Stevens And Stupak Today, Barack Obama Tomorrow

The big news today, that will go unnoticed by Big Media, is Hillary Clinton in Kentucky. So forget Justice Stevens retiring and all the other shiny object bright light news. The big news today is Hillary Clinton in Kentucky. And don’t think Barack Obama does not know it.

Today Barack Obama will spin from his role as International Man Of Boobery to talk on camera about the coal mine deaths in West Virginia. Now why is Obama all of a sudden concerned about the deaths of ‘bitter and clingy’ Americans in West Virginia? Because Hillary Clinton is to speak today in Louisville, Kentucky.

Regular readers of Big Pink will recall that we have repeatedly written that the most important signal to us that Hillary Clinton is contemplating a run for president would be a visit to the states where she walloped Barack Obama in the primaries. That visit happens today.

The return of Hillary Clinton to a Hillary stronghold and the return of Obama to the bottom of the poll barrel, takes us to the other news of the day – the resignation of Bart Stupak.

In a article from 2009 we wrote:

“While we don’t think Hillary Clinton will directly challenge Obama for the nomination in 2012, we do think it is the job of sensible Democrats and smart Hillary supporting websites to drive Obama from the 2012 race. It is also the job for American citizens who care about the country.”

So Bart Stupak is the model to be used. Run Barack Obama out of the race in the same way Bart Stupak has been run out of town.

Bart Stupak was to be the target of unrelenting demonstrations by the Tea Party movement. Today, without much effort but with determined conviction, Bart Stupak was forced out of congress for his “Save Obama” vote. After November, Nancy Pelosi will have one less vote at the very least because the Stupak seat, for all intents and purposes, was won by Republicans today. Thanks Barack. Thanks Pelousy.

Bart Stupak will not be alone. Already there have been sixteen Dimocratic House retirements. The additional Dimocratic “retirements” to come by the end of this month and then defeats in November will grab the gavel of power from the hands of Pelousy in 2010 and pull the White House rug from Obama if he persists in a run in 2012.

As to the “news” of the Justice Stevens retirement, it is more ill tidings for the Domestic Man Of Boobery. Justice Stevens was the keystone of the liberal bloc in the court. The most Obama can do is to try to appoint another equally liberal justice to the court. That won’t be much of an accomplishment, more running just to stay in place, but even that we doubt is possible.

Obama has thus far slapped his PINO dupes in the face and with a bit of pressure from Republicans and Tea Party activists, Obama will easily cave.

Of course, if Obama does the remarkable and does not cave, he will further paint himself into the corner as Republicans denounce him as the reincarnation of Karl Marx all throughout the election season. And Republicans know why Stevens quit – fear of Dimocratic defeat in November and the need to get a vote before the big Republican wins (which might be bigger if the Supreme Court fight lasts through the fall).

If there indeed is a “pitched battle” from the left, the wounded on the field will be Obama and his PINO allies. There is nothing Republicans would love more just before the election than Obama fighting for his PINO allies in a “pitched battle” – and losing the non-existent “focus” on the economy and jobs, jobs, jobs.

The only “jobs, jobs, jobs” Barack Obama is worried about is his own job right now – and what “jobs, jobs” he and Michelle Obama will coerce once they are booted out of the White House.


144 thoughts on “Stevens And Stupak Today, Barack Obama Tomorrow

  1. The workings of Big Media – how Oprah will be protected like Obama was/is protected:

    For her biography about Oprah, she did 850 interviews. Eight hundred and fifty! (In my news days if I contacted four people I thought I had really worked my tail off.) Her work is that of a hybrid researcher/historian, and whatever she writes you can take to the bank. She is in no way an academic, which is probably the reason her books sell in the millions.

    The second thing you need to know about this book is that most of the kingpin interviewers in the mainstream media were astonishingly up front about saying they would not help Kitty promote her book because they didn’t want to offend Oprah! They didn’t even make up excuses; they flat-out said they didn’t want to offend Oprah.

    It was surprising, to say the least, that interviewers such as Larry King, Charlie Rose, David Letterman and Barbara Walters all shut her out.

    Walters’s turn-down was especially interesting in that she said she wouldn’t even have Kelley on “The View.” I mean, that’s a show with four or five babes nattering on, where no guest is on for more than maybe seven minutes. Walters told Random House publicity she didn’t want to “upset” Oprah. Letterman said he didn’t want to “disrupt” his détente with Oprah. And ABC, whose name might as well now stand for “All ‘Bout Cowards,” made an across-the-board decision that Kelley’s book would be boycotted by all ABC shows. Even second-tier people like Joy Behar followed suit. And Rachael Ray! A cooking show, no less.

  2. says, ahhhhhh, the sweet smell of a beautiful spring Friday and the news that STUPAK is KAPUTS!!!!!!!!!!
    Cavuto had the Donald on yesterday, and he says that he KNOWS China, and that they are LAUGHING at us, er Obummer. He suggests a big tax on imports from China [and I say Japan] as we do not need products from China; rather we need to make our own products in America. He says they are manipulating us, er Obummer. I agree. He also said that OPEC did not get due credit for its manipulation and the collapse of our economy. I agree. I do not like the arrogance of the Donald, but he has this right.

  3. Good riddance Stupak. Now there is a rumor about Barney Frank. They are all cowards. After the HCR debacle they don’t have the face or the nerve to face voters. Same will happen with Obama. After he wrecks everything in the next two years, he won’t have the balls (he never had) to stand before the voters for judgment day.

  4. Stevens retiring is not necessarily good for Obama. It may turn into a tug of war between keeping your base happy otoh and not getting to war with the opposition oto. Obama, the “present” man could get into trouble just before the Nov elections here.

  5. Sarah Palin at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference just quoted Bill Clinton. She used the “this is the biggest fairy tale” line Bill Clinton said in a much more expansive context.

    The use of Bill Clinton attacks on Obama is one of the reasons why we think, contrary to PINO opinion, that Sarah Palin is a very smart woman. Mind, she is not particularly well educated, but she is a very smart woman.

    We have constantly advised Republicans that their most powerful weapon against Barack Obama is Hillary Clinton and the primary history of what was done to her by Obama thugs, and what she said about Obama. The few smart Republicans are heeding our advice.

  6. Is the orka bashing book available for pre-order or order? I’ll get my copy today.
    Actually watched her show for the first time since the primaries because she had Glee on and I love the show. Saddened that they have taken to bashing Palin, but I think it is the best show ever to watch and hold a conversation with young adults.

  7. Here’s an Oprah show to end all shows Our Lady of syndication confronts first lady about her extra body fat and hubby’s smoking. And while they’re on it bring up carbon foot prints for the first family.

  8. Have I missed something or has nothing been raised about the fact that the health bill mandates that translators be employed and that it must be done by community organizers. How is that not raising ire. To my knowledge every hospital which has a significant non-english speaking clientele pays nurses and administrators accordingly to provide such services. So the community organizers are going to be paid to provide access at a huge cost to what every hospital already offers. I was told it will cost a quarter of a million dollars per major metropolitan city for this service which is already attended to. But I have heard nothing about it.

  9. admin
    thanks for the Glee clip
    Funny how music has such a profound effect
    Took my niece and nephew to see Slumdog a few years ago and they were bored til the end when the bollywood dance bit took place. They loved that and were completely taken by surprise. watched the movie again with them and they saw a different film. Odd the eighteen year old football player loves bollywood. MUSIC.

  10. Not so fast for RUBIO!!!!

    After repeated requests, Rubio will not be vetted by the Tea Partys.
    But, he presents himself as being backed by the Tea Party.

    Why? Or a better question might be, why not?

    My husband and I both love GLEE.

  11. FYI
    Here in the Pittsburgh area I keep hearing political ads with the candidates saying they are against abortion.
    Yuck. As someone who left the democratic party i can say that those ads give me no choice but to not vote. Abortion rights are not an issue for a local congress person so why are they choosing to alienate?

  12. GLEE
    My sister in law has arranged a glee party to follow the next show
    concern was raised after the internet bullying suicide
    my neice is a winner(perfect grades, basketball, baseball cheer leading) yet she can be cruel.
    Confronted by her mother reminding her that she has a gay uncle and a black cousin and that her actions have reprecussions. Watching the show and talking about it with her was profound. I just wish the writer’s producers would practice what they preach as they refer to Palin as an idiot.

  13. For those who might think we are making up the potential disaster for Dimocrats this November we have some information from the Obamatron side. Nate Silver, the Obama numbers fluffing blogger was a short time ago saying things are not so bad for Dimocrats in November. No longer. Nate Silver today write this:

    A couple of weeks ago, we examined the potential upside case for Democrats in November’s midterms. If the party were able to limit their losses to about 20 House seats and 3-4 Senate seats, it might not have as deleterious an effect on their policy agenda as you might think.

    But that is the upside case for Democrats. It is not the base case, and it is certainly not the worst case — both of which look as grim as ever. [snip]

    Although analysts debate the precise magnitude of the difference, on average the generic ballot has overestimated the Democrats’ performance in the popular vote by 3.4 points since 1992. If the pattern holds, that means that a 2.3-point deficit in generic ballot polls would translate to a 5.7 point deficit in the popular vote — which works out to a loss of 51 seats, according to our regression model.

    These sorts of questions have been the subject of many, many academic studies, almost all of which involve far more rigor than what I’ve applied here. This is just meant to establish a benchmark. But that benchmark is a really bad one for Democrats. One reasonably well-informed translation of the generic ballot polls is that the Democrats would lose 51 House seats if the election were held today.

    In my piece a couple of weeks ago, I wrote that there was only a 1 in 10 chance that Democrats would lose more than 55 seats in November. Having now looked at this issue in somewhat more detail, that clearly seems to be a lowball estimate. While there is other statistical and anecdotal evidence that one can point toward that is relatively more favorable to Democrats, and while there are other techniques, like a district-by-district analysis, that could be applied to this problem instead — if you could get 9:1 odds (a 1-in-10 chance) on the Democrats losing more than 55 seats in the House, that would be a good bet.

    And what if, for example, the Rasmussen case comes into being? Rasmussen has the Democrats losing the generic ballot by 9 points (and has had similar numbers for awhile). A 9-point loss in the House popular vote would translate into a projected 65-seat loss for Democrats. Or, if we adjust the Rasmussen poll to account for the fact that the Democrats’ performance in the popular vote tends to lag the generic ballot, it works out to a 12.4-point loss in the popular vote, which implies a loss of 79 seats!

  14. Henry, I wanted to link a different version. If you’re interested search for it on youtube using this: “Kajra Re it’s a Yash Raj clip” and the user name is “Khushiangels”. It has better sound and more than 1.2 million views.

  15. I’m glad to see that the dem are going to lose that many seats, perhaps that why Obama looked so glum today. His hair also looked weird in the Rose Garden today…it seems the grey was applied perfectly right down the center on the right side of the head…WEIRD….his head is weird…he has a big scar on one of it too!

  16. Speaking of bumper stickers, I saw one in the rich Dem neighrborhood of Chevy Chase that said “we have to endure 4 years of Carter to get Reagan”
    I would amend it to “we have to endure another 4 years of Bush to get Clinton”.

  17. Admin, Taylor Marsh stole your post from yesterday and is now asking “where is the left’s Sarah Palin” in the Huff and Puff.

  18. …well, I guess Kitty Kelly will be all over FOX nonstop…she will get top billing and promos on FOX for sure…and then contents of her book will get on the net and in blogs…those that do not want to offend Oprah can try but they cannot prevent…

    April 9th, 2010 at 1:55 pm

    We have constantly advised Republicans that their most powerful weapon against Barack Obama is Hillary Clinton and the primary history of what was done to her by Obama thugs, and what she said about Obama. The few smart Republicans are heeding our advice.

    …and if they are SMART, the Republican women will start with speaking up for women and not running away from the misogyny and vile attacks that started with Hillary and then moved on to Sarah and then Michelle and any woman that is threat to the established insider boys club and Liberal elite women …they can effect and make the premptive strike against their own marginalization by Republican MEN and Democratic men and women…

    …truth and honesty is what people began clamoring for with the PUMA movement and is continuing with the Tea Party movement…people are tired of being spun…tired of the Lies…and they just are not going to take it anymore…

    …the manifestation of the Tea Party movement in many ways had its seeds planted with the onset of the PUMAS…party unity my a–! we are sick of it…and in this 24/7 media and climate party loyalty no longer has the control it had in the 20th century…

  19. Admin @ 1:55pm…I agree totally. As a matter of fact one of the bloggers we often see on No Quarter and Citizen Wells is looking into the election fraud here in Texas. I uncovered the fact that Boyd Richey was chosen to take over the state’s democrat chairmanship in 2006′ under very unusual circumstances…jdjb is looking into it as he/she is a lawyer. Very funny stuff happened here in Texas.

    Mrs. Smith, The atty general here in Texas has 3 candidates, but looks like the Perry appointee will win and he actually put some community organizers on trail in Corpus Christi for election fraud in 2006′, but did nothing about Hillary’s problem in the state…doesn’t that tell you something?? Boyd Richey is part of the head of the snake…I wish I could uncover more about him and why no one did anything about the election fraud that took place here against Hillary!

  20. Someone needs to look into Clyburn’s sordid practices. There may be grounds for multiple ethics complaints.

  21. Barack’s Surrender Monkey Mentality
    larry johnson @ no quarter

    Birther’s who insist that Barack Obama was born in Kenya are missing the boat. I think he may be French. How else to account for his willingness to run up a white flag even before the shooting starts (folks, if you don’t understand sarcasm and humor you should stop reading now and go elsewhere).

    Barack’s new policy towards nuclear weapons sure sounds like surrender in advance to me:

    President Obama announced a revamped American nuclear strategy yesterday, for the first time declaring that the US would never use the bomb against a non-nuclear state.

    The new policy narrows significantly the circumstances in which the US would use nuclear weapons, shifting the emphasis to preventing nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism.

    In a clear break from his predecessors Mr Obama committed the US to not launching a nuclear strike against a non-nuclear nation, even if that state had attacked America with biological or chemical weapons.

    There are exceptions. Non-nuclear states not in compliance with the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) could be attacked, leaving the option of nuclear strikes against a country such as Iran. Mr Obama, in an interview before the review was released, also singled out North Korea as another potential nuclear target.

    I don’t know anyone who goes into a bar where a fight is likely and announces in advance that they will not break a chair over someone’s head if they are sucker punched.

    How naive and silly can the Hawaiian kid be? One thing that has helped keep us safe from rogue states is the belief that we are crazy enough to use all means at our disposal to defend our nation, up to and including nuclear weapons. Barack now has taken that off the table. While I do not doubt the good intention of Barack Obama, good intentions, when mixed with inexperience and naivete, is very dangerous.

    Worse is Barack Obama’s taxi-cab door size political tin ear. When George Stephanopoulus queried the boy wonder about Sarah Palin’s criticism, Barack Obama snarfed up the bait and spewed out a snarky comment that simply makes him looks churlish and petty. And he also gave Sarah Palin more ammunition for bashing him back.

    A real political leader would have shied away from engaging former Governor Palin. Bill Clinton, for example, might have said something like:

    “Well, I appreciate Governor Palin’s point of view and am sure that if she sat down with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense, as I did, that she would come away reassured that we are not surrendering any of America’s strength and, in fact, are doing all we can to strengthen our national security and prevent the nightmare of a nuclear war.”

    See? You make the point without attacking the opponent directly. But Mr. Community Organizer and Part-time Senator Obama chose instead to act like some snotty teenager. As someone who has acted in the very way that Obama did let me draw a distinction–I am not President and I enjoy stirring the pot and generating controversy. I answer to no one and represent no one. Not so with Barack. He is the President but, as evidenced by his latest outburst against Sarah Palin, he is anything but Presidential.

    By the way Barack, what chapter of the ACORN handbook covers the topic of nuclear proliferation? That’s where you acquired your enormous expertise on the subject, right?

  22. I was there in West Virginia. As I recall Barack got 26% of the vote, Hillary got about 70%, governor joe manchin (aka mancini) promised to endorse the victor in that contest, froze up, refused to endorse Hillary after a number of us asked him to live up to his promise, and ultimately endorsed Obama. I have already told you what he is based on what people who know him say. There is no need to repeat it here. His word means absolutely nothing.

  23. admin:

    thought this might of interest for you. I recently started visiting, it was linked to by the HillBuzz boyz (love them!), I was reading some of the comments, I was very surprised to see how many PUMAs, hillary dems, or former dems post there.
    (some have defended Hillary against sexism, but not her policies, which considering its a conservative site, I can see that.)

    I will have to figure out how to post there to remind them, there are millions of Hillary dems or ex-dems, PUMAs, who support Sarah Palin. She doesnt have to defend Hillary’s policies, but just a defense (and/or acknowledgement) of Hillary against sexism during 2008 would go a long way to gain even stronger support from centerist dems and independents.

    I know I sure as hell have not forgotten what happened on May 31th, 2008. It is still that fresh in my heart and mind.

    “More Voters Believe We’d Be Better Off with McCain and Palin in Office Than the Number Who Believe We’d be Worse Off With McCain and Palin ”

  24. This is funny, and true:

    Ratings-challenged CNN anchor Anderson Cooper is about to experiment with a live studio audience.

    The network is recruiting a crowd for two shows that will serve as a testing ground for a potential new primetime talk format.

    CNN is calling the trial episodes “specials” to keep expectations low in case the project doesn’t make it to the series stage. But, really, expectations couldn’t be much lower for Anderson — his show has recently been beaten by repeats of programs on MSNBC and HLN.

    A studio audience for a serious news program is a bit like adding a laugh track to a eulogy, so it’s unclear how this is going to work with Anderson, who’s an agreeable enough newsreader and interviewer but not exactly the sort of chap you can picture wooing a live audience. The network would only confirm the format will be “conversational.”

    This isn’t the first time news nets have played around with studio audiences. When “Primetime Live” first went on the air on ABC in 1989, it used a studio audience. And CBS News experimented with a studio audience on “The Morning Program” in 1987. CNN’s own “Talkback Live” aired for many years starting in 1994. Cooper’s producers reportedly try about a dozen test shows a year searching for new format tweaks for the host.

    The specials will be taped April 15th and 22nd, but no air date has been set.



    According to the latest CBS News Poll, President Obama’s health care bill has lost seven points in popularity since it passed last month. When the legislation passed, it won approval from 41% of Americans according to a CBS poll taken at the time. Now, the network reports that only 34% back the legislation. Since July, backing for the plan stood at 49% in CBS’ polling.

    (The network also found that Obama’s overall job approval is down to 44%, also five points lower than CBS found last month).

    The comforting assumption among Democrats that all they had to do was to pass the bill and their fortunes would turn around is being dashed by the data. Just as we predict in our new book 2010: Take Back America – A Battle Plan, the Obamacare bill will drag the Democrats ever further down until they shed that particular albatross from around their necks. (Click HERE to preorder a signed copy of 2010)

    Obamacare is a gift to the Republican Party that keeps on giving. The supposed benefits of the legislation start kicking in at the beginning of 2014 – far to distant to be of much political use today. But the defects start showing up right away. Insurance premiums are rising in the aftermath of the legislation’s passage. Doctors are retiring or closing their Medicare practices. Companies are taking write downs in their expected profits due to the higher health care costs imposed by the legislation. Soon, Medicare patients will begin to meet the word “no” when they seek care.

    And then will come the most deadly reality – that Obamacare is doing nothing to create jobs, lower unemployment or deal with the national economic crisis. The President will be seen to have spent his entire first year and a half in office pushing for legislation that means nothing to the central problem the nation faces – its economy – unless it is to make things worse.

    The deflation in expectations of improvement in health care, the manifestation of the harms of the legislation, and the continuation of our unemployment woes all will continue to drag Obama and the Democrats down, down, down.


    Fox has Loser at 43% approval, Rasmussen has him -4 overall

    Approve Disapprove
    Rasmussen 48 52 -4
    FOX News 43 48 -5

  27. wbboei
    April 9th, 2010 at 8:40 pm


    So, people have started reading the fine print finally. And they don’t like it? Despite all the spin effort being expended to sell the feces as a dozen roses?

    Maybe because even the fudged numbers in the bill reveal how much everyone is going to have to “chip in” by getting screwed over by the bill. A bill designed solely to show that Obama can draw a line in the sand and win a battle (but lose the war).

  28. CNN is calling the trial episodes “specials” to keep expectations low in case the project doesn’t make it to the series stage. But, really, expectations couldn’t be much lower for Anderson — his show has recently been beaten by repeats of programs on MSNBC and HLN
    So Gloria Vanderbilts precious baby boy is sinking in the polls. He should not call Tea Party Members teabaggers for the same reason that people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. When he is gone from New York, Central Park will be safer at night, except for the CNN cameraman who hung himself awhile back. Now there is a high for you. Perhaps Anderson has the same predictions. I don’t know and I don’t want to know, if you know what I mean. In the meantime, I would urge his producers not to worry that the expectations will be too high. Our expectations for Anderson could hardly be lower.

  29. But, really, expectations couldn’t be much lower for Anderson — his show has recently been beaten by repeats of programs on MSNBC and HLN
    The two MSNBC repeat programs that have become household favorites are Life Behind Bars and To Catch A Predator. I wonder which of those two gems beat out Anderson.

  30. So, people have started reading the fine print finally. And they don’t like it? Despite all the spin effort being expended to sell the feces as a dozen roses?

    Maybe because even the fudged numbers in the bill reveal how much everyone is going to have to “chip in” by getting screwed over by the bill. A bill designed solely to show that Obama can draw a line in the sand and win a battle (but lose the war).
    rgb: it is a little like the famous last words of the CEO of the now defunct Boise Cascade Timber Company: we have a wonderful business plan but the customers are not smart enough to appreciate it–yet.

  31. It is interesting is it not. She has said she has no interest in the Supreme Court. But the bots at Slate and elsewhere persist in that narrative. This is bad strategy on their part, because in order to pursue it they must laud her virtues. That is not a bad thing from her standpoint because it enhances her qualifications for the top job. But it is bad from the bots standpoint because it forces them to argue against themselves. It is a strategy so stupid that it reminds me of Stupak.

  32. I do not think it is the dim stategists at all. I can pretty much assure you that Obama is the one who thinks he can win over the public months after he blew it on health care and they made up their minds that they don’t like it. To continue down this ally is an act of sheer folly. It is part and parcel of his perverse mindset which says “I can make them believe anything I want them to believe”. He believes it and now he cannot afford not to believe it.

  33. admin:

    not sure if you have watched Sarah’s speech today. She referenced both Bill Clinton’s “fairytale” line, and credited him

    and then she used Hillary’s famous line that we all love: “the clouds parting and the seas rising”
    (she didn’t credit Hillary, but we PUMAs know and I know I certainly love Sarah using that Hillary-line)

    I gotta say, I am really liking this woman.

  34. The only “jobs, jobs, jobs” Barack Obama is worried about is his own job right now – and what “jobs, jobs” he and Michelle Obama will coerce once they are booted out of the White House.
    Amen Admin.

    His job only.

    And more is the pity for that.

    People are motivated by unfulfilled needs.

    The need for new jobs is now acutely felt.

    Yet Obama ignores it.

  35. I know I sure as hell have not forgotten what happened on May 31th, 2008. It is still that fresh in my heart and mind.
    1. A day that shall live in infamy for all true democrats who believe the party should be responsive to the people.

    2. From this day forward that date should be celebrated (and reviled) as Voter Disenfranchisement Day.

    3. That would be a good idea for a PUMA rally which would remind the world of the evil thing that was done to them, to Hillary, and to our country by the dark movers in the back room.

    4. I could imagine masks with their likenesses parading around the scene of the crime, with a tip off to FOX News,

  36. I asked someone in the know where Anderson Cooper got that gold plated name.

    I was told that the butler’s name was Anderson.

  37. Last few times on really posted on this blog I told you all that Perry was going to be the GOP wonder boy…a total globalist and a fraud and a far right winger. He is worse than Romney! The republicans really have no one and neither does the dims…its a shame!

  38. one thing that can certainly be said about Sarah Palin is that she is GUTSY…that woman does not hold back…fearless…

    over at Gateway Pundit where it is said…SARAH PALIN BLASTS BACK!!!

    Sarah Palin clobbered Barack Obama today in her speech at the Souther Republican Leadership Conference. The former Alaska Governer responded to the “community organizer’s” attack on her nuclear experience.

    Obama just couldn’t resist her bait.
    She hooked him yesterday… She reeled him in today.
    Hope For America has video.

    She owned him:

    video clip follows

    : )))))

  39. Agreed, Obama sniping at Palin, reveals a few things. According to the MSM, she is supposed to be a lightweight who quit her job to pursue celebrity-hood, and is politically ambitious.

    He, is supposed to be noble, THE most intelligent person on the planet, Mr. Cool.

    Yet here he is, having to retaliate, looking petulant and small.

    He came down out of his ivory tower, and once you are in the street, you’ve lost your protection.

    If this was a chess game, the announcers would be commenting, “WTF!! That does NOT look like a smart move. A blunder”.

    Obama sucks, he’s an idiot.

    Sarah P. seems to have some political smarts.

  40. This analysis is correct. If Crist fights the sumanmi, he will drown. If he gets behind it, then in 2012 he can take Nelson’s seat or Rubio’s when he runs for higher office. As I said before, Rubio has star power and most Republicans do not. Absent some unforeseen scandal, I fully expect that Rubio will be on the Republican Presidential ticket. They want the Hispanic vote. When it comes to experience I do not think the electorate has learned a damned thing. They are brand buyers and they go for American Idol. By 2012 the Democratic brand will be toxic. And Obama charisma will be seen as greasy and highly manipulative. The only hope for the Democrats is to nominate Hillary in 2012. But that assumes a degree of integrity, patriotism and survival which Democrats have failed to manifest up to this point. Let us hope that changes.
    Posted by Moe Lane (Profile)
    Friday, April 9th at 7:54PM EDT
    It’s not your time, Governor.

    Via Hot Air: Allahpundit independently makes the same suggestion…

    If I were Crist, here’s what I’d do. First, I’d dial up Jeb Bush and ask him whether there’s any chance whatsoever that he’ll endorse me. If he says no (which seems likely), either because he’s backing Rubio or staying out of the race, then I’d dial up Rubio and offer him a deal. In return for me dropping out right now, endorsing him, and helping him fundraise, I’d ask for a commitment that he’ll help me beat Bill Nelson in 2012. That’s really the only way at this point that Crist can regain his standing among the base, whom he’ll need to have onboard for any shot at the Senate.

    …that I did last month, only I didn’t bother with suggesting that Crist give Jeb an opportunity to bail him out. It’s not too late, Governor: you still have something to trade. We don’t have to let this situation deteriorate further.

    But the clock’s ticking.

    Moe Lane

  41. Its going to be Rick Perry, Forbes was here in Tyler saying if this country was run more like Texas we’d be better off….The Presidential nominee will be Rick Perry/Sarah Palin…I’ll betcha!
    Rubio is already in trouble…some unusual expenses on RNC credit card!

  42. Here are some questions big media should be asking Obama to determine who and what he is:

    1. Are you not considered charming by many others?
    2. Do you use this charm to manipulate or con others?
    3. Do you have a big ego?
    4. Are you a pathological liar?
    5. Do you feel no remorse when you hurt someone?
    6. Do you often break promises?
    7. Are you incapable of loving someone?
    8. Do you get bored easily?
    9. Do you not care much about the feelings of others?
    10. Do you have bad control over your impulses?
    11. When you were younger were you prone to behavioral problems?
    12. Are you unreliable and irresponsible?
    13. Are you not loyal to your significant other?
    14. Are your plans for the future unrealistic? (be honest now)
    15. Do you cling onto others for self gain?
    16. Would you break the law?
    17. Would you have committed criminal acts as a child?
    18. Are you a paranoid person?
    19. Do you tend to have many short-term relationships but never any meaningful long-term ones?
    20. Are you secretive?
    21. Do you know the difference between right and wrong?
    22. Do you learn from your past mistakes?
    23. Do you just want to “be trusted”?
    24. Do you betray people’s trust?

    (Note: these are the benchmarks of a sociopath)

  43. I can listen to all these theories about how Obama will be the come back kid, the republicans have no candidate, the stock market is up, 2012 is a long way off, but when all is said and done, I will put my marbles on the following proposition. He will not win re-election because he cannot solve our problems and because he is the sum of the fears of Jacksonians:

    “It is perversion rather than corruption that most troubles Jacksonians: the possibility that the powers of government will be turned from the natural and proper object of supporting the well-being of the majority toward oppressing the majority in the service of an economic or cultural elite—or, worse still, in the interests of powerful foreigners. Instead of trying, however ineptly, to serve the people, have the politicians turned the government against the people? Are they serving large commercial interests with malicious designs on the common good? Are they either by ineptitude or wickedness serving hostile foreign interests—giving all our industrial markets to the Japanese, or allowing communists to steal our secrets and hand them to the Chinese? Are they fecklessly frittering away huge sums of money on worthless foreign aid programs that transfer billions to corrupt foreign dictators?”—-Walter Russell Meade.

  44. Least we forget that Soros owns the voting machines!! That will definitely have an effect as long as someone doesn’t beat him by a landslide, then he will be able to cheat himself in again! Of coarse there is the issue of eligibility! That could be a problem for him. I was just on a conservative blog a famous one at that and they absolutely hate Palin, I was shocked!

  45. Carol commenting at No Quarter gives Stupak inter alia the eulogy they deserve:

    “God Bless America!

    They are dropping like the maggots they are after they completely gourged themselves on the carcus that was America.

    To hell with all of them.”

    To which I say bravo Carol and amen.

  46. These words by Hillary in her speech at the Univ.of Lousville yesterday.Bi-psartisonship is the main theme of the introduction and she is by far the best of the best to maintain a level head and the trust of all parties.I believe thatthis is the opening salvo for her return to the an active run for the Oval Office.It is up to the citizens of this plague-ridden country to clear Obama an his band of cohorts out of of great Whitehouse and our Book of Mistakes and crimes made in our badly broken electoral process.Read her words slowly and weigh them carefully. SHE IS RUNNING on her terms.


    I’m out of politics now. That’s what I say all the time to everybody who asks me an opinion about anything, except foreign policy things. And I am excited to be part of this Administration at this point in history.

    And I want to thank my former colleague, Senator McConnell, for inviting me here and for that very kind introduction. During the eight years that I served in the Senate with Mitch, I was fortunate to find common cause and work with him on a number of foreign policy issues: human rights in Burma; legislation to support small businesses and micro-credit lending in Kosovo; promoting women and civil society leaders in Afghanistan; strengthening the rule of law in parts of the Islamic world. And I’ve appreciated working with him in my new capacity upon becoming Secretary of State.

    I think this McConnell Center really demonstrates Mitch’s deep appreciation not only for the political process of which he’s been a part for years – I didn’t know until he was introduced that he is the longest serving senator in Kentucky history – but also to the importance of education and the role that education plays in the life of our country. And it is a real tribute to him that this idea which he put forth so many years ago has created the McConnell Center, and certainly these young people who are here studying as part of the center.

    Now, I have to say that for some of you McConnell Scholars, graduation is approaching quickly. And I want you to know that we are hiring at the State Department. (Laughter.) We are looking forward to filling our ranks with the best and brightest of young Americans to do the work that needs to be done on behalf of diplomacy and development, two of the three legs of the stool that represents American foreign policy; the other, of course, being defense. And we’ve been fortunate to have bipartisan support of which Senator McConnell was a part, to make sure that we had the personnel that we needed to be able to tackle all of the challenges we face.

    I always knew the world was big, but it just seems to have gotten bigger and bigger since I’ve been Secretary of State, and that there isn’t any place – it’s not like being in a big house where you say, “Well, I think we’ll just shut off that third floor so that we don’t have to heat it. Because sure enough, you try to do that, you’re going to have a fire and then you’re in trouble. So you have to paying attention all the time. And we need young people with patriotism, a sense of civic responsibility, a keen awareness of their citizenship and patriotic duty to serve in the State Department and USAID on behalf of the United States.

    Back in Washington these days, our policy discussions can get pretty lively. We can both vouch for that, both Senator McConnell and I, because anybody who’s turned TV during the last few months will remember some of the heated exchanges. But in foreign policy, we have a long tradition of coming together across party lines to face America’s toughest national security challenges. That commitment to cooperation helped protect our nation through two World Wars and the Cold War. And Senator McConnell and I were part of that legacy in our cooperation when I was in the Senate. And appreciate the work he’s done and the leadership he has demonstrated encouraging Republicans and Democrats to work together as we deal with the extremely complex situations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

    Well, today, I want to speak about another challenge that is bigger than any one Administration or any political party – it’s protecting our families, our neighbors, our nation, and our allies from nuclear terrorism and nuclear proliferation.

    Now, for generations, Republican and Democratic Administrations have recognized the magnitude of this challenge. And they have worked together in partnership with the Congress to reduce the danger posed by nuclear weapons and to maintain a safe, secure, and effective deterrent to protect the United States and our allies across the world.

    President Reagan had these goals in mind in 1987 when he negotiated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty, which eliminated an entire class of nuclear armed missiles. And that agreement was ratified in the Senate by a vote of 93-5.
    President George H.W. Bush presided over ratification of the START I treaty, which was approved 93-6. And President George W. Bush’s Moscow Treaty passed 95-0. And two years ago this week, President George W. Bush issued a joint statement with the Russians in support of negotiating a successor to the START agreement.

    This issue has united national security experts from both political parties. And four of the strongest advocates for action like this are former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, and former Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sam Nunn – two Republicans and two Democrats. Faced with what they said is “a very real possibility that the deadliest weapons ever invented could fall into dangerous hands,” they have come together repeatedly to demand a global effort to reduce reliance on nuclear weapons, prevent their spread, and ultimately end them as a threat to the world.

    And so the Obama Administration is committed to building on the work of the last four administrations, and we’ve worked on these issues hand-in-hand with Republicans and Democrats in Congress.

  47. I think that Sarah is so busy making money that she has no interest in being a candidate again.If you look at Hillary and listen to her words she projects a picture of great political skills knowledge patience serious analytical thoughts in every word she speaks.She is a valued visitor and negotiator in any world visit she makes to our friends and enemies alike.By contrast Sarah projects a Barbie Doll type with a screechy voice making jokes and showing very little knowledge of the serious conditions in this tinderbox world.She could not pass the muster test in just about all of the world Capitols she would have to visit.Nice Cute Girl but not up to the job.

  48. Another reminder of the big sunday morning coming up tomorrow.


    Daily Appointments Schedule for April 9, 2010

    Washington, DC

    April 9, 2010



    Secretary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates tape joint interviews with ABC’s “This Week,” CBS’s “Face the Nation” and NBC’s “Meet the Press” to air on Sunday, April 11.

  49. It would be interesting to see how large the audience is who tunes into Clinton events, vs O events.

  50. As a follow up to my assessment of candidate Sarah I would rather see her and her family in yhe Whithouse than its present occupants.I believe so much damage has been done by Obama and his forty thieves that we need Hillary ASAP.

  51. ABM90 I agree with that. I don’t think anyone owns Sarah, and she is a tough competitor. Yes, she has limited experience and knowledged, but she has more executive experience than the present resident. She has gone against some tough issues in Alaska. Don’t get me wrong,
    HRC has a lot more, but this woman is showing a lot of intelligence, guts, and courage.

    I don’t know what will happen in November, but what ever it is, the Dims have made their own destiny. They have encouraged and backed a candidate who promised hope and change, and then they went about bullying and shoving things down everyone’s throat, think people would not notice, and they could control the media.

  52. wbboei
    April 10th, 2010 at 1:48 am
    I was not referring to our Carol but another one at No Quarter. She summed up my own feelings so well that I posted it.

  53. screechy voice is right…she is in dire need of a voice coach…but Sarah is great! Its just hard to listen to her because of the pitch of her voice. I don’t think she can win because of minute knowledge of world affairs…she’s learning though.

  54. No one has as much experience and knowledge as Hillary.

    Sarah is very capable, very intelligent, very honest. She did a great bi-partisan job as Gov of Alaska (coming to THAT job with very little experience). Of all contenders except Hillary, Sarah is probably the best qualified.

    We can’t judge Sarah by the soundbytes the media chooses to quote, or the subjects that she is given air time for.

    And certainly not for her female voice! That is a damn sexist attitude. Remember people who called Hillary ‘shrill’ or said she ‘cackled’?

  55. See
    “Palin governed from the center”
    about her accomplishments and success in Alaska.

    As to world affairs, for taming the oil companies, Sarah had to learn about the oil situation world-wide, which included the leaders and policies of Middle East leaders etc. Oil and economics worldwide.

    That’s the biggest part of the international picture already. She went from the Wasilla PTA to the Governor’s office — she’s already got the main piece of the world puzzle now.

    Of course I prefer Hillary’s policies, but even as a rightwinger (she’s not extreme) Sarah would be the next best person this leftwinger can think of for the job in either party.

  56. The only difference is that Hillary voice was not shrill, she has a fine speaking voice and she never had a cackle….Sarah voice is very high pitched so when she tried to speak loudly its hard to understand what she is saying…Bachman on the otherhand has a lower tone and she sounds better…saying that is not at all demeaning it is the truth. She really needs a voice coach…If Hillary doesn’t run, I want Sarah to and I want her to have every opportunity to win….so now is the time to work on that pitch in her voice. Actually lots of folks do this, so its not being mean to say this.

    What about the plane crash that took out most of the Polish government including the President..Putin is taking over the investigation personally…thats weird!

  57. I don’t like to comment on women’s voices, screechy or not (just like I don’t like to comment on their appearance). As a minority in a field dominated by men (both colleagues and students) I used to get all kinds of comments about my voice — monotonous, dry, blah, blah. I wondered if the same students made similar comments about a male colleague who had an especially shrill voice and I doubt that they did. If we, women were dominant in all fields, my theory is that everybody would be used to a variety of voices that we would not find it difficult to listen to them. We have to get past the voice factor when it comes to women leaders.

  58. We should tell the bots who say Hillary will be the nominee that she is not interested by Oprah is so the real story is the Fraud in the White House will nominate a dark horse candidate named Oprah and everything else is merely diversionary. The timing of his retirement was a strategic mistake by Stevens–as the following article illustrates. Let us hope that Obama compounds that mistake by nominating a leftist candidate–someone who substitutes his or her judgment for the Constitution. That will open another front for attacking Obama and rallying the Tea Parties. If he does the opposite, and nominates someone who is faithful to the Constitution then that will be another slap in the face to his liberal base. He is between a rock and a hard place. His big media cronies no longer control the court of public opinion. They have lost their relevance.
    While Supreme Court Justice John Stevens’ decision to retire this summer will give President Obama a second chance in as many years to shape the high court, the upcoming confirmation battle during an election year all but guarantees that his ambitious legislative agenda will grind to a halt.

    President Obama approaches the podium in the Rose Garden of the White House, Friday, April 9, 2010, to speak about the retirement of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. (AP)
    While Supreme Court Justice John Stevens’ decision to retire this summer will give President Obama a second chance in as many years to shape the high court, the upcoming confirmation battle during an election year all but guarantees that his ambitious legislative agenda will grind to a halt.

    Obama and his Democratic allies are hoping for a swift confirmation process while pushing through the rest of the president’s legislative agenda, including an overhaul of Wall Street, immigration reform, climate change legislation, and a comprehensive jobs bill.

    But some observers say getting any of that accomplished this year is unlikely because Supreme Court battles slow things down.

    “All of the air is sucked out of the town and it’s focused on one issue and one issue only,” said Roger Pilon, founder and director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies.

    “Mainly the hearings that take place before the Senate Judiciary Committee and of course the run up to that is of course the examination in exquisite detail of the nominee,” he said. “And so I don’t think the Obama administration is going to get a lot done this summer.”

    In particular, Pilo said he doesn’t expect the Senate to take up the climate change legislation that barely passed the House last year.

    Stevens announced his retirement Friday, saying he will step down when the court finishes its work for the summer in late June or early July.

    Obama said he will move quickly to name a nominee, as he did with Justice Sonia Sotomayor last year, and that he’ll look for someone with similar qualities — independent mind, fierce dedication to the rule of law.

    The timing of Stevens’ announcement leaves ample time for the White House to settle on a successor and Senate Democrats, who control 59 votes, to conduct confirmation hearings and a vote.

    While Republicans have not ruled out an attempt to delay confirmation, some Democrats believe the process won’t slow Obama’s agenda down.

    “I think we can both handle the nomination of a justice and get to the critical issues at the same time,” Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said at a news conference Friday, adding that he expects the Senate to pass financial reform and to tackle a controversial Supreme Court case that rolled back restrictions on campaign spending by corporations.

    While Democrats will be looking to move quickly, Republicans smell the possibility of big wins in the fall and might look for opportunities to drag the battle out until after the November elections.

    Which leaves the president with a decision to make about what kind of nominee he wants to choose. If he picks a nominee with views that are well left of center, he’ll please his base but will need to brace for a fight that brings his legislative agenda to a halt. If he picks a more moderate nominee he may hack off his base but he avoids a big fight and makes it possible to push through at least some of his agenda.

    The leading candidates to replace Stevens are Solicitor General Elena Kagan, 49, and federal appellate Judges Merrick Garland, 57, and Diane Wood, 59.

    While Obama’s nomination is unlikely to change the balance of the high court, these confirmation battles have become knock-down drag-out affairs over the years. The Senate Judiciary Committee is packed with the hardest of the hard core partisans from both sides of the aisle.

    For the Republican minority, Sen. Jeff Sessions, the ranking member, will lead a bench of rock-ribbed conservatives like Sens. Orrin Hatch, Chuck Grassley, John Kyl and Tom Coburn.

    Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., chairman of the Judiciary Committee, is a fierce, take-no-prisoners liberal. Joined by stalwarts of the left like Sens. Dianne Feinstein, Dick Durbin and Schumer who is confident that Obama’s agenda will not be affected by the confirmation battle.

    “At a time when the public is yearning for bipartisanship, the American people hope the president picks a candidate who merits consensus support,” he said. “I would similarly expect that the rest of the important agenda that awaits the Senate this year would not be bogged down on the account of this nomination.”

    Fox News’ Brian Wilson contributed to this report.

    Leave a Comment Sort: Newest Sort: Oldest Subscribe to CommentsSort: Newest Sort: Oldest Email
    * not displayed
    Comment Required
    FOX News encourages you to participate in this discussion; however, please be sure to review our Terms of Use and Privacy Statement
    or Leave a CommentYou must be logged in to comment. Please login or register below.
    Already a member of

    Log in now

    Username or Email Address
    Remember me on this computer Forgot your password? or login using a third-party account

    Reset Password
    To reset your password, please fill in your email below. A password reset link will be emailed to you.

    Email Address

  59. The Daily Howler

    WE WERE WRONG! Rep. Cohen played a race card, reminding us how we were wrong: // link // print // previous // next //
    FRIDAY, APRIL 9, 2010

    WE WERE WRONG: We’ll admit it—we were wrong! In the 1990s (and for a few years thereafter), when the liberal world was still on vacation, we never bought it. We never bought the silly line which held that we liberals are just too nuanced, too reflexively fair, to ever succeed at talk radio.

    Too honest. Too smart. Too high-minded.

    To us, that was always self-pimping bunk. On the other hand, we could never have dreamed how small and nasty we liberals would actually turn out be once we emerged from our decades-long slumber and rejoined the political world. We couldn’t have dreamed how much we’d enjoy playing nasty, self-defeating race cards. We couldn’t have dreamed how much we’d enjoy sneering at our lessers.

    Today, the career liberal world is a dumb, ugly place—and Democratic/liberal numbers just keep falling That polling trend may change, of course—but then too, it may not. Why would people vote for us, given the way we behave?

    We love to play race—and we love to sneer. Let’s scope a few recent examples:

    Part one—Rep. Cohen plays Hardball: Just consider Rep. Steve Cohen’s nasty, disrespectful, race-baiting performance on last evening’s Hardball. We’ve rarely seen a more rancid display of cable TV race-baiting.

    Cohen is a Democrat from Memphis—and he ought to resign. Last night, this baldly dishonest man voiced a lofty concern. He complained about the way the GOP has been pandering to its base with nasty, vile race talk:

    COHEN (4/8/10): Well, I do think there is race involved in it. And it’s because the parties are so separate, and people play to their base. And the Democratic Party has most of the African-American support and the Republicans don’t. And they are just playing to their base. And it’s unfortunate. You need leadership.

    And I think the Chuck Percys, the Nelson Rockefellers, the Howard Bakers, the Bob Doles, that type of Republican is not around anymore. And they need moderates that with—who are within the Republican Party, but not in leadership. And these people talking about secession, it sounds like nullification and interposition dripping off their lips. It’s not the kind of language you need to bring together America.

    Poor Cohen! This deeply dishonest man was offended by all the divisive language when the GOP plays to its base! Unfortunately, Cohen may have been playing to his base a bit too. He represents a majority-black district, and he was on Hardball because he had been on the radio talking shit this:

    MATTHEWS (4/9/10): Welcome back to Hardball. Well, the tea party crowd has called President Obama a socialist, a communist and a Nazi. And now Democratic congressman Stevce Cohen of Tennessee compared the tea party movement itself to the KKK in a radio interview. Let’s listen to it.

    COHEN (audiotape): The tea party people are kind of, like—without robes and hoods, they have really shown a very hard-core, angry side of America that is against any type of diversity. And we saw opposition to African-Americans, hostility toward gays, hostility to anybody who wasn’t just, you know, a clone of George Wallace’s fan club. And I’m afraid they’ve taken over the Republican Party. I think these—it’s cultural, and these people are ready to be led by the nose and they’re being led, and it’s just to be against Barack Obama.

    MATTHEWS: Well, we have Congressman Cohen joining us right now from Memphis. Sir, thank you for joining us. Give me your insights right up front here because I’m a student of it, as well, of the tea party crowd. Who are these people? How much of it is racial? How much of it is ideological? How much of it is rooted in organizations like, well, the Know-Nothings, the KKK, et cetera?

    According to Cohen, the tea party is like the KKK. They’re hostile to anyone who isn’t a clone of George Wallace’s fan club. And not only that! Republicans aren’t using “the kind of language you need to bring together America!”

    It’s hard to be a bigger clown—but Cohen gave it the old college try. In this, his very first statement on last night’s program, he described a fact-finding tour he took during the health care protest:

    COHEN (continuing directly from above): I think there’s a lot of it, Chris. You know, on the health care vote, I walked on the Mall among the protesters for at least a half an hour. I took my congressional badge off, had shades on and walked around. It was a very homogeneous group. It was almost 99 percent white. I saw a minimal number of African-Americans, Asians, native Americans. It was just—they were so alike.

    And after the hatred that I saw exposed—calling Congressman John Lewis, one of my heroes, and Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, another friend, the N-word, and spitting on Emanuel Cleaver—just disgusted me. And then the names they used for Barney Frank. And it showed a disregard. Now, not all tea party people, obviously, think that way, but when the leadership didn’t say anything about it and object, the group becomes surety for the harmful words and actions that others took, comparing President Obama to Hitler and to a Nazi, and the party does look very bad when they don’t stand up and say this was wrong and shameful.

    There weren’t any native Americans! Pure clowning—and prime race-baiting.

    According to Cohen, there’s a lot of the KKK stuff in this group. He knows this because he spent a half hour walking among them; it almost sounded like he had seen a lot of hatred exposed. But Matthews, a re-purposed corporate pseudo-liberal, back-slid at one point last night. He made the mistake of asking Cohen if he actually saw or heard racial epithets during his half-hour stroll on the mall. Cohen’s response was so baldly dishonorable, he ought to resign today:

    MATTHEWS: When you were out moving around on the—on the crowd there, incognito, if you will, did you actually hear these epithets thrown at the black members of Congress and at Barney Frank for his orientation? Did you personally witness that?

    COHEN: I personally can’t say I was. To be honest, I was listening to Steve “Guitar” Miller my iPod.

    MATTHEWS: Yes. So, you can’t witness that. Let me ask you about the issue of—well, let’s take a look at some e-mails you have been getting. They have been turned over to the FBI.

    Let us explain Cohen’s statement. Cohen spent half an hour walking among the crowd—and he heard no racist language. His explanation for this will satisfy you if your IQ is 9. According to Cohen, he didn’t hear any racist language because he had his iPod on! Matthews—a re-purposed ersatz corporate liberal—knew he must quickly move on from that ludicrous answer. (By the way: If that’s the way Democrats conduct their fact-finding tours, can you think of any reason why voters should trust their work?)

    Cohen’s performance was vile, dishonest, disgraceful. How disrespectful was he? At one point, he even stooped as low as this:

    COHEN: You know, one of the main things the group was against was against health care. And Dr. King was assassinated in my hometown, Memphis, Tennessee, and we observed that horrific day with activities and remembrances this past weekend. Dr. King talked about health care being a right and that one of the great inhumanities was not providing health care to people. Then you have this group 40 years later, almost entirely white, opposing the United States government for giving health care to—making us the last industrialized country in the world to provide health care for its people. And it just doesn’t seem like we’ve come that far. And in reflecting on Dr. King having been a proponent of health care and seeing the opposition to health care, which affects so many people, white and black, but a disproportionate amount of people who are black, it was just a flashback to an era. Jim Clyburn said he hasn’t seen words expressed since the ’60s by these groups.

    Clyburn also said, when Olbermann asked, that he hadn’t heard any racial epithets. Like Matthews, Olbermann knew he must quickly move on (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 3/25/10). But it’s hard to be more disrespectful than Cohen was in that passage, dragging Dr, King into this crap as a way to extend his race-baiting. The logic here is that of a fool—or of a nasty race-man. According to Cohen, Dr. King spoke about health care—so white people must support the Democratic plan today! That is profoundly stupid work—and it’s profoundly disrespectful. Dr. King never made a statement like that in his life. Cohen should resign—should go home.

    (By the way: Bob Dole, who Cohen grandly pimped—see above—staunchly opposed health care in 1993. Was he insulting Dr. King’s memory? Why not?)

    For the record, Reps. Clyburn and Cohen have now both said they didn’t hear racial epithets. But good God, how we liberals love our race-baiting! Consider a lesser example from a more honorable source. Consider the post Joan Walsh offered last week.

    Part two—Joan sees white people: In no way do we want to compare Walsh to the appalling Rep. Cohen. But good God, how we love to play race cards! On March 29, Walsh offered this profoundly illogical post. It ran beneath these headlines:

    What’s the matter with white people?
    Too many believe—incorrectly—that healthcare reform helps “other people,” not themselves

    On the merits, this was a profoundly weak piece of analysis. On the politics, Walsh’s insistence on playing her “white people” card should go directly to the Smithsonian, where it could live for all time in the display about the dumbest ways to do politics.

    In this post, Walsh presented an exceptionally weak analysis of a Gallup survey. In the survey, Gallup asked respondents a fairly simple question about effects of the health care bill. Respondents were given a list of groups; they were asked if the health reform bill will make things better, or make things worse, for the various groups in question. Will the bill make things better for lower-income families? Will it make things better for health insurance companies? Will it make things better for people who lack insurance? For the United States as a whole? This was the type of question Gallup asked. For the full survey question, click here.

    How did respondents answer? In the least surprising result ever recorded, 59 percent of respondents said the bill will make things better for “Americans who do not have health insurance today.” For our money, the surprise here would be the fact that only 59 percent said this. If there’s a group who will obviously be helped by this bill, surely it’s the uninsured, many of whom will receive health coverage which is highly subsidized or essentially free. (15 million of the uninsured will be enrolled in Medicaid.) But in part, Walsh was upset by the way those white people responded to this question. This is a stunningly unintelligent analysis—an analysis which shows how much we liberals now love playing race:

    WALSH (3/29/10): Even though the Obama administration tried to stress the bill’s benefits to all families—insurance for folks with preexisting conditions, restrictions on companies dropping you when you get sick, letting kids stay on parents’ policies until they’re 26, as well as subsidies that will mainly go to middle- and working-class families (the poor are already covered by Medicaid)—a Gallup survey found that 57 percent of white respondents said that the bill would help the uninsured, and 52 percent said that it would improve conditions for low-income families. Only a third of whites thought it would benefit the country, and shockingly, only 20 percent thought it would benefit their family. (Nonwhites polled were more likely to say the bill would help their families.)

    Why were non-whites “more likely to say the bill would help their families?” Duh. In a column from which Walsh took her lead, Ron Brownstein had explained the obvious—non-white families are more likely to lack insurance! But Walsh was upset—indeed, was shocked—by the responses of those “white people.” Despite the fact that Obama had tried to stress the bill’s benefits to all families, “white people,” in their responses, had offered an unpleasing set of reactions: They said the bill will help the uninsured and families with low incomes. But shockingly, a much smaller percentage said the bill will help their own families! The reason for this would seem fairly obvious: Most families already have health insurance; Obama’s emphasis to the side, it isn’t especially clear that such families will be helped by the bill. But so what! To Walsh, the fact that Obama had stressed a certain point meant that white people should agree with his presentation. They should be obedient proles. They should respond to this poll in the way their Dear Leader would want.

    Will the bill help families who have insurance? In some cases, it certainly will—but in other cases, it won’t. Absent clairvoyance, it’s hard to know which families it will and won’t help. Without question, it’s much more clear that it will help families who don’t have insurance. (Will it help the United States as a whole? That’s a completely debatable point.) But so what? Walsh ran “white people” into her headline, and even stuck a phony quote into their mouths. This is the way our favorite race-baiter chose to open her post:

    WALSH: Frank Rich’s column “The Rage Is Not About Health Care” got a lot of attention this weekend. It ran through the examples of Republican overreaction and right-wing rage in response to the passage of healthcare reform—all of it well-covered in Salon—and concluded the rage mainly stems from the fact that whites are about to become the minority in this country.

    Rich isn’t wrong (although calling last week’s uprising a “small scale mimicry of Kristallnacht” was a little shrill). The “I want my country back!” rhetoric does reflect a mind-set in which one’s country has been taken away by … others. But in thinking about race this weekend, I got more out of a column by Ron Brownstein, which examined poll data showing that white voters—wrongly—tend to believe healthcare reform helped “other people,” not themselves.

    Joan knows they’re “wrong,” because Dear Leader said! That said, we’re not sure why the phrase “other people” shows up inside quotes, in this passage and in the headline. The phrase played no part in the Gallup poll; no respondent used this term. But given the well-known language of race, it makes it sound like those puzzling “white people” had been resentfully discussing The Other. (To liberals,“other people” of course means people of color in this context.) In fact, the responses which have Walsh so shocked are perfectly sensible responses, even if they diverge from what Dear Leader’s might want. (And let’s be clear—this is Walsh’s work, not Obama’s. Obama has never said anything so foolish.) But Joan couldn’t wait to pander to her own constituents. “What’s the matter with white people?” she asked in her headline.

    Perhaps she should look in a mirror.

    By the way, Walsh at least was able to see the hysteria in Frank Rich’s earlier race-baiting, in which he compared the demonstrations against health reform to Kristallnacht. (The demonstrations weren’t as bad, he judged.) But then, Rich is one of our biggest liberal race-baiters. How moronic is this bloated, pale, Imus-loving hack? This passage came from that same column. You can’t get dumber than this:

    RICH (3/28/10): If Obama’s first legislative priority had been immigration or financial reform or climate change, we would have seen the same trajectory. The conjunction of a black president and a female speaker of the House—topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay Congressional committee chairman—would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play. It’s not happenstance that Frank, Lewis and Cleaver—none of them major Democratic players in the health care push—received a major share of last weekend’s abuse. When you hear demonstrators chant the slogan ”Take our country back!,” these are the people they want to take the country back from.

    Rich is one of the biggest buffoons of the past twenty years. (Bush and Gore are just alike! We now know that Gennifer Flowers was telling the truth! I will miss my intelligent conversations with Don Imus! Gore’s film is like the kind of movie they make you watch in high school! How did this man get so dumb?) That said, the highlighted passage is spectacularly dumb, even by Rich’s standards. Conservatives may want to “take the country back” from Obama, Pelosi, Sotomayor and Frank—but do they want to take it back from blacks, from women, from Hispanics and gays? Just this week, a large crowd of conservatives loudly cheered the idea of a Palin-Bachmann presidential ticket. (Palin and Bachmann are women.) When asked by Sean Hannity at that same rally, Palin said she supports Michael Steele. In Florida, Republicans have fallen in love with Marco Rubio; in the process, they’ve thrown away Charlie Crist, the whitest male pol on the planet. Do you know how dumb it is to keep insisting that they hate women, Hispanics and blacks when their biggest favorites are drawn from these camps? Do you understand the insulting message this nonsense sends to Walsh’s shocking “white people?” When we tell them they’re stone-cold racists—that their limbic brains don’t work right—we’re telling them to join the other side, We might as well send limos around to drive them to the tea party.

    Part three—We luvvv coal miners: We liberals luvvvv coal miners—this week. We love them this week because their deaths let us parade quite grandly about, complaining about their corporate owners. All other weeks, we mock their values and their culture—for example, their religious beliefs. In this morning’s New York Times, Shaila Dewan presents a fascinating report on the way coal mining families view their dangerous work in the mines which became so famous this week. Repeatedly, she describes these people praying for safety:

    DEWAN (4/9/10): Unlike in many households, where financial security brings peace of mind, in mining families the two are permanently at odds. Stephanie Pennington, for instance, is quick to acknowledge that her family lives well, with a three-bedroom home and a 2007 Dodge Durango, its rear window studded with decals of a pick and shovel, a crawling man with a headlamp, and the legend ”WV Coal Miner’s Wife.”

    But each night when her husband, Robert Shawn Pennington, leaves for the hoot-owl shift at the ICG Beckley coal mine here, she gathers her three children to pray. ”I don’t sleep until I hear that key in the door every morning,” Ms. Pennington, 29, said. For her family, the anxiety spans the generations. Mr. Pennington’s father was crushed to death in the old Beckley mine while his mother was six weeks pregnant with him.

    These are the people we enjoy mocking every other week. Here at THE HOWLER, we don’t have religious beliefs—but West Virginia’s coal miners do. (So does Al Gore. So did Dr. King.) But so what? Tomorrow, Steve Benen will do his weekly piece about “The Week in God,” mocking what’s new from “The God Machine.” Do you have any idea how dumb that is, if you’re dealing in electoral politics in a largely religious nation?

    (According to exit polls, West Virginia’s white voters favored McCain over Obama in 2008, 57-41. These coal miners are the very people we constantly insult and mock—except when their deaths let us parade around for a week, pretending we somehow respect them.)

    We’ll admit it—we didn’t know! We never could have imagined how nasty and dumb we liberals are—how much we love to play race cards, how much we love to mock teabaggers, a term Digby applied to Pam Stout again, just yesterday. (Darlings! Glenn Beck makes her think! She gets more like Sally Quinn every day.) Just a guess: Digby doesn’t watch Beck a whole lot. Yes, he’s one of the biggest nuts and/or frauds ever seen on TV—but he can’t be dismissed quite that simply. Most of his work comes from fever swamps—but some of his work is quite erudite. People who aren’t quite as bright as the self-admittedly brilliant High Lady Quinn-Digby may not always see the problems with Beck’s claims. They will be much less likely to see the problems when nasty, name-calling “Quinn lite” types keep calling them naughty names.

    Our side is nasty, brutish and stupid. (And short—in attention span.) We seem determined to lose at politics, as we so skillfully did four decades ago, the last time we pretended we cared. Some of us were raised by racist fathers, against whom we grandly recoil. Just a question: Is there any chance that the “my tribe and no other” gene of the fathers may be swimming around in the daughters? The fathers ridiculed The Other on the basis of race. The daughters also love to exclude. And we love to play our own race cards! Just go back and review the work of the honorable Mr. Cohen.

    He had his iPod on! Could any tea-bagger we ever imagined say anything so dishonest, so dumb?

    Final question: What should we do in our schools to help deserving, low-income kids? You will never see that question addressed at deeply caring, deeply progressive sites like Walsh’s Salon. People like Walsh are very good at playing the “racial hero” card. But they quit on black kids a long time ago. They don’t give a flying frack about them. The truth is, they never will.

    If you doubt us, go search your leading “liberal” sites. Go try to find a single “liberal” presenting a single idea! Go search all the years of KO and Rachel, looking for one single word.

    Long ago, we liberals quit on this topic. We left the field to conservatives, to business types, to “educational experts.” (We left the field to Wendy Kopp!) Those people actually seem to care. Your side is AWOL, uninvolved.

    How easy it would be to borrow the race-baiting language of Colbert King at this time! When I look in the face of Joan Walsh, I see the face of Louise Day Hicks!

    It’s very easy to play these games. If you doubt how easy it is, just watch us liberals as we keep playing race. As we work around the clock, restoring conservative power.

  60. Tim thanks for that interview link. We especially like the ‘first come the Bush disaster and now we have the worse Obama disaster’.

    ABM90, Hillary invited by arch Republican McConnell informs us a bit more of her intentions and how she continues to build bridges.

    Wbboei, the DailyHowler article is excellent. It cogently sums up several of our themes on race-baiting Dimocrats, the Republican strength of having Palin, Rubio, Brown in their tent, and the utter dumbness of Joan Walsh and Digby types. These are hard things for “our side” to realize so it is good to see that we are not alone in writing what we write.

  61. …stopping in for a quickie…

    the race baiters personified are on MSNBC…it is a concerted effort and strategy on MSNBC to turn everything…every discussion…word…movement, etc into an act of racism…they are the perpetrators of race BAITING…’they’ said the sun came out today’…MSNBC’s translation…those racists…

    someone should track how many segments on MSNBC and CNN are filled with race baiting going way back to the primaries…

    they are patently ABSURD…and sick! they know just what they are doing and they know why…and it is on purpose…

    next comes CNN…they are more coy…more crafty…they present their racism meme generally in identity programming…’black in america’ ‘black this, black that’…next, latinos this, latinos that…on and on…while pointing out all those ‘white’ tea ‘baggers’, etc and then they have their attack dogs like Roland Martin and AA Professor Michael whatever his name is on…to condescendingly drive the black victims and racism themes…

    MSNBC though gets the prize…they STARTED it with pushing and driving that Bill and Hillary Clinton were racists at the beginning of the primaries…once they established and spred that, they went on to attack Gerry Ferraro and Ed Rendell…basically, anyone that opened their mouth and had one negative word towards Obama was a racist…now that Bill and Hill are no longer perceived threats to them….everyone else is on notice…of course SP and the whole “white” as they like to say, Republican party, and any other tea party or dissenters in the country…are a bunch of white racists…and if you are a black person in those groups, you become invisible…

    that clip above of Norah O’Donnell is a PERFECT example of how at any given moment any one of them is trying to weave this racism BS into the discussion…Obama threw a bomb pitch at the baseball game…’how dare you, you racist’

    ABSURD! MSNBC and CNN, along with Obama have taken race relations backwards and DIVIDED US…where we have come together MSNBC and CNN seek to DIVIDE US…

  62. Admin: after reading this gem, I came to a clear understanding of what big media has become: a vestigial organ.

    Definition of vestigial organ:

    “An organ that was once useful in an animal’s evolutionary past, but now has no apparent nor predictable function [based on the behavior of the species (or sex) in which they are found, or the anatomy of the particular feature]: e.g., male mammae, rudiments of pelvis and hind limbs in snakes, wings on many flightless birds . . .”

    And the largest vestigial organ of all to this society: Big Media, who churns the same romance novel over and over and over again. Only to be proven wrong again and again and yet again.

    Same source:

    BEEN THERE! Because we’ve Been There, we can offer a few real-world suggestions: // link // print // previous // next //
    THURSDAY, APRIL 8, 2010

    Perchance to joke: John McCain’s recent demurral got so much play that even a high lady heard about it! This morning, Lady Collins muses about a great saint’s recent flip:

    COLLINS (4/8/10): This week, John McCain rewrote his own political biography, telling Newsweek: “I never considered myself a maverick.”…

    [I]f McCain wants to re-imagine the 2008 presidential campaign, he is free to give it a try. Although if you are planning to deny that you ever thought of yourself as a maverick, it would be better not to have subtitled one of your memoirs “The Education of an American Maverick.”

    Collins can recall the 2008 campaign, and a book which appeared in 2002. In fact, McCain was first fluffed as a “maverick” in the New York Times as early as 1996. And this designation lay at the heart of his 2000 White House campaign, as the New York Times’ Alison Mitchell noted in December 1999:

    MITCHELL (12/12/99): [The McCain] campaign telegraphs that the man is the message when it calls his campaign bus the “straight-talk express” and the plane for his announcement tour “Maverick One.”

    That “straight talk” blarney was foolish, even then. (The press corps swallowed it whole, then begged for more.) But in those days, McCain really was a political maverick, and the press corps relentlessly pimped his vast greatness. That said, a tiny question entered our heads, when we saw that his recent demurral has grown so big that even Collins is writing about it. To wit:

    Is it possible that McCain was joking, speaking tongue-in-cheek, when he made that statement to Newsweek? In fairness, we’d have to say yes.

    McCain has been anything but a straight-talker in recent years. But then too, he has always spoken in tongue-in-cheek, wink-wink fashion to legions of fawning reporters. And we think you know how that sorry breed works: When they love you, as they loved Saint McCain, they dote on every whimsical nuance, using your wit to help the public understand your eternal greatness. But when they abandon you—and they’ve largely dumped McCain—they will often play their small tricks. And one of their tricks is famous: If they no longer like you, they love to report your joking remarks as if they were offered straight.

    Was McCain joking? We have no idea. You’d really have to look at the tape—and no tape has been supplied.

    That said, we were struck by Digby’s recent post about the pimping of Saint Petraeus as a possible White House contender. In this case, Petraeus is being pimped Over There, in the pages of the Telegraph. But in that UK paper, Toby Hamden was praying that Saint Petraeus might run against Fallen Obama. (“Speculation about ‘Petraeus in 2012′ persists.”) We were struck by the way Hamden’s piece faithfully recycled the standard dime novel which drove Campaign 2000:

    HAMDEN (4/3/10): Americans have never been so disgusted with their politicians. More than three-quarters of Americans disapprove of Congress. President Barack Obama’s favourability ratings have slumped to below 50 per cent and he is no longer trusted or believed by many who voted for him.

    Republicans are faring little better and the growth of the Tea Party movement reflects the widespread disgust with Washington and the political class. Incumbents across the board are vulnerable in November’s mid-term elections.

    Many voters yearn for an outsider, someone with authenticity, integrity and proven accomplishment. Someone who has not spent their life plotting how to ascend the greasy pole, adjusting every utterance for maximum political advantage.

    In this toxic climate, perhaps the only public institution that has increased in prestige in recent years is the American military. Its officers are looked upon, as General George Patton once noted, as “the modern representatives of the demi-gods and heroes of antiquity”.

    Where better to look for Obama’s successor, therefore, than in the uniformed ranks? Not since 1952, when a certain Dwight Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe during the Second World War, was elected President, have the chances of a military man winning the White House been more propitious.

    Within those ranks, no one stands out like General David Petraeus…

    Hamden begs Saint Petraeus to challenge the fallen Obama. (Presumably, this isn’t Petraeus’ doing.) But Hamden’s novel is drawn, almost word-for-word, from the novel the press corps endlessly churned in 1998 and 1999, cheering Saints Bradley/McCain against Fallen Clinton and Gore.

    According to Hamden, Americans are disgusted with their politicians, including Obama. They long for someone with “authenticity,” “integrity”—someone who hasn’t spent his whole life chasing political success. This is precisely the silly dime novel which began to appear in 1998, as the press corps scrounged for ways to get rid of Clinton and Gore. Below, check the late Jack Newfield, a certified Bradley hack, in the New York Post, urging Bradley to run against Gore. Every key part of Hamden’s piece exists in this earlier novel:

    NEWFIELD (10/26/98): He holds no public office, having quit the Senate. He makes fun of himself as a boring public speaker. And he lacks the ruthless ambition of Clinton and Gore, who knew they wanted to be president at 16.

    But Bill Bradley’s particular virtues do seem to match this moment of disgust with sleaze, slickness, lying and excess.

    He does have integrity, intellect, empathy, self-knowledge, authenticity, discipline, curiosity, respect for opponents. And a life before politics that makes him a whole human being.

    The 24-second clock is winding down, Bill. Don’t pass. Take the shot.

    Then as now: In a moment of disgust with sleaze, Bradley was full of “integrity,” “authenticity.” He hadn’t spent his whole life chasing the golden ring, as Clinton and Gore had done.

    For the record, that last claim was just absolute nonsense. Few politicians have ever sought office more aggressively, from an earlier age, than Bill Bradley did. (There was nothing wrong with that.) But Newfield composed a pleasing novel—and one year later, in Newsweek, Howard Fineman, a virtual Bradley employee, basically rewrote Newfield’s work, tossing McCain in as well:

    FINEMAN (11/15/99):This is shaping up as the year of the straight shooter—slickly packaged to sell. Character is always important in presidential politics, but in the 2000 campaign the personalities of the candidates may count more than ever before as other familiar issues fade…

    Skillfully, sometimes too eagerly, Bradley and McCain are hawking this year’s hottest commodity: the aura of authenticity—and plain-spoken candor—that comes from a life that starts outside politics. Bill Clinton was the ultimate other directed political figure, a changeling searching for identity and affirmation in shaking hands and winning votes. He’s left voters exhausted and jaded by the mechanics of politics—the polling, the fund-raising, the negative ads. But if every presidential election is a course correction, there may now be a growing demand for someone who learned to steer by his own compass. Voters will respond to someone who seems comfortable with himself, says Douglas Bailey, founder of The Hotline, a political newsletter. Bradley and McCain convey that sense. They’ve confronted very big things, and don’t seem to need to win to be complete.

    By contrast, Al Gore and George Bush do.

    Synopsis: “Bradley and McCain are selling this year’s hottest commodity: the aura of authenticity that comes from a life that starts outside politics.”

    Again, a great deal of that is utter bunk, but the novel remained the same. The public was sick of Bill Clinton’s sleaze. Luckily, Bradley and McCain were full of “authenticity,” “candor.” They hadn’t lived their whole lives to win this race. They didn’t need to win to be complete, the way Vile Gore/Bush did.

    (Once Bush beat McCain, this novel was updated. Now, it was Bush who didn’t need to win to be complete, although Vile Gore still did. By the way: Pundits often compared Bush to Eisenhower, in favorable ways. This comparison resurfaces in Hamden’s retyped novel.)

    At any rate, that’s the way the press corps’ dime novels sold Saint Bradley/McCain as opposed to Vile Clinton/Gore. Today, Hamden types the same novel about Petraeus/Obama. Once again, a basic proposition: A great deal of our political “journalism” is a set of silly, inane romance novels.

    Back to McCain’s ballyhooed demurral: They loved McCain in those days. They loved his playful, tongue-in-cheek, winking comments. Did a former saint wink at Newsweek last week?

    Knowing these scribes as we do, we make the odds 30 percent.

  63. S, what we said is now said by none other than the head of MSNBC:

    The only public statement about David Shuster’s suspension from MSNBC was five words from a spokesperson.

    But Mediaite has obtained an email from MSNBC President Phil Griffin to an angry fan, explaining in slightly more, and much harsher, detail the reason for Shuster’s indefinite suspension.

    Here’s the full email from Griffin, sent last night to a fan:

    From: Griffin, Phil (NBC Universal)
    Sent: Wed 4/07/10 11:16 PM

    Sorry, but this is a business and I need team players. He was not moral, ethical or professional and that is not fair to the 500 people who work at msnbc.

    Thanks for your note,

    This was meant to be a private correspondence, but it is interesting to see the President of a network so freely respond to someone who was upset about a host’s punishment.

    It also sheds some more light on the severity of what MSNBC believes took place – separating Shuster from the “team players” and calling him “not moral, ethical or professional” are serious charges.

    It is the entire clownship at MSNBC that is not moral, ethical or professional.

  64. He was not moral, ethical or professional
    I think he has valid grounds for a lawsuit against MSNBC for disparate treatment, and against Phil Griffin for defamation of character. You can add another zero to the settlement figure after Griffin sent out that email. Whoever the general counsel is–probably the same joker I sent an email to during the primary protesting Matthews attacks on Hillary should now be fired for letting this happen. Griffin himself should step down). Given what these people did to Hillary, let’s have a little fun with this one:

    1. disparate treatment: plaintiff Schuster will prove that moral turpitude, unethical behavior and material breach of journalistic standards are de rigeur at MSNBC. Thus they are not grounds for termination. In fact, they have been grounds for promotion and million dollar bonuses. Mattthews, Olberman and Russert are/were prime examples of this.

    2. defamation: plaintiff Schuster will further prove that when MSNBC President sent an e-mail to a fan falsely accusing the wonderful Schuster of these vile acts, he besmirched his character as a human being and integrity as a journalist. Schuster has been unable to locate alternative employment and has reason to believe that he has been blackballed from the industry. Furthermore, he has suffered mental anguish, loss of consortium, and has asked Elliot Spitzer for his black book.

    3. damages: Schuster is now reduced to a shell of his former self. He has been rejected for the menial job of paper delivery boy in Chevy Chase where he currently resides. He has also been rejected for a job of pimp in the Columbus Circle neighborhood, an otherwise lucrative gig. As a result, Schuster has suffered significant pecuniary and non pecuniary losses in an amount no less than $1 compensatory and $1 billion punitive damages to be proven at trial.

    Honestly, I do not know how MSNBC will get out of this legally without a huge settlement to a vile human being who does not deserve it. There is no honor among thieves who deal in hate.

  65. Stepping back from this thing for a moment, I think what you are seeing is the effects of a poisonous corporate culture. Griffin and Immelt cultivated that kind of a culture, and they pushed the talking heads I mentioned further and further out on a limb for the sake of profits. These talking heads themselves lack moral character and do not know when a line has been crossed. Griffin does not give a damned about that unless the line they crossed is his.

    If I were representing Schuster, I would tell him that given the hard feelings and the lack of a job future in the industry, he should listen to the offer they make, reject it and tell them he has been working on a book which will expose Griffin and the rest of them for the charlatans and thieves they are. A book that reveals how the truth is twisted and perverted by that network for profit, with specific examples in the campaign. It would provide a fine counterpoint to the romance novels frauds like Halperin, Heilman, Wolfe and others are publishing which are propaganda. If he makes that threat and is prepared to follow through on it they will give him anything he wants.


    Bush was too aggressive…
    Obama is too passive…

    Hmmm, throw a hissy fit, and Obama buckles. What a negotiator is he!

    U.S. Now Trying Softer Approach Toward Karzai

    Published: April 9, 2010

    WASHINGTON — After more than a year of watching America’s ability to influence President Hamid Karzai ebb, Obama administration officials now admit privately that the tough-love approach Mr. Obama adopted when he came to power may have been a big mistake.

    The difference in approach was evident in two recent scenes on Air Force One.

    Scene 1, March 28: Gen. James L. Jones, the national security adviser, visited reporters flying with the president from Washington to Kabul and promised that President Obama would take on the Afghan president for ignoring American demands on corruption and drug trafficking.

    Scene 2, Friday: General Jones visited reporters, this time traveling with the president to Washington from Prague, and told them that Mr. Obama had sent Mr. Karzai a thank-you note expressing gratitude to the Afghan leader for dinner in Kabul. “It was a respectful letter,” General Jones said.

    What happened between these two scenes? Mr. Karzai publicly lashed out against Western governments, hosted the president of Iran and said he would join the Taliban if the international community kept pressuring him.

    Obama administration officials maintain that they are not going to return to the days when President George W. Bush and Mr. Karzai would have twice-monthly videoconferences. But the pivot reflects a recognition that public pressure on Mr. Karzai may have driven him away. “In some ways, we want to do more of the love part of ‘tough love,’ and less of the tough part,” a senior administration official said.

    The turnabout reflects a growing recognition that the more the administration has taken Mr. Karzai to task publicly, the more resistant he has been to American demands. It also shows that no matter how much administration officials try to work around him, they have no choice but to deal with him.

    The relationship with Mr. Karzai has grown so tense, administration officials said, that the foreign leader who may be most important to American interests barely speaks to some of the president’s senior advisers. His relationship with the two key administration emissaries — Richard C. Holbrooke and Karl Eikenberry — is deeply strained. He has also clashed with Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. Mr. Karzai’s ties to Mr. Obama himself are, at best, distant.

    The only official with whom Mr. Karzai has a solid, day-to-day relationship is the top American military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal.

    The tension with Mr. Karzai mirrors internal stresses within the administration’s Afghanistan team, including friction between Mr. Eikenberry, who is the American ambassador to Afghanistan, and the military, and between Mr. Holbrooke and the White House.

    Military officials remain wary of Mr. Eikenberry, himself a former general who served in Afghanistan, after he sent a diplomatic cable last fall that warned that sending additional forces to Afghanistan would result in “astronomical costs” and increase Afghanistan’s dependence on the United States. General McChrystal and other military commanders at the time had requested additional troops, which they received. To this day, the Pentagon, the State Department and the White House all blame one another for leaking the highly classified memo to the news media.

    Mr. Holbrooke, the administration’s special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, has taken a lower profile in Afghanistan after a contentious first year with Mr. Karzai that included testy encounters over the Afghan leader’s conduct after his country’s elections. While Mr. Holbrooke did leave Friday for a trip to Afghanistan, he was not a part of the entourage that accompanied Mr. Obama to Kabul two weeks ago, a remarkable absence given that he is supposed to be the top official in dealing with the region.

    Managing the relationship with Mr. Karzai is important because so much of Mr. Obama’s strategy in Afghanistan, where he will soon have an American deployment of close to 100,000 troops, is contingent on the administration’s ability to get the Afghans to take the lead so the United States can eventually withdraw.

    On March 28, as Mr. Obama prepared to meet with Mr. Karzai, General Jones told reporters that the American president would try to “make him understand that in his second term, there are certain things that have been not paid attention to, almost since Day 1,” like battling corruption. Afghanistan experts say that the public hectoring undermined Mr. Obama’s visit, and helped ignite Mr. Karzai’s most recent anti-American and anti-Western remarks. “It was a poorly handled visit,” a European diplomat said.

    The damage was compounded when the White House reacted to Mr. Karzai’s outburst by hinting that Mr. Obama might rescind his invitation to Mr. Karzai to visit Washington next month. White House officials, one administration said, took umbrage that the Afghan leader would lash out right after his biggest benefactor visited. But officials at the State Department argued that the cycle of vitriol needed to be stopped before it spiraled out of control.

    “There is a realization that public remonstrances and temper tantrums don’t work,” said Bruce O. Riedel, an Afghanistan expert at the Brookings Institution who has worked with the administration on Afghan policy. “It brings out the worst in Karzai, while undermining support for the war effort in Congress, in the media, and in the public. If you disparage Karzai, you’re in effect saying the war cannot be won.”

    Several Afghanistan experts noted that the one success the Obama administration has had with Mr. Karzai was last October, when the administration sent Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, to Kabul to talk Mr. Karzai into agreeing to a runoff election. Mr. Kerry took long walks with Mr. Karzai in the gardens of the heavily fortified presidential palace in Kabul, recounting his own personal political experiences and commiserating with Mr. Karzai, who eventually relented under the pressure.

    That contrasts sharply with other high-profile dealings between Obama administration officials and Mr. Karzai. Earlier this year, Mr. Eikenberry was quoted in a confidential diplomatic cable saying that Mr. Karzai “is not an adequate strategic partner.” In February 2008, Mr. Biden ended a dinner with Mr. Karzai, throwing his napkin down, after Mr. Karzai told him that there was no corruption in Afghanistan and that, in any case, it was not his fault.

    And Mr. Obama himself has publicly referred to the Karzai government as “very detached from what’s going on in the surrounding community.”

    Now, “Cooler heads are starting to prevail,” said Mr. Riedel, of Brookings. You’ll see, I hope, a more nuanced approach.”

    The more nuanced approach relies more on General McChrystal, who speaks daily with Mr. Karzai and who has traveled around the country with him, developing a reservoir of trust, administration officials said. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is also emerging as an interlocutor. She has tried to appeal to him as a fellow politician.

    The clearest signal of the new approach came during Friday’s Air Force One flight. “We believe that we are on an encouraging glide path in Afghanistan,” General Jones said, adding that during Mr. Obama’s visit to Afghanistan, the American delegation was “generally impressed with the quality of the ministers and the seriousness with which they’re approaching their job.”

    Mr. Obama, General Jones said, was “fortified by the conversations he had, reassured by the conversations” with Mr. Karzai.


    At least he gets to spend more time with his family…

    APRIL 9, 2010, 2:24 P.M. ET

    Casualty of ObamaCare

    Bart Stupak retires due to low levels of public support for health-care reform.


    Bart Stupak, the co-chair of the House Pro-Life Caucus, played a pivotal role in the passage of ObamaCare last month when he announced his last-minute support for the measure. Pro-life groups that had previously supported him accused him of betrayal, claiming he accepted a watered-down compromise that allows federal funds to be used for abortions.

    While Mr. Stupak has expressed frustration at the anger directed against him, the political calculus of his district probably played a more important role in his decision today to retire. He faced a primary opponent from his party’s left as well as other political headaches. Just last night, buses from the Tea Party Express movement rolled into Mr. Stupak’s district for the first of four rallies — presumably they will now be taking something akin to a victory lap. Their previous stop had been in Nevada for a series of rallies against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

    The Upper Peninsula of Michigan is a culturally conservative area that viewed most aspects of the health care bill with suspicion. In 2000 and 2004, the district went easily for George W. Bush, and Barack Obama barely managed 50% of the vote there in 2008. Mr. Stupak is known to have taken a private poll of his district since his health care vote, and his retirement announcement is a likely indication that he feared he might lose to a Republican challenger this fall.

    Whatever political bounce Democrats thought they would get from passing health care isn’t showing up in national polls. In districts like Mr. Stupak’s health care appears to be a distinct liability.

  68. Another indication of the representative ignoring the voters he represented, thinking somehow they would not notice, now facing the music. It could not happen to a nicer person.

  69. Yeah, they thought they could ram it through in the middle of the night, without ever reading the bill.

    Remember O’s promise, “all bills would be posted on the internet for five days”. I guess the answer to that is, “That was said in ‘campaign mode’, I’m the president. Do I need to reiterate, I…AM…THE…PRESIDENT”.

    So much for him being a “brilliant politician”, with “amazing instincts”, etc. yadda etc.

  70. Here-here… JanH..

    A sobering question regarding Obama’s visa policy: (h/t Pam Gellar)

    Why hasn’t Obama made any move to bar Muslims from studying nuclear engineering in the U.S. Only Jews?

    “This is part of a larger stance. Professor Zeev Alfasi, a nuclear engineering expert at Israel’s Ben-Gurion University, revealed that now the U.S. refuses to:”

    “sell anything nuclear-related to the Dimona reactor…Radiation detectors, for example have to be purchased now in France because the USA refuses to sell these to Israel.”


    When this story broke, the Obama White House went into damage control mode. According to Ben Smith at Politico, (link to Smith’s article at primary link)

    “White House spokesman Bill Burton flatly denied the report of a change to U.S. visa policy,” and “the State Department is telling members of Congress, ‘The report is inaccurate; there has been no change in administration policy regarding visa issuance to scientists from Israel. We value greatly our academic and scientific exchanges with Israel and will continue to promote these important exchanges.’”

    However, Rob Miller of JoshuaPundit, who first reported on the story in English, isn’t buying it:

  71. So, does anyone believe the fatal plane crash of the Polish president and all 96 aboard was accidental?

    It took Zbig et al 5 min to free up air time on msnbc to voice his opinion on the ramifications of Soviet/Polish relations since the accidental death of the Polish president and top level Polish officials of governmental agency’s. hmmm…

  72. Toning more bass in on the pa system would help Sarah’s audience. When I attended her speeches in person, the tone of her voice was fine. I know when I have to project loudly that my soft tone of voice becomes shrill, at least it does in my own ears. I would rather have a shrill smart gutsy woman in the White House than any teleprompter man. Smoothly delivered lines that drone on with nothing but lies, lies, lies makes me think of a used car salesman…

  73. I have this feeling that Obama is going to use this mining accident to put a huge dent in the coal industry. He said he was going to take the coal industry down. Never let a crisis go without getting some use out of it.

    It is very unusual that Putin took over the investigation right away, it smells fishy to me!

  74. There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting Sarah to be all that she can be…she merely needs a voice coach…many people use them….look how Hillary’s speeches improved from the being of her campaign to the end of it…she improved quiet well. Not everyone is Bill Clinton and those that aren’t should get help…there’s no shame in that!

  75. Admin: It only took this long for media journalists to recognize Obama is suffering from more than one serious personality defect. The thin skin-ness to criticism is almost always the first recognizable trait in your face red flag you notice as they play the bully reactionary card against all comers.

    Obama going off the deep end

    A recent analysis by Roger Simon of PJTV Media maintains that Obama is showing signs of mental illness. A wide variety of commentators have observed that Obama displays severe narcissism. Obama is conceited, and he is demonstrating a serious disassociation from reality.

    A recent case in point was Obama’s bizarre and meandering 17-minute, 2,500-word answer to the simple question about how he could justify raising taxes for ObamaCare during a recession when citizens are already overtaxed. Obama’s wildly inappropriate answer left the audience stunned and led commentator Charles Krauthammer to mockingly say, “I don’t know why you are so surprised. It’s only nine times the length of the Gettysburg address, and after all Lincoln was answering an easier question, the higher purpose of the union and the soldiers who fell in battle.”

    This lapse of delusion occurred in front of a friendly audience. Overall, Barack Obama seems to be slipping into a slightly more delusional state these days.

    On Monday, following his embarrassing answer on Saturday, Obama stopped by the Washington Nationals home opener to loft an effeminate toss toward home plate constituting the ceremonial first pitch. After this display, Obama was mucking it up in the press booth talking about his love of the Chicago White Sox. The announcers asked Obama which players he supported growing up a White Sox fan. After hemming and hawing for about 30 seconds, Obama responded that he grew up in Hawaii and was actually an A’s fan. Again, he avoided mentioning any players by name. Obama seems to believe that he can say whatever he wants, and not reap the consequences or be forced to defend his empty assertions. Obama behaves in a manner so disconnected from reality that he is shocked when someone has the audacity to question him. Obama acts like his word is infallible.

    In March of last year Obama was on “60 Minutes” with Steve Kroft. Throughout the interview as Kroft questioned about the economic downturn and people losing their life savings, Obama just kept laughing. A one point CBS’s Kroft stopped him and asked, “Are you punch drunk?” How will the American people react to seeing their president laugh off their predicament? Obama’s inappropriate laughter clearly demonstrated he has lost touch with the pain that people are feeling.

    Obama portrays himself as the larger-than-life figure towering above the political fray. At the summit when Obama was pushing his health care package through Congress, he attempted to act as if he were the chief arbiter of truth. With petty insults, he slapped down what the Republicans proposed and audaciously claimed his was a “bipartisan bill.” Obama distorts the truth with such frequency that one must start to question if Obama even realizes he is lying or is so disassociated from the truth that he believes what he says.

    We Irish call it… “LIVIN a LIE”

    A further example of Obama’s delusions of grandeur occurred when he gave himself a “good solid B plus.” Believing that his presidency was an above average success when America is hurting is absurd. Obama went so far as to claim that he would give himself an “A” once health care was passed. Obama is not living in the same reality as the rest of us.

    As Charles Krauthammer wrote, “Not that Obama considers himself divine. (He sees himself as merely messianic, or, at worst, apostolic.) But he does position himself as hovering above mere mortals, mere country, to gaze benignly upon the darkling plain beneath him where ignorant armies clash by night, blind to the common humanity that only he can see.”

    Obama sees himself as the greatest man to be president in all time. He truly believes it when he said “we are the ones we have been waiting for,” and “this is the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and the planet began to heal.” He believes that he can do anything he pleases and the people will love him for it. Obama plans to radically transform this country and go down in history as, in his mind, the greatest ever. Obama is clearly disconnected from reality.

    Obama is, according to Newt Gingrich, “potentially the most dangerous (president), because he so completely misunderstands reality.” Gingrich was referring to Obama’s inept and weak stance on missile defense amongst other things. Even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said that Obama is an amateur; so much for wowing the world. Obama lives in an alternate universe where he treats our friends poorly and expects our enemies to change and become our friends. Here’s hoping that the voters help to connect this president back to reality in November.

    I have heard Bill Clinton himself praise and appreciate the intelligence of Gingrich and Rove just as I do. It doesn’t mean I’m a Republican; it means I have been presented with an opportunity to learn an important lesson from a master politico. Then again, Bill Clinton is a secure individual who isn’t intimidated by adversaries he has beaten on the world stage.

    Alls Fair in Love and War… If you can’t take the heat… stay out of the kitchen.

  76. confloyd
    April 10th, 2010 at 10:34 pm

    Mrs Smith,
    Check this out, Lamecherry even has the weather conditions in Russia at the time of the crash….pretty interesting!

    Earlier today, I read a synopsis of the plane crash on msnbc.. It said there was heavy fog and poor visibility advising the pilot to land at another airport with better/clear visibility.

    The update said: “Crash blamed on Pilot”!
    When the blame is shifted to dead people, it’s a sure sign of skulduggery. Dead people don’t talk.

  77. In March of last year Obama was on “60 Minutes” with Steve Kroft. Throughout the interview as Kroft questioned about the economic downturn and people losing their life savings, Obama just kept laughing. A one point CBS’s Kroft stopped him and asked, “Are you punch drunk?” How will the American people react to seeing their president laugh off their predicament? Obama’s inappropriate laughter clearly demonstrated he has lost touch with the pain that people are feeling.

    This can easily happen if your smoking a little maryjane also….you just laugh at the darndest things…LOL!! He’s smoking something all the time…just like his diplomats!

  78. Mrs smith, do you realize what you just said….you watched it on MSNBC….they for sure tell the truth everyday, LOL!

  79. MSNBC on the web, not on tv- confloyd.

    The only news I ever watch is our local news and the BBC.

    Admin: If you would/could, please post this video..

    There are 4 young Russian boys (w/mullets) retelling the story of witnessing the crash of the Polish plane in their nearby woods. There is something else intrinsic to this video you may not notice on the first viewing.

  80. Hillary Clinton on the deaths of Polish leaders:

    “I join President Obama in offering my deepest condolences to the people of Poland, to the Kaczynski family, and to the families of all those killed in this tragedy. Lost alongside President Kaczynski and his wife were Polish leaders from across the political spectrum, men and women who shaped and sped Poland’s post-1989 democratic transformation and were leading Poland into its promising future. The tragedy of these lives cut short will be felt deeply across the world, but their legacy will live on in a free and flourishing Poland.”

    “The United States stands with the Polish people in this difficult hour. Like the country he led, President Kaczynski was one of America’s most valued and trusted allies. He was well known in the United States as a champion for democracy against an oppressive regime, a man whose journey took him from the Gdansk Shipyards to the presidency of a free people. President Kaczynski was an unstinting advocate for freedom and human rights not just in Poland, but around the world. He will be long remembered and sorely missed.”

    “The Polish people have endured more than their share of sorrow, but they have always shown resilience and resolve in the face of adversity — and I know they will pull together in solidarity to grieve this loss.”

    “My thoughts and prayers are with all the people of Poland today.”

  81. Mrs.Smith, Give me a hint…was it the guards…..the very clear weather….or that it was late afternoon when they were giving their accounts, not morning….???

  82. admin
    April 11th, 2010 at 12:14 am

    “Hillary Clinton on the deaths of Polish leaders”:

    Thank you, admin for posting Hillary’s sympathetic response.

    Hillary always finds a moment to do and say the right thing at the right time. Sure she delegates- Anyone can. But do they when time is of the essence in extolling heartfelt sentiments? This administration’s protocol finds government opportunists reveling in ways of taking advantage of a crisis.

    Of course you know of whom I speak- the WH cadre lobbying for the fifth head on Rushmore.

  83. “French Leader Sarkozy Slams Obama, Warns He Might Be Insane”

    Confloyd, the insanity meme is going viral. Obama is a bionic product of corporate engineering by the Franken-global lunatics, Soros and Brezinski. The primary reason why Obama is unable to pull off a valid representation of a US President. I expect at some date in the near future Obama will be remembered as a broken man after taking residence in a long term rehabilitation facility. Obama is the ‘real life’ failed model of the Manchurian Candidate.

  84. Hillary was just on Meet the Press. She was asked if the present Healthcare bill was what she would have wanted. She said she was thrilled it was passed.

    Sec. of Defense Gates was on with her.

  85. Southern Born
    April 11th, 2010 at 9:37 am

    Thanks for the reminder, SB. MTP comes on at 10am here. Getting the HCR Bill passed is a major accomplishment, something Hillary could not do. However, if she gains the seat of power while we are still young, a little tweaking of word changes here and there could make a world of difference on how the bill is meant to function maximized in value as user friendly for consumers.

    I think Hillary is looking at the potential of the bill, now that the framework for Health Care is in place.

  86. Just shoot me, but I will be damned if I like that response.

    How can she be thrilled with a bill that cedes control to the insurance companies?

    Here is what I would like to have have heard in response to that question.

    “The Democratic Party has trying to achieve universal health care for over thirty years. Our goal has been to establish single payer or at a minimum a viable public option. I fought the insurance companies on this issue very hard. That was a lifetime ago. As you know I have been very busy in the realm of foreign affairs. I have not had an opportunity to read the bill.”

    The country is at a point now where truth really, really, really matters–far more than party or politics. In the final analysis what else is there. My concern is that when he goes down he will take everyone else with him because they marched entirely to his drum.

  87. Lets see how many of the dimocrats who voted in favor of this toxic piece of legislation are willing to cover themselves and their families under Obamacare. If they refuse vote against this bill (which 11 of 23 tried to bottle up in committee) or tank it through some archane parliamentary maneuver then that is another nail in their coffin. On the other hand if they say yes, and do not buy supplemental coverage to escape its limitations, then they can crow about it, and maybe convince their constituents that chicken shit is really chicken salad. See what you think:
    I do not forward messages as a general rule but this is one that I must

    Dear Friends

    I just signed this on the congressman’s website and encourage you to do

    On Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a two-page
    amendment that would require all Members and their staffs to enroll in any
    new government-run health plan.

    It took me less than a minute to sign up to require our congressmen and
    senators to drink at the same trough! Three cheers for Congressman John
    Fleming of Louisiana!

    Congressman John Fleming (Louisiana physician) has proposed an amendment
    that would require congressmen and senators to take the same healthcare plan
    they force on us (under proposed legislation they are curiously exempt).

    Congressman Fleming is encouraging people to go on his Website and Sign his
    petition (very simple – just email). I have just done just that at:

    Please urge as many people as you can to do the same!

    If Congress forces this on the American people, the Congress should have to
    accept the same level of health care for themselves and their families.

    Please pass this on!!

    Pass this on to everyone on your e-list.pass it across America!

  88. CORRECTION to the above:

    I wonder how many of the DIMOCRATS who voted FOR OBAMACARE are WILLING TO COVER THEMSELVES and their FAMILIES under this toxic piece of legislation. (See email below). We know Obama will not–he has already said so.

    If these Dimocrats VOTE AGAINST THIS AMENDMENT or tank it through some arcane PROCEDURAL MANEUVER (note: as you can see, 11 of 23 tried to bottle up in committee) then that is another NAIL IN THEIR COFFIN come November.

    On the other hand if VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS AMENDMENT, and do not buy supplemental coverage to escape its limitations, then they can crow about it, and maybe convince their constituents that CHICKEN SHIT IS REALLY CHICKEN SALAD. See what you think:
    I do not forward messages as a general rule but this is one that I must

    Dear Friends

    I just signed this on the congressman’s website and encourage you to do

    On Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a two-page
    amendment that would require all Members and their staffs to enroll in any
    new government-run health plan.

    It took me less than a minute to sign up to require our congressmen and
    senators to drink at the same trough! Three cheers for Congressman John
    Fleming of Louisiana!

    Congressman John Fleming (Louisiana physician) has proposed an amendment
    that would require congressmen and senators to take the same healthcare plan
    they force on us (under proposed legislation they are curiously exempt).

    Congressman Fleming is encouraging people to go on his Website and Sign his
    petition (very simple – just email). I have just done just that at:

    Please urge as many people as you can to do the same!

    If Congress forces this on the American people, the Congress should have to
    accept the same level of health care for themselves and their families.

    Please pass this on!!

    Pass this on to everyone on your e-list.pass it across America!

  89. Not to change the subject on Hillary saying she was thrilled it passed….did she say why she was thrilled…it could be that she knows it will sink Obama, LOL! However, I agree with Mrs. Smith in which she thinks if Hillary were Potus she could tweak it into a better bill.

    I just read over at BBC News that Greece has/will accept a loan from the IMF to help with their defienct. What I am wondering is how much the interest rate will be…if it is as high as it was for Chile, Argentina and most of South American in the past it will be high. If it is then we know they are performing a “Shock Doctrine” scenario on Greece to gain control of it for corporate greed. Hope we find out soon, because according to Beck we’re next! The IMF is a crooked organization and is owned by the Rothchilds and is ofisciated by Soros!

  90. Mrs. Smith
    April 10th, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    Obama going off the deep end

    As with most things, the level of insanity will have to be overwhelming before it “becomes a problem”, where the whispers grow louder that the person is not fit.

    But he seems to be headed past the point. The pressures of the job he was never qualified for are obviously getting to him. He is looking “overwhelmed”.

    Whatta douche.

  91. #
    Mrs. Smith
    April 11th, 2010 at 9:58 am

    Getting the HCR Bill passed is a major accomplishment, something Hillary could not do. However, if she gains the seat of power while we are still young, a little tweaking of word changes here and there could make a world of difference on how the bill is meant to function maximized in value as user friendly for consumers.

    I think Hillary is looking at the potential of the bill, now that the framework for Health Care is in place.

    1. Getting a REAL health care bill through would be a major accomplishment, whenever such a bill might be passed. This was a health INSURANCE reform bill, and a terrible one at that.

    2. Tweaking??? If you call burning the whole bill, and starting over, but leaving two or three original words in place, then fine, call that “tweaking”. The bill was horribly crafted.

    3. Framework in place??? Again, if you want consider that a piece of legistlation with the word “health” in it was recently signed, and want to consider it a framework, go for it. Otherwise, the bad bill is a terrible foundation to build upon.

    As for Hillary’s “support” of the health scare bill, I’ll let Hillary pick her spots as to when she wants to:
    * take veiled shots at the president (underwhelming praise)
    * take overt shots at the president
    * or “play nice” because she’s a better chess player, and is keeping Obama and the media off-balance as to “what is Hillary up to?”.

    I think we can agree that if you talked with her in private, she’d be able to go on for 48 hours straight about everything that is fucked up with the bill, how Obama got it wrong, why it is bad going forward, oh yeah, and how it needs to be fixed / overhauled.

    To ask her to always be open and honest would mean that she should join a religious order rather than be a political leader.

  92. For any of you involved with Tea Parties, the following advice seems sound. (Note: these conservatives are idiots to use the word liberal. Liberal is a very respectable word. So I have taken the liberty of using different words like pinko plant or dimocratic zombie.

    I can’t speak for whether or not the ‘Crash the Tea Party’ thing referenced here is real, or just some dweeb on the West Coast who’s trying to sell t-shirts to dimocratic zombie racists who don’t want to admit that they’re racists. Honestly, I could see either; one of the gratifying things about the Tea Party movement has been to see demonstrated that the Left’s vaunted prowess at organization and activism largely depends on having no standard for comparison. They’re really pretty lousy at this.

    That being said, the advice found here is pretty good:

    Plants have already happened, just not organized ones. Regardless, perhaps organizers (or attendees) need to have a few signs that say “Pinko Plant, not a REAL TeaPartier” and be on the lookout for these double-secret spies. When one is found, then pull out your signs and stand next to the plant. No violence or physical actions, just isolate and embarrass.

    And make sure that you get it on the record that you’ve done this. I will keep harping on this until the end of time: a camera is an indispensable tool for these things. Without cameras they would have been able to get away with lying about Congressmen being spit on and called racial epithets*. So get one.

    Moe Lane

    *Yeah, go ahead and burn that account. Over a failed narrative, no less.

    Crossposted to Moe Lane.

  93. wbboei why is Congressman Fleming hiding the results of his vote. I know you must be rolling your eyes but I have learned to never trust politicians in anything. How do you set those votes up. Is the default setting hide the outcome or is the default setting show the outcome? Is he just trying to get email addresses to use for campaign funds?

  94. Mrs. Smith, So when Obama takes up permanent residence in the looney bin we can all imagine his perfect running mate would have been John Edwards…both are screwups of the highest order and are egotistical maniacs. LOL!

  95. He is looking “overwhelmed”.
    I had dinner last night with a guy who has been making films in Hollywood, but has fallen on hard times like the rest of the middle class. He voted for Obama and is a brand buyer. He told me that Obama is having a hard time sleeping at night. He also said the country is ungovernable. I told him that according to my information, Obama sleeps like a baby because he lives in an alternative universe and had delivered the bacon for is banker buddies, Rezko redux and all that. I told him that loss of sleep crap is just propaganda to elicit sympathy from those he has betrayed, so don’t get too twisted over it. I told him the country is ungovernable for Obama because Obama has no idea of how to govern. All he knows how to do is campaign. And if he is having any trepidations at this point it is because he is forced to confront the central truth which is that he may be able to make dimocrats and wayward republicans like Crist and Coburn, and all of big media in this country believe ANYTHING HE WANTS THEM TO BELIEVE, but some foreign leaders are becoming just a little sceptical perhaps at this point with everything around him falling apart. They must be racists.

  96. Betty–an excellent question. I assume it is early in the game and the email is going viral only now. I assume he will release the results at the conclusion of the exercise. But it would be good to have a real time count.

    I will call his office and see what they say.

    Do I think he wants to get email addresses for fundraising purposes? Sure. They all do. I did not check that box which puts me on his newsletter. I did not bother to look to see if he is a Republican, because I am sure he is. I am not interested in his agenda, or his fundraising. But I am very interested in forcing the hand of the dimocrats on this sell out legislation.

    In my opinion, this amendment might well be the vehicle to do that.

  97. If Obama is having trouble sleeping at night its because the jig is up and he knows it. I say good he should step down and let the person with testicular fortitude to do the job he cheated her out of. He found out life at the top is not so easy! LOL! The skies did not open up, no light came down and no celestial choir sang and NO ONE DID WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSE TO DO, ROTFLMAO! Couldn’t of happened to a nicer guy!

  98. did she say why she was thrilled…it could be that she knows it will sink Obama
    Stupid me. I never thought of that.


    Health care act’s two ticking bombs

    By Shawn Tully, senior editor at largeApril 9, 2010: 3:31 PM ET

    (Fortune) — A week ago, a good friend — let’s call him Anthony — related a remarkable story about shopping for health insurance in two states, New York and Arizona.

    For Anthony and millions of other consumers, New York represents the ultimate nightmare for finding affordable coverage, pairing outrageously high prices with a tiny roster of offerings. By contrast, Anthony found fabulous bargains and a rich variety of policies in Arizona’s desert sun.

    So it would be wonderful for folks like Anthony if the historic health-care reform law scuttled the rules that created the disaster in New York, and made America’s insurance markets a lot more like Arizona’s.

    But amazingly, the bill imposes a New York-style regime on the rest of the nation, then makes a gigantic bet that the results won’t mimic those of the Empire State.

    That’s the problem with Obamacare: It’s staking its entire success on a complex web of subsidies and penalties designed to pull young and healthy Americans into the insurance system, even as their policies get more expensive. As we’ll see, that’s an extremely risky wager.

    Let’s look at the great deals Anthony found, then handicap whether they’ll flourish, or more likely, vanish under the new law. Anthony commutes back and forth from New York City to the Phoenix area, where he started a real estate business. He’s a handsome, strapping six-footer in his early 40s.

    Anthony first looked for individual health insurance in New York. The rates shocked him: around $1,200 a month for a basic HMO plan from carriers like Aetna and Empire, and over $1500 for a point-of-service policy that allow customers to choose out-of-network doctors in exchange for higher co-pays.

    To make matters worse, Anthony wanted an inexpensive, high-deductible policy, but he couldn’t find a suitable one in the New York individual market.

    Crash diet

    So Anthony went shopping where he works — in Arizona. There, he found a far wider menu of offerings, including the inexpensive, high-deductible policies that best fit his needs. To obtain the lowest rates, Anthony needed a battery of tests to prove to the insurer that his health was excellent. From his annual checkup, Anthony learned his cholesterol was high.
    0:00 /2:29Small biz reacts to health care

    So he went on a crash campaign to lower it, working out on the elliptical machine at his health club, swapping cheese omelets for oatmeal and raisins at breakfast, and devouring Fage Greek yogurt, a favorite discovery on his adventure in healthy eating.

    Last year, thanks to his youth, good health history and newly tamed cholesterol, Anthony qualified for a $5,500 deductible plan with a premium of just $100 a month. (The policy in Arizona closest to the New York point-of-service coverage costs around $300, versus $1500.) “The system in Arizona gave me a major financial incentive to improve my health,” says Anthony.

    New York’s fair pricing problem

    What accounts for the huge price differences between Arizona and New York?

    Two regulations enormously inflate prices in New York (and, incidentally, rates aren’t much lower in Albany or Syracuse than in Manhattan), especially for young, healthy folks such as Anthony — just the kind of people who must buy in for the insurance pools to succeed.

    The first regulation is Guaranteed Issue. In New York, and several other states including Vermont, Massachusetts, and New Jersey, carriers must accept all customers regardless of their medical condition. It would be illegal in New York to offer the deal Anthony got in Arizona — a lower rate in exchange for lowering your cholesterol.

    The second premium-swelling rule is Community Rating. In New York, all customers pay the same rate regardless of either their age or medical status. As a result, someone Anthony’s age or younger pays an identical premium for the same policy as a 64-year-old customer, although they actually cost a fraction as much in medical claims. So older patients effectively get a big subsidy, and the young pay far more then their actual cost.

    It gets worse. Because of guaranteed issue, patients know they can enroll in a plan anytime they get cancer or diabetes, so they have little incentive to sign up when they’re healthy. Community rating assures that they can re-enroll at premiums far lower than the actual costs of the tests and procedures they require. Hence, the pools of the insured in states like New York and Vermont consist of an extremely high proportion of sick people. (This PricewaterhouseCoopers report describes how the guaranteed issue and community rating could drive up premiums.)

    As the old and ill flood the plans, the rates rise even further, pushing out more and more of the young and healthy in a cycle of rapidly rising premiums and sicker and sicker customers.

    “There is no question that the combination of community rating and guaranteed issue drives up premiums in states that now have those regulations,” says Thomas Snook of actuarial consulting firm Milliman Inc.

    The Arizona bargain

    By contrast, Arizona — and most other states, from Pennsylvania to Tennessee — doesn’t have guaranteed issue or strict community rating. “The individual market is a bargain in states without those regulations,” says health care economist John Goodman of Dallas think-tank the National Center for Policy Analysis.

    Young, healthy customers like Anthony get a good deal on insurance for a simple reason: They don’t cost much. But their premiums flow into a big pool that supports the patients who are getting older and sicker. That’s how classic insurance is supposed to work.

    Starting in 2014, Obamacare will impose both Guaranteed Issue and Community Rating on the entire nation, including Arizona and the other states that don’t have those regulations now. The Community Rating law will not be as strict at the one in New York: Insurers will be able to charge three times as much to a 64 year old, versus someone 18 or 20.

    But that will still raise rates for the young, since they normally cost just one-sixth of patients in their 60s. (To gauge the huge difference in premiums between states, check this report from AHIP, the health insurers’ industry association.)

    The Administration is convinced that even though premiums rise for the young, more of them will buy insurance. Why? Well, first, Americans who don’t buy coverage are fined. Second, lower and middle-income Americans get lavish subsidies to help pay for the inflated health insurance costs.

    All carrot, no stick

    Making sure the stick and carrot work will require enormous calibration.

    “Rates will go up for young people in states like Arizona, not enough to make them leave the system, especially with the new fines and subsidies,” says John Sheils of the Lewin Group, a research group owned by UnitedHealth. “But the fines may be too weak to prevent the young and healthy from dropping their plans.”

    For now, the penalties start at $600 and by 2016 they will rise to $1500 for a someone making $60,000. And if the insuree can’t find a policy that costs 8% of his income or less, he’s exempted from all fines. That’s just $400 a month.

    Let’s say Anthony’s premium rises to over $300 a month by 2016. Will he keep his policy?

    First, he’s earning too much as a single — say $60,000 — to get any subsidy at all. And second, even if he has to pay a fine, it’s a lot less than paying almost $4000 a year for insurance.

    So the success or failure of ObamaCare depends on how much premiums rise for the young and healthy under the new rules. Be warned: They could explode. That’s what happened in New York. To top of page

  100. rgb44hrc:

    1. Getting a REAL health care bill through would be a major accomplishment, whenever such a bill might be passed. This was a health INSURANCE reform bill, and a terrible one at that.

    2. Tweaking??? If you call burning the whole bill, and starting over, but leaving two or three original words in place, then fine, call that “tweaking”. The bill was horribly crafted.

    3. Framework in place??? Again, if you want consider that a piece of legistlation with the word “health” in it was recently signed, and want to consider it a framework, go for it. Otherwise, the bad bill is a terrible foundation to build upon.

    If you’re having a bad hair day- I completely understand. However, I am not resposible for the synomous terms regarding HCR and HIR… or the real literal meaning of the bill, a Health Care TAX, you failed to mention because they are never presented that way. No one ever said the bill was “good”.. not even our girl Hillary..

    However you define tweaking, it’s still a rewrite of original text where simple changes of words such as and and the can change the whole meaning of a sentence in the reverse of the original meaning.

    Yes, framework. If you think Hillary was thrilled at notion of a HC framework, you’re in denial it IS a foundation on which to build on..All we need is her in the driver’s seat to make it so. That is the reason why her supporters stay at the ready. Waiting for the signal SHE is ready.

    As for Hillary’s “support” of the health scare bill, I’ll let Hillary pick her spots as to when she wants to:

    * take veiled shots at the president (underwhelming praise)

    * take overt shots at the president

    * or “play nice” because she’s a better chess player, and is keeping Obama and the media off-balance as to “what is Hillary up to?”.

    sorry, you don’t know Hillary- that will never happen. She is a better person than you happen to think of her. You are describing the actions of a petty, insecure, person who has acomplished little in their lifetime.

    — I think we can agree that if you talked with her in private, she’d be able to go on for 48 hours straight about everything that is fucked up with the bill, how Obama got it wrong, why it is bad going forward, oh yeah, and how it needs to be fixed / overhauled.

    Again, Hillary would never leave herself wide open to speculating such things. It’s not the privacy that would matter. It’s the loyalty and past history of keeping conversations between two people private. You may remember how her confidential conversations were betrayed by one of her dearest friends, a childhood friend and Patti Solis Doyle.

    The generality you speak of is of a dishonorable backstabber. If you think Hillary operates that way, you have are so wrong, my friend. You have underestimated her integrity and abilities of success and her instance of longevity. Those are things to ponder and compare with other people you associate yourself with..

    — To ask her to always be open and honest would mean that she should join a religious order rather than be a political leader.

    The only statement you’ve made in this whole diatribe I can partially agree with and I will tell you why- Haven’t you ever been schooled in taking a particularly unpopular topic in a debate and defending the good points of the topic against the errant ones. The example I will use is : Vegans vs Meat Eaters? and let you process the example.

    And her interview this morning on MTP: You have to learn to read between the lines and listen carefully to the words she used in the interview.

    Hillary is always open and honest in answering a question posed by an interviewer. Your mindset is stuck in her giving an opinion of how she would do things differently. A totally different point of view to the reality of her job as Chief diplomat of US Foreign Affairs.

    Thanks, rgb- it’s been a pleasure reading your response and answering same maybe not to your liking but honestly nonetheless.

  101. Mrs. Smith,

    I haven’t kept up much with the news lately with one exception:

    In Canada – Two students at Ottawa’s Carlton University reported they were attacked with a machete after being chased by a group yelling in Arabic and English that they were Jews and Zionists…

    In Greece – The nation’s largest newspaper, Ta Nea, published a vicious cartoon
    — the “burning of Judas” a sample of the overt anti-Semitism appearing annually throughout Greece during Easter. The cartoon appeared after a rash of other anti-Semitic incidents throughout the country and a spate of synagogue arsons in Crete…

    In Hungary – anti-Semitism played a role in the campaign leading up to national elections, stones were thrown through the windows of a Rabbi’s house during a Passover Seder, anti-Semitic graffiti was found in Budapest, a Holocaust memorial was damaged and neo-Nazis held an anti-Semitic rally in a city where Jews were killed in pogroms over a century ago…

    In Argentina – “Die Jews” was spray-painted on a hotel in Santa Teresita where a
    Jewish group was celebrating Passover; some were also verbally assaulted and harassed…

    In Slovakia – a Jewish cemetery was repeatedly desecrated and anti-Semitic slogans were spray-painted on tombstones in Zvolen where only 50 of hundreds of gravestones remain untouched; anti-Semitism is alive although no Jews have lived in the area since the Holocaust…

    In France – a blatantly anti-Semitic demonstration was organized by a pro-Palestinian
    group who were planning to march by a synagogue during the Passover Sabbath in Drancy, a city which served as the transit-point for the deportaion of 72,000 Jews deported to Auschwitz under the Vichy government, the march was averted by the intervention of police…

    At the Vatican – During the traditional Good Friday Service and in the presence of the Pope, a senior Vatican priest compared the ongoing uproar over sexual abuse scandals in the Catholic Church to the persecution of the Jews…

    In Latvia – SWC Israel Director, Dr. Efraim Zuroff helped lead a counter demonstration against World
    War II Latvian Waffen-SS Veterans and denounced “the glorification of those who fought for a victory of the Third Reich, a regime directly responsible for the murder of millions of innocent civilians.”

    Of course I blame the usual monsters. But I now add the newest ringleader of these Jew Haters: OBAMA

    His constant insiduous attacks on Israel, his blatant love of terrorist groups (who I now include Iran among), sickens me to death.

    And one other thing. Having stepped back from all of the rest of his insane rhetoric and actions lately, one thing in particular stands out for me. It is easy to become complacent about what this monster has achieved…it’s just one more thing…he know’s not what he does…he’s insane…etc…etc… However, this game that he and his bosom buddies keep playing, i.e. undercover anti-semitic moves that they keep thinking no one will hear about…well enough is enough!

  102. I think it is highly unlikely that Obamacare will be modified. Either it will be struck down as unconstitutional in whole or in part, or the major provisions will be implemented as written. The reason I say that is because the special interests have already lined up at the public feeding trough. I believe General Electric will be awarded a no bid contract. It would have been a major accomplishment IF the bill were different than it is, was not bitterly opposed by the American People, and had elicited bi partisan support. Instead, it put a lie to the myth that there are moderate dimocrats. In the final analysis, what this bill has effectively done is kill the prospects for the health care reform concept advocated by Hillary in the primary, enriched big business beyond their wildest dream and imposed an onerous tax on the middle class.

  103. The dims could have gone for a public option, or even single payer. The former has been an option since Nixon. If they had gone for the public option, they would have satisfied the base and lured back a lot of independents. It would have cost them no more political capital than this terrible bill has. They could have bribed bartered and threatened the same dimocrats who voted for this bill to vote instead for the public option. So why didn’t they? Simple. The insurance industry was unalterably opposed to single payer and therefor would not fill his campaign coffers. Lest we forget this asshole was their go to guy in the state of Illinois. In the final analysis, big business is the only constituency obama cares about, i.e. Rezko redux. And he will betray his constituents and his supporter every single time and say show me the money.

  104. We may understand the comments Hillary is giving about Obamacare and the hidden meanings, however, many people do not and are beginning to get unhappy with comments by Hillary supporting BO.

    I agree with Wbboei. I wish she were not quite so supportive sounding of The Fraud.

    I would LOVE to see Hillary as our president. She may be the only one who can right our sinking ship and get the USA back on course.

    But if Hillary intends to run in 2012 or in 2016, she may need to begin separating herself from the fraud and his policies real soon.

  105. JanH
    April 11th, 2010 at 3:02 pm

    Mrs. Smith

    Yes, Jan- thanks to your examples given, it seems Obama is following a familiar pattern playing the Anti-Semite Card like he did during the Primary playing the Race Card against whites and directly at the Clintons. Obama is stirring up hate against the Jews for one reason and one reason only… a full out WAR in the ME.

    JanH said:

    “And one other thing. Having stepped back from all of the rest of his insane rhetoric and actions lately, one thing in particular stands out for me. It is easy to become complacent about what this monster has achieved…it’s just one more thing…he know’s not what he does…he’s insane…etc…etc… However, this game that he and his bosom buddies keep playing, i.e. undercover anti-semitic moves that they keep thinking no one will hear about…well enough is enough!”

    If Obama dares to breach a decades long trust between Israel and the US- He ultimately will be forceably removed from office. At present, there are smatterings of his removal from office showing up on the web as we type. This is the way it begins. Soft groundswells of rumor start breaking the surface until further information is gleaned from reliable sources and provided. Confloyd mentioned something related to Obama’s removal yesterday. A post was written at the Citizen Wells website stating The US Provo Marshall was approached as to the particulars of how Obama could be removed from office in a bloodless coup.

    Let me just say this… If the Muslims think they are going to takeover our country forcing us to be subjected to Sharia Law, they’ve got another thing coming. The sure trigger would be if Iran ever dares attack Israel and the US response is watching and waiting… that will be a sure signal big changes are about to happen. Hillary has said more than once, if Iran vollys an attack on Israel, it will be obliterated into dust. She said it and she is not kidding- I believe we have to play this scenario out to the end because the hand that rises against Israel and America has to be clearly and solely the hand of Obama as the impetus to his removal.

    Here is how I hypothesize it should happen- Biden moves up and picks HRC as his choice for VP… Biden has openly supported Israel. We have have security he is not in Obama’s inner circle. It works for him to play the misspoken buffoon and an unwanted accessory to the rouge presidency.. Therefore, Biden proceeds with defending Israel as it is written and as it is meant to be…

  106. Oh admin, a juicy article on Chicago malfeasance has gotten a mention on Corrente Wire but no one can access the article. Any chance you could get a hold of it or have it in your archives?

    Oddly, or not, a story from Daily Finance by Moe Tkacik that covers this story — Rahm Emanuel and Magnetar Capital: A Love Story — isn’t available any more, not even in Google’s cache. Traces of it do, however, still exist at Hedgehogs, Yahoo, and Bing. Tkacik is for real (see, e.g., Felix Salmon) so what happened to her story?

    NOTE Via Yves.

    Hmmmm, via Yves. She is responsible for so much of the good stuff on the internet. That woman is a powerhouse.

  107. Southern Born
    April 11th, 2010 at 3:38 pm

    We may understand the comments Hillary is giving about Obamacare and the hidden meanings, however, many people do not and are beginning to get unhappy with comments by Hillary supporting BO.

    We cannot be responsible for many people’s unhappiness because of Hillary’s comments supporting parts of Obama’s policies. They who are unhappy are most likely people that voted for Obama in the first place and expect Hillary to strike down a sitting president pointing out his mistakes ridiculing him with innuendo as was mentioned by rgb44hrc in a previous post. That would be the fastest way to Hillary’s demise as our protector in the worst of times. Obama would gag and quarter her at the drop of a hat if she showed any inkling she was not supportive of him. I prefer to let her play this out on her own steam and in her own time. She is our last and only hope for turning this country around. There is no one else we can turn to…

    I do not agree with wbboe’s assessment of the HC Bill either. I don’t believe it will be struck down as unconstitutional in whole or in part as he believes because it is essentially a new TAX being imposed on citizens.

    I say this because the IRS wouldn’t be hiring thousands of new employees as the enforcement arm for HC premium payments if the HCTax was to be struck down.

    “( – The Internal Revenue Service will function as the government’s chief enforcer for health care reform, should President Obama sign the bill into law as expected, monitoring both businesses and individuals to certify whether they have the insurance coverage the government requires.

    The tax collection agency will be responsible for monitoring and enforcing compliance with the individual and employer insurance mandates which form the backbone of the Democrats’ hard-won reforms.

    The bill states that the purpose of the mandates is to regulate “economic and financial decisions about how and when health care is paid for, and when health insurance is purchased.”

    But wbb and I do not agree on many levels yet we remain friends for the same reason.. We are willing to fight for what is right and do whatever it takes to make RIGHT happen.

  108. Ater the three interviews that Hillary and Gates hit the networks there can be no doubt that she has separated as much as she can and still serve as SoS.She has always explained that her job is to deal with Dept of State issues and cannot toch political agendas.In the pst several weeks since Otrauma appears to be off his trolley it is very likely that he will attempt to isolate or blame Hillary fo just about everything that he manages to screw up.The whole world is upset with him and he shows many signs emotional inbalance.
    My friends please leave her future up to her.She knows when where the time has come to let Otrauma
    get out of her way.This country as a whole must take some very serious steps to stop the destruction of mankind by this greenhorn..
    …..the FOX’s Den will no doubt soon realze that they are fighting a losing battle in ignoring Hillary.She has so much support from many solid and honest Rebublican supporters in Congress.Otrauma is now the Joker and his days in office are numbered.

  109. Andy McCarthy led the prosecution against Omar Abdel Rahman and 11 others who plotted to bomb the World Trade center 8 years before 9/11. He recounts the experience of a general who was holding the attackers in preparation for a military trial and was served with a writ of habeas corpus. He recounted the history of the Great Writ–which is an order to produce the body so that his guilt or innocence could be determined in federal court. He argues against this proposition and contends that such terrorists should be tried as enemy combatants. He cites Justice Jackson in Chicago and Southern Airlines v. Waterman 1948.

    “The very nature of executive decisions as to foreign policy is political, not judicial. Such decisions are confided by our Constitution to the political departments of the government. They are delicate, complex and involve large elements of prophesy. They are and should be undertaken only by those who are directly responsible to the people whose welfare they advance or imperil. They are decisions of a kind for which the judiciary has neither aptitude, facilities, nor responsibility and are not subject to judicial intrusion or inquiry.”

    McCarthy: “A free people do not surrender control of the most fundamental decisions–such as those concerning national defense–to officials who are not politically accountable. NOR SHOULD OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS VOLUNTARILY SURRENDER CONTROL OF THOSE DECISIONS. WE MUST REJECT THE IDEA OF ENTRUSTING OUR SECURITY TO JUDICIAL PROCESSES OR WE SHALL EVENTUALLY FIND OURSELVES NEITHER SECURE NOR FREE.”

  110. Try this for size:

    President Hillary Rodham Clinton

    Vice President Robert Gates

    They sure present a very impressive pair of smart and fearless leaders to correct the damage
    and right our Ship of State

  111. ABM90
    April 11th, 2010 at 4:38 pm

    Try this for size:

    President Hillary Rodham Clinton

    Vice President Robert Gates

    I agree, ABM90- They are an impressive, good looking, well matched couple. During this morning’s MTP interview with Gregory, they presented a united front in their assessments of Obama’s policies… they compliment each other with ease.. Looking forward to that reality…

  112. I do not agree with wbboe’s assessment of the HC Bill either. I don’t believe it will be struck down as unconstitutional in whole or in part as he believes because it is essentially a new TAX being imposed on citizens.
    April 11th, 2010 at 3:22 pm

    ???????? Here is my quote:

    “I think it is highly unlikely that Obamacare will be modified. Either it will be struck down as unconstitutional in whole

    Also, as I said a couple weeks ago:

    “If Obamacare is struck down it will not be because it imposes a new tax. Most likely, it will be because it represents an unconstitutional expansion of federal power under Article III insofar as it presumes to regulate inactivity as opposed to activity, and because it imposes usurps the power of the States under Article 10.

    If the proceed to incur costs on the assumption that it will not be struck down then they proceed at their peril. There will be no hostage taking here. It is a question of law.

    Finally, a case could be made that Hillary was thrilled with the passage of the bill as opposed to the bill itself. But discrimination so subtle is a feat beyond the compass of ordinary minds. (Cardozo)/ And voters, like jurors, display most of the qualities of ordinary minds, unfortunately.

    Yes. We are friends. And life would be boring if we agreed on everything.

  113. It is beyond disgracefull how Obama is treating Israel…this will be his downfall…I will even side with the rwn on this one…Israel has to be defended. There are many who find his treatment of Israel contrary to what America has always stood for…and I believe that is an impeachable offense of coarse unless we are already NOT America…as some have said. I personally think this whole 50 countries represented at this summit is the intention of making Israel look as bad as Iran…just my opinion…just get this sick feeling in my stomach.

    Of coarse the HCR can be tweaked, just as medicare and social security was…this is just a scare tactic. If something is not working a Potus like Hillary will FIX it. I fully believe that!

  114. #
    April 11th, 2010 at 3:38 pm

    The dims could have gone for a public option, or even single payer. The former has been an option since Nixon. If they had gone for the public option, they would have satisfied the base and lured back a lot of independents. It would have cost them no more political capital than this terrible bill has. They could have bribed bartered and threatened the same dimocrats who voted for this bill to vote instead for the public option. So why didn’t they? Simple. The insurance industry was unalterably opposed to single payer and therefor would not fill his campaign coffers. Lest we forget this asshole was their go to guy in the state of Illinois. In the final analysis, big business is the only constituency obama cares about, i.e. Rezko redux. And he will betray his constituents and his supporter every single time and say show me the money.

    Exactly right. Really, this single bill demonstrates exactly who Obama is and his willingness not only to throw the majority of Americans under the bus for campaign contributions, but he does it all while telling the regular American, who would so benefit from single payer, or a public option, that he has done so much for them. That he has brought them the best ever health care they could have. It’s really disgusting.

  115. wbboei
    Thanks, I should have added that I voted and gave my information anyway. The chance he was really keeping track of the votes and would do something with the total was worth taking.

Comments are closed.