Obama Becomes Nixon As The Nutroots Hatred Of White People And Bobby Kennedy Democrats Rises

Are we in the 1960s? Is Richard Nixon the current president? Are race politics the only defense of scoundrel Obama Dimocrats? We’re scratching our heads thinking we are in a time tunnel.

Tonight America will be subjected to another Barack Obama publicity stunt. The Obama publicity stunt to be staged tonight is a nationally televised speech on the Iraq War. We will not be surprised at any fairy tale or lie from Obama nor will we be surprised if Obama utters the Nixonian “Peace With Honor” as he proceeds with the George W. Bush Iraq withdrawal timetable.

This past weekend Obama borrowed from Richard Nixon when he declared he snubbed the Glenn Beck “Restoring Honor” rally in Washington, D.C. The Obamas were too busy on Martha’s Vineyard to bother with the hundreds of thousands massing in Washington.

Obama sounded Nixonesque. In 1969, after the anti-Vietnam War Moratorium, Richard Nixon, with more politeness and savvy than Barack Obama, also ignored Americans who raised their voices in the streets. In 1969 Richard Nixon declared he was listening, not to street protests, but to the great “Silent Majority” that eventually did lead him to reelection victory in 1972. Barack Obama must be hearing voices from an imaginary “silent majority” too but unlike in 1969 the “silent majority” is already in the streets and not so silent.

Richard Nixon thought there was a “silent majority” that supported his policies. The “dirty tricks” and unlawful methods Nixon deployed in 1972 were not necessary to win reelection because indeed a great many Americans supported Nixon. In contrast Barack Obama does not have majority support. Obama Dimocrats do not have majority support.

“Democrats thought things couldn’t get much worse on the electoral front — and then they went home to campaign.

A new Gallup poll released Monday shows Republicans with a record 10-point edge over Democrats on the “generic ballot” test — the question of whether voters prefer a Democratic or Republican congressional candidate. It’s the largest GOP polling edge at this stage in the 68 years of the generic ballot poll.

While party optimists say Democrats may cling to a small majority after the November election, an increasing number of Democratic strategists now say privately that they fear the House is already lost.

The Gallup poll, coming at the end of a brutal August for Democrats and President Barack Obama, reinforces the rapidly forming prevailing view that the horizon is as bleak for Democrats as it ever has been.[snip]

Worse for Democrats, the news comes after they’ve spent most of the last month on the campaign trail, touting their accomplishments for local communities and trying to remind voters of what life was like when George W. Bush was president.”

Whatever consent from the governed Obama and Obama Dimocrats extracted in November 2008 is now gone. The Culture of Corruption and the incompetence and the failures have drained consent away. There should also be no doubt now that there is a racial component to opposition to Obama and his Obama Dimocrats – however that racial component is not the one Big Media indulges in. The racial animus comes from Obama and Obama Dimocrats against ordinary Americans. In the very same interview in which Barack Obama on Sunday declared his disdain for the “Restoring Honor” rally, Obama again expressed his contempt for “bitter” and “clingy” small town America.

There cannot now be any doubt that “small town America”, “bitter” and “clingy” are Obama references to White people, particularly working class White people.

This past Sunday The Confluence published a retrospective of “best of/worst of” columns. One of the mocked columns is Changing of the Guard written by Chris Bowers, formerly of the website (he’s now at DailyKooks) we refer to as “Nothing Left”.

At The Confluence, MaBlue2 wrote this about “Changing of the Guard”: “I challenge anyone out there to come up with something this guffaw inducing.” We don’t think this is a “guffaw inducing” article but rather a nausea inducing article. Indeed that article is one of the clearest expositions of the “Mistake In ’08” we have written so often about (and we have much more to write about). Here are excerpts from “Changing of the Guard” written on May 8, 2008 to celebrate the supposed triumph of Obama and Obamaism:

“So, unless Obama somewhat surprisingly does not become the next President of the United States, the Democratic Party will experience its first changing of the guard since the late 1980’s. What differences will be in store? Here are the three major changes I expect:

1. Cultural Shift: Out with Bubbas, up with Creatives: There should be a major cultural shift in the party, where the southern Dems and Liebercrat elite will be largely replaced by rising creative class types. Obama has all the markers of a creative class background, from his community organizing, to his Unitarianism, to being an academic, to living in Hyde Park to shopping at Whole Foods and drinking PBR. These will be the type of people running the Democratic Party now, and it will be a big cultural shift from the white working class focus of earlier decades. Given the demographics of the blogosphere, in all likelihood, this is a socioeconomic and cultural demographic into which you fit. Culturally, the Democratic Party will feel pretty normal to netroots types. It will consistently send out cultural signals designed to appeal primarily to the creative class instead of rich donors and the white working class.

2. Policy Shift: Out with the DLC, up with technocratic wonks. My sense of Obama and his policy team is overwhelmingly one of technocratic, generally less overtly ideological professional policy types. [snip]

3. Coalition reorganization: Out with party silos, in with squishy goo-goos. In addition to a shift in culture and policy focus, I also expect a different approach to coalition building. A long-standing Democrats approach of transactional politics with different issue and demographic silos in the party shift toward an emphasis on good government (goo goo) approaches.”

While there is a high level of stupidity, dementia, and delusion in that article there is one huge triumph. The White Working Class have indeed been jack-booted out of the Obama Dimocratic Party with forethought and purpose. The elderly have also been booted out, or walked out, of the grand coalition which was once the FDR/Hillary Clinton Democratic Party.

While the malice aforethought of the purge of Working Class Whites is something we have repeatedly written about (see HERE for example regarding the White Working Class and Health Care, and HERE for the theoretical justifications for the Obama “situation comedy” coalition) there is something much deeper at play here. There is a profound hatred of White People.

At every turn in the political debate, Obama Dimocrats especially those ensonced in Hopium Dens, shout “racism”. It’s race this, race that. There’s always a newly discovered “dog whistle” heard by the Obama JournoListers and protection squads. There’s always some new and super secret “racist code language” deciphered. But there is never a discussion of the hate displayed towards White people every day in the Hopium Dens and in Big Media.

Those predominately White “honky” Big Blog White Boys sure hate white people. This “creative class” thinks of Black people like gentle pets to be patted on the head and love to indulge in the self-hate of anti-White bigotry.

The “honky” Big Blog White Boys are frat-housed together shouting insults and mooning Tea Party activists (because the Tea Parties demonstrate they are capable of organizing street protests unlike the Big Blog Boys). These well educated White boys must know that adding groups to a coalition is the smart way to politically organize (not their politics of subtraction of groups and division). Knowing in politics you add, not subtract, these Big Blog Boys and Obama Dimocrats persisted in their hate of White people and goal of driving out the White Working Class from consideration as a coalition member in the Obama Dimocratic Party.

In earlier articles we discussed how Hillary Clinton could have “healed the breach” in the Democratic Party caused by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. We wrote about how Lyndon Johnson after signing the great Act continued to fight for White Working Class votes and how Lady Bird Johnson toured the South in pursuit of those aims. But the well educated White Boys from Big Blogs insisted Obama be president and that Whites are racists. Why is this?

Sexism and misogyny explain part of the spiteful rage. But in the attacks on Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin there is a strong class hatred exhibited. Both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin appealed strongly to White Working Class voters and therefore they became objects of derision to the Obama Left. It wasn’t always this way.

In 1968 Bobby Kennedy visited Hazard County Kentucky as part of his Appalachia tour. Bobby Kennedy, with all his many massive faults, is mourned in large part because he too could have united Black people and the White Working Class “towards a more perfect Union”.

Today a politician who inspires White people is a target of suspicion and hatred – from the Obama Left and the Nutroots Nation of Nutopia. The hate of White people extends to all aspects of American life from these nuts. The creatures of hate hiding at the Big Blogs were created by the Howard Dean campaign and they will not allow any discussion of race without polluting such a discussion with the “racist” tag. Shelby Steele, notes the irony of Dean’s creations turning against him:

“In 2004, when Howard Dean reached out to “guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks,” Shelby Steele wrote that this was “absolutely verboten. Racial identity is simply forbidden to whites in America” because of their history and white guilt.”

“Breathing While White” is now a crime – ask a black man – ask Kelefa Sanneh. Kelefa Sanneh wrote an article in the New Yorker that only a black man could write because a white person would immediately get the “racist” tag on the toe. In the “Beyond The Pale“, published this past April, the hatred of White people was discussed:

“But what of it? Why is it that, from Christian Lander to Jon Stewart, a diagnosis of whiteness is often delivered, and received, as a kind of accusation? The answer is that the diagnosis is often accompanied by an implicit or explicit charge of racism. It’s become customary to suppose that a measure of discrimination is built into whiteness itself, a racial category that has often functioned as a purely negative designation: to be white in America is to be not nonwhite, which is why it was possible, in 1961, for a white woman from Kansas living in Hawaii to give birth to a black baby. In a marvellously splenetic essay, “On Being White . . . And Other Lies,” James Baldwin argued that America had, really, “no white community”—only a motley alliance of European immigrants and their descendants, who made a “moral choice” (even if they didn’t realize it) to join a synthetic racial élite. And, in the nineteen-nineties, a cohort of scholars took up Baldwin’s charge, popularizing a field of research that came to be known as whiteness studies. In 1994, the white labor historian David R. Roediger published an incendiary volume, “Towards the Abolition of Whiteness.” Paying special attention to unions and strikes, he traced the unsteady growth of American whiteness, a category that eventually included many previous identities that had once been considered marginal: Irish, Italian, Polish, Jewish. “It is not merely that whiteness is oppressive and false; it is that whiteness is nothing but oppressive and false,” he wrote. “Whiteness describes, from Little Big Horn to Simi Valley, not a culture but precisely the absence of culture. It is the empty and therefore terrifying attempt to build an identity based on what one isn’t and on whom one can hold back.” In his view, fighting racism wasn’t enough; white people who wanted to oppose oppression would have to do battle with whiteness itself. Nearly two decades later, amid a rancorous debate over our first black President, the idea of abolishing whiteness seems no less tantalizing—and no less remote.”

“Driving While Black” is a closely watched phenomenon but few pay attention to “Breathing While White”. Read Sanneh’s essay then read Fratboy Whiteboy David Sirota at Nothing Left:

“I’m finishing up my book right now, and am on a chapter about race and white privilege. During my research, I came upon this lengthy article on the Tea Party movement in the latest edition of the American Prospect. It provides a telling (if mundane) example of how in our persistently racist politics, all roads – even “progressive” ones – always seem to lead back to deifying white privilege.[snip]

In other words, instead of building the strength of progressives’ burgeoning multicultural coalition through overtly anti-racist themes that explicitly challenge white privilege, the American Prospect asks progressives to fight white privilege by immediately privileging political messages that coddle privileged whites – that is, by trimming the progressive message into one that makes sure not to offend/counter white resentment. This, despite the resounding electoral success of progressives’ multicultural coalition in the last two elections, and despite Census data showing America will soon be a majority minority (read: non-white) country.[snip]

But that’s the whole point: White privilege in America today is so omniscient, so assumed, so embedded in everything, that it is even forwarded by some liberal voices as the answer to the very problems it creates. And the fact that so many of the liberal voices that inadvertently perpetuate these rhetorical parameters (particularly magazines, pundits and think tanks inside the cloistered Beltway) are catering to a mostly white privileged audience of elites means that they rarely – if ever – are called out for their contribution to an inherently racist paradigm.”

For David Sirota “White People Need Not Apply” – they are “racists” and are obsessed with “racist White privilege.” All White people are “racists” except of course the well educated and very privileged white frat boys who write for predominantly white Big Media and predominantly white Big Blogs.

To these white frat boys on Big Blogs, Bobby Kennedy is nothing but a dead “racist” and nothing but a honky loaded up with White privilege. If Sirota and his readers are right that America will soon be a “majority minority” country – White people may ironically have to demand Affirmative Action in hiring in order to overcome the “racist” prejudice of the Big Blog types in “majority minority” America. The logic of these racist against white people racist white boys defies logic. Bobby Kennedy saw the white poor of Appalachia but Sirota only sees “racists” with “white privilege”. And then the Sirota’s and the other white Big Blog Boys sit back and ponder why white people won’t vote for them.

Senator Jim Webb recently wrote about affirmative action programs historically and in the contemporary world.

“Forty years ago, as the United States experienced the civil rights movement, the supposed monolith of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant dominance served as the whipping post for almost every debate about power and status in America. After a full generation of such debate, WASP elites have fallen by the wayside and a plethora of government-enforced diversity policies have marginalized many white workers. The time has come to cease the false arguments and allow every American the benefit of a fair chance at the future.[snip]

In an odd historical twist that all Americans see but few can understand, many programs allow recently arrived immigrants to move ahead of similarly situated whites whose families have been in the country for generations. These programs have damaged racial harmony. And the more they have grown, the less they have actually helped African-Americans, the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action as it was originally conceived.

Lyndon Johnson’s initial program for affirmative action was based on the 13th Amendment and on the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which authorized the federal government to take actions in order to eliminate “the badges of slavery.” Affirmative action was designed to recognize the uniquely difficult journey of African-Americans. This policy was justifiable and understandable, even to those who came from white cultural groups that had also suffered in socio-economic terms from the Civil War and its aftermath.

Those who came to this country in recent decades from Asia, Latin America and Africa did not suffer discrimination from our government, and in fact have frequently been the beneficiaries of special government programs. The same cannot be said of many hard-working white Americans, including those whose roots in America go back more than 200 years.

Contrary to assumptions in the law, white America is hardly a monolith. And the journey of white American cultures is so diverse (yes) that one strains to find the logic that could lump them together for the purpose of public policy.”

It’s Breathing While White.

“Policy makers ignored such disparities within America’s white cultures when, in advancing minority diversity programs, they treated whites as a fungible monolith. Also lost on these policy makers were the differences in economic and educational attainment among nonwhite cultures. Thus nonwhite groups received special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts.”

The response from Obama Dimocrats to any argument on race is “code”. As Sanneh writes,

“The problem with a fixation on “code words” is that you can start to see them everywhere. At one point, Roediger analyzes the politics of America in the nineteen-seventies through the prism of “such racial ‘code words’ as crime, busing, welfare, and taxes.” Taxes! Is there any hotly debated political topic that couldn’t be considered, in some context, a code word? [snip]

And is there any way for a white politician to criticize a black President in front of a disproportionately white audience and be certain that he or she isn’t, however inadvertently, appealing to a sense of racial solidarity?

James Taranto, in the Wall Street Journal perhaps has the answer to the anti-white hatred of the Big Blog/Big Media white boys. Taranto writing about the Mosque of Doom employs a word which is applicable to the “honky” Big Blog Boys hatred

“What is the nature of this contempt? In part it is the snobbery of the cognitive elite, exemplified by a recent New York Times Web column by Timothy Egan called “Building a Nation of Know-Nothings”–or by the viciousness directed at Sarah Palin, whose folksy demeanor and state-college background seem terribly déclassé not just to liberals but to a good number of conservatives in places like New York City.

In more cerebral moments, the elitists of the left invoke a kind of Marxism Lite to explain away opinions and values that run counter to their own. Thus Barack Obama’s notorious remark to the effect that economic deprivation embitters the proles, so that they cling to guns and religion. [snip]

The liberal elites cannot comprehend common sense, and, incredibly, they think that’s a virtue. After all, common sense is so common.

The British philosopher Roger Scruton has coined a term to describe this attitude: oikophobia. Xenophobia is fear of the alien; oikophobia is fear of the familiar: “the disposition, in any conflict, to side with ‘them’ against ‘us’, and the felt need to denigrate the customs, culture and institutions that are identifiably ‘ours.'”

The Oikophobe, or “Oik” is a familiar character to Hillary Supporters and Sarah Palin supporters:

“The oik is, in his own eyes, a defender of enlightened universalism against local chauvinism.”

Sirota, Bowers, the DailyKooks, the Head Kook, the “creative class” are Oiks.

“Yet the oiks’ vision of themselves as an intellectual aristocracy violates the first American principle ever articulated: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . .”

This cannot be reconciled with the elitist notion that most men are economically insecure bitter clinging intolerant bigots who need to be governed by an educated elite. Marxism Lite is not only false; it is, according to the American creed, self-evidently false. That is why the liberal elite finds Americans revolting.”

Americans are revolting but not in the Sirota, Bowers, “creative class”, DailyKooks, understanding of the term. Americans are revolting and in November the “creative class” of Kooks is going to witness an all out electoral REVOLT. It can’t come soon enough.


Restoring Honor

Glenn Beck hosted a massive rally today in Washington, D.C. whose theme was “Restoring Honor”. Though not officially a “Tea Party” event, there is no dispute that Tea Party activists comprise a large component of the organizational effort and more than likely a majority of the participants in attendance.

The “Restoring Honor” rally is billed as non-political and a benefit for the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. Obama Dimocrats and even some well meaning people attacked the rally because of this or that reason.

The biggest reason cited in attacks to the “Restoring Honor” rally is that it takes place on the 48th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s great “I have a dream” speech. The attacks are tedious and unoriginal and to be expected. The rally itself, from what can be seen on TV, is likewise tedious and unoriginal – but it is very effective.

Not only is the “Restoring Honor” rally an effective organizational tool, but it says something much greater about the evolution of American politics. One question is: why is this mass rally organized by the “right” and not by the “left”?

Such is the depravity of today’s Obama Left, that the first reaction is a resort to the “racist” cry. Instead of asking why the Left cannot or will not mount massive protests in the streets, there is a whiny rebuke of Glenn Beck for actually pulling off something quite impressive.

Perhaps the depraved Obama Left does not know the history of the great 1963 Civil Rights March. The actual march on Washington’s name is the “March On Washington For Jobs And Freedom“. [One would think that “freedom” could be dumped by these drones and at least the call for a “jobs” march adopted by today’s corrupt Obama Left.]

“The Great March On Washington”, as it later became known was the brainchild of A. Philip Randolph. Randolph was the president of the union The Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters in an age when air travel was not so ubiquitous. Together with the brilliant Bayard Rustin (a black Gay man who deserves more credit and study than he has ever received), the gentlemanly Randolph stitched together the event which the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would usurp with a speech that shook heaven and earth.

What was the purpose of the great march? Why did the great march take place?:

“Randolph had planned a similar march in 1941. The threat of the earlier march had convinced President Roosevelt to establish the Committee on Fair Employment Practice and bar discriminatory hiring in the defense industry. [snip]

The march was not universally supported among African-Americans. Some civil rights activists were concerned that it might turn violent, which could undermine pending legislation and damage the international image of the movement. The march was condemned by Malcolm X, spokesperson for the Nation of Islam, who termed it the “farce on Washington”.

March organizers themselves disagreed over the purpose of the march. The NAACP and Urban League saw it as a gesture of support for a civil rights bill that had been introduced by the Kennedy Administration. Randolph, King, and the SCLC saw it as a way of raising both civil rights and economic issues to national attention beyond the Kennedy bill. SNCC and CORE saw it as a way of challenging and condemning the Kennedy administration’s inaction and lack of support for civil rights for African-Americans.”

A. Philip Randolph would not recognize the garbage which is today’s Left. Randolph lived in an age when leaders and organizations fought for their constituencies. World War II and Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt in office did not deter Randolph from representing his union and his people. John F. Kennedy in the White House did not deter Randolph from the fight.

The Kennedy Administration applied great pressure on Randolph and King to call it off but without success. The march was held on August 28, 1963.”

Imagine today’s depraved Left calling for a march on Martha’s Vineyard Washington. In 1964 the progressive labor movement, liberal organizations and all the major civil rights organizations took on a young and popular president who took office after years of Republican rule. No longer is this possible.

Today, mainline women’s organizations, along with Gay organizations, many Jewish groups, labor, and the rest of the corrupt Left do not represent their constituencies. The corrupt Left can only whine and complain about Glenn Beck and the Tea Party movement. The corrupt Left today is incapable and unwilling to organize anything to match the Tea Party movement. Today’s corrupt Left will only protect Barack Obama with shouts of “racist” at every turn and development.

The great march on Washington in 1963 was not just about great speeches. It was part of a movement. Today’s corrupt Left has forgotten the effect of riding buses for hours in pursuit of a cause you believe in, along with other like minded people. Every bus becomes a political convention and life long friendships. Every bus becomes a strategy session. Every bus becomes a canvassing effort. Every bus reveals unknown allies in local communities who then establish a connection – which becomes a stronger and more powerful movement.

Today’s “Restoring Honor” rally is a bookend rally which closes a door and opens another door. The new door the rally opens today is that the fruits of today’s rally will reflect even greater organizational muscle and even stronger vote operations in the November elections to come.

The closed door is the precursor rally to today’s rally. On April 15, 2009, the first Tea Party rally was held in Washington, D.C. The Obama Dimocrats tried to stage counter rallies that day. When the counter rallies fizzled, mockery of the Tea Party became the only card left to play. But that first Tea Party rally was successful and it led to today’s rally and it also led to the horrible for Obama August of 2009.

Obama Dimocrats thought this year’s “Recovery Summer” series of publicity stunts would not only be a time to trumpet how they wasted money on “stimulus” projects. Obama Dimocrats also thought that the series of “Recovery Summer” publicity stunts would preempt another horrible August like the Tea Party summer of Town Hall protests in 2009. Problem is the economic data do not cooperate and Obama and Biden are increasingly out of touch and obviously so.

So let the Obama Dimocrats, the Obama Left, the “creative class” fools allow themselves to feel superior to the Tea Party activists with the same vinegar disdain they held and hold for Hillary Clinton supporters. We haven’t gone away and neither will the Tea Party.

Let these sybarites luxuriate in their smugness. Let them whine. While today’s corrupt Left whines Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin organize. Today’s corrupt Left is not only corrupt it is also useless and stupid. The Black Agenda Report:

“That’s what happens when progressives maneuver themselves onto the same side of the battlefield as Goldman Sachs, as they did with abandon in 2007-08, deliriously fighting their way into a cul-de-sac in which they are now surrounded.

The leftish brigades rallied to a commander who styled himself an incarnation of Abraham Lincoln, but turned out to be a General George McClellan, the Union’s first commander of the Army of the Potomac. McClellan was great at rousing the troops and putting his army on parade, but constantly overestimated his Confederate adversaries and, in Lincoln’s final estimation, refused to fight. [snip]

The question is, how in the hell did lefties conclude that Big Capital’s and Big Oil’s “greater good” candidate was also the progressive side’s fountain of Hope – or even a “lesser evil” – in 2008? Both camps placed their bets on Obama, but only one side could possibly win.”

Oh, you gluttonous Left, or what pretends to be the Left. The Left that enabled Barack Obama will never overcome it’s shame. After November and the losses in the election, the Left that was so stupid it supported Barack Obama will attempt to wash the blood from its hands by claiming Obama is not one of them. But you bought him, you own him. And what a great price you paid for such a cheap tinny product.

Two years ago today, we outlined our strategy. We failed in that Barack Obama, only because of a near collapse of the financial system and exhaustion with George W. Bush, was elected. But our words and strategies are still right on target:

“Yesterday, the Democratic Party of the FDR coalition committed suicide.

True Democrats will remember and regret the suicide of the Democratic Party. Hillary supporters must not only cherish the memory of the FDR coalition Democratic Party but fight to breathe life anew and restore that coalition for justice.

For Hillary supporters at Big Pink, and everywhere else, the duty is to remember and fight. Like patriots in occupied France, patriots in the 13 colonies when Royalists commanded at the point of gun American cities, real Democrats will not only preserve the memory of the great Democratic Party of FDR, but gather in resistance. We will organize and fight to galvanize the Democratic Party from death and to great purpose.

For us no Greek temples. Hillary supporters have many more fights left to fight. [snip]

Big Pink will not allow the voter disenfranchisements of 2008 to be forgotten. Like Banquo’s ghost we will not go away. Like King Hamlet’s ghost we will shout “Remember”. We will not allow the glories of the Democratic Party of FDR to be forgotten nor buried. We will fight to restore the party of FDR to life and glory.

Here at Big Pink we continue the fight against the sexism and misogyny of Obama/Dean/Brazile/Pelosi. Here at Big Pink we continue to remind every day, by our very existence, by our very name, the travesties and treacheries committed by Obama/Dean/Brazile/Pelosi and Big Media.

The corpse that labels itself as the Obama Democratic Party must be defeated in NOvember. The Obama Democratic Party must not be rewarded for sexisim, misogyny, and voter disenfranchisemen with electoral successt. The Obama Democratic Party must be punished with devastating, wakeful, DEFEAT.

We will not go away into the good night. We fight on.

We live to continue the struggles for justice but the Democratic Party is dead.

For Hillary supporters, for those of us here at Big Pink issues do matter and are worth fighting for. For us Obama must be defeated in NOvember. We have written before and we repeat today our reasoning to oppose Obama in NOvember: Better to fight McCain and the Republicans with Democratic majorities forced to fight than to bow to Obama’s betrayals of core Democratic principles and appeasements to Republicans. Obama cannot be trusted by neither friend nor foe. We want Democratic elected officials to fight for core Democratic principles. Obama would betray Democratic principles, appease the worse of Republican demands and anyone who opposed Obama as in the past would be called a “racist”.

Two years ago we honorably pledged to continue the fight with words and strategies that have proven prescient and wise. Two years ago, the once great Democratic Party was in convention to nomination the sorely unqualified, ruthlessly race-baiting, hatefully gay-bashing, and woman hating, flim-flam man Barack Obama. We opposed him then and we oppose him now.

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

Today Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin and hundreds of thousands of others rallied under the banner “Restoring Honor”. Here at Big Pink we’ve been “restoring honor” long ago.


‘Relapse Summer’ – Where Are The Promised Jobs In The Obama Economy Of Doom?

Republicans continue to get rid of the dead wood in their party – the Murkowski clan is the latest sent to the dumper by Sarah Palin and Tea Party forces. What used to be the great Democratic Party continues to shrug shoulders and surrender to the corrupt forces that declared this to be “Obama’s time”. Obama? He’s having a great ol’ time vacationing while the country burns.

And the jobs? Where are the jobs? Obama promised that if his “stimulus” scam was passed unemployment would not rise beyond 8.5%. That was a lot of scams and a lot of Hope ago.

The Obama “stimulus” scam passed in 2009 and the excuse from B.O.T.s (Barack Obama Thugs) now is that ‘well, maybe we were too optimistic and should not have said that’. But the never ending Obama excuse machine has a lot of ‘splaining to do. A few months ago, in April 2010 “Nobody messes with Joe” Biden promised more Hope for Change. Remember that scam? We do:

Some time in the next couple of months we’re going to be creating between 250,000 jobs a month and 500,000 jobs a month,” Biden said at a fundraiser today in Pittsburgh.

Next month, Biden predicted, the nation’s employers will add between 100,000 to 200,000 jobs to their payrolls. [snip]

“We caught a lot of bad breaks on the way down,” Biden said. “We’re going to catch a few good breaks because of good planning on the way up.”

Good planning???? This is what they call good planning – waste of trillions of dollars, higher deficits, nation-devouring debt, and no jobs? And Joe said this recently in full knowledge of how badly the Obama scams, plans, and promises have fallen short.

* * * * * *

Before we continue with our autopsy of the Obama Economy of Doom, a very brief discussion of our introductory paragraph is appropriate. First Sister Sarah then the original Mama Grizzly – Hillary.

This year in state after state Republican activists and disgusted Tea Party members are cleaning their barn. While we can disagree on the aims and ideology which drives Sarah Palin and the Tea Party what we admire is that they are doing what the “professional left” is incapable of doing – cleaning out their own barn of the stench in the Republican Party as they smell it.

The latest victory for Sarah Palin and the Tea Party, however it eventually turns out, is the shocking results from Alaska last night. Sarah Palin and the Tea Party activists supported a candidate without any real money, who was outspent tenfold, who was 20 to 30 points down in the polls. He is currently ahead as the few remaining votes to be counted indicate he will win the primary and eventually become a U.S. Senator from Alaska.

In contrast, at a Bill Clinton birthday party, we had this revealing comment from Jon Corzine, the recent loser to Republican Chris Christie in blue state New Jersey:

“…as former New Jersey Senator John Corzine looked on wistfully. “I just wish,” Corzine said shaking his head, “I mean I knew — she would have been able to handle this Congress… but it was just Obama’s time.

What fatalistic bunk! Instead of fighting for what America needed the once great Democratic Party surrendered to the worse of Chicago politics and a Democratic establishment that thought they knew better than the voters. Disgusting.

Bill Clinton also had something interesting to say about what is going on in the White House. Regarding Rahm Emanuel, the former Clinton White House aide that Hillary bounced into the basement when he screwed up repeatedly. Bill said:

“Before dancing with his wife, the former president, still as passionate about saving the world as a Yale undergrad, engaged in a spirited conversation about the need for focus on “micro-economics — not macro economics. Rahm is great on micro,” he said, referring to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, “But he’s tied up on politics.”

Rahm Emanuel along with all the former Clinton aides in the world will not save Barack Obama’s mess of an administration. The problem is Barack Obama. If Hillary Clinton was in charge Rahm and the other stumbling former aides would be back in the basement or out in the street clattering tin cups against the White House fence.

While Hillary Clinton and other Americans work hard every day, take only short breaks at night from work, where was Obama? David Letterman, the Obama fluffer and Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton hater, had something to say:

“A storm that curtailed outdoor activities for much of President Barack Obama’s vacation was forecast to end Wednesday, but he said he’s been able to fight off cabin fever.

Not only has he been able to sneak in two rounds of golf, but he told reporters Tuesday he’s “doing a lot of reading” at the farm compound he’s rented for the first family. “I’m having a great time,” he said.

The president made the remarks, his first in public since heading out on vacation last week, as he escorted first lady Michelle Obama from the State Road restaurant.

Obama has faced some criticism for his latest vacation, his sixth since taking office. At a time when painful unemployment numbers continue to bear down on the tattered economy, many are frustrated that the nation’s leader is enjoying another luxurious trip. On CBS’ “The Late Show” Tuesday night, David Letterman took a jab at the president, saying: “He’ll have plenty of time for vacations after his one term is up.” [snip]

The Obamas are scheduled to remain on vacation until Sunday, when the president heads to New Orleans to check on the gulf oil spill cleanup and to mark the fifth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina.”

Sixth luxury vacation.

* * * * * *

While Barack Obama is having a great time with his sleeve amputating wife what is happening in America?

One thing we know is that Obama Dimocrats are running away or hiding from the legislation they once so proudly passed and trumpeted:

“Say you’re a Democratic member of Congress. You proudly cast your vote for Obamacare, you cheered when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hailed it as the achievement of a generation and you scoffed at Republicans who vowed to repeal it. Now you’re running for re-election, and a voter asks: What is the most important thing you’ve done in the last two years?

The answer should be easy. In passing the national health care bill, you accomplished something your party dreamed of for decades. It was your most important vote, and now is the time to take credit for it.

Except it’s not.

Recently a number of top Democratic strategists conducted focus groups in Las Vegas, Charlotte, Philadelphia and St. Louis. They also conducted a national poll of 1,000 likely voters and an online poll of 2,000 more likely voters. They wanted to measure the public’s feelings about Obamacare and help Democrats make an effective case for the bill they passed in March.

The researchers found what they call a “challenging environment,” which is a nicer way of saying “disaster in the making.” Voters simply aren’t buying the Democratic case that health care reform will insure more than 30 million currently uninsured people and save money at the same time. And when they think about their own health care, people worry that reform will mean less, not more, availability of care, and at a higher cost.

Faced with that bad news, the pollsters came up with several recommendations for Democratic candidates. When talking about Obamacare, Democrats should “keep claims small and credible.” They should promise to “improve” the law. They should avoid talking about policy and stick to “personal stories” of people who will benefit from Obamacare. And above all, the pollsters advise, “don’t say the law will reduce costs and deficit.”

It’s a stunning about-face for a party that saw national health care as its signature accomplishment.”

Obama’s health care scam was sold as a way to “bend the cost curve”. No longer.

“This legislation will … lower costs for families and for businesses and for the federal government, reducing our deficit by over $1 trillion in the next two decades,” President Obama said when he signed the bill into law on March 23. Now, Democrats are throwing that argument out the window.”

After bloating the profits of Big Insurance and Big PhaRma, at the expense of the American taxpayer who are now threatened with the IRS as the Frank Nitti enforcer, Obama Dimocrats expose themselves fully as the corrupt entity they are.

And jobs? Where are the jobs Joe? Where are the jobs Barack? The only jobs safe are those of Obama courtiers such as the chef which accompanies the Obama’s on their latest luxurious Martha’s Vineyard vacation and the seamstresses and staff attending Lady of Spain Michelle Obama.

Where are the jobs? The jobs are going, going, gone – in large part because of Barack Obama. It’s ‘Relapse Summer” not “Recovery Summer”. And what do Americans get from the White House? Words, words, words – according to Barney Frank:

“The 2009 stimulus package is so unpopular that Democrats have banned the word from their campaign vocabulary. “I’m not supposed to call it stimulus,” Rep. Barney Frank told the “Daily Show’s” Jon Stewart. “The message experts in Washington have told us that we’re supposed to call it the recovery plan.

I’m puzzled by that,” Frank went on. “Most people would rather be stimulated than recover.” The problem is, the economy has neither been stimulated nor has it recovered.”

No stimulus, no recovery, no nothing. That’s not what Barack said:

“Recovery summer, opposition to Arizona’s immigration law, negative campaigning, and intervention in the Ground Zero mosque dispute—call them Obama’s Four Disasters. As policy, they’re questionable. As political exercises, they’re losers. As clues about Obama, they’re evidence he’s lost his political knack.

What was Obama thinking? These weren’t initiatives taken suddenly. They were carefully thought out and plotted, no doubt in expectation the president would gain politically and so would Democratic candidates. Whatever calculations the White House made, they were faulty.

Recovery summer. This was proclaimed in June, with fanfare, in a briefing by Vice President Biden and the issuance of a report titled “Summer of Recovery: Project Activity Increases in Summer 2010.” The report said “millions of Americans [are] on the job today thanks to the Recovery Act”—better known as the “stimulus package”—but its work is not done. “Summer 2010 is actually poised to be the most active Recovery Act season yet.”

Where are the jobs, Barack? No disinformation campaign is going to help, no attempt to tar the opposition with bogus “extremism” charges or race-baiting (Obama Dimocrat Alvin Greene is now race-baiting the “racist” Obama Dimocrats!) is going to work. No amount of attacks on Jews and Holocaust survivors is going to work. No amount of money (look to Alaska) raised, or thuggery unleashed, is going to save Obama and his Dimocrats from the wrath to come in November.

Americans know what Obama Dimocrat from Colorado Michael Bennet now admits to:

“Sen. Michael Bennet’s recent appearance in Greeley, Colorado is sure to set political tongues wagging–Bennet is quoted as saying that though trillions of dollars of Federal debt has been incurred through spending since he was appointed to the Senate in January of 2009, “we have nothing to show for it”:

Michael Bennet, D-Colo,at a town hall meeting in Greeley last Saturday, Aug 21 said we had nothing to show for the debt incurred by the stimulus package and other expenditures calling the recession the worst since the Great Depression. […]

Regarding spending during his time in office he said, “We have managed to acquire $13 trillion of debt on our balance sheet” and, “in my view we have nothing to show for it.”

Nothing to show for it.” That’s what Bennet told the Greeley Gazette but Big Media outlets like the New York Times will not report in any meaningful way to the American people.

What is happening to America while Obama vacations with Lady of Spain Michelle? Even in Big Media Obama fluffer outlets the Obama Economy of Doom is discussed:

“Positive gross domestic product readings and other mildly hopeful signs are masking an ugly truth: The US economy is in a 1930s-style Depression, Gluskin Sheff economist David Rosenberg said Tuesday.

Writing in his daily briefing to investors, Rosenberg said the Great Depression also had its high points, with a series of positive GDP reports and sharp stock market gains.

But then as now, those signs of recovery were unsustainable and only provided a false sense of stability, said Rosenberg.

Rosenberg calls current economic conditions “a depression, and not just some garden-variety recession,” and notes that any good news both during the initial 1929-33 recession and the one that began in 2008 triggered “euphoric response.”

“Such is human nature and nobody can be blamed for trying to be optimistic; however, in the money management business, we have a fiduciary responsibility to be as realistic as possible about the outlook for the economy and the market at all times,” he said.

The 1929-33 recession saw six quarterly bounces in GDP with an average gain of 8 percent, sending the stock market to a 50 percent rally in early 1930 as investors thought the worst had passed.

“False premise,” Rosenberg said. “And guess what? We may well be reliving history here. If you’re keeping score, we have recorded four quarterly advances in real GDP, and the average is only 3%.”

Rosenberg is not alone:

“Rosenberg’s warning comes as a slew of major analysts—Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan among them—have slashed GDP projections for 2010 to the 1.5 to 2 percent range.

Chicago Federal Reserve President Charles Evans said in a speech Tuesday that the risk of a double-dip recession has escalated. He said government programs to help distressed homeowners have been ineffective and aren’t helping the pivotal housing sector recover.

The dour outlooks come on the same day that the National Association of Realtors said home sales reached a 15-year low in June, dousing hopes that the industry had reached a bottoming point.

Rosenberg points out that the “overall economic malaise” has come despite aggressive efforts by the Federal Reserve to stimulate the economy through rate cuts. The central bank itself has scaled back its economic projections, has held steady on its balance sheet, and could be announcing another round of quantitative easing measures at its Jackson Hole summit this week.

“How’s that for a reality check,” Rosenberg said.”

It’s the Obama Economy of Doom and Gloom:

“After months of withering job losses and weak economic growth, summer was going to be the season of recovery, the Obama administration heralded in June.

Thousands of infrastructure and construction projects funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act were to come on-line during June, July and August, helping to “create jobs for American workers and economic growth for businesses, large and small.”

The White House dubbed it “Recovery Summer” and President Obama declared the economy had begun “growing at a good clip.” Vice President Joe Biden predicted weeks earlier that creation of 250,000 to 500,000 new jobs a month could soon be on the horizon.

But with summer quickly coming to an end, those jobs gains and a robust economic recovery have not yet materialized, leaving Democrats on the verge of a fall election campaign in which Republicans are poised to make them eat their words.

How bad is it while Obama vacations with Lady of Spain Michelle?

Home sales:

“Sales of previously occupied homes in the United States fell 27 percent in July, the weakest showing in 15 years, the National Association of Realtors said Tuesday. It was the largest monthly drop in the four decades that records have been kept.”


“The nation’s economic recovery continued to sputter in July as employers kept shedding jobs and 181,000 discouraged workers dropped out of the labor force, according to a government report released Friday.

The nation’s unemployment rate remained at 9.5 percent for the month, the Labor Department said, as private employers added a modest 71,000 jobs. But that increase was overwhelmed by the loss of 202,000 government jobs, including 143,000 temporary census positions.

In all, employers cut 131,000 jobs, adding to mounting concern among policymakers and analysts that the recovery needs to pick up momentum or risk stalling.

“The road ahead is uncertain, but what is crystal clear is that if we don’t see significant job growth by the end of the year, the economy could be in serious trouble,” said Bill Cheney, chief economist for John Hancock Financial.”

Housing HAMP:

“HAMP might well have been a success in the ways that Treasury enumerates — helping out banks on the solvency front, reducing the rate of foreclosures, that sort of thing. It was almost certainly a good idea politically, as well: you don’t hear much about the plight of homeowners being foreclosed upon, these days, certainly compared to the huge amount of noise on the subject around the time that Obama was elected president. The government is perceived to have Done Something, and the circus has moved on.

But it’s still a tragedy that hundreds of thousands of people who signed up for loan modifications — and who made all of their modified loan payments in full and on time — have had their modifications cancelled. Many of those people blame the servicers; Treasury, meanwhile, is more prone to blaming the borrowers themselves, claiming they’re incapable of verifying their income.”

In spite of the suffering the Obama scams continue to try to fool all of the people all of the time:

“Biden conceded that the economic recovery was not proceeding as fast as the administration had hoped, but claimed there was “no doubt we’re moving in the right direction.”

“Moving in the right direction”? Joe must mean the vacation direction to Martha’s Vineyard. The Obama Economy of Doom is on main street and every street in bitter and clingy small town America and is now hitting Wall Street:

“The Richmond branch of the Federal Reserve’s gauge of manufacturing activity for the US’s mid-Atlantic region fell by nearly a third, and sales of existing homes fell 27.2 per cent in July – to the lowest level for 15 years – well past consensus expectations of a 12 per cent decline.

“There has been a double dip in home sales and housing construction, triggered by the weakening economic backdrop,” said Ethan Harris, head of developed markets economics research at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, in a note.[snip]

Last week, the Philadelphia branch’s own index of factory activity slipped to negative levels and sparked a multi-day sell-off, as it augured a potential dip in the August reading of the broader Institute of Supply Management’s index. The Chicago Fed’s index is due next week.

Things appear to have come to a head…with markets braced at the edge of a precipice ahead of key US economic data likely to further unnerve investors already concerned by the extent of impending slowdown,” said Andrew Wilkinson, senior market analyst at Interactive Brokers.”

The Obama Economy of Doom is a great Hindenburg crashing:

“The Hindenburg Omen reared its ugly head late last week, signaling more doom and gloom as stocks plod along amid the dog days of summer.

The Omen, a technical indicator which uses a plethora of data to foreshadow a stock-market crash, was tripped again on Friday, marking the second time since Aug. 12 it has occurred. (It also came close on Thursday, but one of its criteria fell short.)

The latest trigger has prompted the Omen’s creator, Jim Miekka, to exit the market. “I’m taking it seriously and I’m fully out of the market now,” Miekka, a blind mathematician, said in a telephone interview from his home in Surry, Maine. “I would’ve probably stayed in until the beginning of September,” depending on how the indicators varied. “That was my basic plan, until the Hindenburg came along.”

The Hindenburg Omen is economics is akin to the disaster many of us foresaw politically with the rise of Barack Obama and his Dimocrats of Doom and Corruption:

“It’s sort of like a funnel cloud,” he said. “It doesn’t mean it’s going to crash, but it’s a high probability. You don’t get a tornado without a funnel cloud.”

Wall Street celebrated when Barack Obama back-slapped at high dollar donor events. But Wall Street cannot survive without Main Street and those “bitter and clingy” small town Americans:

The Dow Jones Industrial Average will lose about half of its value over the next couple of years as it follows a Nikkei-like pattern of several sharp rallies in an overall decline, according to Charles Nenner, founder and president of Charles Nenner research.

Stocks are currently in a bear-market rally, and looking at charts and past trends, unemployment and leading indicators suggest the Dow will drop to 5,000 in the next two to two-and-a-half years, Nenner told CNBC in an e-mail.” [snip]

“Things look really bad for the next 10 years,” Nenner said.”

But don’t worry “bitter” and “clingy” Americans – Obama is having a great time.


Obama The Muslim Enters The Mosque Of Doom

Why do so many Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? Two polls released last week were a shock to Big Media and Obama acolytes because of the increased belief among Americans that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim (and even more Americans either do not know or perhaps refuse to believe the Obama protestations about his religious identity). The PEW poll was taken before the Mosque of Doom became an issue. The Time magazine poll was in the field on the Monday and Tuesday after Obama bungled into the Mosque of Doom controversy.


“A new national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that nearly one-in-five Americans (18%) now say Obama is a Muslim, up from 11% in March 2009. Only about one-third of adults (34%) say Obama is a Christian, down sharply from 48% in 2009. Fully 43% say they do not know what Obama’s religion is. The survey was completed in early August, before Obama’s recent comments about the proposed construction of a mosque near the site of the former World Trade Center.

The view that Obama is a Muslim is more widespread among his political opponents than among his backers. Roughly a third of conservative Republicans (34%) say Obama is a Muslim, as do 30% of those who disapprove of Obama’s job performance. But even among many of his supporters and allies, less than half now say Obama is a Christian. Among Democrats, for instance, 46% say Obama is a Christian, down from 55% in March 2009.”

Why do so many Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? It’s not because being a Muslim is a dirty thing to be. It’s because every day the Big Media and Barack Obama created delusions during the primary and general election campaigns of 2008 are proven a lie. So why not be willing to believe that Obama’s words about his religion are also a lie?

Why do so many Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? It’s not because being a Muslim is a dirty thing to be. The short answer is because increasingly Americans wake up in the morning and go to bed at night reciting our mantra as revealed truth:

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

Big Media protects Barack Obama now as during the elections of 2008. Big Media sold Obama as a great communicator. Now, the illness of leg tingles when Obama speaks have been cured by the reality of Obama actions and the realization that the words themselves are just sugar water platitudes and phony baloney.

David Paul Kuhn yesterday wrote about the now discredited premise that Barack Obama is a “great communicator”. Kuhn wrote,, “The conventional perceptions of Obama were flawed from the outset.” Kuhn cites the Mosque of Doom, the AIG bonuses, the BP oil gusher, the purge of David Paterson, the “bitter” slap at small town America, and other Obama created disasters of communication.

Kuhn recites all the many advantages Obama enjoyed in 2008 but sums up the end result as “But in the end, it was still the market crash that assured his victory.” Big Media did not vet Barack Obama, attacked Obama opponents with JournoLister fury and connivance, and swooned at every Obama utterance.

All the hype, all the “great communicator” verbiage, all the Hope and Change sloganeering, is now viewed as not congruent with reality or the truth. So why shouldn’t Americans now begin to question the most fundamental elements of an Obama they realize they do not know at all.

Why do so many Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? There’s the full name. Today is one of the few times we have employed Barack Obama’s full name. During the 2008 primary campaigns and subsequently anyone who dared mention the unmentionable middle name was tarred as a “racist” or “Islamaphobe”. Byron York remembers the great unmentionable:

“You a Muslim?”

“Grandfather was,” Obama said, according to his memoir Dreams From My Father.

Smitty’s question, which Obama didn’t exactly answer, prefigured a controversy that continues to this day.

A new poll by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life shows that 18 percent of Americans believe Obama is a Muslim. That is up from the 12 percent who believed that in October 2008, just before Obama was elected president.

At the same time, the number of Pew respondents who say Obama is a Christian — in Dreams From My Father, he describes his conversion to Christianity under the tutelage of Rev. Jeremiah Wright — has declined from 51 percent in October 2008 to 34 percent now. And the number of people who say they don’t know Obama’s religion is growing, from 32 percent back then to 43 percent today.

The White House blames the situation on a “misinformation campaign” from Obama’s opponents. But Obama and his aides might also blame themselves for the way they’ve handled the Muslim issue over the years.

The question did not come out of nowhere. As Obama said, his grandfather was a Muslim. His father was raised a Muslim before becoming, by Obama’s account, “a confirmed atheist.” Obama’s stepfather was a Muslim. His half-sister Maya told the New York Times that her “whole family was Muslim.”

Obama spent two years in a Muslim school in Indonesia and later, in a conversation with the Times’ Nicholas Kristof, described the Arabic call to prayer, the beginning of which he recited by heart, as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.” Given all that, it is entirely accurate and fair to describe Obama as having Muslim roots.

Yet during the campaign his aides shouted down even a measured discussion of the topic, and Obama’s critics could face ostracism simply for uttering the candidate’s middle name. In December 2007, with the Iowa caucuses approaching, former Democratic Sen. Bob Kerrey, a Hillary Clinton supporter, said of Obama, “I like the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim and that his paternal grandmother is a Muslim. There’s a billion people on the planet that are Muslims, and I think that experience is a big deal.” Kerrey’s remarks caused an uproar — one TV commentator wondered whether they were “poisoning the well” — and Kerrey later apologized.”

Barack Obama and Big Media JournoListers attacked anyone who mentioned the unmentionable middle name. But then on the bungled Oath of Office on Inauguration Day Barack Obama declared himself Barack Hussein Obama. Obama flashed the “Hussein” on and off – just like the flag lapel pin he disdained with high minded words – only to ostentatiously wear when it convenienced him and his not proud of America wife.

The “Christian” label, like the flag lapel pin, like the “Hussein” middle name was a sometime thing. During the Jeremiah Wright episode we quoted the New York Times:

“Mr. Obama is particularly vulnerable because voters are still getting to know him, said Democratic and Republican strategists — and a few voters as well. The Wright affair “makes me question other things. What else do we not know?” asked Karen Norton, 58, a computer saleswoman in North Carolina and a Republican who said that, until now, she had been stirred by Mr. Obama’s message of national reconciliation.”

What else do we not know?” The answers are coming in fast and furious and that is why Barack Obama is in daily worsening trouble. Byron York details the Obama hypocrisy as to his Muslim roots:

“Eighteen months later, when President Obama traveled to Cairo for a long-awaited speech to the Muslim world, the White House was saying, and the press was reporting, the same thing Kerrey had to apologize for. “President Obama is now embracing his Muslim roots,” ABC News’ “Nightline” announced. “President Obama’s speech … was laced with references to the Quran and his Muslim roots,” said USA Today. “Obama touched on his own Muslim roots,” reported the Associated Press.[snip]

Pew asked respondents how they learned about Obama’s religion. Most who believe Obama is a Muslim say they learned it through the media. But 11 percent say they learned it through Obama’s “own words and behavior.” Perhaps they read the White House press pool reports, which often describe Obama heading out to play basketball or golf on Sunday mornings.”

Why do so many Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? It’s not only the golf on Sunday mornings and the decades of attendance at the pulpit of “God Damn America” Jeremiah Wright. It’s not only the Obama family tradition of not observing the Christmas holidays with exchanges of gifts as most Christians, even the poorest observe. Perhaps the Obama’s are Jehovah’s Witnesses. Perhaps Antoin “Tony” Rezko performed Santa duties and donated bags of money and that was Christmas. Whatever his religious affiliation or possible atheism there are other reasons to believe Obama is not completely forthcoming on this belief system issue as with everything.

Recall the necessary do-over inaugural oath of office during which no Christian Bible could be found in the White House library or any room in the White House. No Obama lackey or Obama family member thought to cross the street to get a Bible from a nearby church, a Gideon donation hotel Bible, or passerby tourist Bible – if there was a concern on that special day to express religious devotion?

Obama did make a great show, an ostentatious display, of a Lincoln Bible at the official and televised proceedings in order to steal himself into the Lincoln lineage, but in private, the oath was a secular affair. Perhaps its the lackadaisical attitude of the Obamas and their fellow travelers who did not think it would matter to Americans that the Bible was not an Obama concern at all – simply because a Bible is not specifically legally mandated in the Constitution as the oath is?

Why do so many Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? Perhaps it is that the church Obama attended, for decades, celebrated, on the Sunday after September 11, the destruction of the Twin Towers, and the death of thousands of Americans at the hands of organized Islamic hatemongers, with “God Damn America!”

Perhaps it is because Obama was not outraged enough, thought his church was some sort of normal, did not denounce the “God Damn America!” pastor/friend/mentor until that pastor/friend/mentor of decades insulted Obama personally. Muslim bodies were pulverized at ground zero along with Christians and Jews and Sikhs and those of other faiths – but it was a certain rabid Muslim sect and political ideology that championed the attacks. And it was at Obama’s purported “Christian” church where “God Damn America” chants joined “Death to America” chants coming from the caves of Afghanistan and the golden mosques of Saudi Arabia.

Why do so many Americans believe Obama is Muslim? Because increasingly Americans don’t trust Obama and his lies are becoming all too transparent. It is not that being a Muslim is the problem. Perhaps it is the cancellation of the National Day of Prayer? Perhaps it was the stated Obama desire and plans of no traditional Nativity scene in the East Room that is responsible for the head turning poll responses. No doubt it is the sense that Obama has been dishonest for too long about too many things.

There was also the Cairo speech with its ugly adoption of Muslim extremist grievances and distortions of history. There was no mention of Bill Clinton and General Wesley Clark and the fight to save Muslim lives at Obama’s Cairo speech. There was Obama “the Arabs’ lawyer” at Cairo and the insults to Israel, which did not merit a visit, on the Cairo trip. There was also the snub of Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu. No surprise then that Jews are joining seniors in an Exodus from the once great, now dead, Democratic Party.

Why do so many Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? One large part of the puzzle is that Big Media and the front line shock troops propaganda cadre from JournoListers have been projecting and protecting the many Obama fairy tales so that when Big Media assures Americans that Obama is X Americans immediately suspect the truth is Y.

Why do so many Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? Not because “Muslim” is a dirty word and not because all Muslims are to be feared. But Americans have learned from shattered lives and crumpled buildings that there is a such a thing as “stealth” jihadists who will flim-flam to get into positions of trust. Americans have learned that some, certainly not all and not even a significant in numbers group, of Muslim jihadists will deceive in order to destroy.

Christopher Hitchens, the Hillary Hater and cancer ridden walking corpse, today writes about Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the wannabee builder of the Mosque of Doom which Obama wants built before he does not know if he wants it built. Hitchens has called opposition to the Mosque of Doom “stupid and demagogic“. Hitchens also says this about the stealthy Imam Rauf:

“From the beginning, though, I pointed out that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was no great bargain and that his Cordoba Initiative was full of euphemisms about Islamic jihad and Islamic theocracy. I mentioned his sinister belief that the United States was partially responsible for the assault on the World Trade Center and his refusal to take a position on the racist Hamas dictatorship in Gaza. The more one reads through his statements, the more alarming it gets. [snip]

I do not find myself reassured by the fact that Imam Rauf publicly endorses the most extreme and repressive version of Muslim theocracy. The letterhead of the statement, incidentally, describes him as the Cordoba Initiative’s “Founder and Visionary.” Why does that not delight me, either?

Emboldened by the crass nature of the opposition to the center, its defenders have started to talk as if it represented no problem at all and as if the question were solely one of religious tolerance. It would be nice if this were true. But tolerance is one of the first and most awkward questions raised by any examination of Islamism. We are wrong to talk as if the only subject was that of terrorism. As Western Europe has already found to its cost, local Muslim leaders have a habit, once they feel strong enough, of making demands of the most intolerant kind. Sometimes it will be calls for censorship of anything “offensive” to Islam. Sometimes it will be demands for sexual segregation in schools and swimming pools. The script is becoming a very familiar one. And those who make such demands are of course usually quite careful to avoid any association with violence. They merely hint that, if their demands are not taken seriously, there just might be a teeny smidgeon of violence from some other unnamed quarter …

As for the gorgeous mosaic of religious pluralism, it’s easy enough to find mosque Web sites and DVDs that peddle the most disgusting attacks on Jews, Hindus, Christians, unbelievers, and other Muslims—to say nothing of insane diatribes about women and homosexuals. This is why the fake term Islamophobia is so dangerous: It insinuates that any reservations about Islam must ipso facto be “phobic.” A phobia is an irrational fear or dislike. Islamic preaching very often manifests precisely this feature, which is why suspicion of it is by no means irrational.”

Hitchens on his last days on this Earth relates looking at the minaret of the biggest Washington, D.C. mosque. It is where George W. Bush went after 9/11 to express hopes for peace. [Yes, that alleged warmonger Bush could have led the United States into a Kristallnacht of anti-Muslim violence – but instead he reverently respected American Muslims who had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks and many of whom are good people.]

Hitchens relates how a wife of an ambassador taking her dog for a walk hear the mosque “when a bearded man accosted her and brusequely warned her not to take the animal so close to the sacred precincts”. Muslim cabdrivers in the nation’s capital, Hitchens relates are increasingly refusing to accept passengers with “unclean” dogs. Hitchens also dislikes the “display of flags outside, purportedly showing all those nations that are already Muslim.” There is also the proposed by Muslims United Nations resolution “that would circumscribe any criticism of religion in general and of Islam in particular.”

No doubt Hitchens’ article is a response to the disgraceful Time magazine current issue, “Is America Islamophobic?” For all its faults, and all its hypocrisies, and all its shortcomings and failings, it is the United States which enshines in Article VI of its Constitution that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” JFK overcame the “Papist” label with his forthrightness and honesty and gave deeper meaning to Article VI of the great American Constitution. No one doubted which country had JFK’s allegiance.

Why do so many Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? It’s not because of hate of Muslims or intolerance of Muslims. But it certainly is a fear of a certain type of Muslim. As we have always warned there are rotten people and they come in all colors, shapes, genders, and religions. There are rotten people everywhere including high office.

Americans have to be excused for believing anything and everything about Obama. It was the Obama campaign that exploited the strategy of letting the voters project their hopes and fears and dreams unto the blank slate which was Obama. Now that blank slate is the aged and corrupt Picture of Dorian Hussein Gray.

Remember how Obama disdained old issues from the 1990s and the 1960s? Obama promised he would “turn the page“. That’s not quite what he has done. If anything the culture clash is back full force. Whether it is illegal immigration or the Mosque of Doom, because of Barack Obama – the fight is on.

Why do Americans believe Barack Obama is a Muslim? It’s not because Muslim is a dirty word. A great deal of it is that many Americans understand Big Media protected Obama instead of vetting him. Americans still don’t know who this guy is. Americans knew who Hillary Clinton is. Americans knew who John McCain is. But Barack Obama was protected from prying eyes.

Big Media protected Obama and attacked anyone who explored his past or his character. Questions about Barack Obama’s finances, his investments in biotech stocks (followed quickly by political actions which would help those stocks rise), Michelle Obama’s remarkable raise in salary after Obama earmarked her employer money, the assertions of European travel that has still never been disclosed, the Pakistan trip we did not know about until after the election – are all questions that have never been answered about Barack Obama.

Even before the Mosque of Doom, which has surely aggravated the doubts, less than half of Obama SUPPORTERS believe he is a Christian. This religion question is a proxy way of saying:

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

We do not care what Barack Obama’s religion, if any, is. We do care what Obama says about his religion or anything else. We do not believe Barack Obama. We do not trust Barack Obama.


Mosque Of Doom Dimocrats

It’s a fake community center only a fake community organizer could love. The Mosque of Doom builders are too busy to answer questions about their plans for the great unity to come. But the Mosque of Doom builders are not to busy to post attacks on other religions on their official Twitter site.

Meanwhile Obama Dimocrats are throwing themselves under the bus and Nancy Pelosi must have a bottle of Gin she’s taken more than one “nip” from. It is increasingly clear that the Mosque of Doom will crush Obama Dimocrats and they must get rid of this issue before Labor Day. Like an asteroid approaching the Earth bringing death, destruction, and doom, the Mosque of Doom must be deflected – before Labor Day – before November 2011 – before November 2012.

* * * * * *

JournoLister Ben Smith at Politico posted an article about the tolerant “tweets” coming from the Mosque of Doom official Twitter account. Among the official “tweets” from the self-proclaimed paragons of tolerance were these questions to someone who uses the name “Amish”: “1. What are you doing on the computer? 2. That’s not very Amish 3. Shouldn’t you be making butter?

Such tolerance and sensitivity melts our hearts!

In another “tweet”, the person who authored the official Mosque of Doom response to an Ha’aretz article, declared: “On a side note, if Haaretz likes publishing fables, perhaps they could go back to the Yiddish ones with parables”

Such sensitivity! Such unifying rhetoric! How dare anyone question the motives of these Mosque of Doom advocates!

Soon after various websites (and Greg Gutfeld’s “Red Eye” TV show) discussed the offensive “tweets”, the up till then official responder to Ha’aretz, was declared an intern and “replaced”. The offensive “tweets” were wiped from the record, never to be seen again.

The Mosque of Doom builders are such great “uniters” that it is hard to track all their activities. Indeed, the Mosque of Doom builders are so busy uniting they cannot meet with the Governor of New York.Mosque Developer Rejects Meeting With Paterson” blares the headline.

Are the Mosque of Doom builders refusing to meet with the Governor of New York because the governor is blind and black – or is it his breath? It certainly cannot be because the Mosque of Doom builders are intolerant and refuse dialog when their alleged raison d’etre is tolerance and dialogue.

The Mosque of Doom does have some friends. The Mosque of Doom friends are doing some rather astonishing business. So tolerant, or is it desperate, are the Doomers that they think George W. Bush will save their precious Mosque. This is the same George W. Bush that Obama Dimocrats think will save them in November because they plan to run the entire Obama Dimocratic Campaign as an anti George W. Bush referendum. But how can you run against George W. Bush by calling him a savior?

Garbage scow Maureen Dowd says “W. needs to get his bullhorn back out”. Garbage truck Eugene Robinson moans “I… would hove to hear from former President Bush on this issue“. Garbage can Peter Beinart wept, “Words I never thought I’d write: I pine for George W. Bush”.

Perhaps the Mosque of Doom is already working it’s unity magic. All these Obama Dimocrats who wanted W. Bush and his administration prosecuted now want W. Bush to save them from B. Obama (the “B” stands for “boob”). All these Obama Dimocrats want to utilize W. Bush as a demon figure in order to win elections but at the same time these Obama Dimocrats want W. Bush to come to their rescue. Obama Dimocrats will be “for” W. Bush before they are “against” W. Bush. Or is it they are “against” W. Bush before they are “for” W. Bush. It’s all very confusing.

Obama appears to be the most confused of all (and testy too). Obama was “for” the Mosque of Doom before he was “against” the Mosque of Doom. That is, if you believe Obama said he was “for” the Doom Mosque and his later “No comment” on the Doom Mosque, which on Sunday he “clarified” by stating he was “for” what it was he said on Friday which today he says he is “for”.

Ignore that previous paragraph. Consider it a missive from “Amish”. Wipe it off your memory. What we meant to say, What Obama Really Meant is that he is Edith Piaf – “No Regrets”.

Non, je ne regrette rien:

“Via Greg Hengler, a silly question gets a silly answer. How else could he respond? “Why yes, in light of the catastrophic polling on this issue for my party, I should have avoided even the lame, equivocating statement I gave initially”? His disapproval rating has been creeping up in Gallup ever since he weighed in, rising from 48 percent last week to a siren-worthy 52 percent today. Of course he regrets it. But now he’s stuck with it, so here’s his — very — perfunctory show of resoluteness in the face of self-generated adversity.

The media meme du jour, naturally enough, is that the mosque debate is causing an intra-party crack-up — on the right. Our Democratic president is at odds with our Democratic Senate majority leader, and our Democratic Speaker of the House has lost her ever-lovin’ mind, and meanwhile national polls show even a majority of Democrats in opposition to the mosque, and yet … somehow it’s conservatives who have been torn apart by this issue. Good work, Politico. So batty have liberals become, in fact, that supposedly clear-eyed, battle-hardened, bottom-line political operative Mark Halperin is now screaming for Obama to wade in further on the mosque’s behalf instead of shutting up until this goes away:”

Mark Halperin is inconsolable over Obama’s “losing control of his public image on a key issue” Full regret was left to others, willingly flinging themselves under the bus to get away from the poison that is Barack Obama.

“After almost total silence from New York elected officials over the weekend after President Obama’s mosque speech (in which some members were out of town, or pocket), the reactions from members in swing districts are starting to come in — and they’re almost all at odds with the president.”

Michael Arcuri the NY-24 incumbent is against building the Mosque of Doom. Mike McMahon of NY-13 (which has many 9/11 families) wrote: “We have seen very clearly in the past weeks that building a mosque two blocks from ground zero will not promote necessary interfaith dialogue, but will continue to fracture the faiths and citizens of our city and this country. As such, I am opposed to the construction of the Cordoba Center at the currently-proposed location and urge all parties to work with local community leaders to find a more appropriate site.”

Steve Israel of NY-2 said, “While they have a constitutional right to build the mosque, it would be better if they had demonstrated more sensitivity to the families of 9/11 victims. I urge them to do so before proceeding further.”

Tim Bishop of NY-1 said “As a New Yorker, I believe ground zero is sacred ground and should unite us. If the group seeking to build the mosque is sincere in its efforts to bring people together, I would urge them to seek an alternative location which is less divisive. I dispute the wisdom of building at that location, not the constitutional right.”

Howard Dean, who whored slavishly for Obama for so long, ran under the bus and away from Obama too. Howie wants a relocation and thinks the Mosque of Doom is “a real affront”.

2×4 Chuck Schumer is in hiding, aware that buses are prowling the streets looking for his treacherous self:

“The National Republican Senatorial Committee on Monday targeted Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., for not speaking out on the issue. Citing an article that said the normally chatty Schumer would not comment on the mosque remarks, the NRSC said Schumer should weigh in.

“It’s a remarkable commentary on the most camera-friendly senator that hes more than happy to weigh-in on caffeinated malt beverages, but he wont take a public position on the construction of a mosque near Ground Zero,” NRSC spokesman Brian Walsh said in a written statement.

“It’s time for Chuck Schumer to stand up and be counted — does he stand with President Obama in support of this mosque or does he stand with the countless 9/11 families who believe its location is inappropriate?” Walsh asked.”

2×4 Chuck Schumer must be made to respond to the Mosque of Doom question. Are yer fer or agin it Chuckie boy? ‘Fess up!

To her credit, Nancy Pelousy has taken a gin soaked stand. [Charles Krauthammer thinks it is “lunacy” not the effects of gin.] Pelousy was out on Treasure Island. Not the pirate and rum soaked Treasure Island of Robert Louis Stevenson. This Treasure Island preferred Gin to Rum:

“House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday said she supports an investigation into groups opposing the building of a mosque near ground zero in New York.

Pelosi told San Francisco’s KCBS radio that “there is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some.”

“I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded,” she said. “How is this being ginned up?

Put down the gin bottle Nancy.

“There is no question that there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some, and I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded. How is this being ginned up, that here we are, talking about Treasure Island, something we’ve been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community as we go forward to an election about the future of our country, and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City.”

Perhaps Nancy Pelousy is too ginned up to understand that no one, other than herself, is calling for an investigation into the funding of those who oppose the Mosque of Doom. There are questions about who is funding the Mosque of Doom, but Nancy needs to put down the Beefeater bottle and look up and see the approaching asteroid.

Fundraising questions Nancy? Fundraising questions???:

“The developers behind the Islamic center planned for a site near Ground Zero won’t rule out accepting financing from the Mideast — including from Saudi Arabia and Iran — as they begin searching for $100 million needed to build the project.

The religious organization and the development company behind the center declined to say how much of the $100 million needed to build the facility has already been raised.”

Such transparency! Such openness! Such elevated dialogue!

“When asked if they would then turn to foreign donors, Sultan replied, “I can’t comment on that.”

Pressed on whether the developers were willilng rule out accepting donations from the governments of Saudi Arabia or Iran, he repeated, “I can’t comment on that.

So much information coming from the Mosque of Doom now. Imagine the golden future when the Mosque of Doom is fully built and hosting all those ecumenical events with Iran’s president attacking the very idea of a Holocaust or perhaps Barack Obama will come to bow before the Imam. We can’t wait to see the souvenir stand stocked full of World Trade Center Twin Towers candles. We can extrapolate the unity and openness to come from the unity and openness already displayed.

The Obama Mosque of Doom, just like Barack Obama, will be a uniter not a divider.

* * * * * *

Supporters of the Mosque of Doom must realize that the Mosque of Doom and it’s builders are not “moderates”. Quite the opposite. The Muslims that need to be encouraged to speak up against the horrors of modern day Islam will be hurt and demoralized by the Mosque of Doom. Don’t take our word for it. Listen to the Muslims who say this openly:

“A House of Worship or a Symbol of Destruction?

By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashid

Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed the general manager of Al -Arabiya television. Mr. Al Rashed is also the former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs. He is currently based in Dubai.”

What does Abdul Rahman Al-Rashid say that Obama Dimocrats need to read? It’s a Mosque of Doom:

“US President Barack Obama adopted a difficult position when he supported the building of a mosque near ground zero, where 3,000 US citizens died at the hands of Al-Qaeda terrorists on 11 September 2001.

Despite the fact that the president adopted the correct stance in principle, i.e. the principle of freedom of worship, in my opinion he adopted an unnecessary and unimportant stance, even as far as Muslims are concerned. The mosque is not an issue for Muslims, and they are not bothered by its construction.

This reminds us of another principled stance Obama took when he insisted on putting the Guantanamo prisoners accused of belonging to Al-Qaeda on trial before civilian courts, and on closing down the military prison. It is true that this stance deserves appreciation. However, the fact is that he fought a battle that does not concern Muslims across the world, because there are tens of thousands of Muslims – similar to those accused of extremism – who are imprisoned in worse conditions in Muslim countries.

Muslims do not aspire for a mosque next to the 11 September cemetery, and are not bothered with Bin Ladin’s cook being put on trial in a civilian court.”

Obama and Obama Dimocrats are flinging themselves into the pyre of fire for nothing. The Mosque of Doom is a killer without benefits:

“The fact is that building a mosque next to the site of the World Trade Center Twin Towers, which were destroyed during the 11 September attacks, is a strange story. This is because the mosque is not an issue for Muslims, and they have not heard of it until the shouting became loud between the supporters and the objectors, which is mostly an argument between non-Muslim US citizens!

Neither did the Muslims ask for a single building, nor do the angry Muslims want the mosque. This is one of the few times when the two opposing sides are in agreement. [snip]

I cannot imagine that Muslims want a mosque on this particular site, because it will be turned into an arena for promoters of hatred, and a symbol of those who committed the crime. At the same time, there are no practicing Muslims in the district who need a place of worship, because it is indeed a commercial district. Is there a side that is committed to this mosque? The fact is that in the news reports there are names linked to this project that costs 100 million dollars![snip]

I do not know whether the building applicant wants a mosque whose aim is reconciliation, or he is an investor who wants quick profits. This is because the idea of the mosque specifically next to the destruction is not at all a clever deed. The last thing Muslims want today is to build just a religious center out of defiance to the others, or a symbolic mosque that people visit as a museum next to a cemetery.

What the US citizens do not understand is that the battle against the 11 September terrorists is a Muslim battle, and not theirs, and this battle still is ablaze in more than 20 Muslim countries.

This is the key sentence of the argument, one we have made and which Mosque of Doom supporters need to consider because it is the source of the emotional tuning fork which will turn the Mosque of Doom into a defining issue this November. Read it and weep, Mosque of Doom supporters:

Some Muslims will consider that building a mosque on this site immortalizes and commemorates what was done by the terrorists who committed their crime in the name of Islam. I do not think that the majority of Muslims want to build a symbol or a worship place that tomorrow might become a place about which the terrorists and their Muslim followers boast, and which will become a shrine for Islam haters whose aim is to turn the public opinion against Islam. This is what has started to happen now; they claim that there is a mosque being built over the corpses of 3,000 killed US citizens, who were buried alive by people chanting God is great, which is the same call that will be heard from the mosque.”

The Mosque of Doom is the thunder and lightning of a storm to come. The storm arrives in November.


Blagojevich – A New Hope

After November – for the first time ever – there will likely be a legislative body willing to investigate Barack Obama and his business dealings. When he was in Illinois, Barack Obama was the darling of corrupt officials who ran the entire state. When he moved into Washington D.C in the majority Democratic Senate, Obama was not investigated but instead trained, by people like Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid and 2×4 Schumer, to become their puppet president.

After this November for the first time all the questions we have about Barack Obama can finally be investigated. There are a lot of questions. Obama earmarks in the millions of dollars for his wife’s employers meant a windfall for the Obamas as Michelle Obama got a substantial raise in pay (Maxine Waters gets investigated, Obama got a free pass). The boxes of papers Obama cannot seem to find would answer the questions about what he knew and when he knew it about freezing tenants in Rezko housing (as Obama got Rezko money). The Rezko house, the many deals with corrupt and corrupting individuals, the money deals and investments – all can be investigated after November.

This August 26, at an attorney conference, a retrial date will be set for impeached and removed Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. The retrial will likely take place in the new year with a new Republican majority in charge in Congress and willing to get answers to questions the trial will raise.

Rod Blagojevich was convicted today of only 1 of 24 counts. The prosecution was a mess and they got the comeuppance deserved. The prosecution sought to protect Barack Obama and therefore refused to call as witnesses against Blagojevich friends of Barack such as Antoin “Tony” Rezko. The witnesses not called against Blagojevich were the important witnesses. But it was “protect Barack Obama” time in the Chicago courts.

The judge and the prosecution did not want Blagojevich given an opportunity to question Rezko and other corrupt Obama friends. The Blagojevich defense would have explored all the corrupt details of Barack Obama’s life. Barack Obama would have had to be forced to testify. Even in the now ended trial Barack Obama’s name was constantly mentioned. In a new trial the prosecution will have to put up Rezko and open up the can of worms or they will lose again.

Governor Blagojevich did not even put up a defense and he still got off on 23 of 24 counts. The government prosecutors are humiliated. The judge did everything possible to convict Blagojevich (from the jury instructions to what the defense could say and who the defense could call as witnesses). The prosecution will now have little reason to protect Barack Obama because a Republican majority in either house of congress will not protect Obama but rather investigate Barack Obama.

The Blagojevich retrial is be scheduled during the last two months before the November elections. The two months before the elections will be garnished heavily with corruption and ethics trials of Culture of Corruption Obama Dimocrats.

Two months after the November elections the investigations will begin.


The Obama/2×4 Schumer Mosque Of Doom Rising

Late this past Friday Barack Obama handed the keys to the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives to the Republicans. By Saturday, Barack Obama was trying to take the keys back.

Of the many explanations for Barack Obama’s odd behavior this weekend there is one not a single person has commented on. There were comparisons to the Beer Summit fiasco. But the most similar flim-flam has not been mentioned.

It was the Jeremiah Wright “race” speech all over again. In the Obama “race” speech Obama distracted from his 20 plus years of sniveling at the knees of Jeremiah Wright. Instead of addressing why he attended the “God Damn America” preacher’s sermons Obama instead emitted a “teachable moment” about race. Aided and abetted by the JournoLister Big Media wing of his campaign, Barack Obama got away with his wrong Wright distraction.

But on Friday, Barack Obama tried to distract from the central issue – the propriety of a towering Mosque at the 9/11 Ground Zero doom site – with a “race” speech style “teachable moment” on religious freedom and tolerance. This time the organized Big Media JournoListers could not muster sufficient shiny objects with which to aid and abet Barack Obama’s attempted distraction.

Not that they did not try. JournoLister Greg Sargent twisted himself from senseless to senseless with grotesque rationalizations. Fellow JournoLister Ben Smith noted that Greg Sargent had tried “valiantly to split the baby“.

Sargent on Saturday called “Obama’s forceful speech” on Friday, a speech “which will go down as one of the finest moments of his presidency”. The sad and laughable rationale for the JournoLister’s praise was because “Obama didn’t just stand up for the legal right of the group to build the Islamic center. He voiced powerful support for their moral right to do so as well, casting it as central to American identity.” A commenter almost immediately noted that “‘”one of the finest moments of Obama’s Presidency” needed to be “clarified” less that 12 hours later.’ Sargent embarrassed himself in an extraordinary way, but misery had company.

Obama said on Friday: “As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances.” Such a clear and direct statement for the Mosque of Doom elicited this shriek of joy from JournoLister Sargent: “… this couldn’t have come at a better time for Obama. His core supporters, frustrated, were badly in need of a display of presidential spine. They got one.”

Such gallantry! Such spine!

At DireFog too, there was exultation before the “clarification”. Interrupting a Robert Gibbs ordered drug test, Glenn Greenwald embarrassed himself with this hosanna: “one of the most impressive and commendable things Obama has done since being inaugurated.” Having tested “positive” on the drug test, Greenwald later ate crow and humble pie:

“But clearly, the tone and the emphasis of his speech — and the absence of the fine distinctions he’s drawing today — made it obvious that it would be interpreted as siding with the mosque proponents and against those opposing the mosque, and that’s exactly how it was interpreted by virtually everyone.

But by insisting now that he was merely commenting on the technical “rights” of the project developers — as a way of responding to Republican criticism that he was advocating for the project itself — he has diminished his remarks from a courageous and inspiring act into a non sequitur, somewhat of an irrelevancy. After all, the “right” of the mosque isn’t really in question and didn’t need a defense. As Ben Smith correctly explains: Obama’s new remarks, literally speaking, re-open the question of which side he’s on. Most of the mosque’s foes recognize the legal right to build, and have asked the builders to reconsider. [snip]

The signal Obama sent with his rhetoric last night wasn’t that he had chosen to make a trivial, legal point about the First Amendment. He chose to make headlines in support of the mosque project, and he won’t be able to walk them back now with this sprinkling of doubt. [snip]

Even worse, the primary focus of my praise here — that Obama was taking a politically unpopular position — isn’t even true in light of this clarification. As Nate Silver documents, the same polls which show that large majorities oppose the mosque also show that majorities affirm the “right” for it to be built. That means Obama was merely echoing what polls show is the majority view, while explicitly distancing himself today from any view that is unpopular. So even that praise of him now seems inapplicable.”

From courage to cowardice in so short a time. The fact is that this was just another Obama attempt to bamboozle and distract. The JournoListers are in a shrinking CabaList and could not aid and abet in another successful Jeremiah Wright style distraction.

Democrat Ricki Lieberman, via email, spoke for many Democrats in opposition to the Mosque of Doom:

“My POV: building a 13+ story mosque/community center overlooking the graveyard that was the Twin Towers is not a matter of religious freedom or tolerance. It is a matter of appropriateness and sensitivity. [snip]

The unwillingness of the development group to make provisions to reveal the sources of funds, suggests they have something to hide. If they are so eager to emulate the 92nd St YMHA or the JCC of Manhattan, they should adopt the same transparent fundraising procedures that these and other groups use for capital campaigns.

New York is basically a Muslim-friendly town, with mosques everywhere. I reject those who have seized on this issue to question the right or ability of Muslims to grow in New York. Freedom of religion is alive and well in New York, and I also question those who insist that this is a core issue of religious freedom and would make those of us who disagree into bigots.

Indeed, the latest defense of the Mosque of Doom is that it is akin to the YMCA. However, this is a view fermented in ignorance. Every mosque is a “community center(“The mosque serves as a place where Muslims can come together for salat (prayer) (Arabic: صلاة‎, ṣalāt) as well as a center for information, education, and dispute settlement.) But a community center strictly for Muslims. As is well known to fans of the probably defunct disco group the “Village People” the YMCA welcomes Gay people. The YMCA welcomes Jews, Buddhists, Jains, Pagans, and Muslims. We somehow doubt that the swimming pool at the Mosque of Doom will have a welcoming swim for infidels. Muslims must be free to determine how their mosques conduct their business, but the “community center” defense is a shallow pool to swim in.

“Let’s not forget that a mosque is an exclusive place of worship for Muslims and not an inviting community centre. Most Americans are wary of mosques due to the hard core rhetoric that is used in pulpits. And rightly so. As Muslims we are dismayed that our co-religionists have such little consideration for their fellow citizens and wish to rub salt in their wounds and pretend they are applying a balm to sooth the pain.

As the JournoListers retreated to their bars and watering holes to concoct more YMCA style defenses, Obama Dimocrats ran out of the scalding pool of stench Obama drenched them in. Politico tracked the comedic results:

“With the exception of Rep. Jerrold Nadler, I haven’t gotten a single response from the N.Y. congressional delegation I reached out to about the president’s speech, but I have heard from multiple Democratic sources that some have privately expressed a sense of discomfort about the topic, and to some extent, the mosque project.[snip]

If so, it’s a bracing moment for New York, among the bluest states in the land and one that prides itself on thriving multiculturalism and attempts at tolerance, and a reminder of how complicated the emotions are for many people within some level of proximity of ground zero about everything related to it and the attacks.[snip]

Prior to Obama’s speech, some were getting questioned but few other than those in marginal districts faced tremendous pressure to provide an answer on the issue, since it’s realistically not something that they have any legal authority over in their current jobs.

Sen. Chuck Schumer’s office didn’t respond to e-mails. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s aides didn’t give a statement, although she did apparently tell a reporter at a public event that she found the speech “thoughtful.”

ADDED: I e-mailed a spokesman for Andrew Cuomo, who has been unequivocal in supporting the mosque under religious freedom, about the president’s remarks, but didn’t get a response. I didn’t get one from a N.Y. Democratic Party spokesman either.

Rep. Joseph Crowley, a Blue Dog Democrat, was “out of pocket.” Rep. Carolyn Maloney, who’s facing a primary, didn’t put out a statement about the president, although an aide referred to her past support for the project.

In three heavily Republican districts, the issue is being raised by rivals.”

Bill Owens, Mike McMahon, Tim Bishop, Steve Israel, John Hall, Scott Murphy, Anthony Weiner, all ran in silent scream from the drowning pool Obama filled for them. But it is now, thanks to the brilliant Barack Obama not only New York Democrats who have to swim furiously from Obama and his flip-flop flim-flam blundering:

“The White House on Saturday struggled to tamp down the controversy over President Barack Obama’s statements about a mosque near ground zero — insisting Obama wasn’t backing off remarks Friday night when he offered support for a project that has infuriated some families whose loved ones died in the Sept. 11 attacks.

Obama’s comments placed him in the middle of the controversy over a Muslim group’s plans for a mosque near the site of the 2001 attack — and in turn, transformed an emotion-laden local dispute in New York into a nationwide debate overnight.[snip]

And Democrats — at least those who were willing to comment — could barely contain their frustration over Obama’s remarks, saying he had potentially placed every one of their candidates in the middle of the debate by giving GOP candidates a chance to ask them point-blank: Do you agree with Obama on the mosque?

That could be particularly damaging to moderate Democrats in conservative-leaning districts, already 2010’s most vulnerable contenders.

“I would prefer the president be a little more of a politician and a little less of a college professor,” former Rep. Martin Frost (D-Texas), who once ran the House Democratic campaign arm, wrote in POLITICO’s Arena. “While a defensible position, it will not play well in the parts of the country where Democrats need the most help.”

Adding to the political problem for Democrats were the mixed messages out of the White House.

Obama’s comments Friday night — at an Iftar dinner at the White House marking the start of Ramadan — were widely reported as offering support for the specific mosque project in question near ground zero.

But on Saturday, Obama seemed to contradict himself, telling reporters at one point, “I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That’s what our country is about. And I think it’s very important, as difficult as some of these issues are, that we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about.”

That impromptu answer to a TV reporter covering his trip to Florida prompted a second attempt to clarify his initial statement, this time from spokesman Bill Burton.

“Just to be clear, the president is not backing off in any way from the comments he made last night,” Burton said. “[snip]

The legal right to build the mosque is one even many critics of the mosque have not contested — claiming mainly that the project was inappropriate on grounds of taste and local sensitivities and therefore should be strongly discouraged.

One can easily imagine New York Senator 2×4 Schumer asking “why?” 2×4 Schumer would not be alone:

“The main reaction is ‘Why? Why now?’” said one House Democratic leadership aide. “It’s just another day off message. There have been a lot of days off message.”

The chief of staff to one politically vulnerable House Democrat said it “probably alienates a lot of independent voters” and “it’s not a good issue to be talking about right now.”

He said he suspects “there are a lot of [Democrats] who are spooked in tough districts today” and “a lot of Republicans licking their chops right now.”

Prior to his speech, a few candidates tried with limited success to make the proposed mosque an issue outside of the tristate area around New York City — but Obama’s words may have served to do that for them. A recent CNN poll found two-thirds of Americans oppose building the mosque in the neighborhood around ground zero.”

The Mosque of Doom is now a national issue. The ads write themselves:

“Debra Burlingame, whose brother Charles Burlingame was the pilot of the plane the terrorists hijacked and flew into the Pentagon, said she was furious over the president’s remarks.

“I’m so angry. I believe this president has abandoned the American people,” she said. “This isn’t a fight about religious freedom for Muslims. No one has argued they don’t have the property rights. This is about a project led by someone who says he’s trying to build bridges and bring the community together and he’s chosen probably the worst place in America and the worst way to do it.”

Bitter and clingy Americans will see lots of advertisements featuring the Mosque of Doom and the victims:

“Tim Brown, a New York City firefighter and the plaintiff in a suit filed recently aimed at stopping the mosque based on the argument that the city failed to follow its own landmark policies, said, “I really think he was not speaking to us, I think he was speaking to the Muslim world.”

“It’s hurtful,” he said. “Our own president, the president of the United States, has abanddoned the families who gave too much already. It’s insensitive what he did, it’s hurtful what he did, and he couches it in religious freedom except (the Imam building the mosque)” doesn’t feel that way.”

Grizzly Mama Sarah Palin saw the blood in the water and threw in some Piranha:

“Legitimate Questions for the President –

Mr. President, should they or should they not build a mosque steps away from where radical Islamists killed 3000 people? Please tell us your position. We all know that they have the right to do it, but should they? And, no, this is not above your pay grade. If those who wish to build this Ground Zero mosque are sincerely interested in encouraging positive “cross-cultural engagement” and dialogue to show a moderate and tolerant face of Islam, then why haven’t they recognized that the decision to build a mosque at this particular location is doing just the opposite? Mr. President, why aren’t you encouraging the mosque developers to accept Governor Paterson’s generous offer of assistance in finding a new location for the mosque on state land if they move it away from Ground Zero? Why haven’t they jumped at this offer? Why are they apparently so set on building a mosque steps from what you have described, in agreement with me, as “hallowed ground”? I believe these are legitimate questions to ask.”

2×4 Schumer must be forced to answer that question as well. Every elected official, especially those running for office in November must be made to answer the Mosque of Doom question. Those that support the building of the Mosque of Doom must explain themselves. We know they do not want to be held to account. Before Obama’s Friday night/Saturday morning bamboozlement flip-flop-flim-flam Politico explained why the issue was toxic for Mosque of Doom proponents:

“Wonder why the White House doesn’t want to touch this one?

CNN finds (.pdf) that 68 percent of voters oppose plans to build “a mosque two blocks from the site in New York City where the World Trade Center used to stand.”

The cross-tabs are striking, and negative across the board. A full 79 percent of seniors oppose the plan, but so do 54 percent of Democrats and 45 percent of self-described liberals.”

Recently we wrote an article (“What is a Good Muslim? The New York Mosque of Doom?“) naming good Muslims. The New Republic now asks “What Is Moderate Islam?”

“Is the “Ground Zero Imam,” Feisal Abd ar-Rauf, a moderate Muslim? [snip] Some of his short essays and interviews in English suggest that he is a preacher of moderate disposition and views. But some of his more tentative, if not deceptive commentary about terrorism against Israelis, America’s culpability for 9/11, and the nobility and value of the Holy Law for Muslims living in the West suggest something different.[snip]

However, building an Islamic complex where the Twin Towers collapsed is different from building a mosque on Massachusetts Avenue in Washington, DC. With the latter, we may frown on monies flowing to it from Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabi establishment, given Wahhabism’s virulently anti-Western, anti-Semitic, and just all-around anti-fun traditions, but we certainly would not try to shut it down.

But standards for judging Mr. Rauf and the Cordoba Initiative should be different. Charles Krauthammer is right: Ground Zero is sacred ground. It would be morally obscene to allow Muslims to build a center near Ground Zero who had not unequivocally denounced (renounced, would be okay, too) the ideas that gave us the maelstrom of 9/11. If Mr. Rauf has collected monies from individuals or Muslim organizations overseas that preach contempt for infidels, have financially supported religiously militant organizations, or, worse, provided aide to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, then his project, which has been approved by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, ought to be cancelled. Any American non-profit organization can tell you exactly whence its money comes. By contrast, it appears that the Cordoba Initiative’s funding has not been cross-checked with financial counterterrorist information within the Treasury Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Central Intelligence Agency. (If it had been, we probably would have heard about it.)

We also might wonder whether Mayor Bloomberg has asked for and received any alarming information from the FBI and the CIA about Mr. Rauf and his organization (Republican and Democratic members of either the House or Senate select committees on intelligence could do likewise, and receive a much fuller accounting of any information, and then relay, with due attention to Mr. Rauf’s privacy, a “yes” or “no” about any damning intelligence within classified files).

As any American or European counterterrorist officer can tell you, there is often a bewildering matrix of Islamic charities and financial institutions that knowingly, and unknowingly, funnel monies for terrorist groups and radical organizations. Mr. Rauf may be unfairly thought guilty by association; if so, he most of all should want to know whether he has received funds from Muslims who do not believe in peaceful coexistence with the West.

So we need to know whether Mr. Rauf is a moderate Muslim.”

The “Good Muslims” we named understand and have said they will be undermined by building the triumphalist Mosque of Doom. Why do elected officials fail to encourage these good Muslims and instead reflexively embrace the untested? Marc Gerecht at The New Republic thinks he knows why:

“Who—or what—is a “moderate Muslim” isn’t an easy question to answer. A moderate believer in the Iraqi holy city of Najaf isn’t the same as a moderate Muslim in the down-and-out suburbs of Paris. Moderate American Muslims, given the cultural traditions and moral expectations in the United States, would be different from moderate Muslims in the Persian Gulf (Mr. Rauf was born in Kuwait), where, depending on the country, an unveiled Muslim woman is a profound provocation.

Mirror-imaging themselves onto foreigners, Americans on both the left and the right are usually pretty quick to see moderate Muslims everywhere (George W. Bush and Barack Obama differ little here). Historically, Muslims themselves have shied away from splicing and dicing the faith in secular Western ways. The Ottomans viewed the jihad-happy, shrine-destroying, Shiite-killing Saudi Wahhabis as being beyond the Islamic pale; when a historian hits the words ghulat or ifrati—both denote “extremism”—in chronicles, he knows the author is probably discussing Muslims who are outrageously violent or proselytizing unholy ideas, like a Sufi lord, a pir, becoming a god-head.

But non-Muslim Americans need not, of course, define “moderation” as would faithful Muslims with a respectful eye to the past. We get to use American definitions for anything that happens on American soil. As de Tocqueville noted, faith in the United States is a civil creed: Americans have always put limits on what is acceptable in the communications between God and man. American Protestants and Catholics got to tell Mormons that despite their divine text messaging, polygamy and racism were taboo. (Today’s American secular elite has obviously gotten a bit lax about polygyny.) American Jews get to cross off the “moderate list” anyone who describes the children of Abraham as “Christ-killers.”

So what might be an American definition of a “moderate Muslim?” Perhaps the following two entries would be a good place to start.

(i) a believer who unqualifiedly rejects terrorism against anyone. This is America’s Eleventh Commandment. If a Muslim cannot renounce terrorism against Israelis, that person should not be allowed to build an Islamic center near Ground Zero. Testing for unacceptable deviancy isn’t hard. Just borrow from the former al-Qa’ida philosopher, Abd al-Qadir bin Abd al-Aziz, aka “Dr. Fadl,” who sees Palestinian suicide bombers as destined for hell. Thus: “Do you, Feisal Abd ar-Rauf, believe that Allah damns eternally Palestinian suicide bombers?” “Do you believe that rockets launched at Israeli towns by Hamas and Hizbollah are acts of terrorism, which will bring down upon the perpetrators Allah’s wrath?” Mr. Rauf’s answers ought to be short.

(ii) a believer who embraces the doctrine of “neo-ijtihad,” which holds that Muslims today are not chained to the Qur’anic interpretations and legal decisions accepted centuries ago as canonical. Specifically, a “moderate Muslim American” is someone who unqualifiedly renounces the applicability of the Sharia, the Holy Law, in American society. The “Americanization of Islam” here means that the traditional Muslim understanding of orthodoxy as orthopraxy (it’s not what you believe in your heart—that is between you and God—but how you act, i.e., apply the Sharia, in the public square that matters) is null and void. Thus, women may veil or not veil as they please; a woman’s testimony is equal to a man’s; polygyny is verboten; marriage to a menstruating child is an abomination; accepted corporalpunishments—amputations and stonings—are immoral; apostasy reflects bad judgment but isn’t criminal; and Jews and Christians should spiritually no longer be viewed as dhimmis, a properly subordinate species who really don’t deserve the same social status and legal rights as Muslims. Jewish and Christian power in America and Europe isn’t an offense against the divinely-sanctioned natural order; it’s just the product of a long, difficult, and tortuous evolution. The Sharia is a lengthy and complicated corpus that developed over centuries and often constrained the worst instincts of despots. A “moderate Muslim American” would see it in much the same way that a faithful “moderate Jewish American” views the Old Testament and the Talmud: documents of a certain time that contain considerable “divine” wisdom (as well as much looniness) and many imperatives for a good, healthy life.”

Our elected leaders and those that seek election must be made to explain their positions, pro or con, the Mosque of Doom. 2×4 Schumer as Senator from New York must answer these question fully. We know 2×4 Schumer does not want to answer these questions:

“A new poll from Marist shows that a majority of registered voters in New York City oppose the construction of a mosque near Ground Zero in Manhattan. Fifty three percent of those surveyed, including 50% of Democrats, 74% of Republicans, and 52% of “non-enrolled” voters, don’t want to see the mosque built, while 34% fav0r the project and 13% are “unsure.”

A nearly identical 50% saying that building such a structure “offends the memory of thge 9/11 victims and their families.” Thirty-four percent say the project will “help people better understand the teachings of Islam and the Muslim religion.”

These numbers will get worse for Barack Obama and 2×4 Schumer. As voters end their vacations and the post Labor Day campaigning begins – the talk will be about the Mosque of Doom. Also, Ramadan this year ends almost on September 11 heightening the Mosque of Doom awareness. After Labor Day, the Mosque of Doom will be the overriding emotional issue along with the collapsing economy.

Barack Obama and his haughty Dimocrats must speak clearly and explain their support for the Mosque of Doom. 2×4 Chuck Schumer must explain his silence and his position on the Mosque of Doom. 2×4 Schumer must explain to Bonnie McEneaney WHY?

Barack Obama tried to do a Jeremiah Wright “race” style speech and this time he failed to distract from the basic issue. Unfortunately for 2×4 Schumer and other Obama Dimocrats they are the ones directly up for election this November.

Barack Obama entered the Mosque of Doom on Friday. 2×4 Chuck Schumer and Obama Dimocrats entered the Mosque of Doom along with Obama. It’s now Barack Obama’s Mosque and it’s now 2×4 Schumer’s Mosque as well as every Obama Dimocrat’s Mosque.

Those who want to stop the Mosque of Doom will vote out every Obama Dimocrat who does not speak out against the Mosque of Doom now and in a convincing manner.

Ask not for whom the Mosque of Doom tolls, Chuck. It tolls for thee.


The Audacity Of Dopes

It’s Friday the 13th and Barack Obama and Madame Michelle are planning another V-A-C-A-T-I-O-N. This very short vacation of 27 hours in Florida is a politically necessary V-A-C-A-T-I-O-N. It is politically necessary to pretend concern for Gulf Coast residents so that “The One” and Only Barack Obama and Madame Michelle can then fly off for 10 days V-A-C-A-T-I-O-N among the lofty in the $50,000 a week “Blue Heron Farm” in Martha’s Vineyard.

Fools will be fools and will continue to defend the sumptuous lifestyles of the inexperienced and undeserving. Some fools are waking up however slowly:

“In 2008,” Michelle Rena Jones says with a laugh, “we cheered, hollered, partied, celebrated.” The party’s over in 2010, though, and she knows it. Jones says promises haven’t been fulfilled, and now she feels as though she made a mistake — and she’s not the only one. The Wall Street Journal tells a story that George Stephanpoulos notes Democrats “don’t want to hear” in this midterm cycle, a story of hype and disillusion that has voters looking for change in 2010 — real change:”

No doubt, because the story originates in the Wall Street Journal, this “Michelle Rena Jones” is a RACIST. How dare “Michelle Rena Jones” steal Madame Michelle’s glorious first name to attack The One and Only Barack Obama! How dare this “Michelle Rena Jones” say the outrageous things she says! She sounds like one of them Big Pink People who so unfairly trash The One and Only Barack Obama. She surely is a racist:

“Now, the 40-year-old is rethinking her lifelong support for the party. She has been without steady work for two years, lost her home and car and began receiving cash assistance from the state for the first time. This year, she says, “I’m willing to take a chance on something different.” Another possibility, she says, is that she won’t vote at all.”

Don’t let that skin color disguise fool you! This “Michelle” is a racist! How dare she question The One and Only Barack Obama. How dare this “Michelle Rena Jones” say she wants “Change” by saying she’s “willing to take a chance on something different”. She (and all the others quoted in the article) is obviously a racist using her dire economic circumstances to be “bitter” and attack The One and Only Barack Obama.

The racists are everywhere these days and growing in number as they attack The One and Only Barack Obama and Madame Michelle:

“In every week of his presidency until now, Barack Obama has enjoyed a majority approval rating in the Gallup Poll from people earning less than $2,000 per month. But that changed in the Gallup survey conducted from Aug. 2-8, when only 49 percent of Americans in that income bracket said they approve of the job Obama is doing.

This marks the first time since Obama was inaugurated on January 20, 2009, when Americans in all four of the income brackets reported in Gallup’s weekly survey of presidential approval gave Obama less than 50 percent approval.”

Rat Bastard Racists are everywhere! These racists are even attacking Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters! Ask yourselves – Why are Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters being persecuted when they only did what Barack Obama has done? Charlie Rangel screwed the poor by taking apartments set aside for the poor – which is kinda sorta the same disdain for the poor Barack Obama displayed when he left the filthy lowlifes freeze. So what’s the problem?

Why are these racists attacking Maxine Waters? They say it’s because Maxine steered money to OneUnitedBank when she knew her husband would profit from the money. Barack Obama got earmarks for Madame Michelle’s employer and they in turn gave Madame Michelle a salary increase.

Barack Obama got away with that and with the Rezko House and few were upset. Barack Obama has not yet been investigated by the ethics committee of congress for what he did when he was in congress. If Barack Obama was not investigated and convicted and imprisoned, why should Maxine Waters and Charlie Rangel and the obviously innocent and obviously brilliant (to all but the racists) Alvin Greene and other African-Americans be investigated? Obama got off scot-free so should everyone else in the entire United States. It’s the Racists causing trouble again.

The Rat Bastard Racists won’t give Obama the credit he deserves no matter how brilliant the One and Only Barack Obama displays himself. For instance, does anyone think to grace Barack Obama with this enchanting quote from the opponents of Gay Marriage in California (from yesterday’s “Stay Motion” before the 9th Circuit)?

“As an initial matter, redefining marriage in this manner would eliminate California’s ability to provide special recognition and support to those relationships that uniquely further the vital interests marriage has always served. See BARACK OBAMA, THE AUDACITY OF HOPE 222 (2006) (“I believe that American society can choose to carve out a special place for the union of a man and a woman as the unit of child rearing most common to every culture.”). ( p. 53)”

The Rat Bastard Racists don’t understand that Obama Hates Gay People too! The racists won’t give Obama credit for anything. Sigh.


“They need some serious come-uppance or we’re all f***ed.”

Time for us to “cackle”. The first in our series of articles “Obama Is The Third Bush Term” was published on November 13, 2008 – less than a week after the November 2008 elections (don’t miss our pictorial representation of “Obama is the Third Bush Term” on the lower right hand column). This week Obama thug Robert Gibbs lost his mind over that one.

“Culture of Corruption”? We began to expose the Obama Dimocrat “Culture of Corruption” before Michelle Malkin even dreamed of her book (see, June 2, 2008’s The Democratic? Party Fractures; see, June 4, 2008’s Rezko Convicted – Culture Of Corruption – Barack Obama“; see July 2, 2008’s “Barack Obama’s Chicago Culture Of Corruption” as examples).

We hit the bulls-eye with those prescient evaluations. But only now are the Hopium Guzzlers beginning to understand how right we have been with this:The antidote to the poison which is Barack Obama is devastating defeat for his drone Dimocrats.”

When we wrote “Tough Times Ahead For Hillary Clinton Supporters” the central thesis of our argument was resisted. We argued that

“The tough times will come because in order to do what is best for the country and to resurrect the now dead Democratic Party of FDR and Hillary Clinton we will have to assist in the destruction of the Obama Dimocratic Party.

Lifelong Democrats will find the purposeful destruction of a party disguised as the Democratic Party a difficult decision to make. [snip]

We still believe that in order to bring sanity to the process we must make sure that the Obama Dimocratic Party suffers devastating defeat in election after election after election.

The resistance to our strategy of doom, destruction, defeat was a misguided call to think first of “the issues” and “principles”. Our response was “what principles? – Obama has no principles other than self-agrandizement”. We asked a devastating question:

“The argument is we must support Dimocrats who stabbed us in the back. Where does that get us? Where has that argument gotten the Nutroots?

We now have an answer from the Nutroots. The very same answer the PUMA movement came up with in 2008, the very same answer we gave in 2008, is now dawning on the “creative class” Nutroots. Here is what happened, courtesy of JournoLister Ben Smith:

A prominent progressive who backed Obama early doesn’t buy my theory that the White House’s attitude toward the “professional left” comes from a sense that Obama won Iowa without its help.

I wrote:

But after Iowa, from the vantage point of Gibbs and others who had begun two years earlier, was very late in the game. If you were with Obama before Iowa, you were making an investment. If you were there after Iowa, you were jumping on the bandwagon, going with the front-runner. You would still incur gratitude — but the risk you were taking just wasn’t the same.

My correspondent furiously e-mails:

F*** them. We were with them pretty damn early on, and they still treated us like sh**, after they used us, and then came back and begged for more help when the going got tough in September. [Economist Joe] Stiglitz was with them from the beginning, and they treated him like sh**. So, with all due respect, f*** them. This isn’t about them not liking people who came late to the ball game. It’s about the smartest people in the world and the smartest candidate in the world thinking they don’t need anyone’s help, because they’re just so much damn better than everyone else, and thinking they did it all without anyone’s help. They need some serious come-uppance or we’re all f***ed.

That “prominent progressive” Hopium Guzzler, now gets it. They need some serious come-uppance or we’re all f***ed. Only now does he understand what we said for so long. The only way to deal with thugs, Obama thugs, Chicago thugs, is to punch them in the face. No words just punch them in the face. F**k ’em.

Hillary used the more polite “Deck’Em”. But we will be much more blunt, just like that idiot “prominent progressive” – F**k ’em. F**k You Barack Obama. (we use the asterisk version due to internet censorship programs which would block our site if we used the full word – but we mean the full “uc” version of the word. “F**k You Barack Obama”.)

“They need some serious come-uppance or we’re all f***ed.” is another way of saying “doom, destruction, defeat” for Obama Dimocrats and Obama in November 2010 and 2012 and on and on until every vestige of the Obama corruption is purged from American life.

Earlier this year we compared Barack Obama to fecal matter on a fine dinner. In that same article we addressed the many Hillary VP rumors. An extended excerpt of “Let’s Boo Hillary Clinton” follows which addresses some of the Hillary rumors (we’ll have a full series of articles on Hillary strategy for 2010/2012 coming soon) and the need and reasons for “doom, destruction, defeat”:

“That is as elegant/inelegant a way to say that not even the lovely Hillary Clinton could induce us to vote for Barack Obama. We write this because of all the gushing speculation lately that Hillary Clinton might replace Joe Biden and rescue Barack Obama in 2012.

Mess-iah Barack Obama needs a Savior and that Savior is Hillary Clinton. The Hope and Change is to dump Biden and beg Hillary to become Obama’s VP.

In 2008 we occasionally stated that an Obama/Hillary ticket would be perhaps difficult for us in the same way that a child might have an unsavory dinner vs luscious dessert moment. “Eat your vegetables and you can have your favorite dessert.”

No longer. Barack Obama is not a personality issue. True, here at Big Pink, Obama’s nasty self, his snubs, his self-worship and self-love, his Joker face, his head shape, his lanky akimbo self, the very air he breathes, his stinkiness which we can smell through the television – we have grown to dislike Obama personally. But as we have repeatedly written it is Obama and Obamaism that must be defeated, and defeated without mercy and without doubt.

“The person singularly responsible for these catastrophes and the policy singularly responsible is Obama and Obamaism.”

It is not only Barack Obama who must be defeated. Obama’s politics of division “situation comedy coalition” must be defeated and the Democratic Party resurrected and restored.

Now some Democrats are so disgusted, some newly minted Independents are so disgusted, many Republicans are so disgusted that their response is to say that they just want the Obama Dimocratic Party to die and that every Dimocratic elected official should be politically killed, – they never want to have anything to do with, ever again, with or for the Democratic or Dimocratic Party or anything it stands for, has ever stood for, or will ever stand for. We understand that level of disgust.

However, America needs the old Democratic Party. Republicans need the Democratic Party as it used to be before Barack Obama and his thugs so thoroughly trashed it, killed it, and replaced it with that monstrosity we dub the Obama Dimocratic Party.

As we have written before the Republican Party should be the party of the green eye-shade accountants always asking how much things cost and wanting America to either stay the same or go back to an earlier and mythical easier time. The Democratic Party, as it used to be, should be the party that wants to change things – for the better – and wants to move to the future.

The modern Republican Party, in other words, should be the stern “Daddy Party” of stereotypical fastidiousness, frugality, conservatism and the status quo. The modern Democratic Party, in other words, should be the smiling “Mommy Party” of stereotypical freshness, generosity, and daring coupled with change for the better. That’s what the Founding Fathers and Mothers wanted – faction versus faction leading to good government from the clash of ideas.

The Democratic Party, once resurrected, must be for CHANGE. But, it must be CHANGE FOR THE BETTER. We wrote that over and over and over in 2007-2008 but the Hopium guzzlers wanted change for the better or the worse – we got worse with Barack Obama.”

* * * * * *

Regular Big Pink readers know our catechism, our mantra:

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

Tim in our comments section added another important mantra which we have adopted as one of the canonical truths:

They do not care and they do not care that you know they do not care.

When Gibbs attacked Obama supporters because he knows these fools will humiliate themselves further and vote for Obama and his corrupt Dimocrats he was letting them know that he does not care that they know he does not care. Later Gibbs made the point again when he refused to retract his statements.

“But if there was nervousness over base voters not heading to the polls, Gibbs didn’t show it.

“I don’t think [liberal voters won’t show up],” he said, “because I think what’s at stake in November is too important to do that.”

Its the same “red flag” politics we rejected in November 2008. When Obama needed votes from Hillary supporters and especially from women he began to wave the red flag on abortion rights and Supreme Court appointees. Now Gibbs makes the “red flag” politics obvious. To the Nutroots we say: They do not care and they do not care that you know they do not care.

When we rejected “red flag” politics and refused to give our votes to the corruption called Barack Obama many on the “professional left”, the “creative class” were angry with us. Now they know we are right but can’t quite bring themselves to say “Big Pink you have been right all along, please accept our totally abject apology, humiliate us all you wish… you were right and are right.” Our response on the day they say that: “F**k You!”

Thug Gibbs and corrupt Barack Obama believe this is still 2008. But as we noted yesterday, Obama and his Dimocratic corrupt clowns are in trouble. Even the Hopium Guzzlers on Huff n’ Puff know it’s not 2008 anymore:

“For all the chatter about the White House’s ability to get out the vote in Colorado’s Tuesday night primary, the election produced one statistic that could leave Democrats unsettled.

The losing candidate in the Republican race, former Lt. Gov Jane Norton, actually earned more votes (197,143) than the winning candidate in the Democratic primary, Sen. Michael Bennet (183,521).

A voting breakdown like that is troubling enough for the party. That it occurred in Colorado — a state targeted by the Obama presidential campaign and turned into a potential Democratic stronghold in 2008 — makes it slightly more frightening.”

It’s not 2008 anymore. When Michelle Obama paraded her cheap Chicago self through the streets of Marbella, Spain, in her Dolce Vita John Paul Gaultier Halloween Eurotrash outfit in her movie-stars-wear-these sunglasses she was telling economically distressed Americans “I don’t care and I don’t care that you know that I don’t care.” MoonOnPluto informs us today that Americans are saying to Michelle: “F**k You Michelle!”

“The number of Americans who have a positive opinion of First Lady Michelle Obama has fallen in the last 16 months, according to the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. In April, 2009, 64 percent of those surveyed by the Journal/NBC said they had a positive impression of Mrs. Obama; today, the number is 50 percent. That 50 percent personal approval is just slightly above President Obama’s personal approval figure, which stands at 46 percent in the new poll.”

Obama Dimocrats are in trouble (“Recovery Summer” is “Relapse Summer” to most Americans not in Marbella) because they are not Democrats in the FDR/Hillary Clinton mold (check out the latest results from California to see how bad Obama Dimocrats will be beaten this November).

This November all Americans, Democrats and Republicans and Independents better say “F**k You Barack Obama! F**K You Michelle Obama! F**k You Obama Supporters!

“They need some serious come-uppance or we’re all f***ed.”


Hey Jorge, Obama Cannot Be Trusted

Bless their pointy, empty heads. Big Media outlets, in worship of Obama, continue to butt their heads against the cemented brick wall of reality. After last night’s primaries Politico writers dressed in their Harlequin finery to proclaim “Primary night yields good news for Obama, Dems.” The dervishes whirling at the New York Times toasted with Hopium filled chalices and celebrated “A primary victory boosts White House – For now.”

But the afternoon Hopium hangover hit hard. Rasmussen’s new presidential approval poll came out and it was sobering on all issues. Directly beneath the dubious headline of last night’s “triumphs” was a much more ominous and honest headline: “Stocks retreat as gloom descends on several fronts.” By the end of the day the Dow Jones industrial average was down by 265.

[And as a sidelight, today the Blagojevich jury is deadlocked; deadlocked as in they don’t have a verdict on “any given count”; job openings fell in June; the “leave Michelle Obama alone” youtube is up; and the Mosque of Doom just won’t go away.]

The Colorado results were hailed today as good news for Obama Dimocrats. But did any of these Hopium guzzlers notice the vote totals? For instance, in the Colorado Senate race the Republican loser got 197,143 votes. The Dimocratic winner received 183,521 votes. Both races were contested. The Republicans won on turnout.

The desperate Hopium guzzlers also faced a buzz kill this morning when the Obama backed Dimocratic winner effectively stated that Obama would not be welcome as a campaigner this fall. Another buzz kill was a widely ignored article in the New York Times, with this headline: “Obama’s Youthful Voters More Likely to Skip Midterms.”

But the biggest buzz kill of all came from the mouth of Harry Reid. Harry Reid said “I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican.Harry Reid pulled out a race card then tried to put it back in the deck. The race card is Barack Obama’s and Harry Reid’s favorite card and they pull it out repeatedly.

Latino Republican and Florida Senate candidate Marco Rubio hit back at Harry Reid.

But Marco Rubio, for all his popularity nationwide and in Florida, is not the Latino story today. Harry Reid, for all the damage he might have caused in Latino populated states like Nevada and Colorado, is not the Latino story today. The story today is Jorge. Jorge Ramos.

“President Barack Obama has lost the most trusted man in the Hispanic media.

Univision’s Jorge Ramos, an anchor on the nation’s largest Spanish-language television network, says Obama broke his promise to produce an immigration reform bill within a year of taking office. And Latinos are tired of the speeches, disillusioned by the lack of White House leadership and distrustful of the president, Ramos told POLITICO.”

Dear Jorge, perhaps you have heard the Big Pink mantra. Memorize it. Repeat it as a daily affirmation. Say it with us Jorge:

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

Obama cannot be trusted by friend nor foe:

He has a credibility problem right now with Latinos,” Ramos said. “We’ll see what the political circumstances are in a couple of years, but there is a serious credibility problem.”

Ramos has been called the Walter Cronkite of Spanish-language media, an unparalleled nationwide voice for Hispanics. And just like the famed CBS newsman’s commentary helped turn the country against the Vietnam War, Ramos may be on the leading edge of a movement within the Hispanic media to challenge the president on immigration — a shift that some observers believe is contributing to Obama’s eroding poll numbers among Latino voters.

“When you have a Univision and a Telemundo taking an aggressive and active role pointing to the White House inaction, it calls attention,” said Jose Cancela, president of the media consulting firm Hispanics USA. “It is not helping the administration at this point in time.”

Obama does not seem to realize that you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

“The editorials and commentary from the Spanish-language media have been brutal since April, when Arizona passed its controversial immigration enforcement law — a moment that crystallized a sense of urgency among Latinos but also underscored how little progress the White House had made on reform.

“Words matter,” Telemundo anchor Jose Diaz-Balart said in April on NBC’s “Meet the Press” — adding that Obama’s campaign promise, known as “La Promesa de Obama,” has gone unfulfilled. “We haven’t seen it.”

Words matter? Who knew? The endless rain of Obama words never had any meaning followed up with action. Words matter – interesting concept.

“The president’s major immigration speech last month only created more discontent.

La Opinion, the country’s largest Spanish-language daily newspaper, titled its editorial, “Words are not enough.”[snip]

Cheap and easy rhetoric,” La Opinion contributor Jorge Delgado concluded.”

Spanish Big Media (and if you do not know the world-wide reach of Univision and Telemundo – you better start watching the hours long extravaganza which is “Sabado Gigante”) is really Big Media. Spanish language Big Media will not be bought off with Michelle Obama publicity stunts in Spain. Spanish language Big Media refuses to be Obama’s lap dog:

“It is unprecedented what Spanish-language media has been doing over the past several months,” Cancela said in an interview. “Many in the administration thought there was a cozy relationship and the Spanish-language media would play the role of quiet cooperator. It has been a wake-up call.”

The shift in tone among Hispanic opinion makers is helping solidify a narrative about Obama among Latino voters. They held great hopes for the president — given his promise in a May 2008 interview with Ramos to draft an immigration reform bill during his first year in office — but he has deeply disappointed them so far.

“Latinos voted overwhelmingly for President Obama, and they expected him to keep his promise and he broke his promise,” said Ramos, author of the recently released book “A Country for All: An Immigrant Manifesto.”

American Big Media better get the rewrite desk. Maybe Colorado last night was not such a good night. If Jorge is gone a lot of Latinos will go with him.

“The swing in opinion couldn’t come at a worse time for Democrats, who need a strong Latino turnout in November if they hope to maintain control of Congress. That voting bloc could be decisive in dozens of competitive House, Senate and gubernatorial races across the West, according to a report by America’s Voice, an immigration reform advocacy group.

But polls show signs of trouble. Obama’s approval rating among Hispanics dropped from 69 percent in January to 57 percent in May, even as his support among black and white voters remained stable, according to the Gallup Poll.

In a Univision/Associated Press poll released last month, only 43 percent of 1,521 Hispanics surveyed from March 11 to June 3 said Obama is adequately addressing their needs. [snip]

The president heavily courted Hispanic voters with La Promesa, and Democrats control both chambers of Congress. Latinos may acknowledge that it takes 60 votes to do anything in the Senate, but they’re not accepting it as an excuse.

“It was lukewarm,” said Ruben Funes, editorial page editor for La Prensa newspaper in Orlando, Fla. “It is not really strong support from him.”

Obama Dimocrats have so hocked themselves to a patchwork of racial and ethnic groups that now they are in trouble. Obama and his thugs dumped the winning FDR and Hillary Clinton coalition and the new Obama Dimocrat coalition is not worth a warm bucket of spit.

Latinos via Jorge might be the first group (beating Gays, Jews, Women) to detox from the Hopium:

“Editorial page editors and Spanish-language journalists told POLITICO that their coverage reflects rising frustration in their community. For years, they said, Democratic leaders told Hispanics to be patient; now, their patience has run out.[snip]

“There is a disappointment of a promise that has not been fulfilled,” said Henrik Rehbinder, La Opinion’s editorial page editor. “More than disappointment is some anger, some resentment, over the fact that this administration was going to be sensitive to family separations, and they really are not.” The critique from Ramos could prove particularly damaging to the White House.

A Mexican immigrant and Univision anchor for more than 20 years, Ramos carries such weight with Hispanic-Americans that his commentary is viewed as the definitive take on an issue — “kind of the final word on it,” said America’s Voice Executive Director Frank Sharry.

Ramos turned critical after the first anniversary of Obama’s Inauguration, when it became clear the promise would not be met, and he hasn’t let up on the administration since.

“They know they are in trouble with the Hispanic community, and the problem in November is the Hispanic vote may be up for grabs again,” Ramos said. “My fear is they might not vote. They don’t feel protected or supported by either party.”

Jorge baby, Obama can’t be trusted. Get that simple fact into your head. Get that simple fact to your viewers. Whatever side of the illegal immigration issue you are on, Obama can’t be trusted. Whatever side of the legal immigration issue you are on, Obama can’t be trusted. Whatever side of whatever issue you are on, Obama can’t be trusted.

Get it now Jorge?

[Note: Tomorrow we introduce another must-be-memorized mantra to supplement the current mantra. Don’t miss it Jorge.]