Chelsea Clinton’s Wedding Day

Musical flowers for daddy and mommy’s little girl on this special day.

Time flies love endures.

She met the boy and the boy met her.

They got each other to hold on to.

The old poet wrote so long ago wrote the words so apt for today:

“Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate.
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And summer’s lease hath all too short a date.
Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,
And often is his gold complexion dimmed;
And every fair from fair sometime declines,
By chance, or nature’s changing course untrimmed.
But thy eternal summer shall not fade
Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow’st;
Nor shall death brag thou wand’rest in his shade,
When in eternal lines to time thou grow’st,
So long as men can breathe or eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.”

Our little girl has grown up.


Fear And Loathing – The Meaning Of The Arizona Illegal Immigrants Law – It’s Not About 2010 Or 2012 (Plus Hillary Clinton, Rangel, And The View)

Why all the fear and loathing from Obama Dimocrats and allied organizations about the Arizona Illegal Immigrants Law? It’s not about 2010 or 2012. It’s about 2010, 2012, 2016, 2020, 2024, 2028, 2032, 2036, 2040 and beyond.

All the cockamamie “demographic destiny” projections/delusions into the future are imperiled by the Arizona law against illegal immigrants. As we pointed out repeatedly in our “Mistake In ’08” series of articles, Democrats, because of crackpot theories by prognosticators, assumed that the future lay with the new Obama Coalition and not the FDR Coalition (which included working class White people). What the Arizona law and the prospects of other states passing similar laws imperils is this warped theory.

Just imagine the torments Obama Dimocrats undergo every day knowing their God Has Bailed. Add to those torments the misery, the cold sweat fear, the dread and paralyzing fear about this: What if all the back-stabbing, all the race-baiting, all the sexism and misogyny, all the JournoList JournoGate collusions, corruptions, and betrayals, all the 10 years of planning, all the dreams and demographics went up in smoke? That’s what the crisis in Arizona is all about.

The “situation comedy” Obama coalition for organizing the Democratic Party for the future was and is an illusion. Now the likely loss of the gamble in favor of the Obama “situation comedy” coalition and abandonment of the FDR coalition (already discredited by polls about the November elections of 2010), has Obama Dimocrats in hysterics.

Senior citizens (who vote in great numbers in midterm elections as well as in all elections) have moved against Obama Dimocrats. “The White Working Class is moving against the Obama Dimocratic Party because the Obama Dimocratic Party opposes their interests.” Other large groups of Americans, particularly political independents, are also moving away from Obama Dimocrats. And for what?

Already, according to the census,

“The estimated time when whites will no longer make up the majority of Americans has been pushed back eight years — to 2050 — because the recession and stricter immigration policies have slowed the flow of foreigners into the U.S.”

The very popular Arizona illegal immigration law (the Arizona law is at 61% support; support for a Mexican border fence is now up to 68%; the percent of voters who say the political class does not care what they think is at 68% too), sure to be duplicated in many other states, threatens to de-accelerate the Obama Dimocrats dream of a “majority minority” country which supposedly would vote for Dimocrats for a thousand years. Again, this was always an illusion because while Latinos and African-Americans might have an “affinity” to vote for Dimocrats, that does not mean they will.

Young people grow older and change their views and African-Americans and Latinos are in many instances, particularly among seniors, socially conservative and just might turn Republican especially as Republicans increasingly court them and field candidates designed to woo these groups (notice the preponderance of women Republicans this year along with Indian-American candidates and Latino Rubio). Even the “creative clueless”, in-between gulps of Hopium, realize the reality of the foolishness they have inflicted on the once great Democratic Party of FDR:

“However, this also reveals a fundamental weakness of the Obama electoral coalition, especially during midterm elections. Turnout is way down during midterm elections, and there is no group where turnout declines during midterms more than it declines among young voters:”

What we are witnessing in the hysteria about the Arizona illegal immigration law is an illusion being seen as the illusion it is and the fear caused by their world falling apart.

No GOTV operation, however strong, can reverse trends on that massive scale. Whatever efforts OFA ends up making will only limit the amount of damage Democrats will suffer by basing their coalition on younger voters and irregular voters.”

Most everyone understands that short term at the very least the Arizona illegal immigrant law and the court decision will help the GOP. Even Jabba the Hut Matthews understands this obvious fact about the very popular Arizona illegal immigrant law:

Today the Arizona court ruling has been appealed to the Ninth Circuit and which ever side prevails will appeal to the Supreme Court. But the ultimate supreme court will be the American people in the elections of 2010 and beyond.

* * * * * *

The shrinking Obama “situation comedy” coalition and the likely doom facing Obama Dimocrats has forced Obama to try to appeal to the Hillary voters. That’s why Obama went on The View today for a dose of Hopium fueled love. We of course laughed ourselves silly when Obama confessed he was not invited to the Chelsea wedding.

Usually, as a perfunctory courtesy many people invite their “bosses” to weddings. Hillary and Bill Clinton could have easily coaxed Chelsea into extending an invitation along with a request to declare whether or not Obama would attend. The request could have been worded in such a way (“many arrangements for security and added costs, etc. etc.”) as to make it clear that it would be best he not attend. But, no invitation was extended. We laughed and laughed.

* * * * * *

Obama is the problem, Hillary is the solution.

“The persistence of Hillary – As secretary of state, Clinton has made an impression across the globe and spectrum.

If you want to find a harsh crowd for an American official, send him – or her – to Pakistan. That’s why reviews of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s stop in Islamabad during her latest dizzying tour of international trouble spots should make us take notice.

Drum roll for Hillary,” wrote Rizwan Ghani in the Pakistan Observer, “because she has hit a home run.”

Hillary, as she is known around the globe, does not earn accolades just for her cheerful smile. She is tough as nails. In fact, she’s much tougher than her boss, President Obama. And her mastery of complicated issues can leave observers’ jaws dangling from their hinges.

The Pakistani daily Dawn spoke of her “Iron fist in a velvet glove,” as it described her taking on Pakistani officials over tense problems, including Afghanistan, the Taliban, China-Pakistan nuclear cooperation, Indo-Pakistani water disputes, and so on.

And that was just one stop on the trip. In South Korea, she sent one of the strongest messages this administration has issued to Pyongyang, and then walked right up to the edge of the DMZ, within inches of nervous North Korean soldiers.

On Afghanistan, no U.S. official can deal more openly and effectively with President Hamid Karzai. And speaking of Afghanistan, remember that Rolling Stone article that got Gen. Stanley McChrystal fired? The piece showed his aides tearing down just about every administration official, but added, “Only Hillary Clinton receives good reviews from McChrystal’s inner circle.”

In fact, Clinton, who was supposed to ignite the flames of conservatives’ hatred, is becoming more popular every day across the political spectrum. [snip]

Since she electrified an audience in Beijing in 1995, declaring that “it is no longer acceptable to discuss women’s rights as separate from human rights,” her run for the presidency and her time as America’s top diplomat has helped girls everywhere aim higher and forced oppressors of women to deal with a woman if they want to speak with America. Her town-hall meetings around the world promote America’s values and human rights.

Clinton, whose approval ratings easily surpass those of the president and the vice president, has acted as something of a bad cop to Obama’s good cop. [snip]

In a Wall Street Journal column, former Delaware Gov. Pete du Pont, a Republican, listed Obama’s troubles and suggested Hillary could prove to be the Democrats’ savior – if not at the top of the ticket, perhaps as Obama’s running mate. (No comment from Biden on that.)[snip]

She would not run against an incumbent Democrat. But it’s too early to know how 2012 will look. If unemployment does not improve; if Obama’s ratings continue to slide; if Obama decides not to run – there are a lot of ifs. But remember, Hillary Clinton is still hitting home runs. And there’s always 2016.”

Who knows?

“As President Obama continues to face grim comparisons to Jimmy Carter, due to the faltering economy and high unemployment rate, the issue of a Democratic presidential primary challenge to him in 2012 is starting to emerge. Just as Carter faced a challenge from the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, there’s a long-shot that Obama could face a challenger too.

If he was to face a challenge, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is best poised to challenge him, according to a new Washington Whispers poll. Some 61 percent said Clinton, a 2008 primary challenger to Obama when she was a New York senator, could beat the president in a primary. [snip]

In our Internet poll, conducted by Synovate-eNation, Clinton was the overwhelming choice to take on and beat Obama across every demographic when compared to four other prominent Democrats, including former Vice President Al Gore. She did very well among the poor, those aged 55-64, families with children, minorities, and the unemployed.”

Internet polls are fairly useless, but what is clear is that Hillary Clinton is the best bet to a resurrect a Democratic Party and the FDR coalition. As we have repeatedly noted

“We have documented our case that (1) the White Working Class along with other core groups of the Democratic Party of FDR have been run out of the party by Barack Obama only to be replaced with a “situation comedy” coalition; (2) the Democratic Party had a chance in 2008 to heal the breach in the FDR coalition caused by Lyndon Johnson’s brave and correct signing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act; (3) Hillary Clinton’s embrace by the White Working Class was the vehicle to heal that breach and Barack Obama would sunder the party to pieces; (4) the elections of 2009 and the Scott Brown election demonstrate the validity of our thesis; and that (5) the Obama Dimocratic Party is doomed to continued failure and the only solution is to reject Obama and his cult in favor of the FDR/Hillary Clinton coalition.”

Healing the breach between the White Working Class and African-Americans was the road to a long lasting Democratic majority. Add Latinos, women, and independents, which Hillary Clinton proved to be popular with in 2008 and the future was golden for Democrats. But instead the Barzinis of the party gifted Obama the nomination and not funny hilarity has ensued.

* * * * * *

As has the Culture of Corruption (this is not about Blagojevich today) which we have only begun to outline. Instead of draining the swamp, as promised by Nancy Pelousy it is a swamp feeding frenzy of corruption with Charlie Rangel as the latest example of corruption and tax cheating.

The swamp is not drained, but deals are cut still. The deals are cut to prevent a full airing of the scams which include tax cheating from the man who wrote tax legislation and rent controlled apartments for private use in a city in need of cheaper rent controlled apartment for the poor.

Like the toxic dispersants sprayed to hide Obama’s Katrina, Obama Dimocrats want to hide Rangel’s misdeeds with dispersant deals in order to avoid accountability in November. Sunshine is a disinfectant and that is why the deal are worked out in the shadows.

The work in the shadows will not hide the greater shadow cast over this November’s elections. The great shadow cast by the gifting of the Democratic nomination to JournoList protected and unvetted Barack Obama will cover the elections in 2010, 2012, 2016, 2020, 2024, 2028, 2032, 2036, 2040 and beyond.


Hillary Clinton Was Right – Barack Obama Is Not Ready And Has Not Even A Little Bit Of Dignity

Our lectures to Republicans work. Someone with brains at the RNC is listening. Hillary Clinton is the powerful Secret Weapon. Weapon deployed:

Deploy the really powerful weapon every time race-baiting is weaponized. Deploy the powerful weapon to expose JournoList JournoGate (remind everyone that Hillary Clinton was the first target of PINOs at JournoList, Sarah Palin was the second target of JournoList). Deploy the powerful weapon to educate the public that there were NO heroes on JournoList – only varying degrees of collaboration in protecting Barack Obama and targeting anyone who vied for votes.

The race-baiting is going to continue, the smearing by Obama and his JournoList creeps will continue, and Hillary is a target of Obama thugs already. The White House knows they have a weaponized Hillary Clinton on their hands and they are getting burned.

It’s ugly and getting uglier. Obama we mean. It’s hard out there for a pimp. Even Michelle Obama is dumping him for a trip to Spain, on his presumed birthday. Perhaps John Kerry will guest Obama on his floating tax dodge. Obama loves tax cheats (Geithner, Daschle) so there is no doubt he will berth at Kerry’s ‘I was for taxes before I was against taxes’ do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do boat, er, ship. Caught, Kerry now is ‘for taxes before I was against taxes.”

Indeed November Starts Now as the chess pieces are aligned on the board and Big Money takes center stage. David Soufflé knows Obama has fallen flat. In a conference today, Soufflé told Obama Dimocrats they are on their own in 2010.

After forcing tough votes on Obama Dimocrats in the House (Captain Crunch Cap n’ trade) in order to “save Obama”, House Dimocrats are abandoned as quickly as Obama’s dad dumped him. In the Senate Obama Dimocrats are going down too because of boob Obama. Young people are running away from their big mistake. Latinos are prepared to siesta too.

The political situation is so dire, Obama is pretending to have financial concerns about paying for his daughters’ college bills (don’t worry Barack, you’ll find another Rezko). Obama has so angered the electorate he doubling up on publicity stunts to pretend he too is sacrificing, that he is “not that far removed from what most Americans are going through.” Ha! So worried about the loss of voters, particularly voters Hillary Clinton appeals to, that Obama is going on an afternoon chat show.

“Pennsylvania Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell advised President Barack Obama against appearing later this week on “The View,” encouraging the president instead to only do “serious shows.”

“I think the president should be accessible, should answer questions that aren’t pre-screened, but I think there should be a little bit of dignity to the presidency,” Rendell said during an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

Dignity? From Barack Obama? The guy who golfs? Ha!

Dignity? Dignity? Dignity?

“Here’s one thing Gov. Ed Rendell (D-Pennsylvania) and Pat Buchanan (R-everywhere) agree on: Pres. Obama should not go on ‘The View.’

Rendell: I think there’s got to be a little bit of dignity to the presidency.

Mika Brzezinski: What are you saying, Ed?

Willie Geist: What a horrible insult to “The View.”

Rendell: I think there are some shows. I wouldn’t put him on “Jerry Springer,” too, right? … I think the president of the United States has to go on serious shows. And “The View” is, you can make a case that it’s a serious show, but it also rocks and rolls a little bit. I’m not sure he has to go on “The View” to be open to questions.”

Dignity? It’s like expecting Michelle Obama to wear something sensible, not cocktail dresses, at every opportunity.

Obama has no dignity. Obama is not ready. Hillary was right.


Dumb Black People

Black people are dumb. They are really, really, dumb. They are as dumb as White People, Yellow People, Green People, Red People, etc., etc. We wrote “Dumb White Peoplel” in March 2008, so now with race and race-baiting so much in the news, it’s time for equal opportunity laughter at Dumb Black People.

In “Dumb White People” we singled out as examples Andrew Sullivan and John Kerry. Oh, how stupid they are and how we have laughed at them through the years. Andrew Sullivan and John Kerry thought the world would change because an African-American, a Black man, a half-Black, half-White guy took George W. Bush’s third term. We warned those lunkheads that naivete in world affairs would not work (“an administration of lies” says Ahmadinejad of “no preconditions” Obama boobery) and that:

“Osama Bin Laden does not care at all if you are African-American, Jewish-American, Irish-American, White-American, Chinese-American, Indian-American, etc. All Osama Bin Laden cares about is that you are American. Then Osama will kill you. Or try to kill you. Osama Bin Laden is post-racial. Kill Americans. It’s that simple. Osama, does not care if you are black or white, ebony or ivory.”

We confess, in moments of undiluted misanthropy we wish Black People would disappear from the entire planet – along with White People, Yellow People, Green People, Red People, etc., etc. Let’s turn the place over to dogs, and cats, and birds, and roaches. Down with people – up with our furry and feathered friends. But we digress.

Mind, not all Black People are dumb, just as not all White People are dumb (ditto the rest of the list). But for Barack Obama the dumb came out of the woodwork, the lemmings ran away from the smart.

Let’s laugh at dumb Princeton professor Cornel West. He has a master’s degree, rather, a doctorate in dumb. Try reading this and not laugh at our dumb black brother:

“Princeton professor (and spoken-word artist) Cornel West has never been shy about publicly sharing his views, whether about race in America, Obama’s Nobel Prize or animal rights. He talks to Playboy for its August issue and is typically candid about what’s going on today with the tea party movement, Barack Obama, FLOTUS and more. [snip]

On what President Obama is doing wrong: “While he’s made some good, positive changes, I don’t think he’s a messiah or even a very progressive politician. It turns out when you talk about hope, you have to be a long-distance runner.”

On Michelle Obama: “I think she’s got a lot of Malcolm X in her, a lot of Ella Baker. [snip]

On “whitewashing within [the Obama] administration”: “What happened to the black elites inside Obama’s campaign, Valerie Jarrett, John Rogers and Eric Whitaker? They’re practically invisible or gone. Instead Obama has a savvy political team — brother [David] Axelrod, Bbrother David Plouffe, brother Robert Gibbs, brother [Rahm] Emanuel — who are eperts at PR. … Black folk can’t be blindsided by Obama’s pigmentation and historical symbolism. What I’m saying is I wish he could be more Martin Luther King-like. … But by necessity, Obama has had to downplay his blackness to appease the white moderates and independents and speak to their anxieties.”

Poor dumb ol’ Cornel. Now he realizes Obama is not “a messiah” nor “a very progressive politician.” These facts did not stop the dumb ol’ progressive from Princeton from endorsing Barack Obama.

As to Michelle “got a lot of Malcolm X in her”, Michelle has all the ugly anger of Malcolm but none of his commitment to community, none of his (often misplaced) strength, none of his history of hard work and intellectual curiosity, none of his ability to question others and himself, none of his ability to learn and grow. Michelle does however have the friendship of Malcolm’s likely killer “the Honorable Louis Farrakhan”. Michelle Obama is more “Malcolm In The Middle” than Michelle X (if you ignore the scowl of her anger). And Ella Baker she surely is not unless we revise Ella Baker into a self-interested, self-obsessed, self-promoting, arugula eating Chicago thug.

Now, the above is Grade A “dumb” but it is this following sentence which catapults Cornel West into “Dumb Black People” status:

“On his current relationship with Obama:

“He doesn’t return my calls. … I did 65 events for my dear brother Barack on the campaign trail but have not seen him since Martin Luther King Day 2008. … I couldn’t even get a ticket to the Inauguration for my mother. … I think he has the kind of disposition where he just moves on.”

Grade AAA dumb. West, the great intellectual from Princeton only now realizes Obama “has the kind of disposition where he just moves on.” That has to go down as one of the funniest/dumbest statements ever. Alice Palmer learned Obama can’t be trusted – he just moves on – and you find yourself under the bus. The Obama stabs in the back are many.

Dumb and Black Cornel West, along with other Dumb Black People (aided and abetted by Dumb White People), fooled themselves into beating themselves. They voted skin color and the skin is now burned by Barack Obama. We wrote it repeatedly: Obama will hurt his supporters the most.

“No, we are not talking about losers like Daschle, Richardson, Kerry. Nor do we refer to the those writhing under the Obama bus like Chris Dodd or Jeremiah Wright.

We are talking about young people and African-American supporters who were ever so fervent in their religious worship of Obama.”

The garbage scow that writes for the New York Times found a ‘Dumb Black People’ to state what we at Big Pink indeed did know – although the ‘Dumb Black People’ of the Dowd article appears surprised by what was ever so obvious:

Who knew that the first black president would make it even harder on black people?” asked a top black Democratic official.”

We knew, that’s who. We knew and we wrote about it back in 2007:

“What use was Obama’s “community organizer” experience to those shivering tenants?

What use was Obama the state senator to those shivering tenants?

What relationships did Obama build during his “community organizer” days that proved useless when he became state senator, and failed to keep him in touch with the community?

What was Obama doing in his plush state senator office that kept him too busy to know that these “struggling families” were without heat “For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997″?

If Obama with all his “community organizer” experience did not know what was happening in his small district office in Chicago, how in blazes does anyone think he will respond to the needs of an American electorate that numbers in the hundreds of millions?[snip]

When it came time to defend the defenseless or protect and enrich the powerful. Obama made a decision. He protected his powerful friends and provided them with even more government money. Same old Chicago politics. The poor shivered in cold tenements. Obama bought a new house. Now he wants a bigger White House to entertain his Chicago friends.”

It is no mystery why we knew Obama would hurt African-Americans and the young – it’s what he has always done. Obama “moves on” after he has used you.

The garbage scow at the Times and the professor from Princeton are nothing in their dumbness compared to – James Clyburn of South Carolina. Dear old race-baiting James Clyburn. What is the race-baiting Clyburn saying now? Is Clyburn still race-baiting Bill Clinton? No. Clyburn sees White People.

Clyburn takes the Dumb Black People magisterial magisterium award for this profundity:

“The president’s getting hurt real bad,” Clyburn told me. “He needs some black people around him.”

Paging Sista Michelle X. Michelle X, cancel that luxury trip to Spain (the one you schemed to go on but you knew you first had to go to dumb ol’ Florida or you’d be criticized for all the vacations you’re taking even as you say you are “not far removed” from American suffering). The brother from Hawaii needs your inner Sista Souljah. He’s exhausted with the job. It’s no longer fun. It’s work.

Stop Michelle X from more vacations. With her scowl and Lanvin sneakers she will appeal to the race-baiters and fight the Uncle Toms.

Damn those Uncle Toms who didn’t drink the Hopium. Damn those Uncle Toms who voted character not skin color. Damn those Uncle Toms who are proud to be Americans. Damn those Uncle Toms who proved to be so smart they never did and never will vote for the flim-flam man from Chicago. Damn those Uncle Toms who turn out to be so smart. Damn those Smart Black People. Get rid of them all.

The last thing Michelle X and Barack Obama want to see is Smart Black People.


Going… Going… Gone

The usually secret warfare by Barack Obama against Hillary Clinton has become open war and direct attacks against Hillary – straight from the Obama campaign apparatus. Yesterday the attacks from the Obama campaign against Hillary (shades of 2008!) became blatant, not disguised, attacks.

We’ve written about the earlier, none too veiled attacks, by Obama and his thugs against Hillary (see Barack Obama At War With Hillary Clinton (And Thank You Andrew Breitbart). In earlier articles we have noted the reasons for the attacks:

“The increasingly wounded animal which is Barack Obama and his Dimocrats are waging a secret war on Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is more popular that Barack Obama and his sleeve yanking wife. Dimocrats are terrified of what the voters will do in November 2010.

The fear of Hillary Clinton is growing. Hillary Clinton is increasingly viewed as a threat because she can be the 44th person to take the oath of office (Grover Cleveland had two non-consecutive terms, so Hillary can be the 44th person to take the oath of office and be 44 still). The secret war has begun.”

The news for Obama gets worse every day. Hillary Clinton grows more missed and more popular and stronger every day. Obama is forced to dispatch an emergency “2012 rescue team” to Florida, according to Politico. Young voters are in need of stronger, greater quantities of Hopium as they begin to join “Obama girl” in detox. The schizophrenia on taxes and deficits is more deranged. The race-baiting continues with diminishing returns. But the race-baiting continues sillier than ever. And even the Nutroots can’t get fired up for the Chicago flim-flam man.

In earlier articles we have noted just how open the open wounds from the Democratic Primary of 2008 are and most importantly, how the anti-Hillary sub rosa Obama attacks are carried out:

“Here’s what we wrote back then in an article called The Republican Secret Weapon – Hillary Clinton:

Republicans and Conservatives should take a clue from Ms Tantaros – utilize the history of the 2008 primaries and what was done to Hillary Clinton to expose the intolerant bullies who pose as progressives.[snip]

Hannity would make a stronger case against Barack Obama if he would invoke the nastiness of the Obama campaign against Hillary and stop the nastiness against Hillary himself.[snip]

Sean Hannity began with a tedious recitation of a Washington Post story published that very day. The Washington Post story was a hit piece against Bill and Hillary Clinton. Hannity saw the article as another opportunity to bash and beat the Clintons. Andrew Breitbart was not a fool however. Breitbart saw the hit for what it was.

Here is a rush transcript from the Hannity show with most of the rubbish about Riady removed so we can get to the Breitbart analysis. Here is the obtuse Hannity parroting the Washington Post hit job: [snip]

HANNITY: All right, Breitbart, Hillary knew nothing. A conspiracy to defraud the U.S. government, you get back in, no problem.

BREITBART: Well, I find it strange that this is coming out after the — what happened with the plane bomber over Christmas. I think what you have here is a case of finger-pointing within the administration. And perhaps some — some turmoil going on between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. This is a huge piece. It’s written very negatively against Hillary Clinton, and there’s innuendo and implications in there that somehow she knew something when it looks like it was the Department of Homeland security that issued this waiver.[snip]

This is a guy who treated a surf board accident with his kid more seriously than he treated the underwear bomber. He went out to play golf once he found out about, you know, what had occurred. But when he found out that a friend’s kid’s chin got a cut on it, he quit his golf outing.[snip]

I think that, quite frankly, Hillary Clinton, if she were in charge, would actually be a hell of a lot tougher than Barack Obama is. And perhaps that’s what this entire article in The Washington Post is about, is that she’s been standing off to the side and allowing for these people to hang themselves with their inept behavior.”

As we wrote then, and Andrew Brietbart understands, this is a secret war waged by Barack Obama against Hillary Clinton. “There is a secret war of attacks by Barack Obama against Hillary Clinton but Hannity is too busy hating to see it. The more Obama attacks, the more coy Hillary Clinton becomes. Her laughter can be heard throughout Washington.”

The Obama people are very much aware that during the health care debacleBill and Hillary say as little as possible and issue bland emails. Barack Obama would like a massive publicity tour of support but Bill and Hillary only say the obvious – a defeat on healthcare will bring the White House columns down on Obama’s already scarred head. When disaster strikes, Hillary dances away to work her magic. She keeps her distance while doing her job and saving the world from the Obama boobery. When Obama has a publicity stunt to unveil, Hillary dances to work in Europe or Asia or anywhere but near the ground zero which is the big zero at 1600 Pennsylvania. Obama and other Hillary haters are beginning to take notice

The Obama campaign is aware of how distanced Hillary keeps herself. The Obama campaign is aware of the contempt many Hillary voters still harbor against Barack Obama. Today as Fox & Friends continued to keep its promise with a new segment into what happened in 2008 during the Democratic primaries the Barack Obama campaign chortled. Today’s segment was in response to yesterday’s Fox & Friends interview with Steve Hildebrand the deputy campaign manager of the Barack Obama campaign when he attacked Hillary Clinton directly.

Hildebrand lied repeatedly about the control and influence Harold Ickes exercised in the Rules and By-laws Committee and did not mention the cabal of Obama operatives (secret and not so secret) that worked against democracy in the process. Hildebrand also refused to acknowledge the legitimate scams and flaws detailed by Hillary supporters and voters. Hildebrand apparently is not aware that elections are about voters, not candidates. Elections are about voters choosing candidates and elected officials – not about candidates. It’s about the voters.

Hildebrand sought to make elections about candidates. In his most direct attack on Hillary Clinton, Hildebrand demanded that Hillary Clinton herself either refute or confirm the statements of the voters and campaign workers who make a strong case against Obama’s thugs and intimidation and other abuses of the process.

Hildebrand also tried to pretend there were no complaints filed with officials (who did nothing for fear of race-baiting and the DNC) at the time. For Hildebrand the fact that Obama JournoListers said nothing about the abuses means the abuses did not occur. For Hildebrand the fact that secret Obama supporters, like Howard Dean and Donna Brazile did nothing about the abuses but pretend to be neutral officials from the Democratic Party, means the abuses did not occur. But those in charge pretended to be neutral but we know they were in Obama’s circus tent – race-baiting:

Hildebrand wants to “smoke out” Hillary Clinton into open warfare with Barack Obama or into a dispute with her own most loyal supporters. As if. Hillary is not that stupid and neither are we. We know the process is fixed. We know that Obama thugs are ostensibly in control at the DNC and the local party organizations. We also all understand we have different roles to engage. Obama shills like Al Sharpton, Howard Dean and Donna Brazile (she kept her job at CNN, Hillary Supporters like Carville were fired) played their “neutral” roles during 2008, but we know what they really were.

(Sharpton, secretly to Obama: “I’m gonna do whatever I gotta do to help you… I won’t endorse you or not endorse you.”). The JournoListers, including some supposed Hillary supporters, played their phony roles. Some are exposed now. But… We are still uncovering, still investigating, still finding out who was who and who was doing what. Eventually we will have a list of all the 2×4 Schumers and the secret supporters and the back-stabbers and those who worked with Ted Kennedy/Daschle/Pelosi/Kerry, in secret, with the JournoListers, to thwart the will of the Democratic rank and file voter. Then we’ll all make our move.

Here’s thug Hildebrand baiting Hillary in yesterday’s cablecast:

Hildebrand and the JournoListers and the PINOs and the rest will attempt to rewrite history and declare that Hillary was in control or influential in the Rules and By-laws Committee. But Youtube documents how delegates elected by voters were stolen by Democratic Party officials to gift the nomination to a man who was not even on the ballot, not even a candidate (and the “rules” respecting votes for those voting in favor of “not committed” were debased and violated as well). The theft was done in the open with JournoListers applauding and secret Obama DNC officials squealing with delight. The voters were robbed. The candidate of the voters was robbed.

The man with one kidney, one vote:

Hildebrand pretends, against the evidence, that there was silence. We didn’t hear silence, we saw injustice and a stolen election.

Hildebrand suggests there was surrender. We didn’t hear surrender, we heard “fight on”:

“If you hear the dogs, keep going.If you see the torches in the woods, keep going.

If they’re shouting after you, keep going.

Don’t ever stop. Keep going.

If you want a taste of freedom, keep going.

Even in the darkest of moments, ordinary Americans have found the faith to keep going.”

The Obama thugs can play their masquerade on the Titanic all they want. We won’t fall for their games and cheap diversions. Hillary supporters will continue to investigate. Hillary supporters will continue to speak out. Hillary supporters will continue to prepare. Then we’ll make our move – when we are ready to do so.

We’ll “keep going” until Obama is going… going… gone.


The Barack Obama Campaign Started “Call Them Racist” – JournoList Followed – And A Shocking ‘Hooray For Tucker Carlson’!

This July has been very hot – politically. Fox & Friends began to broadcast the hitherto uncovered story of Hillary voters intimidated by the Obama campaign in the 2008 primaries. This past week, Tucker Carlson’s DailyCaller began to expose the JournoList JournoGate. The information, and most importantly proof, Tucker Carlson uncovered is that the most trusted news and opinion writers for Democrats did everything they could to protect Barack Obama from examination, and smear all Obama opponents as “racists”.

That the most trusted news and opinion writers, for Democrats, protected Obama – during the Democratic primaries – very much hurt the Hillary Clinton campaign (and eventually McCain/Palin). It was a multiplier effect – the most trusted sources of news for Democrats in the tank for Obama led to protection of Obama and no news about how dirty Obama is. This multiplier effect isolated Democratic voters from the news and questions they needed to hear and therefore they believed the worse about Obama opponents such as Hillary Clinton. More importantly, Obama was not vetted and we now have a destructive force in the White House – destructive to core Democratic values, destructive to government, and destructive to the United States.

But this story goes much much deeper. It’s Friday so we will postpone a longer discussion of these issues (including what it means for a primary challenge to Obama in 2012) until next week. What we will discuss today is that the race-baiting and “call them racist” strategy began with Barack Obama, the Obama campaign, and that JournoList shills only followed in the race-baiting footsteps of Barack Obama. The JournoList fish began to rot from the Obama top.

Some of the most unobservant commentators will deride the Barack Obama race-baiting as old news which calls for more flowery words and lectures on race from the race-baiters (“It’s all been forgotten, which presents us with a teachable moment on race.”)

These not-to-swift back-yard correspondents apparently have failed to note that race relations under Barack Obama are getting worse, not, as promised by Mess-iah Obama and his acolytes, an expanded electoral map of limitless Dimocratic victory and a post-racial future of bliss and “ebony and ivory” harmony. Shirley Sherrod’s race-baiting and the anti-Tea Party race-baiting by the NAACP must not have penetrated the D.C. bubble of these bobble-heads. The “it’s his face” and race, dumb white people have not noticed the news headlines of late:

“In suing Arizona over immigration reform, he takes a step that alienates the three-quarters of Anglo voters who back the law. In refusing to prosecute the Black Panthers for their blatant intimidation of white voters in 2008, he alienates fair thinking people of both races. But in firing Shirley Sherrod, he showed African-Americans that he was caving in to pressure from FOX News and the conservatives. Then, by reversing field and reinstating her, the president and his Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack show whites and Republicans-Independent voters that he is caving in to pressure from the African-American community.

There are two common denominators to this equation: race and weakness. Any involvement in racial politics has to hurt Obama at his core. It goes to his fundamental selling point: That he is post racial.”

But that post-racial future was all part of the con job Chicago’s Barack Obama engaged in. Obama posed as a “uniter not divider” but Obama has always been ‘all racial, all the time’. Which brings us to Tucker Carlson.

In 2009, after the election, Tucker Carlson told a truth. The truth should have been told back when it mattered – when voters were voting. Carlson kept quiet during the elections, just like the JournoList participants. But to his credit, Carlson came clean in 2009 – when it was too late. In a two part series called The Obama Race-Baiting History – And Other Truths Emerge we transcribed what Tucker Carlson said to Greta Van Susteren.

Almost no one (other than Hillary Supporter web sites) noted the remarkable exchange and what Carlson said. Now, those chickens are coming home to the stinking Obama roost. We wrote:

“Yesterday Tucker Carlson finally broke down and confirmed that yes indeed, the duo he hates – Bill and Hillary Clinton were purposefully smeared by race-baiting Obama and his campaign operatives. Obama thugs continue to race-bait.

Here’s Tucker Carlson on Obama race-baiting and the smearing of Bill and Hillary Clinton:

Our transcript of Tucker Carlson’s remarks:

Tucker Carlson: “For Barack Obama to say that the media has taken the low road when many of his allies have accused his opponents of racism… and where was he when they did? When Clyburn of South Carolina accused opponents of racism… when Charlie Rangel did the same… when Governor Paterson of New York… you heard not a word from Barack Obama.

So, you know, it’s a little much for him to claim that the media is stoking this race talk.

[snip – discussion of Joe Wilson and the definition of “news”.]

But let me just say, very clearly, it was the Obama campaign that first bought up the race question. It was the Obama people who smeared the Clintons as racists, Bill and Hillary Clinton. They made the case to reporters off-the-record, including me, that the Clintons were racists. They started this.

So for him to get up with a straight face and say the media is bringing this race issue up… No, it was your campaign that started this.

Greta Van Susteren: How did they bring it up?

Tucker Carlson: By this whisper campaign. That Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton were somehow opposing Barack Obama because they did not like the fact he was black. And that various statements they made, remember Hillary Clinton famously said that of course it was Lyndon Johnson who signed the Civil Rights Act, you know. Martin Luther King might have advocated for it but it was the president who signed it.

Somehow that became a racist statement according to allies of Barack Obama. He didn’t tell them to be quiet then. He allowed that to happen. Allowed, I think, the slur against the Clintons to fester. That they were somehow animated by bigotry was outrageous. And he did nothing to clear the air.

So, I don’t know… I don’t want to be lectured by him, at this stage, as a member of the media, in a sanctimonious way. That somehow we’re perpetuating unhealthy race talk. That’s nonsense.”

We don’t need any more “teachable moments” from race-baiter Barack Obama. What we need from him is a confession of what he has done and a resignation.

We don’t need any more opinions or words of any kind from the JournoList shills. What we need is a mass firing of these shills for not providing the information Democratic voters needed in the primary elections and the information all American voters needed in the general elections.

The JournoListers who protected Barack Obama also protected spiteful clowns like Keith Olbermann and MSNBC. In private JournoList participants knew that Keith Olbermann was a sexist and a misogynist. In a political year in which a woman ran during the primary elections and a woman ran during the general election season the fact that a main source of information for center and left of center Democrats is a misogynistshould have been disclosed. But the JournoList shills protected Barack Obama and NBC and MSNBC.

“Julian Zelizer, a Princeton professor and CNN contributor, said Olbermann’s root problem is his misogyny. “I can’t take him anytime. I think to write off his mysogyny (sic) as limited to Musto is just not accurate. That very much defined much of how he talked about Clinton as well as others.”

Zelizer was referring to a series of instances during the primary campaign between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama when critics from both sides of the aisle criticized Olbermann for allegedly sexist treatment towards Hillary. Olbermann was forced to apologize.”

Yes, there was some slight discussion of Olbermann’s misogyny. Olbermann after all at one point suggested Hillary needed to be taken to a back room and physically assaulted and his playmate, the balding David Shuster declared Hillary was a pimp and Chelsea was a whore (this because Chelsea was a surrogate speaker for her mom). There was no “call them sexists” campaign of exposure in this case against a batch of genuine sexists and misogynists which almost held a monopoly on Democratic discourse.

There was no “call them sexists” campaign from JournoList because to them women are second class hos who can be sacrificed for the greater “good”:

“Or, as then Harper’s editor Luke Mitchell put it, “Olberman is irritating and his obvious sexism is reprehensible. But yes, someone going on TV and saying that torture is bad is a net positive.”

That “he’s a sexist but… a net positive’ is a short version of what we wrote about in Hillary Clinton And Sarah Palin Versus Mel Gibson And Hendrik Hertzberg (And Bonus Sunday Special: Fox News Finally Weighs In On The Democratic Primaries 2008).

It is very easy to see race as the greater oppression when you remove 90% of violence against woman from the equation. The daily beatings and denigrations against women, even unto today, are not considered “oppressions of gender” by Hertzberg and his ilk. Slave rape is considered a “race” crime not a gender crime. Wife battering is considered a “personal mistake” not part of the “oppressions of gender”. Verbal abuse of women in the vilest forms is tolerated as long as the “N” word is not invoked.

Hertzberg’s ilk includes people like Howard Dean and Chris Matthews. Many Republicans will soon join Hertzberg and Dean and Matthews in “oppressions of gender” against Sarah Palin.”

We were all JournoListed. It was Hillary Clinton who was the first target, Hillary Supporters the secondary target, Republicans and conservatives were tertiary targets. We can also picture the discussions of Big Pink (Tucker Carlson, pretty please, can we see those?) by the JournoListers.

JournoList succeeded in the goal of electing Barack Obama. But as Bob Dylan wrote “Tonight you got the power to take it. Tomorrow you won’t have the power to keep it.” Already the grasp on power is failing fast and the weak and unvetted Obama falls as all his liabilities flash out like a pervert in a trenchcoat. His approval numbers on the economy begin to reflect the boobery we all see. The Arizona race-baiting gambit has failed in the court of public opinion and is faltering in the courts of law.

November is coming. The subpoenas will follow. Only then will we get the answers we have not gotten in the Chicago trials of Rezko and Blagojevich. Only with subpoenas will we get the answers JournoList sought to conceal.


‘Call Them Racists’ – The New Racism And The Political Importance of JournoList JournoGate; JournoLister Ben Smith’s Delusions; And Scooter Libby

The “New Racism” like the New Black Panther Party is a political phony smear utilized to destroy political opponents. Likewise, the JournoList JournoGate story is important because it is the indisputable evidence of a “vast Hopium Guzzler conspiracy” – a Big Media CARTEL to destroy anyone who opposed and opposes Barack Obama by smearing them as “racists!”

No longer is racism confined to Eliza slavery narratives and segregation horror of dogs, water cannon, lynchings and rape. Now “racism” is shouted when a 25 year old African-American multi-multi-millionaire basketball player leaves the team and the team owner is upset thereby opening himself to the charge of being a “slave master” and the super rich player a “runaway slave”. The “New Racism” is a parody which dilutes actual racism.

The JournoList JournoGate scandal is also a worry to Superstar race-baiter Barack Obama. The loss of “good will” (to borrow from trademark law) associated with the negative term “racist”, the tarnishment and dilution of his weapon of choice for 2012 – the race card – makes it that much more likely that a challenge in 2012 will occur. If the race card loses its value entirely, a possible challenge from within the Democratic Party can emerge (we’ll have much more of this soon). No longer will African-American supporters be labeled “racists” or “self haters” or “racist enablers” for their courageous support of Hillary Clinton. White Hillary Supporters likewise can engage in political activity without the smear “racist” hurled. The race card wall is the only defense left for Barack Obama and his army of JouroList Hopium Guzzlers and the dreams of 2012.

The JournoList JournoGate is an indisputable fact about the Pro-Obama, Anti-Hillary, Anti-McCain/Palin Big Media bias during the primaries and the general election.

Some of the less than functioning are saying “so what” about the Dailycaller story. Their defense is that the JournoListers were known progressive op-ed people. But these dolts are clearly not reading the story with any precision. This sentence from the DailyCaller article should silence them if they have any honesty left or any brain cells functioning:

“Hayes urged his colleagues – especially the straight news reporters who were charged with covering the campaign in a neutral way – to bury the Wright scandal.”

The Big Media cartel is in coordinated defense mode even as the various Hopium Guzzling members employ the Sergeant Schultz defense “I know nothing!” When the JournoList JournoGate scandal began to unravel Ben Smith pretended as if it was all new to him even though he was a long time participant in JournoList. It was just like the W. Bush days when Tim Russert and other Big Media obfuscaters pretended they where not privy to secret facts about Scooter Libby. Tim Russert was “central to the CIA leak case” which involved Scooter Libby but Russert pretended he was Sergeant Schultz (Russert also pretended he was Sergeant Schultz during the Don Imus “ho” scandal).

Instead of telling the truth when the JournoList JournoGate scandal began to unravel with the Weigel scandal, Ben Smith played dumb to dumb down his readers:

“Weigel first had to apologize for a tweet expressing incomprehension of “bigots” who oppose same-sex marriage. He’s now apologized for intemperate, leaked emails sent to a large, private listserv started by his Washington Post colleage, Ezra Klein. [snip]

I quoted him in 2008 as the leading expert on strange Obama smears. He also comes from the Washington tradition of responsible, ideological reporting at places from Reason to The American Prospect that don’t require the sort of formal, careful neutrality that traditional newspaper reporters (like me) grew up with.[snip]

There’s a broader debate in journalism right now over whether reporters should strive for neutrality at all, or whether they should bring their own views and experiences into their writing. The Post’s Klein, Weigel, and Greg Sargent (along with the fired Dan Froomkin) are the latter model, along with those at newer outlets from TPM to the Breitbart empire. Most of the rest of the Post’s political reporters, and most of us at POLITICO, are the former. My personal view is that ideological and neutral journalism can flourish side by side, each going places the other is unwelcome, and each correcting for the other’s weaknesses. (And neutral reporters don’t have to be allergic to ideology: I’m on Journolist, Klein’s off-record listserv; I also get in on private conservative conversations when they’ll have me.)[snip]

One thing nobody argues is that publications should misrepresent and misidentify their own reporters.”

Ben Smith thinks he is objective? He has guzzled so much Hopium he can be classified by the DEA as a drug mule. Ben Smith did not report about JournoList until this week and did not tell his readers what they needed to know – facts he knew about back in 2008 and which he did not report in 2008. Ben Smith was on JournoList as were many of Politico’s supposedly “straight news” reporters but not one wrote in 2008 or ever about the strategy of JournoList participants to label as “racist” those who discussed Jeremiah Wright and were not duped by Obama’s “race speech” which did not answer any of the questions raised about Obama’s 20 years plus relationship with the toxic reverend.

Yesterday Ben Smith continued to deceive his readers and Politico continued to deceive their readers.

I was surprised to read on The Daily Caller yesterday that a POLITICO colleague of mine was among those “participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.” [snip]

So I asked Zenilman, my former assistant on this blog, who left POLITICO in November 2008, what he’d written. He dredged up the e-mails, which came in response to others’ angry comments about ABC’s moderation of a presidential primary debate. (Carlson also sent them to VandeHei.) [snip]

The sloppy line in The Daily Caller, though, gets at a real, and reasonable, concern that I’ve heard from readers and commentators: A handful of POLITICO reporters, myself included, were members of the now-defunct listserv, which has been portrayed at times as a kind of cabal aimed at, among other goals, doing physical harm to Matt Drudge and Rush Limbaugh and destroying Fox News. (POLITICO was also the first publication to report on the list, much to the dismay of some of its participants, and that piece remains a useful explanation of what Journolist was.)

As I’ve written before, my view is that I’ll listen in on any conversation that I’m allowed to listen in on. [snip]

But I’m also sensitive to the perception from readers that, in particular, admission to a conversation itself reflects some kind of tacit stamp of ideological approval, though participating in that list certainly didn’t require any overt test. I asked POLITICO editor-in-chief John Harris for his thoughts on the question.

“I understand why people are troubled. The very fact that you’re let on suggests that they’re accepting you into a club,” he said, adding that he had not “seen anything on Journolist that compromises POLITICO.”

“I knew you were on it, I knew Mike Allen was on it,” he said. “It seemed appropriate to me to have you following a conversation where you might learn something germane,” he said, adding, that he understood, accurately, that we were there “more as observers than as participants in an ideological conversation.”

But Harris also said he agrees with Andrew Sullivan’s criticism of the list, which is more intellectual than ethical.

“[S]ocialized groupthink is not the answer to what’s wrong with the media. It’s what’s already wrong with the media,” Sullivan wrote.

Harris said he worried about “cliquishness” and “groupthink.”

“This is true for reporters and even for ideological commentators: You don’t play on one team or another — you play on your own team,” he said.

I don’t have particularly strong feelings on where and how ideologues should have conversations with one another, and it doesn’t seem like a terribly pressing issue. The list was free of the sort of effective coordination some critics allege, and many of its participants disagreed with one another bitterly, while others on the list mostly lurked silently. I can’t recall any substantive difference between what people wrote privately and publicly. Like many private e-mail conversations, it had no shortage of stray inflammatory and ill-advised comments, and many, many more mundane ones.

I’d add only one thing: I never found out any good secrets on Journolist. It wasn’t that kind of list. But to get the flavor of it, you can read conversation that mirrors it on Twitter. That platform — although it’s in principle open and democratic — in fact reflects more or less the same virtues of hashing out ideas and the dangers of the herd mentality.

Ben Smith is either delusional or a liar. He says he never found any “good secrets” at JournoList nor was he troubled by the “groupthink”. He apparently found nothing “germane”. But the fact remains that a coordinated campaign to label Hillary Supporters and any opponent of Barack Obama as “racists” – by the Left wing of the journalism establishment! – is one hellava story – if Ben Smith had reported it at the time of the “bitter and clingy” Pennsylvania primary!

Ben Smith pretends JournoList was a silly collection of Drudge and Limbaugh haters and killers but the story is much more nefarious than the strawman Smith builds then knocks down. We corrected the not functioning link in the Ben Smith article which he claims as some sort of badge of honor for Politico because they were “the first publication to report on the list”. What Ben Smith fails to mention is that that “report on the list” came in 2009 well after the information would have been useful to the Hillary Campaign and the McCain/Palin campaign.

The article from 2009, (written by Michael Calderone, who’s beat was the Media) which Ben Smith lauds is quite comic as a defense:

“For the past two years, several hundred left-leaning bloggers, political reporters, magazine writers, policy wonks and academics have talked stories and compared notes in an off-the-record online meeting space called JournoList.

Proof of a vast liberal media conspiracy?

Not at all, says Ezra Klein, the 24-year-old American Prospect blogging wunderkind who formed JournoList in February 2007. “Basically,” he says, “it’s just a list where journalists and policy wonks can discuss issues freely.” [snip]

But some of the journalists who participate in the online discussion say — off the record, of course — that it has been a great help in their work. On the record, The New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin acknowledged that a Talk of the Town piece — he won’t say which one — got its start in part via a conversation on JournoList. And JLister Eric Alterman, The Nation writer and CUNY professor, said he’s seen discussions that start on the list seep into the world beyond. [snip]

Last April, criticism of ABC’s handling of a Democratic presidential debate took shape on JList before morphing into an open letter to the network, signed by more than 40 journalists and academics — many of whom are JList members.

But beyond these specific examples, it’s hard to trace JList’s influence in the media, because so few JListers are willing to talk on the record about it.

POLITICO contacted nearly three dozen current JList members for this story. The majority either declined to comment or didn’t respond to interview requests — and then returned to JList to post items on why they wouldn’t be talking to POLITICO about what goes on there.”

Calderone should have talked to Ben Smith, or Mike Allen, or Laura Rozen. To his credit, Calderone did disclose some of the JournoList members such as Allen and Smith. But Mike Allen who has been lauded repeatedly as the “most influential journalist in DC” never confessed the secrets of JournoList when it mattered. Indeed Calderone mostly focuses on the opinion writers of JournoList but downplays that “straight news reporters” were members of JournoList. These many “straight news reporters” failed to mention the “call them racists” strategy but neither Calderone, nor Smith, nor Allen thought that race-baiting was news.

We need a full list of the “straight news reporters” who failed to inform their readers of the pro-Obama race-baiting “call them racists” strategy that was deployed against Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton and John McCain and Sarah Palin:

“One byproduct of that secrecy: For all its high-profile membership — which includes Nobel Prize-winning columnist Paul Krugman; staffers from Newsweek, POLITICO, Huffington Post, The New Republic, The Nation and The New Yorker; policy wonks, academics and bloggers such as Klein and Matthew YglesiasJList itself has received almost no attention from the media.

A LexisNexis search for JournoList reveals exactly nothing.

As we noted in our previous article, the Head Kook of DailyKooks killed a newsworthy story about his friend and business partner Jerome Armstrong (both were involved in the politically equivalent variant of a “pump and dump” scheme which mimicked the real life stock “pump and dump” scam Armstrong was prosecuted over) using a listserve called Townhouse. The difference between Townhouse and JournoList is denied but the denial is an obvious lie:

“Several members volunteered that JList is unlike listservs such as Townhouse, the private, activist-oriented group formed by liberal blogger Matt Stoller.

“No one’s pushing an agenda,” said Toobin. [snip]

John Judis, a senior editor at The New Republic, described JList in an e-mail as “a virtual coffeehouse” where participants get a chance to talk and argue.[snip]

“It’s sort of a chance to float ideas and kind of toss them around, back and forth, and determine if they have any value,” said New Republic associate editor Eve Fairbanks, “and get people’s input on them before you put them on a blog.”

Indeed, the advantage of JList, members say, is that it provides a unique forum for getting in touch with historians and policy people who provide journalists with a knowledge base for articles and blog posts. [snip]

Alterman said it’s important that there are “people with genuine expertise” on the list.”

Comically, Calderone does discuss the JournoGate scandal to come:

“But what if all the private exchanges got leaked?

That’s been the subject of some JList conversation, too, as members discuss the Weekly Standard’s publication of a 2006 e-mail posted to the private China Security Listserv by diplomat Charles Freeman, who last week withdrew his name from consideration for a top intelligence job.

Michael Goldfarb, a former McCain staffer and conservative blogger who published the e-mail, was not part of the China list and therefore hadn’t agreed to any off-the-record rules.

Asked about the existence of conservative listservs, Goldfarb said they’re much less prevalent.

There is nothing comparable on the right. E-mail conversations among bloggers, journalists and experts on our side tend to be ad hoc,” Goldfarb said. “The JournoList thing always struck me as a little creepy.

Kaus, too, has seemed put off by the whole idea, once talking on BloggingHeads about how the list “seems contrary to the spirit of the Web.”

“You don’t want to create a whole separate, like, private blog that only the elite bloggers can go into, and then what you present to the public is sort of the propaganda you’ve decided to go public with,” Kaus argued.”

It’s creepy because it’s a CARTEL. A cartel, which like Townhouse, suppresses news. It’s a cartel which produces propaganda and suppresses news and information.

As to the “expertise”, that is a fiction. A law professor “expert” on JournoList suggested Fox News be suppressed with coercive government action on a list populated with those protected by the First Amendment. The “expertise” consisted of incorrect and silly understanding about cable television as opposed to broadcast television (and don’t miss Bloomberg’s Ryan Donmoyer’s hysteria and ahistorical musings).

The members of the Big Media Cartel that did not inform readers of the race-baiting JournoList should be fired. There is no excuse for those who failed to live up to the First Amendment responsibilities while enjoying First Amendment protection when they failed to report about the “call them racists” strategy.

“Hayes urged his colleagues – especially the straight news reporters who were charged with covering the campaign in a neutral way – to bury the Wright scandal.”

The list of those who should be fired is being compiled:




Ben Smith and fellow Hopium Guzzler might defend themselves with the “no news” about race-baiting “call them racists”, “ignore Wright” defense. But other Big Media outlets realize Ben Smith and the Hopium Guzzling he represents is wrong and violates the spirit of the First Amendment. Race baiting is news and it is wrong:

“Excerpts published Tuesday by a conservative online news site suggest that a group of journalists from the mainstream media discussed ways to shield Barack Obama from criticism during the 2008 presidential election.

Among the strategies put forward: call conservative critics racists.”

SORRY – WRONG AGAIN. It was Hillary Clinton supporters targeted by the “call them racists” strategy. Yes, the names the JournoList participants invoked were Fred Barnes and other Republicans, – but this occurred in the context of the Pennsylvania DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY. THE TARGET WAS THE HILLARY CLINTON CAMPAIGN. The race-baiting which we began to discuss long, long ago (see HERE for “the Obama campaign and its supporters, well-prepared to play the “race-baiter card” launched it with a vengeance when Obama ran into dire straits after his losses in New Hampshire and Nevada” article by Sean Wilentz) is ongoing:

“Now, conservative commentators are pointing to the JournoList excerpts as proof that the mainstream media collude to promote a liberal agenda, play the race card, and discredit conservative movements like the tea party.

“The [JournoList] is troubling,” says Jim Campbell, a political science professor at the State University of New York (SUNY) in Buffalo. “At one level it could be thought of as just colleagues throwing ideas out to one another, but from another standpoint it almost looks like collusion … where virtual talking points are shared and solidified in a group.”

That can’t be healthy for the country – or for the media, for that matter,” he says.

JournoList: What is it?

The list was created by the Washington Post’s Ezra Klein and, and several hundred self-described liberals joined before it was shut down recently.[snip]

When conservatives were criticizing Mr. Obama for his connection to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright in 2008, some JournoList members discussed a counterstrategy.

The Daily Caller writes that Spencer Ackerman, then of the Washington Independent, “urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Mr. Ackerman wrote, ‘Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares – and call them racists.’ “

The JournoList story is a great scoop for the Daily Caller, but doesn’t necessarily indicate a broader media conspiracy, says Mike Hoyt, editor of the Columbia Journalism Review. [snip]

To conservatives, a smoking gun

To some conservatives, however, the Daily Caller excerpts are a smoking gun, showing that the media is not a neutral arbiter in refereeing racial spitball fights like the one that has broken out between the NAACP and the tea party.

What the Daily Caller has unearthed proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that most media organizations are either complicit by participation in the treachery that is JournoList, or are guilty of sitting back and watching...,” writes conservative firebrand Andrew Breitbart.

Such criticisms are fair, says Professor Campbell at SUNY Buffalo.

“To some extent [some] media have been successful in [playing the race card],” he says. “You have people now talking about the tea party and others in terms of this race issue, and that in itself deflects from what the tea party people are really concerned about, which is out-of-control federal spending and excessive intrusion of government. To the extent that the press, even by suggesting that race is an issue, if it gets everybody talking about the tea party in those terms, they have been successful.”

At the same time, Campbell says, the race card may have been so overplayed that it no longer has much of an effect on how Americans think or act.

“I think a lot of people don’t take it very seriously anymore,” he says.”

Real racism is diluted and real racism victims are hurt by the race-baiting in defense of Chicago’s Barack Obama. The question which remains to be answered is whether indeed the race card has been so diluted that Obama cannot use it in 2012 or in a possible primary challenge.

That question remains to be answered (and we will attempt to answer it soon). What we do know now is that JournoList JournoGate helped kill the Jeremiah Wright story at a moment of great peril for Barack Obama. We do know that JournoList JournoGate had no qualms about government force against Fox News and that the alleged post racial America to be ushered in by Obama is now the all-racial-all-the-time cesspool many of us warned about (how long before Charlie Rangel, or his supporters, decides to race-bait?). We do know that the “Obamagasms” of election night 2008 by JournoGate JournoList turned many brains to “jelly” (Michael Tomasky – “I’m just jelly. Lord!).

We know that the latest JournoList JournoGate revelations about Sarah Palin involve Hillary Clinton:

“Ed Kilgore, managing editor of the Democratic Strategist blog, argued that journalists and others trying to help the Obama campaign should focus on Palin’s beliefs. “The criticism of her really, really needs to be ideological, not just about experience. If we concede she’s a ‘maverick,’ we will have done John McCain an enormous service. And let’s don’t concede the claim that [Hillary Clinton] supporters are likely to be very attracted to her,” Kilgore said.”

The very people who tried to kill the Wright story during the Pennsylvania Democratic primaries dared preach about what Hillary Supporters thought. The sexists and misogynists who race-baiting for Obama over Hillary then sought to claim that the McCain choice of Sarah Palin was “sexist. Sarah Palin knows these are “sick puppies” – Hillary needs to understand the same thing. Avi Zenilman, the Politico co-worker of Ben Smith, the one Ben Smith found no problem in participation in JournoList wrote:

“Zenilman of Politico, a purportedly nonpartisan journalist, weighed in with tactical advice: “The experience attack is a stupid one. It’s absolutely the wrong tack — the tack that McCain took when he was losing, and that Hillary and Biden took all primaries.” Zenilman said Wednesday he was offering “typical offhand political analysis.”

Some right-wing bloggers and left-wing idiots might delude themselves that this was all “political analysis” by opinion writers (of course you have to ignore the Chris Hayes quote from above). But this was news suppression and a cartel seeking to control the news Americans heard.

This left wing cartel was even more effective than the right wing imagines because these were the writers most Democrats voting in the Democratic primary read for their “news”. But it was not news. It was pro-Obama propaganda which hurt Hillary Clinton’s campaign and smeared Hillary Supporters all.

The right wing probably does not care about the smears against Hillary Supporters. But if we all don’t learn from the race-baiting of 2008, we’ll never get the leaders we need.

We don’t intend to forget, nor shut up about JournoGate and the race-baiting of 2008.


Hillary Was Smeared First – DailyCaller, Race-baiting JournoList, And DailyKos DailyKooks – The Big Media/Big Blog Cartel

What we said about the Black Panther case and the voter intimidation and Obama caucus scams: only now are we beginning to get the facts and understand what really happened in 2004-2008 and “Hey Republicans, it all happened during the Hillary Clinton campaign in 2008. Don’t you get it yet?

DailyCaller does the nation a great service today. DailyCaller posts some hidden history from the Democratic primaries of 2008 via the private emails of “JournoList” – which confirms and expands on our analysis of the 2008 elections. The secret history is of a kind with an earlier, no-longer-secret history, of the DailyKooks and the suppression of another scandal.

On November 12, 2007, we published “Big Media Party”. We noted that Big Media was in form and function more a political party than a news dissemination enterprise. As the primaries developed Tim Russert took the lead along with the rest of Big Media blowhards in taking down Hillary Clinton (then McCain, now Palin). Barack Obama was so incompetent and not up to the job of defeating Hillary Clinton that Tim Russert was repeatedly called Hillary’s “toughest opponent” on the debate stage. On the day after the November election we wrote “Big Media Elects Its Stooge” because the election was a triumph of the Big Media Party not the boob candidate and boob occupant of the White House known as Barack Obama.

With the now uncovered JournoList postings and the earlier DailyKooks postings it is also clear that the Big Media Party is also a Big Media/Big Blog CARTEL. Suppression of the news is their business. These “journalists” and Big Blog Boys should be prosecuted for their behavior and news suppression. We explain below.

* * * * * *

Call it what it is: a Cartel. Form follows function

“It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic,
Of all things physical and metaphysical,
Of all things human and all things super-human,
Of all true manifestations of the head,
Of the heart, of the soul,
That the life is recognizable in its expression,
That form ever follows function. This is the law.”

Call it what it is a cartel:

“Cartels are agreements between most or all of the major producers of a good to either limit their production and/or fix prices. Cartels are generally illegal in the United States.”

The Big Blog Boys and the participants in JournoList are members of a cartel engaged in suppression of the news. The Big Blog Boys and the participants in JournoList come from many Big Media business enterprises, many publications, many broadcast outlets, many different companies, many different corporations, many different conglomerates – and they all conspired to suppress the news at their various business outlets. If a group of grocery stores owned by different people conspired to fix prices they would be liable to prosecution and trial and punishment. In this case “journalists” from many organizations conspired to fix the news. They likewise should be liable to prosecution and trial and punishment.

DailyCaller does not mention that the JournaList scandal is the same as an earlier scandal that has been forgotten by many. We have not forgotten. We have not forgotten the suppression of news engaged in by the Head Kook of DailyKooks concerning the illegal activities of his business Partner Jerome Armstrong. When the illegal and unethical frauds against the weak and powerless “pump and dump” schemes became public the Head Kook engaged in a successful suppression of the news.

“TNR’s Jason Zengerle has published an e-mail in which Markos Moulitsas urged his fellow liberal bloggers not to write about the burgeoning scandal involving his Crashing the Gate co-author Jerome Armstrong:

Why the strange silence in the face of such damning allegations? Well, I think we now know the answer. It’s a deliberate strategy orchestrated by Kos. TNR obtained a missive Kos sent earlier this week to “Townhouse,” a private email list comprising elite liberal bloggers, including Jane Hamsher, Matt Stoller, and Christy Hardin Smith. And what was Kos’s message to this group that secretly plots strategy in the digital equivalent of a smoke-filled backroom? Stay mum! He wrote (emphasis added below):

[…]My request to you guys is that you ignore this for now. It would make my life easier if we can confine the story. Then, once Jerome can speak and defend himself, then I’ll go on the offensive (which is when I would file any lawsuits) and anyone can pile on. If any of us blog on this right now, we fuel the story. Let’s starve it of oxygen. And without the “he said, she said” element to the story, you know political journalists are paralyzed into inaction.

He also has a theory about why the liberal bloggers on the listserv are complying. If you need to get caught up on the scandal, check out Jim Geraghty’s post on the subject.

The question raised by the “pump and dump” and the back stabbing of Paul Hackett pay-to-play episodes by Armstrong and Kos was this:

“I wonder how much this sort of thing goes on. I’m not on any private email lists like that and have never seen any behind-the-scenes plotting about what should or should not be blogged about. And I wonder who’s the leaker among the elite bloggers.”

Wonder no more. The question has been answered by DailyCaller. The cartel that liberal news outlets such as The Nation used to denounce has become us. DailyCaller get the emails which explicitly state the strategy to, as in the “pump and dump” scandal, ignore the news – and label Obama opponents as RACISTS:

“After someone torpedoed Dave Weigel’s Washington Post gig by breaking the code of silence on the Journolist listserv, the race has been on to see who would sell the entire contents of the e-mail messages between the liberal members of the group — and who would get to buy them. We may never know who sold it, but Tucker Carlson and the Daily Caller wound up with the data, and they found a big story to lead off their exposés. In the first of a series on Journolist, Daily Caller reporter Jonathan Strong lays out a strategy plotted by Journolist members to kill the Jeremiah Wright story during the 2008 primaries — and to smear Barack Obama’s critics as racists:

The Big Media cartel exposed, courtesy of the DailyCaller:

“It was the moment of greatest peril for then-Sen. Barack Obama’s political career. In the heat of the presidential campaign, videos surfaced of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, angrily denouncing whites, the U.S. government and America itself. Obama had once bragged of his closeness to Wright. Now the black nationalist preacher’s rhetoric was threatening to torpedo Obama’s campaign. [snip]

Watching this all at home were members of Journolist, a listserv comprised of several hundred liberal journalists, as well as like-minded professors and activists. The tough questioning from the ABC anchors left many of them outraged. “George [Stephanopoulos],” fumed Richard Kim of the Nation, is “being a disgusting little rat snake.”

Others went further. According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.”

All these agents of Big Media corporations conspired to suppress the news. It’s a cartel of news suppression and disinformation and race-baiting. More from DailyCaller and the race-baiting which continues to today:

“In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”

Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: “Listen folks–in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.”

“Richard Kim got this right above: ‘a horrible glimpse of general election press strategy.’ He’s dead on,” Tomasky continued. “We need to throw chairs now, try as hard as we can to get the call next time. Otherwise the questions in October will be exactly like this. This is just a disease.”

Tomasky puts a high-minded spin on the suppression of the news and his “throw chairs” strategy and Ackerman’s “call them racists”. Tomasky must be fired along with all the others on JournoList who knew what was going on in their listserve but suppressed that news too.

Cartels leverage their market power to affect prices. The Big Media cartel leverages its market power to distort and suppress the news and incite future intimidation of dissemination of news and actual questions about Obama:

“Thomas Schaller, a columnist for the Baltimore Sun as well as a political science professor, upped the ante from there. In a post with the subject header, “why don’t we use the power of this list to do something about the debate?” Schaller proposed coordinating a “smart statement expressing disgust” at the questions Gibson and Stephanopoulos had posed to Obama.

“It would create quite a stir, I bet, and be a warning against future behavior of the sort,” Schaller wrote.

Tomasky approved. “YES. A thousand times yes,” he exclaimed.”

The news suppression occurred with the assistance of Jared Bernstein who now, no surprise, works for Joe Biden. The members of JournoList who knew all this was going on must provide full disclosure and/or be fired by their respective “news” operations. The list is long – Holly Yeager, Joe Conason, David Greenberg, David Roberts, Todd Gitlin are just few of the names. That we know several of these people and like them is difficult but necessary – fire them all. Investigate what happened and who did what.

A statement was eventually released and published by the New York Times. As the Jeremiah Wright outrages increased with every Wright appearance, the cartel increased their suppression of news and protection of Chicago’s Barack Obama.

“It was another crisis, and members of Journolist again rose to help Obama.

Chris Hayes of the Nation posted on April 29, 2008, urging his colleagues to ignore Wright. Hayes directed his message to “particularly those in the ostensible mainstream media” who were members of the list.

The Wright controversy, Hayes argued, was not about Wright at all. Instead, “It has everything to do with the attempts of the right to maintain control of the country.”

A whore calling a whore a whore is Chris Hayes. What Hayes and his fellow news suppression agents did was an attempt to “maintain control of the country” while decrying others for trying to “maintain control of the country”. LeftTalkers and others endorsed Barack Obama because he was the Big Media “darling” and thereby surrendered the country to the Big Media Party and the cartel.

Chris Hayes and others engaged in more high minded flowery talk (just like Barack Obama) but they are just as crooked as he is:

“Hayes castigated his fellow liberals for criticizing Wright. “All this hand wringing about just how awful and odious Rev. Wright remarks are just keeps the hustle going.”

“Our country disappears people. It tortures people. It has the blood of as many as one million Iraqi civilians — men, women, children, the infirmed — on its hands. You’ll forgive me if I just can’t quite dredge up the requisite amount of outrage over Barack Obama’s pastor,” Hayes wrote.

Hayes urged his colleagues – especially the straight news reporters who were charged with covering the campaign in a neutral way – to bury the Wright scandal. “I’m not saying we should all rush en masse to defend Wright. If you don’t think he’s worthy of defense, don’t defend him! What I’m saying is that there is no earthly reason to use our various platforms to discuss what about Wright we find objectionable,” Hayes said.”

Spencer Ackerman shouted “CALL THEM RACISTS!”:

“What is necessary is to raise the cost on the right of going after the left. In other words, find a rightwinger’s [sic] and smash it through a plate-glass window. Take a snapshot of the bleeding mess and send it out in a Christmas card to let the right know that it needs to live in a state of constant fear. Obviously I mean this rhetorically.

And I think this threads the needle. If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.”

What the DailyCaller and the thugs on JournoList do not acknowledge however is that even though Ackerman named Barnes and Rove as examples of whom to call RACISTS – the inescapable truth is that this occurred during the Democratic primaries and THE ONES CALLED RACISTS WERE HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTERS – US.

The “call them racists” strategy was not supported by Kevin Drum in what surely is a fitting testament to the stupidity of these Big Media/Big Blog boobs:

“Kevin Drum, then of Washington Monthly, also disagreed with Ackerman’s strategy. “I think it’s worth keeping in mind that Obama is trying (or says he’s trying) to run a campaign that avoids precisely the kind of thing Spencer is talking about, and turning this into a gutter brawl would probably hurt the Obama brand pretty strongly. After all, why vote for him if it turns out he’s not going change the way politics works?

But it was Ackerman who had the last word. “Kevin, I’m not saying OBAMA should do this. I’m saying WE should do this.”

“Cal them racists” was a coordinated attack on Obama opponents from Obama and Obama worshipers.

We are just beginning to get the truth.
We are just beginning to understand what happened in 2004-2008. We are just beginning to document the suppression of the news and the protection of Barack Obama. (Don’t Miss – “Ed Driscoll put together a video showing the correlation of this effort on Journolist and the declaration by CNN that it would be a “Wright-free zone.”)

The “race card” was first played against Hillary Clinton supporters and it is still being played today. The “racist” smear and the race card were first played against Hillary Clinton supporters and the target is still anyone who opposes Barack Obama. The blatant racism and race-baiting from Barack Obama and his thugs is only now being exposed.

The truth will continue to be exposed and a secret history of the 2008 elections will eventually emerge no matter how the latter day Stalinist try to suppress and distort the news:

“American journalism died today. What The Daily Caller has unearthed proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that most media organizations are either complicit by participation in the treachery that is Journolist, or are guilty of sitting back and watching Alinsky warfare being waged against all that challenged the progressive orthodoxy. The scandal predictably involves journalists posing as professors posing as experts. But dressed down they are nothing but street thugs. They deserve the deepest levels of public consternation. Will they get it?

The only way that the media will recover from the horrifying discoveries found in the Journolist is to investigate and investigate until every guilty reporter, professor and institution is laid bare begging America for forgiveness. Will they do it?”

What many will miss, either intentionally or because they will revert to tribal prejudices is that Hillary, her campaign for president, and Hillary Supporters were the first targets and victims of the Obama thugs.

We will not forget this history. We will continue to investigate. We will remember in November.


The Boy Raised By Wolves And His Health Scams And Schemes

After the loss of his father, Germanicus, little Caligula grew up to be an odder boy and an even more bizarre man. As Emperor, Caligula appointed his horse to be a Senator in the Roman Senate. So is it any wonder that a boy raised by wolves appoints his handsome cook to a senior policy position?

In Obama besotted Washington such an insular appointment does not trigger the revulsion it should. Want to advance in life? Get a job for a rich and powerful family and you too can go from cook to policy adviser. With all the many unemployed nutritional experts and short order cooks in the nation few bat an eyelash that Obama’s cook gets to be a policy maker too. But such is the disconnect from America and bitter and clingy Americans, that this daft disconnected executive displays at every turn.

Now that the cook is raised to tribune status, it is the dog who flies on his own jet, the eponymous BO, we expect to soon be named a Senator or perhaps Canine Excelsior in charge of recreational activities.

The Obama disconnect can be understood by examining the latest poll data from Politico.

A new poll by Politico shows that Beltway denizens are much happier with the state of the nation than those whom they supposedly serve, and for good reason:

America is struggling with a sputtering economy and high unemployment — but times are booming for Washington’s governing class.

The massive expansion of government under President Barack Obama has basically guaranteed a robust job market for policy professionals, regulators and contractors for years to come. The housing market, boosted by the large number of high-income earners in the area, many working in politics and government, is easily outpacing the markets in most of the country. And there are few signs of economic distress in hotels, restaurants or stores in the D.C. metro area.

As a result, there is a yawning gap between the American people and D.C.’s powerful when it comes to their economic reality — and their economic perceptions.

A new POLITICO poll, conducted by market research and consulting firm Penn Schoen Berland, underscores the big divide: Roughly 45 percent of “Washington elites” said the country and the economy are headed in the right direction, while roughly 25 percent of the general population said they felt that way.

The disconnect is highlighted by the fact that the poll itself is skewed away from present day reality:

“The poll sample consists of 38% Democrats and 31% Republicans, with 22% claiming to be independent and the remaining 9% unclear on the concept. The seven-point margin is the same size as the popular vote gap by which Obama won office, which is hardly a good indication of accuracy after almost two years of Tea Party organizing and serious damage to Obama’s support. This sample overemphasizes Democratic input while shortchanging Republicans and especially independents.”

In this vertiginous world of unreality, major news personalities are not aware of the news. The latest news on the news is that Bob Schieffer did not ask Attorney General Eric Holder about the Black Panther intimidation scandal because Schieffer did not know about the story. The news personalities who purport to tell us the news do not know what their readers and viewers know. It’s the blind leading the sighted.

In March of this year, we wrote “It’s Not A Mandate – It’s A Tax!” about Obama’s health scam. Big Media refused to take notice of that obvious fact. Big Media refused to see, or to report what it saw.

It was obvious all along that it was a tax. Obama of course promised “no new taxes”.

It’s taken a while, but yesterday the New York Times informed its readers what we informed our readers about months ago. It’s a tax:

“When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.

And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.”

Obama lied with his big Joker grin. Obama cannot be trusted. Obama is a liar:

“While Congress was working on the health care legislation, Mr. Obama refused to accept the argument that a mandate to buy insurance, enforced by financial penalties, was equivalent to a tax.

“For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase,” the president said last September, in a spirited exchange with George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program “This Week.”

When Mr. Stephanopoulos said the penalty appeared to fit the dictionary definition of a tax, Mr. Obama replied, “I absolutely reject that notion.”

Congress anticipated a constitutional challenge to the individual mandate. Accordingly, the law includes 10 detailed findings meant to show that the mandate regulates commercial activity important to the nation’s economy. Nowhere does Congress cite its taxing power as a source of authority.”

The courts will doubtless note that the Obama scam does not cite the tax power as a source of authority. Even Obama supporters acknowledge Obama’s dishonesty on the issue:

“Jack M. Balkin, a professor at Yale Law School who supports the new law, said, “The tax argument is the strongest argument for upholding” the individual-coverage requirement.

Mr. Obama “has not been honest with the American people about the nature of this bill,” Mr. Balkin said last month at a meeting of the American Constitution Society, a progressive legal organization. “This bill is a tax. Because it’s a tax, it’s completely constitutional.”

He’s a liar, pure and simple.

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

That’s not the only Obama health scam the New York Times and Big Media are finally informing their readers of. All the promises of keeping your own doctor are defunct too:

“As the Obama administration begins to enact the new national health care law, the country’s biggest insurers are promoting affordable plans with reduced premiums that require participants to use a narrower selection of doctors or hospitals.

The plans, being tested in places like San Diego, New York and Chicago, are likely to appeal especially to small businesses that already provide insurance to their employees, but are concerned about the ever-spiraling cost of coverage.

But large employers, as well, are starting to show some interest, and insurers and consultants expect that, over time, businesses of all sizes will gravitate toward these plans in an effort to cut costs.

The tradeoff, they say, is that more Americans will be asked to pay higher prices for the privilege of choosing or keeping their own doctors if they are outside the new networks. That could come as a surprise to many who remember the repeated assurances from President Obama and other officials that consumers would retain a variety of health-care choices.”

“No new taxes, keep your doctor” – all Obama lies. The Obama lies are many. Here is another one on the health scam:

“If Massachusetts is the laboratory for ObamaCare, consider this an explosion. The Boston Globe reports that employers have begun doing precisely what everyone knew they would do when insurance prices spiked: dump health plans. Companies that used to offer health-care coverage are paying the fines and saving money by dumping their employees into state-run coverage (via Newsalert):

The relentlessly rising cost of health insurance is prompting some small Massachusetts companies to drop coverage for their workers and encourage them to sign up for state-subsidized care instead, a trend that, some analysts say, could eventually weigh heavily on the state’s already-stressed budget.

This is all not news. These are facts we reported on when they were relevant to the debate. The only relevance at this point is to note Obama’s continuing lies and Big Media irrelevance when it matters.

The Boston Globe report on health care in Massachusetts must be augmented with this Samuelson report:

“If you want a preview of President Obama’s health-care “reform,” take a look at Massachusetts. In 2006, it enacted a “reform” that became a model for Obama. What’s happened since isn’t encouraging. The state did the easy part: expanding state-subsidized insurance coverage. It evaded the hard part: controlling costs and ensuring that spending improves people’s health. Unfortunately, Obama has done the same. [snip]

Emergency rooms remain as crowded as ever…. Finally — and most important — health costs continue to soar.

Aside from squeezing take-home pay (employers provide almost 70 percent of insurance), higher costs have automatically shifted government priorities toward health care and away from everything else — schools, police, roads, prisons, lower taxes. In 1990, health spending represented about 16 percent of the state budget, says the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. By 2000, health’s share was 22 percent. In 2010, it’s 35 percent. About 90 percent of the health spending is Medicaid.

State leaders have proved powerless to control these costs. Facing a tough reelection campaign, Gov. Deval Patrick effectively ordered his insurance commissioner to reject premium increases for small employers (50 workers or fewer) and individuals — an unprecedented step. Commissioner Joseph Murphy then disallowed premium increases ranging from 7 percent to 34 percent. The insurers appealed; hearing examiners ruled Murphy’s action illegal.”

There has been no health care reform. The only reform has been more money for Big Insurance and Big PhaRma.

“Similar forces will define Obamacare. Even if its modest measures to restrain costs succeed — which seems unlikely — the effect on overall spending would be slight. The system’s fundamental incentives won’t change. The lesson from Massachusetts is that genuine cost control is avoided because it’s so politically difficult. [snip]

Obama dodged the tough issues in favor of grandstanding. Imitating Patrick, he’s already denouncing insurers’ rates, as if that would solve the spending problem. What’s occurring in Massachusetts is the plausible future: Unchecked health spending shapes government priorities and inflates budget deficits and taxes, with small health gains. And they call this “reform”?”

No it was not reform. Universal health care died when Ted Kennedy race-baited for Barack Obama. Obama’s “heath reform” has always been a scam, as we reported long ago. The junk reform which transfers massive wealth to Big Insurance and Big PhaRma is the junk reform Hillary Clinton refused to accept in the 1990s.

The Obama disconnect and lies continue to gush forth. The latest lies are exposed by forced-to-retire David Obey:

“The secretary of education [Arne Duncan] is whining about the fact he only got 85 percent of the money he wanted .… [W]hen we needed money, we committed the cardinal sin of treating him like any other mere mortal. We were giving them over $10 billion in money to help keep teachers on the job, plus another $5 billion for Pell, so he was getting $15 billion for the programs he says he cares about, and it was costing him $500 million [in reductions to the Race to the Top program]. Now that’s a pretty damn good deal. So as far as I’m concerned, the secretary of education should have been happy as hell. He should have taken that deal and smiled like a Cheshire cat. He’s got more walking around money than every other cabinet secretary put together.

It blows my mind that the White House would even notice the fight [over Race to the Top]. I would have expected the president to say to the secretary, “Look, you’re getting a good deal, for God’s sake, what this really does is guarantee that the rest of the money isn’t going to be touched.” We gave [Duncan] $4.3 billion in the stimulus package, no questions asked. He could spend it any way he wants.I trusted the secretary, so I gave him a hell of a lot more money than I should have.

My point is that I have been working for school reform long before I ever heard of the secretary of education, and long before I ever heard of Obama. And I’m happy to welcome them on the reform road, but I’ll be damned if I think the only road to reform lies in the head of the secretary of education.”

Good riddance to David Obey. Only now does Obey mention that Obama was never around for any fight. In 2007 we repeatedly asked “who is this guy?” No one knew the answer. Obama never participated in any national debate and never fought for anything other than for himself. But Kennedy/Kerry/Daschle anointed him for the Democratic nomination years before public declarations of support. Now Obey complains that he never heard of Obama. Obey has more to say about Obama’s schemes behind the scenes:

“We were told we have to offset every damn dime of [new teacher spending]. Well, it ain’t easy to find offsets, and with all due respect to the administration their first suggestion for offsets was to cut food stamps. Now they were careful not to make an official budget request, because they didn’t want to take the political heat for it, but that was the first trial balloon they sent down here. … Their line of argument was, well, the cost of food relative to what we thought it would be has come down, so people on food stamps are getting a pretty good deal in comparison to what we thought they were going to get. Well isn’t that nice. Some poor bastard is going to get a break for a change.”

Where are the great fake liberals of the “creative class” with their great fake outrage? Where are the Big Blog Boys denouncing Obama and his money grab from food stamps – all in secret?

David Obey’s revelations of behind the scenes Obama scams and grabs are shocking only to the somnambulant Hopium Guzzlers. While these are battles between the teacher unions and budgetary conflicts, the overall fact to notice is the duplicity and hidden from public view ugliness of Barack Obama’s cowardly refusal to acknowledge and defend his own policy proposals.

Like Caligula at the end, Obama will meet his fate at the hands of those closest to him. After November, when the election results roll in, the Obama Praetorian Guard will unsheathe their political swords and cut him loose. It will be ugly, but it will be necessary for their own survival.

Barack Obama, the boy raised by wolves, will politically be cut down by other wolves. We hear the howling already.


Festivus In July

It’s time for the airing of grievances, It’s time for feats of strength, Let others celebrate Christmas in July. It’s Festivus for the rest of us.

The origins of Festivus are not shrouded in the mists of time. We know exactly and with precision the origins of the effulgent holiday. We know the traditions. We honor the short lived traditions.

So throw away the distracting tinsel, grab the aluminum pole – it’s time for airing of the grievances and amazing feats of strength. Festivus is here.

Last week, Nancy Pelousy and Obama congressional Dimocrats, the very people who cheated and lied to drag Obama’s limp body accross the finish line in the 2008 primaries, began the airing of the grievances:House Democrats will air grievances to Obama” blared the Politico headline. It seems that the congressional Dimocrats are now aware that Obama only cares about himself and does not care about their reelection.

That was a rather tepid and late grievance. For a full fleged festive Festivus grievance we turned to scandal sheet Globe magazine:

“President Barack Obama is tangled in the mystery surrounding the murder of the gay choir director of his controversial Chicago church – and the slain man’s mother is demanding answers NOW! This week’s GLOBE blows the lid off the shocking scandal America can’t afford to ignore.”

Now that is surely a Festivus grievance. A mother of a dead gay son clamoring for answers to the murder. The Globe has aluminum pole popping Festivus grievances to air:

“Norma Jean Young speaks out about the murder of her son, Donald Young, former Choir director of Obama’s Church Trinity United in Chicago. Mrs. Young “What was the cause of my son’s death? I’m very suspicious that it may have been related to Obama.” “Donald and Obama were close friends.”

Asked who benefited from a cover-up, Norma says, “it could be anyone, including Obama.”

That is certainly a shocking airing of grievances. But Festivus should have some heart-warming stories of cheer. And what could be more heartwarming than a job promotion in these tough times? The uppity people at Uppity Woman warm our hearts with this lovely story:

In a comical move even for a czar-happy president who has rewarded dozens of cronies with distinguished titles, the White House has named the Obama’s personal Chicago cook as “Senior Policy Adviser for Healthy Food Initiatives.”

It’s no joke, even though is sounds like a bad one. The Chicago chef’s rapid ascension, reported this week by a conservative Washington D.C. newspaper, has been kept under the radar for the last month. Sam Kass went from being a 20-something, Windy City gourmet cook—privately paid by the Obama’s to feed them—to big-time White House adviser in a matter of months.

At first we thought the promotion was for “Obama’s personal Chicago crook” but we realized that it was a cook who was in this particular mix. Indeed, the cook in question, Sam Kass is quite a beauty (picture HERE). But he is a cook, not a chef as the uppity women seize the distinction and enlighten us all on this spontaneous Festivus. This particular cook is also named as one of “Barack’s Beauties” in a People magazine list.

But the news of the promotion for the lucky cook, was not the main news for those uppity people. The real story was about a dead woman and her living children (in contrast to the Globe story about the live woman with her dead son). It turns out that Charlotte McCourt proves that Festivus is also for the dead.

“Charlotte M. Tidwell McCourt, 84, of Pahrump, passed away July 8, 2010, after a long illness. She was born Dec. 25, 1925, in Wellington, Utah, and was a 40-year resident of Nevada. Charlotte held a zest for life and loved serving her family of five children; 20 grandchildren; and 65 great-grandchildren. She had been the wife of Patrick L. McCourt for 67 happy years. Active in her community, she assisted in many political figures’ campaign efforts. As an active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Charlotte served as a leader in the Relief Society for over 20 years. She and her beloved husband also served a full-time mission in the Cabanatuan Mission in the Phillipines. Charlotte is survived by her husband, Patrick; children, Pat and Nellie McCourt, Dan and Lanny Shea, Bill and Marsha Sortor, David and Sherry d’Hulst, and Tom and Ann McMullin; and many grandchildren. A memorial service was held Saturday, July 10, at the LDS Chapel, 921 E. Wilson, in Pahrump. We believe that Mom would say she was mortified to have taken a large role in the election of Harry Reid to U.S. Congress. Let the record show Charlotte was displeased with his work. Please, in lieu of flowers, vote for another more worthy candidate.”

Ah, Festivus! It unites us all. Even those no longer among the quick are free to air grievances. The women at Women State joined in the Festivus airing of grievances with this video:

May we intrude with some Big Pink grievances? Well, perhaps not full fledged Festivus approved grievances, more like addenda to the record. This past May we wrote “Racist Americans Attack Mess-iah Obama”. We amused ourselves by making the case that if those who criticize Obama are racist, then those who called Hillary supporters “racists” during the primaries are racists themselves because they too are finally criticizing Obama. Now, without placing a feather in our cap, the scamps at the Dallas Tea Party have put our concept into a clever video:

Recall when we discussed in What Would Hillary Clinton Have Done? – America Thrown To The Wolves how Hillary would have handled the Gulf oil gusher? We wrote:

“We easily picture President Hillary Clinton touring the Gulf, for days, in a boat – gutting fish and those who stood in the way of immediate action. James Lee Witt would have received a phone call the very hour the Deepwater Horizon went bad. The armada against invading oil would have been organized from the start and the first speech a few days after the crisis began would have been comprehensive and effective.”

Well, guess what. Obama boob and overall oily Gulf incompetent Ken Salazar is still on the job when he should not be. But… without a word of thanks to Big Pink and at least 80 days late, James Lee Witt is now on the job. And apparently he is doing a wonderful job. That’s what they’re saying in the Gulf – oh and Jim Carville is celebrating Festivus (along with grievance airing Anderson Cooper) too and airing grievances:

Oh, we get no appreciation. Sigh. Grievance. Festivus.

And we have to Festivus grievance air on Dick Morris, specifically on his “post racial presidency” column. Morris declares:

“Now, Obama is letting his supporters strip away his image of a post-racial president by their increasingly racial rhetoric and his support for radical black activists.

Attorney General Eric Holder’s refusal to prosecute the Black Panthers so obviously guilty of racial intimidation at the Philadelphia polling places in 2008 is of a piece with the NAACP’s loud denunciation of the Tea Party movement as racists, likening it to the White Citizens Councils of the segregationist past. And the Obama Administration’s decision to sue to overturn the Arizona immigration law — despite the fact that Americans approve of the statute, and disapprove of the lawsuit to void it, by 59-28 — is an attempt to foundation his appeal to Latino voters in racial terms.

In a bid to increase enthusiasm and, therefore, turnout among minority voters, Barack Obama is sacrificing his white support and his non-racial image.”

Morris is wrong. Obama was stripped of the fake “post racial” fairy tale during the Henry Louis Gates race-baiting episode.

As we wrote in “Is Barack Obama A Racist?“:

“The fact that Obama was half-black and half-white didn’t matter much to anyone but Obama, Kakugawa says: “He made everything out like it was all racial.” On one occasion, Obama thought he’d gotten a bad break on the school basketball team because he was black. But Kakugawa recalls his father’s telling the teenager, “No, Barry, it’s not because you’re black. It’s because you missed two shots in a row.”

Now Obama Hopium Guzzlers describe anyone who opposes their Mess-iah as “racists”. But people criticize Obama not because he is black, but because he “missed two shots in a row.” Obama is a boob who race-baits to advance himself and when we point out he is a boob, the response is “racist”. Obama and his supporters make “everything out like it was all racial” but it is not. A boob is a boob, a thief is a thief, a jerk is a jerk, and color is irrelevant.

As Morris points out in his latest column, even Obama Dimocrats are airing grievances and approving less and less of Mess-iah:

“According to the FOX News/Opinion Dynamics poll, Obama’s job approval among Democrats has dropped from 84% two weeks ago (June 29-30) to 76% on July 13-14. At 76%, this level of job approval is below any the Fox News poll has ever recorded.

Why the collapse? Most likely it is due to liberal disappointment with the continuation of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the continued use of Guantanamo, Obama’s inability to cope with the oil spill, and his refusal to push immigration reform when he could have passed it before he lost his 60 vote majority. Undoubtedly, the renewed sluggishness in the economy is also playing its part.[snip]

But Obama is making his troubles worse by his insistence on focusing on his minority voters to the exclusion of even the white liberal electorate. Consider Obama’s decision to sue Arizona over its immigration law. The general electorate backs the Arizona statute by 59-29 according to the FOX News poll. But 38% of Democrats support it as well (50% oppose it). Obama’s refusal to prosecute the Black Panthers for voter intimidation after they stationed themselves outside a Philadelphia polling place in military uniforms with clubs also underscores the growing exclusion of whites of all stripes — including liberals — from the Obama base.”

Oh the spirit of Festivus is strong when we quote Dick Morris. And speaking of Black Panthers, the Washington Post ombudsman airs grievances:

“Thursday’s Post reported about a growing controversy over the Justice Department’s decision to scale down a voter-intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party. The story succinctly summarized the issues but left many readers with a question: What took you so long?

For months, readers have contacted the ombudsman wondering why The Post hasn’t been covering the case. The calls increased recently after competitors such as the New York Times and the Associated Press wrote stories. Fox News and right-wing bloggers have been pumping the story. Liberal bloggers have countered, accusing them of trying to manufacture a scandal.

But The Post has been virtually silent.”

Get to the truth. Investigate fully and get the results of the investigation fully aired to the public – where ever the chips may fall. The Ombudsman makes the point we fully endorse:

“The Post should never base coverage decisions on ideology, nor should it feel obligated to order stories simply because of blogosphere chatter from the right or the left.

But in this case, coverage is justified because it’s a controversy that screams for clarity that The Post should provide. If Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and his department are not colorblind in enforcing civil rights laws, they should be nailed. If the Commission on Civil Rights’ investigation is purely partisan, that should be revealed. If Adams is pursuing a right-wing agenda, he should be exposed.

National Editor Kevin Merida, who termed the controversy “significant,” said he wished The Post had written about it sooner. The delay was a result of limited staffing and a heavy volume of other news on the Justice Department beat, he said.

Better late than never. There’s plenty left to explore.”

There sure is plenty left to explore. Grievances should be investigated and fairly debunked or fairly confirmed. Maybe someday The Washington Post will discuss the 2008 primaries.

And there is this latest installment into the investigation:

There’s plenty left to Festivus grievance about. Obama’s dog on a separate jet to join Obama and Scowley on their latest vacation. As the uppity people note, “Imelda Obama” (we call her Mary Todd and “Scowley”) “do as I say, not as I do”.

What about that dress??? Were those oil stains or perspiration from all that alleged gardening? Oh, Festivus. The airing of the grievances is better than Dreidels or glittery ornaments on trees. As to gifts, this one is ready made for Festivus celebrants:

The Hopium addled will not enjoy this wonderful gift. As useful as this bumper sticker removal kit is, a much more needed invention is a “racist” label or “racist” resolution removal kit. A wayback machine to remove embarrassing YouTubes could be helpful as well to Hopium Guzzlers and race-baiters.

Festivus celebrants do not need gifts to enjoy the holiday. On Festivus grievances about the economy can be aired even as we know that it will take many years for the economy to recover with a boob at the helm. Jobs? Not with a boob at the helm – so just air your Festivus grievances. Air your Festivus grievances Obama endorsing and Obama loving Mort Zuckerman. Keep calling it “our economic Katrina” Mort. You bought him, you own him.

Air the grievances Obama lovin’ Charles Blow. Keep making excuses and keep deluding yourself that things will get better for the boob and that he will be reelected. Air the grievances you idiot blowhard:

“A CBS News poll released on Tuesday found that “a majority of Americans have a negative impression of the economy and expect the effects of the recession to linger for years.”

One of the most stinging findings: “Only 13 percent of Americans say Mr. Obama’s economic programs, among them the stimulus package, have helped them personally. Twenty-three percent say they have hurt, while 63 percent say they have had no effect.” Ouch. That’s an abysmal favorability return on an enormous financial investment.

A Gallup poll released on Friday found that satisfaction with the direction of the country among members of the president’s own party has dropped by a fourth since last month.

The BP disaster poisoned the waters of the gulf and sent saddening waves of tar balls and dead animals washing up onto its beaches. One of the president’s responses was to call for a moratorium on new deep-water drilling. Not cool, say gulf residents. An ABC News/Washington Post poll released on Wednesday found that 3 in 5 residents from the areas most affected disapproved of the moratorium and 7 in 10 disapproved of the government’s overall response to the disaster.

Polls continue to find that more people disapprove than approve of the Justice Department’s decision to sue over Arizona’s immigration law, a move that Hillary Clinton let slip was being made under Obama’s direction.

And, the N.A.A.C.P. scratched an old wound this week when it called on the Tea Party to expel racists from its ranks. The Tea Partiers protested — too much methinks — because the racism is a rap they can’t seem to beat.”

Continue to race-bait Charles Blow. Continue to think that Obama is sure to win in 2012. Continue to notice that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are not friends. Air your grievances. You will however not be invited to the wedding.

All those people who wrote silly stories about how Obama now controlled the Clintons and now Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton were part of the Obama Team, now have grievances to air. They were wrong. They will not be invited to the wedding. A lot of people will not be invited to the wedding. No Oprah, no Barack, no Doris. Air your grievances – it’s Festivus.

Air your grievances John Edwards, surely you have a bunch with more to come this and next year:

“Aaron Sorkin — best known for creating “The West Wing” — will make his feature directorial debut with a John Edwards biopic.

Sorkin’s adapting and producing Andrew Young’s “The Politician: An Insider’s Account of John Edwards’s Pursuit of the Presidency and the Scandal That Brought Him Down.” Project’s not yet set up at a studio.

Young, a longtime Edwards aide, gained notoriety during the 2008 presidential primary when he admitted — then later recanted — an affair with Edwards’ mistress Rielle Hunter and claimed Edwards’ child from that relationship as his own.”

Ah, the grievances of Festivus. But something is missing. Something is missing. Where are the feats of strength?

Oh, yes. The feats of strength.

Grab your aluminum polls. Here are the feats of strength:

Bill Clinton Has the Most Political Capital

Nearly half of voters (49 percent) would be less likely to vote for a candidate if President Obama campaigns for them. That’s 10 points higher than the number that would be more likely to vote for that candidate (39 percent).

It’s about the same for former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin: 51 percent would be less likely to vote for a candidate she backs and 37 percent more likely.

Former Republican presidential candidate and Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney also risks doing more harm than good: 31 percent of voters would be more likely and 39 percent less likely to vote for a candidate if Romney campaigns for them.

Only former President Bill Clinton receives an overall positive response. By 45-41 percent, voters would be more likely to vote for a Clinton-backed candidate, rather than less likely.

By 16 percentage points, independents are more inclined to vote for a candidate supported by Clinton (47 percent) than Obama (31 percent). Clinton also outperforms Palin among independents by 24 points.”

Whoa! Can you imagine what a Hillary Clinton endorsement is worth these days? Talk about feats of strength.

Sarah Palin is showing a feat of strength among Republicans too. Isn’t that just ducky. A woman in the lead in the Republican Party!

And Hillary. We’ll talk about her this coming week. Talk about feats of strength.

Happy Festivus Everybody!!!