Volcanic Bill Clinton And The Tea Party Movement, Part I

Today is our third year anniversary, the 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing, the anniversary of the Battle of Lexington and Concord, as well as the 17th anniversary of Waco. Big Pink began publication on April 19, 2007 and we can’t celebrate today, because too much is going on. We’ll celebrate on another day.

What is the “much” that is going on? There is a volcanic eruption in the news and it is called Bill Clinton.

Bill Clinton has been saying and doing some strange things lately which we do not take at face value. Bill has the usual suspects up in arms as well as some allies. Ditto Hillary. What is going on?

Recall our years long critique of the Obama health scam, which was not such an outré viewpoint: Long ago we stated that we did not know what was worse for Dimocrats – to pass the health scam they call “reform” or to fail to pass the health scam.” That was conventional wisdom in the best sense because it reflected polling reality. We also noted repeatedly that “the medium is the message” when asked about where Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton stood on the Obama health scam. Our contention was that if Bill or Hillary Clinton wanted to express support they had the means, opportunity, and knowledge to do a full court press. We wrote:

Bill Clinton has not been campaigning or touring and giving public speeches at rallies to support the legislation. This pro forma, almost ministerial, verbiage is interpreted by the desperate as a full-throated battle cry. It isn’t. When Bill fully supports a cause, it’s full throttle, not half measure, or half statement, as in this case.

Our case was quite simple: health care was not popular and if it failed to pass would be Obama’s personal Waterloo and if it did pass it would be the Dimocrats Waterloo. We also noted the eerie silence from Bill And Hillary Clinton.

And there was almost complete silence from Bill and Hillary Clinton on health care. The few times either of them spoke on the issue was when asked in private or when asked explicitly in a public interview. There were no mass rallies, no ceaseless round of interview, no speech tours, no fusillade of published articles. There was one e-mail sent out on Bill Clinton’s behalf, but not much else. There was another very odd thing Bill Clinton said publicly and repeatedly.

The most prominent political prognosticator who predicted a post-reform bump for Obama was President Bill Clinton – who told reporters last year that Obama would add 10 points to his approval rating “the minute health reform passed.

We were not the only ones who thought Bill Clinton was saying something odd. Tom Jensen of the Democratic polling firm PPP (Public Policy Polling) scratched his head and said, “I don’t know why Bill Clinton is out there saying there’ll be a ten point bounce.”

Our answer to the Bill Clinton puzzle at the end of March wasBill Clinton is no dope and he usually lowers expectations, not heightens them. Now, why would Bill do the contrary in this case?

Was Bill Clinton delusional and did he actually believe, contrary to all the evidence displayed for months and months that Obama’s health scam was hated, that there would be joy in the streets and in the polls for Barack Obama post scam passage? Or was Bill Clinton doing something much more sly? Your answer to that question will color reaction to Bill Clinton’s latest statements.

Bill Clinton is clearly proving us right that when he wants to communicate something he does so with gusto. Our question now that we have witnessed repeated interviews, and a big speech and a New York Times Op-Ed from Bill Clinton is – what is Bill up to? It’s almost as if Bill Clinton is on a one man “sink Obama Dimocrats” in November tour.

Bill Clinton respects polling. That is something both enemies and allies agree on. Bill Clinton respects polling and understands political strategy, but yet he raised expectations beyond the reasonable and said that Obama’s numbers would rise the moment the health scam passed? Bill Clinton respect polling and understands political strategy, but yet he decides to poke at the hornets’ nest which is the Tea Party movement? Our eyebrows arch.

* * * * * *

Has Bill Clinton lost all interest in polls and the information they provide? It’s possible of course, but somehow we think not.

Today is the Patriots Day holiday in Massachusetts. There are lots of polls published today and in recent days for Bill Clinton to consider – polls which we do not doubt Bill Clinton has thoroughly digested.

“Public confidence in government is at one of the lowest points in a half century, according to a survey from the Pew Research Center. Nearly 8 in 10 Americans say they don’t trust the federal government and have little faith it can solve America’s ills, the survey found.

The survey illustrates the ominous situation President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party face as they struggle to maintain their comfortable congressional majorities in this fall’s elections. Midterm prospects are typically tough for the party in power. Add a toxic environment like this and lots of incumbent Democrats could be out of work.[snip]

This anti-government feeling has driven the tea party movement, reflected in fierce protests this past week.

“The government’s been lying to people for years. Politicians make promises to get elected, and when they get elected, they don’t follow through,” says Cindy Wanto, 57, a registered Democrat from Nemacolin, Pa., who joined several thousand for a rally in Washington on April 15 – the tax filing deadline. “There’s too much government in my business. It was a problem before Obama, but he’s certainly not helping fix it.”

Majorities in the survey call Washington too big and too powerful, and say it’s interfering too much in state and local matters. [snip]

Trust in government rarely gets this low,” said Andrew Kohut, director of the nonpartisan center that conducted the survey. “Some of it’s backlash against Obama. But there are a lot of other things going on.”

And, he added: “Politics has poisoned the well.”

The survey found that Obama’s policies were partly to blame for a rise in distrustful, anti-government views. In his first year in office, the president orchestrated a government takeover of Detroit automakers, secured a $787 billion stimulus package and pushed to overhaul the health care system. [snip]

“I want an honest government. This isn’t an honest government. It hasn’t been for some time,” said self-described independent David Willms, 54, of Sarasota, Fla. He faulted the White House and Congress under both parties.[snip]

In the short term, the deepening distrust is politically troubling for Obama and Democrats. Analysts say out-of-power Republicans could well benefit from the bitterness toward Washington come November, even though voters blame them, too, for partisan gridlock that hinders progress.

In a democracy built on the notion that citizens have a voice and a right to exercise it, the long-term consequences could prove to be simply unhealthy – or truly debilitating. Distrust could lead people to refuse to vote or get involved in their own communities. Apathy could set in, or worse – violence.

Democrats and Republicans both accept responsibility and fault the other party for the electorate’s lack of confidence.

“This should be a wake-up call. Both sides are guilty,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. She pointed to “nonsense” that goes on during campaigns that leads to “promises made but not promises kept.” Still, she added: “Distrust of government is an all-American activity. It’s something we do as Americans and there’s nothing wrong with it.”

Sen. Scott Brown, a Republican who won a long-held Democratic Senate seat in Massachusetts in January by seizing on public antagonism toward Washington, said: “It’s clear Washington is broken. There’s too much partisan bickering to be able to solve the problems people want us to solve.”

And, he added: “It’s going to be reflected in the elections this fall.”

We’ve always said it’s about trust. And we don’t trust Barack Obama. Most Americans increasingly agree with us.

Claire McCaskill thinks it is “nonsense” those pesky “promises made but not promises kept”. Claire should also realize that delegitimizing people by calling them “racist” (a favorite past time by Obama thugs against Hillary Clinton supporters and Tea Party activists) is also a pesky problem – especially when the “racist” shouters are doughy white boys or work at doughy white boy institutions.

Calling people who express themselves legitimately by the anti-gay and simultaneously misogynistic “Teabagger” epithet can also rile people up. And tit-for-tat never works because for every “Oklahoma City” shouted by the Left, the right will shout “Waco”.

Before continuing with our discussion of Bill Clinton and what he is up to, we need to exactly understand why the Tea Party movement is such a threat to so many people. And the Tea Party movement is indeed a great threat to established institutions. It might be the real thing. It might be the same thing as what they celebrate today in Massachusetts.

We’ll discuss exactly why the Tea Party movement is so important and so feared in our next thrilling, Bill packed, episode.

Share

164 thoughts on “Volcanic Bill Clinton And The Tea Party Movement, Part I

  1. Reposted.

    DEMS: “PLEASE SUPPORT BILLS WITH RIGHTEOUS SOUNDING NAMES, BUT PLEASE DON’T TAKE A PEEK AT THE DETAILS.”

    investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=530543

    Wall St. Bailouts Would Be Invited, Not Prevented, Under Dodd’s Bill
    ===================

    By NICOLE GELINAS
    Posted 04/16/2010 05:21 PM ET

    President Obama castigated Senate Republicans last week for opposing Sen. Chris Dodd’s Wall Street “reform bill.” Democrats say Republicans’ main argument — that the bill won’t prevent future bailouts — is false. The bill itself, though, is irrefutable evidence that the Republicans are dead on.

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell started the fight earlier in the week when he said the bill “not only allows for taxpayer funded bailouts for Wall Street banks, it actually institutionalizes them.”

    The White House and congressional Democrats have hit back hard. “I am absolutely confident that the bill that emerges is going to be a bill that prevents bailouts,” Obama said.

    His Treasury chief, Tim Geithner, was even stronger. The bill will ensure that “if a major institution manages itself to the edge of the abyss, we’re able to … dismember them safely without taxpayers being exposed to a penny of loss,” he said.

    Dodd was the bluntest: “The bill as drafted ends bailouts. Nothing could be more clear.”

    In the 1,336-page text, though, Dodd left room for regulators to be generous with citizens’ money. For example, the bill would direct the FDIC, which would wind down too-big-to-fail financial firms, to operate under only “a strong presumption that creditors and shareholders will bear the losses.”

    As for whether the bill puts taxpayers at risk: failed firms must repay “any amounts owed to the United States, unless the United States agrees or consents otherwise” (italics mine).

    Why would the financial firm owe Uncle Sam money in the first place? Partly because of something else in the bill: an “orderly liquidation fund.” Big or complex financial firms would have to pay upfront into a Treasury-controlled $50 billion pot of money that would bear the cost of liquidating a future AIG.

    The FDIC would have the authority to use this money as it sees fit, including guaranteeing bondholders, uninsured lenders, counterparties and other creditors to a failed company just as the government did with AIG and Citigroup in 2008.

    The idea that the financial industry can pre-fund its next arbitrary bailout with $50 billion is a pleasant fiction. How much would an “orderly liquidation fund” have needed to stem investor panic starting in 2008? Try $20 trillion.

    The true tab is not the retroactive cost. Rather, it’s what investors demand at the time of an acute crisis so as not to flee the unknowable risks of a financial system in meltdown, precipitating depression.

    Think about everything that Washington has done in the past two years. TARP was $700 billion; that’s easy. Outside of TARP, the Treasury said it would guarantee $3.4 trillion worth of money-market funds in the fall of 2008. The Fed has purchased $1.25 trillion in mortgage-backed securities over the past year or so — providing a floor to avoid deeper housing-price declines and bank losses. It also offered $1.8 trillion to commercial-paper markets.

    The FDIC guaranteed up to $940 billion in financial-firm bonds and committed another $700 billion in expanded deposit guarantees, which allowed banks to avoid selling off assets at crisis-level prices. Taking Fannie and Freddie into conservatorship and guaranteeing other housing agencies and their debt? Another $7 trillion. Other sundry programs add up quickly (see table).

    Democrats can’t really believe that a $50 billion fund could avert the kind of investor panic we saw in 2008 — and if they do believe that, we’re in real trouble.

    The answer is not to make the bailout fund bigger. Even if the financial industry could suck enough resources up from its customers and the economy to pay into a $2 trillion fund — a mere down payment — that fund itself would represent a systemic risk to the nation.

    The feds could not invest $2 trillion in any financial markets — Treasury bond markets, global stock markets, real estate or some combination — without distorting them. And in a crisis, global investors would expect the bailout fund to dump some assets to pay for its rescues. This expectation would exacerbate price declines.

    The only regulation that would better protect the economy from future financial failures is a set of predictable rules — including consistent borrowing limits and trading rules across financial firms and securities — like those we had before the 1980s.

    The Dodd bill doesn’t propose such rules — and Republicans should point out that the mere idea of those rules is what really annoys the too-big-to-fail financial firms.

    &&&&
    Gelinas, contributing editor to the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal, is author of “After the Fall: Saving Capitalism From Wall Street — and Washington.”

  2. Bill on Hillary too old:

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0410/Hillarys_second_husband.html?showall

    Bill Clinton, speaking to NBC, contemplates the notion of appointing Hillary to the Court:

    I think she’d be a great Supreme Court judge. But I think she probably thinks that it’d be better if he appointed somebody younger. Although if you look, I mean, my mother-in-law’s 91. I mean, Hillary’s going to live to be 110. I joke with her all the time. She might have three husbands after me. You know, she’s going to live forever.

  3. Admin, a cliffhanger, eh?!

    “And tit-for-tat never works because for every “Oklahoma City” shouted by the Left, the right will shout “Waco”. ”

    To this I say, no McVeighs emerged after Bush sent 1000s of soldiers to death in a war of choice, doing it on the cheap with his idiot defense secretary.

  4. Admin:

    I agree, if Bill C. has as long a memory as is purported, there’s no way it’s all just water under the bridge. And we’ve seen how tepid his support has been for D’ohbama.

    So if things don’t add up…

    As Judge Judy always says, “If it doesn’t make sense, it must not be true”.

  5. Let’s hope he knows what he is doing as the last thing we need is Bill and Hillary propping up Obama at a time when many Americans are reluctantly realizing what he is doing to our nation, let alone, our standing in thw world.

  6. President Obama castigated Senate Republicans last week for opposing Sen. Chris Dodd’s Wall Street “reform bill.” Democrats say Republicans’ main argument — that the bill won’t prevent future bailouts — is false.
    ———————
    Yes. False. Like everything else about Obama.

    Life is uncertain, human relationships are ambiguous, but one thing is for sure: the financial reform bill by Chris Dodd will be written by the attorneys for Goldman Sack et. al., just as the health care deform bill was written by insurance company lobbyist. Furthermore, they will prove to be yet another Rezko deal for Obama. Reward his Wall Street backers and screw his constituents. And, for Chris Dodd it will be the ticket to a million dollar job on Wall Street in 2011.

    I live in a college town and the Obama bumper stickers persist among the young and delusional. Today, I saw a car with six Obama bumper stickers, two university of Chicago and one Massachusetts Institute of Technology decals and four parking tickets. He wants us to think he is in tune and a very smart young man.

    Like the Rogers and Hart lament–yes, he has stayed too long at the fair. He is a fierce supporter of crony capitalism and is clueless.

  7. Ooooooo, the stage is set, we are sitting in our seats ready to hear your idea of what the Big Dawg is talking about…

    Could it be that by telling everyone in the media the passing of the Hell Care bill would put the polls up on the Fraud 10 points, to disappoint the obots, help tear down the Democratic party, to essentially cripple Nasty and Reid in the election, by taking away their power so that the only Democrat that can save the day is a women riding on her white horse in 2012…Hillary?

    I hoping for that ending, but I will be waiting to hear yours. 🙂

  8. I have written a couple bills which were introduced in Congress. In each case, I prepared my draft, and forwarded it to Congressional Legislative Counsel for editing, conformity to law and ensuring that critical provisions were not omitted. They forwarded it back to me for review and approval, ad seriatum.

    I am quite sure that the health care deform bill in its entirety was never run by Legislative Counsel. Same story with The Bail-out, the Stimulus Plan, Cap & Trade and the Financial Reform bill. If they had been then in its own self interest, Legislative Counsel would have caught the following error and corrected it.

    Sure as day follows night, those bills were written by attorney working for the very business interests they purport to regulate, and never reviewed before hand by anyone else. That is the modus operandi of this Administration. How else would Goldman Sacks know the bill would be good for them.

    This is the utter negation of representative government.
    —————————————————-

    Because if you are, you have a destiny.

    Congress may be fined tens of millions of dollars a year under its own health-care law, in part because the bill dumps members of Congress and their staffs from their current health-care plans.

    [snip]

    Before Congress incurs any fines, a complex series of events would be required to happen under the law. Generally speaking, an lower-tier aide — one not making a six-figure salary like some 2,000 House employees — would have to apply for government subsidies. The way the law works is that employers incur a $2,000 or $3,000 fine for each employee, depending on the circumstances, if only one of their employees obtains the subsidies.

    So one lowly staff assistant could think he’s just getting some health-care help, while actually triggering a $50 million annual fine for Congress.

    Embrace your destiny. Start the ball rolling. Force the Obama administration to demonstrate – once again – that their slipshod and slapdash approach to legislation requires constant intervention to keep even themselves from the consequences of their actions. Here is your monkey-wrench. There is some exposed machinery.

    You know what you need to do.

    Moe Lane

  9. Happy third and going strong anniversary Admin, Big Pinkers, and those who read and those who post.

  10. As long as Bill keeps himself out there in the news he is keeping the Hyenas at bay and sparing his gal Hillary above the fray.The old dawg is under the bus for a reasonHe loves and respects Hillary and he will see her in the OO.Otrauma is due to hit bottom by Nov.We must all push him out on to PA ave. with all his belongings.

  11. Happy anniversary, Admin. 🙂

    —————-
    & Thank you Bill!

    —————-
    Mon, Apr. 19, 2010

    Bill Clinton, students spruce up Homestead homeless center

    BY CHRISTINA VEIGA

    Fresh red mulch was poured and raked outside. Paint was spread across plain tiles, making bright images with inspirational messages. And former President Bill Clinton, along with local athletes, pitched in.
    Hundreds of young people with big ideas came together Sunday, marking the end of the Clinton Global Initiative University with a community-service project at the Homestead Homeless Complex.

    “Everybody is here out of a choice they made,” said Shane Doyle, a graduate student at Montana State University. “They’re here because they want to make the world better.”

    Clinton’s annual conference brings together students with dreams of planting gardens in New York City or hopes of organizing marathons at Indian reservations. They meet with community leaders who have already seen their ideas come to life. Together, they brainstorm and encourage each other to move forward with their own community-service projects.

    The University of Miami played host to this year’s conference, which brought together 1,300 students from more than 80 countries.

    Clinton, along with 100 UM student athletes and a few Miami Dolphins players, also joined in on the work.

    The Homestead Homeless Complex swarmed with students, athletes and residents who helped beautify the 80-acre transitional housing facility. Mindy Camacho, 48, a resident of the complex, chose red, white and blue to paint the flags of the two lands she considers home. On the top half of a plain white tile, Camacho painted the Puerto Rican flag. On the bottom half, she painted the stars and stripes of the American flag.

    Dolphins players Patrick Cobbs, Greg Camarillo and Lousaka Polite painted their team logo across several tiles. “Go Dolphins!” Clinton said. Then he grabbed a paintbrush and some green paint to fill in a UM logo — which he smudged. “It looks good — except for that blob,” Clinton said.

    The tiles will become part of a wall in a planned farmers’ market at the complex that will feature fresh, organically grown foods. “While we’re going through trials in our life, they took a moment to bring happiness,” Camacho said of the participants. Pointing to her heart, Camacho said: “That brought joy.”

    The farmers market is part of a larger expansion of the homeless complex, scheduled for completion in May 2011, that will include an organic nursery and 600 more beds for homeless people, said David Raymond, executive director of the Miami-Dade County Homeless Trust. The complex currently offers 300 beds for singles, families and veterans, he said. The nursery, Raymond said, would grow mostly fruits and vegetables to be sold to local restaurants, but would also include landscape plants.

    Alonzo Mourning, a former Miami Heat mainstay, and Ronald Book, chairman of Homeless Trust, were on hand to encourage the students. “All of us want to see good things happen,” said Mourning. “The only way to see good things happen is if we get involved in the community.”

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/04/18/1586117/hundreds-of-students-join-celebrities.html

  12. Admin:, Thanks for this wonderful place to come and communicate our fears,hopes and dreams for this country. Every place else is boring, there’s nothing out there like this blog.
    Happy Anniversary!

  13. Happy Anniversary Admin. The best political analyst in the business. Light years ahead of big media.

  14. Perhaps it is all a matter of judo. Using your opponent’s own momentum against him rather than actively resisting.

  15. Bill and the Volcano! I’ll bet he Loves the similarity. Time for dark clouds
    floating lava dust over 1600 Pensey Av.

    Happy Anniversary, Admin- This blog has been an oasis for Hillary supporters for 3 yrs now. No other blog in the ether of web space has the understanding of what is happening to us because of this administration.

    We Love You- Admin- Thanks for putting up with our tantrums when we are cranky- soothing us when we are frightened and always keeping us informed advising us to step lively when faced with the latest of Obama’s landmines.

  16. Happy Anniversary, Big Pink. I cannot wait until the next installment. Admin always has a way of seeing through the volcanic cloud. Way to go!

  17. Re Obama’s phoney ‘mandate’ for hospital visitation for gays/lesbians, here’s an abbreviated version of the info someone posted on a previous thread.

    NY Times eventually discloses at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/us/politics/16webhosp.html?ref=todayspaper

    Richard Socarides, who advised President Bill Clinton on gay rights issues, said that while the memorandum on its own did not grant any new rights, it did “draw attention to the very real and tragic situations many gays and lesbians face when a partner is hospitalized.”

    From the Memorandum:

    “This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

  18. “And tit-for-tat never works because for every “Oklahoma City” shouted by the Left, the right will shout “Waco”. ”

    ================

    Huh? The Waco nuts were right-wingers too. They had some sort of fundamentalist religious gun factory.

    Reno was blamed for the Feds’ attack on them, but actually those Feds were Bush holdovers who deceived her about what they were doing. So Waco was Rightwing vs Rightwing.

  19. Don’t give up hope on Hillary busting that glass ceiling, I don’t think she is any where ready to retire from politics…

  20. One more thing, Hillary is at the top of her career right now, highest in the polls and she never gives up.

  21. Have we heard anything about Israel…I heard one Fox News idiots say that Israel just can’t go bomb the hell out of Iran…

  22. Happy Anniversary to Admin and to all the 44-ers!

    And yeah, Bill Clinton is definitely up to something. The right wingers know it, too. Bill’s Tea Party comments are driving them crazy. Sure, they’re not going to like anything that Bill has to say, but they are giving this far too much attention and airtime. It means something other than what it looks like, and I’m very much looking forward to part two of the Volcano article.

    Excellent work as always, Admin!

  23. confloyd,

    Bibi restated today that Israel will not give up East Jerusalem.

    As well, the Syrian rep was called to the WH to answer questions about the arming of Hezbollah, which the WH condemned.

  24. Bill the Volcano has plenty to say:
    _________________________

    Goldman Sachs prosecution threatens to open the floodgates on Wall Street

    “Oversight on derivatives trading has been a contentious topic for years. Advocates of light-touch regulation argue that the investors involved are sophisticated institutions that are savvy about the risks they are taking.”

    But the former US president Bill Clinton today expressed regret for listening to such sentiments. He said that he should not have listened to the former treasury secretaries Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, both of whom opposed tight protection when derivatives were gaining popularity during the 1990s.

    “I think they were wrong and I think I was wrong to take [their advice] because the argument on derivatives was that these things are expensive and sophisticated and only a handful of investors will buy them,” Clinton said.

    h.. w.. guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/18/goldman-sachs-prosecution-wall-street-crackdown

  25. Something to think about after you view the above Hillary video when it comes out of moderation.
    ******************
    John Conyers: Those “Teabaggers” Are Angry So Their “Rational Abilities Are Compromised”
    —Ace

    And he says teabaggers twice. No mistake.

    I think this is the Democrats’ real Waterloo. They are going insane as they watch their precious power about to be taken from them — possibly, for several generations to come.

    They are the ones, in fact, whose “rational abilities” have become “compromised,” as they lash out with infantile venom at the voters.

    This is a meltdown, and I just get angrier and angrier — and more and more optimistic — as they vent seething hatred and vile condescension at the voters who will decide their political fates in just five months and a couple of weeks.

    Joe (“Who?”) Klein just decided that dissent was no longer the highest form of patriotism, but instead “borderline sedition,” and it was no ill-considered slip of the tongue; he’s said it before at least twice.

    I had been mulling an essay on that all day, which I’ll write later, but I suppose I have to put it up now rather than waiting for the essay.

    I will just say that liberals will not be able to sell the “dissent is the highest form of patriotism” line when they are the opposition party, frozen out from all branches of government, in January 2013. I personally intend to accuse them of sedition and a lack of patriotism on a daily basis, and when they whine (as they always do) I will cite back to them the expansive definitions of “sedition” and “treason” they employed from January 2009 to January 2013.

    Is it sedition to strenuously argue against a party in power? Well, good to know, considering that Republicans/conservatives/Tea Partiers are poised to sweep Congress (both houses, possibly) in January 2011.

    Are you sure you can’t criticize the party in power, Joe? Are you certain of that? I hope you are, because you are then destined to become an enemy of the state in five months and two weeks.

    It’s good to know that Joe Klein will set aside his own hateful rhetoric at that time. On penalty of jailing should he refuse to do so.

  26. Admin:

    April is a huge month of celebrations in MA- Not only is it a remembrance of the Battle of Lexington but it is the 235th year commemerating The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere.

    Tenth Annual Paul Revere Row Reenactment

    Boston National Historical Park, Charlestown Navy Yard Visitor Center and Pier 1

    7:00 – 9:45 pm

    Witness a dramatic recreation of the night when patriots rowed midnight rider Paul Revere across the harbor from Boston to Charlestown to begin his famous ride towards Lexington and Concord. This year marks the 235th Anniversary of Paul Revere’s midnight row and ride and 150th Anniversary of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s famous poem. The event begins with dramatic and musical performances at the Charlestown Navy Yard Visitor Center. Around 8:30 noted historian, author, and Boston tour guide Charles Bahne will speak on “What Did Longfellow Know and When Did He Know It?” in the course of writing his poem. The speaking program will be followed by a procession from the Visitor Center to the end of the pier in time for the dramatic arrival of the row boat containing costumed rowers and actor reenactor Michael LePage portraying Paul Revere.

    This event coincides with the Old North Church’s Annual Lantern Ceremony on the other side of the Charles River. Free.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    We mussen’t forget Rachael Revere, Paul’s second wife and mother to his 16 children.

    Rachel Revere: A Revolutionary Woman

    Paul Revere House, 19 North Square, Boston
    1:00, 1:45, and 2:30 pm

    Professional storyteller Joan Gatturna takes on the role of Paul Revere’s second wife. Listen to her dramatic account of a woman’s struggle to hold home and family together in a time of war, blockades, and shortages.

    Free with museum admission: adults $3.50, seniors and college students $3.00, children ages 5-17 $1.00. Members and North End residents admitted free at all times.

    (Noting the 150yrs mentioned in this link is in memory of Longfellow’s poem)

    h.. w.. paulreveresride.org/2010/02/events-in-april-2010.html

  27. Interested in Hillary’s Plans? Just Watch Bill

    As Barack Obama’s approval numbers trend ever lower – and a new Gallup poll reports that 50% of Americans believe the President doesn’t even deserve a second term – it’s going to be very interesting to watch Hillary Clinton. Well, not the Secretary of State herself, of course. She’s busy at Foggy Bottom, burnishing her foreign policy credentials. Instead, watch her husband.

    Notwithstanding news accounts about the détente between the Clintons and Obama, surely the former president and his wife can’t help but feel that their predictions about the political disaster that would result from Obama’s inexperience and naivete, reportedly made during the 2008 campaign, amply borne out. With Hillary turning 65 in 2012, can anyone blame her (or her husband) for entertaining the idea of challenging Obama in two years if his popularity continues to plummet?

    Sean Hannity book FREE

    In fact, Democrats might be well-advised to take with a grain of salt any advice Bill Clinton offers in months to come. The greater the damage to the President (and his party) that accrues in the interim, the greater the justification for a new (yet experienced!) candidate to step in to “rescue” the tarnished Democrat brand in 2012.

    Certainly, this rationale would explain the advice that President Clinton offered the Democrats in the midst of the health care debate. Push forward, he told them, predicting that “the minute health care reform passed, President Obama’s approval ratings would go up 10 points.” Of course, that simply didn’t happen, and every day, the ObamaCare vote looks like nothing so much as a Democrat political suicide pact. If Democrats are nervous now, consider that the ex-President insisted at the same time that Obama’s ratings would increase by 20 points by next year.

    Most recently, President Clinton emerged to insult the members of the Tea Party. Invoking memories of the Oklahoma City bombing, he implicitly compared administration critics to domestic terrorist Timothy McVeigh, insisting that “all you have to do is read the paper every day to see how many people there are who are deeply, deeply troubled.” If polls are to be believed, more Americans identify with Tea Partiers than with the President himself – and so Clinton’s remarks couldn’t be better designed to alienate voters from the Democrat establishment. At the very least, his comments will serve further to energize the administration’s most fervent opponents.

    All of this could be attributed simply to political wrongheadedness and clumsy posturing – if it weren’t Bill Clinton. For years, Americans have been informed of his formidable political and strategic skills – and his political adversaries have learned, to their detriment, of his dexterity in assessing and responding to the public mood. If he is truly seeking to help the Obama administration, then it’s fair to say that the Comeback Kid has lost a lot of his kick.

    On the other hand, if the former President dislikes being sidelined and upstaged by a younger, more powerful man – who is singlehandedly shredding the Democrat coalition that Clinton himself did so much to assemble – and misses the attention of being the undisputed leader of his party, then his actions aren’t so difficult to understand. If Clinton still resents the battering his image (especially in the black community) suffered at Obama’s hands in the 2008 campaign, then perhaps his words aren’t so inexplicable. Oh, yes, and if he wants to see himself and his legacy vindicated (and his wife’s years of hard work and forbearance repaid) by helping Hillary take her own shot at The White House – then maybe, just maybe, Bill Clinton’s behavior makes perfect sense.

    http://townhall.com/columnists/CarolPlattLiebau/2010/04/19/interested_in_hillarys_plans_just_watch_bill

    (Thanks to another PUMA blog)

  28. I can almost see the double meaning of Bill saying Hillary will live to 100 because her mom is 90…I think he telling us to hold up and believe she will still run when the time is right regardless of her age.

  29. JanH, That’s it, they condemned it, that’s all! For heaven’s sake, what the heck is Israel going to do…well what ever happens I stand with Israel…ALWAYS!

  30. Admin: Congratulations on the third anniversary of Big Pink. In a just world, you would have a Pulitzer hanging on your wall for all of the great work that you have done.

  31. Well, I hope you are right about Bill Clinton. I voted for him twice, and have had mostly positive feelings about him up until just recently. I have been finding myself thinking “shut the hell up Bill”. I’m losing confidence in him because I expected him to be a strong counterbalance to the demon in power, but I haven’t seen this from him yet. How long should one wait before one closes the door on someone. It won’t be long beforei start to put Bill in the same boat as his stinking VP who I also voted for, but am now relieved that he lost his presidential run regardless of how it happened.

    By the way, the lamecherry blog has been very good lately making the case that Americans need to stand up to Obama and his supporters, and not let them go forward with their evil plans for America. DemobRats are now falsely accusing Americans of seditious behavior when actually there is sedition being stoked and perpetrated against lawful Americans that is being orchestrated from the White House. I truly believe this.

  32. nomobama, You must not believe Hillary can still be Potus, if you think Admin needs to have gumption to stick around, granted he might have to rename to blog!

  33. Another Happy Birthday, for my part. I’ve been here since about mid-May 07, or earlier, as soon as you announced your existence in a HillaryClinton.com blog which I attended every day.

    I also make the rounds to the State Department site every few days to try to keep up on what our girl is doing. In a recent statement (still available) on that site, the assistants returning from an AfPak trip were ecstatic over the success of the State/AID actions over the past year. The AfPak policy, for which Holbrook, Gates and, yes, even o have to take some credit, is a success because Hillary is at the helm making sure the job gets done, and done right. She has taken over a number of functions from DoD and, as Bill has pointed out, she is a doer. She is on top of every issue down to the details – a perfect executive. State/AID is turning the Afgan narco-state into the profitable agricultural country it once was, developing mining as well, and side-stepping the corruption.

    Recent dismay expressed here about Bill Clinton and his recent remarks are ill-considered. This man is a former President, and in many people’s opinion a very good one, whose opinion is still sought by the media, while that of George Bush Junior (or Senior) are not even sought. The opinions he expresses are always well-informed but are parsed and over-analyzed by people who want desperately for him to be saying what they want him to say, or sound bites are taken out of context to show that he has said something he didn’t intend at all, or that he is contradicting Hillary. But the very fact that people are listening to his every word indicates that he is a man of intelligence with extensive knowledge and experience, is still very active, and is something of a philosopher to boot, while no one seems to care what the other former presidents, or even the current one, think.

    He issues stern words for violent language, even for the glorious Tea Party? So do I. He has soothing words for o and the health insurance reform? Well, he’s not imposing his opinion on anyone, even if we and, currently, the country do not agree. And after all, there may be some good to come from this bill.

    Long after we’re gone, let’s say by the end of the 21st century, the Clintons will be part of American and world mythology, much like Gandhi is to India or Ben Gurion to Israel, and o will go the way of his predecessor. So when we talk about Bill, we have to see the bigger picture, the larger-than-life man that he has been, is, and will be.

  34. jewesey, I couldn’t have said that better. He was telling the world that Hillary is doing a great job and will live to be 100, so that is the best news I can think of…so she still could be the first woman Potus…which I still want.

  35. Yes, confloyd, my ending comment stands of course for Hillary too – even more so as I am sure she will outlive Bill and all of us, not just as a living person, but as a force for the betterment of America and the world. She is an inspiration to so many people, not just women and girls. After Bill’s “110” comment, I know she will be POTUS, if not the first. I persist in believing her year will be 2016, but just don’t know what she will do in the hiatus 2012-2016. She has stated she will not continue as SoS for more than 4 years, but I don’t see her window of opportunity for 2012.

  36. Question: why Bill Clinton is supporting Obama on health care and taking on the tea parties? Granted, these positions are popular within the party, but they are very unpopular with the general public and on the surface are not conducive to his wife’s presidential candidacy.

    Yesterday, I offered one possible explanation, i.e. that Bill is acting the way he is to support Hillary because Hillary has been offered the vice presidency on the 2012 ticket. That theory was based on a rumor, a prior showing of interest and circumstantial evidence. And while this is all subjective, such accommodations are not uncommon in the corridors of power. However, it is far from conclusive. And it was rejected by most of you for reasons I can readily understand,

    I will now offer an entirely different explanation, which should be more to your liking. The reason Bill is acting the way he is is because he is giving the dimocrats all the rope they need to hang themselves in November 2010 and 2012. At this point, the dims and their media allies are drunk with power. They are calling the Tea Parties racist. They are trying to provoke racial incidents. They have formed shadow groups to infiltrate them. This is madness. Here’s why:

    The Tea Parties are predominantly white. Eighty percent of the electorate voting in the fall will be white. To slander and libel white people and expect them to turn around and vote for you is madness, If perchance a former president decides to echo the party line to keep things moving in the right direction who in the party could possibly fault him for that. After all, he is simply supporting the Chosen One. It might even nudge them along,– and simultaneously mobilize the opposition.

    Of course, this is nothing more than a theory. What supporting evidence is there? First, there is Admin’s blog today. Second, there is the open question why would Bill tell Obama that his poll numbers would go up 10% if he passed health care deform. And third, there is this analysis by Somersby talking about how race baiting journalists are setting the stage for Obama’s 2012 electoral defeat, both arrogantly and unwittingly:
    ————————————————–
    “In the general population, 77 percent said they were white. That is the key number in the New York Times/CBS poll.

    Why is that stray number the key? Crackers! Because the electorate this November will be overwhelmingly white. Almost surely, whites (especially older whites) will vote at a disproportionate rate—it’s an “off-year election,” after all—with Tea Party supporters leading the charge. In the context of an electorate which is overwhelmingly white, “liberals” who “argue” as Blow does in his piece seem to have an electoral death wish. We say that because Blow “argues” one point in his column, and one point alone:

    If you don’t agree with me, that proves you’re a snarling racist! This is a very weak claim on the merits, of course. (Can anyone recall conservative reaction to Clinton, Clinton and Gore?) On the politics, it’s a virtual death wish. Indeed, how hopeless does Blow’s presentation get? Go ahead! Laugh out loud at this unintentionally comical death wish, which continues the passage we quoted above:

    BLOW: It was a farce. This Tea Party wanted to project a mainstream image of a group that is anything but. A New York Times/CBS News poll released on Wednesday found that only 1 percent of Tea Party supporters are black and only 1 percent are Hispanic. It’s almost all white.

    And even when compared to other whites, their views are extreme and marginal. For instance, white Tea Party supporters are twice as likely as white independents and eight times as likely as white Democrats to believe that Barack Obama was born in another country.

    Furthermore, they were more than eight times as likely as white independents and six times as likely as white Democrats to think that the Obama administration favors blacks over whites.

    Too funny! Even when compared to other whites, the views of Tea Party whites are extreme and marginal! We won’t even bother explaining the logic of that comical construction. We’ll only say that columns like this are utterly hopeless on the merits—and represent an electoral death wish.

    What’s wrong with this column? Let us count the two ways:

    First: Blow discusses nothing but race and alleged racial motivation, which he is forced to mind-read. In an electorate which may be 80 percent white in the fall, this would be amazingly risky, even if Blow were able to construct persuasive arguments about motivation. Needless to say, he doesn’t. Question: If President Hillary Clinton had pursued the same policies Obama has pursued, what do you think conservatives would be saying about her? (In our view, these policies have made basic sense. But crackers! That wasn’t our question!)

    (By the way: 74 percent of white Tea Party supporters said Obama doesn’t favors blacks over whites. But you had to study Blow’s graphic with care, then reason a bit on your own, to come up with this fact. Question: Are these 74 percent a gang of snarling racists too? Or is it just the 26? In his actual text, Blow fails to tell us if every white Tea Party supporter is driven by race. Or is it just the people whose specific assessments he disfavors?)

    Second, and possibly worse: In columns like this, people like Blow yell race, then grandly exit the stage. In the process, they develop no political argument at all; the whole of “liberal” argument is thereby reduced to assertions about racial motives. In our view, the political views of Tea Party supporters are pretty much full of holes, as has been true for decades. But people like Blow don’t waste their time on that. They simply yell race, thus proving their grandeur, then retire to the cheers of the crowd.

    Our side yells race—and we say nothing else. In similar ways, losers like Blow have enabled conservative hegemony for the past fifty years. Truly, if Blow didn’t exist, the RNC would have to invent him. Meanwhile:

    Frank Rich pretty much wrote the same damn column, as he pretty much does every week (click here). Minor differences: Where Blow can’t even record basic data, Rich basically lies in your face about this “typical column,” to which he links, after baldly misstating its contents. But then, Rich has long been full of contempt for your intelligence and your interests—and he’s plainly one of the dumbest people in all of American journalism. In 2000, he spent the whole year telling readers that Bush and Gore were two peas in a pod. In 2006, he told Don Imus that Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, was like one of those films they made you watch in high school.

    Please don’t make us give more examples. But yes. Frank Rich is that dumb!

    The blunderbuss Rich has spent his career getting Republicans elected. With the help of his hapless colleague, Blow, he grandly parades on. Let’s face it: If Rich and Blow didn’t exist, the RNC would have to invent them. By 2012, they may even have found a way to help get Obama defeated. (As Rich worked so hard to help defeat Gore, the guy who was just like Bush.) If modern history serves as a guide, discouraged “liberals” will then retreat from the scene, staging their next 30-year hibernation.

    Given the perilous mess we’re now in, could we survive it this time?”

  37. wbboei: “Question: why Bill Clinton is supporting Obama on health care and taking on the tea parties?”

    The answers you propose for this question, and the article you quote, are ridiculous because your very question is a demonstration of what I posted just above: Bill Clinton’s statements are what they are, and you are just trying to read into them or extract from them something that was not intended. He is not maneuvering for Hillary’s future candidacy, nor for the Demicratic party’s future defeat. He is simply stating his considered opinions, and his opinions are solicited because a lot of people care about them. Even o cares about them, to the point that he consults often with Bill and asks for his help (such as lobbying for passage of the health insurance bill). Those opinions may prove wrong, and they may not jive with what we want to hear, but they hold their own weight.

    Bill Clinton is a free-wheeling political force despite himself. He wants debate and is willing to engage in it, but doesn’t want to get in o’s way, just as he never criticized George W. Bush.

  38. wbboei, your question is the wrong one to ask at least according to admin’s article whose premise is that BC IF he really supported HCR, he would be doing a lot more explicitly, visibly and such.

  39. Audio in that Hillary video up thread has definitely been altered and made to sound ugly. I was disgusted when I first heard it on another site.

  40. Happy Anniversary, Admin!! Thank you for this blog.

    And Bill Clinton is always doing one thing: keeping himself in mind. He rarely trips over his own feet while giving his opinion. And what I’m hearing from him is “debate is awesome, keep it up!” while only asking that violence be tempered.

    Hillary 2012!

  41. well, well.. sounds like blackmail in the works to me. Craig ought to know a few skeletons in the closet. link at meme.

    “Goldman Sachs is launching an aggressive response to its political and legal challenges with an unlikely ally at its side — President Barack Obama’s former White House counsel, Gregory Craig.”

  42. pm317…my husband worked in construction for many years one of the famous statements in that field of work is “be nice to your helper for tomorrow he may be your supervisor”.

    When I read your post I thought of that…Craig may have an Ax to grind, LOL!

  43. THank you admin. for the past 3 yrs. of pure pleasure with Big Pink on my daily agenda.It has made my 90’s a very pleasant an challenging place to spend my days in between keeping a house and grounds in excellent condition living on my own and paying homage to Hillary.To me she is like a 4th daghter and I just have to see her take the oath of office as the first woman POTUS.
    Oreoma must be removed from office soon.The great
    danger he has brought from rezko and the Chicago
    mob to the WH may well destroy this country and the free world.Otrauma may the grapes of wrath destroy you and your evil plans for the good people of this wonderful bright star of democracy.

  44. Goldman suit timed conveniently for Obama

    By Gary Lamphier, Edmonton JournalApril 20, 2010

    Don’t count out the Great Vampire Squid just yet.

    Just days after U.S. securities regulators accused Goldman Sachs of defrauding investors in subprime mortgage-backed securities, the Wall Street giant’s stock seems to be on the mend. In heavy trading Monday, Goldman’s shares jumped $2.62 US apiece to close at $163.32 in New York. Volume topped 54 million shares.

    Although the uptick represents a fraction of Friday’s steep decline — when Goldman’s shares plunged $23.57, knocking billions off the storied firm’s market value — the mini-rebound shows some investors believe the bad news is already fully priced into the stock.

    That seems like a safe bet. Which may explain why all but seven of the 29 analysts who track Goldman’s stock rate it a “buy,” according to a Bloomberg survey.

    Even if Goldman is eventually forced to cough up $2 billion in penalties — a figure knocked around by some analysts, equalling twice the billion-dollar loss racked up by two European banks that invested in Goldman’s paper — that’s virtual pocket change for Wall Street’s most powerful bank. Goldman earned a record $13.4 billion last year alone, and that’s after paying out a staggering $16.2 billion in salary and bonuses to its employees. It’s a money-making juggernaut.

    Moreover, there’s no guarantee the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s suit against Goldman will succeed. Goldman dismisses the allegations as baseless, and it’s sure to be an awfully formidable foe for the SEC, which has a patchy history when it comes to prosecuting Wall Street miscreants.

    Skepticism about the strength of the SEC’s case mounted Monday after reports surfaced that the decision to file suit against Goldman was supported by only three of the SEC’s five commissioners. The 3-2 split broke along party lines, with both Republicans opposed, Bloomberg reports.

    More to the point, no matter what you think about Goldman or its ethics — it was famously described by one U.S. magazine writer as “a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money” — it’s hard not to be a wee bit cynical about the timing of the suit.

    To say that it comes at an awfully convenient time for President Barack Obama’s Democrats is a colossal understatement.

    With mid-term elections just a few months off and the U.S. Congress set to debate a massive financial regulatory reform package — one that Wall Street lobbyists and their pals in the Senate have been fighting every step of the way — the suit offers tailor-made reformist ammo for Obama & Co.

    According to U.S. media reports, SEC investigators have been probing Goldman’s trading activities in the subprime mortgage market since at least the middle of last year. Meanwhile, Goldman has been under intense media scrutiny for more than a year.

    Major financial publications as well as influential newspapers like the New York Times and even pop-culture mags like Rolling Stone have devoted an ocean of ink to Goldman’s questionable trading activities and its casino-like corporate culture. For those who have followed the coverage, the SEC’s allegations hardly come as shocking news.

    Yet the SEC’s investigation seems to have only just wrapped up, on the eve of the big financial reform debate. How nice. How politically convenient.

    Something else rankles. While millions of Americans have lost their jobs and their homes over the past couple of years, Wall Street has returned to business as usual, courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer and the largesse of the U.S. government.

    Big bonuses are back — even if Goldman opted to pay out most of its bonuses for senior execs in stock for 2009 — and the culture of entitlement that’s so pervasive on Wall Street has returned. It’s as if the Great Recession never happened.

    Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein’s oft-quoted utterance about “doing God’s work” exemplifies the casual contempt that the suits on Wall Street seem to hold for their less prosperous fellow citizens. The gaping chasm between the fabulous world of Wall Street and the dismal world of Main Street is reflected in recent polls. By a wide margin, most average Americans believe the U.S. economy has actually gotten worse over the past year, not better.

    The big gains in the stock market seemingly aren’t reflected in their portfolios. In fact, just three in 10 say the value of their holdings has gone up, according to one recent poll. Just one in three say the U.S. economy is on the right track, and fewer than one in 10 expect the economy to be strong a year from now.

    The sense of despair has fuelled growing cynicism toward the entire political class in Washington, including the Democrats. It’s painful to think that the suit against Goldman might be motivated by nothing more than crass political calculations. But since I wasn’t born yesterday, it’s hard not to come to that conclusion.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/Goldman+suit+timed+conveniently+Obama/2927633/story.html

  45. Obama’s Golf Game Draws Ire from Polish Press

    April 19, 2010

    President Barack Obama came under fire today for playing golf on a day when he had been scheduled to attend the funeral of Polish President Lech Kaczynski.

    President Obama was forced to cancel his plans to attend the funeral on Sunday after the ash plume from the eruption of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano in Iceland caused twenty-six European countries to close their airspace to air travel. President Obama took advantage of the unexpected free time in his calendar to head to the golf course at Andrews Air Force Base.

    Polish People Offended

    The Polish people were noticeable upset with what they perceived as a lack of respect. The Warsaw Business Journal lead with a headline, “Obama Goes Golfing Instead of Attending Kaczynski’s Funeral.” Further exacerbating matters, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Vice President Biden have both stopped by the Polish embassy to sign a book of condolences, while President Obama has not yet done so.

    Polish President Killed in Plane Crash

    Kaczynski, his wife, and 94 other people were killed on April 10 when the airplane they were traveling in clipped a tree and crashed as they were approaching Smolensk Airport in western Russia. The delegation was scheduled to visit the site of the Katyn Massacre. Investigators have blamed the crash on fog.

    The funeral was held on Sunday as planned with over 100,000 in attendance. A large number of the world leaders that had been expected to attend the ceremony had to send their regrets because of cancelled flights in and to Europe.

    Golf and the Presidents

    According to BBC News, President Obama has played golf 32 times since he took office in January 2009. In comparison, President George W. Bush played golf only 24 times while in the White House. He achieved that number in the first two years and nine months of his presidency.

    http://news.suite101.com/article.cfm/obamas-golf-game-draws-ire-from-polish-press-a227738

  46. The Polish people have every right to be offended. Obama doesn’t seem to think he needs to have any manners or follow state protocol. He the King of the world and he doesn’t have to go to any funeral he doesn’t want to.

    I wonder if there is some historical reason he doesn’t like the Polish like he has a thing against Winston Churchill or if he has just moved on…

  47. I never watch Msnbc, but I thought I would check it out this morning, they are all but saying to expect a Nuclear Iran…Whhhhaaaatttt!!!

  48. JanH
    April 20th, 2010 at 10:23 am

    Goldman suit timed conveniently for Obama

    “Big bonuses are back — even if Goldman opted to pay out most of its bonuses for senior execs in stock for 2009 — and the culture of entitlement that’s so pervasive on Wall Street has returned. It’s as if the Great Recession never happened.

    Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein’s oft-quoted utterance about “doing God’s work” exemplifies the casual contempt that the suits on Wall Street seem to hold for their less prosperous fellow citizens. The gaping chasm between the fabulous world of Wall Street and the dismal world of Main Street is reflected in recent polls. By a wide margin, most average Americans believe the U.S. economy has actually gotten worse over the past year, not better.

    The big gains in the stock market seemingly aren’t reflected in their portfolios. In fact, just three in 10 say the value of their holdings has gone up, according to one recent poll. Just one in three say the U.S. economy is on the right track, and fewer than one in 10 expect the economy to be strong a year from now.

    The sense of despair has fuelled growing cynicism toward the entire political class in Washington, including the Democrats. It’s painful to think that the suit against Goldman might be motivated by nothing more than crass political calculations. But since I wasn’t born yesterday, it’s hard not to come to that conclusion.”
    ___________________________

    I had hoped the SEC suit against GS was the real deal. It seems more like a sleight at hand attempt at political blackmail by Republicans. Seeing “the decision to file suit against Goldman was supported by only three of the SEC’s five commissioners. The 3-2 split broke along party lines, with both Republicans opposed, Bloomberg reports.”

    Republicans have their hand out threatening “where’s MINE?”

  49. Critics Give U.N. Climate Researchers an ‘F’

    h/t PumasUnleashed

    It may be time for the United Nations’ climate-studies scientists to go back to school.

    A group of 40 auditors — including scientists and public policy experts from across the globe — have released a shocking report card on the U.N.’s landmark climate-change research report. And they gave 21 of the report’s 44 chapters a grade of “F.”

    The team, recruited by the climate-change skeptics behind the website NoConsensus.org, found that 5,600 of the 18,500 sources in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Nobel Prize-winning 2007 report were not peer reviewed.

    “We’ve been told this report is the gold standard,” said Canadian global-warming skeptic Donna Laframboise, who runs the NoConsensus.org site and who organized the online effort to examine the U.N.’s references in the report, commonly known as the AR4.

    The cover of the IPCC’s fourth assessment report to the U.N., “Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report,” more frequently referred to as AR4.

    “We’ve been told it’s 100 percent peer-reviewed science. But thousands of sources cited by this report have been nowhere near a scientific journal.”

    Based on the grading system used in American schools, 21 chapters in the IPCC report received an F for citing peer-reviewed sources less than 60 percent of the time. Four chapters received a D, and six received a C.”

    To review graph and grading system read further here:

    http://pumasunleashed.wordpress.com/

  50. “The team, recruited by the climate-change skeptics behind the website NoConsensus.org”

    ===================

    And the ‘article’ is written at a silly level, too.

  51. I worked for 13 years for scientific reviews, and I can say that faith in the peer reviewing process is unfounded. The process may appear to be sound and, sorrowfully, it is the best review process we have, but it is flawed by personal antagonisms between reviewers and authors, so the reviewer’s opinion cannot be trusted. In the climate-change field, where there are so many charlatans who want one or another opinion to be published, the acceptance criterion is just as bad as no review at all. So grading a report on the percentage of peer-reviewed sources is just about meaningless.

    This is not to say that the report is good or bad; but judging from my own scientific experience and from discussions with scientists outside the field of climatology (mainly astronomers, geologists and atmospheric specialists), global warming may be for real, but it is probably not anthropogenic. There are many other sources of warming, including galactic tide, solar activity, the earth’s orbital parameters, magnetic activity, the earth’s internal dynamics, and more, that have prompted major changes in earth climate historically and especially prehistorically. Astronomers and geologists I have known claim that these sources are at least 99% responsible for any global warming or climate change we experience.

    This means there is not much we can do about it. However, whether we can or cannot influence the earth’s climate, most all of the proposals put forth for fighting global warming are sensible proposals, because they aim at more intelligent and sustainable use of earth’s resources, including energy to start off with. They just require investment; but investment means research and manufacturing jobs. So this whole climate change initiative makes economic sense as well as technical sense. This is why the Clintons have successfully convinced foreign countries, including China and India but also African and Latin American countries, to get into the sustainable energies market and get going on climate change, while we at home are still dithering about whether or not there are really good scientific reports on climate change.

  52. wbboei
    April 20th, 2010 at 6:12 am

    Question:
    —–
    Great analysis above and it brings to mind that article of Rove and Brazillnut hatching a plan to get the Fraud in office. Also, Bill and Hillary have every reason to want the destruction of the Chicago thugs that derailed their party and stole the election from the rightful winner.

  53. GATES CAN’T HELP BUT POINT OUT THAT “THE US” (READ, “OBAMA”) IS SCREWING UP ON CONTROLLING IRAN

    time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1983216,00.html

    Gates’ Memo on Iran: Controversial but Correct
    =======================================

    By Tony Karon Tuesday, Apr. 20, 2010

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates, according to Sunday’s New York Times, warned President Obama in a classified memo in January that the U.S. lacks an effective strategy for dealing with Iran’s nuclear progress. Gates later rushed to set the record straight, saying his memo had been designed to “contribute to an orderly and timely decisionmaking process.” But that may be a distinction without much of a difference; the sentiments attributed to him in the original report remain a coldly clear assessment of the Administration’s Iran strategy.

    The Times reported that Gates warned that the U.S. had no clear policy guidelines in place should Iran ignore international sanctions and continue to develop its nuclear program to the point that the country becomes a “threshold” power. In that event, Iran would (as Japan is reputed to) have all the major components necessary to quickly assemble a bomb but still refrain from taking the final steps in order to remain within the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Many analysts and policymakers believe that reaching such a threshold, rather than obtaining a full strategic nuclear arsenal, is Iran’s goal.
    (See pictures of terrorism in Tehran.)

    Administration officials, the Times story suggests, hope to prevent Iran from achieving even threshold capability, although it’s tough to see how that will be accomplished. Most of Washington’s focus is on building international support for a new round of U.N. sanctions. U.S. officials have made much of the fact that Russia and China have eased their opposition to new measures, but the harsh reality is that any new measures adopted at the Security Council are likely to be watered down by Moscow and Beijing to a point where they’re highly unlikely to change Iran’s behavior. The “crippling sanctions” demanded on Monday by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are unlikely to emerge from the U.N. process. Indeed, Russia and China both stress that sanctions are unlikely to have a positive impact on the standoff and could complicate the search for a diplomatic compromise.

    In order to prevent Tehran from achieving threshold status, the U.S. and its allies hope to stop Iran from enriching uranium altogether, even for energy purposes — but on that issue, the Western position has limited international support. The Russians and Chinese, like other Security Council members such as Brazil, Lebanon and Turkey — all three of which continue to oppose new sanctions — don’t see Iran as an imminent nuclear threat and insist that a diplomatic solution should be found via dialogue with Iran. The Western powers maintain that dialogue failed when Iran turned down a deal that would have exchanged much of its stockpile of enriched uranium for reactor fuel. Iran has begun floating a new version of that deal — on terms previously rejected by the Western powers — hoping, no doubt, to further deflate any sanctions momentum. Comments on Monday by State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley that the U.S. remains “interested in pursuing that offer if Iran is interested” suggest Tehran could yet manage to reopen negotiations.
    (See the top 10 players in Iran’s power struggle.)

    While unilateral sanctions by the U.S. and its allies targeting Iran’s gasoline imports have persuaded a number of third-country suppliers to pull out of the Iranian market, China remains Iran’s key energy partner and is unlikely to join such a strategy. Attempts by the U.S. Congress to force the issue by penalizing Chinese companies doing business with Iran could scupper whatever sanctions consensus has been achieved at the U.N.

    In short, Obama’s sanctions option is likely to be as protracted and frustrating as it was for the Bush Administration. And what Gates’ memo, according to the Times story, seems to be suggesting, is that the Obama Administration had better plan for the eventuality that sanctions will fail. That message is also coming from Republican critics like Arizona Senator John McCain, who said on Sunday, “We have to be willing to pull the trigger on significant sanctions,” by which he meant unilateral Western measures that China and Russia would not back. “And then we have to make plans for whatever contingencies follow if those sanctions are not effective.” That should include the option of military action, said the Senator, who on the campaign famously suggested that “the only thing worse than bombing Iran is Iran with the bomb.”
    (See the top 10 Ahmadinejad-isms.)

    But while the U.S. claims broad international support for its diplomatic effort to restrain Iran from building a nuclear weapon, such support would narrow dramatically for any military action. It’s far from clear even that the U.S. military shares McCain’s view. Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen have repeatedly made clear that military action could succeed only in delaying Iran’s nuclear progress — but at a risk of sparking a regional war with unpredictable consequences.

    Gates doesn’t want the issue to come down to a choice between bombing Iran or watching it achieve threshold capacity. But he also has good reason to doubt that the current sanctions effort will work — and to press the Administration to figure out its next steps.

  54. wbboei, your question is the wrong one to ask at least according to admin’s article whose premise is that BC IF he really supported HCR, he would be doing a lot more explicitly, visibly and such.
    ———————-
    PM 317: No he cannot be seen as supporting Hillary’s political ambitions. Nor can he actively oppose the orgy of racism directed against the electorate by Chris Van Hollen the high born self loathing white man who runs the dcc, and has the strategic competence of General Raymond Navarre at the batttle of dien ben fu. Ditto with that delusional black man John Reparations Now Conyers. Things like this are now a force of nature and they must run their course.

    Under this theory, Bill is practicing judo. Rather than resisting their momentum, he is stepping aside and giving them a nudge. He helping accelerate their velocity. He is greasing the skids for the dims to do what they are predisposed to do in the first place, which is to totally racialize this election, and alienate white voters at the policy level and the political level. The beauty of it is he ls letting them do it to themselves.

    To the hopium addled (90% of the party at this point) this will be seen as standing with Obama, to the conservatives it will light old the fires, and to independents it will illustrate that what a post racial presidency is really all about. In short, it gives each side the pretext they need and want to fight with each other. And like Mark Anthony after he delivered his Brutus is an honorable man to an emotionally charged crowd at the funeral of Julius Caesar’s funeral, Bill can step back. reflect on his efforts and say this:

    “Now let it work. Mischief, thou art afoot,
    Take thou what course thou wilt!”

    Again, to be clear, this is just theory.

  55. BTW, Bill’s statement that Obama’s ratings would go up 10 points after passage of HC was a reiteration of what White House officials like Rahm Emanuel were telling Dems in Congress, so he wasn’t saying anything new.

    I guess my point is, I don’t believe at all Bill is trying to undercut the administration, because Hillary is a key part of it. And he will strongly support her whatever she decides to do – although I’m certain she won’t challenge O in 2012. But I hope 2016 isn’t out of the question!

  56. I guess my point is, I don’t believe at all Bill is trying to undercut the administration, because Hillary is a key part of it
    ——————————
    And you may well be right. The truth is we do not know.

  57. Whether 2012 or 2016, don’t forget that women typically have a longer life span than men, by about five years in this country. 80.8 yrs for females versus 75.6 for males for years 2005 – 2010, according to:

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

    So for Hillary’s age as compared to other male presidential hopefuls, please adjust.

    Funny, for a country with “the best health care system in the world!!!”, us being ranked 36th should be a reminder that perhaps the health care is great for those who can afford it and receive it.

    Oh wait, I forgot. We JUST PASSED UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE, because of Obama’s determination to do right by all the citizens of this fair land.

  58. In order to win this war, we need to understand what it is that we are fighting. We need to give a descriptive name to it. The word I would use is a cartel. In this case, the cartel consists of the Obama Administration, the Dimocratic Party, Big Media and the big business interests centered in financial and new economy who are financing and promoting this entire charade for their benefit, and to the detriment of their customers, who are of course the American People.

    A political cartel is a confederation of political and business players who agree to conspire against the public interest in order to achieve market power, i.e. a monopoly. Cartel members may agree on who runs for political office, what they are allowed to say, what programs they are required to support, how the political and economic spoils will be divided, bid rigging , allocation of territories, and the like. Since 1930, this has been the imprimatur of the Chicago Machine–the quintessential example of what we now call crony capitalism. Obama is a living symbol of this ugly phenomenon and he is taking it national at the expense of the American People.

  59. A little tough for Bambi to demogogue on this one when they were his largest or one of his very largest contributors. He can blame the other party as much as he wants, but in the end, the finger points back at him.
    —————————————–
    Obama, Goldman Sachs, and Reform?
    By Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy
    No Quarter on April 20, 2010 at 1:00 PM

    In AIG, Bailouts, Bamboozling, Campaign promises, Congress (House & Senate), Current Affairs, Democrats, Economy, President Barack Obama, Wall Street

    Goldman Sachs has been in the news a bit lately, and with good reason. As Larry Doyle has detailed, the SEC filed a civil suit against Goldman Sachs last week for fraud. Obama is trying to use this recent lawsuit as a way to increase restrictions against Wall Street. And as this LA Times article points out, the “Goldman Sachs Case Could Help Obama Shift Voter Anger:” The fraud charges may strengthen the president’s campaign, against Republican resistance, to tighten regulations on Wall Street.

    The article states:

    Fraud charges leveled against the investment bank Goldman, Sachs & Co. center on complex financial dealings. But for President Obama, the accusations against the venerable Wall Street institution offer a chance to revitalize a simple political narrative that he has all but lost in recent months: that he and his party are protecting ordinary Americans victimized by the economic meltdown.

    Republicans have been notably successful in mounting populist attacks on the administration, even framing the pending legislation that would increase regulation of Wall Street as a recipe for perpetual bailouts by taxpayers. Now the Goldman case gives the administration a chance to send a countervailing message that government intervention is essential in the face of unregulated trading that favors well-connected insiders.

    Treasury officials were all smiles Friday after the Securities and Exchange Commission charges against Goldman Sachs were announced. The SEC, an independent commission, contends that Goldman stacked the deck on billions of dollars in mortgage securities in favor of insiders and against unknowing investors, a charge Goldman denies.

    The Goldman case comes along at a time when the Democrats need help. Obama’s approval rating is tumbling and independent voters are disillusioned with his leadership. Unemployment is expected to hover near 10% nationally for the rest of the year.

    Well, that’s some interesting timing. All of a sudden, the SEC is filing a civil lawsuit against them? Hey, I’m not saying they don’t DESERVE to have a lawsuit against them, but it is just a little curious, isn’t it? (Click HERE to read the rest of this piece.)

    Why do I say that? Because during the campaign, Obama and Goldman Sachs were mighty friendly. As in, Goldman Sachs was Obama’s biggest corporate contributor. Yes, indeedy. Isn’t that curious that he is now railing against them? I think so.

    So does Bob Ostretag in this piece, Goldman Sachs, Obama, Money. As they say, follow the money:
    When Obama said he wanted bi-partisanship, this is probably not what he had in mind: Democrats and Republicans in Congress speaking in a united voice against corporate executives that have been equally cosy (sic) with Democrats and Republicans.
    As in: equally cosy (sic) with Senator John Warner, that bad Republican, and Chris Dodd, who presented himself as a mild progressive in the last Democratic presidential primary.

    As in: equally cosy (sic) with the Fed and Treasury under Clinton and Bush. As in: pretty darn cosy (sic) with President Obama himself.

    Forget the bonuses at AIG. Chump change. Let’s put what Goldman Sachs has been up to in plain English. Goldman Sachs had made a lot of esoteric financial transactions with AIG. Banks were collapsing at the time, leaving their investors with huge losses. When things started looking shaky at AIG, Goldman and other investors started calling in their claims, and pushed AIG off the cliff.

    Now ask yourself: with banks collapsing, why would you push the one you had put so much money in to collapse?

    Answer: because you had your boys on the inside in Washington, that’s why. And your boys got a bail-out package for AIG which actually paid you more than your claims that broke the bank. What investors had demanded from AIG was collateral on debts. But they actually got with the bailout was the whole damn amount, 100 cents on the dollar.

    Wow, nice work if you can get it, right? And if you’re Goldman Sachs, you did:
    To put it even more bluntly: if AIG had managed to not collapse and not require $180 billion in taxpayer money, Goldman Sachs would be sitting today with some very very shaky investments. But since AIG collapsed, the folks at Goldman cleaned up.

    Or even more bluntly: Goldman used AIG as a funnel.

    That’s a nice trick. It’s like two guys rolling someone on the street when the first guy comes up on the right and throws a punch after which the guy on the left quietly lifts the mark’s wallet. Of course you run the risk that the cops might see you. Then again, if you have the cops in your pocket…

    OK, that is a simplification. It is not the whole story. But it is a big part of the story.

    But but… wasn’t there an election between the AIG bail-out and today? The world changed, didn’t it?

    Goldman Sachs employees gave just shy of a million dollars to the Obama campaign, ranking second in contributions. Citigroup and JPMorgan ranked sixth and seventh. Goldman Sachs gave Obama four times more than they gave McCain.

    This is one big fat ugly chicken that is coming home to roost.

    So, to be clear – when Obama claimed to be a man of the people, does he mean Wall Street people? Because that’s pretty much how it’s looking. And now he is openly turning against them? Oh, this should be fun to watch:
    Our political attention span being what it is, we might need reminding that there was actually a big debate over this very thing last year. From my July 1 blog:

    When Barack Obama pulled out of public campaign financing, I wrote a column about his money machine, noting that despite all the small Internet donors, his campaign is still mostly funded in the most traditional of ways. Numerous readers taking offense at my characterization of Obama’s fundraising as dominated by “fat cats.” In light of new details on Obama’s fundraising which have become available, now would be a good time to revisit this issue.

    I noted that that, by the end of June, Wall Street had already given Obama $9.5 million, that four out of his top five contributors are employees of financial industry giants, with Goldman Sachs at the top of the list. Even conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks was appalled: “Over the past few years, people from Goldman Sachs have assumed control over large parts of the federal government. Over the next few they might just take over the whole darn thing.”

    The reader response was overwhelmingly negative. The debate was over which was more significant: the half of Obama’s money that came in small Internet contributions, or the half that came from big corporate money. I argued that:

    adding a layer of small Internet donations (45% of Obama’s money) on top of all the traditional campaign money (55% of Obama’s money) does not change the game of politics and money. It just adds another layer to the same old cake. To really change the game, one would need to replace all that traditional money with small Internet donations. … Just think through the basics: if on one side you have over a million people giving you little donations that make up 45% of your budget, and on the other side you have a handful of people giving you big donations that make up 55% of your budget, whose telephone calls are you going to take?

    So here we are with the world economy collapsing and the big question is exactly this: whose calls is Obama going to take? Because both sides are calling, big time. I don’t have to tell you who is winning so far.

    I am just going to guess it is the Big Cats on Wall Street even as Obama and the Democrats are demonizing them in the press. How does he get them to stay quiet while he is doing that, I wonder? I’d say, follow the money, but apparently, I am more cynical than Ostertag is:
    But I am more optimistic than I thought I would be at this point. The looting of the US Treasury has not gone as planned. Everything is spiraling out of control. And Americans are actually mad! Bankers are in tears (at least according to their congressional testimony). When Republican congressmen are calling for corporate execs to commit mass suicide, you know the ground has shifted.
    Have things changed so dramatically that Obama will have room to dump his biggest campaign contributers (sic) overboard? That question will be answered in the coming weeks.

    Now is not the time to be quiet. Now is the time to yell bloody murder. We will soon know whose call comes through the loudest.

    Yes, the question will be answered in the coming weeks. My bet is that Obama will continue to rail against the very companies that helped him get into office, just like he did with the insurance companies. The Democrats will try and tie the Republicans to Wall Street, like they are currently doing with Senator Judd Gregg as he urges caution:
    “We should not legislate based on anecdotal events,” Gregg said. “This is a big piece of legislation, we shouldn’t overreact.”
    The reform bill, one of President Barack Obama’s top domestic priorities, is awaiting passage by the Senate. Should it pass, the bill would have to be merged with the House’s version approved last year, then it would have passed again by both houses before Obama can sign it.

    Ah, yes. The Reform Bill. You will NEVER believe what is in it. Essentially, the Congress is abdicating some of its oversight responsibility, and giving it – GIVING it – to the Executive Branch. Oh, you know I am not making this up:

    (If the video doesn’t come up, click here.) Remember when we were all worried about crap like this happening with Bush?? Obama seems hellbent on amassing as much power as he possibly can, and unfortunately, this Democratic-heavy Congress is all too willing to hand it to him. So much for those pesky little checks and balances our founders thought were important enough to put into our Constitution. You know, the document the Congress, and the President, swore to uphold? Uh huh. That one. Well, the Democrats have decided not to bother with that whole democracy thing. Whatever…

    I guess that’s some kind of reform – trying to change three branches of government to only two…

  60. turndown,

    When I look at the issue of climate change, I can’t help also wondering about the garbage pollution on our streets today. I don’t want to lump the younger generation all together, but it makes me sick to see used cigarettes, fast food garbage, etc…just thrown on the ground when there is a recepticle maybe 2 feet away from them. This has become a huge issue in our downtown area as well as bus stops, parks, etc.

    As far as climate change goes, there has been so much written by both sides that it is hard to find a balanced viewpoint. What I do know though is that to me, saving the environment as a whole is very important.

    I don’t like the money scams that have come from this though a review done by an independent commission, membered by scientists with no hidden agendas would be the way to go.

  61. Hillary Clinton, Ehud Barak To Address American Jewish Committee

    04-20-10

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak are slated to speak at the American Jewish Committee’s Annual Meeting in April.

    In addition to Barak and Clinton, the annual conference, held in Washington at the end of the month, will feature the Dutch and Spanish foreign ministers.

    Clinton’s speech comes on the heels of a major address she gave in March on U.S.-Israeli relations, in a speech to AIPAC. Her upcoming speech was announced yesterday in an e-mail to AJC supporters. Also yesterday, as Israel celebrated its Independence Day, Barak spoke frankly about the growing friction between Israel and the U.S.

    “[W]e also shouldn’t delude ourselves,” Barak said. “The growing alienation between us and the United States is not good for the state of Israel.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/20/hillary-clinton-ehud-bara_n_544384.html

  62. April 20, 2010

    Hillary Clinton to visit VMI, receive diplomat award

    LEXINGTON, Va. (AP) — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is being honored by Virginia Military Institute for her work in advancing U.S. interests through diplomacy.

    Clinton will receive VMI’s Distinguished Diplomat Award and deliver remarks on April 28. The event is free and open to the public.

    Past recipients of the award include former CIA director James Woolsey, former U.N. ambassador Jean Kirkpatrick and foreign affairs strategist Susan Eisenhower.

    http://www.wdbj7.com/Global/story.asp?S=12340733

  63. wbboei
    April 20th, 2010 at 3:06 pm
    A little tough for Bambi to demogogue on this one when they were his largest or one of his very largest contributors.
    &&&&&&&

    Pshaw. Not tough for him to demagogue this at all. Not when you are shameless.

  64. “[W]e also shouldn’t delude ourselves,” Barak said. “The growing alienation between us and the United States is not good for the state of Israel.”
    ******************
    I hope Israel does not give in to the Fraud…

  65. I just talked to an obot at work that just admitted he is disgusted with the Fraud, wishes he hadn’t voted for him and that he will vote for Hillary if she runs in the future. He holds a good position in Israel and says if Iran becomes a nuclear threat, Israel will attack. He said most of the Israel’s don’t like the Fraud and they all know Hillary and Bill are on their side.

  66. Pshaw. Not tough for him to demagogue this at all. Not when you are shameless
    ——————————–
    I said it wrong. Little tough for him to demogogue SUCCESSFULLY on this one. He may have others in the cartel do it, like E J Dion or some other bot with whiskers. WashPo is now hiring the worst of the worst young nihilists. Inglesias is their latest newfound treasure.

  67. Paula, Hillary will be his running mate in 12′. I am sure of that. They want to put the dream team together to fight the republicans. The only thing is they’ve got the wrong one on top. What once would have been great is now tarnished because the mistake the dims made and all the mistakes Bambi has made not being ready. THey could have had a 12 to 16 years run with the right person on top and BO was NOT ready…he needed to work on his golf game a little longer before taking the top spot.

  68. [W]e also shouldn’t delude ourselves,” Barak said. “The growing alienation between us and the United States is not good for the state of Israel.”
    ————————–
    I used to know mafia thugs who could threaten more subtley than that.

    The question for Bambi is who do you mean by “us”? This corrupt and benighted Administration? Or the United States of America–a country which supports its friends, fights terrorists and believes in the constitution? Because if it is the latter, Israel has nothing to worry about.

  69. I used to know mafia thugs who could threaten more subtley than that.

    The question for Bambi is who do you mean by “us”? This corrupt and benighted Administration? Or the United States of America–a country which supports its friends, fights terrorists and believes in the constitution? Because if it is the latter, Israel has nothing to worry about.
    —————————
    Sorry. I got good Barack and bad Barack confused. The good Barack (good compared to bad Barack) has always believed that a peace agreement is good for Israel. I have friends–American Jews who believe that too. Bibi believes that a peace agreement can be either good or bad depending on what is in it. And two state recognition, and secure borders are sine qua non. Also, it would be rather nice to have a negotiating partner who is in control of his side of the table. But when you live in a virtual world that is merely a detail. The Middle East is not Ireland.

  70. Shadowfax
    April 20th, 2010 at 5:12 pm

    ———————-
    I hope more bots turn away finally from the idiot.

  71. #
    JanH

    ———————-
    I hope more bots turn away finally from the idiot.
    ———
    Almost as many as Hillary had, one more Obot down, so many more to rehabilitate from the kool-aid.

  72. File under “What would we have said if Bush had done this?”

    Some gay servicemen handcuffed themselves to the fence at Lafayette Park to protest DADT. The park police pushed the media back 2 blocks, and refused to let them cover the protest.

    Didya get that? Protesters have been doing this sort of thing in this location for YEARS, and the media has ALWAYS been allowed to cover it, even if the public was shooed away. Several reporters are saying this is “unprecedented”.

    Can’t have the public aware that the Left is pissed off at Obama.

  73. Via BP
    **********

    South Park creators will “probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh”

    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/20/south-park-creators-will-probably-wind-up-like-theo-van-gogh/

    Hmmm … do you think that threats leveled against the creators of South Park for last week’s episode came from Tea Partiers? Buddhists enraged over the depiction of Buddha snorting cocaine? Redheads incensed over their depiction as terrorists? Comedy Central execs embarrassed over the slam they received for their pusillanimity in handling a previous episode dealing with censorship? Barbara Streisand? Not exactly. In fact, threats against Trey Parker and Matt Stone came from one group that they specifically didn’t mention in “200″:

    The radical Islamic Web site Revolutionmuslim.com is going after the creators of the TV cartoon series “South Park” after an episode last week included an image of the Prophet Mohammed in disguise.

    Revolutionmuslim.com, based in New York, was the subject of a CNN investigation last year for its radical rhetoric supporting “jihad” against the West and praising al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Its organizers insist they act within the law and seek to protect Islam.

    On Sunday, Revolutionmuslim.com posted an entry that included a warning to South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone that they risk violent retribution – after the 200th episode last week included a satirical discussion about whether an image of the prophet could be shown. In the end, he is portrayed disguised in a bear suit.

    The posting on Revolutionmuslim.com says: “We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.”

    Of course, this is exactly the point Parker and Stone intended to make — or rather, intended to provoke people into making for them. During the episode, Randy Marsh scolds Stan by saying, “Jesus doesn’t matter where Mohammed’s involved,” as a way of explaining why people feel perfectly safe in satirizing other religious figures but won’t treat Mohammed the same. It’s simple; Islamists threaten people with terror whenever they feel insulted, which is exactly what happened here.

    Kudos to CNN for reporting on this, but don’t expect it to be a trend. We’ve watched as Tea Party speeches got dissected by cable-news network hosts for any sign of latent bigotry and violence in order to paint as terrorists and threats those Americans who peacefully assemble for political change. How much time will get spent by Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and Ed Schultz on MS-NBC in parsing “will probably wind up like [assassinated filmmaker] Theo Van Gogh for airing this episode” and determining whether radical Islamists tend to be terrorists and threats? While these hosts hyperventilate over words like “regime,” “target,” and “crossfire,” they’ll avert their eyes to a real threat.

    That will prove the other main point from Parker and Stone, which is that the media hasn’t exactly manned up in facing this threat.

    Here’s a clip from the show, and watch the whole episode at South Park Studios. It’s not safe for work, but it’s one of their best episodes in the last couple of years.

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/269252

  74. pm317, I have been watching DC protests my whole life, and what these vets were doing is pretty common fare for protestors in Lafayette Park. I’ve seen the media cover similar protests many many times. It’s just routine, no biggie. It is freaking blowing my mind that they CLEARED THE PARK of cameras and reporters for 8 or so measly protestors?

    Just how insecure is Obama?

  75. I don’t think the question regarding Global Warming revolves around who to believe. My statement agreed to by many, is and always has been, climate change is cyclical. The extinction of the dinosaurs is an empirical example.
    We all agree on that.

    The charges made attached to the institution of a Cap and Trade Tax and a Carbon Tax on humans for exhaling CO2 is/was the basis for the Climate Report and for the failed meeting recently taken place in Copenhagen. I am not addressing in this context adding to the confusion vast arguments regarding pollution involving Clean Air and and Clean Water. Because again, we all agree, I like you, detest pollution in any form.

    In the first place, the basis for this climate report was for the sole purpose of convincing the World we humans are responsible for the majority of CO2 emissions. That is the crux of the argument, nothing more. And we are responsible to correct this supposed transgression by accepting a Carbon Tax in restitution for remediation of a problem we never created. That is/was essentially the basis for Climate Change study. And enhancing the process (scam) to include a worldwide global effort requiring Capital countries loaning money to Third World Countries. Then on to the Cap and Trade proposal auctioning off carbon credits to the highest bidder etc-etc…

    Notice the pro-global warming radicals will never make that distinction… They always hide behind the environmentally conscious who are unaware this specific facts carrying the most weight concerning “human CO2” emission IS at the apex of the argument.

    The serendipitous release of the scientists responsible for fraudulent e-mails detailing the use and misuse of scientific data to produce the desired result has been proven to the world… as a sham and a ruse that the means do not justify the end.. And the sole reason the Copenhagen
    Summit failed miserably. Hillary’s proposal at the Copenhagen Summit committing 10 million to the program included a caveat called “TRANSPARENCY”, a caveat proving to be kryptonite to the Climatologists because the wording mandated a full independent audit, which as I said in my post today at 11:04am here was completed:

    “A group of 40 auditors — including scientists and public policy experts from across the globe — have released a shocking report card on the U.N.’s landmark climate-change research report. And they gave 21 of the report’s 44 chapters a grade of “F.”

    Have done a complete forensic audit and have the proof in black and white of the corruption by the IPCC’s Report to the U.N. Facts do not lie no matter who is presenting them. Meaning the Global Warming zealots will never pass the sniff test or qualify to the world on their original premise, “Humans because of CO2 emissions are the major cause of Global Warming” because their results have been proven and identified as corrupt thanks to the long awaited independent audit.

  76. Mrs. Smith,

    You broke this important issue down for me very well. I have had trouble reading the excess of arguments out there, but your arguments very much match mine.

    I would still like to see a brand new investigation done, without hidden agendas and corrupt pressures from governments and companies that stand to profit or lose depending on the answers.

    Unfortunately, with obama and his buddies being so corrupt as well as other groups and people in it for themselves, I doubt we will ever get the definitive answers we need. More monies will fall into selfish and corrupt hands before this is over.

  77. Rahm was interviewed and he said he wanted to go back to Chicago and run for mayor…he also said he wanted speaker of the house, but said, “now that’s out”. hmm, hmmm so their was a coordinated effort to get rid of Nasty…she herself probably held up HCR so her folks would only do what she said….

  78. JanH
    April 20th, 2010 at 8:14 pm

    Mrs. Smith,

    You broke this important issue down for me very well. I have had trouble reading the excess of arguments out there, but your arguments very much match mine.
    __________________________

    Good to know- I have been away most of the day. After reading the response from all the great posters here I knew there had to be confusion on the sailent aspect at the core of the Global Warming debate and that is blaming humans for CO2 emissions. I hope I was able to break it down as understandable to others as well.

    I am so happy to see you back Jan and in true form posting your usual informative articles. You have been sorely missed (by me and others) at this forum.

  79. Ehud Barak is playing politics and has no love for Bibi. The Clinton” like him cuz he gave Arafat everything, but the terrorist Arafat was could never allow him to have a legacy of making peace with the Jewish state, so he rejected Bills efforts. Today, it’s a different game completely with a Jew hating President, a soon to be nuclear Iran, and Europe losing thousands of yrs of culture to Islam. I would take Bibi’s tough stance rather than Barak’s concessions…particularly since Muslim lover Obama wants even more-a divided Jerusalem, our eternal capitol.
    Bibi should play let’s make a deal, you allow us and or help us take out Iran, and then, we can talk borders…what the hell good are borders when these crazy stone aged barbarians are looking forward to launch a nuclear warhead and annihilate Israel. They view a nuclear weapon like those characters in “Planet of the Apes 2”.

  80. JanH,

    We had impartial researchers years ago: academics at universities etc. Slowly their research pointed to the conclusion that there is global warming, and it is probably increased by human actions. This growing consensus provided some mild peer pressure to conform.

    However soon there was much strong pressure from the polluters for the opposite findings. These corporations have unlimited money and power.

  81. Thanks jbstonesfan.

    As far as Barak goes, I agree completely. You would think he would have learned by now.

  82. turndown,

    Yes there is global warming to some extent. There is pollution, both air and garbage, and to a large extent many illnesses are exasperated because of this…asthma, lung issues, etc. I don’t think there is any dispute here.

    But what direction do we go in from here? How do we trust those “experts” who kept information back for what they call “the greater good?” How do we live with the decisions government bodies make to allow this corporation and that corporation to pollute the earth for reasons of selfishness and greed? Who do we trust now to fix things?

    And if it is cyclical as Mrs. Smith suggests and I believe, what then?

    I don’t have the answers.

  83. JanH,

    Later factors are legitimate ‘green’ grants and investments in alternative energy technology. A very recent factor is Cap and Trade.

    On the other side, people who oppose the Clinton/Gore camp are trying to discredit Clinton/Gore by arguing against the fact of global warming.

    To find scientists we can trust, imo we should look for a time period when there was very little pressure anywhere, ie before this became such a political/financial football. Ie in the academic community when they were the only ones doing the research. And even now, they are the ones who have the most motive for keeping their research honest.

    In any case, we can oppose Cap and Trade but support green technology etc, which will have other good effects: ending dependence on foreign oil, less pollution at home, etc.

  84. H4T, no lefty blogs are covering it (looking at the list on meme). SHAME! That fucking ex-repub turned Dem Obot Aravosis or whatever that idiot’s name is, has a gentle post saying Obama promised and has not delivered and therefore gays are upset (I think he is a gay too.) SHAME!!

  85. “To find scientists we can trust, imo we should look for a time period when there was very little pressure anywhere, ie before this became such a political/financial football.”

    —————-
    Yes, I agree with you. But will it happen? I just think there are too many hands in the pot and not enough integrity to do what is right.

    Once again I enjoy reading your breakdowns just as I enjoy Mrs. Smith’s.

    As far as Clinton/Gore goes, I admit that I put more faith in the former than the latter. I also admit that I was never a huge Gore fan so maybe that skewers my opinion of him. Either way, thank you for fighting the good fight. The only way I learn is to hear all sides.

  86. Interested in Hillary’s Plans? Just Watch Bill

    As Barack Obama’s approval numbers trend ever lower – and a new Gallup poll reports that 50% of Americans believe the President doesn’t even deserve a second term – it’s going to be very interesting to watch Hillary Clinton. Well, not the Secretary of State herself, of course. She’s busy at Foggy Bottom, burnishing her foreign policy credentials. Instead, watch her husband.

    Notwithstanding news accounts about the détente between the Clintons and Obama, surely the former president and his wife can’t help but feel that their predictions about the political disaster that would result from Obama’s inexperience and naivete, reportedly made during the 2008 campaign, amply borne out. With Hillary turning 65 in 2012, can anyone blame her (or her husband) for entertaining the idea of challenging Obama in two years if his popularity continues to plummet?

    Sean Hannity book FREE

    In fact, Democrats might be well-advised to take with a grain of salt any advice Bill Clinton offers in months to come. The greater the damage to the President (and his party) that accrues in the interim, the greater the justification for a new (yet experienced!) candidate to step in to “rescue” the tarnished Democrat brand in 2012.

    Certainly, this rationale would explain the advice that President Clinton offered the Democrats in the midst of the health care debate. Push forward, he told them, predicting that “the minute health care reform passed, President Obama’s approval ratings would go up 10 points.” Of course, that simply didn’t happen, and every day, the ObamaCare vote looks like nothing so much as a Democrat political suicide pact. If Democrats are nervous now, consider that the ex-President insisted at the same time that Obama’s ratings would increase by 20 points by next year.

    Most recently, President Clinton emerged to insult the members of the Tea Party. Invoking memories of the Oklahoma City bombing, he implicitly compared administration critics to domestic terrorist Timothy McVeigh, insisting that “all you have to do is read the paper every day to see how many people there are who are deeply, deeply troubled.” If polls are to be believed, more Americans identify with Tea Partiers than with the President himself – and so Clinton’s remarks couldn’t be better designed to alienate voters from the Democrat establishment. At the very least, his comments will serve further to energize the administration’s most fervent opponents.

    All of this could be attributed simply to political wrongheadedness and clumsy posturing – if it weren’t Bill Clinton. For years, Americans have been informed of his formidable political and strategic skills – and his political adversaries have learned, to their detriment, of his dexterity in assessing and responding to the public mood. If he is truly seeking to help the Obama administration, then it’s fair to say that the Comeback Kid has lost a lot of his kick.

    On the other hand, if the former President dislikes being sidelined and upstaged by a younger, more powerful man – who is singlehandedly shredding the Democrat coalition that Clinton himself did so much to assemble – and misses the attention of being the undisputed leader of his party, then his actions aren’t so difficult to understand. If Clinton still resents the battering his image (especially in the black community) suffered at Obama’s hands in the 2008 campaign, then perhaps his words aren’t so inexplicable. Oh, yes, and if he wants to see himself and his legacy vindicated (and his wife’s years of hard work and forbearance repaid) by helping Hillary take her own shot at The White House – then maybe, just maybe, Bill Clinton’s behavior makes perfect sense.

    http://townhall.com/columnists/CarolPlattLiebau/2010/04/19/interested_in_hillarys_plans_just_watch_bill

    h/t FLBarbara – pumapac.org

  87. JanH,

    At this point I don’t think there is any hope of the politicians agreeing on any ‘commission.’ If we individuals must jump to some conclusion, we can do it each ourself: pick a period when research was under less pressure, and read up on those results.

    But why must we jump to any conclusion? We can oppose Cap and Trade as impractical and likely to be corrupted, without concluding that the whole global warming theory is a ‘scam.’ We can favor controls on pollution for its immediate effects on health etc.

  88. turndown:

    “In any case, we can oppose Cap and Trade but support green technology etc, which will have other good effects: ending dependence on foreign oil, less pollution at home, etc.”
    ____________________________

    You are forgetting we must oppose a “Carbon Tax on People”. The middle class are being taxed to death as it is with Obama’s health Care Tax using the IRS as the Tax collector/enforcer. Passing a People’s Carbon emission Tax will bring the EPA in as another federal arm of the government as a Tax enforcer.

  89. I really hope the media, as feckless as they are, stands together and demands answers from Gibbs tomorrow regarding their banishment from the “don’t ask, don’t tell” protest.

  90. Mrs. Smith
    April 20th, 2010 at 7:46 pm

    I am in agreement.
    ***************

    Turndown

    So many of the “academic” researcher’s turn out papers supporting whom ever is financing their research, and always have.

  91. “And what I’m hearing from him is “debate is awesome, keep it up!” while only asking that violence be tempered.”

    That’s the Slick Willie soft-shoe. You left out the part where he dropped in Timothy McVeigh. If Dems ran an ad featuring the Tea Party and then cut to footage of the Oklahoma Bombing, that’s clearly an attack ad — just as if Repubs ran an ad split-screening Obama with Khalid Abdul Muhammad, the madman of the Nation of Islam/New Black Panther Party who preaches that blacks should slit the throats of white children.

    Bill knows how foul his remarks are. He knows Brandenburg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court free speech case that shot down the bogus ‘advocating violence’ pretext for suppressing political dissent. The liberal court, including the great Thurgood Marshall, unanimously threw out the charges against an anti-government KKK rally where they were just shouting some stupid Klan stuff but were arrested for ‘advocating violence.’ The baseless ‘advocating violence’ smear had been used under the ‘clear and present danger’ test to convict members of the Communist Party for their political views. Brandenburg was a landmark free speech case that broke just as Hillary was entering law school, and with his wife serving as a legal monitor for the Black Panther trial, no doubt they both were highly tuned into Brandenburg.

    When the primary was running hot and Bill looked to be getting pissed at the Obama race game, he briefly started some race hard-ball of his own. He said about Team Obama, “They think they’re better than you,” ‘they’ being smart-mouth Harvard snots and ‘you’ being the main Tea Party demographic. He’d already tuned into Obama’s ‘bitter clinging’ vulnerability. So he knows this game inside out.

    What’s he up to? Well, it didn’t help when Jimmy Carter tried it. Pelosi tried to link the Tea Party to the Aryan Nation and the poll numbers on deform kept falling. Bill finesses it better than clumsy Carter, but it’s still the same losing tactic. Obama, just like Charles Blow, is just savoring his revenge on white people. But why is Bill enabling O’s neurosis when he knows the country better than O?

  92. Ariz House: Check Obama’s Citizenship

    POSTED: 7:15 pm MST April 19, 2010
    UPDATED: 10:23 pm MST April 19, 2010

    facebookdel.icio.usbuzzdiggreddit›› Email›› PrintPHOENIX — The Arizona House on Monday voted for a provision that would require President Barack Obama to show his birth certificate if he hopes to be on the state’s ballot when he runs for reelection.

    The House voted 31-22 to add the provision to a separate bill. The measure still faces a formal vote.

    It would require U.S. presidential candidates who want to appear on the ballot in Arizona to submit documents proving they meet the constitutional requirements to be president.

    Phoenix Democratic Rep. Kyrsten Sinema said the bill is one of several measures that are making Arizona “the laughing stock of the nation.”

    Mesa Republican Rep. Cecil Ash said he has no reason to doubt Obama’s citizenship but supports the measure because it could help end doubt

  93. The fools still voted for him. Take a look at the date of this — NASA was going to get the shaft and it was known in 2007:

    Space vs. education?
    Posted: Monday, November 26, 2007 7:41 PM by Alan Boyle

    Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s education policy is causing a stir … but not all in a good way. Advocates for space exploration are noting with dismay that he’d take billions of dollars from NASA to pay for the educational programs he’d like to expand.

    The shift from exploration to education came last week when Obama talked up his $18 billion education plan during a New Hampshire campaign swing. Actually, the reference to NASA comes at the end of a 15-page document laying out the details behind the plan (PDF file):

  94. gonzotx said:
    So many of the “academic” researcher’s turn out papers supporting whom ever is financing their research, and always have.

    =========================

    Do you think non-“academic” researchers have a better record? Those who are directly hired and paid by oil companies, for instance? Or by rightwing groups?

    The academics may not be perfect, but they are much more independent than anyone else — especially years ago before any ‘peer consensus’ formed. When a peer consensus began to form, it was formed BY the earlier, more pure reearch.

  95. pm317
    April 20th, 2010 at 11:05 pm
    &&&&&&&&&&

    Pretty scary that the Fraud has this kind of protection. Americans should be terrified!

  96. And how many paid attention to this:

    Clinton Favors Future Human Spaceflight
    Democratic Candidate Launches a Position as Opponents Orbit From a Safe Distance

    By Marc Kaufman
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, November 23, 2007

    The major presidential candidates pummel each other daily on issues ranging from the Iraq war to health care. But when it comes to President Bush’s ambitious initiative to send humans back to the moon and on to Mars, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is all but alone in staking out a formal position — and it’s one that lends support to key aspects of the president’s effort.

    She initially outlined the need for a “robust” human spaceflight program last month during a Washington speech on science policy, despite being broadly critical of the Bush administration’s record on scientific issues.

  97. Mrs. Smith said:
    You are forgetting we must oppose a “Carbon Tax on People”.

    —————–

    Oppose whatever you like, on its own demerits. Maybe it is impractical, maybe it is too harsh. But that’s no reason to say the whole global warming theory is untrue, or a ‘scam’.

    We can oppose the draft, without saying there are no threats from abroad. We can oppose doubling prison size, without saying there is no crime.

    We can say a particular cure is worse than the disease (or is ineffective), without saying there is no disease.

  98. This is a game changer. Cantor endorses Rubio. This suggests a seismic shift within the Republican Party in two respects.
    First, they are no longer just the white people’s party– as Coward Dean described them. Second, they are finally turning to a younger more aggressive group of leaders whom I hope will fight Obama to preserve what is left of this country, what that fraud in the White House has not yet destroyed. Out with the bad air, i.e. McCain, McConnell, Hatch, Graham inter alia. And in with the good.

    ————————————————————————————————

    House Republican Whip Eric Cantor endorsed former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio’s Senate campaign this morning.

    The theme running through Cantor’s endorsement of Marco Rubio was that we need principled leaders to make the tough decision:

    America needs energetic, smart, responsible leaders to start making sure that Washington once again starts working for the people, and Marco will play a big part in that effort.

    During the conference call announcing Cantor’s endorsement, I asked about the impact of the support the National Republican Senatorial Committee now gives Rubio.

    Cantor replied that now is the time for the country to turn to the new generation of leaders that Marco Rubio represents to take on the challenges and make the tough decisions to assure America’s continued leadership in the world.

    In his response, Rubio said that when he started this campaign, he wanted the next Senator from Florida to be someone that he could be trusted to stand up to the Obama agenda and offer alternatives. Rubio is the only candidate in this campaign who will do that regardless of which label the candidates embrace.

    Cantor also took Governor Crist to task for his on again off again threats to campaign as an Independent, his support of the Obama stimulus and his recent veto of an education bill. Most of Cantor’s criticism of Crist concerned the Independent threat:

    We need an entirely different kind of leadership, a principled leadership and an individual that will keep his word to the voters.

    As someone working in Congress to change the direction we are headed as far as an agenda is concerned, we have to stand firm on principles. Running as an Independent means throwing away years and years of involvement in our party and the policies of limited government, lower taxes, free markets, individual responsibility, and more freedom just to stay in office. The people of this country do not need another U.S. Senator who will do that.

    Right now, what we need are principle-based leaders who will be there to make tough decisions for the people of this country.

    It is good to see the Republican establishment finally getting on the Rubio bandwagon. Too bad it did not happen sooner. Those of us fortunate enough to have been at the RedState gathering in Atlanta have known since last summer that Rubio was likely to be the Republican nominee.

  99. turndownobama
    April 20th, 2010 at 11:38 pm

    *****************

    It has always been skewed Can’t really trust any of it with the money involved.Believe what you want.

  100. Bill and Hillary are in such a complicated position, that at the moment I have more trust in Gore, whose position is simpler.

  101. gonzotx
    April 20th, 2010 at 11:46 pm
    [Academic research] has always been skewed

    ======================

    If you like. But do you think the research funded more directly by oil companies etc is LESS skewed?

  102. Funny and talk about coincidence!! this arrived at my mailbox just now:

    As you know, only 8% members of the Scientific Research Society agreed that ‘peer review works well as it is.’ (Chubin and Hackett, 1990; p.192)

    “A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision and an analysis of the peer review system substantiate complaints about this fundamental aspect of scientific research.” (Horrobin, 2001)

    Horrobin concludes that peer review “is a non-validated charade whose processes generate results little better than does chance.” (Horrobin, 2001) This has been statistically proven and reported by an increasing number of journal editors.

    But, “Peer Review is one of the sacred pillars of the scientific edifice” (Goodstein, 2000), it is a necessary condition in quality assurance for Scientific/Engineering publications, and “Peer Review is central to the organization of modern science…why not apply scientific [and engineering] methods to the peer review process” (Horrobin, 2001).

    This is the purpose of The 2nd International Symposium on Peer Reviewing: ISPR 2010 (http://www.sysconfer.org/ispr) being organized in the context of The SUMMER 4th International Conference on Knowledge Generation, Communication and Management: KGCM 2010 (http://www.sysconfer.org/kgcm), which will be held on June 29th – July 2nd, in Orlando, Florida, USA.

  103. I heard this on the radio this afternoon and I have to say, I felt like I wrote this article! Ace
    *****************

    Nanny State Knows Best: Federal Government To Regulate Salt In Processed Foods

    —DrewM.
    Because government knows better than you, you stupid, lazy slob.

    The Food and Drug Administration is planning an unprecedented effort to gradually reduce the salt consumed each day by Americans, saying that less sodium in everything from soup to nuts would prevent thousands of deaths from hypertension and heart disease. The initiative, to be launched this year, would eventually lead to the first legal limits on the amount of salt allowed in food products.
    The government intends to work with the food industry and health experts to reduce sodium gradually over a period of years to adjust the American palate to a less salty diet, according to FDA sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the initiative had not been formally announced.

    Officials have not determined the salt limits. In a complicated undertaking, the FDA would analyze the salt in spaghetti sauces, breads and thousands of other products that make up the $600 billion food and beverage market, sources said. Working with food manufacturers, the government would set limits for salt in these categories, designed to gradually ratchet down sodium consumption. The changes would be calibrated so that consumers barely notice the modification.

    Oh the government simply wants to “adjust the American palate” because it’s good for you. No big brother here. No sir, not at all.

    Food by government bureaucracy…what could go wrong? Obviously the FDA knows more about cooking than food companies which have been doing this for decades. The FDA has studies! All the food companies have is experience and feedback in the form of consumer demand. Only crazy, bigoted, anti-government tea party types would trust the people over government!

    Just wait til ObamaCare kicks in and all sorts of bureaucracies can get their fingers into any aspect of your life that impacts your health and therefore the amount of money the government has to spend on you!

    Don’t worry, it’s just a little freedom you are trading for the warm embrace of an all knowing government that only has your best interest in mind.

  104. turndownobama
    April 20th, 2010 at 11:47 pm
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    Yes, SHOW ME THE MONEY GORE… SIMPLE!

  105. Less Free Speech for the Free Market On Its Way
    Mark J. Fitzgibbons

    The Direct Marketing Association issued a warning about new powers about to be given to the Federal Trade Commission under The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173).

    H.R. 4173 passed in the House. The Senate is now considering tackling the same issues. The bill would increase the authority of the FTC to issue regulations even though it abused that authority in the past, and had to be reined in.

    The bill would authorize the FTC to use its own attorneys in litigation rather than using presumably more objective and professional Justice Department attorneys. H.R. 4173 would also make advertising agencies subject to charges of aiding and abetting violations by their clients for which they prepare ads, which will chill the work of ad agencies and create a new need for advertising malpractice insurance, further driving up advertising costs.

    The bill would allow the FTC to seek fines to deter violations rather than just to correct past violations, sort of like the Pre-crime Unit in the sci-fi thriller Minority Report. The Obama administration will undoubtedly tout the reduced unemployment numbers for psychic precogs that the FTC will hire.

    Much like the Left has used the notion of environmentalism as a means to achieve its political agenda, the catchphrase “consumer protection” is used to expand the reach of government over private enterprise. The FTC has been a bastion for leftists, and has notoriously abused its powers against the free market.

    For those keeping track of relative or complete industry takeovers by government, such as the health, financial and portions of the auto industries, the FTC has broad jurisdiction over all industries since it regulates marketing and advertising.

    Health, money and transportation are not enough. Advertising and marketing are essential to the free market. Control the means of promoting consumer goods and services, and you’ve controlled the goods and services themselves.

    I thank my friends at the Free Speech Coalition for the head’s up.

  106. gonzotx
    April 20th, 2010 at 11:46 pm
    [Academic research] has always been skewed

    —————–

    For that matter, the polluters have always been funding some academic research too, just in case. So the consensus that finally developed supporting global warming (before there was any money in it), developed in spite of the money the polluters were spending to skew academic results in their direction.

  107. No turndown:

    “Maybe it is impractical, maybe it is too harsh. But that’s no reason to say the whole global warming theory is untrue, or a ’scam”.
    ____________________________

    Using half baked data aimed at producing a predetermined conclusion is fraud- And that is what the IPCC Report was commissioned to achieve- Blaming Carbon Ommissions on humans which they then can exert as a lever for creating another new Tax. None of your examples:

    “We can oppose the draft, without saying there are no threats from abroad. We can oppose doubling prison size, without saying there is no crime.”

    are analogus to creating a Tax on people backed by the enforcement of a Federal agency. You can duck and dodge all you want but all you’re doing is offering up false analogies that do not wash and prove your point.

  108. Maybe their just buying one way tickets and the jokes on the poor? Found @ American Thinker
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    Traveling is a human right?
    Jeannie DeAngelis

    Just when New Zealand seemed like the place to move, with the centre-right government, “considering cutting income tax rates,” and all, and the European Union comes out with a proposal that makes it hard to chose where expatriates should go when fleeing the US.

    Americans used to think that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness encompassed the basis for human rights and now the European Union confuses the issue by declaring, “traveling a human right.” That’s right, we can now add traveling to the list directly behind the right to universal health care.

    The EU is so dedicated to insuring the right to traveling that they are “launching a scheme to subsidize vacations with taxpayers’ dollars for those too poor to afford their own trips.” Do they fund haircuts in Europe too, because everyone needs a haircut now and again? Call it the right to good grooming.

    The Times of London reports Antonio Tajani, the European Union commissioner for enterprise and industry, “proposed a strategy” that if the right to vacation program becomes universal, it could cost EU taxpayers as much as half a billion dollars a year. Mere pittance when measured against subsidizing tours to Madrid.

    America too is descending further and further into European style socialism, while Barack and his band of belligerent reformers promote a new bill of rights right here at home. Obama’s “halves and halves not” bill includes homes, free education, health care and support of 50% of the population by the other 50%. What’s to stop vacations from being added to the “rights” list?

    The European Union commissioner claims that, “Traveling for tourism today is a right. The way we spend our holidays is a formidable indicator of our quality of life.” Sort of like Obama believing being denied the right to health care affects America’s quality of life.

    The EU commissioner for enterprise and industry has yet to decide, “Just who gets to enjoy the travel package.” It is likely EU taxpayers would be forced to foot, “some of the vacation bill for seniors, youths between the ages of 18 and 25, disabled people, and families facing “difficult social, financial or personal” circumstances.” One additional person will be subsidized for each single disabled or elderly traveler because human rights advocates know that free vacations include the right to travel with a friend.

    In the EU where income taxes combined with VAT can siphon off upwards of 70% of personal income, what’s an additional tax burden to ensure travel funds for the underprivileged? Especially, if hard earned money is going to the morally righteous cost of cultural appreciation tours for overworked youth, elderly hangers on and the trek-bound disabled.

    What’s wrong with paying people to go on vacation? Steal from one group all year long and then provide the indigent with a treat–a subsidized Hawaiian shirt, carry on luggage and a weeklong cheap holiday. That’s change, even Barack Obama and globetrotting Michelle can believe in, right behind energy efficient vehicles, healthy food and the right to affordable housing.

    European Union commissioner Mr. Tajani has one specific goal, which is to ensure the “right to be tourists,” remains integral to the proposal. According to Tajani, “right to travel” will be a pilot program until 2013, and then fully launched.

    Perfect! Because if the right to gratis holidays has not been passed into law in the US by the 2012 election, insolvent Americans can always move to socialist Europe, which by then will be a familiar home away from home, and in the process, maybe even get a free vacation.

    Author’s content: http://www.jeannie-ology.com

  109. Mrs. Smith
    April 21st, 2010 at 12:13 am
    **************

    I suggest we all hold our breath for 5 minutes a day and that should take care of it. Case solved!

  110. pm317
    April 21st, 2010 at 12:04 am

    wbboei, Rubio is their golden goose to trump Dems for the latino votes. They will not abandon him.
    ——–
    Besides the Latino voters they are following a similar pattern that they think ‘won’ the election for the Fraud, the younger male to pull in the young voters. But, do they also know that in the last election the Fraud had the help of ACORN, votes in prisons and possibly a fleet of buses like in the primary. I guess the Repugs also have their own ways of ‘winning’ an election, hope it doesn’t come down to which have the most successful thugs.

  111. wbboei, Rubio is their golden goose to trump Dems for the latino votes. They will not abandon him
    ————————————————————————————————-
    Correct. That is what they are banking on. But it may not be quite the trump card they think it is. Marco is Cuban whereas most Hispanics in this country are Mexican or Puerto Rican.

  112. gonzotx
    April 21st, 2010 at 12:18 am
    Mrs. Smith
    April 21st, 2010 at 12:13 am
    ______________________

    But how will my Jack Russell and “golden” puppy pay for CO2 Tax when they legislate all living things including mammals, reptiles and fish will be taxed for their contribution to polluting the atmosphere??

    Oy, the poor ranchers- by then a steak will cost as much as an oz of gold ineveitably, the Tax will be passed on to the consumer, nes pas-

  113. We can oppose a new rocket to the moon, without saying the old moon landing was a hoax.

    Think what a vast conspiracy it would take, starting how many decades ago, to fake all the independent measurements that show global warming. For example dates kept by locals of thawing of lakes, permitting boat travel.

    And this conspiracy would have to start for no motive, and opposed by the polluters’ funding, back under — President Hoover???

    Let’s oppose these bad taxes because they are bad and impractical. Not by making ourselves ridiculous with a rightwing conspiracy theory that puts us out there with the Creationists and the tobacco companies.

  114. When Humphrey Bogart was asked why he was not more forthcoming about his love life he said that he felt no need to discuss it in public because those who were doing all the talking about it were not getting it, and those who were getting it were not talking. It can also be that way with violence. Ask any police officer and they will tell you that the loud mouth who issues threats is usually hot air and gut wind. It is the guy who is not talking you need to worry about. Sure, in some cases words can incite violence and if you doubt it read Mark Anthony’s speech at Caesar’s funeral. But most people lack his forensic skill. It therefore follows that society may be better off letting these people sound off rather than driving it underground. When the big media wing of the Obama cartel i.e. Klein, Heilman et. al. claims the Tea Parties come dangerously close to sedition they display their own intolerance, their ignorance of the Constitution, and their ignorance of human nature. Your typical tea party members are peaceful law abiding citizens. They have nothing in common with Bomber Bill Ayers and his ilk. The amusing part of this is the cartel is so focused on the Tea Parties and Sara Palin that they totally neglect people like Glen Beck who have far more influence over the electorate as a whole than big media will ever have. The good will they cultivated since the days of Sarnoff is kaput. They are simply part of the cartel which preys upon the country, the constitution and the people.

  115. Marco is Cuban whereas most Hispanics in this country are Mexican or Puerto Rican.
    —————

    Well, 0bama is not an authentic Black either.

  116. Clinton going ahead with trip to Estonia for NATO talks

    WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will go ahead with plans to travel Wednesday to Estonia for NATO talks, an aide said, after a volcanic ash cloud raised doubts about whether the event would take place.

    “With NATO’s decision to proceed with the ministerial meetings, we’re a go,” the aide to Clinton told reporters Tuesday on the condition of anonymity.

    Clinton’s spokesman Philip Crowley had said earlier that Clinton was prepared to travel to the meeting of North Atlantic Treaty Organization foreign ministers in Tallinn but she was awaiting a decision by the Brussels-based group.

    NATO officials in Brussels told AFP the meeting was on.

    US and Finnish officials said Monday that Clinton would not visit Finland on Wednesday as planned due to the ash cloud from an erupting volcano in Iceland that has grounded tens of thousands of flights across Europe.

    During her talks in Tallinn on Thursday and Friday, Clinton was to discuss European security and the war in Afghanistan, among other issues facing the transatlantic military alliance.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gD6uCFYA0djCK5t5jO3aCu0cmM_g

  117. Bill Clinton will try to check waterworks at Chelsea’s wedding

    Uttara Choudhury / DNA
    Wednesday, April 21, 2010 3:00

    As a doting ‘FOTB’ (father of the bride) former US president Bill Clinton expects to feel “proud, grateful, wistful”, and may be even a little weepy when his only child Chelsea walks down the aisle this summer.

    According to media reports, Chelsea, 30, is set to marry her childhood friend Marc Mezvinsky, an investment banker, in an A-list wedding in July. The pair have dad’s blessing.

    “I like and I admire my prospective son-in-law,” Clinton told Jenna Bush Hager, former Republican president George W Bush’s daughter, during an interview on NBC’s Today show on Tuesday. “I feel grateful that they have been such close friends for half of Chelsea’s life. I look forward to what they do together, and I’m happy about that.”

    Asked if he has been a part of the strenuous wedding planning, Clinton said he helps pay the bills.

    “You sound like my dad,” Hager said, smiling.

    Clinton then added that he was pitching in with the finer details.

    “I participate,” said Clinton. “Chelsea has been good enough to include me in the decisions they’re making in how to do it, so I love that.”

    Clinton, 63, said he knows the wedding will make him emotional. “I just hope I can keep it together until I walk her down the aisle and do the handoff,” Clinton said. “Like your dad was telling me when he did it with you, you know it proves you’ve done what you were supposed to do, but it doesn’t make it entirely easy.”

    Clinton said the wedding day would make him remember how fast his daughter had grown up. “I’ll be thinking about the day she was born, I’ll be thinking about the first day of school.”

    Hillary Clinton had earlier joked that the Middle East peace is just as hard as negotiating her daughter’s upcoming wedding.

    The wedding plans are in full throttle even though the bride-to-be recently hurt her foot.

    Chelsea has been hobbling around Manhattan in a medical boot and crutches after breaking her heel two weeks ago.

    The New York Post reports that she’ll be off the crutches in time for the July wedding.

    http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report_bill-clinton-will-try-to-check-waterworks-at-chelsea-s-wedding_1373715

  118. Clinton to receive memorial award

    04/21/10

    Oklahoma – OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) – Former President Bill Clinton has been chosen as the recipient of the sixth annual Reflections of Hope Award from the Oklahoma City National Memorial & Museum. Clinton will receive the award Wednesday night at the National Cowboy & Western Heritage Museum. Clinton was president when a terrorist bomb destroyed the Oklahoma City federal building 15 years ago, killing 168 people and injuring hundreds more. He is being honored for his work in helping Oklahoma City transform following the bombing and for his international peace work during his presidency and over the past decade. Clinton is founder of the William J. Clinton Foundation, whose mission is to strengthen the capacity of people in the U.S. and around the world to meet the challenges of global interdependence.

    http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/0410/727916.html

  119. turndownobama:

    “Oppose whatever you like, on its own demerits. Maybe it is impractical, maybe it is too harsh. But that’s no reason to say the whole global warming theory is untrue, or a ’scam’.”

    Your argument is good, as are the examples you give to support it. But the point is, in the Clintons’ line of reasoning, that the global warming theory itself is irrelevant to the fact that the proposed solutions for global warming are in themselves technically and environmentally sound and make good business and economic sense. The Clintons are not pushing the carbon tax or cap-and-trade on the world, because they know the investment money for research and manufacturing of renewable resources and better construction and transport practices can be found from conventional sources (banks and business self-finance) without bludgeoning people for new tax resources or punishing them for existing conditions.

    Europeans and Japanese realized this 10 years ago, and now, as I said upthread, the Clintons have been bringing the Chinese, the Indians, many small African countries and all of Latin America to understand that the fight against global warming is an opportunity not to be missed. While all this is going on in the world, we in the US are stuck on the question of whether or not global warming is for real? are the scientists honest or not? how are we going to finance all these solutions? are they really necessary? and so forth. We must realize that all these questions are beside the point. Just get on the bandwagon and start acting!

    We think the US is the greatest country in the world, so we never look around us to see if anybody else is doing anything better that we can learn from. This global warming process is typical of our belly-button approach to any changes that might be envisioned in our beautiful way of life.

    The same was true for the health care debacle. The UN WHO ranks US health system as 37th worldwide, just behind Slovakia, but the American attitude was that the US must have the best health care system in the world because the US is the best in everything, so don’t touch health care at all, and certainly don’t look around for other examples to learn from. Everyone, including people on this blog, ignorantly held up the French system as the perfect example of the “socialist” thing we should avoid in the US; but the same UN WHO ranks France as having the world’s best health care system, and the facts certainly back that up: France insures 100% of its citizens with very good health coverage and quality care, and the medical sector accounts for 11% of French GDP. The US insures 84% of its people, leaving out the 16% who need care the most, and US health care accounts 18.5% of US GDP. Furthermore, the French system cannot be styled “socialist.” It was set up by rightist governments after WWII and includes mostly private practitioners, a fully private pharmaceutical industry, and private hospitals and clinics. The (single) insurer is government-regulated, but is backed up by a couple of private insurers who cover any out-of-pocket expenses there may be. You choose your own doctor, who may charge what he wants despite the social security standard. The biggest difference from the US is that the health care industry in France does not operate as a Robber Baron monopoly. We couldn’t possibly allow something that doesn’t rake off as much as it can from the sick, and refuse care to the sickest. That’s not the American way!

  120. “But the point is, in the Clintons’ line of reasoning, that the global warming theory itself is irrelevant to the fact that the proposed solutions for global warming are in themselves technically and environmentally sound and make good business and economic sense. The Clintons are not pushing the carbon tax or cap-and-trade on the world, because they know the investment money for research and manufacturing of renewable resources and better construction and transport practices can be found from conventional sources (banks and business self-finance) without bludgeoning people for new tax resources or punishing them for existing conditions.”
    ______________________

    That may very well be- If either of the Clinton’s were president, I might agree with you. But that is NOT our reality. Obama is president and not acting in our best interests. Obama promised his globalist buddies he would have Cap and Trade in hand this year and has failed to get the job done and why he is pursuing the C&T&Carbon Tax domestically. The EU and Third World countries followed Hillary’s lead when she announced subtlety including a “Transparency” clause in the US proposal to seal the deal for signing on to the Copenhagen Accord. This [she] inadvertently raised a red flag that the driving force for that agreement, the data collected by the IPCC, is questionable at best needing to be quantified before any money commitments could be allocated. Hillary for all intents and purposes put a respectable offer on the table and at the same time insulated Americans from an unproven proposal that may be entirely driven by global financiers setting the stage snookering the public once again into paying for something that doesn’t exist… (just like the Health Care Reform package. Paying health care premiums for 4 years without actual coverage.) You seem to ignore the basic claim by the globalist pushing the Carbon/Cap and Trade Tax. The impetus for the IPCC’s study is Humans are responsible for the majority of CO2 emissions and we therefore have to throw money at the problem in the form of a Tax subsidized forever by the middle class, when the earth’s climate change is an evolution of a natural process something no amount of money can do anything to change it.

  121. Obama backers show signs of disappointment

    (Reuters) – Gay rights activists heckled President Barack Obama this week at a Democratic event that exposed signs of disenchantment threatening the party in November’s congressional elections.

    Five million first-time voters turned out in 2008, many drawn by Obama’s promise of hope and overwhelmingly voting for Democrats. Now disappointed, or at least apathetic, they may not go to the polls this year.

    Obama’s support has dropped below 50 percent from nearly 70 percent after 15 months in office, Gallup opinion polls show.

    Gay rights supporters, anti-abortion activists, environmentalists and backers of immigration reform all have seen their agendas stalled, with watered-down healthcare the main accomplishment of Obama’s once-ambitious agenda.

    At Monday’s rally in Los Angeles, protesters shouted at Obama to repeal the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” military policy that allows gays to serve if they keep quiet about their sexual preference. Gays believe that makes them second-class citizens, and Obama has vowed to repeal the policy.

    “Hey hold on a second. We are going to do that,” he said. “I don’t know why you’re hollering,” he added.

    Supporters shouted “Yes we can,” his slogan from the 2008 election, and “Be quiet,” but the discontent lingers.

    Democratic National Committee spokesman Hari Sevugan insisted that opinion polls showed more than 80 percent of liberals approved of Obama. By comparison, Republicans right and center are locked in a “bloody civil war,” he said.

    Obama himself acknowledged during the day that “some folks are impatient and some folks just didn’t realize how long this was going to take, how hard each battle was going to be. And so people get kind of worn down.”

    Many on the left who want more are fighting the president and one another. Others are abandoning politics. Both trends bode poorly for Democrats, who have controlled both houses of Congress in addition to the White House since January 2009.

    All 435 seats in the House of Representatives are up for grabs along with a third of the 100 seats in the Senate.

    APATHY SAPS SUPPORT

    Many gay activists would not show up to heckle Obama. They have stopped paying attention altogether.

    “Obama was a vessel that everybody poured their hopes into. The gay community was no different,” said John Henning, director of the Los Angeles-based grass-roots group Love Honor Cherish, before the president’s California visit.

    “What is really happening in the gay community is we are going into a hibernation phase,” Henning added.

    The sentiment is widespread.

    “Even in the best of conditions, the Democrats would have a slight retrenchment of voters,” said Stanford University professor Gary Segura, who is also a researcher at pollster Latino Decisions.

    “But we’re not in the best of conditions. We have a lot of disappointed Democrats and so I would expect more significant retrenchment, a lot of disappearing voters.”

    Blacks, Latinos and young people made up the bulk of the new voters who secured comfortable congressional majorities for the Democrats in 2008. Each could be a problem this year.

    Obama is the first black U.S. president and more than 90 percent of black voters still approve of his record, Gallup says. But African-American members of Congress say job creation is critical and unemployment is roughly twice the national average among black males over the age of 20.

    San Francisco videographer Joe Razo, a 24-year-old black man, backs Obama but needs to be convinced that congressional races matter. “I kind of just do the presidential elections,” he said.

    For many Latinos, including nearly 11 million illegal immigrants, the lack of an immigration bill and heavy use of deportation are a double slap in the face.

    “A lot of people are not going to vote,” said Salvador Reza, operator of a day-laborer center in Arizona. “(Obama) would have to actually come through with … a serious immigration reform effort, or people are going to abandon him,” he said.

    Keeping Latinos happy should be a no-brainer for the Democrats, the party of choice for the fastest growing minority largely because of a pro-immigrant stance that contrasts with the anti-immigrant rhetoric of many Republicans.

    Obama campaigned on making immigration reform a priority, but the way forward for illegal immigrants and the employers who say they need them is no more clear than it was before Obama took office.

    FIGHTS WITHIN THE LEFT

    The “everyone’s in it together” feeling of the 2008 election has been replaced with “me first” on many fronts.

    Obama’s biggest accomplishment, the healthcare overhaul, opened old wounds. A fight over whether federal funds could be used to pay for abortion tied up the bill and split the party, which has been a strong supporter of abortion rights but now has a significant wing opposed to abortion.

    Michigan anti-abortion rights congressman Bart Stupak, who voted for the healthcare bill after getting a pledge from Obama not to use federal funds for abortion, became the number one target for abortion rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America.

    Stupak has dropped out in the face of what was expected to be a bitter primary race against an opponent backed by NARAL and other abortion rights groups. This could open the district for Republicans in November as Democratic success in such rural heartland areas has been based on the party fielding candidates with conservative views on issues such as abortion.

    Similar fights will be played out elsewhere.

    “Pro-life Democrats generally win in the more conservative states in the Midwest, if you think of Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio. A pro-choice candidate would have a more difficult time,” said Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas.

    Other issues are causing rifts in the ranks — among them climate change legislation, now stuck in Congress.

    Former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental group is trying to push aside rival left-wing groups vying to be the next issue in line for congressional attention. “Tell our Senators: We got next!” Gore’s Repower America, urged on March 26.

    POTENTIAL LOSSES

    Politicians are counting the races at risk.

    Four of the 10 Senate races where Democrats may lose, including Majority Leader Harry Reid’s re-election bid in Nevada, are in states that had above-average increases in turnout between 2006 and 2008, Professor Tom Schaller of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, calculated on political blog fivethirtyeight.com.

    Battles for governor that could be affected by the new 2008 voters include California, Texas, Florida, Nevada, Georgia and Illinois, he calculated, noting that new governors will oversee redrawing federal voting districts after the 2010 census.

    The voters could affect the outcome of the majority of 23 highly contested House of Representatives races. Democrats’ key to winning is not persuading moderates but mobilizing the newer voters, Schaller said.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE63K0KS20100421

  122. RUH-ROH: LIMBO OBAMA GOES EVEN LOWER

    quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1447

    April 21, 2010 – Obama’s Bounce Goes Flat, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; But Voters Confident He Will Pick Good Judge

    President Barack Obama’s job approval, which bounced slightly to a 45 – 46 percent split March 25 in the wake of his health care victory, has flattened out at 44 – 46 percent, his lowest approval rating since his inauguration, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

    A total of 53 percent of American voters are “very confident” or “somewhat confident” President Obama will make the right decision in nominating a U.S. Supreme Court justice, while 46 percent are “not too confident” or “not confident at all,” the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN- uh-pe-ack) University survey finds.

    Voters trust the President rather than Senate Republicans 46 – 43 percent to make the right choice for the Supreme Court, but say 48 – 41 percent that Senators who do not agree with the nominee on key issues should filibuster the choice.

    American voters approve 49 – 21 percent of the job John Roberts is doing as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and approve 52 – 32 percent of Obama’s nomination of Justice Sonia Sotomayor to the Court.

    The court is too liberal, 29 percent say, while 19 percent say it is too conservative and 40 percent say it is about right. Saying “about right” are 36 percent of self-described liberals, 44 percent of moderates, 38 percent of conservatives and 30 percent of those who consider themselves part of the Tea Party. Voters say 78 – 16 percent that Supreme Court justices allow political views to enter into their decisions.

    “President Barack Obama’s approval rating hovers at an all-time low. The White House had predicted passage of the health care overhaul would boost his fortunes, but that has not been the case, and that legislation itself remains decidedly unpopular,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

Comments are closed.