The Third Party

[A United Airlines flight landed in Salt Lake City after a bomb threat; an airplane intentionally crashed into the IRS offices in Austin, Texas; Dick Cheney mocks Obama as a one term president – a day in the life of the United States under Barack Obama.]

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.

Evan Bayh slapped Barack Obama then went on the Charlie Rose Show. Bayh had this to say:

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: IF Obama runs for reelection. As to Rose’s observation that a third party candidate has to have “appropriate credentials to run” – he means MONEY.

At his wealthiest, Ross Perot had five billion dollars. Michael Bloomberg on a bad day, has much much more money. Bloomberg’s salary as Mayor is low, but his assets are sitting pretty. As of May 2009:

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.

Is there an additional White House in Washington Bloomberg is going to purchase? There is this realistic report:

“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.”

The Wolfson hire led to a great deal of speculation. The well connected Maggie Haberman at the New York Post, scratched her head:

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.

In one of his saddest attempts to save Barack Obama, the love struck David Brooks, discussed the rise of the third party candidate to come:

“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?


95 thoughts on “The Third Party

  1. Admin: Just running out to buy horse feed, but will read your article when I get back.

    This guy in Austin and his little plane did a heck of a lot of damage. He must have had extra fuel or something extra on that plane because I remember seeing a little plane hit a building in Florida somewhere after 9-11 and it merely looked like a couple of broken windows. This whole building is destroyed. He must of been a GlennBeck watcher and went nuts. All Glenn’s/Fox News gloom and doom and constant attacks on our economy/taxes lead this unstable man to go further into the abyss. Fox News needs to tone it down.

  2. 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.
    Precisely. That is the bottom line. If you want an economy that looks like Dubai–where 88% of the population works for 12% of the population, then by all means vote for Mike. And while you are at it, vote for Mort. They understand the problems of working people. Like they say in the Hamptons it is hard to find good help these days. You have to import it from overseas. I have been told that there is a clash within the elite group of money people between those who are content to make their money the old fashioned way which is to say from behind the scenes playing what they euphemistically refer to as ‘The Game’, and those who want to step forward into the limelight and seize direct power. Neolibs like Mike and Mort fall into that category. Old left wing money men like Soros prefer typify the first group. Thus, the answer of the American people should be no, net, nein, which is to say no in any language. Or in the memoragble words of the comedian Robin Williams: hey Mort–fuck off.

  3. Another Barack day, another Barack horror:

    The United States voiced renewed concern Thursday about Iran’s nuclear program after a report by the UN’s atomic watchdog suggested Tehran may be working on a nuclear warhead.

    “We have ongoing concerns about Iran’s activities. We cannot explain why it refuses to come to the table and engage constructively to answer the questions that have been raised,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters.

    The Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said earlier Thursday in a restricted report obtained by AFP that Tehran may be working on a nuclear warhead and had begun enriching uranium at higher levels.

  4. What is significant here is that Mike is a money man and Mike suggests that if Obama runs in 2012 and the Republicans select a right wing candidate, by which they mean a populist, then the threat to his financial empire will be so great that he will toss his hat in the ring. In other words, the money men have no confidence in Obama. He is becoming a joke in the eyes of his supporters, the country and the world. And his political machine is collapsing. Big media is in one hell of a fix.

  5. Obama is not a leader. His vaunted health care effort has come down to this: “The moderates are paranoid, the liberals are upset, the leaders are frustrated and losing the trust of everybody. There’s no level of trust between the Senate and the House or the White House and everyone else. There has been a breakdown of the kind of chemistry you need to get this kind of thing done.” Congratulations to you, your media whores and your toxic agenda.

    The Tortured History of Obamcare

    Posted by Dan Perrin (Profile)
    Thursday, February 18th at 2:18PM EST
    Elizabeth Drew has written a long, biased and tortured health care reform review of recent events. Two items of interest appear at the end of the article.

    “Obama’s move to take the issue to the Republicans by inviting them to a half-day, bipartisan meeting at Blair House on February 25 to discuss health care—without, as the Republicans had been insisting, scrapping the pending bill and starting over—was intended to show the public (and wobbly Democrats) who the obstructionists are. (And Obama’s recent televised meeting in Maryland with House Republicans had been a big hit.)”

    And second:

    “Without sixty votes, the Democrats couldn’t simply reopen the Senate bill to incorporate the changes that the Democratic House and Senate leaders had agreed upon. Instead, the Senate Democrats wanted the House to adopt the Senate bill, and then both chambers would adopt a “reconciliation” bill (which would require just fifty-one votes in the Senate) that would include most of the final changes.”But House Democratic leaders, mistrusting the Senate—and not liking it, either—balked at doing that. Pelosi stated definitively that she couldn’t get enough House votes to pass the Senate bill, unless the Senate passed the reconciliation bill first. And the Senate said that the rules made it impossible to adopt the reconciliation bill first (the House disagreed). Some of the changes couldn’t be put in the reconciliation bill, which can only deal with matters that affect the budget. This would call for a third bill, which no one knows how to pull off.

    “Logically, there should still be a way to get a bill passed. But logic went out the window on January 19. The situation was as much psychodrama as legislative stalemate. The perfectly reasonable argument was made to Democrats in Congress, mainly by the administration, that, having voted for the bill already, it would be worse for them to fail to pass it than to pass it, but this seemed not to be heard. If Obama didn’t exert himself for the bill on which he’d spent most of his time in office thus far, it would be not just a political catastrophe for him but leave a scar on his presidency. Longtime observers—members of Congress and people who deal with them—say they have never seen such a sour mood on Capitol Hill, affecting both members and staff alike. One longtime Democrat said to me recently:

    “The moderates are paranoid, the liberals are upset, the leaders are frustrated and losing the trust of everybody. There’s no level of trust between the Senate and the House or the White House and everyone else. There has been a breakdown of the kind of chemistry you need to get this kind of thing done.”

    About a week later, the same aide wrote Drew with this update:

    “Every option is bad. The leaders in the House and the Senate want to get a bill but enthusiasm is waning in the rank and file. They want us to focus on jobs. Still think we can get it done but have no idea how.”

    And the bold above, in a thimble, is the story of health reform: everyone thinks they can do it, everyone says they want to do it, they are convinced they should do it, but have no idea of how to do it, and nearly everyone fails to do it.

    There are now reports of the Dems nearing another (umpteenth) deal. And they are “warming” to the idea of reconciliation. Expect a spate of these stories as the White House – GOP Meeting nears.

    Let them try. It will end badly. But they won’t try, because they know they cannot succeed.

    Sphere: Related Content
    Share on: Facebook | | Reddit Category: Elizabeth Drew, New Yor

  6. More BAD news for BO…GOOD news to US

    Mayor Goodman rejects invitation to meet with President Obama

    President Obama singles out Las Vegas, Mayor calls him “slow learner”

    Las Vegas, NV (KTNV) – Mayor Oscar Goodman has refused an invitation to meet with President Obama when he arrives in town on Thursday. Mayor Goodman called President Obama a slow learner after he told Americans not to blow money on a weekend in Las Vegas if they were saving to put their kids through college.

    “I’ve got other things to do quite frankly for my constituents here in Las Vegas who rely on me to do the right thing as a mayor,” explained Mayor Goodman.

    Mayor Goodman has more important things like attend budget meetings during a major shortfall than meet with President Barack Obama when he visits Las Vegas Friday, even though he’s invited by the White House.

    “Were you surprised to get that invitation in light of comments you’ve made before and your opinion on him and what he says,” asked Action News reporter Heather Klein.

    “A little bit in the sense I would think they would know that I would say I’m not coming,” said Mayor Goodman.

    They say time heals all wounds but not this time. Mayor Goodman not backing down after the president used Las Vegas the example of where not to go if you’re saving money.

    This is strike two for the mayor.

    “We are hurting, we have people in foreclosures, we have people having a hard time feeding their families and we can’t stand to have a flippant statement made,” said Mayor Goodman.

    “I haven’t heard an apology, I haven’t heard a response, all I do is get invitations,” Goodman went on to say.

    Invitations Mayor Oscar Goodman respectfully or depending on your point of view not so respectfully declines. The mayor says his presence isn’t necessary its more protocol than anything else. However, he says all it will take is a simple phone call and he will be there ready to move on.

  7. A valid observation from the conservative side:

    A year ago the media resonated with the celebration of democracy, grassroots pushback against the existing order, the renewal of Congress, and the novel harmony between government and the people.

    Now? Suddenly all this seems to be inoperative: Our institutions are supposedly broken and fossilized, rendered so by partisanship or inherent structural problems such as filibusters. The people themselves have almost magically gone from enlightened to dense, gullible, and undeserving of their one chance at progressive salvation.

    So what changed? The Obama administration offered a statist agenda of massive deficits, and it blamed Bush for America’s current problems. The people revolted, and even the combined power of large Democratic congressional majorities, a ministry-of-truth media, and an Ivy League technocracy could not push through hope and change — largely due to Democratic legislators’ worries that they were walking out on a plank that would soon be sawed off by the next election.

    The implosion of the Obama administration is newsworthy, but not as astonishing as this petulant liberal reappraisal of both popular political participation and the structure of American government.

    Given that the people apparently don’t want bigger deficits, more stimulus, statist health care, cap and trade, or “comprehensive” immigration reform, and given that the most influential members of the Obama administration think the people either do or should want those things, we are apparently left with blaming George Bush, or self-righteously blaming the people for their stupidity, selfishness, brainwashing, or racism. Yet all of those assumptions only exacerbate the problem, and if continually voiced will turn a mid-term correction into an abject disaster for Democrats.

  8. Reposting from previous thread… ON TV tonite-

    I continue to wonder why Al Gore declines every invitation giving him the opportunity to defend his position that humans are responsible for Global Warming?


    In a follow-up to the hit KUSI show :
    “Global Warming: The Other Side”, iconic weatherman John Coleman documents the latest developments in Climategate.

    “Global Warming: Meltdown” airs Thursday (tonight) at 9pm PT on KUSI-TV in San Diego.

    New revelations have brought a chill to the hot rhetoric about Global Warming according to a new prime time television special report. And, the series of major snow storms in the eastern U.S., a series of freezes in Florida, and unrelenting cold over much of the Northern Hemisphere has given a major boost to global warming skepticism.

    Set for broadcast on Thursday, February 18th at 9pm PT on KUSI-TV in San Diego, this new program follows up on a mid-January Global Warming special on KUSI that was both a ratings and Internet hit.

    KUSI Meteorologist John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel and a leading global warming skeptic, will be seen in a point, counter-point segment that also features Richard Sommerville, Ph.D., an emeritus Research Scientist from Scripps Institution of Oceanography. (A brief video preview can be found at Thursday morning.

    Scripps, a major global warming research center, took exception with the first program’s segment that debunked the hypothesis of carbon dioxide as an important greenhouse gas.

    The program will document many other new developments in the “Climategate” controversy including new questions about data manipulations at the US climate centers and problems with the weather observation stations where the critical temperature data is collected in this county and around the world.

    The program also covers the ever-growing list of revelations about the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and its troubled leader, Rajendra Pachauri.

    Well-known Climatologist John Christy, Ph.D., will be interviewed on the program to report his findings from measuring Earth’s atmospheric temperature by satellite, a far more comprehensive measurement than is possible using land based thermometers.

    Also appearing on the program will be Anthony Watts, the former TV Meteorologist and weather computer system entrepreneur who has documented the problems with weather stations and explains his view of the problems with global warming science.

    “Global Warming: Meltdown”, the hour long, prime time special airs at 9 PM Pacific Time Thursday evening on KUSI-TV, 9/51 in San Diego.

    The program will also be available after the broadcast on the station’s website at link below. Over one million people have logged on to the website’s section on global warming since the first episode aired in January.

    Global Warming: Meltdown is a production of McKinnon Broadcasting.

    The Executive Producer is Joe Riddle.

    For further information contact:

    Steve Cohen, KUSI-TV News Director


  9. Agreed on Marc Rubio, Admin. I watched this clip and he’s got all the tools in the charisma and message and backstory department – -don’t know yet about the depth of policy department however.

  10. If Hillary doesn’t run in 2012 and the Repugs run an anti chice conservative, then I think Bloomberg is a fine choice and I would vote for him.

    I don’t agree with all of his positions…..the two I most disagreed with didn’t happen, fortunately…..,however, he is a centrist politician. I think he is a very decent man, very capble and intelligent. New York City is running well… .better than under Guiliani….that’s why he has been reelected.
    One of many good things he has done as mayor is to have changed the management of the Animal care and control which had been a veritable auschwitz for dogs and cats. They reduced the euthanasia rate by 50% during the first Bloomberg administration and aimed to reduce it by 50% again. The schools and many other aspects of city life have improved under Bloomberg.

    He is a hard working, intelligent guy who gets things done and generally treats people well.

  11. Admin: thanks for the post on Marco. I have been watching him for over a year. I like him personally, but do not know him. I think he has a bright future.

    As I look into my crystal ball here is what I see: Marco will beat Crist and win the general election. He will be tapped for the vice presidential candidacy in 2012. In 2016 or 2020 he will be president. By the end of his term Obama will have destroyed the Democratic Party. It has degenerated into a cult run by the Chicago Machine–a shadow of what it once was. Trust me. Evan Bayh would be no match for this guy. Evan is not that dynamic. The only hope for the party and the country is Hillary.


    The Fed decided to bump up the so-called “discount” lending rate by one-quarter point to 0.75 percent. The increase takes effect Friday.

    The central bank said the action should not be viewed as a signal that it will soon boost interest rates for consumers and businesses. Record-low borrowing costs near zero are still needed to foster the recovery, it said. The Fed repeated its pledge to keep interest rates at “exceptionally low” levels for an “extended period.”

  13. Bloomberg is no different than than the obligarchs in Russia. I do not want to be run by billionaires. I know that it was the view of Edmund Burke that the England should be ruled by the wealthy because they would be immune from corruption. Tell that one to the Kennedy’s. One of the PUMANs had an excellent line about Marie Shriver who presumed to give advice on some policy matter of consequence: I do not take advice from someone who has a maid. It gets back to that discussion between Hemmingway and F Scott Fitzegerad: when Fizgerald told Hemmingway the rich are different, and Hemmingway said yes they have money, Fitzgerald said no I mean they are different. Bloomberg is a globalist. That is okay when you are mayor of New York, but the first priority of a president should be to serve and protect the people of this county. As a matter of fact, that is Obama’s core failing, and I will be damned if I want to replace an incompetent globalist with a competent one.

  14. As I thought you guys were at CPAC.

    While out buying horse feed, the AP said “the two nobel laureat’s huddled together for tea”, OMG. The “Bambi is the antichrist” groups will be screaming at that remark by the AP because the antichrist is the epitome of peace while he is making war in 3 countries and acting like he is going to make that 4. Bambi just can’t understand why no one trusts him. He is the epitome of talking out of both sides of his mouth. Peace prizes and Wars are not meant to be used in the same sentence, someone should tell this to “who’s your daddy George Soros”.

  15. wbboei,

    Tell that one to the Kennedy’s. One of the PUMANs had an excellent line about Marie Shriver who presumed to give advice on some policy matter of consequence:


    Gimme a break! Do you think the Bush’s are broke??? The republicans are the epitome of RICH!! Your inner Glenn Beck is showing!!!

  16. Bloomberg is no different than than the obligarchs in Russia. I do not want to be run by billionaires


    Now that IS funny!!

  17. As some of you know, I live in Austin and had to drive by the Gov building Joe Stack took out. It really looks bad and I can not believe more people did not die. You can read his on line manifesto on the below link. The Gov took it off the initial site but some people had it anyway. The horrific thing is that he says many things we have said. He was an engineer. He obviously had mental health issues. My guess he was at least suffering from Major Depression and some paranoia (which can be part of sever Depression) but maybe some Schizoid on top, it’s an interesting read anyway. I don’t think Beck had anything to do with this confloyd.

    He got in a fight with his wife the night before. She was so scared she took their child and slept in a motel. He apparently blew up the home prior to getting into his plane.

  18. gonzotx, what a sobering statement from Joe Stack. This may be a precursor for what is to come.

    Want something done? Ask a woman who has already done it. I am referring to the part of Pat Conroy’s commencement speech in 2001 whereby strong women made a huge difference for women to come after them in the military academies. And no one else would ever have known were it not for Pat Conroy’s speech.
    I salute those women and Pat Conroy!!!
    Here is the link to The Citadel Commencement Speech – “I wear the ring”
    May 12, 2001

  19. Thanks for the link GonzoTx. We’re reading the letter. He is most definitely a very angry man. The anecdote of the widow eating cat food in Harrisburg is disturbing as are his many fights with the IRS.

  20. And, Admin, you and your team are doing stellar work here. And not just no, but HELL NO, there has been NO gay bashing here. Gay hating is on the same plane as misogyny, ageism and sexism. I have not commented on the posts by LosAngelosDem because I forgave them when I saw where he/she is evidently from. And though I forgave them, it still pissed me off – using Alinksy tactics!!! sheesh.

  21. I found this comment re the tragedy today in Austin on another site.

    Somebody tell me again why Tim Geithner and Charlie Rangel can freely cheat on their taxes without penalty?

  22. admin, did you notice all the IRS ads to the right of Stack’s letter? Appalling, just sickening. Yeah, the cat food did not go unnoticed.

  23. Admin, more than anger, I saw desperation coming through. He was a broken man. A man broken by the system. How many more men are to be broken by this system, as I believe the worst is yet to come.

  24. Obama is Snubbing the White House Press Corps

    The president is subjecting himself to more questions in a variety of ways

    By Kenneth T. Walsh
    Posted February 18, 2010

    President Obama finally held a news conference last week after a hiatus of seven months, the longest gap in a decade. But his aides say Obama is in no hurry to engage with the White House press corps again anytime soon.

    This attitude may upset the men and women who cover Obama, but it’s part of a larger strategy to greatly expand the president’s options for communicating with the public. Actually, Obama isn’t shielding himself from scrutiny; he is subjecting himself to more questions in a variety of ways, not just from the “mainstream media,” to keep him in greater contact with the world outside the White House.

    On Super Bowl weekend, Obama talked at length with Katie Couric, the anchor of CBS Evening News. He took questions from House Republicans in a much-praised performance on January 29. He has met with Senate Democrats in Washington, hard-pressed workers in Ohio, and students in Florida, and he has addressed the concerns of YouTube users via the wonders of computer technology. Before that, he became the first president to appear on the Jay Leno and David Letterman late-night talk shows. He has given interviews to ESPN and People magazine. He holds periodic town-hall meetings across the country. He plans to have a televised “summit” February 25 with Democratic and Republican congressional leaders to hash out a way to revive healthcare legislation.

    “The president believes that part of the president’s job is to tell the country what he thinks,” says a White House spokesman. “And while he wants to explain his views, he wants to hear what’s on people minds. It’s important to get outside the bubble of the presidency.” Adds the spokesman: “There’s an advantage in taking questions from people who don’t live and work in Washington and who are outside the cable-news, beltway echo chamber.”

    Overall, there’s no doubt that Obama is snubbing the White House press corps. Not only has the president shied away from full news conferences; he has also declined to take a few reporters’ questions at many public events on his schedule, which had been a habit of his predecessors.

    Even when he holds a news conference, Obama tends to give reporters relatively short shrift. His opening statements sometimes go for 10 minutes, leaving only about 50 minutes in the traditional hourlong format for questions. His answers often run long, eating up more time, and he calls on only 12 reporters or so, with an emphasis on TV correspondents and the wire services. This constricted pattern held true last week, when Obama spoke at length in his opening remarks and managed to call on a half-dozen reporters in 33 minutes.

    White House strategists say that reporters are too eager to play “gotcha” with the president and that they don’t focus on what’s of most concern to every­day Americans. As a result, Obama’s preferred way of dealing with the mainstream media is through interviews. He gave 161 during his first year, according to the New York Times, compared with 50 by George W. Bush and 53 by Bill Clinton. (U.S. News was part of the mix: I interviewed Obama for a cover story on leadership a few months ago.) Obama’s pattern is frustrating to the television reporters on the White House beat because when the president does grant TV interviews, they are often with network anchors or Sunday-show hosts, not with the regular White House correspondents.

    There are larger trends at work. The mainstream media have less clout at the White House because the public has developed such a disdain for journalists and because the media have become more fractured than ever, with smaller audiences than in the past. The old power brokers in Washington, such as the broadcast networks, no longer hold sway.

    Some political activists and pundits are calling on Obama to have regular sessions of “question time” with Congress, similar to what the British prime minister does with members of Parliament. White House officials are skeptical, arguing that the regularity would encourage legislators to use rehearsed talking points to concoct the best sound bites. The fear is that question time would quickly degenerate into an adversarial ritual and make an already polarized environment even worse.

    But Obama advisers say that an occasional session with legislators is a good idea. They see it as part of an overall media approach based on the concept that diversity is good and more is better.

  25. Another head scratcher story, is the world gone completely nuts?:,2933,586721,00.html

    The U.S. Army is investigating allegations that soldiers were attempting to poison the food supply at Fort Jackson in South Carolina.

    The ongoing probe began two months ago, Chris Grey, a spokesman for the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division, told Fox News.

    The Army is taking the allegations “extremely seriously,” Grey said, but so far, “there is no credible information to support the allegations.”

    The suspects were part of a Arabic translation program called “09 Lima” and use Arabic as their first language, two sources told Fox News. Another military source said they were Muslim.

    Grey would not confirm or deny the sources’ information.

  26. SURPRISE!!!

    The suspects were part of a Arabic translation program called “09 Lima” and use Arabic as their first language, two sources told Fox News. Another military source said they were Muslim.

  27. Connie: I know you are concerned about the influence of the Bush family. They are a controlling force in your state. You know from my discussions that I am too. I never liked that wing of the party and I never voted for a Bush. I left the Republican Party because of W Bush. You also know from our discussions what I think of Glenn Beck.

    Paddy4Hill had a brilliant comment about neolibs as an American expatriate in China from a couple years ago. If I can find it then I will post it. It goes to the concerns I have about Bloomberg. You would not like an America run by Bloomberg any more than you like one run by Obama. As far as the the comment about Bloomberg being like the Russian obligarchs I misspoke. What I meant to say is he could be worse for the United States, since their actions had no appreciable impact upon this country.

  28. Wbboei, the video you posted is from 2008. It’s still very funny
    Admin: yes it is. And as they say many a truth is said in jest.

  29. Gonzotex @6:39, This Kamakazee pilot in Austin today has some of the same characteristics of our “dear Leader”. He tends to blame everyone but himself. I feel bad for this guy, but sometimes you have to wonder why some people can’t just say ” I screwed up, I will try again, If I fail again, I will try again” Of coarse everything that happens to them is something or someone’s else’s fault. I know my husband is the same way.

    BTW, Obama is too. He just can’t take the blame for anything.

    Glenn Beck call this guy a communist today, sorry the guy was not a communist, just a maladjusted individual.

  30. Wbboei, What I was laughing at is that when’s the last poor person that got elected anyway????

    They’re all rich, self centered and in the pocket of big business. If we are lucky we might can find two that will throw us a bone every now and then just to make themselves feel better and to do a few good works, so maybe God won’t be as hard on them when the time comes.

    OK, OK, I know I’m in a bad mood, but you realize I am going to have to wait now for my tax refund, since that COMMUNIST took out the IRS headquarters. I have been salivating over the 52″ flat screen from China for my bedroom for months. LOL!!

    I hope I did not hurt your feelings?

  31. Wbboei, I think the answer is Hope, you remember a place called Hope, Arkansas, that was the last poor person to become POTUS>

  32. Here is what Paddy said a couple years ago about the neo-libs who have since taken over our country, and are leading it down a very destructive path.
    March 26th, 2008 at 5:04 am

    The Rise (and Fall) of the Neo-libs

    When and where did the neo-libs come from? One might say that the first sightings of what would eventually evolve into the neo-libs were the various state level Green Party organizations that sprung up in the early 1990s. These were Americanized copies of similar groupings in Europe, mainly white university liberal arts graduates from upper middle class families. The Greens were strongly anti-establishment and radical environmentalists. Their slogan was “think globally, act locally”, and were the ones to first coin the “global village” concept.

    They never made it into the mainstream and peaked with the Green Party candidacy for President of Ralph Nader. It didn’t matter much. Although they themselves did not hit the big time, their ideas lived on. For soon, most of their political positions had been usurped by a new radicalized youth who began protesting against the global status quo at international gatherings. And unlike the more pacifist Greens, the protests grew more and more violent, culminating in the notorious Seattle riots. Lacking an organizational base, financial support and a cadre of capable leaders, these protests may have just faded into the haze of yesterday’s news headlines as just another of those leisure-time indulgences undertaken by the spoiled offspring of well-off families. But something else was simultaneously happening that would alter the landscape of political America. The very global system that the protesters were rebelling against was creating one of the biggest wealth transfers the world had ever witnessed.

    Globalization resulted in vast amounts of wealth moving to the United States. This wealth though was not distributed evenly among the general population, but instead enriched a new group of younger, well educated, liberal minded, high tech savvy, entrepreneurs and highly paid professionals, now often described as middle-class millionaires. They made their fortunes using new asset classes of investment such as hedge funds, private equity and venture capital, most out of the reach of the average investor. This group of new rich left stood in stark contrast with old money that had long identified with the conservative faction of the Republican Party. The new class, who described themselves as progressives, was for the most part well-heeled political clones of the radical student protesters. Hence they were very internationalist in focus, taking extreme positions on the environment, human rights, global working conditions, and a collection of various causes such as Tibetan independence, organic farming, fair trade, and opposition to international organizations such as the World Bank and IMF. There was then a marriage of convenience between the two. Sharing similar goals as to what the world should look like, the new rich left differed from their radical student soul-mates in that they had money and lots of it to achieve their political goals. On the other hand their student ideological allies would be the ones that would supply the manpower. As the old saying goes, “if you’ve got the money honey, I’ve got the time.”

    Its was this convergence of what was left of the Greens, the radicalized youth and the new rich left, that gave birth to what I am calling the neo-libs. This name was chosen deliberately to draw on the similarities between the neo-libs and the neo-cons who occupy the opposite end of the political spectrum. Both hold views that are not at this point part of mainstream American politics, both are by themselves small factions within the two major parties, both are more concerned about international than domestic affairs, both advocate interventionism, including the use of force if necessary, to obtain their political objectives, both pose a grave danger to world peace and security.

    But major distinctions exist between the neo-libs and neo-cons. The neo-libs actively seek to dominate the newest and fastest growing form of information, the internet, through the use of coercion and e-violence. The student wing because their comfortable life styles and affluence allows them the time and finances, is employed to contain opposition to their movement. A variety of intimidation tactics ranging from the use of gross profanity on anti-neo-lib blog entries, posting crude and rude comments on sites running unfavorable news articles, conducting web searches on active opposition bloggers in order to find personal information that can be used on-line in ugly ways, and even death threats on the web against political opponents, are becoming commonplace. The majority of political blog sites are controlled by the neo-libs and most use strict censorship to screen out entries they consider unfriendly.

    Political intimidation tactics are not confined to the internet. Polling organizations have close connections to the neo-libs and many poll results are obvious attempts to mislead the public to disguise real voter sentiment. During the Democratic caucuses, it was common place for neo-lib student radicals to intimidate voters into voting for their candidate Senator Obama. The censorship of anti-Obama stories in the media and their near worshiping of his holiness has been so obvious that a famous late-night comedy program started a series of skits poking fun if it. Such a wide range of political intimidation and information control has not been seen in western developed countries since the early days of the National Socialist movement in Germany. This kind of worshiping of a political leader by followers and media alike is also too reminiscent of the National Socialist Adolf Hitler to be comfortable. While the neo-cons were able to take advantage of the weak Bush conservative administration to give us such things as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the neo-libs promise to give us much worse if they ever come to power. The neo-libs are no lovers of freedom.

    Grounded in the transformed Green agenda, relying on an infantry of radicalized youth from upper middle class families, and powered by the big bucks of the new rich left, the neo-libs as a coherent movement made their initial foray into the political mainstream in 2004 by backing their first candidate, the former governor of Vermont Howard Dean, in the Democratic presidential primary. Although not a neo-lib himself but a member of the ageing-liberal wing of the Party, he nonetheless utilized neo-lib support on an anti-war platform to run as an “outsider,” distinguishing himself from the ageing-liberal Kerry and the moderate Edwards. They failed miserably; Dean did not win one contest. The neo-libs ended up reluctantly backing as second choice John Kerry, who like all previous liberal Democrats before him, went down to political defeat in the general election.

    The neo-libs extracted as the price for backing Kerry ageing-liberal support in giving the leadership of the Democratic National Committee to Howard Dean. Next, the unpopular war in Iraq resulted in the crushing defeat of the Republicans in the congressional elections in 2006, encouraging the ageing- liberals to try one more time to get into the White House even if it meant doing so through the back door. The key to that door would be resurrecting the coalition with the neo-libs. This time it would be a neo-lib that would head the ticket, and for this they anointed the African-American junior Senator from Illinois, Barak Obama. Their strategy was clear from the outset. The ageing-liberals would not run anyone from their own ranks to oppose Obama in the primaries and would provide the necessary Democrat establishment backing the neo-libs lacked. For their part, the neo-libs would implement an improved version of the Dean 2004 campaign strategy. The new rich left would bankroll the operation, with the radicalized youth serving as foot soldiers for the campaign and running interference on the web and at the caucuses. They would enjoy the added bonus of the African-American vote going for a favorite son. The media, dominated by either ageing-liberals or younger neo-libs, would serve as the organs of Obama’s propaganda. Their goal: to prevent the moderates from re-taking control of the Democratic Party and defeat of the unpopular Republicans in the general election.

    But globalization had not only created the new rich left, but also one of the widest gaps between the haves and haves not in American history. The pain resulting from the global economic restructuring was creating great difficulties for the middle classes. In a final act of desperation for one last chance at gaining the White House in alliance with the neo-libs, the ageing-liberals, once their champions, deserted the middle class. As for the neo-libs, they have little sympathy for the average working American. They, along with the old money Republicans, see no need for government programs that benefit the middle class. They already have it all. They can afford the best doctors, their children attend the finest schools, and they are going to retire in comfort. Hence they are more interested in Tibetan independence, human rights in Kosovo, and the Kyoto climate pact, than universal healthcare, better public schools or meaningful social security reform.
    The so-called Regan democrats, who have been pushed out of the Republican Party by the costly foreign adventures of the neo-cons and the rigid moral positions of the religious right, found themselves stranded in a political no-mans’ land. That was until the moderate faction of the Democratic Party launched a challenge on their behalf in the candidacy of New York Senator Hillary Clinton. Their strategy was just as ingenious as the neo-libs. Clinton as the candidate of the moderates would represent not only the former Regan Democrats now re-termed Lunch Bucket Democrats, but also Latinos, Asian Americans, Jewish Americans and carry the additional punch of being the first serious female contender for the White House in American history. The moderates under Clinton have still many allies within the Party, those who refuse to surrender it to the neo-lib bullies.

    It is odd that the African-American voters can not see the obvious fact that they are being used. The neo-libs will have no use for them if they ever come to power. They should realize what more and more middle class Americans already have. The new rich left will continue to use international capital to enrich themselves at the expense of the common folks. The current economic mess that began with the sub-prime meltdown was created by them as they attempted to maximize the return on their investments by upping the risk factors. And with their wealth they will seek to use the government to remold global economic and political conditions to their liking, much like neo-cons on the right. It is just that the agenda will change slightly. They will send the country’s youth of all colors to liberate Tibet, to free some far-off country like Burma or Sudan from their oppressors, force the price of goods up for the average consumers via international environmental taxes, fair trade quotas and product boycotts, and increase international tension. After waiting patiently eight years for the nightmare of the Bush administration to end, the world might have to endure eight more years of worse mistakes, this time from a new tyranny of the left and not the right. And it could be worse than before. The neo-libs have already shown brown-shirt like tendencies in a willingness to use the radicalized youth as a force to achieve their goals. They feel so strongly that they are right that any means will justify the ends. Many in the political and working classes have already fallen prey to the sweet sounds of the neo-lib propaganda, that a world built on their principals will be one of peace and prosperity. What they don’t tell you is that the peace and prosperity will be built on the backs of the working people and that the benefits will go disproportionately to themselves for they already control the purse strings of international capital.
    As for this election, the neo-libs would rather win the nomination and lose the general election than lose the nomination. If they secure the nomination, they remain in control of the Party until the next round. This will allow them to bring in more of their own people and dominate the agenda for years to come. After all, it has already been eight years since moderates under Bill Clinton held the reigns of power in the Party. Many of his people will be leaving political life in the next few years as they retire. The neo-libs and ageing-liberals want to replace as many of them as possible with their own. If Senator Clinton and the moderates win, this will keep the neo-libs out and ensure that the Party is one that occupies the political center.

    The neo-lib alliance does indeed want to win the general election too if they can, even though that seems remote at this point given the new problems of their candidate. Then they could exercise complete mastery of the Party. With both houses of congress at their disposal, especially the House under the ageing-liberal ally Pelosi, they can re-make the world according to their own image without restraints. But since the White House is looking increasing difficult to take for Obama, the last thing they want is to lose the nomination to Clinton, because then they lose everything. If she does win the nomination, the moderates will control the Party no matter which party is victorious in November. This is why the neo-lib duet of Obama and Dean, and the ageing-liberals leadership under Kennedy, Kerry, and Pelosi, are so desperate to win the primary election at all costs, even if it means losing the general election. It is the nomination that counts most for now and for the future direction of the Party. It is better to have half the pie than none.

    As Senator Clinton often correctly points out, America has never faced such challenges as it does at the present. The stakes have never been higher. The Republican leadership for too long believed that the biggest challenge to their ideals came from Senator Clinton. They are now belatedly realizing that a much more serious threat, this time to the vital interests of the United States, is coming from the neo-libs. Better late than never. At the same time, many have decided that the Democratic Party is worth fighting for. And the great masses of the American middle class are finally awaking to the fact that the only way to avoid a mistake of catastrophic proportion for both the world and their own economic interest, lies is the election of Democrat Senator Clinton as President.

  33. I hope I did not hurt your feelings?
    As a matter of fact, I am sitting here in the fetal position trying to type and chew gum at the same time.

    I also think that Obama is the salvation of humankind and deserves another Oscar I mean Nobel Prize just for showing up.

    I simply did not want anyone to get the idea that I am a Bush defender or a Glenn Beck admirer.

  34. admin: A very thought provoking article. Bloomberg would be the first Jewish Potus. I would like that, if he was the kind of Jew that would protect Israel, but so many American jews are not doing much in the way of helping keep Israel safe.
    I also think that a Bloomberg Potus would further inflame the Arabs, possibly causing more attacks, especially if he were to have to declare a war on say Iran, that could be really bad. Hey, but this is America if we can have a black Arab Potus from Kenya, we should be able to have a constitutional eligible American Jew for Potus as well.
    I fully am aware of the Perot effect though, I was a Perot supporter, in fact I just barely threw out my old Perot yard signs a couple of years before Hillary ran. I was a avid Perot supporter, watched every debate, read every article, put signs up all over town. I was upset when he quit and then came back in. His daughter was threatened, I have always wondered who did that??
    If he runs we could have another 4 years of the “One” or we could have Hillary if we can talk the “One” into moving to Davos with “big daddy”. TIme will til, things are beginning to get interesting, at least I will something to listen to besides the PROGRESSIVES ARE THE DEVIL INCARNATE that I hear all day every day.

  35. Wbboei, DId you see Cheney today at CPAC?? LOL!! I was asking because I was wondering who is paying for that ambulance he must have following at all times now?? Probably the same folks that pay for Nasty’s Gulfstream?

  36. Speaking of Cheney at CPAC today ” barack obama is going to be a one term president” comment

    I am willing to wager a rather large bet that Meeeschelle is yanking every sleeve that is left inside OUR White house tonight LMAO!!! 😀

  37. JanH, Thanks for sharing that with me, at least Bloomberg is rich enough on his own and won’t have to be managed by Soros.

    djia, I hate Cheney, but I would have given him a standing ovation for that statement. lol!!
    Cheney has that Nixon look to me. I am not a crook!

  38. John Bolton just said on Greta, the outcome of Iran is that they will have a nuc and a way to deliver it and it will start the arms race. He also said he had high hopes for Hillary the begining of the week, but she has fizzled out. Well, she is not the PRESIDENT.

    JanH, What is Israel going to do??? What can it do??? Did Hillary secure a flight path over Saudi??? Lets all pray she did!

  39. confloyd,

    I don’t know what Israel will do. I think Iran and their Arab allies are just looking for a reason to instigate a “final war.”

    If that happens, Israel will protect itself. It is to be hoped that the U.S. will help out a little when that happens, but who knows?

  40. I agree, who knows. I am sure we will sell both sides arms so our military complex can remain FAT.

    I think Netanyahu is going to make up his mind soon. I don’t think they will let this happen. Geez, I wish Hillary would’ve won, we have this muslim in office helping the other side now.

  41. China raps U.S. envoy in Dalai Lama row

    Thu Feb 18, 2010
    Ben Blanchard

    (Reuters) – China summoned the U.S. ambassador on Friday to complain about President Barack Obama’s meeting with the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader Beijing reviles as a separatist.

    Obama held a low-key meeting with the Dalai Lama in the face of wider tensions over U.S. weapons sales to self-ruled Taiwan, China’s currency practices, trade disputes and Internet censorship, risking further damage to strained Sino-U.S. ties.

    Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu said the meeting “violated the U.S. government’s repeated acceptance that Tibet is a part of China and it does not support Tibetan independence”.

    Chinese Vice-Foreign Minister Cui Tiankui later “lodged solemn representations” with U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman, the official Xinhua news agency said.

    Chinese troops marched into Tibet in 1950. The Dalai Lama fled in 1959 after a failed uprising against Chinese rule.

    The United States, like most of the world, recognises Beijing’s “one China” policy which holds that Tibet and Taiwan are part of China. Only 23 countries recognise Taiwan, which Beijing regards as a renegade province.

    Beijing accuses the Dala Lama of fomenting unrest and seeking to split Tibet from China. The Dalai Lama says he is merely seeking greater autonomy.

    In the predominantly Tibetan region of Tongren in northwest China’s Qinghai province, monks expressed their support for the Obama meeting, saying they celebrated the event with a large firework display.

    “This is great news for the Tibetans,” said Jokhar, a local monk. “We don’t care that it makes the government angry. It makes us very happy that Obama met him.”

    Tsering, a Tibetan celebrating the lunar new year on Thursday, smiled when he heard the meeting was about to take place.

    “It lets us know we have not been forgotten,” he said.

    Obama encouraged China and the Dalai Lama’s envoys to keep up efforts to resolve their differences through negotiations, despite recent talks having yielded little progress.

    Beijing did not threaten retaliation and its response was in line with past denunciations of U.S. dealings with the Dalai Lama. But the visit could complicate Obama’s efforts to secure China’s help on key issues such as imposing tougher sanctions on Iran and forging a new global accord on climate change.

  42. Why in the world is the uk threatening Israel over the death of a Hamas Commander??? WHat in the world is going on, Hamas is a ring of murderers. I read now that Interpol is involved.

  43. Wbboei,

    This one is for you. How anyone could ever defend anyone who works for Fox News that was ever Hillary supporter is beyond me. Yes I watch Fox, I don’t defend their methods. This is one, just one of the most demeaning videos of Bill and Hillary I’ve ever seen and its clear Fox & Friends were having good time. I don’t know if I will ever be able to really, really ever consider becoming a real republican or like their party. I voted for McCain/Palin, but it was the anti-Obama vote.

    JanH, I enjoyed those lovely pics of BIll and Hillary.

  44. confloyd,

    It’s because “whoever” assassinated him used British passports.

    It still hasn’t been proven that the Israelis were behind the murder.

  45. The original Tea Party was Ron Paul supporters, so I just happen to run across this that Hillary said about his supporters. It kinda made me go hmm, hmmm, especially since that statement that BC was suppose to be going after the Tea Party folks (which I don’t believe). Here’s the video, its cute.

  46. JanH, Exactly what are the Israeli’s supposed to do for the rest of the world to be happy, throw down their weapons and give the Palestinians the whole country?? It’s stupid these kinds of things happen all the time and is a much better way than having a war all the time. Its ridiculous.

  47. I am not able to place a picture here, but an interesting one came to my attention today. It is a road sign that reads in English and some foreign language: Welcome to Kenya the Home of Barack Obama

    If this is a photoshopped photograph, I would not be surprised. This is a photo making the rounds on email: It is supposed to be a sign between Sudan and Kenya.

    Admin have you seen it?

  48. confloyd, did you see the post in the comment section of the snubbed kiss? The one that said: c@nt. Go eat some chicken.
    Everyone please go there and rate it down; I had to respond to it. Help me out.

  49. Obama is just so darn dangerous!!

    us | Digg it
    NASA chief Charlie Bolden
    WASHINGTON — NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden said Tuesday that President Barack Obama has asked him to “find ways to reach out to dominantly Muslim countries” as the White House pushes the space agency to become a tool of international diplomacy.

    “In addition to the nations that most of you usually hear about when you think about the International Space Station, we now have expanded our efforts to reach out to non-traditional partners,” said Bolden, speaking to a lecture hall of young engineering students.

    Specifically, he talked about connecting with countries that do not have an established space program and helping them conduct science missions. He mentioned new opportunities with Indonesia, including an educational program that examines global climate change.

    “We really like Indonesia because the State Department, the Department of Education [and] other agencies in the U.S. are reaching out to Indonesia as the largest Muslim nation in the world. We would love to establish partners there,” Bolden said.

    As a presidential candidate, Obama espoused a space program that invited more participation from the international community and Deputy NASA Administrator Lori Garver said recently that the next time NASA lands on the moon it would be part of an international exploration effort.

  50. Correction to ShortTermer
    February 19th, 2010 at 12:04 am
    Welcome to Kenya the BIRTHPLACE of Barack Obama

  51. Shorttermer, Done, I wasn’t nice, it might get pulled. I ask you why Rev. Manning was banned from Youtube, but these little cheeto freaks still keep posting this crap without as much as a grip from YouTube. How and where do we complain, do you know??

  52. Personally I have no pity for thos Hezbollah or those Hamas killers, I like happen to think an organization like Mossaud is good. What the Arab’s don’t realize is the Israeli’s wouldn’t need Moussad if they did not have Hamas and Hezbolla, AlQueda, and Taleban. Awh, if we all lived in a perfect world, the lion would lie down with the lamb, until then, there’s Mossaud. Get over it!

  53. confloyd
    February 19th, 2010 at 12:19 am

    Obama is just so darn dangerous!!

    NASA chief Charlie Bolden

    WASHINGTON — NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden said Tuesday that President Barack Obama has asked him to “find ways to reach out to dominantly Muslim countries” as the White House pushes the space agency to become a tool of international diplomacy.

    “In addition to the nations that most of you usually hear about when you think about the International Space Station, we now have expanded our efforts to reach out to non-traditional partners,” said Bolden, speaking to a lecture hall of young engineering students


    Sharing our technology with underdeveloped countries has Soros’ fingerprints all over it. If I remember correctly, it was a clause in the Global Warming agreement held recently in Copenhagen. ( \It didn’t specify Muslim countries.) With this revelation, I can understand why Obama has cut funding to the bone for Space programs. Give the technology our scientists have worked so hard to perfect always striving to protect and keep our astronauts safe. Give it to the Muslims to sabotage our own Space programs and kill more Americans?… uh, huh- righto!

    Rule of thumb- when the managers of the company start giving away the store… bankruptcy is not far behind.

  54. CBN Exclusive: Five Muslim Soldiers Arrested at Fort Jackson in South Carolina

    Thursday, February 18, 2010 6:17 PM

    CBN News has learned exclusively that five Muslim soldiers at Fort Jackson in South Carolina were arrested just before Christmas. It is unclear whether the men are still in custody. … check the Lincoln bedroom..

    The five were part of the Arabic Translation program at the base.

    The men are suspected of trying to poison the food supply at Fort Jackson.

    A source with intimate knowledge of the investigation, which is ongoing, told CBN News investigators suspect the “Fort Jackson Five” may have been in contact with the group of five Washington, DC area Muslims that traveled to Pakistan to wage jihad against U.S. troops in December. That group was arrested by Pakistani authorities, also just before Christmas.

    Coming as it does on the heels of November’s Fort Hood jihadist massacre, this news has major implications.

  55. I did a search in Stack’s statement (posted at unixronin) for terms like ‘tea’, ‘stimulus’, ‘deficit’, and ‘Obama’ and found none; those are big Tea Party issues and would be expected if he were sympathetic to the Tea Party.

    There was an insult to the Catholic church (and by implication all churches that get tax deductions); not a Tea Party issue sfaik.

  56. Good morning friends:Our one trick HHOCUS POTUS is out burning our assets in Air Force and dodging the Welcome Mats being thrown at him wherever he lands.Meanwhile our REAL PRESIDENT keeps on giSecretary Clinton’s Trip to Qatar and Saudi Arabia

    Posted: 18 Feb 2010 09:54 AM PST

    About the Author: Jeffrey Feltman serves as the Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs.

    The Obama Administration has made it a priority to broaden U.S. engagement around the world — reaching out to a wider range of partners, in and beyond governments, to discuss and work together on shared challenges, concerns, and opportunities. To see this approach in action, you don’t have to look further than Secretary Clinton’s February 13 – 16 trip to Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which I was privileged to join.

    On the ground, Secretary Clinton’s schedule was jam-packed. Even younger aides, accustomed to the Secretary’s often grueling schedule, began dropping like flies after the sixteen hour flight from DC to Doha. The Secretary, meanwhile, stayed up, editing her speech for the U.S.-Islamic World Forum in Doha and reading her briefing papers.

    After landing in Doha, she went straight into intensive bilateral talks with the head of the Turkish government, Prime Minister Erdogan, who was also in Qatar to attend the U.S.-Islamic World Forum, and then with the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani. The next day in Riyadh, she spent four hours in dialogue with the King of Saudi Arabia, Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. She also met with the Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud Al Faisal and the Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu. In each meeting, she discussed the many shared challenges and opportunities our countries face, including support for a comprehensive peace in the Middle East and concerns over Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

    In between these “bilaterals” Secretary Clinton sat down with civil society leaders in Doha; conducted a combined town hall and interview with students and Al-Jazeera in Education City; met with women business leaders from the Jeddah Chamber of Commerce and Industry; took questions from a group of Saudi students at Dar al-Hekma College; and delivered a significant policy address at the U.S.-Islamic World Forum.

    For those keeping score at home, the Secretary met with government leaders, citizen activists, regional media, and leaders in education and the private sector. The dialogue was robust and lively. As she said during the Q&A session after her speech at the Doha Forum, “We are not always going to agree. We are not always going to disagree. We ought to narrow the areas of disagreement, enhance the areas of agreement, and look for ways to try to solve problems in between.”

    The administration’s commitment to a broader engagement is evident not only in the conversations we have, but in the policies we pursue and the partnerships we build. In the last year, the United States rejoined the UN Human Rights Council and the P5+1 process with Iran. The Secretary traveled to the BMENA Forum for the Future in Morocco to reinforce the importance of civil society and announce programs to support citizen empowerment through education technology, and other means. The Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) is ramping up its support for local activists and organizations with home-grown agendas for progress — these projects now make up more than half of all MEPI-funded projects.

    The most clearest message I took away from the Secretary’s trip, besides her unmistakable commitment to reaching out and hearing from people of all backgrounds and perspectives, was that the United States is fully committed to realizing President Obama’s vision for a new approach to foreign policy — through the work we do, and the way we do it. That vision is for relationships defined by partnership and by shared responsibility for tackling our common challenges. These aren’t relationships that can be created in an instant, or even a year, as the Secretary said. But every day, we are building partnerships and looking to solve problems in accordance with the principles of mutual respect, mutual interest, and mutual responsibility; a shared commitment to universal values; and a broader engagement with citizens and governments alike.

    ving her all to save her country her party and our world.Take a look at her schedule and praises from all the countries she visits.


  57. It’s nonsense to say the U.S. is ungovernable

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, February 19, 2010

    In the latter days of the Carter presidency, it became fashionable to say that the office had become unmanageable and was simply too big for one man. Some suggested a single, six-year presidential term. The president’s own White House counsel suggested abolishing the separation of powers and going to a more parliamentary system of unitary executive control. America had become ungovernable.

    Then came Ronald Reagan, and all that chatter disappeared.

    The tyranny of entitlements? Reagan collaborated with Tip O’Neill, the legendary Democratic House speaker, to establish the Alan Greenspan commission that kept Social Security solvent for a quarter-century.

    A corrupted system of taxation? Reagan worked with liberal Democrat Bill Bradley to craft a legislative miracle: tax reform that eliminated dozens of loopholes and slashed rates across the board — and fueled two decades of economic growth.

    Later, a highly skilled Democratic president, Bill Clinton, successfully tackled another supposedly intractable problem: the culture of intergenerational dependency. He collaborated with another House speaker, Newt Gingrich, to produce the single most successful social reform of our time, the abolition of welfare as an entitlement.

    It turned out that the country’s problems were not problems of structure but of leadership. Reagan and Clinton had it. Carter didn’t. Under a president with extensive executive experience, good political skills and an ideological compass in tune with the public, the country was indeed governable.

    It’s 2010, and the first-year agenda of a popular and promising young president has gone down in flames. Barack Obama’s two signature initiatives — cap-and-trade and health-care reform — lie in ruins.

    Desperate to explain away this scandalous state of affairs, liberal apologists haul out the old reliable from the Carter years: “America the Ungovernable.” So declared Newsweek. “Is America Ungovernable?” coyly asked the New Republic. Guess the answer.

    The rage at the machine has produced the usual litany of systemic explanations. Special interests are too powerful. The Senate filibuster stymies social progress. A burdensome constitutional order prevents innovation. If only we could be more like China, pines Tom Friedman, waxing poetic about the efficiency of the Chinese authoritarian model, while America flails about under its “two parties . . . with their duel-to-the-death paralysis.” The better thinkers, bewildered and furious that their president has not gotten his way, have developed a sudden disdain for our inherently incremental constitutional system.

    Yet, what’s new about any of these supposedly ruinous structural impediments? Special interests blocking policy changes? They have been around since the beginning of the republic — and since the beginning of the republic, strong presidents, like the two Roosevelts, have rallied the citizenry and overcome them.

    And then, of course, there’s the filibuster, the newest liberal bete noire. “Don’t blame Mr. Obama,” writes Paul Krugman of the president’s failures. “Blame our political culture instead. . . . And blame the filibuster, under which 41 senators can make the country ungovernable.”

    Ungovernable, once again. Of course, just yesterday the same Paul Krugman was warning about “extremists” trying “to eliminate the filibuster” when Democrats used it systematically to block one Bush (43) judicial nomination after another. Back then, Democrats touted it as an indispensable check on overweening majority power. Well, it still is. Indeed, the Senate with its ponderous procedures and decentralized structure is serving precisely the function the Founders intended: as a brake on the passions of the House and a caution about precipitous transformative change.

    Leave it to Mickey Kaus, a principled liberal who supports health-care reform, to debunk these structural excuses: “Lots of intellectual effort now seems to be going into explaining Obama’s (possible/likely/impending) health care failure as the inevitable product of larger historic and constitutional forces. . . . But in this case there’s a simpler explanation: Barack Obama’s job was to sell a health care reform plan to American voters. He failed.”

    He failed because the utter implausibility of its central promise — expanded coverage at lower cost — led voters to conclude that it would lead ultimately to more government, more taxes and more debt. More broadly, the Democrats failed because, thinking the economic emergency would give them the political mandate and legislative window, they tried to impose a left-wing agenda on a center-right country. The people said no, expressing themselves first in spontaneous demonstrations, then in public opinion polls, then in elections — Virginia, New Jersey and, most emphatically, Massachusetts.

    That’s not a structural defect. That’s a textbook demonstration of popular will expressing itself — despite the special interests — through the existing structures. In other words, the system worked.

  58. The get-away continues:

    Neera Tanden, Hillary Clinton’s chief policy advisor and a rare Hillarylander to make it into the senior ranks of the Obama administration, is departing to take a top job at the Center for American Progress, Jonathan Cohn reports.

    Tanden is currently a senior adviser to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and her departure, as Cohn notes, can’t be good news for health care legislation — though he says he’s credibly informed the timing is a coincidence.

    Outside the Clintonite-dominated Treasury, the Obama administration hasn’t absorbed many new faces, not to mention women, into its top rank. Tanden, a well-regarded political and policy thinker who moved to Chicago for the campaign after Clinton withdrew, seemed to a candidate to rise. Her departure for the outside reinforces the impression of how little change there’s been to Obama’s inner circle since the campaign.

    CAP is a hub of the Democratic infrastructure, and her new role as Chief Operating Officer will make her a major player in shaping the party’s agenda. Cohn reports that she’ll also be writing for his magazine, The New Republic.

  59. admin
    February 19th, 2010 at 8:57 am

    The get-away continues:


    Or is it shifting gears placing our own (Hillary’s) people in the Soros camp? CAP was a Soros policy and strategy website used for information access during the Primary. It has since been changed to a CAP Action Fund site for use for another one of Soros’ non-profit Foundations.

    (the chess pieces move silently around the board)

    This is a very interesting development indeed.

  60. February 19, 2010

    Sestak: White House Offered Me Federal Job to Drop Out of Senate Primary

    Rep. Joe Sestak , a Pennsylvania Democrat, says the White House dangled a federal job in front of him to convince him to drop his primary challenge against incumbent Arlen Specter, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported Friday.

    Apparently it was an offer he could refuse.

    Rep. Joe Sestak, who is causing heartburn for Democratic leaders by running against Arlen Specter for a Senate nomination in Pennsylvania, says the White House dangled a federal job in front of him in an attempt to entice him to drop out of the state’s Democratic primary, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported Friday.

    But the White House “vociferously” denies Sestak’s accusation, which came during a taping on a local Sunday news show. A White House official told Fox News that Sestak is expected to “clarify” the allegation.

    Sestak’s campaign office said the Pennsylvania Democrat “stands by his statement.”

    Sestak didn’t elaborate on the circumstances during the interview on the Sunday show, the Inquirer reported, but acknowledged that the job was a high-ranking position. Sestak told the show’s host that he would “never leave” the Senate race for a deal, the newspaper said.

    Sestak later he said he recalled the White House offer coming in July as he was preparing to formally announce his Senate candidacy in August, the newspaper said.

    During the same period this summer, the White House played an active role in clearing the primary for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand in the New York primary. President Obama persuaded Rep. Steve Israel not to challenge Gillibrand, and the White House may have figured prominently in Rep. Carolyn Maloney’s decision to stay out of the race. Harold Ford, who is mulling a challenge against Gillibrand, has warned the White House not to bully him.

  61. Admin,Mrs.Smith, That is quiet interesting! Mrs. Smith do you think Soros has decided he put all his eggs in the wrong basket??? Bloomberg taking notes from Hillary on her campaign, why, the DNC says she wasn’t the winner, but we know the real outcome, don’t we? You’d think he’d be asking Obama how to win unless of coarse the idiot will try and run again. Without SOros Obama can’t win.

  62. OH, isn’t there more pressing things around the world than listening to the serial cheater Tiger Woods. Why do people care about this???

  63. Radical Anti-tax Groups Growing Threat, Say Law Enforcement

    Friday, February 19, 2010
    By Jana Winter

    Joseph Stack, the 53-year-old software engineer who crashed his small plane into a seven-story office building in Austin, Texas, was part of a growing, violent anti-tax and anti-government movement that has become increasingly alarming to law enforcement agencies.

    Stack, who torched his home Thursday morning before setting out on his suicide flight, was fueled by his hatred of the Internal Revenue Service, which had offices and employed nearly 200 workers in the building.

    In his wake he left a rambling and lengthy online manifesto in which he railed against big government, bank bailouts and the IRS and revealed his decades-long involvement in the anti-tax movement and the evolution of his beliefs.

    Experts are pointing to the incident as further evidence of what they say is a proliferation of anti-government militia groups. “There is a real rage out there, and this terrible attack may be a reflection of that,” Mark Potok, the director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project, said in a statement to The SPLC has been studying the resurgence in anti-government militias and groups, which it attributes to a perfect storm of economic, political and social factors. “There’s been an explosive growth of anti-government militias and so-called Patriot groups over the past year, and the central idea of many of them is that taxes are completely illegitimate,” Potok said.

    There was an immediate response to Stack’s violent act on anti-government and anti-tax blogs, and on Facebook, where multiple fan pages attracted hundreds of followers within hours of the plane crash. “Half of them are making this guy into a hero, that’s scary stuff. The other half is saying that this guy’s a victim,” said J.J. MacNab, a Maryland-based insurance analyst who has testified before Congress on the anti-tax movement and is writing a book on the subject. She said anti-tax, anti-government protesters did not condone Stack setting his house on fire, “but the tax protest movement is not condemning him.”

    Tax protesters have a history of violence against the IRS, MacNab said. But she said Stack’s method of attack – a suicide mission – was unusual. The anti-tax protester’s favorite weapon, she said, is a bomb.

    “He is not your typical tax protester, but he got angry like the rest of them,” MacNab told “He’s had lots and lots of tax problems, spanning back to the mid-1980s.”

    According to the SPLC, there were five domestic terrorist plots against the IRS between 1995 and 2009; an IRS building in Austin was the target of a plot 15 years ago.
    “In the 1990s, the combustible mix of rising antigovernment anger and the growth in militias was a recipe for disaster that ultimately resulted in the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building by Timothy McVeigh, who was motivated by antigovernment hatred,” read a blog post on SPLC’s Web site after Stack’s attack.

    Stack’s manifesto offers insight into his personal journey as a tax protester – and into the large and growing movement that attracted him. Passages of Stack’s manifesto suggest that he was involved in a notorious home church scheme that was popular in the part of California where he lived before he moved to Texas, MacNab said.

    Stack wrote that he was part of a group who held tax code readings and “zeroed in on a section relating to the wonderful ‘exemptions’ that make institutions like the vulgar, corrupt Catholic Church so incredibly wealthy.” He said they had “the best high-paid experienced tax lawyers in the business.”

    MacNab said Stack likely was referring to a notorious scheme run by lawyers William Drexler and Jerome Daly. It was based on the idea that citizens could establish themselves as a church and gain the same tax exemptions afforded to religious institutions.

    The scheme didn’t work, and Drexler and Daly were disbarred and imprisoned. If this was the operation Stack was referring to, it may have been a turning point in his life. He wrote: “That little lesson in patriotism cost me $40,000+, 10 years of my life, and set my
    retirement plans back to 0. It made me realize for the first time that I live in a country with an ideology that is based on a total and complete lie.”

    This inspired him to take action, write to politicians and meet with likeminded anti-tax protesters. He wrote: “I spent countless hours on the L.A. freeways driving to meetings and any and all of the disorganized professional groups who were attempting to mount a campaign against this atrocity.”

    His anti-tax and anti-government beliefs may also have been fueled by Section 1706, an obscure and relatively unknown change in the tax code that focused on his industry and went into effect in 1986. Section 1706 essentially removed technical workers like software engineers from a safe haven classification of “self-employed consultant,” making it easier for the IRS to challenge how Information Technology companies classified their employers.

    An association of IT companies and industry professionals, now called TechServe Alliance, was created to protest the changes in tax law that it says singled out the industry. “It made the whole business riskier for people using independent contractors because it favored the so-called employment business model,” Mark Roberts, TechServe CEO, told “It created havoc on a number of folks.” Roberts was quick to condemn Stack’s behavior as “an act of a very, very sick individual.”

    “I don’t see a long-term lasting effect, just a troubled wayward person acting in response to a legitimate issue. But I don’t think that actually impacts the issue,” Roberts said. Noting that Section 1706 was passed years ago, he added: “We still resent the fact that it singles out the industry, but folks have basically learned to adapt. It’s kind of been awhile since this was a burning issue in the industry.”,2933,586904,00.html

  64. JanH
    February 19th, 2010 at 10:34 am
    February 19, 2010

    Sestak: White House Offered Me Federal Job to Drop Out of Senate Primary

    I can just imagine what the “plausible deniability” arguments from the White House might sound like:

    “We happened to know of a few slots where Joe Sestak’s skills are a perfect match. Perhaps someone contacted Joe about that. But of course we would never interfere in the democratic process by meddling in local politics. That would be wrong.”

    Heh, heh.

  65. confloyd
    February 19th, 2010 at 11:12 am
    OH, isn’t there more pressing things around the world than listening to the serial cheater Tiger Woods.


  66. JanH
    February 18th, 2010 at 7:39 pm

    Al Jazeera townhall meeting with US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton


    Hillary looks wonderful. A very encouraging sign (for us) she is speaking at the (Carnegie-Mellon) Al Jazeera Town Hall Meeting.

    It means people, people who formerly may not have been in her corner are realizing they fell for Obama’s ‘sizzle’ when, all along, Hillary was and IS the STEAK.

    You probably noticed as I did, she is speaking directly to them without the use of a script or a teleprompter. Hillary is speaking TO THEM; NOT AT THEM as Obama is wont to do-!

    They respect her opinion and are looking for solid answers to their questions and concrete solutions to their problems. The interaction that is sorely lacking coming from the “fizzler” in Chief.

  67. Why do people indulge in everyone else’s sex life??? I am just not interested in anyone else’s. The money generated/spent looking into Bill and Hillary’s could rebuild Haiti, pull us out of this jobless state in our country, pay for healthcare for millions. Sorry, I believe a person sex life is between themselves/partner/partners and God, no one else.
    Do you all realize that more money was spent looking into Bill Clinton’s BJ than was spent looking into 9/11. I ask you, which is more important??

  68. The video upstream of Bill and Hillary favorite pics is a really great montage. My favorite is the 3rd one. The hippy one. It shows two brainac’s, full of love for each other, a promise of a future that will go on the help millions and is yet unstained by the filth of politics. It’s the real Bill and Hillary. Its my favorite. I believe I have one of myself and my husband that looks relatively the same.


    U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, New Jersey’s 86-year-old senior senator, was diagnosed with treatable cancer in the stomach in the last 24 hours and will begin chemotherapy today.

    The Democrat still plans to finish out his current term – his fifth in the Senate – and seek re-election in 2014.

    “This doesn’t change any of that,” Lautenberg’s chief aide, Dan Katz, said of the senator’s political plans. “After he receives his treatment, back to normal.”

    Yeah but in saying that, Good wishes but Chemo really whacks you out for months and the man is 86.

  70. ot rant

    i am so sick of continuing to see the BO brand everywhere i go. from the obvious politico graphics rip-off to countless ads. the latest showing up in a weight-watchers online ad. i refuse to purchase, or give a second glance to, anything sporting the “Gotham” typeface, or pantone blue, or the word “change” in any product i see.
    in my eyes, stamping the BO logo brand on any product spells flim flam, fraud and failure. it makes me sick… end of rant.

  71. Excuse the term, but what a jackass.

    Weatherproof President Sends Free Coats To 200 World Leaders, Disses Hillary Clinton


    After putting up a billboard featuring President Barack Obama, taking it down, and then turning to Honest Abe Lincoln to promote the brand, Weatherproof has devised a new advertising strategy: send free jackets to 200 world leaders. President of Weatherproof Freddie Stollmack told WWD, “We want to keep the political fever going.”

    But then he dissed Hillary Clinton, explaining, “We want to have powerful beings wearing our coats, be it Sen. Scott Brown, Gov. [Arnold] Schwarzenegger or Secretary [of State Hillary] Clinton, who could use some improvement when it comes to fashion.”

    French President Nicolas Sarkozy already wrote Weatherproof to thank the company for the free jacket.

Comments are closed.