Archives:

Categories:

Presidential Seal

Get a Hillary Is 44 button! Here's How:

Please Send a Donation to us at Hillary Is 44 So We Can Continue Our Work. Donate $10.00 or more and we will send you a pink Hillary Is 44 button.

Get a Hillary Is 44 T-Shirt! Here's How:

Donate $100.00 or more and we will send you a pink Hillary Is 44 T-shirt as well as a button.

Donate To Hillary Is 44 below:





Suscribe To Our RSS Feed

The Funnies

See Our Funnies Archive.

February 17, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Hillary Clinton Wants To Accomplish On Her Trip Overseas

10 Exchange U.S. dollars for currency that's worth something

9 Win respect defeating Japan's top-ranked sumo wrestler

8 Shift world's perception of America from "hated" to "extremely disliked"

7 Personally thank all of her illegal campaign donors

6 Three words: stylish Indonesian pantsuits

5 Visit burial site of revered Chinese military leader, General Tso

4 Get drunk with that Japanese finance minister guy

3 Convince China to switch from lead-tainted products to mercury-tainted products

2 Catch Chinese screening of Benjamin Button entitled "The Strange Adventures of Freaky Grandpa Baby"

1 Pick up carton of duty-free smokes for Obama

February 16, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Abraham lincoln Would Say If He Were Alive Today

10 "Sup?"

9 "I see Madonna's still a slut"

8 "Who's that handsome sumbitch on the five?"

7 "Is that free Grand Slam deal still going on at Denny's?"

6 "I just changed my Facebook status update to, Tthe 'ol rail splitter is chillaxing'"

5 "How do I get on 'Dancing with the Stars'?"

4 "Okay, Obama, you're from Illinois, too. We get it!"

3 "Hey Phelps, don't Bogart the weed!"

2 "What's the deal with Joaquin Phoenix?"

1 "A Broadway play? Uhhh, no thanks. I'm good."

January 28, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Overheard at the Meeting Between Barack Obama and the Republicans

10 "I miss the Clinton administration when we'd meet at Hooters"

9 "Can we wrap this up? I've got tickets to the 4:30 'Paul Blart: Mall Cop"

8 "Smoke break!"

7 "You fellas really need to take it easy on the Old Spice"

6 "Mr. President: don't misunderestimate the Republicans"

5 "Another smoke break!"

4 "What was the deal with Aretha Franklin's hat?"

3 "About that tax the rich stuff -- you were joking, right?"

2 "Sir, it's refreshing to have a Chief Executive who speaks in complete sentences"

1 "Senator Craig's offering his stimulus package in the men's room"

January 27, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Ways Rod Blagojevich Can Improve His Image

10 Star in new television series, "America's Funniest Haircuts"

9 Quit politics and become a fat, lovable mall cop

8 Start pronouncing last name with Jerry Lewis-like "BLAGOOOYYYJEVICH"

7 Offer a senate seat with no money down, zero percent interest

6 Team up with John Malkovich and Erin Brockovich for hot Malkovich-Brockovich-Blagojevich sex tape

5 Change his name to Barod Obamavich

4 Safely land an Airbus on the Hudson River

3 I don't know...how about showing up for his impeachment trial?

2 Wear sexy dresses, high heels and say, "You Betcha!"

1 Uhhh...resign?

January 16, 2000 - David Letterman - Top Ten Signs Obama's Getting Nervious

10 New slogan: "Yes we can... or maybe not, it's hard to say"

9 In moment of confusion, requested a $300 billion bailout from the bailout industry

8 He's up to not smoking three packs a day

7 Friends say he's looking frail, shaky and...no, that's McCain

6 He's so stressed, doctors say he's developing a Sanjay in his Gupta

5 Been walking around muttering, "What the hell have I gotten myself into?"

4 Offered Governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, $100,000 to buy his old Senate seat back

3 Standing on White House roof screaming, "Save us, Superman!"

2 Sweating like Bill Clinton when Hillary comes home early

1 He demanded a recount

January 8, 2000 - David Letterman - Top Ten Barack Obama Plans To Fix The Economy

10 Encourage tourists to throw spare change in the Grand Canyon

9 End our dependence on foreign owls

8 Sell New Mexico to Mexico

7 Put a little of that bailout money on the Ravens plus 3 at Tennessee. Come on! It's a mortal lock!

6 Rent out the moon for weddings and Bar Mitzvahs

5 Lotto our way out of this son-of-a-bitch

4 Appear on "Deal or No Deal" and hope to choose the right briefcase

3 Bail out the adult film industry -- not sure how it helps, but it can't hurt

2 Release O.J. from prison, have him steal America's money from China

1 Stop talkin' and start Obama-natin'!

January 7, 2000 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Overheard At The Presidents' Lunch

10 "Sorry, you're not on the list, Mr. Gore"

9 "If Hillary calls, I've been here since Monday"

8 "Laura! More Mountain Dew!"

7 "You guys wanna see, 'Paul Blart: Mall Cop'?"

6 "Call the nurse -- George swallowed a napkin ring!"

5 "Hey Barack, wanna go with us to Cabo in March? Oh that's right, you have to work!"

4 "Kissey kissey"

3 "Obama? I think he's downstairs smoking a butt"

2 "Did you ever see a monkey sneezing?"

1 "I hope Clinton's unbuckling his belt because he's full"

Recent Articles Calendar

July 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jun   Aug »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Networked Blogs

Follow me on Twitter

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.

Be Sociable, Share!

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

  • admin

    What these JournoList “journalists” were defending and protecting Obama from:

  • JanH

    Bravo admin!

    Complete Murrow Speech From Good Night, and Good Luck



  • wbboei

    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.
    _____________________________________________________________

    That was my thought as well when I first read that article. A cartel whose purpose was to prevent competition and sell a product to a gullible public at a level well above market price. Holmes, a legal positivist, once opined on the reason we do not allow government to regulate the media is because we need the truth and the best test of the truth of an idea is its ability to survive and gain acceptance in the marketplace of ideas. The net effect of this conspiracy by journalists is to destroy the marketplace of ideas. Interestingly, I was speaking to a friend of mine who is a first generation asian immigrant. He spent his life moving from country to country, always one step ahead of the communists. He sees much in common between Obama and the communist, but that is not the point I am making here. The point here is that he also says that that the press in Taiwan will criticize the government whereas in the past it did not. But the press in Red China will not. And here is the kicker: he sees the press in this country today as moving in the direction of the red china model in that they will not criticize Obama, or report stories which contradict their narrative that he is the messiah, as opposed to a sociopathic politician who would destroy this country to maintain power. He does not have cable news, so he does not hear FOX. He sees the contradiction in what the Chinese newspaper I post here from time to time says about Obama and what he sees on the main networks.

  • jbstonesfan

    Markos and Huffington are two (2) of the most despicable people in “journalism”.

  • S

    from the last thread
    ************************************
    S
    July 20th, 2010 at 4:03 pm
    wbboei
    July 20th, 2010 at 3:35 pm
    S: I think that article by Walderman is a snare and a delusion
    ************************************************************

    I hear you Wbboei and I agree…however this is the closest any of them will get to pinning anything directly on O…any criticism from the left always blames the people around O…his treasury…his advisors, etc…they always make excuses for O and try to isolate him…even if he is the boss of all these people…makes no sense…and makes smart people sound stupid…and gulliable…

    so just the fact that these criticisms come out (Eric Alterman in the Nation…a long one) indicates that yes, they are still in denial…so they rationalize because they know something has gone very wrong…”it was not supposed to be this way with O – no big pharma deals, expanding wars, all his victories a sham…less and less jobs each day, etc, etc, etc’

    truthfully, they know he is a fraud but it just hurts too much…they invested so much and he faked them out…all that info on ‘the daily caller’ today regarding how they plotted to protect him and label ANYONE a racist, etc, etc, etc…they put their heart and soul into fool’s gold…

    they protected O, helpted create the myth of O and now it is all backfiring…

  • rickya

    This is totally despicable. The Mainstream Media should be ashamed!!! This is an outright scandal. That it is still not getting the traction that it should get tells us that the stranglehold of this Cartel on the MSM is still very strong.

  • S

    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?

    Admin says:

    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.
    *************************************************************************

    Bravo, admin…

    …let us be relentless in cornering and focusing and targeting on ‘Who knew what and when they knew it’ from the beginning of the Democratic Primaries and the planned, systematic take down of HC and the fraud of the O campaign…

  • basil9

    Perfect analogy, admin.

    A cartel.

    I felt sick when I first posted about the story on the previous thread. Now, reading your astute analysis I feel even worse as I realize how much more horrifying this cartel cancer is than I first thought.

    Unbelievable.

  • S

    oops, did not mean to copy all that above…but another bravo to admin because you are right on!

  • JanH

    Any bets as to whether any media outlet with stand up, take their share of responsibility, and discuss this in a fair and balanced way?

    Will any heads roll?

  • Shadowfax

    Another great post Admin!!!

    All of this is making me sick to my stomach. I hope to God, the truth comes out and is stuck smack in the face of all the idiots that destroyed our Democracy. Every last one of the media crooks need to pay with their jobs……at the vary least.

    Here is an email I just sent:

    This is an email I sent to Greta, Hannity and Fox with the link to the Daily Caller article.
    —–

    Please report on the Daily Callers new developments of journalistic suppression to protect Barack Obama.

    Greta, great job interviewing Hillary!

    Also, please, pick up the Fox and Friends story of caucus fraud during the 2008 Democratic primary.

    Thank you.

    Here are email addresses for anyone that wants to follow drop them a line:

    Hannity at foxnews dot com (His mailbox was full)
    gretawire at fox dot com
    foxreport at foxnews dot com
    foxwire at foxnews dot com

  • SHV

    I don’t have the time to look for the primary source material but it is looking more like the “Shirley Sherrod” story is more about a pathological White House staff throwing a “lesser person” under the bus in order to avoid a possible minor inconvenience to the Sociopath-in-Chief. Allegedly the big Racism story happened more than 20 years ago and was related by Ms. Sherrod as an example of her moving beyond racial antagonism. She wasn’t a USDA employee at the time and did help the white “victim” and they have been friends since then. After the story broke, she received calls from the WH and was forced to resign.

    If the new evolving “Sherrod” story is even partially true than the bigger story is that the Obama minders threw a minor govt employee out of work for a non-story just to possibly, might protect the POS who flies his dog on a separate jet.

  • holdthemaccountable

    A grand slam home run. That’s what this post is. Thank you admin.

  • moononpluto

    SHV, best part is Sherrod said the White house and Obama are “scared to death” of Beck.

    That brought a smile to me face.

  • Shadowfax

    Why doesn’t Blago sing???????

    Sources: Gov. Rod Blagojevich doesn’t plan to testify

    Sources told the Chicago Sun-Times that Blagojevich is unlikely to take the stand and that his lawyers told U.S. District Judge James Zagel they plan to rest their case without calling a single witness. However, Zagel asked them in a private conference to think about it over night.

    Read the online story now: Click here

    Before adjourning for the day, Zagel conferred privately with the attorneys in the case and told the defense lawyers to take tonight to think over their decision, according to the sources. Zagel said the trial would resume at 9:30 a.m. Wednesday.

    The former governor had been expected to testify in his own defense starting this afternoon but did not take the stand.

    Earlier today, during a lunchtime break in the trial, Blagojevich’s lead attorney, Sam Adam Jr., wouldn’t say whether Blagojevich would testify.

    And Adam’s father and co-counsel, Sam Adam Sr., said only: “Nothing is a certainty.”

    http://blogs.suntimes.com/blago/

  • moononpluto

    Sounds like Blago has been told, if he sings, he wont be round long enough to get reduced time. Thats how Chicago works.

  • SHV

    SHV, best part is Sherrod said the White house and Obama are “scared to death” of Beck.
    *********
    There is no “best part” to the story if this woman was fired because she might be a minor inconvenience. This fits into “might be a problem for Obama”..swell just call them racists”….All that I see going on is that the WH staff has bought into Obama’s sociopathic behavior. The welfare or feelings of another human being are of no consequence to Obama, just the “typical white woman” just another black lady of no consequence; don’t do any investigation…under the bus and move on.

  • moononpluto

    All depends on what happened, what she did and what the response was.

    If she was part of the problem and was being racist, then she got what she deserved, if she did so to please Obama, she’s even more stupid.

  • Shadowfax

    Fox is covering the story:

    Liberal Journalists Plotted to Protect Obama From Rev. Wright Scandal, Online Mag Says

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/20/liberal-journalists-reportedly-plotted-protect-candidate-obama-jeremiah-wright/

  • Shadowfax

    Clinton and Gates poke North Korea in eye

    I just interviewed Secretary Clinton in Kabul about her trip tomorrow to DMZ with Secretary Gates. I essentially asked if it was poking a stick in their eyes…tune in tonight to ON THE RECORD at ten pm to our 2nd interview with Secretary Clinton…this one in Afghanistan.

    Read more: http://gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com/clinton-and-gates-poke-north-korea-in-eye/#ixzz0uGUYZfWX

  • SHV

    if she did so to please Obama, she’s even more stupid.
    **********
    My guess is that she got a call from some low level WH puke and was told to hand in a resignation or she might have problems with he retirement program blah..blah. I don’t underestimate the ability of the POSs surrounding Obama to make the life of an “unimportant” person miserable and enjoy doing it. No different than the POS “journalists” who will ruin a person’s life and reputation without a thought or concern.

  • Shadowfax

    From the Oildrum…latest update

    BP’s Deepwater Oil Spill – Bubble, Bubble Oil and Trouble – and Open Thread 2

    Posted by Heading Out on July 20, 2010 – 4:55pm
    Topic: Environment/Sustainability

    Update 2:30 pm EDT: Original leak on the pipe has been sealed, but there are two major leaks on the stack now. One is at the bottom of the new “cap” and the other is on both sides of the BOP just underneath the flex joint. Lots of hydrates above the leaks.

    http://www.theoildrum.com/

  • admin

    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.”

  • SHV

    Update 2:30 pm EDT: Original leak on the pipe has been sealed, but there are two major leaks on the stack now.
    *******
    TOD seems to be the place to get real info and opinions. Seems to be “crunch” time for the USG and BP. Potential for bad weather moving in, possibility of worsening leaks on the BOP stack; seems the options are to keep the well shut down, do a static kill attempt, hook up to surface processing despite weather problems, hope for the best.

  • JanH

    JULY 21, 2010

    Obama’s Economic Fish Stories

    On unemployment, the president claims that the stimulus bill was several times more potent than his chief economic adviser estimates. Such statements hurt his credibility.

    By MICHAEL J. BOSKIN

    A president’s most valuable asset—with voters, Congress, allies and enemies—is credibility. So it is unfortunate when extreme exaggeration emanates from the White House.

    All presidents wind up saying some things that make even their own economists cringe (often the brainchild of political advisers unconstrained by economic principles, facts or arithmetic). Usually, economic advisers manage to correct these problematic statements before delivery. Sometimes they get channeled into relatively harmless nonsense, such as President Gerald Ford’s “Whip Inflation Now” buttons. Other times they produce damaging policies, such as President Richard Nixon’s wage and price controls. The most illiterate statement was President Jimmy Carter’s late-1970s plea to the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates to combat high inflation, the exact opposite of what it should do. Not surprisingly, the value of the dollar collapsed.

    President Obama says “every economist who’s looked at it says that the Recovery Act has done its job”—i.e., the stimulus bill has turned the economy around. That’s nonsense. Opinions differ widely and many leading economists believe that its impact has been small. Why? The expectation of future spending and future tax hikes to pay for the stimulus and Mr. Obama’s vast expansion of government are offsetting the direct short-run expansionary effect. That is standard in all macroeconomic theories.

    So, as I and others warned in 2008, the permanent government expansion and higher tax rate agenda is a classic example of what not to do during bad economic times. Worse yet, all the subsidies, bailouts, regulations and mandates are forcing noncommercial decisions on the economy, which now awaits literally thousands of new diktats as a result of things like ObamaCare and the financial reform bill. The uncertainty is impeding investment and hiring.

    The president does not say that economists agree that the high future taxes to finance the stimulus will hurt the economy. (The University of Chicago’s Harald Uhlig estimates $3.40 of lost output for every dollar of government spending.) Either the president is not being told of serious alternative viewpoints, or serious viewpoints are defined as only those that support his position. In either case, he is being ill-served by his staff.

    Mr. Obama’s economic statements are increasingly divorced not only from competing viewpoints but from those of his own economic advisers. It is surprising how many numerically challenged pronouncements come from this most scripted and political of White Houses. One slip is eventually forgiven, but when a pattern emerges, no one believes it is an accident.

    For example, on the anniversary of the stimulus bill, Mr. Obama declared, “It is largely thanks to the Recovery Act that a second Depression is no longer a possibility.” Yet his Council of Economic Advisers just estimated the stimulus bill’s effect on GDP at its trough was 1%-2%.

    The most common definition of a depression is a long period in which GDP or consumption declines at least 10%. The decline in GDP in the recent recession was 3.8%, in consumption 2%. No one disputes the recession was severe, but to reach a 10% GDP decline requires tripling the administration’s estimate (three times their 2% effect) added to the actual 3.8% decline. On the alternative consumption standard, the math is even more absurd. The depression statement isn’t credible. The stimulus bill has assumed certain mystic powers in administration discourse, but revoking the laws of arithmetic shouldn’t be one of them.

    The recession would have been worse if not for the Fed’s monetary policy and quantitative easing. Also important were the unmentioned automatic stabilizers—taxes falling more than income, cushioning declines in after-tax incomes and consumption—which were far larger than the spending and tax rebates in the stimulus bill. Arguing that all these policies (including injecting capital into banks, which was necessary but done poorly) may have prevented a depression is perhaps still an exaggeration but at least is within hailing distance of plausibility. On that scale, the effect of the stimulus was puny.

    On his recent “Recovery Tour,” Mr. Obama boasted, “The stimulus bill prevented the unemployment rate from “getting up to . . . 15%.” But the president’s own chief economic adviser, Christina Romer, has estimated that the stimulus bill reduced peak unemployment by one percentage point—i.e., since the unemployment rate peaked at 10.1%, it prevented the unemployment rate from rising to just over 11%. So Mr. Obama claims that the stimulus bill was several times more potent than his chief economic adviser estimates.

    Perhaps the most serious disconnect concerns the impending expiration of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which will raise the top two income tax rates and the rates on dividends and capital gains. If these growth inhibiting tax increases occur—about $75 billion in tax increases next year, $1.4 trillion over 10 years—there will be serious economic damage.

    In the most recent issue of the American Economic Review, Ms. Romer (and her husband David H. Romer) conclude that “tax increases are highly contractionary . . . tax cuts have very large and persistent positive output effects.” Their estimates imply the tax increases would depress GDP by roughly half the growth rate in this so-far-anemic recovery.

    If Mr. Obama is really serious about a second stimulus, by far the best thing he can do is have Congress quickly extend the expiring Bush tax cuts, combined with real spending cuts set to take effect as the economy improves.

    The president badly needs to make more realistic pronouncements. No one expects him to say his policies have failed (although most have delivered far less than claimed at large cost). A little candor about the results of experimentation in uncharted waters would go a long way. But at the very least, his staff needs to avoid putting these exaggerations on the teleprompter. It undermines confidence and raises concerns about competence. It’s doing nobody any good—not the economy and certainly not Mr. Obama.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703724104575378751776758256.html

  • ShortTermer

    Thank you, Admin and posters for this post and comments. This must have consequences, especially this part: “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.”

    Billboards all over America would be nice to education those who have their heads stuck up their……

  • gonzotx

    Will they get it?

    I think THAT is the catch all. It didn’t matter how many thousands of affidavits of illegal doings the Fraud has perpetrated, they look away.

    Who will stand up for American principals that has the POWER to effectively do anything?

    In the end, it will have to be the people.

  • admin

    What the vendors in Times Square prevented:

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/chilling_toll_of_times_sq_bomb_400MLFIYrBDELDqzmiq0EM#ixzz0uDzPM6oY

    “Thankfully, it didn’t go off as planned.

    A secret FBI test of a correctly made version of the Times Square bomb revealed that it “would have killed thousands of people” if it had been made to explode as terrorists had intended, law-enforcement sources told The Post yesterday.

    Had he built the Times Square device the way he had originally intended to, terrorist Faisal Shahzad, would have turned his SUV and nearby vehicles into a fatal spray of razor-sharp fragments and transformed building windows into glass guillotines hurtling to the streets, cutting down hundreds of people walking by.

    The results were discovered after feds composed the type of bomb Shahzad set out to make — with the exact components he had initially intended to use — and exploded it in Pennsylvania last month.

    It would have been the biggest thing ever to happen in this country since Sept. 11,” another source said.

    It definitely would have been bigger than [the 1995] Oklahoma City” bombing of the federal building that killed 168 people, the source said. “There would have been a lot of casualties.”

    “People would also have been stomped to death from running away. It would have been panic. The buildings would have been severely damaged.”

    One source added: “If you look at the four corners [near the bomb] that night, there could easily be 500 people between 20 to 30 feet from the car.

    “Any car going down that block or parked nearby would have been turned into fragments, because that SUV’s going to rip apart those cars. More people get killed by the fragments than the actual explosion.”

    Shahzad’s homemade bomb — on which he substituted less effective, cheaper components for the more expensive and deadly components he had planned to use — was left in the back seat of his parked SUV in the middle of Times Square, where it smoldered but failed to detonate.

    Street vendors noticed the smoke and alerted police. The cops quickly evacuated the tourist-packed area as they dismantled the device.

    Shahzad, 30, was nabbed several days later trying to flee the country. Last month, he pleaded guilty to federal terrorism charges, saying he wanted to attack America in retaliation for US military killings of Muslims abroad.

    At the end of June, the FBI built its replica of the bomb and exploded it outside Harrisburg, Pa., to test its destructive force, sources said.

    The results of the explosive test were sobering — showing that Shahzad was on track to becoming the biggest individual mass murderer in US history, several sources said.

    “This attempt failed,” one source said. “But no one thinks this is the only time someone is going to try to blow something up in Times Square.”

  • SHV

    What the vendors in Times Square prevented….
    *********
    With Eric Holder and Obama, a “leaked secret FBI test” is probably total bull shit and is more indicative that their legal case sucks. “Shahzad was on track to becoming the biggest individual mass murderer in US history” that kind of hyperbole is consistent with the Obama thugs and their “journalist” enablers.

  • wbboei

    Tim Russert was repeatedly called Hillary’s “toughest opponent” on the debate stage.
    ——————————
    The toughest opponent any competitor can face is a corrupt referee. That is exactly what Timothy Russert, it is all that he was, and it is how his real epitaph should read.

  • Shadowfax

    Hanity is about to expose this story too….

    Liberal Journalists Plotted to Protect Obama From Rev. Wright Scandal, Online Mag Says

    ———
    Tucker ‘I used to be obnoxious but now I am going to call out Obots’ Carlson will be on in a minute…on Hannity.

  • Shadowfax

    Okay, Tucker C. is saying when the journalists decided to ‘protect’ Barry, was a “pivotal” time in the campaign, where Hillary Clinton “could have won” if the Ref Wright story was not choaked…………

    Back to listening….

  • Shadowfax

    Tucker also said he is releasing a new story on the Daily Caller at mignight, where these Obots were trying to get the Government to shut Fox station down, yank their license.

  • tim

    I knew what the fking media did in 2008 was bad, I never had a clue it was this disgusting.

    I am not joking when I say I get sick in my stomach when I see any nightly news anchor or any sunday shows… I only trust Fox News now. I do not trust ANY MSM anymore.

    I saw what they did to Hillary and then to Sarah. Freaking a$$holes. All of them.

  • moononpluto

    Thank god for the internet, never trust what the media tells you, find out for yourself.

    Fight internet censorship and govt regulation or they will control it too.

  • tim

    moononpluto
    July 20th, 2010 at 9:44 pm

    Ditto on that. Thank God for the internet. I trust nothing on any MSM anymore, not the AP, nothing at all, I verify everything myself on the Internet and Fox.

  • Linda192

    Delurking to say that I was listening to the UK news this morning – either BBC World or Sky News, I’m not sure which as I listened to both. They were discussing the Cameron/Obama meeting and the “special relationship”. The commentator said that the rapport between the two men was quite warm and something to effect that “we thought it could be two years before David Cameron had that kind of warm relationship with” a president. I thought it interesting because it certainly did not sound as though the Brits believe Obama will be a two-term president.

  • Shadowfax

    Part 2, Greta and Hillary in about 15 minutes.

  • blowme0bama

    moononpluto
    July 20th, 2010 at 9:44 pm
    Thank god for the internet, never trust what the media tells you, find out for yourself.

    Fight internet censorship and govt regulation or they will control it too.
    ___________________________

    That’s why I haven’t sat down and watched any network news (I’m including Fox within the scope of “network”), in many, many years. I get all my news from the internet.

  • wbboei

    So now the cat is out of the bag. Left wing journalists conspired to bury the truth. And John Q Public says who the fuck cares, they all do it, and where is my six pack. How do we help them understand why this is important. I think we have to be very direct about it. We have to tell them that in a democracy honest journalists are truth tellers. They give the public an honest assessment on both sides of an issue and let the public. It is called democracy. What big media and big bloggers have done is hide the truth and substitute their elitist judgment for the judgment of the people. They treat them like a mushroom, i.e. keep them in the dark and feed them shit. This is what the Nazis did, and it is what the Soviets did. They devalued their citizens and now the scions of big media are doing the same thing to us. They pretend to be reporters but they are nothing more than propagandists, and anyone who takes what they say at face value is feeble minded.

  • wbboei

    they let the public DECIDE

  • MichL

    If I remember correctly, BigDawg made a comment during the primary about the racism claim. It was something about an e-mail that he heard about where they were planning to smear him as a racist. I’ll search for it. It’s hard to find, but here’s a bit by abc. Oh yes, the memo. They were keeping track…

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/04/bill-clinton-cl.html
    I found another story, but won’t link to the crazy huffpo.

  • JanH

    Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity are only beating the drum on this volatile issue because the rest of the media was mean to Fox and wanted them off the air.

    Just once I would like a representative media to do the right thing without hidden agendas no matter how bad they might look afterwards.

  • JanH

    And as far as this woman being fired goes, whether she was guilty or not, NAACP used her to get their own tea party scandal off the front pages and the White House helped them.

    It is similar to how quiet it has gotten already about the Black Panther issue.

    This is manipulation at it’s worst.

  • tim

    The race card attack first started with

    1)”fairytale” comment against BC, it was that hateful woman who took to the stage at some award show and ranted against BC with the “fairytale” comment

    2) Next, came the comment from Hillary about civil rights law being signed for Johnson, which is 100% correct, not-so-Sharpton and Jesse Idiot ran with the race card

    3) Melon-head Roland Martin, and Donna “My mama told me rules are rules” Brazille went on every MSM ranting how racists the Clintons were.

    Hillary in spite of all this $hit still won the popular vote.

    For 2010 and 2012, I say to these freaks, bring that race card on, keep playing that card.

    Now we have complete proof this was completely coordinated between the so-called Media and the community organizer’s camp

  • SHV

    Jeeebus if Beck and I agree on something, then Hell just froze over. Larry Johnson on the “Sharrod affair”:

    The real issue here is the bizarre, shoot from the hip decision making that is the modus operandi of the Obama Administration. Remember, as Beck correctly notes, Obama shot his mouth off and accused a white police officer of improper behavior without taking time to learn the facts. Talk first, learn later. That is the Obama team. And they’ve done it again.

    These assholes, Obama and his team, are political monsters without a conscience. They have fired a woman who, best I can determine after watching the full tape, is innocent of the charge initially leveled against her. Watch it and decide for yourself.

    http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2010/07/20/barack-obama-incompetent-fool/#more-48243

    Larry said what I was trying to say earlier: “political monsters without a conscience”…That would be Obama and his merry band of thugs…

  • tim

    “They have fired a woman who, best I can determine after watching the full tape, is innocent of the charge initially leveled against her”

    Agreed. The woman is not at fault, I do have a problem with the NAACP members who were cheering her saying she didn’t want to help that white farmer as much as she could have [before they heard the rest of her story]

    Although the story is 20 years ago, I accept that and her journey is to be respected, what I don’t accept is that she was recounting this story only 3 months ago, and the racism by the NAACP when she was telling this story is so disgusting, they were clapping and saying “that’s right”

    what if a white person was saying “”I didn’t help someone as much as I could have because they are black” and the audience clapped and said “that’s right”

    the woman is not the story, she was thrown under the bus, its the NAACP that is the issue.

  • SHV

    the woman is not the story
    ******
    that is where we disagree…she is no different than the people smeared as racist by the “big blogger boyz” and the MSM hacks. Their attitude, along with the “political monsters without a conscience” is that a little collateral damage is acceptable for the bigger purpose. Now Obama and the NAACP don’t know sh*t except that Tom Vilsack needs to fall on his sword and crawl under the bus

  • jbstonesfan

    I was never much for conspiracy theories, but I have no doubt anymore that the 2008 primary/general election was rigged by the MSM at the request of some very powerful people long before that first vote was cast in Iowa.

  • admin

    Obama who? Not likable enough:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/20/barack_obama_introduce_yourself_106374.html

    But the fallacy in all of them is apparent when — as always happens — Obama is likened to Ronald Reagan. (Shrum does this.) The similarities are superficial, and foremost among them is the fact that Reagan too had dismal numbers at this state of his presidency — a consequence of a steep recession. In fact, the Republicans lost House seats in the 1982 midterm elections, just as the Democrats are fated to do, according to every conceivable political seer. Reagan, of course, went on to win re-election by a landslide and has since become a Mount Rushmorian figure. Break out the chisels.

    The comparison to Reagan may give Obama cheer, but it is not really apt. For even in Reagan’s darkest days when, according to Gallup, six out of 10 Americans reported that they did not like the job he was doing, an astounding six in 10 nevertheless said they liked the man himself. He was, of course, phenomenally charming, authentic and schooled at countless soundstages in appearing that way. Just as important, the public had faith in the consistency of his principles, agree or not. This was the Reagan Paradox and it helped lift his presidency.

    No one is accusing Obama of being likable. He is not unlikable, but he lacks Reagan’s (or Bill Clinton’s) warmth. What’s more, his career has been brief. He led no movement, was spokesman for no ideology and campaigned like a Nike sneaker — change instead of swoosh. He seems distant. No Irish jokes from him. For the average voter, he casts no shadow.

    Reagan, by contrast, had been around forever. He was not defined solely by gauzy campaign ads but by countless speeches, two contentious and highly controversial terms as California governor and a previous race for the presidency. There was never a question about who Reagan was and what he stood for. Not so Obama. About all he shares with Reagan at this point are low ratings.

    What has come to be called the Obama Paradox is not a paradox at all. Voters lack faith in him making the right economic decisions because, as far as they’re concerned, he hasn’t. He went for health care reform, not jobs. He supported the public option, then he didn’t. He’s been cold to Israel’s Binyamin Netanyahu and then all over him like a cheap suit. Americans know Obama’s smart. But we still don’t know him. Before Americans can give him credit for what he’s done they have to know who he is. We’re waiting.

  • tim

    “Americans know Obama’s smart.”

    um, no.

  • [...] at Hillaryis44.org I found an article about how a group of influential journalists and professors working for some of the biggest media [...]

  • Shadowfax

    Second part of Hillary’s interview with Greta is great, not as tough as the first part. Hillary rocked!

    I just have one question, so in the past few days Hillary went to Pakistan, then Afghanistan, now she is headed to South Korea with Sec. Gates.
    Three of the most dangerous places on the planet for an American woman.

    And where is the Wolf King, is he golfing, is he on another vacation or hanging out with the bald cook or having tea an crumpets with the Prime of Eng?

    One person gets the perks and kicks back while the real winner, works her ass off in daily danger.

    Oh………….payback is brewing, big time!!!

  • hwc

    I have no sympathy for the Sherrod woman getting the ol’ Okie Doke from the Obama regime. According to Obama’s thugs, I’m a racist because I voted for Clinton. Donna Brazile and the DNC say they need white folk like me in the Democrat Party. So, let Sherrod work it out for herself.

  • Shadowfax

    lorac

    Could you post the article if it isn’t too long, the page appears then goes away for me…not sure why.

    Thanks.

  • Shadowfax

    Too bad we don’t have a PUMA in Nevada, saw this on Netroots, would be good to find out if they plan to “get in people’s faces”.

    Admin, do you live back east?

    Netroots Nation 2010

    The fifth annual gathering of the Netroots (formerly known as the YearlyKos Convention) will be held July 22-25 at the Rio Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas, NV. Netroots Nation 2010 will include panels led by national and international experts; identity, issue and regional caucuses; prominent political, issue and policy-oriented speakers; a progressive film screening series; and the most concentrated gathering of progressive bloggers to date.

    About Netroots Nation

    Netroots Nation amplifies progressive voices by providing an online and in-person campus for exchanging ideas and learning how to be more effective in using technology to influence the public debate. Within that campus, we strengthen community, inspire action and serve as an incubator for progressive ideas that challenge the status quo and ultimately affect change in the public sphere.

  • Fifth Dimension

    On the matter of Shirley Sherrod — some sense of ambivalence. On the one hand, if she had enough self-reflection to see the error in her misguided ways, then “Sure, that’s great.” That doesn’t really excuse though that she was a bigot to begin with, and she probably should have learned that “race doesn’t matter” before she was “on the job”, and not after the fact.

    But on the other hand, I can’t help but feel that there is a bit of that phony “hate the sin, but love the sinner” transcendence going on here. It’s like how some religious fundamentalists will claim they accept homosexuals, but that they still disapprove of homosexuality. Similarly, she claims learning lessons of acceptance and transcendence, but her acceptance still appears to be conditioned.

    Well, I’m not for conditioned acceptance of difference, to me that is not indicative of the liberal legacy. I am (and at least I thought other liberals were also) for unconditional acceptance of all people. At least as a starting point.

    Notice also how even in full video of her remarks she says “That’s when it was revealed to me that ya’ll it’s about poor vs those who have, and not so much about white…It is about White and Black…it opened my eyes.”

    Even after supposedly being transformed, she still defaults to seeing the world through racial epistemology. And when that is the case, then, no matter how much she and others may protest otherwise, the point of arrival of her story is still not truly that of a post-racial ontology.

    So, I’ll give her credit for at least moving beyond active bigotry — if that supposedly, deserves credit, I would think that would be the minimum, but what do I know — but that she still sees in the world through a racial prism indicates to me, that her ‘transcendence’ is still far from complete. Just my opinion.

  • Fifth Dimension

    hmm..must have forgotten to close the bold tag…

  • Fifth Dimension

    On the matter of Shirley Sherrod — some sense of ambivalence. On the one hand, if she had enough self-reflection to see the error in her misguided ways, then “Sure, that’s great.” That doesn’t really excuse though that she was a bigot to begin with, and she probably should have learned that “race doesn’t matter” before she was “on the job”, and not after the fact.

    But on the other hand, I can’t help but feel that there is a bit of that phony “hate the sin, but love the sinner” transcendence going on here. It’s like how some religious fundamentalists will claim they accept homosexuals, but that they still disapprove of homosexuality. Similarly, she claims learning lessons of acceptance and transcendence, but her acceptance still appears to be conditioned.

    Well, I’m not for conditioned acceptance of difference, to me that is not indicative of the liberal legacy. I am (and at least I thought other liberals were also) for unconditional acceptance of all people. At least as a starting point.

    Notice also how even in full video of her remarks she says “That’s when it was revealed to me that ya’ll it’s about poor vs those who have, and not so much about white… It is about White and Black … but it opened my eyes.”

    Even after supposedly being transformed, she still defaults to seeing the world through racial epistemology. And when that is the case, then, no matter how much she and others may protest otherwise, the point of arrival of her story is still not truly that of a post-racial ontology.

    So, I’ll give her credit for at least moving beyond active bigotry — if that supposedly, deserves credit, I would think that would be the minimum, but what do I know — but that she still sees in the world through a racial prism indicates to me, that her ‘transcendence’ is still far from complete. Just my opinion.

  • Fifth Dimension

    Also, I wonder what would have happened if this white guy hadn’t been poor? What then? Would she still have had her teachable moment?

    Who knows. Even now, some of her thoughts still seem entrenched in processes of “otherness.”

  • wbboei

    I was never much for conspiracy theories, but I have no doubt anymore that the 2008 primary/general election was rigged by the MSM at the request of some very powerful people long before that first vote was cast in Iowa.
    ————————————————————————————————
    Jbstonesfan: this is what I wrote on September 11, 2008 about the conspiracy by big media, in a much larger paper entitled The Real Story of The 2008 Democratic Primary.
    ——————————————————————————————

    VI. COMPLAINT AGAINST BIG MEDIA

    1. Nature of Proceeding: This is a pro-forma civil complaint filed in the Court of American Public Opinion against Big Media as hereinafter defined for i) breach of fiduciary duty, ii) fraud on the American people, iii) discrimination on the basis of gender, and iv) conspiracy to hijack an election. The parties have waived their objections under the First Amendment and mutually agree that this action will proceed in the Court of American Public Opinion with all deliberate speed and without precedent.

    2. The Parties: The charging party is the American People (past, present and future). The defendant is the major television networks, newspapers and blogs hereinafter referred to as Big Media. The major newspapers are the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune. The major television networks are ABC (Disney), NBC (GE), CBS (Westinghouse) and the cable networks CNN (Time Warner), MSNBC (GE), FOX (Murdock). The blogs are Politico and Huffington Report. (Note: the television network coverage of the primary can be rated in terms of fairness from best to worst as follows: ABC, FOX, CBS, CNN, NBC/MSNBC).

    3. Stipulation: The following facts are not in dispute: a free society cannot endure without an honest press. Citizen journalists lack the professionalism, training and resources to fill that vital role. At one time, the small town newspaper did so. Thousands of them existed across the United States. Some were primitive, others were sophisticated but the one thing they had in common was a commitment to the well being of the community they served and a dedication to the truth. If now and then they fell short of that standard they would hear about it directly from their friends and neighbors. Thus, they were accountable to their audience.

    Today the small town newspaper is gone. We have a different kind of institution in its stead and place, i.e. Big Media. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of multi-national corporations. Big Media is in the entertainment business, it survives by ratings, and it has no direct contact with its audience. The modern reporter is under severe pressure to meet deadlines. When the subject matter is complex Big Media cannot deal with it. Solid investigative journalism is a thing of the past. Thus, Big Media is unable to provide voters with the information they need to make wise decisions.

    4. Breach of Fiduciary Duty: The First Amendment prohibits government from abridging freedom of the press. In return, the press has a fiduciary duty to provide the public with a fair sense of the pros and cons of each candidate so the American People can make an informed decision at the ballot box. No function is more critical to our democracy.

    a. the standard: Big Media has a fiduciary duty to the American People to conduct a due diligence investigation into all candidates seeking high public office, to treat them with a decent respect, to provide fair and balanced coverage, and to act as an honest broker in the process. It must hold that duty inviolate from the personal opinions of pundits, editors and producers, and the business interests of its owners if it wishes to be taken seriously.

    b. the breach: Big Media breached its fiduciary duty when it failed to investigate: i) Obama’s toxic association with political fixer Rezko until Hillary mentioned it in a debate, ii) Obama’s 20 year association with his racist spiritual advisor Reverend Wright until FOX News broke the story, iii) allegations that Obama does not eligibility requirements to be president, iv) allegations that Obama has a illegitimate child by a white woman who he lived with for a year when he was attending Columbia University who he has failed to provide for, v) allegations that John Edwards had a love child until National Enquirer broke the story, vi) massive fraud in the caucuses which they refused to acknowledge and report on. (Note: if Big Media had done its job, investigated the Edwards story a year ago, and uncovered the massive fraud in the caucuses then Hillary Clinton would be the nominee.) Moreover, Big Media breached its fiduciary duty when it failed to act as an honest broker. Instead, it managed to present all the pros of Obama and all the cons of Hillary. Fortunately, many voters had a chance to meet the candidates as they traversed the country and make up their minds on that basis. Others had access to the internet where the truth could be learned if you found the right blogs. But at some point it became obvious to everyone that that Big Media is a dishonest broker. For many the moment of truth arrived when Saturday Night Live presented a skit showing how the late Tim Russert would attack Hillary and lob soft balls to Obama in the debates.

    c. damages: A democracy is most vulnerable at election time when there is a transfer of power. That is particularly true today. Big Media knows that Hillary is qualified for the job but they have demonized her to ensure she is not elected. Meanwhile Big Media knows that Obama is unqualified for the job but has deified him to the point that if he elected the country will have poor leadership whereas if he is rejected then there may be riots. This is not what Jefferson had in mind when he drafted the First Amendment. But how could he have ever known that the free press he believed in so earnestly would one day become Big Media– the wholly owned subsidiary and indentured servant of multi-national corporations?

    5. Fraud On The American People: During the 2008 Democratic Primary Big Media set out to destroy Hillary Clinton both as a candidate and as a person. The first step in their strategy was to perpetrate a fraud on the American People by playing the race card against her, swiftboating her and engaging in character assassination against Hillary and her supporters. They conspired with the Obama campaign and the DNC every step of the way.

    a. race card: To paraphrase Baltimore Sun writer H.L. Mencken, false claims of racism are the last bastion of scoundrels. Clearly, at MSNBC there is no shortage of scoundrels. When Hillary scored an upset victory in New Hampshire pundit Chuck Todd of Politico presented the Obama campaign spin that this was due to the “Bradley Effect” which is to say latent racism of white voters. Of course he had no hard evidence to support this destructive accusation. Never one to miss a hand-off pundit Eugene Robinson echoed the same sentiment, then backed off and then wrote a column affirming it. Meanwhile, CNN pundit and DNC member Donna Brazille twisted Bill Clinton’s comparison of the Jesse Jackson Sr. candidacy and his characterization of Obama’s Iraq position into a racial slur. In effect, she accused the most pro-African American President in history of being a racist. And they provided a forum for Jesse Jackson Jr. and Doug Wilder to make racist allegations and predict violence in Denver if Obama is not the nominee. This is the moral equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater.

    b. swift boating: Is defined as an ad hominem attack or smear campaign which is untrue and is intended to destroy the political credibility of a candidate. That is precisely what Big Media did to Hillary Clinton when she met with the editorial board of the Argus Leader in South Dakota, and cited the date of the assassination of Robert Kennedy in response to a question on why Big Media was trying to drive her out of the race. Whereupon MSNBC pundit Keith Olberman pounced on the statement, accused Hillary of wanting Obama assassinated and thereby swift boated her. Obama people then circulated the Olberman tape to journalists across the country. Michael Goodwin of the New York Daily News accused Hillary of evil reasons for staying in the race and wrote articles with hysterical headlines which screamed “Killer Gaff” and “Get Out!” Hillary issued an immediate apology for any misinterpretation, Robert Kennedy’s son stated no one should take offense and the Argus Leader editorial board defended it as well. Nevertheless, MSNBC and CNN harped on it for three days. This was a staged media event designed to force Hillary out of the race. The further motive was to prove she is a bad person—which she most certainly is not. On the morning of the South Dakota primary Hillary was swift boated again. In this case, the culprit was Associated Press reporter Beth Fouhey, who published a false report that Hillary would drop out that evening. The transparent motive was to suppress voter turn-out since the polls in South Dakota were moving in Hillary’s favor. The final irony is that after Hillary suspended her candidacy Fouhey wrote a piece claiming that the presidential race had grown dull and she wished Hillary were back in it.

    c. character assassination: Big Media parsed every word that Hillary spoke for some obscure negative connotation. When she made a speech about Bosnia and stated that she landed in a war zone (which was true), there was small arms fire (which was true in the surrounding Hills), and they had to run for cover (which was not accurate). So she embellished on a story to make a point. Political speeches are full of this kind of thing. It is done to make the stories interesting. It is only a lie when it relates to a material issue in the campaign and here it did not. By contrast, Obama changed his story nine times on whether he heard his spiritual advisor utter racist statements. That statement related directly to a material issue in the campaign, it was not true, therefore it was a lie, or rather nine of them.

    How did Big Media respond? They called Hillary a liar for three solid days, whereas they ignored his multiple deceptions. Previously, they demanded that Hillary apologize for voting in favor of the Iraq Resolution even though many of them had supported it themselves at the time. When Hillary finally suspended her campaign an MSNBC cartoonist produced a cartoon of Hillary as an ugly dragon eyes closed tongue hanging out slain by Obama who is depicted as a smiling St. Christopher. Another media outlet produced a cartoon of Hillary kneeling before Obama with both arms cut off and him standing over her with a sword at parade rest again smiling with caption just a flesh wound. Big Media is pathological.

    6. Discrimination Based On Gender: During the 2008 Democratic Primary Big Media set out to destroy Hillary Clinton both as a candidate and as a person. The second step in their strategy was to dismiss the historic nature of her candidacy and engage in a pattern and practice of sexism against her. They conspired with the Obama campaign and DNC to do so.

    a. sexist attacks: From 2007 to early 2008 MSNBC pundit Chris Matthews launched a steady barrage of sexist attacks against presidential candidate and US Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. The record is replete with examples, but in one series of tirades he called her a witch, a castrator, and a she-devil. When he finally got the vaudeville hook they assigned the role of attacking Hillary to another pundit Keith Olberman, a known degenerate. Thus, it wasn’t long before Olberman was saying naughty things like someone should take Hillary into a room and only one come out, i.e. physically beat her into quitting the race. Not to be outdone, the village idiot David Shuster accused Hillary and Bill of pimping out Chelsie. When Hillary wrote a letter to MSNBC protesting this attack on her daughter, he received a two week suspension and network staffers expressed sympathy for him. What this shows is that MSNBC has a culture of misogyny.

    b. ratification: there is no question that this pattern of sexism was known, condoned and promoted by MSNBC as a business strategy. They cannot deny knowledge of the problem because thousands of protest letters were sent to their designated flack catchers Steve Capus (Sr. Vice President, MSNBC) and Phil Griffin (Senior Vice President, NBC). I myself wrote 5 letters on the subject, one of them to the General Counsel. The National Organization for Women organized a protest against MSNBC to no particular avail. Nor can they deny this was a business strategy, because it is their job to know what is being said on their network, yet pundits continued to attack Hillary despite the public outcry. Thus, it is amazing that Griffin would deny that there was a problem with sexism at MSNBC as he did recently. Like Adolph Eichman he was merely following orders.

    c. evidence: Chris Matthews has a bad memory and so do others. As he prepares to launch a run for the Senate he seeks to rewrite history by claiming that the charges of sexism against him are overblown. Also of late, actress Susan Sarandon (idiot wind) has taken to criticizing Hillary for speaking out on the issue of sexism and how it affected the campaign. Lest we forget here is a short summary of some of Matthews’ sexist comments:

    • I hate her. I hate her. All that she stands for.“ “She Devil“ • “Nurse Ratched“ • “Madame Defarge“ • “Witchy“ • “Anti-male“ • “[U]ppity“ • “She’s going to tell us what to do.“ • “Her scolding manner in terms of her public speaking“ • “[L]et’s talk about the troops …Will they take the orders?“ • [D]oesn’t she know she looks like a fraud?“• Look at those eyes. Look at the cold eyes that she’s giving him. Look at that cold look.“ • [L]ike a strip-teaser saying she’s flattered by the all the attention“• On Sen. Clinton’s endorsers: “castratos in the eunuch chorus“ • “Let me tell you how short Hillary’s leash is.“ • “Is she a convincing mom?“ • On Sen. Clinton’s laugh: “What do you make of the cackle?“ • [S]he’s clapping, like she’s Chinese. I know the Chinese clap at each other, but what is she clapping at? I mean, it’s like one of these wind-up things.“ • “[S]he was giving a campaign barn-burner speech, which is harder to give for a woman; it can grate on some men when they listen to it — fingernails on a blackboard, perhaps.“ • “Is there, out there in the country or out in the Atlantic Ocean, some gigantic monster — big, green, horny-headed, all kinds of horns coming out, big, aggressive monster of anti-Hillaryism that hasn’t shown itself: it’s based upon gender …“ • “[B]eing surrounded by women, does that make a case for commander in chief — or does it make a case against it?“• “Is she hemmed in by the fact that she’s a woman and can’t admit a mistake, or else the Republicans will say, ‘Oh, that’s a woman’s prerogative to change her mind,’ or ‘another fickle woman’? Is her gender a problem in her ability to change her mind?“ • “[T]he reason she’s a U.S. senator, the reason she’s a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around.“ • “She may have gotten The Des Moines Register’s endorsement the other day, thanks to her husband’s lobbying with its female editors

    7. Conspiracy To Hijack An Election: During the 2008 Democratic Primary Big Media set out to destroy Hillary Clinton both as a candidate and as a person. The third step in their strategy was to hijack the process by stamping Hillary with a negative brand, applying a double standard, depriving her of equal time and applying intense pressure to terminate her campaign. Once again, they conspired with the Obama campaign and the DNC every step of the way to do so.

    a. negative branding: on the eve of the primary season, CNN retained strategists developed a marketing strategy to brand Hillary Clinton as someone who is “divisive”, “polarizing”, “dishonest”, “untrustworthy”, “calculating”. Then they proceeded to repeat those adjectives again and again in the same manner that “biological warfare” and “weapons of mass destruction” were pounded across the air waves in the lead-up to the Iraq War. ABC resident lightweight Jake Tapper (aka Snark) compared Hillary to “Tanya Harding” implying that she would break Obama’s knees to steal his crown. And another pundit compared her to the deranged villainess in “Fatal Attraction” who continued to pursue the hero. Terry McAuliffe observed no candidate in history has received so much disrespect from Big Media.

    b. double standard: Big Media treated Obama with great respect and deference compared to Hillary. According to the Wall Street Journal they provided generous explanations for Obama and put the best possible gloss on his serial gaffs. For example, they characterized his dramatic reversals on issues like campaign finance reform, government surveillance, withdrawal timetable as a “shift his position”, “moving to the center as every candidate does in the general election” or “expanding his horizons”. When constituents criticized him for selling them out on an issue involving radioactive leakage NBC pundit Brian Williams sought to minimize its significance by calling it as “something of a political lesson”. And when he gave us nine different stories on whether he was present at Trinity Church on those days when Reverend Wright delivered his unpatriotic and racist sermons Big Media minimized the topic (with the obvious exception of FOX). In the debates Hillary showed an encyclopedic knowledge of the issues and her answers were clear, cogent and convincing. His were not. Yet Big MSNBC and CNN pundits called the debates a draw. Since his performance was poor they sought to dilute hers.

    c. unequal time: Big Media gave far more time to Obama than they did to Hillary during the latter half of the race. This was strange because her margins of victory were far greater in important states, i.e. West Virginia (41%) and Kentucky (35%). CNN would present a brief clip on her and then break away for extensive coverage of an Obama event or speech. They would cover his speech in its entirety without interruption. When it was concluded they would never come back and finish the piece on her. MSNBC would not allow pro-Clinton pundits on their panels, whereas CNN allowed pro-Clinton pundits Carville and Begala to appear but would not permit them to advocate whereas they did allow pro-Obama pundit Donna Brazille to advocate on his behalf without limitation. The Rassmussen polling service stopped tracking her numbers.

    d. terminate campaign: What Mark Twain said about himself could just a easily be said about Hillary: “rumors of my untimely (campaign) death have been greatly exaggerated”. From the night she lost Iowa, Big Media began predicting the imminent demise of her campaign. By February the New York Times publishing headlines like “With Skies Darkening Hillary Soldiers On”. Meanwhile the blogs were howling at the moon that her prospects were “fading fast”. When she debated Obama in Texas, MSNBC interpreted her closing remarks about party unity as a veiled concession speech. They used phony delegate math to convince the public that it was impossible for her to win the nomination and misrepresented the role of superdelegates. When Hillary suspended her candidacy Associated Press misrepresented her status by calling her the “defeated” candidate, the “vanquished” candidate and the “losing” candidate. They failed to report that she won the popular vote, the electoral math and was therefore the most electable candidate.

    8. Quid Pro Quo: MSNBC led the attack on Hillary. They did this because they wanted Obama to be President and she stood in his way. What did they expect to get in return? The obvious answer would be access to the pinnacle of government like FOX has had with the Bush Administration these past eight years. Also, they saw him as an exciting new product that would increase their viewing audience and drive ratings. For better or worse, they tied their credibility to his. In the case of MSNBC it may well be the latter.

    But the real reason may go deeper. The parent company of MSNBC and NBC is General Electric. They are a large contributor to Obama and so are their individual employees. Why? Barack is a big supporter of nuclear energy. In fact, Illinois has more nuclear plants than any other state. Those nuclear plants use cores produced by GE. But the biggest reason why GE supports Obama, is because General Electric along with Westinghouse and three consortiums plans to build 29 nuclear plants in the near term. A company that wants to build 29 nuclear plants needs a federal loan guarantee in order to proceed because private banks regard it as too speculative and indeed the Congressional Budget Office rated the risk of default as higher than 50 percent. Nevertheless, Obama voted in favor of it. GE stands to get a lot of money if Obama becomes President.
    If this is the ultimate explanation then it points to a serious threat to our democracy. If business interests can take over the media and the government, then they can control our thinking much as a dictatorship would. This is not a case of first impression. When my dad was at University of Southern California Law School in the late 1930s there was talk about this. The Dean of Harvard Roscoe Pound published an article entitled “Corporations: The New Serfdom”. During the 1950’s President Eisenhower warned us of the perils of the so-called military-industrial complex. Today, the business interests are global and the concern is real and palpable. Ideally, there would be a wall of separation between business and government as there is with religion.

    9. An Equitable Remedy: The Court of American Public Opinion is a figment of our imagination. It is an equitable court therefore its mandate is “to do justice and that not by halves”. To that end, the moving party beseeches this Court to do the following:

    a. declaratory judgment: that Big Media as it exists today is neither an accurate source of relevant information nor a credible one relative to the political process. Sadly, time and again it has failed to tell the American People the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Therefore the American people are advised to ignore its edicts and to accept nothing it says as true unless supported by testimony of 2 sworn witnesses.

    b. divestiture: there is an inherent conflict of interest between the role of a news organization which is to provide objective reporting for the public good, and the countervailing role of a multi-national corporation to promote its business interests regardless of anything else. This conflict is exposed by the comments of former Chairman of General Electric Jack Welch in his acclaimed book Winning. He describes how after GE acquired NBC a hostage situation developed at NBC’s News Division where the leaders “openly and brazenly questioned GE’s ability to manage a journalistic enterprise . . . and put together a budget which made money.” As you can see from these comments, when a multi-national company owns a news organization and the firewalls are removed it will ultimately reflect the business interests of the parent company. When that happens it is no longer a legitimate news organization. Therefore, we pray that General Electric be ordered to divest itself of its holdings in NBC and MSNBC in their entirety within a period not to exceed 180 days, and that this Court retain jurisdiction until such time as that order has been fully and effectively complied with.

    c. just compensation: we pray that the Big Media whores and headliners who participated in this psychodrama be awarded the compensation they rightfully deserve for their contributions to human misunderstanding, to wit: a padded cell for Olberman; a year supply of time release Prozac for Matthews; a dunce cap for Schuster; a week in the wooden stocks for MSNBC and NBC executives who denied there was a problem when they knew there was one; a copy of story of Faust for Brazille; a rat suit for Todd; a clown suit for Robinson; a broomstick for Modo; a Dudley Do Right RCMP uniform for Brian Williams. And because Russert is now before St. Peter we ask this Court to defer to his judgment– which should not take long.

  • wbboei

    Notice also how even in full video of her remarks she says “That’s when it was revealed to me that ya’ll it’s about poor vs those who have, and not so much about white…It is about White and Black…it opened my eyes.”
    ===================================
    There are the elites and the rest of us whether black or white are buffalo soldiers.



  • democrat1

    For long, I wondered how Wright disappeared so fast from media. Now I know.

  • turndownobama

    When one of the MSM finally did broadcast the Wright tapes, one of them admitted on air that they had had this information for months but hoped they wouldn’t have to reveal it. He still sounded like he thought concealing it would have been the right thing.

  • Mormaer

    The JournoList participants were the wannabees and that is where they hashed out their ideas, plans, and orders from the biggies so they might aspire to one day be a biggie too. They saw power, money, perks and ego seeking attention passed out in the Obama Chicago mob regime. They had to use a crappy JournoList because as punks, hangers on, misogynists, starving creative class ne’r do wells they could not do it at DC cocktail parties or board meetings of which they would never be invited. They were given hopes that they too would have big bucks to appear on cable blab shows and write slanted nonsensical columns. Too bad big media died before they got theirs, they just got their “super big” brains picked, and they were stupid enough to put this shit in writing. My current favorite TV watching is NatGeo Wild’s Rebel Monkeys of which I imagine I am seeing the political class and their media surrogates scrounging for a place to live and something to eat after this fall’s election. But the monkeys are much smarter and better looking.

  • JanH

    Clinton and Gates visit Korean demilitarised zone


    The video cannot be shown at the moment. Please try again later.

  • JanH

    SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON ATTENDS DANGEROUS 70 NATION CONFERENCE



  • Betty

    Fifth Demension, you quoted – “That’s when it was revealed to me that ya’ll it’s about poor vs those who have, and not so much about white…It is about White and Black…it opened my eyes.” And put your finger on exactly what troubled me too.

    I wonder if she had to be “politically correct” in that room. In this case being “politically correct” would be never saying that it isn’t about black vs white to that crowd.

  • hwc

    Shirley Sherrod:

    You can bite me, too. Yes, it is a shame that they didn’t even get the facts before branding you as a racist. Did I mention the time I was branded as a racist because I voted for Hillary Clinton? Did I mention that Bill Clinton was called a racist? Did I mention that I was told to pack my bags and get out of the Democrat Party because there was no longer a place for “my kind”? All by the same goons that just fired you for being a racist.

    Yesh, it sucks. But, I’m guessing you probably were with those goons 100% when it mattered. So yes, you can bite me, too.

  • JanH

    US announces another new sanctions against N.Korea



  • jbstonesfan

    That was a brilliant analysis Wbboei..I am glad I never had you as an advesary in court in court:)

  • AmericanGal

    New Poll: Americans would vote for any Republican over Obama

    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1478

  • Carol

    Tea Party caucus today with Senators in Washington….

    My first gut reaction to this is that we Hillary supporters…moderate dems…PUMAS….missed an opportunity.

    We should have, could have oraganized in a fashion similar to the Tea Party….which to my mind has a more conservative agenda than most Hillary supporters agree with…..and should have / could have been a similar force in National politics.

    In fact, we could have given political cover to Clinton supporters in Congress to push for the things we believe in.

  • jbstonesfan

    http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1478

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

    Obama’s lowest poll numbers to date..

  • Shadowfax

    Put away the tambourine, Blago won’t sing.

    Just listening to two lawyers watching the trial…talk on Fox last night, they both agreed that the prosecution didn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that Blago was guilty of trying to ‘sell’ Barry’s senate seat.

    I guess that’s the way Blago’s attorney’s must feel, because they decided to rest their case, leaving only closing arguments on the agenda.

    As I mentioned yesterday, the prosecution did not call Rezko nor Rahm to the stand as they promised. So, I guess his attorneys think Blago has a better chance of a ‘not guilty’ verdict if there is no cross examination of him. (Probably correct on that, as much as I will miss the fireworks.)

    My question is, if Blago is found ‘not guilty’, can he go back and sue to get his Governors job back?? If he was impeached without being guilty of breaking any law????

  • Shadowfax

    JanH
    July 21st, 2010 at 8:31 am

    Clinton and Gates visit Korean demilitarised zone

    ———
    Thank God, looks like Hillary and Gates were well protected there!

  • S

    washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/Examiner-Opinion-Zone/Shirley-Sherrods-Disappearing-Act-Not-So-Fast-98846149.html

    is there more to this story than meets the eye???

    oh what a tangled web…

  • Shadowfax

    Rod Blagojevich to Judge Zagel: It is my decision not to testify
    By
    Sarah Ostman
    on July 21, 2010 10:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

    Reporting with Natasha Korecki and Dave McKinney

    Judge James Zagel has the jury taken out of the room and then addresses Rod Blagojevich.

    The judge asks him to state his name for the record. “Rod Blagojevich.”

    Zagel explains to Blagojevich that it has to be his own decision not to testify.

    “So now I’m going to ask you if it is your personal decision not to take the witness stand,” the judge says
    “Yes, judge,” the ex-governor responds.

    Zagel asks Blagojevich if he had discussed the matter with his attorneys.

    “Yes, judge, fully and completely,” he says.

    And you have “deliberated in your own mind” after discussing with your lawyers? the judge asks.

    “It is my decision, judge, on the advice of my attorneys. I made the decision freely and voluntarily,” he says, speaking longer than necessary but sounding perfectly comfortable.

    Zagel says he is satisfied and tells Blagojevich to sit down or remain standing.

    “What would you recommend, judge?” the ex-governor asks.
    “I would return to your seat,” the judge says without hesitation.

    Rod laughs and moves through his lawyers, touching one on the shoulder. Still smiling, he sits down, unbuttons his suit coat, runs his left hand through his hair, and with his hands clasps, sits and listens.

  • S

    maybe someone got to blago and told him to be quiet and he will be free…maybe a deal for him behind the scene thru undefined channels that if he refrains from incriminating anyone near the WH…

  • “Tea Party caucus today with Senators in Washington….

    My first gut reaction to this is that we Hillary supporters…moderate dems…PUMAS….missed an opportunity.

    We should have, could have oraganized in a fashion similar to the Tea Party….which to my mind has a more conservative agenda than most Hillary supporters agree with…..and should have / could have been a similar force in National politics.

    In fact, we could have given political cover to Clinton supporters in Congress to push for the things we believe in.”
    _________________________________

    There were many reasons why this was not viable. Most importantly, PUMAs were all over the map ideologically, unlike the Tea Party which is almost (ALMOST) monolithically far right. Also, the Democratic Party kept us at arms length and saw no value in us. While the GOP may be wary of the tea partiers, they do recognize their value. Tea Partiers have a party. PUMA, by name, did not (and does not).

    What we did accomplish was keeping Bill and Hillary Clinton politically viable, and of course, sans the PUMA vote John McCain never would have picked Sarah Palin…and the rest, as they say, is history.

  • rgb44hrc

    jbstonesfan
    July 21st, 2010 at 11:24 am
    &&&&&&&&&&

    Yes, The Amazing LimbObama continues to go ever lower. Too delicious not to share:

    July 21, 2010 – Obama Approval Drops To Lowest Point Ever, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Independent Voters Turn On President Since Honeymoon
    =======

    A year after President Barack Obama’s political honeymoon ended, his job approval rating has dropped to a negative 44 – 48 percent, his worst net score ever, and American voters say by a narrow 39 – 36 percent margin that they would vote for an unnamed Republican rather than President Obama in 2012, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

    This compares to a 48 – 43 percent approval for Obama in a May 26 national poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University and a 57 – 33 percent approval last July, just before the political firestorm created by opposition to his health care plan galvanized political opponents and turned independent voters against him.

    In this latest survey of more than 2,000 voters, independent voters disapprove of Obama 52 – 38 percent and say 37 – 27 percent they would vote for a Republican contender in 2012.

    American voters also say 48 – 40 percent Obama does not deserve reelection in 2012.

    Anti-incumbent sentiment slams both parties as voters disapprove 59 – 31 percent of the job Democrats are doing, and disapprove 59 – 29 percent of Republicans in Congress. But voters say 43 – 38 percent they would vote for a Republican in a generic Congressional race.

    American voters say 42 – 32 percent that Obama has been a better president than George W. Bush, similar to the 43 – 30 percent who felt that way in January of 2010.

    “It was a year ago, during the summer of 2009 that America’s love affair with President Barack Obama began to wane. In July of 2009, the President had a 57 – 33 percent approval rating. Today, his support among Democrats remains strong, but the disillusionment among independent voters, who dropped from 52 – 37 percent approval to 52 – 38 percent disapproval in the last 12 months, is what leads to his weakness overall when voters start thinking about 2012,” said Peter A. Brown., assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

    “In politics a month is a lifetime and we have 28 months until November of 2012. But politicians with re-elect numbers at 40 percent bear watching,” Brown added.

    American voters like Obama more than Sarah Palin, giving him a 49 – 45 percent favorability, while she gets a negative 35 – 49 percent.

    Michelle Obama does much better, with a 55 – 19 percent favorability.

    Twelve percent of voters say they are more likely to support a candidate for office, if Obama campaigns for the candidate, compared to 16 percent if Palin campaigns.

    The country would be better off if John McCain had won the 2008 election, 37 percent of voters say, while 35 percent say the U.S. would be worse off. This compares to 37 – 35 percent who thought in January the U.S. would be worse off under McCain.

    Asked to describe their feelings toward the President:
    * 17 percent say they admire him
    * 33 percent are satisfied
    * 33 percent are dissatisfied
    * 15 percent are angry with him.

    “The Republican tilt of the electorate little more than 100 days before the 2010 election is evident, but not overwhelming. Republicans hold a 43 – 38 percent lead on the ‘generic ballot,’ compared to a 42 – 34 percent Democratic lead in July 2009,” said Brown. “What a difference a year makes.”

    Voter approval of the President’s handling of some of the nation’s problems shows:
    * Disapprove 56 – 39 percent of his handling of the economy;
    * Disapprove 46 – 43 percent of his handling of foreign policy;
    * Disapprove 51 – 41 percent of his handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill;
    * Disapprove 58 – 30 percent of his handling of illegal immigration;
    * Approve 46 – 34 percent of his nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court.

    “The massive disapproval of his handling of illegal immigration stems from voter opposition to his decision to have the government ask the federal courts to throw out the Arizona law. They say 60 – 28 percent the lawsuit is a bad idea,” said Brown.

    Support for the war in Afghanistan hit a new low with 48 percent saying it was the right thing to do and 43 percent saying America should not be involved. That’s not much different from May’s 49 – 42 percent support, but markedly down from 56 – 36 percent in April.

  • S

    …just speculating here…but…perhaps Trump will get Blago some computer training and put him on the payroll with Levi Johnston as his assistant…or some such arrangement or combo…would not be surprised if Trump takes both of them under his wing somewhere…

  • tim

    The Tea Party is not “far right”

    I consider myself a PUMA and a Tea Party supporter, and was a registered democrat all my life until May 31th, 2008.

  • HillaryforTexas

    I agree with tim that the Tea Party is not all FAR right (though in fairness the majority are further right than me.) What we have to be aware of is that we ONLY SEE the version of the tea party that the media allows us to see. The reporters DO NOT interview or speak to the many former Dems involved at those rallies. They do not interview those concerned with merely fiscal responsibility, rather than extreme social issues. The media goes and finds the furthest right people they can at these rallies, and trumpets their words to paint it as a solely far right movement. it is not.

    With all that we now KNOW about the media’s perfidy, why should we trust the version of the Tea Party that THEY present to us on the TV and in print? Why would we be that stupid? If we rail against the public gullibly accepting the media’s version of Hillary as true, then WHY would we take their word for the makeup of the Tea Party members as any more valid? They would like us to believe that Hillary is a conniving witch, and the people at tea parties are extremist loons. Neither is true.

  • JanH

    The BBC on Hillary’s visit to South Korea


    The video cannot be shown at the moment. Please try again later.

  • Carol

    sans the PUMA vote John McCain never would have picked Sarah Palin…

    Not sure what you’re saying here…..Palin was NOT a good choice for disenchanted Hillary voters. I know many who did not vote or voted for BO because they would not vote for Palin.

    I firmaly believe that if McCain has chosen a perceived moderate, he would have won.

  • turndownobama

    carol,

    I watched the polls pretty carefully around August/Sept 2008. SOME people said they were repelled by Palin on McCain’s ticket, OTHERS said they were attracted. The two figures evened out. (Guess which side the media emphasized. :-/ )

    I think this referred to Hillary supporters, or at least to Dems, or to Dem women. I might still find the details somewhere.

  • turndownobama

    As to whether the PUMA movement encouraged McCain to choose Palin.

    [At the beginning of her acceptance speech] Ms. Palin made an explicit appeal to the disappointed supporters of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton by praising not only Mrs. Clinton but also the only other woman in American history who has been on a presidential ticket, Geraldine A. Ferraro, Walter F. Mondale’s Democratic running mate in 1984.
    “Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America, but it turns out the women of America aren’t finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all,” Ms. Palin said to huge applause.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/us/politics/29palin.html?_r=1

    Now, maybe McCain had nothing to do with this speech and Palin was just going rogue already…. ;-)

  • Shadowfax

    Blago: Prosecutors ‘proved my innocence’
    |
    Standing before a crowd of reporters, cameras and microphones in the courthouse lobby, Rod Blagojevich said he wanted to testify but took the advice of his attorney Sam Adam Sr., who convinced him the prosecution hadn’t proven its case.

    “I felt all along and believed all along that I was going to testify,” he said. But he said the government case wasn’t as they presented it, without calling witnesses Antoin “Tony” Rezko and Stuart Levine, both convicted in the federal probe.

    Blagojevich said with the father-son lawyers on his legal team in disagreement over his testimony, he picked the elder attorney’s advice.

    “Sam Junior still at this moment wanted me to testify and frankly, so did I,” Blagojevich said.

    He said the decision was talked about until late Monday night.

    “Sam Adam Sr.’s most compelling argument and ultimately the one that swayed me was that the government in their case proved my innocence,” he said. “They proved I did nothing illegal and that there was nothing further for us to add.”

    “In the tapes that the government played, they proved as I said all along that I did nothing illegal,” the former governor continued. “In fact they proved that I sought the advice of my lawyers and my advisers. They proved that I was on the phone talking to them, brainstorming about ideas. Yes, they proved some of those ideas were stupid, but they also proved some of the ideas were good.”

    Blagojevich also claimed the government failed to prove any evidence that he illegally took money. Though the evidence did show his wife was paid by Rezko, Blagojevich has said she worked for that money.

    “I never took a corrupt dollar, I never took a corrupt dime, not a corrupt nickel, not a corrupt penny,” he said.

    Before leaving without taking questions, Blagojevich said: “Now I also would like to say … I’ve learned a lot of lessons from this whole experience and perhaps maybe the biggest lesson I’ve learned is that I talk too much.”

    And with that he grabbed wife Patti’s hand and headed for the courthouse exit.

    Moments later, Sam Adam and his son, Sam Adam Jr., told reporters the decision to keep Blagojevich off the stand boiled down to their belief that the government had not proven its case. Adam Jr. said his split with his father over whether Blagojevich would take the stand was a battle between “an old bull and a young colt, and the old bull won.”

    He said he, too, was swayed by the idea that Blagojevich didn’t need to explain himself and said he will make a similar argument with the jury. Adam Jr. said he realizes there could be some harm, though, in not delivering on a promise to the jury to have Blagojevich testify.

    “Is that harm greater than putting him on the stand saying, ‘We think they proved you guilty, you need to answer’?” Adam said.
    Adam said he had seen newspaper articles with headlines asking whether the government had proven its case and asked reporters if they ever thought they’d be standing in the courthouse today asking those kinds of questions.

    Adam Sr. said the government was missing star witnesses such as Rezko and Levine because they would take the stand and lie. “And everyone in the city knows it,” he said.

    The father and son were asked whether the government had perhaps saved some of the most damaging tapes to use against Blagojevich on cross-examination. They said that was not the case.

    Adam Jr. said he didn’t believe U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald would hold back the best tapes and not use them in its case in chief.

    “I have more faith in our government than that,” he said.

  • blowme0bama

    DefiantOne
    July 21st, 2010 at 12:10 pm
    unlike the Tea Party which is almost (ALMOST) monolithically far right.

    ______________________________________________________

    Disagree strongly. I am a middle of the road moderate, and I would venture to offer that a very sizeable portion of those who support TEA Party principles are the same. I’m moderate to slightly right leaning on fiscal matters; when it makes sense and its smart policy, spending can be a good thing and should be done. When you’re bankrupt, you tighten your belt. It is context specific.

    On social matters, I’m middle of the road, period. I don’t like ideologues of either end trying to mandate their BS on me.

    I think you are misunderstanding TEA Party constituency to a large degree if you believe they are “almost monolithically” hard right.

    We’re common sense average Americans who hate the destruction of our country through divisive politics, destruction of the economy, and elite rule by technocrats.

  • Shadowfax

    My guess is the reason that McCain/Palin didn’t win is that Republican’s didn’t like one or the other and stayed home.

    McCain wasn’t conservative enough for the far right.

    Palin was a pretty female… ‘nough said.

  • Shadowfax

    The Queen’s Riddle

    Barack Obama met with the Queen of England.

    He asked her, “Your Majesty, how do you run such an efficient government? Are there any tips you can give to me?”

    “Well,” said the Queen, “the most important thing is to surround yourself with intelligent people.”

    Obama frowned, and then asked, “But how do I know the people around me are really intelligent?”

    The Queen took a sip of tea. “Oh, that’s easy; you just ask them to answer an intelligent riddle.” The Queen pushed a button on her intercom.
    “Please send Tony Blair in here, would you?”

    Tony Blair walked into the room and said, “Yes, my Queen?”

    The Queen smiled and said, “Answer me this please, Tony, your mother and father have a child. It is not your brother and it is not your sister.
    Who is it?”

    Without pausing for a moment, Tony Blair answered, “That would be me.”

    “Yes! Very good,” said the Queen.

    Obama went back home to ask Joe Biden, his vice president the same question. “Joe, answer this for me. Your mother and your father have a
    child. It’s not your brother and it’s not your sister. Who is it?”

    “I’m not sure,” said Biden. “Let me get back to you on that one…” He went to his advisors and asked every one, but none could give him an answer.

    Finally, he ended up in the men’s room and recognized Colin Powell’s shoes in the next stall.

    Biden asked Powell, “Colin, can you answer this for me? Your mother and father have a child and it’s not your brother or your sister. Who is it?”

    Colin Powell yelled back, “That’s easy, it’s me!”

    Biden smiled, and said, “Thanks!” Then, he went back to speak with Obama. “Say, I did some research and I have the answer to that riddle.
    It’s Colin Powell!”

    Obama got up, stomped over to Biden, and angrily yelled into his face, “No! you idiot! It’s Tony Blair!”

    —posted on PUMApac by Simofish :-)

  • jbstonesfan

    I would like to see Hillary and Gates announce further snactions against Iran as well…with N. Korea it’s too late, but Iran must be stopped before going nuclear.

  • gonzotx

    Fritz is such a disappointment. Obviously he got his orders not to bring to trial as witnesses anyone? No balletqueenRhambo, no Redzothepalnextdoor, no Valerieiwanttobesenator,no fraudulentpresident. The fix was in, Chicago style. I don’t blame Blago, but we all lost. It seems everything is fixed in America these days, maybe it always was.

  • S

    edgeoforever.wordpress.com/

    …from ‘notyoursweetie’

    the current list of media whores on jurnolist:

    Spencer Ackerman – Washington Independent

    Michael Tomasky – The Guardian

    Thomas Schaller – Baltimore Sun

    Jonathan Stein – Mother Jones

    Jared Bernstein – Biden’s economist

    Joe Conason – New York Observer

    David Greenberg – Grist

    David Roberts – Grist

    Todd Gitlin – Columbia journalism profesor

    Chris Hayes – The Nation

    Katha Pollitt – The Nation

    Mark Schmit – American Prospect

    Kevin Drum – Washington Monthly

    From the original story revealing this

    David Weigel – Washington Post

    From the new article in Daily Caller, additional names

    Luke Mitchells – Harpers

    Ezra Klein – American Prospect

    Alec McGillis – Washington Post

    Ryan Donmoyer – Bloomberg news

    Laura Rozen – Politico

    Jeffrey Toobin – The New Yorker

    Michael Hirsh – Newsweek

    Joel Klein – Time

    Eric Alterman

    NYS will update this as names keep dripping. Feel free to let NYS know if she missed anyone.

  • gonzotx

    from bitter
    **********

    look this up on fox news:

    “The Agriculture Department has a lengthy history with the official forced to resign Monday over a controversial YouTube clip — it turns out she and a group she helped found with her husband won millions last year in a discrimination suit settlement …”

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/20/official-ousted-ag-department-took-usda-court-won/

    But it’s not the first time Sherrod faced off against the federal government. Days before she was appointed to the USDA post last year, her group reportedly won a $13 million settlement in a longstanding discrimination suit against the USDA known commonly as the Pigford case.

    The Rural Development Leadership Network announced last summer that New Communities Inc. — a group Sherrod formed with husband Charles, who is a civil rights activist, and with other black farmers — had reached the agreement. The RDLN said the USDA had “refused” to offer new loans or restructure old loans to members of New Communities, leading to the discrimination claim.

    The announcement said that in addition to the $13 million to New Communities, Shirley and Charles Sherrod would each get $150,000 for “pain and suffering.”

    A USDA official told FoxNews.com on Tuesday that the settlement had “nothing to do with” Sherrod’s hiring last year — likewise, the official said her resignation was only the result of her comments in the video.

    “This is all about her comments,” the official said.

    Sherrod’s settlement was a drop in the bucket in terms of the money the federal government has paid out in Pigford claims to other black farmers over the years. The suit claimed the USDA racially discriminated against black farmers by not giving them fair treatment when they applied for loans or assistance. The case was first settled in 1999, resulting to date in more than $1 billion in compensation payments from the federal government.

    In addition, the Obama administration has called for another $1.15 billion to settle claims for other black farmers — Congress has not yet granted the money.

    However, the case has attracted some scrutiny.

    Former Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer told Fox News that while those who were discriminated against “should be reimbursed,” there are other hangers-on trying to game the system.

    “The problem you have with the class-action lawsuits is a lot of people jump in that may be on the fringe, that maybe don’t deserve it, that sounded good because their neighbor got a check … (It) is very expensive, very time consuming,” Schafer said. “It probably in the long run is going to be cheaper just to settle the whole thing — so some people will get paid that probably don’t deserve it. And to me, I don’t like that kind of thing. I like to settle it on merit.”

    Vilsack appeared to reference the Pigford case, or the backstory behind it, in his statement Tuesday defending his decision to effectively dismiss Sherrod.

    “Yesterday, I asked for and accepted Ms. Sherrod’s resignation for two reasons. First, for the past 18 months, we have been working to turn the page on the sordid civil rights record at USDA and this controversy could make it more difficult to move forward on correcting injustices. Second, state rural development directors make many decisions and are often called to use their discretion,” he said.

    Sherrod claims the administration never bothered to find out “the truth” about the video clip. She says she was telling a story about something that happened more than two decades ago when she was working for a local nonprofit group. She ended up helping that farmer and says she was, in recalling the story, trying to impart a lesson about the importance of looking beyond race.

  • gonzotx

    Hillary Clinton vows to defend rights of Afghan women

    US secretary of state tells foreign ministers meeting in Kabul women ‘will not be sacrificed’ in any peace deal with the Taliban

    Hillary Clinton today promised that any peace deal with the ultra-conservative Taliban movement would not come at the cost of the rights of Afghan women.

    The US secretary of state told a conference of the world’s foreign ministers that women in the country “will not be sacrificed” and announced a number of initiatives to improve their situation.

    Her intervention came when many diplomats assume that any deal with hardline insurgents will inevitably involve compromises that would have been unthinkable nine years ago, when the US-led invasion of Afghanistan was in part justified by the desire to emancipate Afghan women.

    But in a meeting with leading Afghan women today Clinton told them that any deal “can’t come at the cost of women and women’s lives”.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/20/hillary-clinton-afghan-women-taliba

  • Carol

    turndown….

    I don’t know many Republicans. The Palin choice was designed to attract them and I think McCain thought the women would go for Palin…and many did.

    I only know what I know, and that is that many Hillary supporters wanted to vote for McCain but changed their mind when he chose Palin.

  • JanH

    S
    July 21st, 2010 at 3:53 pm
    ———–

    Thanks for the list of traitors. Good to know.

  • Shadowfax

    I am looking over what is still around of the Journolist website……..

    Pretty interesting stuff on this page, and there is a search box of the site, so God only knows what that could lead to for anyone that cares to venture down that path.

    Tid bits on this page:

    The Invisible Web

    Sites that search won’t find

    It is easy to become overwhelmed by the sheer size of the Internet, especially when we do a web search and are told that two million pages meet our requirements. Of course, few of those will be useful.
    How big is the web?

    A typical search engine now claims to index more than a billion documents. Of those, many will be duplicates or obsolete. It’s still a huge number, but the truth is that the web is actually much bigger than that. Enthusiasts for what is called the “Hidden” or “Invisible” web insist that it is either 10, 100 or 500 times the size of the “normal” web.

    The “invisible” parts of the web are those which cannot be “crawled” or automatically indexed by the search engines. There are various reasons why that might be so. They might not be accessible by links from outside. They might use types of file that can’t be read by the search engines. Until recently, that included Acrobat files, known as PDFs. Some of these contain extremely useful and important documents, and it is good news that Google and AllTheWeb searches will now include them.

    Still more documents are not available because they are held in databases and can only called up or generated if you actually ask for them from the site itself. The search engine can’t do that, but you can, if you know where to look. There is a useful overview of the topic by Chris Sherman at Search Engine Watch.

    The numerous competing “Invisible” or “Hidden” web tools are really offering access to those databases. Most now have a searchable front-end, but they don’t offer a search of the database contents, only of their names and other descriptive text.

    lots more

    http://www.johnmorrish.com/journolist/invisible.html

  • JanH

    Shadowfax
    July 21st, 2010 at 3:03 pm
    ————-

    LOL…too funny!

  • basil9

    great find, gonzo.

    I have copied to other blogs.

  • moononpluto

    Oh bloody hell, this could be bad.

    Al Gore sex scandle shocker, police investigate two more

    The NATIONAL ENQUIRER reports in an exclusive bombshell exclusive that police have investigated charges from TWO MORE WOMEN who claimed they were abused by former VP AL GORE!

    The allegations come hot on the heels of an ongoing Portland, Ore., police investigation that reopened after The ENQUIRER exclusively revealed accusations by a licensed massage therapist who says Gore groped her in 2006.

    ….National Enquirer wont let me link or access as i’m outside the continental US.

    Anyone else hearing more. I sincerely hope Gore has not thrown away a lifetime of work for this.

  • moononpluto

    If those numbers from Dem friendly Quinnipac polling today are in any way accurate, we are looking at a Dem bloodbath in a few months.

  • blowme0bama

    moononpluto
    July 21st, 2010 at 5:28 pm
    If those numbers from Dem friendly Quinnipac polling today are in any way accurate, we are looking at a Dem bloodbath in a few months.
    ____________________________________-

    Good. The thug-o-crats must be driven from the party.

  • Shadowfax

    moononpluto
    July 21st, 2010 at 5:25 pm

    Oh bloody hell, this could be bad.

    Al Gore sex scandle shocker, police investigate two more

    ——–
    In midflight to the fainting couch……oh no, Gore caught forcing himself on women…what a shock.

  • confloyd

    Good grief! I’ve been out of pocket for a little over 24 hours and the political world has gone nuts.

    Admin: great post…rather shocking though….looks to me that the wheels on the Obama bus are flying off and Gore’s is too!

  • moononpluto

    Confloyd, welcome to the big party, its gonna be an interesting few months coming up and a nasty evil one election season.

  • wbboei

    This morning, I spoke with a friend of mine who is Iranian. He was explaining the history of Islam in Iran. Iran was originally Persia, and the official religion was Zoroaster. This religion studied the stars, and the three wise me who followed the star to Bethlehem were members of that religion. They were called majis. That religion did not believe in burying their dead so the bones were left to bleach in the sun. Marco Polo in his journal mentions having seen the bones of the three wise men, and today they are supposedly entombed in Cologne Germany.

    I asked him what the difference was between Shiites and Sunnis. He says it is doctrinal and political. Doctrinally, the Prophet had a daughter but no sons. Therefore, he made his son-in-law his successor, and for the next 12 generations the sons of his sons, and their sons etc ruled and were deemed the rightful heirs. This was the view of the Shiites, and it is akin to a monarchy. The Sunnis have a different view of the matter. They believe that when the Prophet died it ended and none of those successors were true descendants of the Prophet. Blood line was important to them. Politically, Iran is 80% Shiite today, whereas Turkey, Saudi Arabia, etc are Sunni. The Ottoman empire was Sunni, and Iran used their Shiite religion as a buffer against it. Today, they also make a distinction between Persians and Arabs. Persian like my friend tend to be westernized and highly educated, and that is less true with the Arabs as a group, but individuals may vary.

    My friend is very saddened by what happened to his country. He says many people were in favor of overthrowing the Shah, and the Mullahs hijacked the revolution. The only question they asked was do you want to be an Islamic Republic the people said yes, to which they said fine now we will make the rules. That was their mistake. For example, Dinner Jacket has just come out with a set of fines for women if they wear lipstick-$25, nail polish (a similar amount), and forced marriages.

    He voted for Mr. Obama but is deeply disappointed in him now, and feels that if Barack had shown some courage at the right time then the student revolution could have succeeded, whereas now Dinnerjacket and his thugs continue to kill dissidents on a daily basis. He said the sanctions imposed by Europe have had some effect, hence the Iranian government imposed a 70% tax on the bazargi which is the life blood of their economy. It is a market in goods, their version of Wall Street he said. The result was they began shutting down their shops. So he dropped the tax to 20% and asked them to please reopen. They did not so now he has dropped it down to 15%. These merchants have got Dinnerjacket over a barrel.

    He said the Government their has been in intense negotiations with the Russians for assistance on their nuclear program. Recently, they gave the Russians major concession on fishing rights and other uses of Iranian land on the Caspian Sea. Meanwhile, China continues to pursue its energy needs in derogation of the promises which were made to the United States. I told him we have seen that before where Chinese politician make a commitment, and then the People’s Liberation Army does what it pleases.

    He said there are many groups in Iran now who want the current Administration to go. The problem is they cannot agree on a unified future vision. Some of them want a monarchy restored, some are communists, some are capitalists, and there is no mutually prominent figure who can unite them successfully. Meanwhile, Dinnerjacket and his supporters are waiting for the Obama Administration to leave office. They are determined to make as much progress on their nuclear program while he is still in office, because they see him as an easy mark, whereas his successor might not be.

  • ShortTermer

    listserv Journolist = Pravda – American Style!

  • ShortTermer

    My Representative, Cliff Stearns, is a member of the newly formed Tea Party caucus. I replied to his email with my thoughts about where our country should go and not go when I congratulated him and told him I was proud of him, and I offered my help as a member of the Tea Party.
    Tim you and I share a lot of the same views.

  • confloyd

    They are going to talk about Blago’s sudden decision not to testify…poor little Blago…he’s finally going to cash in! LOL! I wonder how much he settled for???

  • gonzotx

    I am unfortunately now hearing much outrage about the cartel.

    Ah, so what, move on…

    This is what dumbing down of the education in America has accomplished.

    I was thinking, there were several media people that disappeared around 2007,2008 and I wonder if they refused to go along with the “Agenda”. Abrams, others whose names I don’t recall. Remember that attractive middle aged blond female (always) ex judge, I think from Texas, she was pretty good and she disappeared too. These people were generally fair minded. I guess that automatically lost their job for them.

  • gonzotx

    That would be NOT hearing much outrage about the media cartel

  • gonzotx

    CNN Reporter Throws Softballs Hardballs At Ground Zero Victory Mosque Developer
    —Ace
    Some good questions.

    FEYERICK (on-camera): Why not have a prayer space for Buddhists or Jews or Christians or- why must it be Muslim? It can’t just be a business decision.
    EL-GAMEL: There are Jewish community centers all over the country. There are Y-

    FEYERICK: But the Jews didn’t take down two towers.

    EL-GAMEL: There are YMCA’s all over the country-

    FEYERICK: But the Christians didn’t take down two towers.

    EL-GAMEL: And this is- and this is a need that exists.

    FEYERICK: For those who are so- still sensitive and so raw to this, their question- their overriding question is, why here? Why so close? It’s two blocks, but it was close enough that landing gear ended up on the roof. Why?

    EL-GAMEL: There is a need. It’s supply and demand. The community wants it. The politicians are supporting it.

    FEYERICK (on-camera): Coming out of that hearing, somebody said, ‘The Japanese would never have dared to build on Pearl Harbor.’ What makes this different?

    EL-GAMEL: If you were at that hearing the way that I was at that hearing, you come out understanding that there is a great need for dialogue now.

    One trick the media does is to ask the “hard questions,” but without challenge or follow-up — basically inviting the subject, then, to make his best rebuttal to his critics. And the media pats itself on the back for these softballs disguised as “hard questions.”

    I don’t know if that’s what this reporter is doing here, though. The interview is cut up into snippets so we don’t know how she pushed him on these things.

  • confloyd

    So is Vilsack being held responsible for the firing?? This is what I hear. Wasn’t he the one who stuck with Hillary until the bitter end???

  • JanH

    wbboei
    July 21st, 2010 at 6:55 pm
    —————-

    I would be interested in hearing your friend’s views on Israel’s right to exist and the Jews in general.

  • gonzotx

    Drones in U.S. skies – to keep eye on us?

    ——————————————————————————–
    Posted: July 20, 2010
    8:00 pm Eastern

    © 2010

    In May of last year, David Kilcullen, a counterinsurgency adviser to Gen. David Petraeus from 2006 to 2008, co-authored a strategic analysis (“Death from Above, Outrage Down Below,” New York Times, May 17, 2009). He emphasized that the “public outrage” among Pakistan’s civilians caused by our drone attacks “is hardly limited to the region in which they take place.”

    Extensively reported by the news media, “the persistence of these attacks on Pakistani territory offends people’s deepest sensibilities, alienates them from their government, and contributes to Pakistan’s instability.”

    A year later, in Foreign Policy in Focus (fpif.org, May 19), Conn Hallinan, reporting on the increase in drone strikes in Pakistan, notes that the continuing controversy over the actual number of corollary civilian deaths “is a sharply debated issue.” Neither President Obama, who authorizes them, nor the CIA, which does the actual killing, directly gives us the numbers. As for the Pakistani government’s figures, Hallinan continues:

    “The word ‘civilian’ is a slippery one, because no one knows exactly what criteria the United States uses to distinguish a ‘militant’ from a civilian. Is someone with a gun a ‘militant?’ Since large numbers of males in the frontier regions of Pakistan carry guns, that definition would target a huge number of people.”

    I mentioned this life-ending ambiguity in drone strikes to a person who claims to be concerned with human-rights abuses. Shrugging, she said: “I don’t have to worry about that. The drones aren’t coming here; and since they’re pilotless, there are no American casualties. So I’m all for their use.”

    But drones are indeed in our skies.

    Constitutionalist John Whitehead – who is also a careful master researcher – points out (“Drones Over America: Tyranny at Home,” Rutherford.org, June 28), that “unbeknownst to most Americans, remote-controlled pilotless aircraft have been employed domestically for years now. They were first used as a national security tool for patrolling America’s borders, and then as a means of monitoring citizens.”

    When did government officials start ignoring our national charter – and why does it continue? Find out in “Who Killed the Constitution?”

    He cites a 2006 news story, moreover, that “one North Carolina county is using a UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) equipped with low-light and infrared cameras to keep watch on its citizens. The aircraft has been dispatched to monitor gatherings of motorcycle riders at the Gaston County fairgrounds from just a few hundred feet in the air – close enough to identify faces.”

    As John Whitehead also reports, “Drones (are) a $2 billion cornerstone of the Obama administration’s war efforts.” And Defense Secretary Robert Gates adds, “The more we have used them, the more we have identified their potential in a broader and broader set of circumstances.”

    So broad that – and this is Whitehead’s core discovery – “the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is facing mounting pressure from state governments and localities to issue flying rights for a range of UAVs to carry out civilian and law-enforcement activities.”

    You think a UAV won’t be interested in you, innocent of any conceivable (even by the CIA) terrorist connections? Do not underestimate an all-seeing, suspicious government. “State police,” writes Whitehead, “hope to send them up to capture images of speeding cars’ license plates.” And, in 2007, “insect-like drones were seen hovering over political rallies in New York and Washington, seemingly spying on protesters.”

    As I was writing about drones watching over us, I found a triumphant breakthrough (“Unmanned Phantom Eye Demonstrator Unveiled,” spacedaily.com, July 13): “The Boeing Company has unveiled the hydrogen-powered Phantom Eye unmanned airborne system.” Said Darryl Davis, president of Boeing Phantom Works, at the St. Louis unveiling ceremony:

    “Phantom Eye is the first of its kind and could open up a whole new market in collecting data and communications. … The capabilities in Phantom Eye’s design will offer game-changing opportunities for our military, civil and commercial customers.”

    Will we citizens have any say in whether we want to be part of this continually omnivorous government game? Whitehead gives you the answer: “Unfortunately, to a drone, everyone is a suspect because drone technology makes no distinction between the law-abiding individual and the suspect. Everyone gets monitored, photographed, tracked and targeted.”

    (Column continues below)

    But not terminally targeted like the innocent civilians during Predator and Reaper strikes in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen. However, the Obama administration has made it clear that, like its predecessor, it has decided the battlefield against terrorism can be anywhere – including the United States.

    And should there be another 9/11 or a successful suicide bomber in New York’s Times Square, the government – with its ever-increasing, undeniable evidence of homegrown jihadists (who look just like your neighbors) may use UAVs not only for surveillance but in the self-defense of us all. Drones have already committed extra-judicial killings outside our borders. Are we immune at home?

    Whitehead summons James Madison: “A standing military force with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defense against foreign danger have been always the instruments of tyranny at home.” Are the drones to remain beyond the American rule of law? It’s past time to begin to find out.

    So far, we are told nothing credible of whom we are targeting, and why, in other countries. We should at least be let in on the rules of this grim game as it may affect our own fate. Failing our responsibility as citizens, we have become almost entirely complicit in the extent and depth of our being continually surveilled at home outside the Constitution.

    Will drones continue to hover outside the Constitution? Barack Obama knows.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Nat Hentoff is a nationally renowned authority on the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights and author of many books, including “The War on the Bill of Rights and the Gathering Resistance.”

  • turndownobama

    carol and shadow,

    I seem to recall that some Hillary supporters did back off from McCain because of Palin. I do remember that an equal number (of Hillary supporters?) said they were MORE likely to vote for M because of P, so it all evened out. This was in some WP or NYT poll.

    (Someone’s personal acquaintances is what they mean by ‘anecdotal’.)

    She certainly has a strong following among GOP, especially GOP women, now. And a very impresssive performance record in Alaska. Not just a pretty face.

  • turndownobama

    gonzotx
    July 21st, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    Drones in U.S. skies – to keep eye on us?

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

    Ah, the black helicopters have upgraded!

  • gonzotx

    from gateway pundit:

    Guess what? White farmer-hater Shirley Sherrod is linked to Bill Ayers.
    Reader Dude Meister discovered this information:
    An announcement of Ms. Sherrod’s July 2009 appointment to her USDA position at ruraldevelopment.org gives off quite a few clues:

    RDLN Graduate and Board Vice Chair Shirley Sherrod was appointed Georgia Director for Rural Development by Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack on July 25. Only days earlier, she learned that New Communities, a group she founded with her husband and other families (see below) has won a thirteen million dollar settlement in the minority farmers law suit Pigford vs Vilsack.

    This must-read story at Illinois Review and The Washington Examiner also reveals that Ms. Sherrod’s husband is a former honcho in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee back in the 1960’s. You can read more about it in Bill Ayers book “Fugitive Days.” Yes, that Bill Ayers. He was involved in SNCC as well.

  • wbboei

    I would be interested in hearing your friend’s views on Israel’s right to exist and the Jews in general.
    ————————————
    I will ask him Jan. But it will be awhile. I generally see him every six months, or so.

  • jbstonesfan

    Alter , Fineman, Robinson, and too many others to name should be included on the above list.

  • JanH

    Thanks wbboei.

    From your post, he sounds like a very interesting and knowledgeable man.

  • JanH

    Hillary Clinton: A US Secretary of State fluent in ASEAN

    by Ernest Bower, Center for Strategic and International Studies
    Posted at 07/21/2010

    This should be a good week for U.S. engagement in ASEAN. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrives in Vietnam for the seventeenth annual ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) as most of you read this note. By definition, that means a good week for U.S. strategy in Asia.

    Setting a strong ASEAN foundation will provide Americans a balanced perspective on which to build an enduring Asia strategy. Enduring in this context means strategic pillars that will serve U.S. interests in the region for two to three decades. A strong presence and good ties in Southeast Asia will help the United States and Asian partners welcome China to continue a relatively peaceful and constructive entrance onto the regional and global stage. That welcome applies not only to China, but to India, a giant country with massive contributions to make and equal claims to historical trade, cultural, and social ties to Southeast Asia. ASEAN is the dynamic center for a new Asia, and the United States has well-established interests and strong ties in the region. Secretary Clinton recognizes that fact, even if she has not yet connected all the dots to take full advantage of the U.S. leadership position in the region. The good news is that not only is she showing up, but she is armed with ideas and initiatives.

    This is a secretary of state who is fluent in ASEAN—one who not only knows what the multiplicity of ASEAN acronyms stand for, but also understands the concepts and history behind most of them. This high-level ASEAN fluency is welcome and represents a significant opportunity for the United States in Asia. Clinton has prepared well for the ARF and has also deployed her deputies to prepare the ground before she arrives. Kurt Campbell has been a forward-deployed ASEAN-focused assistant secretary of state for East Asia and Pacific affairs, even while dealing with the unwelcome surprise of a Japan relationship gone rogue, real threat of confrontation in the Koreas, and the need for laser-like focus on China. Under secretary of state for political affairs Bill Burns is wrapping up a visit to Thailand, Cambodia, the Philippines, and Indonesia, reconfirming U.S. commitments and highlighting key issues ahead of the secretary’s arrival. Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg has also been a key actor in Foggy Bottom’s ASEAN initiative, having made several trips to the region with a follow-up planned after the ARF meeting.

    The Americans have some heavy lifting to do in Hanoi. For one, it is time to show the U.S. hand on regional architecture. Look for Secretary Clinton to indicate that the United States is interested in joining the East Asian Summit (EAS). The United States will likely join with Russia, and the EAS will then consist of the 10 ASEAN countries forming its core—plus Australia, China, India, Japan, Korea, and New Zealand. In terms of U.S. commitment, the EAS would require the U.S. president to participate every year, as the EAS is held back to back with the annual ASEAN Summit. In terms of a long-term U.S. approach to Asia, the EAS was the only realistic choice for regional architecture. It puts the United States fully at the table, with ASEAN at the center of the structure. The hard parts will be building the EAS into an effective organization, overcoming the battle with domestically focused scheduling mandarins at the White House, helping ASEAN to become a stronger and more unified organization so the foundation of Asian regionalism is sound, and, last but not least, rationalizing regional structures to clean up redundancy and use that most precious commodity, the bandwidth of leaders, efficiently.

    The last of these will require some hard decisions. The intention of the EAS is to create an effective regional organization that can provide direction and real results in economic, political, and security affairs. To do this well, it will need to reconcile, absorb, or establish real coordination with the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF)—coordinated by the ministries of foreign affairs and including 17 ASEAN dialogue partners and observers; the ASEAN Defense Ministers Meeting +8 (ADMM+8)—coordinated by the ministries of defense and consisting of ASEAN and the same eight partners within the EAS; and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum—coordinated by the ministries of foreign affairs and trade, including 21 economies from around the Pacific. Arguably, ARF and ADMM+8 can serve the EAS as direct inputs, but APEC is a more significant challenge. It has primarily delivered results in economic and related areas, some very practical such as the APEC visa program, but most have tended to be more aspirational than concrete. The Transpacific Partnership (TPP) is, from an American perspective, probably the most serious Asia-wide trade enabling initiative at this time, and while its eventual goal is to be a Free Trade Area for the Asia Pacific (FTAAP) and expand to cover all eligible Asian countries, it is not technically part of APEC.

    Therefore, it is likely that APEC economies will need to take a hard look at whether leaders— meaning the top official managing the affairs of state for each entity—will still need to meet annually if EAS summits are held annually. Don’t look for strong U.S. leadership on this decision until after President Obama hosts APEC in Hawaii in 2011. After that date, there will likely be a hard look at how APEC can be effective as a bridge to the Americas, an investment that should not be taken lightly or discarded. However, the question of continuing annual APEC Leaders meetings will certainly come under serious scrutiny.

    Turning back to Secretary Clinton’s visit to Hanoi, we can expect to see a real test for the dialogue on the South China Sea set of issues. While Burma and North Korea will feature prominently on the agenda, all parties agree privately that the South China Sea is a priority issue. China has worked tirelessly over the last weeks and months to ensure that the issue is not on the agenda at the ARF. Meanwhile, most Southeast Asian countries want light shed on the issue, particularly those that are claimants in the Spratley Islands disputed territory. Like the case of the sunken South Korean frigate Cheonan, there is need for transparency, dialogue, and a clear statement of interests so diplomacy has a chance to be effective. China’s mixed messages, stating that the South China Sea is one of its “core interests” while at the same time trying to keep it off of the agenda for regional political and security discussions, is not a recipe for peace and mutual prosperity. Such an approach can lead to serious misunderstandings and, worse, maritime confrontations that are not in the interests of any country.

    U.S. interests should be well served by having a secretary of state fluent in ASEAN at the ARF. It doesn’t hurt that Mrs. Clinton also has a perfect attendance record at the annual ASEAN meeting and is focused on the right issues. The outcomes of the ARF discussions will be an important point of departure for the next round of discussions on U.S.- ASEAN relations and regional architecture. Watch the cables from Hanoi carefully this week.

    Ernest Bower is a senior adviser and director of the Southeast Asia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.

    http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/insights/07/21/10/hillary-clinton-us-secretary-state-fluent-asean

  • JanH

    Jul 22, 2010
    Clinton leaves for Vietnam

    SEOUL – US SECRETARY of State Hillary Clinton left South Korea on Thursday, a US embassy spokesman said, after a one-day visit designed to show solidarity following the sinking of one of Seoul’s warships.

    Mrs Clinton was headed for the Vietnamese capital Hanoi, where she will attend a meeting on Friday of the Asean Regional Forum (ARF) on security.

    While visiting Seoul along with Defence Secretary Robert Gates, she announced new US sanctions against North Korea in response to the warship sinking which killed 46 people.

    The United States and South Korea, citing findings of a multinational investigation, accuse the North of torpedoing the ship near the disputed Yellow Sea border in March – a charge it denies.

    The US and South Korea also announced plans for a series of joint naval exercises starting on Sunday as a deterrent to the North, sparking complaints by China that the drills could aggravate regional tensions.

    Mrs Clinton plans to meet China’s Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi on Thursday in Vietnam. She and North Korean Foreign Minister Pak Ui Chun will be among representatives of the 27 ARF members gathered round the table for Friday’s meeting. — AFP

    http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/SEAsia/Story/STIStory_556474.html

  • JanH

    Bill Clinton More Popular Than Barack Obama

    By Robert Schlesinger
    Posted: July 21, 2010

    Gallup reports that for the first time in the Obama years Bill Clinton has surpassed the sitting president in terms of public popularity. According to the polling organization, 61 percent of Americans view Clinton favorably, as opposed to 52 percent for Obama. George W. Bush registers a surprisingly strong 45 percent approval.

    The Clinton number is good news for Democrats looking ahead to the 2010 midterm elections and the battle for Congress.

    As my colleague Kenneth T. Walsh noted a few weeks ago, Clinton is a hot ticket on the campaign trail. And no surprise: Clinton can bring presidential-level troop rallying, headline grabbing, and fundraising to a campaign without bringing any of the baggage that is piling up around Obama. As Ken wrote:

    Party strategists say Clinton’s lure is especially powerful because of the relatively low job-approval ratings of President Obama in many swing states and districts, where voters are upset by his brand of activist government and big spending. As a result, Clinton is considered a larger draw than Obama in conservative and centrist regions, such as the South and rural areas.

    Indeed, as The Fix’s Aaron Blake noted a few weeks ago, a majority of top 2010 congressional races are taking place in areas where Obama struggled during the Democratic primaries two years ago. Districts like those represented by Democratic Reps. Suzanne Kosmas of Florida, Baron Hill of Indiana, and Harry Teague of New Mexico were Hillary Clinton country in 2008. They should be Bill Clinton country in 2010.

    There is actually a neat circularity about the idea of Clinton becoming the surrogate campaigner in chief. Back in 1998, when he was mired in the Monica Lewinsky scandal, President Clinton was not the usual hot presidential property on the campaign trail. I remember campaign flacks arguing with apparently straight faces that a presidential visit was really much more trouble than it was worth. Instead a different Clinton was dispatched around the country: Hillary. Her success on the hustings not only helped propel the Democrats to a stunning upset victory in the midterm elections but also set the stage for her New York senate run (and, ultimately, her presidential bid).

    Republicans and not a few fearful Democrats wonder if this year’s elections will be a rerun of 1994. Maybe with a bit of help from the Comeback Kid they might look more like ’98?

    http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2010/07/21/bill-clinton-more-popular-than-barack-obama

  • lorac

    Shadowfax – I just saw your note. Here you go:

    Shirley Sherrod’s Disappearing Act: Not So Fast
    By: Tom Blumer
    Special to The Examiner
    07/20/10 1:52 PM EDT
    My oh my, that happened quickly. Perhaps too quickly.

    Until yesterday, Shirley Sherrod was Georgia Director of Rural Development for the USDA. Earlier in the day at Big Government, Andrew Breitbart put up a video that exposed Ms. Sherrod as someone all too willing to discriminate based on race.

    Within hours of the video’s release, USDA Director Tom Vilsack announced Sherrod’s resignation, and in the process issued an exceptionally strong condemnation (“We are appalled by her actions … Her actions were shameful … she gave no indication she had attempted to right the wrong she had done to this man”).

    The NAACP, at whose Freedom Fund Banquet Sherrod spoke of her discriminatory posture, and at which the audience seemed to indicate approval of her outlook, followed a short time later, virtually echoing Vilsack.

    So I guess we’re supposed to forget about Shirley Sherrod from this point forward.

    Not just yet. Luckily, she’s not going away quietly, and is complaining about Fox News and the Tea Party causing her dismissal. Keep it up, ma’am, because you and the USDA both deserve further scrutiny.

    Ms. Sherrod’s previous background, the circumstances surrounding her hiring, and the USDA’s agenda may all play a part in explaining her sudden departure from the agency. These matters have not received much scrutiny to this point.

    An announcement of Ms. Sherrod’s July 2009 appointment to her USDA position at ruraldevelopment.org gives off quite a few clues:

    RDLN Graduate and Board Vice Chair Shirley Sherrod was appointed Georgia Director for Rural Development by Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack on July 25. Only days earlier, she learned that New Communities, a group she founded with her husband and other families (see below) has won a thirteen million dollar settlement in the minority farmers law suit Pigford vs Vilsack.

    What?

    The news that follows at the link, which appears to pre-date the announcement of Ms. Sherrod’s appointment, provides further details:

    Minority Farm Settlement

    Justice Achieved – Congratulations to Shirley and Charles Sherrod!

    We have wonderful news regarding the case of New Communities, Inc., the land trust that Shirley and Charles Sherrod established, with other black farm families in the 1960′s. At the time, with holdings of almost 6,000 acres, this was the largest tract of black-owned land in the country.

    … Over the years, USDA refused to provide loans for farming or irrigation and would not allow New Communities to restructure its loans. Gradually, the group had to fight just to hold on to the land and finally had to wind down operations.

    … The cash (settlement) award acknowledges racial discrimination on the part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture for the years 1981-85. … New Communities is due to receive approximately $13 million ($8,247,560 for loss of land and $4,241,602 for loss of income; plus $150,000 each to Shirley and Charles for pain and suffering). There may also be an unspecified amount in forgiveness of debt. This is the largest award so far in the minority farmers law suit (Pigford vs Vilsack).

    The Pigford matter goes back a long way, and to say the least has a checkered history, as this May 27, 2010 item at Agri-Pulse demonstrates (bolds are mine):

    As part of a April 14, 1999 class action case settlement, commonly known as the Pigford case, U.S. taxpayers have already provided over $1 billion in cash, non-credit awards and debt relief to almost 16,000 black farmers who claimed that they were discriminated against by USDA officials as they “farmed or attempted to farm.” In addition, USDA’s Farm Service Agency spent over $166 million on salaries and expenses on this case from 1999-2009, according to agency records.

    Members of Congress may approve another $1.15 billion this week to settle cases from what some estimate may be an additional 80,000 African-Americans who have also claimed to have been discriminated against by USDA staff.

    … Settling this case is clearly a priority for the White House and USDA. Secretary Vilsack described the funding agreement reached between the Administration and advocates for black farmers early this year as “an important milestone in putting these discriminatory claims behind us for good and in achieving finality for this group of farmers with longstanding grievances.”

    However, confronted with the skyrocketing federal deficit, more officials are taking a critical look at the billion dollars spent thus far and wondering when these discrimination cases will ever end. Already, the number of people who have been paid and are still seeking payment will likely exceed the 26,785 black farmers who were considered to even be operating back in 1997, according to USDA. That’s the year the case initially began as Pigford v. (then Agriculture Secretary) Glickman and sources predicted that, at most, 3,000 might qualify.

    At least one source who is extremely familiar with the issue and who asked to remain anonymous because of potential retribution, says there are a number of legitimate cases who have long been denied their payments and will benefit from the additional funding. But many more appear to have been solicited in an attempt to “game” the Pigford system.

    Here are just a few questions about Ms. Sherrod that deserve answers:

    •Was Ms. Sherrod’s USDA appointment an unspoken condition of her organization’s settlement?
    •How much “debt forgiveness” is involved in USDA’s settlement with New Communities?
    •Why were the Sherrods so deserving of a combined $300,000 in “pain and suffering” payments — amounts that far exceed the average payout thus far to everyone else? ($1.15 billion divided by 16,000 is about $72,000)?
    •Given that New Communities wound down its operations so long ago (it appears that this occurred sometime during the late 1980s), what is really being done with that $13 million in settlement money?

    Here are a few bigger-picture questions:

    •Did Shirley Sherrod resign so quickly because the circumstances of her hiring and the lawsuit settlement with her organization that preceded it might expose some unpleasant truths about her possible and possibly sanctioned conflicts of interest?
    •Is USDA worried about the exposure of possible waste, fraud, and abuse in its handling of Pigford?
    •Did USDA also dispatch Sherrod hastily because her continued presence, even for another day, might have gotten in the way of settling Pigford matters quickly?

    The media and the blogosphere shouldn’t be so quick to forget about Shirley Sherrod.

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/Examiner-Opinion-Zone/Shirley-Sherrods-Disappearing-Act-Not-So-Fast-98846149.html#ixzz0uNGbytv6

  • wbboei

    The Game Big Media Is Playing

    1. Definition: propaganda is a specific type of message presentation, aimed at serving an agenda. Even if the message conveys true information, it may be partisan and fail to paint a complete picture. The book Propaganda And Persuasion defines propaganda as “the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist. (snip). What sets propaganda apart from other forms of advocacy is the willingness of the propagandist to change people’s understanding through deception and confusion, rather than persuasion and understanding.”

    2. Dual Objective: the goal of propaganda is to recruit non-believers to a particular agenda through deceptive practices and to keep true believers in line by answering the doubts that arise when that agenda and reality clash.

    3. Big Media: uses a combination of propaganda and censorship to mislead the American People into believing that Obama is on their side, whereas the opposite is true. Throughout his career, he has always been on the side of big business and never once on the side of the American People. When he appears to be on the side of the American People it is always a ruse. All you need to do to know the truth is follow the money. And you can know him by the company he keeps. The rest is nothing but marketing hype, smoke and mirrors.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Propaganda

  • wbboei

    What we are seeing in the Obama Administration, the Financial Reform Bill, and now this new revelation about the Pigford Program is affirmative action run riot.

  • wbboei

    When affirmative action is pursued in this manner, it becomes a racial spoils system.

  • wbboei

    The Clinton number is good news for Democrats looking ahead to the 2010 midterm elections and the battle for Congress
    ——————————
    Only a blatant partisan like Robert Schlesinger could look at that poll and find good news in it for Dimocrats. He seems to assume that Bill Clinton is the one who is running for office. And to suggest that Bill is acting as a surrogate for Obama gets a little delusional, don’t you think. The big story is Obama is the president, his numbers are drifting down into Bush country, and trust me that is not good news for dimocats. What good old Bob fails to understand is you can only spin bad facts so far before you begin to look like an idiot. Bob has definitely crossed the line, whether he knows it or not.

  • gonzotx

    This must-read story at Illinois Review and The Washington Examiner also reveals

    that Ms. Sherrod’s husband is a former honcho in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee back in the 1960’s. You can read more about it in Bill Ayers book “Fugitive Days.”

    Yes, that Bill Ayers. He was involved in SNCC as well.

  • basement angel

    So, why are these Gore stories coming out now? This is one more thing that makes me think something is up with the 2012 primary.

    Admin? Any insight as to who was digging around under the rocks? I have my suspicions…

  • ShortTermer

    hahahahahah, heheheheheh, roflmao!
    ‘They’ are afraid of Beck, Fox, and the Tea Party!!!!!!!

  • basement angel

    I think Sherrod got thrown under the bus so quickly because she is a woman. It fits in with the Obama campaign meme that middle aged women are racist.

    The fact of the matter is that she is a woman whose father was murdered in a racist killing by a white farmer, and she conquered her demons. She’s an admirable figure.

  • Shadowfax

    lorac
    July 21st, 2010 at 10:28 pm

    Shadowfax – I just saw your note. Here you go:

    ———–
    Thanks a bunch lorac!!

  • Shadowfax

    I was poking around that website I mentioned above, the Journolist, and clicked on a source they use called Newsflashr, to search for……….news on the internet.

    I typed in Journolist and these are articles surfacing now:

    *

    * more▼
    o politics
    o politics(blogs)
    o science
    o health
    o showbiz
    o techmeme
    o oil
    o gold

    Hide time stamps
    Headlines per feed
    close options Text size? Show time? (in feeds view) No text highlights? (in topics view)

    Scroll to topAsk Big News
    Tucker Carlson will keep releasing, misrepresenting JournoList …
    10 hrs ago
    Journolist: A Conspiracy, or Just a Clown Show?
    12 hrs ago
    Journolist Excerpts Show Progressive Journalists’ Panties In A …
    13 hrs ago
    Journolist Equals Liberal Fascism
    15 hrs ago
    Journolist replacement has 173 members so far
    19 hrs ago

    Scroll to topMicrosoft Live
    No news headlines available

    Scroll to topGoogle Blogs
    Update: “Journolist” Reporters’ Pact to Favor Obama
    1 hrs ago
    Journolist Reporter on Conservatives: “F***ing Nascar Retards …
    1 hrs ago
    The JournoList’s Sheer Ecstasy on Election Day 2008 :: The Lonely …
    3 hrs ago
    iOwnTheWorld.com » Blog Archive » Journolist replaced by Cabalist
    3 hrs ago
    » Did Journolist Try to Censor Stories to Help Obama against …
    3 hrs ago
    ————-
    and there are a ton more………

    http://www.newsflashr.com/search/Journolist

  • Shadowfax

    Still going down the Rabbit hole using Newsflashr and ran across this…………..

    July 20, 2010:

    The Media’s “Day Of Infamy”

    By Abraxas

    (See also: Did Breitbart get “Journolist” Archives to Prove Media Basis)

    Folks, the most devastating blow against the Mainstream Media has just been delivered today, July 20, 2010, by Jonathan Strong of the ‘Daily Caller’. In his stunning article listed below, Mr. Strong deals such a crippling blow to the media’s credibility and reputation that it is doubtful the press will ever recover. See it here.

    To begin with, it appears that an anonymous individual secretly gained access to the archives of the powerful listserv ‘Journolist’ (a private email list subscribed to by hundreds of left-leaning journalists), copied all of the emails of that group and then passed them along to Mr.Strong. The amount of copied emails must surely be in the tens of thousands since Mr. Strong’s reference to them in his article cites emails dating back as far as April of 2008. And the emails aren’t just from one journalist – they are from countless different journalists, so many in fact that it makes your head spin as Mr. Strong cites the name of one journalist after another. The list just goes on and on.

    But it is not the quantity of the emails but their content that is devastating. As one sickening email exchange after another makes clear, these emails prove at long last the accusation which the Mainstream Media has consistently denied – i.e., journalism in America is horribly biased against the right. In email after email cited in Mr. Strong’s article, one journalist after another chimes in with his or her bias, bigotry and hate. It is brutal. The particular focus of the emails which Mr. Strong has just released deals with the media’s reaction to a televised debate in mid-April, 2008 wherein Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos dared to ask Barack Obama why he had waited nearly a year to disassociate himself from his rabid, fire-breathing racist minister, Rev. Wright.

    The reaction of the members of Journolist is revealing – and disgusting. Instead of being horrified that Obama had sat for two decades in the pews of a church listening to Wright scream that white America had invented AIDS in order to ‘kill black folks’, the journalists were instead outraged that ‘their candidate’, Barack Obama, was being questioned at all on the subject. How dare Gibson and Stephanopoulos confront Obama with his racism? As the emails make chillingly clear, the journalists began almost in unison to frantically concoct ways in which they could not only bury stories about Obama’s racism, but prevent any future stories from occurring. Their strategy was grisly – and effective. They would accuse the accusers of racism. Any reporter who dared to confront Obama’s racism (or his sleazy land dealings, his corruption and his terrorist friends, etc.) would instead be immediately branded a ‘racist’ himself – i.e., any reporter questioning Obama was doing so only because that reporter didn’t want a President who was black.

    Horrifyingly, it worked. On November 4, 2008, a racist, corrupt Marxist was elected as President of the United States of America. And we have the mainstream media to ‘thank’ for it. Had it not been for their massive coverup and lies, this man would never have been nominated for President, let alone won. The mainstream media was ecstatic.

    Well, that ecstasy has just been shattered. Today, July 20, 2010, in what has to be a ‘day of infamy’ for the Mainstream Media, their lies have been exposed to the brutal light of day.

    People – this is just the beginning of these devastating emails. As I’ve just pointed out, they have to be in the thousands since the ones Mr. Strong quotes date from over 2 years ago. It is impossible to believe there aren’t more bombshells in those emails, besides the one just detonated about Obama’s association with Rev. Wright. Indeed, even before today Journolist had already detonated a bomb underneath the reputation of a reporter – specifically, Dave Weigel who worked for the Washington Post. Mr. Weigel had been hired by the newspaper to give ‘fair and unbiased’ reporting on the conservative movement in America. Instead, leaked emails from Journolist revealed that Mr. Weigel so loathed and hated the members of the conservative movement that he literally wished one of them was killed. His emails further revealed his shameless attempts to bias the news about conservatives into as negative a picture of possible; indeed, Mr. Weigel openly pleaded with other members of Journolist to help him with his biased reporting. Within days of his emails being leaked to Drudge and elsewhere, Mr. Weigel was thrown out of his position with the Washington Post. It is impossible to believe a similar fate does not await the remaining members of Journolist who have woken this morning to see their own biased emails exposed in Mr. Strong’s article.

    Mark my words, people. Today’s ‘Daily Caller’ article is the equivalent of a journalistic nuclear warhead exploding in the midst of the Mainstream Media. And I assure you that before the radiation of that blast subsides, the ground will be littered with more devastated reputations than just Dave Weigel’s. Fasten your seatbelts, Media – it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

  • Shadowfax

    Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise to perform independent assessment of oil spill impacts on Gulf

    Since the Deepwater Horizon offshore rig exploded and sank in April, BP has devoted inadequate resources to the oil spill response, withheld information from the American public, and denied access to spill sites to journalists. So our ship the Arctic Sunrise is heading to the Gulf to do an independent assessment of the impacts. We believe it’s way past time the full, unabridged truth about the extent and nature of this oil catastrophe was told to America and the world.

    The reports coming out of Louisiana about cleanup workers and even local police helping BP enforce a media blockade have been nearly as frustrating as watching the oil spew into the Gulf without cease for almost three months (a hat tip is most definitely deserved here to Mother Jones’ Mac McClelland, who has been chasing this story all along and doing a great job of reporting what’s happening on the ground).

    It’s in BP’s best interest to limit media access to oiled beaches and wildlife, as the more they can contain the truth about just how much damage has been done, the more they can limit their liability to pay for that damage later on. We released our ScamWow video last week to highlight this very sad and galling state of affairs.

    Greenpeace BP Deepwater Disaster picture
    View more images of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

    We’ve also had a team on the ground since the start of the disaster, tirelessly investigating local beaches and coastal ecosystems to take measure of the extent of the damage. Our team has taken copious photos and posted numerous oil spill updates on our blogs to make sure folks can see for themselves just what BP has done to the Gulf.

    But BP is cracking down on public access more than ever, so we’re stepping up our efforts. The Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise is on its way to the Gulf for a three-month expedition to document the true impacts of the BP Deepwater Disaster on the Gulf’s marine life and unique ecosystems. This tour is especially crucial now because even if BP has finally capped the leaking well, the crisis will continue for some time, endangering wildlife and ecosystems, destroying the region’s fisheries, and affecting the ocean for decades to come. It’s important that we not let the focus shift away from the truly extensive catastrophe that is still unfolding in the Gulf, whether more oil is spewing out of BP’s well or not.

    The Sunrise will leave Tampa, Florida during the week of August 9th and visit the Florida Keys and the Dry Tortugas before approaching the wellhead during the first month of the expedition. The crew aboard the Sunrise will be examining everything from the plankton on the surface to the subsurface plumes and the deep-sea corals on the floor of the Gulf.

    more…
    http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/greenpeace-ship-arctic-sunrise-to-perform-ind/blog/12967?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MakingWaves+%28Greenpeace+Blog%3A+Making+Waves%29

  • basement angel

    Anyone who thinks Obama is a Marxist probably isn’t well-informed enough to know a bomb when he sees one. Obama is to both Reagan and Dubya’s right time and time again.

  • confloyd

    Those Gore stories are most interesting…I wonder whose behind them?? I imagine they have been kept underwraps for a while now.

  • wbboei

    that Ms. Sherrod’s husband is a former honcho in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee
    ———————————————————–
    That organization was headed up by Stokley Carmichael, aka Kwame Ture (June 29, 1941 – November 15, 1998), a Trinidadian-American black activist active in the 1960s American Civil Rights Movement. He rose to prominence first as a leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC, pronounced “snick”) and later as the “Honorary Prime Minister” of the Black Panther Party. Initially an integrationist, Carmichael later became affiliated with black nationalist and Pan-Africanist movements.[1] He popularized the term “Black Power”.[2]

    This is yet another example of the evolution I mentioned a few days ago–from equal rights, to preferential treatment, to black supremacy. I believe one of Obama’s goals is to RENEGOTIATE the settlement to the whole question of civil rights which was reached in the 1960′s. At that time, society agreed on the idea of colorblind neutrality expressed by Dr. King and flatly rejected the extreme views of Elijah Mohammed, Stokley Carmichael and more recently Louis Farrakhan, Wright and Shabaz. Obama has been explicit that he does not like that settlement reached in the 1960′s, and feels that the Supreme Court should have gone farther. The Bohemian Corporal was explicit about his intentions as well. He laid them out in his book Mein Kamf. But not enough people listened. If Obama were an honest man, which he is not, he would condemn all racism, stop hiring these radicals, and prosecute all voting rights violations regardless of race.

  • wbboei

    Ready, fire, aim. No wonder Beck scares the billybejiggerds out of Manchild Obama. He has his facts, and Obama has has only Jim Messina–the same guy who dispatched SEIU thugs to disrupt the tea parties, and beat up the black conservative. This guy is so bad he makes Rahm look civilized. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,597263,00.html
    ————————————————————-
    Moe Lane

    (Via AoSHQ) Every time I think that the Shirley Sherrod story cannot make the administration look more foolish, new details come out [link fixed - ML].

    …three Democratic sources said deputy chief of staff Jim Messina singled out the White House’s initial response to the incident for praise in the regular 8:30 a.m. staff meeting Tuesday morning.

    [snip]

    One source, who is unhappy with the administration’s handling of the incident, paraphrased Messina’s remarks: ”We could have waited all day — we could have had a media circus — but we took decisive action, and it’s a good example of how to respond in this atmosphere.”

    No, in fact, it was not a good example*. It’s hard to see how it could be a worse one. The Right is hardly abashed that Ms. Sherrod ended up being maligned by the Obama administration and defended by Glenn Beck; the Left is infuriated** that their precious man-god stomped all over their favorite narrative before it could even get started; and the Middle is mostly going to take away from all of this the sight of the White House apologizing to a black woman for passing instant judgment on her based on the color of her skin, rather than the content of her character.

    And, oh yes: there’s a media circus, too.

    Moe Lane

    *For what it’s worth, the other two sources of Politico’s are pushing back on the first source’s narrative.

    **They’re even more infuriated that some of their favorite devil-figures showed more discernment than said man-god, which was both a: funny and b: not very difficult to accomplish. Contra that link above, the President is not actually very good at deflecting criticism, mostly because up until now he’s never particularly needed to…

    Crossposted to Moe Lane.

  • ShortTermer

    I just came across this and thought it should be shared. It is a video of the Tax Day Tea Party:

  • ShortTermer

    I guess I am not well informed – NOT, even after all this time develing into such matters, but The Won could not be MORE left and pick your -ism to match it: socialist, marxist, communist, black liberation theologist. Some people just do not know left from right.

  • wbboei

    THEATER OF THE ABSURD: First The Verdict Then The Facts

    Cast

    Chicago Thug: Barack Insane Obama (We must not jump to conclusions about Fort Hood. Here’s Looking At You Kid).
    Henchman: Evil Jim Messina (I am proud of you for firing Sherrod quickly without investigating the facts)
    Fair Maiden: Saint Shirley Sherrod (I now have the mother of all discrimination suits against this Administration)
    All American Hero Glenn Beck ( Just watch me. I will slay the dragon and rescue The Fair Maiden in less than an hour)
    Audience: dumbfounded

    Musical Score What Did I Have That I Don’t Have (Barack in response to sliding poll numbers)

  • Mormaer

    #
    “wbboei
    July 21st, 2010 at 10:48 pm

    When affirmative action is pursued in this manner, it becomes a racial spoils system.”

    Yep. Need some enterprising researching “journalist” to go through who has been paid, what they do for a living, where the farming property is located and if it is arable or in the middle of a swamp or forest and the last time someone actually lived on it. Also if it is leased to someone who does farm it successfully or if it is a deer lease. I bet some very interesting names show up and where they actually live.

  • Mrs. Smith

    Gore protecting his 2nd most important asset-

    WHY did AL & TIPPER GORE buy $8.8 mill California mansion just prior to publicly announcing their divorce? And WHAT is the real-estate sleight-of-hand they pulled in their home state of Tennessee that experts find “puzzling”?!

    A month after scoring their new palatial Montecito estate, Al and Tipper transferred nine properties the wealthy Gores own in Carthage, Tennessee from their own names into a limited liability company (LLP) – a corporate partnership which, legally, is a separate entity.

    According to legal docs filed in Tennessee, the transfer of ownership occurred after the accuser in the AL GORE SEX SCANDAL filed a 2009 police complaint accusing the ex-VICE of sexual misconduct.

    A real estate insider told The ENQUIRER that such a transfer of ownership protects the valuable assets in potential legal claims.

    A limited liability partnership, like a corporation, is a completely separate entity and can not be liable as an asset if someone files personal lawsuits against either Gore.

    The Gores also bought the new California mansion under the auspices of a trust which, experts say, can also be shielded from potential legal attack.

    ________________________________

    Well, there you go- I guess Al admitted his transgressions to Tipper. The allegations held by one of his massage therapist’s Gore accosted her, seems to be echoed by several other therapists:

    A Beverly Hills hotel source told The ENQUIRER:

    “The therapist claimed that when they were alone, Gore shrugged off a towel and stood naked in front of her.

    “He pointed at his erect penis and ordered her, ‘Take care of THIS.’”
    _________________

    If she had the presence of mind, she should have said: “wait, let me get my camera.” :)

  • JanH

    July 22, 2010

    In Hanoi, Clinton Criticizes Vietnam on Rights

    By MARK LANDLER

    HANOI, Vietnam — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton expressed concern on Thursday about what she called the Vietnamese government’s intolerance of dissent, as she started a two-day visit to mark 15 years of normalized relations between Vietnam and the United States.

    Noting Vietnam’s recent jailing of democracy activists, attacks on religious groups, and the curbing of Internet social-network sites, Mrs. Clinton said she raised the status of human rights in a meeting with the country’s deputy prime minister, Pham Gia Khiem.

    “Vietnam, with its extraordinary dynamic population, is on the path to becoming a great nation, with unlimited potential,” Mrs. Clinton said in her opening statement at a news conference, as Mr. Khiem stood stone-faced next to her. “That is among the reasons we expressed concern.”

    At a lunch with Vietnamese and American businesspeople, Mrs. Clinton returned to the theme, speaking of the “profound differences” between the United States and Vietnam on political freedoms. She said the United States would press Vietnam to do more to protect individual freedom.

    Mr. Khiem replied that human rights were rooted in unique cultural and historical circumstances. He cited what he claimed was an observation by President Obama that countries be allowed to choose their own path and that human rights not be imposed from outside.

    Mrs. Clinton’s comments were notable, given that she has played down human rights concerns in visits to Vietnam’s neighbor, China. But her timing, at the outset of the visit, suggested that she wanted to make her point, and move on.

    She devoted most of her remarks to promises that the United States would increase cooperation on trade and investment, and would do more to help Vietnamese suffering lingering effects from Agent Orange, a chemical the American military used as a defoliant during the Vietnam War.

    “We have been working with Vietnam for abut nine years to try to remedy the effects of Agent Orange,” she said. “I told the minister I would work to increase our cooperation.

    The United States normalized diplomatic ties with Vietnam in 1995 while Bill Clinton was president, and Mrs. Clinton spoke of the “poignant” memories that the country evoked for her and her husband. She last visited as first lady with Mr. Clinton in late 2000, in the waning days of his presidency, a few weeks after she had been elected a senator from New York.

    On that trip, Mrs. Clinton brought along her daughter, Chelsea, delighting people in a dusty village outside Hanoi, when they both put on conical hats to ward off the scorching sun. A local artist captured that moment in a large mosaic composed of rubies, sapphires, and quartz from Vietnam and Burma. A gem and jewelry company presented the portrait to Mrs. Clinton as a gift.

    Mr. Khiem, the minister, also presented Mrs. Clinton with a white tablecloth for Chelsea, who is getting married on July 31. “I’m very honored,” she said. “I will be very pleased to give it to her.”

    Noting that she is juggling wedding-planning duties with a grueling week-long trip to Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Korea, and Vietnam, Mrs. Clinton joked that one might question her common sense.

    In addition to promoting Vietnamese-American ties, Mrs. Clinton is in Hanoi to attend a regional security meeting sponsored by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or Asean.

    North Korea is likely to be high on the agenda. An international investigation recently concluded that the North was responsible for torpedoing a South Korean warship, killing 46 sailors. Asean issued a statement deploring the attack but declining to point a finger at Pyongyang as the culprit.

    Mrs. Clinton is also expected to raise the issue of Myanmar, also known as Burma, which she said posed a threat to the stability of the region, not least because of flows of refugees into neighboring countries.

    In addition, she said the United States was concerned about shipments of military equipment and material to Burma from North Korea, as well as unconfirmed reports that Burma is seeking help from North Korea to develop its own nuclear weapons program.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/world/asia/23diplo.html

  • moononpluto

    Mrs Smith, sounds about right, sounds as if a lot of planning has gone on in order to protect, sounds like they knew this was going to come out and took steps to protect the money, if they “divorce” then perhaps that protects even more money as half would go to her personally and untouchable. Maybe its a money divorce to save the family cash.

  • NewMexicoFan

    Interesting, we are seeing more media coverage of HRC, coming down the stairs of airplanes, witnessing the signing of agreements, than we are seeing of anyone else. It is amazing of the comeback of the Clinton’s. But then, Bill was defeated as Gov of Arkansas, and came back to be Gov again. I would like to see Bill help the people win that stood by HRC in the primary. However, the rest of them I could care less.

  • moononpluto

    Its funny how Hillary looks more like the President than dumbo does and dont think the american public has not noticed, i think they are………..

  • confloyd

    I can’t wait for the newest installment, admin!

  • wbboei

    A limited liability partnership, like a corporation, is a completely separate entity and can not be liable as an asset if someone files personal lawsuits against either Gore.
    ——————————————————-
    I can see where the LLC would provide protection for future acts by the incorporators which produce liability. But for past acts–meaning acts which occurred prior to the formation of the LLC? In bankruptcy law, in medicaid law and in other areas as well, where a party transfers assets to a third party, in this case an LLC for the ostensible purpose of escaping liability it is deemed to be an anticipatory transfer, it is voidable as such and there is even a look back period of months and in some cases years. I suspect some enterprising plaintiffs lawyer would find a way to pierce the corporate veil for these antecedent acts of liability provided they are proven. Yet I have to believe that Gore has competent attorneys (Monte Mac in Philadelphia perhaps which is a reputable old line Philadelphia firm) so they must have an angle on this which I am not seeing. Perhaps they see this as a defense, but not a dispositive one. Jbstonesfan, Okieattorney, BlowmeObama do you have any insights. experience or thoughts which confirm or negate what I am saying?

  • moononpluto

    lol

    KSDK — A new Gallup poll shows that only 11 percent of Americans say they have a great deal of quite a lot of confidence in Congress, which is down from 17 percent in 2009.

    The poll was conducted July 8-11.

    Half of Americans say they have very little or no confidence in Congress. That’s up from 38 percent in 2009. It’s the highest since Gallup first asked the question in 1973.

    The poll also found a 15-point drop in the high confidence in the presidency, down to 36 percent from 51.

    LOWEST POLLING FOR CONGRESS EVER!!!

    Expect a clear out in a few months, the people are going to swing the axe.

  • wbboei

    Monte Mac = Montgomery McCracken. They were Gore’s attorneys in his presidential campaign. SHV they have a small plaque in their law library commemorating your relative who was with their firm before he went on the Supreme Court.

  • JanH

    Clinton and Gates pay respects to victims of naval ship sinking

  • blowme0bama

    wbboei
    July 22nd, 2010 at 11:10 am
    A limited liability partnership, like a corporation, is a completely separate entity and can not be liable as an asset if someone files personal lawsuits against either Gore.
    ——————————————————-
    I can see where the LLC would provide protection for future acts by the incorporators which produce liability. But for past acts–meaning acts which occurred prior to the formation of the LLC? In bankruptcy law, in medicaid law and in other areas as well, where a party transfers assets to a third party, in this case an LLC for the ostensible purpose of escaping liability it is deemed to be an anticipatory transfer, it is voidable as such and there is even a look back period of months and in some cases years. I suspect some enterprising plaintiffs lawyer would find a way to pierce the corporate veil for these antecedent acts of liability provided they are proven. Yet I have to believe that Gore has competent attorneys (Monte Mac in Philadelphia perhaps which is a reputable old line Philadelphia firm) so they must have an angle on this which I am not seeing. Perhaps they see this as a defense, but not a dispositive one. Jbstonesfan, Okieattorney, BlowmeObama do you have any insights. experience or thoughts which confirm or negate what I am saying?
    __________________________________________________

    No. Entirely correct. It is a fraudulent transfer and can be set aside. This is not a “piercing the [llc] veil” which can be surprisingly difficult with a single member LLC (given how the traditional veil piercing elements are almost always present with a single member LLC).

    It will create one more obstacle which is always a PitA, but the effort would be rewarded with attorney’s fees for having to go through the effort.

  • wbboei

    Expect a clear out in a few months, the people are going to swing the axe
    ————————————————————————-
    Nancy, turn off those jet engines, put down that vodka glass, you have had more than enough. Biden says you are the most powerful person in Congress, in the country and in the entire universe, in vino veritas and all that. But if Biden is right praytell how could it be that only 11% of the electorate thinks the institution you lead is doing a credible job. In case you are a little slow on the numbers Poopsie that means nine out of ten people do not. If the thought of that gives you delirium tremors, then try this one on for size. Are you and your fellow dims ready for Freddie? And oh by the way don’t look to Barack to save you. He is busy planning his eighth vacation.

  • moononpluto

    wbboei, you kill me that was sheer genius.

    Poopsie has been on the vodka a bit too much, she’s probably seeing double the amount of congressmen, she probably thinks she has 500 to spare.

  • rgb44hrc

    NewMexicoFan
    July 22nd, 2010 at 9:11 am
    Interesting, we are seeing more media coverage of HRC, coming down the stairs of airplanes, witnessing the signing of agreements, than we are seeing of anyone else.
    &&&&&&&&&

    New York Times today:
    Hillary front page, with Def. Sec. Gates in North Korea.

    NY Times earlier this week: Barry taking it easy from his “stressful job”.

  • rgb44hrc

    SISTA SOULJA SHERROD?

    Does anyone think Obama’s White House was eager to throw Shirley Sherrod under the bus, to show that they are willing to stand up to “black racists”, after they were caught pandering to the New Black Panther Party voter intimidators?

    Now, it seems that the White House overreacted when they had Agriculture Sec. Tom Vilsack for Sherrod to resign, for what in hindsight was for bogus reasons.

    And here’s Eugene Robinson’s take. He tacitly admits that Obama’s administration over-reacted, but doesn’t see the motive that I outline above. Instead, he conflates it into one big rightwing plot to “get Obama”.

    realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/22/using_race_to_smear_obama_106416.html

    July 22, 2010
    Using Race to Smear Obama
    By Eugene Robinson

    WASHINGTON — After the Shirley Sherrod episode, there’s no longer any need to mince words: A cynical right-wing propaganda machine is peddling the poisonous fiction that when African-Americans or other minorities reach positions of power, they seek some kind of revenge against whites.

    A few of the purveyors of this bigoted nonsense might actually believe it. Most of them, however, are merely seeking political gain by inviting white voters to question the motives and good faith of the nation’s first African-American president. This is really about tearing Barack Obama down.

    Sherrod, until Monday an official with the Department of Agriculture, was supposed to be mere collateral damage. Andrew Breitbart, a smarmy provocateur who often speaks at tea party rallies, posted on his website a video snippet of a speech that Sherrod, who is African-American, gave to a NAACP meeting earlier this year. In it, Sherrod seemed to boast of having withheld from a white farmer some measure of aid that she would have given to a black farmer.

    It looked like a clear case of black racism in action. Within hours, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack had forced her to resign. The NAACP, under attack from the right for having denounced racism in the tea party movement, issued a statement blasting Sherrod and condemning her attitude as unacceptable.

    But Breitbart had overstepped. The full video of Sherrod’s speech showed she wasn’t bragging about being a racist, she was telling what amounted to a parable about prejudice and reconciliation. For one thing, the incident happened in 1986 when she was working for a nonprofit, long before she joined the Obama administration. For another, she helped that white man and his family save their farm, and they became friends. Through him, she said, she learned to look past race toward our common humanity.

    In effect, she was telling the story of America’s struggle with race, but with the roles reversed. For hundreds of years, black people were enslaved, oppressed and discriminated against by whites — until the civil rights movement gave us all a path toward redemption.

    With the Obama presidency, though, has come a flurry of charges — from the likes of Breitbart but also from more substantial conservative figures — about alleged incidences of racial discrimination against whites by blacks and other minorities. Recall, for example, the way Obama’s critics had a fit when he offered an opinion about the confrontation between Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and a white police officer. Remember the over-the-top reaction when it was learned that Justice Sonia Sotomayor had once talked about how being a “wise Latina” might affect her thinking.

    Newt Gingrich called Sotomayor a racist. He was lightning-quick to call Sherrod a racist, too. I’d suggest that the former House speaker consider switching to decaf, but I think he knows exactly what he’s doing.

    These allegations of anti-white racism are being deliberately hyped and exaggerated because they are designed to make whites fearful. It won’t work with most people, of course, but it works with some — enough, perhaps, to help erode Obama’s political standing and damage his party’s prospects at the polls.

    Before Sherrod, the cause celebre of the “You Must Fear Obama” campaign involved something called the New Black Panther Party. Never heard of it? That’s because it’s a tiny group that exists mainly in the fevered imaginations of its few members. Also in the alternate reality of Fox News: One of the network’s hosts has devoted more than three hours of air time in recent weeks to the grave threat posed by the NBPP. Actually, I suspect that this excess is at least partly an attempt by a relatively obscure anchor to boost her own notoriety.

    The Sherrod case has fully exposed the right-wing campaign to use racial fear to destroy Obama’s presidency, and I hope the effect is to finally stiffen some spines in the administration. The way to deal with bullies is to confront them, not run away. Yet Sherrod was fired before even being allowed to tell her side of the story. She said the official who carried out the execution explained that she had to resign immediately because the story was going to be on Glenn Beck’s show that evening. Ironically, Beck was the only Fox host who, upon hearing the rest of Sherrod’s speech, promptly called for her to be reinstated. On Wednesday, Vilsack offered to rehire her.

    Shirley Sherrod stuck to her principles and stood her ground. I hope the White House learns a lesson.

  • rgb44hrc

    A MORE REASONABLE VIEW ON THE SISTA SHERROD FIRING

    …although Ben Evans calls Obama’s wading into the “black Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates” incident a “rare, undisciplined gaffe”.

    Rare?

    Then this: “Bedeviled by right-wing attacks of favoritism toward blacks, Obama’s administration was in a hurry to deny his critics any more ammunition.”

    The trouble is, Obama’s AG Eric Hold showed blatant favoritism in dropping the case against two out of three NBPP thugs, with a wrist slap for the third. THAT’S why “the perception” exists, dodo.

    realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/politics/2010/Jul/22/analysis__obama_again_sucked_into_race_debate.html

    July 22, 2010
    Analysis: Obama again sucked into race debate
    Ben Evans
    The Obama White House is back to a teaching moment on race, once again playing the student.

    This time, it tried so hard to steer clear of a black-white controversy that it wound up planting itself firmly in just that kind of a spectacle.

    Now, President Barack Obama is trying to fix things with a mea culpa — offered through his spokesman — to ousted Agriculture Department worker Shirley Sherrod. But the incident proves that nearly halfway through his term as the nation’s first black president, Obama is still struggling to strike the right balance between taking a stand on race and leading the country past it.

    The Sherrod firestorm dragged Obama into an ill-timed debate this week that overshadowed what was supposed to be a high moment for him: signing a significant legislative accomplishment, Wall Street reform, into law. And the incident reinforced the damaging perception that his White House caves too quickly to criticism from the political right.

    Sherrod certainly thinks so. She accused the administration of losing its backbone in pushing her out of her job, and hinted she may not come back.

    Obama so far has refused to directly address Sherrod’s plight, contrary to his own statements encouraging people to speak more openly about race. His silence leaves unclear whether this flap will fade or continue to steal focus from his message.

    Will Obama step in and offer his voice?

    “I wouldn’t rule it out,” said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs.

    But Gibbs didn’t rule it in either.

    Perhaps that’s because a year ago — almost to the day — Obama was burned by his own misstep on race, wading into the uproar surrounding the arrest of black Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates outside his home by Sgt. James Crowley, a white police officer.

    In that case, Obama admitted “I don’t know all the facts,” then proceeded to indict the Cambridge, Mass., police for acting “stupidly.”

    That rare, undisciplined gaffe created a backlash that also distracted attention from his signature proposal at the time, health care reform. Obama acknowledged he should have chosen his words better, and he convened his famous beer summit in an effort to turn the incident into a “teachable moment.”

    The latest uproar began when the flame-throwing conservative website BigGovernment.com posted a two-and-a-half-minute video clip of Sherrod’s speech to a rural south Georgia NAACP banquet. The website’s owner, Andrew Breitbart, said it showed that the NAACP condones racist elements, just as the civil rights group accuses the tea party movement of doing.

    The full speech shows Sherrod was really talking about racial unity and redemption — about how she came to learn that whites were struggling just like so many blacks she knew.

    In the Internet age, that context was lost. And with lightning speed, so was Sherrod’s job.

    Administration officials were so eager to keep the story off cable TV’s round-the-clock news cycle that they had Sherrod pull her car over to the side of the road Monday and submit her resignation on her Blackberry.

    Bedeviled by right-wing attacks of favoritism toward blacks, Obama’s administration was in a hurry to deny his critics any more ammunition.

    “That’s the kind of thing the White House is certainly sensitive to,” said Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. “I think the desire to avoid conflict and accusations of racial insensitivity actually walked them into the very problem they were trying to avoid.”

    Even the NAACP jumped to conclusions, condemning Sherrod’s remarks and supporting her resignation.

    When the full story came out, they both had egg on their faces.

    The NAACP quickly reversed itself, saying it was “snookered” by Breitbart — even though the speech happened at one of its own events.

    But the White House was slower to face reality. Less than a day after saying the president was not involved in Sherrod’s ouster but supported it, the administration was apologizing to her effusively and trying to make amends; Vilsack, it seemed, had a little trouble reaching Sherrod to talk to her.

    Speaking Wednesday about why Sherrod lost her job for no good cause, Gibbs had to come forward and say that “everybody involved made determinations without knowing all the facts.”

    Sound familiar?

    Gibbs largely blamed that on a culture in which “things whip around. People want fast responses. We want to give fast responses.”

    And he added, “I think this is one of those teachable moments.”

  • rgb44hrc

    GOTTA LOVE IT:

    Excerpt from above regarding the NAACP:

    “Even the NAACP jumped to conclusions, condemning Sherrod’s remarks and supporting her resignation.

    When the full story came out, they both had egg on their faces.

    The NAACP quickly reversed itself, saying it was “snookered” by Breitbart — even though the speech happened at one of its own events.”

  • moononpluto

    The NAACP quickly reversed itself, saying it was “snookered” by Breitbart — even though the speech happened at one of its own events.”

    ……………………………………..

    Where they the NAACP clapped and cheered when she said she didnt help whitey and sent him to one of “his kind”.

  • wbboei

    The trouble is, Obama’s AG Eric Hold showed blatant favoritism in dropping the case against two out of three NBPP thugs, with a wrist slap for the third. THAT’S why “the perception” exists, dodo.
    ————————–
    Well said rgb. And one other detail which escaped the attention of this apologist. It aint just that Barack showed favoritism. It is much worse than that, and this is what Bartle Bull was getting at. Barack failed in the most fundamental sense to discharge his constitutional responsibility under Article II to faithfully enforce the law. This time the victim is white, the next time he may be black and the time after that Asian. Yes, it is a slippery slope that the Messiah is taking us down, and there is no ski lodge with a roaring fire and hot totties at the bottom. Just a hard brick wall.

  • wbboei

    The NAACP quickly reversed itself, saying it was “snookered” by Breitbart — even though the speech happened at one of its own events.”

    ……………………………………..

    Where they the NAACP clapped and cheered when she said she didnt help whitey and sent him to one of “his kind”.

    —————-
    They don’t know which rock to crawl under.

  • basement angel

    Short Termer,

    He is not a lefty – not in any way, shape or form. He is frequently, as I said, to the right of Bush and Reagan.

    If he were a liberal, he would be targeting ordinary Americans, with average or below income, for policies that would expand their quality of life. IOW, he would bail out the home owners (as Hillary proposed doing) instead of the banks (as he and Bush both did). He would be cracking down much harder on financial regulation as Roosevelt did and as Hillary proposed. Instead, he is largely looking the other way. His health care proposal would have expanded access to health care, rather than simply demanding that people pay premiums to private business.

    I can’t think of a single policy that Obama has embraced and advanced that has made the lives of ordinary people better. He sides with the financial elites at every instance. That’s the very definition of the right, not the left.

    But if you seem him as doing things to help average people, by all means, point them out.

  • confloyd

    Maybe Biden’s statement “Pelosi is the most powerful woman” was actually a eulogy…LOL! 11% ROTFLMAO!

  • wbboei

    As she looks ahead to November.

    And empties another shot glass.

    Poopsie is humming a new tune.

    Clue: it ain’t hail to the chief:

  • Shadowfax

    ‘Take care of THIS.’”
    _________________

    If she had the presence of mind, she should have said: “wait, let me get my camera.” :)

    ———-
    Maybe a cast iron frying pan might fix his problem.

    I can’t believe I was actually pist that Gore didn’t become President and now the cheating Supremes in Fla may have saved the US from a serial sexual predator in the White House.

    Which is worse?

    Now we are in two major wars, 5500+ American deaths, thousands of innocent Iraqi civilian deaths, bombed the Hell out of a country that we taxpayers have to fund to rebuild it, with no WMD from Bush.

    And now we have Barry finishing us off.

    H-I-L-L-A-R-Y, we need you in the White House, asap!!!!!

  • Shadowfax

    McCracken

    When us white PUMAs are called ‘crackers’, in the future, if anyone says that in a crowd I am in, I am going to yell out. “Release the Crackens!!” :lol:

  • confloyd

    The cheating supremes….LOL! Well now we know why Gore seemed so unusual!

  • holdthemaccountable

    The one good thing about Al Gore’s campaign in 2000 was his continuing reference to the necessity of keeping Social Security funds in a lock box. Of course he was mocked for this as well as everything else he did. And pulling the strings then was Karl Rove. Oh how I despised him, but now I find him to be a good read.

    Karl Rove: Friendly Fire on the Hill – WSJ.com
    Describing the White House last week, Congressional Democrats used words like “ineptness,” “neglected” and “disconcerting,” and phrases like “isn’t aggressive enough.” President Barack Obama has only himself to blame for these protests. Well, maybe more than just himself. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs may have spoken the truth when he admitted Democrats could lose the House. He forgot that White House staffers are expected to be advocates, not prognosticators, when their party faces electoral defeat. Mr. Gibbs need not lie, but he could have been discreet. While an angry response to Mr. Gibbs from Hill Democrats was expected, several factors produced an unusually fierce reaction.
    First, Democrats in Congress feel underappreciated for having cast tough votes. True, they wanted to pass health care, the stimulus, record deficits, and cap and trade. They thought these would be political winners. But now they feel exposed for supporting unpopular policies they consider poorly explained and badly defended by the administration.
    Then there is the White House’s practice of outsourcing the drafting of major legislation to Democratic chairmen. This has made congressional Democrats more sensitive when Mr. Obama exerts himself, as he did with a threatened veto of a spending bill that trimmed his education priorities. One Democratic committee chairman (George Miller) affected by the veto threat complained, “there’s no strategy there,” while another (David Obey) fumed, “there’s a lot I don’t know about this administration.”
    Third, Hill Democrats were upset when the president brought up immigration reform without consulting them. Vulnerable Democrats know this issue may help Mr. Obama in the long run, but it jeopardizes them in this midterm. Obama aides stoked their ire further by boneheadedly conceding this point to reporters.
    Then there is the record of Mr. Obama’s short stint in the Senate. Congressional Democrats saw that he didn’t apply himself to the business of legislating, nor lead any major battle. Instead, he was singularly focused on winning the presidency. They applaud him for winning, but they neither fear nor respect his legislative skills and now ask why he gets the credit while they receive the public blame.
    Mr. Obama’s arrogance, coolness and diffidence also make it difficult for him to nurture close friendships, personal trust and mutual respect with the poobahs on the Hill. And so House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the president’s press secretary “politically inept” and condemned the “friendly fire” from the White House. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid snapped, “I do not work for Barack Obama, I work with him.”
    This problem is exacerbated by the poor or nonexistent ties between many of Mr. Obama’s top aides and Democrats on the Hill. Some of his aides were Congressional staffers, but senior advisers David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett are virtual unknowns to Congress. And while Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was the congressman who chaired the Democrats’ campaign that reclaimed the House in 2006, he is not known for his warmth, empathy and easy working relationships.
    Then there’s a belief around Capitol Hill that the White House is already pointing the finger at them for the coming fall’s losses. That’s in keeping with a pattern: After all, Team Obama publicly trashed its gubernatorial candidate in Virginia last fall and its Massachusetts senatorial hopeful last winter, weeks before their elections.
    Congressional Democrats also worry the president is insufficiently concerned about the November election. Maybe the White House believes Democrats have seats to give, that its agenda may be more achievable with fewer moderate Democrats, or that Mr. Obama can win re-election in 2012 more easily with a Republican Congress to blame.
    Finally, congressional Democrats are frustrated the president doesn’t do more to help them. The problem here is that he can’t. His approval rating was 54% when his party was walloped in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts last fall. Now it’s 47% in the RealClearPolitics average of recent polls. Mr. Obama’s presence will hurt more than help in many swing races. Even his fund raising isn’t going as well as expected. A recent presidential fund-raising event in Missouri had to discount tickets to fill otherwise empty chairs.
    The White House’s appearance of institutional and personal arrogance has left congressional Democrats divided and discontent going into the midterms. It weakens Democratic efforts not only this year, but well into the future. Having once fostered the impression that it’s every Democrat for himself, the president will find it hard to undo the damage when his own name is on the ballot.
    Mr. Obama is already learning from his own party the meaning of payback.
    h t t p://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704684604575381081034220838.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

  • basement angel

    wbboei,

    In the full video, they aren’t laughing and clapping at that point. they’re listening quietly.

  • confloyd

    Shadowfax
    Think of it this way…we have to rebuild Iraq after bombing the hell out of it…at least Haliburton will have work. LOL!!

  • Shadowfax

    confloyd

    The cheating supremes….LOL! Well now we know why Gore seemed so unusual!

    —–
    Weren’t the two terms used, ‘cold’ and ‘stiff’…

    :-0

  • wbboei

    It appears that grinning weasel Eugene Robinson has found the same old sad familiar rock to crawl under. Propagandist that he is, Robinson instinctively resorts to the false charge of racism, and uses it to defend a clear and continuing case of serial incompetence–Barack’s and no less his own. This is how the concept of civil rights gets turned on its head. False charges of racism are the last bastion of scoundrels. Case in point: Eugene Robinson.

  • confloyd

    Looky what I got from Paul Begala today in an email….
    ————————————————
    connie –

    Want to know the GOP’s grand 2010 plan? Bring back the same exact failed Bush agenda!
    ———————————————————————————————-

    I thought that was what we had already done in 08′….I actually want a new policy…we’ve had Bush’s for ten years now!

  • confloyd

    shadowfax,

    Yes those were exactly the two terms…ROTFLMAO!

  • Shadowfax

    When McCain picked Palin, liberal journalists coordinated the best line of attack
    By Jonathan Strong – The Daily Caller

    In the hours after Sen. John McCain announced his choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate in the last presidential race, members of an online forum called Journolist struggled to make sense of the pick. Many of them were liberal reporters, and in some cases their comments reflected a journalist’s instinct to figure out the meaning of a story.

    But in many other exchanges, the Journolisters clearly had another, more partisan goal in mind: to formulate the most effective talking points in order to defeat Palin and McCain and help elect Barack Obama president. The tone was more campaign headquarters than newsroom.

    The conversation began with a debate over how best to attack Sarah Palin. “Honestly, this pick reeks of desperation,” wrote Michael Cohen of the New America Foundation in the minutes after the news became public. “How can anyone logically argue that Sarah Pallin [sic], a one-term governor of Alaska, is qualified to be President of the United States? Train wreck, thy name is Sarah Pallin.”

    Not a wise argument, responded Jonathan Stein, a reporter for Mother Jones. If McCain were asked about Palin’s inexperience, he could simply point to then candidate Barack Obama’s similarly thin resume. “Q: Sen. McCain, given Gov. Palin’s paltry experience, how is she qualified to be commander in chief?,” Stein asked hypothetically. “A: Well, she has much experience as the Democratic nominee.”

    “What a joke,” added Jeffrey Toobin of the New Yorker. “I always thought that some part of McCain doesn’t want to be president, and this choice proves my point. Welcome back, Admiral Stockdale.”

    Daniel Levy of the Century Foundation noted that Obama’s “non-official campaign” would need to work hard to discredit Palin. “This seems to me like an occasion when the non-official campaign has a big role to play in defining Palin, shaping the terms of the conversation and saying things that the official [Obama] campaign shouldn’t say – very hard-hitting stuff, including some of the things that people have been noting here – scare people about having this woefully inexperienced, no foreign policy/national security/right-wing christia wing-nut a heartbeat away …… bang away at McCain’s age making this unusually significant …. I think people should be replicating some of the not-so-pleasant viral email campaigns that were used against [Obama].”

    Ryan Donmoyer, a reporter for Bloomberg News who was covering the campaign, sent a quick thought that Palin’s choice not to have an abortion when she unexpectedly became pregnant at age 44 would likely boost her image because it was a heartwarming story.

    “Her decision to keep the Down’s baby is going to be a hugely emotional story that appeals to a vast swath of America, I think,” Donmoyer wrote.

    Politico reporter Ben Adler, now an editor at Newsweek, replied, “but doesn’t leaving sad baby without its mother while she campaigns weaken that family values argument? Or will everyone be too afraid to make that point?”

    Read more:

    http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/22/when-mccain-picked-palin-liberal-journalists-coordinated-the-best-line-of-attack/#ixzz0uQn0hQlT

    Link posted by Murphy at PUMApac

  • JanH

    NMF,

    Good golly! First the faux media scares the bejeebus out of me by saying that bambi is actually thinking of sending Richardson to North Korea…and now they are saying it won’t happen.

    LOL…how desperate can they be?

  • confloyd

    Fox is now discussing the Sherrod and the email scandal! Gibb is making another appearance…I just can’t wait.

  • confloyd

    The North Korean’s only speak to Bill, don’t they know that yet!

  • Shadowfax

    More pieces from the dailycaller on the Palin attacks:

    [snip]

    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.

    [snip]

    Suzanne Nossel, chief of operations for Human Rights Watch, added a novel take: “I think it is and can be spun as a profoundly sexist pick. Women should feel umbrage at the idea that their votes can be attracted just by putting a woman, any woman, on the ticket no matter her qualifications or views.”

    Mother Jones’s Stein loved the idea. “That’s excellent! If enough people – people on this list? – write that the pick is sexist, you’ll have the networks debating it for days. And that negates the SINGLE thing Palin brings to the ticket,” he wrote.

    Another writer from Mother Jones, Nick Baumann, had this idea: “Say it with me: ‘Classic GOP Tokenism’.”

    [snip]

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/22/when-mccain-picked-palin-liberal-journalists-coordinated-the-best-line-of-attack/2/#ixzz0uQotSRQS

  • wbboei

    Most people are oblivious to what is going on outside their own lives and even if they are not the judgments they make are tentative when they should be firm. Wrong is wrong and people should not scruple to say that, but too often they do. But then something happens which creates a tipping point, and after that they are willing to speak up. We saw the blatant racism of the Obama campaign in South Carolina on, but nobody would speak up. It was present in the general election, but not the the same degree. The response was silence. And we have seen it in so many ways as Obama attempts to govern by campaigning and destroying our nation. But nothing drew the issue into such high relief as the dropping of the case against the black panthers by Barack and his Justice Department. That was the tipping point. That gave context to everything else Obama has done which raised eyebrows in certain quarters but not in others. Now at last the bad guys in his adminstration and in big media are on the defensive in the eyes of everyone I speak to, regardless of political stripe.

  • confloyd

    According to Megan on Fox…..a poll shows Bill Clinton at 61% and Obama is at 52%….I love it! That must be why they wanted to send Judas to North Korea!

  • wbboei

    Spencer Ackerman shouted “CALL THEM RACISTS!”

    Question: who is Spenser Ackerman, that he can use his pack of hyenas to terrorize mainstream journalists like Princeton Charlie Gibson, among others?

    Answer: a fine young turk. If you do not believe me then see for yourself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spencer_Ackerman

    In particular, note the following:

    1. Ackerman is a fan of comic books and hardcore punk music. He has appeared on CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, Al Jazeera and BloggingHeads.tv.

    2. In October 2006 he was fired by The New Republic Editor Franklin Foer. Describing it as a “painful” decision, Foer attributed the firing to Ackerman’s “insubordination”: disparaging the magazine on his personal blog Too Hot For TNR, saying that he would “skullfuck” a terrorist’s corpse at an editorial meeting if that was required to “establish his anti-terrorist bona fides” and sending Foer an e-mail where he said—in what according to Ackerman was intended to be a joke—he would “make a niche in your skull” with a baseball bat.[3]

    3. On July 22, 2010, Fred Barnes reported in the Wall Street Journal that during the Jeremiah Wright controversy Spencer Ackerman proposed attacking Mr. Obama’s critics as racists themselves, writing: “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. . . . This makes them ‘sputter’ with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.”[citation needed

  • S

    wbboei
    July 22nd, 2010 at 12:02 pm
    The trouble is, Obama’s AG Eric Hold showed blatant favoritism in dropping the case against two out of three NBPP thugs, with a wrist slap for the third. THAT’S why “the perception” exists, dodo.
    ————————–
    Well said rgb. And one other detail which escaped the attention of this apologist. It aint just that Barack showed favoritism. It is much worse than that, and this is what Bartle Bull was getting at. Barack failed in the most fundamental sense to discharge his constitutional responsibility under Article II to faithfully enforce the law. This time the victim is white, the next time he may be black and the time after that Asian. Yes, it is a slippery slope that the Messiah is taking us down, and there is no ski lodge with a roaring fire and hot totties at the bottom. Just a hard brick wall.
    ********************************************************

    …this is all true…however the point that ADMIN is trying to drive to the surface and the one that I wholeheartedly agree with it, is…for this story about racism to really resonate, the media, pundits, and all concerned need to view O FROM THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES…

    …the racism of O and his ‘team’ starts during the primaries…and then the ‘racism’ football gets thrown over and over again…none of O’s supporters or ‘jurnolists’ are ever confronted with anything that puts them on the spot…the TRUTH is still ignored and the dots are still not CONNECTED…that is the MISSING LINK…

    O and his thugs started at the top of the democratic party and hit BC first as a racist…right out of the gate…then they went after HC…then they took on Geradine Ferraro and Ed Rendell…then anyone who continued to support Hillary or fell under the category of PUMA were racists…then they moved on to Sarah Palin, now the tea party and all of FOX news and all their viewers and through in the whole GOP…

    (all while the thuggish, rigged caucuses were held, and O won without any question or scrutiny and all complaints and irregularities were ignored by DNC and MSM)

    in fact, anyone but O and his supporters are racists…

    …when objective and honest people start putting the whole big picture together instead of fragments and incidents, THEN THEY WILL SEE THE PATTERN…and the TRUTH…

    …until then…it is dribs and drabs…

    and the O apologists are still out in full force trying to protect him…it is simply getting harder and harder to avoid reality and defend the indefendsible…

  • wbboei

    These chip on the shoulder punks are a wrong turn for journalism. I am beginning to think there is hope for Matthew Lee. He is from their generation and he has reined in much of what was once bad about him. Traveling with Hillary as he has from time to time has widened and broadened his horizons or so it seems.

  • wbboei

    S: that is what I was saying too at 1:08

  • S

    correction “throw in the GOP”

  • confloyd

    So now the debating whether to drop all charges against Blago…Geez, why is no one question this…theyve found conspiracy in the blogosphere and the news media…lets delve into the conspiracy to keep Obama from having to testify…this is so fishy..lets watch the media not cover this at all!
    They would be hanging Bill/Hillary out to dry on this…

  • wbboei

    I should have gone further. I think there is a good chance that Matthew Lee will become a fine journalist.

  • S

    wbb…we are on same wavelength…:)

  • S

    confloyd
    July 22nd, 2010 at 1:34 pm
    So now the debating whether to drop all charges against Blago
    ********************************

    had not heard that yet, I am waiting any minute for newsflash that comes thru saying Blago ‘not guilty’ or ‘acquitted’

  • turndownobama

    in fact, anyone but O and his supporters are racists…

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

    Continuing the pattern, there’s a move going on to re-define ‘racist’ and ‘racism’ so that it can be applied to more people.

  • confloyd

    Megan Kelly now showing the jounolist, but not linking them to the primary!

  • turndownobama

    basement,

    I think you were defending Wikipedia?

    There are some quotes from Wikipedia in wbboei’s post at July 22nd, 2010 at 1:23 pm. I suggest you see whether these stay in the article. (I expect obots are editing it as fast as they can.)

  • turndownobama

    wbboei said:
    Most people are oblivious to what is going on outside their own lives and even if they are not the judgments they make are tentative when they should be firm.

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

    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.

  • turndownobama

    shadow,

    I hope you didn’t mean to say you take nasty accusations at face value without proof. What if they were said about Bill — or Hillary?

    Things like that will always be said against celebrities, and political enemies will broadcast them.

  • turndownobama

    basement angel said:
    July 22nd, 2010 at 12:06 pm
    [Obama] is not a lefty – not in any way, shape or form. He is frequently, as I said, to the right of Bush and Reagan.

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

    And to the right of Hillary.

  • turndownobama

    the NAACP clapped and cheered when she said she didnt help whitey and sent him to one of “his kind”.

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

    If in fact at some point they were silent, it would be easy for someone to dub in a ‘laugh track’ or applause over the speaker’s voice.

    It might be harder to erase laughter/applause that really happened. But I expect an expert could change it either way.

    So — how do we know that any version is untampered? Send them to Interpol? ;-)

  • JanH

    Secretary Clinton Meets with Vietnam Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister

  • JanH

    very cute!

    Hillary Clinton in VietNam

  • turndownobama

    a video snippet of a speech that Sherrod, who is African-American, gave to a NAACP meeting earlier this year. In it, Sherrod seemed to boast of having withheld from a white farmer some measure of aid that she would have given to a black farmer.

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

    Isn’t the key the reaction of the Naacp audience “EARLIER THIS YEAR”, though the incident happened in 1968.

    (These dates are from realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/22/using_race_to_smear_obama_106416.html
    a very slanted article.)

  • turndownobama

    confloyd
    July 22nd, 2010 at 1:10 am
    Those Gore stories are most interesting…I wonder whose behind them??

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

    Paula Jones.

  • confloyd

    turndown,
    LOL! Did Paula know Gore too??? LOL!

  • confloyd

    JanH, Did the Vietnameze give something to Chelsea for her wedding? Hillary is so gracious with world leaders and she doesn’t bow to them.

    Im sorry but I still don’t like Rove…he looks like a sick little rat to me…disgusting…something is definitely wrong with him as he’s been married a conjellion times…he NO keeper apparently!

  • confloyd

    Somewhere today I read that Obama was an wonderful husband and treats his wife respectfully…hmmm,hmmm….I guess keeping his own “on grounds” men’s club doesn’t count???

  • JanH

    confloyd,

    I think so, but not positive.

  • Shadowfax

    #
    S
    July 22nd, 2010 at 1:39 pm

    confloyd
    July 22nd, 2010 at 1:34 pm
    So now the debating whether to drop all charges against Blago

    who is saying this??????????????

    If blago is not found guilty, can he sue for being impeached for no legal ‘wrong doing’?
    Can he get back his Governor’s job???

    If prosecutors were too chicken to put Rezko and Rahm on the stand, why make Blago take the fall??

  • JanH

    turndownobama
    July 22nd, 2010 at 2:19 pm
    —————

    LOL…

    Why is this all coming out now? I’m not condoning what Gore allegedly did, but why now?

  • Shadowfax

    #

    #
    turndownobama
    July 22nd, 2010 at 1:56 pm

    shadow,

    I hope you didn’t mean to say you take nasty accusations at face value without proof. What if they were said about Bill — or Hillary?

    Things like that will always be said against celebrities, and political enemies will broadcast them.
    ——

    What???
    What post are you referring to?

  • confloyd

    I read that about Blago off a comment I think on citizen wells. I don’t know where they got their information, but it fits doesn’t it?? They called no one from the WH…things were going good for the prosecution until Obama made his sudden vacation weekend to Chicago. This is what happens with anything Obama…nothing…he gets away with everything. The media is dividing up the leftovers now and you can bet Hillary will not be the beneficiary of it. It will go to some unnamed republican.

    I am just sick of this crap against Hillary….sick as hell about it. The rethugs are going to use it to better their game, not to be honest and let all the Obama filth come out against Sarah but Hillary too.
    We freaking don’t need a bunch of freaking republicans taking over and continuing this bs against the middleclass and this is what is going to happen unless we can get this whole mess from 04 to date out.
    I think they are all in it together. We will see when the rethugs take over the senate and congress and the devil will have all its demons together eating out of one plate…the middleclass!

  • Shadowfax

    turndown
    If you are talking about my comment about Gore, I think the timing of his breakup with Tipper makes me lean towards believing there is some real truth to it.

    Are all the claims are true, don’t know yet…but if one is true, and he molests women, he is a slimeball in my eyes. Affair is bad, but this is creepy.

  • confloyd

    I also could care less about Gore…he screwed his ownself up when he refused to ask Bill for help. His elitest can go to hell!

  • Shadowfax

    Confloyd

    I think they are all in it together. We will see when the rethugs take over the senate and congress and the devil will have all its demons together eating out of one plate…the middleclass!

    ——–
    I agree, that’s why I intend to throw all the bums out! Rethugs and Demthugs OUT!!!

    I am planning to vote for some independents this time too.

    When I go to vote, and only one person is running it makes me livid. I NEVER vote for them.

  • turndownobama

    shadow,

    Lots of people get divorced. If it’s more than coincidence, the timing is more likely the other way. Hearing about the divorce, Gore’s enemies got up this story.

    Do you believe Paula Jones? Juanita Whosis’ story accusing Bill of rape?

    Just because a vivid story is told, DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE.

  • Shadowfax

    turndown

    Sorry, maybe I have more of a tendency to believe it than you because I no longer see Gore as the good guy that I did back when. I will refrain from accusations from now on about him until the ‘facts’ come out.

    As to Bill, I still admire him as a leader but hate what he did behind Hillary’s back, and no, I don’t think Bill is capable of rape.

  • AmericanGal

    Does someone have more info on the “State Department Army in Iraq” story on Drudge. Of course, he puts a headline linking it to Hillary but the article does not tie this plan to her, it sounds like an Obama administration plan.

  • Shadowfax

    Blago

    July 21, 2010 (CHICAGO)
    — The Rod Blagojevich trial appears to be in its final days.

    Defense attorneys continued to argue their motion for judgment of acquittal Thursday morning.

    The defense argued there was no action, just discussions on count 23, specifically the portion where the government alleges Rod Blagojevich sought a highly paid leadership position with an organization known as Change to Win, with the expectation that then-President-elect Barack Obama would help Change to Win with its agenda.

    The defense also asked for Count 24, making false statements to the FBI, to be dismissed because the former governor’s words to federal agents were “ambiguous.”

    Judge James Zagel is continuing the motion. Zagel said he is “currently not persuaded by the motion” but sometimes his mind is changed after hearing closing arguments.

    The defense also argued to have transcripts of three secretly recorded calls that were never played in court to be given to the jury. Judge Zagel denied the request.

    A hearing to decide whether or not jurors’ names will be released to the media will be held Thursday afternoon.

    On Friday, attorneys on both sides will discuss proposed jury instructions with Judge Zagel.

    Closing arguments will be Monday morning. Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher Niewoehner will go first and said he will take two to 2 1/2 hours. Robert Blagojevich’s attorney, Michael Ettinger, will go next and plans to take about an hour. Then the former governor’s attorney, Sam Adam Jr., will get his turn. He is expected to take about 2 1/2 hours.

    Finally, Assistant U.S. Attorney Reid Schar plans to spend an hour or hour and a half on the rebuttal. Judge Zagel said he would like to complete all closing arguments on Monday.

    He would read the jury instructions to jurors on Tuesday morning and then they will begin deliberations.

    Jurors will be given more than 100 pages of instructions, reminding them of the testimony, the recordings and specific charges, such as racketeering and conspiracy to commit bribery and other charges. Jurors will also be given a computer and access to secret recordings played in court.

    Defense attorneys did not put the former governor on the stand. Blagojevich talked to the media again, again and again before and during the trial, but he decided to keep his lips sealed in court.

    After promising for months he would testify in his corruption trial, former governor Blagojevich went before a judge and said he would not take the stand and that he was following the advice of his lawyers.

    “They promised him an opening statement to the jury. And while the jury is not supposed to be watching and listening, I do think pretrial they may have heard some of the stories,” said legal expert Patrick Collins. “For him to now, at the end, say even though they promised him he’s not going to do it, I don’t think it was the right setup.”

    “Sam Adam Sr.’s compelling argument was that the government, in their case, proved my innocence, proved I did nothing illegal,” said Blagojevich after court Wednesday.

    “The law is clear. The burden of proof is on the government. They did not meet their burden of proof, and I think the jury will say that,” Adam said.

    In opening statements, the defense promised jurors that they would hear from Blagojevich.

    “Did I get up and tell them he was going to testify? Yes. Did I believe it at the time I said that? Yes, I did. Have times changed? They certainly have,” said lawyer Sam Adam Jr.

    One legal expert said jurors will be instructed not to hold this decision against Blagojevich, but some question whether they will be able to do just that.

    “If I was innocent and charged with a crime, I would scream my innocence to anybody who would listen and if they didn’t, there must be some reason,” said Prof. Richard Kling, Kent College of Law, of the possible mindset of a juror.

    Neither Blagojevich nor his brother was in court Thursday.

  • turndownobama

    Thanks, shadow.

    Even if a person believes the worst about Gore politically and financially, that’s no reason to think he would do a nasty thing unrelated to those areas.

    What we do know is that like Bill and Hillary, he has a lot of enemies — many the SAME enemies who used that kind of accusation against them. (Hillary was accused of lesbian affairs.)

    It’s like accusations of racism — eventually the accusation will be made against ANYONE.

  • gonzotx

    July 22, 2010
    Race Played Role in Obama Car Dealer Closures

    By William Tate

    The Obama administration, already under fire for unprecedented allegations of racial bias, faces a new bias claim from a most unlikely source: one of the administration’s own inspectors general.

    Decisions on which car dealerships to close as part of the auto industry bailout — closures the Obama administration forced on General Motors and Chrysler — were based in part on race and gender, according to a report by Troubled Asset Relief Program Special Inspector General Neal M. Barofsky.

    [D]ealerships were retained because they were recently appointed, were key wholesale parts dealers, or were minority- or woman-owned dealerships. [Emphasis added.]

    Thus, to meet numbers forced on them by the Obama administration, General Motors and Chrysler were forced to shutter other, potentially more viable, dealerships. The livelihood of potentially tens of thousands of families was thus eliminated simply because their dealerships were not minority- or woman-owned.

    As has been widely reported, the Inspector General’s study skewered the Obama Gang for strong-arming the companies into closing 2,000 dealerships, costing an estimated 100,000 people their jobs during a recession.

    But the news media has ignored key elements of Barofsky’s report — elements that are far more damaging, if possible, to Obama. As we reported earlier in the week, a top Obama official, manufacturing czar and “Auto Team” leader Ron Bloom admitted that the dealerships could have been kept open, saving those jobs, “but that doing so would have been inconsistent with the President’s mandate for ‘shared sacrifice.’”

    Barofsky says the administration insisted on the closings even though a GM official told him

    that GM would usually save ‘not one damn cent’ by closing any particular dealership. … Furthermore, a GM official stated that removing a dealership from the network does not save money for GM — it might even cost GM money — and that savings cannot be attributed or assigned to any one dealership.

    And a reading of the IG’s study makes plain that some dealership closings forced by the administration were based largely on politics.

    The report is highly critical of how dealerships were selected for closure, or termination. Barofsky notes that

    experts said that while metro areas were oversaturated with GM and Chrysler dealerships and reductions were needed in these areas, this was not the case in rural areas where GM and Chrysler had an advantage over their import competitors. [...]

    Although sales volume in small towns may be lower, the cost of operating dealerships in small towns is lower as well. In addition, closing dealerships in small towns could ruin the “historic relationship” that GM has had with residents in small towns and force buyers to drive to metro areas, where there are more competitors. In the worst case, the loss of market share in small and medium-sized markets could “jeopardize the return to profitability” for GM and Chrysler, the (the Center for Automotive Research) representative said. Representatives from the National Automobile Dealers Association also concurred that dealership terminations would cause GM and Chrysler to lose market share in rural areas. [Emphasis added.]

    Nevertheless, as Barofsky notes, “ultimately close to half of all of the GM dealerships identified for termination were in rural areas.”

    That is where raw, hard, sewage-filled Chicago politics came into play.

    Records indicate that in 2008, Obama lost the vote totals in the nation’s 1,300 rural counties by nearly 80%.

    The Obama administration’s insistence on radical numbers of closures ended up shuttering dealerships in those rural areas disproportionately, while dealerships and jobs in metro areas — Obama’s geographical base — were left open.

    Additionally, it has been widely theorized that dealers targeted for closure as a result of Obama’s interference were predominantly those who donated campaign contributions to Republicans. Although evidence to date is largely anecdotal, given what we’ve already reported about the Obama administration’s handling of the auto bailout, such speculation does have considerable grounds for support.

    While that last point is leaves room for debate, the details contained in the Barofsky report are not. As Barofsky points out, the Obama administration was given an advance copy, and “Treasury [the Obama Treasury Department] might not agree with how the audit’s conclusions portray the Auto Team’s decision making or with the lessons that SIGTARP has drawn from those facts, but it should be made clear that Treasury has not challenged the essential underlying facts upon which those conclusions are based.”

    Included among those undisputed facts:

    -”[D]ealerships were retained because they were … minority- or woman-owned dealerships”;

    -Thousands of jobs were lost, unnecessarily, due specifically to Obama’s “mandate for shared sacrifice”;

    -A disproportionate number of Obama-forced closings were of rural dealerships, in areas unfriendly to Obama, even though such closures could “jeopardize the return to profitability” for GM and Chrysler.

    The media, of course, remain mute about these serious allegations in the Barofsky report. They have limited their coverage to the job loss numbers and tried to place the blame on Treasury Secretary Turbo-Tax Tim Geithner.

    For now.

    Before long, we’ll be reading that it was somehow Bush’s fault.

  • gonzotx

    July 22, 2010
    What the NAACP/Tea Party Battle Is Really About

    By Robert Weissberg

    The recent dust-up between the NAACP and the Tea Partiers over charges of “racism” appears to be yet one more instance of blacks accusing whites of insensitivity, real or imagined. In reality, however, these exchanges reflect far deeper animosities that will not vanish with “clarifications” or expelling “racist” Tea Partiers.

    The NAACP and its numerous allies have for decades led the charge to expand government power, including intruding into areas once considered absolutely off-limits to local government, let alone Washington. Tea Partiers are not libertarians, but they’ve had enough with government power run amok. This disagreement is, to use Thomas Sowell’s words, an unbridgeable conflict of visions: the Tea Party’s agenda, even stripped of any racial component, contravenes the NAACP’s raison d’être, so when the NAACP complains about insensitivities, it is just saying, “You intend to destroy us.”

    Begin by recognizing that the post-1960s civil rights agenda has been the single most powerful force in expanding Washington power. Nothing comes even remotely close. During WWII, Washington set prices, rationed consumer goods, and limited business profits, but this infringement was correctly understood as temporary and was universally welcomed as vital to national survival (and it was soon ended). Neither the environmental movement nor consumer protection legislation has penetrated so deeply into the everyday life of Americans.

    Documenting this expansion is endless. In education, for example, the push to integrate America’s schools has affected the lives of millions, especially those who fled cities to avoid forced busing, while judicial degrees have shaped everything from tax rates to the racial composition of school staffs. Urban demographics were radically altered by forced integration, and this remains true today. The 1964 Civil Rights Act brought federal intervention into local restaurants and movie houses and even constrained people’s ability to choose their neighbors. The 1965 Voting Rights Act and subsequent extensions now make every city and town in America vulnerable to Justice Department oversight if their election system slights minority representation. Employment-based affirmative action has exploded from a narrow presidential directive targeting federal government contractors to a bureaucratic colossus. There is scarcely a person alive, from professors to blue-collar cops and firefighters, whose life-chances have not been shaped by government race policy. There is no escape — those in rural Idaho seeking a mortgage will probably experience the repercussions of the government’s push to promote home ownership among blacks and Hispanics.

    Yet, thousands of civil rights successes aside, the political appetites of groups like the NAACP seem insatiable. It is no exaggeration to say that they believe that government is sufficiently powerful, if only vigorously prodded, to level outcomes across nearly all of human existence. This faith-based relentlessness soon resembles the classic gambler’s fallacy — if one lawsuit does not bring racially proportionate equality of admission to law schools, file two, and if that comes up short, file four, and eventually, it is believed, victory will arrive. Scarcely a day passes without some civil rights group going to court to challenge an exam that allegedly hinders black job applicants or demanding that Washington forcefully intervene to protect poor blacks from allegedly discriminatory financial practices.

    At some point, even those sympathetic with the civil rights agenda — and this undoubtedly included most Tea Party fans — will recognize that this relentless craving for government-imposed racial equality is deeply antithetical to limited government. In the final analysis, then, the NAACP and its allies are on a collision path with the Tea Party movement. Put more formally, given what is already on the books and vigorously enforced, new civil rights measures serve only to expand government, with scant payoff for intended beneficiaries. The point of diminishing returns on political pressuring was reached long ago. In a nutshell, the very existence of the Tea Party is a message to the NAACP: Stop.

    Make no mistake: Civil rights groups are not the only fans of big government. There are those who would radically expand defense budgets; others demand gargantuan expansion of social welfare. Further add nanny-state meddlers obsessed with our diets. But what makes the civil rights agenda so contrary to the principles of limited government, over and above its ceaseless character, is its penchant for invading what was heretofore politically off-limits. It is one thing to demand free universal medical care, but quite another to attempt to micromanage the workplace to root out any vestiges of alleged discrimination. To those unfamiliar with this Kafkaesque madness, consider just one of hundreds of anti-discrimination strictures from the U.S. Equal Employment Commission:

    For example, a “no-beard” employment policy that applies to all workers without regard to race may still be unlawful if it is not job-related and has a negative impact on the employment of African-American men (who have a predisposition to a skin condition that causes severe shaving bumps).

    There are also rules about non-job social events, so, for example, a firm that favors golf outings may be guilty of racial discrimination if its black employees prefer basketball to golf. A firm might also risk lawsuits if refuses to promote a white person who has a black spouse or if the white employee socializes with blacks, or if the firm’s insurance policy had a race-related illness as an excluded existing precondition. The list of prohibitions and requirements is not only far-reaching and murky, but navigating them requires legal staffs trained in the equivalent of Talmudic interpretation. Who would have ever guessed that firms must now consider shaving bumps when setting grooming standards? Or must inquire about the race of an employee’s friends or spouse before announcing layoffs? No, these are not hypothetical illustrations.

    The NAACP/Tea Party conflict would vanish if the NAACP and its allies suddenly abandoned their infatuation with federal coercion and instead embraced a strategy more in tune with the non-political approach of Booker T. Washington or Father Devine — working one’s way up the economic ladder via self-help. So, instead of piling on yet more made-in-Washington rules and regulations to exorcise the demons racism and discrimination in education, civil rights groups would, for example, create after-school cram academies to help struggling students earn a legitimate high school diploma. And I’d guess that they would have no problem recruiting Tea Party sympathizers to help teach these courses.

    The NAACP/Tea Party conflict over limited government cannot be resolved, though it is all too easy to paper it over. Tea Party fans are not anti-black or anti-civil rights; they certainly do not favor repealing civil rights legislation or enfeebling the Justice Department. They just prefer limited government to pursuing an aim — racial equality — that appears unreachable. It is one thing to expand government during wartime, when national survival is at stake, or to achieve a worthy and reachable goal; but to empower Big Brother and accomplish nothing other than bigger government is hardly an acceptable sacrifice.

    When confronted with the inevitable charge of racism, Tea Party folk should resist the urge to fight the battle on these acrimonious grounds. Battling a civil rights group over “racism” is an unwinnable, pointless battle. Blacks will always claim the high ground of moral authority to define “racism.” The debate should be about sustaining a bedrock principle of our Republic — limited government — versus some egalitarian dream. This is a classic clash of principles and transcends who said what when. It is, moreover, about time that the virtues of limited government enter the public debate next time the NAACP or its sympathizers demand yet more government intrusion into private life.

    Of the utmost importance, African-Americans should be reminded that, after all, they are a minority, and the purpose of limited government is to prevent tyranny, especially the tyranny of the majority over the minority. In the long run, African-Americans — like all Americans — should dread an out-of-control government no matter how seductive that government’s mission. The NAACP has, sad to say, forgotten perhaps one of the most basic lessons of American governance. Doubters should just observe what happens elsewhere in today’s world when government power is unchecked. There is an oft-repeated Jefferson quote that captures this dilemma exactly: “A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have.”

    The dust-up is about power and tyranny, not insults.

    Robert Weissberg is Professor of Political Science-Emeritus, University of Illinois-Urbana. His latest book is Bad Students Not Bad Schools. badstudentsnotbadschools.com

  • Shadowfax

    Good news and bad news on Oil Spill cleanup invention:

    First the good news…

    A bag and a trap. Oil spill invention is a keeper
    ‘It’s not rocket science, but it works,’ a BP official says of Gerry Matherne’s device, one of thousands engineers have sorted through that claim to clean up the sludge in the Gulf of Mexico.

    [snip]

    Gerry Matherne…

    “I’m always inventing something,” said the gruff 61-year-old captain of an oil supertanker. “When I was a boy, a wristwatch was never safe in my hands. I’d dismantle anything to see how it ran.”

    So when Matherne learned of the runaway BP oil leak, he considered it a personal challenge. He drove to a hardware store, bought some window screens and PVC pipe, and began to tinker.

    The result is the first device that, according to BP engineers and Coast Guard officials, promises a faster, cheaper and more efficient way to remove spilled oil than traditional skimmers in the Gulf of Mexico.

    Matherne’s apparatus looks like a trash bag in a big crab trap, but it works like a sieve to snag sludge and oil while seawater passes through. BP officials say they aim to build and deploy 100 units by the end of the month, and add more after that if needed.

    [snip]

    Matherne’s gadget, officially called the Heavy Oil Recovery Device, or HORD, is far simpler.

    It uses a 6-foot-long bag made of the same synthetic mesh in lawn furniture. The bag is secured inside a large cage with an open end, like a trash bag in a kitchen pail.

    When the floating cage is towed at slow speed, the porous bag captures weathered oil — the tarry globs that wash ashore — but lets seawater flow through. After a ton of tar balls fills the bag, it is cinched closed and hauled on deck, and a clean bag goes in the cage.

    The cost: $42 per bag and $6,000 per cage.

    ………….and the bad news for this inventor:

    Matherne already was working for BP so he will not get paid for the invention.

    ***** I just wonder, how many good inventions were bypassed because the inverntor wasn’t a BP employee, where BP could snag the invention????

    More of the story:

    At this point, BP is using 593 modified fishing boats that tow floating barriers to corral the surface oil. They then drag the booms to collection points, where powerful pumps vacuum the glop into containment tanks. The process is painfully slow.

    The disposable bags in the HORD eliminate the pumps and vacuums. Engineers hope they also can link cages in static lines to protect vital channels and fragile coastal wetlands and estuaries.

    The advantages seemed clear during tests of the system on a recent torrid afternoon.

    About five miles out in the Mississippi Sound, two skimmers slowly dragged a containment boom in a V-shape, corralling inky ribbons of oil. A cage at the bottom of the V appeared to scoop up the entire sheen.

    Nearby, a 90-foot shrimp trawler, the Michael, lowered its outriggers to pull four cages on each side. The bags netted oil and let greenish water filter through.

    [snip]

  • turndownobama

    Interesting thought about the NAACP/Tea Party. But I doubt if many actual Tea Party people make that connection. Aren’t they more focused on recent government expansions that are more obviously about cash, ie the ‘bailouts/stimulus’?

  • Shadowfax

    http://www.floridagulfresponse.com/go/doctype/3051/54119/

    This link has photo links of the invention and although BP had a video on another site, saying they wouldn’t tell what is inside the ‘cage’ to protect the invention…here it is, and anyone could make one now that they know how, and that it works in thick floating oil.

  • basil9

    I was taking an afternoon break and couldn’t find the usual mindless pleasant time-wasting mind-numbers on BRAVO so I surfed through the channels and I thought I’d give this update into enemy territory about what CNN and MSNBC were covering.

    Sanchez had on some wacko named Harry Hughes who wants the US to be a white country with people having to prove whiteness going back generations and of course Sanchez was drippingly sneeringly obnoxious – almost as obnoxious as the guy he was interviewing.

    And the sister channel had on Jesse Jackson and some other AA activist talking about poor Shirley.

    Just imagine the people who watch those stations 24/7 and what they’re being brainwashed with.

  • Shadowfax

    Good news: The Crap and Tax big bill is dead for now!

    Hallelujah!!!!!!!!!

    Climate Bill: Senate Democrats Abandon Comprehensive Energy Bill

    WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats on Thursday abandoned plans to pass an energy bill that caps emissions of carbon dioxide, saying Republicans refuse to support the measure.

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said no Republican was willing to back a comprehensive energy bill, a development he called “terribly disappointing.”

    Democrats have been trying for more than a year to pass a plan that charges utilities and other major polluters for their heat-trapping carbon emissions, which contribute to global warming. They’re also abandoning a compromise plan to limit emissions only from utilities that also failed to attract the 60 votes needed to advance it in the 100-member Senate.

    Reid and other Democrats said they would focus on a narrower bill that responds to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and improves energy efficiency.

    “We’ve always known from day one that to pass comprehensive energy reform, you’ve got to have 60 votes,” said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., the bill’s lead sponsor. “As we stand here today we don’t have one Republican vote.”

    ————–

    HuffPuff

  • JanH

    gonzotx
    July 22nd, 2010 at 4:01 pm
    ——————
    Makes you wonder have many other monstrous decisions that have caused so much loss were made by obama with one criteria only: race, race, race.

  • JanH

    confloyd…here you go…

    Jul 22, 2010

    Hillary Clinton given wedding presents for Chelsea

    The wedding presents are rolling in from around the world.

    Today, while in Hanoi for diplomatic meetings a little over a week before the July 31 wedding of Chelsea Clinton, U.S. Secretary of State and mother-of-the-bride Hillary Clinton was given a wedding present — a white tablecloth — for her daughter by the Vietnamese government. She was also given a gemstone mosaic portrait of her with Chelsea during their 2000 visit to the country.

    “Very nice,” Clinton said when Vietnamese Foreign Minister Pham Gia Khiem presented her with the gifts, reports AP.

    Clinton is on the last leg of a four-nation tour that also took her to Afghanistan, Pakistan and South Korea — all while helping to plan the wedding. Clinton said that traveling while “trying to help organize my daughter’s wedding is proof … that I may be lacking in common sense.”

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/entertainment/post/2010/07/hillary-clinton-given-wedding-presents-for-chelsea-in-vietnam/1

  • JanH

    Clinton vows to increase cooperation on Agent Orange
    (AFP) – 12 hours ago

    HANOI — United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, on a visit to Vietnam Thursday, vowed to increase cooperation in dealing with the legacy of the wartime herbicide Agent Orange.

    US aircraft sprayed the chemicals during the Vietnam War to strip trees of foliage in order to deprive communist Viet Cong forces of cover and food.

    “We’ve been working with Vietnam for about nine years to try to remedy the effects of Agent Orange. I will work to increase our cooperation and make even greater progress together,” Clinton said at a press conference on the sidelines of a regional security meeting.

    Potentially cancer-causing dioxin was a component of Agent Orange and other herbicides sprayed by American forces.

    Since 2007, the US Congress has appropriated nine million dollars to help Vietnam clean up the contamination, and for related health activities.

    Experts have identified three former US air bases as “hot spots” of dioxin contamination, but decontaminating all three of them would cost an estimated 59 million dollars, most of which still needs to be committed, a United Nations adviser in Hanoi said last month.

    A Vietnamese doctor testified before the US Congress last week that more than three million Vietnamese have suffered the effects of the herbicide.

    Vietnam and the US normalised relations 15 years ago.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iBbnzH-ZvaFUQJUmOoa0xaBdm5-A

  • Shadowfax

    I am getting so sick of the word RACE!!!!

  • Shadowfax

    JanH

    Hillary Clinton given wedding presents for Chelsea

    The wedding presents are rolling in from around the world.

    ——-
    Since Barry isn’t going to be at the wedding,

    another gift from above,

    I wonder if his wedding gift will be another iPod with his ‘speeches’ on them to Chelsea,

    I am sure she will take the first opportunity to fling it from her moving car onto the freeway while driving away for her honeymoon.

  • JanH

    Clinton meets ASEAN leaders

  • JanH

    U.S. Delegation Arrives in South Korea – Statements

  • JanH

    shadowfax,

    LOL…and we both know what she would do with a “gift/punishment” like that.

  • JanH

    hmmm…flushed down the toilet? Driven over by her car over and over and over again?

  • Shadowfax

    And HuffPuff craps up and twists the media bias story as only HuffPuff can………flinging more bs at Palin and not mentioning the attacks were first at Hillary.

    I started to read the comments and it made my blood pressure go sky high…..

    ———

    Sarah Palin Lashes Out At Media, McCain Campaign And JournoList, Maybe

    Sometime Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has heard about the JournoList! And she’s not at all happy about it, according to “exclusive remarks” given to the Daily Caller.

    From a remote location on an island off Alaska’s coast, former Governor Sarah Palin is blasting what she describes as the “sick puppies” in the media who immediately and ruthlessly attacked her when Sen. John McCain picked her as his running mate during the 2008 presidential campaign.

    In exclusive remarks to The Daily Caller, Palin described “hordes of Obama’s opposition researchers-slash ‘reporters’” descending upon Alaska in the days after she was picked by McCain.

    The big “ha-ha!” in all of this is that Palin never herself identifies JournoList by name. JournoList is simply shoehorned into this narrative by Jonathan Strong for fun! But, okay, we’ll just run with this for the time being.

    Insofar as JournoList is involved in any of this, we’ll refer you back to a previous Caller piece, which tells the nearly impossible-to-believe story of that time the McCain campaign announced Palin as his running mate, which prompted many JournoListers to take to their laptops to ask each other things like, “Who is Sarah Palin?” and “I’ve never heard of this Sarah Palin person,” and “I wonder how Obama will run against this person, Sarah Palin,” and, “Seriously, I do not know much about Sarah Palin.”

    Later, the liberal commentators on this list of liberals would opine that the choice seemed to be a mistake and were critical of Palin — which is something you wouldn’t possibly expect from a group of liberal commentators, right? Anyway, all of this research and criticism apparently resulted in this listicle on Joe Klein’s blog, which was generally regarded as a game-changing moment in the 2008 election.

    Palin, in her “exclusive remarks,” does not restrict herself to lashing out at JournoList (if she’s even lashing out at JournoList at all — remember, we are just going with it for the time being.)

    She’s also mad at the “hordes of Obama’s opposition researchers-slash ‘reporters’” that came to Alaska (to presumably do the “opposition research” and “reporting” that someone should have told Palin are mainstays in American politics), the McCain campaign (“To not have had the McCain campaign staff defend my record was an insurmountable challenge, because once a bell is rung, it’s impossible to un-ring,” Palin said), and CBS News for broadcasting an interview with Katie Couric that Palin says was “selectively edited.” Palin says that all of these things fed her decision to quit her post as Alaska’s governor.
    Story continues below

    So that’s the incredibly true story of how JournoList, the McCain campaign, and a camera owned by CBS News that was pointed at Sarah Palin cunningly conspired to get her to quit her job.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/22/sarah-palin-lashes-out-at_n_656073.html#comments

  • Shadowfax

    JanH
    July 22nd, 2010 at 5:00 pm

    shadowfax,

    LOL…and we both know what she would do with a “gift/punishment” like that.

    ——-
    Maybe bury it in MO’s toxic sludge garden?

  • confloyd

    turndown,
    I guess you don’t think Gore had anything to do with Hillary’s election theft?? You don’t think he helped Obama at all and screwed Hillary??
    This is what I have against him…he could of come out for her because without Bill and Hillary Gore would be another another smart guy from Tennesee.

    Everyone and their brother screwed the Clinton’s…that I’m not going to forget.

  • confloyd

    Obama has now lowered himself to vacation in the Gulf of Mexico…gee I wonder if the kids will get in the water…I heard they were going to a Florida Beach…I think they should go to Alabama cause thats where he told everyone else to go.

  • Shadowfax

    Debate Over Arizona Immigration Law Comes to U.S. Court

    PHOENIX — Partisans in the debate over Arizona’s stringent immigration law squared off for the first time in federal court Thursday, providing an early glimpse into the legal arguments that will be used in the coming battle over the new law.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/us/politics/16arizona.html

    Greta will be talking about it tonight…

  • confloyd

    Beck has got the timeline on the firing of Sherrod…this was all orchestrated by someone other than Fox…

  • Shadowfax

    Someone get Barry a belly board to use in FLA. He should keep his kids out of the water, but he and MO, who say it is so safe, should be snorkeling in the Keys, and especially in LA where the money is really needed.

  • Shadowfax

    Barry, how about a nature trip out to see the oil covered birds, on your 8th vacation!! MO can put on her expensive tennis shoes and wash some birds or stuff human hair booms.

  • confloyd

    Lets hope he brings everyone in his inner circle for a great “Gulf of Mexico” vacation! They could all use a bath in “the water” down there.

  • S

    Shadowfax
    July 22nd, 2010 at 3:34 pm
    Blago

    July 21, 2010 (CHICAGO)
    — The Rod Blagojevich trial appears to be in its final days.

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

    shadowfax…thanks for the timelime…should be interesting

  • [...] 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. [...]

  • admin

    NEW ARTICLE IS UP.

  • confloyd

    JanH, thanks it appeared in the video that it was a gift for Chelsea and Mark. Geez, I wonder if they will be able to keep it…I thought there were rules for such things.

  • Mrs. Smith

    #
    confloyd
    July 22nd, 2010 at 5:30 pm

    turndown,
    I guess you don’t think Gore had anything to do with Hillary’s election theft?? You don’t think he helped Obama at all and screwed Hillary??
    This is what I have against him…he could of come out for her because without Bill and Hillary Gore would be another another smart guy from Tennessee.

    Everyone and their brother screwed the Clinton’s…that I’m not going to forget.
    ______________________

    Of course, confloyd. It’s bad practice deifying politicians. They’re all human. Just some are more repulsive than others. What makes Gore scum is not standing by the friends that gave him his start when they needed him and he could have made a difference. Please, every time I hear Gore compared to Bill and Hillary, I throw-up in my mouth a little. Gore isn’t fit to shine Bill’s shoes or open the door for Hillary… and I mean this well before the sleazy accusations coming out about Gore and his sexual proclivities in the Enquirer.

  • S

    But the news media has ignored key elements of Barofsky’s report — elements that are far more damaging, if possible, to Obama. As we reported earlier in the week, a top Obama official, manufacturing czar and “Auto Team” leader Ron Bloom admitted that the dealerships could have been kept open, saving those jobs, “but that doing so would have been inconsistent with the President’s mandate for ’shared sacrifice.’”

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

    the SOB’s…where is the media…this is the worst administration in my lifetime…

    why aren’t the repubs running with this? – our country is going right down the tubes and NO ONE is looking out for the average people

    and add O’s failed foreclosure program to that…can’t this damn admin do anything right…can’t they do anything that ACTUALLY helps people in this country…

    …if they dare not choose Elizabeth Warren that will be the final slap in the face to the middle class…

    btw…if any of you are dealing with any of these banks or credit cards companies – what they are allowed to get away would make the mafia blush…the mafia would be ashamed to pull off what our esteemed democratic congress and democratic president have allowed to evolve…

    I cannot understand how the opposition cannot make a clearer, more cohesive and articulate case against the failure of this administration…the dems in control of everything and things have gotten and are getting worse and worse…

  • ShortTermer

    basement angel, there is no way I can change your ideology nor you mine. There is no way that dimocrats are about helping the ‘small’ people with the Obama/Reid/Peolosi agenda of central planning. Period.

  • turndownobama

    Hillary Clinton given wedding presents for Chelsea

    The wedding presents are rolling in from around the world.

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

    THey’ll need a 22 acre estate to hold all this stuff!

  • turndownobama

    confloyd,

    In the primary Gore remained officially neutral. However when others were pressuring HIllary to drop out, he came to her defense saying the primary should continue through its normal process. This was an important help to her.