Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption!: Election 2006 And Dimocrat Obama’s Culture Of Corruption Election 2010, Part I

Update: Regarding David Paterson and Eric Massa, we are not excusing the conduct of either of them. However, as we wrote before about David Paterson, these are Obama thug drive-by shootings. Paterson and Eric Massa both fit into the pattern of Obama using sex related stories to destroy opponents (such as Blair Hull).

Sex and race-baiting are on the menu. Craig Crawford is out at Hillary hate cesspool MSNBC. Sane, not zany, left of center, Crawford was called a racist by Chris Matthews on MSNBC because Crawford thought Hillary Clinton was wise to court the White Working Class vote (we’ve had a few things to say about that too and wish Crawford a fond adieu, for now). The casualties mount in the continuing Democratic Civil War which we wrote about long ago.

And follow the money, out the window. It was Friday so on news dump day the money news emerged “Obama’s proposed budget would add more than $9.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, congressional budget analysts said Friday.” The drowning waves of debt and deficit won’t stop Obama from rewarding his cronies and mob friends however. The Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption! will continue along with the Big Media protection – but that’s for tomorrow’s article.
—————————————————————————————

Let’s talk, not in order: (1) Michelle Malkin, (2) Election 2006, (3) Election 2010, (4) Obama’s health scam.

First, let’s look at where the twig was bent. The Democratic myth of Election 2006 is that the election was about Iraq. We have always disagreed with that analysis. We believe Election 2006 was about arrogance (and incompetence and corruption). In 2006 Americans saw the same type of arrogance, incompetence, and corruption, from Republicans that Americans see in 2010 from Barack Obama and his corrupt Dimocrats.

In 2006 the Nutroots decided to run Joe Lieberman out of the U.S. Senate for his many outspoken deviations from Democratic orthodoxy. Rich self-funding Ned Lamont ran against Lieberman and won the primary. Lamont ran as an anti Iraq war candidate with the support of anti Iraq war Democrats and Nutroot websites eager to capitalize on Lamont’s self-funded campaign. Since the Lamont primary victory the Nutroots have twisted the narrative of Election 2006 to their benefit and declared Election 2006 was a referendum on the Iraq war and the need for Democrats to follow their line of thought or be defeated. But of course, Joe Lieberman won reelection though not on the Democratic Party line.

Without getting into the weeds (today) of whether or not Joe Lieberman should have been removed and the many Iraq war arguments – we do not believe that Election 2006 was specifically about the Iraq war. Frustration and anger with the floundering, incompetently run Iraq war was important, but that is not what was determinative. For example, there are little to no electoral results that year which are directly attributable to the Iraq war as the issue which swung any election. A few Iraq war veterans won election but even they did not focus their elections solely on Iraq (compare with Carolyn McCarthy when she won strictly on gun control). The exit polls confirm our view that Iraq was important but not determinative. What was determinative? We believe it was the arrogance and incompetence and corruption of the party in power.

The narrative pushed from the Democratic Left is that Election 2006 was about Iraq. This misguided analysis of Election 2006 has had deleterious effects on the Democratic Party and must be corrected. Americans will be patient with stupid wars and dumb policies but Americans will bristle and rear when hypocrisy and arrogance slap them in the face. That’s what happened in 2006 and that is what is happening now. What we are saying might be too subtle for many, but it is important. Again, Iraq was important to the results of 2006 but it was the Bush W. arrogance about Iraq which infuriated the electorate sufficiently to “throw the bums out.”

We believe Election 2006 was about arrogance, incompetence, corruption, and that has lessons for 2010. Vice President Dick Cheney in 2006 arrogantly told Americans “Screw You! You don’t matter. We Republicans will do what we want.” We Republicans will do what we think is right.” “Screw you Americans, we will ignore you and your votes.” This is Cheney repeating the arguments made all throughout Election 2006 four days before election day:

“We’ve got the basic strategy right,” Cheney told George Stephanopoulos in an interview to be broadcast Sunday on “This Week.”

October was one of the deadliest months in Iraq for U.S. troops. Cheney said that while the administration’s policy may not be popular, “This is the right thing for us to be doing.”

In the most recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, 57 percent of Americans said that the war was not worth fighting. The poll also showed President Bush’s job approval rating dropped to 37 percent, the second-lowest mark of his presidency.

Cheney said that even with pollsters predicting that Democrats would likely make gains in both houses of Congress Tuesday, voter sentiment would not influence Bush’s Iraq policy.

It may not be popular with the public — it doesn’t matter in the sense that we have to continue the mission and do what we think is right. And that’s exactly what we’re doing,” Cheney said. “We’re not running for office. We’re doing what we think is right.”

“It doesn’t matter…what WE think is right… We’re doing what we think is right.” Faced with such arrogance, Americans said, ‘No, you must go because you are not listening to us.’ Americans will put up with a great deal, but don’t tell Americans you will ignore them.

In the same TV show interview, then Vice President Dick Cheney reacted to a Vanity Fair article which reported that “two of the Pentagon’s strongest supporters of the war, Richard Perle and Ken Adelman, now say they would not have supported the invasion if they had known how incompetently the administration would handle it.” This is how Cheny responded to the incompetence charge:

“Cheney said, “I haven’t seen the piece I’m not going to comment on it. I think there is no question that it is a tough war, but it is also the right thing to do,” he said. “And it is very important that we complete the mission.”

Dick Cheney did not offer any acknowledgment that things were “on the wrong track” in the country generally and in the Iraq war specifically. There was no explanation or engagement of the substantive disagreements, just an occasional publicity stunt. All Dick Cheney offered was ‘we are right and we will continue to do what we want to do and we will even ignore our own friends who criticize us.‘ Who does that sound like in 2010?

In 2006 Americans were frustrated that they were not being listened too. The Dick Cheney Republican arguments did not start four days before the election. This was an all year refusal to listen to American voters and simply keep on repeating the same arguments at publicity stunts. The secrecy and arrogance from Republicans in 2006, along with incompetence, was suffocating the American people. The American people on many policy issues (Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, secret surveillance programs, secrecy, terrorism, oil, Darfur, budget cuts) were confused if not angry and frustrated and George W. Bush appeared not to be listening. The American people smacked George W. on the head and yelled ‘LISTEN to us.’

“Voters across the nation said they disapprove of the job President Bush is doing and many said their vote for Congress was to express opposition to him. A clear majority said they disapprove of the war in Iraq, and most said they do not believe it has improved the long-term security of the country.”

The Iraq policy issue was a point of contention but what voters voted on was opposition to George W. Bush. It was the arrogance of power.

More from the 2006 exit polls:

“President Bush played a large role in today’s voting, as a majority of voters said he was a factor in their decision: One in five voters (22 percent) said their vote was to show support for Bush, while 36 percent said it was to express opposition. [snip]

In addition, the number of voters who said they are angry with the Bush administration has increased to 29 percent today – up from 23 percent in 2004. Another 30 percent said they were “dissatisfied but not angry,” while at the other end of the spectrum 27 percent felt “satisfied, but not enthusiastic,” and about one in 10 felt “enthusiastic.”

Over half of voters (55 percent) said the country is headed in the wrong direction and 41 percent said it is going in the right direction. Those saying the country is on the right track broke for the Republican candidates by over 50 points, while those saying the country is going in the wrong direction went solidly for the Democratic candidate in their district about 60 points.”

The exit poll numbers confirm our analysis (this one from CNN) that Iraq was not the main factor in Election 2006. It was arrogance. In 2006 voters were emotionally angry. The visceral reaction at the polls, we believe, was due to the arrogance of George W. Bush and Republicans who would not listen but thought they knew better and did not have to explain or change policy simply because the American public did not agree with them.

Then there was the corruption, which was the final straw that broke the hump.

“When deciding which candidate to support, more voters today said political corruption (41 percent) was extremely important to their vote than said the economy (39 percent), the issue of terrorism (39 percent), the war in Iraq (36 percent), values issues (36 percent) or illegal immigration (30 percent) was extremely important.

Those saying corruption was extremely important to their vote backed the Democratic candidate in their House district by a 60 to 38 percent margin.

Economy voters favored the Democrats by 20 percentage points, and Iraq war voters backed the Democrats by over 20 points.

Republicans were favored by terrorism voters (+ 7 points) and immigration voters (+ 6 points). The largest margin comes from values voters, and this group backed the Republican candidate by 18 points.

The 2006 Election was about Arrogance!, Incompetence!, Corruption! The 2010 elections will be about Arrogance!, Incompetence!, Corruption!

Corruption! in 2006 by the Republican incumbents became widely known as a infection spread widely throughout the entire Republican Party and Republican establishment. Near the end of 2006 the Mark Foley scandal crystallized the Republican corruption in the public mind. In the public mind the Republican Party and Republican establishment had a disease. It was the Culture Of Corruption. It began with allegations of insider trading by Republican Majority Leader Senator Bill Frist.

Then came the Jack Abramoff Indian lobbying scandal, the Tom DeLay campaign finance investigation, the Plame affair, the Cunningham scandal, the Jerry Lewis scandal, the Bush administration payment of columnists, the entire Ohio political establishment scandal featuring beanie babies and wooden nickles, and the Mark Foley scandal.

* * * * * *

Arrogance!, Incompetence!, Corruption! doomed the Republicans in Election 2006. Arrogance!, Incompetence!, Corruption! will doom the Obama Dimocrats in 2010.

Celebrity Barack Obama and his Obama Dimocrats have already outpaced George W. Bush Republicans in the arrogance race. The argument on health care is a Cheneyesque ‘Once we pass health care Americans will love it even though they hate it now, because we know better than stupid Americans and the Tea Party activists we once derided as ‘teabaggers’ but once they whupped us at the polls we have to pretend we don’t hate them and want to snub them, and anyway we are going to ignore everyone and do what we want to do and pass whatever we want to do because we have to transfer taxpayer dollars to Big Insurance and Big PhaRma just like we transferred trillions to our Wall Street friends.’

Celebrity Barack Obama and his Obama Dimocrats have already outpaced George W. Bush Republicans in the incompetence race simply by bumbling massive majorities into tiny, dubious, hated, “achievements”.

Celebrity Barack Obama and his Obama Dimocrats have already set to outpace George W. Bush Republicans in the corruption race. Already we have seen paid “analysts” pimping Obama scams. Already we have seen resignations due to sex scandals. Already we have seen resignations due to finance scandals by senior and powerful Dimocrats.

Already we have seen… but let’s leave all that for the next installment of Arrogance!, Incompetence!, Corruption!

[Next, Part II of Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption!: Election 2006 And Dimocrat Obama’s Culture Of Corruption Election 2010]

Share

195 thoughts on “Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption!: Election 2006 And Dimocrat Obama’s Culture Of Corruption Election 2010, Part I

  1. AP Sources: Massa to resign under ethics

    WASHINGTON – New York Democratic Rep. Eric Massa, the subject of a harassment complaint by a male staffer, is stepping down from his seat, The Associated Press has learned.

    http://m.yahoo.com/w/ynews/article/topstories/1;_ylt=A0SO81iIeJFLyEwAKwMp89w4?url=http://xml.news.yahoo.com/us/news/rss/richstoryrss.html?u=/ap/20100305/ap_on_go_co/us_massa_resigns&.tsrc=yahoo&.intl=US&.lang=en

    This is a Demobrat seat in one of the most, if not the most Republican leaning district in New York. One less House vote for Pelosi. I hope the seat reverts back to a Republican.

  2. Yup NoMoBama – It’s now officially a scandal:

    http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/03/massa_to_resign.php

    Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) will resign Monday at 5pm, a source close to the embattled incumbent tells Hotline OnCall.

    Massa has been pressured by House Dems to step aside amid an ethics controversy that caused him to announce earlier this week he would not run for a second term.

    Earlier this week, the House ethics committee confirmed it was looking in to allegations against Massa. Those allegations reportedly include sexual harassment of a member of the Congressman’s staff.

    Massa’s decision to retire came as a surprise to both parties. While he said his decision was based on a recurrence of cancer, the ethics committee investigation made Dems push him out the door.

    In a statement posted on his website, Massa maintained his medical issues were his reason for stepping down, but for the first time he acknowledged the ethics committee investigation.

    “After I decided not to run again I was told, for the first time, that a member of my staff believed I had made statements that made him feel ‘uncomfortable.’ I was told that a report had been filed with the Congressional Ethics Committee. At no point prior to this had any member of the Ethics Committee communicated with me directly – if [sic] fact I first read it on the internet,” Massa said in the statement.

    “In fact, there is no doubt that this Ethics issue is my fault and mine alone. But in the incredibly toxic atmosphere that is Washington D.C., with the destruction of our elected leaders having become a blood sport, especially in talk radio and on the internet, there is also no doubt that an Ethics investigation would tear my family and my staff apart,” Massa said. “My difficulties are of my own making. Period.”

    Massa’s resignation doesn’t necessarily mean there will be a special election. The only timetable for a special is that, after Gov. David Paterson (D) declares the seat vacant, a set a date no later than 40 days after that. But if he chooses not to declare the seat vacant, there will be no special, and the seat will be without representation until the general election in Nov.

    If there is a special election, it would be the fifth such contest between now and Nov. There will be a 4/13 contest to replace Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL), where Dems are favored, and two contested specials in HI and PA. Rep. Nathan Deal (R-GA) plans to resign at the end of Mar., and a date has not yet been picked for an election to fill that seat.

    Before the news of Massa’s resignation hit today, candidates were already emerging for the open seat contest. The GOPer on the top of the GOP’s wish list — Monroe Co. Exec. Maggie Brooks (R) — appears ready to make a decision within the week. If she doesn’t run, there are a bevy of legislators ready to jump into the contest. [snip]

    A special would benefit GOPers, should Brooks — with her considerable name ID in the CD’s largest county — get into the race.

  3. You got my name right, admin! It stands for no mo(re) Obama. Most write my handle as noobama. I’m not sure why that “m” is overlooked so many times. Anyway, I’m just happy that Pelosi will lose a vote for Obamacare.

  4. Arrogance!, Incompetence!, Corruption!

    Via National Journal and conventional wisdom Bill Schneider of CNN:

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/politicalpulse.php

    Party-Line Vote Will Produce Political Firestorm

    If the Democrats pass health care reform on a partisan vote, they will do so in the face of public opinion.

    “The issue trumps the process.” That’s what Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., told The New York Times about health care reform. And that’s what Democrats have got to believe. There is no question that the process has been costly thus far. In January, an uninsured 18-year-old waitress in New Hampshire explained her opposition this way to a Times reporter: “If you have to bribe people to vote for it, it can’t be good.”

    The process could get costlier as Democrats try to pass the bill on a partisan majority vote. In his response to President Obama’s weekly radio address, Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., charged that congressional Democrats “want to use procedural tricks and backroom deals to ram through a new bill that combines the worst aspects of the bills the Senate and House passed last year.”

    Coburn was referring to the reconciliation process, whereby a health care bill could pass the Senate with 51 votes without being subject to a filibuster, which can be ended only by a 60-vote supermajority. [snip]

    That’s why the health care bill is such an unusual experience for the United States. Democrats are trying to behave like a parliamentary majority. Coburn and other critics are calling it legislative trickery. What seems extraordinary in the United States — the reconciliation process — is just normal politics anywhere else.

    It will not be easy for the Democrats to muster even a simple majority, particularly in the House. The health care bill passed in that chamber last November on a 220-215 vote. The lone Republican who voted for it has indicated he will oppose the bill this year. Since November, three Democratic “aye” votes have disappeared (two resignations, one death). That puts the tally at 216-216.

    As we get closer to the midterm election, more yes votes seem to be switching to no than no votes to yes. Although health care reform is still a popular cause, the Senate and House bills are not. In a CNN poll in February, only 25 percent of Americans thought that Congress should pass a bill similar to those approved by the House and Senate. The same number felt that Congress should stop working on health care. The prevailing view, held by 48 percent, was that Congress should start working on an entirely new bill. [snip]

    If the Democrats pass health care reform on a partisan vote, a political firestorm will likely ensue. Congress would be defying public opinion. President Obama said at last week’s health care summit, “I think we’ve got to go ahead and make some decisions, and then that’s what elections are for.” That’s also what makes Democrats in Congress very nervous.

    If they pass the bill, Democrats have to hope that the firestorm passes and people discover they are better off. But expanded health insurance coverage will take years to kick in. At the same time, higher taxes are also likely to be some years down the road. The battle over health care reform could go all the way to the polls in November, with politicians still arguing over principles rather than experiences.

  5. Soon he’ll appear on MSNBC “Predator” shows:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100304/ap_on_en_tv/us_tv_obama_america_s_most_wanted_4

    President Barack Obama is going to help TV’s “America’s Most Wanted” mark the milestone broadcast of its 1,000th episode.

    Obama will be interviewed by the show’s host, John Walsh, on the episode airing 9 p.m. EST Saturday on Fox.

    The president will discuss the show’s impact in its 22 years as well as his administration’s anti-crime initiatives, including those involving white-collar crime, Fox said Wednesday.

  6. I just read that Massa was an anti-obamacare Demobrat. His loss actually will help Pelosi, not hurt her. Seats!

  7. Seats? That should have been drats! This iPhone makes it’s own spelling corrections, and I missed this. I guess it didn’t recognize the word drats so its recommendation of the word “seats”.

  8. admin,

    You either have an amazing resource library or you have a memory that just keeps growing…maybe both? It continues to amaze me how far you can go back in the history of U.S. politics to prove your points. It makes for a fascinating read time and time again.

  9. I read a poll earlier this week ( I think it was from Rasmussen but not sure) that stated that obama still has the youth vote in his pocket.

  10. Clinton pledges Central America help on drug fight

    Sarah Grainger
    GUATEMALA CITY
    Fri Mar 5, 2010

    GUATEMALA CITY (Reuters) -Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday pledged more U.S. help for Central America’s fight against drug cartels, saying the United States was part of the problem as trafficking and violence spread.

    “We are going to forge an even closer partnership in the months and years ahead,” Clinton told a news conference in Guatemala, the last stop on a five-day Latin America tour.

    “We are well aware that Central America is between the countries of Mexico and Colombia that are waging their own very intense efforts against the criminal cartels.”

    Clinton’s stop in Guatemala featured talks with regional leaders on both the drug problem and Honduras, which is struggling to move beyond last year’s coup.

    Mexico’s powerful drug cartels have moved deep into Guatemalan territory in the past few years as a Mexican army crackdown has pushed them to seek new smuggling routes between South America and the United States.

    The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration reckons three-quarters of South American cocaine going north passes through Central America, smuggled by cartels that earn some $40 billion per year.

    Clinton said the United States must take some responsibility

    for Latin America’s drug wars because the huge U.S. domestic drug demand helps to drive the market.

    “We know that we’re part of the problem,” she said. “That’s an admission that we have been willing to make this past year and it’s one of the reasons why we feel so strongly about trying to help countries like Guatemala fight this terrible criminal scourge.”

    Traffickers traditionally moved cocaine through Central America by plane or boat but are increasingly developing land-based operations in countries such as Guatemala and Costa Rica, leading to rising rates of local drug violence and addiction.

    Central American leaders have complained that their region is increasingly at risk in the drug wars and is not given enough assistance under the 2007 U.S. Merida initiative, which has authorized some $1.12 billion in help since 2008, mostly for Mexico.

    “We are convinced that the fight against narco-trafficking and organized crime should be regional,” Guatamalan President Alvaro Colom said at the news conference. “We have seen an invasion by the Mexican cartels, we have seen a total invasion of narco-trafficking.

    “The cartels move from one place to the next but its our society that is suffering.”

    Clinton did not provide specifics of the new U.S. help on Friday but has used her visit to reassure Central American governments that they would see more U.S. assistance on things such as maritime security, police and judicial capacity, and anti-corruption efforts.

    Guatemala has made several high-profile arrests in recent weeks, including those of the national police chief and anti-drug czar, both charged in connection with the theft of cocaine and guns from a drug gang warehouse last year.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62444420100305?type=politicsNews

  11. JanH
    March 5th, 2010 at 6:13 pm
    Police: Pentagon Suspect ‘Well Armed’
    *********

    My understanding is that he was Bipolar, non compliant with his meds. They usually are very bright people… he was highly educated the video says. Apparently his family had a missing persons out on him in CA.

    Unfortunately they are trying to link him and the Austin terrorist as fringe, ie Tea Party types, in some outlets. Angry white male, anti gov.

  12. Mrs. Smith @ 6:29

    LOL! You guys thought my candidate was nuts, this one really is…..her campaign promise got her elected,lol…..that should tell Obama something…..so now the republicans need to quit with the socialism, communism theme and just go with….IMPEACH OBAMA…..We need to tell this to Hillary….she will win easily, LOL!

  13. from BP
    **********

    Re: Only the House Vote Matters [Yuval Levin]

    It’s worth reiterating something Rich and Jeff Anderson have pointed out: The focus on reconciliation in the past few days confuses things a bit. The question in the health-care debate at the moment is whether Nancy Pelosi can get enough of her members to vote for the version of Obamacare that passed the Senate late last year. If the House passes that bill, it will have passed both houses, will go to the president, and will become law.

    Some liberal House Democrats have problems with that bill — especially with some of its tax provisions, though also a few other things. So to get some of their votes, the leadership is now telling them that if they vote for the Senate bill, the House could then pass another bill that amends the Senate bill to fix some of what they don’t like about it. The Senate could then pass that amendment bill by reconciliation and it would also become law, and so the sum of the two laws would be closer to what they want.

    But that amending bill wouldn’t change the basic character of what would be enacted (and to the extent it would change it at the edges, it would be mostly for the worse): Either way, if the House passes the Senate bill then Obamacare would become law, complete with its massive, overbearing, costly, intrusive, inefficient, and clumsy combination of mandates, taxes, subsidies, regulations, and new government programs intended to replace the American health-insurance industry with an enormous federal entitlement while failing to address the problem of costs. Just about everything the public hates about the bill is in both versions. The prospect of reconciliation is just one of the means that the Democratic leadership is employing to persuade members of the House to ignore the public’s wishes and their own political future and enact Obamacare.

    The fate of Obamacre therefore now rests not in the Senate but in the House. It is members of the House who must decide if it will be enacted, and it needs to be clear to voters exactly where their opposition to the Democrats’ approach to health care should be focused now.

    Rich Lowry saying the same thing….

    Only the House Vote Matters

    This is an important point. I don’t think people understand that reconciliation isn’t really that important except as a promise to members of the House. Even Charles Krauthammer, if I understood him correctly, said last night that he thinks the bill will pass the House but fail during the reconciliation process. But if the bill passes the House, the same bill has passed the Senate and the House and Obama can just sign the thing. It won’t matter if the reconciliation process bogs down, except to those Democrats who thought the bill would be “fixed.” But once they’ve voted, they’ve voted. Obama can say, “See you in the Rose Garden and we’ll try to fix it next year.”

  14. also found this @ BP. Know some of you like Craig
    ***************

    Craig Crawford leaves MSNBC…

    http://tinyurl.com/ylxn6hp

    Longtime MSNBC analyst Craig Crawford has left the network…according to Craig Crawford…

    For those who might be interested – and you have every reason not to be – I am no longer with MSNBC. Three months short of my current contract I sent the following to the boss, Phil Griffin: “Phil, Just wanted to give you the heads up that my situation with MSNBC has become so unrewarding for me that I’ve decided to move on. — Craig”

    And Crawford saves the real venom, and dirt, for the thread comments…

    Can’t tell ya how hard this choice was to make. I’ve had a difficult time with MSNBC since the presidential primaries, should have pulled the trigger long ago. but my scotch-irish blood keeps me loyal long past the bitter end, which has long past, sadly.

    _______________

    i simply could not any longer endure being a cartoon player for lefty games, just gotta move on to higher ground even if there’s no oxygen

    _______________

    thanks bethy, i have never and never will forgive Chris for calling me a racist after the West Virginia primary (the last time I will ever go on air with him). Probably should have resigned then and there, but better late than never.

    Crawford was a mainstay on MSNBC for a very long time and also one of the more level headed analysts they had. If the Craig Crawfords of the network are getting fed up with what’s going on, that’s bad. One can only infer from Crawford’s tweets exactly what at MSNBC is going wrong in his eyes (“lefty games”, while a pretty provocative term, is also maddeningly inexact and unspecific) but it’s obvious he really got fed up with Matthews. But aside from Matthews, what else?

  15. GonzoTx, thanks for the article on Craig Crawford. He’s not perfect but he tried to do right by Hillary. He’s made the right decision to leave MSNBC.

    This should be a big story. We’ll try to squeeze the story into the next installment of Arrogance! or perhaps do another Big Media Must Die article.

    We’ll send him an email of thanks and perhaps others should consider doing so too.

  16. PumaPac has advice for those who oppose Obama:

    http://pumapac.org/2010/03/05/advice-to-those-who-oppose-obama/

    Advice to anyone who stands up to or tries to thwart obama: Don’t have a sex scandal in your closet. It WILL be exposed.

    Just ask Jack and David, and Eric. Oh, and also Quarles Harris and the dude in Chicago, what’s his name again? Larry? Yeah, that’s him. Well, I guess the last two aren’t really sex scandals per se. They involve murder and illegal drugs instead.

    We’d add John Edwards.

  17. http://thatsmeontheleft.blogspot.com/2010/03/trust-democrats-and-thuggery.html

    Every day I make decisions based on my knowledge of various brand names. This decision making occurs with coffee all the way to television channels. Many people choose their coffee based on where and how it was grown. I won’t watch certain channels due to my disgust of their previous products. I trust certain products and I don’t trust others. [snip]

    We stick with what we know because we trust the product, we trust our product. Most times it takes a lot to get us to leave out product and “buy” some other.

    Up until this past primary I was a die-hard Democrat. I knew my product and I trusted it to be the much better product. In my mind there was no doubt who were the good guys and who were the bad guys. My product would NEVER do what that other product was capable of doing (and actually did do). Never, never, never. I knew this and I was very vocal about my disgust of that other product, the Republican Party.

    Even when the Democrats would do something “wrong” I could easily look the other way or minimize it or even justify the action or event. I knew in my mind that it may have been something that shouldn’t have occurred but it was never as bad as what they would and could do.

    I was always very strong in my reaction to all things Bush. That’s probably when I started to get vocal in my political beliefs. In college I minored in Political Science and yet I had no desire to watch anything related to Iran-Contra. In looking back, it is shocking to me that I had no interest in that event. It wasn’t until I had children that I really started to notice what that other product was capable of. I started to get fired up during the Clinton years due to how they were being attacked. Bush put me over the edge. I was one angry Democrat. I went to peace marches with my youngest and I started this silly little spot on blogspot. I was angry with anyone who could not see what I saw. My product was far superior than theirs and I was very proud to be on the side of the “good” guys.

    Then the primary election occurred.

    More at the link.

  18. “The only way back for me is if there is a complete cleaning of the thuggery in the Democratic party.”

    ——————–
    Admin,

    That poster wrote an amazing piece.

    Bravo to her and thank you for adding it here.

  19. I have a suggestion: converge all the data on those players still alive and still politically active that a.) supported Hillary b.) betrayed Hillary and c.) that may want Hillary destroyed even yet. With all the documentation that was gathered it would be an arsenal of ammo should our Hillary run again. This would allow us to do our own oppo research and disseminate it online; hoping it would go viral. Methinks we could have smoked out Penn and Doyle at a minimum. Add to the research anyone who actively smears her.
    Do it by the name of the individual, make the website password protected, and we could start to work for Hillary now. I would think that we would have lots of support.

  20. Admin: that’s a great article, its how I felt, I wonder how many have left and to never comeback?

  21. Shorttermer. I am with you on that.

    I talked to an old friend that I hadn’t seen since 06′. She and I grew up together and neither of us had ever spoke about politics. I spoke with her tonight and she is an Obama supporter and is still one, she is a nurse, and her Doctor gripes her out several times a day for voting him in. I felt sorry for her. Thats why I never wanted to work for a Dr., I liked larger institutions.

  22. “The only way back for me is if there is a complete cleaning of the thuggery in the Democratic party.”

    I don’t know that I could vote for a Democrat again. I mean, Martha Coakley was a college classmate of mine and my wife’s. We donated significantly to her in the primary. My wife volunteered for her. I voted for her in the primary. My wife doesn’t know, but I voted for Scott Brown in the general election.

    I look at what the Democrat party has become and I just don’t see a place for me.

  23. Kesha Rogers: ‘Impeach Obama’ Candidate Wins Texas Democratic Primary
    ————————————
    I got a call from Harley S at 2:15 PST from Houston. He was involved with her campaign. He is the number 1 guy for the LR organization in the west. I met him in the 18 million voices campaign and we have touched base with each other three or four times since. He is a student of politics, a radio personality in Texas and California and a first rate operative. He was a very strong supporter of Hillary.

    Harley told me that Keisha won 53% of the vote in the Democratic Primary for district 22. This was 10% more than her nearest competitor. She won on a two part platform: i) save NASA jobs (a big deal in Houston), and ii) impeach Obama. The Democratic Party was taken aback by this result. He told me that Paul Begala called him and asked for his perspective on how this could have happened. He told our friend Paul that it was due to Obama’s failure to address the economy and protect jobs. The same old story. I contributed a small amount to her campaign as a favor to Harley.

    This development symptomatic of the dry rot within the Dimocratic Party. People who never would have voted for a La Rouche candidate did. And in doing so they endorsed a platform of impeach Obama. That might go unnoticed in a Republican Primary, but when a democrat wins the primary on that platform it is clear, cogent and convincing evidence that regardless of how HuffPo tries to dismiss it (i.e. a member of the La Rouche “cult” that will not die), the significance of this can hardly be overstated.

    Equally important, it is an embarrassment and a repudiation the state party chairman Boyd Richie. This asshole is part of the Kennedy machine and he was brought in shortly before the primary to deliver the state for Obama. He replaced a Chairman who was gay and was pro Clinton. When I learned of the widespread caucus fraud I tried to reach this foghorn leghorn and could never get past his secretary. No Hillary supporter could. Also, he presided over the stealing of delegates under the so called Texas two step. Kesha’s win makes him look totally incompetent. Besides that he is corrupt in my opinion.

    As you can see the bots have gotten to her site already. http://www.kesharogers.com/content/ides-march-are-coming-pro-impeachment-democrat-wins-nomination-texas

  24. I went to the casino today. It is becoming an (unremunerative) ritual. If you can control your losses it is worth the price of admission. Why? Because it is a continuing Felini movie. Watching people who cannot afford it lose and people who do not deserve it win. Then you go upstairs and watch people who could afford to miss a meal or two indulge as only they can. One particular example of this caught my eye. A man with a 60″ waist line strolled across the floor with a large plate of frozen king crab legs piled 1 foot high, in a balancing feat worthy of Houdini. He was about to gorge himself. As he walked past me I saw the following words on the back of his sweatshirt–I kid you not:

    “Pig Out! They will not squeal”.

    Those words called to mind the example of Obama, Reid and Pelosi. History will remember how they turned a trillon dollar stimulus paid for by taxpayers into a trillion dollar slush fund to re-elect Dimocrats in 2010.

    “Pig Out! They will not squeal”–the voters I mean.”

    Correction: “Like hell they won’t.”

  25. I feel a lot like HWC, I just don’t see a place for me in the Dem Party anymore.

    I attended a neighborhood coalition meeting this week, one I had not been to in over a year, because the dems hang out there. I found myself avoiding them, and recoiling at their touch. I am not sure if they noticed. One young Dem whom I use to think a lot of came over to hug me, and I don’t know if he noticed, but I touched him as little as possilbe.

    I feel very alianated to this group, and I don’t think it will return.

  26. pm317

    An interesting way to spin someone who knows how to do nothing. But then Hollywood’s image has a lot riding on him, and they see the failure coming. Remember they make their living by pretending.

  27. I feel a lot like HWC, I just don’t see a place for me in the Dem Party anymore.

    I attended a neighborhood coalition meeting this week, one I had not been to in over a year, because the dems hang out there. I found myself avoiding them, and recoiling at their touch. I am not sure if they noticed. One young Dem whom I use to think a lot of came over to hug me, and I don’t know if he noticed, but I touched him as little as possilbe.

    I feel very alianated to this group, and I don’t think it will return.
    ——————————————————————
    I do not know these people you do. But to me this is amazing. Evidently, they are clueless. They have no idea of how badly the values of the party have been betrayed by Obama. For them it is all just democrat vs republican. And you can find an opposing group across town for whom it is all republican vs democrat who felt the same way about Bush. This is not problemsolving. It is crude tribalism. And it is not confined to neighborhood coalitions. Consider the case of Greenspan who talked about how much he liked Hillary and thought she would be good for the country but would not vote for her because she is a democrat and he is a republican.

  28. http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/05/tom-hanks-our-wise-calm-president-is-doing-a-spectacular-job/
    ———————————-
    If he thinks slipping on banana peels, betraying core party values, charging down bind alley like a banshee, pushing programs the public hates, cutting secret deals with big pharma, being “calm” about 10% unemployment and failing to deliver a single legislative victory with a supermajority in Congress is “doing a spectacular job” then I guess Hanks is not as delusional as he sounds. Part of the answer is Hollywood is invested in this dodo and he speaks in some respects for the establishment such as it is. He was a bundler for Obama, and cannot admit to his peers he is wrong. But no less there is that flash of insight given to us by the French President about Obama, when Obama wanted to preach about a brave new world and not reveal to the world that intelligence information made available to the NATO nations revealed that Iran was further ahead on nuclear development than previously believed and had multiple sites: Mr. President, we live in a real world, not a virtual one. Whereas Hanks, a Hollywood pretender, makes his living in the same virtual world that Barack does.

  29. Hillary has a very busy week ahead.She will be a keynoter on several important gatherings.We would like to enjoy her comments and adulation by the great crowds she attracts and applauds that they give.Unfortunatly what is left of the media and that network of evil FOX will cover the activities by a screen crawler with minimum details if any.

    ___________________________________________________

    Dipnote – Offical Blog of the U.S. State Dept.

    ——————————————————————————–
    Pathways to Prosperity Promotes Social and Financial Inclusion in the Americas
    UNESCO Shines Spotlight on Women Scientists
    How Best Can We Advance Women’s Rights as Human Rights?
    U.S. Health Partners Key to Haiti Earthquake Response
    In Egypt, U.S. Science Envoy Speaks About Education and Technology
    As Winter Games Conclude, Vancouver Emerges Victorious
    Chilean Earthquake: U.S. Embassy Santiago Responds to Crisis
    Adventures in Travel Expo
    Pathways to Prosperity Promotes Social and Financial Inclusion in the Americas

    Posted: 05 Mar 2010 02:56 PM PST

    Interactive Travel Map | Text the Secretary | Trip Page

    On March 4, 2010, Secretary Clinton addressed the Pathways to Prosperity Ministerial in San Jose, Costa Rica. Pathways to Prosperity is a conference for foreign leaders focused on economic development in the Americas. Secretary Clinton said, “I look around this table and I see nations dedicated to strengthening democracy, spreading opportunities, and promoting inclusive prosperity throughout the Americas.”

    Before addressing how the United States is supporting Pathways to Prosperity initiatives across the Western Hemisphere, Secretary Clinton acknowledged that the region has been tested by a number of crises, including two recent devastating earthquakes. She said, “I was in Santiago two days ago, where I had the opportunity to meet and consult with both President Bachelet and President-elect Pinera. And it is so important that we all, once again, come to the aid of our neighbors.”

    Secretary Clinton continued, “Now it is time to stand with both Chile and Haiti as they recover and rebuild. These emergencies highlight the strength of our ties as neighbors, partners, and friends, and they amplify the importance of the work we are doing through Pathways. We are here to help create conditions that enable people to obtain the economic and social opportunities critical to national and regional stability and progress. Whether our countries are seeking to defuse threats to democracy, protect against the effects of natural disasters, or build long-term prosperity, it is vital that we spread the benefits of economic growth and integration to more people in more places.”

    Secretary Clinton said that Pathways to Prosperity provides a critical forum where nations committed to democracy and open markets can share the best practices for promoting social and financial inclusion. After traveling throughout the hemisphere, the Secretary said, “What I have concluded is that talent is universal, but opportunity is not.”

    She then outlined several Pathway initiatives that the United States will be focusing on to support entrepreneurs across the hemisphere. “First, we’ve had success in our country with the creation of small business development centers where people can go to get information and advice about starting a business. Some Pathway countries have adopted this model, and we’re looking to share it with others by organizing exchange visits between countries.”

    Secretary Clinton continued, “Second, we are supporting women entrepreneurs across the hemisphere. We know that women still today are often overlooked or excluded, especially when they go for credit. I’ve had women say to me, ‘A lot of dreams die in the parking lots of banks.’ So even though these women are innovative, energetic, hardworking, and committed, we’re not doing enough to support their businesses and efforts. Last October, the United States hosted a conference for women entrepreneurs from the Americasconference for women entrepreneurs from the Americas. And we’ve launched a mentoring network to connect experienced women business leaders with women who are just starting out. In the coming months, we’ll work with you to deepen and expand that network.

    “Third, we want to help our partners in Pathways modernize customs procedures, something that was also mentioned by the Costa Ricans. Efficient and effective customs practices are critical to attracting foreign investment and succeeding in global markets.”

    The Secretary then said, “Fourth, trade requires effective communication. This year, we have offered 100 teachers from Pathways countries training in English language instruction, and over 400,000 students across the region are learning English at the 140 bi-national centers we support. This is work we are committed to continuing, and I’d like to ask our partners in Pathways to make this a mutual exchange. Millions of U.S. citizens speak Spanish as a first or second language, or are learning how to speak it. With your help, we can have even more U.S. citizens learning Spanish, and that will increase our trade and business ties.

    “Fifth, we are working to help small and medium-sized enterprises decrease the amount of water, energy, and raw materials they need to protect natural resources, shrink carbon emissions, and save costs.

    “Sixth and finally, the United States is committed to working with our Pathways partners to modernize laws that govern lending so that small and medium size businesses can use assets other than real estate as collateral for loans.”

    Secretary Clinton concluded, “I was reminded again that wherever we live in the Americas, whatever our heritage, whatever language we speak, we all want the same thing: the chance to live safe and healthy lives; to see our families productive and moving toward a better future; to participate fully in our communities; and to do all that we can to extend those opportunities to others.”

    Read the Secretary’s full remarks here.

    UNESCO Shines Spotlight on Women Scientists

    Posted: 05 Mar 2010 02:07 PM PST

    About the Author: Ambassador David T. Killion serves as U.S. Permanent Representative to UNESCO.

    I was honored to attend the 12th annual L’Oreal-UNESCO awards ceremony for women in science hosted by UNESCO on Wednesday, March 3. Women scientists from Latin America, Asia, Europe, Africa and North America are nominated each year as laureates for their contributions to research and excellence in the sciences.

    This year, the North American laureate is Dr. Elaine Fuchs from Rockefeller University in New York City, who recently received the National Medal of Science from President Obama. We’re so proud of Dr. Fuchs, and I also want to mention the other laureates: Dr. Anne Dejean-Assemat from France, Dr. Rashika El Ridi from Egypt, Dr. Lourdes Cruz from the Philippines and Dr. Alejandra Bravo from Mexico. Last year, two former laureates from the United States and Israel were awarded Nobel prizes; this prize is certainly an indicator of even greater things to come.

    UNESCO showcases its vital role in promoting science focused international communication and networking opportunities through events such as its flagship L’Oreal-UNESCO prize. It’s inspiring to see the five laureates here in the presence of previous prizewinners and new fellows. The L’Oreal- UNESCO partnership has also awarded doctorate and post-doctorate fellowships to fifteen women from around the world. Many of these fellows will conduct important research and create lasting collaboration at U.S. institutions, including: the University of Minnesota, Harvard Medical School, Baylor College of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Lowell, and the University of Pittsburgh.

    With this ceremony following on the heels of Presidential Science Envoy Dr. Elias Zerhouni’s February visit to UNESCO, the potential for scientific innovation and collaboration has never been brighter.

    How Best Can We Advance Women’s Rights as Human Rights?

    Posted: 05 Mar 2010 02:20 PM PST

    The world recognizes March 8 as International Women’s Day. This year marks the fifteenth anniversary of the United Nations Fourth World Conference in Beijing. The message from that conference still resonates today: Human rights are women’s rights, and women’s rights are human rights. As Secretary Clinton has said, no country can move ahead if half its population is left behind.

    How best can we advance women’s rights as human rights?

  30. With idiots like these… I never liked him as an actor either.
    ——————————
    His appeal is as incomprehensible to me as it is to you. Maybe it is the fact that his wife Rita Wilson was part of the Brady Bunch. Or maybe it is shining example of something Woodie Allen said: 90% of life is just showing up.

    How the hell do you compare guys like this to Clark Gable, Burt Lancaster, Jimmy Stewart, Kirk Douglas, Michael Douglas, Al Pacino, John Wayne, Robert Mitchum, Humphrey Bogart, Rock Hudson etc who made their mark during the golden era. With all its faults, there was something to be said for the studio system.

    Of course nobody today remembers them. They are too focused on the latest Batman movie.

  31. One more thought on the subject. Hanks is a perfect example of someone who does not understand the difference between campaigning and governing. Campaigning is about inspiration, whereas governing is about problem solving. Hanks is a very rich man and he lives in a virtual world. He does not depend on government to solve his problems, and there is nothing Barack can do or fail to do which will put him on the street. How different his situation is, then, than the plight of the middle class. Take away the word actor and all you are left with really is another plutocrat wanting to play power games.

  32. wbboei

    Perhaps American has found out how little endorsements mean. The Hollywood TV endorsements should have been meaningless. Even the political ones were suspect as to what they would get out of the endorsement.

    What they should have gone with was the experience, or lack there of, and their gut feeling.

  33. In Karl Rove’s new book, he supposedly talks about how the Democrats came out with info about George Bush’s DUI in 1976 just before a primary vote (I think it was). To include that situation after all these years in his book, it would seem he is still upset about that dirty trick and even named the guy he suspected.

    Well, you can understand why Karl would still be stressed about the opposite side pulling that stunt on his candidate.

    Playing those kind of dirty, underhanded, rotten games is something Karl Rove would NEVER do and has NEVER done…right! LOL

  34. Southern Born

    Exactly, which is why I am NOW independent, but registered as Dem, so I can remind them of what they did every single time they call. When the Reps call I do the same thing.

  35. President Obama, AG Eric Holder face political embarrassment in 9/11 terror trial shuffle

    BY Thomas M. Defrank
    Saturday, March 6th 2010

    WASHINGTON – It’s difficult to imagine a decision so bungled that almost everybody associated with it looks utterly foolish.

    The decision to hold the 9/11 terror trials in a lower Manhattan federal courtroom – and then, apparently, to move them elsewhere under a military tribunal – has showered all the combatants with political embarrassment.

    That would include President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder, a fingerpointing White House staff, Republican opportunists, New York City officials and many in the city’s congressional delegation.

    Except, perhaps, for South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who appears to have forced the Obama administration into a big-time course correction in exchange for signing on to closing Guantanamo Bay, all the players come off diminished.

    “This is Classic 101 Boobery,” a well-placed Democratic source lamented. “They all look awful.”

    The decision-making process for bringing Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and his four accomplices to their near-certain execution has been so ham-handed it joins such political howlers as Jerry Ford’s “Whip Inflation Now” campaign; Jimmy Carter’s handling of the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis; Bill Clinton’s disastrous rollout of HillaryCare, and George W. Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” choreography.

    Most of the brickbats, even from within, are aimed at Holder, who no doubt decided on civil trials for principled reasons. But even defenders say he overdid the purity.

    “We believe we’re above the taint of crass and petty political considerations and make our decisions solely on the merits of the law,” a former senior Justice Department official, a Democrat, told the Daily News.

    “But that doesn’t mean you don’t loop other affected parties in on what’s about to happen.”

    In that regard, Mayor Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly have a valid point in complaining they weren’t consulted by Holder. But that didn’t stop them, or most of the congressional delegation, from saluting smartly once they were informed.

    Then, when the political winds shifted and businessmen howled about traffic disruption and lost revenues, they flipped in a New York minute. And most of the city’s voices in Washington followed suit.

    As Ronald Reagan’s chief of staff, Don Regan, loved to say, “Their names are known to management.”

    The end result is that if the leaks are correct, the attorney general has been reversed by Obama twice on appeal – on where to stage the trials and the civilian versus military route.

    In the process, the President has been damaged afresh at a critical time when he’s struggling to prove he can lead.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/03/06/2010-03-06_political_players_are_all_guilty_of_classic_boobery.html

  36. Dr Al Gore?

    The University of Tennessee announced that former Vice President Al Gore will receive an honorary doctorate of Laws and Humane Letters in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology on May 14 at graduation ceremonies, where he will be the featured commencement speaker. Reporter Chloe White Kennedy wrote on knox news dot com that UTchancellor Jimmy (no tongue in) Cheek said:

    Vice President Gore’s career has been marked by visionary leadership, and his work has quite literally changed our planet for the better. He is among the most accomplished and respected Tennesseans in history, and it is fitting that he should be honored by the flagship education institution of his home state.

    Al will be adding to an impressive haul of honors and accolades that he’s accumulated over the years, including the first runner-up for Time Person of the Year in 2007, the Dan David award from Israel (with a million bucks), an Oscar, and the Nobel Peace Prize (and another million).

    The green champion of global warming recently emerged from wherever he had been hiding since Climategate broke to submit a self-serving op-ed piece to the New York Times. Gore wrote:

    “But unfortunately, the reality of the danger we are courting has not been changed by the discovery of at least two mistakes in the thousands of pages of careful scientific work over the last 22 years by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

    The two errors to which Al referred were the claim the Himalayan glaciers were melting because of an article in a hiking magazine and the failure of certain researchers to abide by British Freedom of Information Act requests from climate change skeptics. In the Times piece, he also wrote that “e-mail messages stolen from the University of East Anglia in Britain showed that scientists besieged by an onslaught of hostile, make-work demands from climate skeptics may not have adequately followed the requirements of the British freedom of information law.”

    Did Al actually read the article to which he provided the link in the quote above? It talked about how the scientists “flouted” regulations. Those were the same poor scientists “besieged by an onslaught of hostile, make work demands” who cheered at the death of a leading skeptic who had been hounding them to validate their alarmist claims.

    Al conveniently ignored recent admissions by lead climate conspirator Phil Jones that there’s been no warming for fifteen years when he amazingly wrote, “What is important is that the overwhelming consensus on global warming remains unchanged.”

    But Al cannot afford to accept this inconvenient truth. Climategate exposed the leading climatologists and global warming experts as conspirators, data-fabricators, and obstructionists. Al’s got too much skin in the game, standing to make billions if Obama advocates for cap-and-trade as he’s done for health care reform.

    According to the U.K. paper The Guardian, Gore has invested in one company that received over half a billion dollars in subsidies from the Department of Energy. Another company he’s involved with received $683 million for “green investment.” With those two companies alone, Gore has interests that control over a billion dollars in U.S. funds, and if cap-and-trade is ever passed, he’ll control much, much more.

    Hypocrisy is nothing new to Al Gore. He huffed (through a spokesperson, naturally) that he purchased more than enough green power to balance his electricity costs. However, in February 2007, Bruce Nussbaum reported in Business Week:

    The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh-more than 20 times the national average.

    And that’s just one of his three houses. Gore also has places in Carthage, Tennessee and in the vicinity of Washington, D.C. Between his electric and gas utility bills, Al spends more than $40,000 per year on just the Nashville house’s energy. Spokeswoman Kalee Kreider defended his energy use to CBS news, sniffing that “[s]ometimes when people don’t like the message, in this case that global warming is real, it’s convenient to attack the messenger.”

    That’s just what these poor kids graduating from UT need to hear as their refuge of higher education is gone and it’s time to look for nonexistent jobs in a terrible economy. They need to have their heads filled on the way out the door that they are responsible for the environmental destruction of the planet like they need a hole in the head.

    Al Gore has no business to talk. He’ll fly out of Knoxville in a private jet. Or he’ll motor to his mansion in Nashville, only four times the size of the average house, but an energy hog with consumption that dwarfs the use by the average American household by orders of magnitude.

    Abraham Lincoln said, “You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” Apparently the only people still fooled by Al Gore in Tennessee are the academics running the State University in Knoxville. (well, no- there are still some hangers-on that insist Al Gore is “holy” man and we should genuflect and bow our heads when uttering his name out loud. So, I asked myself, what would Jesus do? How would Jesus earn $40,000 to pay his electric bill? My answer: Good Question!

    His fellow Tennesseans are not. The knoxnews dot com website that published the article conducted an online poll. More than 90% of almost 14,000+ people who’ve responded thus far expressed the opinion that Gore doesn’t deserve the honorary degree.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/honorary_dr_al_gore.html
    ________________

    Well, that tearszit- The Al Gore shrine is coming down tomorrow. I’m sending out a memo to all his faithful followers: The candle lighting vigil scheduled for tonight has been canceled until further notice perhaps for good. We just don’t know. It’s too soon to tell.

  37. Hi wbboei, Here is another, what are your thoughts…..?

    The following is a narrative taken from a 2008 Sunday morning televised “Meet The Press’. The author (Dale Lindsborg) is employed by none other than the very liberal Washington Post!!

    From Sunday’s 07 Sept. 2008 11:48:04 EST, Televised “Meet the Press” THE THEN Senator Obama was asked about his stance on the American Flag.

    General Bill Ginn’ USAF (ret.) asked Obama to explain WHY he doesn’t follow protocol when the National Anthem is played. The General stated to Obama that according to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171…During rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, all present (except those in uniform) are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Or, at the very least, “Stand and Face It”.

    NOW GET THIS!! – – – – –

    ‘Senator’ Obama replied:

    “As I’ve said about the flag pin, I don’t want to be perceived as taking sides”. “There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression..” “The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all that sort of thing.”

    (ARE YOU READY FOR THIS???)

    Obama continued: “The National Anthem should be ‘swapped’ for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song ‘I’d Like To Teach the World To Sing’. If that were our anthem, then, I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as ‘redesign’ our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It’s my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we, as a Nation of waring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails – – – perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments.”

    “When I become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past”.

    “Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put my hatred aside. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path.. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country’s First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America ”

    WHAAAAAAAT, the Hell is that!!!

    Yes, you read it right.

    I, for one, am speechless!!!

    Dale Lindsborg , Washington Post

    Hi Bill, Here is another, what are your thoughts….. cut and pasted?

    The following is a narrative taken from a 2008 Sunday morning televised “Meet The Press’. The author (Dale Lindsborg) is employed by none other than the very liberal Washington Post!!

    From Sunday’s 07 Sept. 2008 11:48:04 EST, Televised “Meet the Press” THE THEN Senator Obama was asked about his stance on the American Flag.

    General Bill Ginn’ USAF (ret.) asked Obama to explain WHY he doesn’t follow protocol when the National Anthem is played. The General stated to Obama that according to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171…During rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, all present (except those in uniform) are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Or, at the very least, “Stand and Face It”.

    NOW GET THIS!! – – – – –

    ‘Senator’ Obama replied:

    “As I’ve said about the flag pin, I don’t want to be perceived as taking sides”. “There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression..” “The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all that sort of thing.”

    (ARE YOU READY FOR THIS???)

    Obama continued: “The National Anthem should be ‘swapped’ for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song ‘I’d Like To Teach the World To Sing’. If that were our anthem, then, I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as ‘redesign’ our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It’s my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we, as a Nation of waring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails – – – perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments.”

    “When I become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past”.

    “Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put my hatred aside. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path.. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country’s First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America ”

    WHAAAAAAAT, the Hell is that!!!

    Yes, you read it right.

    I, for one, am speechless!!!

    Dale Lindsborg , Washington Post

    Hi Bill, Here is another, what are your thoughts….. cut and pasted?

    The following is a narrative taken from a 2008 Sunday morning televised “Meet The Press’. The author (Dale Lindsborg) is employed by none other than the very liberal Washington Post!!

    From Sunday’s 07 Sept. 2008 11:48:04 EST, Televised “Meet the Press” THE THEN Senator Obama was asked about his stance on the American Flag.

    General Bill Ginn’ USAF (ret.) asked Obama to explain WHY he doesn’t follow protocol when the National Anthem is played. The General stated to Obama that according to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171…During rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, all present (except those in uniform) are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Or, at the very least, “Stand and Face It”.

    NOW GET THIS!! – – – – –

    ‘Senator’ Obama replied:

    “As I’ve said about the flag pin, I don’t want to be perceived as taking sides”. “There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression..” “The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all that sort of thing.”

    (ARE YOU READY FOR THIS???)

    Obama continued: “The National Anthem should be ‘swapped’ for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song ‘I’d Like To Teach the World To Sing’. If that were our anthem, then, I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as ‘redesign’ our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It’s my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we, as a Nation of waring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails – – – perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments.”

    “When I become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past”.

    “Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put my hatred aside. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path.. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country’s First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America ”

    WHAAAAAAAT, the Hell is that!!!

    Yes, you read it right.

    I, for one, am speechless!!!

    Dale Lindsborg , Washington Post

    Hi Bill, Here is another, what are your thoughts….. cut and pasted?

    The following is a narrative taken from a 2008 Sunday morning televised “Meet The Press’. The author (Dale Lindsborg) is employed by none other than the very liberal Washington Post!!

    From Sunday’s 07 Sept. 2008 11:48:04 EST, Televised “Meet the Press” THE THEN Senator Obama was asked about his stance on the American Flag.

    General Bill Ginn’ USAF (ret.) asked Obama to explain WHY he doesn’t follow protocol when the National Anthem is played. The General stated to Obama that according to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171…During rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, all present (except those in uniform) are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Or, at the very least, “Stand and Face It”.

    NOW GET THIS!! – – – – –

    ‘Senator’ Obama replied:

    “As I’ve said about the flag pin, I don’t want to be perceived as taking sides”. “There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression..” “The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all that sort of thing.”

    (ARE YOU READY FOR THIS???)

    Obama continued: “The National Anthem should be ‘swapped’ for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song ‘I’d Like To Teach the World To Sing’. If that were our anthem, then, I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as ‘redesign’ our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It’s my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we, as a Nation of waring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails – – – perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments.”

    “When I become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past”.

    “Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put my hatred aside. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path.. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country’s First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America ”

    WHAAAAAAAT, the Hell is that!!!

    Yes, you read it right.

    I, for one, am speechless!!!

    Dale Lindsborg , Washington Post

    Hi Bill, Here is another, what are your thoughts….. cut and pasted?

    The following is a narrative taken from a 2008 Sunday morning televised “Meet The Press’. The author (Dale Lindsborg) is employed by none other than the very liberal Washington Post!!

    From Sunday’s 07 Sept. 2008 11:48:04 EST, Televised “Meet the Press” THE THEN Senator Obama was asked about his stance on the American Flag.

    General Bill Ginn’ USAF (ret.) asked Obama to explain WHY he doesn’t follow protocol when the National Anthem is played. The General stated to Obama that according to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171…During rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, all present (except those in uniform) are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Or, at the very least, “Stand and Face It”.

    NOW GET THIS!! – – – – –

    ‘Senator’ Obama replied:

    “As I’ve said about the flag pin, I don’t want to be perceived as taking sides”. “There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression..” “The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all that sort of thing.”

    (ARE YOU READY FOR THIS???)

    Obama continued: “The National Anthem should be ‘swapped’ for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song ‘I’d Like To Teach the World To Sing’. If that were our anthem, then, I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as ‘redesign’ our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It’s my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we, as a Nation of waring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails – – – perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments.”

    “When I become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past”.

    “Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put my hatred aside. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path.. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country’s First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America ”

    WHAAAAAAAT, the Hell is that!!!

    Yes, you read it right.

    I, for one, am speechless!!!

    Dale Lindsborg , Washington Post

  38. I got this email from a republican friend of mine…I thought it was very fitting…

    Great quote. To bad we don’t know who wrote it….

    The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.” — Author Unknown

  39. Indonesian students protest Barack Obama’s visit

    Friday, March 5, 2010

    JAKARTA, Indonesia — Scores of Islamic students staged protests outside Jakarta’s parliament and in at least three other major Indonesian cities on Friday against President Barack Obama’s upcoming visit to this predominantly Muslim country.

    The students carried banners branding Obama as an enemy of Islam and an imperialist in downtown Jakarta as well as in the provincial capitals Padang, Yogyakarta and Surabaya.

    They also threw shoes at large pictures of Obama’s head. An Iraqi journalist was sentenced to a year in prison for throwing his shoes at U.S. President George W. Bush during a news conference in Baghdad in 2008.

    Protest organizer Ahmad Irhamul Fikri, spokesman for the Coordinating Board for Campus Proselytizing Institute, said bigger rallies will be staged next Friday in more Indonesian cities ahead of Obama’s March 20-22 visit.

    Such demonstrations of hostility toward Obama are rare in Indonesia, where he enjoys widespread popularity because he spend part of his childhood in Jakarta while his mother was married to his Indonesian stepfather.

    Local government officials allowed business people to erect a statue of a 10-year-old Obama in a Jakarta park in December. But it was shifted last month to a nearby elementary school that he attended after more than 50,000 people supported a Facebook campaign against it and court action was threatened.

    Obama is expected to sign the statue’s pedestal while in Jakarta.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/05/AR2010030501213_pf.html

  40. Andy is an Alinsky type radical. He and Jim Hoffa and a few others have spun off from the AFL-CIO. Jim’s main interest is having Obama lift the federal trusteeship which has been in place since 1988 and was originally intended to root out mafia influence. Over time however it has become a lucrative gig for retired attorney generals and prosecutors. That was the quid pro quo for Teamster support.

    As for Andy, I aint sure I know what his quid pro quo is. Card check is DOA. It may be in the health care area. But he has certainly delivered for Obama. He has loaned his members out as storm troopers in the caucuses where 2000 complaints for fraud and intimidation were filed, to punish the owner of Whole Foods for speaking out against Obama’s health care plan with picket lines across the country, and sending in the SEIU thugs in St. Louis who beat up the black conservative at the behest of Messina Obama’s deputy chief of staff who specifically admonished they to hit back twice as hard, except in this case there was no provocation for the assault.

    In my opinion, Andy is the living embodiment of Saul Alinsky and has no place on a deficit commission, period. But of course I have no vote in the matter.
    ———————————————————–

    Obama Draws Fire for Appointing SEIU’s Stern to Deficit Panel
    By Ed Barnes
    – FOXNews.com

    President Obama’s decision to appoint his close political ally, union leader Andrew Stern, to the newly created National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform has set off a firestorm of criticism from business and conservative groups who charge he is a political radical who should be investigated for failure to register as a lobbyist.

    print email share recommend (1)

    SEIU President Andy Stern speaks with the Associated Press during an interview in his Washington office Oct. 9, 2009. (AP Photo)
    President Obama’s decision to appoint his close political ally, union leader Andrew Stern, to the newly created National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform has set off a firestorm of criticism from business and conservative groups who charge he is a political radical who should be investigated for failure to register as a lobbyist.

    The prestigious 18-member commission will study and recommend ways to whittle down the $12 trillion debt the federal government has amassed. Stern is one of six panelists Obama has named; the House of Representatives and the Senate will each appoint six others.

    Stern, the 59-year-old president of the 2.2 million-member Service Employees International Union, has angered business groups and political conservatives because of his support for health care reform and controversial “Card Check” legislation, which would make it easier for unions to organize in workplaces.

    Called “the most important labor boss in America today” and once considered for secretary of labor, Stern has become a political lightning rod. His appointment to the commission, wrote Investor’s Business Daily, “is like having a serial arsonist organize Fire Prevention Week.” Katie Packer, executive director of Workforce Fairness, a group backed by the Chamber of Commerce, said his appointment to the commission “doesn’t pass the laugh test.”

    Brian Johnson, executive director of the Alliance for Worker Freedom, which opposes Card Check, called the appointment a White House scheme to skirt lobbying laws. Three months ago, Johnson’s organization and Americans for Tax Reform, headed by Grover Norquist, sent a joint letter to the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington demanding a criminal investigation of Stern for failing to register as a lobbyist.

    That request stemmed from an investigation the groups conducted of Stern’s dealings with government officials. Using public records, press reports, White House logs, Twitter messages and disclosures in union reports filed with the labor department, their investigation found that Stern spent more than 20 percent of his time in contact with policymakers and elected officials.

    Under the 2008 federal lobbying law, anyone who spends that amount of time trying to influence government must register as a lobbyist; failure to register is punishable by up to five years in prison and a $200,000 fine.

    Stern, whose union funneled $60 million to the Obama election campaign, has been a regular visitor to the White House since Obama’s inauguration. White House logs released last October showed he visited the presidential mansion 22 times since Obama took office, including seven meetings with the president. But most of the visits were for group events, and it is an open question whether his attendance would count as lobbying activity.

    Earlier this week Johnson pressed for action on his lobbying complaint in letters to the Senate and to the U.S. Attorney’s office. In an interview he complained that no charges had been brought against Stern, saying, “It is hard to believe political pressure wasn’t involved.”

    Keith Morgan, the assistant U.S. attorney handling the case, blamed the delay on the unique way the complaint came to his office, which handles thousands of lobbyist complaints every year.

    “Most of the referrals we get come directly from the House or the Senate,” Morgan said. ” This one is rather unique,” he said, referring to the conservative groups’ involvement, “and we are still taking a look at it.” He said there is no time frame for a decision to be made.

    When the accusations were first made in November, the SEIU issued a written statement calling them meritless, adding that it was their “final” comment on the matter. Kawana Lloyd, spokeswoman for Stern, did not return calls seeking additional comment this week.

    Kenneth Gross, an expert on lobbying laws with the law firm Skadden, Arps, says it is unlikely that the U.S. attorney’s delay was due to political reasons. “The United States Attorney’s office in Washington has other things on its plate, like murders and rapes, and not Andy Stern’s lobbyist filings.

    “The office literally gets thousands of referrals a year on lobbying violations from the House and Senate and has been very tepid about acting on them. They are about as welcome as ants at a picnic,” he said.

    Referring to the letters submitted by the conservative groups, he said the law was still filled with gaps and that Stern probably has a number of ways to explain away the time he spent at the White House. In the letter to the U.S. attorney, the conservative groups count a visit to the White House as one day of lobbying, but “usually lobbying time is counted in hours,” Gross said.

  41. …must be a full moon- the machines are acting nutty today… I wasn’t sure my post made it through the firing line. apologies if this is a repost …

    Dr Al Gore?

    The University of Tennessee announced that former Vice President Al Gore will receive an honorary doctorate of Laws and Humane Letters in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology on May 14 at graduation ceremonies, where he will be the featured commencement speaker. Reporter Chloe White Kennedy wrote on knox news dot com that UTchancellor Jimmy (no tongue in) Cheek said:

    Vice President Gore’s career has been marked by visionary leadership, and his work has quite literally changed our planet for the better. He is among the most accomplished and respected Tennesseans in history, and it is fitting that he should be honored by the flagship education institution of his home state.

    Al will be adding to an impressive haul of honors and accolades that he’s accumulated over the years, including the first runner-up for Time Person of the Year in 2007, the Dan David award from Israel (with a million bucks), an Oscar, and the Nobel Peace Prize (and another million).

    The green champion of global warming recently emerged from wherever he had been hiding since Climategate broke to submit a self-serving op-ed piece to the New York Times. Gore wrote:

    “But unfortunately, the reality of the danger we are courting has not been changed by the discovery of at least two mistakes in the thousands of pages of careful scientific work over the last 22 years by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

    The two errors to which Al referred were the claim the Himalayan glaciers were melting because of an article in a hiking magazine and the failure of certain researchers to abide by British Freedom of Information Act requests from climate change skeptics. In the Times piece, he also wrote that “e-mail messages stolen from the University of East Anglia in Britain showed that scientists besieged by an onslaught of hostile, make-work demands from climate skeptics may not have adequately followed the requirements of the British freedom of information law.”

    Did Al actually read the article to which he provided the link in the quote above? It talked about how the scientists “flouted” regulations. Those were the same poor scientists “besieged by an onslaught of hostile, make work demands” who cheered at the death of a leading skeptic who had been hounding them to validate their alarmist claims.

    Al conveniently ignored recent admissions by lead climate conspirator Phil Jones that there’s been no warming for fifteen years when he amazingly wrote, “What is important is that the overwhelming consensus on global warming remains unchanged.”

    But Al cannot afford to accept this inconvenient truth. Climategate exposed the leading climatologists and global warming experts as conspirators, data-fabricators, and obstructionists. Al’s got too much skin in the game, standing to make billions if Obama advocates for cap-and-trade as he’s done for health care reform.

    According to the U.K. paper The Guardian, Gore has invested in one company that received over half a billion dollars in subsidies from the Department of Energy. Another company he’s involved with received $683 million for “green investment.” With those two companies alone, Gore has interests that control over a billion dollars in U.S. funds, and if cap-and-trade is ever passed, he’ll control much, much more.

    Hypocrisy is nothing new to Al Gore. He huffed (through a spokesperson, naturally) that he purchased more than enough green power to balance his electricity costs. However, in February 2007, Bruce Nussbaum reported in Business Week:

    The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh-more than 20 times the national average.

    And that’s just one of his three houses. Gore also has places in Carthage, Tennessee and in the vicinity of Washington, D.C. Between his electric and gas utility bills, Al spends more than $40,000 per year on just the Nashville house’s energy. Spokeswoman Kalee Kreider defended his energy use to CBS news, sniffing that “[s]ometimes when people don’t like the message, in this case that global warming is real, it’s convenient to attack the messenger.”

    That’s just what these poor kids graduating from UT need to hear as their refuge of higher education is gone and it’s time to look for nonexistent jobs in a terrible economy. They need to have their heads filled on the way out the door that they are responsible for the environmental destruction of the planet like they need a hole in the head.

    Al Gore has no business to talk. He’ll fly out of Knoxville in a private jet. Or he’ll motor to his mansion in Nashville, only four times the size of the average house, but an energy hog with consumption that dwarfs the use by the average American household by orders of magnitude.

    Abraham Lincoln said, “You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” Apparently the only people still fooled by Al Gore in Tennessee are the academics running the State University in Knoxville. (well, no- there are still some hangers-on that insist Al Gore is “holy” man and we should genuflect and bow our heads when uttering his name out loud. So, I asked myself, what would Jesus do? How would Jesus earn $40,000 to pay his electric bill? My answer: Good Question!

    His fellow Tennesseans are not. The knoxnews dot com website that published the article conducted an online poll. More than 90% of almost 14,000+ people who’ve responded thus far expressed the opinion that Gore doesn’t deserve the honorary degree.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/honorary_dr_al_gore.html
    ________________

    Well, that tearszit- The Al Gore shrine is coming down tomorrow. I’m sending out a memo to all his faithful followers: The candle lighting vigil scheduled for tonight has been canceled until further notice perhaps for good. We just don’t know. It’s too soon to tell.

  42. NewMexicoFan:

    If you want to set off one of your Dem friends, ask ’em, “So, how’s that hopey changey stuff working out for ya?”

    They go ballistic. Everytime.

    Dems aren’t stupid. They know they elected a fraud. They know they stabbed the most experienced woman candidate they’ll ever see to elect the fraud. It’s a very painful thing for them to watch their party crumble.

  43. NMF:

    Just use “blockquote” in brackets at the start of the quote and “/blockquote” in brackets at the end. The “cite=” business is optional if you want to put the name of the person you are quoting.

  44. NewMexicoFan

    Here use the word blockquote with these things at either end of word blockquote. The sentences will be outlined in pink..

    at the end of the paragraph close the tag with forward slash symbol like this / before the word blockquote and the enclosing either end of the word blockquote. I hope the example shows up.

    If you want to add bold to your post use adding / to close the html tags at the end..

  45. nope these things… didn’t show up greater symbols on your keyboard..

    For embolding us but take away the spaces.

  46. Some dems are stupid, just spoke a childhood friend and I am 60 years old, she’s still defending poor little Obama is being blasted by the republicans just like Bill Clinton was. She says she was a Hillary supporter and was against trying to draft Hillary to run against him. Hillary of coarse will not run against him (she remembers Kennedy) and you know she has a point that if the republicans want to drive a wedge between Hillary supporters and Obama supporters they could just keep starting rumors that she will run against him.
    Personally since she really threw in the towel to save the democratic party to the point of supporting the fraud, I doubt she will run against him to destroy it….just guessing

    I don’t think it will be hard for the republicans to beat Obama, Larouche figured it out…..the country wants him impeached…

  47. PM 317

    Sadly, there is no u-tube video of this. But if you like Gregory Peck movies then surely you will remember the one. It begins with a panoramic camera eye that roams over a dark barren country side barely lit by a dying sun and comes to rest on a little flower growing out of the crevice of barren rock, with a weary and timeless voice over by Orsen Wells:

    “Deep among the lonely sun-baked hills of Texas, the great and weatherbeaten stone still stands. The Comanches called it Squaw’s Head Rock. Time cannot change its impassive face, nor dim the legend of the wild young lovers who found Heaven and Hell in the shadows of the rock…”

  48. Thanks all of you for taking pity on me. Now let’s hope I understand what you were trying to teach me.

  49. Yes, see I am not so thick headed after all. You guys are great teachers. I should have remembered some of that from my web design class.

  50. Senators to Obama: Don’t send ambassador to Syria

    In letter to Clinton, six Republican senators say Syria wants to be part of legitimate international community ‘without significantly changing its policies’

    Yitzhak Benhorin Published: 03.06.10,

    WASHINGTON – Republican senators demanded that the Obama administration cancel the appointment of a new US ambassador to Syria.

    In a letter addressed to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over the weekend, six senators asked for an answer before the nomination of career diplomat Robert Ford is sent to the floor for the consideration of the Senate.

    If confirmed by the Senate, Ford would represent the United States’ interests as it moves toward restored diplomatic relations with a nation that borders both Iraq and Israel. The democrats control the Senate, so the appointment is likely to pass.

    The United States withdrew its ambassador from Damascus in 2005 after Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese prime minister, was assassinated in Beirut. Lebanese critics contended that Syria was involved in the killing, an accusation that Syria denied.

    The Obama administration is not pleased with Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime, but hopes improved relations would curb the infiltration of terrorists into Iraq from Syria. The US hopes the move would help stabilize Iraq and allow for the withdrawal of American troops next year.

    Senators Jon Kyl (AZ), Pat Roberts (KS), Christopher Bond (MO), Tom Coburn (OK), John Barrasso (WY) and Mike Johanns (NE) said in the letter, “Engagement of hostile regimes in pursuit of US interests in not necessarily bad policy, if it is part of a realistic strategy with measurable goals. But engagement for engagement’s sake is not productive. However well-justified the engagement is, the US pays a price for lending even a modicum of international legitimacy to a regime like Syria’s.”

    The letter, which also mentions Syria’s poor human rights record, states “We believe the Syrian government would like to be fully part of the legitimate international community without significantly changing these or other security policies.”

    The senators further wrote Clinton that the appointment of an ambassador to Damascus “must be aimed at achieving tangible Syrian concessions in response,” adding, “Does the recent trilateral meeting among Syrian President Assad, the leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad less than two weeks after you announced the nomination of Ambassador Ford give you reason to doubt the wisdom of this step at this time?”

    The Obama Administration has been urging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resume peace talks with Syria as part of the efforts to sever Damascus’ ties with Iran and encourage it to stop supporting Hezbollah and the Palestinian terror groups.

    Defense Minister Ehud Barak is in favor of negotiating with Syria.

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3858604,00.html

  51. The unresolved question in my mind is not whether Hillary can escape the stench of Obama. I think she can do that if she plays her cards right. The question that troubles me is whether Obama will so damage the brand that no democrat is electable. To give you a sense of what I am talking about take a look at this video and ignore the tripe about W. When Barack is relegated to the dust bin of history at the foot of Mount Rushmore, this is what the party will be left to defend:

    http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/video/video/show?id=2734278:Video:157739&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_video

  52. Still a long way to go
    In the last 100 years, it has been two steps forward, one back for women

    By JANET BAGNALL,
    The Gazette
    March 5, 2010

    Monday will mark the 100th anniversary of the first International Women’s Day. This should be a real milestone, a time to celebrate what women achieved after the world began acknowledging that they had been unfairly held back by centuries of legal prohibitions and social exclusion.

    In 1910, more than 100 women from 17 countries gathered in Copenhagen to vote in favour of a Women’s Day. A hundred years later, it feels like by now women should be a lot closer to true equality than we are.

    Too often, it’s a case of two steps forward, one back. In the last few weeks Canada’s female Olympians, who have few other athletic competitions open to them, poured their hearts into the Vancouver Games. They dazzled their country by winning the lion’s share of a historic number of medals.

    During those same weeks, but way down the equality spectrum, Nicaragua withheld life-saving medical treatment from a newly pregnant cancer patient. Authorities ruled that because chemotherapy could harm the fetus, treatment would violate the country’s ban on abortion.

    Medical authorities say the 27-year-old woman, already the mother of a 10-year-old girl, will die unless she is treated. This is the same country in which women carried arms in the country’s 1979-90 Sandinista revolution, every bit the equal of male revolutionaries.

    Last month U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Saudi Arabia, one of the most misogynist countries on Earth.

    At the same time as Saudi authorities welcomed Clinton – as the representative of U.S. power and emblem of female equality that she is – they acquiesced in an extraordinary sentence against a 75-year-old widow.

    She is to be lashed 40 times and imprisoned for four months for asking her late husband’s nephew to deliver bread to her home because she was too ill to go out shopping herself. Her nephew by marriage is not considered an immediate relative under Saudi Arabia’s strict sex-segregation laws. He and his aunt therefore were not supposed be in the same house.

    How are women doing overall? Not great. Women make up 70 per cent of the world’s estimated 1.2 billion poor, according to the United Nations. Women do 66 per cent of the world’s work, produce 50 per cent of its food, but earn only 10 per cent of global wealth and own only one per cent of property.

    While the average wage gap worldwide was under 20 per cent, in Japan in 2006 women earned only 51 per cent as much as men.

    The United Nations also reports that women are concentrated in job sectors that are badly paid and offer few protections.

    In the undeveloped world, honour killings, female infanticide, genital mutilation, bride killings, and sex trafficking add an extra layer of horror to women’s lives.

    In developed countries, there has been undeniable progress. Women have crowded into universities and the professions, a majority working full-time while raising families.

    But the fact is that even in countries where women have made enormous progress, their advancement has stopped short of equality. All those degrees, all those long hours at the office were supposed to lead to equality – of opportunity, pay, and advancement.

    While they wait, women keep hearing that their turn will come: Once there are enough of us “in the pipeline,” the most talented and driven among us will become CEOs and board members.

    But that’s just wishful thinking, new research by Catalyst Inc. has found. Catalyst, a group working to expand opportunities for women in business, tracked more than 4,100 graduates of elite MBA schools around the world, to find that with no difference in ambition or skills or devotion to family, women no matter where they were in the world were hired at a lower level than men, paid less than them – and never caught up.

    There seems little point waiting for government to legislate correctives. Barely 22 per cent of MPs in Canada are women. Around the world, women hold an average of 18.4 per cent of seats in national assemblies. Who in male-dominated legislatures answers to the world’s women?

    A hundred years ago, women argued that it was necessary to make Parliament more democratic by extending the franchise to women.

    Franchise in hand for nearly a century, it’s time women used Parliament to make their lives more democratic. First, they must run for office.

    http://www.montrealgazette.com/sports/2010wintergames/Still+long/2643391/story.html

  53. BIG PICTURE THINKING BY OBAMA???

    Heh, heh. This article sheds light on how Obama’s inner circle might be trying to make lemonade out of 2010 elections…and how this lemonade might not be very palatable to Dems.

    baselinescenario.com/2010/03/05/does-the-obama-administration-even-want-to-win-in-november/

    Does The Obama Administration Even Want To Win In November?
    ========================

    By Simon Johnson

    Increasingly, senior administration officials shrug when you mention the November mid-term elections. “We did all we could,” and “it’s not our fault” is the line; their point being that if jobs (miraculously at this point) come back quickly, the Democrats have a fighting chance – but not otherwise.

    It may be true, at this point, that there is little fiscal policy can do that would have effects fast enough; and monetary policy is out of the administration’s hands.

    But ever so quietly, you get the impression the Obama team itself is not so very unhappy – they know the jobs will come back by 2012, they feel that Republican control of the House will just energize the Democratic base, and no one will be able to blame the White House for getting nothing done from 2010 on.

    When you push them on this issue, they snap back, “Well, what do you want us to do? What’s the policy proposal that we are not pursuing?” But this is exactly the wrong way to think about the issue.

    The point is that the administration has lost control over the narrative. Why have we lost 8 million jobs since December 2007? Why will debt-GDP rise by 40 percentage points relative to what the CBO baseline would have been? Who is responsible for this deep global disaster?

    The president has only addressed this head-on once – when he launched the Volcker Rules in January. That was a good moment, grabbing attention and focussing it in a productive direction. But it proved fleeting – Secretary Geithner was spinning it away within 7 hours – and there has been no follow-up in terms of clear political messages.

    There’s no story in the culture about what the big banks did and why. There is no attempt from the top to push through the key message for the day – financial reform – and to explain what this can do and how. The adminstration, in effect, is not even trying.

    The inner team apparently thinks that 2012 will go just fine – as long as unemployment is down around 6 percent. And, they reason, the people who lose their seats this November won’t be around to complain.

    Really?

    If the administration fights hard and loses in November, that is one thing. If it fights on clear issues – forcing the other side to support Too Big To Fail structures – they may still lose, but such a loss will clearly communicate that the political strength of the big banks is now out of control. That is an issue to run on – and win big – in 2012.

    And if the administration doesn’t even care and hardly tries now, who will come out for them (or send a check) in two years?

    The Obama team – both political and economic wings – seems to feel that their base has nowhere else to go, and all they need to do is drift towards the right in a moderately confused fashion to assure re-election for the president.

    Jimmy Carter had the same sort of idea.

  54. The other thing I forgot to mention. Concerning the failure of the Obama Justice Department to investigate the rather suspicious activities of Obama ally Andy Stern, I find the explanation offered by that partner at Skadden Arps (one of the major New York law firms) to be less credible than it might otherwise be, inasmuch as that firm was a major contributor and bundler for the Obama campaign.

  55. Sorry about that, my dashes disappeared that time so forget I asked. Again thanks for the html lesson.

  56. I have found that to be the attitude in the Dem party. It is by that time, they will forget, or they will fold in, or we are the dictator attitude.

    I see Brown is campaigning with McCain.

  57. That video posted above is nothing more than republican propaganda at its best. I could not even watch the whole thing. I will refer George Carlin’s epic video is that the people who own this country (republicans) do not want an educated/informed voters in this country, they want folks who will jump from the rethug ship to the dem ship without thinking…..guess what I’m not one of those folks, its barely been one year since……W….least we all forget what the republicans did to this country….people have short memories….my suggestion is that Obama is impeached for treason…..the rethugs needn’t spit all over Hillary….but they are trying to do it…..if you don’t believe me what what Romney said about his wife and Hillary while talking to Neal Cavuto last THursday….He’s an idiot.

  58. lessee:

    underline = underline

    strike through= strike

    I’m curious to see what this looks like-

  59. Apparently, the site code doesn’t recognize underlining words.. which is no big whoop.. But it does recognize strike through like this OBAMA which is grand!

  60. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100306/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_venezuela_chavez

    Venezuela’s President Hugo mocked U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday as a “blond” version of her predecessor, and said a row with Spain over alleged links with rebel groups was over.

    Visiting Latin America this week, Clinton said the Obama administration’s policies towards the region were helping blunt the criticism of the United States by leftist leaders like Chavez.

    “To me, she’s like Condoleezza Rice … a blond Condoleezza,” said the Venezuelan, referring to former U.S. president George W. Bush’s secretary of state, with whom he exchanged frequent harsh words at long-distance.

    Citing comments by Clinton in Brazil, Chavez said she was proving to be equally aggressive. “She comes to Brazil to provoke us, to try and divide us from our brothers.”

  61. confloy @ 2:13

    My blog was in reference to rgb44hrc at 1:27. Sorry for not making that clear.

  62. OK, Admin why do some pink blogs have light dashes around them, and others do not. I guess it could be my computer.

  63. The following, link heavy, update has been added to the article:

    Update: Regarding David Paterson and Eric Massa, we are not excusing the conduct of either of them. However, as we wrote before about David Paterson, these are Obama thug drive-by shootings. Paterson and Eric Massa both fit into the pattern of Obama using sex related stories to destroy opponents (such as Blair Hull).

    Sex and race-baiting are on the menu. Craig Crawford is out at Hillary hate cesspool MSNBC. Sane, not zany, left of center, Crawford was called a racist by Chris Matthews on MSNBC because Crawford thought Hillary Clinton was wise to court the White Working Class vote (we’ve had a few things to say about that too and wish Crawford a fond adieu, for now). The casualties mount in the continuing Democratic Civil War which we wrote about long ago.

    And follow the money, out the window. It was Friday so on news dump day the money news emerged “Obama’s proposed budget would add more than $9.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, congressional budget analysts said Friday.” The drowning waves of debt and deficit won’t stop Obama from rewarding his cronies and mob friends however. The Arrogance! Incompetence! Corruption! will continue along with the Big Media protection – but that’s for tomorrow’s article.

  64. Admin: the problem is our side is taking all the hits. How do we cut the legs out from under this corruption? How do we shake this country out of its complacency? When we raise the issue of our traditions, our country and what we are losing, ignorant people jump to their feet and scream republican propaganda etc. They are too dumb to see that this issue transcends party. Furthermore, their prejudice prevents them from realizing that there are good people in both parties. These people play right into the hands of the opposition who wants to divide and conquer. It is tragic.

    At this point, the bad guys have all the levers of power. Crawford is forced to leave MSNBC. Dobbs is forced to leave CNN. Why did Roberts threaten to resign. How can we prevent this despot from wrecking the country. So far this civil war is a cold war, and let us hope that it stays that way. I do not think it is beyond the realm of possibility that Obama, or someone acting at his direction, would provoke civil disorder and then impose martial law. We have seen the campaigns this White House has directed against the tea parties. It may be a shadow of things to come.

    What can we do to save this country from a disaster other than what we are doing now. I ask myself that question several times as day. I do not mean flailing. I mean something that will make everyone–right left and center see the problem here and where it will lead if we are not vigilant. Big media reamins our biggest enemy of the republic because they are in the business of covering this up until it is too late. Goebbels redux.

  65. pm317
    March 6th, 2010 at 11:58 am

    pm317 – IMO, Gregory Peck in Spellbound was probably the most handsome man in history! (and of course, Ingrid was beautiful, too!)

  66. Here is the problem on this health care thing:

    Posted by SusanAnne Hiller (Profile)
    Friday, March 5th at 2:33PM EST
    23 Comments

    Americans need to understand the devastating significance of the House vote on the Senate health care bill set for March 18th. The Democrats have–by design–created the perfect storm to take over the US healthcare system, while providing an ideal distraction–reconciliation.

    First, let’s examine exactly how we got here. In late December, while Americans were arguing that no one had read the bill, Leiberman was posturing to vote against the bill with a public option, and the debate on abortion continued, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) took an existing HOUSE-passed bill, H.R.3950–the Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009–and here’s how it unfolded:

    10/8/2009:
    Received in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
    10/13/2009: Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 175.
    11/19/2009: Motion to proceed to consideration of measure made in Senate. (consideration: CR S11578)
    11/19/2009: Cloture motion on the motion to proceed to the bill presented in Senate. (consideration: CR S11578; text: CR S11578)
    11/20/2009: Motion to proceed to consideration of measure considered in Senate. (consideration: CR S11826-11879, S11888-11903)
    11/21/2009: Motion to proceed to consideration of measure considered in Senate. (consideration: CR S11907-11967)
    11/21/2009: Cloture on the motion to proceed to the bill invoked in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 60 – 39. Record Vote Number: 353. (consideration: CR S11967; text: CR S11967)
    11/21/2009: Motion to proceed to consideration of measure agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
    11/21/2009: Measure laid before Senate by motion. (consideration: CR S11967)
    11/21/2009: S.AMDT.2786 Amendment SA 2786 proposed by Senator Reid. (consideration: CR S11967)
    In the nature of a substitute. emphasis mine

    The GOP must have known what was about to happen next because they were united in voting “Nay” against this bill on November 21, 2009. Additionally, the Senate Amendment offered by Reid was none other than the Senate version of the healthcare bill.

    Reid HAD to do this. Why? Because all legislation that raises taxes MUST originate in the House of Representatives and H.R. 3590 satisfies that requirement.

    I will repeat that, Harry Reid switched the language in H.R. 3590 and replaced it with the Senate’s version of the health care system takeover in order to satisfy the requirement for all legislation raising taxes to originate in the House. The bill summary outlines the evolution of this bill:

    OFFICIAL TITLE AS INTRODUCED:
    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, and for other purposes.

    OFFICIAL TITLE AS AMENDED BY SENATE:
    An act entitled The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

    For the record, Republicans did challenge this amendment substitution, but were defeated. The simple fact that the Democrats voted on Reid’s “amendment” is appalling and demonstrates their condoning of the abuses we are seeing unfold. Democrat Senators are now willing accomplices to the destruction and socialization of the US health system.

    The deceptive practices to pass a government takeover of healthcare can be summed up as the ultimate betrayal by the Democrats against the American people in order to ram through their progressive, socialistic, freedom-stripping policies.

    Furthermore, the Democrats talk of “reconciliation” or the nuclear option is nothing more than a diversion from what the real goal is–to pass the Senate version through the House and then have Obama sign it into law.

    And once signed into law, does anyone really think that Obama will keep his promises of the “fixes” through the reconciliation process after he got what he wanted via the Senate bill? Seriously, he will have the healthcare takeover he wants, so why make the House and Senate suffer more.

    In addition, I don’t think that the House will hold the bill to work out differences between the two chambers as is being floated. While it may be an optional maneuver, the Democrats need the tax increases to take effect now so they can offset some of their rabid spending.

    The House Democrats have a choice: either stand with the American people and kill the bill or endorse the deception, betrayal, and bribes of Harry Reid, Obama, Pelosi, and the Senate Democrats, in addition to the destruction of the US health system. Either way, the American people will never forget.

    Yes…
    fredrik Saturday, March 6th at 12:30AM EST (link)
    You do have the basic idea right. The strategy being discussed is:
    1. The house passes the Senate bill (#1) unchanged.
    2. The house passes a second bill (#2) amending the Senate bill (#1) under reconciliation rules.
    3. The senate passes the same bill (#2).
    4. Obama signs #1 and #2 into law.

    At the moment, #2 doesn’t exist. Perhaps it will come into existence in the next few days, perhaps not. The suspicion (which I share) is that steps 2 through 4 above are just a clever ruse. What I expect to happen is that as soon as the House passes the Senate bill (#1), Pelosi will send it to the President, and Obama will sign it into law.

  67. Not sure how accurate the following is…

    —————
    Chelsea Clinton To Have Jewish Wedding

    Mar 6th, 2010

    Chelsea Clinton, daughter of President Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton will not be having a traditional Christian wedding but are planning a Jewish wedding since her future husband, Marc Mexvinsky is Jewish.

    The bride and groom announced their wedding in November and are just now talking openly about the groom’s Jewish religion. Much of the talk that is circulating is coming from Jewish Community Centers who are looking eagerly to having a member of President Bill Clinton’s family join their Community. The talk might have started since gossip is that Chelea has been looking for a Jewish rabbi to perform the ceremony.
    President Bill Clinton and his daughter have not been attending their Southern Baptist Church since the President’s minister offended the President by criticizing him on his gay and pro abortion policies while in office. The problem of a mixed marriage as in the case of Chelsea Clinton and Marc Mexvinsky is being pondered upon by people like Rabbi Steven Car Reuben, leader of a Reconstructionist Jewish sect known as Kehillath Israel whose temple is in Pacific Palasades, California.

    He is telling his congregation that Chelea Clinton should be considered a part of the Jewish Community even if she is not married by a rabbi and does not convert to Judaism. Another prominent member of the religious Jewish Community, Ed Case, of InterFaithFamily.com stresses that it is important for Jews to allow interfaith couples to join Jewish associations.

    Another interested member of the religious communities involved, Rev. Taylor Burton-Edwards of the Methodist General Board of Discipleship of The United Methodist Church to which Hillary Clinton, mother of the bride belongs comments that his Church allows local pastors and their congregations to judge on whether to allow a mixed wedding in a Methodist Church if one of the couple is not converted to Methodism.

    http://www.ecanadanow.com/entertainment/2010/03/06/chelsea-clinton-to-have-jewish-wedding/

  68. Hillary Clinton show to stay on the road

    March 5, 2010
    By Daniel Dombey, US diplomatic correspondent

    Travelling with Hillary Clinton this past week has given me a distinctly unusual perspective on the world.

    For instance: on some stops just about all you see is the inside of the presidential palace. So I can report that Argentina’s famous Casa Rosada or Pink House, from whose balcony Evita Peron made appearances before Argentina’s shirtless masses, is in a distinctly dodgy state of disrepair.

    Outside, the building seems incandescent in the evening light. Inside, the colonnaded patios are buttressed by cheap bits of plywood and black plastic lining and one patch of land has been converted into an apparent building site. It’s all rather a reminder of the long and disastrous economic slide that took Argentina from being one of the richest countries in the world at the start of the 20th century to virtual bankruptcy just a few years ago.

    By contrast, Guatemala’s presidential palace which like the Casa Rosada has colonial style touches but is a 20th century pastiche is an unexpected pleasure.

    The inner courtyard where Clinton and president Alvaro Colom gave their press conference is full of light and from the balcony you can look on to Guatemala City’s main square, with its cathedral, jacaranda trees, peanut sellers and parrots flying past.

    When we arrived in a convoy at the palace schoolgirls lined the square crying out Clinton and Colom’s first names in a cheerful spectacle that felt less North Korean than it probably should.

    Now Guatemala is very far from being an uncomplicated success story – it would take too much space and expertise I don’t have to go into the problems facing Mr Colom and his country. He spent some of last year denying he was involved in the murder of a prominent lawyer who just before being killed made a videoed denunciation of the president; this year a UN-backed commission found that Mr Colom was innocent of the murder and that the lawyer had in fact orchestrated his own death. The soldiers who lined our route from the airport were also a reminder of the country’s civil war, the longest in Latin American history, which ended only in 1996.

    But that only goes to show travelling in the bubble on such trips gives you a different angle on things – one which is often much more informative and illuminating about the policies and personalities of the visiting delegation than it is about the places being visited.

    Aside from the presidential palaces, four star hotels and conference centres are the natural – and sometimes exclusive – habitat of the travelling diplomats on these sorts of trips.

    Yesterday, I watched Hillary Clinton sit at a horseshoe-shaped table where some 50 people pontificated on their visions for Latin American prosperity. As she gave her controlled little nods – not too vigorous but just enough to stay awake – while they droned on, I wondered how many such anonomously chandeliered and carpeted ballrooms she had spent time in during her extraordinary varied public life. Probably thousands. And there will be hundreds more, together with the airport hangars, presidential palaces and foreign ministries.

    In a few hours time we fly back to Andrews Airforce Base and I am heading home. But the Hillary Clinton show is set to stay on the road for quite some time to come.

    http://blogs.ft.com/rachmanblog/2010/03/the-hillary-clinton-show-to-stay-on-the-road/

  69. Obama grows weary of the global stage: Rather than risk a one-term presidency with more failures than victories, he has put foreign goals aside to focus on the domestic

    Olivia Hampton guardian.co.uk,
    Saturday 6 March 2010

    Weeks and months of non-stop mudslinging over healthcare have taken their toll on President Obama and placed his foreign policy agenda on the back burner.

    An anxious world is asking what has become of all Obama’s promises to solve the thorniest and most entrenched problems, from the Middle East conflict to closing the internationally reviled Guantánamo prison camp and halting Iran’s nuclear defiance. As the flood of words dissipates with little concrete change to show, hope has faded, leaving disillusionment in its place.

    Nowhere is this more true than in the Middle East. Arab capitals were buoyed when Obama initially dared confront Israel over settlements. But when pressure mounted in Washington and around the country against harming US relations with Israel, the president quickly backed down and made amends – somewhat – with hawkish Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

    With his poll ratings slipping, Americans still rattled by their thinning wallets and worried about a possible Republican revival in crucial mid-term elections, Obama the bold, the daring, has adopted a more populist tone and become more risk averse than ever before.

    More than a year since he was swept to office riding on waves of hope from a tired people, Obama has angered and frustrated his most liberal and most conservative supporters by bowing to internal political pressures. He is now reportedly on the verge of yet another about-face, this time reneging on his decision to try the 9/11 suspects in federal criminal courts and bringing them instead before Bush-era military commissions.

    After months of shuttle diplomacy from secretary of state Hillary Clinton and Washington’s top Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, the Palestinians and the Israelis appear close to resuming long-stalled negotiations, albeit indirect ones brokered by the US.

    The Palestinians, who have long insisted that any conditions be predicated on a return to pre-1967 borders, had dragged their feet for over a year in part because they lacked the political cover from key regional powerbrokers Egypt and Saudi Arabia. With the Arab League now giving its blessing to indirect talks, the onus is now on Washington to prove it can play a vital role as honest broker and realise a peace deal that has eluded Obama’s predecessors. But the path is riddled with landmines, and last-minute setbacks can be expected at every turn.

    Obama may have extended his hand to Tehran, but the Islamic Republic has yet to unclench its fist and halt uranium enrichment. At best, the outreach has managed to give him political cover to push for slapping a fourth round of UN sanctions on Iran for its continued defiance over its suspect nuclear programme. In the meantime, the White House has hardened its tone, drifting further from the consensual approach of the president’s Nowruz video and sounding more and more like Clinton during her failed bid for the presidency. From her perch as the top US diplomat, Clinton the realist can now contently tell her former rival: “I told you so.”

    The world, perhaps prematurely, awarded Obama its highest peace prize, but even the Nobel committee acknowledged it was more an assignment of sorts to act on his promises of engagement than a reward for actual accomplishments.

    So many deadlines have been missed now – on clinching a Middle East peace deal, shuttering Guantánamo Bay or persuading Iran to curb its nuclear ambitions – that Obama no longer bothers to issue any more.

    Even in Europe, where he remains popular, Obama made an apparent snub at his allies by cancelling a planned appearance at the US-EU summit this May, angering Madrid and forcing the event to prematurely shut down.

    His international schedule during this second year in office will be far leaner than his record-breaking pace last year, as the president sets his sights more squarely on hard-hit areas at home.

    Given the history of overly zealous US presidencies on the international front, he may be well-advised to continue this long break from the world stage. Domestic failures have unmistakably weakened presidents’ hands to secure hard-won concessions in global capitals. If Obama does not hone his appeal at home, where even senior Republican fundraisers are playing up conservatives’ fear of the president’s “socialist threat”, he risks becoming a one-term president like Jimmy Carter with few victories and many failures in his name.

    Having seen the messiness of diplomacy first hand, Obama has retreated to more familiar, and more immediate, grounds.

    A defiant Obama finally took ownership of his top domestic priority of reforming America’s flawed healthcare system this week, telling Congress “let’s get it done” by whatever means necessary.

    The shift reflects in part a realisation that success on the world stage – and success here is not speaking to hundreds of thousands in Berlin but actually delivering on needs and promises – is far riskier and garners much less political clout at home, where voters will seal his fate.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/mar/06/barack-obama-foreign-policy

  70. There was another section added to Donna Brazile’s explanation of the new Dimorcatic coalition that went something like….the party may require destroying before it can be be reconstructed to be viable again.
    Does anyone recall where to find this info?

  71. Exactly who are we calling stupid here folks, in my opinion its the folks who vote Democrat then Republican then democrat and then republican again..In case you hadn’t noticed that has the same rhythmic motion as waves. I am not going to get in the boat of the STUPID people again….I am going to read…..use common sense….and realize this is exactly what the power brokers want you to do so they can hire a new american idol every 4 to 8 years that will tell us he is the messiah and give us nothing in return…..the last true POTUS we had was Bill Clinton….and he wouldn’t have got elected without Ross Perot and me…..He threw a monkey wrence in the powers…..and set back the scam 8 years……so the could not risk another 8 on another Clinton.

  72. Blowback From the Relentless Push to Pass Obamacare
    By Bronwyn’s Harbor on March 5, 2010 at 7:50 PM in Current Affairs

    Americans across the country are getting pretty damn weary of hearing news story after news story about the latest bumps in the road to the seemingly endless tactics employed by the White House and Democratic leadership to ram Obamacare through Congress. Can you believe that we’re now into the second year of listening to this daily back-and-forth, with an unbelievable amount of time and work expended on a bill that still hasn’t passed Congress? Can you comprehend the time wasted while far more pressing problems — like the deficit, joblessness, and a weak economy — take a back seat? Watch this segment from last night’s Hannity featuring Frank Luntz’s impressions gleaned from both polls across the country and overall impressions he gained from a focus group conducted last week:

    These focus group members made some astonishing, profoundly thoughtful statements:

    Man: “They’re not listening to us. My representative has not responded to me one time. Phone calls, e-mails, letters. No town hall meetings. Nothing. He’s run away.”

    Woman: “This is not what the American people have wanted. … This is a transformative change of our economy, of our health care delivery system that will … we will never be able to change it back again.”

    I am impressed with the woman’s grasp of the enormous shift that Obamacare will bring if enacted. And, while Republicans vow to immediately begin a recall effort should the bill pass, we all know that that will doubtless take years and depends on the outoc

    As a Hillary Democrat, I am in favor of health care reform. Hell, everyone with any sense in both parties agrees that we need reform of our health delivery system. But this plan is so badly constructed and forces people to buy insurance from insurance companies that, because people won’t be allowed to shop beyond their state’s boundaries, aren’t sufficiently challenged to be competitive. And, as you all know, there’s much more wrong with Obama’s bill. (See the quote from Larry Johnson’s post below.)

    Frank Luntz had plenty to say last night as well. “One wonders whether this is a suicidal position,” he said about the unceasing push to pass Obamacare.

    It’s astonishing that Obama is endangering every Democratic incumbent running for reelection in 2010. It’s more alarming that Obama is ignoring the large number of polls that consistently show Americans opposed to his health care plan.

    In “Democrats Go For Suicide,” Larry Johnson referred to the stunning remarks by Frank Luntz’s focus group on the effects of the stubborn, tone-deaf insistence of the White House on ramming health care legislation through.

    Last night, Luntz described the disaster awaiting both incumbent Democrats and the American people. What he said was so well-expressed that I had to type it up:

    The question is whether [Obama] is listening to the American people. …

    The percentage of Americans who think the country is heading in the right direction is collapsing. … Consumer confidence is falling. On question after question, the American people are becoming as pessimistic and cynical as they were in the last few months of the Bush administration.

    Obama had this brief honeymoon and now that he keeps pushing this health care plan. I don’t know who he is listening to but the American people clearly don’t want it.

    There are states [Colorado, Indiana, etc.] where the opposition to the plan is 20% or higher.

    The latest meme among the pundits is that the American people have a short attention span and, after the bill passes, will forget the drawn-out, confusing, messy fight for Obamacare.

    I disagree. Americans are so angry and bitter that they won’t soon forget that both their representatives and their president ignored their loudly stated opposition to this plan.

    Larry’s post, “Democrats Go For Suicide,” is worth reading again. Here’s one particularly important section that describes both the frustration of Americans and recommendations to start over with a new bill that offers changes that will truly improve health care delivery:

    A majority of Americans want Congress and the President to start over on health care. The process needs to be transparent. Americans with Health Care coverage don’t want the Government tinkering with what already works. The Congress would be on more solid ground if they would focus on some specifics like the following:

    Step one–Allow cheaper drugs from Canada to be sold in the United States. Eliminate the monopoly behavior of the drug companies, who charge higher prices for medicine in the United States.

    Step two–Remove the anti-trust protection from Insurance companies and force them to compete across the board. This will reduce costs and prevent insurance companies from their own form of monopoly behavior.

    Step three–The Government should set up a fund, much like the FDIC, which will backstop insurance companies who provide coverage to people previously denied coverage for pre-existing conditions.

    Step four–Tort reform and government backed malpractice insurance. Too many doctors, especially Obstetricians (ie, baby doctors), are bailing out of practice and leaving folks without coverage. This is an appropriate area for government intervention.

    But the Democrat leadership is not inclined to do so. They are convinced they are right and are going to muscle this through. But they do so at their peril. To pretend that the majority of Americans are not satisfied with their health care and want to scrap the current system is insane. The majority of Americans do not back what the Democrats have put forward in the House and the Senate. If Democrats insist on pursuing this madness they will be reminded come November who is in charge.

  73. This is a frightening analysis of the HOCUS POTUS strange utterances of late.Sounds familiar.The other one tried to shoot his way into the Pentagon.This one tries to talk his way out of the Whitehouse.

    Get ready Hillary. Your country needs you now more than ever.

    _________________________________________________________OTUS’s arguments can be summed up in deceptive, often contradictory and somewhat laughable bullet points:

    •It’s the right thing to do.
    •You’ve already voted once for a health care overhaul — and reconciliation has been used before.
    •My bill won’t add to the deficit.
    •We’ve tried to get Republican cooperation.
    •Don’t listen to the media.
    •And, lastly, we need to prove that government can work.
    Tony Gallardo observed today at American Thinker, perhaps it’s time to revisit a question posed in a June 10, 2009, Esquire on-line article by Charles P. Pierce in which he asked: “What if Obama’s out of his mind?”

    As Gallardo points out, Pierce said:

    Listen to him. He’s talking in what seems to be a glossolalic deluge of issues. One plan a week, each thrown out there while we’re still digesting the previous one. He’s moving too fast for us to keep up with him. He’s talking a private language, to himself, like crazy people do…..
    Gallardo writes:

    Maybe it is time to ask again.

    After pursuing a reckless healthcare reform plan for 14 months now; after having it roundly rejected by the American people; in the aftermath of significant election losses in New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts; after having been shown that it is at minimum a budget busting $1 to $2 trillion monstrosity, he is continuing to insist on getting it passed, one way or another.

    On Wednesday, March 3, 2010 he again made it clear that he will do whatever it takes to enact something (anything) into law.

    His rationale, if you can call it that, is a variation on the same thing he has been saying for 14 months.

    […]

    Listen to Pierce again; “He’s talking a private language, to himself, like crazy people do…..”

    There seem to be only two possibilities; either Obama is in fact “crazy”, meaning he is certifiably detached from even a scintilla of reality, or he is cunningly trying to drive the rest of us crazy by standing before us, chin jutted into the air, and seriously proclaiming for the umpteenth time what we all know to be pure claptrap

  74. I want to thank everyone for their kindness and patience with me on this wonderful blog.

    I believe that it is time for me to walk away from here. I have learned so much from all of you and am very appreciative of the opportunity to blog with all of you.

    I wish you well in your continued championship of the Clintons.

    Thanks again.

  75. Obama isn’t crazy and he is easy to understand. His nomination was handed to him by DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee chair James Roosevelt who disenfranchised voters of two states to guarantee Obama the nomination. Mr. Roosevelt is the CEO of Tufts Health Care – a health care insurance firm – and President Obama is repaying him by creating the very health care reform that Mr. Roosevelt lobbied for.

    Obama is simply organizing the route from the bank accounts of health insurance firms to the pocket books of Americans – that’s all he is doing. Just like Bush did with the oil companies and the defense contractors. Just like Bush and Obama did together for the banks.

    As admin continuously observes, this is Bush’s third term. Obama is merely finishing the job that Bush started. This is all about huge corporations being a given a percentage of every pocketbook in America.

    Bush couldn’t do in Social Security, so you know that’s next on the list.

  76. Call me when you think the republicans are going to put in/or get passed step 1 thru 4…..ain’t gona happen….those are Hillary Clinton steps for healthcare….not the republican’s healthcare……of coarse its not above the republicans to steal her ideas…..afterall Obama did!…..whats one more below the belt hit that will be leveled at Hillary…I am sure she will survive…

  77. They say Obama has no conviction, no values, nothing he believes in.

    They are wrong.

    Obama is a man of conviction.

    And this is what he believes:

    “The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.” (from the book 1984 by George Orwell).

  78. I am sorry to hear that Jan. We will miss you. Your contributions have been very valuable and appreciated.

  79. Obama grows weary of the global stage: Rather than risk a one-term presidency with more failures than victories, he has put foreign goals aside to focus on the domestic
    ——————————————
    I read it a little differently. I think the bloom is off the rose. And, I think he has been rejected by the world.

    We saw it at Copenhagen, we saw it with China, we saw it with his failure to win over Iran, we saw it with his failure to make Hugo his amigo and we saw it with the trenchant remark by the French President to him that we live in a real world–not a virtual one.

    If he is worthy of anything it is weary of failure. His forte is speeches, and words are no substitute for action. Action requires decisions and decisions involve risk. He is risk adverse.

  80. JaH : Sorry to see you leave.I have enjoyed your posts and grateful for your kind comments about mine.Good luck and I do hope you will return (like The great Gen MacArthur)TRuly hope it is not illness that is involved.

    THanks ABM90

  81. wbboei
    March 6th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
    Admin: the problem is our side is taking all the hits. How do we cut the legs out from under this corruption? How do we shake this country out of its complacency? When we raise the issue of our traditions, our country and what we are losing, ignorant people jump to their feet and scream republican propaganda etc. They are too dumb to see that this issue transcends party. Furthermore, their prejudice prevents them from realizing that there are good people in both parties. These people play right into the hands of the opposition who wants to divide and conquer. It is tragic.

    At this point, the bad guys have all the levers of power. Crawford is forced to leave MSNBC. Dobbs is forced to leave CNN. Why did Roberts threaten to resign. How can we prevent this despot from wrecking the country. So far this civil war is a cold war, and let us hope that it stays that way. I do not think it is beyond the realm of possibility that Obama, or someone acting at his direction, would provoke civil disorder and then impose martial law. We have seen the campaigns this White House has directed against the tea parties. It may be a shadow of things to come.

    What can we do to save this country from a disaster other than what we are doing now. I ask myself that question several times as day. I do not mean flailing. I mean something that will make everyone–right left and center see the problem here and where it will lead if we are not vigilant. Big media reamins our biggest enemy of the republic because they are in the business of covering this up until it is too late. Goebbels redux.

    I could’nt have said it much better, and agree with you a 100%. I will never belong to one Party again, I choose to be a free thinker. May 31st 2008 has set me free.

    Run Hillay Run 2012

  82. JanH, did I miss something? You are always adding thoughtful comments and I appreciate yiur support on the Mideast /Israel. Why are you leaving?
    As I stated a while ago, we all certainly don’t agree on everything, but our love for the Clinton’s unites us.
    I don’t like this recent trend of people coming and going….I can’t ppst to often , or that thoughtful as many, cause I work about 65 hrs a week at my law practice, and have a wife and kids 3, 13, and 16 to spend time with. Thus, I rely on reading all of the thoughtful and insightful posts by those like you, the Admin., Wbboei, and so many others to fill may void. It’s been a depressing couple of yrs with Obamanation, and it probably will get worse. Let’s stay together and try to make real “change” in our commitment to Hillary and quite frankly, our country, which Obama is fundamentally transforming for the worse . Kudos to all of you who fought the good fight and keep posting everyday and being counted!!! It’s the only voice we have!!!

  83. JanH

    WHAT IS GOING ON WITH ALL “I’M LEAVING” AROUND HERE LATELY?…TAKE A BREAK, BUT COME BACK…

  84. wbboei,

    No, I don’t think that’s it. What Obama is seeking is to sit on every board possible when he leaves office and collect gazillions of dollars for doing nothing. That’s it – he doesnt’ really give a shit about having power or about his friends having power after her leaves office because he’s going to be rich, rich, rich. He wants his supporters to talk about him the way Reagan’s supporters talk about Reagan. Reagan is his role model, and he’s very much kin to Reagan. Lazy, mean-spirited, stupid, self-absorbed and narcissistic. Obama is interested in sucking up to rich people, being one of them and having them say nice things to him about his presidency. Fuck the working class.

    Power for power’s sake? No. That would involve him continuing to work after he leaves office because power does not maintain itself – just go read your Machiavelli for an update on that. And Obama does not want to work. Give him a choice between helping Bill Clinton on a project or posing for the front of GQ, and he’ll take the GQ cover.

    Obama is a narcissist. He wants to be rich and be feted by the rich. Beginning, middle and end of the story. Hopefully, he’ll be too lazy to run for a second term or Clinton already has him cornered. This really isn’t his thing.

  85. JanH – I’d like to thank you for your comments, your insight and your kindness and generosity. I hope your stepping away from this site is a very short lived one. I think you said once that you are Canadian – and I have noticed on this blog and on others that having commenters from different countries, cultures, backgrounds, etc, adds to the quality and diversity of a blog. I always look forward to your comments.

    I also very much enjoy your remarks Confloyd and hope that if you do follow JanH, you also follow her in coming back very quickly.

    Although I do not often comment on this blog, I have learnt a lot from sites such as this. I hope you keep informing us for a long, long time. Thank you.

  86. Jan and Confloyd….

    You are the two posters I most often agree with .Why are you leaving Jan?

    I must say I have often felt recently that I no longer beonong here. If you both leave, I clearly don’t belong here either.

  87. All, I think you all belong here, if you want to support HRC. Yes, we disagree, we argue some, and in many other areas we might be very different.

    However, we agree that HRC should have been elected President of the Country, she was fraudulently denied this, and we will support her in what ever way she goes.

    We also will not let the fraud get away with anything. Let’s face it, there are a lot of people reading this blog, some at a very high national level. We want to make sure that nothing the fraud does or does not do goes unnoticed.

    The group here is outstanding of making that happen. This blog makes my day.

  88. I am sorry, I know this will make me unpopular for saying it. What is with all these grand exits? If someone wants to take a break from it all let them do it so without creating a big buzz about it. If they want to leave for a legit reason, let them explain so that people won’t jump to conclusion. Why are we assuming Jan is leaving in a huff? Who the hell makes anyone welcome or unwelcome? Why do you give up your right to say what you want to say so easily? Be your own person and ignore the silly uncivil shenanigans and say what you want.

    On another note, this behavior is excellent topic for researchers in social networking.

  89. If people don’t want to participate here at Big Pink, why not just stop showing up? Maybe you no longer think Obama is a problem, or maybe you have become turned off from politics altogether.

    If you feel the need to announce that you’re leaving, perhaps it is ) because some other contributor has rankled your feathers, or b) you don’t like the direction the site has taken.

    If it’s (b), make your opinion known. “Hey, I think you’re too hard on Obama’s position X”, or “This crowd is not radical enough for my tastes”.

    If it’s (a), you can either address a problem poster head on, and they sometimes have to be chased off the site with figurative torches (which we’ve done in the past).

    Another approach is to just let things slide. I don’t agree with every posting here, or sometimes I might find a particular topic tedious, played out, or too much detail. But I can always scroll past it. And we haven’t yet run out of room to post the next thing.

    I think that when people’s motivation is primarily personal, seeking acceptance or kudos from others here, it can foster a clique mentality with bruised feelings and grudges.

    When the motivation is more selfless, when the ego is lessened, we can contribute more meaningfully. I think we’d all like this country and the world to thrive; we hope that our government can achieve that, and strive to improve the health of our political landscape, ridding it of corruption and intimidation. We might feel that Democrats or independents are the means for achieving this, and want to see those entities live up to their potential, and rid them too of corruption and intimidation.

    So if you need to take a break, we’ll see you when you get back. Some folks have had health problems, and there’s lots of support that I’ve seen offered here, emotional and sometimes technical. Sometimes I don’t post for days at a time because I’m too busy with work or personal stuff.

    If you don’t like this site, maybe you can come up with constructive criticism. If you feel it’s beyond repair, there are many other nice web sites.

    As I’ve said before, it is impossible to run a larger political blog site (or party) that does not have differing opinions. If you want to create a party or blog site with 100% agreement, “For people named Ed who are over 6 foot tall and live in Minnesota….”, you can have your small cadre, but you can’t expect it to be a large, culturally impacting force which is something that happens when there are bigger numbers. There’s not much as gravitational force exerted by a baseball as there is by a planet. Larger parties suffer from their own sets of problems, in being efficient and on the same page.

    So let’s try and be positive and remain focused. Obama and his faction in the Democratic party need to be displaced from power, by exposing their disgraceful actions as governmental employees and party leaders. Obama and his rule in Washington needs to be politically ended before he can do more harm to the country.

    How we do that is open to debate, which is what I thought was the point here.

  90. I agree PM317. I happen to know a social scientist that does just that. He wrote Bowling Alone, and was an advisor to President Clinton. I have recommended this blog to him as a place to watch this dynamics. Our social networking has really changed.

  91. I would conntinue to read Admin’s posts because they have been so relevant and illuminating.
    However, I don’t have the time or interest to continually answer posts with such cliche statements such as “a government takeover of healthcare” straight from the conservative party line. I don’t see Americans lining up to give up medicare or social security. I would rather discuss how we support Hillary’s concept of universal healthcare and how to advance that agenda.

    I still agree with Al Gore that world wide pollution is a threat to our planet and our health, whether or not I agree with cap and trade. The vast majority of scientists agree that pollution is a factor in global warming. We should all support ways to protect our environment and support clean energy.

  92. I apologize for not explaining more clearly why I am leaving the site. I never intended for it to become a debate.

    A simple explanation for those who might care is that health and family issues are beckoning me and I need to step back for a while.

    I thought the polite thing to do was to say goodbye. If that isn’t the right thing to do then again I apologize.

    I do not have a “grudge” against anyone here and am still 150% behind the Clintons.

    I hope that clears things up.

  93. Thanks, JanH. I look forward to your return, and if you need a shoulder to lean on with your health and family, we are here for you. Please Keep reading.

  94. JanH, I understand. Best wishes.

    I guess we’ve seen the “I’m outta here” posts before, so it was in that context that our comments were about people “resigning” from Big Pink.

  95. Carol
    March 7th, 2010 at 10:35 am

    I would continue to read Admin’s posts because they have been so relevant and illuminating.
    &&&&

    Actually, a good chunk of the time, admin’s lead story is based on what participating bloggers have brought up for discussion.

    But if you don’t have time for that, you can focus on whatever parts of this blog you find useful. Like maybe the Top 10 David Letterman list. :^)

    Like I said, I wish I had more time to read more posts, but sometimes have to power through due to time constraints.

  96. Sebelius is being hammered on Meet the Press. She would not agree to a definite time frame, and would not agree that if it is not passed by Easter, it was dead. She also was asked about the meeting with Dems, and the fact that President O said it was important to his Presidency (note he did not say it was important to the American People). She usually answered by telling health care nighmirror stories, and he kept trying to pin her down. Playing hard ball, and I don’t think she did well.

    Some people getting a 40% increase in insurance policy does not justify passing a law where the Insurance people are in control. I don’t understand why they don’t see this.

    In addition calling this a new bill with all Ideas, after he yawned, and did not agree with the reps at his open meeting does not indicate he resolved anything. Do they really think we are this stupid.

  97. Let me say this in response to those who are talking about leaving the blog. In reading this blog since its inception, I perceive it core objectives to be as follows:

    1) to prepare the way for Hillary to pursue the presidency in 2012, and to encourage her to do so, for the good of the nation, the party and the American People.

    2) to marshal the evidence which will convince others, particularly former Obama supporters, to see that he is not the Messiah, that his promises are a devil’s lie and to renounce their support of him despite his flowery rhetoric.

    3) to prevent Obama from achieving his legislative objectives which are contrary to the interests of the American People and to prevent him from running again in 2012 for the good of the nation, the party and the American People.

    4) to win the internal battle which is being waged within the party between the Roosevelt coalition forces which include the white middle class and the Obama coalition forces typified by people like Clyburn with his veiled racism and self dealing.

    5) to hold big media and the hard left of the party fully accountable for the sexism and homophobia which they deployed to corrupt the 2008 campaign and divide the country.

    If you think those goals are worthy of your time and energy then you will resist the impulse to abandon this blog. Where else can you find a source like Admin who is more informed on the issues, more strategic in her thinking and more focused on the issues that matter to Hillary, the party and the American People? From the very beginning up to and including now, Admin has pointed the path to victory here and the challenge is to get everyone in the country to listen.

    The success of this mission requires the coordinated efforts of all concerned. For that reason, I hope those who feel they are not in sync with what is being said in comments, and perhaps some things that I have said in response to the frustrations, and the sense of disenfranchisement we all feel reconsider their decision for the good of the whole. If personal apologies make any difference, then I am willing to offer my own.

    Frankly, this was the very scenario I was concerned about when I took a leave of absence. I could feel my own frustrations getting the better of me. I was and still am deeply concerned that we were falling into traps set by the other side and losing sight of the ultimate goals enumerated above. What I would ask of those who are at the same place I was at a couple weeks ago, prove to everyone on the blog that they are better than I was at that moment of frustration and stick with the program here. Admin has too much to teach us and too much work needs to be done to abandon ship.

    In essence, this is what ABM90 told me when I just wanted to get away because of some of the things said. We all say things we don’t mean in moments of frustation–or we bottle them up and they come out in some more pernicious form. It is part of the game. And, I figured if I could not take sound advice from someone who has seen as much of life as ABM 90 has and put his life on the line for all of us in the dark days of World War II, then the fault lies with me.

  98. JanH and Confloyd, I have missed something too. I think you both are being obtuse. Do you disagree with Admin or the other bloggers. Do you feel we are wasting our time. Who was it who just recently returned, was it you JanH? I can’t remember.

  99. THE HEALT OF HEALT CARE REFORM…D.O.A.?

    This is a good close up examination of the “devil is in the details” reasons why the bill Obama wants to ram through via reconciliation sucks so bad.

    philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20100307_Back_Channels__Democrats_silent_on_health-bill_concerns.html

    Back Channels: Democrats silent on health-bill concerns
    ======================

    A GOP lawmaker laid out a compelling case for why the president’s initiative costs too much.

    By Kevin Ferris

    Inquirer Columnist
    President Obama sent a letter to congressional leaders Tuesday, touting additions to his health-care reform bill that were inspired by GOP ideas from the recent summit.

    There’s a pinch of fighting waste, fraud, and abuse. A dash on medical malpractice – not even close to tort reform. A nod to health savings accounts. Even a call to increase Medicaid reimbursements to doctors – because if there’s one thing this bill needed it was more spending.

    It’s great to see the two parties trying to get along, sharing ideas, engaging, and listening. But one thing was missing in the summit and in the 10 days since: answers to the sharp criticisms raised about the Obama/Reid/Pelosi health-care bills.

    Yet Obama and congressional Democrats charge ahead: We must have reform. Now. And it must be this Obama/Senate bill.

    The public has been skeptical all along, doubting Congress’ veracity and its accounting skills. Last week, a CNN poll showed only 25 percent in favor of the current Democratic plans, while 48 percent say start over.

    Yet opposition and legitimate criticisms have been largely dismissed, and this was true at the summit, too, when raised by U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) and others. So let me join Investor’s Business Daily’s Feb. 26 issue and others who have repeated Ryan’s concerns, so these serious flaws can be addressed before “reform” is jammed down our throats:

    “If you take a look at the CBO analysis, analysis from your chief actuary, this bill does not control costs; this bill does not reduce deficits. Instead this bill adds a new health-care entitlement, at a time when we have no idea how to pay for the entitlements we already have.”

    This bill “is full of gimmicks and smoke and mirrors.”

    “The bill has 10 years of tax increases of about one-half trillion dollars, with 10 years of Medicare cuts of one-half trillion dollars to pay for six years of spending. What’s the true 10-year cost of this bill? In 10 years, it is $2.3 trillion.

    “When you strip out the double-counting and what I call the gimmicks, the full 10-year cost is a $460 billion deficit. The second 10-year cost of this bill has a $1.4 trillion deficit.”

    “It takes $52 billion in higher Social Security tax revenues and counts them as offsets, but that is really reserved for Social Security. So either we are double-counting them or we are not planning to pay those Social Security benefits.”

    “It takes $72 billion and claims money from the Class Act, that’s the long-term-care insurance program. It takes the money from premiums that are designed for that benefit and instead counts them as offsets. The Senate Budget Committee chairman said this is a Ponzi scheme that would make Bernie Madoff proud.”

    “It treats Medicare like a piggy bank. It raids a one-half trillion dollars out of Medicare . . . not to shore up Medicare solvency, but to spend on this new government program.”

    “The chief actuary of Medicare . . . is saying as much as 20 percent of Medicare providers will go out of business or stop seeing Medicare beneficiaries. Millions of seniors who have chosen Medicare Advantage will lose the coverage they now enjoy. You can’t say that you are using this money to extend Medicare solvency and also offset the cost of this new program. That’s double-counting.”

    “We don’t think we should cut [Medicare reimbursements to] doctors 21 percent next year. . . . It was in the first iteration of all these bills, but because it was a big price tag, and made the score look bad, it has been taken out of this bill and is going along in stand-alone legislation. But ignoring these costs does not remove them from the backs of taxpayers. Hiding spending does not reduce spending. . . . ”

    “Are we bending the cost curve down or bending the cost curve up? If you look at your own chief actuary at Medicare, we’re bending it up. He’s claiming we are going up $222 billion, adding more to the unsustainable fiscal situation we have.”

    “We are all representatives of the American people. We all do town hall meetings. We all talk to our constituents. And I’ve got to tell you the American people are engaged. If you think they want a government takeover of health care, I would respectfully submit, you are not listening to them.”

    “What we simply want to do is start over, work on a clean sheet of paper, move through these issues step by step, and fix them, and bring down health-care costs and not raise them.”

    Ryan speaks as the author of a health-care plan that would cut costs, extend coverage, and not add to the deficit. Obama has continually made the same three promises, but while all Democratic plans extend coverage, they increase costs and the deficit.

    Their response to Ryan thus far: We must have reform. Now. And it must be the Obama/Senate bill.

    They’re half-right. We must have reform. But it most definitely should not be this bill.

  100. WEATHERIZE THIS

    Being green is good; falsely using green initiatives for your own political purposes may not necessarily be good.

    And good intentions are meaningless when not being able to follow through due to ineffeciencies and ineptitude.

    Some keeper quotes found below include:

    “According to a Department of Energy inspector general report last month, “only 2 of the 10 highest funded recipients completed more than 2 percent of planned units.” New York had completed 280 out of 45,400 planned units as of December, Texas had completed 0 of 33,908, and California 12 out of 43,400. That’s 292 homes in three states with a total population of roughly 80 million.”

    “So much for the 87,000 jobs the administration promised “right away.” The inspector general report is unsparing: ‘The job creation impact of what was considered to be one of the Department’s most ‘shovel ready’ projects has not materialized,’ and neither have ‘the significant reductions in energy consumption.'”

    “More homes will get weatherized over time, but even Obama admits the folly of the concept of “shovel ready” projects, a damning indictment of his own credulousness in overselling the stimulus.”

    realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/03/07/the_home_weatherization_lie_104663.html

    March 7, 2010
    Obama’s Stimulus & the Home Weatherization Lie
    By Rich Lowry

    A year ago, President Barack Obama peered into our economic future and saw foam sealant and weatherstripping.

    In the midst of a punishing recession, Obama would wield that incomparable jobs-creating tool, the caulk gun. What the Works Progress Administration was to Franklin Roosevelt, the government-funded weatherization of homes would be to Obama.

    “If you allocate money to weatherize homes,” Obama effused to an audience in Elkhart, Ind., “the homeowner gets the benefit of lower energy bills. You right away put people back to work, many of whom in the construction industry and in the housing industry are out of work right now.” And it’s a step to “a new energy future.”

    Obama was hawking another one of his cost-free, best-of-all-worlds scenarios, one that has been exposed in all its self-deluding inanity in the space of a year. As a writer parodying such magical thinking long ago observed, “Sun-beams may be extracted from cucumbers, but the process is tedious.” A sun-beam extraction program might have been just as effective, and nearly as timely.

    Obama poured $5 billion into weatherization as part of last year’s stimulus and wanted to spend billions more in a second stimulus. The Department of Energy managed to get the money to the states, where it has swelled the coffers for weatherization and done little else.

    According to a Department of Energy inspector general report last month, “only 2 of the 10 highest funded recipients completed more than 2 percent of planned units.” New York had completed 280 out of 45,400 planned units as of December, Texas had completed 0 of 33,908, and California 12 out of 43,400. That’s 292 homes in three states with a total population of roughly 80 million.

    So much for the 87,000 jobs the administration promised “right away.” The inspector general report is unsparing: “The job creation impact of what was considered to be one of the Department’s most ‘shovel ready’ projects has not materialized,” and neither have “the significant reductions in energy consumption.” Besides that, weatherization has been a stimulative triumph.

    Visions of grand Hoover Dam-style projects issuing from Obama’s stimulus – employing masses of laborers and benefiting the economy for decades – have foundered on the realities of 21st-century government, which is run by halting bureaucracies hamstrung by regulations and at the service of favored interest groups.

    Prior to the stimulus, weatherization funds were not subject to the Davis-Bacon Act, a union-friendly law that mandates government pay contractors the “prevailing wage.” Slavishly committed to the unions, Democrats made Davis-Bacon apply to the new weatherization funds, and the Department of Energy spent the past year trying to determine the prevailing wage in thousands of counties. At least the program kept someone busy.

    According to a Government Accountability Office report, meanwhile, 90 percent of the homes slated for weatherization in Michigan were subject to historic preservation review; as of last fall, only two people worked in the state’s historic preservation office. And cash-strapped states have simply struggled to process the billions stuffed down their gullets by a federal government that is as profligate as it is impatient.

    More homes will get weatherized over time, but even Obama admits the folly of the concept of “shovel ready” projects, a damning indictment of his own credulousness in overselling the stimulus. But he remains an enthusiast for the creation of “green jobs,” a politically driven industrial policy sure to pile boondoggle atop boondoggle.

    Remember ethanol, the former miracle fuel that isn’t even environmentally friendly? Its subsidy rolls on. The stimulus devoted $2 billion to wind power, creating an estimated couple of hundred jobs while permanent wind manufacturing employment still declined last year. The Department of Energy will hand out $2.3 billion in tax credits for the creation of 17,000 “clean” jobs – at a cost of $135,000 per job, if they materialize.

    This is the racket that Obama touts as a miraculous economic and environmental boon. Would you buy a health-care plan from this man?
    Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review.

  101. Virginia first state to challenge federal health insurance mandate
    By: Barbara Hollingsworth
    03/05/10 1:20 PM EST
    Congress hasn’t even passed Obamacare yet, but if and when it does, Virginia’s General Assembly has already fired the first round in what could be a major legal showdown with Washington over the limits of federal power.

    On Thursday, the oldest legislative body in the Western Hemisphere became the first state to enact legislation that prohibits the federal government from forcing its citizens to purchase government-approved health insurance. The measure was sponsored by two Northern Virginians – State Senator Jill Vogel, R-Warrenton, and Del. Bob Marshall, R-Manassas – who also co-signed a Feb. 24 letter to President Obama protesting state legislators’ exclusion from his recent health care summit.

    In an ominous sign for the president’s top domestic priority, five Democrats in the Virginia Senate joined 18 Republicans to vote for the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act in a state Obama won handily less than 18 months ago. They were, perhaps, influenced by the 2,400 grassroots activists who trekked to Richmond last month to oppose federally mandated insurance coverage.

    A constitutional amendment passed earlier in Arizona, but has yet to be approved by voters. It will be on the ballot in November.

    Legislators in more than 30 other states are also considering similar bills based on the American Legislative Exchange Council’s Freedom of Choice in Health Care model.

    The Tenth Amendment Center has a map of pending health care “nullification” bills that challenge the federal government’s jurisdiction based on its reading of the Constitution.

    So even if Obamacare passes, this brewing constitutional battle could delay enactment for quite some time.

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Virginia-first-state-to-nullify-federal-health-insurance-mandate-86632032.html#ixzz0hVodVDcA

  102. rgb, wise words, my friend. I will give you kudos whether you want it or not for this:

    I think that when people’s motivation is primarily personal, seeking acceptance or kudos from others here, it can foster a clique mentality with bruised feelings and grudges.

    But that is a behavior that is manifest in every human endeavor — a sense of belonging, acceptance, recognition, reward, superiority, dominance. I am amazed however at the degree to which it is sought in this environment that is primarily driven by anonymity.

  103. STIMULUS WATCH: Less stimulus for minority firms

    By JESSE WASHINGTON, AP National Writer Jesse Washington, Ap National Writer
    Sun Mar 7, 9:26 am ET

    WASHINGTON – Hispanic and black businesses are receiving a disproportionately small number of federal stimulus contracts, creating a rising chorus of demands for the Obama administration to be more inclusive and more closely track who receives government-financed work.

    Latinos and blacks have faced obstacles to winning government contracts long before the stimulus. They own 6.8 and 5.2 percent of all businesses, respectively, according to census figures. Yet Latino-owned business have received only 1.7 percent of $46 billion in federal stimulus contracts recorded in U.S. government data, and black-owned businesses have received just 1.1 percent.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100307/ap_on_bi_ge/us_stimulus_minorities/print

    Oh, my. Sounds like somebody’s been giving them the Okie Doke. Ya’ll know ’bout the Okie Doke, right?

  104. I went to dinner last night at a local restaurant with my friend. It wasn’t long before our discussion turned to Obama. She is worried sick about what Obama is doing to destroy our country. She is the one who sent me the tape I posted here yesterday, as evidence people are waking up. She is also the one who sent me the quote from Obama at MSNBC posted above–which shocked her. She has no spare time so the most she can do is forward these clips to everyone she knows.

    I opened the discussion by asking her so many young people are still riding the hopium train–and more importantly, how do we get through to them.

    She told me that you are a very old 59 and live in a very different world than they do. You remember Truman, Korea, the civil rights movement, Kennedy, and the moon landing. Those were big events in your early life whereas they are artifacts of history to young people today. Their world is defined by more current events which you do not relate to the same way they do. They were born with the computer and they consider people like us to be from another century. They communicate with each other through social networks like Twitter and Facebook. Nothing deep but lots of chatter like high school kids. She also said young people today are not challenged the same way we were and do not grow up as fast. 50 is now the old 40. She mentioned a sense of entitlement which they grew up with and warned me that is where the new bell curve is heading.

    I told her that I thought young people today are challenged in different ways than we were. I mentioned that one of the reasons I supported Hillary was because she alone understood the challenges faced by young people and was prepared to offer specific solutions as opposed to the vague rhetoric of Obama. Hillary understood that if we are to compete in the world economy then we must invest in young people, like China is doing, rather than ignore them as both parties have done in the past on the erroneous assumption that they do not vote. But Hillary also knew that young people need jobs, and help on the obscene cost of an education.

    Unfortunately, I found very few young people who understood how committed Hillary was to them. I did find one young doctor who voted for Hillary because she listened to both candidates closely, and found Hillary offered specific solutions, whereas Obama was vague and airy–just as he is now as he presumes to govern. But for every young person like that doctor, there were ten young people who never got to the analytical stage. All they heard was the music.

    It was getting late and the restaurant owner was preparing to close. The waitress who had been patient with us all evening delivered the bill. My friend asked her what she thought about Obama. She was early 30s and unmarried. Her father was a Mexican immigrant, her mother a United States citizen who graduated from Catholic high school. She said well that is a loaded question. My friend pressed the issue and she said that she had voted for Obama. She asked her why. She said well I am poor and Obama promised to do something for the lower class and middle class. I used to work three jobs and now I have this one. When I had three jobs I used to wonder if I was being selfish and taking one someone else could have. Today, I see unemployed people and realize it could be any of us. This restaurant is a good place to work. They are good people. But they cannot afford to provide health care coverage. Obama is trying to do that for us. That is why I support him.

    I told her that she had just given me the perfect reason to support Hillary as opposed to Obama. She said I did support Hillary in the primary. But she supported Obama in the general election. She said I respected McCain, but what I saw in Obama was someone who understood the big picture. In other words, his professed world view. Also she did not like Governor Palin because of her right to life positions, even though the waitress was Catholic. I told her that thinking people who voted for Obama are re-evaluating their support and realizing that he is not committed to the promises he made in the campaign. I told her I could think of no better example than his position on health care, which was a breach of transparency and a sell out to big business. Under his plan, the public option Hillary championed was stillborn.

    My friend asked her how her generation felt. She said something interesting. She said many of those she knows waited until their 30s to have a family and are completely absorbed in their own lives of making a living and raising their children. They are willing to make a contribution to Haiti, because the issue has been defined for them, and they can feel good about themselves with the relative ease of pushing a computer button. But when it comes to making a contribution to the people in this country who are suffering, although not to that same degree, they are strangely silent. That bothered her. She said that future financial security and health care were big issues for her generation.

    She told me that her peers are troubled by the fact that Obama is not the same man as he was in the campaign. He does not seem to be as in touch with them and their lives. And even though he never misses an opportunity to get a headline, they see hims as a more distant figure. In other words, that intimate bond he had with them is fraying. But she then pointed out that he has only been office for a year and they want to give him more time. I asked her how long they would give him to prove that he could or could not deliver. She said she thought they would know in another year.

    I asked her if Hillary ran again would she and her friends support her. She said “definitely”. I asked her what could we do to reach thinking people in her generation who were as smart as she was, and as concerned about the future. She said you must communicate to them through Twitter. That is where they go. They are always texting each other. She suggested that we just give them a single fact, without any embellishment. For example- under the Obamacare you will be forced to buy insurance whether you can afford it or not–assuming that is true. If you say more they will think you have an agenda, so the less you say the beyond the specific point the better.

    Money is very tight these days. I no longer give a 20% tip for meals. But in this case, I made an exception. A fine meal and that much wisdom from a young person who has a heart and the ability to think was well worth it.

  105. Great post Wbboei!!! You remind me of my partner, a appellate atty, whom I hand all of my appeals over to. We want Hillary in 2012 as well, but realistically, it’s a long shot. We keep the hope alive for ourselves and more importantly our country/world, as we see how much damage has already been done.

  106. I don’t think the Congressional Dems are supporting the health care bill and that’s why it hasn’t passed. I don’t think they want to vote for a bill with mandates but no Medicare-like option to buy public insurance. I mean, the bill Obama has put together is a nightmare for the Democratic party. I’m starting to think that’s what’s going on is that he doesn’t have the Democratic votes that he says he has. I think this is Obama’s bill and their are a lot of congressional reps that can’t quite stand up to him publicly, what after all the primary threats and what not, but who are saying privately that they cannot and will not vote for the current structure.

    Maybe that is what Stupak is all about – sabotaging the bill sufficiently that liberals cannot vote for it.

  107. A Devastating Critique of Obama Care–From the Far Left
    No Quarter
    Bronwyn’s Harbor on March 7, 2010 at 1:20 PM in Current Affairs

    Obamacare is anti-choice, anti-consumer and anti-patient. Obamacare forces Americans to buy insurance, yet still allows premiums and deductibles be controlled by insurance companies that can freely raise rates. Then, if Americans refuse to buy (or can’t afford) the insurance, the IRS will come after them to collect penalties on their income.

    Insurance companies are the real winners in Obamacare. Their objections to the plan have been coy and tepid because insurance company executives know that Obamacare’s forced mandates will not only fill their coffers — the companies anticipate at least $500 billion revenue in the next 10 years, including subsidies from Medicare (!) — but also give them control over pricing. Oh sure. Obama met with insurance executives this past week to plead with them to control rate increases, but all he can do is beg since he’s already in bed with them.

    Progressives who truly care about real health care reform are as appalled by this plan as the rest of us.

    On Friday night, Bill Moyer interviewed single-payer advocate Dr. Marcia Angell, the first woman editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine and a senior lecturer at Harvard University Medical School. Dr. Angell hammers Obama’s plan for caving into — and enriching — the insurance and pharmaceutical companies:

    BILL MOYERS: So, has President Obama been fighting as hard as you wished?

    MARCIA ANGELL: Fighting for the wrong things and too little, too late. He gave away the store at the very beginning by compromising. Not just compromising, but caving in to the commercial insurance industry and the pharmaceutical industry. And then he stood back for months while the thing just fell apart. Now he’s fighting, but he’s fighting for something that shouldn’t pass. Won’t pass and shouldn’t pass.

    What this bill does is not only permit the commercial insurance industry to remain in place, but it actually expands and cements their position as the lynchpin of health care reform. And these companies they profit by denying health care, not providing health care. And they will be able to charge whatever they like. So if they’re regulated in some way and it cuts into their profits, all they have to do is just raise their premiums. And they’ll do that.

    Not only does it keep them in place, but it pours about 500 billion dollars of public money into these companies over 10 years. And it mandates that people buy these companies’ products for whatever they charge. Now that’s a recipe for the growth in health care costs, not only to continue, but to skyrocket, to grow even faster.

    We all know that the current situation is bad, and that’s an argument Obama et al. use to urge the passage of Obamacare. The problem is that Obamacare will make things worse, according to Dr. Angell:

    [I]f you look at it as a matter of policy, the President’s absolutely right that the status quo is awful. If we do nothing, costs will continue to go up. People will continue to lose their coverage. Employers are dropping health benefits. Things will get very bad. The issue is will this bill make them better or worse? And I believe it will make it worse.

    […]

    MARCIA ANGELL: The government part of that. So if they can save money in Medicare, then they come out ahead, no matter what happens out in the private sector. And so that’s what he’s talking about. It will take money out of Medicare and put it into the private sector. Medicare is the source for a lot of the funds that are going to go to subsidize the private health insurance industry. So that’s the first thing. The second thing is the CBO has to build in assumptions. And those assumptions are arguable, to put it mildly.

    And as far as cost-cutting, there are sort of promissory notes. ‘We’ll get a committee to look at the cost of effectiveness, of various medical procedures.’

    BILL MOYERS: Well, you remind me 45 thousand people, as Wendell Potter said earlier, die every year for lack of health insurance. That should be– they’re–

    MARCIA ANGELL: It’s not lack of health insurance. It’s lack of health care. There is a difference between health insurance and health care. You can have insurance offered that is too expensive to buy or too expensive to use. What good does it do? And what happens when this occurs, is that what you see is instead of improvements, look at my state of Massachusetts.

    Instead of seeing improvements, you see it shredded even further. You see more people denied access anyway. Now they’re about, I think over 60 thousand people in my state who are exempted from the plan for financial hardship and this is also in the Obama plan. If you’re really poor, you don’t have to participate, and these are the very people who should be in a plan to cover them.

    BILL MOYERS: But, the very poor do get Medicaid.

    MARCIA ANGELL: Yes, yes. And one of the things about the Obama plan that I do like is that it expands Medicaid up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level and that’s fine. The problem is that could have been a stand alone measure. You didn’t need to have it incorporated in this massive Rube Goldberg apparatus.

    BILL MOYERS: Is there anything else in there you like, in the Obama plan?

    MARCIA ANGELL: Oh yeah. I mean–

    BILL MOYERS: What?

    MARCIA ANGELL: First of all, the intention is very good. The expansion of Medicaid is very good. Raising the age of dependents to 26, and saying that they have to be covered under parents’ plans. I think that’s very good. Looking at the cost-effectiveness of various procedures is a good thing to do in its own right.

    So yes, there are things in it. But the bill as a whole, the more I look at it, the worse it gets. It’s going to increase costs, not decrease them. And it’s going to increase the rate of growth. It’s not going to bend the curve, except in Medicare.

    I think in order to look at a reform and to measure a reform, you have to look at the problem it’s designed to answer. You have to look at what’s wrong with our system, in order to evaluate a reform. You have to ask yourself, “Why is it that we spent over twice as much per person on health care and yet don’t manage to cover everyone?” … Read all or view the video of the interview

    In December, in “10 11 Reasons to Kill the Senate Bill , I posted progressive Jane Hamsher’s strong objections, among them:

    Forces you to pay up to 8% of your income to private insurance corporations — whether you want to or not.
    If you refuse to buy the insurance, you’ll have to pay penalties of up to 2% of your annual income to the IRS.
    Many will be forced to buy poor-quality insurance they can’t afford to use, with $11,900 in annual out-of-pocket expenses over and above their annual premiums. …
    True progressives get that this is a disastrous plan. So do we.

    Even the good parts of the bill fail on closer inspection. For example, Obama likes to stress his bill does away with the “donut hole” that Medicare patients endure every year when their prescription costs hit an arbitrary amount. Many seniors have to take expensive drugs that, come August or September, suddenly cost them thousands per month, rather than a reasonable co-pay. What is Obama’s fix for this? A $250 check to those seniors who hit the donut hole. Hell. $250 will barely cover the costs of part of one month for these drugs. $250 beats nothing, but it does NOT eliminate the donut hole, as Obama has claimed. It’s a band-aid on a gaping wound that allows prescription drug insurance companies to escape having to provide coverage for most seniors for part of every yea

  108. wbboei,

    Across the political spectrum, people are appalled by this bill. Forcing Americans to fund private business is just insane.

  109. We want Hillary in 2012 as well, but realistically, it’s a long shot. We keep the hope alive for ourselves and more importantly our country/world, as we see how much damage has already been done.
    ——————————————————————-
    jbstonesfan: correct. It is a long shot alright. But if you and I were sitting around the Hialeah race track in your neck of the woods wouldn’t this be the perfect bet to place. After all:

    1. Hillary is a thorough bred and a champion. She can runs a good race and is particularly strong in the closing laps.

    2. Nevertheless, the wise guys in big media and the party selected Obama and rigged the game so he could win in 2008.

    3. Today world knows the wise guys in big media and the party did this. Next time the country will watch them like a hawk.

    4. Now, the wise guys are placing their money on Obama in 2012. They do not believe Hillary can win, place or show.

    5. We have studied Obama in the campaign and in governing. We know he cannot go the distance.

    6. We also know that Hillary is winning races around the world, and grows stronger even as Obama goes weaker.

    7. We know the wise guys who put him in there are dropping like flies.

    9. When the party realize he cannot win they will turn to the thoroughbred.

    9. Otherwise they will have to shut down the stable.

    This is the situation we find ourselves in now. These conditions create leverage at the betting window. And a big pay day when Hillary runs and wins in 2012.

  110. wbboei,

    Across the political spectrum, people are appalled by this bill. Forcing Americans to fund private business is just insane
    ————————-
    Yes. And I guess it is better that wisdom come late than not at all. But it sure does beg the question of the political instincts of Obama. I swear to you I have been in similar position, and if the deal is not there then no force of will can create it. I have tried this myself. It doesn’t work. And if perchance you do succeed when the stars are not in alignment it is inevitable that whatever deal you strike through sheer persistence will go bad on you.

  111. wbboei:I am not a betting man gave never been.In fact I have never played cards except a game of “Hearts with my late beloved”.I have always depended on sound advice and intuition.They have served me well over these many years.In these critical political times however I would follow Hillary as my leader and you as the source of good informative know-how :Over The Cliff If Called upon:I have so much to gain and very little if anything to lose.Admiration does’nt cost a thing but it is rewarding.

    By ABM90 Run Girl Run

  112. Louis Lane reporting in….Adam Gahayn(the american) has been caught…. Annie Oakley has caught another badguy, LOL!! I sincerely give all the credit to Hillary for catching all these bad guys because Gates was there with Bush and he never caught anyone but Saddam (probably knew too much). Gee they still have the 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaik whatever, but Saddam has long since been hung….WONDER WHY??? It must of been very important to knock off Saddam quickly! Here’s to Hillary for expanding the War on Terror into Pakistand and Afganistan (where the terrorists really hide)and getting those bad guys….I would not be surprised if she doesn’t get Bin Ladin….if I wasn’t going to work I would break out a cold Bud Light Lime (fully dressed) to celebrate….GO HILLARY GO!! 2012′

  113. oops, I almost forgot….his trial should be held in San Francisco since Adam is from California…I am sure Nancy will enjoy a terror trial in her back yard….New York has had enough.

  114. That was an interesting race the filly wins it over Big Drama….how fitting…..I found it most interesting that the filly got nervous while in the starting gate and had to be pushed back in. I used to have to back my filly up for many yards to get her in the arena gate to run barrels or into the roping shoot when I used to rope….yes I ran the barrel race and did breakaway roping as a whole lot of girls from Texas did when they were young…lots of fun.

  115. I guess they don’t know now who they’ve caught in Pakistan, they just know he is an American…LOL!!

    The Academy Awards particularly this year I find irritating because most of these fools are the ones that thrust the One in the WH on us over Hillary. I hope the financial crisis is getting to them too.

  116. Wbboei,

    I think that goal for Obama here is to pass bill that costs the Democrats the majority in at least one house. He is then dealing with a new, outraged and newly powerful majority. He revamps social security in the manner that Wall Street but now he has the GOP in control of at least one house of Congress.

    I don’t think Obama cares about Dems winning in November because his personal fortune is best enhanced by them losing, and his using the new GOP majority to force changes to Social Security that Democrats would never go along with.

    The Dems losing control of Congress may be a feature of the health care reform, not a bug. But right now, I don’t think Dems are going along with them as well as we are being led to believe.

  117. Oh lord, did I screw those two paragraphs up. It should read:

    I think the goal for Obama here is to pass a health insurance reform bill that costs the Democrats the majority in at least one house. He is then dealing with a new, outraged and newly powerful majority. He revamps social security in the manner that Wall Street but now he has the GOP in control of at least one house of Congress and that makes it much easier for him to give Wall Street the slice of every American paycheck they’ve been slavering over.

    I don’t think Obama cares about Dems winning in November because his personal fortune is best enhanced by them losing, and his using the new GOP majority to force changes to Social Security that Democrats would never go along with. A Democratic president willing to undo Social Security with a Republican congress – it’s a Wall Street dream come true. What better way to get there than to pass a health care reform bill that every American, right and left, is going to hate?

  118. It is thrilling to see that Barack’s protege, basketball buddy and favorite sun of the Greek community of good old Chicago the estimable Alexi Giannoulias has figured out a way to get paid three times for the failure of his family’s Broadway Bank. In that case, he could serenade Zero Mostel with lyrics like this:

    If I were a rich man,
    Daidle deedle daidle
    Daidle daidle deedle daidle dum
    All day long I’d rip off Broadway Bank
    And I’d steal some stimulus funds
    Then I’d do the Senate,
    Daidle deedle daidle
    Daidle daidle deedle daidle dum
    Find myself a Rezko
    Just like Bambi did by gum

    Mayor Daley you made the lion and the lamb,
    You decreed I should be what I am–
    Would it spoil some vast, eternal plan,
    If I a pulled a Goose Lake scam?
    ———————————

    Posted by Moe Lane (Profile)
    Sunday, March 7th at 2:37PM EST
    3 Comments
    Nice work, if you can get it:

    The family of Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Alexi Giannoulias stands to collect more than $10 million in federal tax refunds even if its Broadway Bank fails, which Mr. Giannoulias said this week is likely.

    A $75-million loss at the struggling lender last year generated tax benefits potentially worth between $12 million and $15 million to Mr. Giannoulias, his two brothers and his mother. As the sole owners of a subchapter S corporation that controls $1.2-billion-asset Broadway, they pay the taxes on the bank’s income and reap tax deductions on its losses.

    The possibility of family members pocketing millions in tax refunds as Broadway slides toward insolvency and federal receivership is likely to fuel more controversy for Mr. Giannoulias, who is already under fire for his role in the bank’s downfall.

    (Via Hot Air) Of course, not being in a rich banking family linked to Chicago’s culture of political corruption… oddly enough, that’s precisely the kind of work that I can’t get. And then there’s this little gem:

    Asked whether he would advise his family to put the tax refunds back into the bank to help recapitalize it, Mr. Giannoulias said, “We’ll do everything we can to keep the bank going. . . .You’ll have to ask management of the bank what the best course of action is.”

    Translation: “No.” Mind you, if they took this money and added it to the 70+ million in dividends that the Giannoulias family pulled in from the failing bank from 2006 to 2008, the bank would probably be able to avoid closing. But that would hurt them; so better to let the bank fail, let the FDIC take it over, and let the taxpayers take the blow. Much better, all around.

    After all, the Giannoulias family got their refund.

    Moe Lane

    PS: Mark Kirk for Senate. He doesn’t get paid three times for failure.

  119. Actually, my favorite part of that song If I Were A Rich Man is this:

    The most important men in town will come to fawn on me–
    They will ask me to advise them,
    Like a Solomon the Wise–
    “If you please, Reb Tevye?”–
    “Pardon me, Reb Tevye?”–
    Posing problems that would cross a rabbi’s eyes–
    (chanting) Ya va voy, ya va voy voy vum…
    And it won’t make one bit of difference
    If I answer right or wrong–
    WHEN YOU’RE RICH, THEY THINK YOU REALLY KNOW.

  120. adding to my previous post….now we know why Perry wants the TTC….he is in bed with Soros…I pity the poor farmers…

  121. admin: You suggested more pro-Hillary blogs and I think that’s an excellent idea. I also think it’s time to network. I think joining forces would be a good idea. Darragh at PUMA PAC would be a great ally and force. We will find strength in numbers. Facebook is a great resource, too. Team Hillary is mobilizing so the troops are ready. I am a foot soldier.

  122. Somehow I have a hunch that this was written decades ago and someone just put Obama in by search and replace. 😉


    The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.” — Author Unknown

  123. See even Michael Moore knows Obama is a citizen of Kenyan..read the whole thing and you will it! This is an open letter from Michael Moore to Potus.

    Dear President Obama,

    I understand you may be looking to replace Rahm Emanuel as your chief of staff.

    I would like to humbly offer myself, yours truly, as his replacement.

    I will come to D.C. and clean up the mess that’s been created around you. I will work for $1 a year. I will help the Dems on Capitol Hill find their spines and I will teach them how to nonviolently beat the Republicans to a pulp.

    And I will help you get done what the American people sent you there to do. I don’t need much, just a cot in the White House basement will do.

    Now, don’t get too giddy with excitement over my offer, because you and I are going to be up at 5 in the morning, seven days a week and I am going to get you pumped up for battle every single day (see photo). Each morning you and I will do 100 jumping jacks and you will repeat after me:

    “THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ELECTED ME, NOT THE REPUBLICANS, TO RUN THE COUNTRY! I AM IN CHARGE! I WILL ORDER ALL OBSTRUCTIONISTS OUTTA MY WAY! IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DON’T LIKE WHAT I’M DOING THEY CAN THROW MY ASS OUT IN 2012. IN THE MEANTIME, I CALL THE SHOTS ON THEIR BEHALF! NOW, CONGRESS, DROP AND GIVE ME 50!!”

    Then we will put on our jogging sweats and run up to Capitol Hill. We will take names, kick butts, and then take some more names. If we have to give a few noogies or half-nelson’s, then so be it. In our pockets we will have a piece of paper to show the pansy Dems just how much they won by in 2008 — and the poll results that show the majority of Americans oppose the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and want the bankers punished. Like drill sergeants, we will get right up in their faces and ask them, “WHAT PART OF THE PUBLIC MANDATE DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND, SOLDIER?!! DROP AND GIVE ME 50!”

    I know this is the job Rahm Emanuel was supposed to be doing.

    Now, don’t get me wrong. I have always admired Rahm Emanuel (if you don’t count his getting NAFTA pushed through Congress in the ’90s which destroyed towns like Flint, Michigan. I know, picky-picky.). He is what we needed for a long time — a no-apologies, take-no-prisoners fighting machine. Someone who is not afraid to get his hands dirty and pound the right wing into submission. Far from being the foul-mouthed bully he has been portrayed as, Rahm is the one who BEAT UP the bullies to protect us from them.

    That’s certainly what he did in 2006. After six long, miserable years of the middle-class getting slaughtered and the poor being flushed down the toilet, Rahm Emanuel took on the job of returning Congress to the Democrats. No one believed it could be done.

    But he did it. Big time. He put the fear of God into the party of Rush and Newt. They had never been so scared. More importantly, though, he instilled a sense of hope in the Democrats that they could actually score the mother of all hat tricks in 2008 — and with you, an African American no less, in the pole position!

    It worked. The Darkness ended. The vast majority of the nation wept with joy on the night of the election (those who weren’t weeping went out and bought a record number of guns and ammo). Unlike the last president, you didn’t “win” by 537 votes in Florida (although Gore won the popular vote by a half-million), you beat McCain nationally by 9,522,083 votes! The House Democrats got a walloping 79-vote margin. The Senate Dems would caucus with a supermajority of 60 votes unheard of in over 30 years. The wars would now end. America would have universal health care. Wall Street and the banks would, at the very least, be reined in. Hardworking citizens would not be thrown out of their homes. It was supposed to be the dawning of a new age.

    But the Republicans were not going to go quietly into the night. You see, instead of having just one Rahm Emanuel, they are ALL Rahm Emanuels. That’s why they usually win. Unlike most Democrats, they are relentless and unstoppable. When they believe in something (which is usually themselves and the K Street job they hope to be rewarded with someday), they’ll fight for it till the death. They are loyal to a fault to each other (they were never able to denounce Bush, even though they knew he was destroying the party). They dig their heels in deep no matter what. If you exiled them to a lone chunk of melting polar ice cap, they would keep insisting that it was just a normal “January thaw,” even as the frigid Arctic waters rose above their God-fearing necks (“See what I mean — this water is COLD! What ‘global warming’?! Adam and Eve rode dinos…aagghh!!… gulp gulp gulp”).

    We thought we were all done with this craziness, but we were mistaken. Like a beast that you just can’t cage, the Republicans convinced not only the media, but YOU and your fellow Dems, that 59 votes was a minority! Precious time was lost trying to reach a “consensus” and trying to be “bipartisan.”

    Well, you and the Democrats have been in charge now for over a year and not one banking regulation has been reinstated. We don’t have universal health care. The war in Afghanistan has escalated. And tens of thousands of Americans continue to lose their jobs and be thrown out of their homes. For most of us, it’s just simply no longer good enough that Bush is gone. Woo hoo. Bush is gone. Yippee. That hasn’t created one new friggin’ job.

    You’re such a good guy, Mr. President. You came to Washington with your hand extended to the Republicans and they just chopped it off. You wanted to be respectful and they decided that they were going to say “no” to everything you suggested. Yet, you kept on saying you still believed in bipartisanship.

    Well, if you really want bipartisanship, just go ahead and let the Republicans win in November. Then you’ll get all the bipartisanship you want.

    Let me be clear about one thing: The Democrats on Election Day 2010 are going to get an ass-whoopin’ of biblical proportions if things don’t change right now. And after the new Republican majority takes over, they, along with a few conservative Democrats in Congress, will get to bipartisanly impeach you for being a socialist and a citizen of Kenya. How nice to see both sides of the aisle working together again!

    And the brief window we had to fix this country will be gone.

    Gone.

    Gone, baby, gone.

    I don’t know what your team has been up to, but they haven’t served you well. And Rahm, poor Rahm, has turned into a fighter — not of Republicans, but of the left. He called those of us who want universal health care “f***ing retarded.” Look, I don’t know if Rahm is the problem or if it’s Gibbs or Axelrod or any of the other great people we owe a debt of thanks to for getting you elected. All I know is that whatever is fueling your White House it’s now running on fumes. Time to shake things up! Time to bring me in to get you pumped up every morning! Go Barack! Yay Obama! Fight, Team, Fight!

    I’m packed and ready to come to D.C. tomorrow. If it helps, you won’t really be losing Rahm entirely because I’ll be bringing his brother with me — my agent, Ari Emanuel. Man, you should see HIM negotiate a deal! Have you ever wanted to see Mitch McConnell walking around Capitol Hill carrying his own head in his hands after it’s just been handed to him by the infamous Ari? Oh, baby, it won’t be pretty — but boy will it be sweet!

    What say you, Barack? Me and you against the world! Yes we can! It’ll be fun — and we may just get something done. Whaddaya got to lose? Hope?

    Retardedly yours,
    Michael Moore
    MMFlint@aol.com
    MichaelMoore.com

    P.S. Just to give you an idea of the new style I’ll be bringing with me, when a cornhole like Sen. Ben Nelson tries to hold you up next time, this is what I will tell him in order to get his vote: “You’ve got exactly 30 seconds to rescind your demand or I will personally make sure that Nebraska doesn’t get one more federal dollar for the rest of Obama’s term. And then I will let everyone in your state know that you wear Sooner panties, backwards. NOW DROP AND GIVE ME 50!”

  124. First there was the neocons, then came the Obamacons aided and abetted by the neolib’s, we to chunk all three of these and get good ol’ trustworthy, hardworking workhorse Hillary Clinton to save us from ourselves!!

    Hillary 2012′ hopefully we will all still be here by then !

  125. confloyd
    March 8th, 2010 at 2:48 am
    &&&&
    Worth putting up the whole Huffpo piece. It underlines what smart micro-loans can do, which is outperform bloated behemoth stimulus bills that are merely ploys for handing out cash to your friends.

    Also, funny to see anything supportive of Hillary over at Obama-lovers United Huffpo. Unless they are starting to feel a little under the bus nowadays.

    By BRETT ZONGKER | 03/ 7/10 02:26 PM

    Obama is cutting one of Hillary’s project
    WASHINGTON — As Hillary Rodham Clinton was leaving the White House, she asked Laura Bush first lady to first lady to continue one program if nothing else – the historic preservation program Save America’s Treasures.

    Mrs. Bush said she knew about the project and pledged to see it through.

    Now, the grant program Clinton created that helped restore the original star-spangled banner, Rosa Parks’ bus, President Lincoln’s summer cottage in Washington and hundreds of sites across the country is on the current administration’s chopping block.

    “The unfortunate thing is we had no warning” the program was being wiped out of President Barack Obama’s budget, said Bobbie Greene McCarthy, who has overseen the program at the National Trust for Historic Preservation and was Clinton’s deputy chief of staff. “It was like being hit by a truck.”

    The program has paid out nearly $294 million over the past decade to more than 1,100 different sites and generated at least $377 million more in matching funds, according to the National Trust. The National Park Service administers the program, but the nonprofit trust is its chief advocate and helps coordinate applicants.

    Historic preservation advocates have shifted into survival mode.

    They argue the program, with its relatively meager federal funding of $30 million annually, has created more than 16,000 jobs across the country at a cost of about $14,000 each. They point out the White House’s federal stimulus package is creating jobs at a cost of $248,000 each.

    At the same time, the program has become a favorite pot of money for members of Congress to fund pet projects through earmarks. Lawmakers have sent home money to restore small-town movie houses and county courthouses.

    The earmark process may have sullied its reputation as the program’s competitive, merit-based process could be bypassed with a willing congressional sponsor. It’s also a tight budget year with shifting priorities.

    Budget watchdogs have been critical of the earmarks for years because they say the process rewards political muscle, not project merit.

    “That certainly makes it a less desirable program from a budgetary perspective because it means it’s inviting waste into the system,” said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense. “It’s supposed to be competitively awarded. Why would you then reserve all this money that is then just a fiefdom of powerful members of the Appropriations Committee?”

    The Office of Management and Budget said as much in its justification for eliminating the program. Save America’s Treasures and a related program started by the Bush administration called Preserve America “lack rigorous performance metrics and evaluation efforts,” the office said. And at least half the program’s funding “is provided without using merit-based criteria.”

    National Park Service spokesman David Barna said the Interior Department is simply facing a tight budget and wants to reclaim the program’s $30 million for priorities in national parks, which face a $9 billion maintenance backlog.

    “I don’t think it’s fallen out of favor. It’s just a matter of priorities,” he said. “We all have to do as much as we can to reduce government spending.”

    The park service would still award $500 million a year in local tax credits for historic preservation, he said.

    Advocates say that’s not enough because grant money is critical in leveraging private support for restoration projects.

    “If this program goes away, there is nothing to replace it,” McCarthy said.

    Because the Obama administration has been generous to arts and cultural programs, it was surprising to see the preservation programs cut, said Richard Moe, president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Their contributions were cast in doubt without giving program managers a chance to prove the funding’s impact, he said.

    The group is pledging to strengthen and standardize the criteria used for grants awarded by congressional sponsors.

    Last year, Rep. Jim McDermott of Washington sought a $250,000 earmark to help restore The Rainier Club, an elite Seattle social club with politically connected members. It was considered historic by local standards but wasn’t recognized as “nationally significant.”

    The grant request wasn’t funded after it drew media scrutiny, but it called into question whether other requests were granted by earmarks regardless of the criteria.

    Part of the problem was each congressional office was setting its own criteria for the program.

    “Up until a couple years ago, it was pretty haphazard,” McCarthy said. “Frankly, I don’t think they’re necessarily abuses … as much as just not recognizing what the program’s requirements are.”

    Earmarks have been kept as part of the grant program to help promote diversity and geographical balance among applicants, she said. Otherwise, money would flow heavily to projects in the older Northeast states and less to sites west of the Mississippi River.

    Some historic preservation projects have become economic engines, organizers said. The Colonial Theatre in Pittsfield, Mass., for example, was one of the earliest sites restored with help from a federal grant. James Taylor later recorded a CD there, and it continues to operate as a full-time performance space.

    “I think it’s very shortsighted for the program to be zeroed out,” said Missouri Rep. Russ Carnahan, co-chair of the Congressional Historic Preservation Caucus. “We know preservation works and creates jobs.”

    The program’s creator, now Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, has been informed of what’s happening, McCarthy said. “I think beyond that, it’s up to her,” she said.

    Advocates are calling on friendly ears on Capitol Hill and may try to reach current first lady Michelle Obama.

    “I don’t think it’s too late,” McCarthy said. “We’re trying everything.”

  126. Let me see if I got this right…overseer of the project, Bobbie Greene McCarthy and advocates for the Historic Presevation Project started by Hillary Clinton and carried on by Laura Bush are going to get in touch with Michelle Obama to try to save the program.

    So they are going to appeal to Mrs. Obama’s sense of history, pride in the United States of America or on the other hand give her a chance to clean up a program that started out with great intentions but got a little side tracked but still provides JOBS. Michelle would be given a chance to help FORMER first ladies with their project…right?

    Okey-Dokey, lots of luck, Mrs. McCarthy.

  127. Since there has been talk here of HRC running in 2012, I thought it would be appropriate to post the following article, which expresses my pessimistic view:

    March 08, 2010
    Clinton running in 2012 a political fantasy

    In a recent letter, Kevin Cardin imagines that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “is still salivating over the prospect of elevating herself” to the presidency (“Clinton’s experience could help her win presidency,” Feb. 25).

    Secretary Clinton’s running for the Democratic nomination in 2012 is a neocon fantasy, as conservatives want the Democratic Party as divided as possible so one of their favorites like former Gov. Mitt Romney or the phony rogue Sarah Palin would have an easier race. Yet Clinton is running only if President Barack Obama isn’t, and if Obama’s healthy, he’s running for a second term.

    Remember what happened to Sen. Ted Kennedy when he challenged a sitting president for his party’s nomination? Ronald Reagan didn’t fare any better against Gerald Ford, and Ford wasn’t elected to the presidency; he assumed the office when President Nixon resigned.

    Cardin cites “the astronomically high unemployment rate” and Obama’s “low approval ratings” and then asks, one imagines longingly, is the president “even electable?”

    According to Real Clear Politics, a Web site offering conservative and liberal commentary as well as straight political news, Obama’s job approval rating is 47.7 percent; 45.6 percent disapprove (Feb. 26).

    The president’s approval rating is enormously high when compared with Congress’ rating (18.8 percent approval, 75.6 percent disapproval) and President George W. Bush’s rating when he left office (29 percent approval, 65.2 percent disapproval). A 47.7 percent approval rating is OK.

    Currently the unemployment rate is just under 10 percent. Obviously that’s bad. The unemployment rate was almost 11 percent in 1982, however, and Ronald Reagan was reelected two years later in the second-largest landslide in American history, winning every state except his opponent’s home state.

    Those hoping for the president’s political demise would be wise to set aside just a little of the money they received from the Obama-Democratic Congress’ stimulus for earplugs — big, big earplugs. If Reagan’s experience foreshadows Obama’s future, shouts of “Four more years!” on the first Tuesday of November in 2012 will be deafening.

    Arthur F. Bethea
    —–
    Of course, history is a teacher and often repeats itself. As I said the other day, Evan Bayh may be thinking of challenging o, but he will have a chance only if o withdraws, as LBJ did (that’s one example of history not mentioned in the above article). LBJ, with his enormous ego, nonetheless was able to see the dire situation in which he had put the country, and also saw that McCarthy was outpolling him in the primaries. Similarly, o would withdraw only if someone like Bayh started winning primaries against him, and by that time it would be too late for Hillary to enter the race. I can’t see her entering the race first. In politics, anything can happen, but there is such a thing as probability too.

  128. Well, I am not so sure that Arthur Bethea is the final word on the subject. According to my research, he is an assistant professor of English at Purdue University. I have a friend who teaches there so I will be sure to ask about him.

    As to his contention that Hillary running in 2012 is a “political fantasy” I have the following reaction:

    1. first, I question his qualifications to speak to the subject. The last time I checked English was an entirely different discipline from politics and history, yet judging by this article he claims some expertise in all three.

    2. second, I question his mental horsepower. It is noteworthy that he has been an assistant professor of English for 15 years. That is a long time to remain in the doldrums time not to advance when you are an expert on extraneous matters like he is. At a minimum his career path is in a rut.

    3. third, I question the merits of his argument. He claims Obama’s rating is high compared to congress. So then I take it that that 47% is good, and a 30% drop using the inflated figures he does is even better.

    4. fourth, I question how he reads history. He calls history our teacher and then proceeds to read it like an accountant, with no sense of nuance, imagination or possibilities. And most of all, he does not understand the dynamic of momentum.

    5. fifth, with such stellar credentials and bulletproof advocacy skills I am hardpressed to understand why he is not famous. For some mysterious reason, he is not listed in Wikipedia. Obviously, an oversight on their part.

  129. In a recent letter, Kevin Cardin imagines that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “is still salivating over the prospect of elevating herself” to the presidency (”Clinton’s experience could help her win presidency,” Feb. 25).

    Imagines…IMAGINES! Kevin Cardin is channeling Maureenn Dowd, for Heaven’s Sakes.

    It’s amazing Hillary is apparently the only one Kevin, Maureen, et al “imagine” is wanting to be president. Bet that thought never enters Mitt Romney or Sarah Palin’s heads or any other politician.

    I “imagine” that same old tripe is getting boring to most of us.

  130. This is why English teachers should stick to Chaucer.

    He thinks Bayh will challenge Obama. Now there is a fantasy for you. Bayh is dull as paint. This country may be in a depression three years from now. But one thing will not change. C-e-l-e-b-r-i-t-y. And Bayh aint got it. No sale.

    Hillary is the only celebrity in the Democratic Party. Also, she has experience and a proven track record of success. But those do not matter the the electorate any more. The celebrity thing is what counts.

    Arthur does not understand how important the celebrity factor is in the political process. It is sine qua non.

  131. wbboei 11:18

    Thanks, I needed that. We always look to history to project the future, which is what this guy does. However, what we forget is that many times the voters, people running, the economy, etc, are not identical, and therefore, today’s outcome might not follow the historical course.

    I always said that economics was a study of history, yet we insist on going back and trying to employ the tools that worked before. A case in point is throwing money at a recession/depression, which worked in the past. However, in recent history it has failed miserable. Yet, we are throwing money at this situation now.

  132. I would conntinue to read Admin’s posts because they have been so relevant and illuminating.
    ————————–
    Good. That is the most important thing.

  133. NMF: I read a book one time on the American Intelligence Community, primarily the CIA. It talked about the intelligence failures we have had and why they occurred. More often than not it was because people looked at history and said ah ha here we go again. In other words they leaped to the conclusion that history repeats itself when in fact it never really true. The point was that in each instance they studied where there was an intelligence failure, there was some factor which they overlooked and as a result their analysis proved disasterously wrong.

  134. Sebelius is being hammered on Meet the Press. She would not agree to a definite time frame, and would not agree that if it is not passed by Easter, it was dead. She also was asked about the meeting with Dems, and the fact that President O said it was important to his Presidency (note he did not say it was important to the American People). She usually answered by telling health care nighmirror stories, and he kept trying to pin her down. Playing hard ball, and I don’t think she did well.
    ————————————————-
    Thank you. That is excellent. I think she is pretty uninspiring. This is not a good position for her. She was better off being governor of Kansas. Still, to use the comparative standards deployed by the estimable Arthur Bethea, compared to a Neopolitano interview aka a disaster, she did great.

  135. wbboei, your 1st, 2nd, 5th and subsequent objections to this article are all ad hominem. Your 3rd argument, that 47% is really bad, may well be wishful thinking. That could be turned around from now until January 2012 and, if o doesn’t get it back above 50%, it still won’t stop him from running for a 2nd term, just as the other presidents mentioned (Ford, Carter) did. So, in o’s mind, 47% is AOK.

    Your argument that Bayh is dull is unconvincing. He is better known to the public now than Kerry was, 3 years before the 2004 election, or even 1 year before that election. Also, he has never lost an election in otherwise red Indiana, and has experience in that state. Furthermore, he has already called it quits with the dimocrat machine, is a conservative Dem, and seems well positioned now for a challenge against o.

    Again taking the lesson of 1968, RFK, who was the Dem c-e-l-e-b-r-i-t-y of that era, only entered the race once the unknown McCarthy had upset LBJ in the first primaries. It took those upsets to convince LBJ that neither the country nor the party wanted him any more. RFK entered the primary race in March 68.

  136. I would hope the electorate would wisen up about hiring celebrity President’s. The country is going to be so screwed by 2012′ that hiring another celeb should not be considered, although the SHEEPLE seem to allow Big Media and the king makers to alter their decisions every 4 to 8 years.

  137. Looks like Massa is going to give BO some problems….its about time someone stands up to him…too many blue dogs are being pushed out!

  138. I apologize for my comments concerning Eric Massa at the top of the thread. What is being reported today about his situation sure sounds like a set up to me. It’s Democrat thuggery. I called his office in Corning, NY and spoke wih a concerned office person. I requested that he reconsider resigning. She said that his offices have been getting many calls, and that they are being passed on to him. I WANT him to stick it to the Obama administration. Anyone who has experienced the trauma of having Rahm Emanuel in his face while Rahm was naked deserves support in my opinion.

  139. Confloyd,

    It’s not the blue dogs that are being hammered – they’re the ones being protected. Rahm is fiercely protective of Blue Dogs and is personally involved in getting as many to run against liberals as can be managed. Massa is a liberal – a real liberal – and it’s the liberals that Obama is going after. IT’s liberals that will not support his healthcare plan. It’s fascistic and will be deadly to the Democratic party.

  140. Carol,

    I really think all of us should hang in. It’s difficult when I see hateful things posted about Gore and environmentalism. I don’t know whether to argue or what, so I just close the window.

    But let’s keep trying….

  141. We need to talk about entitlement reforms, folks. This is dead serious. If Obama succeeds in passing his health care plan, then Democrats will lose control of Congress in the fall. If that happens, then Obama will go into revamping Social Security and Medicare with a conservative congress hot to cut entitlement programs. Obama and the Republican congress will destroy Social Security as we know it. Obama cannot destroy Social Security and turn our retirement accounts over to his good friends in Wall Street with a Democratic congress. They won’t let him do it. But if Republicans have the majority, he’ll be able to pass (and without 60 votes, I might add) a bill that will decimate Social Security.

    If he breaks the Democratic congress and manages to hammer them into voting for his health care scheme that turns our health care dollars over to private insurance, he will then turn our retirement dollars over to Wall Street. This is a deeply fascistic move he is making here and it’s going to get worse if he succeeds.

  142. Does anybody remember what Obama campaigned on during the primary about Social Security? I vaguely remember arguing with a young voter why Obama was wrong about his SS policy during the primary and now can’t remember the details.

  143. Carol and Basement angel,

    I did not realize that Massa was a leftie, LOL! Those folks were stupid enought to vote the messiah in, but not stupid enough to vote for this healthcare….goodQ

    angel, I think this whole healthcare thing is about blanking us out of social security and medicare/medicaid….I listen to Fox 24/7 and you would have to blink deaf and dumb not realize this is what they are planning….we are screwed…..Why aren’t the republicans going after Obama on stuff that would put him out of office….WHY???

  144. rgb44hrc, I never go to Huff and Puff, the reason I found those articles that I posted in the middle of the night (bored at work)I was researching Soro’s last CEO of his Open Society Institute. He left OSI in 07′ and begin blogging for Huff n Puff….I was trying to look up his stuff to see if he was one of them that was constantly putting Hillary thru hell. I ran across the Moore open letter that I thought was funny and Hillary’s pet project being stopped…..personally I agree with the republicans on this one thing….Nancy big jet and its gas bill….lets put Nancy on the continental trailways bus to get back and forth to California and give that 5 mil to Hillary’s pet project.

  145. Confloyd,

    Because Obama is a conservative. He’s a died in the wool conservative who just happen to live in a Democratic district when he decided to run for Congress and learned how to talk the talk. The GOP doesn’t want to get rid of Obama. They want to get rid of liberals and Obama is almost as far right as Reagan.

    His health care scheme is a deeply conservative scheme – he’s going to force Americans to hand over a chunk of their income to private business or he’ll unleash the IRS on them. If he was a liberal, there would be a serious discussion about single payer or there would be a public insurer that would have coverage levels mandated. Both of those things are absent. This is a simple financial scheme to turn over a good chunk of most Americans income to private industry. That’s something a Republican would dream of doing but wouldn’t have the credibility to do. This is a “nixon goes to China” kind of moment. Americans trust Democrats on health care and social security much more than Republicans – who have always been slavering to make those things profitable to private industry. So, Obama can do what no Republican can do – and that’s what he’s going for.

  146. Confloyd,

    The reason Nancy has the private jet is that the Speaker of the House being on a commercial jet is considered a terrorism risk that would put innocent passengers at risk. I mean, think about it – do you really want to fly from DC to San Francisco on a commercial jet on a Friday night knowing the Speaker of the House, and one of the top terrorism targets in the nation, is on that jet? Do you want your kids flying on it?

    I think it’s really important to not get caught up in the petty bullshit that the Republican outrage factories turn out just to get people worked up, when health care and social security are at risk. Just imagine the fall out if Pelosi was hammered into taking commercial airliners and she, and 300 civilian passengers were killed in a terrorist attack. Is that really what you want to stand up for?

  147. I really don’t know the answer to this question. Have all the Speakers of the House since 2001 had private jets?

  148. Southern Born,

    Yes, they’ve all had private jets. What happened when Pelosi took the position was that we had to buy a new jet because the previous one could not fly to California without stopping for refueling – and refueling is, again, a terrorist risk. So the Sergeant At Arms of Congress, who is responsible for the safety of Congress, made the decision to buy a jet that could fly to California without stopping. That’s what the brouhaha is about. The previous Speaker, Denny Hastert, lived in Chicago which is a much shorter flight.

Comments are closed.