Democrats Versus Dimocrats – And What Is Bill Clinton Up To?

“If you elect a boob – expect boobery.” We’ve said that for more than three years now. Bitter Keith Olbermann effectively said “boob” about Obama’s speech and now he is pouting. A few of the typical insults from Obama Hopium Guzzlers (Keith Olbermann put down the Hopium only for one night) at DailyKooks and outraged Keith has left the building:

“If I can understand people’s frustration with seeing a speech by a Democratic president criticized in a venue such as mine, why is it impossible for some people here to accept my frustration about the speech? You don’t agree with me, fine. You don’t want to watch because you don’t agree with me, fine. But to accuse me, after five years of risking what I have to present the truth as I see it, of staging something for effect, is deeply offensive to me and is an indication of what has happened here.”

Keith Olbermann is an Obama Hopium Guzzling Dimocrat who is now attacked by his fellow Hopium Guzzlers. Soon Keith Olbermann, misogynist and sexist, will be called a “racist” by the Obama protection dens that have destroyed the once great Democratic Party.

Keith Olbermann trashed Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and Sarah Palin in personal and ugly terms in order to elevate Barack Obama. Now Keith Olbermann is shocked to find Obama is a boob. Well, he has not gotten all the way there yet, but it is only a matter of time.

But that time, as we have also repeatedly written, will only come after devastating defeat and doom in the November elections. Obama Dimocrats must hit bottom before they put aside the Hopium bottles and syringes and chalice.

We at Big Pink are blessed because in a little noted article Robert Shrum has laid out, in lucid and logical language and “reasoning” what the Obama Dimocrats have planned. Shrum is in deep delusion and the bottles of Hopium have been emptied down his throat. But we appreciate that Shrum has so clearly laid out the road to ruin for Obama Dimocrats. Writes Shrum:

“For the midterms and beyond they must decide whether to run with Barack Obama or away from him. [snip]

It’s hard to understand why congressional Democrats, with their parlous poll ratings, would distance themselves from Obama, whose favorable rating is 52 percent in the ABC/Washington Post survey. There may be a few districts where candidates can stand or fall on local issues; most Democrats this year will stand or fall with the president.[snip]

The president and his party will have to stand together to survive the midterms and to triumph in 2012. They will be aided by Republican folly—but that won’t be enough to save them. This is a tipping point—a moment to seize or be seized by events. During his 2008 campaign and the great legislative clashes of the last two years, Obama has shown a remarkable capacity to tip events in his favor—and in a progressive direction. Now he has to do it again.”

That is remarkable advice which ignores so much reality. Shrum is selective about the polling and delusional about Republican weakness and their alleged “accelerating march of folly”. Writing about Republicans, Shrum writes two sentences which are more appropriately addressed to Obama Dimocrats:

The potent brew that Republicans were counting on may prove to be political hemlock instead. Do they dare put down the tainted chalice?”

Physician, heal thyself. But we appreciate that Shrum has so compactly laid out the Obama Dimocrat line.

Shrum does have one pedestrian insight and that is “it’s the economy stupid”.

“It isn’t the BP oil spill. Despite a gathering consensus among the press and the political community, and continued bad news pouring out of the Gulf, moving from the glib notion that this is Obama’s Katrina to the ahistorical suggestion that this is Obama’s Iran hostage crisis only confirms that the oil spill, like Obama, is sui generis.[snip]

Obama’s real danger—and it was Carter’s true weakness in 1980 as well—is a faltering economy. The recovery could stall or plunge into a double-dip recession. That’s why the anemic job numbers for May drove the Dow down, and had to dismay even the most optimistic White House aides.

The remedy is not entirely within the president’s control.”

Shrumie postulates that the American economy was coming up roses only to be throttled by those nogoodnik Europeans. According to that losing campaign manager for several presidential campaigns, Obama is an economic genius with a genius plan but he forgot to take into account the economic realities of a worldwide economy. It is absolution by delusion. Put down the tainted chalice Shrumie!

Shrumie’s ultimate advice to American voters and to the Dimocratic establishment is the suicidal “stay the course.”

Barack Obama, is taking Shrumie’s delusions as his own.

BREAKING — OBAMA, BIDEN DECLARE “RECOVERY SUMMER”: Vice President Biden today will kick off “Recovery Summer,” a six-week-long push designed to highlight the jobs accompanying a surge in stimulus-funded projects to improve highways, parks, drinking water and other public works. Biden will present President Obama with a report laying out a spike in stimulus activity this summer, and how it will contribute to a steady climb to a total of 3.5 million Recovery Act jobs by the end of the year. Biden, Obama and other administration officials will travel to more than two dozen Recovery Act project sites in coming weeks. Tomorrow, the president will travel to Columbus, Ohio, to mark the groundbreaking of the 10,000th Recovery Act road project, around Nationwide Children’s Hospital. On Monday, Biden will travel to Midland, Mich., for the groundbreaking of the new Dow Kokam advanced battery manufacturing facility.

–David Axelrod said: “This summer will be the most active Recovery Act season yet, with thousands of highly-visible road, bridge, water and other infrastructure projects breaking ground across the country, giving the American people a first-hand look at the Recovery Act in their own backyards and making it crystal clear what the cost would have been of doing nothing. … In the face of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, Republicans in Congress chose to play politics with economic recovery and declared the Recovery Act a failure before it even began. They made a cynical bet that if the President fails, they win. Democrats chose to act by tackling the crisis head-on. Just over a year later, the Recovery Act is putting millions of Americans to work and helping the economy grow again. But our work is far from over.”

Put down the chalice. Step away from the steering wheel. You’re under arrest for repeated flim-flam scams.



“Recovery Summer” dawns with jobless claims rising. These new disturbing numbers are not “unexpected”. In language that even Shrumie can understand The labor market is not improving.” “Recovery Summer” is just the same old flim-flam publicity stunt Obama, hawking cheap wares that impoverish.

Many Democrats who vote Democratic at the polls automatically went along with the obvious flim flam of Obama Dimocrats. But real Democrats knew all along that Obama is a flim-flam artiste.

“Singer Sophie B. Hawkins told The Hill on Thursday that “America’s being thrown under the bus” by President Barack Obama as he presses forward with his agenda and comes under criticism for his response to the Gulf oil spill.[snip]

The singer campaigned on the trail with Hillary Rodham Clinton during her presidential campaign, and told The Hil [sic] from her tour bus that she “never believed in [Obama’s] philosophy” — which she said runs contrary to her beliefs in “smaller government, smart government, flexible government.”

“I think the writing was on the wall,” Hawkins said. “I honestly couldn’t believe so many people were into him.”

She describes herself as a centrist who’s identified with the Democratic and Green parties, but said even though she’s never been Republican she wouldn’t cross that vote off the list if the right leader came along.”

The arc of Sophie Hawkins politics is one which describes many conflicted Democrats these days. Many Democrats, not friendly in the least to Republican government, recognize that something is very wrong with the Obama Dimocratic Party. “I want the Congress that really is going to listen to the people,” she said. “I really don’t care what party it is anymore.

When your own political party turns on you and disrespects the primary process in order to gift a grifter with its highest honor and nomination, expect new coalitions to form. With 71% of Americans saying the government’s response to the oil spill is important to their vote, expect new coalitions in November. More about Sophie:

“Hawkins said she attended a Tea Party rally in Santa Monica, Calif., that was “mostly all Democrats.”

The Tea Parties are only here because people are not listening,” she said.

The singer said she viewed the government’s attitude as “arrogant” and said people are hungry for leaders who will “take us in a direction that’s truly American.”

“Obama may be brilliant, but he’s not a leader,” Hawkins said.

The lack of leadership on this Gulf issue is so shocking,” she said, adding that while government organization is lacking, the president “should be galvanizing people who voted for him to go to the Gulf and help.”

The growing NObama coalitions will take superficially weird turns to those that do not try to dig deeper and understand that the Democratic Party is dead and the Obama Dimocratic Party is death.

“Stay the course” will not work. There is however a path which we believe will only be open after death, destruction, and doom for Obama Dimocrats this November.

“If you’re keeping score of who is better at getting Democrats elected this cycle, President Obama is 0-for-4 while former president Bill Clinton is golden at 2-for-2.

Last fall’s gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia, and this year’s U.S. Senate races in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, proved Obama impotent at influencing voters.[snip]

In an election year full of disconnect between Main Street and Washington, each man symbolizes specific constituencies with different visions of their party.”

Issues effectively don’t matter when you do not trust the carnival barker making the sales pitch. Obama cannot be trusted. So whatever he says must be discounted or viewed with suspicion. It’s like a sick person offered valuable medicine from the trunk of a rusted car. You need to trust not only the wares, but the seller as well. Obama cannot be trusted.

Bill Clinton has an extraordinary history of action and accomplishment. Agree with him or not, be disgusted with his personal behavior or not, but Bill Clinton has a track record which the post November electorate will clamor to return to. Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton represent a different vision than what can be extrapolated from Barack Obama’s self-interested, self-absorbed “vision”. What are the different visions?

Clinton represents the common-man, blue-collar-worker middle class – those who work hard and play by the rules, who view themselves as fighters who dig in and don’t give up.[snip]

Obama represents the party’s intellectual elite and ideological progressives. [snip]

He represents Democrats who believe in Thomas Frank’s thesis that “there is something the matter with Kansas.” In other words, people in Kansas (read: “mostly rural people”) are not educated enough to understand their own rational self-interest and are too emotionally attached to their guns and their religion.

That side of the party believes that people on Main Street are kept back by their ignorance and that the job of the Democratic elite is to ‘enlighten’ them as to what would really make their lives better,” Brown explains.

Clinton’s beliefs are quite the opposite, she says, and are similar to what makes Republican Sarah Palin resonate: “He believes that some of America’s greatest wisdom and strongest spirit comes from those people who do wrestle with the joys and hardships of everyday life in ways that the intellectual elite believe are too mundane … to be meaningful.

Obama’s is the “coastal” part of the party – the secular, educated, wealthier side that, despite its ardent belief in helping others, rests on a noblesse oblige service-ethic towards those less fortunate.

Clinton’s is the “fly-over” part of the party – the religious, hard-working, more middle-class side that believes in pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps with help, not a handout, from government.”

These are complex thoughts. They are complex because they are more about a world-view than about day-to-day “issues”. We wrote about this in our penultimate article of 2009 (“Barack Obama Is Not Qualified To Be President“) in which we summarized the annus horrendus after one year of Obama:

“Barack Obama was not, and is not qualified to be President of the United States. Put aside Obama’s flim-flam history, the thugs he surrounds himself with, his treacheries, his total lack of accomplishments other than self-advancement, his risible résumé, his stinky body odor, the secretiveness of his past, the lack of documentation about earlier periods of his life, drug use, the self-admitted inability to keep a paper in front of him for 2 seconds before losing it, the lies about lost documents from his Chicago legislative office, the grabbing of credit for work others have done, the race-baiting, the woman-hating, the profitable alliances with criminals which even got him a house, the lack of interest in his constituents, the obvious lies when he denies positions he has even affixed his signature to on questionnaires, his lies about being a reformer when he swims in the swamps of Chicago corruption, the ugly church mentor of 20 plus years, his smearing of opponents with sexual or racial slurs, the gay-bashing, the secret deals, the incompetence, the long list of corruptions and boobery… – put all this history we have documented aside. Barack Obama is not qualified to be President because he does not have a world-view which is congruent with reality.” [snip]

To be an American president means having a world view. Hillary Clinton has a world-view. Hillary Clinton mocked Obama in her insightful “celestial choirs” speech. Hillary Clinton mocked Obama about his foolish “no preconditions, in the first year, anywhere, anytime” meetings with America’s enemies. Hillary Clinton mocked Obama as “naive”. Hillary Clinton was saying that Obama did not know or understand how the world works. Hillary Clinton was saying that Obama’s world view was not congruent with reality. Hillary Clinton has been proved right.

After the primary campaigns and the general election of 2008 Obama Hopium Guzzlers reacted with scorn because we at Big Pink and many other websites had not disappeared into the rabbit hole of history taking with us the institutional memory of who Obama is. We have not gone away and will not go away.

Equally, Big Media and other Hopium Guzzlers assumed that Hillary Clinton had been put in a box and Bill Clinton would wither and go away and take us with them. But like us, Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton are fighters who do not give up. If there is an multi-dimensional chess player it is Bill Clinton who along with Hillary Clinton means to rescue us even if that means skating at the very edge of what is politically possible:

“If Obama passes off to Clinton the job of helping Democrats in the midterm elections (either because he is too busy or too unpopular in certain districts), then those Democrats may not be so willing to help him in 2012.

“Obama is eventually hurting Obama by employing Clinton to be his partisan wrangler in this election,” Brown said.

Clinton, however, doesn’t lose a thing: The more he helps Democrats, and the more successful they are, the more they will carry on his vision and his political legacy.”

The fight is not over. We have not yet begun to fight.

Share

253 thoughts on “Democrats Versus Dimocrats – And What Is Bill Clinton Up To?

  1. http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/17/cnn-poll-shows-disapproval-over-obama-handling-of-gulf-spill-increasing/

    A new CNN poll taken a day after Barack Obama’s Oval Office speech delivered more bad news to the White House. The poll shows 59% disapproval over Obama’s handling of the crisis in the Gulf of Mexico, an increase of eight points since May 21-23 survey. Approval has dropped from 46% to 41%, making an 13-point shift in approval in three weeks. The result shows that Obama’s speech failed to repair his damaged position and build his credibility on his competence.

  2. The thing I think is missing is that I don’t think so-called blue dog Democrats like Claire McCaskill, who just voted to cut off unemployment compensation, reflect Bill Clinton’s approach at all. He wasn’t heartless. That’s the Obama wing. For example, it was Hillary Clinton just weeks ago that said taxes must be raised on the wealthy, that they are not paying their fair share in any sphere, business, personal, etc. And she made the point that that was her opinion, not the administrations. On health care, it was the Republican alternative to Bill Clinton’s proposal that Obama endorsed. I just think the analysis of Sophie Hawkins and some of the others cited here mistake Obama for somehow the big government liberal versus Bill Clinton the small government centrist. Yes, the stimulus seemed large because the government normally doesn’t have to inject that sort of money into the system, but it’s failed because it was actually too small, too much was devoted to tax cuts, and it didn’t target job growth nearly enough. Obama and his administration are incompetent and that’s the major distinction between him and the Clinton’s, not the size of his program proposals. Everyone fooling themselves that Obama is just too liberal are going to be really disillusioned come next fall when they see Congress impose a means test on social security for the first time in history.

  3. from the last thread at end

    jtjames
    June 17th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
    sorry wrong link…. here it is.
    msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/

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

    jtjames…thank you…that video clip is MUST VIEWING for everyone…and for many reasons on many levels…

    …to begin with Rudy, Dylan and Cramer do nail O perfectly…especially Rudy

    …next, you see first hand how corrupt MSNBC is…Mika and Joe S, especially Mika are on the payroll big time…they are shameless

    Joe S, former repub, even says “we’ll talk to ‘our friends’ at the WH” WTH?

    …then there is the missing info from all of them that was in the Rolling Stone article…no mention of the WH knew what was really happening…another cover up…

    …Dylan reinforces what Rudy is saying by continually rebutting Mika and stating that the ‘containment strategy’ is the responsibility of the govt and they have not done it…they keep referring to the ‘flow rate”…the RS article makes it quite clear that O and the govt knew from the get go that BP was fudging the ‘flow rate’ numbers and they were much higher (More negligence, as Rudy was saying)

    …the WH interpretation of the way things happened is a lie

    …and finally no one mentions that the reason O has not consulted other experts is because of conflict with the unions…O could have superceded any regulations or obstructions (The Jones ? law) whatever…to get the right people there at the right time to head off this monstrosity disaster…

    …O did not, he “dithered” again…daudled, voted present…stayed clear of the story and distracted with golf, paul mccartney, bono, baseball and basketball teams, etc…anything but pay attention to the greatest envioronmental disaster in our lifetime…

    at the risk of being redundant, Joe S and Mika are so shameless that nothing that either of them say or do can ever be taken seriously again…what a joke they are…

    Rudy should be all over TV on every cable show (I never thought I would hear myself say that…but so be it!)

  4. Of course, McCaskill wants to cut benefits. She’s a blue dog. They, like Obama, are conservatives and don’t give a rat’s patootie about anyone that’s not funding their campaigns. Obama cuts liberals off at the knees – as he did with his health care reform – and counts on blue dog support to pass the crap that no one, save their corporate benefactors, wants passed. Lincoln’s in trouble not because she’s too liberal but because she is siding with corporate America – as she did when she finally caved and voted yes on the health care reform – against the well being of ordinary people. Poor Arkansans may wind up with a Republican senator who will do even less to represent their needs.

    This is where leadership comes in. It’s easy to side with the wealthy and big business interests – even in less developed cultures it happens. It takes work and moral awareness to develop and execute policies that benefit the work-a-day world. And that’s one of the things that the Clintons have that Obama and his ilk do not – a genuine moral philosophy that guides their policy choices. And without a real leader pulling their attention to the costs that every day people are paying, legislators will attend to the needs of the wealthy. That’s what is happening here.

    You cannot elect someone who has never once in his life identified a problem affecting ordinary people, developed a solution to the problem and executed the solution to completion and expect him to get things done. Obama has no record of accomplishment and he will seemingly leave the White House without one as well (and no, passing a stimulus bill that cannot bring unemployment down under 9.5% is NOT an accomplishment regardless of the dollar amount spent). Who would have ever thought, after the past 110 years of history, that that could be said about a modern Democratic president?

  5. Mj, you are right that it is not a debate between big government liberal versus small government centrist. That’s why we said this is complex and we need to look at subtext and leadership here. We can easily see Bill or Hillary proposing big government solutions but that would be in the context of a plan that takes into account the entire polity not just the coastal liberal states.

    We were against Obama’s “stimulus” not because of the philosophy of such an expenditure, but because there was no logic or planning to it. It was just “throw money’ at the problem – the problem being the 2010 elections and the need for a slush fund. If Hillary was president and presented a genuine stimulus designed to get the economy going as part of a long term investment strategy we would be alright with that. Indeed we thought a HOLC, and a health care plan were the way to go but only as part of a comprehensive plan. We were for investment in “smart” highways but against pouring concrete “shovel ready” wastes of money.

    At the time we also warned very specifically about potential natural disasters and the need to spend money wisely.

    In all these debates we are hampered by “issues” and language because it is difficult to always explain that what is said is flim-flammery. Obama is not a progressive – we are sure of that and we know that Hillary was to the “left” of Obama. But those words become meaningless when what Obama does/is is now in fact the “progressive” position. It’s why we use the acronym “PINO”.

    Chris Bowers in one of his more stupid moments argued strongly that Obama now is the progressive left. How can such lunacy be argued with employing traditional terms and meanings? It’s impossible.

    When Hawkins talks about “small government”, remember she is Green/Democrat – ordinarily a contradiction of terms (a Green small government voter is a huge contradiction in normal discourse) but digging a little deeper and trying to understand what she is saying, not impose our matrix of thoughts on her words, and it sort of makes sense.

    What we do know is that the majority of the “progressive” movement (which we condemn as a bunch of PINOs) did everything to get Obama elected. Therefore we seek to destroy “progressives”. But at the same time, we support Hillary and FDR who are progressives (some will modify it as “sane progressives”). It’s a hall of mirrors filled with smoke. Likewise these “progressives” sided with Obama against people who were much closer to the left/progressives. Mirrors with smoke.

    The entire “socialist” or “republican” discussion suffers from the same problems. When people describe Obama as a “socialist” the subtext is the arrogance of power and imperial dirigisme (another contradiction in terms). Bill Clinton proposed big government solutions but they were viewed rightfully as truly “lifting all boats” not just a privileged few.

    What we are arguing is that we need to stop imposing our definitions on others and listen to what they mean and try to understand. It’s why we have been so sympathetic to the Tea Party movement. We understand their anger even as their “demands” (and there are so many of these Tea Party groups it is difficult to even ascribe hard positions to the entire group/s) are inchoate.

    Bill and Hillary listen and that is their strength. When we don’t listen we weaken ourselves. We are all going to have to deal with this Brave New World.

  6. Very well said, admin. And I understand that. My fear is that Obama and the PINOs have so ruined the liberal or Democratic brand that as Hillary feared in the primary we will and are indeed slipping backwards. That voters just attribute their anger at Obama’s incompetence to liberalism and thus turn toward the Right not just in the next election cycle or two but going forward, and that future Democratic leaders will also attribute voter anger to liberalism and thus also move Rightward. Basically, he’s moved the overton window to the Right at the precise time it needed to move to the left. He and his followers have unbelievably given new life to the Right wing. My fear is that that’s what the country will be stuck with for sometime to come. Incompetent, right leaning, elite Democrats versus incompetent, right leaning elite Republicans. Your point is very much understood. But I truely worry about this country, and Hillary’s words about falling back haunt me as I watch these hacks in Washington.

  7. you go Sophie, girl, you go!

    if tea parties are being held in Santa Monica and mostly “dems” are showing up (that would have been me in my old beloved stomping grounds – 11th and Montana – anyway, if that is what is going on there…then O, watch out, your base has moved on…

    wish we could have the video clip of Sophie at that congressional visit mentioned above..

  8. I think the problem is that definitions have become so polluted. We’ve had people argue on here that Obama supports big business because he is a socialist and they see Bush’ TARP that Obama whipped for, as evidence of socialism.

    I agree that you have to listen to the Tea Partiers but I also think expecting people to use words correctly is reasonable.

    MJ – remember, the Republican brand is even more trashed. People are voting to the right simply to stop Obama, not to support the GOP. Once 2012 rolls around, a good Dem candidate will stop that movement cold. I’m convinced Clinton is running in 2012. But other than that, yes, I worry too about the Overton window being moved farther right with Obama’s implicit acceptance of so much that the Bush admin and the conservative think tanks have advocated for the past 30 years. We have a lot of damage to undo.

  9. BA, I actually don’t blame the voters for confusing Obama with liberalism. He’s the leader of the liberal Party, what are they supposed to think? But it’s a disaster. I don’t see how Hill runs unless Obama doesn’t. I just don’t see her doing a primary challenge. I know one thing, I again will not be voting for him.

  10. mj said:
    That voters just attribute their anger at Obama’s incompetence to liberalism and thus turn toward the Right not just in the next election cycle or two but going forward, and that future Democratic leaders will also attribute voter anger to liberalism and thus also move Rightward.

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

    Ouch. Perhaps his backers installed him for that purpose.

  11. basement said:
    I agree that you have to listen to the Tea Partiers but I also think expecting people to use words correctly is reasonable.

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

    I wish. But unfortunately for some people and some words, it seems to be a lost cause.

  12. mj
    I don’t see how Hill runs unless Obama doesn’t. I just don’t see her doing a primary challenge.

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

    Someone said that in the history of the Dem party, when someone challenges a sitting Dem President, two things happen:

    1. the challenger loses in August
    2. the party loses in November

    Examples: Ted Kennedy vs Carter, several challengers vs Lyndon Johnson

  13. As Rome burns, the political landscape is caught with it’s pants down. Exposing the worst of both parties.

    Elite does not equal superior intelligence even with a Harvard/Yale degree…Bush and Obama serve as reminders.

    Elite means the comfortably weathy, not the working class.

    Voters are the ‘little people’ that can’t buy their way into a political office, most have to gather their education from public universities or learn from the school of hard knocks in the working world.
    Voters are the working machine of America, the surfs.

    The wealthy of both parties need the American workers to support them, pay their taxes so they can diddle in congress, diddle making decisions for the surfs, and pass off the biggest lies of all that convince the surfs that they are doing what is best for them.

    Obama supporters show the worst of the worst in not using their own street smarts and education to stand by a man that has not only broken all of his promises, but also doesn’t need to show his indifference for their well being.

    Obama is just another Jim Jones, a snake oil salesman and they are getting mad as hell as they start to realize that they have been hoodwinked, bamboozled and their fits of depression have just begun.

    Bill and Hillary were also treated as outsiders by the elite, and American voters of both parties can more easily identify with them, admire their hard work and centralist political beliefs. We see the Clinton’s walking the walk each day, day after day.

    I feel proud to have Bill and Hillary representing my beliefs, fighting against the elites that tried so hard to end their political careers.

    I am proud to call myself a Clinton Democrat.

  14. Admin, yet another great post.

    “If Obama passes off to Clinton the job of helping Democrats in the midterm elections (either because he is too busy or too unpopular in certain districts), then those Democrats may not be so willing to help him in 2012.

    If there was ever an 11th dimensional chess player, its President Bill Clinton. Lets look at the facts. Hillary has the highest approval rating of ANY demcrat in the States, and if the wizard helps a bunch of them not bite the dust, in 2012 they will have no choice BUT to support Hillary. There is going to be a clamor from mainstream America for her to run EVEN IF the dem establishment doesn’t want her to. Couple that with a mass retirement of the corrupt democratic establishment and we may see an immediate change in the way government works. A huge injection of smart and capable people will be brought in to do alot of cleaning up starting February of 2013.

    And if Claire McCaskil or Barbra Boxer or Nancy Pelosi has the gall to try to ride the coattails of the first woman in the Oval office, they should be led away in chains. Asshats.

    Hillary ’12 (even if she’s not on the ballot, that my vote. Can I cast it tomorrow?)

  15. I don’t expect her to challenge him either, but I am convinced she is running, and I’m not saying anymore than that. And yes, if I’m right, she’ll be running as a Democrat. Hillary as the Democratic nominee in 12 is the only way a lot of this makes sense.

    As for words, you put it right by objecting when you hear it. The right is aggressively trying to paint him as a liberal to despoil the image of liberals. If you don’t object to that usage, then you’re furthering that goal. It may be frustrating and it usually won’t take, but you cannot go along with it without endorsing it.

    What the tea party activists are objecting to is real. There is interpretation though couldn’t get through the first round of “Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader” and that’s a big problem for our nation.

    Hopefully, Clintonian credibility will clean some of this mess us.

  16. That should read, “their interpretation of the problem and the solution couldn’t get through the first round of “Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader”.

  17. Whose reporting of whose interpretation? Of course the media is going to find the dumbest Tea Party person in the dumbest costume and show only the dumbest soundbyte.

    The only fair way to assess the TP or any other group, would be to look at the websites of their own leaders.

  18. MJ – remember, the Republican brand is even more trashed. People are voting to the right simply to stop Obama, not to support the GOP. Once 2012 rolls around, a good Dem candidate will stop that movement cold
    *********************8
    Sorry, don’t agree. This Tea Party movement will not go away. People don’t trust either party because neither party deserves it. Some politicians get that, but not many. We, the people of the United States have finally had enough I believe.

    And Bill, please STOP campaigning for Dem’s that will just turn around and vote in lock step with the Fraud and stab both you and Hillary in the back once again. It didn’t matter how many IOU’s that SHOULD have mattered when Hillary ran, they just did the bidding of their masters, the All Mighty Dollar. Maybe the Yen, I don’t know @ this point.

    To me, the Fraud is a Fascist opportunist.Put a mustache on him.

    As far as voting against the unemployment benefits? If I am not mistaken, some people have been getting them for 2 years, that’s not unemployment, that’s welfare and should be handled as such at this point.

  19. Tony Hayward sounds like he is on downers…so slow, so calm, so forgetful……….

    Geeeeesus…………….

  20. Looks like Fox is trying to change the subject back to freddy and fannie mae and Arizona…anything to change the subject off the gulf…meanwhile the dolphins are dying.

  21. #
    confloyd
    June 17th, 2010 at 5:48 pm

    Looks like Fox is trying to change the subject back to freddy and fannie mae and Arizona…anything to change the subject off the gulf…meanwhile the dolphins are dying.
    ——–

    Yup, Republican’s love Big Oil. They have stock in Big Oil, they love to drive their SUVs and they need oil to do it.

    Screw them.

  22. Turndown,

    I’ve listened to plenty of Tea Party activists talking in their own right. I had one guy lecture me that Palin was going to restore employment, cut taxes and balance the budget. In four years. Well, no, she isn’t. But that’s pretty common sentiment when you hear them talk in their own right. Our cultural dialogue has been contaminated with pro-corporate, pro-elite talking points so thoroughly for the past thirty years that a lot of people think that’s a reasonable expectation when, in point of fact, the policies that are being advanced cut the taxes of the wealthy and balance the budget on the backs of the middle class and the poor, funneling money upwards, and destroying our economic stability in the process.

  23. turndownobama
    June 17th, 2010 at 4:28 pm

    The difference is that O never actually won a primary. He was never really that popular and stole the primary. His support has always been thin. I know MANY Hillary supporters who would have voted for McCain but for Palin.

    I hope that Hillary will run. O will never get reelected unless the Repugs really run an unacceptable candidate.

  24. Shadowfax, I wonder who told the idiot from Texas today to STFU?? He certainly changed his tune from poor BP to he did not mean what the CLEARLY said….I’ve heard many rethugs say the same thing that poor BP should not be held responsible. I imagine the elites of both parties would like to blame the middle class was wanting cars, afterall in China the workers ride bikes.

  25. Carol
    June 17th, 2010 at 5:55 pm
    I should add that I voted McCain Palin. It was definitely a lesser of two evils decision for me.

    So did I. And I’m tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. That’s why I want Hillary….

  26. “Palin accomplished a lot in Alaska even in a partial term.”

    Yes, I agree with this, I researched her and her record, after what they did to Hillary, I didn’t trust a damn word from the lying media.

    And the fact that the establishment repubs in Alaska hated Palin tells me everything I needed to know. I voted for her with no regrets. The oil companies up there gave money to the democrat who was running against Palin in the governor’s race, because they knew Palin wouldn’t coddle them.

  27. confloyd

    I wonder who told the idiot from Texas today to STFU??
    ———-
    My guess would be Boehner, he has a lot of BP stock.

    House Republican leader John Boehner bought BP and other oil company stock last year while other lawmakers were a little more fortunate, getting rid of BP stock before the oil spill caused the environmental disaster in the Gulf.

    Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/06/16/national/w110233D26.DTL#ixzz0r9Sukfx9

  28. tim
    June 17th, 2010 at 6:07 pm

    I think the pertinent question is how do we stop this? It becomes a problem if this president is polling at 35% or higher in 2012.

  29. TheRock

    And I’m tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. That’s why I want Hillary….

    ——–
    Me 2, haven’t voted for a good Democrat since Bill.

  30. Down goes BP……

    tandard & Poor’s cut its credit ratings for BP on Thursday afternoon and warned that it might downgrade its ratings again because of the growing liabilities from the enormous oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. It also said that BP faced “intense political pressure” in the United States.

    The downgrade came on a day when BP’s chief executive, Tony Hayward, was assailed by angry lawmakers at a Congressional hearing for repeatedly sidestepping questions about the causes of the oil disaster in the gulf.

    S.&P. cut its ratings on BP’s debt to “A” from “AA-minus,” which maintains its investment-grade status for now. But it said the company would remain on its CreditWatch list with “negative implications,” indicating that a further downgrade was likely.

    http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/s-p-cuts-bp-ratings-citing-liabilities-and-politics/?hp

  31. I apologise that I did not realize that Joe Barton represents the area in Texas where I live…I will definitely campaign against this idiot…I guess he and Boner own the same stock because Boner said the same thing last week. Barton I guess did not get his email, LOL!

  32. TheRock
    June 17th, 2010 at 6:24 pm

    I’m not even sure, because they wanna get rid of the superdelegates, and now do this. Its like they want to purge anyone not supporting that marxist fool, and so no moderates and centerists are allowed.

    I have no faith in this party anymore, I reregistered as an Independent, I used to be proud to call myself a democrat, now I cringe when I hear that. I am now convinced since JFK, a democrat, the last good one was BC, b/c he was a moderate centerist dem, and he brought the dem. party back to the center and as the party of mainstream people, I used to love Hillary’s slogan, We want to give people not a hand out but a hand up.

    And that current fool in the WH in 1 year completely gutted BC’s welfare to work program.

    I considered myself a JFK democrat, but if JFK was alive today, he would be kickout of the undemocratic party

  33. Tim, are you saying then you think LBJ wasn’t a good Democratic President? Odd. Bill Clinton was a huge LBJ fan, and often said he thought Hillary would be an LBJ president, and LBJ arguably accomplished more than any President since FDR.

  34. Obama has not gutted Clinton’s welfare to work program. Nothing at all has been done to welfare since the 1990’s reforms, and Obama has absolutely no interest in revisiting welfare. Where did you hear that?

  35. sorry, I was never a fan of LBJ and never will be, I was and still consider myself a JFK dem, he and RFK were and are my biggest heroes. I guess I am probably old comparatively.

  36. Ok, but if you are “comparitevly old” then I would assume you are close to going on Medicare. When you get Medicare just remember you have LBJ to thank for that.

  37. More dissent on the DailyKooks site:

    Jon Stewart Slams Obama. It’s About Time!

    (I can’t embed the clip, but you have got to click on the link below and watch this video)

    Frodo? Ouch.

    Finally Jon Stewart is seeing the darkness of this administration.

    Jon spends 8+minutes highlighting Obama’s contradictions and hypocrisies in regards to executive power and civil liberties. It’s pretty damning stuff. And pretty remarkable that once again, it’s The Daily Show that’s speaking truth to power. I’m sure Colbert is not far behind.

    There’s a lot of anger and disappointment at Obama right now and justifiably so. He has betrayed many of us who gave our precious time, energy and money to get him elected. But whatever your views or feelings about Obama, at the end of the day, it’s about holding our elected leaders accountable. And once again, Jon Stewart is leading the way. Good for him.

    And a few choice comments:

    -Blame me. Not only did I vote for Barack, I volunteered for his sorry ass.

    -And if you need their money to get re-elected, you can’t govern fairly, unless you’ve decided not to get re-elected.

  38. actually no, I cannot get medicare nor am I applying for it. I get my insurance through my small business. And I try to hire older people for my business whenever I can so they can get more flexibility for their insurance (and the doctors they can then see).

  39. Here’s Hillary differentiating herself from the administration on taxes:

    (CNN) – Hillary Clinton struck a strong populist chord while wading into territory secretary of states rarely go Thursday: Domestic policy.

    During a conference at the Brookings Institution on national security, the nation’s top diplomat bluntly aired her own views on the nation’s tax policies, saying she feels “the rich are not paying their fair share.”

    “The rich are not paying their fair share in any nation that is facing the kind of employment issues [like the U.S.] – whether it’s individual, corporate or whatever the taxation forms are,” Clinton said after clearly stipulating that these were her opinions, no those of the Obama administration.

    Clinton went on to cite Brazil, long known for its high taxes, as a model of a successful economic policy.

    “Brazil has the highest tax-to-GDP rate in the Western Hemisphere and guess what – they’re growing like crazy,” Clinton said. “And the rich are getting richer, but they’re pulling people out of poverty.”

    “There is a certain formula there that used to work for us, until we abandoned it, to our regret in my opinion,” she added.

    politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/28/clinton-rich-arent-paying-fair-share/?fbid=aNox5OKAsBO

    So who is the “liberal” and who is “centrist”? This is why I hate when people act as though Obama is just too left leaning. He’s incompetent, not left leaning. The “centrists” certainly have not been kicked out of the Democratic Party. They are blocking extensions to unemployment compensation as Claire McCasskill just did. Or blocking jobs bills as Ben Nelson did today. Who are these wide eyed liberals some people think manage the Party? Harry Reid? Please.

  40. Why can’t you get Medicare? All older Americans, even upper middle class Americans take advantage of Medicare. Not to would be utterly foolish.

  41. mj
    June 17th, 2010 at 6:50 pm

    He is increasing welfare by lowering the wage per year requirement. Handout galores. I believe in his healthware disaster program, a family of four can get subsidies making 80,000 a year. Let’s not forget the illegals. I was looking @ the requirements for MAP, the medical asst program in Texas and welfare payments @ work, and a family with 10 children, yes ten…because you all know YOU can afford to raise 10 children (and then 10 of someone else’s!) got over $7,000 dollars a month- ILLEGALS MIND YOU. Actually the requirements for citizens was harder to bank on. Oh he is increasing the welfare programs, just not calling it as it is.

    And I a Dem ( choke ) for 39 years, voted for and continue to support Palin. Yes Tim, she did a heck of a job way up North!

  42. the last good one was BC, b/c he was a moderate centerist dem, and he brought the dem. party back to the center and as the party of mainstream people, I used to love Hillary’s slogan, We want to give people not a hand out but a hand up.

    Tim @ 6:34, I agree, but admin is right that definitions have become so muddled. The right screams that big govt is a danger, and you know what? They are correct. The left screams that corporate interests unfettered is a danger, and you know what? They are correct. But neither group will admit to the danger also coming from their “sacred cow”, and will only admit to the danger from one side (either govt or corporations).

    The truth is, BOTH Big Money and Big Gov have the potential to become self-perpetuating monoliths that trample on the hard-working middle class, and suck them dry. There are ways that govt can indeed help that do not create a permanently dependent populace. REAL Democrats, like WJC, did not want to create a dependency on govt. But this current Dim party wants to do just that – siphon money to the Big Money boyz, and at the same time pacify and ensnare generations of voters by pittance handouts and make-work “jobs”. By making them serfs on the Federal Plantation. The govt will give you just enough to scrape by on (like the 2 yr unemployment benefits), so that you don’t notice that there are no REAL jobs, no REAL growth, no real opportunity to advance your SELF.

    What is happening now is that the worst of the right’s failings AND the worst of the left’s failings are unified in the Dimocratic party, and in the Rethuglican party of Bush. Big Corporate Government that keeps enough handouts and “programs” going to justify their total control of everything, and to create a permanent dependent entitlement class. There are not going to be enough middle class working people in this country to sustain all that. Screw taxing the rich – there is NOT ENOUGH MONEY THERE, no matter at what rate we tax them, because there are not enough of them. Do the freaking math. No society can stay prosperous and vital without a thriving, working, entrepreneurial middle class, and BOTH big corporate power and big govt power WILL destroy it. It makes no difference in the end if the middle class is destroyed in the boardrooms or in the ivory towers of socialist theory, or both, it will still be just as dead.

    This is the “Centrist” world view that both Bill and Hillary understand. That the dangers come from 2 areas, and too much power in the hands of EITHER a huge bank or a huge faceless govt bureaucracy are equally stifling.

    My prediction is that whichever party “gets” that idea of balancing opposing powers (neither of which, whether business or gov, are bad in themselves) first will be in for a long long ascendency. I HOPE that it’s the Dems, but that remains to be seen. There is a very libertarian-but-with-fairer-and-tougher-rules mood in this country right now, and people are sick of being hosed by BOTH the govt and big business.

  43. “gonzotx
    June 17th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
    mj
    June 17th, 2010 at 6:50 pm

    He is increasing welfare by lowering the wage per year requirement

    That’s not true. Didn’t happen. There is no such policy tyhat lowers the wage requirement for welfare recipients.

    Hillary had BIGGER subsidies in her health plan. Did you listen to her in the primary? Bigger subsidies than what Obama proposed and most certainly what passed. I don’t see how one can attack Obama on “big” health care subsidies if they supported Hillary on health care, when she argued for bigger subsidies. There’s plenty to not like about Obama, but I think people who play it loose with the facts make poor arguments.

  44. ” Screw taxing the rich – there is NOT ENOUGH MONEY THERE, no matter at what rate we tax them, because there are not enough of them.”…”This is the “Centrist” world view that both Bill and Hillary understand.”

    =====

    And, yet, as I post right above Hillary disagrees with you completely.

    She says: “The rich are not paying their fair share in any nation that is facing the kind of employment issues [like the U.S.] – whether it’s individual, corporate or whatever the taxation forms are,” Clinton said after clearly stipulating that these were her opinions, no those of the Obama administration.

    Clinton went on to cite Brazil, long known for its high taxes, as a model of a successful economic policy.

    “Brazil has the highest tax-to-GDP rate in the Western Hemisphere and guess what – they’re growing like crazy,” Clinton said. “And the rich are getting richer, but they’re pulling people out of poverty.”

    “There is a certain formula there that used to work for us, until we abandoned it, to our regret in my opinion,” she added.

  45. Further, the government and the coporations don’t represent “opposing powers” today. They are very much working in concert. Indeed, in many ways the corporations are now in a position to run roughshod over the federal government. I really think people need to take a look ate the federal budget, They will find our biggest spending is on defense, then Medicare and social security, and that discretionary spending remains quite small. There is no one, no Party out there supporting some huge government, That just isn’t factual.

  46. I mean, just look at what happened with that oil well. That happened explicitly because the federal government abdicated their responsibility to regulate oil drilling to BP. It’s called regulatory capture. That happened under Obama, and it’s extremely hard to make the argument that that is an example of “big government”.

  47. anyone catch that article by the female boobette, Sally Quinn (WP)…she wants Hillary and Biden to switch jobs…can you imagine? all of a sudden Sally deems Hillary OK and such a tireless workhorse that she should start campaigning for O’s re-election…and Bill is now OK in SQ’s eyes…

    what a condescending SOB!

    as long as Hillary has the highest poll ratings, will work to save O’s sorry butt, then she is ok with SQ…_ _ _ _ her!

    HA, HA, HA…Hillary please do not give any thought to any ticket with O…never!

    I would rather see Hillary out of politics and doing good works independently as Bill does any day before having Hillary associated in any way with the O WH and on the same ticket as him…

  48. LBJ was a great President unfortunately he has the stain of Vietnam on him. Some folks can’t get past that to see was a reformer for civil rights and the author of medicare.

    MJ, people just can’t see the big picture and thats how we get these numbskull’s like we have now…

  49. A commentor over at CW is spot on with this analogy…the republicans on the side of BP…the dems brow beating BP and as usual no news of the Blago trial where Obama’s name is brought up daily. hmm, hmmm

    The dog and pony show today in D.C. is ridiculous…did it save a single dolphin, whale, crab, fish or anything else…NO! Did it stop the leak…NO! It was theatre for the masses and it kept us from hearing about the Blago trial.

  50. Agreed, I can not stand the political theater. If I wanted drama, I’d go to the movies. Atleast then I might be entertained. LOL

  51. I have to wonder if even the dims are having a hard time believing that obama could be this bad/stupid. Did they ever in their wildest dreams think it could get this bad?

  52. JanH, I guess not, they didn’t equate Obama with the crap that has been going on in Chicago for 100 years….here again…folk just can’t grasp the “big picture”.

    THis may sound stupid, but what was the reason for this theatre today…how much did it cost the taxpayer for this dog and pony show?

    The heckler they threw out of the meeting today was a shrimper for Seadrift, Texas….30 miles from where I grew up…this is how they treat the people who have lost everything….she should have had her say…I would have been more interested in what she said than the pigs at the trough in D.C.

  53. That’s not true. Didn’t happen. There is no such policy tyhat lowers the wage requirement for welfare recipients.
    ***************

    So sorry, did happen! Look at his heathwelfare program and the subsidies.
    ***********
    There’s plenty to not like about Obama, but I think people who play it loose with the facts make poor arguments.

    Jesus you are an arrogant piece of work.
    ****************

    By the way, that wonderful program for unwed mothers that LBJ bastardized? oh…..

    “As bad as his failure in Vietnam proved to be, the results of his Great Society Programs were far more insidious, deadly and injurious to our Nation’s psyche. The mammoth social welfare entitlement programs that streamed out of Washington did more damage to the fabric of our society than any number of Vietnams could have done. The irony is, that the segment of our society that it meant to help, was the one that was most grievously harmed. Of all those who fell victim to the welfare mentality, none suffered more than the black communities.

    In the fifties, although blacks were still struggling for equal oppertunities and were on the low end of the economic ladder, the black family was for the most part strong and stable. Two parent families were the rule, not the exception. They attended church together, had strong moral values, and did not comprise a majority of the prison population. Compare that to the present state of the black community after 40 years of Liberal Socialism. Our prisons are disproportionably black, unwed mothers and single parent families are the rule, black youths without a strong male role model other than rap stars and basketball players, roam the streets and are drawn into a culture of drugs and crime.

    The following statistics are provided by Star Parker’s Coalition of Urban Renewal, (CURE).

    *60 percent of black children grow up in fatherless homes.

    *800,000 black men are in jail or prison.

    *70 percent of black babies are born to unwed mothers.

    *Over 300,000 black babies are aborted annually.

    *50 percent of new AIDS cases are in the black community.

    *Almost half of young black men in America’s cities are neither working nor in school. What we have here is a ticking time bomb waiting to explode.

    What was the message of the social programs that came out of LBJ’s Great Society? One of the most devestating to the family was that if an unwed woman became pregnant, moved out of the home of her parents, did not name or know who the father was, then Big Daddy in Washington would provide for all her essential needs. Ergo she no longer needed a husband or the support of her family. In fact, the more children she had out of wedlock, the more money she would receive from the government. This program was the death knell for many families, especially in the black community.”

    Free Republic

    LBJ’s Great Society: 40 Years Later

  54. gonzotx
    June 17th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
    That’s not true. Didn’t happen. There is no such policy tyhat lowers the wage requirement for welfare recipients.
    ***************

    So sorry, did happen! Look at his heathwelfare program and the subsidies.

    ====

    Welfare is an actual program where recipients are given subsidies for living expenses. I think you must be thinking of medicaid which has nothing to do with Bill Clinton’s welfare to work program. Bill Clinton himself expanded the Medicaid program. Most Democrats, centrists or not, supported expanding Medicaid. It’s not some liberal plot.

    Talk about arrogant…

    I really don’t know what kind of Democrat you were or whatever, given the way you talk about LBJ, but again, Hillary Clinton proposed BIGGER subsidies for americans to purchase health care with, and let’s not forget she also wanted a PUBLIC health care option. How does her advocacy of such things square with yout support of her when you seem to hate the idea of the government helping Americans afford health care?

    I opposed Obama Care because it didn’t include a public program, and thus I found it to be a cgive away to the corporatins, not because it included subsidies for the majority of American families. Hillary’s absolute signature issue was health care, and I assume you supported her, yet you seem completely opposed to her assertion that health care is a human right and that the government indeed has a responsibility to make it affordable. Odd.

  55. Most Democrats, centrists or not, supported expanding Medicaid. It’s not some liberal plot
    **************

    WRONG!
    ******************

    Any expansion of taking the middle class money and giving it to the “needy” is welfare, they just don’t use the label…for obvious reasons.
    ****************
    Hillary had a FAIR way to pay for it and a MUCH better plan for all. PLEASE don’t confuse the two.

    Yes you are ODD and arrogant,I agree. You don’t play well with others, but the, I am sure that is not the first time you have heard that!

  56. I really don’t care about your personal attacks. Democrats have long supported expanding Medicaid, and that had little to do with the over all health bill. Indeed, it could have been added on to a number of other bills. It was one of the least contenious issues in the entire health care debate.

  57. Confloyd, this story is for you.

    Being in Calif, where I work, I pass environmental groups of kids (no other jobs around) that ask folks daily to support X, Y or Z by signing up as a member. I deal with different kids 5 days a week on the way home from work.
    Today, a poor young kid with a Greenpeace t-shirt approached me.

    “Support Greenpeace, help save the whales, only 50 cents a day, less than a cup of java to save the whales.”

    First thing I did was let him know when I was his age, back in the 60’s I fought on the side of Greenpeace to help them build their their agenda an base.
    But, what the hell, Greenpeace needs to get their buns down to the Gulf. Yes the whales are at risk again, but the Gulf needs all the help they can get. Not just whales are going to die there.

    Forget asking me for a donation, forget giving any money for a lobbyist to go to DC…forget that crap and change your agenda, tell your people to rally the troops and head down to the Gulf.

    That kid was shocked, and then I said, “You probably supported Obama too, he is a total fraud and a disaster and you and your friends should have voted for Hillary and we wouldn’t be in this mess!”

    That kid did not have a good day. 😉

  58. Shadowfax, Our Whales and Dolphins are as important as those up north, I thought you knew this! LOL!

    Where the hell are those folks anyway…I guess they believe like Oprah does the fraud is doing everything possible for the South coast. Oprah also said she doesn’t have the kind of money that could help those on the Gulf Coast, so she is not donating…she could get her fat ass down there and hold a show or something…there are still a few stupid people who like her.

  59. Gonzo,

    In the fifties, although blacks were still struggling for equal oppertunities and were on the low end of the economic ladder, the black family was for the most part strong and stable. Two parent families were the rule, not the exception. They attended church together, had strong moral values, and did not comprise a majority of the prison population. Compare that to the present state of the black community after 40 years of Liberal Socialism. Our prisons are disproportionably black, unwed mothers and single parent families are the rule, black youths without a strong male role model other than rap stars and basketball players, roam the streets and are drawn into a culture of drugs and crime.
    ————————————————————————–

    I have a problem with saying that LBJ’s programs did this to the blacks all by itself…which I doubt…in the major cities it was the de-industriazation of the rust belt and many jobs lost….ie Raygun economics.

  60. I just read that Sally Quinn column for the heck of it and was LMAO. I love how she says Hillary deserves to be VP because the “problems” anticipated from her haven’t materialized. In other words, she’s shocked HRC hasn’t been the power-hungry administration-wrecking bitch Sally expected her to be.

  61. S, isn’t Sally Quinn the person that started in the Hillary-hate in 92′ because Hillary didn’t fall down and worship those in D.C., she actually went there to change the status quo and she stepped on some toes trying to do it…

    I still love to see militant Hillary talking about baking cookies. LOL! She is amazing! She does look tired though!

  62. Sally can take a long walk off a short pier. Where does that B*tch get off? Hillary will not be Obama’s VP. She’s not interested in being the next Joe Biden.

  63. I don’t think Hillary looks tired. I don’t see that. I think some of the press photos, as with the primary, are doctored to make her look awful. But most of the foreign press pics I see of her, she looks great.

  64. Obama and the vision thing

    By Charles Krauthammer

    Friday, June 18, 2010

    Barack Obama doesn’t do the mundane. He was sent to us to do larger things. You could see that plainly in his Oval Office address on the gulf oil spill. He could barely get himself through the pedestrian first half: a bit of BP-bashing, a bit of faux-Clintonian “I feel your pain,” a bit of recovery and economic mitigation accounting. It wasn’t until the end of the speech — the let-no-crisis-go-to-waste part that tried to leverage the Gulf Coast devastation to advance his cap-and-trade climate-change agenda — that Obama warmed to his task.

    Pedestrian is beneath Obama. Mr. Fix-It he is not. He is world-historical, the visionary, come to make the oceans recede and the planet heal.

    How? By creating a glorious, new, clean green economy. And how exactly to do that? From Washington, by presidential command and with tens of billions of dollars thrown around. With the liberal (and professorial) conceit that scientific breakthroughs can be legislated into existence, Obama proposes to give us a new industrial economy.

    But is this not what we’ve been trying to do for decades with ethanol, which remains a monumental boondoggle, economically unviable and environmentally damaging to boot? As with yesterday’s panacea, synfuels, into which Jimmy Carter poured billions.

    Notice that Obama no longer talks about Spain, which until recently he repeatedly cited for its visionary subsidies of a blossoming new clean energy industry. That’s because Spain, now on the verge of bankruptcy, is pledged to reverse its disastrously bloated public spending, including radical cuts in subsidies to its uneconomical photovoltaic industry.

    There’s a reason petroleum is such a durable fuel. It’s not, as Obama fatuously suggested, because of oil company lobbying but because it is very portable, energy-dense and easy to use.

    But this doesn’t stop Obama from thinking that he can mandate into being a superior substitute. His argument: Well, if we can put a man on the moon, why not this?

    Aside from the irony that this most tiresome of cliches comes from a president who is canceling our program to return to the moon, it is utterly meaningless. The wars on cancer and on poverty have been similarly sold. They remain unwon. Why? Because we knew how to land on the moon. We had the physics to do it. Cancer cells, on the other hand, are far more complex than the Newtonian equations that govern a moon landing. Equally daunting are the laws of social interaction — even assuming there are any — that sustain a culture of poverty.

    Similarly, we don’t know how to make renewables that match the efficiency of fossil fuels. In the interim, it is Obama and his Democratic allies who, as they dream of such scientific leaps, are unwilling to use existing technologies to reduce our dependence on foreign (i.e., imported) and risky (i.e., deep-water) sources of oil — twin dependencies that Obama decried in Tuesday’s speech.

    “Part of the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean,” said Obama, is “because we’re running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water.”

    Running out of places on land? What about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge or the less-known National Petroleum Reserve — 23 million acres of Alaska’s North Slope, near the existing pipeline and designated nearly a century ago for petroleum development — that have been shut down by the federal government?

    Running out of shallow-water sources? How about the Pacific Ocean, a not inconsiderable body of water, and its vast U.S. coastline? That’s been off-limits to new drilling for three decades.

    We haven’t run out of safer and more easily accessible sources of oil. We’ve been run off them by environmentalists. They prefer to dream green instead.

    Obama is dreamer in chief: He wants to take us to this green future “even if we’re unsure exactly what that looks like. Even if we don’t yet precisely know how we’re going to get there.” Here’s the offer: Tax carbon, spend trillions and put government in control of the energy economy — and he will take you he knows not where, by way of a road he knows not which.

    That’s why Tuesday’s speech was received with such consternation. It was so untethered from reality. The gulf is gushing, and the president is talking mystery roads to unknown destinations. That passes for vision, and vision is Obama’s thing. It sure beats cleaning up beaches.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/17/AR2010061704209.html

    ——————

    Amen.

  65. mj
    June 17th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
    I really don’t care about your personal attacks.
    ***************

    Actually mj, just giving it back to you. Most just move on by, but I say, what the hell, I have a few minutes on my hand and you never disappoint.

  66. confloyd
    June 17th, 2010 at 8:56 pm

    Confloyd, I grew up in Wisconsin, you can not tell me much about the loss of the manufacturing base, but the great welfare policies of the “Great Society” have by and large destroyed the AA community.

  67. Does anyone else find the Alvin Green win in SC humorous, given the crap Bill Clinton got for suggesting identity politicis at play in the presidential primary there?

  68. Obama’s speech: There’s a pipe spewing a gazillion gobs of oil into the gulf, so let’s build more windmills

    Bitterpol

  69. gonzotex, Since your from Wisconsin, fill me in. I not being a jerk but would love to know what went down there during the shutdowns of steel plants and all the manufacturing. Do you know the percentage of black families that were employed in these businesses and what happened to them, did they move on and get re-educated or just what happened?

  70. So the policies of the Great society returned the black population to being lazy and just wanting to live on welfare…is this what happened…or was it that there were no jobs, those folks had children and there was still not jobs and on and on and on. Now welfare has become an occupation…is that what your saying??

  71. Obama and the vision thing

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, June 18, 2010

    Barack Obama doesn’t do the mundane. He was sent to us to do larger things. You could see that plainly in his Oval Office address on the gulf oil spill. He could barely get himself through the pedestrian first half: a bit of BP-bashing, a bit of faux-Clintonian “I feel your pain,” a bit of recovery and economic mitigation accounting. It wasn’t until the end of the speech — the let-no-crisis-go-to-waste part that tried to leverage the Gulf Coast devastation to advance his cap-and-trade climate-change agenda — that Obama warmed to his task.

    Pedestrian is beneath Obama. Mr. Fix-It he is not. He is world-historical, the visionary, come to make the oceans recede and the planet heal.

    How? By creating a glorious, new, clean green economy. And how exactly to do that? From Washington, by presidential command and with tens of billions of dollars thrown around. With the liberal (and professorial) conceit that scientific breakthroughs can be legislated into existence, Obama proposes to give us a new industrial economy.

    But is this not what we’ve been trying to do for decades with ethanol, which remains a monumental boondoggle, economically unviable and environmentally damaging to boot? As with yesterday’s panacea, synfuels, into which Jimmy Carter poured billions.

    Notice that Obama no longer talks about Spain, which until recently he repeatedly cited for its visionary subsidies of a blossoming new clean energy industry. That’s because Spain, now on the verge of bankruptcy, is pledged to reverse its disastrously bloated public spending, including radical cuts in subsidies to its uneconomical photovoltaic industry.

    There’s a reason petroleum is such a durable fuel. It’s not, as Obama fatuously suggested, because of oil company lobbying but because it is very portable, energy-dense and easy to use.

    But this doesn’t stop Obama from thinking that he can mandate into being a superior substitute. His argument: Well, if we can put a man on the moon, why not this?

    Aside from the irony that this most tiresome of cliches comes from a president who is canceling our program to return to the moon, it is utterly meaningless. The wars on cancer and on poverty have been similarly sold. They remain unwon. Why? Because we knew how to land on the moon. We had the physics to do it. Cancer cells, on the other hand, are far more complex than the Newtonian equations that govern a moon landing. Equally daunting are the laws of social interaction — even assuming there are any — that sustain a culture of poverty.

    Similarly, we don’t know how to make renewables that match the efficiency of fossil fuels. In the interim, it is Obama and his Democratic allies who, as they dream of such scientific leaps, are unwilling to use existing technologies to reduce our dependence on foreign (i.e., imported) and risky (i.e., deep-water) sources of oil — twin dependencies that Obama decried in Tuesday’s speech.

    “Part of the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean,” said Obama, is “because we’re running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water.”

    Running out of places on land? What about the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge or the less-known National Petroleum Reserve — 23 million acres of Alaska’s North Slope, near the existing pipeline and designated nearly a century ago for petroleum development — that have been shut down by the federal government?

    Running out of shallow-water sources? How about the Pacific Ocean, a not inconsiderable body of water, and its vast U.S. coastline? That’s been off-limits to new drilling for three decades.

    We haven’t run out of safer and more easily accessible sources of oil. We’ve been run off them by environmentalists. They prefer to dream green instead.

    Obama is dreamer in chief: He wants to take us to this green future “even if we’re unsure exactly what that looks like. Even if we don’t yet precisely know how we’re going to get there.” Here’s the offer: Tax carbon, spend trillions and put government in control of the energy economy — and he will take you he knows not where, by way of a road he knows not which.

    That’s why Tuesday’s speech was received with such consternation. It was so untethered from reality. The gulf is gushing, and the president is talking mystery roads to unknown destinations. That passes for vision, and vision is Obama’s thing. It sure beats cleaning up beaches.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/17/AR2010061704209.html

  72. More than it being the fault of the “great society”, I think it was more the fault of unfettered capitalism that moved those jobs to Japan for steel and Japan for auto building and now to China and as the population grew there was never any jobs to be had?

    LBJ did what he thought was right…history sometimes proves that these ventures into fixing something makes it worse and that happens on both watches, democrat as well as republican. JUst as I am sure Bush thought it was OK to let the oil men police themselves out there in the Gulf of Mexico while the rules were different up in Maine as well as in California…meanwhile the mexican dolphins are dying, but no one gives a shit.

  73. EXCLUSIVE: Alert Issued for 17 Afghan Military Members AWOL From U.S. Air Force Base

    A nationwide alert has been issued for 17 members of the Afghan military who have gone AWOL from a Texas Air Force base where foreign military officers who are training to become pilots are taught English, FoxNews.com has learned.

    The Afghan officers and enlisted men have security badges that give them access to secure U.S. defense installations, according to the lookout bulletin, “Afghan Military Deserters in CONUS [Continental U.S.],” issued by Naval Criminal Investigative Service in Dallas, and obtained by FoxNews.com.

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/17/afghan-military-deserters-missing-air-force-base/

    more at link

  74. confloyd
    June 17th, 2010 at 9:54 pm

    I NEVER said they “returned’ to being lazy. I said it destroyed the AA family and I believe statistics will back me up. Those were your words, not mine.

    I grew up in Milwaukee where people were employed in factories that had over 10,000 employees, like my dad’s, Allen Bradley. People married co-workers and their children grew up and worked in the same factories. It destroyed the Midwest for a long time, the loss of the manufacturing base. Milwaukee is doing better, they got into finance and turned the situation around.Others, not so lucky. Milwaukee had and has a large population of AA’s, but it was very segregated. There was a line and you didn’t cross it either way, then the busing came and white flight.

  75. I love Cinie’s post:

    Talk About Missing The Point

    I’ve been reading and watching all the debate about the Gulf oil disaster and whether the Pretendident’s reaction to it has been adequate, or at least, better than his predecessor, Bush-Lite’s response to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita, totally unrelated disasters save for the Fates’ seeming predilection for dumping on N’Awlins and environs. Folks have been weighing in ad nauseum about whether or not the High Holy One has been mad enough, been seen traveling through the region looking serious often enough, been force-fed photo-op crab cakes enough, been seen reading sternly-worded letters in properly prestigious setting enough, blackmailed the oil company out of money enough, blamed other people enough, is smarter than a fifth grader enough, and so on, and so on until you could just puke enough.

    Enough enough!

    What seems to me to be missing from all this is focus enough on the real issue: SOMEBODY BLEW A BIG FREAKING HOLE IN THE OCEAN FLOOR THAT’S BEEN SHOOTING GAZILLIONS OF GALLONS OF OSSIFIED DINOSAUR GUTS INTO THE WATER EVERY FUCKING MINUTE OF EVERY FUCKING HOUR OF EVERY FUCKING DAY FOR THE PAST TWO MONTHS!! HOW THE HELL DO YOU STOP IT, AND WHAT’S GONNA HAPPEN TO US AND THE PLANET IF YOU DON’T?

    That’s really all I wanna know.

    That, and given the response to the tragedy so far, why anybody would wanna put any of these clowns in charge of increased nuclear production.

    Seems to me, a guy who can channel JFK to challenge America’s scientific community to go to Mars, should have enough common freaking sense to challenge them to save this planet first.

    Is that really too much to ask?

    http://cinie.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/talk-about-missing-the-point/

  76. yep, that sum’s it up rather clearly…too much talk and not enough action….no one gives a shit…they either want to get reelected or elected, so they are in full out bullshit mode.

    One lady on Larry King said she’d been happy if Obama would of said ‘we’re bringing those guys with the idea of soaking up the oil with hay down to Louisiana right now….yes that is what I wanted too, but we got what BP told him to say….by mid july they will be sucking up 90,000 gallons, meanwhile the geiser seems to be larger than it has been….no one is talking about that!

    No one is talking about them burning the oil in the water along with the dolphins, crabs, turtles and fish…NO ONE!

  77. Yes, confloyd, it’s truely sad. BP has always been running the show. Obama won’t interfere. Maybe, as HWC said, that’s for the best, but it’s frustrating when we don’t see any of these ideas utilized.

  78. I really think if Bush were pres. there would be coverage of the wild life. I think Obama’s frineds in the msm don’t want to associate him with all those poor suffering animals.

  79. Evangelical leaders say spill raises moral issues
    Ap Environmental Writer – 2 hrs 44 mins ago
    Leaders of a group that encourages evangelical Christians to care for the environment say the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico raises moral challenges for the country.

    The Revs. Jim Ball and Mitchell Hescox, leaders of the Evangelical Environmental Network, are visiting southern Louisiana to pray with people who have lost jobs because of the spill.

    Joining them is the Rev. Galen Carey of the National Association of Evangelicals.

    ——————————————————————

    Perhaps the good Rev. should of picked up Joe Barton and Rush on their way to the Gulf Coast so they could see for themselves…

    Ball says they took a boat ride off the coast Thursday and were saddened by sights of oil-spattered marshes where birds were nesting.

    He says the oil spill is a stain on the nation’s stewardship of God’s creation, and should inspire people of faith to embrace cleaner energy sources. Ball says how the nation responds to the disaster is a matter of values.

  80. mj, I think the real oil men, not the freaking BP (british/swed socialists) would have tried to save the animals…most real Texas oil men like to fish….its their play area and they love it. I can’t see those folks allowing or covering this kind of crap up. I may be projecting on this, but I like to put on a tin foil hat ever now and again. LOL!

    Money is their God…all of them!

  81. Funny, from BP, someone needs to superimpose the Hussein family

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkOGM6gHvao&feature=player_embedded

    Come and listen to a story about a man named obamhed
    A poor chicagoer, barely kept his family fed,
    Then one day he was shootin at some fool,
    And up through the ground came a bubblin crude.

    Oil that is, black gold, Louisiana tea.

    Well the first thing you know obamahed’s a millionaire,
    Kinfolk said “Obmahed move away from there”
    Said “TehWhiteHouse is the place you ought to be”
    So they loaded up the limo and moved to pennsy.

    vania Avenue, that is. Swimmin pools, movie stars.

    Well now its time to say good by to Obamahed and all his kin.
    And they would like to thank you folks fer kindly droppin in.
    You’re NOT invited back a gain to this locality
    To have a heapin helpin of OUR hospitality

    Pennsylvania Avenue that is. Set just a spell, Don’t Take your shoes off.

    And don’t come back now, y’hear?.

  82. Spill May Have Taken Its Largest Victim Yet
    By LESLIE KAUFMAN
    Published: June 17, 2010

    Over the last weeks, the carcasses of oily pelicans, turtles and other animals have washed to shore in the Gulf of Mexico. Now the first dead whale has been found — a juvenile sperm whale floating 77 miles from the leaking oil well.

    Times Topic: Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill (2010)On Tuesday, a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ship spotted the 25-foot animal due south of the Deepwater Horizon site.

    The water the whale was floating in was not oiled.

    Blair Mase, the Southeast marine mammal stranding coordinator for the oceanic agency, said that scientists were “very concerned” that oil was the cause of the whale’s death, but that the whale’s body was so decomposed and scavenged by sharks that it would be impossible to say for certain.

    Instead, scientists will try to determine whether the whale had been swimming through oil by using a method known as hindcasting, which looks at how bloated an animal’s body is to calculate how long it has been dead, then retraces patterns in water currents to tell where the body might have drifted from. The whale’s condition suggests it has been dead for at least several days, Ms. Mase said.

    Scientists are also taking skin samples from the whale, which will be tested for petroleum. The results of those tests, as well as tests on its skin and blubber to determine its gender, may take weeks to process, the oceanic agency said. Government workers are also trying to rule out other possible causes of death, like a ship strike or net entanglement.

    “It is a relatively rare occurrence,” said Ms. Mase, who added that there have been only five or six whale deaths in the gulf in five years, “so we are studying this very carefully.”

    NOAA sent a research ship to the area around the Deepwater Horizon a few days ago specifically to learn whether the oil spill was changing whales’ behavior and if so, in what ways.

    There are an estimated 1,700 sperm whales that live in gulf waters and they are known to congregate particularly at the mouth of the Mississippi River, a rich feeding ground. Unlike other whales, which travel long distances, these live full-time in the gulf and do not usually mingle with sperm whale pods in the neighboring Caribbean and Sargasso Sea. Ms. Mase said that the dead whale was almost certainly a gulf whale.

    The fate of the whales, which have frequently been spotted swimming in the oil by planes overhead, has been of intense concern to wildlife biologists. Because whales are large and very mobile, they are relatively less vulnerable to oil spills than other sea life. However, the whales are classified as endangered and the crude oil is toxic to them. Moreover, they prefer to dive and fish right off the continental shelf, where the Deepwater Horizon wellhead is located, and their sensitivity to the large plumes of oil droplets and the enormous amount of dispersants being used to combat this disaster is unknown.

    Hal Whitehead, a biologist who studies at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said sperm whales are highly social animals that live in matriarchal groups like elephants. They communicate through noises that sound like clicks, which researchers refer to as a dialect. They have also shown behaviors that resemble mourning. In one case, Dr. Whitehead said, when a young sperm whale died, its mother carried its carcass around in her mouth.

    Sperm whales live anywhere from 60 to 100 years, scientists estimate. But they reproduce on average only every five years, which is why even a few whale deaths can be significant, Dr. Whitehead said.

  83. Did anyone see Greta talking about the possibility of Hillary going rogue?

    She was talking about Hillary spilling the beans that the Obama administration will sue over the Arizona immigration law…

    Meanwhile, Gov Brewer was waiting to hear back from Barry, today was the last day he promised to let her know the details of how much he would help her state (when she met him 2 weeks ago in the White House), and no phone rang today…instead she hears this news from Hillary on tv in Ecuador.

    Greta loves Hillary, saying is she going rogue… 🙂

    http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/06/17/clinton-obama-admin-to-sue-arizona-over-immigration-law/

  84. Sperm whales live anywhere from 60 to 100 years, scientists estimate. But they reproduce on average only every five years, which is why even a few whale deaths can be significant, Dr. Whitehead said.

    ———–
    Horrible.

  85. ADMIN, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION” ” What Is Bill Clinton Up To?”

    I think he is keeping Hillary in the game ready to pounce. I just hope the opportunity opens up before 2016.

  86. Gonzo, Its terrible about those whales.

    Shadowfax…Greta says she thinks Hillary is going rogue??? Did she say that on live tv??

  87. Shadowfax…Greta says she thinks Hillary is going rogue??? Did she say that on live tv??

    ———-

    Yup, she said it twice. 😉

  88. This is great news…Greta I think is in the know…her husband was involved someway I think with the Clinton campaign…I thought things were going to go that way when Carville went nutz…

  89. Well, and look at her comments above on taxes. Not at all a directive from Obama. And, then there is all Bill’s work for the Party. He didn’t campaign this much when he was president. LOL. I think that’s all about Hill.

  90. this one is for ADMIN…you beat them to the punch…

    publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/06/obama-effect.html

    THE OBAMA EFFECT

    Democrats are going to have to think really carefully about how they deploy Barack Obama for campaigning this fall. Polls we’ve conducted nationally and in several different states over the last few weeks have found that a candidate being endorsed by Obama is much more likely to elicit a negative response from Republican voters than a positive one from Democrats.

    PPP’s most recent national survey found that while Obama had a positive approval rating at 48/47, only 33% of voters were more likely to vote for a candidate endorsed by him while 48% said support from Obama would make them less likely to vote for someone. That’s because only 64% of voters who approve of the President say his endorsement would make them more inclined to vote for a candidate, but 91% who disapprove say Obama’s support makes it less likely they would vote for one of his preferred candidates.

    To put into perspective the perils of having Obama out on the campaign trail, consider the numbers in his home state of Illinois. Even there just 26% of voters say they’d be more inclined to back an Obama endorsed candidate while 40% say his support would be more likely to turn them against a candidate. It’s another example where the intensity of feeling about Obama is much stronger on the GOP side- 80% of Republicans say they’re less likely to vote for someone with the President’s support while only 49% of Democrats say they’re more likely to. If Obama’s support isn’t a net positive in Illinois it’s hard to know where he should be deployed.

    Whether Cal Cunningham or Elaine Marshall wins the Democratic Senate runoff in North Carolina next week neither is likely to get much benefit from Obama campaigning for them. 47% of voters in the state say they’d be less inclined to vote for someone he supported to only 30% who say his support would have a positive impact on their vote.

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

    MJ…agree, there is a special irony…maybe more of that Clinton karma payback…with Green and SC…kind of makes the dims look like racists…and Clyburn, the leader of the pack

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

    two other headlines out there really bugging me…

    one…WH flips on reigning in CEO pay and sides with wall st and banks…O screws us again

    and two…what’s with Dodd and the dems awarding $54 to Conn Indian Casino
    WTH??? that’s where 54 million of our stimulus $$$ is going?

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

    Could O and the dims be any more corrupt – the democratic brand is dying a death every day…

  91. mj, I think the real oil men, not the freaking BP (british/swed socialists)
    *********
    Transocean is a Swiss company. In reality they are an old American company that recently moved to Switzerland as a tax dodge….Our tax $$ will end up paying for their part in a trillion dollar screw up and they continue to be tax dodgers.

  92. Is there anyone in Washington D.C. who is not corrupt???
    *********
    I think that the Republicans may be less corrupt. It seems like most of them really believe that it a good idea to redistribute wealth to the upper 0.5% of the population and many really are committed to the bat-shit crazy fundies religious stuff. A lot of Dems are willing to vote against whatever principles that they might have for enough money, power, influence, etc.

  93. I wondered if Greta’s comment about Hillary possibly going rouge what on the nets and ran across this:

    Obama has clearly flipped off any idea that Hillary will “Go Rogue” and run for president in 2012. The idea of Hillary “Going Rogue” is no surprise, the surprise is that Obama is so out of touch that he would dismiss it without a thought. Yet, in Johnathan Alter’s new book, “The Promise: President Obama, Year One” Obama is quoted saying

    Who would really want this job for more than one term? But I have to run now, otherwise it’ll mean letting someone like Mitt Romney step in and get credit for the good stuff that happens after we’ve been through all this crap.”

    From the flippant but revealing mouth of Barrack Hussein Obama to America’s and Hillary’s ears – an overconfident only-Obama isn’t even considering that another Democrat could win the presidency if he doesn’t run. Hillary and her supporters must find that particularly arrogant and insulting; akin to laying down the gauntlet.

    Obama’s statement also begs the question: What if Obama’s “good stuff” doesn’t outweigh Obama’s “bad stuff”. On promises kept, remember that SNL skit that listed all of the promises Obama had failed to keep? Not much as changed since then and in the most crucial issues – jobs, economy and big spending, – Obama’s failures are igniting passions to overturn the Obama regime, Elections 2010.

    It’s possible that the Obama administration will be a waddling of crippled ducks the rest of his term. If Obama’s approval ratings are dismal now, they sure don’t stand to improve when he can’t get a bill passed if he wraps it in bi-partisanship and bows to Republicans.

    Right now, Obama’s “good stuff” isn’t looking “good” enough for him to have much, if any, confidence it will propel him to a second term. And it is possible it’s not a matter of Obama “really wanting the job” but of Americans not wanting Obama.

    About that 2012 election, a majority of Americans now say NObama second term If the numbers don’t change for Obama and Hillary’s numbers continue to climb, why wouldn’t Hillary resign her position and take him on?

    After all, many Democrats sorely regret that Hillary didn’t win. While Obama’s numbers keep on dipping, Hillary’s numbers are doing just fine, thank you. “61% now think favorably of the former senator and only 35% unfavorably, both numbers improved from the 56% and 40% she had during the Democratic National Convention in late August of 2008.” See Red flag for a sinking Obama: Americans now prefer Hillary Clinton.

    Who knows? The real flip-off may be Obama’s 2012 surprise. Hillary may very well “Go Rogue” in 2012. But even so, Mitt Romney could still get a lot of credit for a lot of “good stuff”, none of it Obama’s.

    http://www.examiner.com/x-35532-Dallas-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m5d17-Obama-flipoff-Hillary-Going–Rogue-in-2012-presidential-race?cid=exrss-Dallas-Political-Buzz-Examiner

  94. oops…I wondered if Greta’s comment about Hillary possibly going rouge WAS on the nets and ran across this:

  95. Hillary won’t do that because the Party will just call her racist again. She won’t primary Obama. Not. Gonna. Happen. And, she considers herself the more legimate wing of the Democratic Party. She’s not going independent. The only way Hillary runs is if Obama doesn’t. And, he would be one of very few recent president not to seek re-election. But, hey, I am still hoping he somehow decides not to seek re-election.

  96. Who would really want this job for more than one term?
    *******
    I don’t think he has ever wanted a second term. He got his historic win; he never wanted the “job”, he was bored with it after six months. After the historic 2010 mid-term elections, the media will see blood in the water and a green light to go after the messiah.

    Obama has never had to deal with political “stress” and probably can’t. The thought of a failed, besieged sociopath in the White House is very worrisome.

  97. mj
    June 18th, 2010 at 12:00 am

    Hillary won’t do that because the Party will just call her racist again. She won’t primary Obama. Not. Gonna. Happen. And, she considers herself the more legimate wing of the Democratic Party. She’s not going independent.

    ————
    I hope she does and I don’t think she will, but I don’t see anything saying she would run as an independent.

    The only way I think she will challenge him is if the party is so weak, they beg her to run because they know he will be sent packing. If Nasty gets knocked out of the majority seat and Reid goes home.

  98. the media will see blood in the water and a green light to go after the messiah.

    ———-
    I think the blood is already in the water with the Gulf disaster, and when more photos of the dead appear for months, they can’t sweep the problem under the rug this time. This is one issue that is dear to the hearts of Dems and it may be the one thing that millions can’t forgive.

    I believe he is already toast and is starting to realize it.

  99. Admin: Could you please post the video contained in this link:

    http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/gingrich-obama-spill-situation/2010/06/17/id/362339

    Gingrich makes a good case why Obama should not be president. If you are unable to view the video, the article is a transcript of the video.
    _________________________________

    Gingrich: Obama’s Approach to Spill Made Disaster Worse

    Thursday, 17 Jun 2010
    By: John Rossomando

    The Obama administration has proved a failure in resolving the massive BP oil spill disaster, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tells Newsmax.TV.

    In an exclusive interview, Gingrich blames BP for the catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico, but he says the evidence clearly shows the administration has been ineffective in its response as the oil has threatened the region’s wildlife and tourism industries.

    That doesn’t surprise Gingrich, whose new best-seller, “To Save America: Stopping Obama’s Secular-Socialist Machine,” chronicles problems he sees evolving during Obama’s presidency.

    Obama’s policies pose a “mortal threat” to America’s way of life and the preservation of the Founding Fathers’ vision for America, the former speaker tells Newsmax.TV. His strategies threaten America’s founding values as much as Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union did, Gingrich says.

    “There are two different problems,” Gingrich says. “The first is how you cap the well to keep the oil from coming out, and the other problem is how do you gather up the oil to get it out of the water before it reaches the shore?

    “The Obama administration has so far failed on both of those counts, and we have evidence that foreign governments were prepared to give substantial support and either found no response or a very slow response from the Obama administration.”
    _____________________________

    lil ole grape
    June 17th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
    Mrs. Smith
    June 17th, 2010 at 12:26 am
    Report: Obama said ‘I Am a Muslim’
    ============================
    Mrs. Smith and ADMIN… is it time to reprise the New Yorker cover?
    ___________________________________

    I agree, lil ole grape! 🙂

  100. Shadowfax
    Greta says she thinks Hillary is going rogue??? Did she say that on live tv??

    ———-

    Yup, she said it twice.

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

    No such luck. But I love how a Brit site put it in summer 2008: “If Mrs. Clinton decides to flounce out and run as an Independent”.

  101. Obama’s speech: There’s a pipe spewing a gazillion gobs of oil into the gulf, so let’s build more windmills

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

    I just hope by some chance he means it. It’s the only sensible thing to do. It doesn’t take all of us to attempt to fix the gusher, and it may not be possible to fix it at all.

    Windmills and solar is what we SHOULD do, to prevent any more such drilling in future.

  102. Agreed, turndown, but if he meant it he would have put up a plan and the resources to do it. Obama was Exelon’s go to guy in Illinois. He’s never been solidly behind the best ideas in renewable energy. Never.

  103. Free Republic
    LBJ’s Great Society: 40 Years Later

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

    Skimming bullshit….

    Whatever LBJ’s GS may have been, it hasn’t even existed for the last several decades. Nixon took over, then soon Reagan. Then Bill Clinton cleaned things up.

  104. turndown

    I just hope by some chance he means it.

    ————-
    Lots of people hoped he would do the things he talked of since 2008, so far…they are still waiting.

  105. They will find our biggest spending is on defense, then Medicare and social security, and that discretionary spending remains quite small.

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

    Social Security is self-supporting (tho soon they will need to call in the bonds they have been selling to Congress). Military should be labeled discretionary.

  106. Well, Medicare, federal funding of education, voting rights, Medicaid, land conservation, Head Start and food stamps all survived, and all were part of LBJ’s Great Society. They didn’t exist before him.

  107. A total failure of leadership.

    http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bp-oil-spill-gov-bobby-jindals-wishes-crude/story?id=10946379

    Eight days ago, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal ordered barges to begin vacuuming crude oil out of his state’s oil-soaked waters. Today, against the governor’s wishes, those barges sat idle, even as more oil flowed toward the Louisiana shore.

    “It’s the most frustrating thing,” the Republican governor said today in Buras, La. “Literally, yesterday morning we found out that they were halting all of these barges.”

    Sixteen barges sat stationary today, although they were sucking up thousands of gallons of BP’s oil as recently as Tuesday. Workers in hazmat suits and gas masks pumped the oil out of the Louisiana waters and into steel tanks. It was a homegrown idea that seemed to be effective at collecting the thick gunk.

    “These barges work. You’ve seen them work. You’ve seen them suck oil out of the water,” said Jindal.

    So why stop now?

    “The Coast Guard came and shut them down,” Jindal said. “You got men on the barges in the oil, and they have been told by the Coast Guard, ‘Cease and desist. Stop sucking up that oil.'”

    A Coast Guard representative told ABC News today that it shares the same goal as the governor.

    “We are all in this together. The enemy is the oil,” said Coast Guard Lt. Cmdr. Dan Lauer.

    But the Coast Guard ordered the stoppage because of reasons that Jindal found frustrating. The Coast Guard needed to confirm that there were fire extinguishers and life vests on board, and then it had trouble contacting the people who built the barges.

    The governor said he didn’t have the authority to overrule the Coast Guard’s decision, though he said he tried to reach the White House to raise his concerns.

    “They promised us they were going to get it done as quickly as possible,” he said. But “every time you talk to someone different at the Coast Guard, you get a different answer.”

    After Jindal strenuously made his case, the barges finally got the go-ahead today to return to the Gulf and get back to work, after more than 24 hours of sitting idle.

    Fifty-nine days into the crisis, it still can be tough to figure out who is in charge in Louisiana, and the problem appears to be the same in other Gulf Coast states.

    In Alabama today, Gov. Bob Riley said that he’s had problems with the Coast Guard, too.

    Riley, R-Ala., asked the Coast Guard to find ocean boom tall enough to handle strong waves and protect his shoreline.

    The Coast Guard went all the way to Bahrain to find it, but when it came time to deploy it?

    “It was picked up and moved to Louisiana,” Riley said today.

    The governor said the problem is there’s still no single person giving a “yes” or “no.” While the Gulf Coast governors have developed plans with the Coast Guard’s command center in the Gulf, things begin to shift when other agencies start weighing in, like the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

    “It’s like this huge committee down there,” Riley said, “and every decision that we try to implement, any one person on that committee has absolute veto power.”

  108. Except for Land conservation, which TR was clearly big on, but then basically LBJ was the next pres. to pick up that mantel. The rest of those programs, all of which exist today, absolutely came out of LBJ’s Great Soceity proposals of 1965.

  109. Wow, that’s awful. That’s exactly the place where Obama should be saying yes get those barges out there, let them do their work. He’s the executive. My Lawd, he doesn;t get it.

  110. mj
    June 17th, 2010 at 7:23 pm

    “gonzotx
    June 17th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
    mj
    June 17th, 2010 at 6:50 pm

    He is increasing welfare by lowering the wage per year requirement

    That’s not true. Didn’t happen. There is no such policy tyhat lowers the wage requirement for welfare recipients.

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

    HUH? When there’s a ‘wage requirement’ (aka ‘means test’) connected with any sort of welfare benefit, it’s to say that people have to be UNDER a certain income to qualify. So if there was such a requirement, then lowering it would decrease welfare payments.

  111. What S posted bears repeating – Obama and Obamaism (whatever the hell that is) WILL be defeated:

    Democratic pollsters:

    http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/06/obama-effect.html

    Democrats are going to have to think really carefully about how they deploy Barack Obama for campaigning this fall. Polls we’ve conducted nationally and in several different states over the last few weeks have found that a candidate being endorsed by Obama is much more likely to elicit a negative response from Republican voters than a positive one from Democrats.

    PPP’s most recent national survey found that while Obama had a positive approval rating at 48/47, only 33% of voters were more likely to vote for a candidate endorsed by him while 48% said support from Obama would make them less likely to vote for someone. That’s because only 64% of voters who approve of the President say his endorsement would make them more inclined to vote for a candidate, but 91% who disapprove say Obama’s support makes it less likely they would vote for one of his preferred candidates.

    To put into perspective the perils of having Obama out on the campaign trail, consider the numbers in his home state of Illinois. Even there just 26% of voters say they’d be more inclined to back an Obama endorsed candidate while 40% say his support would be more likely to turn them against a candidate. It’s another example where the intensity of feeling about Obama is much stronger on the GOP side- 80% of Republicans say they’re less likely to vote for someone with the President’s support while only 49% of Democrats say they’re more likely to. If Obama’s support isn’t a net positive in Illinois it’s hard to know where he should be deployed.

    It’s not just Republicans. Hillary supporters remember.

  112. I think they mean because Medicaid went up to 133% federal poverty limit from the federal poverty limit. Medicaid is not a cash reciept welfare program as most people consider trational welfare. It’s a health care program. The Medicaid expansion was long in the works, and something that had broad Democratic support. It’s not an Obama idea, and was not something that needed to be passed in the health reform bill. It would have passed on it’s own. Actually, had they passed a Medicaid expansion to 200% the federal poverty level, they could have covered half of the currently uninsured or almost as many as will be covered under the insurance company bailout program that passed as “universal health care”.

  113. mj
    June 18th, 2010 at 1:25 am

    Oh, and it would cost a quarter of what the bill that passed will cost.

  114. Admin: Wow, when your own state isn’t behind you, you know they have to be inflating the numbers. I realize we’re talking republican, but in Illinois there isn’t much difference. Its called the combine.

  115. mj,

    Sorry, I meant that the stuff the “40 years later” article described, had been changed long ago.

  116. The real Cordoba House:

    http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/main/showNews/id/9401

    By José María Aznar

    For far too long now it has been unfashionable in Europe to speak up for Israel. In the wake of the recent incident on board a ship full of anti-Israeli activists in the Mediterranean, it is hard to think of a more unpopular cause to champion.

    In an ideal world, the assault by Israeli commandos on the Mavi Marmara would not have ended up with nine dead and a score wounded. In an ideal world, the soldiers would have been peacefully welcomed on to the ship. In an ideal world, no state, let alone a recent ally of Israel such as Turkey, would have sponsored and organised a flotilla whose sole purpose was to create an impossible situation for Israel: making it choose between giving up its security policy and the naval blockade, or risking the wrath of the world.

    In our dealings with Israel, we must blow away the red mists of anger that too often cloud our judgment. A reasonable and balanced approach should encapsulate the following realities: first, the state of Israel was created by a decision of the UN. Its legitimacy, therefore, should not be in question. Israel is a nation with deeply rooted democratic institutions. It is a dynamic and open society that has repeatedly excelled in culture, science and technology.

    Second, owing to its roots, history, and values, Israel is a fully fledged Western nation. Indeed, it is a normal Western nation, but one confronted by abnormal circumstances.

    Uniquely in the West, it is the only democracy whose very existence has been questioned since its inception. In the first instance, it was attacked by its neighbours using the conventional weapons of war. Then it faced terrorism culminating in wave after wave of suicide attacks. Now, at the behest of radical Islamists and their sympathisers, it faces a campaign of delegitimisation through international law and diplomacy.

    Sixty-two years after its creation, Israel is still fighting for its very survival. Punished with missiles raining from north and south, threatened with destruction by an Iran aiming to acquire nuclear weapons and pressed upon by friend and foe, Israel, it seems, is never to have a moment’s peace.[snip]

    The parameters of any prospective peace agreement are clear, however difficult it may seem for the two sides to make the final push for a settlement.

    The real threats to regional stability, however, are to be found in the rise of a radical Islamism which sees Israel’s destruction as the fulfilment of its religious destiny and, simultaneously in the case of Iran, as an expression of its ambitions for regional hegemony. Both phenomena are threats that affect not only Israel, but also the wider West and the world at large.

    The core of the problem lies in the ambiguous and often erroneous manner in which too many Western countries are now reacting to this situation. It is easy to blame Israel for all the evils in the Middle East. Some even act and talk as if a new understanding with the Muslim world could be achieved if only we were prepared to sacrifice the Jewish state on the altar. This would be folly.[snip]

    The West is going through a period of confusion over the shape of the world’s future. To a great extent, this confusion is caused by a kind of masochistic self-doubt over our own identity; by the rule of political correctness; by a multiculturalism that forces us to our knees before others; and by a secularism which, irony of ironies, blinds us even when we are confronted by jihadis promoting the most fanatical incarnation of their faith. To abandon Israel to its fate, at this moment of all moments, would merely serve to illustrate how far we have sunk and how inexorable our decline now appears.

    This cannot be allowed to happen. Motivated by the need to rebuild our own Western values, expressing deep concern about the wave of aggression against Israel, and mindful that Israel’s strength is our strength and Israel’s weakness is our weakness, I have decided to promote a new Friends of Israel initiative with the help of some prominent people, including David Trimble, Andrew Roberts, John Bolton, Alejandro Toledo (the former President of Peru), Marcello Pera (philosopher and former President of the Italian Senate), Fiamma Nirenstein (the Italian author and politician), the financier Robert Agostinelli and the Catholic intellectual George Weigel.

    It is not our intention to defend any specific policy or any particular Israeli government. The sponsors of this initiative are certain to disagree at times with decisions taken by Jerusalem. We are democrats, and we believe in diversity.

    What binds us, however, is our unyielding support for Israel’s right to exist and to defend itself. For Western countries to side with those who question Israel’s legitimacy, for them to play games in international bodies with Israel’s vital security issues, for them to appease those who oppose Western values rather than robustly to stand up in defence of those values, is not only a grave moral mistake, but a strategic error of the first magnitude.

    Israel is a fundamental part of the West. The West is what it is thanks to its Judeo-Christian roots. If the Jewish element of those roots is upturned and Israel is lost, then we are lost too. Whether we like it or not, our fate is inextricably intertwined.

    José María Aznar was prime minister of Spain between 1996 and 2004.

  117. admin
    June 18th, 2010 at 1:35 am

    OMG, Obama should be ashamed. He literally doesn’t know how to move the levers of the bureaucracy he manages. That’s his job! Managing the bureaucracy! This is ridiculous. But good for those people.

  118. turndownobama
    June 18th, 2010 at 1:32 am
    mj,

    Sorry, I meant that the stuff the “40 years later” article described, had been changed long ago.

    Oh, sorry, of course, I agree. You are right. Ad, of course the right wing started chipping away at the great society as soon as it was adopted. My point was LBJ’s legacy still stands. Even if diminished.

  119. Interesting….

    PHOENIX – Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said Thursday she’s angry over comments by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that the Obama administration will sue the state over its new immigration law.

    In a June 8 media interview in Ecuador that began circulating Thursday in the U.S., Clinton said President Barack Obama thinks the federal government should determine immigration policy and that the Justice Department “will be bringing a lawsuit against the act.”

    Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler on Thursday declined to say whether the department would sue and that “the department continues to review the law.”

    The department has been looking at the law for weeks for possible civil rights violations, with an eye toward a possible court challenge.

    It’s unclear why Clinton made the comment since it’s not her area. She couldn’t be reached Thursday for comment.

    State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Obama and Clinton have both made it clear that the administration opposes the law.

    “I will defer to the Justice Department on the legal steps that are available and where they stand on the review of the law,” Crowley said. “The secretary believes that comprehensive immigration reform is a better course of action.”

    Brewer, a Republican, said in a statement that “this is no way to treat the people of Arizona.”

    “To learn of this lawsuit through an Ecuadorean interview with the secretary of state is just outrageous,” she said. “If our own government intends to sue our state to prevent illegal immigration enforcement, the least it can do is inform us before it informs the citizens of another nation.”

    Brewer spokesman Paul Senseman said the governor was “outraged” and that Clinton’s comments make it appear that the Justice Department has decided to file suit.

    “But she’s confident that in the end, the state of Arizona, the citizens, will prevail,” he said.

    On April 23, Brewer signed what is considered the toughest legislation in the nation targeting illegal immigrants. It is set to go into effect July 29 pending multiple legal challenges and the Justice Department’s review.

    The law requires police investigating another incident or crime to ask people about their immigration status if there’s a “reasonable suspicion” they’re in the country illegally. It also makes being in Arizona illegally a misdemeanor, and it prohibits seeking day-labor work along the state’s streets.

    The law’s stated intention is to drive illegal immigrants out of Arizona and discourage them from coming in the first place. It has outraged civil rights groups, drawn criticism from Obama and led to marches and protests organized by people on both sides of the issue.

    The law’s backers say Congress isn’t doing anything meaningful about illegal immigration, so it’s the state’s duty to address the issue. Critics say it will lead to racial profiling and discrimination against Hispanics, and damage ties between police and minority communities.

    Brewer met with Obama in the Oval Office about the law on June 3, telling him: “We want our border secured.” Obama reiterated his objections to the law. Neither side appeared to give ground although both talked about seeking a bipartisan solution.

    Other Arizona politicians, political candidates and activist groups were quick to weigh in on Clinton’s remarks. U.S. Senate candidate J.D. Hayworth, who is challenging Sen. John McCain, called them appalling; attorney general candidates Tom Horne and Andrew Thomas also denounced them.

    Joanne Lin, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, urged the administration to take swift action against the law.

  120. Mj, thanks for posting that article about Hillary’s remarks on the Arizona law. We always ask ourselves if we are making excuses for Hillary so we have devised a system whereby we actually listen to what Hillary says. When Hilary, a lawyer and an extraordiarily articulate person says something that she agrees with the article she uses is “I”. When Hillary says something that Obama has either asked her to adopt or, as in what we believe is the case here – she chooses to put Obama in a box, Hillary says “Obama says”.

    Here is the complete quote from Hillary:

    QUESTION: Thank you very much.

    I would like to start with the immigration debate in the United States. The recently approved law in Arizona has presented sort of a difficult scenario for the President Obama Administration. According to some polling, half of the United States has approved this law and maybe other states would like to implement it. How’s Obama Administration dealing with this debate? Is the immigration law near reality?

    SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Andrea, first, let me say how pleased I am that I have this chance to talk to you about these and other important issues. President Obama has spoken out against the law because he thinks that the federal government should be determining immigration policy. And the Justice Department, under his direction, will be bringing a lawsuit against the act.

    But the more important commitment that President Obama has made is to try to introduce and pass comprehensive immigration reform. That is what we need. Everyone knows it, and the President is committed to doing it.

    It’s almost as if Hillary is boxing in Obama – jujitsu Hillary style.

    The White House has not confirmed Hillary spoke on their behalf. (see http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/17/hillary-obama-will-sue-arizona-over-immigration-enforcement-law/ )

  121. Admin: That was the first thing I noticed….she put this in his lap…She allows chooses her words carefully and gives him full credit. LOL!

  122. Did Sara Palin really say she expected to see Jesus Christ walk again on the earth in her life time?
    Just read one of those books you pick up in the airport called the Sign by some guy who wrote the Last Templar, but in the end he has several quotes intended to ridicule American religious thought and good old Sara is featured. Funny thing not one quote frome an Islamic zealot but probably twenty from the “radical right wing”
    Don’t buy the book it sucked. I was just shocked that the last few pages were chock full of anti-americanism and then it says the author lives in England

  123. Well, she certainly did box him in because of course liberals and particularly hispanics would support a lawsuit. While conservatives would vehemently oppose such a suit. It’s interesting. I think his dithering has probably hurt him among latino voters, which of course represent a huge chunk of the Democratic voting base. His biggest problem and what would have curtailed such a bill in the first place, is that he didn’t pass comprehensive immigration reform when he still had 60 votes. That alone would have nullified any legislation out of Arizona. For my part, I think the law puts an undue burden on local police departments, and make it harder for cops to find informants. But yeah Obama is in some hot water.

  124. Henry, don’t know if Sarah Palin will physically walk with Jesus soon but this is interesting:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/17/palin-maybe-we-shouldnt-enforce-marijuana-laws-so-strictly/

    She can’t [champion legalization] if she’s running in 2012. Conservative Republicans, i.e. her base, oppose legalization 20/77; a bold stroke on this front would scare a bunch of them into Huckabee’s camp. If she’s not running, though, then I can see an argument for it. One of her big problems, especially with centrists, is the media’s caricature of her as some sort of fire-breathing theocon, which she isn’t. She’s made moves to chip away at that — the Rand Paul endorsement, and of course campaigning for Maverick instead of Hayworth — but it’s hard to scramble a narrative purely through associations. She needs an issue, and this one is fairly low-cost with a few major benefits. Taking a modest pro-legalization position (i.e. “I don’t use it myself and don’t want kids using it, but…”) would (a) electrify the debate over a hot-button issue, which she obviously relishes doing (see, e.g., “death panels”), (b) prove that she doesn’t mindlessly follow Republican orthodoxy, which would force centrists and libertarians to give her a second look, (c) mindfark the media, which would be on her side for once, and (d) reestablish her political identity as a western, not southern, conservative. The west was, after all, the only region of the country that supported legalization when Gallup polled the issue in October.

    [snip]
    [Sarah Palin quote follows]

    “Well, if we’re talking about pot, I’m not for the legalization of pot because I think that that would just encourage, especially, our young people to think that it was OK to go ahead and use it. And I’m not an advocate for that. However, I think that we need to prioritize our law enforcement efforts. And if somebody’s gonna smoke a joint in their house and not do anybody else any harm, then perhaps there are other things that our cops should be looking at to engage in and try to clean up some of the other problems that we have in society that are appropriate for law enforcement to do and not concentrate on such a, relatively speaking, minimal problem that we have in the country.”

  125. This is kind of funny…

    Fallon: ‘A Bolt of Lightning’
    Monologue | Wednesday night on “Late Night With Jimmy Fallon” on NBC: A new poll found that Hillary Clinton is now more popular than President Obama. Hillary was like, “Look, I don’t pay attention to the silly polls like that — what were the numbers exactly?”

    That’s right, Hillary is more popular than Barack. They’re separated by about 10 points, or roughly one billion gallons of crude oil.

    BP had to stop collecting oil for a few hours yesterday after a bolt of lightning struck its ship in the gulf, causing a fire. When asked for a comment, a spokesman for BP was like, “So that’s how things could possibly get any worse.”

    Today, President Obama finally met with BP’s C.E.O., Tony Hayward, but the meeting was only scheduled 20 minutes. Call me crazy, but I think it should take more time to discuss an oil spill than it does to get your oil checked.

    You guys, “Top Chef D.C.” premieres tonight on Bravo. I love that show. But since it’s in D.C., the contestants don’t actually cook; they just talk about what they’re going to cook in the future.

  126. Agree with Palin completely there. Actually, it’s legal in MA so long as it’s less than one ounce. But I believe in Denver or somewhere they decided to make pot arrests the lowest priority and as a result have been able to make many more arrest in violent crimes and robbery.

  127. Admin, in context of what you said before about Hillary’s use of “I” versus “Obama”, here’s something else she is working on:

    Clinton urges release of American held in Cuba
    By MATTHEW LEE (AP) – 8 hours ago

    WASHINGTON AP) — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton renewed calls on Thursday for Cuba to release a U.S. government contractor it has held for more than six months without charge.

    Clinton made the appeal after speaking with family members at the State Department a day before U.S. and Cuban officials are to meet in Washington for immigration talks. She said U.S. representatives at the those talks would raise the case of the contractor, Alan P. Gross, and tell them that his release would help improve U.S.-Cuban ties.

    “We will underscore that the continued detention of Alan Gross is harming U.S.-Cuba relations,” Clinton said in a statement released after she met with the contractor’s wife, Judy Gross, and other family members.

    Friday’s immigrations talks are the latest in a series intended to monitor adherence to a 16-year-old agreement under which the United States issues 20,000 visas to Cubans a year, although in the past the sides have used the meetings to delve into more contentious issues.

    Gross, a 60-year-old native of Potomac, Md., was working in Cuba for a firm contracted by the U.S. Agency for International Development when he was arrested as a suspected spy Dec. 3 at Havana’s Jose Marti International Airport. He has been held without charge at the capital’s high-security Villa Marista prison ever since.

    “We are deeply concerned about his welfare and poor health, and we have used every available channel to push for his release,” Clinton said. “As I told the family today, we will continue to do so.”

    Judy Gross has said that her husband is a veteran development worker who was helping members of Cuba’s Jewish community use the Internet to stay in contact with each other and with similar groups abroad. She said her husband had brought communications equipment intended for humanitarian purposes, not for use by Cuba’s small dissident community.

    Satellite phones and other telecommunications materials are outlawed in Cuba, where the government maintains strict control over Internet access and the media.

    Last month, the head of Cuba’s high court said the communist island has yet to open a legal case against Gross. Formal charges cannot be filed in Cuba without a judicial accusation and the opening of a court case, so it appears unlikely charges against Gross are imminent.

    It is rare for suspects to be held for extended periods in Cuba without charges or a case being opened. But Supreme Court President Ruben Remigio said in late May that “there still is not a case related to this matter,” and he did not know whether prosecutors were working on one.

  128. page 551 Raymond Khoury
    In the author’s notes of a silly silly book it quotes palin as saying

    “Yes I think I will see Jesus come back to life in my lifetime.”

    Oddly the hacks end notes go on at length to lambast Christianity and gov’ts but not one quote goes the other way.Wiki says the author was raised Catholic but of Lebonese descent. I just found it odd and offensive that after reading 500 pages of poorly writtren garbage I was subjected to his diatribe on religion.

  129. henry,

    The book sounds too trashy to take seriously. So what if it ‘quotes’ Palin as saying xyz. It would have to cite some reliable source — and there are a lot of unreliable sources out there attributing false quotes to her.

  130. Anywho
    The Sign is one of the most inane books I have ever picked up at an airport/train station. Inane doesn’t even come close. My advice if you find yourself searching for a book stay away from anything written by Raymond Khoury, but if you feel like you are short on the I hate America just read the author’s notesw of the last ten pages.

  131. turndonobama
    the piss poor book does not cite anything but instead says this was her response when asked about the end od days
    What annoys me is I picked up a book hoping for garbage entertainment and then I was smacked in the head at the end by just sheer trash.

  132. mj
    authors notes and quotes at the end of the book are not
    His agenda is very clear. And I am disgusted that I spent what I did. Writer is a jackass who belittles Christianity and Judaism while ignoring Islam. Beyond writing a simple novel novel he was a coward for limiting his criticism!

  133. I’m not a Palin fan but people love making up shit about her. Unless it’s a direct quote from her in a mainstream newspaper, I don’t take it seriously. And very little that I’ve been confident that she really said has struck me as being outrageous or inappropriate. She seems to be pretty moderate in practice. To her credit, I suspect she is actually to Obama’s left in action, if not in rhetoric.

  134. Mj
    the book had zero imagination
    and it was very critical of America
    I made the mistake of purchasing the garbage and so I will respond by writing to the three critics who reviewed the book asking if they actually read it and then I will hit Amazon and every other place that offers an online review and I will let them all know I am not happy with their anti-American spiel.

  135. Basementangel
    I did a search of the quote with sarah palin and got millions of hits but none had her actually saying it
    So why is this hack permitted to promulgate such lies? I read it i questioned but how many do not?????????

  136. This author takes the time to write five pages at the end of his novel criticizing fundamentalist and evangelical Christians without uttering even an iota of criticism against islam? If the roles were reversed there would be fatwa on his head? I am tired of the noise. Did you know that the director of 2012 wanted to have islamic things destroyed as well as the Christian idols but was told if he id so it would mean his death?

  137. A couple of new “Hillary 2012” articles.

    http://ricochet.com/conversations/New-Hampshire-Next-Summer

    New Hampshire, Next Summer
    Rob Long · Jun. 16 at 8:53pm

    Stay with me here:

    Data Point #1: Barack Obama’s free-fall in the polls. Data Point #2: Hillary Clinton’s rising popularity.

    The next steps:

    December, 2010: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton resigns. Says she’s “accomplished what she set out to do” and has “restored America’s position and standing in the world.” Will devote time to writing a “major book about America’s challenges, and opportunities, in a complex, multi-polar world.”

    June 2011 – August 2011: The Clintons, inexplicably and very publicly, summer on Squam Lake, in New Hampshire. Lots of Hillary sightings in and around the area, criss-crossing the state. Bill and Hillary at the farmer’s market. At a county fair. You get the idea. ‘What’s she doing in New Hampshire?’ the media wonders.

    Labor Day 2011: Delivering the Goods: What I Learned at the State Department, What I Learned from Main Street hits the bookstores. It’s a big bestseller. And very critical of the Obama administration.

    September 2011: Terry McCauliffe block-books a couple of floors in the Hampton Suites in Iowa City, IA, and the Manchester Marriott in Manchester, NH.

    October 1st, 2011: It’s on. Official. Announcement on Jay Leno during her book tour.

    January 16th, 2012: Iowa Caucuses. She wins?

    January 24th, 2012: New Hampshire primary. She wins?

    You didn’t think she was really going to give up, did you?

    —————————————————-

    http://newledger.com/2010/06/the-return-of-hillary/

    The Return of Hillary?

    Posted By Ben Domenech On June 17, 2010 @ 5:20 am

    Rob Long uses two datapoints — the stunning decline of Barack Obama’s popularity, and the rise of Hillary Clinton’s — as the basis for a timeline of the unthinkable: could Hillary Clinton challenge Obama in 2012? [1]

    There’s certainly space for a McGovernesque movement here — I think the important datapoint here is the activist left’s fundamental rejection by the White House, borne out in the San Francisco protests which united Tea Partiers and Code Pinkers. Obama has disappointed his base in so many areas, either by failing to keep his promises or by dragging his feet on things they view as moral imperatives — on health care, on Gitmo, on Afghanistan, on security policy, on DADT, and on any number of other policies.

    This is a more serious question than you might think, regardless whether Hillary really does write a bestseller in “Delivering the Goods: What I Learned at the State Department, What I Learned from Main Street.” I personally think there will be a challenge, perhaps not from HRC herself, though her angles — competence, foreign policy acumen, a call to break the last barrier for womanhood, and vindication on the spoiled promises of hope and change — are rather appealing.

    I honestly think there is an opening here for the return of Howard Dean. A strong ideological progressive who had an opening to gain the nomination in 2004 before his very public gaffe (amazingly, there was no YouTube then), he has little to lose and has already established a national network, and elected a great many Democrats with his broad national strategy. He has also been the most openly critical of this administration of any potential 2012 candidate in nearly all the areas I listed above. Clinton would need to leave the State Department in short order after the midterms, and even then, she would’ve had more of an opening if Obama had tacked further left on his foreign policy, not right.

    The real question at this point ought to be: who does Tim Gill want to give money to? Money makes things happen. (”That’s why they call it money.”). You have to have someone with a preexisting money source or a motivated base. That is a very short list — but if unemployment is still at ~10%, and Obama’s numbers are still average at best, someone on that list will almost certainly make a challenge.

    ——————————————————
    Moe Lane (via RedState.com) outlines the challenges facing any Democrat thinking of challenging Obama.
    What do you make of this, Admin?

    http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2010/06/17/quietly-revising-the-2012-democratic-nomination-process/

    Excerpt:

    <blockquote cite="Quietly revising the 2012 Democratic nomination process.
    Or, Why Barack Obama Will Win the 2012 Democratic Nomination.

    Posted by Moe Lane
    Thursday, June 17th at 1:00PM EDT
    20 Comments

    A good number of people – on both sides of the spectrum – are allowing themselves to speculate on the previously-unthinkable scenario that possibly, just possibly, the President might be successfully challenged in the primaries in 2012. This is America, right? People come out of nowhere to win elections all the time. Why, look at President Obama! He did precisely that in 2008.

    Yes. That’s why he’s redesigned the system to keep it from happening in 2012.

    You’ve probably never really heard of the Democratic Change Commission; it was set up after the 2008 elections “to recommend changes to the Party’s 2012 presidential nominating process.” Its two chairs were both Obama super-delegates: Sen. Claire McCaskill was an early supporter of the President, while Rep. James Clyburn was merely treated as one long before he got around formally endorsing Obama. A handy list of Change Commission members is here: note that there are thirty-seven people in this commission, which is about thirty-three more than was actually needed. When you see this kind of commission bloat, you can safely assume that it’s there to serve the same purpose as octopus ink: a cloud of opaqueness to obscure its originator.

    And its originator? David Plouffe.

    Yup. The guy who designed the 2008 primary insurgency. The guy that people mean when they talk about how great a campaigner Barack Obama is*. Which makes Plouffe the perfect choice for plugging all the holes in the nomination process; after all, he found them all in the first place.

    You can find the Change Commission’s report here: save yourself time and throw out all the historical details, the process by which they ostensibly made their recommendations, and pretty much everything else except the actual recommendations. I’ve reproduced their summary of those recommendations below, followed by my cynical translation of each.”>

  138. Also if i didn’t say it before the novel is sloppy
    And if you are stuck on a plane the vacuous magazine for free in front of you is a far better read,

  139. I wouldn’t necessarily trust a mainstream newspaper to quote Palin accurately — just a video or her Facebook page. She has said a few things there that I disagree with, but overall I like her.

  140. admin
    June 18th, 2010 at 2:04 am

    Admin, thank you for explaining that. I for one absolutely support that AZ law, and I did read it. Its actually much less stringent that the Federal law, which the AZ law mimics word for word.

    Seriously, the fed say they have jurisdiction, yet won’t do a damn thing to help AZ and other other states with the illegal problems, then a AZ rancher gets killed on his own land, what the hell is AZ supposed to do? Their own citizens are in danger, Go Jan Brewer! I support her! And if Hillary said this to put a cog in the Obama’s falling-apart machine, then fine, but if Hillary actually believes this statement herself, then Hillary you are very out of touch on this one.

  141. I’ve just Scroogled to make certain there are sufficient sources, including yahoo news, for the following event. Incredibly it is not on early am TV which prefers to reiterate the Congress bashes Hayward news, now very old.

    A nationwide alert has been issued for 17 members of the Afghan military who have gone AWOL from a Texas Air Force base where foreign military officers who are training to become pilots are taught English, FoxNews.com has learned. The Afghan officers and enlisted men have security badges that give them access to secure U.S. defense installations, according to the lookout bulletin, “Afghan Military Deserters in CONUS [Continental U.S.],” issued by Naval Criminal Investigative Service in Dallas, and obtained by FoxNews.com….
    www dot foxnews.com/us/2010/06/17/afghan-military-deserters-missing-air-force-base/

  142. Admin,

    I found Hillary’s comments re the Arizona immigration law troubling. I heard agreement not distance.

    I live in an area very threatened by illegal immigrants. The issue is clear cut and important to me. The Arizona law has already sent illegals out of their state. I wish it would happen in my neighborhood.

  143. Heads UP: Wild Card!

    EXCLUSIVE: Alert Issued for 17 Afghan Military Members AWOL From U.S. Air Force Base

    Friday, June 18, 2010

    A nationwide alert has been issued for 17 members of the Afghan military who have gone AWOL from a Texas Air Force base where foreign military officers who are training to become pilots are taught English, FoxNews has learned.

    The Afghan officers and enlisted men have security badges that
    give them access to secure U.S. defense installations, according to the lookout bulletin, “Afghan Military Deserters in CONUS [Continental U.S.],” issued by Naval Criminal Investigative Service in Dallas, and obtained by FoxNews.

    The Afghans were attending the Defense Language Institute at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas. The DLI program teaches English to military pilot candidates and other air force prospects from foreign countries allied with the U.S.

    “I can confirm that 17 have gone missing from the Defense Language Institute,” said Gary Emery, Chief of Public Affairs, 37th Training Wing, at Lackland AFB. “They disappeared over the course of the last two years, and none in the last three months.”

    So, the defectors have been watched the entire time but never followed to determine their destination or intelligence source?

    Each Afghan was issued a Department of Defense Common Access Card, an identification card used to gain access to secure military installations, with which they “could attempt to enter DOD installations,” according to the bulletin. Base security officers were encouraged to disseminate the bulletin to their personnel.

    “The visas issued to these personnel have been revoked, or are in the process of being revoked. Lookouts have been placed in TECS,” it reads.

    Treasury Enforcement Communications Systemn(TECS), which is shared by federal, state and local law enforcement agencies, is computer- based database used to identify people suspected of violating federal law.

    Included in the bulletin are photos of the 17 men, accompanied by their dates of birth and their TECS Lookout numbers.

    The bulletin requests, “If any Afghan pictured herein is encountered, detain the subject and contact your local Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office, the FBI or NCIS.”

    A senior Defense Department official in Washington told Fox News he had no direct knowledge of the 17 men being AWOL. The official added that this is not the first time foreign trainees have gone missing, and said some cases in the past have turned out to be more of an immigration concern than a national security threat.

    The FBI and NCIS did not respond to requests for comment. A Department of Homeland Security spokesman referred FoxNews to the FBI.

    Of course, the usual, kicking the can down the road!

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/17/afghan-military-deserters-missing-air-force-base/

  144. I recently took my Hillary 2012 bumper sticker off my car……mostly because I don’t want anyone to think that I support the Democrats in any way.

    Despite being a lifeong dem prior to O, I am further from the Dem party every day. It’s as if my eyes have been opened and I see them for what they are or have become.

    I still wish Hillary had not joined this administration. I think she could have run as an independent in the last election without any money and beaten both McCain and O. What a lesson that would have been for the corrupt DNC, How much better off the world and our country would have been,

    This administration is a disaster beyond belief.

    Sadly, I believe that Hillary still shares many of their beliefs. Not that I don’t still support her. I still think she is the best leader this country has right now.

  145. Admin, I had noticed how carefully she does talk and how she uses her pronouns. A skillful leader is very careful about how they speak. That does not mean occasionally she does not mis speak, but let’s face it, she is not using a telepromter.

    In addition, I saw a clip where Oprah complains that she does not know what the president is expected to do. Oprah is a micromanager. She knows what he should be doing, and she would never stand for his performancein her organization. Just ask some of her ex employees.

  146. Just my two cents for what it’s worth on Hillary’s comments about the Arizona immigration law…to my ears it sounded like she was going out of her way to make clear this was an Obama administration point of view–not hers. When Hillary takes a stand on something she usually explains herself. I haven’t read that she elaborated more on the statement she made–it was just given factually. I’m sure she anticipated that the question would come up in the interview. Perhaps she felt she needed to say something (rather than brush off the question) as the adminstration wasn’t making any effort to get back to the Arizona governor as promised. Or perhaps she was told by Obama directly to say what she did if asked (so the idiot wouldn’t have to contact the Arizona governor himself). If this was something she personally believed in I think she would have given her rationale ( and as noted would have used “we” or “I” in her statement). Anyway, just my thoughts…

    I do find it interesting that Hillary is making comments on various issues these days…particularly when she has been so silent earlier. I’m not politically astute as most of you here but it just strikes me that something is afoot…otherwise why the change?

  147. JanH, Oh now there’s someone who knows how to be organized before things get worse….Bill Clinton going to Haiti…

    This is all I’ve heard since 8am on Fox News…Hillary becoming VP and of coarse its news drop day.

  148. Obama’s spill recovery chief will be part-time
    Buzz up!30 votes Send
    Email IM .Share
    Facebook Twitter Delicious Digg Fark Newsvine Reddit StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Bookmarks .Print .. AP – FILE – In this April 28, 2009, file photo, Raymond E. Mabus Jr., then the nominee for Secretary of the …
    . Play Video Barack Obama Video:BP prepares for another round with lawmakers KVUE-TV Austin .
    Play Video Barack Obama Video:Any Word from the President? FOX News .
    Related Quotes Symbol Price Change
    BP 32.15 +0.44
    XOM 62.98 +0.38
    By MATT APUZZO and EMILY WAGSTER PETTUS, Associated Press Writers Matt Apuzzo And Emily Wagster Pettus, Associated Press Writers – Fri Jun 18, 7:10 am ET
    WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama’s point man charting a new future for the oil-poisoned Gulf Coast will do the job part-time. Some environmentalists said the job demands someone’s full attention.

    Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who oversees 900,000 Navy and Marine personnel, is inheriting an amorphous second job as the Obama administration’s leader of long-term environmental and economic planning. His task is no less than rebuilding a region still suffering after Hurricane Katrina and beset by decades of environmental problems.
    OH Brother….he thinks a part-time person can coordinate the Gulf clean up??

    Mabus won’t resign from his Navy job. When President George W. Bush picked Donald Powell to lead the recovery after Hurricane Katrina, Powell resigned as head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

    “The president talked to the governor about this, and they both agreed that he had the ability to do both,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Thursday after Mabus met with Obama at the White House.

    That prompted quick criticism from the Defenders of Wildlife, which is working to save animals from the oil that has gushed from an offshore BP oil well for nearly two months.

    “The idea that he is only going to work on this part-time is disturbing,” said Robert Irvin, the group’s vice president for conservation programs. “If this is the equivalent of war, as the president has been saying, it needs a full-time general.”

    In his year at the helm of the Navy, Mabus has called for a cleaner, more energy-efficient fleet. But he is largely unknown among environmental groups dealing with the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history. After Obama named Mabus in a speech Tuesday night, environmental leaders called around, asking each other for insight.

    “I don’t know what demands being head of the Navy requires, but from what I’ve heard he’s got a good head on his shoulders,” said Jill Mastrototaro, the head of the Sierra Club for the Gulf region.

    While Obama selected Mabus for his ties to the Gulf Coast, the wealthy businessman also has had financial ties to the oil industry. Environmentalists want to know more about that from the man charged with helping remake the coastal economy.

    When Mabus joined the Obama administration, energy investments were among the largest holdings in his portfolio. Between $350,000 and $750,000 was invested in partnerships trading energy commodities such as crude oil and natural gas. He also owned between $15,000 and $51,000 in Exxon Mobil stock and as much as $69,000 in energy mutual funds.

    Mabus, whose net worth is millions of dollars, sold all his energy holdings upon taking office, Navy spokesman Thomas Oppel said.

    The White House has not said exactly what Mabus’ job will be, so it’s unclear what sway he will have over the future of Gulf Coast environmental regulations and economic development policies, two things that could affect the coastal oil industry.

    “Nothing in his background would suggest he will do anything but put the interests of the people of the Gulf first as he completes this critical mission, and the president has full confidence in his leadership,” White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said.

    Mabus was one of the Democratic Party’s rising stars when he was elected Mississippi governor in 1987. He had exposed county government corruption as state auditor and campaigned for governor with the slogan “Mississippi will never be last again.”

    But Mabus had a strained relationship with lawmakers. In a state where legislators, not the governor, have the most power, Mabus saw many of his proposals snubbed. At his urging, lawmakers expanded Medicaid coverage, but other efforts such as spending more money on early childhood literacy never materialized.

    In his new job, Mabus must build consensus across the region. Already there are signs that won’t be easy. Louisiana’s former Republican Gov. Buddy Roemer declared that Obama “could not have picked a better man,” but Mississippi’s governor, Haley Barbour, was quick with a barb.

    “If this is really what it sounded like — that is, the federal government is going to make a long-term plan for the Gulf states — then it’s a terrible idea,” said Barbour, a possible Republican candidate for president in 2012. “Mississippians will decide about Mississippi’s future.”

    Oliver Diaz, who was elected to the Mississippi House from the Gulf Coast the same year Mabus took office, said that despite growing up in northern Mississippi nearly 250 miles from the Gulf, Mabus developed strong political ties to the coast that will help him in his new job. Mabus is usually friendly but can be tough, Diaz said.

    “He exercised the strength of the governor’s office when he had to. That’s just part of the job, and it’s going to be part of this new position that he’s been appointed to,” Diaz said. “He’s going to have to exercise some control, whether it’s with oil company executives or people affected by the spill. I think he’s a guy that is going to take control.”

    In his only major environmental decision as governor, Mabus angered politically powerful farmers in 1989 by opposing a plan to build the world’s largest pumps to drain water from flood-prone areas in the Yazoo River basin in rural western Mississippi. Mabus said the proposed federal project would have damaged sensitive wetlands to help agricultural interests.

    The project was discussed for decades, and the EPA eventually killed the $220 million proposal in 2008.

    Mabus’ decision to allow dockside casino gambling along the Mississippi River and Gulf Coast became his unexpected legacy. Millions of dollars poured into Mississippi’s budget, but in a state with historically weak environmental regulations, the decision allowed widespread development in sensitive coastal areas.

    Mabus angered many of his own supporters — including, critically, the Legislative Black Caucus — by closing Mississippi’s three charity hospitals, which for decades had cared for some of the poorest people in the nation. He never recovered politically and lost the 1991 governor’s race to Republican Kirk Fordice, a blunt-spoken contractor.

    During the re-election campaign, Mabus received $1,000 each from oil companies BP America, Shell and Chevron. Each gave the most allowed by law, a tiny fraction of a $3 million campaign that got much broader support from bankers and lawyers.

    An early supporter of Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton’s presidential bid, Mabus landed in the Clinton administration as ambassador to Saudi Arabia. He was the top U.S. diplomat to the oil-rich nation from 1994 until shortly before the deadly Khobar Towers terrorist attacks in 1996.

    After helping with Clinton’s re-election campaign, Mabus stepped out of politics. But he was cast into the public eye in 1998 because of a messy divorce with his wife, Julie. The divorce became national news because Mabus secretly recorded his wife’s conversation with a priest, catching her on tape admitting adultery.

    Before being tapped as Navy secretary, Mabus sat on corporate boards and charities. As CEO of Foamex International Inc. from 2006 to 2007, Mabus steered the polyurethane foam products company out of bankruptcy. He owns more than 4,700 acres of Mississippi timberland worth between $5 million and $25 million.

    He was an early supporter of Obama’s presidential campaign, endorsing him in 2007 and surprising some political observers who had expected Mabus to support Hillary Rodham Clinton because of Mabus’ past political ties to Bill Clinton.

    Political savvy may be the most important aspect of Mabus’ new job. Steven Peyronnin, executive director of the Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana, said Mabus can learn quickly about environmental problems. The cleanup effort so far has been dogged by criticism that nobody is in charge. Peyronnin said the coast needs someone who can make decisions and get things done quickly

  149. confloyd, I was accidently watching Fox this morning also. I thought they were talking if this low polling continues,that the Party would be approaching HRC to run. I thought as President. I don’t think HRC as VP will save. him. I think,if things continue, they must decide if they are going to save the party.

  150. EXCLUSIVE UPDATE: Nationwide alert issued for 17 Afghan troops who were receiving pilot and English lessons in the U.S. before going AWOL from Lackland Air Force base in Texas — with badges that give them access to secure U.S. defense installations. Officials tell FoxNews.com that seven are accounted for, with four in custody

  151. I was looking at the Rassmensen report this morning. The number showing as don’t think he is doing a good job, is as high as the beginning number showing that he did a good job at the beginning.

    However, the people who think he is doing is not as low as the people who thought he was doing a bad job at the beginning. So if the poor job has not equaled the good job at the beginning, how can the good job not be lower. Does that make sense to anyone.

    I guess that the only explaination is those who would not respond or had no opinion, have now started responding. The difference in those line then must be the core of people that no matter what he does, he is doing a good job.

    Does anyone else wonder about this, where those extra people must have come from?

  152. AmericanGal
    June 18th, 2010 at 10:04 am
    Just my two cents for what it’s worth on Hillary’s comments about the Arizona immigration law…to my ears it sounded like she was going out of her way to make clear this was an Obama administration point of view–not hers.

    I came to the same conclusion. I’ve read in so many places how people are getting ‘disillusioned’ by Hillary for staying in this administration. I would only ask them, where her talents would be maximized if not in the capacity that she is in now? As though they went through the emotional roller coaster that was the campaign that she went through. If she says what her BOSS would do in a certain situation, then that is what her BOSS would do. Wasn’t it this week that she said that our tax structure was wrong and that the rich should pay MORE not LESS? Anywho, even if I don’t agree with one of the positions that she takes, I’ll stick with her and the other 45,000 positions that I agree with.

  153. AmericanGal
    June 18th, 2010 at 10:04 am

    Just my two cents for what it’s worth on Hillary’s comments about the Arizona immigration law…to my ears it sounded like she was going out of her way to make clear this was an Obama administration point of view–not hers.
    __________________

    It constantly amazes me how many people cannot automatically make that distictiion when reading Hillary’s quotes.

  154. Hillary may be laying this at Obama’s feet and why shouldn’t she? It’s obviously his call. And, she may not think a lawsuit at this point makes political sense, but there is no way in hell Hillary doesn’t oppose the Arizona law. It would be so far removed from her character to support such a law I find it stunning anyone would think she would. She said over and over again in the primary campaign that the last thing we want is police going door to door asking people for their papers. There is no way she is a supporter of the Arizona law.

  155. holdthemaccountable
    June 18th, 2010

    “Officials tell FoxNews.com that seven are accounted for, with four in custody”
    ____________________________

    Does this mean 3 resisted arrest and were terminated?

    Sounds like it. 🙁

  156. Rock…I’m with you…she CLEARLY says its his plan to sue Arizona under the direction of Obama, she actually helped out Holder…because she clearly says the litigation is at the direction of Obama…

    I don’t think this is her stance…she says its his and under his direction.

    Is she just trying to get fired, especially after releasing the chart showing Obama’s foot dragging in the gulf.

  157. As far as Hillary not be for the Arizona law…she also has common sense and would NOT have left this Governor to hang out to dry….she would have done something….she would have NEVER allowed it to fester into this unmanageable sore that it has become.

  158. I mean, you are talking about a law Meg Whitman has come out against, and people think Hillary would support it? C’mon.

  159. I am worried there’s something going with the 17 Afghans on the loose with papers….Fox wondered if their names were on the “no fly list”….that would involve Hillary…I am sure Obama will try and ruin her if she steps out of line, don’t you all?

  160. Well, I don’t know all the veriables with Hillary…but I will just trust that she will know the right time to kick his ass.

  161. I see the whole issue of Hillary for V.P. or Hillary saving the day for the Dims and running for potus as having major obstacles.

    For one thing, although the Clintons are loyal democrats, do the Clintons trust the dim machine after the way they were treated in 2008? Superdelegate bribery/vote stealing?

    Secondly, will obama go willingly? Will his handlers and obama be willing to leave knowing they screwed up so badly and are laughingstocks?

    Thirdly, will the bots take this lying down? Will they fight to the end for their messiah?

    Finally, Hillary or not, will the voters at large be willing to vote in a democrat again after the mess they have created?

    I may not be explaining this very well, but I wonder if the dims have destroyed any chance for a new democratic congress for years to come. I also wonder if the repubs will do their outmost to paint Hillary as being aligned/loyal to obama’s regime.

  162. Posted on PUMApac by (Rancho)

    Also from Peggy Noonan
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704289504575313181930072638.html

    ” But it’s also true that among Democrats—and others—when the talk turns to the presidency it turns more and more to Hillary Clinton. “We may have made a mistake. She would have been better.” . . . When you’re snakebit you get some sympathy, and some will come. With all the president’s woe there will be some counter-reaction among commentators, journalists and others. There will likely be among the Democratic leadership, too. “Love him or not he’s what we’ve got, and he’s what we have for the next two years. Help the guy, cool the criticism, punch back for him.” But it’s also true that among Democrats—and others—when the talk turns to the presidency it turns more and more to Hillary Clinton. “We may have made a mistake. She would have been better.” Sooner or later the secretary of state is going to come under fairly consistent pressure to begin to consider 2012. A hunch: She won’t really want to. Because she has enjoyed being loyal. She didn’t only prove to others she could be loyal, a team player. She proved it to herself. And it has only added to her luster.”

  163. Peggy Noonan is such an idiot. Hillary has ALWAYS been loyal. She’s not going to primary Obama for the same reason she couldn’t take her primary fight to the convention floor. If she did, it would oh she’s a racist all over again. There is a much greater chance she would be readying a primary challenge if John Edwards were president.

  164. NewMexicoFan
    if this low polling continues,that the Party would be approaching HRC to run. I thought as President. I don’t think HRC as VP will save. him. I think,if things continue, they must decide if they are going to save the party.

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

    Sorry to be negative, but why should ‘they’ want to save the party? By ‘they’ I mean the big money interests who backed Obama to take out Hillary. Corporations who donate to either or both parties with nothing more than a change in the “Pay To” line.

    They have controlled the GOP for a long time. By putting in their puppet Obama as head of the Dims, they control both parties. If Obama runs in 2012 and loses, then they control the government through the GOP. It’s a win/win for them. They’d probably be glad for the Dims to shrivel, so they could go back to their ‘permanent GOP majority’.

  165. Shadow you forgot the most important part…..Bambi is down at 41% total approval….lowest ever.

  166. #
    moononpluto
    June 18th, 2010 at 12:56 pm

    Shadow you forgot the most important part…..Bambi is down at 41% total approval….lowest ever.
    ———-

    That’s were the -21 comes from. He has had -21 before, but not recently.

  167. From HuffPuff

    Environmental engineer Joe Taylor has a dire warning for BP: they have to stop using their chemical dispersant, Corexit, immediately. Or else, according to a report from WKRG in Mobile, everything is going to die!

    He says the sulfur and sulfuric acid based dispersant makes the oil spewing into the gulf sink, where its impossible to clean up–and where it depletes oxygen levels under the water, killing plankton and everything above plankton in the food chain. “Corexit is toxic, petroleum is toxic, and its depleting the oxygen levels,” he says.

    What’s worse says Taylor, is that if he knows this information, so does BP. “They have a lot of chemists who are a lot smarter than I am, and they know this,” he says.

    See video at:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/18/bp-must-stop-using-toxic_n_617334.html

  168. Concerning Hillary’s comments about the Arizona law and other matters, to me it seems obvious.

    1. she is re-entering the political realm

    2. she is underscoring the fact that the stupid inflammatory stuff is his doing.

    3. she is reiterating her belief that the problem cannot be solved piecemeal.

    Let us hope my interpretation is accurate. Clearly, the State of Arizona has a right to protect its sovereignty and its citizens. It has no choice but to act when the White House fails to do so, just as it failed to respond to the Gulf disaster.

  169. I don’t know if I’ve mentioned this yet, but Peggy Noonan can bite me.

    Amazing the way these idiots have finally “found religion” and concluded that Hillary Clinton would have been a strong president. A day late, a dollar short, I’m afraid. I hope they don’t think this somehow makes Clinton supporters feel all warm and fuzzy. I don’t know about the rest of ya’ll, but it makes me see red.

  170. mj,

    The Arizona law DOES NOT let the police go door to door asking for papers. It says that when someone is stopped for some violation, THEN the police can check their immigration status.

    Maybe Hillary would consider it the same thing — but pls be careful of playing fast and loose with the facts of what the Ariz law actually says.

  171. So you think Hillary woud be to the right of Meg Whitman on the Arizona law? I respectfully disagree.

  172. mj, You’re absolutely right that Hilllary has ALWAYS been loyal.

    BTW, there was a story in the L.A. Times last month that quoted sources saying Attorney General Holder had decided to file a lawsuit against the Arizona law. So Hillary’s comments didn’t let the cat out of the bag, but she’s the first prominent administration official to say that on the record. So this really isn’t an example of her “going rogue.”

  173. I’m not playing fast and loose with any facts. My point was givin Hillary’s storyline on anti-immgration policies, I think she would find this law creates a similar chilling effect.

  174. So, mj, what are your thoughts with dealing with illegal immigration?

    I have to show ID just about every time I use my credit card. Legal aliens and work visa foreigners are required to keep documentation on them all the time as it is. Do we just want them to lug around paper for the hell of it?

    For the life of me, I can’t understand what anyone would think is the problem with asking someone to prove they are here legally.

  175. I think it’s really sad that individual communities are trying to cope with our broken immigration system. It should not be the responsibility of a municipality or county. This has to be fixed at the federal level. There are lots of strong arguments against turning local police officers into immigration enforcement officials. It has to do with making sure people will report crimes, making sure people will go to the police when there’s a problem. That’s a matter of public safety. It doesn’t always only affect the immigrant community, it affects all of us.

  176. mj, those same concerns exist regardless of who enforces the immigration laws. However, I agree, the burden of enforcing immigration laws should not be thrown over to individual states. It is part and parcel of what the federal government is upposed to do, but that incompetent government is not doing it, and has not done it for 20 + years.

  177. In the world I live in, I never leave the house without ID. To drive, to use my bank card, to cash a check, to get into things at work I can’t do any of these things without ID.

    I am happy to show my ID on a daily basis and prefer to not have my state continue to bleed from the expense of those that did not enter my country legally.

    This argument about it’s being the government’s responsibility would be moot if the government did it’s job. Same thing in the Gulf states that are taking things in their own hands while those ‘in charge’ diddle.

    I find the arguments against Arizona’s immigration law just plain silly.

  178. First of all, if Hillary wasn’t authorized to make those comments, she wouldn’t have. Clearly, the administration had reasons for wanting Clinton to say the suit would be filed. She’s representing Obama here, not her personal opinion. This is something Richard Clarke talked about extensively – when you work for an administration, and you’re speaking for the administration, you advance the administration’s position. That’s your job. If Hillary hadn’t been given the go-ahead on that topic, she would have never mentioned the law suit.

    No one, not even the justifiably and immensely popular Teddy Roosevelt, could win on a third party ticket. Both Obama and McCain had their support in place. In addition, Obama had a $600m war chest and Clinton was in debt. Running 3rd party would have ruined her credibility with mainstream America. It’s a terrible idea and would have been a catastrophic failure that would have ended her career and sullied the Clinton’s place in the history books.

    I don’t think he is running again. There is clearly something very odd afoot and the only thing I can figure out is that he’s not running, but wants to find ways to prevent Clinton from taking the nomination. He’d want to handpick his successor and be a kingmaker. Also, he doesn’t want the Clintons having the historical significance that Hillary winning the nomination and the presidency would give them. He’s not a despot. He’s not interested in controlling things personally from here on out. He would like to hand the presidency off to his buddies though and let them step up to the public money trough in a big way.

  179. Blowme,

    it’s not incompetence that prevents the government from doing it, it’s big business. Our current immigration situation is a great deal for them. They get workers that they can underpay and overwork, that will not report them for their abuses. The money they save on not hiring Americans who’d bust their ass for employment violations, they spend on political campaigns to keep the laws just the way they are. Then they reward their stockholders who also donate to legislators to keep the laws in place.

    This is going to be an extremely expensive law to execute and is going to suck millions and millions of dollars more than it will ever save. it’ll destroy families, wipe out rental property communities, bankrupt small businesses – it’s going to be ridiculously costly and largely ineffective. It’s also unconstitutional in some significant ways.

  180. BA, I think it has much more to do with politics than big business. Business was behind McCain/Kennedy. But the electorate is divided on immigration. I think it’s politics. And, frankly, illegal immigration can not be stopped or reversed. Hillary spoke about this all the time in the primary.

    Hillary isn’t Obama’s mouth piece. She made her comments about taxes for herself. She was explicit about that. In this case, perhaps for some strange reason they wanted Hill to make this announcement, or maybe it was a mix up, but not everything she says is because Obama tells her to.

    We really don’t know why Hillary talked about the lawsuit. It may be they were planning to annouce while she was away and the communication got crossed. But Hillary doesn’t support the Arizona law, the state department said as much today.

  181. In Louisiana, it’s one damned thing after another: James Carville

    Henry Ford once described history as “one damned thing after another.” And he didn’t even live in Louisiana.

    Much has been made of my outburst toward the Obama administration on May 26 on “Good Morning America” when I exclaimed, “Man, you got to get down here and take control of this! Put somebody in charge of this thing and get this moving. We’re about to die down here!” But those emotions had been percolating below the surface like the crude that threatens our way of life today.

    But while it is important to note that the tepid response to this catastrophe is unacceptable, it is also essential that the rest of the country understand that this feeling of neglect has festered amongst South Louisianians for generations. It’s just one damned thing after another, so the anger rising out of the Gulf is not new.

    For too long, the federal government and industry alike has simultaneously abused and neglected, patronized and plundered, and now polluted the people of Louisiana. And our plight is now a national emergency.

    For decades, massive engineering projects across the country have made us more vulnerable. We lose a football field of land every 38 minutes. Since World War II, we’ve lost wetlands the size of the state of Delaware. I bet Joe Biden would be screaming on national television too if it was happening on his turf. Or if the Hamptons lost 16,000 acres a year, you bet there’d be a Million Hedge Fund Managers march on Washington to demand action.

    We feel ourselves ever more vulnerable due to the nonstop degradation of our wetlands, which serve as our first line of defense against hurricanes and powerful storm surge. Their loss has everything to do with activities across the rest of the country, starting with the deprivation of natural sediment that the Mississippi River should carry to its mouth and dump at the Gulf of Mexico to nourish our barrier islands.

    Then the oil companies dredged canals in the marshlands in an attempt to grow an industry that now provides the country with more than 30 percent of its domestic oil and natural gas. Salt-water intrusion killed the marsh. These marshlands provide jobs for tens of thousands of fisherman in an industry that provides over 30 percent of this country’s domestic seafood supply.

    Add that to the fact that we have not seen a single penny of royalties for oil produced more than six miles off our coast. We assume all of the risk, produce seafood and oil and gas, with none of the reward. Yes, $165 billion of royalties have gone to the federal treasury that could go to help repair this pressing issue.

    But there’s more.

    In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, federal judge Stanwood Duval Jr. found that the Army Corps of Engineers had displayed “gross negligence … insouciance, myopia, and shortsightedness.” He continued, “The corps not only knew, but admitted by 1988, that the MRGO threatened human life.” And yet, nothing was done about it until recently.

    And then BP’s Deepwater Horizon disaster hits us with the deadliest combination imaginable of corporate greed and governmental malfeasance. We’ve been lied to by BP at every turn, from oil flow estimates to the existence of plumes to health effects.
    There’s also the blatant malpractice and corruption in the MMS. Free meals, cushy seats at sporting events, and other gifts from the folks they were trying to regulate seemed to cloud the judgment of too many MMS officials to be bothered with protecting the interests of our residents and our way of life.

    So we’ve had two monumental, mostly preventable man-made disasters in five years which brings us to the moment where I said on television the thing that every person who lives south of the I-10,/I-12 corridor agrees with.

    We’ve been abused, neglected and exploited for too long.

    And to be brutally honest, part of my frustration is a sense of personal shame that I have known this was going on for a long time and I was ineffective in making Louisiana’s case in my years in Washington.

    But let me say that it’s now time to draw a line in the alluvial mud. We want our fair share of oil revenues now so that we can protect ourselves. And we want to be treated like we matter.

    We’re not whiners. We produce oil and gas and produce seafood and allow goods to flow freely to the heartland. We assume the risks with little reward.

    In the end, whatever past transgressions by the country towards us or whatever our failures to articulate our plight have been, we should be reminded of the words of Admiral Lord Nelson just before the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805, “England expects that every man will do his duty.” And in this, the most critical hour in our region’s long, tortured, and yet glorious history, let’s remind ourselves that Louisiana expects every person to do their duty.

    This is a struggle for the preservation of our culture, way of life and the land we love.

  182. MJ

    There is no way she brought that up on her own. That doesn’t happen. The administration wanted it announced in a hands off way, no doubt, and that’s what happened. It’s not her department, and she speaks with no authority, unless she was given authority.

    I can’t imagine she supports the law or the lawsuit. I suspect she supports alternative methods of dealing with illegal immigration.

    Did you read Trumka’s comments?

    http://aflcio.org/mediacenter/prsptm/sp06182010.cfm

  183. MJ,

    You’re wrong. It’s business. Period. This is big, big money for Big Agriculture.

    As for what reverses illegal immigration – the lack of available jobs will reverse it. That simple. If people can’t get better paid work here, they’ll stay there – whereever “there” is.

    The problem is that dealing with illegal immigrants once they are here is more expensive than allowing them to stay. They have to be arrested, incarcerated, their personal effects dealt with (which is nightmare for the landlords), the kids, if they are born here, need to be put in foster homes. Then we have to figure where they are from and fly them there – and that involves two federal agents. It’s all well and good to talk about rounding them up and sending them home, but that costs a bloody fortune to do.

    And yes, I know that not everything Clinton says is authorized by Obama. but when she is talking about what another department is doing as part of his administration, it is absolutely authorized. That wasn’t hers to speak out on unless he wanted her to do it.

  184. Posted by Dan Benishek (Profile)
    Friday, June 18th at 12:00PM EDT
    6 Comments

    I am addressing this post to my fellow citizens of MI-01, fellow activists across the country, and especially to Congressional Democrats and candidates currently serving in Congress.

    The word is out; Mike Allen at Politico.com had the story yesterday. This administration is going to push the Senate to pass a cap-and-trade bill this summer. Then, with the same arrogance we have seen before from this administration, they are planning on passing a final bill during the lame-duck session of Congress that follows November’s elections—elections where the people will have spoken and expressed their will regarding the type of government they want, elections that will show incumbents that the people will no longer accept irresponsible government. The writing is on the wall for incumbents from both parties: either listen to the people and only pass legislation with their consent, or suffer the consequences in November.

    This president is going to try to use the lame-duck session to achieve his agenda–transformation of America into a big government juggernaut, in charge of every aspect of our lives. Passage of the cap-and-trade bill will be a blight and burden on this country. Instead of seeing economic recovery, we will sink into the morass that is Europe. Extreme green energy and climate change agendas can bankrupt nations. America does not want to go down this road; this a freight train that must be stopped.

    We have to stop this administration from going forward with this plan and continuing its record of passing legislation against the will of the people through behind-closed-door tactics and political wheeling and dealing. Now is the time for everyone to stand up and say again, “Enough is Enough!”

    I am setting up a Web site with a petition drive for all concerned Americans to urge the Democratic candidates to sign a pledge that says they will stand with you, the people, and not pass this cap-and-trade legislation in such an underhanded manner. This will be their opportunity to show the American people that they are truly on the side of the people, and not against them. If they do not sign this pledge and continue to pass bills against our will, then we must make it clear that the newly elected Congressional Activists who take office in January will work to repeal or refuse to fund these harmful economic monstrosities. We must do it with the health care bill, and if we have to we will do it with cap and trade. It is about time Washington understood that our activism is not going to stop. November will only be the beginning….

    Join me and sign the petition at NoLameDuckTax.com. Express your concern as Americans and activists. Our government should be responsible and accountable, not arrogant and dismissive. Let’s take it back.

    I remain your fellow activist, who would like to serve the people of Michigan’s 1st District as their Congressional Representative. I will be an activist Congressman, standing with this district and our great country, in espousing; “Enough is Enough!”

  185. The Arizona law doesn’t even require any special new proof of citizenship/status. AN ARIZONA DRIVERS LICENCE is sufficient.

    Or a drivers licence from some other state (which required proof of citizenship to get it). Or tribal id, or various other id’s THAT PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE.

  186. The above is strong evidence that he does not intend to run in 2012. If he moves forward in the manner noted above it is a big fuck you to the American People. That will have dire election consequences, and even they cannot cheat their way out of that one.

  187. Months ago some one maybe Confloyd posted a link to a video which had Soros speaking about the global economy and the environment blaming America’s middle class. I’d love to it again before I begin bombarding my Senators with a just say no to cap and trade.

  188. He would like to hand the presidency off to his buddies though and let them step up to the public money trough in a big way.

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

    Or, his buddies, if this puppet wears out, would like to find a new puppet to keep the Clinton faction out.

  189. He would like to hand the presidency off to his buddies though and let them step up to the public money trough in a big way.

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

    Or, his buddies, if this puppet wears out, would like to find a new puppet to keep the Clinton faction out.

  190. Shadowfax
    June 18th, 2010 at 3:33 pm

    The fact that you blog here lets me know that you have some character and greater intelligence than 46% of the country (Obumbles current approval rating). Noonan is an asshat everyday and twice on Tuesdays…..

  191. BA, I don’t follow. GWB wanted to pass immigration reform and he was in the pocket of big business. It was the split electorater that lead to it’s failure, not big business. I agree with you, immigrants have left in large numbers as the jobs have dried up. My point was that it isn’t merely incompetence.

    Frankly, politically, I can not see why Hillary would oppose the lawsuit. It’s pretty common practice in cases like this. Indeed, the government has already won two other similar cases in the past. Looking at this, I should think Democrats would be happy to have this fight because latinos hate the Arizona law, and see it as agaisnt them. They are the POTENTIAL DEMOCRATIC voters most likely to side with a Party in the voting booth over this issue. I think it’s a win for the Democrats.

  192. Shadowfax
    June 17th, 2010 at 10:56 pm
    Did anyone see Greta talking about the possibility of Hillary going rogue?

    She was talking about Hillary spilling the beans that the Obama administration will sue over the Arizona immigration law…
    &&&&&&

    Yahoo had this a b*tch-slapping contest between Guv Brewer and Hillary. I don’t know how much of that is skewed reporting.

  193. Hayward relieved of managerial duties in BP shakeup

    A day after he was grilled by Congress, (…and acted like he was stoned out of his mind, slow-motion on replies with most an, “I don’t recall” answer for almost all questions.) BP chief executive Tony Hayward is being demoted. According to Britain’s Sky News, BP Managing Director Bob Dudley will take over day-to-day oversight of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill while BP’s chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg (he of the “small people” comment) will assume major PR duties. (Yes, you read that right—the BP executive who famously expressed his compassion for “the small people” will be tasked with enhancing the company’s public image.)

    The main reason for the shift is plain enough for anyone who’s been following the spill: BP executives acknowledge Hayward has blown it as the company’s face during the crisis. Svanberg, while defending the BP CEO, acknowledged the Hayward’s comments have not been helpful to the company’s efforts to control fallout from the disaster.

    “It is clear Tony has made remarks that have upset people,” Svanberg tells Sky News. “This has now turned into a reputation matter, financial and political and that is why you will now see more of me.”

  194. I’m sure Hillary opposes the Ariz law and may support the lawsuit against it.

    But imo it’s important to keep the record straight here about what is and is not in the law, instead of making it (and the people of Arizona) seem monstrous (ie, police ‘going door to door’).

  195. In New Mexico, the Secuity of the people and the border is going to be an issue for the Gov race. Right now the Rep nominee is running 2% above the Dem. I really think that the Dem is in a good position right now with 10% undecided. However, in order to win over those 10% to win, she will have to take a position on the Border that appeals to them yet maintains her base. I am waiting to see what position she takes, and the polls that follow.

  196. So to summarize, there are interests who not only WANT immigrants, but WANT THEM ILLEGAL.

  197. Also, according to Rassmasen Polling, a signifcant % of the people in NM support border security, and do not want this state to sanction Arizona for their positon.

    Some of the liberal Dems have tried to push through legislation in Albuquerque restricting our dealings with AZ, but it failed. They are also making a big deal about whether our drivers license are acceptable in AZ. Of course they are, but I always carry my Passport card in case I should lose my mind and want to cross the border (their murder rate is awful). I think, unless nationally, the Dems address the securing of the border, it is going to be an issue for the candidates running in November, and it will be interesting to see how they handle it.

  198. NMF,
    The Arizona law accepts some states’ drivers’ licenses but not others. It depends on whether that state requires you to show evidence of citizenship to get the drivers’ license, and whether Arizona thinks that state requires enough. Better check with Arizona before going there.

  199. turndownobama

    Don’t worry, I always carry my passport card, so I am covered. I would not at all mind carrying my passport if they wanted that. I have to do that when I travel internationally.

    The murders on this side and the otherside of the border have hit the crisis stage, and O needs to do something. But then, as usual he will do nothing. That puts his superduds at risk when they are up for elections.

  200. If we’re grasping at straws in the wind, who at State released this and why?

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

    confloyd
    June 18th, 2010 at 11:32 am
    Look at this, its interesting in that it was released by the state department and it has a detailed map of what country offered what and if it was accepted…its very damning.

    http://still4hill.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/state-department-issues-chart-on-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-response-government-to-government-international-offers-of-assistance/

  201. Strange that just this morning I saw there was an article on how Barry is still seen as a great President in the eyes of the world….(I was still scratching my head then remembered it was the New York Times reporting this, after all…)

    Now I see the exact opposite:

    Mort Zuckerman: World Sees Obama as Incompetent and Amateur
    The president is well-intentioned but can’t walk the walk on the world stage.

    [snip]

    The reviews of Obama’s performance have been disappointing. He has seemed uncomfortable in the role of leading other nations, and often seems to suggest there is nothing special about America’s role in the world. The global community was puzzled over the pictures of Obama bowing to some of the world’s leaders and surprised by his gratuitous criticisms of and apologies for America’s foreign policy
    under the previous administration of George W. Bush. One Middle East authority, Fouad Ajami, pointed out that Obama seems unaware that it is bad form and even a great moral lapse to speak ill of one’s own tribe while in the lands of others.

    Even in Britain, for decades our closest ally, the talk in the press—supported by polls—is about the end of the “special relationship” with America. French President Nicolas Sarkozy openly criticized Obama for months, including a direct attack on his policies at the United Nations. Sarkozy cited the need to recognize the real world, not the virtual world, a clear reference to Obama’s speech on nuclear weapons. When the French president is seen as tougher than the American president, you have to know that something is awry. Vladimir Putin of Russia has publicly scorned a number of Obama’s visions. Relations with the Chinese leadership got off to a bad start with the president’s poorly-organized visit to China, where his hosts treated him disdainfully and prevented him from speaking to a national television audience of the Chinese people. The Chinese behavior was unprecedented when compared to visits by other U.S. presidents.

    http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2010/06/18/mort-zuckerman-world-sees-obama-as-incompetent-and-amateur.html

  202. turndown, your guess is as good as mine as to who released it??? Got any ideas about this? ‘

    CNN/JohnKing….this story of Hillary talking about the arizona lawsuit was the top story….they were pretty much laughing at Hillary?

  203. Here we go- for a tip-toe through the tulips. Soros needs and wants the 33 oil rigs in question moved from the Gulf to begin drilling (for him) offshore in Brazil. Now this is Kabuki theater of the Best kind playing for our benefit. An esoteric exercise watching the players using the legal system convincingly to bring home the bacon to the desired conclusion. Oil Rigs to Brazil. aka ‘Operation Viva Petrobras’. The judges decision will be an indication of which side he is on-
    ____________________________

    Deepwater drilling moratorium is vital to safety, federal officials say in court filing

    The government asserts:

    “The federal government claims the deepwater drilling ban in the Gulf of Mexico is vital to avoid more well blowouts and oil spills, rejecting the argument from some offshore service companies that their business will be harmed.”

    The contention, entered in court records late Thursday, is at the heart of the Interior Department’s answer to a federal lawsuit challenging the legality of the six-month moratorium filed by a group of offshore service companies June 9.

    U.S. District Judge Martin L.C. Feldman is scheduled Monday to hear a motion to nullify the moratorium at least temporarily.

    The companies, led by Covington, La.-based Hornbeck Offshore Services Inc., contend the Interior Department had no facts to justify the ban and ran afoul of federal law governing offshore lease development by failing to balance resource development and environmental protection.

    The suit comes as many industry officials warn a six-month moratorium will mean a much-longer slowdown in the Gulf as deepwater rigs — some of which command prices as high as $750,000 a day — leave the region to take long-term contracts in foreign markets, costing the Gulf thousands of jobs.

    But in its response, the Interior Department said the moratorium is needed as attempts to stop the leak and clean the Gulf continue and as new safety standards are developed.

    “A second deepwater blowout could overwhelm the efforts to respond to the current disaster,” the Interior Department said.

    The response also said adequate facts were present to justify Interior Secretary Ken Salazar’s May 27 report on safety measures in the Gulf, which led to the moratorium.

    The government filing also challenged contentions the moratorium will lead to long-term economic harm. Although 33 deepwater drilling sites were affected, there are still 3,600 oil and natural gas production platforms in the Gulf, the government pointed out.

    “It is clear that plaintiffs are not solely dependent on the 33 affected operating drilling platforms to stay in business for the next six months, nor does the ‘viability of the entire Gulf of Mexico deepwater industry solely on those 33 drilling wells,'” the government response said.

    “The industry for Gulf of Mexico oil production is not as fragile as plaintiffs would have this court believe,” the filing said.

    http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/06/deepwater_drilling_moratorium_1.html#incart_rh
    ______________________________

    Interesting comment here accusing the Administration of altering commission reports to reflect their own agenda: (ie.. memories of Copenhagen and ClimateGate)

    ” I wonder if it will be brought up in court that the commission ordered by obama to decide on this moratorium voted against it, the white house rewrote the report by the commission to say that the moratorium was necessary and left the names of the engineers and scientists on the report like they were in favor of the moratorium.

    At least those folks had to guts to come out in the media and expose what the white house did. Of course the main street media never mentioned it.”

    And a followup post detailing Obama’s agenda:

    Ken Arnold, an engineer and consultant, said the changes went beyond just the drilling moratorium. The Interior draft he looked at included timelines for each safety recommendation. The “bulk” of those recommendations, he explained, were all ones that could be done within 30 days. And most of the longer-term provisions would result in only “marginal increases in safety.”

    Yet when the final report came out, the timelines he saw had been removed, no doubt because they argued against the necessity of a six-month moratorium. Mr. Arnold adds that the Administration’s decision to allow industry to continue drilling “gas injection wells”—which, he says, are no more risky than production wells—only shows the moratorium makes “no sense.”

    “This was a political call; this was not a technical call,” says Mr. Arnold. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has since testified that the call was his. But Robert Bea, from the University of California at Berkeley, who also reviewed the report, told us Interior had sent him a letter that “stated clearly that [the moratorium] had been inserted at the request of the White House.” Mr. Bea pointed out that the Department of Interior is more than equipped to target and shut down specific Gulf operations that might offer safety concerns. There was no call for a moratorium “for industry as a whole.”

    Ford Brett, managing director of Petroskills and also a reviewer, notes that the experts first went to the Interior Department with their concerns. “All they had to do was put out another press release—one sentence long—clarifying that we hadn’t reviewed the drilling moratorium. . . .That didn’t happen.” Only then did the experts go public.

    Matthew Kaminski and Joe Rago of the WSJ Editorial Board discuss the challenges in Afghanistan and Kyrgyzstan, the Left’s panning of Obama’s BP speech, and the early-retiree fiasco.

    As for Ms. Browner’s claim that no one was “misrepresented,” Mr. Brett disputes that. Several reviewers said they had, in fact, received “apology” notes from the Interior Department acknowledging the misrepresentation. “We did not mean to imply that you also agreed with the decision to impose a moratorium on all new deepwater drilling,” read one.

    All of this matters because it offers proof the moratorium was driven by politics, not safety. The drilling ban was not reviewed by experts, and was not necessary to satisfy most of the safety recommendations in Mr. Salazar’s report. It was authored by political actors so Mr. Obama could look tough. A cynic might argue the ban was only added after review precisely because the Administration knew experts would refuse to endorse it.

    A big reason why those experts would have balked is because they recognize that the moratorium is indeed a threat to safety. Mr. Arnold offers at least four reasons why.

    The ban requires oil companies to abandon uncompleted wells. The process of discontinuing a well, and then later re-entering it, introduces unnecessary risk. He notes BP was in the process of abandoning its well when the blowout happened.

    The ban is going to push drilling rigs to take jobs in other countries. “The ones that go first will be the newest, biggest, safest rigs, because they are most in demand. The ones that go last and come back first are the ones that aren’t as modern,” says Mr. Arnold.

    The indeterminate nature of this ban will encourage experienced crew members to seek other lines of work—perhaps permanently. Restarting after a ban will bring with it a “greater mix of new people who will need to be trained.” The BP event is already pointing, in part, to human error, and the risk of that will increase with a less experienced crew base. Finally, a ban will result in more oil being imported on tankers, which are “more likely” to spill oil than local production.

    All this is even before raising ban’s economic consequences, which already threaten tens of thousands of jobs. This is why Louisiana politicians are now pleading with the Administration to back off a ban that is sending the Gulf’s biggest industry to its grave.

    “Mr. President, you were looking for someone’s butt to kick,” said Lafourche Parish President Charlotte Randolph, recently. “You’re kicking ours.” The sooner the Administration climbs down from this pointless exercise, the better for a Gulf that needs real help.

  204. There is no doubt that the economy is in the toilet. In medium-sized cities like Colorado Springs, CO (hardly a Dem bastion), the unemployment rate went up to 8.6% while additional jobs were added. That makes no sense to me. Many people are misreading this statistic as GOOD news. I don’t find anything cheerful about it.

    I have learned so much from this site, as a former Republican turned Independent. Both political parties are stuck on stupid. We need a grassroots effort like the Tea Party Movement, which is derided by Washington elites and trying to be infiltrated by Republicans, to put more ordinary Americans, especially those with military service, into political office.

    I think that there is such a level of cognitive dissonance on the part of Washington elites and Obamabots, that they refuse to admit what all of us know: the Stimulus was never going to work. You can’t bribe debt-ridden local and state governments to hire workers (or census workers) that will just disappear after the money runs out. Not even increasing the funds will make a difference.

    We’re experiencing the economic mediocrity of what socialism has brought to the rest of Western civilization. China and the third world has caught up to us (and we’ve let them) and their low-cost labor is undercutting what used to be a robust manufacturing-based economy. I’m sorry, but now a economy can’t survive for long as just a consumer-based entity. The use of readily available credit has distorted purchasing power to such a point that we even believed that we could give economically unqualified people (even unemployed people) zero down mortgages they could never afford.

    It is no wonder that the debt bomb will be heading for us after it’s done devouring Europe. And with that reality is something other people like basement angel need to understand:

    1. What are very highly educated people supposed to do? Suppose you’re a well-qualified teacher who can’t find a job? Expect the federal government to give you a job when they’re already busy trying to save the current teaching jobs in danger?

    2. How is one supposed to open a new business (and seeking a SBA loan) when the Small Business Administration (SBA) is already backlogged with applications?

    3. How is one supposed to buy a house when they can’t even get a mortgage loan right now (especially with good credit)?

    4. How is one supposed to rent in a very volatile, housing market, when many homes are already close to foreclosue or their owners are upside down in the mortgage?

    5. Where are the damn jobs for teenagers when the immigrants can just offer lower wages to undercut what used to be a ready-made opportunity for younger people to work and learn important job skills and traits?

    6. What are adults supposed to do when they still can’t find a job? Keep on relying on unemployment?

    These questions are part of the unhappy reality we’re facing right now. My family is being hit by a lot of these scenarios. How ’bout yours?

  205. Soros needs and wants the 33 oil rigs in question moved from the Gulf to begin drilling (for him) offshore in Brazil.

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

    Hope you’re right. I’ll even tell him what he can do with them.

  206. mj
    June 17th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
    The thing I think is missing is that I don’t think so-called blue dog Democrats like Claire McCaskill, who just voted to cut off unemployment compensation, reflect Bill Clinton’s approach at all. He wasn’t heartless. That’s the Obama wing. For example, it was Hillary Clinton just weeks ago that said taxes must be raised on the wealthy, that they are not paying their fair share in any sphere, business, personal, etc. And she made the point that that was her opinion, not the administrations. On health care, it was the Republican alternative to Bill Clinton’s proposal that Obama endorsed. I just think the analysis of Sophie Hawkins and some of the others cited here mistake Obama for somehow the big government liberal versus Bill Clinton the small government centrist. Yes, the stimulus seemed large because the government normally doesn’t have to inject that sort of money into the system, but it’s failed because it was actually too small, too much was devoted to tax cuts, and it didn’t target job growth nearly enough. Obama and his administration are incompetent and that’s the major distinction between him and the Clinton’s, not the size of his program proposals. Everyone fooling themselves that Obama is just too liberal are going to be really disillusioned come next fall when they see Congress impose a means test on social security for the first time in history.
    *************************************************************************************

    This big spending, nanny state, government is smarter than the little people attitude is what now poses as the Dem party. The Dem party is no longer the “party of the people” (don’t make me gag). Neither political party is. If you think that Obummer isn’t living large, and not in charge, on our dime, then you’re quite mistaken.

    Yeah, all we need is a “bigger” stimulus. Wow, the federal government is gonna save us from what THEY caused. Who was it that encouraged the housing bubble? What GSE’s (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) encouraged reckless loans which made their way (derivatives) throughout the whole financial sector? Who’s killing small business now with interference and meddling?

    Yeah, go ahead and keep on raising those taxes on the wealthy. Why aren’t the middle class and poor paying, then? What happened to the phrase, “we’re all in this together?” Isn’t that what dear Joe Biden lectured all of us to do, pay our fair share?

    Why is one group of people being targeted when such taxation won’t really make up for what is the true, underlying problem, an overspending, ever enlarging government? If you don’t think that the middle class (and the poor) aren’t going to pay for the reckless, big government socialism approach of Obeyme, think again. We’re all gonna have to “chip in” more for a government that has never, and will never work. Just wait until the Bush tax cuts expire for EVERYBODY and see what kind of economic carnage ensues.

    I don’t know about you, but if I were rich, owned a company, and heard that the federal government was going after more than the 60-70% of taxes that I and all those evil, rich fat cats are already paying for the lazy, entitled rest of America who thinks they don’t have to contribute anything, think again. I won’t hire any more workers. I will restructure my company so that I can make sure as many people can stay employed with me as possible. Or, if such restructuring doesn’t work, I can always out-source (which will be costly in the long-term rather than short-term), or bring in even cheaper labor, to stay afloat. I won’t buy those big ticket items. I won’t participate in the underlying economy.

    You’re missing the boat, mj. Government is the problem not the solution.

Comments are closed.