and with a filibuster busting 60 vote super-majority in the U.S. Senate, Obama has produced little to nothing – other than massive transfers of wealth from the American taxpayers to irresponsible speculators and the wealthy. The Obama health scam too is a massive transfer of wealth to the Big Insurance and Big PhaRma companies. What to do? Promise bigger, faster.
The latest Obama scam is the publicity stunt summit scheduled for tomorrow along with a bigger faster corollary scam that somehow “reconciliation” is the answer to force through the scam. We wrote a rather definitive article about the “reconciliation” process back in July of 2009 called “Obama’s Bluff”. Think of today’s article as an update to reconfirm what we wrote in July 2009.
Since we wrote “Obama’s Bluff” there have been many articles written about the “reconciliation” rules. The Hill quoted the former Senate parliamentarian on why the process is not “suited” to healthcare reform.
“The only way this works is for the House to pass the Senate bill and then, depending on what the package is, the reconciliation provision that moves first through the House and then comes here,” said Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) outside the upper chamber this morning. “That’s the only way that works.”
I pointed out that House leadership, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi, has repeatedly insisted they won’t take a flier on a reconciliation package–that they will only pass the Senate bill after the smaller side-car reconciliation bill has been all wrapped up.
“Fine, then it’s dead,” Conrad said.”
The Obama loving New Republic in January 2010 published another confirmation of what we wrote last year. It’s a comprehensive article which discusses the current ploys and plots and effectively comes to the same conclusions we did a year ago. The article discusses how “When it comes to enacting laws and then later amending those laws, it doesn’t matter in what order Congress passes bills. All that matters is the order in which the president signs those bills into law.” The article then discusses what we wrote about a year ago, in a New Republic fashion:
“But the problems with reconciliation are legion. [snip]
The process is not as quick as some have made it out to be. In order to qualify for reconciliation, three committees in the House and two committees in the Senate have to mark up provisions within their jurisdiction. Since there are no time limits on committee markups, these would last until recalcitrant Republicans drop from exhaustion and stop offering amendments. Then the committees in each chamber have to give their work product to the Budget Committees, which are then required to hold their own markups of the bill (amendment-free, this time) and report reconciliation bills to the chamber without substantive change (after waiting two extra calendar days in the House to allow Republicans to file minority views). Under the budget resolution, each committee’s portion of the bill must lead to a net reduction of the deficit of at least $1 billion over five years.[snip]
But in the Senate, once the bill gets reported, any grouping of 41 senators can knock out any provision in the reported bill that a) has no budgetary impact (or which has a budgetary impact that is only incidental to the policy provision), b) increases the deficit by any amount over a five-year or ten-year period, c) ups the deficit by more than $10 billion in any one year before 2014 unless fully offset over a five-year period, or d) makes any change to title II of the Social Security Act. And of particular importance to a massive and open-ended bill like health care, the Senate’s PAYGO rule requires 60 votes for any provision that would increase the deficit by more than $5 billion in any ten-year period going all the way out to the year 2059. (You read that correctly: 2059.) This is why so many provisions in reconciliation bills have to “sunset” and expire after ten years.”
It would be entirely irresponsible to create a health plan that would potentially collapse and end in ten years. The uncertainty alone would likely lead to increased health costs. There is also the problem of 41 Republican senators able to knock out non-germane provisions. There is also the amendment problem:
“But in the Senate, while the Budget Act caps the total debate time on a reconciliation bill and all related amendments and motions at 20 hours, the authors of the Budget Act who drafted this provision back in 1974 neglected to limit the number of amendments that can be offered.
This leads to perhaps the Senate’s most stupefying activity (in a chamber chock full of stupefying activity)–“vote-a-rama.” At the conclusion of the 20 hours of debate, senators can still offer an unlimited number of amendments, which must then be voted on immediately, without debate. And by “unlimited,” I mean it is never less than dozens but could easily stretch into the hundreds. The Senate usually gets unanimous consent to shorten the time for roll call votes from the usual 15-plus minutes down to two minutes each, but that requires unanimous consent, which has been lacking on anything having to do with health care. As political scientist (and my old college professor) Walter Oleszek says, the Senate basically only has two rules: unanimous consent and exhaustion. So Republicans can keep offering amendments and forcing roll call votes until they are physically no longer able to do so. (This is why the Majority Leader prefers to schedule a reconciliation bill or budget resolution right before the Senate is supposed to take a long vacation–to give the minority an incentive to cut the vote-a-rama short and go home. The next scheduled Senate recess is the week of President’s Day, so the most logical time to schedule the reconciliation bill for the Senate floor would be the few days leading up to Friday, February 12.)”
February 12 has already come and gone, so perhaps Obama will prove he is the Mess-iah by scheduling an Easter vote.
Other problems then loom large:
“Once the House and Senate pass a bill, it would have to go to House-Senate conference (the Budget Act appears to make no provision for ping-ponging a reconciliation bill). And under a new Senate rule, nothing can be added to that conference report that was not already in either the House or Senate bill, or such provision would require 60 votes in the Senate as well. But the debate on that conference report in the Senate is limited to ten hours, after which there is a final passage vote by a simple majority.
So reconciliation would give the minority party in the Senate a chance to force a separate roll call vote on every line of the bill. The requirement that every single provision in a reconciliation bill have budgetary impact means that the bill cannot address regulatory issues, consumer protection issues, or items like abortion. The open-ended limitations on deficit increases sharply curtail any additional spending in the bill and mean that most changes made by reconciliation that affect spending and revenues must expire in ten years. And the requirement that congressional committees hold a new two-stage markup process, combined with the usual (if time-limited) floor consideration and conference processes, means that using reconciliation would occupy all of Congress’s attention until late February, at a time when legislators are anxious to shift their public focus away from health care and back to the economy.”
Yesterday’s article The Democratic Civil War – One Side Must Die was the prelude to a series of articles we begin today. After reading yesterday’s article, several commentors and emailers asked us, “what should we do now?”, “what steps need to be taken?” By way of response, Hillary supporters are in Winter quarters, meaning we are in a preparatory phase.
For now the job is to remain organized and reach out to as many rank and file Democrats (the innocent dupes who voted for the “D” not necessarily the “O”) as are in our networks. We also must continue to encourage and expand the network of Hillary supporter blogs that did not exist when Big Pink was all alone. And, more than follow and react to the day’s events we must keep the history of what happened in the long 2008 election cycle alive. We must put that history into context and articulate the intellectual reasoning of what and why we fight.
Yesterday we quoted the reprehensible and worldview enemy, Katha Pollit. Pollit wrote an unscrupulous defense of Barack Obama and employed the “he’s doing the best he can” defense we discussed on February 8, with the additional “it’s the best anyone (including Hillary Clinton) can do” corollary defense (along with a surrender-to-sexism-and-misogyny ploy masked as a fake feminism fur wrapped in deception).
Today we will address, not the historic, demographic coalition destroying Mistake In ’08, but Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Let’s start with the, hated by Big Media and Hopium guzzlers, advertisement that so effectively shattered the establishment myth that Obama was ready to run anything bigger than a 711 convenience store.
After more than a year watching Obama perform his publicity stunts starting with the bungled oath of office on Day 1, the 3:00 A.M. advertisement rings truer than ever. But the Katha Pollits and the Left Talkers and assorted deceivers want to pretend that Obama and Hillary are the same and that a President Hillary Clinton would be, in their Hopium Hallucinations, as bowing and corrupt and incompetent as Barack Obama proves to be every day.
Every day proves that Barack Obama either lied to the American public about what he would do and how he would do it – or else his world view is so warped and distorted that he is forced to backtrack on every fake promise whether it is the uniter-not-divider nonsense, the never-gonna-happen end of Guantanamo/Gay Marriage Ban/Don’t Ask Don’t Tell/Health care reform/Immigration reform/Cap and Trade/Financial Reform/Electoral transformation and the receding oceans.
So obvious are Barack Obama’s faults that former fluffers are scouring the employment advertisements in order to find Boob Barack a job he is better suited for. We do not think he is suited to run a low traffic 711 convenience store, for the very reasons former Obama fluffers search for a new job for the Mess-iah. Jeffrey Rosen thinks Obama is suited to a job at the Supreme Court, though we are sure that the same non-accomplishment and self-promotion and non-existent work habits would make him a disaster at any job that requires brains and hard work. Rosen:
“He’s too detached and cerebral. Too deferential to Congress. Too willing to compromise. And he’s too much of a law professor and not enough of a commander in chief, as Sarah Palin recently admonished.” [snip]
Though Obama has struggled to find his footing in the White House, his education, temperament and experience make him ideally suited to lead the liberal wing of the court, especially at a time when a narrow conservative majority seems increasingly intent on challenging progressive economic reforms for the first time since the New Deal. Obama is clearly eager to take on the four truly conservative justices — Samuel Alito, John Roberts, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas — as his State of the Union smackdown suggests. But as president, he’s constrained by that pesky separation of powers. So what better way to engage the fight than to join the bench?
Rosen must be smoking Hopium because otherwise he would know that Obama on the Supreme Court would do what Obama always does – give others the hard work, orchestrate publicity stunts for himself and only himself, and do whatever it takes to become rich personally and avoid fighting those who might benefit him. In short, Barack Obama on the high court would be the ventriloquist dummy for whatever majority exists at the moment. Far from fighting Scalia, Roberts, Alito, or Thomas, Barack Obama would bow to power and prove once again that he simply cannot be trusted – by anyone – friend or foe.
Rosen even has a dream scenario for getting Obama out of 1600 Pennsylvania:
“It would be unusual, but not difficult, for Obama to get himself on the Supreme Court. He could nominate himself to replace John Paul Stevens, for example, or he could gamble and promise Hillary Rodham Clinton that he won’t run for reelection in 2012 in exchange for a pledge of appointment to the next vacancy.”
For those that need translation from the lofty language of D.C. elites, Rosen is very politely saying “get out” to Barack Obama and “forgive us and save us Hillary Clinton.” Rosen also delivers this not too polite slap, though drenched in honey: “It’s surprising but true that the least successful presidents are often the most judicious, while the most successful justices are the most pragmatic.” That’s Rosen’s elite way of saying “Barack, you are a loser.”
Rosen is not alone in politely stating that Obama is a Boob and Hillary is desperately needed by America if we are to survive as a recognizable nation and world power. Eleanor Clift also recognizes the differences between President Hillary Clinton and the current boob:
“Disillusioned Democrats concluded Obama spent too much time chasing bipartisanship, and the yearlong horse trading and backroom dealmaking squandered the mandate he had from the voters. The fractious Democratic majority would only have acted on its own if Obama had cracked the whip. But he signaled early on that he could be rolled when he ceded too much power to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid in putting together the stimulus bill.
If Hillary had been elected, would she have done things differently? Having been burned once with health-care reform, she probably would have approached it more gingerly, and she wouldn’t have felt indebted to Kennedy. Those who know her say she would never have given up that much control to Congress, not so much for ideological or philosophical reasons, but simply because she’s a more controlling personality than Obama. And she certainly wouldn’t have wasted any time seeking bipartisanship. She would have accepted today’s polarizing politics as a fact of life, something to be conquered, not changed.”
Hillary Clinton is a fighter who has over the years worked to reach common ground even with the most hate filled of Hillary haters. Hillary does try to reach common ground, but Hillary will also be able and willing to fight. Hillary will fight, even the scoundrels who run the Senate and the House. That’s why the Democratic establishment went after Hillary, in secret, with a 2×4 and made sure Obama was gifted the nomination. Now the Dimocratic establishment sees the loss of elections and the loss of their big offices and perks and they know only Hillary can save them. But Hillary won’t save them now. They must die a swift political death.
“During the Democratic primaries, I often felt that I was on Jupiter. My fellow Democrats rejected qualities in Hillary Clinton that are essential to a successful presidency.
When Clinton claimed she had more experience than Obama, Democrats either denied this reality or said that experience does not matter. They insisted that “ideas matter more” or that “Lincoln did not have experience either.” Instead of experience, they preferred a “fresh face.”
When Clinton said she was a fighter (explicitly embracing a “Rocky” theme), Democrats turned this into a bad thing, accusing Clinton of negative campaigning. Obama said that Clinton only knew how to fight, but that he would bring together the American people. Democrats wanted a “unifier” rather than a “fighter.”
Well, I think it is time for people to evaluate their choices. From where I sit, I believe we could use a healthy dose of fighting and experience in the White House. What do you think?
On issues ranging from healthcare, anti-terrorism tactics, war, and crime, President Obama seems committed to making deals with moderates and conservatives, rather than fighting for the values of the Democratic Party. Or, is the failure to fight an official value of the Democratic Party? “
“President Obama wanted to change Washington. It changed … for the worse. And it’s now holding his agenda hostage. The question is: How much is he willing to change himself in order to save it? [snip]
Over the same period, his job approval ratings have dropped to new lows for him, and according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll released on Thursday, the gap between those who trust him and the Democrats to handle major issues versus those who trust Republicans to do so has narrowed to nearly nothing.
And perhaps most worrisome, according to a January report from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, Obama’s image among the all-important independents as a “strong leader” and a president “able to get things done” took the biggest slides of all his character traits measured.”
Even the repulsive Hillary haters and Obama lovers like Ed Schultz, Keith Olbermann and Eugene Robinson begin to see Obama slip and slide and deceive and lie. Obama’s inexperience slip is showing.
“President Obama sounded a bit like a weary air traffic controller on Aug. 10, when he was quizzed during a three-way summit with leaders from Mexico and Canada about a promised overhaul of U.S. immigration laws.
“I’ve got a lot on my plate, and it’s very important for us to sequence these big initiatives in a way where they don’t all just crash at the same time,” the president said in response to a reporter’s question.”
Guess what Barack – they’re all crashing at the same time. You are a corrupt boob.
“While then Sen. Barack Obama was considering running for president, his advisor and friend David Axelrod worried in 2006 that Obama would have to toughen up for a White House campaign. Axelrod told Obama that he was thin skinned and he wondered if Obama could take the punches that would come in a presidential campagin.
“You care far too much what is written and said about you. You don’t relish combat when it becomes personal and nasty. When the largely irrelevant Alan Keyes attacked you, you flinched,” Axelrod wrote in a memo.
Axelrod’s strategy memo to Obama is revealed in “The Battle for America 2008,” a new book by Dan Balz and Haynes Johnson about the 2008 presidential campaigns.
Obama’s charmed political career came in part because of puffy, fluffy non-critical press coverage. Axelrod fretted about how Obama would do in the rough and tumble of a campaign.
‘It goes to your willingness and ability to put up with something you have never experienced on a sustained basis: criticism. At the risk of triggering the very reaction that concerns me, I don’t know if you are Muhammad Ali or Floyd Patterson when it comes to taking a punch.'”
Axelrod also predicted how the Hillary Clinton campaign would attack Obama:
“Her goal will be twofold: to suggest that she has the beef, while we offer only sizzle; and that she is not about the past but the future. But for all her advantages, she is not a healing figure. As much as she tacks to the right, she will have a hard time escaping the well-formulated perceptions of her among swing voters as a left-wing ideologue.”
Much of what Axelrod stated was self-serving and protective of his meal ticket. But as we know, Hillary always was about a long lasting and winning coalition for the entire Democratic Party – Hillary was about the future. Obama was about himself. Obama fought hard only when it was for self promotion. When Jeremiah Wright’s “God Damn America” was the headline Barack Obama said he could not abandon Wright. When Wright said Obama was a deceptive politician (“And what I think particularly angered me was his suggestion somehow that my previous denunciation of his remarks was somehow political posturing.” “I don’t think that he showed much concern for me.”) only then did Obama dump the Reverend on his ass.
“Obama, The Great Pretender, was upset because mean ol’ Wright exposed Obama’s lies and because Wright showed “disrespect” for Obama and his pretentious campaign. It wasn’t God Damn America that irked Obama. It was mean ol’ Wright not respecting the new Messiah.”
And yes it was here at Big Pink in May 5, 2007 where you read “When Sizzle Meets Fizzle” an echo of the then secret Axelrod memorandum.
Here at Big Pink we believe the likely scenario for a Hillary Clinton presidential run is that we chase Barack Obama out of a re-election bid (if not out of the White House before his term is up) and only then will Hillary Clinton run. The way to run Barack Obama out of a re-election bid is to make sure the Dimocrats who gifted him the nomination suffer devastating defeats and doom and death. Only then will the return of the FDR/Hillary Clinton coalition be possible and desirable. We will never return to the Democratic Party until it is purged fully from the intelligencia idiots and self-serving “leadership” which gifted Obama the nomination of the once great Democratic Party and cared not a whit that an inexperienced boob and stooge would lead to catastrophic hurt for America.
“If the Democrats lose the House, they can blame Nancy, Harry and Obama. [snip]
Beyond that, Obama will likely not be able to make a Clinton comeback. Obama couldn’t get his radical agenda passed even though the Democrats controlled the Senate and House because he lacks the necessary skills to build consensus and govern. His leadership deficiencies mean that he won’t fare any better in a divided government.
In the face of such Carter-like difficulties, the Democrats will have to ask themselves: Should we place our 2012 Congressional election fate in the hands of Obama? Many will say yes – enough could well say no because . . .
(a) Obama will have not done much for them. Keep in mind that Obama was rushed into the Presidency. He didn’t have a long career of helping other Democrats around the country. [snip] Obama’s campaigning for candidates has not been successful either – just ask Governor Corzine and Senator Coakley. Indeed, moderate Democrats are telling him to stay away in 2010. All-in-all, don’t expect too many to bleed for Obama in 2012 – to the contrary, many will prefer to try to stop the bleeding they are suffering at his hands.”
And here is the important kicker which we agree with:
(b) “Hillary Will Have Better Ratings Than Obama. The Clintons are no dummies. They knew Obama would fail. So, in anticipation, Hillary simultaneously (a) burnished her foreign policy credentials as Secretary of State, and (b) distanced herself from the domestic problems of the Democrats and her approval ratings have risen accordingly – even if she had no major successes. Brilliant by comparison to Obama.
She can also correctly say: “I Told You So – he wasn’t ready and I certainly am.”
The Democrats, or enough them, won’t want to give up the White House in 2012. Carter was a one term President – Johnson not much more than that. Their only two-term President was a Clinton – and enough Democrats will urge this Clinton to run in 2012 hoping for another electoral first – a female President.”
Hillary Clinton supporters are in Winter quarters. But we continue to bust myths and drill every day. We continue to grow our numbers and expand our presence. Spring is coming. We must be ready.
We will be ready on Day 1 when the trumpet sounds.
We are not making Joe Stack style, lucid death threats today. We are making a political analysis of what must happen politically.
On Memorial Day 2008 we wrote that the “Democratic Party is now engaged in the opening battles of a Civil War. As in the 1860s this war cannot be avoided.” The worldviews of both sides are so opposed that one side must die. Either Hillary supporters will die, or Barack Obama supporters will die – nothing else will do to end this Civil War. If Barack Obama supporters win, the situation comedy coalition of Barack Obama wins and Obama appeasement and weakness will provide Republicans with a golden future and many victories for generations to come. If Hillary Clinton supporters win we return to the winning FDR coalition and a party which reaches out for common ground but will fight and hold our ground on core Democratic values.
Hillary supporters who believe there is any hope of rapprochement with Obama supporters are fooling themselves. Hillary supporters who whine about the need for an “apology” from Obama supporters delude themselves and misunderstand the basic nature of the Civil War we are engaged in. The urge for unity in order to fight for issues we supposedly hold in common is understandable. But there is no going back to work with Obama supporters – not with their abominable view of reality. One side must die; one worldview will prevail, one reality will win out.
Recently many Obama supporters have begun to awaken to the “plain as the nose on your face” corrupt boob that is Obama. What they do not acknowledge is their complicity with the most corrupt forces in American life to inflict Obama on the mostly blameless Democratic rank and file and on the nation. Obama is and was the candidate of the Democratic establishment and a Big Media stooge of the Big Media Party.
Left Talker Obama supporters now admit that they were “more than a little hopey changey”. These fools who continue to expound on issues and believe they have an ounce of brains are the same fools who
The Left Talkers thought turning over the Democratic and the democratic process to Big Media was a smart strategy.”
The Left Talkers are not alone. Other toxic allies of Barack Obama and his filth from Lake Michigan persist in their collusions and deceptions and warped worldview. No more disgusting example of the worldview and mentality that must die can be found than Katha Pollitt at The Nation magazine. Pollitt writes:
“I’m still glad I supported Obama over Hillary Clinton. If Hillary had won the election, every single day would be a festival of misogyny. We would hear constantly about her voice, her laugh, her wrinkles, her marriage and what a heartless, evil bitch she is for doing something–whatever!–men have done since the Stone Age. Each week would bring its quotient of pieces by fancy women writers explaining why they were right not to have liked her in the first place. Liberal pundits would blame her for discouraging the armies of hope and change, for bringing back the same-old same-old cronies and advisers, for letting healthcare reform get bogged down in inside deals, for failing to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan–which would be attributed to her being a woman and needing to show toughness–for cozying up to Wall Street, deferring to the Republicans and ignoring the cries of the people. In other words, for doing pretty much what Obama is doing. This way I get to think, Whew, at least you can’t blame this on a woman.”
The worldview represented by Obama supporters and voiced by such as Katha Pollit, The Nation magazine, and the Left Talkers, must die. Nothing else will do. Pollit the Obama supporter (and her ilk), is so stupid, her world view so distorted and debased, that she wants us to believe that Hillary would have been as incompetent and inexperienced and stupid and corrupt as Barack Obama; and that the sexism and misogyny of Big Media and Obama supporters must not be fought but instead surrendered to. Hillary is not the inexperienced corrupt boob Barack Obama proves he is every day and Hillary and Hillary supporters are not afraid to fight and fight hard until we win. We do not give up. We do not accept weak bowing substitutes.
The Katha Pollitt world view must not only be defeated it must be killed and destroyed. The mentality of the Pollitts and the Left Talkers and The Nation magazine must be killed and burned and the ashes scattered to the four winds. These people should not have any place in our national discourse. They are corrupt forces filled with loathing and stupidity. No long list of synonyms for “fecal matter” is sufficient to express the disgust they inspire with their cowardice and complicity and mendacity. They must die.
Once again Barack Obama and Tiger Woods find themselves engaged in same day publicity stunts. Tiger Woods is in trouble not because of his sexual activities outside of marriage, but because he sold himself as an avatar of family values. Today Tiger Woods sought to explain his activities, apologize, and get back to making money. No one, other than wife and family, should involve themselves in L’affaire Woods. Today Tiger Woods, whether he is to be believed or not (we frankly don’t care), performed a thorough and complete scripted apology for his actions.
Unapologetic, Barack Obama will also inflict a publicity stunt on the nation today, as he does almost every day. Today’s Obama publicity stunt in Las Vegas is the announcement of $1.5 billion in “housing help”. The announcement in “the city with the worst foreclosure crisis in the nation” has very little to do with the housing crisis, it has more to do with the Harry Reid crisis.
“The downturn is taking an election-year toll on Obama’s party as voter frustration builds. [snip]
The president is also out to help vulnerable senators protect their seats and, in turn, gain as much legislative leverage as he can.
At the town hall and a business speech he will be lending his support to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, a top 2010 election target of Republicans.
Obama’s political involvement comes as the Democrats’ command of the Senate grows shakier, jeopardizing the president’s agenda. The tide of change that Obama rode to office is threatening to slam against his own party.
The first day of the trip was all politics. Obama campaigned Thursday for Sen. Michael Bennet of Colorado in Denver, then held a $1 million fundraiser for Democrats in Las Vegas.”
The gullible will believe Tiger Woods, as they believe Barack Obama. But there are two other stories, published today, that tell us more about the behavior of Tiger Woods and Barack Obama than today’s razzle dazzle publicity stunts. Explanation #1 regarding Tiger Woods:
“Inevitably, some athletes get beyond flirting. That’s why the Vancouver organizers have laid in a stock of 100,000 condoms, which works out to 14 for each of the 7,000 athletes, coaches, trainers and officials housed in the Games’ two villages. (Apparently, skiing, skating and sliding aren’t the only activities at which Olympians excel.)”
That’s right – athletes (and politicians) have powerful sex drives which make them do stupid things. The damnable offense is when high sex drive athletes and politicians pretend they are exemplars of family life when they know they are not and they seek to deceive in order to profit from their lies.
“Cook County a “Dark Pool of Political Corruption” – New study provides insight into 141+ years of political hijinks.
Cook County has been a “dark pool of political corruption” for more than a century, a new study by the University of Illinois at Chicago says.
Nearly 150 employees, politicians and contractors in the nation’s second-largest county have been convicted on corruption charges since 1957, according to a report released Thursday by the university and the Better Government Association (.pdf)
The 33-page study gives a history of corruption, starting from 1869 when county commissioners were jailed for rigging a bid to paint City Hall. It also details hiring scandals, including some under Cook County Board President Todd Stroger. Stroger hasn’t been charged with any crime.
In the last 36 years, 31 sitting or former Chicago alderman have been convicted of corruption or other crimes. The last was Ike Carothers (29th), who earlier this month plead guilty to charges he accepted gifts in exchange for his votes on zoning issues.”
Yup!, It’s that Todd Stroger, Obama’s friend “a good progressive”. Chicago Obama pretended to be a clean “reformer” just like Blagojevich and others before him. The gullible believed. Obama and his thugs deceived.
Tiger Woods can engage in a “live scripted mea culpa” every day of his life and the gullible and self-interested will believe whatever they are told to believe. Who cares? Unless you are his wife or a family member or an unemployed hooker or some other business associate, a good rule is “mind your own business”.
Barack Obama has and will continue to engage in ceaseless razzle dazzle publicity stunts too. The gullible and the self-interested will again believe whatever they are told to believe. In the case of Tiger Woods, who cares? In the case of Barack Obama – we’re doomed!
You can’t run a country on publicity stunts. Political publicity stunts are useful only as an attention getting device to inform that you are actually getting things done.
Publicity stunts are not useful when they are distractions from disaster. What Americans face is disaster. What Obama offers is the three ring circus, show business, the ol’ razzle dazzle.
Obama, his show business trunk of tricks, has got to go. Obama must be forced out. Obama must go and find something else to do. Like golfing.
Barack Obama is such a mess that he threatens to give rise to a successful Third Party effort in 2012 – if he persists in inflicting himself on the nation yet again. In a sense our discussion today is a continuation of our Mistake In ’08 series. The mistake in ’08, when the Democratic establishment mugged Hillary Clinton in order to gift Barack Obama the nomination, killed the Democratic Party and is now rapidly killing the Obamination which is the Obama Dimocratic Party.
Back in May 2007 we issued a “Word Of Warning About Bloomberg”. We wrote then that Michael Bloomberg, the Mayor of New York City “was a likely candidate for president in 2008.” We also wrote “when billionaires decide to run, the earth moves.”
We followed that warning with a second article about the potential alliance of Bloomberg and Republican Charles Hagel on a presidential ticket. Were we completely daft and wrong? After all, Michael Bloomberg did not run for president in 2008. Were we stupid and sensational? No. We were directly on target. Joyce Purnick of the New York Times proved us right on September 14, 2009:
Would Bloomberg be an updated version of H. Ross Perot, the wealthy Texan who ran as an independent in 1992? No, the mayor kept saying crankily for more than a year, and into the presidential season that ended with the election of Barack Obama. … Yet at the same time, his aides let it be known that Bloomberg could spend whatever he wanted on running for president. It would be ‘a billion-dollar campaign,’ Sheekey told Newsweek. At every opportunity, he talked up the idea of his boss running as a third-party candidate, a message echoed by Bloomberg’s pollster, Douglas Schoen, who, surely by coincidence, was writing a book about the impending death of the two-party system and parallel rise of political independence. … In June 2007, Bloomberg, the lifelong Democrat who had become a Republican to run for mayor, quit the GOP and declared himself an independent. …
“The true scope of the Bloomberg’s stealth campaign has never been disclosed. A company called the Symposia Group, which had a client of one — Mike Bloomberg — had created a Bloomberg for President website on Sheekey’s instruction. Mayoral sources were quoted in news accounts saying Symposia was preparing to analyze voter preferences nationwide if Bloomberg ran. They also said they were polling around the country. It remains a well-guarded secret how far that went, what Bloomberg paid for preliminary ‘micro-targeting,’ travel, salaries and polling, or what he learned. Since Bloomberg personally underwrote his non-campaign, he could spend what he wanted without creating the standard paper trail of public candidate reports. …
“On January 3, … Obama stunned the country by winning the first primary caucuses of the presidential year. … By mid-February John McCain, who, like Obama, appealed to independents, had all but clinched the Republican nomination. A few weeks later, Bloomberg consulted with Sheekey, Patti Harris, Ed Skyler and his ad maker, Bill Knapp. Go for it, Sheekey still advised. He had even lined up a presidential campaign staff-in-waiting, putting former Bloomberg workers on the alert in case the mayor gave the nod. Harris and Skyler advised the mayor to stand down. Knapp was said to be in the
middle. Bloomberg pulled the plug … He was too level-headed to run when he knew he could not win. …
Purnick noted that Bloomberg had a “fantasy he had harbored since college, to be president — to be the first Jewish president”. Bloomberg did not run, but the story is not yet over.
ROSE: My friend David Brooks, who was on the program recently and over the weekend, said at long last, he believes that third party may be a viable alternative if the president runs for re-election and someone from the right of the Republican Party is the nominee, that there is today, in today’s atmosphere, because of a feeling that issues are not being addressed well, an opportunity for a third party candidate with very–with appropriate credentials to run and win the presidency.
Sen. BAYH: Well, there’s a high level of frustration with the two-party system out there. And the public voted–concluded the Republicans weren’t doing a very good job of solving our challenges. They’re giving our party, the Democrats, a chance. I think the president very much wants to be a change agent. He’s making a sincere effort. Not enough members of Congress are listening, either because of partisan or ideological reasons. So I believe the president will be a strong favorite for re-election, certainly as the economy improves. But I do think there’s something to what David Brooks said. This is, in some ways, another–for lack of a better phrase, “a Ross Perot moment.” You remember back then, the deficit was unsustainably high. The economy was struggling. People had a sense that Washington was just broken, and they looked for someone from completely outside the system. So, you know, let me be clear. I support the president. I think he is making a major effort, and I’m going to do what I can to help him succeed. But just my political take on it, I think–I think David is–he’s on to something. Particularly, Charlie, if the–if the economy does not improve and if we were to, as we were discussing on your show the last time, if these deficits and increasing debt are just allowed to run, and you get a reaction in the global credit markets that causes a collapse of the dollar or a dramatic run up-in interest rates, you know, that could be the kind of thing that, in spite of everyone’s efforts, would really galvanize public opinion against everyone in Washington, regardless of party.
Notice, the great conditional to a Third Party run in 2012: IFObama runs for reelection. As to Rose’s observation that a third party candidate has to have “appropriate credentials to run” – he means MONEY.
Yet, there’s Bloomberg at No. 17. The mayor makes a salary of $1 per year, but he’s the only member of the Top 20 whose net worth has risen during the past year. According to Forbes, this is due to a re-evaluation of Bloomberg LP: Bloomberg bought a 20 percent stake from cash-strapped Merrill Lynch last July for $4.5 billion.
Bloomberg, the man who refused to move into Gracie Mansion after being elected mayor, is still living as large as ever. He has expanded his posh East 79th Street townhouse, quietly buying up four of the six apartments in the building next door.
The mayor’s home is now 12,500 square feet. To put it in perspective, media mogul Rupert Murdoch lives on Fifth Avenue … in 8,000 square feet.
Bloomberg also owns property in Bermuda, London, Vail and Westchester County.
“It’s hard to see the populist mood afoot in the country lofting to the White House a billionaire mayor who used to work for Salomon Brothers. But three recent moves by Michael Bloomberg can be seen in the context of an independent mayor who sees President Obama’s sagging poll numbers and has the ability to get into the 2012 presidential race at a late stage and self-finance if no credible Republican or independent alternative emerges.
First, he opposes Mr. Obama’s proposed bank tax, warning it will turn New York City into another Detroit.
Then, he hires Howard Wolfson, who has experience campaigning against Obama as an aide to the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.
Then, Mr. Bloomberg reverses course and opposes the Obama administration’s plan to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in New York City.
Mr. Bloomberg hasn’t run the city exactly on free-market principles. He backed eminent domain at Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn, banned smoking and trans-fats in restaurants, and raised taxes and spending. He’s not strong on Second Amendment issues. But he’s independent, he can’t be bought by the special interests, he’s good on charter schools, and he’s got a fabulous police commissioner in Raymond Kelly. And remember, Ross Perot’s wealth didn’t prevent him from emerging as a voice of Americans who were fed up with both Democrat and Republican politicians in Washington.”
Howard Wolfson, who helped craft and drive the message in Mayor Bloomberg’s re-election bid, is joining the mayor’s City Hall team in a broad senior advisory role as the administration prepares for a third term in a brutal economic climate, sources told The Post. [snip]
Wolfson is also the only senior member of Bloomberg’s kitchen cabinet who’s worked on a presidential run – and speculation has been running wild that the mayor, who’s a lame duck at City Hall now, is eyeing the White House in 2012 after seriously putting pieces together to run for 2008 but ultimately deciding against pulling the switch.
Michael Bloomberg barely won re-election as New York City’s Mayor in 2009. Bloomberg vastly outspent his little known rival and brutalized him with unfair advertisements which ran with brutal frequency. Bloomberg ran after he imperiously swept aside the term limits law, aided by private gifts to silence the city’s elites across the non-profit universe and political consultant establishment. But, he won.
In 2010 Bloomberg pal Mort Zuckerman might run for Senate against Kirsten Gillibrand. Already Zuckerman has spoken with the Republican Party Chairman in New York, Ed Cox. Wayne Barrett (one of the best, check out his April 2008 Hillary Clinton Rules and Bylaws Committee article HERE) does a public service by describing how Big Media operates as well as what is going on with respect to the 2010 political situation in New York State:
Zuckerman is described in the story as a “close friend” of Bloomberg’s, moved by Mike’s success to consider following in his mogul-to-high-public-office footsteps. Close friend is in fact an understatement. They finish each other’s sentences — usually on the editorial page of the Daily News. [snip]
Bloomberg’s top political advisers, from Kevin Sheekey to Howard Wolfson, however, have no difficulty figuring that out. My bet is that this story — about Zuckerman’s possible “independent” candidacy for the senate — emanated from City Hall, where the mayor’s possible independent candidacy for president in 2012 is quietly fermenting. The two close friends may well be embarking on a joint adventure, seeing if they both can capitalize on all the angst arising from a crisis provoked by their own Wall Street clients and cronies.
“There is a specter haunting America: the specter of a saner, updated version of Ross Perot. He is lurking out there, ready to ride the free-floating anger and distrust of Washington. He is out there now in one of his homes or private jets, getting madder by the day. He is large of ego, full of money and cranky in mien.
When he enters the arena, he’ll say that Washingtonians, all of them, are a bunch of failures. Over the past five years, Washington has tried to reform Social Security, immigration, health care and energy policy. All of these efforts have either failed or are close to failure — thousands of people working millions of hours and in all likelihood producing nothing.
He’ll point out that Washingtonians, all of them, breed selfishness. Republicans refuse to accept tax increases. Democrats reject spending cuts. They’ve put the country on a highway to a fiscal crisis, and there are no exit ramps.
When he comes, he’ll present himself warts and all. Yes, I’m an obnoxious S.O.B., he’ll say. But you need me right now. Yes, I am a blank slate, but people are so desperate that they’re voting for blank slates. When he comes — this billionaire Simon Cowell, this political Bobby Knight — he will change the political landscape, at least for a time.”
Barack Obama we now know is the Frankenstein monster of the Democratic establishment. The monster has caused such havoc that the very money men who typically fund the monsters will now come from the shadows to buy political offices – for themselves.
The hope that in 2012 a third party candidate will emerge from “the people” is likely a misplaced one. It could still happen but the likelihood is that a billionaire will be the one to come forth. There will be, we suspect, many challengers to Barack Obama from the left, right, and center in 2012. In 2012 “anything goes” because the country is in such bad shape.
The only way to forestall further disaster is for Barack Obama to be forced out. Not asked out. Forced out. And Hillary Clinton comes to the rescue. Otherwise prepare for the rise of the Oligarchs.
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem Washington to be born?
Today, in order to avoid a repeat of yesterday, we will provide some wisdom and warnings to all the interest groups and allies of the NObama Coalition.
* * * * * *
A Warning To The Tea Party Movement:
Like ants to picnic food, whores are attracted to political conventions. The Tea Party convention was not immune to the lure of whoredom. We speak of course about Arriana Huffington.
Here at Big Pink we wage the battle against sexism and misogyny every day. We will not tolerate sexist language against Hillary Clinton, nor against Sarah Palin. We are aware that women are frequently tagged as “whores” in political argument. These are generally sexist and misogynist arguments deployed to destroy women and women only. However, sometimes the epithet “whore” is very much on target. When we hear the word “whore” we think of Bill Richardson and John Edwards and, of course, Arriana Huffington.
“Though this weekend’s event had a decidedly conservative bent, it was interesting to watch how during the Q&A session after her speech, both Palin and Judson Phillips, the chief organizer of the convention, proudly informed the crowd that neither of their spouses vote Republican.
And thanks to the botched bank bailout, anti-government rhetoric — a conservative hallmark since Ronald Reagan branded government the problem, not the solution — has moved beyond the ideological right.
Indeed, at times in her speech, Palin sounded like the second coming of Huey Long. “While people on Main Street look for jobs, people on Wall Street — they’re collecting billions and billions in your bailout bonuses,” she said. “And everyday Americans are wondering: Where are the consequences? They helped to get us into this worst economic situation since the Great Depression. Where are the consequences?”
I was within an inch of singing along: “Yeah, where are the consequences!? You tell ’em, Sarah!”
I’ve written about how the middle class is teetering on the brink of collapse. And the bleak indicators just keep piling up: a new study found that one in eight Americans received emergency food aid last year — up almost 50 percent from 2005. The numbers are even worse for kids: one in five. That’s 14 million children facing hunger. In America.
Can you hear them now?”
After using her gay husband’s money and reputation to advance herself, after using Newt Gingrich’s money and reputation to advance her Hillary Hating self, after politically fellating Barack Obama – Arriana is ready for a burlap covered Tea Party bed. Tea Party activists beware: Arriana has the pox. Don’t let her near you.
Also pox ridden are Republican bureaucrats, mostly male, who also want to co-opt the Tea Party movement. These pox ridden Republicans will eventually succeed and take over your movement and probably the best you will be able to do is delay the takeover. Fight hard for your principles and delay the takeover as long as possible. Keep away from the pox ridden – like Arriana and job-seeking influence peddling Republican bureaucrats.
“Broadly speaking, the tea parties reflect a growing anger in America that the government seems to be a closed circle, run by an elite in both parties. These elites, combined with a class of bureaucrats, lawyers, journalists and businessmen, use government power to serve their own ends, and not the public good.”
We might not all agree on specific issues. But don’t forget that you have a powerful message.Run for public office. Fight the power. Don’t be afraid to turn ridicule into strength.
Watch out Tea Party Movement, the whores want to share your bed. You have nothing to gain from them but the pox.
* * * * * *
A Warning To Sarah Palin Supporters and Republicans:
That Hillary was asked a silly question meant to incite and responded with grace, humor and good will towards Canada was ignored. Big Media wanted a “cat fight”. Big Media wanted two women Big Media hates to fight each other and not Big Media. Hillary supporters saw right through this ploy but most Republicans have not been at the fight to expose Barack Obama and Big Media long enough to know better.
Republicans and conservatives and Sarah Palin supporters who fell into the trap and attacked Hillary were riding with Chris Matthews.
Big Media wants a “cat fight” – Hillary Versus Palin. But we are not buying into that agit-prop. Sarah Palin has learned not to buy into the Hillary Hate, and Hillary will not buy into the Palin Hate. We’ve been at this too long to fall into the Big Media trap – it’s why Big Media hates Big Pink.
Recall, in September 2008 when Obama wanted Hillary to attack Sarah Palin. Hillary Clinton does not ride with Chris Matthews – Hillary Clinton will not attack Sarah Palin – Hillary Clinton will not “cat fight” for the Big Blog Boys. Recall when in September 2008 we quoted the L.A. Times:
On Saturday in New York, reporters eager for a story about a fight between the two female politicians set Clinton up several times to take easy swings at the 44-year-old reform governor, who blew away the Republican National Convention crowd with her speech Wednesday night about her running mate, her own life and some mocking views of Obama.
But Clinton would not bite. Or swing. Not once.
Sarah Palin said something stupid once about Hillary Clinton during the campaign in 2008. We ignored the stupidity because we knew Sarah Palin would learn and regret her foolishness. Sarah Palin did learn and to her credit Palin made a very public apology to Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton, gracious as ever, Mona Lisa smiled at the idea of a Big Media destroying meeting with Sister Sarah.
Sisterhood Is Powerful.
Hillary Clinton Supporters, Sarah Palin Supporters, Tea Party Supporters should not ride with Chris Matthews, Big Media, and assorted whores.
The NObama Coalition must stand together. Let Obama ride with Chris Matthews.
Evan Bayh of Illinois waited until the Presidents Day holiday to slap Barack Obama in the face. Bayh it seems does not think Obama introduced the golden age of Hope and Change to Washington so Bayh waited until Presidents Day to say so. Indonesia too waited until Presidents Day to slap Obama in the face and finally yanked the statue of baby Hope and Change from Menteng Park.
Whatever happened to the celestial choirs and Hope and Change and the oceans receding? It was always chump change. The Hope and Change dupes with their paper bag covered, “Thunder Bird” size Hopium bottles, guzzled deep draughts – but Hopium kills. Obama is Poison:
“In fact, the current coatless Oval Office guy did the same thing, promising change to believe in, even though a) he was employed there, and b) the real change he believed in was that he become the ringmaster of the very same civic circus. [snip]
Now comes word that later this week the Change Agent will travel to Las Vegas, the city he loves to denounce for its spending excesses, for a Democratic National Committee fundraiser. There, according to the all-knowing columnist Jon Ralston, tickets only cost $30,000 per person.
As Palin, quoting a popular rebel bumper sticker, put it so sarcastically to the recent National Tea Party Convention, ‘How’s that hopey-changey thing working out for ya?'”
While the eventually to be melted Baby Hope and Change statue is probably what Obama mourns the most, an obvious danger to Obama comes from Evan Bayh. Obama Hopium guzzlers and his campaign thugs are well aware of the dangers someone like Evan Bayh (“I am an executive at heart”) poses. Usually “red” Indiana, with its 11 electoral votes is a neighbor state to Iowa, just like Illinois. Whatever shenanigans and advantages of geography Obama leveraged in 2008 to win the Iowa caucuses, Evan Bayh has the potential to leverage those shenanigans and geographic advantages as well, from Indiana. Indiana is also a neighbor state to Ohio which along with Pennsylvania will be in play in 2012. Evan Bayh has also proved to be a prolific fundraiser. Before Bayh left the 2008 presidential race Bayh raised plenty of cash. Bayh’s Wellpoint lobbyist wife has plenty of access to big donors too.
This is not to say that Evan Bayh will be the one to take down Obama. Evan Bayh however is the first to get into position – others especially from the left will soon see the same Obama weakness that Bayh sees. Obama will be chewed to pieces from many directions. After November 2010 Obama will have to get out of the 2012 race or face years of Republican investigations he cannot withstand. As Obama weakness becomes obvious to all, the challengers from the left, right, and middle will proliferate. Evan Bayh is merely the first.
Evan Bayh is also well aware that in 2010 no elected official is safe, especially anyone in any way associated with Poison Obama. In a recent poll “Just 8 percent of Americans want the members of Congress re-elected” and Bayh with $13 million in his reelection fund probably saw reelection as a risky investment that held the potential to break his “never lost an election” reputation.
No way was Bayh going to run for reelection and have to defend Obama and Reid and Pelosi policies which have exploded the national debt and promised trillion dollar deficits for every year.
The signs of Bayh’s discontent with the direction of the economy and with Washington can be seen in his votes over the past year or so, starting with the budget last year — he was one of only two Dems to vote AGAINST it. In fact, according to a Washington Post analysis of Senate Democrats’ voting records late last year, Bayh was the most conservative Democrat, edging out a more high-profile conservative, Sen. Ben Nelson, D-NE. Bayh voted with his fellow Democrats, according to the survey, just 72 percent of the time.
Earlier this year, Bayh voted against his party when Reid tried to bring up a 10-year, $245 billion so-called “doc fix” — which was designed to stop massive cuts in federal reimbursements paid to Medicare docs. He told me it was solely because the measure was not paid for with offsets (e.g., spending cuts).
And though he voted FOR the $787 billion stimulus bill, he was part of a group (“Gang of 18”) that axed $100 million from the original product produced by leadership, what Bayh at the time called “silly stuff.” And just recently, he expressed regret about the design of the stimulus legislation, saying he wished there had been “more targeted spending” in the bill.
And the senator was one of only two Dems to vote against the $410 billion omnibus spending bill – sending Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, scurrying for days in an attempt to shore of 60 votes to overcome a Republican-led filibuster.
During healthcare negotiations, Bayh made it clear he did not trust that the bill would really hold down deficit spending. He worked with other conservative members to craft a package designed to rein in future costs. He also jumped into the center of the abortion policy storm when late last year, he joined with seven of his Democratic colleagues to tighten controls designed to eliminate any federal spending on the controversial procedure.
Bayh was also known to opposed the so-called “cap and trade” climate legislation proposed by the Obama Administration.
The news that Democratic Senator Evan Bayh is retiring is another stunning blow for a Democratic party that is already reeling. This development — because of who Bayh is (perceived as a moderate/centrist); because of the state he represents (a traditionally Red one but won by Barack Obama in 2008); and because of his political situation (it was assumed he was in a comfortable position to win re-election) — will have significant ramifications. It will accelerate almost every bad trend for Democrats (more retirements, fewer entries into national races, more intra-party acrimony, and more panic).
The last time we saw a double-digit shift in Senate seats in a single election was when a former movie actor by the name of Ronald Reagan was elected president (Republicans won a dozen seats back in 1980). A shift of those dimensions in a non-presidential election year would be basically unheard of. But as Jen points out, a pickup of 10 GOP seats — and recontrol of the Senate — is no longer out of the question. America’s political tectonic plates are shifting in a fairly dramatic and rapid fashion; and the resulting dislocation will batter and crush many Democratic candidates, perhaps on a scale we have not witnessed before in our lifetime, at least in a midterm election.
The big difference between now and 1994 is that Democrats have Obama instead of Clinton as the head of their party. And that may turn out to be very bad news for Democrats. The Democratic party is in worse shape now than it was at a comparable period then. The mistrust of government runs deeper. The anti-incumbent tide is stronger. And the public uprising is greater.
The Clinton years — and Bill Clinton’s undeniable political gifts — are looking better and better to Democrats with every passing week.
Democrats indeed have got Obama, and they have Obama’s agenda as well. Could the political millstone be any heavier?
We also know that the fake Hope and Change and “transformational” boob is not who he said he was. Obama is poison and even the most kneeling of Obama worshipers know all the promises of transformation were and are a lie:
Obama’s general-election win in Indiana, along with his victories in North Carolina and Virginia, were central to his claim that he was transcending the red-blue divide, creating a new, less-polarized political map, an enduring Democratic majority of the kind that had been lost when Robert Kennedy was gunned down.
Bobby Kennedy, organized along the principles of the winning FDR/Hillary Clinton coalition that Obama dumped for his situation comedy coalition. Now the Obama comedy is less and less funny to those that believed in their corrupt golden calf from Chicago.
For a party bracing for big losses in Congress, any retirement of a popular sitting senator is a blow. But this one represents something more: the death, once again, of the Democratic Party’s Indiana dream. After his primary victory, RFK remarked that, “The people here were fair to me. They gave me a chance. They listened to me. I could see this face, way in back in the crowd, and he was listening, really listening to me.” For Barack Obama, they don’t seem to be listening anymore.
His stunning retirement from the Senate is essentially a loud and emphatic “screw you” to President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. For months now, Bayh has been screaming at the top of his voice that the party needs to reorient toward a more popular, centrist agenda — one that emphasizes jobs and fiscal responsibility over health care and cap and trade. Neither the White House nor the Senate leadership has given him the response he wanted. Their bungling of what should have been a routine bipartisan jobs bill last week seems to have been the last straw.
Bayh could have won re-election “though he probably did not relish the prospect of a very nasty campaign revolving around GOP attacks on his wife’s business activities”. Charles Lane at the Washington Post reads Evan Bayh’s intentions well:
For him, then, the question was: even if I win, who needs six more years of dealing with these people, after which I might be 60 years old and trying to pick up the pieces of a damaged political party brand? [snip]
Quitting the Senate was a no-lose move for the presidentially ambitious Bayh, since he can now crawl away from the political wreckage for a couple of years, plausibly alleging that he tried to steer the party in a different direction — and then be perfectly positioned to mount a centrist primary challenge to Obama in 2012, depending on circumstances.
The “circumstances” of course are the intentions and moves by a plucky blond lady by the name of Hillary Clinton. There will be challengers to Obama if he does not face reality and pull out of the 2012 election. If he does stay in, he cannot win. If he gets out, the “circumstances” change.
As she surveys the wreckage of Not Ready Obama, Hillary smiles a Mona Lisa smile.