Obama’s Oil Slick

There are so many disasters on a day to day basis that is almost seems as if America is unraveling. The most that a humble website can do is catalog the disasters by category, not on an individual basis. But even with that methodology there are problems because even the disaster categories are multiplying at an exponential rate.

Big Media is quiet, as we predicted about violence at yesterday’s May Day rallies but if there is ever any Tea Party violence, you can be sure it will be top of the pops. The Taliban or someone was busy partying in Times Square yesterday too. The Times Square revelers will eventually be told who violated Hank Hill’s propane and propane accessories. We’ll leave those mysteries to Hank.

We’ll take a break from all that today, because it is such a lovely day in May. We’ll refrain from the cataloging and the serious, and focus instead on a few buffoonish stories that make us cry – whether from laughter or sadness remains to be determined.

First we have the National Enquirer story about Barack Obama and an alleged extramarital affair. We don’t sniff bed sheets so we won’t comment on the validity of the story. Enough to say that the National Enquirer, when compared to the rest of Big Media, has a successful snout at bed sheet sniffing because it does not ignore the obvious. If the National Enquirer story proves to have legs up in the air, so to speak, we want to remind everyone of Michelle Obama’s and Valerie Jarrett’s comments about sex scandals in the White House.



If this story ever breaks Michelle, don’t forget you are the one who opened up the bedroom door to bed sniffing. Remember Michelle, “if you can’t run your own house, you can’t run the White House” – your words.

On November 8, 2007 we wrote Barack Obama’s Sex Life and we quoted Marc Ambinder, quoting Valerie Jarrett:

“His campaign staffers, too, have become frustrated by the focus of the media’s attention, specifically that the press has not covered Clinton in the way they expected it would. During an interview this summer, Obama’s friend Valerie Jarrett said to me, unbidden, “He is a man who is devoted to his wife. There aren’t going to be any skeletons in his closet in terms of his personal life at all. Period.” And at a campaign event in Iowa, one of Obama’s aides plopped down next to me and spoke even more bluntly. He wanted to know when reporters would begin to look into Bill Clinton’s post-presidential sex life.”

As we wrote at the time, “Valerie Jarrett is an optimist if she thinks there is an empty closet – she should read the emails we get.” If anything happens on this front, remember who opened up the bedroom door and fluffed the stinky bed sheets.

Over at a comical LeftTalking website, the PINO world made us laugh again. In what passes for serious “creative class” discussion the LeftTalker wracked her mind over a sign she saw at one of the immigration rallies yesterday. The LeftTalker saw a sign that said “Stop Ignorance” and it got her “thinking”. The solution from this great mind was Maoist style “reeducation” with a human face:

“The one that says “Stop Ignorance” got me thinking. How do we do that? Usually the answer is education. Can that work with the prejudice against immigrants? It may be too late for adults, but can we reduce their success rate in passing their bigoted views onto the next generation? Should schools include in their curriculum, starting in kindergarten, classes and presentations that extol the contributions immigrants have made to this country and promote diversity? Something has to counter-balance what kids are hearing at the dinner table from ignorant parents.

Is there any wonder that some Americans recoil at what is perceived as “socialist” education when such mindless boobery and bigotry rails against mindless boobery and bigotry? Undermine parental authority by forcing kids to learn what the state deems appropriate instead of facts is ugly and wrong whether it is done by Mao, Hitler Youth, or red kerchief communist indoctrination campaigns – or even “well intentioned” liberal indoctrination. The facts should be sufficient to open minds up without having the coercive power of the state weigh in. The very same PINOs who are aghast at right wing indoctrination in the schools of such “ideas” as “creationism” don’t appear to understand the ugly ramifications of the “solutions” they themselves would impose.

In a comment one reader agreed with Madame Mao:

“Um, unfortunately, no. Some people don’t want to learn, they really and truly get off thinking that they’re always right, that they’re better than others, that they deserve more than some other particular set of people, that they are more worthy, that their problems are always someone else’s fault, etc., etc. Nope, some people like being ignorant because it makes them feel better about themselves. You can’t save these people.”

Immediately a wily coyote responded:

“I swear, you just described democrat voters to a tee.”

Well, not Democratic voters but rather the PINO Dimocrats which view themselves as the “creative class”.

Two additional comments gave us hope that not all is lost even in PINO land. The first:

“Schools need to stict to the facts – all of them – its a slippery slope to try to intentionally counterbalance parents. What schools need to do is teach the facts. The nature of American ideals: equality and opportunity for all, and what that means and how so very far short of those ideals, even antagonistic to them the US is, throughout its history and in its current subversive incantation, needs to be taught.

The republican lies of US purpose to be divisive and oppressive need to be counteracted.

The corporate media, servant and propagandist of the plutocracy needs to be attacked, broken up, and neutered.

But trying to intentionally undo, or counteract what parents try do to in the manipulation of their offspring is ill-advised.”

The second:

“Is ignorance the problem in this case however. I would not dispute the contribution of immigration on this country. However, at this point in time, our economy is tanking. It can not handle our current population, let alone additional immigrants, (whether or not they are in this country legally or illegally) being added to the population.

It is possible to be opposed to immigration and not be a bigot. For a lot of people, they are opposed to immigration to protect there jobs and there livelihood.”

That there are racial or ethnic bigots in Arizona and in the movement to slow down or stop immigration is not in doubt. But the hate directed at those who either rationally fear for their lives, or jobs, or sense (misguided or not) of fair play and following the law is ugly. Other than the few native Americans (“Indians” for the politically non-correct) which remain, we are all immigrants.

And certainly “Mexicans” were dominant in the Southwest United States and their descendants can claim to have longer roots in places like California and Texas than many “Americans”. There is a lot of ugly history here for all sides to chew on without resorting to the “racist” charge (Ulysses Grant a hero of the Mexican war, in which we “won” California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming called the Mexican War the most “evil” war the United States had ever fought and that the Civil War was punishment for that “evil”. “The Southern rebellion was largely the outgrowth of the Mexican war. Nations, like individuals, are punished for their transgressions. We got our punishment in the most sanguinary and expensive war of modern times.”).

But neither reeducation camps nor propaganda schools, nor Michelle’s sheets are what have us laughing today. No, the guffaws come from watching Obama’s latest publicity stunt in the Gulf of Mexico. An even bigger laugh comes from comedian Bill Maher as he and Chris Matthews display their hate of Tea Party activists along with a surprising quote by Barack Obama himself.



BILL MAHER: Okay, so I mentioned in the monologue I’m a little mad this week. I usually try to hide that, but, you know, when the Teabaggers say that they feel like they have no…

CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC: I love the way you say that.

MAHER: What?

ROSS DOUTHAT, NEW YORK TIMES: Just trips off the tongue.

MATTHEWS: The Teabaggers.

MAHER: The Teabag, well, you know they always say they feel like neither Party represents them. That’s how I feel this week. So Teabaggers, you’re not alone. And the reason why is because yes, I’m mad at the oil company who didn’t obviously build their rig well enough. I’m mad at America in general because we should have gotten off the oil tit starting in the ’70s. I’m mad at the people who go, “Drill, baby, drill.” And by the way, they should turn up on the Gulf Coast and start cleaning up the birds with their “Drill, baby, drill” t-shirts. But I’ll tell you who I’m really mad at which is Barack Obama. Couple of weeks ago, the President, our President said, “It turns out the oil rigs today generally don’t cause oil spills. They are technologically very advanced.” Now if, if I was quoting George Bush, this crowd would be laughing in hysterics.

LAURA TYSON, ECONOMIST AND FORMER CLINTON ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yes they would.

MAHER: So, why isn’t Barack Obama getting more shit for this? I think he should.

(Applause.)

It does not matter which side of the divide you are on – Drill, Baby, Drill or No Drill – how come that Obama sentence is not on every Big Media headline in every Big Media newspaper and television show?

Perhaps we explained why long ago. Since 2007 we explained that Obama would not only kill the Democratic Party but we also explained that the Progressive Left no longer existed. Fox News is in favor of Drill, Baby, Drill so it’s not up to them to focus on Obama’s hilarious sentence. But what of the Progressive Left? Recall when recently we mocked a PINO “ardent environmentalist” whose anger was so thunderous his demand was that environmental groups “put out statements of annoyed disappointment”.

Much too much too late, DireFog echoes us and declares “the progressive movement is officially dead”:

“Hey, Sierra Club: There’s a giant flaming ball of oil being pushed straight for the coasts of Alabama and Mississippi. Might be the worst environmental event in decades. I know it makes the President’s recent decision to allow offshore drilling look. . . well, awkwardly timed, but this is, sort of, you know, your issue, and there’s no mention of it on your landing page. Was it not on the agenda at the Tuesday afternoon veal pen meeting?

Shortly after Obama took office, the White House tried to cut Social Security benefits, but they had to back off, fearful that they would lose the support of liberal interest groups who joined together en masse behind the scenes to oppose it. The administration subsequently herded them all into a room, threatened their funding, and captivated them in an effort to pass a health care bill written by the Heritage Foundation and the insurance industry. And the progressive groups went along with it, proving that there is absolutely no limit to what they’ll accept.”

Oh, those madcap liberals. We’re ashamed to be genuine progressive Democrats and liberals when such buffoonery is on display by those we are now grateful are no longer on our side. On May 16, 2007, over three years ago, we wrote about Obama and his views on Social Security – three years ago. We quoted Obama saying “everything should be on the table” and now, only now these dolts raise their voices on Social Security? To the reeducation camps with them!

But back to DireFog’s belated complaints about belated Sierra Club complaints as they write three years later what we wrote about years ago:

“Of course, the White House is going to go after Social Security again. It’s the pot of gold at the end of Wall Street’s rainbow, and they desperately want that injection of cash which could keep their giant ponzi scheme from exploding. . . for a little while.

Lucky for them, Obama has successfully dismantled the opposition that kept George Bush from privatizing Social Security at Wall Street’s behest only a few years ago. Did anybody fail to get that message when majority whip Dick Durbin yesterday told “bleeding heart liberals” that they need to be willing to accept cuts to Social Security and Medicare benefits for the economic well-being of the nation?

And there will be zero pushback. Right now liberal interest groups are afraid to oppose Elana Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court because they fear Obama will triangluate against them and they’ll look impotent to their donors. Just as the choice groups sat on their hands for the Nelson amendment in the health care bill, just like the Sierra Club remains mute in the wake of an oil spill the size of Delaware, there will be nothing more than progressive window-dressing in opposition to cutting Social Security benefits this time around. Any of these groups utter so much as a whimper in response to Durbin’s very alarming statement yesterday? Nada. Zip. Zero.

No, these PINO groups have remained silent and in protect Obama mode, while their constituencies suffer yet continue to stupidly donate to corrupt organizations. DireFog, additionally hits at the fake claims of “creative class” LeftTalk types who consider themselves so un-ignorant and “liberal” minded (like Madame Mao above):

The idea that the right is more “authoritarian” and top-down than the left is absurd. Conservatives successfully organized to keep Harriet Miers off the bench for having an insufficient record, they kicked Arlen Specter and Charlie Crist out, and they’re getting ready to expel Bob Bennett — very much against the will of the party. The GOP had to get on board or lose the support of their base. Meanwhile, Democratic leadership still celebrates Joe Lieberman every day, rubbing our noses in it for ever having had the audacity to challenge him in the first place.

John Pilger presciently predicted this liberal capitulation to corporate America in May of 2008:

An Obama victory will bring intense pressure on the US antiwar and social justice movements to accept a Democratic administration for all its faults. If that happens, domestic resistance to rapacious America will fall silent.’

And, as Paul Street noted last fall:

‘[I]n the absence of meaningful anger and protest on the left, the dodgy Republican right wing and its still-potent “noise machine” is absurdly left to soak up and express much of the legitimate “populist rage” that ordinary Americans quite naturally feel over Washington’s continuing captivity to concentrated wealth, corporate-direction, and the military-industrial complex in the Age of Obama. Resentment abhors a vacuum.’

Where were these people when there was a chance to prevent Obama from destroying the Democratic Party? Still think McCain against a unified Democratic Party, purged of the race-baiters, with big majorities in the Congress would have been worse than the current Obamination?

Where were these “progressives” as “The progressive movement died during the primaries, when Obama’s supporters started calling their fellow Democrats racists.”?

When the Obaminations began during the primary elections of 2008, the PINO websites were on the beach sunning themselves and shouting “racist!” at all who saw what was coming. The Obama oil slick was on it’s way to shore long ago. The flames from the Obama oil slick were visible long ago.

Now the oil slick is coming home… to the roost.

Share

272 thoughts on “Obama’s Oil Slick

  1. Good post. But one point – no humans evolved in the Americas. We’re all immigrants. Native Americans/Indians aren’t “native” – they were the first immigrants, coming from Asia over the land bridge.

  2. admin, another superb article! thank you.

    I have to say, if I had not been called a racist by democrats for supporting Hillary in 2008 my eyes would still be closed to how the left operates, if I had not seen the blantant campaigning by the MSM against Hillary in 2008, I still would be believing everything they tell me, if I had not seen the lies the MSM 2008 told me about Hillary and then Sarah, I would still continue to be a drone.

    Perhaps I was always an independent my whole life but was a registered as a democrat. But this is no longer my party, a party I was registered with for over 3 decades, I have no clue who these radical freaks are.

    You are correct this is all unraveling, and wait until the DeathCare crap is going to unravel some more. Doctors like my sister-in-law will be leaving the field all across America, the shortages will come much sooner than expected, the pain will come much sooner than expected, and the middle class will be hurt much sooner and more severely than expected.

    Of course, I fully expect the MSM to cover up for their product, if I had not seen it first hand as a Hillary supporter in 2008, I would not have believed it.

    The Democrat (not democratic as they stole 4 delegates, representing thousands of votes) Party died on May 31th, 2008. It was taken over by corrupt chicago thugs, not bound to any priciple, loyal to no one but themselves and their quest for power!

  3. Excellent admin.

    “Teabaggers?”

    How on earth do they keep getting away with calling them this rude variation?

  4. Excuse my language, but who the hell does this monster think he is? He won’t ALLOW??? He promised Abbas a prolonged Israeli settlement freeze in the West Bank and East Jerusalem???

    ————-
    02/05/2010

    Abbas: Obama won’t allow provocations from either Palestinians or Israel

    Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, on the verge of indirect negotiations with Israel, said Sunday that U.S. President Barack Obama had given a commitment that he would not allow “any provocative measures by either side.”

    Abbas told the Palestinian newspaper al-Ayyam in an interview published Sunday that the U.S. leader had invited him to Washington later this month “in an attempt to push the peace process forward”.
    Abbas gave no specific date for the visit.

    An aide to the Palestinian president said earlier Sunday that Obama had assured the Palestinian Authority that his administration is committed to a two-state solution and that a future Palestinian state will be independent and have territorial continuity.

    Abbas’ meeting with Obama next month will be the first since hosted for a trilateral meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in September at the United Nations.

    PA secretary general Tayeb Abdel Rahim said Obama had relayed that message in a letter delivered by U.S. Mideast envoy George Mitchell while he visited the region last week in a bid to restart peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

    Rahim also said the U.S. vowed to assign blame publicly to any party that takes provocative actions or jeopardizes prospects for peace.

    Obama also reportedly has promised Abbas a prolonged Israeli settlement freeze in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, Army Radio reported earlier on Sunday quoting London-based Arab-language newspaper Al-Hayat.

    According to the report, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat told the Arab League ministers Saturday night that Obama made his promise off the record in order to avoid conflict with right-wing factions in Israel.

    Palestinian sources also claim that Israel has committed to continuing the moratorium on settlement construction in the West Bank beyond the original ten months Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared last December.

    An Israeli official said Mitchell was expected back in the region on Monday to further negotiations ahead of the proximity talks.

    The Arab League on Saturday endorsed a proposal for the Palestinians to hold U.S.-mediated indirect negotiations with Israel. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) will meet later this week and is also expected to approve the indirect talks.

    Abbas said the talks would get under way once both bodies had given their nod.

    On Saturday night, Netanyahu praised the Arab League’s endorsement of renewed peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, scheduled to start mid-May.

    Responding to the League’s decision, Netanyahu said in a statement: “Israel is willing to renew negotiations with the Palestinians at any time and at any place.

    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtStEng.jhtml?itemNo=1166574&contrassID=1&subContrassID=1&title='Report:%20Obama%20promised%20Abbas%20prolonged%20Israeli%20settlement%20freeze'&dyn_server=172.20.5.5

  5. Hillary Clinton On SCOTUS: I Have Never Wanted To Be A Judge

    Glynnis MacNicol
    May 2nd, 2010

    A few weeks back, shortly after Justice Stevens announced his upcoming retirement from the Supreme Court rumors started to swirl (possibly thanks to Politico) that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may, or at least should be, in the running as his replacement. The White House was fairly quick to shoot down the rumors, and former President Bill Clinton followed up, saying that while Hillary (or himself!) would probably be great, neither felt they would be the best pick and President Obama needed to tap someone younger who could steer to court for years to come.

    Today, on Meet the Press, the woman herself weighed in. Let there be no doubt, Hillary is not interested.

    “Oh, never! I do not, and have never, wanted to be a judge. Ever. I mean that have never been anything that I even let cross my mind because it’s just not my personality. I think he [President Obama] should pick a very well-qualified, people-savvy, young person to be on the court to really help to shape the jurisprudence going forward.”

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/hillary-clinton-on-scotus-i-have-never-wanted-to-be-a-judge/

  6. Admin: I lie in wait, waiting for this love story to unfold just so I can invest in the youtube rebuttal to Meanchelle.

    Hillary doesn’t want to be a judge, well of coarse not, she should of been POTUS and she will make her move soon.

    Interesting that he’s pist that Lamestream media is not persuing Obama’s quote. LOL!! It seems he’s made another error in judgement about Offshore drilling.

  7. Admin, nice summation of this farce of an administration.

    Tim, 1000% with you. I am completely creeped out by my pals’ williness to suspend disbelief for this shit. A good lawyer pal gave me a book Thursday about the making of Obama Zombies. Will give a review if I ever get to it.

  8. Oh, I saw the Newsweek cover about Hillary, “Obama’s Bad Cop?”

    Didn’t read the story, but I love the photo. She looks so calculating, so amused…. 😉

  9. The PINOs should should wake up. There is an end game here for those who are wise enough to see it. It is the totalitarian mind at work, seeking to reshape our society by silencing all opposition. New lyrics but the same song. Watch:

    First they called us RACISTS, and I did not speak out—because I was not a racist;
    Then they called us a MOB, and I did not speak out—because I was not a mobster;
    Then they threatened a NEWS NETWORK who opposed them, and I did not speak out—because I was not a journalist;
    Then they LOOTED OUR WEALTH, and I did not speak out—because I wanted to believe they would take care of me;
    Then they UNDERMINED OUR CONSTITUTION, and I did not speak out- because he is a law professor
    Then they CAME FOR ME– even though I never opposed them—–BUT THERE WAS NO ONE LEFT TO SPEAK FOR ME. . . . .

  10. Bill Maher may or may not be a Canadian honker. My mother is sure that he is. But I prefer to take a more scientific approach. I have contacted ornithologist who has yet to opine. However one thing is certain. Maher may as well be a Canadian honker because he is as full of shit as a Christmas goose. He hates America, loves Obama, and the closest he comes to anything negative is to ask the rhetorical question why is Obama not getting more shit over his position on drilling from the environmental groups. He knows full well why the pinos are strangely silent, and unwilling to defend the values they pretend to stand for. They elected him, they worship him, and they are loathe to turn their back on him for fear of showing that they were wrong to have ever supported him in the first place, and they do not want to do anything that could advantage Republicans. So what do they do when he trashes their values? They hang their heads and refuse to criticize which is the mark of a coward.

  11. Tim, the contempt I have for Obama began with a contempt for Bush, because it was obvious to me that both of them served the same capitalist masters as Bush did. From what I can tell as an outsider now, the Republicans have no use for Bush, and if they look back at all the names they cite are Reagan and Lincoln, and TR to a much smaller extent. In some ways, the republicans have awakened to their mistake, and seem to be moving in a better direction. Meanwhile, the Dimocrats are too dumb to realize that they even have a mistake. Therefore let us at least hope that November blows reveille until their eardrums burst.

  12. In some ways, the republicans have awakened to their mistake, and seem to be moving in a better direction.

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

    Don’t they claim that often? Bush Jr claimed to be a ‘new kind of Republican’, a ‘compassionate conservative.’ Didn’t Reagan make some sort of claim of newness, man of the people, westerner, not a politician, etc. And wasn’t he going to reform the whatsis of the Nixon era?

    I’d rather have an old kind of Republican, like Goldwater or Eisenhower.

  13. In some ways, the republicans have awakened to their mistake, and seem to be moving in a better direction.

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

    Don’t they claim that often? Bush Jr claimed to be a ‘new kind of Republican’, a ‘compassionate conservative.’ Didn’t Reagan make some sort of claim of newness, man of the people, westerner, not a politician, etc. And wasn’t he going to reform the whatsis of the Nixon era?

    I’d rather have an old kind of Republican, like Goldwater or Eisenhower.
    ——————-

    Yes on all fronts Turndown. For much depends on whether they can elevate economic security over social issues. The former is inclusive and the later is divisive. One thing I will say for certain however is they are not on a mission to radically restructure our society and disenfrachise the American People like the Dimocrats are. The article I posted last night by the Michigan Supreme Court Justice spells out the Dim agenda and if they succeed we will lose what defines us as Americans.

  14. Mrs.Smith, Have you seen this???

    Seize and Liquidate Goldman Sachs
    [Translate]
    Webster G. Tarpley
    TARPLEY.net
    April 27, 2010

    Today’s Senate hearings, carried on CNBC, Bloomberg, and C-SPAN, represent the first major exposure of the American people to the scandalous frauds of the derivatives casino, including synthetic collateralized debt obligations (synthetic CDOs or CDO²). These are things most people have heard very little about. They begin to open up the shocking reality behind such shopworn euphemisms like “toxic assets,” “exotic instruments,” and “troubled assets.” Reactionaries in general and Republicans in particular have done everything possible to hide the role of derivatives, which must be considered the main cause of the financial panic of September 2008 which brought down Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, and AIG, after felling Bear Stearns in March of the same year. The reactionary legend, repeated yesterday on the Senate floor by financier minion GOP Sen. Gregg of New Hampshire, is that the crisis was caused by poor people taking out subprime mortgages and then defaulting, bringing down the entire Anglo-American banking system and triggering the bailouts. Either that, or too much government spending was too blame.

    A mass of kited derivatives blew up in September 2008
    This Big Lie has come from such propaganda sources as the Limbaugh Institute of Retarded Reactionary Ranting. But the $1.5 trillion in subprime mortgages were dwarfed by the $15 trillion US residential real estate market, to say nothing of the $1.5 thousand trillion world derivatives bubble. But, starting with Bush-Goldman Sachs Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, the talk has been of a “housing correction,” not a derivatives panic. It must be pointed out that derivatives are nothing but wagers, bets placed from a distance on securities which themselves are often not mortgages, but rather other derivatives. The bettor buying a synthetic CDO or CDO² does not own the underlying mortgages or mortgage-backed securities, any more than someone who bets on a racehorse owns part of the horse. Blankfein and others tried to portray derivatives as a service to hedgers and end-users, but it’s clear that the vast majority of derivatives involve neither hedgers nor users, but only bettors on both side of the transaction. It is in any case this mass of kited derivatives which blew up in 2008, bringing on the present world economic depression.

    Goldman Sachs executives are babbling cretins
    The mystique of Goldman Sachs is based in large part on their reputation as the smartest financiers on Wall Street. After today’s hearings, this mystique has permanently dissipated. The Goldman executives babbled. They sounded dumb. They stalled and stammered and went into contortions to avoid giving straight answers to simple questions. They were mendacious and evasive when they did speak. Financial powers around the world will note carefully the refusal of three out of four Goldman executives on one panel to state that they had a duty to defend the interests of their clients. Who will want to do business with such a gang? Goldman Sachs got $10 billion of taxpayer money in low-interest loans under the Bush-Paulson TARP. Part of that money went to pay for obscene bonuses for Goldman executives like the ones on display today. The argument for bonuses is that they must be paid to retain the highly talented personnel, virtual geniuses, who are indispensable for Wall Street speculative success. But these are no geniuses, they are imbeciles. No more bonuses should be paid by banks saved through public money. Continue reading Seize and Liquidate Goldman Sachs

  15. Does anyone here remember what Carl Levin did/said during the DNC rules and by-laws meeting in 08?? Did he stick up for Hillary, I can’t remember? I remember Ickes did, but I thought that Carl Levin did too, I may be mistaken though?

  16. Where in the world is Tony Rezko?
    By: Barbara Hollingsworth
    Local Opinion Editor
    04/20/10 2:44 PM EDT
    Why is Antoin “Tony” Rezko under lock and key at an undisclosed location, like some sort of CIA-renditioned al Qaeda operative? And why hasn’t he been sentenced yet?

    As the June 3 corruption trial of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich for allegedly trying to sell Obama’s former Illinois Senate seat approaches, the whereabouts of the former Blago and Obama fundraiser is literally a state secret.

    The Chicago Sun-Times reported that Rezko was moved from Chicago’s downtown Metropolitan Correctional Center on December 16th, even though it’s right across the street from the federal courthouse where Blago will be tried.

    Rezko’s not listed on the federal Bureau of Prisons’ inmate locator, either.

    “Nobody knows where he is,” a source in Chicago told The Examiner.

    The other big question: Why hasn’t Rezko been sentenced yet? It’s been almost two years since the Chicago restaurant and real estate developer was convicted on bribery, fraud and money laundering charges.

    After months of unexplained delays, Rezko’s January 6th sentencing date was canceled again – this time indefinitely – by U.S. District Court Judge Amy St. Eve, a former Whitewater prosecutor. Reporters were initially told that Rezko was cooperating with prosecutors, but he apparently stopped talking and demanded to be sentenced as soon as possible. That request was obviously denied.

    Randall Samborn, spokesman for Fitzgerald, told The Examiner that Rezko “remains in federal custody,” although admitting that he didn’t know exactly where the convicted businessman was being held. Samborn also confirmed that “there is no sentencing date,” but would not elaborate. Sources in Chicago tell us that the long delay is “very unusual.”

    A call to defense attorney William Ziegelmueller was not returned.

    Is Rezko being held at another prison facility for his own safety? There are plenty of people in Chicago and Washington who might not want Rezko on the witness stand. They include:

    Democratic Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias.

    Rezko was such an enthusiastic customer of Giannoulias’ failing Broadway Bank that he wrote $450,000 in bad checks against his account to pay off gambling debts.

    Alderman Eddie Burke

    Rezko hired Burke’s law firm to get a 77 percent reduction in the real estate taxes of a 62-acre property along the Chicago River he planned to develop using $140 million in city subsidies. After assuring the Chicago Board of Ethics that he would abstain from any Council votes on Rezko’s project, Burke voted for it anyway, blaming his conflict of interest on “an error.” The project was later abandoned.

    President Barack Obama

    Rezko was the president’s “real estate fairy,” as one Chicago columnist likes to put it. Remember how they bought a house together in Chicago? Rezko was one of Obama’s earliest and biggest fundraisers and donors. Obama was one of his go-to guys for housing legislation in the Illinois state Senate.

    If I were Tony Rezko, I’d be hiding, too

    \

  17. It is now Mon. am and our Girl is back at work.Just take a look at her schedule for today while “the J

    oker” starts another day on the campaign trail and avoiding the questions about his failed presidency.

    Secretary Clinton’s Monday Schedule
    May 3, 2010Leave a comment
    tags: Current Events, Iran, media, Nonproliferation, Secretary Clinton’s Daily Schedule, United Nationsby stacyx
    .Big day at the U.N.

    Secretary Clinton, accompanied by Under Secretary Tauscher and Assistant Secretary Brimmer, leads the U.S. Delegation to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty Review Conference, at the United Nations. For more information, click here.

    10:30 a.m. Secretary Clinton meets with Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice and Ambassador Alejandro Wolff, at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.

    11:00 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Philippine Foreign Minister Alberto Romulo, at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.

    12:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton attends a Working Luncheon of the 2010 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, at the TIAA CREFF Building.

    1:20 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Nigerian Foreign Minister Ojo Maduekwe, at the TIAA CREFF Building.

    1:45 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting Brazilian Foreign Minister Amorim, at the United Nations

    2:50 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Austrian Foreign Minister Spindelegger, at the United Nations.

    3:15 p.m. Secretary Clinton delivers Remarks at the Review Conference of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, at the United Nations.

    4:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton attends a Meeting, at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.

    5:20 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Press Availability, at the United Nations.

    6:30 p.m. Secretary Clinton attends a Reception hosted by Philippine Foreign Minister Romulo, at the United Nations.
    ——————————————————

  18. Looks like Hillary will be at the UN all day…hmmm, hmmmm, when is Ahmadinejackass coming to the UN….tomorrow?

  19. Admin, this is a serious question for you. I do not self-identify as a liberal nor a progressive. I consider myself a moderate centrist with some conservative and some liberal viewpoints, but admittedly, I have become much more suspicious and contemptuous of liberal, leftist thought, though I’ve always distrusted the far left since it was obvious to me that they seemed enamored of corrupt, violent, and undemocratic dictators. I feel as if I am becoming much more receptive to libertarian thought which I think is a reaction to my general distrust in government. I see government failing the people, and becoming an impediment to its people’s success. So, where do you stand on this? I enjoy reading your comments about Firedoglake, and TalkLeft, etc. I read about your fondness for liberalism, but I wonder what that means in today’s world. Sometimes I believe that I see you moving toward the center, since you have a penchant for exposing what passes as liberalism/progressivism today. You extol FDR, but many believe that FDR surrounded himself with communist sympathizers, which I could never accept in my own life. Communism is a dead end. I am wondering today where you fall on the political spectrum. I ask this because I used to think of myself as a FDR Democrat, but nowI wonder what an FDR Democrat actually is anymore. I guess I am trying to figure out where I fit in politically since I see some similarity in my thoughts on things with you, but obviously not everything.

  20. The Associated Press has been in the tank for Obama since the beginning. It continues to this day. So what do they do now, when the momentum has shifted to the other party? They write an article claiming that it will not be that bad because they will lost only 30 seats 40 at most. And they will only get 3 or so in the Senate so not to worry because they will not get control of the Seante. They go on to say that this reflects the consensus of unnamed strategists for both parties.

    What do you expect from a media source that lies for a living, and distorts and censors the truth for political gain. Here is the opinion of a couple strategists they did not consult with if indeed they consulted with anyone besides Axelrod. By the way I have it on good authority that their minions were on the guest list at the lavish White House soirees that were held last week, so they continue to get paid for their betrayal of their profession and the American People. Quid pro quo.
    ———————————————————————
    Matthew Continetti (H/T Instapundit) says in print what I – and probably a lot of the VRWC – have been thinking:

    The Democratic response to dissent is a lot like their governing style: partisan, arrogant, and self-righteous. In recent weeks, various Democratic factotums have lectured the public about “extreme” rhetoric, insinuating that the Tea Party takes its cues from The Turner Diaries. Some liberals suffer from a pathological inability to refer to the Tea Party by its name, preferring a crude and infantile sexual epithet. The folks waving signs and holding peaceful rallies have been insulted as fakes, wackos, ignoramuses, racists, nihilists, and hicks suffering from status anxiety. But when a poll revealed the Tea Party movement is better educated and wealthier than the electorate at large, a prominent Washington Post columnist summarily dismissed the movement as the “populism of the privileged.” The lines of attack change, but the message is always the same: Go home. Shut up. Let us do what we want.

    There’s a word for this sort of overbearing, priggish intimidation: bullying. And like a lot of bullying, the Democrats’ behavior seems to stem from deep-seated insecurities. Maybe the Democrats are not as confident in government as they appear. Maybe they worry about the massive deficits and the hemorrhaging public debt. Maybe they read the same polls we do, the ones showing the public shifting right, Republicans leading the generic ballot, Republican-leaning independents returning to the GOP, congressional approval and support for incumbents at record lows, and the conservative base in a state of wild enthusiasm.

    And, do you know something? They’re right to be insecure. I have been on the receiving end of two electoral drubbings, for two electoral cycles straight; and I was on the giving end of one in 2004. So I know what one feels like, from either side; and the Democrats are setting themselves up for an epic version of same*. And I can more or less guarantee that the folks that will be elected in November are going to be distinctly uninterested in playing nice with the political party that will have spent the last four years at that point blaming us for their failures. Which are numerous, systematic, and quite comprehensive.

    Put another way? Matthew finishes:

    Maybe the bully party, in other words, is simply acting out.

    And maybe we don’t give a tinker’s dam.

    Moe Lane

    *This would be the point where a person writing about this situation feels almost obligated to cover their bases with a ‘Of course, the situation can still change’ – but it is now less than six months to Election Day, so one wonders when – or if – the Democrats were going to get started with repairing their situation.

    Crossposted to Moe Lane.

  21. Moe Lane is correct. It is bullying coming from the true believers, and those afraid to take their blinders off.

  22. US to reveal its nuclear weapons
    May 3, 2010 5:56 PM | By Sapa-AFP
    ——————————————————
    The Pentagon will make public on Monday previously classified statistics on the size of the US nuclear arsenal, a spokesman said.

    The information will be unveiled after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addresses a UN conference to review the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a cornerstone of global efforts to check the spread of nuclear weapons, said Colonel David Lapan.

    “Obviously the impact is the fact that they’ve been classified for so long,” Lapan said of the statistics.

    http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/article431341.ece/US-to-reveal-its-nuclear-weapons

  23. More reasons not to trust our current government. Do they honestly think people are THAT stupid? Maybe their supporters are…
    €€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€

    Car views: Did Obama administration tell GM to lie about its TARP repayment?
    May 2, 1:41 PMCar News, Views, and Reviews ExaminerMark Tapscott

    General Motors chairman Ed Whitacre made news last week with a series of national television advertising spots in which he claimed the company has repaid its government bailout loans in full, ahead of schedule and with interest.
    Unfortunately, according to Neil Barofsky, the Inspector-General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) under which the federal loans were made to GM, the repayments cited by Whitacre were simply made with other tax dollars made available to the automaker in its bailout deal with the government.
    So in effect GM was repaying one government loan with another government loan.
    Now Whitacre is not a dumb guy, nor are there any ethics scandals in his previous record as a very successful CEO at AT&T. He was even the national head of the Boy Scouts of America, so why all of a sudden is he making a transparently false statement in a GM TV spot?
    Three Republican members of Congress are asking the same question and they are also demanding some answers from Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, who oversees the TARP program and who issued a statement endorsing the GM claim and citing the repayment as evidence that the government’s bailout effort is working.
    On the House side, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-CA, who is ranking minority member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Rep. Jim Jordan, R-OH, all but accused Whitacre in a letter of committing fraudulent advertising:
    “We are concerned that GM, under your leadership, has come dangerously close to committing fraud, and that you might have colluded with the United States Treasury to deceive the American public.

    “Your false statements may expose GM to millions of dollars in damages, further reducing the value of the taxpayer-owned company.

    “The American people, as the majority shareholders of GM, have a right to know the truth behind the cost of the GM bailout and GM’s genuine financial condition,” Issa and Jordan wrote.
    You can read their full letter here.
    The government’s bailout of GM consisted of $49.5 billion committed to GM through Treasury’s Automotive Industry Financing Program in return for which Treasury received a 60.8 percent common equity stake in GM, $2.1 billion in preferred stock, and $7.1 billion in GM debt.
    Treasury put $17.4 billion of the $49.5 billion bailout in an escrow account, which required GM to obtain Treasury’s permission to draw down. It is from this account that the repayments boasted of by Whitacre were made.
    A spokesman for Issa and Jordan noted that on Nov. 16, 2009, GM said it intended to use the taxpayer money in the escrow account to finish paying back the original $7.1 billion loan. The repayments would be made no later than June 30, 2010, drawing on the taxpayer money in the escrow account to pay back the taxpayer loan.
    Issa and Jordan are not the first to raise concerns about government influence over GM advertising as a result of the bailout. I reported on such worries in this space last year.
    On the Senate side, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-IA, is demanding some answers from Geithner, wondering in a letter made public this week if Treasury approved what effectively amounted to GM misusing TARP escrow funds that were supposed to be used to settle claims in GM’s bankruptcy settlement with parts supplier Delphi:
    “In reality, it looks like GM merely used one source of TARP funds to repay another. The taxpayers are still on the hook, and whether TARP funds are ultimately recovered depends entirely on the government’s ability to sell GM stock in the future. Treasury has merely exchanged a legal right to repayment for an uncertain hope of sharing in the future growth of GM. A debt-for-equity swap is not a repayment.
    “I am also troubled by the timing of this latest maneuver. According to Mr. Barofsky, Treasury had supervisory authority over GM’s use of these TARP escrow funds. Since GM’s exit from bankruptcy court, Treasury had approved the use of the escrow funds for costs such as GM’s obligations to its parts supplier Delphi.”
    You can read Grassley’s entire letter to Geithner here.
    Accusations and worries of improper government interference with business are inevitable results of government picking winners and losers in the private economy, as was done with the trillions of tax dollars used by the Bush and Obama administrations to bail out Wall Street investment firms, GM and Chrysler, insurance giant AIG, and multiple banks.
    There is a name for the kind of regime that allows private ownership of businesses but effectively tells them what to produce and sell. It’s called Facism. America is far from there, but becoming a bailout nation is a significant step in the wrong direction.

  24. I’ve included (at the bottom) a comment from the site that I found interesting…

    Clinton On Air For Lincoln

    May 3, 2010
    By Reid Wilson

    Bill Clinton is going to bat for his home-state ally, cutting radio ads that defend Sen. Blanche Lincoln’s (D-AR) record as an important backer of his agenda.

    “My friend, Sen. Blanche Lincoln, is being criticized from both sides of the political spectrum,” Clinton says in one ad, called “Real Record.” In the spot, Clinton defends Lincoln’s votes for the ’93 economic plan and in favor of NAFTA. The free trade treaty helped open the AR economy to overseas trade, Clinton says.

    As a member of Congress, Blanche helped me get America’s economy moving again when I was president,” Clinton says in another, called “That’s Why.”

    Lincoln has used her post as chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee as her best argument for another term, and Clinton mentions the key post twice. In one ad, the chairmanship helps Lincoln bring new money to the state; in another, Clinton points to Lincoln’s role in crafting a portion of the financial regulatory reform bill that’s on the floor right now.

    The ads come on the heels of spots cut by Pres. Obama, who recorded messages targeted at African American voters who will play a key role in the Dem primary. The primary takes place 2 weeks from tomorrow, on May 18, when Lincoln faces a tough challenge from LG Bill Halter (D).

    1 Comment…

    i did not know both Bill Clinton and Obama were for Lincoln. her opponent is from the movement that helped Obama beat Hillary

    ————————–
    http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/05/clinton_on_air.php

  25. This is a Democrat from California? Hard to believe. He calls himself a common sense Democrat, and I actually agree with what he seems to stand for, at least with regards to illegal immigration and welfare reform. I guess my concern is that common sense does not translate into current Demotoxic policies.

    ££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££

    30 Apr 2010
    Democrats Are Manipulating the Marchers

    Amnesty isn’t going to happen anytime soon. Democrats should stop holding effective border control hostage to a legalization plan they’re using to rev up the Latino vote.

    Participants in Saturday’s pro-amnesty marches are being used by the Democratic party elite, Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mickey Kaus charged today.

    “There is not going to be an amnesty this year, or next year. The majority of the American people don’t want it, for good reason. They want to secure the borders first,” he said. “Amnesty before we secure the borders would only encourage yet another wave of illegals and hurt the wages of unskilled Americans (and legal immigrants).”

    “But every time Democratic politicians in D.C. need to rev up the Latino vote, they dangle the false promise of an amnesty bill. At some point. Latino voters are going to realize they’re being used.”

    Kaus is the only Democratic Senate candidate on the ballot to oppose amnesty proposals, even when they are packaged with enforcement measures and billed as “comprehensive reform.” The incumbent, Barbara Boxer, supports “comprehensive reform” that includes a “path to citizenship” for illegals–i.e., amnesty.

    “It’s time Democrat politicians stopped holding enforcement measures hostage to their goal of amnesty–of giving citizenship to millions who are here illegally.”

    “We need to secure the borders first. Build the actual, physical fence that was supposed to be built. Extend E-verify or another effective means of checking immigration status at the time of employment. Create a system for monitoring visa overstays. Let the ACLU sue. Let the Chamber of Commerce sue. Let MALDEF sue. Then if the system survives those assaults, and works–actually stops illegal immigration and sends a signal to the world that the game has changed–then in a few years we can start to talk about amnesty.”

    “Until then it’s a false promise, a fraud.”

    Kaus also commented on Arizona’s controversial new law:  

    “I’m not for mass deportations, or for rooting out and displacing people who are minding their own business ‘living in the shadows.’ But Arizonans have been sorely tested by wave after wave of illegal immigration, in violation of federal law, which has brought with it unprecedented levels of violence to the state.

    The new law may turn out to be a reasonable response to the problem. It doesn’t say police can stop anyone they “suspect” of being an illegal. The police have to have some other legitimate reason for making contact. This gives them the power to ask for a driver’s license or other evidence of legality. 

    There is a potential for abuse. But let’s give it a chance and see how it works. If I thought it would lead to mass sweeps to check the ‘papers’ of brown-skinned people walking down the street, I would oppose it. The law on its face precludes that. If it happens in practice, it should be stopped. But until it does we should calm down and see if the law is abused or not.”

    “If Obama and the national Democrats don’t like Arizona’s response, they should stop holding effective federal enforcement of immigration laws hostage to the amnesty they keep dangling in front of Latino voters.”

    –30–

    — Mickey Kaus 310 577 3141

  26. Excellent! And here’s a righteous rant on PINO’s from someone who did earn the right to do it
    http://www.johnwsmart.com/2010/05/liberal-caverns-where-principles-go-to.html
    ” Obama’s primary objective has been achieved: Neuter the Left. The farcical heathcare seizure law will now move into the destruction of Social Security. (The Defense department will see no cuts.) Obama, who lied about attacking insurance companies, then lied about attacking Wall Street, will, I have no doubt, find a delicious lie to tell us about the seizure of Social Security by Wall Street. If nothing else it will be “The Republicans made me do it.” Which will be vaguely feasible since they’ll have a majority soon enough”

  27. I liked what I saw in Marco Rubio. Then I heard from people who know his track record better than I do. I would probably vote for him if I lived in Florida. But I would do so more reluctantly. He is smooth–much smoother than Obama. Obama just goes on and on stream of consciousness when he is forced to address a question, and when he is finally through everyone has forgotten the question which he never really answered and big media says he is the smartest man in the universe when in some respects he may be one of the dumbest. Marco is different. He will answer you question concisely. The only problem is it seems to change depending on his audience. Nor do I forget the Bush connection which is always troublesome. I am sorry to say this because I hoped we had someone we could believe it. Then again maybe we do. The conservatives think so. But I begin to wonder. Beyond all the rhetoric, I would like to know what his vision is for the country, and what his pathway is out of the current morass. Perhaps these questions are immaterial in a Senate race, but my sense is he has hitched his wagon to a star, and it does us no good if at the end of the day he ends up serving the same globalists as both Bushes did.

  28. The reason I would vote for Rubio is because I believe him when he says he would fight against Obama. Anyone who is willing to fight against political evil incarnate, which is what smiling Obama is, has my vote. No further questions are necessary.

  29. John Smart has a good piece up about the hypocrisy and blindness of the Big Blogger Boyz in 2008. One part in particular stood out to me.

    This is one of the most insightful statements I’ve read regarding what happened to the prog blogs during 2008. And he managed it in 2 succinct sentences:

    The personality that subsumes all the ugliest elements of the base -in this case, identity politics, self righteousness, and condescension – and brings them to the forefront. He did not tell the Left their principles were right. He told them THEY were right.

    Exactly. It was all entirely self-referential. Obama capitalized on the Bush-hate, not by decrying Bush’s principles and contrasting ours, but by telling the Left “you are, in your very essence, better than the right”. He stoked a feeling of moral superiority in the Left that was completely disconnected from actual beliefs or actions.

    When you have a group of people believing “We are inherently better, just because we are US, not THEM.” then you can use them any way you please, for agendas that they would have rightly abhorred back when the principles were the focus. And it honestly makes me wonder how many of those people truthfully ever had those principles at all. Or were the ideals merely a convenient bludgeon during the Bush years, to beat on the “rednecks and ignoramuses” and secure their elitist advantage?

    Because if they ever had Liberal principles, then what is happening makes no sense. But if all they ever had was an elitist sense of moral and intellectual superiority, then what they are doing makes perfect sense.

    http://www.johnwsmart.com/

  30. I will be voting for Rubio in Florida. Meeks is a typical Obamazoid DemoRat, and Charlie Crist is a legend in his own mind. By default, and a genuine belief that Marco Ruvio is the better choice, he’ll get my vote.

  31. That last statement sounds ridiculous until you think about who controls Obama and his goal to undermine the constitution and radically restructure American society. Anyone who doubts that premise should re read that article by Justice Markman because that is the meat of the coconut, to use a Hawaiian expression that Barry the Bamboozler could relate to. In fact there are alot of coconuts on that $5 million mansion he plans to purchase–besides Michelle I will show you how to plant a garden Roberts–or should I say Jackie O redux.

  32. Today, on Meet the Press, the woman herself weighed in. Let there be no doubt, Hillary is not interested.

    “Oh, never! I do not, and have never, wanted to be a judge. Ever. I mean that have never been anything that I even let cross my mind because it’s just not my personality. I think he [President Obama] should pick a very well-qualified, people-savvy, young person to be on the court to really help to shape the jurisprudence going forward.”

    ———

    I am glad Hillary put it bluntly, so there is no further speculation. She may as well have said, “You are not going to silence me as a member of the Supremes, take your frickin’ burqua and shove it!”

  33. many believe that FDR surrounded himself with communist sympathizers, which I could never accept in my own life. Communism is a dead end

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

    Thus there’s no point in worrying about who FDR was CLAIMED to associate with and CLAIMS that those people were ‘communist sympathizers’ (whatever the accusers meant by that) or even whether the associates would have still ‘sympathized’ with communism even a few years later.

  34. What a surprise…

    May 3, 2010

    White House Dismisses Katrina/Oil Spill Comparison

    Posted by Mark Knoller

    Nothing will get you a faster argument from White House spokesman Robert Gibbs than to liken President Obama’s handling of the BP oil spill to President Bush’s flawed response in 2005 to Hurricane Katrina.

    “Other than geography, I haven’t figured out how,” Gibbs says of anyone making such a comparison.

    Katrina proved to be a political calamity for Mr. Bush that will forever mar his legacy. The current White House wants no such parallels drawn to its management of the oil spill.

    “We’re dealing with a massive and potentially unprecedented environmental disaster,” Mr. Obama declared yesterday after getting an update on the spill at the U.S. Coast Guard Station in Venice, Louisiana.

    To counter comparisons with Katrina, Mr. Obama declared “that’s why the federal government has launched and coordinated an all-hands-on-deck, relentless response to this crisis from day one.”

    He made the reference to “day one” three times in his 8-minute statement – to make the point that by no means was the administration slow to respond to the spill. Among the references:

    “We’ve made preparations from day one to stage equipment for a worse-case scenario.”

    “I want to emphasize, from day one we have prepared and planned for the worst, even as we hoped for the best.”

    He twice used the word “relentless” to describe the government response to the spill.

    “I’m not going to rest,” the president said yesterday standing unprotected in a pouring rain, “until the leak is stopped at the source, the oil on the Gulf is contained and cleaned up, and the people of this region are able to go back to their lives and their livelihoods.”

    Mr. Obama says U.S. personnel “are doing everything in their power to mitigate this disaster, prevent damage to our environment, and help our fellow citizens.”

    As for the costs of the response, he is emphatic.

    “Let me be clear: BP is responsible for this leak; BP will be paying the bill,” he said. Even so, he said he won’t spare any effort in responding to the crisis.

    Above all else, the White House wants the strength of its rhetoric to be seen as reflecting the depth of its commitment to plug the leak and contain the spill and damage.

    As for parallels to Katrina, “I’m happy to compare the response,” Gibbs said on Air Force One as Mr. Obama’s returned from his hastily-arranged visit to the gulf coast. Gibbs concedes that like Katrina, the oil spill is “a situation of great potential environmental and economic devastation.”

    But he said “analogies are tougher to make” because Katrina was “a storm that you track for several weeks that comes ashore and kills 1,800 people.” On the other hand, Gibbs makes the “day one” argument: that the Coast Guard and the Navy were “on site immediately after” the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig from which the oil spill began. And, he says, the administration is doing everything it can.

    It’s a case the White House will be making over and over until the underground gusher is plugged and the spill is contained.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20003988-503544.html

  35. I found this quote today.

    “The tone and tendency of liberalism…is to attack the institutions of the country under the name of reform and to make war on the manners and customs (and freedom) of the people under the pretext of progress.” –Disraeli, “Speech in London”

    It sounds like Obamaism to me.

  36. JanH
    [snip]
    “I’m not going to rest,” the president said yesterday standing unprotected in a pouring rain, “until the leak is stopped at the source, the oil on the Gulf is contained and cleaned up, and the people of this region are able to go back to their lives and their livelihoods.”

    ———
    Sometimes I have to translate comments by politicians in my head…

    what he really tried to say was, “Damnit, leave me alone already, I don’t have my teleprompter ready by the 3 AM call, so don’t call me until after I have had my java fix! So what if it took me a few days to realize this was a real problem. …(can I blame this on George Bush too?)”

  37. the president said yesterday standing unprotected in a pouring rain

    ——-
    I saw this little photo opp and they sure built up his suffering on this piece…

    Unprotected…….he wasn’t standing nude in a Alaskan snowstorm, he was dressed with a light jacket on.

    Pouring rain – it was a light rain at best, but not drizzle.

  38. And the new memeber of countries working on Women’s Rights in the UN starts out the conversation today by clearing the room…

    ————

    UNITED NATIONS — The Iranian president, Mahmoud Adinnerjacket, accused the United States and other nuclear powers on Monday of trying to intimidate non-nuclear countries and said the Americans were the “main suspect” in the stockpiling, spread and threat of nuclear weapons.

    Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at the United Nations on Monday.

    Mr. Ahmadinejad took a defiant posture as the United Nations opened a conference to strengthen the 40-year-old Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, arguing that the world’s nuclear powers needed to disarm and that there was no credible evidence that his nation was seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

    As Mr. Ahmadinejad spoke, members of delegations from a number of countries, including the United States and many members of the European Union, walked out of the General Assembly.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/04/world/04nuke.html?hp

  39. I really need to start looking into FDR. I believe that there have been successes under his leadership like SS, the FDIC, etc., but he was one shady character if the followin is to be believed.

    ————-
    FDR gave a speech in Troy, NY, 3 March 1912, in which he laid out his philosophy – he placed the “liberty of the community” over “the liberty of the individual.” He said competition was bad but cooperation was good. The speech was a concerted assault on the idea of private property. “…why can we not…predict that the state will compel every farmer to till his land or raise beef or horses?” He also claimed that the state could force “idle” men to labor. He imposed no limits on the power of the state. His definition “by liberty we mean happiness and prosperity” is not liberty at all but could as well mean slavery. He pointed to the Germans as proving that we “had passed beyond the limits of the individual.” In his first inaugural speech, he said, “rulers of the exchange of mankind’s goods have failed” and threatened Congress and asked for dictatorial powers.
    Charles Beard, the doyen of American socialists and creator of the ideas for FDR’s NRA and AAA: “FDR accepts the inexorable collectivism of the American economy…national planning in industry, business, agriculture and government.” “Individual economic activities and individual property rights will be altered and changed.” FDR was bringing us to a ‘collectivist democracy’ and “worker’s republic.”
    Earl Browder, a regular Bolshevik and General Secretary of the Communist Party USA, went wild with delight and excitement over FDR’s speeches. “If the New Deal could be established, it should be possible to proceed from this, step by step, without violent overturning, to socialism.” Earl, who was also a Russian spymaster, ran his base of operations from the White House and hired and fired administration officials at all levels. FDR pardoned him from a 5 year prison sentence in 1942.
    George Bernard Shaw said FDR “is a communist but does not know it.” Of course he did know it, but it would have been political suicide to express it.
    H.G. Wells wrote “The exciting thing about him, as about Stalin, is that he, too, has more of the appearance of having modern objectives, however incompletely apprehended, than anyone else in the world.” Also that FDR was feeling his way toward state capitalism and Washington and Moscow were ‘the twin centers of reconstruction effort.’ After reading Well’s autobiography in which he called for a ‘greater effort’ for Communism, FDR wrote him “your direction and mine are not so far apart.”
    FDR said it was time for US “to become fairly radical for at least one generation. History shows that where this occurs occassionally, nations are saved from revolution…Wait until next year, I am going to be really radical.” “National thinking, national PLANNING and national action are the three great essentials…’socialism’ has probably done more to prevent Communism and rioting and revolution than anything else in the last 4 or 5 years.” National planning necessarily requires coercion – it is the recipe for tyranny. FDR liked to call himself the Kerensky of the American revolution.
    “The Russian newspapers during the last election (1932) published the photograph of Franklin D. Roosevelt over the caption ‘the first communistic President of the United States’.” — Senator Thomas D. Schall
    Stalin called FDR in Dec 1933, “a decided and courageous leader.” In 1934 he praised FDR’s “initiative, courage and determination”.
    Although FDR liked to pretend that Teddy Roosevelt and his family supported him, in 1935 in Philadelphia, Teddy, jr. leveled this blast at FDR: “You have been faithless. You have usurped the function of Congress, hampered freedom of the press…You have urged Congress to pass laws that you knew were unconstitutional…You have broken your sacred oath taken on the Bible.”
    August 13, 1938, The House Un-American Affairs received testimony from John Frey, president of an AFL union, about 280 Communist Party members in the CIO and that communists had infiltrated the government in almost every bureau through the United Office and Professional Workers Union. FDR , who was very angry, met with Chairman Dies and told him “Well, there is no one interested in Communism, no one at all. I’ve heard it all my life. There is no menace here in Communism…there is nothing wrong with the Communists in this country. Several of my best friends are Communist.” The bitterest attack FDR ever made publicly against a public official was against Dies for his investigation of Communist influences in union sit-down strikes. FDR refused cooperation with the Dies committee and tried to kill it by blocking funds to it in 1940. Dies claimed there were 3,000 communists working in government.
    “Submission, not freedom is to be the future badge of the United States…the overturn of institutions, including the Constitution, is the avowed goal of his (FDR’s) immediate advisors. — Woodrow Wilson’s Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby, in Portland, OR, Sept. 1934
    Father Coughlin said in 1936 that the New Deal had its feet of clay mired “one in the Red mud of Soviet communism and the other in the stinking cesspool of pagan plutocracy.” Also “the efforts are made for low, practical purposes to confuse a Christian program of social justice with a Godless program of communism.”
    “Now to bring about government by oligarchy masquerading as democracy, it is fundamentally essential that practically all authority and control be centralized in our national government. The individual sovereignty of our states must first be destroyed, except in mere minor matters of legislation. — FDR March 2, 1930
    When his Chief of Security Berle brought him information from the Communist courier Whittaker Chambers that there were 2 Soviet spy rings at the highest levels of his administration, naming names like Hiss, White and Silvermaster, FDR told him to “go jump in a lake.” The report was suppressed for years. The KGB archives list 221 agents in the most sensitive sections of the Roosevelt administration in April 1941. There were probably a like number of Soviet military GRU agents.
    The week before the 1944 election, Izvestia wrote “to announce joyfully that Mr. Roosevelt’s return was secure” and predicted an American Reichstag fire.
    In 1946 FDR’s son Elliot wrote a book titled As He Saw It which was meant to be the memoir that his father never wrote. It quoted many important private conversations and opinions of FDR. The real inside story scandalized the keepers of FDR’s myth, who said that it put the words of the communist newspaper The Daily Worker into his father’s mouth. The truth hurts.
    FDR and Eleanor’s political views were shaped by a political leech named Louis Howe who attached himself in 1912 and was always very secretive about his political beliefs. Similarly, FDR has often been called ‘non-ideological’ because he could not admit his ideology. Howe saw in FDR an ambitious, ruthless young man with no moral compass or ideas. Over years of conversations, and speech writing and agenda planning, and especially during the onset of FDR’s polio when Howe lived with them and they depended on him, Howe shaped both FDR and Eleanor. He was their brain. They were his disciples. He taught them an ideology. They became ideologues. In a Cosmopolitan article in April 1934, Howe wrote quoting his protege FDR “that the time has arrived to build a new kind of government founded on the doctrine of the good neighbor and not the cruel doctrine of ‘rugged individualism.’ ” In other words, FDR stood for the obliteration of individualism at the hands of a ruthless, all powerful state.

    In early 1939, FDR tried to become a card-carrying communist. He applied for membership in the front League of American Writers but Earl Browder, General Secretary of the Communist Party USA, returned his application saying, “Don’t get mixed up in this. There is going to be a lot of controversy about it.” That was the understatement of the decade. Recall that FDR’s choice, when he was aware that he was dying, for vice-president was Henry “The people’s revolution is on the march” Wallace, a communist; that FDR had supported the communists in the Spanish Civil War and had tried to get the neutrality act repealed for them, that FDR sold out Eastern Europe to the Soviets at Yalta; that FDR made Karl Marx’s primary goal, redistribution of income, his primary goal; that he was against loyalty oaths; that remarkably there was not a single prosecution of any Soviet spy during his Presidency; that when 12 communists were arrested by the FBI in Detroit in 1940 that he removed the FBI’s power to make arrests; that he vetoed a bill to deport communist aliens in 1940; that he several times blocked the extradition of communists; that he constantly sent “greetings” to various Red organizations and took every opportunity in public to praise Stalin’s regime.

    When he returned to the United States from Yalta, FDR told his Cabinet that he had found in Stalin “something else in his being besides this revolutionist, Bolshevik thing.” FDR said it might have something to do with Stalin’s early training for the priesthood in the Russian Orthodox Church. “I think that something entered into his nature of the way in which a Christian gentleman should behave,” Roosevelt declared. On Sept 30, 1941 FDR told reporters that there was freedom of religion in the USSR, right after 2 million Christians had been butchered and the churches were still burning: religious control was “essentially what is the rule in this country; only we don’t put it quite the same way.” “I may say that I got along fine with Marshall Stalin. He is a man who combines a tremendous relentless determination with a stalwart good humor. I believe he is truly representative of the heart and soul of Russia; and I believe that we are going to get along very well with him and the Russian people – very well indeed.” –FDR after Teheran Conference.
    (audio)

    FDR lived by the maxim “the ends justify the means” and endlessly preached class warfare – profit was evil, investors were parasites and businessmen were scoundrels. FDR stocked his government with communists. For example the OSS, the forerunner to the CIA, had so many communists that it was jokingly said that OSS stood for “Oh, So Socialist and Office of Soviet Stooges.” Joe Kennedy complained to FDR that he was surrounded by “Jews and communists.” FDR made sure that the atom bomb project was crawling with communists. When the FBI started tracking communist leaks from the project, they were ordered to stop investigating. Earl Browder praised FDR to the Executive Committee of the Communist Party, USA, in September 1934 and they officially threw their support behind him. Prior to that time, they had refrained because they knew the value of communist opposition – the public would support what communists attacked. However, by 1934 that ploy had worn thin so they had no reason not to openly support FDR. The Communist international conference in Moscow in 1935 ordered support for FDR. In the Fall of 1936 Moscow ordered support for FDR in the election. The communist-controlled unions were FDR’s main constituency and power base. In 1936 a communist union put up 1/2 million dollars for his campaign and an unlimited number of labor campaign workers. It is a statistical fact that FDR could not have won his last two terms without the Red vote. Therefore, FDR was a wholly-owned subsidiary of those communist unions (not all unions were controlled by communists, but many were through Stalin’s agent Joseph Zack). FDR spent millions on propaganda for Stalin like the nonsense book and movie Mission to Moscow which had these fine lines: “Stalin’s brown eye is exceedingly kind and gentle. A child would like to sit in his lap and a dog would sidle up to him.” Your tax dollars at work. The House Un-American Affairs Committee in 1940 released the names of 563 communists in his administration. Both Republican candidates for President Landon and Dewey accused FDR of being a communist, as did Hearst who called FDR’s administration “more communistic than the Communists.”

    FDR defined Freedom of Religion as Stalin did.
    FDR defined Freedom of Speech as Stalin did, i.e. he used the Marxist formulation ‘Freedom of Information’ in his speeches.
    FDR pressed a bill to eliminate the right to bear arms, the guarantee of all others.
    FDR told Churchill that “an unwritten Constitution is better than a written one.” When reminded there was the Constitution, FDR said after his 1936 inauguration “Yes, but it’s the Constitution as I understand it – flexible enough (to do what he wanted).” He admiringly told Churchill that Stalin didn’t have to worry about Congresses and Parliaments, “he’s the whole works.” In a letter to a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, FDR wrote- ” I hope your committee will not permit doubt as to Constitutionality, however reasonable, to block the suggested legislation.” FDR did not believe in Constitutional checks and balances – he tried to destroy and was prepared to defy the Supreme Court and Congress. He did not believe in advise and consent or the rule of law – he waged war and made treaties without Congressional approval. He did not believe in representative democracy and often said that since Congress did not reflect the will of the people they should be ignored.
    Probably the best exposition of FDR’s procedures regarding the rule of law vs the rule of men was said by his top deputy, KGB agent Harry Hopkins, to his aides – “I want to assure you that we are not afraid of exploring anything within the law, and we have here a lawyer who will declare anything you want to do legal.”
    FDR defined democracy just as Joseph Stalin did – as the mere act of voting. (Of course he believed it was good to lie to the people to influence their votes. He also engaged in vote fraud – he won the 1928 NY Governor’s race solely with massive vote fraud in Buffalo.) In a famous speech FDR said “The truth of the matter was that the public neither knew or understood what was involved…In other words, public opinion would be easy to manipulate.” So much for the public will.
    Roosevelt showed the liberal’s willingness to side with Communist infiltration and treason, to glamorize the brutality of Communist governments. Liberalism and Communism are both infected with the same materialistic secular virus and have such philosophical affinity that usually they can not be distinguished. Their identical world-view creates a “strong affinity between the Communists and New Dealers; between the progressive and totalitarian visions of the maximalist state.” (Professor Herman)

  40. Of course, FDR surrounded himself with socialists. That’s why we have Social Security and other institutions that protect that working class from the predations of the wealthy – because those are socialist initiatives.

    Medicare, student loans, maternity leave, minimum wage, disability, child labor laws, mass transit, food safety laws, work safety laws, consumer safety laws – those are all socialist initiatives.

    What socialists in socialist countries like England, Canada, France, Sweden and Norway do is create programs that use tax dollars to make the lives of ordinary, working class people better. All of us paying into a pool for health care provides cheaper and better healthcare, than each of us paying individually and many of us being left out.

    Don’t confuse despots who use socialist rhetoric to catapult themselves into power with actual socialism – it’s two different things. The real world definition of socialism is political initiatives that benefits ordinary people directly as opposed to the wealthy. That’s it. If it’s good for the working class and adds directly to their quality of life, and protects their economic stability and physical health, then it’s almost certainly socialist in orientation.

    I’ll point out that when you look at hours worked, France has a higher productivity level than we do, a higher standard of living, first rate health care, and they get those government-mandated vacation weeks. Most of our lives would be better if we lived comparably to the average French citizen.

    Stop being so scared of policies that benefit you as opposed to rich people. The rich will always be with us and they are very good at looking out for themselves.

  41. Oh, and here’s a letter I just wrote to Janice Hahn who is running for office here in California:

    Dear Janice,

    I am immensely frustrated with the direction of the Democratic Party. I’m someone who votes in nearly every election, but I don’t see any reason to vote right now. I can’t detect any real difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. I’m horrified by Obama’s right wing health care plan which has, as it’s first priority, forcing Americans to pay tributes to health insurance companies while doing very little to mandate care. I’m frustrated that we have a president who is taking hostile stands in court on gay issues. I’m stunned that we’re expanding off shore drilling. As long time Californian who recognized her second real estate bubble very early on, I’m heartbroken that we’re bailing out banks, and not homeowners, while allowing mortgages that are in default to remain on the books so that housing prices cannot fall to their natural and desirable level. Until that happens, we can not fix the epic unemployment problem that is destroying California’s economy. And lastly (at least for this letter), as a freelancer in the entertainment industry, I am shocked at the willingness of this state to allow other states to scoop up one of the main generators of well-paid, middle class jobs in California. In the 80s, the studios made over 300 films in California. In the 90s, the studios made over 90 films a year in California. Last year, they made 9 films in California. On both a federal and state level, I feel completely and utterly deserted by the Democrats.

    I don’t like the way the Democratic party resolved the primary issues docking half the votes from Michigan and Florida because of bills written by Republicans, and further, arbitrarily awarding four Clinton’s delegates to Obama allowing him to take the nomination from the candidate who actually won the most Democratic votes. That’s the kind of game playing that landed George Bush in the White House. If you count all the votes, Gore/Clinton wins. If you don’t count all the votes, Bush/Obama wins. Same damn game. Same lousy, right wing president.

    I’m an FDR Democrat. I believe that Democrats should pursue policies that benefit, first and foremost, the lives of ordinary people, and, equally, I believe that Democrats count all the votes and don’t rely on manipulation of the rules to win.

    This is all by way of saying that I’m not voting for you or anyone in the primary. Rest assured, my vote will not be going to Republicans in the general, either. But unless Democrats can start giving me something to vote FOR once again, I’m not voting.

    Best of luck in your election.

  42. basement angel
    …This is all by way of saying that I’m not voting for you or anyone in the primary. Rest assured, my vote will not be going to Republicans in the general, either.
    ——-
    Although I agree with not having many people in Calif. I do support, my vote in 2010 will be to vote against incumbents, also in Sacto. Vote the bums out and start at square one.

  43. • confloyd
    May 3rd, 2010 at 4:22 am
    Does anyone here remember what Carl Levin did/said during the DNC rules and by-laws meeting in 08?? Did he stick up for Hillary, I can’t remember? I remember Ickes did, but I thought that Carl Levin did too, I may be mistaken though?
    Connie, one of the Levin bros (forget whether it was Carl or Sandy) told me in the spring of ’08 that yes, Hillary was indisputably the best choice but, and I quote him, “the deck is stacked against her.” So, Carl at the Rules Bylaws meeting spoke at length but his talk was clouded by defeatism because he knew long before that it was a done deal and he didn’t have the balls to stand tough with Ickes in protest over the disenfranchisement of voters in Michigan and Florida.
    Some say FDR listened to Communists?
    From what I’ve read, I’d say FDR listened to EVERYBODY – and then made up his own mind. There were many, many Commies and Socialists in those days – many! Save being a hermit, one could hardly avoid hearing them – they were everywhere. But FDR was not susceptible to any of the sophomoric ideologies of his day. He was an intellectual and political pragmatist. He simply tried to do all he could to protect and improve living conditions for the majority of people in his own time – especially the middle and lower classes. He wasn’t ALWAYS successful, his choices sometimes, in hindsight, were not always the best, of course, and politics often makes “strange bedfellows,” but his vision was centered on “the people,” and he was true to it.
    It all goes back to this thing of labels. Good and bad ideas come from all people in spite of the labels they give themselves – compare, for instance, Hitler’s National Socialist Party and Mussolini’s Socialist party with The Union of Socialist Soviet Republics and The Fabian Society of GB Shaw and his crowd and compare their ideas with those of the American Eugene Debs. None of those socialist ideologies were all bad or all good, and ultimately, when you read enough of history you see that yesterday’s labels and today’s labels are not only often contradictory but also largely meaningless.
    The pragmatic tailoring of solutions to the specifics of each day’s problems is what’s meaningful and real regardless of labels.
    Labels tend to attract “the true believer” kind of personality (…anybody read Eric Hoffer lately?) The intelligent mind is very open to “on the other hand” points of view and is likely to keep emotionalism at bay. DIdn’t we just see a demonstration of the conflict between wbboei’s rational pragmatism and basement angel’s true believer mentality? But then, that’s labeling, again, isn’t it? Truth is, most of us are not easily labeled…we’re just not that simple.
    As for that long article on FDR above, oh, dear – it’s so full of holes, distortions, etc, it would take a book to clarify all of it. One thing I might mention is that FDR saw Nazism, not Communism, as the Great Enemy in his time. Besides, American Communism was never Russian Communism except among a very tiny few. The real intellects of those days abandoned Communism when they understood what was really happening in Russia. They were mostly idealists who were sincerely naïve. (Poor John Reed) In the overall, however, it’s my opinion that Professor Herman applied the meanings and connotations of today’s labels to a former time without an adequate comprehension of the issues of those days.

  44. There’s nothing rational Wbboie. He’s a propogandist. That’s all. He doesn’t understand politics or economics. He’s language is confused and dishonest. He hedges. He lies. He misleads. That’s neither pragmatic nor informed.

    And what am I true believer in? Go ahead – spell out my political belief and demonstrate that it’s hinged on one dimensional ideology rather than a real world understanding of economics and politics and the impact on people’s lives.

  45. lil ole grape said
    May 3rd, 2010 at 3:34 pm

    “Truth is, most of us are not easily labeled…we’re just not that simple.”

  46. Ahmadinejad, Clinton face off at U.N. nuclear meeting

    By Louis Charbonneau
    Reuters
    Monday, May 3, 2010

    UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – Iran’s president faces off with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday at the start of a meeting on the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a pact Washington and Tehran accuse each other of violating.

    Iran’s nuclear program, which the West suspects is aimed at developing the capability to produce atomic weapons, will be one of the most hotly debated topics on the sidelines of the month long NPT review conference, a meeting held every five years to assess compliance and problems with the treaty.

    Western diplomats in New York expect Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to mark the opening of the conference by accusing the United States and its allies of using fears about proliferation as a pretext to deny developing nations access to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes in breach of the NPT.

    It is an argument that has resonated well in the past with developing nations, which account for the majority of the 189 signatories of the landmark 1970 arms control treaty. The NPT is intended to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and calls on those with atomic warheads to abandon them.

    Western envoys say their fears about Iran are now shared by many Arab states and other developing nations. The United States, Britain, Germany and France are negotiating with Russia and China on a possible fourth round of U.N. sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, which Tehran says is for peaceful purposes.

    Iran’s U.N. mission said little about its plans for Ahmadinejad, the highest-ranking government official scheduled to speak at the opening of the May 3-28 conference.

    An Iranian diplomat said that “this participation at the highest level is a demonstration of Iran’s firm commitment to the NPT and to the success of the review conference.”

    U.S. REVERSES NUCLEAR POLICY

    Clinton is scheduled to speak several hours after Ahmadinejad. Last week she predicted that the Iranian president might not receive a very warm welcome in New York City and said that Iran’s record of violating the NPT was “indisputable.”

    Clinton is expected to highlight the sharp reversal in U.S. nuclear policy since President Barack Obama came to power last year. Obama has made both non-proliferation and disarmament priorities in his foreign policy, unlike his predecessor George W. Bush, who repudiated arms reduction pledges Washington and the four other official nuclear powers made in 2000.

    The United States, Britain, France, China and Russia — the permanent Security Council members — were allowed to keep their nuclear weapons under the NPT but pledged to launch negotiations on scrapping their arsenals. Non-nuclear weapon states complain that the five have not done enough to disarm.

    A new U.S. strategy that reduces the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. defense policy and a recent nuclear arms reduction agreement with Russia are among the examples U.S. officials hope will persuade developing countries that the United States is serious about disarmament.

    Israel, like nuclear-armed India and Pakistan, never signed the NPT and will not participate in the review conference. It neither confirms nor denies having atomic weapons, though analysts say it has a sizable nuclear arsenal.

    U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said over the weekend that more progress needs to be made in ridding the world of the more than 25,000 atomic weapons still on the planet. He also said Iran’s and North Korea’s nuclear programs were “of serious concern to global efforts to curb nuclear proliferation.”

    The last NPT review conference in 2005 was widely considered a failure. After weeks of procedural bickering led by the Bush administration, Egypt and Iran, the meeting ended with no agreement on a final declaration. NPT review conferences make decisions on the basis of consensus.

    The Obama administration is eager to avoid another failure and is working hard with Egypt, the chair of the powerful 118-nation bloc of non-aligned developing nations, to ensure this year’s conference is successful and ends with a declaration that reinvigorates the NPT, Western envoys said.

    That is one of the reasons Washington is negotiating with both Russia and Egypt to find a way to back Cairo’s call for making the Middle East an atomic-weapon-free zone, despite Israeli reluctance, Western diplomats say.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/03/AR2010050300004.html

  47. basement angel
    May 3rd, 2010 at 3:43 pm
    There’s nothing rational Wbboie. He’s a propogandist. That’s all. He doesn’t understand politics or economics. He’s language is confused and dishonest. He hedges. He lies. He misleads. That’s neither pragmatic nor informed.
    ———————————-
    Basement angel: what can I say that hasn’t already been said, except take a deep breath and relax. You are training your guns on the wrong enemy. Take all that misspent energy of yours and direct it at the right target and I will be your strongest supporter.

  48. C’mon, lil ole grape, you dished out a pretty big insult against me. Have the courage of your convictions. Spell out how I’m a “true believer” type.

    I know an awful lot of people who read this site and will not comment because of Wbboei. And these are people with lifetime in politics. They find his commentary right wing and offensive on a site dedicated to Clinton.

  49. Iran moves to challenge U.S. in Mideast: Gates

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Iran is challenging U.S. naval power in the Middle East with an array of offensive and defensive weapons, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Monday.

    “Iran is combining ballistic and cruise missiles, anti-ship missiles, mines, and swarming speedboats in order to challenge our naval power in that region,” Gates told a conference of U.S. Navy advocates outside Washington.

    Gates did not elaborate on the perceived Iranian threat.

    His remarks were part of a review of budget and shipbuilding trade-offs facing the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps, and they came the same day that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at the United Nations in New York.

    Gates said last week he was satisfied with the pace of U.S. planning to thwart Iran’s nuclear program, which the United States and other Western nations suspect is aimed at developing atomic weapons. Iran says the program is to generate electricity.

    Pentagon planners have been drawing up military options in case President Barack Obama opts to use force against Tehran. U.S. leaders repeatedly have said that would be an option of last resort if sanctions and diplomacy failed.

    Iran’s naval forces include several anti-ship coastal defense missile batteries as well as submarines, missile boat and naval aviation units, according to an unclassified version of a Pentagon report on Iranian military power sent to Congress last month.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE6423WJ20100503

  50. Wbboei,

    I think you need to think twice before you post the reactionary, rightwing crap that you frequently post. People who are genuine Clinton supporters aren’t interested in what Limbaugh and Morris have to say about a woman that they have called every name in the book. Limbaugh has called Chelsea the White House dog and Morris has called Hillary that. It’s offensive.

  51. “I know an awful lot of people who read this site and will not comment because of Wbboei. And these are people with lifetime in politics. They find his commentary right wing and offensive on a site dedicated to Clinton.”

    —————
    I’m honestly not trying to take sides here, but isn’t this site for everyone? I don’t understand the labels being attached to a number of posters here. Who cares and whose business is it whether they are right wing, left wing, purple, orange, or even polka dot?

    I thought this site was for everyone who cared about the Clintons and the democratic party/democracy in general. So why can’t those who disagree with wwoebi or anyone here post to their heart’s content?

    Again, why can’t we just agree to disagree, avoid posts we can’t respond respectfully to, and stop the name-calling?

    Okay…now I’ll go into hiding…:)

  52. ET TU, KATRINA?

    Even the NY Times is seeing parallels in Obama’s hands-off approach the the oil spill disaster with Bush’s ineptitude after Hurricane Katrina:

    nytimes.com/2010/05/01/opinion/01sat1.html

    Unanswered Questions on the Spill
    ============================

    Published: April 30, 2010

    President Obama has ordered a freeze on new offshore drilling leases as well as a “thorough review” into what is almost sure to be the worst oil spill in this country’s history — exceeding in size and environmental damage the calamitous Exxon Valdez disaster in 1989.

    There are many avenues to pursue. Here are two: the oil company’s response, and Mr. Obama’s. The company, BP, seems to have been slow to ask for help, and, on Friday, both federal and state officials accused it of not moving aggressively or swiftly enough. Yet the administration should not have waited, and should have intervened much more quickly on its own initiative.

    A White House as politically attuned as this one should have been conscious of two obvious historical lessons. One was the Exxon Valdez, where a late and lame response by both industry and the federal government all but destroyed one of the country’s richest fishing grounds and ended up costing billions of dollars. The other was President George W. Bush’s hapless response to Hurricane Katrina.

    Now we have another disaster in more or less the same neck of the woods, and it takes the administration more than a week to really get moving.

    The timetable is damning. The blowout occurred on April 20. In short order, fire broke out on the rig, taking 11 lives, the rig collapsed and oil began leaking at a rate of 40,000 gallons a day. BP tried but failed to plug the well. Even so, BP appears to have remained confident that it could handle the situation with private resources (as did the administration) until Wednesday night, when, at a hastily called news conference, the Coast Guard quintupled its estimate of the leak to 5,000 barrels, or more than 200,000 gallons a day.

    Only then did the administration move into high gear.

    In addition to a series of media events designed to convey urgency — including a Rose Garden appearance by the president — the administration ordered the Air Force to help with chemical spraying of the oil slick and the Navy to help lay down oil-resistant booms. It dispatched every cabinet officer with the remotest interest in the disaster to a command center in Louisiana and set up a second command post to manage potential coastal damage in Alabama, Mississippi and Florida.

    There are, of course, other questions to be asked. We do not know what caused the blowout or the fire, or why the valves that are supposed to shut off the oil flow in an emergency did not work.

    We do not know whether there were other steps BP — and Transocean, the rig’s owner and operator — could have taken to prevent the blowout, and what steps, including new technologies, that can be taken to prevent such accidents in the future.

    What we do know is that we now face a huge disaster whose consequences might have been minimized with swifter action.

  53. I am glad Hillary put it bluntly, so there is no further speculation. She may as well have said, “You are not going to silence me as a member of the Supremes, take your frickin’ burqua and shove it!”
    ———————————————————————–
    And I am too. It has been clear to those of us who know about Hillary that she loves the public life and the cloistered life for her holds no allure. This was a big media fabrication to begin with and if she were not riding high in the polls compared to him they would have no motive to raise the issue. They want her off the stage, and they want the Republican Party to go the way of the dinosaur, so that Obama and his minions can have a free hand in restructuring our society and looting the middle class. Just as long as they can keep their million dollar homes and summer places in the Hamptons or the Eastern Shore. This is pure class warfare at its worst. They are as contemputous of ordinary people as Obama is. Your typical big media type has a half a million dollar job and a spouse who works for a DC major law firm or lobbying group. Their approach to news reflects this in spades, and when they get invited to the White House it is just divina.

  54. Wbboei is fantastic in his analysis and opinions imho. Many of us were democrats before Obama stole the election…it has made me, along with many others, move away form the party and admittedly, I am much more conservative. I also don’t agree with Hillary on 100% of her politcs, but her lifetime of public service for her country, for women, and for human rights far outweighs any specific policy differences I currently have with her. I also try to keep in mind that she accepted the SOS position, and thus, has to go along with Obama’s agenda to a large degree.

  55. Jan,

    It’s not about labels. it’s about introducing rhetoric that is consistently at odds with Clinton’s actual positions. There are several posters here who are clearly not in sync with probably 90% of what Clinton stands for and the consistently introduce arguments that are in opposition to her positions. Now, I’m not the forum administrator and i do think that admin is brilliant. I’m still astonished at the writing at this site and the courage of it.

    When the comment threads feel hostile to people who put in hundreds of hours on Clinton’s behalf, then I’m going to take a stand just like I did in the campaign. I hate coming in here and reading comment after comment trashing the work of the State Department. Reading the corporatist Obama, who has never done anything even once in his life for ordinary people (literally) described as a “socialist” as opposed to Hillary is just crazy. Obama is a Reaganite through and through and is far, far, far to the right of either Clinton – that is, in the real world. But frequently not in the world of the threads where he becomes a metaphysical evil genius bent on socializing the US – a notion that could not possibly be more at odds with every single action he has taken as president.

    I think Wbboei needs to dial way back. Consider Clinton’s actual positions before he posts the right wing trash he is so addicted to posting.

  56. you dished out a pretty big insult against me.
    —————
    Ah,you’re kidding me!
    I’m sure you’ve been insulted far worse than that! Perhaps I should have just said you easily jump to conclusions, throw insults at people, judge them unfairly or according to the computer user sitting next to me, you’re “a noisy dork who likes to hear herself mouth off.”

    From another computer user across the room comes a message for wbboei: “Tell wonderful wbboei to give it up — she’s a hot head not worth bothering about!”

    Oops, a third voice just joined us…”Tell wobboei he’s the greatest! and tell that silly agitator to go to… ”

    Nah, that’s too silly. It’s late in the afternoon, soon time to shut up shop and we were getting sleepy here, now we’re in high gear again. Thanks for the laughs.

    WBBOEI (pronounced wubby?)– a song: I’m in love with you,wbboei, no-one else will do, wbboei what you say is true, wobbei, seems funny but it’s you — loved you from the start, wbboei, bless your open mind and heart, wbboei and so on
    Salut!

  57. That line from the rabbi is so profound. If I man not for me who will be. But if I am only for me then what good am I. The problem I have with big media is they pass the first test, but not the second. And that self interest is what lies behind so much of what goes on in journalism today. And it cannot be reconciled with the truth or the standards of ethical journalism. If I had to put a name to it, I would call it the Tim Russert school of journalism which comes perilously close to pure propaganda. When I attack the left I do not to proffer a challenge. The say they have values. They know Obama violates them. Therefore, now is the time for them to stand up and be heard. Not later when the damage is done. Now when the issue is ripe.

  58. What Olberman, Mathews and Schultz do is no better than Hannity, Beck and O’Reiley. They all lack credibility . There are very few places left to get unbiased news as it certainly is no longer available on the mainstream networks.

  59. basement angel,

    I understand that you get upset if wbboei mentions the likes of Limbaugh and Morris. I see it as nothing is completely black or white with anyone.

    I will just say this.

    As a research librarian for many years, I have often been asked to accumulate information on a hot topic based on one side only. It goes against my belief system to do so and yet I don’t always have a choice in the matter. It is like making huge decisions with only half of the information you need.

    At one time or another I think we have all cited people we have no respect for when the situation called for it. Morris is a leech and Limbaugh is not much better, but I see nothing wrong in quoting them. It’s called freedom of speech.

  60. JanH
    May 3rd, 2010 at 4:11 pm
    “I know an awful lot of people who read this site and will not comment because of Wbboei. And these are people with lifetime in politics. They find his commentary right wing and offensive on a site dedicated to Clinton.”
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&

    This site should be bigger than any one individual. Okay, admin gets a free pass on THAT one.

    Admin is the colony queen (sorry for the gender reference, but we don’t know who admin is), and we are but worker ants (hopefully) doing what is best for the colony. Ants come, ants go, but the colony must live on.

    If you don’t like someone’s viewpoint, you can ignore it, or rebut it. If you withhold your opinion, than that too is a form of expression, but unfortunately few people will pick up on “non-posts”.

  61. jbstonesfan,

    There is very little of value in Wbboei’
    s analysis. It’s mostly boiler plate right wing fantasy. Much of it is factually in error.

    What was going on about the other week? Oh yeah, Clinton “lobbying” for the State Department job. He couldn’t be more wrong about that, and he has no actual contacts to make the claim. That’s fantasy. And that’s what a lot of his writing is.

    And that’s the problem. People who actually went to work to get Clinton elected and have genuine first-hand insight about what she’s doing, and what happened, don’t feel comfortable in threads.

    Basically, it’s a choice between a right wing propogandist who lies about Clinton, or the people who actually worked their ass on her behalf. The people who are gearing up for her next campaign.

    Maybe I should just write the threads off. Maybe the threads here are simply a Free Republic out post and that is what it is. But I think that there is higher purpose that could served but that won’t happen when we have to come in here and wade through Limbaugh-esque rhetoric.

  62. basementangel, I disagree with wbboei quite often, but I’m not quite sure why you seem to have such a vendetta about him/her. We’re all adults here. We really don’t need you to cover our ears like children so we won’t hear the “wrong” things. We’re perfectly capable of deciding on our own which of his/her musings have merit, and which do not.

    Good Lord, if we all went around screeching “Propagandist! Liar!” at all whose opinions differed with ours we’d soon have no conversation at all. So you think he/she is wrong. So? So what? Why the insistence having him/her STFU? We are all perfectly capable of sorting information from various sources and coming to our own conclusions. An Information Nanny and Overseer of Correct Associations is really not necessary, but thanks for applying for the job anyway.

  63. Correction to the above.
    ————————
    That line from the rabbi is so profound. If “I am not for me then who will be? But if I am only for me then what good am I?”

    The problem I have with big media is they pass the first test, but not the second. And that selfishness is what lies behind so much of what goes on in journalism today.

    It cannot be reconciled with the truth or the standards of ethical journalism.

    If I had to put a name to it, I would call it the Tim Russert school of journalism which comes perilously close to pure propaganda.

    To be clear, when I attack the left I do so to proffer a challenge. They say they have values. They know Obama violates them. Therefore, now is the time for them to stand up and be heard. Not later when the damage is done. Now when the issue is ripe.

  64. As far as quoting right wing commentators who in the past I may have despised…I still may think Rush is a big fat wind bag.

    But if he has a valid criticism of Obama, and can make the public aware of an issue, than I am all for it.

    Apparently, most of the left wingers who could rail against George Bush’s sins all day long and cite lengthy lists of egregious policies, suddenly these active researchers have grown mute as of Jan. 20, 2009. Most of them are now just “state mouthpieces”.

    “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”. Or at least a convenient (temporary) ally.

  65. Maybe I should just write the threads off. Maybe the threads here are simply a Free Republic out post and that is what it is. But I think that there is higher purpose that could served but that won’t happen when we have to come in here and wade through Limbaugh-esque rhetoric.
    ——————
    You’re absolutely right! You should leave us stupid wingers and throw your weight around where it counts! Bye!

  66. Jan,

    Freedom of speech is a constitutional standard that is completely and totally irrelevant to a private forum such as this. Government is not allowed by the Constitution to restrict freedom of speech.

    What I’m talking about is something different. Anytime arguments are made about Clinton’s actual positions, Wbboei is in the thread moving the whole conversation away from her position and over to a Limbaugh-esque position. I’m pointing out that what he does is hostile towards Clinton.

    No one agrees with every single stand a pol takes. Heck, even pols don’t agree with every stand that they personally take. But Wbboei’s overall thrust is deeply dishonest and manipulative and moves to take the conversation from a Clinton-esque position to a Limbaugh-esque one.

  67. basement angel,

    I don’t want to see you leave. I see value in every opinion here. But we all disagree with each other at times and just move on. We don’t attack because of it, at least I try not to. There is room for both you and wbboei and anyone else who wants to post here. That’s what makes it so interesting.

  68. Basement Angel, I agree with you that Obama is a far right wing nut and the republicans love him, no matter what they say….I have thought for quiet a few months that there were quiet a few closet republicans on this blog…I think they are trying to undermine the good work Hillary has done…no matter what they did during the primary…some on here worked and went and helped the campaign…I merely sent my hard earned money that I actually did not have to give, but I did because of her message.
    It breaks my heart here to see folks who said they were Hillary supporters and now say that if she doesn’t get out of this administration they won’t vote for her, yet they know nothing of her real plans….its called trusting the person you believe in and put your time, money in.
    I do also think the republicans have sent individuals out to these blogs to infiltrate them. When I had a problem a few weeks ago as you have had…I went back thru the archives…Wbboei was one of the initial commentors here, but when the campaign really heated up…he was no where to be found on this blog…I guess he was on the trail trying to get Hillary elected…but gee you’d of thought that he could have found a computer somewhere to keep up with this blog…I dunno know, but the real Hillary supporters must stick together and not lose any more to the far lefties and the far righties… I am with you!

  69. RGB,

    How can someone who is pathological liar have a valid criticism? Rush can’t bring anything to anyone’s attention because he is solely a tool of the GOP. His opposition to Obama is not rooted in principle (because he probably agrees with most of what Obama has actually done) but in partisan allegiance.

    If you’re not supporting underlying principles, then you’re supporting labels only and that’s how we’ve gone wrong in this nation. Olbermann/Dowd are no principled than Limbaugh/Hannity. Stop listening to the pundits. They are destroying our nation.

  70. basement angel
    May 3rd, 2010 at 4:56 pm

    —————-
    But isn’t this where freedom of choice comes in. So what if anyone pushes his/their agenda here. We have the choice to read or ignore their posts and go on with our own thoughts. There are times I have agreed with your posts and others where I haven’t. Doesn’t mean I’m not interested in the content and doesn’t mean I’m going to go on the attack.

    I just think that we all have a lot to offer here, including you, and even if some of us sometimes dominate the thread, we all have minds of our own.

  71. I see I am way behind on the posts and will slip around the drama…
    —–

    Webboei

    They want her off the stage, and they want the Republican Party to go the way of the dinosaur,
    ——
    Fox was also talking about Hillary as a good choice for Supreme too, I think both parties want Hillary out of the picture because they are both afraid of her running again. She is the favorite across party lines and they both know it.

  72. Confloyd,

    Thank you. I’ve seen you posting elsewhere. I was happy to see it. 🙂

  73. Limbaugh says things that are true at times, when no one else will say them. Likewise, Michael Moore is a big fat lying self-promoting windbag, but he dared to uncover stuff during the Bush years that no one else would. When a Republican is in power, it is the Left media that will uncover lies and criticize, while the right remains silent or spins for him. When a Democrat is in power, the Left media starts uncritically cheering, while the Right begins to critique and uncover lies.

    I take them BOTH with a grain of salt, but if you want an adversarial press, you need to pay attention to the right when the left is in power, and pay attention to the left when the right is in power. THEN you sift the information judiciously, and use your own brain and make up your own mind about what’s true and what’s not.

  74. Basement Angel, He is doing the same thing to you as he did to me…making it sound as if I am and uptight woman that needs to relax and take a deep breath…this is so misognistic…only women get upset, huh??

    Of coarse I am assuming that you are a woman. He even commented that he thought I needed to get a hold of myself!!! Why is that? I did not know that I was out of line in defending my opinion that Obama is a full out and out republican…if we think that we must be female, under a lot of stress and need to calm down….WTF!

  75. basement angel,

    I’ll just say that I hope you stay and fight the good fight. And even when you disagree, I hope you will post. For me at least, I like to hear both sides of the debate and go from there.

  76. Basement Angel, yes I have been posting elsewhere because I just can’t get my mind around these republicans that are being shoved down our throats here by some of the commentors here. Admin. always says it will be hard for true Hillary supporters to do what must be done…he/she realizes the trauma involved with that. I respect admin. alot.

  77. Haim Saban’s problem with President Obama

    By Ron Kampeas · May 3, 2010

    It comes toward the end this long New Yorker profile, which otherwise focuses on how Haim Saban built up his entertainment empire. Saban, remember, was an avid backer of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s candidacy:

    According to Saban, in June, 2008, after the primary battles finally ended, Barack Obama called and asked for his help. “I said to him, Let me coördinate a meeting between you and some of the people who supported Hillary through me. We have a few things we need to clarify.” For example, Saban continued, “Obama was asked the same question Hillary was asked—‘If Iran nukes Israel, what would be your reaction?’ Hillary said, ‘We will obliterate them.’ We . . . will . . . obliterate . . . them. Four words, it’s simple to understand. Obama said only three words. He would ‘take appropriate action.’ I don’t know what that means. A rogue state that is supporting killing our men and women in Iraq; that is a supporter of Hezbollah, which killed more Americans than any other terrorist organization; that is a supporter of Hamas, which shot twelve thousand rockets at Israel—that rogue state nukes a member of the United Nations, and we’re going to ‘take appropriate action’! ” His voice grew louder. “I need to understand what that means. So I had a list of questions like that. And Chicago”—Obama campaign headquarters—“could not organize that meeting. ‘Schedule, heavy schedule.’ I was ready and willing to be helpful, but ‘helpful’ is not to write a check for two thousand three hundred dollars. It’s to raise millions, which I am fully capable of doing. But Chicago wasn’t able to deliver the meeting, so I couldn’t get on board.”

    Saban offered to fly his group of Hillary supporters to meet with Obama anywhere in the country, but he was told that it couldn’t be arranged. “Haim understands message—Obama didn’t have time for him,” a close adviser said. “After that, he met with McCain. It went that far. But, ultimately, he felt he could not abandon the Democratic Party, even though he did not like its candidate.”

    He has not spoken with Obama since he became President, Saban said, “because he has no need to speak to me—or, at least, he thinks he has no need to.” He has refused on two occasions to co-chair fund-raising dinners for the President.

    Saban called Hillary’s defeat “my biggest loss—and not only mine. I’ll leave it at that.”

    Saban remains a Democrat, remains very loyal to the Clintons, and was key to making sure she got a polite-to-warm at the AIPAC policy conference in March. Still, he flirted with McCain after his Obama frustrations, but came back to the Dems.

    One nuance that consistently gets missed when it comes to Saban-Israel profiles. Much is made of his oft repeated credo, that he does it all to secure Israel — gets involved in politics, buys media, etc.
    But what comes through in this story is that he is committed to protecting Israel through investing in the two-state solution. It’s not a strictly Israel, right-or-wrong approach: The crisis in U.S.-Israel relations that followed Biden’s trip, when Israel announced its construction plans in Eas Jerusalem, seems only to have hardened Saban’s view of Obama. “I don’t think Haim feels particularly positive about Bibi’s performance,” Saban’s close adviser said. “But he certainly isn’t happy about Obama’s.” “I’m hoping that the White House’s brilliance will surprise us all,” Saban told me. “But I believe in my heart of hearts that the chances of success are much bigger if they work with Israel rather than against it.” Saban pointed out that, in the late nineties, President Clinton had pushed Netanyahu very hard, but behind closed doors. “Bill Clinton somehow managed to be revered and adored by both the Palestinians and the Israelis,” he said. “Obama has managed to be looked at suspiciously by both. It’s not too late to fix that.”

    He pointed to news reports that the Obama Administration is considering presenting a peace plan. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that both Netanyahu and Abbas were to sign it, he continued, Netanyahu might still have to bring it to a referendum for approval. “Any deal that is pushed by the U.S. with Obama at a nine-per-cent approval rating in Israel, at the moment, will not go through,” he said. Last August, when Saban was in Washington, he met with both Hillary Clinton and Rahm Emanuel, and he argued that Obama should travel to Israel to speak to the Israeli people. That has been his continuing message. “I told friends of mine in the White House, ‘He goes to Saudi Arabia, he goes to Cairo, he doesn’t even make a stop in Jerusalem?’ If he thinks that having a Seder at the White House is going to mitigate that—no, it’s not.”

    http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2010/05/03/2394635/haim-sabans-problem-with-president-obama

  78. this site is stronger with representatives from both sides.
    I was a very conservative your for Reagan.
    Bill helped me see the other side.
    was not fond of bush(s) at all
    and obama is the fugging devil nd will burn for what he has done.

    I have no issue seeing both sides of an argument here.

    the people who post here is why I return day after day because I can see others opinions about both sides of an issue.

    mrks

  79. Like most people on this site, I spent large amounts of time and money trying to get Hillary elected. I have told you about the states I visited and the experiences I had which only strengthened the great faith I have in our girl. When they stole the nomination from her I went into a long difficult period which bordered on depression. At some point, the question I had to decide how to come out of it. It was a question of fight or flight. Fight meaning hold Obama accountable, educate others on what his master plan is–because clearly there is one, and establish a path for Hillary to run in 2012. Flight meaning walk away from politics, and move on with other aspects of life which are more rewarding. For better or for worse I chose the first path. Once that decision was made the strategy became self evident. In order for Hillary to run in 2012 the people need to know who Obama really is and what he has in mind for them. I do alot of blogging in the wee small hours when confloyd and trundown and I are awake. They come out seven or eight in a row sometimes, and I ask myself may times am I hogging the blog. I decided long ago that I was not as long as what I was saying was supportive of the objective which we on this blog share. More important however, I keep an eye on what the Republicans are doing, and where there are opportunities to leverage our goals off of theirs, yes I do use them. Often they amplify what is being said. I had a friend who was a graduate of the University of the Philippines who I worked with in a cannery in Alaska. He told me that the Chief Justice of that country gave a commencement speech in which he challenged the newly minted lawyers to go forth and find the truth and told them that they could learn the truth from liars, drunks and fools as well as well. That being the case, I fail to see why we should not quote Morris when the situation arises. At the same time, I quote many people from the left, Bob Somerby constantly. The single minded objective is to get Hillary elected and to save our country from this dictator.

  80. basement angel
    May 3rd, 2010 at 5:01 pm
    RGB,

    How can someone who is pathological liar have a valid criticism?
    &&&&&&&&&&

    So if Rush Limbaugh said that Hitler was totally evil, I would have to dismiss that out of hand???

  81. In the world of logic, an argument may be said to consist of a conclusion and its premises. Similar to essay writing, unlike in life, an argument does not mean a fight where one spars with another and wins. Rather, an argument is a technical term, a unit of attempted proof that aims to persuade. You may personally disagree with someone else’s viewpoint on a subject, but if that person makes a well constructed and persuasive argument, then you can still respect that person’s argument.

  82. Shadowfax, some seem to have difficulty in discerning the difference between:

    “John has a valid point, there.”

    and

    “I uncritically swallow John’s wisdom on all things.”

    They are not one and the same.

  83. #
    HillaryforTexas
    May 3rd, 2010 at 5:48 pm

    Shadowfax, some seem to have difficulty in discerning the difference between:

    “John has a valid point, there.”

    and

    “I uncritically swallow John’s wisdom on all things.”

    They are not one and the same.
    ———
    Yup.

    I have no trouble listening or ignoring others views and I always assume others do the same with me. 😉

  84. “I decided long ago that I was not as long as what I was saying was supportive of the objective which we on this blog share.”

    ———————–
    I think that is true of all of us. Your posts are relevant and just as welcome as I hope all of ours are.

  85. Please tell me this isn’t true.

    ————-
    MAY 3, 2010,

    U.S. Pledge Helped Bring Abbas Back to Talks

    By CHARLES LEVINSON

    JERUSALEM—The White House brought Palestinians back on board for derailed Mideast peace talks with a pledge that the U.S. would consider allowing a United Nations Security Council resolution—if one should arise—condemning Israel for building in disputed territory, according to officials briefed on the diplomacy.

    The White House’s Mideast peace envoy, George Mitchell, arrives in Israel Monday for what a senior administration official said would be the resumption, likely by Thursday, of U.S.-brokered, indirect peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

    On Saturday, the Arab League endorsed the talks for the second time in as many months, and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to get a final green light to proceed from a Palestinian policy-making body later this week. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday he welcomed the start of talks.

    Withholding a veto from a U.N. resolution critical of Israel—though there is none now before the Security Council—would be a significant reversal of decades of U.S. policy of largely unwavering support for Israel in the body.

    The U.S. has vetoed more than 40 U.N. resolutions critical of Israel since 1972—at least three of them explicit condemnations of Israeli construction activity in East Jerusalem. There is no resolution before the Security Council at this time to condemn Israel for such construction.

    “The Palestinians were given the impression by the American side that things are not going to be business as usual as far as negotiations are concerned,” a senior Palestinian official said. The no-veto pledge helped persuade the Palestinians to return to the talks.

    “This sounds very conditional,” a senior Israeli official said about reports of the pledge. “If the Palestinians think that this is another tool with which they can corner Israel, they may be in for a very gross miscalculation.”

    Earlier efforts to start what officials involved refer to as “proximity” talks—in which U.S. officials will shuttle among Jerusalem, Ramallah and Washington relaying messages between negotiating teams—have faltered.

    Mr. Abbas pulled out of the talks in early March after Israel announced fresh plans to build 1,600 new Jewish homes in the Ramat Shlomo neighborhood of East Jerusalem in early March. The building announcement came at the beginning of a visit to Israel by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, and became a major thorn in U.S.-Israel relations.

    The assurances to the Palestinians were given to Mr. Abbas by David Hale, an assistant to Mr. Mitchell, at an April 23 meeting in the West Bank city of Ramallah, said officials briefed on the diplomacy.

    Three days later, Mr. Abbas told Israeli television he was ready to resume indirect talks and would seek Arab League backing. The Arab League’s support gives the Palestinian leader political cover to proceed.

    Officials involved in the diplomacy have different interpretations of what exactly was promised in the meeting between Messrs. Hale and Abbas.

    Palestinians briefed on the meeting say Mr. Hale read from a letter in which the U.S. said it “may consider taking action against significantly provocative settlement activity including not using the veto in the Security Council.” The U.S. refused to put their assurances in writing, according to the Palestinians briefed on the meeting.

    But other officials familiar with the exchange said the U.S. threat to withhold a veto in the Security Council was limited to any further building in Ramat Shlomo.

    Mr. Netanyahu has already said publicly that Israel wouldn’t begin construction in Ramat Shlomo for at least two years, meaning the U.S. wouldn’t have to deliver on a pledge related specifically to construction there until at least 2012.

    Mr. Hale also told the Palestinians the U.S. would take punitive actions in response to provocations by the Palestinian side, according to officials familiar with the exchange.

    The U.S. made no firm commitments about what exactly would trigger such a move and stressed that withholding its veto was only one possibility of what it may do, these officials said.

    The Palestine Liberation Organization’s Executive Committee, the organ responsible for conducting negotiations with Israel, is expected to give its approval for the talks to begin by the end of the week.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704608104575219314095811270.html?mod=fox_australian

  86. Haim Saban’s problem with President Obama
    ——————-
    great article Jan. Saban is a good man.

  87. Hunt is on for missing Conn. man who bought car bomb Nissan just 2 weeks ago on Craigslist

    A Connecticut man was being sought Monday in the failed plot to blow up a bomb-laden SUV in Times Square, sources said.

    This “person of interest” bought the 1993 Nissan Pathfinder that was abandoned with the engine running – and with primitive, but potentially deadly payload in the rear – just two weeks ago, law enforcement and police sources told The Daily News.

    Investigators aren’t certain whether he is the same man who drove the rolling bomb to the Crossroads of the World, but he has not been seen by his girlfriend – and has not shown up at his home or job – since the frightening incident on Saturday night.

    Detectives from the NYPD and FBI identified the SUV owner after tracking down the registration of the previous owner, who told investigators he’d sold the vehicle.

    The mystery man met the seller through craigslist.com and paid $1,800 cash for the Pathfinder, the Daily News has learned.

    Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/05/03/2010-05-03_times_square_car_bomb_square_evidence_points_to_overseas_terrorist_involvement_w.html#ixzz0muImK4bN

  88. Jan…from Haim Saban’s article above:

    For example, Saban continued, “Obama was asked the same question Hillary was asked—‘If Iran nukes Israel, what would be your reaction?’ Hillary said, ‘We will obliterate them.’ We . . . will . . . obliterate . . . them. Four words, it’s simple to understand. Obama said only three words. He would ‘take appropriate action.’

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

    TRANSLATION: Hillary was decisive and specific with a course of ACTION

    Obama voted ‘Present’ as usual and avoided commiting to a CHOICE and
    decision…his usual MO/BS…

  89. Madam President speaks at the UN…..

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday said that Iran’s nuclear ambitions put the world at risk and called on nations to rally around U.S. efforts to finally hold Tehran to account.

    In a high-stakes speech that comes as the United States seeks to build support for new United Nations sanctions on Iran, Clinton said Tehran would not succeed in efforts to divert attention and evade responsibility.

    “Iran is the only country represented in this hall that has been found by the IAEA board of governors to be currently in non-compliance with its nuclear safeguard obligations,” Clinton said in a speech to a Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference at the United Nations.

    “It has defied the U.N. Security Council and the IAEA and placed the future of the non-proliferation regime in jeopardy, and that is why it is facing increasing isolation and pressure from the international community,” she said.

    Clinton spoke to the meeting of the 189 signatories of the 1970 NPT just hours after Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who used his speech to slam the United States for what he said were threats to use nuclear weapons on his country. The U.S. and several other Western delegations walked out.

    Clinton dismissed Ahmadinejad’s comments as the “same tired, false and sometimes wild accusations” that the world had heard before, and urged nations to focus on efforts to bring Iran to heel.

    “Iran will not succeed in its efforts to divert and divide. The United States and the great majority of the nations represented here come to this conference with a much larger agenda,” Clinton said.

    “Now is the time to build consensus, not to block it,” said Clinton, who has been driving U.S. efforts to craft tough new U.N. sanctions to punish Tehran.

    Those negotiations are now taking place among the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council — the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China — along with Germany, and the United States wants to see a new sanctions resolution as soon as possible.

    Russia and China are negotiating reluctantly, however, and several other non-permanent members of the Security Council including Brazil and Turkey are also urging that diplomacy with Tehran be given more time to revive an earlier proposed deal covering Iran’s nuclear fuel.

    Clinton said Iran had a history of “confusing, contradictory and inaccurate statements” about its nuclear program and had shown no real wish to address fears about it.

    THE NUCLEAR DEAL

    Clinton’s speech at the United Nations was in large part a sales job, hoping to persuade wavering countries that the United States is committed not only to heading off new nuclear threats, but also to expanding peaceful access to nuclear power for countries that follow international rules.

    Clinton detailed what she described as the strong U.S. record on nuclear non-proliferation and weapons control, including the recently concluded U.S.-Russia deal to cap strategic nuclear weapons and the new U.S. nuclear policy which sets new limits when and where atomic weapons might be used.

    In a further gesture toward transparency, the United States on Monday disclosed for the first time the current size of its nuclear arsenal, saying it had a total of 5,113 warheads operationally deployed, kept in active reserve and held in inactive storage.

    Clinton also said Washington would contribute $50 million to a drive to raise $100 million to support the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.N. nuclear watchdog, to promote peaceful uses of nuclear energy in developing nations.

    She said the United States would ratify nuclear weapons-free zones in Africa and the South Pacific and also support “practical measures” to establish the Middle East as a region free of weapons of mass destruction — which could pique U.S. ally Israel, presumed to have a sizable nuclear arsenal.

    Clinton later told reporters, however, that conditions for such a zone in the Middle East did not yet exist.

    She said the world stood at a crossroads, facing a future either of sharply reduced nuclear risk or of a spread of nuclear-armed states and groups, and that issues such as Iran’s nuclear program could determine which path is taken.

  90. S @ 6:29, I still remember Hillary saying that in reply to the “Iran nukes Israel” scenario. I wanted to stand up and cheer. That’s why it grieves me so to hear her spouting the boob’s wishy-washy pablum regarding Israel and Iran. She’d have gone balls-to-the-wall on their ass. She would have repaired our damaged foreign image WITHOUT apologizing and bowing and scraping and dismantling our security.

  91. This article is by Jim Rogers who was tied in with Soros at an earlier stage. He looks into his crystal ball in light of the crisis in Greece, and he predicts that the Euro will be dead in 10-15 years. That statement has certain implications. First, can the European common market survive without a common currency centrally controlled, or will protectionist sentiments preclude that from happening? Second, what does this mean for those who are working to establish a North American Union with a common currency which is the Amero? Third, what does the collapse of the Euro mean to the architects of global integration? Fourth, will the collapse of the Euro strengthen the dollar? Fifth, how will this impact Obama’s agenda?
    —————————————————————————-
    Short Winding Road For The Euro
    Wall Street Journal
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704342604575222451887532326.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_world

  92. So obama gives away America’s nuclear/defense secrets and China and Russia reluctantly step up but will probably give nothing away.

    Which means simply one thing. obama won’t stop until he has sold The U.S.A. to the terrorists/enemies of the world.

  93. OK, I will bite. I am not sure why people like basement angel come to this blog. Their energies are better spent on a BOT blog. Go, try converting them to a Hillary supporter if you have the nerve, instead of casting aspersions on this blog about one single commenter.

    This bickering reminds me of comments I once read on Corrente talking about this blog — those arrogant pricks thought commenters here were intellectually inferior and always picking on each other and having a fight. I had actually been on this blog for sometime when I read those comments on Corrente and had developed sympathies/empathies with various commenters here and kind of knew who they might be and where they came from and it hurt to read those comments on Corrente about these people here. So basement angel, get back on your high horse and fuxx off if you can’t be civil. As a concession to you, I will ask wbboei nicely not to repeat all the rightwing blog stuff here. I don’t care to read them but who am I to stop him if he wants to link them here.

  94. I have been posting elsewhere because I just can’t get my mind around these republicans that are being shoved down our throats here by some of the commentors here. Admin. always says it will be hard for true Hillary supporters to do what must be done…he/she realizes the trauma involved with that. I respect admin. alot.
    ——————————–
    I think that is it. We are at different places in this process. All of us were united behind Hillary and anxious to drive the Republicans from office because of what occurred during the Bush tenure. Then we got the nomination stolen out from under us by a candidate who represents the same people Bush did except that he is nominally a democrat.

    Some of us cannot forget what occurred under Bush and that dominates their thinking. Others are more worried about what Obama is doing to the country, and they realize that Bush is no longer president.

    I have friends who were died in the wool Bush haters and they get no disagreement on that point from me. However, when I mention something Obama has done which is far worse, their immediate response is Bush did that. My response is Bush is no longer President, this joker is, and to protect our future we must defeat him through all legitimate means.

    They acknowledge the point but do not embrace it. How do I know? Because the next time we meet and talk about it, the same thing happens. If we were not friends their response would probably be of the same tenor as Basement Angel which is to say an ad hominum attack. They cannot countenance a strategy which relies on Republican to react even in a predictable way.

    But before anyone condemns what I am trying to do, they should make some effort to understand it. In order to create the conditions for Hillary to run in 2012 the Dimocrats must suffer devastating defeats in 2010, which compel them to do soul searching and to reconsider whether Obama should run again. In that limited sense, the republicans are a de facto ally, and big media and Obama are our foes. If we succeed then the Republicans will become the enemy once again as they were before.

  95. Yes, Wbboei, I think you are hogging the blog
    —————————–
    Thank you Carol. I knew I could count on you for support.

  96. wbboei — I agree with your post. I had been a lifelong democrat until 2008. in 2009 I reregistered as an Independent, I no longer consider myself a democrat after 30+ years. I was always a pretty conservative democrat, I did vote for Ronald Reagan, but I also voted for Bill Clinton both times. To me, labels mean nothing anymore, I sure as hell am not going to vote for a democrat just because they have a “D” after their name. Those days are over.

    I will be voting all conservatives or as close as I can get this fall and the next fall, at this point, I want opposition to the shit that the fool in the WH is inflicting on America and Americans. Gridlock is the best to hope for at this point. And I will vote and support anyone who opposes that fool in the WH.

    I used to hate Hannity and Morris, but just because I can’t stand them doesn’t mean I don’t agree with them on certain points. After the shit I saw directed at Hillary from the likes of Chris Matthews, and pervert Keith O. and Randi Rhoades, their shit directed at Hillary was much much much than what Hannity ever threw at Hillary. And I cannot believe I am saying that, but I remember after Randi R. called Hillary a “white whore”, it was Hannity that said it was completely inappropiate, and I had to listen to the piece of video several times to see if what I was hearing was correct.

    The left was exponentially more disgusting towards Hillary and then Sarah. I will not be voting democrat for a very long time.

  97. So basement angel, get back on your high horse and fuxx off if you can’t be civil. As a concession to you, I will ask wbboei nicely not to repeat all the rightwing blog stuff here. I don’t care to read them but who am I to stop him if he wants to link them here.
    —————-
    pm 317: I am disappointed. I thought that you of all people would understand the strategy I am pursuing.

  98. basement angel,

    I’ve been very glad to see another unabashed leftist turn up here. For a while I was practically the only one. It’s great to see Carol posting more often too, and some others.

    I sometimes disagree with Wbboei but he’s a great friend and a wonderful resource here. A model of old school civilization.

    When certain kinds of posts seem to be ‘hogging’ the blog, imo the cure is for other people to post other things! To disagree, to take issue. But with the ideas, not the person! No personal namecalling of posters please! (You started it, and now others are calling you names etc. Pls everyone just drop that!)

    This blog is not like a conversation where one or another dominates or monologs. People post when they have time (late evenings for me and wbb) so several posts go up in a row. This is not like someone talking continuously in person. Also some of us are good at cut and paste, others sometimes post a whole article. That’s not a rude use of space. Just scroll on down.

  99. tim, I bet Bill Clinton was the only democrat you ever voted for and how many times did you vote for him??? Did you vote for Al Gore to keep the democratic headway that Bill made going? While there are many on this blog I think are true democrats and are only interested in promoting Hillary, there are some that are questionable, especially if you follow these same people on other blogs.
    I always thought the folks on this blog were really nice people, but when Wbboei insulted me, I found the true colors of everyone on this blog…and they constantly talk about elitests, Oh brother, they should look in the mirror. I think basement angel had every right to confront Bill with his republican (rino message).

  100. I used to hate Hannity and Morris, but just because I can’t stand them doesn’t mean I don’t agree with them on certain points. After the shit I saw directed at Hillary from the likes of Chris Matthews, and pervert Keith O. and Randi Rhoades, their shit directed at Hillary was much much much than what Hannity ever threw at Hillary. And I cannot believe I am saying that, but I remember after Randi R. called Hillary a “white whore”, it was Hannity that said it was completely inappropiate, and I had to listen to the piece of video several times to see if what I was hearing was correct.

    ————-
    Speaking of Hannity, I watch him too for now , for the same reasons you changed from watching CNN and MSNBC…I do have to filter out the religious bend and the drooling over hoping to win back the Whitehouse and I too notice that Hannity is pretty respectful of all women, but he sure as sh!t does not want Hillary in the Whitehouse, nor does Morris. To say they are people I respect for there political views would be a mistake, but I sure do like to hear him rail on the Fraud and point out all his mistakes. Greta is the only newswomen I actually trust, and she does not push her political stance on anyone, but does interview too many Repugs on her show for me.

  101. wow. I did not expect to be attacked for just agreeing with policy views that some but not others may not agree with. It looks like this blog is now turning into conform completely or you are a traitor. I had lurked for a couple of years mainly because I never did feel that confortable blogging much after my attempt at blogging in the past.

    I always enjoyed reading everyone’s posts, even when I did not agree with all of what they wrote. I never attacked anyone, just wrote that I agreed with certain policy views. And for those posts when I did not agree, I respected that view and just read the next one.
    Apparently now though, looks like have to completely agree with policies deemed “true democrats”

    Admin, thank you for all your posts, you have an enormous talent for all the work that you do. I will continue to read them and forward them to my family and friends.

  102. Sorry, wbboei. I did not realize there was a strategy to your posts. I don’t have a lot of time for blogs/comments these days. I appreciate what you do but I don’t have to tell you that the repubs are not on our side.

  103. tim
    May 3rd, 2010 at 8:51 pm

    ———————

    Excellent post.

    This is such a great blog. I don’t post at any other ones. What drew me here in the first place was the love and loyalty everyone had for the Clintons.

    confloyd,

    Please don’t lump everyone together. I don’t believe I’ve ever insulted you. I may not always agree, but I thought that was okay too.

    I’m tired of the recent back and forths going on that make everyone question whether they are true Hillary fans or not. No one has the right to tell any of us what we believe and what we don’t.

    I really don’t know any of you personally and yet I feel like we are friends with a common cause.

    Admin guides us so well with brilliant articles and this haven for those who don’t want to be attacked by bots, etc…

    Well, it looks as if the bots don’t have to do anything because we seem to be able to do it all by ourselves.

    I really hope that things calm down here. I love hillaryis44…lol…and as most of you already know, I hate personal attacks with a passion.

    (((HUGS))) to everyone.

  104. Breaking news on Fox…

    American Who Recently Visited Pakistan Eyed in Times Square Bomb Plot

    The person is a naturalized American citizen who was in Pakistan for several months and returned to the United States recently, investigative sources told Fox News

    The latest developments seem to support investigators’ suspicions that there was a foreign connection behind the failed car bomb attempt in New York City, senior Obama administration officials told Fox News, shedding light on the growing body of evidence.

    Sources say that evidence includes international phone calls made by the person of interest, who has not been identified publicly.

    Police also have interviewed the registered owner of the bomb-laden sports-utility vehicle. They say he is not a suspect, but he recently sold the dark-colored 1993 Nissan Pathfinder on Craigslist to another individual. It wasn’t clear whether the buyer was the person of interest now sought by authorities.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/03/officials-reportedly-foreign-plot-times-square-car-bomb/

  105. Exactly correct HillaryForTexas…I can’t understand why Hillary is allowing Obama to use her as the “bad cop” on Israel. They have only cooled it off a bit b/c of internal; polling showing they are losing some Jewish support which to dems means $$$$$$$$$$$, but their actions are still very hostile as evidenced by the UN veto denial mentioned above. This kind of behavior is not a one of an honest broker, but of a totally pro PA position.

  106. Tim, you are being far too kind in representing what Randi Rhodes said about Hillary…

    …to set the record straight, this is what that piece of work said about Hillary:

    Air America suspended Rhodes from the network on April 3, 2008 after an Air America affiliate, KKGN, event in San Francisco, California, where Rhodes said on March 22, 2008:

    “Geraldine Ferraro turned out to be the David Duke in drag … What a whore Geraldine Ferraro is! She’s such a fucking whore! I wanna see her have to stand beside her husband at one of those mandatory ‘I have sinned against you; I’m a whore’ kind of a press conference. Mr. Ferraro should have to stand next to his whore of a wife … Hillary is a big fucking whore, too. You know why she’s a big fucking whore? Because her deal is always, ‘Read the fine print, asshole!'”

    When a video of the event was made public the following week, Air America suspended her for “inappropriate comments”. The event was billed as “An Evening with Randi Rhodes” and promoted on KKGN’s website.[6]

    Geraldine Ferraro called for the termination of Rhodes when the personal attacks directed towards her and Clinton began circulating through the media

  107. friend, I am certainly no economist…but, isn’t china ‘our bank’, ‘our propper-up’ kind of our ‘last resort’ and ‘daddy’, so to speak??? this cannot be good for ‘us’

    bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aMbfBKW.uKn4

    China May ‘Crash’ in Next 9 to 12 Months, Faber Says (Update3)
    By Shiyin Chen and Haslinda Amin

    May 3 (Bloomberg) — Investor Marc Faber said China’s economy will slow and possibly “crash” within a year as declines in stock and commodity prices signal the nation’s property bubble is set to burst.

    The Shanghai Composite Index has failed to regain its 2009 high while industrial commodities and shares of Australian resource exporters are acting “heavy,” Faber said. The opening of the World Expo in Shanghai last week is “not a particularly good omen,” he said, citing a property bust and depression that followed the 1873 World Exhibition in Vienna.

    “The market is telling you that something is not quite right,” Faber, the publisher of the Gloom, Boom & Doom report, said in a Bloomberg Television interview in Hong Kong today. “The Chinese economy is going to slow down regardless. It is more likely that we will even have a crash sometime in the next nine to 12 months.”

    An index tracking Chinese stocks traded in Hong Kong dropped 1.8 percent today, the most in two weeks, after the central bank raised reserve requirements for the third time this year. The Shanghai Composite has slumped 12 percent this year, Asia’s worst performer, as policy makers seek to rein in a lending boom that’s spurred record gains in property prices. China’s markets are shut for a holiday today.

    Copper touched a seven-week low and BHP Billiton Ltd., the world’s biggest mining company, fell the most since February on concern spending in the world’s third-largest economy will slow and after Australia boosted taxes on commodities producers. Rio Tinto Ltd., the third-largest, slid as much as 6 percent.

    Chanos, Rogoff

    Faber joins hedge fund manager Jim Chanos and Harvard University’s Kenneth Rogoff in warning of a crash in China.

    China is “on a treadmill to hell” because it’s hooked on property development for driving growth, Chanos said in an interview last month. As much as 60 percent of the country’s gross domestic product relies on construction, he said. Rogoff said in February a debt-fueled bubble in China may trigger a regional recession within a decade.

    The government has banned loans for third homes and raised mortgage rates and down-payment requirements for second-home purchases. Prices rose 11.7 percent across 70 cities in March from a year earlier, the most since data began in 2005.

    The government has stopped short of raising interest rates to contain property prices. Within an hour of the central bank announcement on reserve ratios, Finance Minister Xie Xuren said that officials remained committed to expansionary policies to cement the nation’s recovery.

    Stocks ‘Fully Priced’

    The nation’s economy grew 11.9 percent in the first quarter, the fastest pace in almost three years. The government projects gross domestic product growth for the year of about 8 percent.

    The clampdown on property speculation may prompt investors to turn to the nation’s stock market, Faber said. Still, shares are “fully priced” and Chinese investors may instead become “big buyers” of gold, he said.

    BlackRock Inc. is among money managers reducing their holdings on Chinese stocks on expectations that economic growth has peaked. The BlackRock Emerging Markets Fund has widened its “underweight” position for China versus the MSCI Emerging Markets Index to about 7.5 percent from 4.6 percent at the end of March, the fund’s London-based co-manager Dan Tubbs said.

    Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd., China Construction Bank Corp. and Bank of China Ltd, the nation’s three largest banks, are trading near their lowest valuations on record as rising profits are eclipsed by concern bad loans will increase.

    Local Governments

    Citigroup Inc. warned in March that in a “worst case scenario,” the non-performing loans of local-government investment vehicles, used to channel money to stimulus projects, could swell to 2.4 trillion yuan by 2011.

    Housing prices nationwide may fall as much as 20 percent in the second half of the year on government measures to curb speculation, BNP Paribas said April 23. Under a stress test conducted by the Shanghai branch of the China Banking Regulatory Commission in February, local banks’ ratio of delinquent mortgages would triple should home prices in the country’s commercial center decline 10 percent.

    Shanghai is projecting as many as 70 million visitors to the $44 billion World Expo, more than 10 times the number who traveled to the 2008 Beijing Olympics. More than 433,000 people visited the 5.3 square-kilometer (3.3 square-mile) park on its first weekend.

    To contact the reporter on this story: Shiyin Chen in Singapore at schen37@bloomberg.net

    Last Updated: May 3, 2010 01:42 EDT

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

    hmmm…any financial wizards here care to comment and enlighten the rest of us…

  108. I do also think the republicans have sent individuals out to these blogs to infiltrate them. When I had a problem a few weeks ago as you have had…I went back thru the archives…Wbboei was one of the initial commentors here, but when the campaign really heated up…he was no where to be found on this blog…I guess he was on the trail trying to get Hillary elected…but gee you’d of thought that he could have found a computer somewhere to keep up with this blog…I dunno know, but the real Hillary supporters must stick together and not lose any more to the far lefties and the far righties… I am with you!
    ————————————–
    Connie: my departure from the Republican Party is a matter of record. I have been open about it here from time immemorial. If I were a Republican plant do you really believe that I would tell the world about that when I could just as easily keep it secret? The thing it does do is give me a set of insights I would not have if I had spent all my time in one party.

    Your detective skills are second to none. You have gone back in the archives and discovered that there was a break in my posting during the campaign. You find that suspicious. You go on to say that you did not campaign yourself. Well if you had done so, then you would understand why that happened. I will give you a day in the life of a campaigner. And then you can go back to the archives and correlate this information with the missing dates. Sort of like Michael Ishikoff of Newsweek did to Bill and Hillary.

    I was asked to participate in the early campaigns but had pneumonia so I could not do so. I made phone calls but even that was a problem because of an incessant cough. I did participate in a number of donor briefings and blogged here.

    When I was well I went to Laredo. I spent a week there. I worked as an attorney for Hillary and as a campaigner. I worked for the District Director who was a former writer for the Boston Globe. We did not canvass in Laredo, there was not enough population density. I planted signs, stood with Hillary signs at street corners, arranged a town meeting for Bill Clinton and tried to reach out for Dolores Huerta because of the large Hispanic population. I made hundreds of GOTV phone calls, instructed people on the Texas 2 step and communicated with the State Campaign Headquarters in Austin. We dealt with some violence by bots at the one of our precincts and I helped settle the controversy. Confloyd, these werr 12 to 15 hour days. No time to blog, and no lap top. We won the primary 52 to 48, but caucus irregularities, theft of delegates and bad decisions by Boyd Richtie gave more delegates to Obama.

    From there I went to Manaca in Western Pennslvania. I worked for a young district Director who was very sharp. The son of San Francisco Judge and I canvassed the neighborhoods five days straight and did our gotv routine. Those events ran sun up to sun down. We set up an event for Bill Clinton and the former governor of Iowa. Mid way through the week we were sent to a beautiful town called Kitani to open a district office and recruited locals to canvass for Hillary. We participated in the wrap up calls at the end of the evening. We won that state by 10 points and we all got drunk that night to celebrate.

    From there I went to Kokomo Indiana. The Hillary headquarters were located directly across the street from the historic courthouse where Harry Truman announced his candidacy and where RFK stopped on his campaign. We were assigned to a local judge, and our district director was a young woman from Virginia Tech who now works for Planned Parenthood in Iowa. By then I was an experience canvasser so I trained locals how to canvass for Hillary. I canvassed for five straight days morning until night and I opened a campaign office 50 miles to the north. I also manned some of he precincts and reported back to national Hillary headquarters on the results. Then we congregated in a Bar and watched the mayor of Gary come up with more absentee ballots than at any time in history and more votes than the population, similar infractions in Fort Wayne and South Bend, and I learned later that Carville told Hillary you had better get down there and make a speech because they are stealing this election out from under you. Out internals projected a 10% victory and we won by only 2%. That was the direct result of Obama cheating.

    From there I went to Charleston West Virginia. I worked with several a young lady who was a hard campaigner. We worked the phones from morning until night, set up an event for Hillary in a neighboring town where she had the audience spell bound. We did no canvassing, but did a lot of sign holding at busy intersections. I spoke to Hillary at the Flower Garden in Charleston the afternoon of the vote and continued to hold up signs until the polls closed. I gave interviews to a local newspaper and to the Baltimore Sun at the victory party where we smoked Obama by a factor of 70% to 26%. I tried to get the Governor of that State to make good on his promise to endorse the victor but he refused to do so. By then the fix was in.

    I was asked to go into Oregon and South Dakota by Hillary people I worked for in the past. I could not. So what I did do was man the phones for two days prior to each event, and I resumed blogging at that time. But when you are on the campaign trail, you have more pressing matters to attend to than to blog. When I had an opportunity to do so later I reported these events here on this blog so everyone could see what it was like on the front lines. I trust this is sufficient to dispel your doubts as to why I disappeared in the heat of the campaign. I trust you have the common sense to realize that these are not the kinds of things a Republican plant would do. They are the actions of a strong Hillary supporter.

  109. huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/03/rahm-working-with-fed-to_n_561505.html

    The White House, Federal Reserve and Wall Street lobbyists are kicking up their opposition to an amendment to audit the Fed as a Senate vote approaches, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the lead sponsor of the measure, said on Monday.

    Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), who is shepherding the bill through the Senate, told Sanders Monday afternoon that “there’s a shot we’ll be up tomorrow,” Sanders told HuffPost.

    In the spring of 2009, Sanders brought a similar amendment to the Senate floor and won 59 votes. Eight senators who voted against it then are now cosponsors of his current measure.

    “I think momentum is with us. But I’ve gotta tell you, that on this amendment, you’re taking on all of Wall Street, you’re taking on the Fed, obviously, and unfortunately you seem to be taking on the White House, as well. And that’s a tough group to beat,” said Sanders.

    He’s been trading calls, he said, with Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff.

    Earlier on Monday, HuffPost reported that former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan wanted dissent kept secret so that people outside the Fed wouldn’t involve themselves in their debates.

    “We run the risk, by laying out the pros and cons of a particular argument, of inducing people to join in on the debate, and in this regard it is possible to lose control of a process that only we fully understand,” Greenspan said, according to the transcripts of a March 2004 meeting. “I’m a little concerned about other people getting into the debate when they know far less than we do.”

    Story continues below

    also includes who in congress is voting for and against…

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

    there is an interesting comment following this article…perhaps admin can shine more light

    leonardfoo 0 minute ago (10:07 PM) 8 Fans
    Wow, nobody understands why obama and rahmbo dont want transparency on anything, like the fraud HC ramming. So, here are three things you need to google, see the crooks involved which will upset you, and the connect the dots and you will be horrified:

    Crime Inc.
    Chicago Climate Exchange
    Emerald Cities ( Joel Rogers )

    This has been going on full tilt since obama took office. If you love our country, you will act and speak on this. If you dont, then continue too be lied too and stay as a drone…

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

    and the usual MSM blackout…no dots or questions raised

  110. Another reason Wbboei sometimes went without posting was that he was working on big research projects about the caucus irregularities etc. Some of us did beta reading for him by email during those periods.

    It’s ridiculous that he should have to defend himself for attendance breaks!

    Please get back to your usual good socialistic posting! 😉

  111. wbboei,

    Next you’ll be asked to swear on your first born child. None of us need to justify where we are.

    Can we just please stop playing kangaroo court? Do we need to regress to high school tactics.

    wwoebi, I’m sorry you felt you had to give us a play by play of day to day activities that should be personal and confidential in your life.

  112. my two cents…regarding the discussion that is going on here about who should say what and who is who, etc…

    …one of the things that really turned me off to the Democratic party and the so called Left or Progressives starting during the primary and right up to this moment…is for all their protesting about ‘civil rights’ bla, bla, bla…the only opinion they care about is their own ‘selective’ opinions…and if you are not with them, then, as we have seen, they set out to demonize, destroy, intimadate and shut you up…and on top of all of that, as we found out, they are so damn manipulative that they will actually outright deny your vote – Michigan and Florida – or rig the system with those fraudulant caucuses, where your vote is watered down to mean nothing…

    …so i stand behind giving people the opportunity to express themselves and if we do not agree then either we agree to disagree or explore the issue in more depth…I do not believe in shutting people down or silencing them…that is what the left does and I think as Tim as been clearly stating and I agree with…that was a real ‘eye opener’ regarding the ‘party’ i admired and belonged to…

    party loyalty is a waste of time if it is based on lies…

  113. Whether or not we agree that some Republican commentator’s point is a good one, still it’s useful to see what the Republicans are saying — without having to visit their sites.

    Same for KOS etc. Or even the NYT. 😉

  114. Sadly, instead of an oasis of information and discussion lately there have been personal attacks posted. These are bad habits imported from past experiences on sites such as DailyKooks. Some steam needs to occasionally be let out and we are a passionate bunch otherwise we would not be here, but let’s keep the discussions civil.

    Commenters here are pretty much free to post just about any information they want to discuss for whatever reason. Any topic can be discussed with maturity and intelligence without falling into nuthood. Some posters, such as JanH and MoonOnPluto, choose to post dozens of news articles and we certainly appreciate reading all of them and would never think there is such a thing as too much. Information is our life blood here. Some days we are able to garner all the major and less major news happening in the world without ever having to leave the website and that is something we greatly appreciate.

    Some posters, such as Wbboei, post interpretations on the news of the day along with news articles. We also appreciate those interpretations and perspectives. Such comments should be appreciated or ignored, or even contradicted without having to resort to personal attacks or questions about the motives of the commenter.

    If any of us wants to be personally attacked for posting a comment or a perspective we could post at DailyKooks type sites and satiate our appetite for abuse.

    During the Massachusetts Brown v. Coakley election some posters such as TurndownObama had a difficult time with our comments on that election. Some like JBStonesFan are increasingly agitated by Hillary Clinton and some of her statements on the Middle East situation. Some here are for drill, baby, drill and some reject increased oil drilling. Some are for heightened rights for immigrants, legal or “illegal, and some would not mind every “illegal” sent back to their home country. We are not all going to agree all the time with every article we post or every comment expressed. The issues are complex and we each have a history and experiences we bring to bear on these issues. But, these issues can be discussed with respect for those of opposing views.

    Let’s try to keep this a clean, Pink, oasis free of personal attacks. The best way to counter free speech you disagree with is free speech full of facts and links to the facts and an explanation of experiences which have shaped your views.

    In the emails we get many of you have acquired a fan base of readers who don’t post comments but who appreciate representation of their views in the comments. Your views and comments are appreciated by these readers and us. Let’s try to keep the discussions civil and convince with facts and understanding.

  115. tim, I dont believe you were posting here when Wbboei came down on me and got the whole blog to practical call me an ignorant redneck…so you really did not need to chime in…everyone seems to start pecking the chicken that Wbboei decides he sick of on this blog.

    Wbboei, In all our conversation in the wee hours of the morning, and in all the times I researched materials for you for your writing did you ever discuss with me what you really did for the campaign. This is all news to me, and since you did this you’ ve decided to come out with all this information now to make me and basement angel to look bad…afterall I JUST gave my hard earned money…you did all these magnificant things for Hillary…thats great…but most of her 18 million supporters were like me who sent their hard earned money. Maybe to you thats not a lot but to someone who is poor its a lot…so pardon me again if I don’t come up to your standards, education, and station in life…
    Tim, I was called everything but a white person on this blog by just about everyone that blogs here…you did what they all do…you chimed to to save the glory boy Wbboei….whatever his STRATEGY is here…I am not sure of…time will tell…but I did not mean to attack you.

  116. A bit of science news which is pertinent today: 🙂

    http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/the-talents-of-a-middle-aged-brain/?src=me&ref=general

    After we hit 40, many of us begin to worry about our aging brains. Will we spend our middle years searching for car keys and forgetting names?

    The new book “The Secret Life of the Grown-Up Brain: The Surprising Talents of the Middle-Aged Mind,” by Barbara Strauch, has the answers, and the news is surprisingly upbeat. Sure, brains can get forgetful as they get old, but they can also get better with age, reports Ms. Strauch, who is also the health editor at The New York Times. Ms. Strauch, who previously tackled teenage brains in her book “The Primal Teen,” spoke with me this week about aging brains and the people who have them. Here’s our conversation: [snip]

    Q. Is there anything you can do to keep your brain healthy and improve the deficits, like memory problems?

    A.There’s a lot of hype in this field in terms of brain improvement. I did set out to find out what actually works and what we know. What we do with our bodies has a huge impact on our brains. Our brains are more like our hearts in that everything you do for your heart is thought to be equally as good or better for your brain. Exercise is the best studied thing you can do to your brain. It increases brain volume, produces new baby brain cells in grownup brains. Even when our muscles contract, it produces growth chemicals. Using your body can help your brain.

    Q. What about activities like learning to play an instrument or learning a foreign language?

    A. The studies on this are slim. We’ve all been told to do crossword puzzles. Learning a foreign language, walking a different way to work, all that is an effort to make the brain work hard. And it’s true we need to make our brains work hard. One of the most intriguing findings is that if you talk to people who disagree with you, that helps your brain wake up and refine your arguments and shake up the cognitive egg, which is what you want to do.

    Q. Do social connections and relationships make a difference in how the brain ages?

    A. There is a whole bunch of science about being social and how cognitive function seems to be better if you are social. There is a fascinating study in Miami where they studied people who lived in apartments. Those who had balconies where they could see their neighbors actually aged better cognitively than others. There are a whole bunch of studies like that. People who volunteer and help kids seem to age better and help their brains. We forget how difficult it is to meet, greet and deal with another human being. It’s hard on our brains and good for them.

  117. Admin.–I was just reading these comments and I have one thing to say. STOP FIGHTING !!

    There, I feel better. Here’s what I think the problem is: We were all democrats at one time (some liberal and some more conservative) and we usually believed what they told us. After the primaries, we no longer blindly believed the democratic party and that was probably a good thing. Even I sometimes listen to FOX and I am a liberal. I realized after the primaries that there is some truth and untruth on both sides. However, I can filter some news sources because I know their bias. We are adults and we are intelligent, so we can be trusted to filter out bias.

  118. wbboei
    Wow, my hat is off to you for all the hard work you did for Hillary.
    You mentioned the caucus fraud, was Hillary aware of all the caucus fraud that Lynette Long posted on her website? I read that Hillary had copies of all the reports, is that true as far as you know? Did she ever talk about feeling betrayed by her party or did she keep those feeling private?

  119. I sure appreciate reading what people call important news posting. right or left doesn’t matter. what matters is they usually post things that I may have missed since I no longer read politics 2-3 hours a day. the frauds stolen primary cured me of that.

    this is one of the only sites I know of where the comment section has a depth to it that still surprises me every so often.

  120. Kc, what you describe is a large part of the difficult situation we are all in. It’s sort of a political anomie.

    It is an interesting situation if you put distance from the emotional toll it exacts. For instance, we believe in government and generally would want a government solution/involvement when things go wrong. We would also oppose Republican ideas which want to keep the government out of things. But…. with Obama in charge of the government we do now appreciate the Republican/conservative critiques much more than we ever did. We don’t trust Obama and therefore we understand that the solutions we once would have supported we cannot support because (a) Obama is not ready on day 1 or ever; (b) we simply don’t trust him. Experience is teaching us and we are allowing experience to teach us.

    The conservative critique of government resonates now as it never did before. When once we would have read “liberal” news sources to help us form our opinions and to get the facts we now do not trust those sources either. So we are at a point where we don’t agree with conservatives but we find our fellow liberals utterly corrupt. It finds us placed in an odd position.

    Another example is that once we would have been at the barricades fighting against the evil “racists” on issues such as immigration. But because we experienced the “racist” charge ourselves we just don’t believe the “racist” shout any more. On issue after issue, we are having to reevaluate because of the dishonesty we have experienced/witnessed from those on “our” side. It’s an odd situation.

    We wrote about all this at some length in January: “Tough Times Ahead For Hillary Clinton Supporters.

    http://www.hillaryis44.org/2010/01/26/tough-times-ahead-for-hillary-clinton-supporters/

    We wrote then:

    There will be tough times ahead for Hillary supporters because we will have to, once again, do what is right. We’ll have to choose sides that are as confused as Borgia Italy. We’ll have to choose sides and strategies to resurrect the Democratic Party and to benefit the nation. We’ll have to choose sides with cold, clear logic, not red flag emotion.

  121. wbboei,

    Next you’ll be asked to swear on your first born child. None of us need to justify where we are.

    Can we just please stop playing kangaroo court? Do we need to regress to high school tactics.

    wwoebi, I’m sorry you felt you had to give us a play by play of day to day activities that should be personal and confidential in your life.
    —————————
    Thank you Jan. But I am glad to do it because campaigning for Hillary was one of the high points in my life and I would do it again if I was asked to. I have said it before, and I have written in my book on leadership that she is one of the three greatest leaders that I have seen in my lifetime. I agree with Chelsie that while Bill was a great president Hillary would have been, and by the grace of God will prove to be an even greater one–when this country most needs it.

    The last thing I would say on the subject, hopefully for the benefit of all concerned is that politics is the art of the possible. To suggest as some have that it is disloyal to Hillary to speak ill of Obamacare because she favored universal insurance and said she was thrilled that it passed is to miss the nuance altogether. Hillary never supported a health care system run by the insurance companies or back room deals with them. Hillary began by advocating universal health care up front and by the middle of her campaign she said at some point during her first term. She could see the economic problem looming and she made provision for it. And after the crash, Hillary would have proceeded incrementally on that issue. That is political reality and Hillary is a realist. Great leaders are that way. And to point that out is not a lie, it is not propaganda, it is the way things work if we are to move the ball forward. As things now stand, Obama has forced a bad bill through congress that will cost us alot of money and create many unintended consequences. And now after all the bows and curtain calls he is talking about putting it on the table for debt reduction talks. This is not wise governance. It is cheap partisan politics which hurts everyone.

  122. Admin-

    We’ll have to choose sides with cold, clear logic, not red flag emotion.
    ———
    I admire your calm and wisdom.

    Yes, what you wrote is so true and yet, most of us are still feeling like fish out water, party-less and still angry over what happened to Hillary and our party, and one terrible policy pushed on us after another by the fraud. Some are lucky in a way, they found a home under the Republican tent with Sarah, the rest of us…don’t feel comfortable in that tent. I feel perfectly okay using Republican’s to scrub out the infected Democrats, but worried that we might be left with the Republican’s running the country again if we help them too much.
    I hate Hillary supporters to take their frustrations out on one another, since most of us don’t have a party right now and need to rely on each other to weather the storm.
    Attacks seem to always go back to the same reasoning, who is a ‘real’ democrat, who is someone that is only infiltrating others. I say, after all this time, most of us are pretty wise to political hoodwinking…at least I hope we are by now.

  123. Jan- when Terry McAuiffe arrived at our campaign office he asked me whether we would win the state. I told him absolutely, and crossed my fingers that I was right. I cannot tell you how relieved I was when we won by over 40 points–like the song says almost heaven West Virginia etc. Also, I met Ted Danson and Mary Steamburgen who are two of the most engaging and wonderful people I have met. They wanted to thank all of us for the work we had done for Hillary, and we felt the same way about them.

  124. “We forget how difficult it is to meet, greet and deal with another human being. It’s hard on our brains and good for them.”

    Haha.. saved by the admin! “People skills” are the hardest. I spent a sleepless night recently about how to fire an incompetent GRA who I knew needed the money but it is not charity (can we fire Obama for incompetence?). If anybody cares, I am reading this book: “Emotional Intelligence and Social Intelligence” by Daniel Goleman.

  125. admin @ 12:33, I have always been a Liberal, and am not now a conservative, but I feel much the same way.

    I will always be for, in some ways, more govt intervention than my conservative friends are. But my experiences over the last 2 years have very much tempered (though not eliminated) my enthusiasm for govt solutions.

    I still very much believe that govt can be good and effective at helping solve some big problems, but I am MUCH less likely than before to be uncritical of the actual implementation. Just because something purports to do a thing I find worthy (like providing healthcare) does not mean that I am comfortable handing govt a blank check. I am all too aware now of how even good things are used as cover to merely expand govt’s power and control. I am more likely now to look at legislation and ask, “does this provide protection from abuses and power games of the bureaucracy?” Whereas before I was only really looking for protection from abuses of the private sector. Now I am wary and questioning of both.

    I have come to believe that BOTH the captains of industry AND the govt can be a boot on the neck of the people, and BOTH need to be watched like a hawk and given hard limits. Legislation needs to spell out specifically and narrowly what the People are allowing govt to do – no more and no less.

    So I guess one could argue that I have become “more conservative”, but I really don’t feel that my ideals have changed, merely my perspective. What has changed is that I see that the dangers to our freedom and our well-being can come from either direction. From unfettered capitalism, or from an overly powerful and intrusive State. I have learned that BOTH need to be kept on a leash by We the People, because BOTH will abuse power that we just blindly hand them, unless we spell out very clearly what they can and cannot do.

    Govt is not The Enemy, but neither is it entirely benign, not even when trying to achieve good ends. And I think that many of the Teapartiers are using “socialism” as a catch-all word for that sense of govt overstepping its bounds, and using real needs as a vehicle to grab more power than the task at hand really warrants. They may be using the word erroneously, but I do not mock them for it, because their sense of danger is justified, however they mis-label it.

  126. You mentioned the caucus fraud, was Hillary aware of all the caucus fraud that Lynette Long posted on her website? I read that Hillary had copies of all the reports, is that true as far as you know? Did she ever talk about feeling betrayed by her party or did she keep those feeling private?
    ————————————
    Absolutely. The campaign attorney wrote a letter to the DNC on that subject. This was not something we wanted to make public at the time, but to resolve it internally. It was to be used to convince super delegates to support Hillary at the convention. That effort was preempted by a number of factors including the untimely death of two leaders who were prepared to force the issue at the Convention. At the Convention, bots tried to bribe Hillary supporters and a complaint was filed with the Secretary of State of California. Some Hillary delegates locked themselves in their rooms. A straw vote was taken from their rooms and Hillary was actually leading. So what Pelosi did was contract the Obama supporters only, rushed them to the floor and started the vote without the Hillary contingent present. State delegations that supported Hillary were threatened with loss of funding if they did not support Obama–Arkansas for example. And black politicians who supported Hillary were threatened with being primaried. Pelosi forced Congressional superdelegates who had supported Hillary to sign a pledge that they would not. And while all this was going on I was sending 3 sets of letters to undecided and Hillary supporters and making phone calls to them. If Connie wants to go back in the archives she will discover I was MIA on this blog at that time as well.

  127. Our favorite is Vanessa (a great actress who has strong political views we disagree with, but what an actress) and of course Sir Michael Redgrave.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8658484.stm

    Film and stage star Lynn Redgrave has died of breast cancer at the age of 67.

    “Our beloved mother Lynn Rachel passed away peacefully after a seven-year journey with breast cancer,” her children said on Monday.

    Her son Ben and daughters Pema and Annabel were with her when she died in Connecticut on Sunday, Redgrave’s publicist Rick Miramontez said.

    A member of the Redgrave acting dynasty, she is the third member of her family to die in the past year.

    She was first treated for breast cancer in 2003.

    “She lived, loved and worked harder than ever before. The endless memories she created as a mother, grandmother, writer, actor and friend will sustain us for the rest of our lives,” her children’s statement read.

    Vanessa was the one expected to be the great actress. It was always, ‘Corin’s the brain, Vanessa the shining star, oh, and then there’s Lynn’

    Redgrave’s older brother Corin died last month and her niece Natasha Richardson died from head injuries following a skiing accident just over a year ago.

    Redgrave spoke at the funeral of her brother, recalling that he had taught her how to climb trees without telling her how to get back down again.

    The actress was nominated for two Oscars – once in 1967 for best actress in Georgy Girl and again in 1999 for best supporting actress in Gods and Monsters.

    She was the third child of actors Sir Michael Redgrave and Rachel Kempson – her sister is Vanessa Redgrave.

    “Vanessa was the one expected to be the great actress,” Lynn Redgrave told the Associated Press in 1999.

    “It was always, ‘Corin’s the brain, Vanessa the shining star, oh, and then there’s Lynn.”‘

    Redgrave was awarded an OBE for her services to drama in 2002.

    Lynn Redgrave was nominated for a BAFTA Award for her role in the movie Shine

    Her stage credits include her one-woman play Shakespeare For My Father, Mrs Warren’s Profession and The Constant Wife, which all received Tony nominations.

    She has recently appeared in TV shows including Ugly Betty, Law & Order and Desperate Housewives.

    In 2004, she released a book with her daughter Annabel Clark about her fight against cancer, titled A Mother and Daughter’s Recovery from Breast Cancer.

    Tributes have been paid to the actress.

    Director Michael Winner, who cast Redgrave in one of her first movies, Shoot To Kill, played tribute to a “wonderful person” and a “phenomenal actress, [who] could do comedy, tragedy – anything really – with absolute ease”.

    Sir Michael Parkinson said Redgrave was “maybe the jolliest and most likeable of all the family”.

    “She was a good actress, but being a Redgrave I suppose she couldn’t help it – it’s in their blood, in their marrow. She had a great comedic talent,” he said.

    Redgrave is survived by her children, six grandchildren, her sister Vanessa and four nieces and nephews.

  128. delurking for a moment..

    I have been reading Hillary is 44 off and on since early 2008 when I left Daily Kos and later MyDD in disappointment.

    I find the analysis and discussion from various folks interesting. I have found wbboei to be especially interesting and insightful.

  129. wbboei

    I know what you are saying is true, I was in Denver with a large group of Hillary supporters and the delegates were fighting to find each other (the DNC refused to give them phone numbers or emails of other democratic delegates) and try to stand in solidarity for Hillary. Some delegates that wanted to vote for Hillary were chased down the hall ways of the hotels, being threatened if they didn’t vote for the fraud.

    I know some Calif delegates were not told when the roll call was going to go down on the floor, and couldn’t make it to Denver in time.

    I feel so badly that Hillary knows how her party stabbed her in the back.
    I’m glad that she had people around her to support her in those terrible days.

  130. They arrested the Times Square bombing suspect just now. He was at JFK trying to leave the country.

  131. Breaking: NBC: Suspect arrested in NYC bomb attempt
    Man is a Connecticut resident who bought the SUV at center of probe

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36892505/ns/us_news-security/

    NEW YORK – Authorities arrested a suspect in the attempted weekend car bombing in Times Square, NBC News’ justice correspondent Pete Williams reported early Tuesday morning.

    A U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent, Shahzad Faisal, was trying to leave the country Monday night at John F Kennedy International Airport when he was picked up by Customs and Border Protection agents, Williams reported.

    Earlier, an official told The Associated Press that the potential suspect recently traveled to Pakistan. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the case was at a sensitive stage.

  132. Pelosi forced Congressional superdelegates who had supported Hillary to sign a pledge that they would not. And while all this was going on I was sending 3 sets of letters to undecided and Hillary supporters and making phone calls to them
    ———–
    I and many PUMAs on another blog were writing, emailing and calling superdelegates and delegates too, for months before the convention. We went to Denver thinking there was real hope, I talked to delegates I met on the street until I was blue in the face and all the while Pelosi was doing her evil deeds behind the scenes.

  133. Wbboei, In all our conversation in the wee hours of the morning, and in all the times I researched materials for you for your writing did you ever discuss with me what you really did for the campaign. This is all news to me, and since you did this you’ ve decided to come out with all this information now to make me and basement angel to look bad…afterall I JUST gave my hard earned money
    ————————-
    I think I did Connie, but not in this amount of detail. I am certain I mentioned what some of the things that occurred in Texas and that I campaigned in other states as well.

    When you and I started talking off line we were beyond that point and we were collaborating with Mrs. Smith on the expose on Obama’s godfather Soros and others. You did a tremendous job of research and I cannot thank you enough for that.

    The reason I chose to recount my efforts on behalf of Hillary was not to make people look bad but to defend myself against charges that I am a “liar”, a “propagandist” and a “Republican infiltrator”.

    Since those allegations did not blow over and others seemed to climb on board, I decided that I needed to set the record straight. I regard all of you as my friends and I am reasonably certain we can move beyond all this, but it had to play out. Otherwise these suspicions would only continue.

    I must stop now or Carol, who I also like, will accuse me of hogging the blog–or blogging the hog–whichever.

  134. Please, something smells about all these failed terrorists attempts…they are so convenient for the fraud at this point with the oil spill, Goldman Sachs possible indictment, Rev. Manning’s trial, his affairs, the unrest in Arizona, the tea parties, the anti tea parties….please its all sooo made up…he doesn’t want us to know what he is really doing.

    Beck is also helping him…and so is Fox…they are on the Alinsky payroll keeping everyone uptight and nervous…its all part of the plan by the globalists!

    I agree with Larry, this was not anything to worry about…they did not even open the valves onthe propane tanks….Axelrod is working overtime keeping us all looking the other way while they rob us.

  135. #
    HillaryforTexas
    May 4th, 2010 at 1:26 am

    They arrested the Times Square bombing suspect just now. He was at JFK trying to leave the country.
    #
    pm317
    ——————
    Wow…………….I bet there are more people connected to this plan and I hope this killer sings like a bird to the Feds.

  136. Wbboei, I think your right it had to come to a head…I think we can all get along…its over!

  137. Thanks HillaryForTexas and Pm317 for the quick posts on the arrest. We tried googling his name after you posted and it’s already a zoo of posts. Shahzad has hit the big time.

  138. I registered as a Democrat as a teenager in NJ back in 1980. I voted on every presidential election for the Democrat. As for local elections, I may have skipped one election due to not being able to get to my polling location before it closed. All those votes were for Democrats, too. I couldn’t stand Ronald Reagan, but now I have come to respect him more recently. I voted for Jimmy Carter in my first presidential election, and in retrospect, I am happy that he lost that election. I also voted for Walter Mondale, but my true affinity was for the very spunky Geraldine Ferraro. I still like her to this day. I also voted for Kerry and Gore who are two elitist aholes that I truly despise today. I have much affinity for Bill Clinton, and that is a major reason why I supported Hillary in her presidential bid. He is the only presidential candidate that I have ever voted for who actually won! My expectation was that Hillary would govern similarly to Bill, so it was easy to support her. I find her tireless, and intelligent. People derisively referred to her as a policy wonk, but I viewed that as a major plus. I made a good 1000 phone calls during the primary season on her behalf. I had never worked to get anyone elected before, and making cold calls
    to people wasn’t exactly in my comfort zone, but I did it, and I felt good about trying to
    get her elected. I also tried to blog at sites like DailyKos and Mydd and was promptly booted off because I supported Hillary, and I had the termerity to question ‘ol purple lipped jug ears. I was then thrown off of TalkLeft, and Taylor Marsh for not flipping for Obama. I was also blocked from posting on Riverdaughter because Myq??? whatever that fat clown goes by, didn’t like that I disagreed with somethingthat riverdaughter had posted. My eyes opened to the INTOLERANCE of the left. I was a believer in Hillary, even though I knew that there were some issues in which I did not agree with her. I felt like I belonged in the Democratic party, but all that changed in 2008 when the Florida primary, the one that I proudly voted in, became a tool used by a corrupt political party to disenfranchise Democratic
    voters in my state. I trusted the Democratic party to hold a fair and honest election, but I realized at that point in time that evil was amiss in the party. I was angry, and I blamed the leftwing of the party for Hillary’s defeat. It was underhanded, and also well coordinated amongst them. I witnissed vileness against Hillary that came from within the party that I belonged to, and it was worse than anything I had witnessed the Republicans do to her. From that point on, I realized that I wanted revenge, and that I also wanted to distance myself from many of my fellow Democrats
    who frankly seemed unhinged, and thuggish. I was ashamed, and did not want to be associated with these people. That is where I am today, distrustful of of the leftwing in the Democratic party. They have helped nudge me to the right somewhat, but I’m ok with that. It was something that was already starting to happen anyway. I now feel more free to choose the candidate that I feel will best represent America, and the letter D after his/her name is no longer the deciding factor for my vote. Actually, it is i
    the sense that I intend on voting against all Democrats for the forseeable future. The party needs a complete overhaul before I would ever consider voting for it again. I view this as a natural progression. I will feel better once I know that the Democratic party has paid for its transgressions. I will not rest until they do.

  139. admin–you put our situation so well and it is awkward. Thanks-I do have something I feel bad about though. I have two grown wonderful daughters who I raised to be loyal democrats. My oldest understands and although they both supported Hillary, my youngest now feels that I need to get over it and support the party. I just don’t talk to her about it anymore. Oh well, I guess time will heal-she’s very headstrong and opinionated.
    Good night folks—this has got to be the night owl blog!!

  140. One other thing, Big Tent Democrat on SqawkLeft was another ahole. He’s all for having a big tent as long as you believe what he believes. To me, he’s a pup tent.

  141. This terrorist has only been a citizen for a little over a year, I don’t even want him to be identified as an American.

  142. Obama is having bad luck lately. He puts out his foot and some real event sticks it in his mouth.

    He says “drill baby drill” — and a rig blows up.

    He says Arizona’s immigration law is ‘misguided’ — and a recent immigrant tries to blow up Times Square.

    Things come in threes, what’s the third?

  143. Nobama, Rev. Manning is holding a trial against Obama, I believe it starts May 8th, but not sure. He says he has evidence against Obama…he has been getting death threats…Rev. Manning is a brave man. Its in New York, at Columbia University. He is hoping for a big turnout, I hope he gets it.

  144. I think I will watch C-span tomorrow…something is coming down the pike that they want to keep quiet because you can bet all three lamemedia will be talking about this huge car bomb in NY. When there’s another one, then I might believe it, otherwise, its all about smoke a mirrors.

  145. Basement Angel said something profound a few days ago. I failed to acknowledge it then and would like to do so now.

    She said the Democratic Party is the party of Social Security, Medicare, Medicade, Civil Rights, the G-1 Bill, the right to union representation and so many other things that make this the greatest country in the world.

    The Republican Party opposed many of these things at the time they were enacted and under Bush they tried to privatize social security and medicare. They were also in charge when the decision was made to abandon our manufacturing sector.

    Thus, given a choice between voting for a democrat or a republican I would be inclined to vote democratic at this point.

    The problem is the dimocratic party we have today is the antithesis of the democratic party we knew and is controlled by big business elites. And they have a shll in Obama. Therein lies the entire problem.

    As Admin said recently, this nation is best served by having a democratic party which is true to its traditions and the courage to dream big dreams for the future and a republican party which ensures we can afford all that we would like to do.

    That synthesis is the ideal result for the nation. But it cannot occur when we have a dimocrartic party. It is worse than having two republican parties. It is why we say the dimocratic party under Obama must suffer devastating defeat in 2010.

    In other words, we all agree with Basement Angel on the goal. It is the means where we differ. But that is a matter of cold logic and sound strategy. Emotions whether my own or somebody else’s do not get us where we need to be.

  146. Nobama, Rev. Manning is holding a trial against Obama,
    ————————————————–
    I am happy to hear that. I hope he calls you as an expert witness. You have done much research on the subject. Your sworn testimony would be relevant and material in securing a conviction.

  147. If you wanted to hold a fair debate over the Arizona Law would you pack it with four opponents and one supporter? Tapper did. Would you let two of the four be Maher? And Sharpton?? Tapper did. Two pundits with impeccable credentials. Maher who was fired from other channels for profane comments and uncontrollable rage. Sharpton who falsely accused a prosecutor for molesting Tawana Brawley which inspired Tom Wolfe to write Bonfire of the Vanities, only to discover at the end of the day that it was all a hoax. And then we learn he and O’Reilly are buds and have dinner together at Sylvias at 128th and Lennox in Harlem which is one of my favorite restaurants. And would you have dead pan and dull as paint George Will be its sole defender? Tapper did. In fact, Tapper stacked the deck, just as we say NBC and MSNBC stack the deck against Hillary during the campaign. And this passes for journalism? No wait. Somerby does a far better job than I can exposing the machinations of this kangaroo court who operates on the same principle as the court in Alice In Wonderland– first the verdict then the facts.
    —————————————————————
    THE CULTURE OF FURY AND INSULT! When Tapper’s panel discussed that new law, an unhelpful pattern emerged:
    MONDAY, MAY 3, 2010

    For the moment, put aside your views about Arizona’s new immigration law—your views about the original law, your views about the law as it now stands amended. Instead, consider the way Ross Douthat opens his column in today’s New York Times.

    For the record, Douthat says this about the new law: “On the specifics of the law, Arizona’s critics have legitimate concerns.” But first, he offers this assessment of the debate which has blown up around the law:

    DOUTHAT (5/2/10): Critics of Arizona’s new immigration law have not been shy about impugning the motives of its supporters. The measure, which requires police to check the immigration status of people they question or detain, has been denounced as a “Nazi” or “near-fascist” law, a “police state” intervention, an imitation of “apartheid,” a “Juan Crow” regime that only a bigot could possibly support.

    Faced with this kind of hyperbole, the supposed bigots have understandably returned the favor, dismissing opponents of the Arizona measure as limousine liberals who don’t understand the grim realities of life along an often-lawless border. And so the debate has become a storm of insults rather than an argument.

    Douthat isn’t totally even-handed here—correctly or otherwise, he says that liberals started it!—but he makes a reasonably good attempt. Critics of the law went right after motive, he says—and they tossed the standard assessments around. Defenders of the law then “returned the favor.”

    But whatever one thinks of his digest of insults, we think Douthat’s larger assessment is hard to dispute. The debate about the Arizona law “has become a storm of insults,” he says, “rather than an argument.”

    For our money, that’s a fairly good description of yesterday’s panel discussion on This Week —a 16-minute segment about the new law which shed amazingly little light, but created a good deal of heat. As we watched the segment, we thought of the way Pundit Culture has often worked over the past twenty years. Let’s reduce a familiar pattern to three basic steps:

    First step: Pundit Culture often starts with some Widely Accepted Group Judgment. In this case, mainstream and liberal pundits have generally agreed: Arizona’s new law is no good.

    Second step: Once that Group Judgment is widely accepted, all attempts at analysis, clarification or explanation come to a halt. This is true when the Widely Accepted Group Judgment is basically sound, and when the Group Judgment is not.

    Third step: Replacing attempts at explanation or clarification, we are handed a solid dose of the pundit corps’ “Top This” culture. Once pundits have agreed that they’ll all voice The Same Standard Judgment, a pundit can only distinguish himself by voicing that Standard Group Judgment in increasingly colorful ways. Again—this pattern obtains where the Group Judgment is sound, and where the Group Judgment is not.

    Yesterday’s 16-minute panel discussion made us this think of culture, which obtained quite strongly during the Clinton/Gore years. You can watch most of the discussion at ABC’s web site. (For the first chunk, click here. For most of the rest, click this.) You can read the full transcript of the discussion (just click here). If you watch, you will see a profoundly unenlightening discussion in which a five-member panel splits largely four-to-one against the law. Pundits express their grandiose moral objections to the law, while shedding absolutely no light of any aspect of this debate.

    Alas! Our old pal Bill Maher, whose work we greatly admire, was the worst offender. (Bill got in some fiery but incoherent race talk, showcasing his own moral grandeur.) But Al Sharpton, someone else we generally admire, wasn’t far behind. Consider this trio of comments, two of which were directed to George Will, the new law’s lone (apparent) defender on the five-member panel. Guest host Jake Tapper was supervising ABC’s unwieldy quintet:

    WILL (5/2/10): The Arizona law does not say that there should be racial profiling. And let me tell you what the—

    SHARPTON: Well then, why did they just reform it over the weekend?

    WILL: Let me tell you what the federal law says.

    […]

    SHARPTON: With all due respect, Mr. Will, that is not what that federal law says. And the recognition of that is the state of Arizona’s legislature just refined what they said over the weekend. They conceded that we were right and they had to refine it.

    […]

    TAPPER: To be fair to Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona, she signed an executive order the same day that she signed a law that said that a person’s race alone cannot be enough to be reasonable suspicion. There needs to be more than—

    SHARPTON: And now she’s come back this weekend with something else. So are we going to keep redoing it? I think you’d have to concede that had this not been raised and these protests had not—they would not themselves be now doing the moonwalk against their own bill.

    Three times, Sharpton noted that the bill had been amended over the weekend. But he could only interpret this to mean that the law had thereby been shown to be wrong. Could this action also mean that some flaws with the original bill had thereby been fixed? In sixteen minutes, the question was never raised. No one ever described the ways in which the original bill has been amended, nor did Tapper ask anyone to do so. But this is how Pundit Culture typically works once a Standard Group Judgment has been reached.

    Whatever one thinks of Arizona’s law, Tapper presided over a long, uninformative and basically unintelligent discussion. Whatever one thinks of this new law, this long discussion shed a lot of heat—and very little light. Pundits got to showcase their fiery moral greatness. But whatever one thinks of this new state law, most viewers left this discussion knowing nothing about this new law that they didn’t know coming in.

    Do you know how the law has been amended? Sharpton referred to this matter three times. But at no point was anyone asked to explain what has been changed in the original law—how the law has been “refined.”

    In the case of this state law, liberal and mainstream pundits stand opposed to many (not all) conservatives. But as we perused the press corps this weekend, we were struck by the lazy, uninformative ways some Big Liberal Pundits performed their work.

    If liberals want to persuade the public, something more durable than insult and assessment of motive will typically be required. Did Frank Rich provide it? Michel Martin? Charles Blow? We were struck by their groaning factual errors—by the lazy intellectual work with which they tried to support their Standard Moral Postures.

  148. from jbstonesfan: “she accepted the SOS position, and thus, has to go along with Obama’s agenda to a large degree.”

    More correctly, you should note that Hillary is o’s top advisor in all foreign affairs (he has described her as “the ideal cabinet officer”), and while the buck does stop in the Offal Office, o will now take no steps without her prior advice and consent. So Hillary is into it up to her ears.

    So, with the news that the US may refrain from vetoing UN security council resolutions that are unfriendly to Israel, I advise any of us who think Israel should be given carte blanche for anything it does, to jump ship now. This “threat” may be coming from the Awful Office, but it is Hillary’s idea for sure.

    This brings up the upthread dispute over wbboei’s contributions to this blog, because I, as a staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause, was at first heartily booed by several bloggers here when I supported Hillary’s pro-Palestinian actions. I remember one blogger told me “This is a pro-Israel site”, and later “I’m not attached to Hillary at the hip.”

    While it is true that I have no known allies on this site concerning this issue, I think my viewpoint supporting the Palestinians is of particular importance on a website that has always purported to support Hillary Clinton. And I will note that, much to their credit, the bloggers who once wanted me thrown out as a troll, or o shill or whatever, have more recently come forward with more reasoned arguments.

  149. Hmmm….. 😉

    http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/05/hillary_clinton_isnt_entirely.html

    Hillary Clinton Isn’t Entirely Sure She Wants to Finish Out the Term

    * 5/3/10 at 11:00 AM

    Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

    On Meet the Press yesterday, Hillary Clinton adamantly denied that she has absolutely any interest in being a Supreme Court justice — which is fortunate, because nobody’s offering. But she wasn’t as unequivocal when host David Gregory asked her whether she would stick it out as secretary of State for the duration of President Obama’s first term. She intends to, she says, with a familiar, not entirely applicable laugh. She thinks so. BUT — in the interest of full disclosure — it is an exhausting job, what with all the air travel foreign dignitaries force upon her. Ask her next month, because apparently things could change as soon as then. Door: ajar.

  150. Kingsgrove – So now we have the reason why she finds the job gruelling and looks tired. It’s all that air travel. This post is doubly interesting, because she leaves the “door ajar” to leaving before the first term is out, but also because she implies that the presidency would be less gruelling, because there is much less air travel involved. Now I’m beginning to see that “window of opportunity” ajar too…

  151. But also note that even the vile msnbc and NY Mag solicit Hillary’s opinion on the subject. No one is asking Gates or Geithner or Napolitano or any other cabinet member about future projects, because they just don’t give a shit about anyone but HRC.

  152. Sorry, wbboei. I did not realize there was a strategy to your posts. I don’t have a lot of time for blogs/comments these days. I appreciate what you do but I don’t have to tell you that the repubs are not on our side
    ————————————————-
    Hell pm 317 that is no problem. It is hard to connect the dots when the information is spread out over several years, and we all tend to react to what is in front of us.

    My strategy however should be vaguely familiar to the readers of this site. Why? Because it is intended to be congruent in general with the strategy Admin is pursuing. And in most cases it is.

    As I have said before, Admin is the best analyst and strategist I have encountered. I know that and so do our adversaries. Who else has predicted what would occur with as much foresight, wisdom and accuracy? The answer is this: no one.

    It seems to me that one of our responsibilities is to bring relevant information to this site, so we can all see it. It can help us understand what is occurring and it can be of interest to Admin as well.

    If we do not bring it here simply because it emanates from a right wing site then it is always possible that we could miss something important. I have always been encouraged to share what I have with the group so we all have access to it.

  153. Thanks for your comments jbstonesfan, lil ol grape, turndown, nobama, tim and firelight2012, and to others I have responded to directly. They are very much appreciated.

  154. from wbboei: “It seems to me that one of our responsibilities is to bring relevant information to this site, so we can all see it.”

    Yes, and that is one of the big reasons I have been reading here for so long.

    But there is also the clash of viewpoints that is interesting and vital. Some, upthread, have been saying they are more conservative, liberal, or left than the general tone of the site or blog, or that they don’t no where they fit anymore. I don’t say “agree to disagree” to end a discussion, but as a beginning to discussion. Let’s thrash things out and not be afraid to upbraid.

    What’s most interesting here is that people coming from the left, right and center have all agreed at some point to support the Clintons, and particularly Hillary. I am certain that this is because we all sense that she is a selfless public servant like no other, deserved and still deserves the presidency. So, a particular center of debate for us all is, What is she up to now? Why is she doing what she’s doing? Is it really in the country’s best interest? How can we draft her into a future presidential run? and so forth.

    And in this debate, we must remember that she is a team player for better or worse and is now playing a pilot role in o’s foreign policy.

  155. From Taylor Marsh:
    “Netanyahu must protect his nation. Nobody should argue otherwise. However, Israel and the U.S., which will supply $2.7 billion of military aid to Israel this year, also have separate priorities in the Middle East, which while making us allies in many areas, also puts us at odds on other issues.

    Sect. Clinton is in an unenviable position right now. She’s leading the U.S. delegation to the review conference for the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which started today. Egypt is putting forth a proposal for a nuclear-free Middle East. Hard to get there if Israel won’t even publicly admit they have nuclear weapons, with the U.S. supporting this adolescent posturing through grandfathered policy.”

  156. and again from TM:
    “A “transformation of attitude” is needed in the U.S. as well, though I’m not holding my breath. Sen. Chuck Schumer illustrates the infantile thinking of the political class in this country where Israel is concerned. Mr. Schumer revealed that there is no criticism allowed towards Israel, regardless of whether it’s well directed or not. Any politician daring to separate United States interests when necessary, even though many of our goals align with Israeli goals, is destined to find him- or herself unemployed.”

  157. wbboei,

    There was no need to be sarcastic. You raised the issue in a blog and I was being honest with my opinion…one obviously not shared by many others.

    I work full time and have very little time for blogging. I really can’t afford to spend as much time reading this blog as I do but find that it’s like therapy for me….and I appreciate the information I find here.

    I mostly skip over the personal attacks and choose which long posts to read. So when you raised the issue, I thought I might encourage you to be more concise at times. More of us might read more of your posts.

  158. nomobama
    May 4th, 2010 at 2:10 am

    Your post could have been written for me. However, I’m not sure that we have gone further right, I think the Dim party has gone further left. They have become left wing nuts. Their attitudes twards illegal activity are WRONG!. Their attitude toward the poor, sweet Palistinians as the good guys in the mifdlle east are WRONG!

    The important things that the paraty used to stand for….women’s rights and equality, gay rights, universal, affordable health care, gov. ability to negootiate with PHARMA……they no longer stand for.

  159. from Carol: “Their [Dem party] attitude toward the poor, sweet Palistinians as the good guys in the mifdlle east are WRONG!”

    Carol, the Dim party attitude toward Israel and Palestinians is illustrated by the quote of Schumer is posted just above (from TM).

    The Palestinians may be poor, but they are not sweet – more like “bitter” and “clinging” to their land. Israel is neither poor nor sweet.

  160. Taylor Marsh is wrong when she refers to Israel’s adolescent posturing.  It’s called deterrent, and not letting an enemy that vastly outnumbers you know every single detail about your defense.  The fact that countries throughout the Middle East suspect that Israel has nuclear weapons has helped to prevent the Muslim world from using their superiority in numbers as a means of destroying the tiny state of Israel.  

    Imagine what would happen if Israel were to actually admit that it has nuclear weapons.  The full weight of the Muslim world that represents hundreds of millions would then go about skewering Israel in the world of public opinion for that very fact.  The Muslim countries would then demand that Israel give up those weapons of which they now have proof of their existence, the one thing that has kept the state of Israel in a sort of military parity with its enemies, and has so far prevented another military assault by Israel’s enemies.  It would be another weapon in the Muslim’s arsenal to be used as a means to weaken Israel.  One can’t demand that a country dispose of its nuclear weapons without having undeniable proof that they exist in the first place.  Israel has never confirmed that it indeed possesses nuclear weapons, and that is to its strategic advantage.  It keeps the world guessing, and it prevents Israel’s enemies from trying to muster the world’s public opinion to be used to pressure Israel into giving up that which has ensured its very survival. 

    The six day war informed Israel that it needed a way to tell its enemies “never again”, and the only real deterrent was the threat of nuclear annihilation for any country that was foolish enough to attack Israel again, even if Israel has never acknowledged possession of such weapons.

    Some day in the future, new weapons will be developed that will make nuclear weapons less desireable for a nation’s defense.  I’m afraid that nuclear weapons are here to stay, though, only because they will be eventually viewed by the world as the “poor man’s equalizer” after more sophisticated weapons replace them in advanced country’s arsenals.  Regardless of how advanced countries view nuclear weapons in the future with regards to their backwardsness, nuclear weapons will continue to be valued by various rogue nations and terrorist groups for their destructive value vis-a-vis their minimal cost, something that gives them the biggest bang for their bucks. 

  161. Was not the land of Israel historically the land of the Jews, with the so-called Palestinians interlopers?

  162. Seems like that picture of M. with the greased back hair and red dress has been up there for a year now. I am having a hard time trying to tell you why I have such extreme distaste for that particular clip.

    First she thinks she is talking to idiots. She was reminding us all of the media hate fest over Bill Clinton’s superficial infidelity to Hillary to fit in with their “Hillary is too divisive” story to justify their power grab, thuggery. And oh, cheating – I’m talking about you Roosevelt. What she couldn’t comprehend is that what appalled Americans about the affair was not the behavior of Hillary but the behavior of what we thought was our honest disinterested media. That’s when my eyes started to open, I listened to Brit Hume and Cokie Roberts telling me over and over again what the American people thought. I felt so out of step with my fellow citizens because didn’t think what they told me I thought. I still liked Bill Clinton and knew he was a great president. Then I saw a honest poll reflecting Americans true feelings and continued love for President Clinton.

    Michelle didn’t care that she was stating that Hillary is some how inadequate as a wife, and further as a public servant (and after a live time of service) because of Bill’s behavior. Compare Hillary’s live time of service with Michelle’s few days collecting (God, how much money) for services to that hospital in IL where she devised a scheme to dump welfare patients. Although Michelle is perfectly aware the only role Hillary played in the episode was as a loving forgiving wife, she doesn’t care that she is possibly inflicting pain on a fellow human being or for that matter a sister.

    And finally, what says the most about Michelle, she confuses the job Hillary was applying for, Hillary was presenting her credentials for consideration for the position of Leader of the Free World,

    ….not the job of cleaning lady at the White House.

    Kind of incoherent I guess, but best I can do.

  163. jeswezey
    May 4th, 2010 at 9:20 am

    I was referring to a growing liberal contingent that thinks that Palestinian terrorism is justified. I certainly hope you don’t believe that.

    Israel for the most part has conducted itself with a high moral standard that few countries can claim. Any country that was willing to make peace with Israel has walked away with substantial concessions.

    I do not have time to write you a full and comprehensive history.

  164. The New Agenda Vows Never Again To Stay Silent On Sexism

    The New Agenda Embarks On A New Vision For Gender Equality At Event Honoring Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild

    04.28.2010 – NEW YORK CITY—A national women’s organization will honor Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild in an event at Thomson Reuters Building in New York City on Thursday, May 6. The New Agenda, a non-partisan voice for all women, credits Lynn Forester de Rothschild as an inspirational force in its formation and growth since its inception in 2008.

    What began as a grass-roots effort aimed at preserving Hillary Clinton’s legacy evolved into a national organization to advance key goals for women. Amy Siskind, President of The New Agenda, concedes a new brand of feminism emerged from the last presidential election: “For millions of women, 2008 was an awakening,” says Amy Siskind. “Sexism was not only very much alive, but thriving.”

    Since then, the New Agenda has held some of the most powerful figures in media and politics accountable for blatant sexist attacks and continues to defend women on both sides of the aisle, most notably, former Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin who has been the victim of relentless “sexualization” and innuendo by public figures, media and late night talk show hosts.

    The New Agenda brings together some of the most influential women in media and corporate America for a candid discussion on our path to gender equality.
    Sign up to attend here: http://anewvision.eventbrite.com/

  165. from nomobama

    “Was not the land of Israel historically the land of the Jews, with the so-called Palestinians interlopers?”

    It depends on what you take as history. Assuming the biblical history of Moses is true, the Hebrews left Egypt, wandered around the Sinai, and then moved into what is now, more or less, Israel. Historians put this migration at around the 10th century BC. It was then the land of the Hebrews.

    Roughly, when the Romans conquered Judea at about 0 AD, the Jews, including many Christians, left the holy lands and made their homes elsewhere. This does not qualify them as owners of the land they left to others.

    Now, the Palestinians have been there all along, notably since the diaspora. This means they have a right to be there, even if they are a minority in the current state.

  166. I also agree with Nobama…Taylor is wrong about the poor little Palestinians. I also do not think Israel needs to come clean with their nukes…I am on the side of Israel although I will not criticize Hillary for she is trying to do as we are not privy to inside information…inotherwards I trust her judgement.

    My best wishes are with Rev. Manning…he is trying to make a difference in his own way. It irritates me when folks call him a flake…he isn’t, he feels strongly about what he is trying to do…many wouldn’t have the guts to do what he is doing in the heart of the Harlem..

  167. “Taylor is wrong about the poor little Palestinians. I also do not think Israel needs to come clean with their nukes…I am on the side of Israel although I will not criticize Hillary for she is trying to do as we are not privy to inside information…inotherwards I trust her judgement.”

    ———————-

    Exactly.

  168. Betty
    May 4th, 2010 at 9:55 am

    ————————-
    meme and many other “prominent” women in politics did their outmost to attack Hillary whether up front or behind the scenes.

    Their behavior disgusted me.

  169. The is no moral equivalency b/t Israel’s nuclear program and that of Iran whose leader has threatened on numerous occassions to wipe Israel off the map.(I don’t recall Israel threatening to wipe a nation of the map). Some in democratic party feel Israel/Jews need a “slp down” and I say to them was not the Spanish Inquisition, the Pograms, the Holocaust, and the many wars launched against Israel enough? Israel wants peace, but not at the cost of committing national suicide..She can no longer give up territory only for it to be used as launching pads for future attacks. As was reported last week, Hizbollah has more rockets than most small nations. The palestinians do not and never will recognize Israel..they can’t even announce that Israel is a Jewish state, but Israel should kow-tow to Obama and his Muslim agenda…
    As for Hillary, she is not pro palestinians, but pro peace. Her campaign promises were to obliterate Iran if it attacked Israel and she , like Obama, took the position that Jerudsalem was Israels undivided capital. Peace requires a partner, and as Hillary and Bill know, the Palestinians time and time again have rejected more than reasonable offers .

  170. “poor little Palestinians… I am on the side of Israel”

    It’s quite apparent that you’re on Israel’s side, especially with your deprecating reference to the Palestinians. One side is always right, the other side always wrong. This is the ancient war mindset. You pick sides and never try to see anything remotely human in your enemy. But even modern war commanders hold to the maxim “Understand your opponent.” It’s the best way to win a war. Wouldn’t you like to try that for a change?

  171. Gateway Pundit has referenced this Politico link regarding the Times Square bomb attempt perp, and I feel it will be of interest here as well.

    snip
    Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, professor, Washington and Lee University
    I think the politics of this incident will turn heavily on who is found to be responsible. If, as seems unlikely, the bomb is linked to South Asian or Middle Eastern terrorists, questions will again arise as to whether the Department of Homeland Security is doing all it can do to keep us safe. If, as I believe is much more likely, the bomb was placed by a right-wing lunatic, it seems to me that questions need to be raised as to whether the right-wing media bear some responsibility for stoking the delusions of such people through their relentless and often unfounded attacks on the Obama administration and the federal government.
    www dot politico.com/news/stories/0510/36700.html

  172. holdthemaccountable, the suspect who has been arrested is a recent US citizen originally from Pakistan. That professor citing “right-wing lunatic” as the culprit is not worth quoting.

  173. As for Hillary, she is not pro palestinians, but pro peace. Her campaign promises were to obliterate Iran if it attacked Israel and she , like Obama, took the position that Jerudsalem was Israels undivided capital. Peace requires a partner, and as Hillary and Bill know, the Palestinians time and time again have rejected more than reasonable offers .
    ————————–
    Exactly. And thanks for that reminder.
    The Palestinians have demonstrated over and over that they will not accept Israel…recall how close Bill Clinton came to getting them to seal the peace deal and then Arafat destroyed the whole package. Over and over it has been Israel who has made concessions toward peace and fought only to defend its right to exist. The Palestinians will never accept Israel’s right to exist until and unless the whole scene radically changes. They can talk peace to win others to their defense, but like Obama, they have proved they cannot be trusted.

    Side note: the diaspora was not the result of willing abandonment of the homeland — the Jews were DRIVEN out.
    I think, though,that we need to forget all that. The world’s populations have been migrating all over the globe for thousands of years. The clear and immediate fact is that Israel exists, Palestine exists and for the welfare of their people, they both need to find a way to get along.And no-one can force peace upon them. The attempt would only exacerbate hatred of one another and hatred of the enforcer.

  174. jeswezey,

    My loyalty lies with Israel and the Jewish people. That however doesn’t stop me from sympathizing with the Palestinian people as a whole.

    However as long as Hamas and Hezbollah continue to threaten Israel, people on both sides will suffer. Ordinary families, both Israeli and Palestinian are the losers here.

    A state for Palestinians works for me as long as the violence, threats, from Syria et al stops once and for all. A dream to be realized is that they can all live in peace with each other and respect each other’s customs and beliefs.

  175. jeswezey,

    I may respond later to your history of Israel if and when I have the time. For niw though, I would like you to respond to the following. Does Israel have a right to exist ( as a Jewish state)?

    Also, at one time in my earlier years, I actually held similar beliefs as you concerning the Palestinians, but I took your advice about understanding your opponent, and it changed the way that I had previously viewed Israel.

    One other comment. I find it very difficult to support Muslims, when I never see it work the other way around. It is a very one-sided venture. When I read about the Palestinians, I start to think of the Chrisitian Lebanese who are slowly, but surely being pushed out of THEIR country by who? the Muslims. Then I think of the poor Assyrians and Chaldean Christians in Iraq… same story. Then I remember the ill treatment of the Coptic Christians in Egypt who were there before the arrival of the Arab Muslims… same story. Do you get the picture?

  176. Betty
    May 4th, 2010 at 9:55 am

    ***********************************
    ahhh…that would be around the time MO was saying when asked:

    …asked her if she was offended by Bill Clinton’s use of the phrase ‘fairytale’ to describe her husband’s characterisation of his position on the Iraq war. At first, Obama responded with a curt ‘No’. But, after a few seconds, she affected a funny voice. ‘I want to rip his eyes out!’ she said, clawing at the air with her fingernails. One of her advisers gave her a nervous look.

  177. holdthemaccountabel, saw the gatewaypundit story — seems like the left was “hoping” it was a right-wing lunatic, especially after the first surveillance video came out about the white guy who changed his t-shirt on the street near the Time Square walking away from the bomb scene.

  178. pm317
    May 4th, 2010 at 11:09 am
    holdthemaccountabel, saw the gatewaypundit story — seems like the left was “hoping” it was a right-wing lunatic, especially after the first surveillance video came out about the white guy who changed his t-shirt on the street near the Time Square walking away from the bomb scene.
    ********************

    I just called the Mayor of New York’s office, Bloomberg, that idiot, he said yesterday it was probably a “anti-obama health care critic’… ie Tea Party, asshole …and then today when they find out it was a naturalized citizen from Pakistan he did not apologize for his statement against American citizens, but alas cautioned anyone taking anything out against Pakistan peoples in NYC.

  179. huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/03/noaa-warned-interior-was_n_561615.html

    National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration officials last fall warned the Department of Interior, which regulates offshore oil drilling, that it was dramatically underestimating the frequency of offshore oil spills and was dangerously understating the risk and impacts a major spill would have on coastal residents.

    NOAA is the nation’s lead ocean resource agency, and the warnings came in its response to a draft of the Obama Administration’s offshore oil drilling plans. The comments were Web-published in October by the whistle-blowing group, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

    But NOAA’s views were largely brushed aside as Obama went ahead and announced on March 31 that he would open vast swaths of American coastal waters to offshore drilling — a plan now very much in doubt as a blown-out BP well in the Gulf of Mexico spews out an estimated 200,000 gallons of oil daily, for the 13th straight day.

    The memo, which NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco wrote was based on the agency’s “extensive science, management and stewardship expertise related to oceans, coasts and marine ecosystem” recommended that Interior conduct “a more complete analysis of the potential human dimensions of offshore production.”

    NOAA complained that the draft report overstated the safety of offshore oil production by using information on frequency of spills from 1973 to 2004. NOAA pointed out there was a “substantial increase in spill volume in 2005, primarily due to spills associated with Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Some of the damaged rigs and pipelines damaged during the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons continue to have episodic releases, and repairs have not been fully completed.”

    Citing Interior’s own data, NOAA scolded it for asserting that it had “been many years since any substantial environmental impacts have been observed as a result of an oil spill caused by the [Outer Continental Shelf] production and transportation activities.”

    NOAA also wrote that the administration’s “analysis of the risk and impacts of accidental spills and chronic impacts are understated and generally not supported or referenced, using vague terms and phrases such as ‘no substantive degradation is expected’ and ‘some marine mammals could be harmed.'”

    NOAA didn’t even take comfort in the fact that new technology and laws had reduced the frequency of major spills in the U.S. overall since 1990. Analysts including the Congressional Research Service “have questioned the trend in spills, suggesting that ‘[r]ecent annual data indicate that the overall decline of annual spill events may have stopped’ and that ‘[t]he threat of oil spills raises the question of whether U.S. officials have the necessary resources at hand to respond to a major spill. There is some concern that the favorable U.S. spill record has resulted in a loss of experienced personnel, capable of responding quickly and effectively to a major oil spill.'”

    UPDATE AT 8:10 p.m. ET: NOAA officials Monday evening stressed the parts of their memo that were heeded by Interior. “NOAA’s critical concerns were addressed in the comprehensive national offshore energy plan — new drilling leases in the Arctic and the Aleutian Bay were halted,” spokesman Scott Smullen told HuffPost. “In addition, the plan included more detailed assessments of the environmental impact on marine habitats and endangered species, as well climate change and ocean acidification.”

    Jeff Ruch, the head of the public-employee whistleblowing group, said that as in many other regulatory agencies, Obama political appointees in the Interior Department’s notoriously troubled Minerals Management Service (MMS) have not taken enough steps to reverse the anti-environmental and anti-science policies of the Bush years.

    “For the most part, the Obama team is still the Bush team,” Ruch told HuffPost, noting that beyond a thin layer of political appointees, offices like MMS are run by managers who were “promoted during the Bush years — In many instances, promoted for basically violating the law. And from what we can tell, their conduct hasn’t changed.”

    Futhermore, Ruch said, Obama “sees environmental issues as a political bargaining chip.”

    Indeed, Obama’s decision to increase offshore drilling was widely seen as a way of getting some Republican support for the administration’s climate change bill.

    Dan Froomkin is senior Washington correspondent

    *****************************************************
    doesn’t this remind you of the Bush people and their selective junk science reports and holding back of certain important FACTS…
    *****************************************************
    bottom line…O is worse than Bush…in my estimation, he, rahm and the rest of his crew are corportists to the core…all wrapped up in the fake mask of O trying to be a populist

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

    pm317
    May 4th, 2010 at 11:11 am

    yes, pm317…one can only imagine the real MO that lurks below her ‘mask’

  180. holdthemaccountable
    May 4th, 2010 at 10:38 am

    OH HOW UPSET THESE FREAKING LOSER LEFT WING IDIOTS ARE THAT THE BOMBER WAS A MUSLIM…I LUV IT!!!!!

  181. nomobama
    May 4th, 2010 at 9:34 am
    Taylor Marsh is wrong when she refers to Israel’s adolescent posturing.
    ********************
    You are quoting an ex-porn “star”…”star” in her own mind I might add….

  182. gonzotx @ 11:35 & 11:49
    Calling Bloomberg was a great idea. Early on in this he described the explosives used as unsophisticated – like fireworks that can be purchased in Pennsylvania…. Laying more ground work for those simpleton white folk?
    Right now www dot dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1270991/Times-Square-car-bomb-Shahzad-Faisal-arrested-New-York-police.html is reporting the guy acted alone
    while at Fox there is this headline: Up to 8 Reportedly in Custody in Pakistan in Connection With Times Square Bombing Attempt
    Stay tuned. No matter how it turns out, it’s gonna be interesting.

  183. #
    admin
    May 4th, 2010 at 1:58 am

    There is a facebook page for him.

    http://www.facebook.com/people/Shahzad-Faisal/747765415

    If that’s not him, we pity the poor guy with that page.

    BTW, he was naturalized as a citizen a little over a year ago. April 17, 2009.
    ——–

    Just came back to the blog and checked this Facebook page again after seeing the more recent photos of this guy in NYT, the photo looked like the one on Facebook I saw last night, but today the photo has been scrubbed!

  184. gonzotx @ 11:35, that drumbeat pisses me the hell off, too. I agree that no one should retaliate against your average, peaceful American Muslim. But my beef is WHY do our pols always run around giving this “caution” every time a Jihadist attacks us?

    What the fuck evidence do they have that this is a problem? Even after the horror of 9-11, did Americans as a rule retaliate against all Muslims? NO. Every time there is a terror attack, do we go off half-cocked and start beating Muslims in the streets and rioting and burning mosques? NO. The American people have NEVER, not ONCE exhibited a tendency behave that way. Sure you might have one or two nutjobs, but not so much that the entire country has to be “warned” on national television to mind our manners every single time. I am SICK of our polls making statements that tacitly ASSUME that Americans are racist violent people, when all evidence shows the opposite.

    On the other hand, when someone has the temerity to publish a Mohammed cartoon, or say something critical of Muslims, you NEVER hear our politicians get in front of a microphone and admonish the Muslim community to not retaliate. Why not? Based on the likelihood of any sort of “retaliation” happening, I think our politicians are LECTURING THE WRONG FUCKING GROUP. Why not start giving your pious little speeches to those who DO have a history of responding violently to insult?

  185. I am behind on the posts…sorry if I am almost a day late and a dollar short…. :-0

    —-

    #
    jeswezey
    May 4th, 2010 at 5:26 am

    But also note that even the vile msnbc and NY Mag solicit Hillary’s opinion on the subject. No one is asking Gates or Geithner or Napolitano or any other cabinet member about future projects, because they just don’t give a shit about anyone but HRC.
    ———-
    I was thinking the same thing, and I have a feeling that Hillary already is making plans for something…
    She mentioned, she likes to plan things out, make goals for herself and follow though. Being Turner to the Hooch in the Whitehouse is not her long term goal.

  186. Certain stories only get carried on rightwing blogs, apparently. Example the ‘brown tea party’ that happened in Arizona last week. Malkin and some other rw blog showed photos of violent threats, racist signs against whites, etc by the brown protestors. Haven’t seen that info anywhere else (tho I may have missed it).

  187. turndown, there were people carrying signs threatening to “shoot more cops”, but did you see the entire MSM hyperventilating over the “dangerous, violent, fringe, extremist” immigration protestors? Nope. Crickets.

  188. Betty
    May 4th, 2010 at 9:55 am

    Seems like that picture of M. with the greased back hair and red dress has been up there for a year now. I am having a hard time trying to tell you why I have such extreme distaste for that particular clip.

    ———
    Yes, you just reminded me of why MO gets no respect from me either!!!

    I have actually heard Obots say that the reason they didn’t vote for Hillary is because of Bill’s cheating!!

    It was all I could do to tell them in a civil manner what idiots they were.

  189. Just reading quickly before I head out. Taylor Marsh, in my opinion, is an opportunist-plain and simple. She just puts her finger in the wind to see which side she’ll take.

    I think the main reason that Israel doesn’t want to be part of the Nuclear Nonprolifertion Treaty is because if you are, you have to let UN inspectors in to examine your nukes. If that happened, then Israels enemies would know the location of their warheads-since the UN leaks like a sieve and is very pro-Palestinian (and Arabic–since the Arabic Middle East has the oil that most of the world needs). Also, neither India or Pakistan have signed onto the treaty. Sorry to get windy, but nuclear is sort of my forte.

  190. Long before the Republican experienced the Big Media War of Annihilation against anyone who stood in the way of Barack Hussein Obama, scion of the elites, we did.

    Remember?

    The Republicans were caught flat footed in the general election. Paula Abeles tried to get them to listen and understand what America was up against, and so did I. We tried to get them to meet with PUMAs. They would not do it. They would not listen. Now at last they have woken up. They are counterattacking the common enemy i.e. big media.

    Here is their video, i.e Remember November Act II. Forget for the moment who produced it. Focus on what is says. Did we not experience the exact same distortion and lies in the primary? Notice the memos asking NBC to back off, like the times we wrote to Griffin and Capus at MSNBC telling them to stop the sexist against Hillary. And remember how they ignored us and continued the vile attacks, those captive media shills for Mr. Obama who is the epitome of crony capitalism?

    Then ask yourself whether this video does not serve our objectives as Hillary supporters as well.

    http://remembernovember.com/

  191. “Roughly, when the Romans conquered Judea at about 0 AD, the Jews, including many Christians, left the holy lands and made their homes elsewhere. This does not qualify them as owners of the land they left to others.”

    Excuse me, but the Jews didn’t just “leave”, they were driven out. Their country was conquered. There was nothing voluntary about it. Read your history.

  192. HillaryforTexas
    May 4th, 2010 at 1:03 pm
    ————————————
    BRAVO!!! Thanks HforT!
    This needs to be said again! and again!

  193. turndownobama
    May 4th, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    “brown tea party” would imply that they support the tea party movement?

    I worked 12 hour shits the last 4 days so I am behind, but i am assuming the “brown tea party’ people were Hispanics protesting the AZ immigration bill?

  194. here’s the number to call and leave a comment for the “mayor” Bloomberg

    You have to tell them to write it down, and then they give you a report #. You can give them your name or remain anonymous

  195. Israel exists, Palestine exists and for the welfare of their people, they both need to find a way to get along.And no-one can force peace upon them.

    ———
    Will this hatred ever end? The hatred of the adults is passed on to their children and the story continues over generations. They need a Romeo and Juliette moment.

  196. I hope I did not post this before my relaxing trip with girlfriends to the beach this past weekend: We got a letter from our family physician that stated he would no longer be our doctor after May 7th, but would work as a Hospitalist. He was the one who said that HCR would not pass because the doctors would not let it – guess he was wrong on that account. ONe down, how many more to go with the passage of Obummers’s health deform?

  197. lil ole grape and HillaryforTexas, and the mainstream media did not touch sending the SWAT team after us Grandmother Tea Party people. Tyranny. Tyranny. Tyranny, I say.

  198. All day on Fox…the almost car bomb arrest…just as I predicted last night. I think they will continue this theme because they don’t want us to know what is going on in Greece or that our own stock market it dropping today and that many more countries are going to be pulled down with Greece including our own.

    Hardly any news today about Obama’s Oil Slick. They are working so hard to show us that they’ve arrested this guy in 53 hours from the incident…they want to make the messiah look competent…all networks are complicit on this…as Fox is doing the same thing….I can’t wait to see what Glenn talks about today???

    Get ready the bottom is about to fall out!

  199. I have often thought that some group or person needs the IP conflict to continue. It’s in their political or economic interest to keep it going.

    I also don’t think it’s all hatred either. In fact, I know many Jews and Arabs who are friends—actually, they have more in common than differences. Maybe similarities (both semitic-desert peoples, common base for religion-Abraham, many similar foods, etc.) should be pushed rather than differences. And Jews have been in the Holy Land since since Abraham left Babylon and began monotheism. True, they were driven out during the Assyrian and Roman invasions, but the Galilee was still populated by Jews. Strangely, PR from both sides gets the facts mixed up–actually, their was never a nation of the Palestinians-I believe they were part of Jordan. I’d better shut up-old history teacher here.

  200. confloyd – I don’t think the car bomb that didn’t meet expert standards in your book is any reason to think that it is just a distraction for the left. Don’t get too sucked into Fox and Beck and forget that American’s do have a big target on their backs.
    There is news on the oil slick, it might be that the station you are watching has chosen not to cover it.
    The MSM picks what they report and so does Fox.

    Here’s one article on what BP is doing: BP Begins Drilling Relief Well at Gulf Oil Spill

    http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/05/04/bp-begins-drilling-relief-gulf-oil-spill/

  201. wbboei,

    Just wanted to let you know that I look froward to your posts, am sadden when there are none, agree with 90% of them, and above all, you are are true gentleman (did I get that right?)
    I have chosen to skip a few other posters. Their anger and jealousy is most evident, and that is the last I have to say on the subject, except, blog hog? Ridiculous. Blog on !

  202. Shadowfax…I only watch Fox. I gave the others up in 07′ and haven’t went back. Its not just me who thinks this car bomb was an amatuer, but so does Larry Johnson of NoQuarter…I think he is somewhat of an expert since he is ex-CIA. I think the news coverage is overkill.

    And yes I already knew that they were drilling relief wells…one thing I do do is stay up with ALL NEWS…even the news they don’t want us to know…which this administration is constantly trying to do…they like to control the conversation.

  203. Get this. They are talking on CNN of this frustrated “American from CT, that his house was being foreclosed on”, not the Muslim Pakistan “naturalized” citizen of one year ago, but the poor stressed out individual just couldn’t take it anymore and tried to blow up a section of NY and fly off to Dubai.

    How do you think the story would read if it was a true American and he was indeed white?

  204. Hey wait a minute Larry! Maybe this Muslim wasn’t an amateur, maybe he was incompetent!. And maybe he didn’t pay his mortgage because he HAD NO INTENTION OF LIVING THERE SEEING AS HIS WIFE WAS IN PAKISTAN!. Because we all know it ain’t cheap to fly to Dubai…just maybe, ya think?

  205. gonzotx
    May 4th, 2010 at 2:56 pm

    Get this. They are talking on CNN of this frustrated “American from CT
    ——-
    Stuff like this makes me think CNN has hired a crew of circus clowns, and they get PAID to do this……….

  206. Carol

    “Excuse me, but the Jews didn’t just “leave”, they were driven out. Their country was conquered. There was nothing voluntary about it.”

    Well, now, that’s pretty much what’s happening to the Palestinians today, isn’t it? Their lands have been conquered and occupied and 2 million have already been driven out.

    Josephus tells this story, as do the tour guides to Massada. The Jewish king Herod was a Roman puppet and was hated by the Jews. The Jews were not driven out, they simply did not want to be under the Roman boot. Funny, but most of them went on to live very well in other parts of the Roman empire. Read Josephus yourself.

  207. I guess this was only meant for me and not the rest of you guys???

    admin
    May 3rd, 2010 at 11:13 pm
    Sadly, instead of an oasis of information and discussion lately there have been personal attacks posted. These are bad habits imported from past experiences on sites such as DailyKooks. Some steam needs to occasionally be let out and we are a passionate bunch otherwise we would not be here, but let’s keep the discussions civil.

    Commenters here are pretty much free to post just about any information they want to discuss for whatever reason. Any topic can be discussed with maturity and intelligence without falling into nuthood. Some posters, such as JanH and MoonOnPluto, choose to post dozens of news articles and we certainly appreciate reading all of them and would never think there is such a thing as too much. Information is our life blood here. Some days we are able to garner all the major and less major news happening in the world without ever having to leave the website and that is something we greatly appreciate.

    Some posters, such as Wbboei, post interpretations on the news of the day along with news articles. We also appreciate those interpretations and perspectives. Such comments should be appreciated or ignored, or even contradicted without having to resort to personal attacks or questions about the motives of the commenter.

    If any of us wants to be personally attacked for posting a comment or a perspective we could post at DailyKooks type sites and satiate our appetite for abuse.

    During the Massachusetts Brown v. Coakley election some posters such as TurndownObama had a difficult time with our comments on that election. Some like JBStonesFan are increasingly agitated by Hillary Clinton and some of her statements on the Middle East situation. Some here are for drill, baby, drill and some reject increased oil drilling. Some are for heightened rights for immigrants, legal or “illegal, and some would not mind every “illegal” sent back to their home country. We are not all going to agree all the time with every article we post or every comment expressed. The issues are complex and we each have a history and experiences we bring to bear on these issues. But, these issues can be discussed with respect for those of opposing views.

    Let’s try to keep this a clean, Pink, oasis free of personal attacks. The best way to counter free speech you disagree with is free speech full of facts and links to the facts and an explanation of experiences which have shaped your views.

    In the emails we get many of you have acquired a fan base of readers who don’t post comments but who appreciate representation of their views in the comments. Your views and comments are appreciated by these readers and us. Let’s try to keep the discussions civil and convince with facts and understanding.

  208. I always find it hilarious that people quote happenings over 2000 years ago. Truth is, who knows, problem is, what it is today. And it is in today, that we must find a solution. The Palestinians however, can’t seem to have a leader wiling to, or heroic enough, to stand up for their people against the likes of Hamas or the PLO… and until they do, Israel is no fool.

    Your welcome wbboei!

  209. Funny, I just got this email and if you look up post that is exactly what I did!
    **********

    Tea Party Nation

    A message to all members of Tea Party Nation

    Yesterday, on Katie Couric’s show, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg “speculated” that the terrorist who tried to bomb Time Square was “someone with a political agenda that doesn’t like the healthcare bill.” In other words, he was trying to blame the Tea Party movement and the patriotic Americans who stood up and fought against this usurpation of our rights.

    Well, guess what? The bomber is a naturalized citizen from Pakistan, with ties to the terrorists in Pakistan.

    Instead of apologizing for getting it wrong, or insulting mainstream, patriotic Americans, Bloomberg’s response has been to say that “bias will not be tolerated.” Mr. Mayor, how about your bias against the majority of Americans in this country?

    Mayor Bloomberg needs to apologize to all of the Americans he insulted with his “speculation.”

    Call Mayor Bloomberg’s office at (212)-NEW-YORK and demand that he apologize to those patriotic Americans who he is so fond of smearing.

    For those of you who Twitter, until he apologizes, please use the hashtag #Apologize. Let’s make that one of Twitter’s top trending tags. Let’s keep it up until he apologizes.

    Forward this email to your friends and ask them to call and tweet until Bloomberg apologizes.

  210. Keep up the good work wbboei.This is Hillarys Home Page as far as I am concerned and we must blog on until she makes her move just as a good commander leads his (her) troops.Great stuff is always welcome.

  211. From BP (politics, not oil co! )
    *********

    Local NYC Channel Reports: Failed Bomb At Times Square Was A “Diversion” For Massive Explosion

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/05/02/local_nyc_channel_reports_failed_bomb_at_times_square_was_a_diversion_for_massive_explosion.html
    *************

    Just a little info. Hubby works for a drilling company – not the type that drills wells, but high power line poles and bridge footings. Anyway, he says that there is a cut off valve that the oil drilling companies install on the off shore wells that is located at the bottom of the rig. This valve costs over $5M and a lot of comanies have it, but there is no law mandating that they install the valve. BP decided that they wouldn’t invest in this valve when they drilled the Deepwater Horizon site.

  212. Looking at the RCP polls, it seems Obama is nearing 50% approval rating…surprising imo.

  213. gonzotx
    May 4th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
    [snip]
    Anyway, he says that there is a cut off valve that the oil drilling companies install on the off shore wells that is located at the bottom of the rig. This valve costs over $5M and a lot of comanies have it, but there is no law mandating that they install the valve. BP decided that they wouldn’t invest in this valve when they drilled the Deepwater Horizon site.
    ——-

    I was just watching a NYTs video of the news stories they are working on (?) and one was about that BP valve. They said there was a meeting with Chaney way back when about these valves, closed door meeting with big oil guys, and after that meeting, companies like BP were not forced to put the valve on.
    This is from memory, so don’t quote me, but here is the link:

    http://video.nytimes.com/video/playlist/timescast/1247467375115/index.html?hp

    It’s part way into the video, around 1:45

  214. The problem I have with “call me Mike cause I’m just an ordinary guy like you Bloomberg” is that he is a billionaire and his mindset reflects all the bias, hubris and interests of his social class.

    You can see a distant mirror of him in Pasternak’s epic novel Doctor Zhivago when the a large contingent of people gather outside the Kremlin and begin to march on what is today Red Square asking for food. The Romanov elites are having a formal ball in one of the old structures erected by Peter The Great. The crowd begins to chant and the sound of it rises above the festivities. Whereupon the aristocrats freezes for a moment and silence envelops the room. Then Kamaravski says I wonder if they will sing on tune after the revolution. This savoir-faire delights the elites to no end, and they breathe a sign of relief. Not so the poor people on the street however. For seconds later mounted Cossacks with raised cavalry sabers charge into their ranks and cut those people to ribbons in a graphic re enactment of Bloody Sunday 1905.

    Do I get all that out of a comment worthy of the British Prime Minister? Only in the sense that it is the same class driven mindset. Mike is in no imminent danger of being thrown out of Gracie Mansion because of foreclosure. And with his money he rigged the system to get another term and thereby extend his tenancy. So how does he know how it feels to lose what you have? He knows as much about that as he knows about life on Mars. And what right does he have to condescend to ordinary people? Oh I see he is a billionaire. Well then let him stay a billionaire but get out of public office.

  215. #
    ShortTermer
    May 4th, 2010 at 2:16 pm

    lil ole grape and HillaryforTexas, and the mainstream media did not touch sending the SWAT team after us Grandmother Tea Party people. Tyranny. Tyranny. Tyranny, I say.
    ———————
    Not sure what you mean… I do wear a teabag pinned to my clothing, near the left shoulder.

  216. confloyd
    May 4th, 2010 at 3:40 pm

    —————-
    I didn’t think admin singled anyone out in her/his/their post. I thought it was just a good reminder for everyone.

  217. jbstonesfan
    May 4th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
    Looking at the RCP polls, it seems Obama is nearing 50% approval rating…surprising imo.
    **************

    I don’t believe it.

  218. Here’s something else I found on the valve story and the Bush/Chaney connection:

    BP Oil Slick The Result Of Republican DOJ And Regulatory Policy
    By: bmaz Monday May 3, 2010 7:23 pm
    TweetTweet32 Share47 digg reddit stumbleupon

    The economic and environmental damage resulting from the exploding fireball compromise of the Deepwater Horizon oil platform may be unprecedented, with the potential to emit the equivalent of up to four Exxon Valdez breakups per week with no good plan to stop it. There will be plenty of finger pointing among BP, Transocean and Halliburton, while it appears the bought and paid for corporatist Congress put the screws to the individual citizens and small businesses by drastically limiting their potential for economic recovery; all in the course of insuring big oil producers like BP have effectively no damage liability for such losses.

    How did this happen? There are, of course, a lot of pertinent factors but, by far, the one constant theme underlying all is the mendacious corporate servitude of the Republican party, their leaders and policies. The arrogance and recklessness of BP and its oily partners gestated wildly under the Bush/Cheney administration.

    Until the turn of the decade, BP had a relatively decent safety and environmental record compared to others similarly situated. Then BP merged with American oil giant Amoco and started plying the soft regulated underbelly of Republican rule in the US under oil men George Bush and Dick Cheney. Here from the Project On Government Oversight (POGO) is an excellent list of BP misconduct, almost all occurring and/or whitewashed under the Bush/Cheney Administration. If you open the door, foxes eat the chickens.

    But it is not just regulatory policy behind the open and notorious recklessness of BP and its ilk, it is intentional policy at the Department of Justice as well. Here is how the former Special Agent In Charge for the EPA Criminal Investigative Division, Scott West, described the DOJ coddling of BP under the Bush/Cheney Administration:

    In March 2006, a major pipeline leak went undetected for days, spilling a quarter-million gallons of oil on the Alaskan tundra. The spill occurred because the pipeline operator, British Petroleum (BP), ignored its own workers warnings by neglecting critical maintenance to cut costs. The spill sparked congressional hearings and a large federal-state investigation. Despite the outcry, in a settlement announced in late October 2007, BP agreed to one misdemeanor charge carrying three-year probation and a total of only $20 million in penalties (a $12 million fine with $8 million in restitution and compensatory payments).

    The settlement resulted from a sudden U.S. Justice Department August 2007 decision to wrap up the case, according to West. That precipitous shutdown meant

    Felony charges would not be pursued and the agreement foreclosed any future prosecutions. No BP executive faced any criminal liability for a spill second in size only to the Exxon Valdez;

    The fines proposed by Justice (to which BP immediately agreed) were only a fraction of what was legally required under the Alternative Fines Act. EPA had calculated the appropriate fine levels as several times what Justice offered BP – ranging from $58 million to $672 million, depending upon the economic assumptions; and

    The BP Alaska settlement is part of a pattern of “lowball” corporate public safety and pollution settlements engineered by the Bush Justice Department. In that October 2007 settlement package, Justice asked for only $50 million in fines for the BP Texas refinery explosion in which 15 people died – penalties not carrying strong deterrent value for a big multi-national corporation

    The above is verbatim from a formal complaint filed with the Inspector General of the DOJ, Glen Fine, by West and a group known as Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The complaint went on to quote West as follows:

    Never …have I had a significant environmental criminal case shut down by the political arm of the Department of Justice, nor have I had a case declined by the Department of Justice before I had been fully able to investigate the case. This is unprecedented in my experience.

    When a chief agency criminal investigator cannot get traction for the prosecution of crimes, and considers the internal DOJ policy to be complicit, you might have a problem. It appears, however, the complaint went nowhere, which is not IG Glen Fine’s fault as, once again, DOJ accountability has been prevented by the fact that, unique to executive agencies, the DOJ IG has no jurisdiction over the conduct of the attorneys in the DOJ and goodness knows neither OPR nor David Margolis would countenance such an investigation.

    By the way, since I have not seen anybody else mention it, much less the Obama/Holder DOJ appear to care, it should be pointed out that BP, despite the bend over sweetheart comprehensive deal the Bush DOJ worked out for them, is still on at least two different criminal probations for their malevolent reckless and intentional conduct. One case was for the Alaska spill and BP was placed on criminal probation for three years starting in December 2007. The other case was a felony plea resulting from the Texas City Refinery explosion. Here is the plea agreement from the Texas City Refinery case and here is the concurrent statement of facts in support thereof.

    (lots more…)

    http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/05/03/bp-oil-slick-the-result-of-republican-doj-and-regulatory-policy/

  219. Makes no sense given his recent ineptitude on oil spill and negative statements about the commendable law they passewd in Az on immigration.

  220. I believe that is a CBS poll stating that Obama is at 51% approval.

    Rasmussen has this:

    “The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 30% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty percent (40%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -10”

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

  221. Ace
    **************

    Contessa Brewer Is Frustrated That Times Square Bombing Suspect Is A Muslim UPDATE: Note Brewer’s Double Standard For Islamic Terroists And Militia Members
    —DrewM.
    Our favorite MSNBC News whore is back at it.

    I mean the thing is that- and I get frustrated and there was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country because there are a lot of people who want to use this terrorist intent to justify writing off people who believe in a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way. I mean they use it as justification for really outdated bigotry.
    Yes, we need to get past the outdated bigotry of thinking, “My God, what have they (some Muslim) blown up now?” and move on to the new and approved bigotry of attacking people who have the temerity to not fall in line with Obama’s political agenda.

    Won’t some racist teabager please step up and kill someone so Contessa won’t be so frustrated?

    Meanwhile, fresh from betting that the Times Square bomber was opposed to health care reform, Mike Bloomberg is warning people not take out their frustrations on Muslims.

    Liberals have spent the last 8 years far more outraged about these mythical backlashes than the actual terrorist attacks.

    Added: If you follow the link you’ll see Brewer was very concerned about not prejudging the outcome of the Times Square case. Contrast that with her language abut the Michagan militia case.

    And so there was part of me was really hoping this would not be the case that here would be somebody who is not the defined. I mean he’s accused, he’s arrested you know I don’t want to convict him before it’s time to do so. He’s the guy authorities say is involved. But that being said, I mean, we know even in recent history you have the Hutaree militia from Michigan who have plans to, let’s face it, create terror. That’s what they were planning to do and they were doing so from far different backgrounds than what this guy is coming from.
    Notice, the militia suspects definitely had plans to “create terror”. Shahzad? He’s just a “guy authorities say is involved” and we have to be careful not to prejudge him.

    Funny thing, Brewer the Whore apparently didn’t realize the government case against the militia members took a bit of a hit.

    Nine members of a Michigan militia will be released from jail pending trial after a federal judge on Monday harshly criticized the government’s claim they had conspired to overthrow the U.S. government.
    The decision is a significant defeat for federal authorities, who spoke in tough and triumphant terms after arresting members of a southern Michigan group called the Hutaree in March and charging them with conspiracy to commit sedition and attempted use of weapons of mass destruction.

    ..Observers cautioned that U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade and her team should be worried about Roberts’ assessment of their case, rather than her decision to release the defendants pending trial.

    “The feds are in big trouble,” said Lloyd Meyer of Chicago, a former terrorism prosecutor who won decades-long prison sentences against violent militia members in western and northern Michigan. “If they can’t persuade the judge by clear and convincing evidence that the defendants are dangerous, how can they convince 12 jurors beyond a reasonable doubt? Her ruling looks like the feds are prosecuting U.S. citizens for jibber-jabber.”

  222. Pakistan makes arrest over NYC bomb
    By ASSOCIATED PRESS
    04/05/2010 20:32

    Suspect said to be friend of US citizen who was arrested.
    KARACHI, Pakistan — Pakistani authorities have detained at least one man in connection with the Times Square bombing attempt in New York, two intelligence officials said Tuesday.

    The man, identified as Tauseef, was a friend of Faisal Shahzad, the American citizen of Pakistani origin who is in custody in the United States over the failed attack, one official said. He was arrested in the southern city of Karachi, said the official, who like all Pakistani spies refuses to be named in the media.

    Another official said several people had been taken into custody in Karachi since the failed attack Saturday.

    Neither said when the detentions had taken place. They said no charges had been filed.

    Shahzad was arrested in New York on Monday as he was about to board a flight to Dubai.

    US officials have said the 30-year-old had recently returned from a five-month stay in Pakistan, raising speculation he may have been in contact with al-Qaida or Taliban groups in the South Asian country.

    A local television station reported Tuesday that Shahzad spent time in Karachi and visited the northwestern city of Peshawar during his stay in Pakistan. Peshawar is a gateway for foreigners seeking to travel into the nearby tribal regions where militant groups have long had sanctuaries.

    Shahzad is suspected of driving a bomb-laden vehicle into Times Square last Saturday and parking it on a street lined with restaurants and Broadway theaters. He was expected in court to face charges later Tuesday

  223. Well just heard, right off the airwaves, the Pakistani bomber has admitted to being trained in, wait, hold the press, Pakistan! To guess what? Make bombs! Who would have thunk it? Guess CNN, the other deranged media, and “Larry from NQ”, will have to change their directive and forget about the “amateur” or “foreclosure” issues. Ladies and Gents, we got a honest to goodness TERRORIST in them there hills!!!

  224. Why does a “journalist” have to opine on what he or she wants the news to be as opposed to simply reporting that the guy was from Pakistan. What the hell happend to reporting the facts and not making everything so politically correct. We all know most terrorists are of Arab/Muslim origin , yet we fail to profile this group to be pc….It makes no sense!!!!

  225. The CNN clowns should be grateful this terrorist isn’t a trained expect in bomb making. I guess only something equivalent to taking down the Twin Towers will get there respect attention from now on.
    Car bombs in Times Square, no big F’ing deal.

  226. jeswezey
    May 4th, 2010 at 3:16 pm
    Carol

    “Excuse me, but the Jews didn’t just “leave”, they were driven out. Their country was conquered. There was nothing voluntary about it.”

    Well, now, that’s pretty much what’s happening to the Palestinians today, isn’t it? Their lands have been conquered and occupied and 2 million have already been driven out
    __________
    Absolutely not. You are wrong. The palestinians started a war. They refused to accept the UN partition. They lost the war. They have refused a peace agreement. They continue to reject Israel’s right to exist.

    Now I am going to tell you what I told a no longer friend who shares your beliefs. I told him he is either ignorant or an anti-semite.

    I apologize for engaging in name calling, which I have never done on this site before. But your posts can not go unanswered.

  227. Correction RE:
    ShortTermer
    May 4th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
    lil ole grape and HillaryforTexas, I agree; and the mainstream media did not touch sending the SWAT team after us Grandmother Tea Party people.

    We are governed by tyranny. Tyranny. Tyranny, I say.

Comments are closed.