The Bitter Taste Of Words

No more bitter taste than having to eat your own words. Obama supporters have that bitter taste as they cling to their Mess-iah.

The excuses by these Obama apologists are many. The death dealing consequences of their Obama deadender support will likewise be many. Obama, and America, is helplessly engulfed.


Obama Bingo
[h/t the ever vigilant NotYourSweetie]

The excuses don’t work anymore. Mess-iah Fatigue is taking a toll:

“President Obama is angry at God for making it rain in Chicago, and irked at the oil spill, making him pack up between his vacations and make trips down again to the Gulf. Ideologues argue about over whether corporations or government tend to be the least competent, ignoring the proof that the answer is both of them. And Democrats are having their own kind of crisis, a sort of buyer’s remorse at a very high level, which sounds like Messiah Fatigue.

Messiah Fatigue is what happens when your Messiah turns into a millstone, and the force that was supposed to boost you into divine and deep power seems more of an anchor instead. Democrats are bewildered.

They are doing a lot of things, but a lot of people do not like what they are doing. Others do not know what they are doing. And hardly anyone likes the way they are doing it,” as the Los Angeles Times now says of the party.

“A lot of our people have no idea what we’re doing,” it quotes a House member. And David Obey complains that “Obama’s ability to use his bully pulpit to build support for health care and other crises had been eclipsed by the oil spill crisis,” causing James Taranto to note unkindly that, as the health care vote came a month before the crisis erupted, “the explosion created a disruption in the space-time continuum that is causing millions of gallons of oil to leak into the past.”

The Mess-iah Fatigue was evident to Creigh Deeds, Jon Corzine, and Martha Coakley. The article also notes that Obama is magic – for Republicans. On policy after policy anger and resistance grows. As the anger and resistance grows Republican success grows and needed Dimocratic defeat and doom looms.

With mounting evidence and justification the question is increasingly asked “Whose side are you on Barack? Barack Obama and his thugs are on the side of “party” – not political party necessarily – glamorous and expensive dinner parties, and cheap frat boy party.

Obama is magic for Republicans, for his pocketbook, for his criminal and tax cheat friends, for his frat boy graffiti writer clown posse, but death and doom for America and the once great Democratic Party:

“Obama’s mixed [she means losing] electoral record has perplexed operatives who thought his charisma and tactical skill would yield a stronger-than-ever Democratic majority,” reported Anne Kornblut. Instead, it produced a revival among the Republicans, who just a few months ago appeared moribund.

How did this happen, if he was the Anointed? Inquiring minds want to know. Inquiring minds have a few other questions, in light of the gap between promise and fact.

How did he turn health care into a wedge issue against his own party? Why are we awash in a sea of dead pelicans? Why has he so much time on his hands for fundraisers and galas? Why are our relations so much worse with all of our allies, while our — and their — enemies go on building bombs?



As we noted last night in the comments “The splashes of oil hitting his face appear to be waking up Joe Conosen.”

Usually a reliable Obama defender, even Joe Conosen is scratching his head and becoming only slightly aware that Obama is a death dealer to the Democratic Party, the Presidency, and the nation:

Among the most troubling themes in Tim Dickinson’s important new Rolling Stone investigation of the Gulf oil spill is how British Petroleum successfully compromised the federal government, from the obscure Minerals Management Service all the way up to the White House. The failure to respond aggressively and immediately will haunt the Obama presidency for years to come. And early promises of transparency seem to have been broken in this crisis because the administration allowed BP to take control of the narrative — and especially the video:[snip]

That’s clearly correct: The “unified command” in New Orleans, including Coast Guard and other federal officials along with BP executives and engineers, has had streaming real-time video of the Deepwater Horizon site available from the earliest hours following the disaster. Adm. Thad Allen, the incident commander, and other members of the unified command team have testified to that fact on several occasions. Testifying before the Senate on May 18, Allen told Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., that “we have had full access to the video footage in our command center since the event started.”

[snip]

That testimony raises additional questions concerning BP’s steadfast refusal to release any video footage until more than three weeks after the explosion (and to withhold the vide0 stream from the public for an additional nine days). If U.S. government officials could see that streaming video from the beginning, then why did BP get away with keeping video from the public domain for so long? Or to put it another way: Why didn’t the government force BP to release the footage that media outlets and scientists had been requesting for weeks? Only after Sen. Nelson — with Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. — used Allen’s testimony to publicly demand release of BP’s video footage did the company finally accede a few days later on May 21.

Finally, the Rolling Stone story raises the critical question of what the president saw and when he saw it. At his press conference on May 27, Obama suggested that early estimates of the spill’s potential damage were inaccurate because the oil company was not providing all the information it had:

[snip]

“This is an area, by the way, where I do think our efforts fell short. And I’m not contradicting my prior point that people were working as hard as they could and doing the best that they could on this front. But I do believe that when the initial estimates came that there were — it was 5,000 barrels spilling into the ocean per day, that was based on satellite imagery and satellite data that would give a rough calculation. At that point, BP already had a camera down there, but wasn’t fully forthcoming in terms of what did those pictures look like” [emphasis added].

Yet according to Obama’s own crisis commander, those pictures in fact were available to the Coast Guard, the MMS and other agencies in the unified command center “since the event started.” Did someone neglect to tell the president? 

Again the question comes up, on yet another issue, on yet another Jeremiah Wright type “who is this guy Obama?“, on yet another character question, on yet another job badly done, “What did Obama know, and when did he know it? We suggested Joe stop making excuses and accept the reality:

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.


HopeLess

Joe Conoson is not alone in beginning to question Mess-iah Obama. Matt Bai, the serpentine hack for Obama and the “creative class” Left, in an article to be published in the Sunday New York Times wonders if Obama is a Democrat, or the Democratic leader.

“A year and a half after they sat, shivering and awestruck, on a January morning and listened to the sounds of a million cheers careering off the marble walls of the Capitol, the Democrats who work under the dome can feel those same walls closing in fast. Throughout the dismal spring, it seemed as if every visiting delegation that drove up in a coach bus — Main Street merchants, family farmers, Rotarians and Elks — arrived with tales of angst and unrest back home. Every well-paid pollster who came through the door brought with him a stack of surveys and focus-group memos, each more dispiriting than the last, numbers portending an emphatic rejection of the majority in this fall’s elections. Every new thickly bound jobs report landed with a sickening thud on the desks of committee chairmen — a reminder that, despite modest improvements, time was running out to change people’s minds about the direction of the economy.

And then there was the president — their president — who for 17 months had cajoled them into taking tough votes on stimulus spending, on the trading of carbon emissions, on health care. Barack Obama, the postpartisan president. He continued to go out and shake his head disbelievingly at “the culture of Washington,” which to the Democrats in the House sounded as if he were saying that his own party was the problem, as if somehow the Democratic majorities in Congress hadn’t managed to navigate the bulk of his ambitious agenda past a blockade of Republican vessels, their ship shredded by cannon fire. And all this while the president’s own approval ratings fell below 50 percent — an ominous sign, historically speaking, for a majority party.”

According to Bai, in April there was a confrontation between Obama enablers like Nancy Pelousy, the race-baiting Jim Clyburn, and Obama thugs like David Axelrod and Jim Messina. It was too-clever Obama enablers versus too stupid Obama thugs. A pox on all of them and their houses.

There are been other, according to frat boy Bai, Seinfeldian “airing of grievances”. Only now do these blockheads like Bai and Pelousy discover that Obama is only in it for himself. Obama only cares about himself. Michelle Obama has said Obama is only in it for himself. Now these blockheads are surprised that Obama is only in it for himself.

“Unlike his predecessor and some of his own political allies, however, Obama has never betrayed much interest in building political empires. Obama ran on the notion of transcending partisan distinctions, rather than making them permanent, and the political identity that enabled him to draw millions of new voters into the process two years ago is both intensely personal and self-contained. It’s not clear that Obama can translate his appeal among disaffected voters into support for a party and its aging Washington establishment. Nor is it clear, as he looks ahead to 2012, how hard he’s going to try.”

Serpentine Bai has one contribution to make which will rattle the history hating Nutroots. Part of the Nutroots “airing of grievances” is what happened in 1994. The Nutroots blame Bill Clinton for the losses. Reality history blames Democratic corruption and the rising tide of Republican and conservative demographics and organization. Bai tells the Nutroots what really happened in 1994:

“It is difficult to overstate the role that 1994 plays in the tormented psyche of the Democratic Party. For those who went through them, those midterms were less a bunch of elections than a single, sudden event that they never saw coming until it was on them, like something out of “War of the Worlds.” Most of the Democrats who woke up firmly in control of American government on Nov. 8, 1994, had no memory of a time when they didn’t make all the laws, and they couldn’t really conceive of it; by nightfall, 40 years of near-total Democratic dominance in both houses of Congress had been washed away. The costs, for years afterward, were too painful to fully contemplate. Without the voter uprising of 1994, there would have been no Speaker Gingrich, no impeachment and almost certainly no George W. Bush, who, by winning election as the governor of Texas, found himself swept into office that year along with a lot of other political neophytes who might otherwise have disappeared into political obscurity.

Republicans in 1994 gained a net total of 54 House seats and 8 Senate seats and emerged with a majority of governors for the first time in more than 20 years, and state legislatures for the first time in a half century. This year, they need to gain 40 House seats and 8 Senate seats to regain control. Taking back the House is eminently doable; taking the Senate is remote but hardly unthinkable. [snip]

Meanwhile, Democratic governors are bracing for their own losses. The effect of a drubbing at the state level, while likely to garner less attention than what happens in Washington, could be devastating for Democrats, just as it proved to be 16 years ago. Governors have generally proved to be the intellectual catalysts for both parties, and it’s not incidental that four of the five presidents immediately preceding Obama sprang from their ranks. Parties that fail to hold governors’ mansions also fail to develop compelling candidates for national office.[snip]

The 1994 elections marked the culmination of a decades-long transformation. For 30 years before then, since the triumph of the civil rights agenda, Democratic strongholds in the South and in the working-class Midwest had been teetering toward the Republicans. Bill Clinton’s missteps no doubt hastened this process, but so did redistricting based on the 1990 Census, after which Democrats were assured safe, urban seats in minority districts while whiter, more conservative districts were created in the suburbs. The 1994 campaigns were the first waged on this map in a nonpresidential election year, and it all but guaranteed that many longtime Democrats would lose.

Bai, does not mention the killing effect of Democratic congressional corruption in 1994 nor does Bai mention the hate of that Democratic congressional power structure against Bill Clinton because he did not allow them the goodies they craved and instead Bill Clinton opted to destroy the deficit and fix the economy.

Bai excels at coming up with excuses for Obama however. Obama’s lack of experience in party building is contrasted with the Bushes who either ran the Republican Party or Republican campaigns; Bill Clinton who helped George McGovern’s presidential run; and Jimmy Carter who was Chairman of the Democratic Party’s midterm campaign in 1974.

“Obama did his door-to-door campaigning as a community organizer, but he never worked in party politics until he ran for office, and as a presidential aspirant he never bothered with trying to remake his party or modernize its message in the same way that Reagan (a spokesman for the conservative movement) or Clinton (a leader of the centrist New Democrats) did. Other than to assert (dubiously, perhaps) that he wasn’t a “triangulator” like the Clintons, Obama did not run against the party establishment, as other candidates had before, but with indifference toward it.”

The obvious lesson from this history, which escapes the still in love Bai, is that Obama is interested only in himself. Instead Bai contorts himself with talk about “boomers” and “outsiders”.

“Obama, a good 15 years younger than our last two boomer presidents, is the opposite; he is a genuine outsider who spends a fair amount of energy reassuring Democrats that he really does care about the organization.

“Fundamentally, I just think he wants to be bigger than that,” says Cornell Belcher, who was one of Obama’s pollsters during the 2008 campaign. “It gets back to being a transformational leader. A party leader isn’t about transformation.”

What garbage! What stupidity! Obama only cares about himself but these “creative class” dullards and dolts can’t see what is right in front of their noses. Read more of this garbage and see how remarkably stupid the “creative class” and their Matt Bai’s are:

“Obama’s advisers have spoken of his brand, which is a stand-in for the party identity that defined other presidencies. Obama’s brand is about inclusivity, transcendence, a generational break from stale dogmas. Inevitably, Obama’s brand management runs up against the culture of his party. State activists are sometimes told their requests for the president to appear at a typical political event, in some ballroom with room dividers or at the local labor hall, aren’t going to fly. Aides know that if they bring that kind of thing to Obama, he’ll ask, “Can’t we do any better than that?” As a rule, Obama no longer speaks at the traditional Jefferson-Jackson dinners where state Democratic parties gather to raise money from the faithful. “For what?” a senior aide responded when I asked why. “To talk to the same people he already has?” Obama prefers venues, preferably outdoors or in large theaters, where he can reach voters who aren’t party regulars. He generally refuses to do “robo-calls,” those ubiquitous, recorded messages in which a politician asks you to go out and vote for the party. “He’s got a practical objection to them, which is that they’re irritating,” Axelrod explained to me.”

How stupid are these Obama Hopium guzzlers? Read those excuses and laugh. Obama, according to these dolts is “inclusive” which is why he loves huge audiences. Isn’t the more obvious reading of these character traits that Obama does not like to work, and loves the adoration of huge audiences? It’s like a music band with a popular hit that only wants to work in huge arenas, not small clubs. When the hit wears off, it’s back to small clubs or smaller venues and depression and break-up.

Obama’s uselessness and self agrandizement is viewed by clowns like Bai and the Nutroots as somehow endearing. Read this laugh riot stupidity:

“While Obama attended four times the number of fund-raising events that Bill Clinton did during his first year in office, he garnered a fraction of the contributions. “He is the worst Washington fund-raiser in the history of presidents,” a White House aide proudly admitted to me a few months back. All of this exasperates operatives on the Hill who are obsessed with keeping other Democrats in office, and who think maybe Obama should be a little more obsessed with it too. “When you go to the D.N.C., his picture is on that wall,” a longtime strategist who is working for a Congressional campaign told me. “There’s a reason.”

Obama does not care about anyone else but he loves big audiences who adore him (or pretend to) and applaud him and accept him (unlike his daddy). This obvious truth eludes the brilliant Bai and other Hopium Guzzlers.

Bai includes a vulgarity laden interview with Rahm Emanuel which is more an encyclopedia of excuses and blame distribution. But Bai does not include the obvious fact about the upcoming elections: Obama is Poison.

The fact that it is all about Obama emerges even as the attempt is made to obscure it:

“For Plouffe, the unstated goal is to lay the groundwork for Obama’s re-election campaign in 2012. [snip]

Let’s be clear — these are not Democratic voters,” Cornell Belcher, the Obama campaign pollster, cautioned me. “They’re Obama voters.”

It’s all about Obama. There are the Obama deadenders who see a Mess-iah. There are those who see the clown for what he is.

“Some see him as having transformed both the electorate and the nature of campaigning in what could be a lasting and fundamental way, meaning that things are possible now — both in terms of liberal governance and winning elections — that did not seem possible before. Others view 2008 mostly as a cathartic election that had more to do with conditions in the country than with Obama’s peculiar magic, and they don’t think the party should assume that there are millions of new voters out there who can be tapped if you just knock on the right doors. These two worldviews coexist uneasily among the party’s elected officials and candidates, young and old, in every part of the country — sometimes just hours apart.”

Matt Bai and the Hopium Guzzlers will have to eat their own words, with a big dollop of Obama Crude. As Obama and his Hopium hyped thugs drag the nation down even lower the sense of helplessness grows as does the anger.

As the unrestrained Obama crude changes the political landscape, the economic landscape, and the geographical landscape, Americans stand by watching Obama and his incompetent thugs. Americans grow angrier every day as the helplessness of the situation strikes.

The needed Democratic Party no long exists and we all watch helplessly as the Obama Dimocrats wreak havoc. The economic life of the nation is strangled and we all watch helplessly. The Obama crude flows from once shining seas – and we all watch – helpless.

Helpless – until November.

Helpless – until November – when we will make them all, Obama too, eat their words.



Share

194 thoughts on “The Bitter Taste Of Words

  1. Whooooooo it’s a long post and chucked full of goodies…still reading but loved the Bingo……one was forgotten,

    “It’s George Bush’s FAULT!

  2. What a fabulous, fabulous post. Worth waiting for. No wonder the internet gods shut down access to you site. It would be an interesting graph to discover the relationship between when the days when your site is impossible to get to, and what’s going on in the world.

    I can tell you that when you point out that Democratic corruption and accusations of Democratic corruption were the primary factor in the defeats of 94, you are immediately accused of being a Republican who is damning the party.

    I love Obama bingo. And it is astounding how blind the Obama supporters are. What a world.

  3. Another great post – Admin.

    Matt Bai and the Hopium Guzzlers will have to eat their own words, with a big dollop of Obama Crude. As Obama and his Hopium hyped thugs drag the nation down even lower the sense of helplessness grows as does the anger.

    ——-
    Anyone that is not spitting angry at Obama must be on crack.

    The new, young voters may not want to get involved with politics after Obama didn’t legalize pot, but damn, they understand the Gulf Oil Spill, the gusher is still gushing and the photos of the dead animals that are just starting to appear.

    Those 20 somethings will wander into the apathetic woods again and it is up to us adults to stop Obama’s run away train of destruction.

    Damn shame, I say…..it is gonna be a cold day in Hell before most of us will ever see the party we all loved be made whole again.

    What a freakin’ mess, not even sure Hillary will want to deal with all this…but, Hillary does like a challenge.

  4. ““Let’s be clear — these are not Democratic voters,” Cornell Belcher, the Obama campaign pollster, cautioned me. “They’re Obama voters.””

    THis quote basically says everything that is wrong with this President and his GD enablers in the Democratic Party. Where in hells name do these Democrats think they are going to go after Obama? He doesn’t care about their Party! They selected a leader of their own friggen Party who doesn’t give a fig about being a Democrat. This guy doesn’t even fit in with American politics. He’s not a team player. He’s a selfish, egotistical fool.

  5. #
    mj
    June 10th, 2010 at 5:53 pm

    ““Let’s be clear — these are not Democratic voters,” Cornell Belcher, the Obama campaign pollster, cautioned me. “They’re Obama voters.””

    THis quote basically says everything that is wrong with this President and his GD enablers in the Democratic Party. Where in hells name do these Democrats think they are going to go after Obama? He doesn’t care about their Party! They selected a leader of their own friggen Party who doesn’t give a fig about being a Democrat. This guy doesn’t even fit in with American politics. He’s not a team player. He’s a selfish, egotistical fool.
    ——-

    Amen.

  6. Why am I hearing rumours and tabloids in the UK saying the reason for Al Gore’s sudden divorce is he was having a gay affair.

    I aint believing any of this until the man says it himself.

    Its now starting to hit various tabloid news sources, though.

    Quite amazing if it turns out to be accurate.

    Oh and its nice to be back with my good friends at H44. Missed you all.

  7. Al Gore’s sudden divorce is he was having a gay affair.

    Nothing would surprise me these days…unless he is caught with Barry and Larry in a Limo doing coke.

  8. My sentiments exactly…

    Carly Fiorina doesn’t get a pass on comment about Boxer’s hair

    What is this, middle school? I was all set to sit down and write about women in politics, and applaud Tuesday’s results, when off pops the new Republican nominee for senator from California, Carly Fiorina, with a comment that takes you back to the cattiness of the school cafeteria.

    Fiorina, all miked up but not yet ready to be on the air — and, I think it’s fair to suggest, perhaps not ready for prime time — described an aide who saw her opponent, Sen. Barbara Boxer, on television “and said what everyone says: ‘God, what is that hair? Sooo yesterday.'”

    Adding insult to insult, Fiorina didn’t back down when asked about the comment by Fox’s Greta Van Susteren. “I was quoting a friend of mine,” said Fiorina, who lost her hair during cancer treatment and is now sporting what my mother would call a pixie cut. “My goodness, my hair’s been talked about by a million people, you know? It sort of goes with the territory.”

    No no no no no! It does go with the territory that women in politics have more attention paid to their appearance than male candidates. It doesn’t go with the territory that one candidate — female or male — gets a free pass for dissing an opponent’s looks.

    For heaven’s sake, John Edwards got in hot water during one debate for joking about Hillary Clinton’s choice of jacket. The point of having women in politics was not to produce a “Mean Girls” sequel in the form of the California Senate race.

  9. “Where in hells name do these Democrats think they are going to go after Obama?”

    Uh… Claire McCaskill?

  10. There’s a big surprise. The Washington Post found a reason to get indignant over Carly Fiona.

    Did ya’ll catch rumpswab and ballwasher Mark Halpern playing the race card for his buddies at the White House, saying it’s racist to joke about the President wanting to kick some ass. Some mumbo jumbo about “the angry black man”.

  11. Drudge just ran a headline a short time ago that said “Ass dragging..Obama to meet with BP head June 16.” It was up for a short while–now replaced by “60 spillion gallons later: Obama to meet BP chairman” It changed before my eyes. I wonder if Drudge changed it to avoid more foolishness from Mark Halpern?

  12. Shadowfax
    June 10th, 2010 at 6:36 pm
    **********************************

    yes, kind of goes hand in hand with all the speculation on SP’s bustline…endless discussion from the left on her size and look…talk about nonsense…

    FYI…for some dish…

    page2live.com/2010/06/10/sarah-palin-to-visit-west-palm-beach-in-the-fall/

  13. Assdragging???? It only took Obama to be in political hot oily water for him to meet, 50 days later with family members of those who died in the oil rig explosion.

  14. hwc
    June 10th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
    There’s a big surprise. The Washington Post found a reason to get indignant over Carly Fiona.

    Did ya’ll catch rumpswab and ballwasher Mark Halpern playing the race card for his buddies at the White House, saying it’s racist to joke about the President wanting to kick some ass. Some mumbo jumbo about “the angry black man”.
    ***************************************

    hwc…it wasn’t just Halpern…the whole nbc/msnbc crowd speculated…i think there was also an article in WP or one of the current O ‘news’ papers…

    these O apologists will not let any criticism slip by without insinuating racism…it is absurd…if he can’t handle the heat as a man, he should not be in the job…black, white or any other color…

    so he gets special treatment and excuses now BECAUSE he is black…(and actually only half black) pleaaaassse!

  15. I think O will rue the day he mentioned ‘kick ass’…he is getting spoofed, ridiculed and made into a cartoon over those comments…and a lot of it is coming from the left, Leno, Letterman, Jon S…he has turned himself into a running joke…

  16. Admin:

    looks like now the Brits are very angry at Mr.Messaih. Looks like Obama is determined to alienate all our closest allies, first Israel, now Britain. This british man is a very well respected businessman there, he’s not with BP.

    http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Barack-Obama-RSA-Chief-John-Napier-Accuses-President-Of-Being-Anti-British-For-His-Attack-On-BP/Article/201006215647312

    “”Please forgive this open letter but your comments towards BP and its CEO as reported here are coming across as somewhat prejudicial and personal. There is no doubt that BP, as a UK PLC, is totally committed to do everything possible to contain the oil leak and meet all its obligations in the USA. There is a sense here that these attacks are being made because BP is British.”

  17. yes, and the image you posted above Admin, in ‘amny’LOST HOPE and O sinking in the oil sludge is amazing…his failure(s) are resonating…

  18. Tim, it started with Obama getting rid of the bust of Winston Churchill. It’s a small bust which apparently there was so space for anywhere in the White House.

    Then there were the cheesy “gifts” purchased at the last minute from the White House gift shop.

    Lately Obama, instead of saying BP (the corporate name), refers to the company by the name of “British Petroleum”. That’s like calling Exxon “Esso”.

    Obama has something against the Brits and it shows in little ways.

  19. S, we received a link to the AM NY picture via email. AM NY, we were told, is a very pro Obama free newspaper. It is distributed at subway stops and bus stops and in kiosks and news bins all over New York. This means that a very pro newspaper, distributed for free in all neighborhoods, is now mocking HOPEy Obama.

    Can anyone confirm this information?

  20. admin
    June 10th, 2010 at 8:07 pm
    S, we received a link to the AM NY picture via email. AM NY, we were told, is a very pro Obama free
    ******************************

    I am not in NY these days so I cannot confirm…must be like a new times/la weekly throwaway…all i can say is ‘wow’! resonating…

  21. O needs a challenge from the left…a diehard environmentalist, or hard core leftie should reach his/her breaking point…and go after him…

    countdown to a challenge from the hardcore left…come on…put your action where your integrity is supposed to be…

  22. BTW, has anyone else noticed that all those “environmentalists” at NothingLeft, LeftTalk, MyDud (our pet names for these pixel wastes) are ignoring the Gulf of Mexico story? If it was George Bush we are sure there would be front page stories every 5 minutes. But so far silence from these “progressive” “environmentalists”. Not even a discussion of the Rolling Stone story. Nothing.

    What wonderful environmentalists these “creative class” types are!

  23. admin, you are completely correct, I almost forgot about that churchhill bust that was returned. I have 2 collegues from Britain who used to love the loser, the hated Gordon Brown, loved Mr. Messaih, but the tide started turning when the Churchhill bust was returned and when Gordon Brown was dissed with those DVDs.

    They can’t stand Brown, but as they say, he’s their idiot to make fun of, and when he was insulted, Britain was insulted.

    Looks like the fool in the WH is determined to alienate Isreal, now Britain, I’ve heard from my Indian-American friends, India is getting annoyed at the fool also.
    (Apparently they love Sarah Palin over in India, I knew they loved Hillary, but now Palin as well, the Nikki Haley endorsement is huge over there. India sure has no problem with strong women)

  24. Ha, if this was the Bush presidency, they’d be liveblog mothershipping the gusher over at DK.

    I do have a better understanding of the American right now. Their leaders haven’t done anything the voters have wanted them to do since Nixon was in office. I think that’s what Obama and company were trying to pull off – the same ability to sweet talk the voters while doing whatever your corporate sponsors wanted. I just don’t think Dems as a whole will ever be that somnolent. We like information and information will keep you awake.

  25. Tim, don’t forget the Obama “Punjab” anonymous attack on Hillary that many Indian-Americans and Indians from the subcontinent understood as an insult. With Nikki Haley and Bobby Jindal, Republicans now have two big office Indian-Americans to woo the very engaged Indian-American community.

    Republicans are quickly responding to demographic changes and running candidates with appeal to various communities. It’s quite a role reversal. They’ve got top women, the top Latino, Indian-Americans too. When Republicans run African-American candidates they lose because Dimocrats make a concerted effort to keep the veal pen closed.

    If the Republicans get over their anti-Gay nonsense (like the British conservatives did with no problem) and continue to diversify the Dimocrats are going to have to acknowledge that the demographic future has to be fought for, not automatically assumed.

  26. admin- yes I remember that. Also, I didn’t know this, but apparently the ties between the Indian American community and the Jewish community are pretty strong.

    I did not know that. I guess that makes sense, both countries are democracies fighting against radical jihadist, although I must admit 1 of my Indian American friends is muslim, and apparently in India, nationality trumps religion, and of course then you have the extreme nutjob zeolots on either spectrum.

  27. Oh, wait a minute, they are liveblog mothershipping it over at DK. And they’re covering the Rolling Stone story. credit where credit is due.

  28. admin…it is essentially the same with Iraq, Afghanastan and drone attacks in Pakistan…a little rumbling from Code Pink…but mostly the left is silent…after years of going after bush…then attacking Hillary as prowar…and their O as the peace candidate…what a laugh…he has expanded the wars…now the left is sooooo silent on all the wars…i heard that afghanastan is $5 BILLION a day…

    nope, not a word…this is why i say…most of the left are such hypocrites…they showed their true colors during the primaries – no integrity, no scuples…just agenda driven…and as corrupt and power and money hungry as the people they criticize…

  29. I’m watching Bobby Jindal, I frankly feel sorry for him. He has been screaming about boons and equipment the week the rig went underwater. He really has been on top of this the whole way, using whatever platform he could to get what he needed to protect his state.

  30. Anyone watching Hannity? For a second there it appeared that he might be examining the Obama vs Hillary race and how Big Media went all out for Obama. It was a quick promo so we are not sure. Let’s see how he manages to turn this into a Hillary bashing show.

  31. Do you all remember when Hillary said in the debates “If Isreal is attacked, We will erase Iran off the map”

    and of course she was called a war monger.

    Well guess what you ignorant Obots, the world sees what PUMAs always knew. Who’s going to be afraid of Mr. Messaih, really who takes this man seriosuly or is afraid of him?

    and so now we have:

    “Hamas, Turkey Team Up to Sue Israel”

    Its open season on Israel, and Obama’s America.

  32. Somebody tell me again what the frickin point of bambi’s sanctions against Iran are for when Russia says that missile sales will go on, aren’t a part of the sanctions, so arming Iran is A-OK?

  33. admin, I’m watching. I loved the last line in that live polling from the LA people.

    “Washington, either fix it, or get the hell out of the way”

  34. RACE MONGER CLYBURN is worried about something gone wrong in SC dem primary:

    If I didn’t know better, I’d say that Clyburn is giving the duly nominated brother the ol’ Okie Doke. Ya’ll know about the Okie Doke, right?

  35. moononpluto
    June 10th, 2010 at 6:23 pm

    Why am I hearing rumours and tabloids in the UK saying the reason for Al Gore’s sudden divorce is he was having a gay affair.

    OMG what if his affair is with Dr. Andrew Schiff.

    admin
    June 9th, 2010 at 7:03 pm

    Odd. Is divorce contagious?

    Karenna Gore Schiff, the oldest daughter of former Vice President Al Gore and Tipper Gore, has separated from her husband, Dr. Andrew Schiff, after 13 years of marriage, two sources close to the former vice president tell CNN

  36. another youtube interview with Bond, James Bond. (we prefer Sean Connery, but this guy’s ok).

    ———–
    Yea, nice face but too skinny……….by the way, who is ‘We’???

  37. #
    admin
    June 10th, 2010 at 8:20 pm

    BTW, has anyone else noticed that all those “environmentalists” at NothingLeft, LeftTalk, MyDud (our pet names for these pixel wastes) are ignoring the Gulf of Mexico story? If it was George Bush we are sure there would be front page stories every 5 minutes. But so far silence from these “progressive” “environmentalists”. Not even a discussion of the Rolling Stone story. Nothing.

    What wonderful environmentalists these “creative class” types are!
    ——-

    Some of those environmentalists are PUMAs, and we are screaming our heads off…but, the rest are Obots that must still be dealing with denial. Their God is dead.

  38. Freakin’ stupid ass Hannity and his lamebrain guest just said Hillary had nothing to do with women stepping forward this election and winning. They only want Sarah and Michelle B to get credit because they are Republicans.

    Asswipe!!!!

    I don’t know how much longer I can watch Hannity, now only Greta is worth watching.

    Who do you folks watch? I always watched MSNBC and CNN until 2008.

  39. Shadowfax, I just heard that on Hannity and was yelling, “WHAT” …okay so maybe I saying something unladylike.

    Hillary put all those cracks in the glass ceiling. IT WAS HILLARY.

    MSNBC = NEVER
    CNN = ALMOST NEVER
    FOX = About all that’s left but watching it less and less with shows like the vile O’Reilly and Hannity

  40. Southern Born

    Hillary put all those cracks in the glass ceiling. IT WAS HILLARY.
    ——–
    Yea! You’re southern so you are ladylike, I am from California and I say, “Bullshit!” 🙂

    They only want to give any credit to Republican women, and only Republican women have been attacked. Misogyny only applies to Republican women…………..yea, like Hillary wasn’t attacked by the Left and the Right. Bullshit!

    God, I could never be a Republican.

  41. Shadowfax
    June 10th, 2010 at 9:44 pm

    [snip]

    Who do you folks watch?
    ________________________
    Nobody. It’s all shit.

    All my news comes from the interweb.

  42. Well, I’ve started watching the BBC news more and more. Otherwise, I still try to tune into Brett Baier so I can listen to his political roundtable.

  43. On Greta, Rove basically said Obama is so inexperienced and diddles that Bill running around fixing things make it seem more like Bill is the real President.

    Bill and Hillary, working like Presidents while the Fraud collects the Nobel prizes.

    As much as we all would love to see the Clinton’s sit back and watch the house of cards fall, America would be the laughing stock of the world by now and we would be deeper in the hole.

  44. I only watch CNBC (ugh a ge company) purely for financial news. I only trust ADMIN here for news….

    I do not watch any major channel…and I make up my own mind what to believe when I read internet news…..I do not trust any journalist…even on the oil spill news and that is a shame….they are not interested in reporting relevant facts or if they do they are too late or what I believe is a pure self interest…….

    mark my words…these same journalists will soon be praising THE ONE in stepping up and doing his job albeit belatedly.

  45. The myth of Iran’s ‘isolation’

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, June 11, 2010

    In announcing the passage of a U.N. Security Council resolution imposing sanctions on Iran, President Obama stressed not once but twice Iran’s increasing “isolation” from the world. This claim is not surprising considering that after 16 months of an “extended hand” policy, in response to which Iran accelerated its nuclear program — more centrifuges, more enrichment sites, higher enrichment levels — Iranian “isolation” is about the only achievement to which the administration can even plausibly lay claim.

    “Isolation” may have failed to deflect Iran’s nuclear ambitions, but it does enjoy incessant repetition by the administration. For example, in his State of the Union address, President Obama declared that “the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated.” Two months later, Vice President Biden asserted that “since our administration has come to power, I would point out that Iran is more isolated — internally, externally — has fewer friends in the world.” At the signing of the START treaty in April, Obama declared that “those nations that refuse to meet their obligations [to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, i.e., Iran] will be isolated.”

    Really? On Tuesday, one day before the president touted passage of a surpassingly weak U.N. resolution and declared Iran yet more isolated, the leaders of Russia, Turkey and Iran gathered at a security summit in Istanbul “in a display of regional power that appeared to be calculated to test the United States,” as the New York Times put it. I would add: And calculated to demonstrate the hollowness of U.S. claims of Iranian isolation, to flaunt Iran’s growing ties with Russia and quasi-alliance with Turkey, a NATO member no less.

    Apart from the fact that isolation is hardly an end in itself and is pointless if, regardless, Iran rushes headlong to become a nuclear power, the very claim of Iran’s increasing isolation is increasingly implausible. Just last month, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hosted an ostentatious love fest in Tehran with the leaders of Turkey and Brazil. The three raised hands together and announced a uranium transfer deal that was designed to torpedo U.S. attempts to impose U.N. sanctions.

    Six weeks ago, Iran was elected to the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women, a grotesque choice that mocked Obama’s attempt to isolate and de-legitimize Iran in the very international institutions he treasures.

    Increasing isolation? In the past year alone, Ahmadinejad has been welcomed in Kabul, Istanbul, Copenhagen, Caracas, Brasilia, La Paz, Senegal, Gambia and Uganda. Today, he is in China.

    Three Iran sanctions resolutions passed in the Bush years. They were all passed without a single “no” vote. But after 16 months of laboring to produce a mouse, Obama garnered only 12 votes for his sorry sanctions, with Lebanon abstaining and Turkey and Brazil voting against.

    From the beginning, the Obama strategy toward Iran and other rogue states had been to offer goodwill and concessions on the premise that this would lead to one of two outcomes: (a) the other side changes policy, or (b) if not, the world isolates the offending state and rallies around us — now that we have demonstrated last-mile good intentions.

    Hence, nearly a year and a half of peace overtures, negotiation, concessions, two New Year’s messages to the Iranian people, a bit of groveling about U.S. involvement in the 1953 coup and a disgraceful silence when the regime’s very stability was threatened by peaceful demonstrators.

    Iran’s response? Defiance, contempt and an acceleration of its nuclear program.

    And the world’s response? Did it rally behind us? The Russians and Chinese bargained furiously and successfully to hollow out the sanctions resolution. Turkey is openly choosing sides with the region’s “strong horse” — Iran and its clients (Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas) — as it watches the United States flailingly try to placate Syria and appease Iran while it pressures Israel, neglects Lebanon and draws down its power in the region.

    To say nothing of Brazil. Et tu, Lula?

    This comes after 16 months of assiduously courting these powers with one conciliatory gesture after another: “resetting” relations with Russia, kowtowing to China, lavishing a two-day visit on Turkey highlighted by a speech to the Turkish parliament in Ankara, and elevating Brazil by supplanting the G-8 with the G-20. All this has been read as American weakness, evidence that Obama can be rolled.

    The result is succinctly, if understatedly, captured in Wednesday’s Post headline “U.S. alliance against Iran is showing new signs of vulnerability.”

    You think?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/10/AR2010061004110.html

  46. JanH

    Brett Baier so I can listen to his political roundtable.

    I agree that the news folks on during the day are not so right wing opinionated and more credible as reporters, but I work and when I come home, the choices are slim.

  47. That’s an excellent point about Obama not being a true leader of the Democratic Party. But that was obvious during the campaign; it was always all about him. So the Dems turned on a true loyalist in Hillary – and a superbly qualified public servant – to take a flier on an unknown. Wow.

  48. Yes, Gov. Palin has indeed praised Hillary for her 18 million cracks.
    As Lady Lynn has pointed out, neither woman is going to be used by the LSM to attack the other on a personal level. They both respected each other, while disagreeing with each other.

  49. DSCP (not sure what that means, Disney?) has a documentary on the Gulf oil spill right now, lots of details on what BP was doing…good so far.

  50. Watching this documentary, I see that BP engineers are as inexperienced at fixing this leak as Obama is at being President.
    The program is not over but right now………..I have zero to almost no hope that these dilberts will fix the leak.

  51. Ya’ll shouldn’t let Sean Hannity give you aneurisms. Just do what I do when my wife is watching Rachel “Rosanne Rosannadanna” Maddow. Shut the door.

  52. God almighty, that documentary makes me so angry and depressed at what is about to become of the Gulf, I want to burn down BP and take a pitchfork to anyone that says, “Drill Baby, drill.”

    The plumes in the water, mixed with dispersant (like dish soap) is a toxic soup that grows bacteria and uses up the oxygen in the ocean, killing all ocean life, making it a ‘dead zone’. The gusher is not under control, may not get under control, killing all in it’s wake. That on top of the hurricane season, that will continue to spread it all over Hell and back. We haven’t even begun to see the death it will cause for years to come.
    The Discovery Channel

    It’s called, ‘Disaster in the Gulf, A race against time.’
    “An exclusive, behind the scenes look at the engineering efforts to stop the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, already the worst environmental disaster”

  53. Disaster in the Gulf, A race against time

    Former local correspondent- turned-producer Scott Weinberger knew immediately after learning about the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico that he wanted in on the story.

    “I’m still in my news hat,” says Weinberger. “Sitting back and watching the coverage of this, you want to get into it. This is a story that’s going to affect generations to come.”

    So Weinberger, who produces and co-created “On the Case With Paula Zahn” for Investigation Discovery, proposed to Discovery a special report on the engineering aspect of what BP is doing to stop the underwater gusher.

    “This is the Super Bowl of engineering,” Weinberger said. “What are people doing behind the scenes to stop this?”

    Discovery and BP agreed, and crews for Weinberger Media spent four 12-hour shifts in BP’s crisis center in Houston. The result airs tonight at 8 in “Disaster in the Gulf: A Race Against Time.”

    “I was asking for access to areas in their crisis center to see what was going on behind the scenes,” Weinberger says. “We wanted to be inside the discussions.

    “We wanted to talk to the slide-rule guys and gals, and what it took to formulate these plans,” says Weinberger, who also has produced TLC and TruTV shows, and is a former correspondent for WCBS/Ch. 2 and WNBC/Ch. 4.

    His teams were on hand as engineers discussed techniques and terms that would become household phrases, such as “top kill” and “junk shot.”

    Weinberger also gained access to unreleased footage of the oil rig burning that was shot by a deckhand aboard a vessel that responded to the blast 52 days ago.

    The goal of the show is not to create a warm and fuzzy feeling toward BP, which has been harshly criticized for how the spill has been handled, but to show a snapshot of what’s going on behind the scenes with workers who are rarely on TV.

    “They’ll get a perspective that they’ve not seen,” he says. “More of what it took to implement these actions.

    “My angle and my request to them was simple: We do believe the engineering and technology side of this story has not yet been told,” Weinberger adds.

    CNN gained access to the BP crisis center Tuesday and had exclusive footage inside, but Weinberger says the Discovery footage is different.

    “We’re inside closed-door meetings seeing the full implementation, so we’re a fly on the wall,” he says.

    Weinberger’s report, however, uses footage that was made a few weeks ago, and he readily acknowledges the story changes daily. But he says he’s not concerned that the material will appear dated.

    “I think we framed the show in such a way that’s not going to be an issue,” he says. “The effects of the spill are going to be long-lasting. We do talk extensively about what the spill has caused, not only for the environment. We do talk about the economic damage.”

  54. admin
    Southern Born, even Sarah Palin has acknowledged Hillary as a pioneer who cracked the glass ceiling.

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

    And magnificently! Sarah acknowledged it magnificently. And Hillary cracked it magnificently, too!

  55. Why the Oil Spill Could Change Everything – by Al Gore

    May 8, 2010 – The continuing undersea gusher of oil 50 miles off the shores of Louisiana is not the only source of dangerous uncontrolled pollution spewing into the environment. Worldwide, the amount of man-made CO2 being spilled every three seconds into the thin shell of atmosphere surrounding the planet equals the highest current estimate of the amount of oil spilling from the Macondo well every day. Indeed, the average American coal-fired power generating plant gushes more than three times as much global-warming pollution into the atmosphere each day—and there are over 1,400 of them.

    Just as the oil companies told us that deep-water drilling was safe, they tell us that it’s perfectly all right to dump 90 million tons of CO2 into the air of the world every 24 hours. Even as the oil spill continues to grow—even as BP warns that the flow could increase multi-fold, to 60,000 barrels per day, and that it may continue for months—the head of the American Petroleum Institute, Jack Gerard, says, “Nothing has changed. When we get back to the politics of energy, oil and natural gas are essential to the economy and our way of life.” His reaction reminds me of the day Elvis Presley died. Upon hearing the tragic news, Presley’s manager, Colonel Tom Parker, said, “This changes nothing.”

    However, both the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the CO2 spill into the global atmosphere are causing profound and harmful changes—directly and indirectly. The oil is having a direct impact on fish, shellfish, turtles, seabirds, coral reefs, marshes, and the entire web of life in the Gulf Coast. The indirect effects include the loss of jobs in the fishing and tourism industries; the destruction of the health, vitality, and rich culture of communities in the region; imminent bankruptcies; vast environmental damage expected to persist for decades; and the disruption of seafood markets nationwide.

    And, of course, the consequences of our ravenous consumption of oil are even larger. Starting 40 years ago, when America’s domestic oil production peaked, our dependence on foreign oil has steadily grown. We are now draining our economy of several hundred billion dollars a year in order to purchase foreign oil in a global market dominated by the huge reserves owned by sovereign states in the Persian Gulf. This enormous and increasing transfer of wealth contributes heavily to our trade and current-account deficits, and enriches regimes in the most unstable region of the world, helping to finance both terrorism and Iran’s relentless effort to build a nuclear arsenal.

    The profound risk to our national and economic security posed by the prospect of the world’s sudden loss of access to Persian Gulf oil contributed greatly to the strategic miscalculations and public deceptions that led to our costly invasion of Iraq, including the reckless diversion of military and intelligence assets from Afghanistan before our mission there was accomplished.

    I am far from the only one who believes that it is not too much of a stretch to link the ongoing wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and northwestern Pakistan—and even last week’s attempted bombing in Times Square—to a long chain of events triggered in part by our decision to allow ourselves to become so dependent on foreign oil.

    Here at home, the illusion that we can meaningfully reduce our dependence on foreign oil by taking extraordinary risks to develop deep reserves in the Outer Continental Shelf is illuminated by the illustration below. The addition to oil company profits may be significant, but the benefits to our national security are trivial. Meanwhile, our increasing appetite for coal is also creating environmental and human catastrophes. The obscene practice known as “mountaintop mining,” for instance, is not only defacing the landscape of Appalachia but also destroying streams throughout the region and poisoning the drinking water of many communities.

    The direct consequences of burning these vast and ever-growing amounts of oil and coal are a buildup of heat in the atmosphere worldwide and the increased acidity of the oceans. (Although the world has yet to focus on ocean acidification, the problem is terrifying. Thirty million of the 90 million tons of CO2 being spilled each day end up in the oceans as carbonic acid, changing the pH level by more than at any time in the last many millions of years, thus inflicting every form of life in the ocean that makes a shell or a reef with a kind of osteoporosis—interfering with their ability to transform calcium carbonate into the hard structures upon which their life depends—that threatens the survival of many species of zooplankton at the base of the ocean food chain.)

    (Click here to read Al Gore’s “Antarctica Postcard” from December 26, 1988.)

    But rising global temperatures and increasing acidification in the ocean are only the beginning. These processes have triggered a cascading set of other impacts, which include:

    The melting of virtually all of the mountain glaciers in the world—already well underway—threatening the supplies of fresh water for drinking and agriculture in many parts of the world.
    The prospective disappearance of the North Polar Ice Cap, which for most of the last three million years has covered an area roughly the size of the continental United States. Approximately 25 percent–30 percent of this ice cap (measured by the area that it used to cover) has disappeared in the last 30 years during summer. The thickness of the remaining ice has also sharply diminished.
    The melting of the two largest masses of ice on the planet—on top of Greenland and Antarctica (especially West Antarctica, where the bottom of the ice rests under the sea atop submerged islands) is already accelerating far beyond earlier estimates—threatening catastrophic increases in sea level worldwide.
    As the seas rise more rapidly, many millions of climate refugees will be forced to flee from areas they have long called home. Indeed, thousands have already been forced to move from low-lying island nations. The government of the Maldives has included a new line item in this year’s budget for a fund to buy a new country. That option will not be available to Bangladesh.
    Deeper and longer droughts in mid-continent regions, as soil moisture evaporates more rapidly with higher temperatures.
    More and larger forest fires as drier vegetation becomes kindling for lightning—which, according to researchers at the University of Tel Aviv, is also predicted to increase at the rate of 10 percent with each additional degree of temperature.
    The migration of tropical diseases to temperate latitudes, as new ecological niches invite the intrusion of viruses and bacteria and the mosquitoes, ticks, and other “vectors” that carry these diseases. This process is also already underway.
    An accelerated extinction rate which, according to E. O. Wilson and other biologists, threatens to reach levels not seen since the dinosaurs were wiped out 65 million years ago.
    The increased destructive power of tropical storms coming off the ocean (hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons—all different names for the same phenomenon). Though the number of these storms is not predicted to increase, their destructive power is—due to increases in wind speeds and moisture content.
    Increased large downpours of both rain and snow—with a steady shift from snow to rain—resulting in an increased frequency of large floods on every continent.
    This last phenomenon—long understood by scientists to be one of the most confidently predictable consequences of global warming—hit home for many of my neighbors last week when Nashville, the city where I live, suffered what the Army Corps of Engineers described as “a 1,000 year rain event” that caused horrendous flooding, mostly in neighborhoods that had no flood insurance—because homeowners there had been assured that they lived well outside the historic flood plain. The tragic loss of many lives was accompanied by the ruination of thousands of homes and property damages that Mayor Karl Dean estimated at one and a half billion dollars.

    Scientists are always careful in the way they describe the cause-and-effect relationship between global warming and such events: It is a mistake, they say, to attribute any single extreme weather event only to global warming, because there is large natural variability in weather—but the odds of extremely large downpours, scientists repeatedly insist, are steadily increasing with global warming, and such events are predicted to become far more common with each passing decade because when water evaporates from the warmer oceans, warmer air holds more of it. Average humidity worldwide has already increased by 4 percent since 1970, and each additional degree Fahrenheit increases it by another 3 percent-4 percent. The range of increases in global average temperature during this century is estimated at between 2˚ Fahrenheit to 11.5˚ Fahrenheit. The high end of this range would be utterly catastrophic, threatening the survival of civilization as we know it.

    Even now, the hydrological cycle of the entire globe is being radically altered. The timing and predictability of rainfall is changing in ways that are already beginning to disrupt agriculture—particularly subsistence agriculture in developing countries. Crop failures and food insecurity are increasing ominously in many regions where farmers are no longer able to rely on the clockwork intervals of rainy seasons and dry seasons they learned from previous generations.

    The record snowfalls last winter in the northeastern United States also fit into the same pattern. Indeed, the Northeast has long been included among the regions of the world predicted to experience the most dramatic increases in precipitation.

    Bizarre changes in precipitation patterns are now being observed in many regions throughout the world. Last month, British scientists working near the North Pole were astonished by an unprecedented April rainfall. David Phillips, a senior climatologist in Canada, described the event as “bizarre,” adding, “This is up there among fish falling from the sky or Niagara Falls running dry.”

    Temperatures inside the Arctic Circle are increasing far more rapidly than in the rest of the world because the progressive melting of ice and snow leads to a radical change in the amount of heat absorbed by the surface of the uncovered tundra and Arctic Ocean. Incoming solar radiation is no longer reflected by the ice and snow. Arctic researchers from the University of Washington have documented the beginning of significant releases of methane caused by the rapid thawing of permafrost in Alaska and Siberia.

    One important difference between the oil spill and the CO2 spill is that petroleum is visible on the surface of the sea and carries a distinctive odor now filling the nostrils of people on shore. Carbon dioxide, on the other hand, is invisible, odorless, tasteless, and has no price tag. It is all too easily put “out of sight and out of mind.” Because the impacts of global warming are distributed globally, they often masquerade as an abstraction. And because the length of time between causes and consequences is longer than we are used to dealing with, we are vulnerable to the illusion that we have the luxury of time before we begin to respond.

    But neither assumption is correct. Most of the heat trapped by greenhouse gases is stored in the oceans and reemerges over time into the atmosphere. As a result, we are capable-–through inaction—of making truly disastrous consequences inevitable long before the worst impacts are manifested. Our perception of the dangers of the climate crisis therefore relies on our ability to understand and trust the conclusions reached by the most elaborate and impressive scientific assessment in the history of our civilization.

    In other words, rather than relying on visceral responses, we have to draw upon our capacity for reasoning, communicating clearly with one another, forming a global consensus on the basis of science, and making a choice in favor of preventive action on a global scale.

    During the last 22 years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has produced four massive studies warning the world of the looming catastrophe that is being caused by the massive dumping of global-warming pollution into the atmosphere. Unfortunately, this process has been vulnerable to disruption and paralysis by a cynical and lavishly funded disinformation campaign. A number of large carbon polluters, whose business plans rely on their continued ability to freely dump their gaseous waste products into the global atmospheric commons—as if it is an open sewer—have chosen to pursue a determined and highly organized campaign aimed at undermining public confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the global scientific community. They have attacked the scientific community by financing pseudo-studies aimed at creating public doubt about peer-reviewed science. They have also manipulated the political and regulatory process with outsized campaign contributions and legions of lobbyists (there are now four anti-climate lobbyists for every single member of the House and Senate).

    This epic public contest between the broad public interest and a small but powerful special interest has taken place during a time when American democracy has grown sclerotic. The role of money in our politics has exploded to a dangerous level. Our democratic conversation is now dominated by expensive 30-second television commercials, which consume two-thirds of the campaign budgets of candidates in both political parties. The only reliable source of such large sums of campaign cash is business lobbies. Most members of the House and Senate facing competitive election contests are forced to spend several hours each day asking special interests for money to finance their campaigns. Instead of participating in committee hearings, floor debates, and Burkean reflection on the impact of the questions being considered, they spend their time as supplicants. Though many struggle to resist the influence their donors intend to have on their decision-making process, all too frequently human nature takes its course.

    Their constituents now spend an average of five hours per day watching television—which is, of course, why campaigns in both political parties spend most of their money on TV advertising. Viewers also absorb political messages from the same special interests that are wining and dining and contributing to their elected officials. The largest carbon polluters have, for the last 17 years, sought to manipulate public opinion with a massive and continuing propaganda campaign, using TV advertisements and all other forms of mass persuasion. It is a game plan spelled out in one of their internal documents, which was leaked to an enterprising reporter, that stated: “reposition global warming as theory rather than fact.” In other words, they have mimicked the strategy pioneered by the tobacco industry, which undermined the scientific consensus linking the smoking of cigarettes with diseases of the lung and heart—successfully delaying appropriate health measures for almost 40 years after the landmark surgeon general’s report of 1964.

    Meanwhile, many other countries—including China—have developed national strategies for leading the historic shift from oil and coal to renewable forms of energy, higher levels of efficiency, smart grids and fast trains, sustainable agriculture and forestry.

    Here in the United States, the House of Representatives has passed a meaningful plan to move America in the same direction and reestablish our capacity to provide leadership in the world community on the most important issue facing the world today. The Senate, however, has struggled for the last 17 months to find enough votes to take up its own version of the same legislative plan. The unpleasant reality now spilling onto the shores of the Gulf Coast is creating public outrage and may also be generating a new opportunity to pass legislation, just as the oil spill 20 years ago from the Exxon Valdez created public momentum sufficient to overcome the anti-environment special interests. There is new hope that by the time the gusher from the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico is capped, so will carbon emissions from the burning of oil and coal.

    It is understandable that the administration will be focused on the immediate crisis in the Gulf of Mexico. But this is a consciousness-shifting event. It is one of those clarifying moments that brings a rare opportunity to take the longer view. Unless we change our present course soon, the future of human civilization will be in dire jeopardy. Just as we feel a sense of urgency in demanding that this ongoing oil spill be stopped, we should feel an even greater sense of urgency in demanding that the much larger and more dangerous ongoing emissions of global warming pollution must also be stopped to make the world safe from the climate crisis that is building all around us.

    Al Gore, former Vice President of the United States, is chairman of the Alliance for Climate Protection.

  56. Matt Bai is dumb as a post. The question he never quite gets to is can the man govern. Perhaps that is because even to a moron like Matt Bai the answer is obvious.

  57. Last night I watched NBC’s Brian Williams. He/whoever else responsible for its content is/are to be commended. Gave prominence to the Rolling Stone article. In mentioning the upwardly advised gush (how about surge?) estimate which everyone is mentioning, NBC said it’s much larger than originally STATED. Other are saying much larger than previously THOUGHT. Evidently NBC has a place on its web site which accepts questions regarding the oil surge. They select some for on-air answers and last night gave a simple but salient fact: 1 barrel = 42 gallons.

    This made me realize that much of the reporting being done switches back and forth from barrels to gallons to barrels, and that is a wonderful obfuscation for folks like Couric … whose coverage I watched overnight. She definitely has Obama’s back. And I’d rate ABC somewhere in between the two networks already mentioned.

  58. After reading Al Gore’s statement on the oil spill I believe Soros/Zbig & others have intentionally set this rig on fire.
    Al Gore’s really had very little to say on the above comment about the oil spill and ralled on about the Co2 being pumped into the air. He sure could of come out with more information on the despersant that BP is continuing using after all enviromentalists have confirmed its banned in the UK.
    The nutjobs will stop at nothing to sell us this carbon tax…what industries have recently had bad outcomes…the coal industry and the oil industry…it just ALL to damn convenient.

    Moononpluto, I have always wondered why the republicans and the democrats are scared of crossing Obama, well if he has first hand knowledge of all their gay affairs it would definitely cause them to promote him or at least give him cover constantly.

  59. Chaos and anarchy. That’s what New York Gov. David Paterson is warning if he’s forced to shut down the government in a few days.

    The clowns in the state Legislature, now deadlocked for 71 days on the budget, are ready to take down the “big tent” and bring state government to a standstill. At least that’s what Paterson thinks.

    “No one knows the full ramifications of a government shutdown,” said Paterson. “It would create unimaginable chaos around the state and the greater metropolitan areas.”

    Such chaos includes closing all state parks, motor vehicles offices, courts, and even the lottery. Public assistance payments would not be made and unemployment payments might also be held up.

    The governor is in this pickle, in part, because wild cards like Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr. (D-Bronx) and possibly scandal-scarred Sen. Pedro Espada (D-Bronx) might not go along.

    Sources said the next emergency bill from Paterson will have up to $350 million in cuts to human services and mental health. But Republicans, who could become Paterson’s new allies in the budget battle, aren’t satisfied with that.

    They want $750 million in new cuts like:

    Delaying the 10 percent welfare grant increases
    Withholding welfare from those who don’t comply with employment requirements
    Reducing the personal needs allowance of people in drug and alcohol programs

    Diaz will not go along with that.

    “I am not voting for any more cuts. I understand that it is painful,” said Diaz. “But the governor is leaving me no choice.”

    The other renegade, Espada, thinks there might be a budget deal in the offing, but, he said, “I would vote no if such a massive cut were included because the state needs a fiscal plan.

    Paterson called both men “thugs.”

    Espada, like some in both houses of the Legislature, thinks lawmakers will find a way to avoid bringing the government to a grinding halt.

    “There will not be a shutdown on Monday. We’ve never wanted a shutdown,” he said.

    It’s really too early to tell what is going to happen. Will Espada and Diaz back down? Will Paterson make a deal with the Republicans? Or will pigs fly

  60. S
    June 10th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
    I think O will rue the day he mentioned ‘kick ass’…he is getting spoofed, ridiculed and made into a cartoon over those comments…and a lot of it is coming from the left, Leno, Letterman, Jon S…he has turned himself into a running joke…
    &&&&&&&&&

    Exactly. His attempt to overcome the wide-spread perception that he is detached and uninvolved by going to the other extreme is unseemly and unpresidential.

    No amount of WashPo / MSM “racist” talk can cover up the fact that Obama is the one who chose to speak so crassly.

    The man is a turd.

  61. basement angel
    June 10th, 2010 at 9:03 pm
    Oh, that’s rich. Now, they’re worried about primaries being subverted.
    &&&&&&&

    CLYBURN: “I’m shocked. I’m shocked to find that there are shennanigans in the primary that would interfere with fair and just elections!!”

    RGB TIMES INTERVIEWER: “Then what about the race-baiting, and the widespread intimidation in the caucuses that was the prime reason why Obama had more delegate votes than Hillary in 2008?”

    CLYBURN: “Due to color of his skin, and his thin resume, Obama needed to be spotted 800 delegates in order to make it a fair race.”

  62. Interesting that I’ve only seen this Jamaica Newspaper report on this.

    —————-

    Regional countries raise concerns about Gulf oil spill with Hillary Clinton

    Friday, June 11, 2010

    BRIDGETOWN, Barbados (CMC) — Caribbean countries say they are concerned that the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico could reach their shores and have raised the matter with United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during talks here yesterday.

    “Clearly there is anxiety in the region about that and we had the opportunity to speak to that. Clearly we are concerned about the possibility of it reaching our shores and Secretary Clinton recognises that and every effort will be made to solve the problem,” said Antigua and Barbuda Prime Minister Baldwin Spencer.

    Spencer, who is also chairman of the Caricom Council for Foreign and Community Relations (COFCOR), said there were concerns that the spill could reach the Bahamas, Jamaica or Cuba.

    Bahamas Deputy Prime Minister Brent Symonette said experts, including those from the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), have warned that the northern island chain is vulnerable to the spill.

    “At the moment it’s an international concern. Our concern is when it hits the loop and it’s the whole question of that tidal flow brings it down south and, also, the potential of any hurricanes.

    “So we’re monitoring it. I think by the time it gets to the Bahamas it may be in the tar ball stage which is less of a problem but still a very big problem because that’s the feeding ground for a number of our fish.

    “The United States doesn’t have the resources. It’s going to be a challenge to all of us,” he added.

    Clinton described Symonette’s presentation as “sobering” telling reporters that he pointed to the United States’ inability to cope with the clean-up.

    “Our understanding of, and preparation for dealing with a disaster like this is out-of-date,” Clinton said.

    “People have reached agreements and organised themselves to deal with a tanker accident or a cruise ship discharge – the kinds of things that unfortunately were the problems of the past.

    “But now we face this catastrophic blowout of this huge drilling operation in the Gulf and ministers made a very good suggestion that we need to start right now to get better prepared, better equipped to deal with something that might be of this magnitude in the future,” she said, noting that the Obama administration has pledged to do everything possible to prevent further environmental damage.

    Yesterday, BP said it planned to increase the volume of oil captured from a ruptured well in the Gulf of Mexico by early next week.

    The spill, which has been ongoing for almost two months, has severely affected the livelihood of fishermen, tour operators and other businesses in some United States cities.

    http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/Regional-countries-raise-concerns-about-Gulf-oil-spill-with-Hillary-Clinton

  63. Interview: Bill Clinton to Dems, ‘Never give up’

    By RON FOURNIER (AP) – 22 minutes ago

    LAS VEGAS — Bill Clinton says Democratic incumbents can’t run away from their records, so they might as well embrace them. “Tell your story,” the former president advised Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and other embattled Democrats.

    “Never give up,” he added.

    Clinton, considered one of the sharpest political minds of his generation, also urged Reid to avoid getting “ground down” by all the talk of this being an anti-incumbent, anti-Washington, anti-Democratic election year.

    Clinton offered that advice and more in a brief interview with The Associated Press following a Thursday night rally on behalf of Reid. The two-term Democratic president has emerged from a political wilderness of sorts to become a popular campaign surrogate, long forgiven for 2008 outbursts that hurt the campaign of his wife, Hillary, and angered candidate Barack Obama.

    Clinton is still basking in the glow of Sen. Blanche Lincoln’s victory Tuesday night in their home state of Arkansas, where he helped turn the Democratic runoff in her favor.

    What lessons could Reid learn from Lincoln’s victory?

    “First,” Clinton said, smiling, “never give up.”

    Second, he said, don’t listen to political consultants who steer incumbents away from talking about their records. Jon Corzine followed that bad advice, Clinton said, and got bounced from the New Jersey governor’s office last year.

    “Get out and tell the people what you’re doing and what you’ve done and remind them that this is a job,” Clinton told the AP. “I think you have to tell people you know why they are mad and you know why they are frustrated but the question is, What is the most productive thing to do with it?”

    At the rally, Clinton told voters to channel that anger against Reid’s opponent, tea party favorite Sharron Angle, whom he accused of hiding from the spotlight because her positions are so extreme.

    The former state legislator wants to phase out Social Security and backs the processing of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, a wildly unpopular notion in Nevada.

    “I might,” Clinton said facetiously, “be hiding, too.”

    He also questioned why Nevada voters would consider tossing out their senior senator.

    To more than 700 Democrats, Clinton said: “Why would you give away the Senate majority leader who has delivered time and time and time again?'”

    The answer is that voters are angry at Washington — understandably so, Clinton said, but that doesn’t mean Reid and other vulnerable incumbents are doomed.

    In the interview, the former Arkansas governor who dubbed himself “The Comeback Kid” during his 1992 presidential run said Reid and other incumbents can’t get down on themselves.

    “He needs not to be ground down by this,” Clinton said. “A lot of politicians are taking this personally. You have to take it seriously, but not personally.”

    Back to Reid, the president said: “He needs to never forget that he loves the people who are mad at him, and he needs to never forget he spent a lifetime helping them.”

    Chin up, Harry.

    “He can’t stop believing that he’ll get their votes back,” Clinton said. “Never stop believing.”

    Unfortunately, Reid was not on hand to hear the advice or attend his own rally. He was in the last place most incumbents want to be seen these days — Washington.

    “Doing his job,” Clinton said.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jLzz37jT3wZjOeAFmrMqJ7u_3qMQD9G93BP85

  64. NY TIMES’ NICHOLAS KRISTOF SHOWS OBAMA IS A FIGURE HEAD

    This ties in with admin’s theme of excuse making by the liberal out-of-touch elites (like Kristof, who despite growing up on a sheep farm, graduated from Harvard and then hop-scotched around the globe).

    But like the other excuse makers, they have to first find what attack is being leveled at Obumma in order to defend him. And in the process, they precisely reveal the many ways he is a failure.

    So in trying to get the American public to give Obama a break, Kristof inadvertently proves his case the other way.

    He intends to say that Obama is a task master, but the public wants him to be a celebrity, bully-pulpit, emotionally involved, figure head king. He calls Obama a “ruminative and slightly boring president who tries to solve problems rather than fulminate about them”.

    But indeed, he winds up laying down the case for the opposite. Indeed, why hasn’t Obama made time to:

    “…give President Obama time to devise actual clean-up policies. He might then also be able to concentrate on eliminating absurd government policies that make these disasters more likely (such as the $75 million cap on economic damages when an oil rig is responsible for a spill).”

    Instead, Obama perfectly plays the role of Kristof’s recommended figure head king: “…Our king and queen could spend days traipsing along tar-ball-infested beaches, while bathing oil-soaked pelicans and thrusting strong chins defiantly at BP rigs.”

    Hmmmm, isn’t that exactly what Obama is doing??? He is just a figure head celebrity with, amazingly, too much time on his hands: entertaining sports teams, golfing, vacationing, jet setting around the country and the globe giving speeches.

    Here is the article:

    nytimes.com/2010/06/10/opinion/10kristof.html

    A Modest Proposal: A King and Queen for America
    =======================================

    By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
    Published: June 9, 2010

    The national campaign to get President Obama to emote, throw crockery at oil executives and jump up and down in fury has failed. But here’s a long-term solution: Let’s anoint a king and queen.

    If we can just get over George III, our new constitutional monarchs could serve as National Hand-Holders, Morale-Boosters-in-Chief and Founts of American Indignation.

    Our king and queen could spend days traipsing along tar-ball-infested beaches, while bathing oil-soaked pelicans and thrusting strong chins defiantly at BP rigs.

    All that would give President Obama time to devise actual clean-up policies. He might then also be able to concentrate on eliminating absurd government policies that make these disasters more likely (such as the $75 million cap on economic damages when an oil rig is responsible for a spill).

    Our president is stuck with too many ceremonial duties as head of state, such as greeting ambassadors and holding tedious state dinners, that divert attention from solving problems. You can preside over America or you can address its problems, but it’s difficult to find time to do both.

    Other countries often hand over ceremonial duties to a titular head of state with no real powers — sort of a national nanny.

    In Japan, the head of state is effectively the emperor. In Germany, it’s the ceremonial president. In Britain, it’s the queen. Canada divides the job of head of state between Queen Elizabeth (a freebie since she’s on the British payroll) and her representative, the governor general.

    A figurehead head of state is a nifty foreign policy tool as well. President Obama has twice had to delay his trip to Indonesia and Australia because of the press of domestic policy, but an American king and queen could spend days greeting crowds and cutting ribbons at new schools. And when they aren’t traveling, our king and queen could be kept busy hosting state dinners five nights a week.

    Some folks complain that it’s silly to fret that Mr. Obama doesn’t emote. Of course, it is. It’s farcical that we have bullied our president into trash-talking on television about kicking some you know what.

    One of the things I admire about this administration is its cerebral, no-drama emphasis on empirical evidence in addressing issues such as health, education and poverty. This is government by adults, by engineers rather than by dramatists.

    But Mr. Obama also knows that drama and emotion are the fuel of American politics, and that’s why he’s struggling to feign fury.

    As Stephen Colbert observed about the oil spill: “We know if this was Reagan, he would have stripped to his skivvies, put a knife in his teeth, gone down there and punched that oil well shut!”

    But let’s be realistic. Most presidents just won’t look that good in their skivvies. And some may accidentally swallow the knives. Thus, the need for a handsome king and queen to lead photo-ops.

    Small-minded critics will offer petty objections, complaining that it is undemocratic or inequitable to have royalty. Hmm. Considering that the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans own financial wealth six times greater than the financial wealth of the entire bottom 80 percent, well, we already have an aristocracy.

    Critics may also protest the expense of royalty. But we could save on housing by having royals stay in the castles at Disneyland and Disney World. In any case, think of royalty as an investment that could bring in billions of dollars in tourist revenue.

    If we choose well and adopt royals who are prone to scandal, we might also give a much-needed boost to the newspaper industry. A particularly fecund couple might offer the prospect of regular royal weddings, with sales of enough commemorative kitsch to balance the federal budget.

    How should we choose a king and queen? Frankly, we already have royalty: Hollywood celebrities. And they are well trained to emote and explode on demand.

    Just imagine the Nielsen ratings for an Academy Awards-type evening in which Americans would choose a royal family for the first time — live!

    Movie stars are mostly rich enough that we wouldn’t have to pay them, and they can often be counted on to indulge in enough adultery to make royalty entertaining and titillating.

    They also tend to be gorgeous, and if we’re going to have a king and queen stripped to their skivvies with knives in their teeth, we may as well enjoy the sight.

    What? You say that this would be un-American? It’s not who we are as a country?

    Well, rage isn’t President Obama either. It’s not who he is any more than a monarchy is America.

    So maybe we should just accept that we’re stuck with a presidential system — and with a ruminative and slightly boring president who tries to solve problems rather than fulminate about them.

  65. OBAMA SUXS! We know who is doing the knifing of Israel in the back…Susan Rice!

    .. Sources: Obama Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week
    BY William Kristol
    June 11, 2010 10:41 AM
    ShareThis
    THE WEEKLY STANDARD has learned that senior Obama administration officials have been telling foreign governments that the administration intends to support an effort next week at the United Nations to set up an independent commission, under UN auspices, to investigate Israel’s behavior in the Gaza flotilla incident. The White House has apparently shrugged off concerns from elsewhere in the U.S. government that a) this is an extraordinary singling out of Israel, since all kinds of much worse incidents happen around the world without spurring UN investigations; b) that the investigation will be one-sided, focusing entirely on Israeli behavior and not on Turkey or on Hamas; and c) that this sets a terrible precedent for outside investigations of incidents involving U.S. troops or intelligence operatives as we conduct our own war on terror.

    While UN Ambassador Susan Rice is reported to have played an important role in pushing for U.S. support of a UN investigation, the decision is, one official stressed, of course the president’s. The government of Israel has been consulting with the U.S. government on its own Israeli investigative panel, to be led by a retired supreme court justice, that would include respected international participants, including one from the U.S. But the Obama administration is reportedly saying that such a “kosher panel” is not good enough to satisfy the international community, or the Obama White House.

  66. JanH,
    I now know that I am going to have to vote rethug for the next few elections, but how will we know if those rethugs aren’t jew/Israel haters too?

  67. rgbhrc44, you know Bill Clinton tackled and defeated a huge deficit and won. He got all the brainiac’s he could find put them together worked 16 hours a 7 days a week and fixed it. Why can’t we do the same for the oil gusher.
    Why have we not assembled all the brains in the world, not just the ones Obama thinks of, but everyone???

    Bill C would have done this 53days ago!

  68. What really irks me is when I read a ever so slightly critical article by one of Obama’s cheerleaders they always uses the caveat “while Obama’s likeability remains high”. Who likes this guy??? Honestly, even most dems can’t stand him but know they are stuck with him for better or worse. He is the least likeable Presisent since Bush 1. He seems cold, distant, and certainly does not feel “your pain”. When is this likeability bullshit going to cease?

  69. confloyd,

    Not that I am encouraging anyone to vote “rethug” in any way, shape, or form. They have done their share of damage for sure.

    However, I see more of a pattern of rethugs going to bat for Israelis than I do the dims.

  70. Made the mistake and watched the view yesterday. They were discussing the criticize of the President. Three of the four should wear signs around their necks which say, Dimocrate, voted for O. The three ganged up on the fourth, who’s neck sign should read Rep, voted for McCain, and the three said that the people criticizing O were those that did not vote for him. I think that the statistics would prove them wrong. I think a significant number of I’s are criticizing him, and a smaller % of Dims.

  71. I’s and Dims that actually voted for O. I also feel that you can like someone, but not vote for them again for President, once you have really observed their performance, or lack there of.

  72. confloyd
    June 11th, 2010 at 11:26 am
    rgbhrc44, you know Bill Clinton tackled and defeated a huge deficit and won. He got all the brainiac’s he could find put them together worked 16 hours a 7 days a week and fixed it. Why can’t we do the same for the oil gusher.
    Why have we not assembled all the brains in the world, not just the ones Obama thinks of, but everyone???

    Bill C would have done this 53days ago!
    &&&&&&

    You got that right. Big Dawg always had a work ethic. Still does, doing the heavy lifting supporting Dem candidates.

  73. admin @ 7:51 pm: it is great to have other Hillary supporter websites on the job.
    ——-
    Yes. Our girl taught us well.”It Takes A Village.”
    May I say also that you, admin, are toiling at a fever pitch. Incredible analyses abound. Thanks for it all … although one word hardly covers any of the efforts here.

    Snip
    Meanwhile, a delegation of U.S. senators head to the heart of coastal Louisiana on Friday to assess the damage caused by the growing oil disaster. Sens. Benjamin Cardin, David Vitter, Jeff Merkley and Barbara Mikulski, will be in Grand Isle, Louisiana, one of the early areas hit by the slick created by the underwater gusher. The senators are the latest in a virtual parade of Washington officials to make the trip to the Gulf Coast. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis was in the region Thursday, while President Obama is scheduled to make his fourth trip to the region next week.
    www dot cnn.com/2010/US/06/11/gulf.coast.oil.spill/index.html?hpt=Sbin

  74. jbstonesfan, You do have a point…who’s left that likes this guy…the paidoff pundits….the paidoff legislators…the few kool-aid drinkers that have not received their vaccination yet…there just can’t be that many real Obama lovers left! Its the paidoff media that keeps telling us he is still likeable.

  75. Jbstonesfan: could you imagine what it would be like if these talking heads were put through any semblance of the rigors of a courtroom, where, under the concept of authentication, there must be SOME preliminary showing that the witness is credible and knowledgeable on the subject which they propose to talk about, and where whatever they do say is subject to cross examination.

    A typical exchange might go something like this:

    I call Brian Williams to the stand/

    Q-1: Do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

    A-1: Hell no. As a journalist I am exempt from that requirement. As a matter of fact I could have you prosecuted for violating my first amendment rights. I was talking with the head of NBC just last night about that.

    Q-2: Fine. Let the record show that the witness refuses to take an oath promising to tell the truth. I move that his testimony be accepted into evidence. . . for what it is worth.

    Tea Party member: You honor may I speak. Why should we listen to this opinionated hack who is will not promise to tell the truth.

    Court: I do’t know. Why should we Mr. Attorney?

    Attorney: May it please the court, Mr Williams works for NBC, is a personal friend of Obama Lite (FOOL), went to Harvard, is a multi millionaire and never let a little thing like the truth stand in the way of shilling for Obama.

    Opposing Counsel: your honor the bias of this witness is self evident. He refuses to take the oath. He has as much as told us that he will lie for Obama. I ask that he not be allowed to testify. His testimony would shed more heat than light on this controversy.

    Court: How about it Mr. Williams. Are you willing to submit to the rules of this court room.

    Answer: Judge be very careful. I am an anchor man. I went to Harvard. I work for GE–now Comcast. My word is holy writ. It is a deep personal insult to me that anyone would question it.

    Court: Well Mr Williams you leave me very little choice. It is clear from your comments that you have no regard for the truth, you are in the bag for Obama, you refuse to take the oath, that you do not want your word to be question, so I take it you will leave the jury box and not submit to cross examination. I cannot accept testimony on these conditions.

    My advice to you is that you go back to NBC nightly news and your silly little interviews, where you can lie with impunity. But get the hell out of my court room now or I will have the bailiff remove you. You are not excused, just leave, you pompus dudley dooright ass.

  76. Have any pollsters done anything with regards to how Americans feel about the events in the middle east?

    Bambi and rice’s position with regards to the UN has sent one of the last people who I know that cont’d to support the one vehemently against him and she is a 62 year old Catholic. Sadly if the information had been given to her she never would have gotten off the evening news at least not with any sort of perspective.

    I am interested to find out why this finally did the job when an excuse was made for everything else.

  77. Maybe Rice can take this with her to the U.N.

    Interview with Mehmut Tuval, Captain, Mavi Marmara

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JdfxKEGGtc&feature=player_embedded

    Also…

    Gaza flotilla captain: Activists prepared attack against IDF raid

    The captain and first mate of the Mavi Marmara, the ship which led the Gaza flotilla raided by Israel Defense Forces special forces last week, had attempted to prevent premeditated violent clashes between activists and the Israeli military, evidence released Friday showed.

    Late last month, Israeli commandos rappelled onto the deck of one of the ships trying to break Israel’s three-year-old blockade of Gaza. The soldiers were intercepted by a crowd of activists, setting off a clash that killed nine men – eight Turks and a Turkish American.

    Israel says its soldiers began shooting only after a mob of pro-Palestinian activists attacked them – a version backed up by video footage released by the army. But the activists and their supporters say Israeli commandos needlessly opened fire.

    According to the clip, released by the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, the ship’s captain Mehmut Tuval had attempted to prevent a violent altercation by disposing of metal bars and chains IHH activists had cut ahead of the IDF takeover.

    Mehmut said that “once we see that the boats [were] around us…actually not us, but around the total ships…about two hours [before the takeover]… I see they were cutting the steels…chains. And I said to the chief officer, he collected all of them and also we put it in the radio room in the bridge.”

    The captain also indicated that he had thrown some of the bars and chains into the sea, while adding that he also asked IHH activists to pass over the bars and chains that had collected later on.

    Tuval said he sent his chief officer to ask for the bars, “saying …he cannot take directly from the guys..he spoke with the IHH to collect the [steel bars and chains]…we asked them to drop them, drop in the sea, because if they take it from the bridge that’s when we have a problem…and [after that] we didn’t see any in their hands.”

    The Mavi Marmara captain said he was indeed worried that the presence of the makeshift weapons would worsen the situations, adding he thought that nothing would eventually happen since the IHH commanders were at hand to prevent any violence.

    “I was worried but if their [leader] on the ship that there would be no effect, nobody will fight… I said many of times because I know the end,” Tuval told investigators, adding that he thought that nothing would happen since there were civilians on the ship/

    “I worried [that’s] why I collected the things to the bridge and I take how many I see in their hands and I drop them in the sea.”

    Asked whether or not he knew if the IHH activists were preparing a violent welcome to the IDF takeover, Tuval said that “they were preparing to violence against the soldiers: Yeah from what I was informed.”

    The ship’s first officer, Gokkiran Gokhan, told his investigators that he was sent by the ship’s captain to look into an unusual commotion near the life-boat section of the Mavi Marmara.

    Once he got there, Gokhan had noticed that bars and chains had been cut off by IHH activists from the deck using rotary saws, which he claims were no part of the ship’s equipment.

    Asked whose equipment were they, the first officer said: “I don’t know, not the ship’s. There is no such equipment on the ship. The deck has rods with hooks for chains, and when I got there the rods had been cut.”

    Gokhan added that this had happened after dark, and when he had asked one of the activists who had cut the rods, he answered that he didn’t know. The first officer also said that the IHH activists did not allow anyone but members of their group to pass through their section of the ship.

    When asked how the IHH activists communicated with each other, Gokhan told his investigators that “they brought walkie-talkies along with them when they got on board in Istanbul. The radios were distributed to the IHH people and to the ship’s crew.”

    The first mate added that other non-IHH passengers were allowed to move freely, with the exception of the control center which was located above the ship’s bridge, saying that the IHH group was made up of 40 people who boarded the ship in Istanbul.

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/gaza-flotilla-captain-activists-prepared-attack-against-idf-raid-1.295591

  78. Just going over the blog and listened to the Ass Kicking song by Bama again, Admin.

    Gotta admit, if he made some good songs with this great female singer and learned to dance like Michael Jackson, I would like him a little for something…at least.

  79. JanH

    Interview: Bill Clinton to Dems, ‘Never give up’

    ———
    Where have I heard that before………….
    …………..
    ……….

    Oh yea, Hillary. As a matter of fact, I have her black (pay down her debt) t-shirt on right now at work, and it says:

    For everyone who’s ever
    been counted out
    but refused to be knocked out
    and for everyone who works hard and never
    gives up, This one is for YOU!

  80. jbstonesfan
    June 11th, 2010 at 11:36 am
    What really irks me is when I read a ever so slightly critical article by one of Obama’s cheerleaders they always uses the caveat “while Obama’s likeability remains high”. Who likes this guy???
    ___________________________________________

    Have wondered this several times myself. I don’t know ANYONE who likes him. O bumper stickers are seen maybe once every 2-3 months (not that we were overrun with them anytime around the election either, but you usually saw several during daily commutes).

  81. ShadowFax,

    That “never give up” statement from BC has got to be a coded message to us Hillary supporters, right???

  82. Poor Blago, Judge is on his case and may want him duct taped to a chair…… (okay, the last part isn’t quite true)

    CHICAGO (AP) – A federal judge is warning former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to sit still and control his emotions during his corruption trial.

    Prosecutors complained Thursday that Blagojevich made gestures and comments the day before during testimony by his former chief of staff, Alonzo Monk—and that several jurors clearly took notice.

    Monk testified that he, Blagojevich and three others allegedly concocted a scheme to make money illegally.

    Judge James Zagel admonished Blagojevich to avoid making any facial or other expressions during the trial.

    Blagojevich has pleaded not guilty to scheming to profit from his power to fill the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama and squeezing people for campaign contributions.

  83. Re Kristol. But King and Queen Obama are exactly what we’ve got! Someone should show Kristol how many hours they spend on parties and sports.

  84. Bill and Hill catch Dinner in Bogota

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton caught a rare dinner with her husband Bill in Bogota on Tuesday.

    Where did they eat? A local steakhouse. Who paid? Unknown.

    The Colombia tete-a-tete marked a rare overseas schedule intersection for the Clintons, who each spend lots of time on the road — he for his foundation, she for the State Department.

    Clinton told reporters in Bogota it was a chance to get together and reflect on security advances in Colombia, once a byword for political and drug-related violence.

    “We had a wonderful dinner last night in Bogota, among friends, some Colombian and some American, and we talked about how remarkable it was that such a common event could take place,” she said.

    Common in Colombia, perhaps, but not for the globe-trotting Clintons.

    The Clintons were in Bogota on separate business. Both had a meeting with Colombia’s President Alvaro Uribe.

  85. Shadowfax, I thought that was interesting that Blago was a code talker. Many times I thought Obama rests his head in hand with either one, two or three fingers. I thought that mannerism was usual.

  86. It seems like Mrs. Obama got teary eyed at a high school graduation as she remembered her parents and how hard they worked and how much they pushed their children to achieve….all must not be right in fantasy land.

  87. (Reuters) – President Barack Obama pushed congressional leaders Thursday to pass energy, financial reform and jobs measures, even as they grapple with the devastating BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

    But he said he wanted Congress to pass during its current session his measures to boost the economy, generate jobs and aid small businesses and his sweeping financial regulatory reform bill.

    “The financial markets I think deserve certainty, but, more importantly in my mind, consumers and the American people deserve to know that there’s a regulatory framework that is in place,” Obama said.

    Obama met with House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the two Democratic leaders in Congress, as well as House Republican leader John Boehner, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell and Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 Democrat in the House.

    McConnell said Senate Republicans — and some Democrats — were happy to work on legislation directly related to the spill in the Gulf, but would resist efforts to use it as a rationale for a comprehensive energy bill that would include an emissions trading mechanism.

    “What most of my members, if not all of them, and a substantial number of Democrats in the United States Senate will not be interested in is seizing on the oil spill in the Gulf and using that as a rationale … for passing a national energy tax,” McConnell told reporters after the meeting.

    Obama pushed for passage of his sweeping energy bill, which would fight climate change and ramp up production of renewable fuels.

    [snip]

    “Although obviously our immediate task is to deal with a crisis that is affecting millions of people down in the Gulf, we can’t keep our eye off the importance of having an energy policy that meets the needs of the next generation and ensures that the United States is the leader when it comes to energy policy,” Obama said.

  88. jbstonesfan
    June 11th, 2010 at 11:36 am
    What really irks me is when I read a ever so slightly critical article by one of Obama’s cheerleaders they always uses the caveat “while Obama’s likeability remains high”. Who likes this guy??? Honestly, even most dems can’t stand him but know they are stuck with him for better or worse. He is the least likeable Presisent since Bush 1. He seems cold, distant, and certainly does not feel “your pain”. When is this likeability bullshit going to cease?
    &&&&&&&&&&

    The media folks who cover him are the “ones who like him”. They like that they plan to make money off of writing books on how historical and likeable he is…

    Agreed, how many people truly would say, “Gee, I really hate what Obama is trying to do, I don’t like him sticking his nose into my business, I don’t like his policies, he’s lead the Dems into the gutter, and he’s a pompous ass…But gee, I really would love to have a beer with him, he’s just soooooo, likeable.”

  89. henry
    June 11th, 2010 at 3:29 pm
    Got this link from Hillbuzz
    &&&&&&&

    Agreed. I’m putting it up here for all to devour. It cuts him down to size, but without cruelty. Just the facts, ma’am.

    June 11, 2010
    A Shrink Asks: What’s Wrong with Obama?
    ====================================

    By Robin of Berkeley

    So what is the matter with Obama? Conservatives have been asking this question for some time. I’ve written a number of articles trying to solve the mystery.

    Even some liberals are starting to wonder. James Carville railed about Obama’s blasé attitude after the catastrophic oil spill. The New York Times’ Maureen Dowd revamped Obama’s “Yes We Can” motto into “Will We Ever?”

    The liberal women of the TV show “The View” have expressed sympathy for Michelle Obama’s living with a man so out of touch. Peggy Noonan, hardly a vehement Obama foe, recently pronounced him disconnected.

    Obama’s odd mannerisms intrigue a psychotherapist like me. He also presents a serious diagnostic challenge.

    For one, Obama’s teleprompter and the men behind the Blackberry keep him well-scripted. We know so little about the facts of his life.

    But it’s more than just a lack of information. Obama himself is a strange bird. He doesn’t fit easily into any diagnostic category.

    Many people attribute Obama’s oddness to his narcissism. True, Obama has a gargantuan ego, and he is notoriously thin-skinned.

    Yet a personality disorder like narcissism does not explain Obama’s strangeness: his giggling while being asked about the economy; his continuing a shout-out rather than announcing the Ft. Hood shootings; or his vacations, golfing, partying and fundraising during the calamitous oil spill.

    Take also Obama’s declaring on the “Today Show” that he wants to know whose ass to kick. Consummate narcissists would never stoop to this vulgar display of adolescent machismo.

    Obama is flat when passion is needed; he’s aggressive when savvy is required. What’s most worrisome is that Obama doesn’t even realize that his behavior is inappropriate.

    So if it’s not just simple narcissism, what is wrong with Obama? Since I’ve never evaluated him, I can’t say for sure. But I can hazard some educated guesses.

    If I saw a client as disconnected as him, the first thing I would wonder: Is something wrong with his brain? And I’d consider the following theoretical diagnostic possibilities.

    –Physical problems: There are a multitude of physiological conditions that can cause people to act strangely. For instance: head injuries, endocrine disturbances, epilepsy, and toxic chemical exposure.

    It makes me wonder: Did Obama ever have a head injury? His stepfather in Indonesia was purportedly an alcoholic abuser. Was Obama subject to any physical abuse?

    — Drugs and alcohol: Damage to the brain from drugs and alcohol can also cause significant cognitive impairments. Obama once said that there were 57 states — and didn’t correct himself. Memory problems can be caused by both illicit and prescription drug use.

    Obama admits to a history of drug use in his youth. Did his usage cause some damage? Does Obama still use?

    –Asperger’s Syndrome: Also known as high-functioning autism, Asperger’s causes deficits in social skills. A person with Asperger’s can’t read social cues. Consequently, he can be insensitive and hurtful without even knowing it.

    Could Obama have Asperger’s? He might have some mild traits, but certainly not the full-blown disorder. In contrast to Obama, those with Asperger’s get fixated on some behavior, like programming computers. Obama lacks this kind of passion and zeal.

    –Mental Illness: Obama’s family tree is replete with the unbalanced. His maternal great-grandmother committed suicide. His grandfather, Stanley Dunham, was particularly unhinged: He was expelled from high school for punching his principal; named his daughter Stanley because he wanted a boy; and exposed young Barry to not just drunken trash talk, but unrestricted visits with alleged pedophile Frank Marshall Davis (who might or might not be Obama’s biological father). Barack Sr. was an abusive, alcoholic bigamist.

    Since mental illness runs in the family, does Obama have any signs? Yes and no. No, he is not a schizophrenic babbling about Martians. But there are red flags for some other conditions.

    While Obama doesn’t appear to hallucinate, he seems to have delusions. His believing he has a Messiah-like special gift smacks of grandiose delusions. His externalizing all blame to conservatives, George W. Bush, or the “racist” bogeyman hints at persecutory delusions.

    Along with a delusional disorder, Obama may fit for a mild psychotic disorder called schizotypal disorder. It may explain some of Obama’s oddness.

    People with schizotypal disorder hold bizarre beliefs, are suspicious and paranoid, and have inappropriate and constricted affect. They have few close friends and are socially awkward. A schizotypal is someone like your strange cousin Becky who is addicted to astrology, believes she is psychic, and is the oddball at social gatherings.

    Schizotypal Disorder does ring some bells vis-à-vis Obama. One way the diagnosis doesn’t fit, however, is that schizotypals are generally harmless, odd ducks. Not so with Obama.

    –Trauma: My gut tells me that Obama was seriously traumatized in childhood. His mother disregarded his basic needs, dragged him all over the place, and ultimately abandoned him.

    But I think there may be something even more insidious in his family background. While I can’t prove it, the degree of Obama’s disconnect reminds me of my sexually abused clients.

    With serious sexual abuse, the brain chemistry may change. The child dissociates — that is, disconnects from his being — in order to cope. Many adult survivors still dissociate, from occasional trances to the most extreme cases of multiple personality disorder.

    Apparently, young Barry was left in the care of Communist Frank Marshall Davis, who admitted to molesting a 13-year-old girl. As a teenager, Obama wrote a disturbing poem, “Pop,” that evoked images of sexual abuse — for instance, describing dual amber stains on both his and “Pop’s” shorts.

    Would trauma explain Obama’s disconnect? In many ways, yes. A damaged and unattached child may develop a “false self.” To compensate for the enormous deficits in identity and attachment, the child invents his own personality. For Obama, it may have been as a special, gifted person.

    Let’s return now to my original question: What is wrong with Obama? My guess is a great deal. The answer is complex and likely includes some combination of the above.

    Along with the brain issues are personality disorders: narcissism, paranoia, passive-aggressiveness. There’s even the possibility of the most destructive character defect of all, an antisocial personality. Untreated abuse can foster antisocial traits, especially among boys.

    If my assessment is accurate, what does this mean?

    It means that liberals need to wake up and spit out the Kool-Aid…and that conservatives should put aside differences, band together, and elect as many Republicans as possible.

    Because Obama will not change. He will not learn from his mistakes. He will not grow and mature from on-the-job experience. In fact, over time, Obama will likely become a more ferocious version of who he is today.

    Why? Because this is a damaged person. Obama’s fate was sealed years ago growing up in his strange and poisonous family. Later on, his empty vessel was filled with the hateful bile of men like Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers.

    Obama will not evolve; he will not rise to the occasion; he will not become the man he was meant to be. This is for one reason and one reason alone:

    He is not capable of it.

  90. I was wondering what you all thought of Alvin Greene’s surprising victory in the Senate Democratic primary in South Carolina. I am in deep hot water on a couple of other sites for pointing out the obvious. They are calling me racist. A black man won a Democratic primary in a state where the vast majority of Democratic voters are black. The other candidate was white. Who is surprised by this? It’s the same reason Jesse Jackson won when he ran. It is identity politics plain and simple, not that it is right or wrong. That’s just how it is.

  91. Henry

    I followed your link from the buzz boys into the rabbit hole and found this poem by Barack Obama…….. it is beyond odd. Written when he was 19 and about his grandfather (Mother’s father?)

    Pop

    Sitting in his seat, a seat broad and broken
    In, sprinkled with ashes,
    Pop switches channels, takes another
    Shot of Seagrams, neat, and asks
    What to do with me, a green young man
    Who fails to consider the
    Flim and flam of the world, since
    Things have been easy for me;
    I stare hard at his face, a stare
    That deflects off his brow;
    I’m sure he’s unaware of his
    Dark, watery eyes, that
    Glance in different directions,
    And his slow, unwelcome twitches,
    Fail to pass.
    I listen, nod,
    Listen, open, till I cling to his pale,
    Beige T-shirt, yelling,
    Yelling in his ears, that hang
    With heavy lobes, but he’s still telling
    His joke, so I ask why
    He’s so unhappy, to which he replies . . .
    But I don’t care anymore, cause
    He took too damn long, and from
    Under my seat, I pull out the
    Mirror I’ve been saving; I’m laughing,
    Laughing loud, the blood rushing from his face
    To mine, as he grows small,
    A spot in my brain, something
    That may be squeezed out, like a
    Watermelon seed between
    Two fingers.
    Pop takes another shot, neat,
    Points out the same amber
    Stain on his shorts that I’ve got on mine and
    Makes me smell his smell, coming
    From me; he switches channels, recites an old poem
    He wrote before his mother died,
    Stands, shouts, and asks
    For a hug, as I shink, my
    Arms barely reaching around
    His thick, oily neck, and his broad back; ’cause
    I see my face, framed within
    Pop’s black-framed glasses
    And know he’s laughing too.

    — Barack Obama

  92. Shadowfax, That has got to be the weirdest poem I have ever read…I think Obama was a victim of child abuse.

  93. More from the rabbit hole of a different article on American Thinker…sounds pretty rational in her analysis:

    [snip]

    Stanley and Madelyn raised Obama from around age l0 through high school. Stanley, an impulsive and hard drinking man, made one of the most twisted of parental decisions — to have Barry mentored by the elderly Frank Marshall Davis, purportedly a Communist who worked on behalf of the Soviet Union; a pedophile who wrote a book entitled “Sex Rebel: Black,” an alcoholic, a racist, and a misogynist.

    Well regarded bloggers have raised the provocative question about whether Davis violated Obama, perhaps by molesting him. (Read Obama’s college era poem Pop, especially the lines, “Pop. . . points out the same amber stain on his shorts that I’ve got on mine, and makes me smell his smell, coming from me,” and see what you think.)

    Obama himself has said, in his autobiography, that “Frank” made him feel uncomfortable. Grandpa Stanley and Davis would sit around getting loaded, talking trash about women, and making up smutty limericks.

    Whether Davis sexually abused Obama or not, Davis made a lasting impression on his young psyche. Davis blamed racism and capitalism for all of the problems in society and instructed young Barry, “Don’t fully trust white people,” and “Black people have a reason to hate.”

    Obama’s identity was ever in flux until he linked up with Davis. Now he had beliefs he could wrap his mind around — rage at the system. Obama apparently became filled with resentment and anger even though he lived a privileged life in Hawaii.

    As an adult, Obama sought out other people who reinforced and hardened this world view: black nationalists, like Rev. Wright; 60’s terrorists, such as Bill Ayers; wife Michelle, who never felt pride in this country, regardless of a Princeton education, cushy attorney jobs, and a million dollar mansion. Chillingly, some of these people, like Rev. Wright, anointed Obama a messiah, which may have only magnified Obama’s false pride and delusions of grandeur.

    Obama could have gone down one of two roads. One was to face the truth about his life, regardless of the shame, hurt, and grief this would evoke. But Obama chose another path, the one that allowed him to save face; he made the personal political.

    His father didn’t choose to desert him; racism was at fault. His mother didn’t abandon him; the system was to blame. Obama’s grandparents didn’t corrupt him by giving a creepy guy like Davis personal access to him; they were acting like “typical white [people]”.

    Obama, I think, created another reality by blaming white America for his family’s faults. It’s a pattern he’s continued his whole life; his associates are also allergic to personal accountability.

    I picture Obama as a man crying out that he’s thirsty although he’s standing knee high in a fresh water stream. He’s been blessed by the fortunes of a king — prestigious private schools and universities, a lavish home in Chicago, two healthy little girls, state Senate and US Senate appointments, and now the Presidency.

    And yet deep down, I believe that Obama is still the wounded, angry little boy whose parents abandoned him and. Rather than resent and mourn them, he’s turned his rage on a more convenient target — the entire United States system — even though it’s that very same system of largely White Americans who elected him President.

  94. rgb44hrc
    June 11th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
    jbstonesfan
    June 11th, 2010 at 11:36 am
    What really irks me is when I read a ever so slightly critical article by one of Obama’s cheerleaders they always uses the caveat “while Obama’s likeability remains high”. Who likes this guy??? Honestly, even most dems can’t stand him but know they are stuck with him for better or worse. He is the least likeable Presisent since Bush 1. He seems cold, distant, and certainly does not feel “your pain”. When is this likeability bullshit going to cease?
    &&&&&&&&&&

    The media folks who cover him are the “ones who like him”. They like that they plan to make money off of writing books on how historical and likeable he is…

    Agreed, how many people truly would say, “Gee, I really hate what Obama is trying to do, I don’t like him sticking his nose into my business, I don’t like his policies, he’s lead the Dems into the gutter, and he’s a pompous ass…But gee, I really would love to have a beer with him, he’s just soooooo, likeable.”
    ___________________________________________________

    Maybe they’re talking about their own personal experiences at one of his many shindigs. Maybe he’s the life of the party when he gets sloshed. Dunno.

    Otherwise, I can’t imagine who in the general public would find him “personally likeable” while being nauseated by his actions / inactions.

  95. Here’s another goodie…seems Hillary is now liked by Hugo Chavez almost as much as he liked GWB, LOL! I am so glad about this!

    .Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, known for his melodramatic flourishes, improvised a song this week about his contentious relationship with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

    In the middle of a speech on Wednesday, Chavez began singing a little tune with lyrics that translate to, “I’m not loved by Hillary Clinton… and I don’t love her either,” the BBC reports.

    Clinton has been touring Latin America over the past week, and she criticized Chavez’s government policies during a television interview in Ecuador, according to the Associated Press. She said the U.S. is open to improving its relationship with Chavez but that “it doesn’t appear that he wants to.”

    The Venezuela Foreign Ministry reportedly called Clinton’s remarks “foolish and inopportune.”

    In his Wednesday night speech, the AP reports, Chavez said, “Look, Mrs. Clinton, We’re really sorry here about what is happening to the people of the United States…They’re the ones who are suffering with some of the measures that Obama is taking.”

    Chavez is notorious for giving hours-long speeches and making over-the-top statements about the United States, such as when he called President George W. Bush the devil as he was addressing the United Nations

  96. Shadowfax
    June 11th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
    Just going over the blog and listened to the Ass Kicking song by Bama again, Admin.

    Gotta admit, if he made some good songs with this great female singer and learned to dance like Michael Jackson, I would like him a little for something…at least.
    _______________________________________

    I’d never seen any of those autotune news things before. They’re really pretty funny.

  97. JanH
    June 11th, 2010 at 5:01 pm
    She’s looking very tired again.

    LAHT.COM — US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at OAS, Peru, June 2010
    ________________________________________________

    She being run ragged having to cover for the idiot.

  98. #
    blowme0bama

    JanH

    She’s looking very tired again.

    ________________________

    She being run ragged having to cover for the idiot.

    ——–

    I was just thinking the same thing. As much as I love Hillary acting like Superwoman, flying around saving the world, I can’t wait until she tells Barry to shove it when he comes up with his next list of places to travel for him.

    She should hook up teleconferencing with leaders that she already met in person…and kick back a little. She is also planning her daughter’s wedding.

    Hillary needs to rest and have some fun with the Big Dawg.

  99. I agree, she is looking tired. I think its best to be as far away from oil spill the better…she needs to get a little cabana on a clean beach somewhere and rest til all this oil gusher gets in hand. Let the grand master try to do this by himself,inotherwards let him swing in the breeze by himself, LOL!

  100. holdthemaccountable
    June 11th, 2010 at 7:01 am
    Last night I watched NBC’s Brian Williams. He/whoever else responsible for its content is/are to be commended. Gave prominence to the Rolling Stone article. In mentioning the upwardly advised gush (how about surge?) estimate which everyone is mentioning, NBC said it’s much larger than originally STATED. Other are saying much larger than previously THOUGHT. Evidently NBC has a place on its web site which accepts questions regarding the oil surge. They select some for on-air answers and last night gave a simple but salient fact: 1 barrel = 42 gallons.

    This made me realize that much of the reporting being done switches back and forth from barrels to gallons to barrels, and that is a wonderful obfuscation for folks like Couric … whose coverage I watched overnight. She definitely has Obama’s back. And I’d rate ABC somewhere in between the two networks already mentioned.
    *******************************************************

    holdthemaccountable…I believe this is part of a covert strategy of NBC/MSNBC…IMO what NBC and MSNBC and to an extent CNBC are doing is playing up and manipulating the oil spill story…taking some surface shots at O and his admin…but, I believe, their real strategy is to set him and the Dims up for pushing through their new “energy” policy…

    I honestly think they are purposely using the spill and will continue to manipulate the story to pave the way for the dims and O to push their energy policy…at that point NBC and crew will pound away reinforcing the need for it and try to create as much support for it as possible…they will drill that story every day and coordinate with the WH and Dim congress…appearances and talking points…keep in mind there is always a corporate motivation behind anything going on at NBC, and affiliates….Jeff Immelt, CEO and Chairman of GE, so conveniently serves on O’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board…hard to believe that such a conflict of interest would be allowed or hardly mentioned…but true…or that O would be the recipient of the largest amount of contributions from BP in history…never mentioned…more protection of O

    remember in the old days how we heard all about Cheney’s conflicts of interest…but O remains untouched while he has NBC, MSNBC and CNBC singing he praises all day…and protecting him…(happened to catch a few comments from Mika and Joe and they both sound like they are protecting O as if he was their child…sickening!)

    don’t really watch Morning Joe, but once in a while I catch a bit of it in the AM while rushing around…Joe S has become a big O kisser…Joe is beginning to sound like an O dim…he takes shots at SP and repubs and continually protects O

    anything connected to NBC cannot be trusted in any way…with the exception of Dylan Ratigan…that one I cannot figure out…why they allow him to actually utter some objective truths…Ratigan does take some direct shots at the lies on BOTH SIDES…

  101. Well, ain’t this flippin’ great……

    Louisiana (Reuters) – Britain stuck up for beleaguered BP Plc on Friday against American criticism over the massive Gulf of Mexico oil spill, while the company prepared to ramp up efforts to siphon more crude from its gushing deep-sea well.

    ….later they say:

    It is moving a second ship to the spill site to enable it to increase the amount of oil it is siphoning from the well “toward the end of June,” the Obama administration’s point man for the disaster, Admiral Thad Allen, said.

    Under U.S. government direction, BP also plans to nearly double its oil-collecting capacity by mid-July. The upgraded oil collection system could potentially siphon up to 50,000 barrels a day, Allen said.

    ——
    Okay, let me ask a stupid question…

    Why in F haven’t they thought of bringing in more flippin’ boats to collect more crude until now? What are the fleet of boats that are already there doing now…fishing?

    %$#*7!!!!!!!!

    Screw BP and Brittan, they would be starting a Revolutionary War against us if we mucked up their piece of dirt and surrounding water across the pond.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6573FD20100611

  102. Actually, NY Metro is the free Obama toilet paper. AMNY, I haven’t noticed a huge bias, definitely not like ultra-left Metro. But yes, you can’t even find AMNY after noon. It’s a major free daily in Manhattan. Everybody on the subways at rush hour saw that cover.

  103. Nothing like a good Carville vant to get the media’s attention.

    The woman standing next to him just couldn’t wait to get her 2 cents worth in, but James wasn’t going to buy any of the CNN reporters free pass for Barry.

    The last part of his little rant really rang true, “……we aren’t going to shut up this time.”

    No James, you and all your Democratic buddies shouldn’t have shut up the first, second, third and all the times you watched Barry buffalo the American public.

    Better late than never.

  104. That Fareed guy pist me off too. Who the heck is this guy anyway. Its been so long since I’ve watch CNN I hadn’t realized they’ve gone all arab.

  105. confloyd:

    Notice the lady standing next to James has taken the “akimbo” stance. 🙂 (hands on hips forming sharp angles between the wrist and shoulder) It’s a wonderful thing to hear them argue when they are on the same side. Mary’s response didn’t make it to the video. The clip is from the John King show.

  106. Wonder if Carville’s wife privately likes Bill and Hillary? Carville has been about the only loyal Clinton person out there(see also Ann Lewis).

  107. #
    jbstonesfan
    June 11th, 2010 at 9:44 pm

    Wonder if Carville’s wife privately likes Bill and Hillary? Carville has been about the only loyal Clinton person out there(see also Ann Lewis).
    ________________________________

    I attended a seminar where they were appearing together. This was early on probably mid 99′ for the 2000 Gore/Bush election.
    Together, they were electric- no animosity from Mary- she let James talk and they agreed on most issues. This was a side I had never seen of them performing together. It was then I realized when they appear together on the pundit shows, it’s all play fighting ….(theater).

    To answer your question, I don’t know if Mary likes Bill and Hillary but she sure as hell respects them; even if she doesn’t or won’t admit it. I think as time has gone by, she has grown to admire how they’ve survived and persevered through it all. And the respect and love the Clinton’s have garnered from people throughout the world.

    When traveling Europe one summer, every country we visited, as soon as they found out we were Americans, they chanted “CLINTON” with 2 thumbs-up… It was funny- they wanted to talk to us, asking us: ‘what are they like?’ As if we knew Bill and Hillary personally. 🙂

  108. In an interview with POLITICO’s Roger Simon, President Barack Obama said
    Friday that some members of Congress should share the blame for the Gulf
    of Mexico oil spill.

    http://www.politico.com

    I don’t even know what to say to this. This man is no man, he is an immature child, I have never heard of a “leader” who seems to think his first priority is to make sure to assign blame…….. to someone else.

  109. Went to a high school graduation earlier tonight and I was shocked that very few people participated in the Pledge of Allegiance. Nine years ago these same people had flags hanging from their homes in the wake of 9/11. Why the shift I wonder?

  110. henry
    June 11th, 2010 at 10:32 pm

    Probably student apathy. He promised them a new world, a new government, they believed and it didn’t happen. They feel burned by a politician selling them snake oil.

  111. tim
    June 11th, 2010 at 10:28 pm

    I’ve never heard a former president say:

    ‘I have to find out whose ass to kick.’

    Obama responds in the vernacular of an NBA coach, not the President and representative of the Free World!

  112. #
    henry
    June 11th, 2010 at 10:43 pm

    Mrs Smith
    Wasn’t the kids it was the 2000 or so adults that didn’t chime in.
    ———-
    Because they are idiots????????????????????

  113. henry
    June 11th, 2010 at 10:43 pm

    yes, mostly parents, friends and relatives. The people who campaigned hard to elect Obama. Now they are hearing complaints from their kids day in and day out.

    I can still see the black woman at Obama’s acceptance speech, practically in tears, screaming hysterically : “Obama’s going to pay my car payment and help me with my mortgage.”

    Well, We know how that all turned out. we weren’t crazy enough to listen to his lies or believe anything he said. Some of us felt because of Hillary, we knew more about politics than Obama did… even though we were still reeling from Hillary’s withdrawal from the race. We tried convincing his cultists it wasn’t going to happen… and they called us racists. We were liars because we didn’t want a black man in the WH. The rest as you know, is history-

  114. tim
    June 11th, 2010 at 10:28 pm

    ——————-

    Oh that’s just bambi’s fingerpointing/throw your best buds under the bus Laurel & Hardy comedy routine…don’tcha know. 🙂

  115. What has happened over at NQ, there are lots of folks saying this oil spill will not be as bad as Itox in 79′. They are still quoting the 5,000 barrels a day and agreeing with Rush that the Gulf just cleans itself. What they don’t see the dolphins, fish, crabs and birds dying?? What are they blind?? I don’t want to cancel drilling in the gulf at all, but I don’t want to kid myself into believing that drilling and spilling is not a terrible thing either. What idiots.

  116. Already, really bad. Read the whole story at the link:
    ______________________

    P&J looks to bring oysters in from the West Coast for the first time in its 134 years.

    The impact of the oil from the Gulf of Mexico spill now soiling the Louisiana shoreline was felt far inland on Thursday as P&J Oyster Company, the country’s oldest oyster processor and distributor, ceased its shucking operations.

    http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/06/pj_looks_to_bring_oysters_in_f.html

  117. So it turns out that Harry’s Reid’s rival is a nutjob. She wants to end all social security and she believes in Scientology, now that will play well in Nevada….why do we believe we actually pick the folks in DC….we don’t. Just like in Texas, they wanted Perry and used Beck to take out Debra…folks we will get who THEY want.

  118. According to Harry Reid and the Democratic Party goons, Hillary Clinton was a “nutjob” and Bill Clinton was a “racist”. I don’t know why you would believe them about some other opponent.

  119. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7148555.ece

    Saudi Arabia has conducted tests to stand down its air defences to enable Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities, The Times can reveal.

    In the week that the UN Security Council imposed a new round of sanctions on Tehran, defence sources in the Gulf say that Riyadh has agreed to allow Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran. To ensure the Israeli bombers pass unmolested, Riyadh has carried out tests to make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defence systems not activated. Once the Israelis are through, the kingdom’s air defences will return to full alert.

    “The Saudis have given their permission for the Israelis to pass over and they will look the other way,” said a US defence source in the area. “They have already done tests to make sure their own jets aren’t scrambled and no one gets shot down. This has all been done with the agreement of the [US] State Department.”

    Sources in Saudi Arabia say it is common knowledge within defence circles in the kingdom that an arrangement is in place if Israel decides to launch the raid. Despite the tension between the two governments, they share a mutual loathing of the regime in Tehran and a common fear of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. “We all know this. We will let them [the Israelis] through and see nothing,” said one. [snip]

    The targets lie as far as 1,400 miles (2,250km) from Israel; the outer limits of their bombers’ range, even with aerial refuelling. An open corridor across northern Saudi Arabia would significantly shorten the distance. An airstrike would involve multiple waves of bombers, possibly crossing Jordan, northern Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Aircraft attacking Bushehr, on the Gulf coast, could swing beneath Kuwait to strike from the southwest.

    Passing over Iraq would require at least tacit agreement to the raid from Washington. So far, the Obama Administration has refused to give its approval as it pursues a diplomatic solution to curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Military analysts say Israel has held back only because of this failure to secure consensus from America and Arab states. Military analysts doubt that an airstrike alone would be sufficient to knock out the key nuclear facilities, which are heavily fortified and deep underground or within mountains. However, if the latest sanctions prove ineffective the pressure from the Israelis on Washington to approve military action will intensify. Iran vowed to continue enriching uranium after the UN Security Council imposed its toughest sanctions yet in an effort to halt the Islamic Republic’s nuclear programme, which Tehran claims is intended for civil energy purposes only. President Ahmadinejad has described the UN resolution as “a used handkerchief, which should be thrown in the dustbin”. [snip]

    In 2007 Israel was reported to have used Turkish air space to attack a suspected nuclear reactor being built by Iran’s main regional ally, Syria. Although Turkey publicly protested against the “violation” of its air space, it is thought to have turned a blind eye in what many saw as a dry run for a strike on Iran’s far more substantial — and better-defended — nuclear sites.

    Israeli intelligence experts say that Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan are at least as worried as themselves and the West about an Iranian nuclear arsenal.Israel has sent missile-class warships and at least one submarine capable of launching a nuclear warhead through the Suez Canal for deployment in the Red Sea within the past year, as both a warning to Iran and in anticipation of a possible strike. Israeli newspapers reported last year that high-ranking officials, including the former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, have met their Saudi Arabian counterparts to discuss the Iranian issue. It was also reported that Meir Dagan, the head of Mossad, met Saudi intelligence officials last year to gain assurances that Riyadh would turn a blind eye to Israeli jets violating Saudi airspace during the bombing run. Both governments have denied the reports.

  120. Good article on why Reid will lose was published before the primary. Reid has tons of money and that is about it. Here’s a sample from the article:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/06/08/regardless_of_who_wins_gop_primary_reids_in_trouble_105884.html

    Moreover, none of this changes the fact that, in polling terms, Reid is a dead man walking no matter who he faces. In the past two months, he’s polled a 37, 39, 39, 42, and 42 against Lowden. His numbers against Tarkanian are 41, 41, 43 and 39, while his numbers against Angle are 40, 42, 43, and 41. The only numbers that change are voters flipping between Lowden/Tarkanian/Angle and undecided.

    Not only are these numbers virtually identical in statistical terms, they are uniformly atrocious for someone who has been a fixture in Nevada politics since Nixon’s first term, and only a handful of politicians with these types of poll numbers five months out from an election have gone on to win.

    How much will Republican social issues really matter this year? — The conventional wisdom is that Angle’s brand of Christian conservatism may well be too much for the libertarian-ish voters in the Silver state to bear. Truth is, Lowden and Tarkanian hold similar, if more nuanced views.

    But I think there’s a few important caveats. First, Harry Reid is pro-life, which deprives him of the number one card typically played against Christian conservatives in swing states. Second, the idea that the state won’t elect a social conservative statewide is belied by the fact that it has twice elected John Ensign, and elected Governor Gibbons in 2006.

    Most importantly, I’m not sure that voters are focused on social issues this year, and even if Angle/Reid/Tarkanian are poor fits for libertarian-leaning voters, so too is Reid. After all, Reid brings a ton of baggage to the table, as a leading face of the Washington that voters presently despise. Reid may run ads implying that Angle wants to make beer illegal, or that Tarkanian favors Arizona’s illegal immigration law, or that Lowden wants to reduce health care to a barter system. But the Republican nominee will respond with ads showing that Harry Reid was responsible for a health care bill that a majority of the state’s electorate disapproves of, that he pushed through a deeply unpopular stimulus bill, and that he moved TARP through the Senate.

    In the end, regardless of whether the Republican nominee is Angle, Tarkanian, Lowden, or even Brian Nadell, this will be a referendum on Harry Reid and the Obama Administration. Right now, that referendum doesn’t look so good for Reid against any of the potential Republicans.

  121. admin
    June 12th, 2010 at 2:21 am
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7148555.ece

    A nuclear Iran threatens the entire Middle East, ESPECIALLY the royal family of the House of Saud. Remember, they quickly authorized coalition forces to base there when Iraq invaded Kuwait, almost completely out of their own self interest. The interesting thing will be the Muslim reaction to the Saudis allowing the Zionists the freedom to bomb other Arabs. Will that be the straw that breaks the collective Muslim camels back? Will it cause civil war WITHIN the Arabic communities? Will it spur the peace b/w the Palestinians and the Isrealis by introducing an Arab state the likes of Saudi Arabia on the side of the Zionists? The only real sad thing is that the leader of the free world is an idiot. But I digress……

  122. Mrs. Smith
    June 11th, 2010 at 11:02 pm

    And the short answer is:

    Because they are idiots???

    🙂

  123. “The interesting thing will be the Muslim reaction to the Saudis allowing the Zionists the freedom to bomb other Arabs”

    Iranians aren’t Arabs, not all Arabs are muslims, few muslims are Arab, 1/3 of Israelis are Arabs….

  124. I hope you Bibi lovers realize that US support for the upcoming resolution against Israel is not the doing of Susan Rice. She is not in charge, and o is not in charge either. The top banana in US foreign policy is Hillary, who called for a “careful” reaction to the Israeli raid.

    Part of that careful reaction is recognizing that attacking friendly civilian ships in international waters is illegal. If the attackers had been armed Somalians boarding civilian ships in international waters off the horn of Africa, the Somalian attackers would have been called “pirates”, any resistance by the ships’ crew or passengers would have been hailed as heroism, and the pirates could have been killed or brought to justice and no one would give a hoot about their hides.

    This is how most of the world views the Israeli raid, and Hillary is aware of that. We should be too. Now, for once and the first time, the US must condemn Bibi for his action. It is all about the trigger-happy Netanyahu. The raid would never have taken place, or had the disastrous results it had, if Sharon or Olmert were in power.

  125. S @ 5:55pm: I believe this is part of a covert strategy of NBC/MSNBC
    ———————
    I’m a bit slow on the uptake, but entertained the covert strategy during today’s early am walk. I might add that I tuned in again last (Friday) night for more of Brian. He was not even there. Don’t recall what was covered by the sub as I was disappointed, uninterested. That broke my spell in a hurry, and you added confirmation.

  126. From No Quarter

    ABC’s Sunlen Miller reports on Political Punch:

    While visiting with Louisianan residents last week during his trip to Grand Isle, President Obama expressed a little frustration that he was not able to plug to hole still spewing oil in the Gulf by himself.

    “Even though I am President of the United States my powers are not limitless,” Obama said last Friday at Camardelle’s Live Bait and Boiled Seafood, “So I can’t dive down there and plug the hole. I can’t suck it up with a straw. All I can do is make sure that I put honest, hardworking, smart people in place.”

    “I will do everything in my power to do right by you guys. And everybody along the coast.”

    The president’s quote – previously unseen by the pool of reporters traveling with him not allowed access to this specific exchange – was posted today on the White House website as part of their weekly video posting, “West Wing Week.” The weekly video summarizes the president’s week by featuring behind-the-scenes footage shot by White House videographers.

    First President Obama wants to know whose ass to kick.

    Now he is speaking with local residents suffering horribly because of the BP crisis and actually has to make the snarky, petulant comment that “He can’t suck it up with a straw.” I understand this is a very difficult situation, but I think it is safe to say that he has no reserves whatsoever to deal with adversity if he resorts to making offhanded petulant comments like this.

  127. jeswezey
    June 12th, 2010 at 6:21 am

    I hope you Bibi lovers realize that US support for the upcoming resolution against Israel is not the doing of Susan Rice. She is not in charge, and o is not in charge either. The top banana in US foreign policy is Hillary, who called for a “careful” reaction to the Israeli raid.
    _______________________________

    Obama always has the final say over cabinet members and appointments. Hillary is not running Foreign Policy in her own world making major decisions as you seem to claim in your post. Hillary did say, she would like a thoughtful and thorough investigation once all the facts and evidence is gathered. Hillary does not represent the UN- she represents the Foreign Policy office of the United States…

    I found this article written on 6-1-10 stating it was the UN Security Council ordering the investigation not, as you say, Hillary.

    “After 12 hours of negotiations that stretched into the early hours, the UN Security Council issued a statement today demanding an “impartial” investigation of the deaths and condemning the “acts” that led to it.” Where Foreign Secretary William Hague welcomed the UN statement: “We look to Israel to co-operate to implement that resolution with a transparent and thorough investigation,” he said.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7141891.ece

    No doubt Hillary will follow through on her statement, but that investigation will be done objectively for our own benefit and the verification of facts and weighing the evidence she has gathered against other investigative sources.

  128. “According to Harry Reid and the Democratic Party goons, Hillary Clinton was a “nutjob” and Bill Clinton was a “racist”. I don’t know why you would believe them about some other opponent.”

    Yep. Completely agree with this. I donated to Sharone Angle, and plan to fundraise for her. After what I saw done against Bill and Hillary, I am pretty stunned that Bill Clinton still is going around stumping for a man who would not lift a finger when all the descrepanicies were happening in Nevada. Reid’s answer to the huge, and they were huge discreapnicies in the NV primaries, “Hillary’s concerns are overblown”.

    While I understand that BC may think he is rebuilding the party, this version of the dem. party is done, it is not worth saving, and frankly when BC goes around endorsing and promoting someone like Reid who is so aligned with Mr.Messaih, he is ruining any buffer Hillary had from this disgusting administration.

    This is 2008 all over again, when BC kept putting his foot in his mouth over and over again at the beginning of the campaign, and then once Maggie was brought in, BC was reigned in, and Hillary started gaining momemtum.

    I have checked out Sharon Angle’s record, don’t agree with all of it, but I loathe Reid’s assisine behaviour and peddling Mr.Messaih’s horrible policies even more. Have donated to Angle once already and I plan to donate more and fundraise for her.

    I no longer trust anyone in this party [or the LSM] after what I saw they did in 2008.

  129. democrat1
    June 12th, 2010 at 7:14 am

    “So I can’t dive down there and plug the hole.”
    “I can’t suck it up with a straw.”

    Playing the role with the mental acuity of a 15yr old adolescent talking to Dad at the dinner table explaining why the grass is not cut as was expected today. (broken lawnmower)(won’t start)(no gas)(wheels fell off) (if I could I would have eaten/mowed the grass with my teeth) (Reductio Ad Absurdum)

    The longer we go on putting up with this man’s destructive behavior; the deeper we sink into the misery he has created for us. Hopefully we pull-out before we reach the point of no return. I feel we are very close to that turning point now.

  130. tim
    June 12th, 2010 at 7:47 am

    This is nothing like the 2008 campaign. Hillary was convinced (by Patti Solis Doyle and Hillary saboteurs) she didn;t need Bill to win the election. It was going to be a ‘women’ thing. PSD was taking Hillary down internally while the Obama raptors were submarining her campaign in Iowa.

    Harry Reid will be just a bad memory in a few short months. Look at his poll numbers. Bill campaigning on his behalf did nothing for Reid’s numbers… and why BC told Reid not to give up but to believe. (Obama rhetoric)..

    Theres is no one better at this game than BC. Bill involved himself beyond half-time during Hillary’s primary and almost pulled it off. Hillary won the popular vote because of him. However, Bill did have the political allies to fight the electoral vote challenge. Obama had the DNC, CBC, DRC and every other coalition in their pocket at the time of the dem nomination.

  131. Mrs. Smith,

    yes, that may be true, but for me, I no longer view things through the lens of a political party.

    Frankly, wrong is wrong, I don’t care which party does it, and it infuriates me when operatives of that party then blindly defend the actions of that party member, either side.

    And frankly, that is what has changed since 2008, I no longer see myself a democrat, but an American first. I get pissed when I see some idiot repub operative blindly defend Bush, just as I get pissed when I see someone like BC campaign for Harry Reid, I remember this so distinctively, I remember I called Reid’s office numerous times because the fraud was so blatant during the NV primaries, and I remember Reid made some comments on some TV interview “Hillary’s concerns are overblown”

    No. This are the same losers who stood by, called Bill and Hillary racists, they used Bill’s “fairytale” word against him, they used the whole RFK and Lyndon Johnson sentences against Hillary.

    And after I saw they did to Hillary, I could see it clearly when it was applied to Sarah Palin, when I few years ago I would not have.

    So, again, I completely agree with the statement:
    ““According to Harry Reid and the Democratic Party goons, Hillary Clinton was a “nutjob” and Bill Clinton was a “racist”. I don’t know why you would believe them about some other opponent.”

    I have family in NM who are going to NV to fundraise for Angle, and these are lifelong dems/ now independents who will not forget or forgive what what done to them, this is beyond Hillary, this was about Hillary’s supporters. And I will be one of those disgusted ex-dems donating to Angle, and doing everything to see Reid fired!

  132. Mrs. Smith
    June 12th, 2010 at 8:04 am
    tim
    June 12th, 2010 at 7:47 am

    Harry Reid will be just a bad memory in a few short months. Look at his poll numbers.
    __________________________________________

    YES!!

  133. admin: I read the article, I sure hope their right because I won’t to see Reid gone. He has been in lock step with the goon in the WH. He has to go and his little partner from California too. I don’t hear much about her race on here. I thought she was up for re-election?? Doesn’t Nancy Pelosi have a challenger??

  134. I also want to say that TM has delved in to the birther thing. She apparently feels if the republicans win the midterms there may be an impeachment process launced about the birth certificate. I was shocked to see that on her blog. I read it days ago on CW. There is this man that was the elections officer in Hawaii during the primary and he said “there never was a birth certificate”, it was common knowledge.

  135. Confloyd, what is amusing about the birth certificate story is that the guy making the latest revelations is a Hillary Clinton guy.

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=165041

    A college instructor who worked as a senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu in 2008 is making the stunning claim Barack Obama was definitely not born in Hawaii as the White House maintains, and that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Obama does not even exist in the Aloha State.

    “There is no birth certificate,” said Tim Adams, a graduate assistant who teaches English at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, Ky. “It’s like an open secret. There isn’t one. Everyone in the government there knows this.”

    Adams, who says he’s a Hillary Clinton supporter who ended up voting for John McCain when Clinton lost the Democratic nomination to Obama, told WND, “I managed the absentee-ballot office. It was my job to verify the voters’ identity.”

    He says during the 2008 campaign when the issue of Obama’s constitutional eligibility first arose, the elections office was inundated with requests to verify the birthplace of the U.S. senator from Illinois.

    “I had direct access to the Social Security database, the national crime computer, state driver’s license information, international passport information, basically just about anything you can imagine to get someone’s identity,” Adams explained. “I could look up what bank your home mortgage was in. I was informed by my boss that we did not have a birth record [for Obama].”

    At the time, there were conflicting reports that Obama had been born at the Queen’s Medical Center in Honolulu, as well as the Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children across town. So Adams says his office checked with both facilities.

    “They told us, ‘We don’t have a birth certificate for him,'” he said. “They told my supervisor, either by phone or by e-mail, neither one has a document that a doctor signed off on saying they were present at this man’s birth.”

    Hillary supporters are everywhere and we have not forgotten nor forgiven. The Obama Dimocrats will rue the day they called us “racists” and smeared us as “old hags” or “bitter” or “deadenders”. Hillary supporters have always been the ones to do the work.

  136. 2 points.

    “Adams, who says he’s a Hillary Clinton supporter who ended up voting for John McCain when Clinton lost the Democratic nomination to Obama,”

    First, the sentence should be:
    “Adams, who says he’s a Hillary Clinton supporter who ended up voting for John McCain when Clinton’s nomination was STOLEN and the Democratic nomination was GIVEN to Obama,”

    Second, PUMAs are everywhere 🙂

  137. tim
    June 12th, 2010 at 8:31 am

    “yes, that may be true, but for me, I no longer view things through the lens of a political party.”

    “Frankly, wrong is wrong, I don’t care which party does it, and it infuriates me when operatives of that party then blindly defend the actions of that party member, either side.”
    ________________________

    Tim, you are talking like a small business idealist. Which you are. No one is blind to the outrage committed by Harry Reid. I’m sure your donations will be appreciated by Angle as well as your telephone banking, canvasing the neighborhood, volunteering as a precinct captain and fundraising for Reid’s opponent.

    You are not a political strategist. You seem to be confusing yourself with a credentialed political strategist who intends on taking the eventual control to be the head of the Democratic Party taking it out of the hands of the current holders. This is why BC has deeply involved himself in every primary race in the country.

    Do you actually know what you are saying in that post? I know you know this. You are comparing your thoughts and emotionally charged wishes to a former president’s actions of trying to restructure the Dem Party and use that force eventually behind Hillary to get her elected to the presidency. Bill Clinton’s name is loved and recognized as a household word in every home and hut on the planet. You can afford to be blunt in your assessments because your clientèle and your income will not suffer because of your personal preferences writ large on the national stage. Bill Clinton does not have to be insulting to Harry Reid. Bill Clinton’s acuity and personal expertise can accomplish the desired effect in a more subtle way.

    Politics are a game with many variables employed to produce a specific result. Winning your point and position is the end game in politics meaning you arbitrate issues and opinions to arrive at a compromise enjoyed by both sides. The proverbial win-win situation. In order to do that, you use diplomacy when dealing with people you do not like in your own party or do not care to be representative of their past records of achievement or non achievement. Basically you flat line them without using a pointed insult or accusation; after all we are not a court of law and this is not a declared trial intending to produce a verdict of guilt or innocence. Except the system when it works determines who wins.

    As I said, look at Reid’s poll numbers.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/nevada/election_2010_nevada_senate

    He’s polling at 39% and Angle at 50%. So, ranting about Bill Clinton has no merit as far as affecting Reid as a potential winner. Reid is not even close. And apologies if I have been too blunt with my post explaining my position to you.. FWIW I am an Independent.. but have not registered as such..

  138. “Two NYT Reporters Tar Nevada GOP Candidate Sharron Angle: “Far-Right,” “Extreme” ”

    I just find this so hilarious, its almost like these fools in the media think we have no memories and can’t look up on the Internet what their past record was. And they actually think we don’t know what their agenda is.

  139. Yes, I am a small business owner, built it from the ground up, while I respect your views, I do not agree with them.

    I have already reregistered as an Independent. I always considered myself a JFK moderate/conservative democrat, there is no longer a place for me in this party. And frankly for a party to be rebuilt, the bad apples have to go, BC is only hurting Hillary by going around helping Harry Reid, because now it seems he agrees with everything Mr. Messaih has done by endorsing and campaigning for someone who is so aligned with it.

    Frankly, if Hillary does not leave this mess of an administration after this year’s midterms[or around that time], she will be closely aligned with it, at this point, people only see Obama, they see Hillary as the competent one, not really aligned with the harmful policies.
    She will not be able to seperate herself from it the more BC campaigns for people like Reid who are so closely aligned with Mr. Messaih.
    And at that point I would not be able to support Hillary either.

    And the more BC does nonsense like this, I will no longer support him. What next? campaigning for Claire Mcaskill?

    No apologies needed, you posted a good analysis, but we will just have to agree to disagree.

  140. tim
    June 12th, 2010 at 10:09 am

    And the more BC does nonsense like this, I will no longer support him. What next? campaigning for Claire Mcaskill?
    ___________________

    The Right will welcome you with open arms.

  141. The Flotilla Choir parody We con the World which had more than 2 million hits is no longer on you tube.

  142. admin: You never said if you thought there might be a congressional investigation/impeachment hearings into this new birth certificate accusation.

  143. “The Right will welcome you with open arms.”

    LOL, this is no longer a right or left thing. Best part of being an Independent, no loyaties to either party, only american principles.

  144. BP Spill – Obama’s Katrina? (210,365 Respondents)–Newsmax

    1. What is your opinion of President Obama?

    Favorable 58,340 (27.74%)

    Unfavorable
    151,982 (72.26%)

    2. Do you believe President Obama was right in letting BP manage the oil spill disaster?

    Right: 93,211 (44.88%)

    Not right: 114,494 (55.12%)

    3. How would you rate President Obama’s handling of the disaster?

    Excellent: 23,770 (11.33%)

    Good: 26,531 (12.65%)

    Fair: 16,435 (7.83%)

    Poor: 143,041 (68.19%)

    4. Do you believe BP’s political donations to the Obama has been a factor in how the President handled the matter?

    Yes, it played a role: 135,155 (65.42%)

    No, it didn’t play a role: 71,439 (34.58%)

    5. Have the media been much more lenient on President Obama than on President Bush with the Katrina disaster?

    Yes, more lenient on Obama: 153,951 (73.72%)

    No, it’s been about the same: 54,870 (26.28%)

    6. In the 2008 election between McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden, whom did you vote for?

    McCain-Palin: 120,150 (58.32%)

    Obama-Biden: 56,518 (27.44%)

    Other: 29,337 (14.24%)

  145. Education

    She believes that the US Department of Education should be eliminated. She says the Department of Education is “unconstitutional” and should not be involved in education at all. She has said, “The best education is the education that is controlled closest to the local level as possible

    She believes the United States should withdraw from the United Nations, saying it is a bastion of liberal ideology and “the umpire on fraudulent science such as global warming

    She supports the traditional family, defines marriage as between one man and one woman, and supports the Federal Marriage Amendment to ban gay marriage.[25] She also personally believes that single income households are the best way to raise a family.[26] Angle is pro-life, and supports a ban on partial birth abortions

    She favors phasing out Medicare and Social Security and moving towards a free market solution, as opposed to expanding both programs.[27] She has voted against putting fluoride in drinking water, which many view as one of nation’s leading public health achievements.[28]

    She says that financial reform is not needed. Instead she favors a comprehensive audit of the Federal Reserve, eliminating the IRS code and abolishing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.[29]

    She has stated that she opposes legalizing marijuana and has stated that she feels the same about alcohol.[30]

    She does not believe in man made global warming.[24] “I’m a clean-air proponent,” Angle said. “I don’t, however, buy into the whole man-caused global warming, man-caused climate change mantra of the left. I believe that there’s not sound science to back that up.”

    As a long-term policy, America must expand its own domestic energy supplies. She would legislate to repeal regulations that prohibit off shore drilling, drilling in ANWR and development of American owned petroleum resources. In the Nevada State Legislature, she led efforts to reduce Nevada’s high gas tax, which was the second highest in the nation. She would also have supported the three coal fired plants in Ely.[31]

    She has long favored Yucca Mountain as a profitable center for reprocessing, not a nuclear landfill and dumping ground. In 2005, she voted for a resolution rejecting Yucca mountain as a dead-end nuclear dump. Yucca Mountain has enormous potential to bury the nuclear waste from the nation’s nuclear power plant, thus fulfilling the need in America for clean, cost efficient energy, as well as economic diversity for Nevada and much needed jobs for thousands.[32]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharron_Angle

    http://sharronangle.com/issues/

    Presented without comment, as none is really needed…

  146. Here is something Paddy4Hill wrote over two years ago on this blog. Much of it continues to be relevant.
    ——————————————————-

    March 26th, 2008 at 5:04 am
    The Rise (and Fall) of the Neo-libs

    When and where did the neo-libs come from? One might say that the first sightings of what would eventually evolve into the neo-libs were the various state level Green Party organizations that sprung up in the early 1990s. These were Americanized copies of similar groupings in Europe, mainly white university liberal arts graduates from upper middle class families. The Greens were strongly anti-establishment and radical environmentalists. Their slogan was “think globally, act locally”, and were the ones to first coin the “global village” concept.

    They never made it into the mainstream and peaked with the Green Party candidacy for President of Ralph Nader. It didn’t matter much. Although they themselves did not hit the big time, their ideas lived on. For soon, most of their political positions had been usurped by a new radicalized youth who began protesting against the global status quo at international gatherings. And unlike the more pacifist Greens, the protests grew more and more violent, culminating in the notorious Seattle riots. Lacking an organizational base, financial support and a cadre of capable leaders, these protests may have just faded into the haze of yesterday’s news headlines as just another of those leisure-time indulgences undertaken by the spoiled offspring of well-off families. But something else was simultaneously happening that would alter the landscape of political America. The very global system that the protesters were rebelling against was creating one of the biggest wealth transfers the world had ever witnessed.

    Globalization resulted in vast amounts of wealth moving to the United States. This wealth though was not distributed evenly among the general population, but instead enriched a new group of younger, well educated, liberal minded, high tech savvy, entrepreneurs and highly paid professionals, now often described as middle-class millionaires. They made their fortunes using new asset classes of investment such as hedge funds, private equity and venture capital, most out of the reach of the average investor. This group of new rich left stood in stark contrast with old money that had long identified with the conservative faction of the Republican Party. The new class, who described themselves as progressives, was for the most part well-heeled political clones of the radical student protesters. Hence they were very internationalist in focus, taking extreme positions on the environment, human rights, global working conditions, and a collection of various causes such as Tibetan independence, organic farming, fair trade, and opposition to international organizations such as the World Bank and IMF. There was then a marriage of convenience between the two. Sharing similar goals as to what the world should look like, the new rich left differed from their radical student soul-mates in that they had money and lots of it to achieve their political goals. On the other hand their student ideological allies would be the ones that would supply the manpower. As the old saying goes, “if you’ve got the money honey, I’ve got the time.”

    Its was this convergence of what was left of the Greens, the radicalized youth and the new rich left, that gave birth to what I am calling the neo-libs. This name was chosen deliberately to draw on the similarities between the neo-libs and the neo-cons who occupy the opposite end of the political spectrum. Both hold views that are not at this point part of mainstream American politics, both are by themselves small factions within the two major parties, both are more concerned about international than domestic affairs, both advocate interventionism, including the use of force if necessary, to obtain their political objectives, both pose a grave danger to world peace and security.
    But major distinctions exist between the neo-libs and neo-cons. The neo-libs actively seek to dominate the newest and fastest growing form of information, the internet, through the use of coercion and e-violence. The student wing because their comfortable life styles and affluence allows them the time and finances, is employed to contain opposition to their movement. A variety of intimidation tactics ranging from the use of gross profanity on anti-neo-lib blog entries, posting crude and rude comments on sites running unfavorable news articles, conducting web searches on active opposition bloggers in order to find personal information that can be used on-line in ugly ways, and even death threats on the web against political opponents, are becoming commonplace. The majority of political blog sites are controlled by the neo-libs and most use strict censorship to screen out entries they consider unfriendly.

    Political intimidation tactics are not confined to the internet. Polling organizations have close connections to the neo-libs and many poll results are obvious attempts to mislead the public to disguise real voter sentiment. During the Democratic caucuses, it was common place for neo-lib student radicals to intimidate voters into voting for their candidate Senator Obama. The censorship of anti-Obama stories in the media and their near worshiping of his holiness has been so obvious that a famous late-night comedy program started a series of skits poking fun if it. Such a wide range of political intimidation and information control has not been seen in western developed countries since the early days of the National Socialist movement in Germany. This kind of worshiping of a political leader by followers and media alike is also too reminiscent of the National Socialist Adolf Hitler to be comfortable. While the neo-cons were able to take advantage of the weak Bush conservative administration to give us such things as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the neo-libs promise to give us much worse if they ever come to power. The neo-libs are no lovers of freedom.

    Grounded in the transformed Green agenda, relying on an infantry of radicalized youth from upper middle class families, and powered by the big bucks of the new rich left, the neo-libs as a coherent movement made their initial foray into the political mainstream in 2004 by backing their first candidate, the former governor of Vermont Howard Dean, in the Democratic presidential primary. Although not a neo-lib himself but a member of the ageing-liberal wing of the Party, he nonetheless utilized neo-lib support on an anti-war platform to run as an “outsider,” distinguishing himself from the ageing-liberal Kerry and the moderate Edwards. They failed miserably; Dean did not win one contest. The neo-libs ended up reluctantly backing as second choice John Kerry, who like all previous liberal Democrats before him, went down to political defeat in the general election.

    The neo-libs extracted as the price for backing Kerry ageing-liberal support in giving the leadership of the Democratic National Committee to Howard Dean. Next, the unpopular war in Iraq resulted in the crushing defeat of the Republicans in the congressional elections in 2006, encouraging the ageing- liberals to try one more time to get into the White House even if it meant doing so through the back door. The key to that door would be resurrecting the coalition with the neo-libs. This time it would be a neo-lib that would head the ticket, and for this they anointed the African-American junior Senator from Illinois, Barak Obama. Their strategy was clear from the outset. The ageing-liberals would not run anyone from their own ranks to oppose Obama in the primaries and would provide the necessary Democrat establishment backing the neo-libs lacked. For their part, the neo-libs would implement an improved version of the Dean 2004 campaign strategy. The new rich left would bankroll the operation, with the radicalized youth serving as foot soldiers for the campaign and running interference on the web and at the caucuses. They would enjoy the added bonus of the African-American vote going for a favorite son. The media, dominated by either ageing-liberals or younger neo-libs, would serve as the organs of Obama’s propaganda. Their goal: to prevent the moderates from re-taking control of the Democratic Party and defeat of the unpopular Republicans in the general election.

    But globalization had not only created the new rich left, but also one of the widest gaps between the haves and haves not in American history. The pain resulting from the global economic restructuring was creating great difficulties for the middle classes. In a final act of desperation for one last chance at gaining the White House in alliance with the neo-libs, the ageing-liberals, once their champions, deserted the middle class. As for the neo-libs, they have little sympathy for the average working American. They, along with the old money Republicans, see no need for government programs that benefit the middle class. They already have it all. They can afford the best doctors, their children attend the finest schools, and they are going to retire in comfort. Hence they are more interested in Tibetan independence, human rights in Kosovo, and the Kyoto climate pact, than universal healthcare, better public schools or meaningful social security reform.

    The so-called Regan democrats, who have been pushed out of the Republican Party by the costly foreign adve
    ntures of the neo-cons and the rigid moral positions of the religious right, found themselves stranded in a political no-mans’ land. That was until the moderate faction of the Democratic Party launched a challenge on their behalf in the candidacy of New York Senator Hillary Clinton. Their strategy was just as ingenious as the neo-libs. Clinton as the candidate of the moderates would represent not only the former Regan Democrats now re-termed Lunch Bucket Democrats, but also Latinos, Asian Americans, Jewish Americans and carry the additional punch of being the first serious female contender for the White House in American history. The moderates under Clinton have still many allies within the Party, those who refuse to surrender it to the neo-lib bullies.

    It is odd that the African-American voters can not see the obvious fact that they are being used. The neo-libs will have no use for them if they ever come to power. They should realize what more and more middle class Americans already have. The new rich left will continue to use international capital to enrich themselves at the expense of the common folks. The current economic mess that began with the sub-prime meltdown was created by them as they attempted to maximize the return on their investments by upping the risk factors. And with their wealth they will seek to use the government to remold global economic and political conditions to their liking, much like neo-cons on the right. It is just that the agenda will change slightly. They will send the country’s youth of all colors to liberate Tibet, to free some far-off country like Burma or Sudan from their oppressors, force the price of goods up for the average consumers via international environmental taxes, fair trade quotas and product boycotts, and increase international tension. After waiting patiently eight years for the nightmare of the Bush administration to end, the world might have to endure eight more years of worse mistakes, this time from a new tyranny of the left and not the right. And it could be worse than before. The neo-libs have already shown brown-shirt like tendencies in a willingness to use the radicalized youth as a force to achieve their goals. They feel so strongly that they are right that any means will justify the ends. Many in the political and working classes have already fallen prey to the sweet sounds of the neo-lib propaganda, that a world built on their principals will be one of peace and prosperity. What they don’t tell you is that the peace and prosperity will be built on the backs of the working people and that the benefits will go disproportionately to themselves for they already control the purse strings of international capital.

    As for this election, the neo-libs would rather win the nomination and lose the general election than lose the nomination. If they secure the nomination, they remain in control of the Party until the next round. This will allow them to bring in more of their own people and dominate the agenda for years to come. After all, it has already been eight years since moderates under Bill Clinton held the reigns of power in the Party. Many of his people will be leaving political life in the next few years as they retire. The neo-libs and ageing-liberals want to replace as many of them as possible with their own. If Senator Clinton and the moderates win, this will keep the neo-libs out and ensure that the Party is one that occupies the political center.

    The neo-lib alliance does indeed want to win the general election too if they can, even though that seems remote at this point given the new problems of their candidate. Then they could exercise complete mastery of the Party. With both houses of congress at their disposal, especially the House under the ageing-liberal ally Pelosi, they can re-make the world according to their own image without restraints. But since the White House is looking increasing difficult to take for Obama, the last thing they want is to lose the nomination to Clinton, because then they lose everything. If she does win the nomination, the moderates will control the Party no matter which party is victorious in November. This is why the neo-lib duet of Obama and Dean, and the ageing-liberals leadership under Kennedy, Kerry, and Pelosi, are so desperate to win the primary election at all costs, even if it means losing the general election. It is the nomination that counts most for now and for the future direction of the Party. It is better to have half the pie than none.

    As Senator Clinton often correctly points out, America has never faced such challenges as it does at the present. The stakes have never been higher. The Republican leadership for too long believed that the biggest challenge to their ideals came from Senator Clinton. They are now belatedly realizing that a much more serious threat, this time to the vital interests of the United States, is coming from the neo-libs. Better late than never. At the same time, many have decided that the Democratic Party is worth fighting for. And the great masses of the American middle class are finally awaking to the fact that the only way to avoid a mistake of catastrophic proportion for both the world and their own economic interest, lies is the election of Democrat Senator Clinton as President.

  147. tim
    June 12th, 2010 at 11:08 am

    Tim, in case you need a reminder. This site exclusively supports the Clintons and YOU do not speak for us. Even though your posts hypothesize events in the future predicting outcomes that are, in the vernacular of Bill Clinton, ‘fairytale’ predictions or the delusional aberrations of one’s mind akin to screaming fire in a movie theater.

    It’s slow and steady that wins the race not scare tactics and delusional thinking veering off in abstract directions thinking Hillary supporters are following you. We’re not. If you want to follow us and help Hillary attain the presidency, you are welcome. If you think demeaning the Clintons with ultimatums of your choosing not letting them run their own race, then do the right thing and stop hurting our chances for success.

    Tim, The Clintons, more than any other politicians represent American principles, and the primary reason they have our unyielding support.

  148. Mrs. Smith
    June 12th, 2010 at 11:34 am

    Tim, The Clintons, more than any other politicians represent American principles, and the primary reason they have our unyielding support.

    Well said…

  149. Why
    Is the We Con the World video with over 2 million hits no longer on you tube?
    At two million it was already a story and one not covered, at three ten million what would it have been? The lame stream media employs people and technology to determine what is the news. A hot you tube video gets press. Something getting a huge amount of hits then just disappears without the press ever commenting?

Comments are closed.