The Sedition Edition – Sestak Shutup, 2×4 Schumer, BP Daschle, OilBama, Arizona Brewer, And Alexi Giannoulias, Part II

The categories of disaster, as we wrote, continue to multiply “at an exponential rate“. The natural disaster called Barack Obama must be removed from office. Today we continue with our seditious questions.

We’re not the only ones with seditious questions [WARNING: video of Keith Olbermann and Donna Brazille may blind you]:



Let’s pile the questions up before all too briefly discussing them:

  • Remember Alice Palmer, Paul Hackett (Chuck Schumer and Rahm Emanuel were the culprits who forced Paul Hackett off the ballot) and the many others forced off the ballot? Do remember how Barack Obama stabbed Alice Palmer, his friend, in the back when she stood in the way of his election. For that matter, recall why Governor of Illinois and former Obama pal Rod Blagojevich is under indictment. So why is anyone surprised that Obama would commit an impeachable offense to get Joe Sestak off the ballot?
  • When are Barack Obama and 2×4 Chuck Schumer to be asked whether they condone a Mosque built next to the remains of the World Trade Center? When will Chuck Schumer take a stance on this issue?
  • Just how thin-skinned is unqualified, inexperienced, Boob Obama?
  • When will the Obama Dimocrats learn – from Jerry Springer???? – to stop the class based bigotry against Sarah Palin and White Working Class Americans?
  • When will Barack Obama and his corrupt henchmen stop blaming George W. Bush for the corrupt incompetence in the Gulf of Mexico as barrels of oil slick the coast and the waters like a Chicago political meeting?
  • As we have noted before, Republicans have the most important Latino politician. Republicans have the most (excluding Hillary) exciting woman politician. Republicans have the most exciting white male politician. Now Republicans have the two most forceful governors. Does the Dimocratic Party, the once great Democratic Party have anyone to match such firepower from simple straight talk?
  • Who the hell does Joe Sestak think he represents?
  • * * * * * *

    2×4 Chuck Schumer has to answer the Mosque question before November. 2×4 Schumer must be asked before the United Nations considers mocking Mohammad a death penalty crime.

    Last night a community board in New York City approved the construction of a Mosque right next to the World Trade Center site. Silence from 2×4 Schumer who is up for reelection in November.

    When Catholics wanted to build a Carmelite convent at the death camp in Auchwitz-Birkenau there were protests. The Vatican wisely relocated the convent in order to maintain good relations with the Jewish community. There was controversy over the role of the Vatican and the Catholic Church during World War II and the possible complicity with the Third Reich in the attempted extermination of the Jews. But now, families of September 11 victims are supposed to acquiesce in what appears to be a triumphalist massive Mosque right next to the World Trade Center where thousands perished in a radical Islamic attack. The massive Mosque is scheduled to open on September 11, 2011. Republicans are rightly making this an issue in this year’s elections.



    When will Chuck Schumer be asked questions about the building of this triumphalist Mosque?

    * * * * * *

    Thin-skinned Obama was heckled this week at a Barbara Boxer fundraiser by gay activists not fooled by his flowery talk. Thin-skinned Obama was flustered and tried to bully his way past the heckler.

    Yesterday Barack Obama showed his thin skin again (and his lies) when he met with Republican senators who questioned his “audacity and unbending partisanship”.

    “I told him I thought there was a degree of audacity in him even showing up today after what happened with financial regulation,” Corker told reporters. “I just wanted him to tell me how, when he wakes up in the morning, comes over to a luncheon like ours today, how does he reconcile that duplicity?”

    Four people who were in the room said Obama bristled and defended his administration’s handling of negotiations. On the way out, Corker said, Obama approached him and both men repeated their main points.

    “I told him there was a tremendous disconnect from his words and the actions of his administration,” Corker said.”

    Charles Krauthammer had the last word when he volunteered to write a prescription for Valium.



    * * * * * *

    As the Gulf of Mexico bleeds black blood, Obama henchmen are blaming George W. Bush instead of taking responsibility. Chris Dodd, the disgraced Senator from Connecticut (not the current disgraced wannabee Senator from Connecticut) was on the Don Imus show (why are people still going on that disgraced show?):

    “When asked by Don Imus on his morning program if the Obama was to blame for lack of response to the oil spill, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) blamed the Bush administration. “Well, you know, they come into office a year ago with all of this. And so, after the last eight years,” he said.

    At that point, Imus interrupted and asked if he has “lost” his mind for blaming Bush. “The President has been in office for a year and a half and they’ve been dragging their feet and even people like James Carville said that his behavior ‘has been at the very best lackadaisical and naive’ and you’re still going to try to blame Bush?” he said.”

    Dodd was one of the Obama voters that during the health care debate put his trust on regulators. But as we now know, regulators have been captured in all sectors of the economy. Obama fluffers at MSNBC noted how “regulators” took industry gifts. And there was more porn (as in the SEC during the financial crisis in late 2008). When will Obama fix the problems he campaigned to CHANGE? Barack Obama has left the revolving door turning in the White House and in the Executive Branch. Obama is to blame.



    * * * * * *

    Jerry Springer of all people, is correct:

    “Well, [Sarah Palin is] incredibly charismatic. Her politics are different than mine. But I don’t belittle her. She represents a significant segment of America. It might not be the majority, but certainly a significant segment of America that lives her lifestyle and believes as she does. And therefore, I can disagree with her without making fun of her. And for those of us who are more liberal, we step on dangerous ground when we try to belittle her, or belittle her fundamentalism, or religion or stuff like that, saying you know she is backwoods or stuff like that. That is how liberals come across as elitists or snobs … She touches a nerve for people who resent being looked down upon. And there is a significant segment of America that feels it is being looked down upon. I think that’s dangerous. It’s where people who are liberal can get into trouble. So, I respect her. I disagree with her. But I have nothing bad to say about her.”

    * * * * * *

    And who the hell does Joe Sestak think he represents? The people of Pennsylvania just rid themselves of Arlen Specter who cared more about saving his job than representing them. Now Joe Sestak, who has potentially incriminating evidence is withholding that testimony/evidence. This is evidence of a potentially impeachment worthy crime. Joe Sestak either represents the people of Pennsylvania or he represents corrupt forces in the White House.

    “What did the White House promise Joe Sestak if he dropped out of the Senate race, and why won’t they talk about it?

    There was a time when the White House and Rep. Joe Sestak were enemies. Now they’re in the bunker together: Neither wants to talk about whether a White House official tried to get Sestak to drop his campaign for senator by offering him a job. With its reticence, the Obama White House raises some eerie (and, from its perspective) unwelcome parallels with the Bush White House.

    President Obama endorsed Sestak’s opponent, incumbent and recent Democratic convert Arlen Specter, in Pennsylvania’s Democratic primary. Included in the standard package of services that accompanies such support is “field-clearing”—encouraging challengers to look for employment opportunities elsewhere. Sestak says that an administration official offered him a job if he’d drop out of the race. He declined and went on to win the party’s nomination. Now he and White House officials are allies in trying to keep the seat in the Democratic Party.[snip]

    Offering a job in exchange for dropping out of a political race actually is illegal.”

    That type of activity is the impeachment crime against Governor Blagojevich. The Illinois governor was forced out and now faces trial. The same Chicago style questions must be raised about Chicago Obama.



    As we wrote in 2008, Americans need a Special Prosecutor. In this case the supposed Department of Justice has ruled out a Special Prosecutor. As the New York Times, on the front page notes, this will not go away and “trust me” is not enough.

    “The problem with both responses, of course, is that we can’t just take the word of White House officials. Sestak says the offer was made, and the White House admits there were conversations. At least three laws might have been broken, according to Darrell Issa, the Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. With that many, it shouldn’t be up to one of the interested parties to decide whether any laws were broken.

    Chicago Dick Durbin has been forced to squeak out a demand for answers from the White House and Joe Sestak.

    Sestak must answer to the people of Pennsylvania via prosecutors. The “ethics” committee in the House should demand answers from Sestak.

    Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) also wants answers. Weiner is asking seditious questions just like us.

    The New York Times almost equals the Big Pink warning we began to sound years ago:

    Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

    The New York Times is mocking, on its front page, the “trust me” bull:

    “For Sestak Matter, a ‘Trust Us’ Response From White House.

    “For three months, the White House has refused to say whether it offered a job to Representative Joe Sestak to get him to drop his challenge to Senator Arlen Specter in a Pennsylvania Democratic primary, as Mr. Sestak has asserted.

    But the White House wants everyone who suspects that something untoward, or even illegal, might have happened to rest easy: though it still will not reveal what happened, the White House is reassuring skeptics that it has examined its own actions and decided it did nothing wrong. Whatever it was that it did.

    “Lawyers in the White House and others have looked into conversations that were had with Congressman Sestak,” Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said Sunday on “Face the Nation” on CBS. “And nothing inappropriate happened.”

    “Improper or not, did you offer him a job in the administration?” asked the host, Bob Schieffer.

    “I’m not going to get further into what the conversations were,” Mr. Gibbs replied. “People that have looked into them assure me that they weren’t inappropriate in any way.”

    Perhaps unsurprisingly, the “trust us” response from the White House has not exactly put the matter to rest. With Mr. Sestak’s victory over Mr. Specter in last week’s primary, the questions have returned with intensity, only to remain unanswered. Mr. Gibbs deflected questions 13 times at a White House briefing last week just two days after the primary. Mr. Sestak, a retired admiral, has reaffirmed his assertion without providing any details, like who exactly offered what job.”

    As we noted above, this has all the earmarks of Rahm Emanuel. But Emanuel would not have acted without Barack Obama’s corrupt complicity.

    “There are certainly statutes that bar government employees from using their authority to influence a Senate nomination or to promise employment as a reward for political activity. Yet presidents have given appointments to many people to reward allies or take would-be obstacles out of the way for other allies, explicitly or not.

    Even if the conversations were perfectly legal, as the White House claims, the situation challenges President Obama’s efforts to present himself as a reformer who will fix a town of dirty politics. And the refusal to even discuss what was discussed does not advance the White House’s well-worn claim to being “the most transparent” in history.

    When Mr. Gibbs was pressed on the matter Thursday, he resolutely referred to his original statement exonerating the White House and refused to elaborate.

    “But you never really explained what the conversation was,” said Jake Tapper of ABC News.

    “And I don’t have anything to add today,” Mr. Gibbs said.

    “But,” Mr. Tapper continued, “if the White House offers a congressman a position in the administration in order to convince that congressman not to run for office …”

    “I don’t have anything to add to that,” Mr. Gibbs said.

    Mr. Tapper persisted: “But do you really think the American people don’t have a right to know about what exactly the conversation was?”

    I don’t have anything to add to what I said in March,” Mr. Gibbs said.”

    It’s an impeachable offense. If Joe Sestak wants to be the Obama protector not the representative of the people of Pennsylvania, he must be thrown out of the House and not be elected to the Senate. If Joe Sestak changes his story it will not be viewed as a truthful change. If Joe Sestak names a low ranking official as the corrupt force, the question will remain as to how high up the chain the corruption runs. We think we know the answer to that question.

    The Stonewall continues:

    “The White House had nothing more to say Monday. David Axelrod, the president’s senior adviser, said on CNN, “I don’t think any questions will be left unanswered on this,” but he did not actually answer the questions. Other Democrats have come to the White House’s defense by arguing that even if Mr. Sestak’s assertion about a job were true, it would hardly be shocking in a city of political tradeoffs.

    “I don’t see the scandal,” Steve Elmendorf, who was chief of staff to former Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri when he was the House Democratic leader, said in an e-mail message. “Sestak is totally qualified for the job, and Dem and Rep presidents routinely offer members of Congress jobs for all sorts of reasons.”

    Tell that to Blagojevich, Elmendorf. The pay to play has worn think with the corrupt forces in the White House. Whatever happened to Hope and Change?

    “Indeed, Douglas B. Sosnik, the White House political director under President Bill Clinton, said using jobs to reward political friends was simply “business as usual.” But, he added, that was the problem: Mr. Obama promised not to perpetuate business as usual. “It cuts against the Obama brand,” he said. “The public tolerance for these deals is less than in the past.”[snip]

    “Tell me a White House that didn’t do this, back to George Washington,” Mr. Kaufman said. “But here’s the difference — the times have changed and the ethics have changed and the scrutiny has changed. This is the kind of thing people across America are mad about.”

    Moreover, he said, Mr. Obama’s own rhetoric raised the bar: “When you get out there and say, ‘We’re going to do things totally different, we’re above all this and we’re going to be totally transparent,’ they cause their own problem because they’re not being transparent.”

    Americans want straight talkers. Jan Brewer is increasingly viewed as a straight talker because she is… straight talking.



    And Brewer is straight talking with a smile too.



    Agree with her or not, Jan Brewer is straight talking. Joe Sestak is weasel talking – just like Barack Obama.

    If Joe Sestak wants to protect the corrupt, he cannot be trusted. He’s like Obama.

    Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

    They both must go – as a start.

    Share

    70 thoughts on “The Sedition Edition – Sestak Shutup, 2×4 Schumer, BP Daschle, OilBama, Arizona Brewer, And Alexi Giannoulias, Part II

    1. James Carville’s latest sedition:

      http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/bp-oil-spill-political-headache-obama-democrats-slam/story?id=10746519

      The White House is seemingly making an increased show of pressuring BP, but President Obama is facing political heat from within his own party for what some say has been a lackluster response to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

      The “political stupidity is unbelievable,” Democratic strategist James Carville said on “Good Morning America” today. “The president doesn’t get down here in the middle of this. … I have no idea of why they didn’t seize this thing. I have no idea of why their attitude was so hands off here.”

      On Thursday, Obama will announce new measures the federal government will take to try to prevent any future BP oil spills, administration officials said. And on Friday, the president will visit the Gulf coast, his second trip to the region since the environmental disaster happened last month.

      But Carville said the Obama administration’s response to the BP oil spill has been “lackadaisical,” and that rather than place the blame on the previous administration, it should’ve done more to deal with BP and “inept bureaucrats,” which would’ve in turn helped boost Obama’s approval ratings.

      “The president of the United States could’ve come down here, he could’ve been involved with the families of these 11 people” who died on the offshore rig, Carville said. “He could’ve demanded a plan in anticipation of this.”

    2. Also, the spill is an issue that really cuts close to home for Carville because he’s from Louisiana.

    3. Carville is on Obama’s ass big time…LOL! Carville’s boot is definetly on Obama’s neck…wonder what Rahm is saying about Carville.

    4. This is I think a oil well with extremely high pressures…so they are digging other holes in the ground under the ocean…lets hope they don’t do this again.

      I guess we havent heard whether theyve managed to the “top kill”.

    5. admin: reading your blogs, laying it out straight and calling the ass an ass, is damned near euphoric for me.

    6. I guess when the disaster is in your back yard, you feel a little differentl about it. Carville really is upset. But with everything turning to shxt for the people on the coast, and those who depend on them, and a complete lack of much reaction from the President, it is not hard to understand how they feel.

    7. It’s about time that Carville is pist at Barry…only because the spill strikes him close to home.

      Barry must be a raving lunatic around the oval office, not getting the ‘good ol’ boy’ knuckle bumps he is expecting these days.

      I secretly wonder if he is glad he scammed the system for this ‘job’. His hair is turning white by the day.

    8. Shadowfax, I noticed that he was turning white also. But I guess I decided his staff just quit dying it for him.

    9. The first time you get elected because you are young, but the second time it is because you are gray.

      I wonder if your hair falls out what happens.

    10. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/05/exclusive-senate-judiciary-committee-republicans-atorney-general-eric-holder-special-prosecutor-sestak-job-offer.html

      In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder today, all seven Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee “urge the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate Congressman Joe Sestak’s claim that a White House official offered him a job to induce him to exit the Pennsylvania Senate primary race against Senator Arlen Specter.”

      The seven – Sens. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Orrin Hatch of Utah, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Jon Kyl or Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John Cornyn of Texas and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma – allege that the offer would appear to violate federal criminal laws, including 18 U.S.C. 600, which prohibits promising a government position “as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity” or “in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office.”

      Rep. Sestak, D-Penn., who defeated Specter in the primary last week, told Comcast’s Larry Kane in February that the White House had offered him a position in exchange for not challenging Specter. White House senior adviser David Axelrod said on Monday that White House lawyers had looked into it and judged everything “perfectly appropriate.”

      CNN’s John King suggested to Axelrod that such a job offer “marches up into the gray area, perhaps into the red area of a felony. It is a felony to induce somebody by offering them a job.”

      “If such things happened they would constitute a serious breach of the law,” Axelrod told CNN, “and when the allegations were looked into there is no evidence of such a thing”

      That was not enough for the Republican Senators, who wrote to Holder that they “do not believe the Department of Justice can properly defer to White House lawyers to investigate a matter that could involve ‘a serious breach of the law.’ The White House cannot possibly manage an internal investigation of potential criminal misconduct while simultaneously crafting a public narrative to rebut the claim that misconduct occurred.”

      Assistant Attorney General Ronald Welch last week told Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., that a special counsel is not needed; the Republican Senators are asking for Holder to reconsider that decision, though they suggest he could also refer the matter to the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section or the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia.

    11. admin: I am hoping they really look into this….I heard that Barney Frank is a birther….I caught the tale end of that on Hannity….don’t know if I misunderstood.

    12. May 26, 2010

      Clinton dishes on Chelsea wedding to Chinese TV

      Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warmed up for interviews with Chinese television, in one of the lighter moments of an Asia trip dominated by mounting tensions on the Korean peninsula.

      In Beijing with Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner for the U.S.-China Strategic Dialogue, Clinton told China’s Central Television Monday that daughter Chelsea’s upcoming wedding “is the most important activity going on in my life now.”

      “We are looking forward to it,” Clinton said of the upcoming wedding, via the AP. “It is something that every mother dreams of. And so for me it’s … the most important activity going on in my life now, I have to confess. Don’t tell anybody that but it is such an enjoyable and exciting time for our family.”

      Clinton also explained the concept of a bridal shower to the television audience.

      “It is not where you go in and have a shower, it is where friends of the bride and family come together and you give gifts to the bride and you tell stories and you show pictures of when she was a little girl.”

      Clinton and Geithner also opened up in an interview with China’s Phoenix TV, discussing living life in the public eye, facing criticism, and husband Bill’s taste in movies.

      “Well, we have an ongoing negotiation, because my husband prefers the action movies,” Clinton said.

      “That’s a surprise,” Geithner, sitting beside her in the interview, said.

      “The more violence, the better,” Clinton continued. “And I don’t find that relaxing at all. … So we take turns. And when I go to one of his movies, I shut my eyes a lot, and listen to the music and the soundtrack. And when he goes to one of my movies, he falls asleep a lot. So it works out pretty well for us.”

      Clinton also says she doesn’t miss life in the White House.

      “I don’t really miss living at the White House, because I had eight years living there, which I am very honored to have had,” Clinton said later in the interview. “I miss the people who work there, they are wonderful people. And I love going to events now at the White House. But that time is over.”

      Clinton said her 90 year old mother lives with them in Washington.

      Clinton was in South Korea Wednesday, where she offered U.S. support for Seoul. South Korea wants the U.N. Security Council to take up the issue of sanctioning North Korea for sinking the South Korean naval vessel the Cheonan in March; China has not yet agreed, Clinton acknowledged Wednesday.

      Clinton is flying back to Washington Wednesday, and is due to roll out the Obama administration’s new National Security Strategy Thursday at the Brookings Institution.

      http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/0510/Clinton_dishes_on_Chelsea_wedding_to_Chinese_TV.html

    13. By now maybe we could get some more detail on this. How many ‘hundreds’ of Americans showed up? How many actually applied when they found out what the open jobs were? How many of those new American workers are still working at those jobs?

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

      Americans rush to fill vacant jobs held by illegals
      Submitted by Clint on Mon, 05/03/2010 – 09:25
      in Current Events
      PHOENIX — Job hunters turned out in the hundreds to fill recently-vacant positions at Pro’s Ranch Market stores, where a federal audit led to the firing of some 300 workers.

      “We heard they are firing a lot of illegal people, so we’re here to apply,” she said.

      About 300 of the 1,500 total employees at the six Phoenix supermarkets were let go this week after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement audit found them to be working illegally.

      http://www.azfamily.com/news/Hundreds-seek-to-fill-vacant-po…

    14. David Remnick shouts “racists!”:

      http://thejewishstar.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/q-and-a-with-david%C2%A0remnick/

      MO: Do you think there are some other factors involved in the Orthodox sentiment towards Obama?

      DR: What I think you’re hinting at is race here. When I see placards in Israel calling Obama an anti-Semite or having him wear a kaffiyeh I just think that it’s grossly unfair. And the roots of that are, to me, a great deal deeper than a debate over a detail in timing of a piece of negotiation. By no means, do I think that everyone who disagrees strongly is a racist, but I think it’s one element among some people.

    15. turndownobama
      May 26th, 2010 at 10:30 pm

      By now maybe we could get some more detail on this. How many ‘hundreds’ of Americans showed up? How many actually applied when they found out what the open jobs were? How many of those new American workers are still working at those jobs?

      ========

      ANd, btw, what WERE those jobs?

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

      Americans rush to fill vacant jobs held by illegals

    16. Clinton also says she doesn’t miss life in the White House.

      “I don’t really miss living at the White House, because I had eight years living there, which I am very honored to have had,” Clinton said later in the interview. “I miss the people who work there, they are wonderful people. And I love going to events now at the White House. But that time is over.”
      *******************

      She sounds absolute

    17. I really think Stephanopoulos had no clue as to what the fraud should have been doing. What a jerk and really kind of laughed at Carville in his snarly sick way. Can’t stand the fool/traitor/elitist

    18. #
      gonzotx
      May 26th, 2010 at 11:03 pm

      Clinton also says she doesn’t miss life in the White House.

      “I don’t really miss living at the White House, because I had eight years living there, which I am very honored to have had,” Clinton said later in the interview. “I miss the people who work there, they are wonderful people. And I love going to events now at the White House. But that time is over.”
      *******************

      She sounds absolute
      &&&&&&&&&&&&&

      Oh, believe me, she will comfortable there again.

      But she will be looking forward to having a different view; from behind the Oval Office desk.

    19. Geez. The idiot must really be worried about the Jewish vote
      —————-
      May 26, 2010

      Netanyahu to Meet with Obama at White House Next Week

      A White House official confirms Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been invited to visit Washington next week.

      Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel extended the invitation during a private visit to Israel to celebrate his son’s Bar Mitzvah. The visit will take place on Tuesday after Netanyahu’s previously planned visit to Canada.

      The two leaders are expected to discuss what Emanuel described as “shared security interests,” an apparent reference to the Iranian nuclear program and other issues.

      The president and the Israeli leader will also obviously discuss the stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

      The administration has been working to thaw recent chilly relations with Israel. When Netanyahu visited the White House in March, reporters and photographers were barred from the meeting. In fact, the president and the prime minister were not seen in public together. The Israeli media portrayed it as a snub as the two allies sparred over Israeli settlement construction. Earlier in March, Israel angered the administration when it unveiled plans for new housing in disputed East Jerusalem while Vice President Biden visited Israel.

      But the White House has used a series of recent events and statements to emphasize the traditional “unshakeable” commitment to Israeli security. In recent weeks, Mr. Obama met with Elie Wiesel at the White House and White House staff met multiple times with a group of rabbis from around the country.

      The administration is also encouraging the Palestinians to maintain the diplomatic process as the U.S. is trying to build momentum as it mediates indirect peace talks.

      White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said, “The president looks forward to a visit from Palestinian President Abbas in the near future. We’re just working out timing.”

      http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20006026-503544.html

    20. “Oh, believe me, she will comfortable there again”
      ————-

      Not unless she fumigates first.

    21. On his program tonight, Bill O’Reilly and Dennis Miller were making fun of James Carville in his passionate comments about the damage being done to Louisiana with the BP oil disaster. Their callousness literally made me sick.

      We’ve heard ad naseum about Bill O’s childhood in his book that he hawks continually. Wonder how he would feel if the oil spill was going to destroy his boyhood home and areas in his home state? Bill O and Obama ONLY care about ADVANCING THEMSELVES…you’d think they were brothers.

    22. That Opens The Door!
      Barney Frank is not a chess player:

      Tongue firmly in cheek, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) on Tuesday afternoon called on reporters to demand to see the birth certificate of new Rep. Charles Djou (R-Hawaii).

      As Djou (pictured here) was being sworn into office, Frank walked the hallway of the Speaker’s Lobby off the House floor calling on the media to “do your job” and review Djou’s papers.

      It was a small bit of payback for the enormous amount of attention some conservatives (and the media) paid to the is-the-president-really-from-America controversy.

      if Djou was interested in being my hero for life he would request from the Hawaii Dept. of Health his full vital records file (which they make available to amateur genealogists and family members preparing, or battling over, estates).

      Mr. Djou could then release the full file and tells us how long the process took, just so we could all see how easy it would be for Obama to scotch this birther silliness.

      It may not happen, of course, since the press would switch to bitterly denouncing this as a cheap stunt, Barney Frank’s bon mot notwithstanding.

      That said, if any enterprising JOM reader was born in Hawaii (or knows someone who was), please give some thought to volunteering as a crash dummy. Obviously, any file actually released would be heavily redacted, but still.

      http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2010/05/that-opens-the-door.html

    23. gonzotx
      May 26th, 2010 at 11:03 pm

      Sadly, I agree.

      As I said a few days ago in a post, the Tea Party is organized and making good politial progress…getting candidates elected and putting pressure on the republican party.

      If Hillary really has moved on….and I can’t say that I blame her…..then we are really are a movement without a leader. If the Tea Party is a center right movement, then where is the center left movement in our country right now. As soon as Hillary dems get elected…beating out Obama’s choices….they go over to the dark side. They seem afraid or incapable of speaking up independently for what we represent.

    24. some good news:

      Advertisement

      Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
      Wednesday, May 26, 2010

      The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 23% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-five percent (45%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -22. That’s the lowest Approval Index rating yet measured for this president (see trends).

    25. Yes Carol, I don’t trust any of them and not to many Repubs. I really wish, and it is doable, if we get enough Tea Party people in in the next 6 years, term limits, term limits…then again, everyone seems to get bought so easily like Brown. Rand Paul is nearly insane.

    26. Bill O’Reilly and Dennis Miller

      Their egos are only surpassed by the frauds, and not by much!

    27. Anderson Cooper had David Gergen on his program again tonight and gave him a chance to recind his comment that if our government had treated WWII like they are treating the BP oil disaster, we’d be speaking German.

      Gergen said he believed that even more today. Apparently they took a trip down into the marsches and even Anderson was stunned about the condition and that nothing has been done or very little.

    28. If Hillary does not throw her hat in the ring then it is because she knows that 2012 will be a Republican year. It sure smells that way to me.

    29. If Hillary does not run again then I am 100% sure we will not see a woman president in my lifetime. That was never the issue for me that is was for many of her supporters. I respect their opinion on that matter but it was not mine. For me the issue was getting the best candidate to lead this nation in one of the most dangerous periods in history. She was the right candidate at the right time. Two many of our fellow citizens lacked the judgment to realize that and like naive school children fell for the travelling medicine show and bought the elixir he was peddling. In fact they were so stupid that they desperate and naivve that they had no idea what questions to ask. When you tried to let them know they refused to listen.

    30. Those are the kind of stupid questions you get from Scarbrough. He want to know what kind of a republican this guy is–and you can tell at a glance that he is a boring one. The questions they avoid are how are you going to solve the unemployment problem, how are you going to cut costs without cutting benefits, is social security on the chopping block or not, what is you view on Iraq withdrawal and what can you offer to the youth of this country. Instead you get this tripe do you think Obama is racist. I do not care what kind of Republican this guy is, nearly as much as how he is going to save this country–what exactly is his plan.

    31. I am sorry. I do not get a warm and fuzzy feeling about this Toomey. He looks like a RINO to me–which is the opposite number of an Obama supporter.

    32. Speaking of Social Security, I keep seeing people say that it takes some large chunk of the federal budget — without mentioning that it also BRINGS IN a large chunk of the federal income. Plus it has a reserve that earns interest.

      Unfortunately Congress has been borrowing from that reserve for decades — but that is not SS’s fault.

    33. What is “means testing” in Social security reform??? Who ever that guy that was asking that question scares the heck out of me???

    34. basement angel,

      Was it you who finds Wikipedia trustworthy?

      Wikipedia has the same anti-SS slant. It begins by saying loud and clear that SS pays out a lot, not even mentioning in that paragraph that SS also brings in money to the federal budget.

      Only way down the article does it talk about what SS brings in — and that is buried in a topic “The negative financial outlook.”

      From wikipedia:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)#The_negative_financial_outlook
      Current year expenses are paid from current Social Security tax revenues. When revenues exceed expenditures, as they have in most years, the excess is invested in special series, non-marketable U.S. Government bonds, thus the Social Security Trust Fund indirectly finances the federal government’s general purpose deficit spending. In 2007, the cumulative excess of Social Security taxes and interest received over benefits paid out stood at $2.2 trillion. [footnote cites http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4a3.html ]

      The cite in the footnote does look useful.

    35. Hey people, the Repugs have just put up a “listening tour” site called

      http://www.americaspeakingout.com

      where they are asking for people’s ideas. I visited the site with trepidation, thinking I would give them a piece of my mind about a thing or two; but when I looked into it, I realized that a lot of other people had the same idea as me. Some of the comments are hilarious. Give it a look, just for a laugh!

      For instance, under American Values: Life: “Share your thoughts about protecting the sanctity of human life”, one person wrote in “I think all men should be forced to become pregnant and yellow yams should be eaten four times a day, with warm milk”,

      while another writes in: “I am a bit troubled. I believe my son has a girlfriend, because she left a dirty magazine with men in it under his bed. My son is only 16 and I really don’t think he’s ready to date yet. What’s worse is that he’s sneaking some girl to his room behind my back. I need help, God! I want my son to stop being so secretive”,

      and another: “I challenged President Barack Obama to a public debate on abortion, which he lost by not responding. He must have accepted my challenge before May 26, 2010 at 5:00 p.m. Therefore, he lost, I won, abortion is wrong, abortion is evil, abortion must now and immediately be made illegal everywhere in the world.”

      If the Repugs actually read these responses, I think a bell might ring in their heads that only nut jobs really support their “values”, or that the real “values voters” don’t surf the internets.

    36. About the RNC site I just mentioned above, the site is already on the blink – just when I was ready to put in a comment of my own!

    37. My take on Hillary is what else can she say right now regarding her political future? Despite the current hits coming his way, Obama is still the darling of the media, the economy may or may not be starting a recovery (and if it isn’t I’m sure there will be lots of press releases claiming it is anyway), moderate voters have soured on the Democratic party, and current members of her own party are still largely sticking with the Obama agenda. She might not think there is any possible opening to challenge Obama at this time.

      Personally, I think there is still a legitimate chance for her however. If things really, finally get bad for Obama (particularly in the press), surely her inner circle will encourage her to go back to politics as she would be the Democratic frontrunner. Right now I don’t let myself get to discouraged about what Hillary says–there is still too much time for things to develop before the 2012 contest.

    38. Wednesday, May 26, 2010

      How Obama got into Harvard
      Exclusive: Jack Cashill asks where Barry would be if his dad had been from Kentucky

      May 27, 2010
      By Jack Cashill

      Two years ago I inadvertently began my exploration of the authorship of Barack Obama’s 1995 memoir, “Dreams From My Father,” with an inquiry into how Obama got into Harvard Law School in 1988.

      In the summer of 2008, I was tipped to a story that the media were scrupulously ignoring. It involved the venerable African-American entrepreneur and politico Percy Sutton.

      A Manhattan borough president for 12 years and a credible candidate for mayor of New York City in 1977, Sutton had appeared in late March 2008 on a local New York City show called “Inside City Hall.”

      When asked about Obama by the show’s host, Dominic Carter, the octogenarian Sutton calmly and lucidly explained that he had been “introduced to [Obama] by a friend.”

      The friend’s name was Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, and the introduction had taken place about 20 years prior. Sutton described al-Mansour as “the principal adviser to one of the world’s richest men.” The billionaire in question was Saudi prince Al-Waleed bin Talal.

      According to Sutton, al-Mansour had asked him to “please write a letter in support of [Obama] … a young man that has applied to Harvard.” Sutton had friends at Harvard and gladly did so.

      Three months before the election it should have mattered that a respected black political figure had publicly announced that a crazed anti-Semite like al-Mansour, backed by an equally bonkers Saudi billionaire, had been guiding Obama’s career perhaps for the last 20 years, but the story died a quick and unnatural death.

      The definitive documentary on the red-hot eligibility story: “The Question of Eligibility: Is Barack Obama’s presidency constitutionally legitimate?”

      The books that might have shed some light on this incident have not done so. John Heilemann and Mark Halperin’s comprehensive look at the 2008 campaign, “Game Change,” does not so much as mention Percy Sutton.

      Nor does David Remnick. His new book, “The Bridge,” stands as the authoritative book on Obama’s “life and rise,” but he only inadvertently addresses the question of how Obama got into Harvard Law.

      The reader learns from Remnick that Obama was an “unspectacular” student in his two years at Columbia and at every stop before that going back to grade school.

      A Northwestern University prof who wrote a letter of reference for Obama reinforces the point, telling Remnick, “I don’t think [Obama] did too well in college.” As to Obama’s LSAT scores, Jimmy Hoffa’s body will be unearthed before those are.

      How such an indifferent student got into a law school whose applicants’ LSAT scores typically track between 98 to 99 percentile and whose GPAs range between 3.8 and 4.0 is a subject Remnick avoids in the section of his book dealing with Obama’s admission.

      In his 2007 book, “Obama: From Promise to Power,” David Mendell is likewise silent on the mystery admission. This surprises because Mendell, a Chicago Tribune reporter who saw more of Obama than Michelle often did, writes objectively and intimately about Obama’s ascendancy.

      Mendell traces Obama’s sudden itch to become a lawyer to the model of the recently deceased Chicago Mayor Harold Washington, but Washington went to Northwestern’s very respectable law school in Evanston, Ill.

      The thought doesn’t cross Obama’s mind. In “Dreams,” he limits his choices to “Harvard, Yale, Stanford.” Writes Mendell as casually as if the honor were deserved, “Obama would soon be accepted at the most prestigious law school in the nation.”

      Whether or not Sutton helped Obama get into Harvard, Michelle Obama’s experience suggests that he could have gotten in without that help.

      “Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in “Barack and Michelle,” “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.”

      Sympathetic biographer Liza Mundy writes, “Michelle frequently deplores the modern reliance on test scores, describing herself as a person who did not test well.”

      She did not write well, either. Au contraire. One of my correspondents, a college drop-out, found Michelle’s senior thesis at Princeton online and concluded, “I could have written it in sophomore English class.” Mundy charitably describes it as “dense and turgid.”

      The less charitable Christopher Hitchens observes, “To describe [the thesis] as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be ‘read’ at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn’t written in any known language.”

      Hitchens exaggerates only a little. The following summary statement by Michelle captures her unfamiliarity with many of the rules of grammar and most of logic:

      The study inquires about the respondents’ motivations to benefit him/herself, and the following social groups: the family, the Black community, the White community, God and church, The U.S. society, the non-White races of the world, and the human species as a whole.

      Michelle even typed badly. Still, she was admitted to and graduated from Harvard Law. One almost feels sorry for her. She was in so far over her head that the anxiety had to have been corrosive.

      Obama was sufficiently self-deluding – some would say narcissistic – that he felt little of that anxiety. Later in his book, Remnick lets slip into the record a revealing letter Obama had written while president of the Harvard Law Review:

      I must say, however, that as someone who has undoubtedly benefited from affirmative action programs during my academic career, and as someone who may have benefited from the Law Review’s affirmative action policy when I was selected to join the Review last year, I I have not felt stigmatized within the broader law school community or as a staff member of the Review.
      Bottom line: Had Obama’s father come from Kentucky not Kenya and been named O’Hara not Obama, there would have been no Harvard Law Review, no Harvard, no Columbia. Barry O’Hara would probably be chasing ambulances in Honolulu and setting his political sights on the Honolulu City Council.

      http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=158901

    39. JanH, This Talaweed guy just bought the majority interest in Fox news network…total control of media….so we can expect this descent we are hearing over the last couple of days of the “ONE” is a cover for something else that is happening.

    40. Hit the Meadowlands opening night with bon jovi last night… amazing night, and I came home with a new anthem as the song was playing and the crowd was going crazy I couldn’t help but think of what’s going on around us…. oil spill in the gulf, jobs disappearing for fishermen, tourist industry going up in smoke before our eyes, but thats ok because BP has got our backs. right! I leave you with Jon bon Jovi and the boys.

    41. This was in an e-mail I got from Hillary yesterday asking for help with congress for her budget at the State Dept.
      I researched the site and found this and I know she is definitely hers.

    42. EXPOSING THE INCOMPETENCE: NOT READY FOR THE 3AM PHONE CALL, OR THE 3PM MEETING

      nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/where_was_plan_rlt5oDKad55hkqHe64BgqM

      Where was plan A?
      O still bumbling on oil spill
      ========================

      Posted: 1:28 AM, May 27, 2010
      By Kirsten Powers

      Do something, baby, do something: That’s the cry from Obama supporters and opponents alike as the oil keeps gushing into the Gulf of Mexico.

      The political firestorm kept growing yesterday, with supporter James Carville ranting that the administraion has been “lackadaisical” and “naive” in its response to the disaster. He urged it to rapidly “move to Plan B.”

      But that suggests there was ever a Plan A.

      Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is so frustrated with the lack of response to his plan to stop the slick with sand barriers that yesterday he called on the White House and BP to either “stop the oil spill or get out of the way.”

      “Plug the damn hole,” President Obama reportedly barked at staffers in frustration after the explosion. That’s right up there with “Heckuva job, Brownie” in terms of clueless statements uttered by presidents in the midst of nationally televised disasters.

      Meanwhile, White House regret over Obama’s politically expedient embrace of the “Drill, baby, drill” trope is growing faster than the vast oil slick.

      Back on March 31, Obama announced — to the horror of many of his supporters — that he was expanding offshore drilling along the coastlines of the south and mid-Atlantic and in the Gulf of Mexico. Worse, he painted a (too) rosy scenario of offshore drilling being eminently safe.

      True, it is rare that a full-blown environmental catastrophe results from an offshore oil well. But it can happen — and a Democratic president who’s embracing drilling ought to know the risks, and be prepared for the worst. But rather than planning for a spill, Obama parroted McCain-Palin talking points about how safe offshore drilling is.

      Turns out the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration back in 1994 drafted plans for responding to a major Gulf oil spill, a response called “In-Situ Burn.”

      Ron Gourget, a former federal oil-spill-response coordinator and one author of the draft, told the Times of London: “The whole reason the plan was created was so that we could pull the trigger right away.” The idea was to use barriers called “fire booms” to collect and contain the spill at sea — then burn it off. He believes this could have captured 95 percent of the oil from this spill.

      But at the time of the Deepwater Horizon explosion, the federal government didn’t have a single fire boom on hand. Nor is there any evidence that the government required BP to have any clear plan to deal with a massive spill. How is this OK?

      The administration’s chief response so far was to send out Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to do his best impersonation of a totalitarian thug, proclaiming that the government would “have its boot on the throat of BP.”

      (Fun fact: While in the Senate, Salazar backed an increase in oil and gas leases in the Gulf Coast region by promoting and voting for the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006.)

      Since the “blame BP” strategy isn’t working, Obama will today announce tougher safety requirements and more rigorous inspections for offshore drilling operations. Sounds nice — except the problem isn’t a lack of safety requirements, it’s that the experts at the US Minerals Management Service ignored the existing requirements.

      In fact, it was under Salazar’s reign that the MMS approved BP’s drilling without getting the permits required by law for drilling that might harm endangered species. The agency routinely overruled warnings regarding the safety and environmental impact of drilling proposals in the Gulf.

      None of this was a secret.

      It also shouldn’t be a secret that no matter how many inspections and safety requirements you have, you can’t ever completely prevent disasters like this one. If you’re going to permit offshore drilling, be prepared to respond to a spill.

      If he promised us anything, Obama promised us competence. Instead, we’ve gotten the Keystone Cops.

    43. That was beyond vulgar, when America is broke and Louisiana is swimming in oil on their beaches….disgusting! Unfettered capitalism at its finest.

      Bill is having lunch with Odummer today, Hmmm, hmmm. I guess another SOS has been sent….Bambi needs help…we can’t expect him to earn his wages, can we???

    44. So more and more, then question of “Is Spillgate (or whatever -gate you want to hang on it) ‘Obama’s Katrina’?” is being asked more frequently by a wider audience. And by “asking”, the question is becoming rhetorical, with the answer leading inescapably toward, “yes, his Katrina, except a FAR worse environmental disaster, but the same dithering, lackluster, laissez-faire approach that Bush showed.”

      My wife says that in watching tv news, for the first several weeks she noted a complete dearth of information on what’s going on with the spill, that almost all the info she got was from me (online, Big Pink, etc.) She said that any coverage was relegated to the weather guy! Only in the past couple of days has it moved front and center.

      We here at BP (Big Pink, not that OTHER BP) are realists, wide-eyed, ready to point out the inconvenient and the appalling. We saw Obama sitting on the sidelines, and by like Day 3, we started asking questions, wondering why nothing was done.

    45. confloyd
      May 27th, 2010 at 10:33 am

      Bill is having lunch with Odummer today, Hmmm, hmmm. I guess another SOS has been sent….
      &&&&&&&&

      Bill C. will be negotiating with The One:

      Bill: “See, this is a really, really hard job. You thought we were kidding. It involves long hours, hard work, and being the center of criticism.”

      Oilbama: “Hmmm, I see. Yeah, I thought I could escape the hard work and the criticism with my charm and my ability to tune things out.”

      Bill: “How about we agree to help you out, how to actually make government do its job. But first, you will have to sign this contract that you will ‘decide to spend more time with your family’, not seek the Democratic nomination, and endorse your Secretary of State as the Democrat most deserving to run in 2012 against the Republicans and any third party candidates.”

      Oilbama: “And if I don’t sign…”

      Bill: “No helpie. And we blow the cover off several of your elligibility issues.”

      Oilbama: “Dang. I’ll miss being worshipped.”

      Bill: “You’ve already been weaned off it. Now it’s just a job, and you’re not cutting it.”

    46. confloyd
      May 27th, 2010 at 10:33 am
      That was beyond vulgar, when America is broke and Louisiana is swimming in oil on their beaches….disgusting! Unfettered capitalism at its finest.

      ____________________________________________

      That has nothing to do with capitalism. That has everything to do with government elitism.

    47. Paula
      May 26th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
      Also, the spill is an issue that really cuts close to home for Carville because he’s from Louisiana.
      &&&&&&&&

      Good point.

      I think many “Clintonistas” (a term of disparagement that we’ll endearingly accept) have been playing “The Good Democrat”, secretly hiding their disdain for Obama and his inner circle’s thug tactics. This way, they can safely say, “I supported Obama, but HE blew it. I now am forced to challenge him on his lack of competence on Topic X”.

      With this understanding, we can see why Bill & Hill have been such Good Democrats, even if it made us here at Big Pink retch, or worry that they’ve sold their souls.

    48. MVP of Obama’s security team: Hillary ‘the hammer’ Rodham Clinton

      Even the right wing applauds Secretary of State Clinton’s performance.

      By Walter Rodgers
      May 27, 2010

      Washington —
      One of my friends is a classic Republican: He’s a businessman from a Southern “red state,” and a Marine Corps veteran of Vietnam who earned a Silver Star for heroism at Hué. To put it mildly, he’s never been a fan of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Yet he recently called to acknowledge a conversion like Paul’s on the road to Damascus. He now kind of likes her.

      “She’s out there doing things … she’s smarter than Bill. If she was [messing] up, the far right would be all over her and they’re not coming up with anything.”

      He’s got a point. Hillary Clinton, the once-hated first lady, appears to have hit her stride as secretary of State. The right wing, even “talk radio,” deems her the “good” member of the Obama team.

      The right-wing Republican mantra goes something like this: “If only the president were more like her. She’s pushing him on Iran, pushing for more troops in Afghanistan. He’s wobbly. She’s the iron fist in the velvet glove.”

      The right is right that Clinton is tough on Iran, but it’s wrong to think that there’s much daylight between her and the president.

      Clinton has been intolerant of Tehran’s dissimulation. As the administration “hammer,” her message is steely: First, Iran must live up to its nuclear nonproliferation treaty obligations or it will find itself globally isolated. Second, if Tehran builds nuclear weapons, it will ignite a nuclear arms race in the Sunni Arab world with more than a few of the Sunni nukes likely to be pointed at Shiite Iran, a historic rival.

      “Both the president and his secretary knew there was a good chance Obama’s initial outreach to Iran would fail,” says a Clinton aide who sat down with me recently for an interview on condition that he not be named. But it was part of a
      long-term calculation.

      As the aide explained: “Failure would set us up to pursue the ‘pressure track’ more effectively … if Iran didn’t respond affirmatively [on its nuclear program], then you can bring the hammer down on them with an international consensus you could not otherwise have created.”

      Indeed, on May 18, a day after Brazil and Turkey announced a nuclear fuel deal with Iran, Clinton said she had secured the support of Russia and China for “strong” new sanctions against Iran.

      Clinton may appear to have been born a diplomatic pro, but at least some of her exemplary patience, discipline, and professionalism were probably forged on the anvil of some bruising blows during the eight years of her husband’s presidency.

      Her battle-tested political savvy may be one reason today’s national security establishment – the State Department, the Pentagon, and the National Security Council – has shown less backstabbing, bureaucratic rivalry, or policy contradictions than I’ve seen in 45 years of watching Washington.

      In the Nixon, Carter, Reagan, and second Bush administrations, infighting between State and the Pentagon, and the National Security Council and State, was at times poisonous.

      Today, there seems to be less clamoring for celebrity status amid an overpowering realization the president is the celebrity.

      Sure, there is some difference in tone between this White House and Foggy Bottom, but totally similar views between the commander in chief and the secretary of State would smack of redundancy or lack of imagination. Where all people think alike, no one thinks very much.

      The Clinton aide says it was Obama who set the harmonious tone for his national security team, insisting he wanted a team without internal rivalries. That’s a welcome change from the contentious relations between President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

      Secretary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates reportedly “see the world through the same glasses.” Each has a huge number of items on their plate, so there is no time for argument over the grand ideological disputes – the kind that hobbled previous administrations.

      On the face of it, Obama’s team is an odd mix: Defense Secretary Gates is a former CIA director; National Security Adviser James Jones Jr. is a highly decorated retired US Marine Corps four-star general. And Clinton is a Midwestern lawyer turned first lady turned New York Senator.

      Clinton’s experience as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee no doubt helps the chemistry. As a member of that committee she became quite close to senior military officials. “She also came to understand the workings of the military and the way it fits into the broader national security fabric,” says the aide.

      Is she in the same league as James Baker, the most recent “great” secretary of State? Not yet, perhaps. But then the simpler bipolar world that Mr. Baker had to manage no longer exists. We no longer live even in a multipolar world. As Clinton put it recently, we now belong to a “multipartner world.” Still, she notes, there is no major global problem that can be solved without US involvement.

      Ironically Clinton’s greatest diplomatic challenge now may be convincing Israel, an American ally, that Obama is no less a friend of the Jewish State than was her husband. It is not proving easy.

      http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Walter-Rodgers/2010/0527/MVP-of-Obama-s-security-team-Hillary-the-hammer-Rodham-Clinton

    49. JanH
      May 27th, 2010 at 11:30 am
      MVP of Obama’s security team: Hillary ‘the hammer’ Rodham Clinton
      &&&&&&

      You consistenly bring us good stuff. Thanks!

    50. Gov Ed Rendell of PA, the difference between Obama and our buddy bill.

      Rendell also noted a difference between Obama’s style and that of the last Democratic president, a famous micromanager: “If Bill Clinton was president, he’d have been in a wetsuit, you know, trying to get down to see the spill,” the governor said with a laugh.

    51. They fired a woman this morning and according to CNN was not the person in Mineral Management that screwed up the oil leases and let BP get away with murder….they got the token woman.

    52. rgb44hrc
      May 27th, 2010 at 11:34 am

      ——————
      Thanks so much for your kind words.

      I keep hoping that they will start writing more and more positive articles about this amazing woman.

    53. According to various things, we hear NOW that “Obama is ‘outraged’ about how the spill is being handled”.

      a. What took you so long to work up from “mildly concerned”, “startingly miffed”, “dander is raised”, to “outraged”?

      b. Whom is he directing his anger at not being on top of this world-wide environmental disaster??? (Helpful hint, Mr. President: there is a mirror on that wall over there).

    54. This will give you a glimpse of how the Obama forces use terrorism by SEIU thugs to suppress dissent and scapegoat people. The man ultimately in charge of this operation is an Emanuel lieutenant named Jim Messina who is a deputy chief of staff. He is the string puller. And this is part of the fall campaign.

      Nina Easton had the courage to report this mob attack. She is a class act, a high test journalist and a quality news analyst. That put the Obama forces on the defensive. Consequently, they unleashed Media Matters to attack Easton. However their attacks are shown to be false and defamatory.

      The Ghost of Paul Revere
      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 came after honest journalists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a journalist;
      Then they destroyed our country, and I did not speak out—because I wanted to believe their lies;
      Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me. . . . .

      .
      ———————
      http://hotair.com/archives/2010/05/26/nina-easton-what-i-saw-at-the-seiu-thug-protest-at-that-bankers-home/

    55. wbboei
      May 27th, 2010 at 1:06 am

      If Hillary does not run again then I am 100% sure we will not see a woman president in my lifetime. That was never the issue for me that is was for many of her supporters. I respect their opinion on that matter but it was not mine. For me the issue was getting the best candidate to lead this nation in one of the most dangerous periods in history. She was the right candidate at the right time.
      ———-

      The thought of Hillary not running and winning AGAIN is to painful for me to even consider.

      I have waited for her to run for decades and it has always been about her for me.

      Her policies
      Her example to all women
      Her morals
      Her tenacity
      Her fight
      Her determination

      …and her being a HER makes me more proud to be a woman.

      So webboei, your not a woman so you don’t have ‘identity’ in the mix with Hillary.

      You have many good men that have made it to being our President, but us women have no one.

      Think about that, NO ONE. Not even as a Vice President, and very few Sec. of State.

      Talk about pitiful, the damn ERA is still not passed in this country making women equal with men. The only ‘right’ women have is the right to vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    56. What took him so long to get involved…its spelled poll numbers…they starting dropping…so he got off his ass!

    Comments are closed.