Almost Completely Naked: Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Part I

The idiocy or willful blindness is amazing to watch for those with eyes wide open. Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton are almost striped bare but all Big Media does is “deck our kings” and queens with ill-fitting clothes.

No matter how overt Hillary Clinton is, now matter how forcefully Bill Clinton propels the verbal darts, no matter how many veils Sarah Palin removes – Big Media creates a whole other reality.

Sarah Palin:

The psychos continue to turn Sarah Palin into a sidelined cheerleader with rah-rahs for the boy players. Sarah Palin won’t run for president the psychos insist. But look at the evidence with your own eyes. We report, you decide. Is this video, produced by Sarah Palin’s campaign operation, a presidential ad?:



The wisdom or success of a Palin presidential run is not the question. The question is how much more naked does Sarah Palin have to be about her intentions before the psychos and Big Media acknowledge reality?

She’s running and running fast. At the very least Palin, like a sharpshooting billiards player who sets up angles and has the balls strategically lined up, is setting up the table. Mark Halperin has put aside the Hopium and taking No-Doz:

“TO: Coastal Elites, the Media and Establishment Politicians of Both Parties

RE: Sarah Heath Palin

Don’t underestimate Sarah Palin. Yes, she is hyper-polarizing: she sends her fans into rapture and drives her detractors stark raving mad. But she can dominate the news cycle with a single tweet and generate three days of coverage with a single speech (as she did this past Friday in Iowa). Her name recognition is universal.[snip]

Trash her all you want (even you Republicans who are doing it all the time behind her back) for being uninformed, demagogic and incoherent, and brandish the poll numbers that show fewer and fewer Americans think she is qualified to be President. Strain to apply political and practical norms to Alaska’s former governor. You are missing the point.[snip]

But what you need to appreciate is that the same dynamics of supply and demand that Palin has cleverly exploited for financial gain also make her inimitably formidable as a political force.

Take this weekend’s Des Moines, Iowa, speech, for example. You all perceived it as a rambling nothingburger of a diatribe, with a convoluted, self-pitying screed about the media. And you considered the trip itself a missed opportunity, since Palin held no meetings with grass-roots activists and didn’t lay a foundation for the kind of voter contact essential to compete in the Hawkeye State’s caucuses.

But ask yourself why Palin was in Iowa this of all weekends. Remember that she herself negotiated the date for the Iowa Republican Party’s annual Ronald Reagan dinner. This allowed her to conveniently skip the Values Voter Summit simultaneously going on in Washington, where most of the other potential 2012 Republican candidates appeared. By choosing Iowa over Washington, Palin avoided having to compete head to head with her would-be rivals and dodged the event’s concluding straw poll. Meanwhile, Palin got more weekend coverage than all the other prospects combined. Not everything she has done thus far has been obviously calculated, but her choices overall have been too savvy to be coincidence or luck.”

From the very beginning we denounced those who referred to the Tea Party movement as “teabaggers”. We saw the potential force that was developing. Tea Party activists were derided. Not so much now. So continue to deride Sister Sarah at your own peril Big Media and Hopium Guzzlers.

Likewise Sarah Palin has been derided. Shortly after Sarah Palin was selected by John McCain we read something quite silly that confirmed to us how smart this lady is. We thought her selection by McCain was inspired and said so on the very day her selection was announced. The selection of Palin was not happenstance. There were a lot of organized people lobbying for her selection. A lot of things about Palin are not happenstance and instead a very deliberate, very intelligent, calculation on her part.

What was the article, a silly piece to be sure, that told us so much about Sister Sarah. It was an article in the New York Times about her hair:

“Hair, of course, is never just about the hair. Intentionally or not, hairstyles help answer the voters’ throw-down question: “Who does she think she is?”

Hillary Clinton struggled for years to achieve hair credibility. Now Ms. Palin’s upsweep is being praised and derided across the Internet. Do her bun and bangs signal that Ms. Palin does not want to attract attention to her appearance — even as she wants to remain presentably attractive?

Of course, a hairstyle may not tell you about her views on universal health care. But how Ms. Palin honed her image can be glimpsed at the Beehive, a tiny pink-collar haven in Wasilla, a mountain-rimmed community of less than 10,000.[snip]

Ms. Palin’s appointments were multitasking events, Mrs. Steele recounted. The governor would sit in full foil, checking her BlackBerry, writing speeches and chatting with customers as her daughter Piper played nearby.[snip]

As Mrs. Palin became a public figure, Mrs. Steele said, she gave more thought to her image.

“She’s very involved in her look and how she’s perceived,” Mrs. Steele said. “We would talk a lot about how if she looked too pretty or too sexy, people wouldn’t listen to her. How important it was for people to see her as an intelligent, smart woman. It was comical when her hair was down, how big a difference that would make, especially when she was running for governor.”

Eventually, Mrs. Steele suggested that Ms. Palin put up her hair because “Sarah wanted to look more professional and ready to work and not come across as high maintenance and fussy.”[snip]

The two experimented with full bangs, side-swept bangs, clips, curls, twists and blond streaks. “We just kept polishing her look,” Mrs. Steele said. “We would try more warm, red and coppery highlights or more of a contrast with pale highlights, not to be severe but just more striking.”

Put aside the sexism and misogyny that such an article displays so vividly (we confess to mocking male John Edwards in The House, The Hedge, And The Hare). That Sarah Palin has been so attentive and perceptive, from the outset, about her image and the need to control that image informed us that this was not the bumbling bimbo many sought to turn her into.

John Edwards knew his pretty looks, smooth skin, and truly beautiful hair, along with that lovely smile was an asset to be exploited. Smart politicians know looks matter and that they can be used to send a message. Sarah Palin devised her appearance not to be a sex bombshell (recall that sexist Newsweek cover of Sarah in sexy gym clothes) but to take advantage of her attractiveness as well as send a message to her “base” that “I am one of you.”

Hillary Clinton, once said, “If I want to knock a story off the front page, I just change my hairstyle.” Hillary knows the tricks of appearance and message sending via clothes and looks.

[Don’t miss other Hillary humor including this arch bit of hair humor from Hillary: “Frankly, Mr. Mayor, I think your new hairstyle is the right way to go. After all, in Washington, the coverup is always worse than the truth.” –to Rudy Giuliani, after he gave up his combover.”]

At the risk of belaboring the point, Sarah Palin chose a hairstyle that would appeal to middle America not coastal elites. Palin knows who she is and who her voters are. This is no dummy cheerleader to be mocked without paying a price (just ask David Letterman). Palin and her “do” courtesy of The Beehive is not as overt as a mullet but she gets her message across to those she wants to communicate with.

Back to Halperin’s wake up call to Big Media and coastal elites:

“The past 22 months have been replete with situations in which Palin has refused to adhere to the conventional playbook of presidential contenders and party honchos. That posture, along with — let’s face it — her watchability, star quality and good looks, is what keeps her core supporters hanging on her every word. Her followers forgive her sloppy syntax and seemingly haphazard methodology — to them, this makes her accessible, relatable and real. The more she is attacked and belittled, the more they rally to her defense. And when she has laid hands on her chosen 2010 candidates, such as Nikki Haley and Christine O’Donnell, she is able to transfer that protective shell, shepherding them through the slings and arrows of “the politics of personal destruction” to victories against Establishment favorites.”

The current crop of Dimocrats have learned too late that whatever “charms” Obama has will not transfer to others. Yes, appearing with Palin can hurt some, but those that can be hurt by such an appearance are not people Palin worries about. In addition, smacking Obama about helps candidates who want to win succeed. Smacking Palin about gets you into trouble if you are a Republican or a snarky comedian:

“Palin’s strength also derives from the unwillingness of you Republicans to take her on or to call her out for her more detrimental candidate selections and statements. [snip]

Most of you Republicans are afraid to challenge Palin publicly, in part because you recognize that she speaks to the mood and emotions of the Tea Party and other conservatives better than anyone else. Her anti-Washington barbs and taunting denigration of the President and his policies hit home and get out the vote. She is almost certainly going to be in a position to take a victory lap of sorts on Nov. 2.

Palin is operating on a different plane, hovering higher than a mere celebrity, more buoyant than an average politician. Some of you are too young, or too forgetful, to recall the breathless fusses over Donald Trump and Warren Beatty when they toyed with presidential bids, or how much oxygen Ross Perot sucked up when he ran in 1992. You may think Palin is full of hot air, but there is enough of it to power her from Alaska to the Republican nomination in 2012, and until she unambiguously takes herself out of the running, or until the nomination is definitively won by another, she will remain both a force and a force field.

All of you are certain she can’t win the presidency — and as of today you are right. But the nomination is another kettle of salmon, and she bears more in common with the past three presidential winners than with the passel of hopefuls clamoring for donations, press attention and straw votes. She is like Obama: the camera loves her and both sides of the political spectrum hang on her every word. She is like Bush: able to communicate with religious conservatives and Middle Americans. Most of all, she is like Bill Clinton: what doesn’t kill Sarah Palin makes her stronger. So as the world gets ready for the midterm elections and for the start of the epic contest in which Republicans will pick their champion to go into battle against Barack Obama, be advised: Palin is very much alive and, despite what you think, extraordinarily strong.”

We’ll discuss Naked Bill Clinton and Naked Hillary Clinton in Part II. Let’s end with what Bill Clinton says about Sister Sarah Palin:

“Former president Bill Clinton had words of warning for Democrats who think Sarah Palin could be the best thing to happen to President Obama in a 2012 presidential bid – “It’s always a mistake to underestimate your opponent.”

“In the Republican primaries she’s very popular with the conservative base. She gets more people to come out,” he told me. “And she hasn’t won all of her endorsements, but she’s won most of them. And you know, she’s a compelling, attractive figure.”

I sat down with the former president as he kicked off the sixth annual Clinton Global Initiative. Palin, who recently made a high profile trip to Iowa, was the subject of Mark Halperin’s “One Nation” column Monday. I asked Clinton to react to Halperin’s take on the former Alaska governor that “Most of all, she is like Bill Clinton: what doesn’t kill Sarah Palin makes her stronger.”

Clinton laughed and then offered his own observations.

I do think she’s a resilient character. And we may be entering a sort of period in politics that’s sort of fact free, where the experience in government is a negative,” he told me.

“I think she’s clearly a public figure who is, who speaks well and persuasively to the people who listen to her. And she’s somebody to be reckoned with,” he said. “And she’s tough.”

Clinton recalled when “people were making fun of her” he read about Palin’s husband finishing the last 500 miles of Alaska’s Iron Dog race with a broken arm.

“Now, where I come from people like that. They think that’s pretty good,” he said.”

Bill Clinton, a billiard player who knows how to set the table, had more than Sarah Palin in mind when he declared “…we may be entering a sort of period in politics that’s sort of fact free, where the experience in government is a negative.” But that’s all for Part II.

Tomorrow the Republicans will officially release their “Pledge to America” (full text HERE) follow-up to the “contract”. Many in the next few days will be distracted by that publicity stunt or venture into arguments about the generic ballot and what that says about the coming elections. Others will look at the entrails as “Wal-Mart Moms” abandon Obama Dimocrats and yet others will focus on the latest insults attacking Tea Party activists and the utter stupidity of such comments.

We have better things to do. We be looking at almost completely naked people who are thinking long term and planning… planning.

Share

190 thoughts on “Almost Completely Naked: Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Part I

  1. Bombshell: Defying DOJ Instructions, Christopher Coates Will Testify on NBP Case

    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/bombshell-defying-doj-instructions-christopher-coates-will-testify-on-new-black-panther-case-%E2%80%A6-tomorrow/

    In a dramatic development that could shake the political leadership of the Justice Department, career lawyer Christopher Coates has sent a letter to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights offering to testify Friday on matters related to the controversial New Black Panthers voter-intimidation case. Click here or on the screen capture below to read Coates’ letter in PDF form:

    Ten months ago, Coates, the award-winning former chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division, was subpoenaed by the Commission to testify about the case. He was subsequently instructed by DOJ officials to ignore the subpoena. Within the past hour, commissioners were informed that Chairman Gerald Reynolds had spoken with Coates and that the chairman would reconvene the Commission’s ongoing hearing on Friday at 9:30 a.m. to hear Coates’s testimony.

    The Civil Rights Commission has sought to obtain Coates’ testimony on Justice’s dismissal of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case in Philadelphia. In a recent request to Justice, the Commission agreed to limit initial questioning of Coates to accusations made by former career lawyer J. Christian Adams about statements and other actions by Julie Fernandes, an Obama administration political appointee, if DOJ produced Coates.

    The DOJ refused.

    Adams testified that Fernandes, a deputy assistant attorney general in the Civil Rights Division in charge of voting matters, told Voting Section leadership that the Obama administration would not file election-related cases against minority defendants — no matter the alleged violation of law.

    Adams also testified that Fernandes said Justice would not enforce the provisions of Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Section 8 requires states to clean up voter registration lists on a regular basis by removing the names of ineligible voters who have died or moved away.

    On Election Day 2008, two uniformed members of the New Black Panther Party — one wielding a club — were caught on video as they appeared to harass voters outside a Philadelphia polling place. The Voting Rights Section filed a civil lawsuit that the defendants did not answer, placing them in default.

    However, the Justice Department dismissed virtually the entire case despite the objections of career attorneys.

    Watch PJM for more on this remarkable news as it develops.

  2. DrudgeReport has this story under the headline “Clintons Rise Again”:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100921/ap_on_re_us/us_clinton_global_initiative

    Bill Clinton largely steered clear of politics during the conference, but said at one point he wished more world leaders made their decisions based on facts.

    “Do you know how many political and economic decisions are made in this world by people who don’t know what in the living daylights they are talking about?” Clinton said.”

    What world leader(s) is Bill talking about? Is it a certain naive boob?

  3. Bill, gotta love him, smacked him between the eyes with a 2×4 and the boob probably hasnt even realised he’s been bushwhacked.

  4. Kathleen Parker discusses the above ad:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/21/AR2010092104408.html

    Sometimes when everyone is shouting, only a whisper can be heard.

    This is the thinking behind a powerful new anti-Barack Obama ad that seeks to tap not the nation’s anger but its sadness.

    “Mourning in America,” which is hitting the national airwaves, is a poignant takeoff of Ronald Reagan’s iconic “Morning in America” ad. Whatever one’s political affiliation, it is impossible to watch this new ad and not feel, well, sad.

    Brilliant.

    Everyone’s angry. But anger is cheap and tired. Rode hard and hung up wet, as we say down South. Most Americans are also sad. The always bountiful America seems on the edge of famine, spiritual if not literal, though the latter seems all too possible as jobs disappear and businesses close.

    The ad, which can be viewed on YouTube, cites the latest unemployment and foreclosure statistics, and other facts that illustrate the rupture of the social contract — the idea that our children could, should and would do better than we. Or at least as well.

    Echoing closely the text of Reagan’s ad, the new one is shot in darker, more somber light. Here’s Reagan:

    “It’s morning again in America. Today, more men and women will go to work than ever before in our country’s history.”

    The new ad, produced by Citizens for the Republic, a group of organizers who identify themselves as friends and fans of Reagan, is less sunny:

    “There’s mourning in America. Today, 15 million men and women won’t have the opportunity to go to work. Businesses shuttered. Twenty-nine hundred families will have their homes foreclosed by nightfall. This afternoon, 6,000 men and women will be married, each of their children to be born with a $30,000 share of the runaway national debt.”

    The camera pans to an infant — burdened with debt.[snip]

    The ad is not subtle in blaming current circumstances on Obama. Quite the contrary, the narrator says that under the president’s leadership, the country is “fading, and weaker, and worse off.” In a gesture of charity, perhaps, the ad allows: “His policies were a grand experiment, policies that failed.”

    Can’t blame the man for trying? Good guy, bad policies? To the point: Vote Republican in November and “choose a smaller, more caring government, one that remembers us.”

    Ads come and go. Many tap into the ambient anger. But “mourning” aims straight for the emotional solar plexus and hits its mark. As someone behind the scenes in the ad’s production told me: “It says what we know in our hearts, that something is terribly wrong.

    “In 1984, Americans were more optimistic about their future. Now, Americans feel uncertain and are deeply concerned about the direction of the country. . . . This president truly looks at America differently than Reagan did. Reagan saw America as a shining beacon to the old world. Obama explicitly rejects American exceptionalism. . . . America in 2010 is suffering from a failed leader and failed economic policies.”

    Parker is a Clinton hater who credits Bush I for Clinton’s successes and blames Clinton for Bush II’s problems. She’s blinded by hate but she is right that the ad is emotional and resonates.

  5. admin, that’s a powerful ad. The pitch was perfect -not attacking Obama angrily, but just sadly shaking our heads at him.

  6. We’re working on the access/commenting problem some of you have informed us of. While we work out the snag here’s the latest news:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42585.html

    Barack Obama heckled in Manhattan

    President Barack Obama was heckled multiple times during his speech at a Democratic fundraiser in one of the country’s most Democratic cities.

    Demonstrators held signs that said “Broken Promises” and interrupted his speech to protest AIDS funding and the stalled repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the policy banning gays from serving openly in the military that Obama has promised to lift.

    Obama showed a flash of irritation after he was forced repeatedly off his prepared remarks. “We listened to you, we heard your point,” he told the “young lady” who continued shouting at him about AIDS funding. “This is not the time or the place to do what you’re talking about.” [snip]

    The “don’t ask, don’t tell” protest came moments later, as Obama began talking about how incomes for the middle class fell by 5 percent – a statement he had to repeat twice.

    The president pointed out that this week Senate Republicans blocked Democrats’ attempt to begin debating a bill that would have moved toward repealing the policy.

    “And as a consequence some of those signs should be going up at the other folks’ event. Folks should be hollering at the other folks’ event,” he said, “because the choice in November could not be clearer.”

    The heckling inside the ballroom at the Roosevelt Hotel began almost immediately at the start of Obama’s speech, when a woman began shouting, “President Obama, President Obama” and several men held up signs, including “No retreat, fund AIDS.” The woman eventually stopped shouting, but the men continued to hold up their signs, printed out on letter-sized sheets of paper.

    One of the demonstrators, independent AIDS activist Jennifer Flynn, told a pool reporter she and her friends bought tickets to the reception but not to the dinner.

    The fundraiser brought in an estimated $1.4 million for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and its counterpart for the Senate.[snip]

    “We need your energy and enthusiasm,” he told the 550 donors who had paid $100 to hear him speak.

    “People are frustrated with the pace of change, and so am I, but I am also here to tell you this: We cannot lose heart. We cannot give up.”

    Obama worked in a half-kidding dig at Democrats who are, as he said, sitting on their hands because they only got 80 percent of what they want.

    And that wasn’t the only place where a lack of party unity was on display.

    Rep. Charlie Rangel, who has tangled publicly with Obama over Rangel’s ethics woes, was in the audience.

    Obama singled him out by name first as he praised New York’s “unbelievable delegation.”

    The president also headlined a VIP reception, where tickets cost $2,500 each, and he spoke at a 125-person dinner, which featured Barbara Streisand and cost $15,200 a plate.

  7. Additional reasons why Sarah is a viable candidate for 2012

    1/ we live in the age of celebrity: Sarah is a celebrity who lights the fire of many people

    2/ the country no longer supports Obama: Sarah is the antithesis of Obama

    3/ the country hates big media: Sarah is hated by big media– ergo as the enemy of my enemy is my friend

    4/ the country hates the elites in both parties: Sarah is the sworn opponent of the elites and their target

    5/ the country is prepared to embrace small government: Sarah is a champion of small government

    6/ the country is swinging more to the right as a result of Obama: Sarah is on the right side of the aisle

    7/ a president must have coattails: Sarah has coattails, i.e. the candidates she endorses tend to win their elections

    8/ the country wants simple answers to tough questions: Sarah is no policy wonk–she will give answers they understand

  8. Folks that vote for age, or looks are idiots.
    Case in point. See BarryBoy run, pretend to be Mr. High Class, Poverty Pimp.

    Personally, I don’t think he is attractive, too distracted by that mole.

    Sarah, looks cute even with no makeup and in a pony tail.

    Hillary is beautiful, inside and out…with head bands, or paint suits, or in sweats.

    All of this is just a worthless distraction, vote for brains and experience. Or, vote against Barry.

  9. I had some good news today. I went to renew my health insurance coverage. The premium increased from $590 per month to $891 per month==roughly 30%. A small part of the increase is attributable to another birthday. Another small part is an attempt by the insurance company to force policy holders to migrate to alternative policies featuring higher deductibles, higher co pays, no prescription coverage, and 4 doctor visits per year. But the lion’s share was due to that the greatest piece of social legislation since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that gift from The One to the unwashed masses who can ill afford it, that toxic piece of monumental stupidity otherwise known as Obamacare which was supposed to cut insurance costs rather than raising them by over 30%

  10. Shadowfax, I just had this conversation with my son-in-law. He thinks Palin will get the rethug nomination and go on to win the Presidency.

    I told him not so fast…she can easily beat Obama, but not Hillary and that the rethugs don’t like Sarah because they won’t be able to lead her around by the nose.

    I told him I don’t think this time there is a person who could beat Hillary that I’ve seen yet and that the country I think won’t vote again for inexperience.

  11. wbboei, That’s awful and I’m sorry! I had a self pay policy but I got this job so now I’ll have employer based, but I just don’t trust that we’re not going to have another layoff when they figure out how much insurance is going to cost.

  12. [Still working to fix the problems with access/comments.]

    We started the day with the startling poll on Paladino in New York. There is more information now. Gillibrand is only 1% ahead of her opponent. 2×4 Schumer is not doing as well as he should be doing either.

    http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=87726&catid=37

    “There’s no question about one thing about this year,” said Lenihan. “Nobody should take anything for granted.”

    The Andrew Cuomo campaign did not respond to a request for comment on this latest Survey USA poll.

    Other Races:

    The same poll also measured voter’s thoughts in other key New York State races.

    In the Special Election to fill the final 2 years of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s term, incumbent Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand and former Congressman Republican Joe DioGuardi today finish effectively even, with Gillibrand’s nominal 1-point lead being within the survey’s theoretical margin of sampling error.

    Gillibrand leads in the 5 boroughs of NYC but trails elsewhere.

    Men vote Republican, women vote Democrat and, in this contest, cancel each other out.

    Lower-income voters break significantly Democrat. Middle-income and upper-income voters break slightly Republican.

    In New York’s general election for US Senate, incumbent Democrat Chuck Schumer leads Republican Jay Townsend 54% to 33%.

    Schumer leads among both men and women, among both young and old, among both whites and minorities.

    1 in 4 Republicans cross over to vote for Schumer; Independents favor Schumer by 17 points.

    Schumer wins in NYC and its suburbs, leads in WNY, trails upstate.

  13. Admin-

    “Do you know how many political and economic decisions are made in this world by people who don’t know what in the living daylights they are talking about?” Clinton said.”

    ————

    If I believed in having a tattoo, this would be imprinted on my forehead. 😆

    Go Bill, you are so wise.

  14. Our visit to the podiatrist yesterday indicated that if you are diabetic and go to a podiatrist for your toe nail clipping, instead of getting the cut every 2 months, you must now wait until 3. This is new change to medicare.

    This is probably not a horrific change for most people, but you got to wonder what else has been cut.

  15. confloyd
    September 22nd, 2010 at 11:23 pm

    Shadowfax, I just had this conversation with my son-in-law. He thinks Palin will get the rethug nomination and go on to win the Presidency.
    ———

    Yup confloyd, I agree with what you said. Sarah was on Greta tonight and said she would run for President if no one else stepped up to do the job Sarah thinks a candidate should stand up for. Strong defense, smaller gov. and fiscal responsibility. The rethugs would get a whole lot more of support if that’s really what they stuck to, but dragging in religion, women’s health issues and all the other rightwing stuff turns off a lot of socially liberal independents.

    And yes, the rethugs have a long way to go to support Sarah for President, instead of just using her to get votes.

  16. It might be interesting seeing two women run against each other at that level, at least the sexist stuff would stop. (Of course I mean Palin and Clinton).

    In NM we have heard a lot of mud slingging between our two women candidates for Gov, but there has been no sexist stuff that I have seen.

  17. My contention is that there wouldn’t be Islamic terrorism directed against America in the free America, because the current Islamic terrorism directed against America is in response to all the intrusions by the U.S. government in Middle-Eastern and Asian territories for the last 60 or 70 years, a region over which the U.S. government has no legitimate authority nor sovereignty.

    —————

    Pssssst. Careful, there….

  18. Speaking of Palin, here is her latest tweet:

    http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0910/strange_doings_21bbc78a-fb7b-42fb-98a0-81dc49f78a6a.html

    Sarah Palin is urging her quarter-million Twitter followers to investigate “shadow”-y Alaska native Pete Rouse — rumored to be temporarily replacing non-Alaska native Rahm Emanuel as White House chief of staff.

    “Now, check out possible COS Pete Rouse. His background, voter reg in AK,etc. It’s a small world,” Palin wrote this afternoon, an apparent invitation for like-minded conservatives to rifle Rouse’s record for possible ACORN-Black Panther-type nastiness.

    Reading the news today that Emanuel might head to Chicago as early as next month to embark on his mayoral run — and confirmation of long-lingering rumors that his temporary stand-in might be Rouse — Palin unleashed a pair of Twitter messages.

    “(Rahm’s the smart one…bailing before Nov),” the former Alaska governor wrote.

    “Alaska’s Pete Rouse (@ least he claims to be “Alaska”)finally comes out of the shadows; Obama looks to appt him COS;strange doings in the WH,” she added.

  19. Shapiro is by no means the first to point out that terror attacks on U.S. soil and indeed anywhere in the world serve only to benefit those in positions of power.

    ————————-

    Had bin Laden read Shapiro?

  20. she let slip an offensive and patronizing charge: The Vietnamese are trying to take the seat from Latinos.

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

    Good heavens! Sin and corrption!

    Sanchez was a very strong supporter of Hillary. No wonder she is on a watch list for this kind of ‘racist’ accusation.

  21. All of you are certain she can’t win the presidency — and as of today you are right. But the nomination is another kettle of salmon

    —————

    Would Sarah take the nomination if she didn’t think she could win in Nov?

  22. TurnDownObama, the more interesting question is “Would Obama Sarah take the nomination if she didn’t think she could win in Nov?” 🙂

  23. 8/ the country wants simple answers to tough questions: Sarah is no policy wonk–she will give answers they understand

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

    Correction — like the Clintons, Sarah IS a policy wonk who can ALSO make the answers understandable.

  24. admin
    September 23rd, 2010 at 1:21 am

    I have actually been pondering that question for awhile. Is Obumbles so egotistical that he would accept the nomination even if it was certain he would lose? Since he only knows how to campaign, I would say yes. The direction of the country and his very evident lack of desire to do the job suggests he would say no. I’m torn as to what the correct answer is.

    Hopefully, the DNC will, after this November and over the two years until the next election, have grown up and excised the cancerous elements of the party. The ultimate hope is that Hillary arrives to a fairly even House and Senate and begins work from there.

    Hillary 2012

  25. Is Obumbles so egotistical that he would accept the nomination even if it was certain he would lose? Since he only knows how to campaign, I would say yes.

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

    My impression is that Obama is a professional politician who stays bought. He won’t run out on his big money backers. He’ll take the nomination to keep Hillary from getting it; that’s what he was hired for in the first place.

    If he wins they keep him as a puppet in the White House. If he loses, they control the White House directly.

    (Unless he loses to Palin….)

  26. TheRock, our guess is that Obama thinks that “to know me is to love me” is still operational. He will want to run no matter what. However, if November is very bad, it will be elected Dims hoping to be reelected in 2012 that will start to speak up, at first in private and then if necessary in public. Then the floodgates will open.

  27. PS. This applies to Obama’s actions as POTUS so far. Someon’s analsys of him as wanting public approval so he grabs things from Reagan or Clinton randomly was well written, but imo Obama is less emotional, more professional — a professional staying bouoght.

    To test this, we’d have to look at the outcomes of the Reaganesque and the Clintonesque things: which if any have seriuosly benefited anyone except his big money backers?

    (Sorry for bad typing on this keyboard.)

  28. admin
    September 23rd, 2010 at 2:05 am

    From your lips to God’s ears. I’ll say it a million times – the catalyst for those dems speaking up is an approval rating of around 35% in late summer of 2011. Congressional dems will have seen the benefit of having Obumbles in ’10 over President Clinton in ’94, and they won’t like it. Then, as you said, let the floodgates open….

    Hillary 2012

  29. admin: I don’t know, I think a narcissist would have a hard losing so in that respect I would think he wouldn’t want the nomination.

    Although being a narcissist, wouldn’t it be hard for him to understand that he is going to lose??

    turndown,

    Sure but they also think at this point they’ve beaten Hillary, so his job would be done…no democrat could win…right?

  30. turndownobama
    September 23rd, 2010 at 2:03 am

    That is my first instinct as well. When all cards are in his favor (or when he sets the cards up in advance to be in his favor), he is a professional campaigner. His same puppeteers will be at the helm. We’ll see if that is the avenue they want to use to keep the White House…..

  31. And if there is a Draft Hillary movement (or if she challeges him), then his job will be to damage her enough that the GOP will win in 2012. His campaign will read ‘racism’ into her statements. Bots will vote Nader again, or will run Obama as third party or writein.

    The only insurance I see for Hillary 2012 is — Palin as GOP nominee. With Pres Hillary, the current GOP elite can hiberate under rocks. A Pres Palin would root them out.

    For Palin, losing to Hillary would not be fatal; who could have won? Like Nixon, she can keep trying, she’s young enough.

  32. Did anyone see the news tonight where Barry was heckled by HIS supporters?
    It was over him not funding AIDs patients enough. The signs they held up said he did not keep his promises. They were pist, even when he tried to get them to shut up and sit down with his okey dokey slick bs…………..they did not listen to him and kept holding up big signs and yelling.

    Barry’s administration are leaving the sinking ship…he has to be smart enough to realize the smoke and mirrors no longer are working and the Obots are waking up and they are angry.

    I feel a little satisfaction when I think of all the idiots that gave him money for his campaign until they bled.

    Too bad, so sad. Next time use your head when you vote, not your fantasy.

  33. turndownobama
    September 23rd, 2010 at 2:29 am

    I don’t think that will be the case this time. The video of Mrs. Hart will be the norm if Obumbles continues his policies in the current manner. His and his much fewer supporters efforts to then paint her as racist won’t work as well the second time around, especially with the library of film that Hillary will have interacting with peoples of every stripe and economic status worldwide. Voters won’t be as easily misled the second time around….

    Hillary 2012

  34. Shadowfax
    September 23rd, 2010 at 2:36 am

    I feel a little satisfaction when I think of all the idiots that gave him money for his campaign until they bled.

    Too bad, so sad. Next time use your head when you vote, not your fantasy.

    I know, right?!?! 😀

  35. “we may be entering a sort of period in politics that’s sort of fact free…”

    Hillary calls that the ‘evidence-free zone.’

  36. “we may be entering a sort of period in politics that’s sort of fact free…”

    Hillary calls that the ‘evidence-free zone.’

    ===========

    That’s fine applied to Obama. But I don’t like it in a statement about Palin.

    As Gov she was wonkily into facts — dull facts about oil production and taxing the oil companies, about negotiating with Canada about the pipeline….

    As kingmaker, she seems to have done her homework….

  37. If you ask me, Sarah is taking charge. The evidence in chronological order:
    Yesterday’s mail included a letter stumping for the RNC. Sarah had these questions:
    – Do you think voters in your Congressional District are waking up to the real cost of letting Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid have unchecked power?
    – Do you think we can afford two more years of total Democrat control?
    – I am writing for your help to win the House, the Senate and Governorships across America.

    Step 1: Beat Pelosi – House of Representatives: Make Nancy Pelosi fight and use resources in every single district and give her no easy wins.
    Step 2: Beat Reid – U.S. Senate: Removing the gavel from Harry Reid is important in returning sanity to the Senate. We have amazing opportunities in Ohio, Florida, Missouri, Arkansas, and Washington state just to name a few. We must elect at least 10 new Senators to win a Republican Majority.
    Step 3: Governors’ Races: With 37 of these at stake, Republican governors are the hope for the GOP to develop a new crop of conservative executives and turn crucial blue states red. No group of our andidates is more important to the GOP’s future.
    snip
    No matter what your level of commitment $25.45 (5 cents per race), $50.90 (10 cents per race) et cetera … please return your completed survey to let the GOP know your opinion on key issues.
    ——————————
    Yesterday I wanted to share her letter with you, but I held off.
    Nearly always I start the day with foxnews and this morning this jumped out at me:
    RNC Pays Palin Legal Bills in Exchange for Help … [The Washington Times] has obtained a copy of a check for $128,518.85 that was made out to Anchorage law firm Clapp, Peterson, Van Flein, Tiemessen & Thorsness, which Palin hired after a string of ethics charges were lodged against her when she was Alaska’s governor and the GOP’s nominee for vice president. RNC Treasurer Randy Pullen, who co-signed the check with RNC Chief Administrative Officer Boyd Rutherford, said Rutherford told him the check was in exchange for Palin’s help with RNC Chairman Michael S. Steele to raise money for midterm election campaigns. “The initial payment was for Palin to do several different fundraising events and sign fundraising letters for the RNC,” Pullen said. He said the RNC has committed to sending the Anchorage law firm a second check of an equal amount, which would bring the total to $257,037.70. Asked about Palin’s role with the RNC this fall, spokesman Doug Heye declined to say whether her fundraising help was the purpose of the check. He said only that “the disbursement relates to legal fees incurred during the summer and fall of 2008, when Democrats engaged in a partisan witch hunt against Gov. Palin. Based on conversations in 2008, the RNC decided to step in to help.”
    h t t p://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/23/rnc-pays-palin-legal-bills-exchange-help/?test=latestnews
    ———————
    Then to complete the trio, a stellar new post here, and focused on Sarah.
    —————
    I guess the sad thing is that even capable women find themselves at the short end of the contribution chain.

  38. Ouch!!!!!
    ———-
    Warren Buffett – the democratic billionaire who kisses BO’s when it suits his money making schemes – thinks that we are still IN RECESSION!!!!

    Of course we are!!!!…we all knew it but BO’s office said that we are not any more…

  39. turndownobama 2:29

    I think Palin might be interested in running just to protect HRC from the sexists remarks. As I said previously, those remarks will go away if two women are running, or they will be very reduced.

    Palin and Hillary should have that cup of tea together and just talk.

  40. Remember how at the beginning of his term, Bill told them to be more positive? Unfortnately, they are being positive with very little support of the facts. People see through that.

    I still would love to see his economic recovery plan along with his financail debt recovery plan. I really don’t think they exists. He just is not an organized, plan making leader He is a politician who is winging it by the seat of his pants, and not very well at that.

  41. Axelrod is deserting Obama

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/23/earlyshow/main6893065.shtml

    President Obama’s inner circle will likely be losing some key players. CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante reports that sources say David Axelrod, the president’s closest advisor, will move to Chicago next spring. Axelrod is expected to reassume his role as campaign manager in Mr. Obama’s 2012 reelection bid. A potential, if not likely, replacement for Axelrod is current White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. The dominoes don’t stop there. Rahm Emanuel, the president’s Chief of Staff, may leave the White House as soon as next month.

    ………………………

    Dare say Axelrod will be taking over Rahm’s election campaign no doubt………..

  42. I’m distressed to see Schumer so far ahead. Where is the dump Schumer movement?

    I will not vote for him again.

    Although I like Cuomo, based on what I now know, I will vote for Palladino. Cuomo is just too tied to democratic club politics.

    Palladino shares my attitude towards illegal immigration, will get rid of lifetime pensions and
    hc for part time legislators and seeems so far like a Christie type.

    Too bad Schumer looks like a shoe in.

  43. Carol, I’m not NY but I cannot stand Schumer either. Maybe some can start reminding voters of his infamous “Americans don’t mind a little pork” comment spoken on the Senate floor during procedures for the February 2009 stimulus bill.

  44. I am weary of repugs as I think shumer is more than ripe for the picking. If the repugs went all out he could be defeated. If there was noise made about him the money would flow in, but the RNC seems pretty silent. Seems like he’s a member of the old boys club and as such will be left alone.

  45. The letter “E” is a much maligned symbol. It many situations it has a pejorative connotation. Such as, I got an “E” in that subject. That means failure. But there are also situations, indeed jobs, like president, where the absence of the letter “E” letter “E” can connote also failure, as in:

    CEO vs CO

    Chief Executive Officer vs Community Organizer

    Bring me the head of the fucking idiot who got that one wrong. He deserves an F.

  46. Dare say Axelrod will be taking over Rahm’s election campaign no doubt
    —————————-
    Like stink on shit. Soon Bambi will be Mr. Lonely. But he will always have Brian Williams and they will always have Paris as Bogey said to whoever he said it to–oh that is right Bergman, I damned near said Bacal. This could be a signal that he will not run in 2012. Of course he always has that moral reparbate Plouffe. And even more important than that he will always have Reggie Love and China Beach, and what happens on China Beach stays on China Beach so long as you cooperate with Chinese intelligence.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8xOMg6ca0U

  47. “Obama showed a flash of irritation after he was forced repeatedly off his prepared remarks. “We listened to you, we heard your point,” he told the “young lady” who continued shouting at him about AIDS funding. “This is not the time or the place to do what you’re talking about.”

    —————
    So when exactly is the time or place to talk about this? 3 A.M.???

  48. White House losing control of its story

    By Ed Rollins, CNN Senior Political Contributor
    September 23, 2010

    New York (CNN) — The oldest rule in politics is to control your story.

    What that means is that, if there are five weeks to go in an election, and your party — meaning the Democrats — is in big trouble, the narrative you want to tell voters is: “Why you should re-elect Democratic majorities.”

    I have been amazed over the past several weeks by how the White House has lost control of the story.

    First everything was President Bush’s fault. It was believable for a time early in President Obama’s term, but soon people responded by saying, “So what? Fix it. It’s your job!”

    The next strategy was: “Look at all the wonderful things that Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Reid and I have done for you.” The $850 billion stimulus, health care, the “cash for clunkers” car rebate program. Unfortunately for the White House, a majority of the voters disapproved of those programs and didn’t think they worked.

    Then we had the “don’t give the keys back to the guys that drove the car into the ditch” strategy. That didn’t quite work either.

    Then the sidebar stories started stepping on the narrative.

    We’ve learned in the last two weeks that Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel may be getting off the sinking ship to go run for mayor of Chicago, Illinois. The mastermind who got most of the endangered members of Congress elected in 2006 and 2008 is saying “Adios guys. Chicago needs me.”

    Then last week some genius in the White House apparently got the idea, “Let’s go brand all Republicans ‘kooks,’ like the Tea Party candidates.” All that suggestion did was get the most enthused voters/volunteers/activists even more revved up and ready for combat.

    Besides, the so-called kook candidates are leading or tied in many of these Senate and governor’s races, and many will be elected.

    Then we have former President Jimmy Carter on his umpteenth book tour telling everyone in all humility how, “I feel that my role as a former president is probably superior to that of other presidents.” What the Carter book tour really did was remind voters how much President Obama reminds them of Carter and his failed presidency.

    Then we come to this week. We start the week with a CNBC sponsored and televised town hall meeting with real voters. Well, the real voters tell the president to his face that they really don’t like him and are terribly disappointed in his job performance.

    Those voters, many of whom voted for the president, are then featured all week on other television shows repeating why they told the president that his administration is failing them.

    Then Tuesday we hear that the economics czar, Larry Summers, is resigning to go back to Harvard and teach. He must have read that the recession is over and his job is done. Ask the 18.8 percent who tell the Gallup Poll that they are unemployed or underemployed if the recession is over.

    Another sidebar: While everybody is distracted and getting beaten up by former supporters who don’t love the president anymore, Harry Reid tries with five weeks to go before Election Day to slip the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” into the defense appropriation bill for the Iraq and Afghan wars.

    It of course fails, so blame the Republicans again.

    And speaking of bad timing and the Afghan war, we read front page stories in the New York Times and the Washington Post about Bob Woodward’s 16th nonfiction book “Obama’s Wars” that is to be published Monday.

    From the excerpts reprinted in the Times and Post stories, the “wars” he talks about are inside the White House — tales that make Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s staff’s comments seem tame by comparison.

    It will take at least a week or two of damage control just to get the White House focused back on the elections a few weeks hence.

    In contrast, the group that has not lost its focus is the Tea Party gang, which seems to pick up strength every week. The Tea Party is not some misguided mob carrying pitchforks and throwing rocks at the windows of the establishment.

    It is ordinary Americans who are frustrated that the people’s government is spending $1.3 trillion a year more than it takes in. It is a movement that feels Congress and other government entities are mortgaging the future of our young people.

    Not that everything is rosy for the Tea Party. Most analysts think last week’s Tea Party upset in the Delaware Senate primary cost Republicans an almost sure victory in November. A CNN/TIME/Opinion Research Corp. poll shows Democrat Chris Coons well in front of Republican Christine O’Donnell. If she can’t close the gap in the next two weeks and prove she is viable, the focus and resources will shift to places like West Virginia and Wisconsin that are now suddenly competitive races for the GOP.

    The Tea Party is not built around a national leader –such as Ross Perot, the leader of an independent movement in the 1990s — but it is not leaderless. It also has guidance from one of the most able political strategists I have ever known. The New York Times last Sunday profiled Sal Russo, the political guru of the Tea Party Express. Sal is a dear friend of 40 years, a former business partner, and someone I have worked closely with on numerous campaigns, including President Reagan’s campaigns and the Perot ’92 effort.

    He was one of the masterminds of two-term California Gov. George Deukmejian’s upset victory over Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley in 1982. The point is that the Tea Party has direction from an operational point of view on how to run winning campaigns — and it has done that throughout this political season.

    The irony is the Obama team ran the most brilliant presidential campaign I have every seen. Its midterm effort pales in comparison. And if the results are as predicted, it will require more change in the White House than just the departure of Larry Summers and Rahm Emanuel.

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/09/23/rollins.obama.story/

  49. From the hotairpundit website…

    President Barack Obama got heckled at a fundraiser Wednesday night by protesters pushing for more funding for AIDS programs and quicker action to allow gays to serve openly in the military. (Sept. 22)

    thehill

    President Obama was disrupted twice by protesters during a speech at a Democratic party fundraiser on Wednesday night in New York City, in both cases addressing the demonstrators directly.

    Obama was speaking at a joint fundraiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee at the Roosevelt Hotel. Shortly after the president began at 6:45 p.m., a woman yelled to him, “President Obama, President Obama,” while the men she was with held up signs that said “Broken Promises Kill,” and “No retreat, fund AIDS,” according to a pool report.

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

  50. The protesters were mad at this… I mean how could that nasty George Bush (snark) fund the fight against Aids at a higher level than the “none”? The following is from this past July.
    ◄▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬►

    Bush led on AIDS funds; will Obama?

    23, 2010|By Sean Kennedy, Special to CNN

    Former President George W. Bush and former first lady Laura Bush put real muscle into the fight against AIDS. For all the discord the Bush administration sowed on the world stage — withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol and various arms agreements, holding foreign nationals indefinitely at Guantanamo with restricted rights, generally disdaining multilateralism — the previous president was rightfully celebrated for his commitment to fighting the global AIDS epidemic.

    In the four years following the unprecedented creation in 2004 of the funding mechanism known as PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief), Bush sent some $19 billion to Africa and other hard-hit parts of the world.

    Bush led on AIDS funds; will Obama?

    Share this on:Mixx Facebook Twitter Digg delicious reddit MySpace StumbleUpon LinkedIn July 23, 2010|By Sean Kennedy, Special to CNN

    Former President George W. Bush and former first lady Laura Bush put real muscle into the fight against AIDS.For all the discord the Bush administration sowed on the world stage — withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol and various arms agreements, holding foreign nationals indefinitely at Guantanamo with restricted rights, generally disdaining multilateralism — the previous president was rightfully celebrated for his commitment to fighting the global AIDS epidemic.

    In the four years following the unprecedented creation in 2004 of the funding mechanism known as PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief), Bush sent some $19 billion to Africa and other hard-hit parts of the world.

    AdvertisementAds by Google
    Tampa Coupons
    1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Get 50-90% off Tampa’s best! http://www.Groupon.com/Tampa
    How much has the Obama administration added this year? Only $366 million beyond the prior year’s level. It doesn’t come close to the $1 billion a year the current president promised to add as a candidate.

    That Republican president Bush was a bigger advocate on AIDS than “liberal” Obama may come as a surprise, but many people around the world are starting to notice the discrepancy. That includes Desmond Tutu, the former archbishop of Cape Town and Nobel laureate.

    On Wednesday, Tutu took the president to task in a sharply worded New York Times op-ed that noted substantially fewer additional African HIV patients will receive treatment than did under Bush if the funding slack persists.

    Indeed, according to two Harvard researchers, if aid isn’t substantially increased over Bush-era levels, an estimated 1.2 million avoidable deaths could occur just in South Africa over the next five years. That would happen on Obama’s watch.

    Domestically, the news isn’t much better.

    When Obama rolled out his ballyhooed national HIV/AIDS strategy last week, there was no new funding attached, just a mandate to re-allocate existing funds to the communities most in need and the tactics that work best.

    (For all his global generosity, Bush was rightly knocked stateside for prioritizing abstinence-based prevention approaches over condom-based ones. The needs of gay men, one of the most affected groups of Americans, were largely left out of the playbook altogether because of pressure from the Christian right.)

    But for all the innovative ideas in the strategy document, such as using social media to raise awareness of HIV/AIDS, what we really need is money.

    The federal/state AIDS Drug Assistance Program, which provides HIV drugs to more than 200,000 uninsured and underinsured people, has a wait list of some 2,300 people. And it’s growing monthly. That’s too many Americans going without medicines that can save their lives.

  51. The fund Aids protest strikes me as fishy.
    They had to pay a hundred dollars apiece to enter and had large signs? Funding for research for HIV has increased and the US has continued its commitment to fighting the disease globally. In fact gives more than any other nation. The whole thing stuck me as being staged. Why? Maybe to make icky seem more mainstream.

  52. THIS narrative is the one that needs to be outed constantly:

    “The irony is the Obama team ran the most brilliant presidential campaign I have every seen.”

    Yes, cheating all the way to the end and having your ass drug across the line is always a “brilliant” move.

  53. Hillary Was Right
    By KT McFarland

    Published September 22, 2010
    | FoxNews.com
    Print Email Share Comments Text Size Hillary was right all along. President Obama wasn’t ready for the 3:00 a.m. phone call. As Bob Woodward’s new book, “Obama’s War,” demonstrates in page after page, President Obama doesn’t know how to be a good wartime president, and doesn’t really want to be one. He sees it as a distraction from his goal of transforming America, and his aides’ worry it will be hard to spin in a reelection campaign.

    President Obama may complain that he inherited the Afghanistan War and yet again try to blame Bush. But the fact remains that candidate Obama said Afghanistan would be HIS war, that it was the Good War, the War of Necessity in contrast to Iraq, which was Bush’s War of Choice. And as “Obama’s War” describes in great detail, once in office the president changed his commanders, altered our military strategy and added more troops – lots of them. Yet Woodward’s book shows us he did so not because he thought we could win, but because of politics.

    A fundamental rule of warfare is if you have a military mission, you must provide the resources required to achieve that mission. If you’re not willing to pay the price, you need to change the mission; otherwise you’re setting up a situation designed to fail.

    Yet that seems the trap Obama has fallen into. He’s ordered a near-term exit from Afghanistan, but at the same time wants to destroy Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan’s tribal regions. His military advisers warned that such a strategy would require a lot more troops and a lot more time.

    But Obama went against their advice and has now has the Afghanistan War on a footing where failure is all but inevitable. He’s given the commanders more troops, although not as many as they asked for; but at the same time set a firm withdrawal date. The troops will be packing up and coming home almost before they’re finished unpacking. Why? Not because it will lead to victory, or save lives, but because of politics. “I have to say that,” Mr. Obama tells Sen Lindsey Graham. “I can’t let this be a war without end, and I can’t lose the whole Democratic Party.”

    YOU MIGHT ALSO BE
    INTERESTED IN
    Ten Worst Places to Live 4 Simple Steps to Getting Rid of Credit Card DebtRepublican Primary Party PoopersUnited States Could ‘Absorb’ Another Terror Attack, Obama Says in Woodward BookBlue Dog Democrats Use Health Care Overhaul as Campaign Punching BagYes, even some of Obama’s top aides – military and civilian – think he’s pursuing a strategy that “can’t work.”

    The one lesson we learned in Vietnam is we shouldn’t fight a war unless we’re willing to devote the resources necessary to win it. Yet, for all the self-proclaimed intelligence of the Obama White House, it’s the one lesson they’ve missed.

    Kathleen Troia “K.T.” McFarland is a Fox News National Security Analyst and host of FoxNews.com’s DefCon 3. She is a Distinguished Adviser to the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and served in national security posts in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations. She wrote Secretary of Defense Weinberger’s November 1984 “Principles of War Speech” which laid out the Weinberger Doctrine. Be sure to watch “K.T.” every Monday at 10 a.m. ET on FoxNews.com’s “DefCon3” already one of the Web’s most watched national security programs.

  54. nomobama
    I don’t know I’d have to research more, but 19 billion is a huge sum of money. Plus what charitable organizations and other countries provide. I have heard that it is big business for some and little relief or care for others.

  55. Madam President? It could happen

    Speculation that she will run for President in 2012 is reaching fever pitch. But what do those who watched Sarah Palin grow up make of her meteoric ascent – and ruthless ambition? By Shushannah Walshe

    Tuesday, 21 September 2010

    The first thing you notice, upon pulling up to Chuck and Sally Heath’s house in Wasilla, Alaska, is the Christmas tree of moose antlers piled up next to the driveway. Step inside the ranch-style home, and you get another unmistakable sign that you’re not in the Democrats’ America anymore: Chuck’s prized collection of skinned and stuffed animals, the spoils of his many hunting trips – a cougar, a mountain goat, foxes, birds, and snake skins spilling over the banister. Outside, a picnic table offers dramatic views of the Chugach Mountain range. It was in this setting that the Heaths, putting aside their natural wariness of press from the Lower 48 states, agreed to meet a reporter, feed her fresh snap peas from their garden-and share their thoughts about their world-famous daughter, Sarah Palin.

    Should she run for president in 2012? Sarah’s mother, Sally, doesn’t hesitate. “It would be a tough thing to do,” she starts to say, until Chuck interrupts: “It’s up to her, whatever she wants to do.” Sally, in a green zip-up sweatshirt, continues. “I love what she’s doing now: scouting around for who would be good candidates, who honestly could stand up and speak and not be afraid to tell it like it is.”

    They don’t know her plans, the Heaths are quick to add, in their first national interview in over a year. But “it would be fun to find out some day”, Sally says, with a contagious laugh.

    In other words, Sarah’s parents seem to feel the way a lot of Alaskans feel about the state’s best-known export, next to oil and salmon: torn over the wisdom of her trying to make the White House her home.

    Some friends expressed caution about Palin’s future. A former adviser in DC who remains friends with Palin said he doesn’t want to see her run. “I think she’s got a great life. She’s got the world by the tail right now,” this friend says. “I mean, she’s earning a lot of money, which she never had before. She is speaking to adoring crowds wherever she goes. She’s greatly appreciated by those she supports and she doesn’t have to take all the grief that you have to take when you are running for or holding office.”

    Others who are less-favourably disposed point out that Palin’s aborted tenure as governor left a lot of bad blood in Alaska; they worry that her baggage would be dragged back onstage in another national campaign, and hurt the state.

    But fans and foes alike warn against the dangers of selling Palin short.

    “Four years ago, right after she was elected, I was quoted as saying, ‘The graveyards of Alaska are covered with the bones of people crossed by Sarah Palin.’ While I said crossed, what I meant was underestimated,” said Alaska Republican pollster David Dittman. “And that’s still true. Consistently, whether it’s the local city council in Wasilla, no matter where she’s gone – say, on the cusp of achieving something – there’ve always been detractors that say it can’t happen, it won’t happen, this is why she won’t be successful. That’s why I will say, to this day, the political graveyards of Alaska – and other places – are filled with the bones of people who underestimated Sarah. And it’s still happening.”

    Adele Morgan, one of Palin’s oldest friends in Alaska, can attest to that. She recalls approaching Palin in 2005, when she first heard that her childhood pal and basketball buddy was running for governor. “I had heard that just from the grapevine so I went and asked her,” Morgan recalls. “I thought that was quite the feat at the time. And I said, ‘What are your plans?’ I was just kidding around and I said, ‘So do you want to be president?’ And that was way back then and she said, ‘Well maybe.’ And I was like, ‘Wow you got some goals there, girl!'”

    The ambition doesn’t always sit well with Alaskans, who have a saying: “We don’t care how they do it on the Outside.” But they clearly care when the Outside suddenly lands on their doorstep. Wasilla Mayor Verne Rupright refers to the town as “Hollywood North” because of the media focus and the parade of tourists from the Lower 48 that now visits, hoping to get a glimpse of Sarah’s backyard.

    She doesn’t spend nearly as much time there as she used to amid her speaking engagements, book tours, and appearances for midterm candidates across the country. (Indeed, until her endorsement of insurgent candidate Joe Miller in the state’s GOP Senate primary, who nosed out incumbent Lisa Murkowski, Palin’s influence had not been felt much at all since she resigned the governorship in 2009.)

    Friends in Wasilla say she doesn’t drive the family’s Escalade SUV anymore and instead has gone back to the VW Jetta she used when governor to avoid being spotted.

    “Every time I drive it, people know who it is and I can just drive the Jetta and nobody pays any attention,” Palin told friend and Wasilla neighbor Bev Perdew.

    When she is in the state, she spends most of her time in her Wasilla home on Lake Lucille. She’s ended the need to pop out to do TV, having recently added a studio as an extension to her house. In the past, she was often spotted shopping at Target and Walmart; these days, she sends her eldest daughter Bristol to the store, to avoid being mobbed by friends and well-wishers.

    On one hand, “you can’t do anything because everybody’s watching when you go to the bathroom”, says Eddie Burke, a Palin family friend who says he lost his job as a radio talk-show host after skirmishing with a Palin critic who worked at the same station. On the other, Burke says, she’s facing the allure of big-money book deals. “So did she leave for money? Probably so.”

    Burke says he still chats with Todd about snow machining (Alaskan for snowmobiling) and was even involved in preparations with Palin for her rally with Glenn Beck. “If I was advising her on one thing: [it would be] never forget your roots, never forget where you come from. I think there was a part of her that kind of got caught up. If I was to advise her, she should not forget where she came from.” He says he told this to Todd, creating some “friction”.

    Walt Monegan knows what it’s like to have friction with the Palins on the grand scale. His firing as Palin’s public safety commissioner led to the “Troopergate investigation”. Monegan is still struggling with the fallout years later. The former Anchorage police chief still breaks down in tears when reminiscing about his time on the beat. If Palin does make a bid for the presidency, Monegan is sure to be held up by opponents as a case study in how she can wield power vindictively. He strongly cautioned against a future President Palin.

    “I think it’d be a train wreck. You need to have a thick skin in public service, especially if you’re going to be a boss of any sort. People are very opinionated; they will go up and tell you what they think about you, where you’ve gone wrong. You have to listen to them. You don’t shut them off, you don’t turn your back on them, and you certainly don’t attack,” Monegan said. “In her case, she is not mature enough, or doesn’t understand that, or she has such a large goal that she feels she knows what’s best for everybody and doesn’t really need any other input.”

    Palin’s foray this summer into the Alaska Senate race left similarly bruised feelings, exacerbating a long-running feud with the Murkowski family which has divided the state’s Republican ranks. It started when former senator Frank Murkowski bypassed Palin when, upon election as governor, he decided to appoint his daughter to fill out the remainder of his term in Congress. Palin returned the favour by ousting Murkowski in the GOP 2006 gubernatorial primary. The fighting continued this summer, when Palin’s decision to back Joe Miller helped propel him past Lisa Murkowski for the GOP Senate nomination.

    Murkowski and her allies thought the move was personal. But SarahPAC (Political Action Committee) staffer Rebecca Mansour, perhaps the aide closest to Palin, said she did not endorse Miller in revenge on the family. “She did not endorse Joe Miller to get back at Lisa. Endorsing someone everyone thought would lose would not be a way to get back at Lisa. Her endorsement of Joe Miller was about principles, not personalities,” Mansour said. “It was about Alaska and her belief that Alaska should have the freedom to develop its natural resources under federal control so it can become more of a giver to the nation through resource development instead of a taker of federal pork [district funding for a specific region].”

    Murkowski’s campaign manager was John Bitney, who, until recently, was a Palin ally. A high-school friend who ran her 2006 campaign for governor, Bitney had a falling out with Palin when she discovered Bitney was having an affair with a family friend, a woman to whom he is now married. Bitney is skewered in Palin’s book, Going Rogue, and says she sometimes uses her power to intimidate – “taking a nuclear bomb when a fly swatter would have dealt with the issue,” as he puts it.

    “If you are perceived having been someone who has criticised her or been on the other side of her or someone that she’s gone after [there’s a feeling] that somehow she can hurt you,” Bitney says. [People] “are scared of her”. Bitney said. “That would really concern me to have that kind of power.” Bitney adds: “I would love to have peace. I’m asking for a truce.”

    Ms Mansour does not recognise that picture: “I’ve worked for her for over a year, and I have not seen any mean side to her. She’s not mean like that. I don’t get that criticism. She’s always been very kind and considerate with me.”

    In smoothing over some of these rifts, Palin’s parents are a great asset. Monegan, the ex-public safety commissioner, says he hasn’t had any contact with Palin or her inner circle. But last winter, he ran into Chuck Heath at a dinner celebrating Alaskan seafood. Heath ran over to Monegan and gave him a handshake and hug, telling him: “That’s just politics. I still like you.” Heath even went over to Monegan’s table to meet his family and regale them with stories of his daughter’s book tour.

    Nobody knows the kind of sacrifices a new national campaign would entail quite like Palin’s parents, who hit the trail in 2008. The night before the ballot, Chuck told an audience in Nevada that he was the one who taught Sarah “how to field-dress a moose”; on Election Day, he joked, she was going to “field-dress a donkey”, much to the crowd’s delight. These days, Sally often accompanies her daughter on trips outside Alaska, helping out with the grandkids, traveling to Washington for the Glenn Beck rally last month. (Chuck, for the time being, stays put: “I don’t like to go during hunting season,” he says.)

    Has their daughter’s fame affected them? “I still run with the same derelicts I did 30, 40 years ago and buy whatever beer’s on sale,” says Chuck with a laugh. “Hasn’t changed me a bit.”

    They both said they don’t see their daughter much (Chuck saying he keeps track of where she travels by watching Fox News) because she is on the road so often, but when they do they don’t talk with their daughter about work.

    “We don’t talk politics. We talk hunting, fishing, sports, and family. Just normal family, none of the political stuff,” her father said. “She hears enough advice from everyone and criticism from everyone and she doesn’t need to hear my bad advice. We hunt together, fish together, travel together and we don’t socialise out in the limelight anymore because she’s mobbed. She can’t walk into a store anymore. We go to a lot of gatherings together, but she has to sneak in.”

    Chuck Heath says his daughter has been busy this summer working on her show for TLC, Sarah Palin’s Alaska, and gave a glimpse into what it will look like. He went caribou hunting with Palin and the TLC team and his favourite episode was their gold-mining adventure, he says: “The people in Nome treated us so well and we found not a lot of gold. But enough gold to make it interesting.”

  56. The future’s looking bright… NOT!

    Examiner Editorial: Obamacare is even worse than critics thought
    Examiner Editorial
    September 22, 2010
    Much more has been revealed about Obamacare since President Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pushed the bill on Americans six months ago. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP file)

    Six months ago, President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rammed Obamacare down the throats of an unwilling American public. Half a year removed from the unprecedented legislative chicanery and backroom dealing that characterized the bill’s passage, we know much more about the bill than we did then. A few of the revelations:

    » Obamacare won’t decrease health care costs for the government. According to Medicare’s actuary, it will increase costs. The same is likely to happen for privately funded health care.

    » As written, Obamacare covers elective abortions, contrary to Obama’s promise that it wouldn’t. This means that tax dollars will be used to pay for a procedure millions of Americans across the political spectrum view as immoral. Supposedly, the Department of Health and Human Services will bar abortion coverage with new regulations but these will likely be tied up for years in litigation, and in the end may not survive the court challenge.

    » Obamacare won’t allow employees or most small businesses to keep the coverage they have and like. By Obama’s estimates, as many as 69 percent of employees, 80 percent of small businesses, and 64 percent of large businesses will be forced to change coverage, probably to more expensive plans.

    » Obamacare will increase insurance premiums — in some places, it already has. Insurers, suddenly forced to cover clients’ children until age 26, have little choice but to raise premiums, and they attribute to Obamacare’s mandates a 1 to 9 percent increase. Obama’s only method of preventing massive rate increases so far has been to threaten insurers.

    » Obamacare will force seasonal employers — especially the ski and amusement park industries — to pay huge fines, cut hours, or lay off employees.

    » Obamacare forces states to guarantee not only payment but also treatment for indigent Medicaid patients. With many doctors now refusing to take Medicaid (because they lose money doing so), cash-strapped states could be sued and ordered to increase reimbursement rates beyond their means.

    » Obamacare imposes a huge nonmedical tax compliance burden on small business. It will require them to mail IRS 1099 tax forms to every vendor from whom they make purchases of more than $600 in a year, with duplicate forms going to the Internal Revenue Service. Like so much else in the 2,500-page bill, our senators and representatives were apparently unaware of this when they passed the measure.

    » Obamacare allows the IRS to confiscate part or all of your tax refund if you do not purchase a qualified insurance plan. The bill funds 16,000 new IRS agents to make sure Americans stay in line.

    If you wonder why so many American voters are angry, and no longer give Obama the benefit of the doubt on a variety of issues, you need look no further than Obamacare, whose birthday gift to America might just be a GOP congressional majority.

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Obamacare-is-even-worse-than-critics-thought-960772-103571664.html#ixzz10N0exdJo

  57. nomobama
    September 23rd, 2010 at 11:57 am
    ————-

    This upsets me so much. The teachers involved in this should be fired.

  58. Good read as usal administator….looks are indeed very important. I have won many cases imo b/c I had better hair than opposing councel.

  59. Last but not least, for now anyway… this is too funny…

    We’ve found someone dumber than Christine O’Donnell
    By: Mark Hemingway
    Commentary Staff Writer
    09/23/10 11:45 AM EDT
    Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, David Bernstein flags this passage from Slate’s legal correspondent, Dahlia Lithwick. I know the media is busy falling all over themselves to show us how allegedly stupid O’Donnell is, but I’m kind of astounded that Lithwick dashed this off:

    O’Donnell explained that “when I go to Washington, D.C., the litmus test by which I cast my vote for every piece of legislation that comes across my desk will be whether or not it is constitutional.” How weird is that, I thought. Isn’t it a court’s job to determine whether or not something is, in fact, constitutional? And isn’t that sort of provided for in, well, the Constitution?

    Bernstein responds: “Senators swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. Of course they are obligated to determine whether a bill they are considering is constitutional. Where did Lithwick get the idea that courts, and only courts, should be concerned with the constitutionality of legislation?”

    I know O’Donnell just finished her undergraduate degree a few weeks ago, but she’s already sounding smarter than elite media.

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/weve-found-someone-dumber-than-christine-odonnell-103628414.html#ixzz10N1x6Wzz

  60. Sorry, one more. Is Libby Mitchell married to George Mitchell?

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

    Tea Party candidate for Governor up 18 points… in Maine?
    By: Mark Hemingway
    Commentary Staff Writer
    09/22/10 1:10 PM EDT
    The governor’s race in Maine has managed to fly below the radar of national pundits, but it’s a heck of a barometer for how bad things are for Democrats. Republican Paul LePage, the mayor of Waterville and a conservative Tea Party favorite is up big in all the polls, and his lead has been growing:

    Republican Paul LePage earns his highest level of support yet in the race to be Maine’s next governor, moving this election from Leans GOP to Solid GOP in the Rasmussen Reports Election 2010 Gubernatorial Scorecard.

    A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in the state finds LePage, the mayor of Waterville, earning 45% of the vote, while Democrat Libby Mitchell picks up 27% support. Democrat-turned-independent Eliot Cutler trails with 14%. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and 10% are undecided.

    In surveys dating back to June, LePage has consistently held the lead, with support ranging from 38% to 45%. In those same surveys, Mitchell has earned anywhere from 27% to 36% of the vote, while Cutler has failed to earn more than 16% support. Early last month, LePage led Mitchell 38% to 30%.

    Remember — this is Maine. It’s one of the last bastions of New England, Country-club Republicanism. It hasn’t voted for a Republican president since 1988, and now the state has Tea Party fever.

  61. #
    NewMexicoFan

    Palin and Hillary should have that cup of tea together and just talk.

    ——–
    My God, that would be a huge leap forward for women, wouldn’t it?

    My real dream would be for Hillary to run for President again, and pick Sarah as her VP. To teach Sarah the ropes and to work more as a centralist with both parties.

    I would be so darn happy, it would make my entire year.

  62. moononpluto
    September 23rd, 2010 at 8:55 am

    Axelrod is deserting Obama

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/23/earlyshow/main6893065.shtml

    President Obama’s inner circle will likely be losing some key players. CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante reports that sources say David Axelrod, the president’s closest advisor, will move to Chicago next spring. Axelrod is expected to reassume his role as campaign manager in Mr. Obama’s 2012 reelection bid. A potential, if not likely, replacement for Axelrod is current White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. The dominoes don’t stop there. Rahm Emanuel, the president’s Chief of Staff, may leave the White House as soon as next month.

    ——
    Holy cow, all the rats are leaving the ship!!!!!

    Pretty soon MO will have to invite all her buddies from the trip to Spain just to fill up the White House, so it will look like someone is still working there.

  63. #
    Norma Desmond
    September 23rd, 2010 at 11:27 am

    THIS narrative is the one that needs to be outed constantly:

    “The irony is the Obama team ran the most brilliant presidential campaign I have every seen.”

    Yes, cheating all the way to the end and having your ass drug across the line is always a “brilliant” move.
    ——–

    Classic!!

  64. Here is where I am at. I hope most other people are as well. We know what big media is doing. It is transparent to anyone who pays attention. They put Obama in the White House. He is there man. They will protect him at all cost. They will structure will introduce experts who support him and ostracize anyone who criticizes him. They will invent or hype favorable facts, and censor negative ones. They are not worth paying attention to, because they do not deal in truth. They are not redeemable. It is too late for them. They no longer have a monopoly, the product they are producing is junk and they are fast becoming an artifact of history. New consumer habits have emerged. People are getting their news on the internet and sports on television. That is the death knell for big media, and the longer they shill for Obama the faster the end will come.

  65. Hey Suckers. Step right up here. Have I got a deal for you:

    “I promise 100% transparency in my administration.”

    “I promise NO NEW TAXES on a family making less than $250K a year.”

    “I will allow 5 days of public comment before I sign any bills.”

    “I will remove earmarks for PORK projects before I sign any bill.”

    “I will end Income Tax for seniors making less than $50K a year”

    “I’ll put the Health Care negotiations on CSPAN so everyone can see who is
    at the table!”

    “I’ll have no lobbyists in my administration”

    Brian Williams comment: he is the north the south the east the west . . . a man’s reach should always exceed his grasp, as long as I get paid.

    Neutral Observer: he is a liar, and anyone who takes anything he says at face value is a fool times ten.

  66. » As written, Obamacare covers elective abortions, contrary to Obama’s promise that it wouldn’t. As written, Obamacare covers elective abortions, contrary to Obama’s promise that it wouldn’t. This means that tax dollars will be used to pay for a procedure millions of Americans across the political spectrum view as immoral. Supposedly, the Department of Health and Human Services will bar abortion coverage with new regulations but these will likely be tied up for years in litigation, and in the end may not survive the court challenge. Supposedly, the Department of Health and Human Services will bar abortion coverage with new regulations but these will likely be tied up for years in litigation, and in the end may not survive the court challenge.

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

    From the examiner. I don’t believe it.

  67. Passages. This report from last night’s Manhattan boo Obama fun comes from Gail Sheehy.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-23/obamas-fire-sale/

    Six weeks before the election, President Obama couldn’t fill the ballroom at the Roosevelt Hotel, despite cheap tickets on offer. And then he was met by hecklers.

    Who would have thought that six weeks before a cliffhanger election, President Obama would have to reach down to the D list to fill a room to listen to him? Most of us low rollers arrived early to see President Obama up close and personal. Our tickets for the general reception at the Roosevelt Hotel in New York were only $100. Some thought the email invitation was a joke. Some bought tickets for $50 from their desperate Democratic committeeman. Some bought the same day.

    “It’s Filene’s,” enthused Sharon Douglas, reliving her heady days as a volunteer in Obama’s 2008 campaign. The doorman beckoned conspiratorially and ushered us out one door and in through another to stand at the back of the $500 line. Their crowd came from Wall Street in car services and killer heels. Our crowd came on subways in flats and scuffed teacher’s shoes.

    Only after I received four email invitations and two personal calls imploring me to come did I call Speaker Pelosi’s office to check the admission price. “You mean, to be in the room with the President of the United States is now on fire sale for $100?

    ”Yup.”

    “How long do we get?”

    “Half hour.”

    “How many $100 givers have rsvp’d?”

    “Mmmm 250.”

    “Do we need to line up early to get in?”

    “That’s not necessary. Everybody will get in.”

    And everybody did—450 people in a room that holds 650. Even Obama’s fire sale didn’t sell out. [snip]

    Later that night, another crowd had shelled out $15,000 to sit for dinner with the President. Think that’s a lot? It’s a 50 percent markdown from a recent invitation to dinner with the President at the home of Linda Douglass and John Phillips, costing $30,000.

  68. basil9, Did you happen to read the comments under that article…people are so unimformed.

    I am so sick of this….I just want you all to wake me up when he’s out of the WH.

    Do you really think Hillary will run again?? Bill said she’s all into wanting to become a grannie, which I can’t blame her for that.

  69. Maybe it’s a crock. Maybe it’s payback. Believe I remember some snickering going on around here when Bill said aloud he hoped hc would pass. I did not recall this specific quote from basil’s link:
    “I’m telling you, I don’t care how low they drive support for this with misinformation. The minute the president signs the health care reform bill, approval will go up, because Americans are inherently optimistic.” — Bill Clinton at the Netroots Nation convention in August 2009.
    but maybe he did say said it.
    oops.

  70. admin: Wow! That is shocking!

    I wonder when he will say he will not seek re-election?? I just looked up when Johnson did, it was March 1968, which is to late to launch a campaign.

  71. admin,

    Now that IS Shocking! (and encouraging)! And he couldn’t even sell out the house?

    confloyd,

    That article had me fuming. What a !#*3# pile of BS. I am so sick of the buck-passing.

  72. Obama Admin predicts small scale terror… in time for elections, again?

    Aaron Dykes
    Prison Planet.com
    Thursday, September 23, 2010

    “Terrorism” concerns necessarily hinge on fear, and it is now completely predictable that an otherwise unpopular Obama Administration would roll out the threat of terror to bolster support for the 2010 elections. The Washington Post reports that the “Risk of small-scale attacks by al-Qaeda and its allies is rising, officials say.” This alarming headline comes in concert with comments from President Obama about absorbing a terror attack, as well as hyperbolic warnings from Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano before Congress that al Qaeda is recruiting for homeland attacks. The Washington Post writes:

    Al-Qaeda and its allies are likely to attempt small-scale, less sophisticated terrorist attacks in the United States, senior Obama administration officials said Wednesday, noting that it’s extremely difficult to detect such threats in advance.

    “Unlike large-scale, coordinated, catastrophic attacks, executing smaller-scale attacks requires less planning and fewer pre-operational steps,” said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, testifying before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. “Accordingly, there are fewer opportunities to detect such an attack before it occurs.”

    The main thrust of these timely “warnings” is to scare the public, not to share intelligence analysis or stop an attack. It is clear from the context that there is no basis for expecting an attack– the ‘evidence’ cited by Napolitano & co. includes reference to the attempted “underwear bombing” on a flight to Detroit– proven to be a falsehood, as eyewitnesses on the plane contradict the official account. Homeland Security also cites the ‘failed’ Times Square car bombing– an incident that didn’t include any real explosives or any connection to al Qaeda at all. Napolitano further links this terror threat with the alleged “rise” of domestic extremism, which has never been qualified or demonstrated, but only hyped via the MIAC and Homeland Security reports issued by DHS earlier in the Obama Administration. Those reports merely speculate that incidents will likely occur based on blanket-mass profiling– a mirror of the Administration’s current attempt to spark worry and fear.
    These are the same tactics the Bush Administration admittedly used for political expediency post-9/11– threats without substance, but useful for enlarging a projected threat. Recall that so-called Bin Laden tapes would consistently emerge just prior to key elections or that the terror alert levels would be elevated to re-enforce the fear in the populace for purely political purposes. CIA officials have now admitted to faking Bin Laden videos.
    Is it any wonder Obama would now discuss absorbing a terror attack in the U.S. or that Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano would revive the script of homeland terror threats and the pre-programmed idea of small-scale al Qaeda attacks? Is it a coincidence that Obama advisor Robert Shapiro suggested this summer that only a large-scale terror attack could counter President Obama’s “credibility crisis”:

    “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”

    Who orchestrates these talking points and baseless forecasts of terror? Why is Republican Sen. Lindsay Graham simultaneously also cynically stating that another terror attack is imminent? Political expediency, not the omnipresence of al Qaeda, is the only logical answer. If the administration has verifiable intel, they should stop any such attempts, not scare up political points.

  73. Palin: Why No Probe of Barack ‘Hussein’ Obama?

    http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Palin-Obama-Van-Susteren/2010/09/23/id/371350

    Former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin alleges that the media has a blatant double standard, shining intense scrutiny on GOP Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell while turning a blind eye to then-candidate Barack Obama’s personal history in the 2008 campaign.

    During an interview with Fox News host Greta Van Susteren Wednesday night, Palin said: “Funny . . . That we are learning more about Christine O’Donnell and her college years, her teenage years, her financial dealings than anybody ever even bothered to ask about Barack Hussein Obama as a candidate and now as our president.”

    (VIDEO AT LINK)

    Palin also recently tweeted to O’Donnell, Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate from Delaware, that she shouldn’t waste time “appeasing nat’l media seeking ur destruction.”

    Obama has come under some criticism during his campaign and after for failing to release documents and background material on his life that has been de rigeur for most candidates.

    Obama has yet to release college transcripts and files from his undergraduate work at Occidental College and Columbia University, and later at Harvard Law School. His college dissertation at Columbia has disappeared. Many of his official papers during his time as an Ilinois state representative have also disappeared. He has never released his full medical records.

    Palin’s reference on the Van Susteren program to the president’s middle name, Hussein, drew national media attention.

    During the the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama and his campaign never referred to his middle name of Arabic origin, which means “good; small handsome one.”

    And Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign studiously avoided using Barack Obama’s complete name.

    In fact, using Obama’s full name was so taboo that when conservative radio host Bill “Willie” Cunningham used it to fire up a McCain rally in Cincinnati, the senator was forced to apologize.

  74. Titanic Mistake: Worst
    Wrong Turn in History?
    ———————-
    No. That record was broken by American voters when the elected Obama. That is now listed in the Guiness Book of World Records as the worst wrong turn in history. However, that is not a bad metaphor for the Obama goons squad, i.e. The Titanic Administration. Captain Boob at the helm.

  75. #
    confloyd
    September 23rd, 2010 at 1:50 pm

    Yes, I read those things the GOP has promised…they are laughable…no meat at all!
    ———
    Yup, lies to the right, lies on the left. Pass your partner and do-se-do.

    Vote all the bums, liars, cheats and thugs out of office. We need a new batch in, and vote them out next time if they play the same dirty game.

    I would like to change electronic voting machines to:

    Button 1 – I vote for putting this person in office.

    Button 2 – ‘Delete’ this person from office.

    Button 3 – No one running is qualified, no one should hold this office until there is a new election.

  76. As written, Obamacare covers elective abortions, contrary to Obama’s promise that it wouldn’t. As written, Obamacare covers elective abortions, contrary to Obama’s promise that it wouldn’t.

    ———–
    If men want to determine what a woman should do with her body……………….then women should decide if they need those parts at all on men that make them pregnant!!!!!

    No Viagra, no enhanced anything for men until they leave it up to women how to deal with their own health.
    I don’t pick your religious and moral beliefs, don’t pick them for women.

  77. Obama plays adoring spouse at Clinton initiative

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/7215046.html

    NEW YORK — Barack Obama knew his role when he took the stage at a global development meeting Thursday, and it was not leader of the free world.

    It was adoring spouse.

    In New York for meetings at the United Nations, the president hopped in a motorcade and ducked over to a downtown hotel to serve as the warmup act for his wife, who was speaking at a meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative founded by former President Bill Clinton.

    Obama laid it on thick.

    “I am not just here today to sing President Clinton’s praises or to commend all of you for the terrific work that all of you have done, although I am grateful for that,” Obama began. “I am here to play an even more important role. And that is to introduce my better half, my extraordinary wife and America’s extraordinary first lady, Michele Obama.”

    The president was just getting warmed up.

    “Bill Clinton understands where I am coming from here,” Obama said to cascades of laughter. “He knows what it is like to be married to someone who is smarter, somebody who is better looking, somebody who is just all around a little more impressive than you are.”

    But wait, there was more.

    “This is not news to people,” Obama said. “Since Michele and I first started dating 22 years ago, pretty much everybody I know who has met her at some point comes up to me and says, ‘You know, Barack, you’re great and all that. I like you. But your wife, she’s really something’. And, I, of course agree.”

    Obama handicapped his wife as the odds-on favorite in a hypothetical Barack-Michelle political smackdown.

    “I feel grateful that Michelle — so far at least — has not run for any offices I have been running for,” he said. “She would beat me thoroughly.”

    ………………………………

    But your wife, she’s really something’. And, I, of course agree.”……………..oh she’s something alright, on that H44’s can all agree but it wont be what Bambi thinks. For everything he called Bill and Hillary Clinton during primaries, he’s got some fucking nerve to say this today. Lol maybe he’s dropped the re-election and gone on a Hillary 2012 endorsement tour.

  78. moononpluto
    September 23rd, 2010 at 6:07 pm
    Obama plays adoring spouse at Clinton initiative

    —————–

    I feel like gagging. He’s talking to a group of very important intellectuals and this is his intro?

  79. More fake:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703384204575509793142421332.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection

    Senate Democratic leaders have decided to delay a vote on President Barack Obama’s call to preserve middle class tax cuts until after congressional elections in November.

    A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday that the Senate will return in November and work to extend the tax cuts for middle-income taxpayers.[snip]

    Sen. Reid (D., Nev.) and Democratic campaign consultants had argued for a pre-election vote. Some felt that such a vote could help Democrats in the fall by showing support for protecting middle-class tax cuts while painting Republicans as willing to protect the wealthy.

    But other Senate Democrats argued privately to postpone the vote, believing that Republicans could use a pre-election vote to argue that Democrats want to increase taxes on small businesses.

  80. Mesmell Obama is going to make people gag on the road campaigning.

    I hope people keep asking…”where is your husband and why isnt he here explaining himself”.

  81. nomobama
    September 23rd, 2010 at 12:14 pm

    Madam President? It could happen

    Speculation that she will run for President in 2012 is reaching fever pitch. But what do those who watched Sarah Palin grow up make of her meteoric ascent – and ruthless ambition?

    Was “ruthless” really necessary?

    How about: But what do those who watched Sarah Palin grow up make of her meteoric ascent – and savvy political maneuvers?

  82. Obama foreign policy in 5 easy steps

    1. avoid confrontation at all cost, just proceed like a man of peace, blame America, and Iran will come around

    2. no military action, no economic action, just reason with him: oh please mister dinner jacket please meet with me

    3. fuck off obama sayeth dinner jacket, I would not waste my time meeting with you, I own you Obama

    4. dinner jacket then goes to UN, calls 9.11 a US plot, thunderous applause at General Assembly

    5. Rice and the rest of his idiots WALK OUT. Yes they showed him. Now that is what you call deterrence.

    Score: dinner jacket: 5 Obama: 0

  83. so, is this the same Meee-chelle Antoinette who wanted to “claw Bill Clinton’s eyes out”??

    is she still proud to be an American?

  84. Hillary Clinton maps women’s changing lives

    Helen Elliott
    September 24, 2010

    Her progress is more complex than a single theme of “feminism”.

    A FRIEND and I were crowing that Hillary Clinton was finally making it to Australia – in November for strategic and security talks -when my friend’s 15-year-old daughter threw a cleaver. “I don’t get the fuss about her. She’s so old. Those clothes!”

    “Huh?” her mother and I said, choir-like. Where do I start?

    Maybe with 1947, when Hillary Rodham was born and when a woman’s destiny was seen as primarily domestic. A female lawyer, female medical specialist, and female chief executive were exceptional.

    Women watch her and what we see is a version of ourselves; the version that held her nerve as she followed through on the theories of De Beauvoir/Greer/Steinham et al. It’s as if this woman is herself an artwork, ”making what appears to be impossible, possible”.

    Hillary Rodham was born lucky in a specific way. Her conservative father believed that his daughter needed an education equal to that of his sons. That daughter ripped through all the hurdles at her first school in Illinois, then at Wellesley where, in 1965, she was president of the Young Republicans.

    But times were revolutionary, and a smart young woman with a passion for justice and human rights was galvanised by the Vietnam War and civil rights movement.

    Those years recast her. Her 1969 graduation speech at Wellesley contains this line: ”The challenge now is to practise politics as the art of making what appears to be impossible, possible.”

    Later, at Yale law school, she met a man who was her intellectual equal, Bill Clinton. This is the place where traditional novels end, the ”Reader, I married him” conclusion as the starry young woman, fuelled by romantic ideas, floats off into the ether of extinction. The Hillary Clinton version changes the script. She didn’t marry him. Yet.

    Hillary Clinton’s progress, our progress, is not just in the grand and obvious plays, but in the detail. Her recognition of a man who could be an equal and taking the initiative made millions cheer. And how they met caused another cheer. She walked up to the dashing young man with these words: ”If you’re going to keep staring at me, I might as well introduce myself.”

    At a time when most women, and men, still saw marriage and bride as synonyms for success, Hillary Rodham rejected Bill Clinton’s proposal. They lived together and when they did marry – in 1975, in the living room of their own house in Fayetteville, Arkansas – she kept her own name. In Arkansas, Hillary became the first female to become partner in a distinguished law firm, and until her husband became US president, she always earned more than he did.

    Nowadays this sounds inconsequential, but at the time it was hullabaloo. Novels, plays and songs have been written about the horror men had, and have, of their partners earning more.

    Clinton immersed herself in issues of children’s justice and oversaw reform of the Arkansas educational system. Her daughter, Chelsea, was born when she was first lady of Arkansas. In 1993, she became first lady of the United States, influential as no other first lady had been. Ever savvy about politics, she pragmatically added “Clinton” to her name.

    But it was the Monica Lewinsky affair that attuned women en masse to Hillary Clinton.

    Sure, she stood by the dope in question, but her posture was different to the abject women of the songs (and real life). Her sophisticated response, putting sex into perspective, was shorthand for the complexity and delicacy of a lifelong partnership of two remarkably well-matched and magnanimous people. In the decade of Charles and Diana, this was especially relevant. Her behaviour at this time moved understanding between the sexes on several decades.

    And today, as US Secretary of State, when she fixes her steely glance on idiots and unleashes her impatience on fools, women – well, certain women – are moved to the core. Unlike most mainstream women, she isn’t afraid to be what used to be the death knell in politics, unfeminine. Meaning, exactly, what? It seems to me that, as she finds out who she is now, she’s increasingly unafraid to declare herself. Julia Gillard might have done well to look to HRC rather than the ALP image-makers.

    Hillary Clinton’s life – struggles, failures, as well as achievements – is a retrospective mapping of women’s lives in the last half of the 20th century. The facts might read as a tick-list of: “First woman to be . . .” but her progress is not about a single theme known as “Feminism”. It’s a bold, infinitely complex and as yet unfinished flow through some 60 years of breakneck change. Faced with the dismaying rise of flirty, dirty Sarah Palin, a woman who declares that all she ever needed to know was learnt on a basketball court, we cling to the idea of a woman of substance, whose eloquent life is making the impossible possible.

    Women look at HRC and think that she is that rare thing, a fully realised woman. If I were Cole Porter I would write a song for her called: ”You’re the Top”. A Porter lyric is immortality, not the way you dress. And, dear 15-year-old, 63 is not O.L.D.

    Helen Elliott is a Melbourne writer.

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/hillary-clinton-maps-womens-changing-lives-20100923-15or5.html

  85. President Bill Clinton on CNBC Clinton Global Initiative and the Global Economy. (on now 8-9 pm) His panel are explaining solutions for job creation and growth. More info than you will ever hear from Hussein and Geithner.

  86. ….

    As kingmaker, she seems to have done her homework….

    Turndown

    not so much with o’Donnell. Surely there was SOMEONE else the tea party could have run.

  87. When Barack Obama took office 20 months ago – and what a long 20 months it seems – there was a lot of talk about the great “Team of Rivals” he was appointing around him. Parallels were drawn with the cabinet of substantial talents and big personalities assembled by Abraham Lincoln to rebuild the nation after the civil war.

    Now, in a new book, Obama’s Wars, the veteran reporter Bob Woodward has confirmed in intricate detail what has been known in Washington for some time: that some of the team could barely stomach working with each other. General David Petraeus, then the military overseer of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, avoided contact with David Axelrod, the President’s chief strategist, whom he regarded as a “complete spin doctor”. No one had a good word for General James Jones, the national security adviser and former Nato commander, while his number two, Thomas Donilon, was regarded as a “disaster” by the Defence Secretary, Robert Gates.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/8019763/What-happened-to-the-Barack-Obama-dream.html

  88. Team Hillay 2012 is mounting a campaign to start to put pressure on the Democratic Party:

    TeamHillary ClintonSeptember 23, 2010 at 8:55pm
    Subject: Hillary 2012 Messages
    First, we want to acknowledge that alot of people do not like getting too many messages and we have made sure not to message too often.

    The reason that we are writing is to ask all members starting tomorrow to please drop by the group and simply write your Hillary in 2012 message to the DNC on the Team Hillary Group’s Wall… We will then on Monday send a message the the Democrat Party to let them know that we want Hillary in 2012. It is extremely important that we reach out to the Party as much as possible now, and again after the mid-terms. While many Hillary Supporters respected the Democrats decision in 2008, we have been fair and we have given President Obama a chance. Sadly on many of the issues, he has failed to deliver results… From a mandated healthcare policy and no public option to failing on the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – we have seen his administration back down at a time when there was no need to – they have a Democratic Majority in both houses. So just as we can give him credit for what little he has gotten done, we realize that the biggest difference between Obama and Hillary was – Hillary could have started on day one – something that President Obama at the time “Promised” he could do also…and which is something that most Hillary Supporters knew that he could not. There was no magic wand that magically made the special interests go away and what we have seen in Washington from his “bringing people together” promise is a more partisian divide under President Obama and it is magnified 10 times more now than it was during the Clinton or the Bush Administraions. Hillary had the experience, the intelligence, and most importantly the compassion to continue the fights and the battles that she had waged for over 35 years. She would not have caved on the energy policy, ran from the healthcare battle, and ignored the econmy the way that The Obama Administration has. Hillary doesn’t back down because Hillary knows how Washington works from inside the Whitehouse to Capital Hill. Hillary could have started on day 1 fixing the devastation left behind by the Bush Administration, instead we have now spent 2 years wasting time, with a promise by the Republicans of 2 more wasted years in our future. President Obama has not delivered results and doesn’t have the “know how” to get the results that most democrats wanted and still need. So we ask that you please over the weekend reach out on the wall to type your message to the Democratic Party, and on Monday we will inform them that Hillary supportrs are uniting, preparing, and fully intend on the Demcoratic Party doing the right thing for America and Americans in 2012 by asking Hillary to run and by asking President Obama to step down (for the good of the party and the country).
    The time for change has come and changes like a balanced budget with a surplus , 22 Million New jobs, and a booming economy sound to us like the results we were looking for from our next President back in 2008 and they are changes were the results that A Clinton Administration has already brought once to America and knows how to bring once again…
    As Mr. Dejean mentioned in his ad –
    Where there’s a Hill, There’s a way…

    Visit the Wall and leave the Democrat Party your message…
    http://www.facebook.com/#!/group.php?gid=292030492766&ref=tsDNC. I received this message from them:
    —————–

  89. “It is a series of compromises and milquetoast rhetorical flourishes,” Erick Erickson wrote on RedState.com. “The House GOP does not have the fortitude to lead boldly in opposition to Barack Obama.”

  90. T-Mobile Claims Right to Censor Text Messages
    By David Kravets September 22, 2010 | 6:21 pm | Categories: Censorship, Network Neutrality

    T-Mobile told a federal judge Wednesday it may pick and choose which text messages to deliver on its network in a case weighing whether wireless carriers have the same “must carry” obligations as wire-line telephone providers.

    The Bellevue, Washington-based wireless service is being sued by a texting service claiming T-Mobile stopped servicing its “short code” clients after it signed up a California medical marijuana dispensary. In a court filing, T-Mobile said it had the right to pre-approve EZ Texting’s clientele, which it said the New York-based texting service failed to submit for approval.

    EZ Texting offers a short code service, which works like this: A church could send its schedule to a cell phone user who texted “CHURCH” to 313131. Mobile phone users only receive text messages from EZ Texting’s customers upon request. Each of its clients gets their own special word.

    T-Mobile, the company wrote in a filing (.pdf) in New York federal court, “has discretion to require pre-approval for any short-code marketing campaigns run on its network, and to enforce its guidelines by terminating programs for which a content provider failed to obtain the necessary approval.”

    Such approval is necessary, T-Mobile added, “to protect the carrier and its customers from potentially illegal, fraudulent, or offensive marketing campaigns conducted on its network.”

    It’s the first federal case testing whether wireless providers may block text messages they don’t like.

    The legal flap comes as the Federal Communications Commission has been dragging its feet over clarifying the rules for wireless carriers. The FCC was asked in 2007 to announce clear rules whether wireless carriers, unlike their wireline brethren, may ban legal content they do not support. The so-called “network neutrality” issue made huge headlines last month, when Google, along with Verizon, urged Congress not to bind wireless carriers to the same rules as wireline carriers.

    EZ Texting claims it will go out of business if a judge does not promptly order T-Mobile to transmit its texts. T-Mobile accounts for 15 percent of the nation’s wireless subscribers.

    A similar text-messaging flap occurred in 2007, but ended without litigation, when Verizon reversed itself and allowed an abortion-rights group to send text messages to its supporters.

    Follow Wired.com Staff Writer David Kravets on Twitter.

    Read More http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/text-message-censorship/#ixzz10PkIn7H8

  91. It appears the French government can’t count much like it’s American counterpart, ie tea party protests…AND like the American counterpart, if all else fails, throw out a threat of terroristic attack!
    ********************************************
    New strikes in France over retirement age

    AP – Protestors shout slogans during a march Thursday Sept.23, 2010 in Paris.

    By ANGELA DOLAND, Associated Press Writer – Thu Sep 23, 4:41 pm ET
    PARIS – French authorities estimated nearly 1 million protesters filled the streets Thursday to try to force President Nicolas Sarkozy to drop his plan to raise the retirement age two years to 62, while strikes also disrupted airports, train stations and schools for the second time this month.
    The protest movement has been a big test for Sarkozy, who, like other European leaders, has struggled to convince his country of the need for cost-cutting and scaling back generous social benefits after the Greek debt crisis scared markets and sapped confidence in the entire 16-nation euro currency.
    France’s powerful unions consider retirement at 60 to be a near-sacred right, and more than 230 demonstrations stretched from the southern port city of Marseille to Lille in the north. Some protesters carried signs demanding early retirement for Sarkozy, whose dismal approval ratings hover in the mid-30s.
    With stakes high, the government and unions disagreed about the size of the turnout — even more so than usual.
    The Interior Ministry said the protest movement had lost steam since the last day of protests Sept. 7, with 997,000 protesters in the streets, a drop of about 11 percent. But unions said the movement grew to nearly 3 million protesters, up from what they said was about 2.5 million last time.
    In Paris, one protester carried a sign reading, “Austerity? For the rich first!” Vendors at the Bastille sold vuvuzelas — a new noisemaker for French demonstrators, joining the traditional megaphones and whistles.
    Some retirees were marching out of solidarity for youths.
    “Today we have a pension, we deserve one, and we wish the same thing for the younger generation,” said retired police officer Michel Fourgues.
    In recent days top officials have said repeatedly that the risk of a terrorist attack on French soil was at a record high, a highly unusual warning in France. But protesters seemed unworried.
    “What’s the point of stirring panic, so that people stay home today because they’re worried the protest might be bombed?” said Micko Bourdo, a disc jockey from the Basque country, who wore a black beret and blue coveralls.
    As baby boomers reach retirement age and life expectancy increases in France, the conservative government insists it must raise the retirement age so the money-losing pension system can break even by 2018.
    Sarkozy has indicated he is willing to make marginal concessions but remains firm on the central pillar: increasing the retirement age from 60 to 62 and pushing back the age from 65 to 67 for those who want full retirement benefits.
    Labor Minister Eric Woerth argued that the government has convinced many people of the need for change.
    “If we don’t reform the retirement system then we’ll endanger the entire pension system,” he told France-2 television.
    Even at 62, France would have one of the lowest retirement ages in Europe. Neighboring Germany has decided to bump the retirement age from 65 to 67. The U.S. Social Security system is also gradually raising its retirement age to 67.
    Sarkozy’s reform passed a vote in the National Assembly lower house of Parliament but still faces other hurdles — including an upcoming debate in the Senate — before becoming law.
    “This is not over yet,” said Bernard Thibault, who heads the CGT labor union. His union released a statement saying the turnout required the president and parliament “to take full account of the exasperation provoked by this law.” Unions were to meet Friday to decide on possible upcoming protests.
    A poll in the left-leaning Liberation daily suggested that 63 percent of respondents supported the strikers, while just 29 percent of those polled supported the government. Almost 60 percent opposed the plan to raise retirement age, with 37 percent in favor, according to the poll, conducted by the Viavoice agency on Sept. 16 and 17 with 1,002 respondents.
    A demonstrator in the northern city of Lille, 48-year-old teacher Odile Deverne, said she found the pension reform unfair.
    “Those who will cope are those who will be able to save some money. The others will retire with nothing but having worked much more than before,” she said.
    Walkouts disrupted travel and commutes across France, and post offices and even opera houses were hit too. The Education Ministry said just over 25 percent of teachers went on strike.
    Traffic was snarled in France’s cities, with fewer than half of the Paris Metro’s lines working normally, according to the RATP public transit network, and about half of France’s long-distance trains canceled, according to the SNCF state-run rail system. Limited train disruptions were expected to continue Friday.
    While the French capital’s bus lines were running almost normally, commuters on some Metro lines had to queue up just to get on the platforms.
    Some commuters opted out of public transit, taking their cars or using Velib, Paris’ rent-a-bike network, including Paris commuter Xavier Roth.
    “Even the scooters struggle to ride between cars, and walking takes a long time, so for me a bicycle is the ideal compromise,” he said.
    ***********

    They are French, I’m sure they will surender on this soon.

  92. Can’t trust him:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68M5X220100924

    Weeks after a federal judge struck down a U.S. military rule that bans openly gay men and women from the armed forces, the Obama administration sought on Thursday to keep the policy mostly intact while Congress debates the issue.[snip]

    President Barack Obama campaigned in 2008 on a promise of a full repeal, and that vow has emerged as a big political issue for the gay and lesbian community before congressional elections on November 2.[snip]

    The executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, Kate Kendall, called the U.S. Justice Department’s court position a betrayal.

    It is offensive and contrary to the spirit of Obama’s promise to end (‘don’t ask, don’t tell’),” Kendell said in a statement.

    Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay rights group that challenged “don’t ask, don’t tell” in court, added, “We are extremely disappointed.”[snip]

    But U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips declared the law to be unconstitutional, ruling in an 86-page opinion on September 9 that it violates the First and Fifth amendments.

    Phillips said then that she intended to issue an injunction restricting the government from enforcing the policy.

    But Obama’s lawyers asked in Thursday’s motion that Phillips refrain from applying her ruling nationally, or to the military overseas. Instead, the Department of Justice argued that the immediate effect of her decision should be to prohibit the military from expelling openly gay service members who belong to the Log Cabin Republicans.

    Regardless of how broadly or narrowly Phillips ultimately applies her ruling, the administration asked for more time to assess the consequences of her decision.

    “A court should not compel … an immediate cessation of the 17-year-old policy without regard for any effect such an abrupt change might have on the military’s operations,” the department wrote, “particularly at a time when the military is engaged in combat operations and other demanding military activities around the globe.”

  93. Woops, so much for Helen Elliot! Pful!

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

    Faced with the dismaying rise of flirty, dirty Sarah Palin, a woman who declares that all she ever needed to know was learnt on a basketball court, we cling to the idea of a woman of substance, whose eloquent life is making the impossible possible.

    Women look at HRC and think that she is that rare thing, a fully realised woman. If I were Cole Porter I would write a song for her called: ”You’re the Top”. A Porter lyric is immortality, not the way you dress. And, dear 15-year-old, 63 is not O.L.D.

    Helen Elliott is a Melbourne writer.

  94. I smell a really nasty professional focus group action behind the wording of this article:

    “Palin’s aborted tenure as governor ”

    The fact is Palin accomplished everything she needed to, early, and retired to move on.

  95. This may be a distorting revision of quote too:

    “Four years ago, right after she was elected, I was quoted as saying, ‘The graveyards of Alaska are covered with the bones of people crossed by Sarah Palin.’ While I said crossed, what I meant was underestimated,” said Alaska Republican pollster David Dittman. [….] That’s why I will say, to this day, the political graveyards of Alaska – and other places – are filled with the bones of people who underestimated Sarah. And it’s still happening.”

  96. PARIS – French authorities estimated nearly 1 million protesters filled the streets Thursday to try to force President Nicolas Sarkozy to drop his plan to raise the retirement age two years to 62, while strikes also disrupted airports, train stations and schools for the second time this month.
    The protest movement has been a big test for Sarkozy, who, like other European leaders, has struggled to convince his country of the need for cost-cutting and scaling back generous social benefits after the Greek debt crisis scared markets and sapped confidence in the entire 16-nation euro currency.
    France’s powerful unions consider retirement at 60 to be a near-sacred right,

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

    That’s in terrible Socialist France. Over here in enlightened USA, our retirement age has been 66+ for quite a while already.

    Don’t the Europeans get like 6 weeks summer vacation, too?

  97. They have complete socialized meds, and when I lived there they got a month off to go south during the summer.

  98. I sent admin a new logo. It is LOL with the O being Obamas round seal. Kind of appropriate, don’t you think.

  99. gonzotx, I think Palin needed a person to stick to Rove…O’Donnell fit the bill. I am sure she will follow Palin’s advice. She is so far.

    Personally of all the folks in D.C. I think Palin really knows where ALL the bodies are buried.

    She is slick, she definitely knows what she is doing…you all really must read her book, “Going Rogue”.

    Do you all remember when John McCain said that one of Hillary’s earmarks were for the Woodstock Museum in N.Y., well Palin in her book saidthe “Senior senator” from N.Y. requested the funds for that museum…that would not be Hillary, she was the Jr. Senator. Oh the misinformation out there and how they twist it to get a jab in to whoever they want to.
    Palin in her book sounds like a conservative democrat and she even says she is a progressive…someone needs to tell that to Glenn Beck! She also seems to like most democrats better than the republicans….I don’t think the “boys club” likes her very much.

  100. I hate this but we are all banned from blogging during work hours so you guys will be saved this election season from my non stop remarks…LOL!

  101. H4T, The shiny is all worn off. I just hope they get the right folks in.

    Just read Palin’s “lies” about the healthcare bill…she says it will make medicare implode, well isn’t that what they want. To rip out medicare, take away social security???

    Its absolutely is so scarey, because we don’t know who is really telling the truth!

  102. OPINION SEPTEMBER 23, 2010 Democrats Run From Pelosi

    By KARL ROVE
    Sometimes the impending loss of power can cause people to say strange things. Consider House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who told reporters last week, “I don’t really even have the time to pay attention” to the attacks on her. “This is what campaigns are about. I sort of, like, thrive on them.”

    Really? It’s hard to imagine Mrs. Pelosi likes the ads run by at least seven Democratic House incumbents distancing themselves from her agenda, such as the stimulus, cap and trade, and ObamaCare. Or the comments in recent weeks by Reps. Chet Edwards (a trusted Texas lieutenant), Heath Shuler (North Carolina) and Zack Space (Ohio), all of whom declined to support her re-election, saying they don’t even know who will run for speaker. Does she appreciate Alabama Rep. Bobby Bright, who said late last month, “Heck, she might even get sick and die”?
    Democrats Run From Pelosi
    Wall Street Journal

    James Freeman interviews Chris Chocola, President of the Club for Growth, and columnist Bret Stephens discusses his breakfast this week with Iranian President Ahmadinejad.
    Mrs. Pelosi also faces an uprising by 37 House Democrats who back extending all the Bush tax cuts. Most of them signed a letter on Sept. 15 saying “given the continued fragility of our economy and slow pace of recovery . . . raising any taxes right now could negatively impact economic growth.” With 179 Republicans in the House, just one more Democratic defection and there could be a majority for continuing the Bush tax cuts right now.

    There is similar discontent among Senate Democrats. It appears impossible that Majority Leader Harry Reid can pass any tax bill. Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus is rumored to be unveiling his proposal within days, but no one seems to know what will be in it. There have been no substantive discussions among the finance committee’s members, a precondition for any sincere attempt to legislate.

    Meanwhile, the president refuses to provide his own proposal. This is especially disappointing given that Mr. Obama’s budget requires that the $3 trillion of Bush tax cuts he favors be offset by tax increases. So whose trillions of oxen does Mr. Obama want to gore with higher taxes just 40 days before the election? He won’t say, proving he’s not really serious about resolving his tax mess now.

    Instead, he’s content to ensnare Democrats in a losing game by asking them to extend the Bush tax cuts before they adjourn—only for those making less than $250,000. But with less than two weeks before Congress adjourns, Democrats can’t pass a tax cut through either chamber.

    So why are they even trying to take it up now? It will leave the president and Democratic lawmakers looking disorganized, incompetent and impotent. No wonder Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) questioned the sanity of Democratic leaders. “I don’t know who takes a tax vote, in their right mind, just before an election,” she told the Daily Caller on Tuesday.

    About Karl Rove
    Karl Rove served as Senior Advisor to President George W. Bush from 2000–2007 and Deputy Chief of Staff from 2004–2007. At the White House he oversaw the Offices of Strategic Initiatives, Political Affairs, Public Liaison, and Intergovernmental Affairs and was Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, coordinating the White House policy-making process.

    Before Karl became known as “The Architect” of President Bush’s 2000 and 2004 campaigns, he was president of Karl Rove + Company, an Austin-based public affairs firm that worked for Republican candidates, nonpartisan causes, and nonprofit groups. His clients included over 75 Republican U.S. Senate, Congressional and gubernatorial candidates in 24 states, as well as the Moderate Party of Sweden.

    Karl writes a weekly op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, is a Newsweek columnist and is the author of the book “Courage and Consequence” (Threshold Editions).

    Email the author atKarl@Rove.comor visit him on the web atRove.com. Or, you can send a Tweet to @karlrove.
    Mrs. Feinstein knows of what she speaks. Depending on how the question is asked, polls show as many as two out of every three Americans want to continue the Bush tax cuts and oppose raising taxes on anyone right now because of the feeble economy.

    Still, Democrats have achieved something significant. Just before a crucial election, they have cemented their party’s reputation as tax-happy.

    Given this ineptness, there will be a temptation for Republicans to ease up, say little of substance, and play out the clock. But in politics, it is never wise to count on the opposition to keep making mistakes. Democrats will get their act together sometime.

    Republicans must reinvigorate the national conversation about jobs and economic growth, the stimulus, spending, deficits and ObamaCare, and then present constructive proposals of their own to meet the nation’s challenges.

    That’s why today’s release of the House GOP’s “Pledge to America” is so important. It presents practical steps to create jobs, control spending, repeal ObamaCare, reform Washington and keep America secure. Much of it is embodied in legislation that can be voted on right now.

    View Full Image

    Associated Press

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
    The only thing Congress must do before it leaves town is fund the government. The “Pledge” would freeze the tax code for two years and fund non-defense spending at 2008 levels—before the bailouts and stimulus. Mrs. Pelosi would lose if this were voted upon, even with her current huge majority. So it’s unlikely she’ll allow the GOP proposal to be considered. But she can’t stop Republicans from making their point on spending and taxes.

    What’s brought Republicans so close to victory are their deep differences with Democrats. Now’s the time to emphasize those policy disagreements in every way possible. Keeping the fight on the big issues will strengthen the powerful current that’s set to sweep Democrats from office.

    Karl Rove

  103. Governor Christie is something. He is brutally honest and he don’t take no shit from nobody. He is a natural choice for the Republicans as a successor to Obama, if the tea parties can face down the establishment. Obama is a latter day Jimmy Walker and Christie is a modern day La Guardia. La Guardia was folksy like an old shoe, whereas Christie is folksie when he counter attacks the press the way ordinary people would like to do. Plus he is entertaining whereas mosts politicians are pretty dull people if you think about it. As far as Renell is concerned, he really should be more circumspect than to call Tea Parties wackos. He is no angel and his wife sits on the third circuit.

    http://www.thefoxnation.com/chris-christie/2010/09/23/christie-why-are-you-booing-first-guy-whos-telling-truth

  104. Now this is endorsing and killing at the same time…

    Former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer said he will back Democrat Andrew Cuomo come November, but it sure didn’t sound like much of an endorsement.

    “Everybody knows that behind the scenes that he’s the dirtiest, nastiest political player out there,” Spitzer said of Cuomo Thursday.

    http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/09/23/spitzer-cuomo-dirtiest-nastiest-of-politicians/

    ……………………………

    Nice….

  105. MoonOnPluto, Spitzer knew exactly what he was doing when he made those accurate remarks about Andrew Cuomo. Spitzer knows the Paladino campaign will use those words in campaign ads.

    BTW, the NYState Dims and Andrew Cuomo’s campaign have opened up a barrage of ads against Paladino. They are doing this because after private polling they discovered that indeed Paladino is catching up. The Siena poll which has it as an easy win for Cuomo is very flawed (they include the fading fast Lazio who will disappear in October and also sample registered voters not “likely” voters).

    Our prediction for the next phase of the campaign: Paladino will allow Cuomo and allies to run many negative ads trashing him. Then Paladino will negate those attacks ads with a response ad that runs the cllip of Spitzer saying that Cuomo is “the dirtiest, nastiest political player out there.”

    This is going to be a fun race to continue to watch.

  106. One look at this headline, admin, and you know this right-wing source is yet another endorsement of hillaryis44’s analysis:
    Obama team uses flimflammery to inflate job numbers
    By: Byron York
    Chief Political Correspondent
    September 23, 2010
    Are you a financial adviser? You may not know it, but you’ve got a green job. Are you a wholesale buyer? You’ve got a green job, too. Or maybe you’re a newspaper reporter. You, too, have a green job — at least according to the Obama administration. For months, Republican Sen. Charles Grassley has been pushing the administration to substantiate its claims of having created nearly 200,000 green jobs. More fundamentally, Grassley has asked Labor Secretary Hilda Solis to state clearly what a green job is. So far, he hasn’t gotten an answer…
    h t t p://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Obama-team-uses-flimflammery-to-inflate-job-numbers-976771-103672044.html

  107. Putting aside the Fiorina/Boxer fight and who you support – is this a good ad?

    No, I don’t like it. Maybe I am out of the mainstream but I felt Barbra Boxer’s request to be addressed by her title was understandable. It may have bugged other people or maybe they just feigned buggery as I am sure Fiorina is in this ad. I am sure Carlie understands what it means to, after having worked hard to gain a position, want to be addressed by the title that acknowledges that achievement.

    I am old, I didn’t work hard to get old, but it turns me off when someone thinks they are being complementary by calling me Miss, or young lady. I am a Mam, as in Yes mam.

  108. admin: they’re even beginning to use our “Big Media” line.
    ———————-
    And I am really beginning to embrace the idea that this wave is too big to stop. I understand that it is no time to sit back, but this wave is already bigger than I could have ever hoped, say back after Denver in 2008.

  109. Sir ad
    Think it is extremely forgettable and doubt it will have any impact on the race.
    Lame in my book.
    I wish the RNC and all the pacs would take on someone Schumer. He is so ripe. He is one of the biggest offenders but seems to be getting a hands off treatment, it kind of seems to me that they are letting Gillibrand take the heat while allowing this guy to go unscathed as he is part of the group.

  110. “DRAFT HILLARY” “IMPEACH the LEECH”

    SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

    9:00 a.m. Secretary Clinton meets with Lebanese President Michel Sleiman, at the Palace Hotel in New York City.

    10:10 a.m. Secretary Clinton meets with Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City.

    Secretary Clinton attends meetings and events with President Obama, in New York City

  111. I watched the Dancing with the Stars show for the first time on abc.com as i was intrigued that Palin’s daughter was a competitor. I think it’ll be interesting to see how far she goes. If she makes it into the top five I think it’ll be a testament to the Palin army. The young lady is not the worst but she is also not a trained performer. I at first thought it was really odd that she was doing it but it seems like a win win for the Palins. The daughter who has been scrutinized by the press gets to put her own face forward and even an early elimination can be called courageous and a decent run will be a testament to the average merican’s affinity for the popularism which is Palin.

  112. Lousy ad……Women are still fighting for respect

    I a;so don’t think Fiorina’s little sneer was working for her.

  113. admin
    I know this is a very vague request but a year or so ago you posted an article by a woman with a name similar to Marie Cucco regarding the sexism. I very much enjoyed her piece and wrote back to her. Got a response within an hour. I’d very much like to read more of her stuff and see her commentary on Palin but I can’t remember the exact name and have had no luck doing a search on variations. I know its a stretch but if you can recall off of the top of your head I would be most grateful.

  114. I think the reaction to the age depends on age, gender and life experience. I think women who lived through a certain period and struggled to attain status and respect in the workplace have one reaction. I think that younger women and most men do not have that sort of reaction. They are more likely to latch on to the point which is that boxer is arrogant, out of touch and disdainful of the military. That is my reaction to the message. I felt that way already so all this really does is remind me. My reaction to the visual presentation is immaterial.

  115. I think the Fiorina campaign could get more mileage from the broken promise as a superdelagate to support the state’s choice. Something along the lines of Boxer says she votes for you but does she?

  116. The establishment is reeling at the reaction of the Tea Party movement. In countless ways it shakes their world. Bill suggests that we may be entering into a period of time where facts do not matter. Certainly that was true in 2008 and if it was true then, then it was doubly true now. The reason for this can be summed up in two words. Big media. If the country has entered into a fact free political world, then it is because they led us there. They are the ones who, as Amdin explains have created the age of fake. Their bitter partisanship, their willingness to shape what they report to satisfy their narrative as opposed to objective reality, and their steady stream of pro administration propaganda which is now seen for what it is, has created this milneau. And coming at a time of economic collapse only exacerbates the problem. We are beyond the point where facts matter because no one can agree on a single set of facts, there are too few problemsolvers and celebrity trumps everything. The end results points to a grand climeractic which shv and hedges worry about. Shirer too if he was still living. What you see now is Republicans like Specter, Murkowski, Castle and Crist losing in the primaries but unwilling to accept the verdict of voters, and running or threatening to run as independents. That will exacerbate the problem too. Frankly I wish Hillary had done that, but that is the exception.

  117. In law they have what is called res judicata– let the prior decision stand, unless it was procedurally flawed or constitutionally impaired. If you lose the case you do not appeal simply because you lost. You do not rush into another court and ask for another trial just because you do not like the verdict. But that is what these erstwhile republicans are doing, but interestingly the democrats care more for obama than they do for this country and would rather die than switch.

  118. For Wikipedia fans. And a funny story worth reading.

    Someone did a prank on Limbaugh by planting false information on Wikipedia.


    It looks like the information came from Wikipedia. The edit history of the page about Judge Vinson shows that the bear allegations Limbaugh mentioned were added late Sunday (September 12), edited on Monday, and then removed entirely on Tuesday, all by the same anonymous person (“Pensacolian”). Limbaugh’s show runs from noon to 3 p.m. Eastern, and the information was deleted at 2:21 Tuesday afternoon. So it would appear that somebody who knew Limbaugh does research on Wikipedia, and that he would be talking about Vinson on Tuesday, posted the bogus story hoping Limbaugh would repeat it, and then deleted the info once he did.
    ….
    Limbaugh said on Tuesday, September 14, that liberals should be worried about Vinson because he is an avid hunter and amateur taxidermist who has killed three brown bears and once mounted their heads over his courtroom door to “instill the fear of God into the accused,” taking them down later when liberal animal-rights groups protested. Number of true facts in that statement: zero.

    http://www.loweringthebar.net/2010/09/im-not-davy-crockett-says-judge-accused-by-limbaugh-of-bear-murders.html

  119. Ooh this is heating up

    Tim Cahill camp shocker
    Top strategist quits, fears re-election of Deval Patrick

    http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1283786&format=text

    Treasurer Tim Cahill’s floundering gubernatorial bid suffered another huge blow last night when his top strategist quit, saying the independent candidate’s slim hopes are only hurting Republican Charlie Baker’s chances.

    “We have to deal with reality as it is and not the way it ought to be,” said John Weaver, a national GOP powerbroker who quit Cahill’s campaign last night. “I would prefer Tim Cahill be the next governor. That’s not going to happen.”

    Weaver, who helped orchestrate U.S. Sen. John McCain’s 2000 presidential bid, told the Herald the move was “not abrupt” and had been building for some time.

    “It’s clear to me the choice is between Charlie Baker and Gov. (Deval) Patrick,” Weaver told the Herald last night. “I don’t want to be a party by helping Tim to in effect, help reelect one of the most liberal governors in the country, and that’s Gov. Patrick.”

    He added: “I think the world of Tim. I think he’d be a great governor. But it’s clear the voters are deciding between two people.”

    Cahill’s campaign spokeswoman, Amy Birmingham, did not return repeated calls last night.

    The move comes as Cahill’s poll numbers have tanked, with some showing him with just five percent of the vote.

    Baker spokeswoman Amy Goodrich said: “John Weaver is a very talented and smart guy. This is a big loss (for Cahill). But we’re proud to have his support.”

    Cahill’s camp trumpeted the arrival of Weaver and three other former McCain operatives in March, portraying their addition as proof his independent bid had strong GOP support and that he wasn’t just a Democrat in disguise.

    Weaver announced his decision on Twitter yesterday, saying: “It’s just not going to happen for Tim and continuing on would only help Patrick and hurt Baker.”

    The Republican Governors Association, which is backing Baker as part of an initiative to pick up GOP seats nationwide, said the move is another blow to the struggling campaign.

    “We took Tim Cahill’s campaign a lot more serious when we saw the team that he had put together,” said RGA spokesman Chris Schrimpf. “Now it’s clear that he has lost any credibility that he’s running a serious campaign.”

  120. Those democrats who supported Obama and are about to pay the price need to stop belly aching, and trying to distance themselves for The One and his catastrophic policies. They should embrace him now with open arms right as they face angry constituents now as they did then. They should tell their constituents fuck off just as they did through their actions when it counted. Come on people. Just be honest about it. Regardless of the lies they tell us now, they will cling to Barack every step of the way if they are re elected. These brave hearts should consider take a leaf from the book of history, and see themselves as the 300 Spartans at the battle of Thermpolaye who died to save western civilization. Duty now as then. Nunc pro tunc. The only difference here is that the man they will support til their dying breath is destroying the middle class and civilization under the rubric of change. Change is not always a good thing. But you cannot tell these people. They are too arrogant. And I hope no voter is actually dumb enough to believe they will change. When they return to Washington that pledge will be soon forgotten. As far as the Republicans are concerned this so called pledge is a white flag to Obama. They have got to get somebody like DeMint, who will fight Obama. Boeher and McConnell are part of the status quo, so I am all in favor of electing them based on Hobsons choice, but the long term answer lies with the Tea Parties and new young politicians who believe in America, and fortunately they do exist in the next generation of leaders.

  121. How can someone like Michelle who is a glutton when it comes to lavish vacations gowns and jewelery at taxpayers expense presume to lecture the country on the need reduce calories, control your appetite, so we can end the scourge of child hood obesity with in generation? Answer: it is an easier ploy than creating jobs, and 58% of the electorate did vote for the fraud she is married to. So why not slip them another mickey finn so they do not notice the damage he is doing. The strategy is so brilliant that it must have come from spin doctor Axelgrease. And what do the big media lap dogs do with it. Because her last name is Obama they lap it up.

  122. The Arbitrator has assured me that there is something called the epheous bird which has the unique ability to fly backwards. I have not been able to locate it on google so either the spelling is wrong or else it is the stuff of myth and legend. But whenever I hear Obama say it is now my fault, I inherited this mess, it is Bush’s fault, I say is yes but you were the one who promised change and the only change we are seeing from you, is you are making things worse. Or, better still, there goes the epheous bird Barack. Its distinctive sound is not the normal bird call but shouting out the words of his speechwriter through a teleprompter which at this point has little effect.

  123. Clinton set to meet with Syrian FM in New York

    By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER
    09/24/2010 01:32

    US Secretary of State will hold rare meeting with Syrian counterpart, in sign of increasing US interest in reviving Israeli-Syrian peace efforts.

    WASHINGTON – US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will hold a rare meeting with her Syrian counterpart Monday, in a sign of intensifying US interest in reviving Israeli-Syrian peace efforts.

    Her meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem in New York on the sidelines of the opening of the United Nations General Assembly is due to be followed by Syrian Vice Foreign Minister Faisal Miqdad’s own trip to Washington later in the week.

    “The foreign minister’s visit to New York provides an opportunity for the secretary to continue our ongoing discussion of peace and regional stability with the Syrian government,” a State Department official said.

    “By definition, a comprehensive Middle East peace will require an agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, as well as Syria and Israel, Lebanon and Israel and the full normalization of relations between Israel and its neighbors.”

    Miqdad made a similar trip to Washington last year and will this time visit with several senior State Department officials, though the meetings have yet to be finalized.

    The discussions, according to the State Department official, “will focus on our bilateral relationship and on our efforts to facilitate a comprehensive Middle East peace, in which Syria plays an important role.”

    The US has been eager to ensure that Syria doesn’t play the role of spoiler in the direct negotiations recently undertaken by the Palestinians and Israel.

    With visits to Damascus and now in the US, officials want to encourage Syria to move back toward the peace process. Syria broke off indirect talks with Israel during the Gaza war in December 2008.

    http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=189071

  124. September 24, 2010
    Liberal Blogger Accuses White House of “Hippie Punching”

    Posted by Stephanie Condon

    The White House yesterday beseeched liberal bloggers to help the administration rally Democratic voters this November, but instead, the Democrats’ liberal base decided to let the White House know just how disappointed they are in the administration.

    White House senior adviser David Axelrod told liberal bloggers on a conference call yesterday, “You play a great role in informing people about the stakes of elections,” the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent reports.

    Blogger Susan Madrak of the website Crooks and Liars reportedly retorted, “Have you ever heard of hippie punching?” Madrak was referencing a phrase thrown around by bloggers who think the Obama administration has treated its liberal base with disdain.

    “You want us to help you, the first thing I would suggest is enough of the hippie punching,” she said. “We’re the girl you’ll take under the bleachers but you won’t be seen with in the light of day.”

    Madrak reportedly implored to Axelrod, “Don’t make our jobs harder,” to which he replied, “Right back at’cha. Right back at’cha.”

    The exchange crystallizes the strained relationship between the White House, which has attempted to implement a liberal agenda without ignoring conservative ideas, and the liberal base, which is resentful of the White House for letting conservatives and moderates hold up important liberal goals.

    The White House, for instance, has allowed the Defense Department to take a slow approach to repealing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that prohibits gays or lesbians in the military from being open about their sexuality. After liberal bloggers this summer angrily lashed out about the delayed progress, a Pentagon spokesperson replied that criticisms from the left were “not helpful.”

    Later in the summer, White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs blasted the”professional left” as unrepresentative of liberals “in America.”

    One of the Democrats’ biggest challenges this November appears to be motivating its liberal base: polls consistently show that Republican voters are more motivated than Democrats to vote in the midterms.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20017528-503544.html

  125. Some Obama Allies Fear School Lunch Bill Could Rob Food Stamp Program

    By ROBERT PEAR
    Published: September 23, 2010

    WASHINGTON — In her campaign to reduce childhood obesity and improve school nutrition, Michelle Obama has become entangled in a fight with White House allies, including liberal Democrats and advocates for the poor.

    cont.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/us/24food.html

  126. An argument has sprung up as to whether America is a center-left or center-right nation. Some dude on huffpo is opining that the fact that only 20% of americans self-identify as liberal is horsesh*t, because polls show most favor gay marriage, or SOME legal abortion, or various othersingle issues where they agree with the liberals.

    What the arguers on either side fail to recognize is what Americans are NOT. And that is Statists. Americans are categorically not Statists. They are not full-on libertarians, because most realize that there are some jobs that govt needs to do.

    But the public did not throw our GWB and the GOP because they have suddenly converted to being all in favor of a massive state making decisions for them. It was, in part, GW’s abuses of the power of the state – with wiretapping and no-bid contracts and lying about wars etc that the people had had enough of.

    When the GOP becomes power-hungry and controlling busybodies in people’s lives, they get thrown out. And when the Dems do the same thing – get power hungry and interfering and poking their noses into private decisions (albeit on different topics), they will get their asses thrown out too.

    Americans want govt that does a good job at what we ask them to do, and STOPS THERE. No more, no less. We want govt to set the stage and keep the stadium lights on and referee the game and send in medics when needed. We do not, and never HAVE, wanted them on the field telling we the people to get to the sidelines because they know how to do this better. If you want support for a govt program, you’d better be able to assure the public that you know your boundaries, and won’t overstep them.

    The defining nature of the American voter is that we are not STATISTS, we are individualists, whether our views lean more liberal or more conservative. We will allow govt to do things for us when needed, but we want it crystal clear where their power starts and stops. The first party to figure out the bald truth that has been staring them in the face forever will be dominant for decades.

    The American people are in no mood to hand either party the keys to the car. What they are saying is : “Hey, WE keep the real keys. You get the valet key. That’s all. So don’t get cocky.”

  127. CBS:
    The exchange crystallizes the strained relationship between the White House, which has attempted to implement a liberal agenda without ignoring conservative ideas, and the liberal base, which is resentful of the White House for letting conservatives and moderates hold up important liberal goals.

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

    Hey, CBS forgot to ask if he’d like another pillow.

  128. Under Obama, the radical Black Agenda takes precedence over the welfare of the institution or the country. From Ayers to Rham to NBP this is what he is all about. This was predicted by a friend of mine who saw this happen in her own life in the heath care industry throughout a major mid west state after a black bureaucrat took the helm. My friend married a black man so this was a statement of fact, not racial prejudice. And any person who defends something like this has got to understand that defending an indefensible position does more harm than good.
    ———————————————————————————————————-
    Voting Rights Official Calls Black Panther Dismissal a ‘Travesty of Justice’

    Published September 24, 2010
    | FoxNews.com
    Print Email Share Comments (123) Text Size

    Members of the New Black Panther Party are seen outside a Philadelphia polling station in 2008. (YouTube)
    The Justice Department is ignoring civil rights cases that involve white victims and wrongly abandoned a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party last year, a top department official testified Friday. He called the department’s conduct a “travesty of justice.”

    Christopher Coates, former voting chief for the department’s Civil Rights Division, spoke under oath Friday morning before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, in a long-awaited appearance that had been stonewalled by the Justice Department for nearly a year.

    Coates went in depth about a controversial decision to dismiss charges against New Black Panther members after they were videotaped outside a Philadelphia polling place in 2008 dressed in military-style uniforms and allegedly hurling racial slurs while one brandished a night stick.

    The case has drifted in and out of the limelight over the past year as the commission has struggled to investigate it. Ex-Justice official J. Christian Adams fueled the controversy when he testified in July and accused his former employer of showing “hostility” toward cases that involve white victims and black defendants.

    Nearly three months later, Coates backed up Adams’ claims. In lengthy and detailed testimony, he said the department cultivates a “hostile atmosphere” against “race-neutral enforcement” of the Voting Rights Act.

    He said civil rights attorneys stick to cases that involve minority victims and that the Black Panther case was dismissed following “pressure” by the NAACP and “anger” at the case within the Justice Department itself.

    “That anger was the result of their deep-seated opposition to the equal enforcement of the Voting Rights Act against racial minorities and for the protection of white voters who have been discriminated against,” he said.

    Coates said that a 2005 case against a black official in Mississippi over voter intimidation claims had stirred a backlash in the department and from civil rights groups — and that the Black Panther case was no different.

    The Bush Justice Department first brought the case against three members of the group, accusing them in a civil complaint of violating the Voting Rights Act. The Obama administration initially pursued the case and at one point won a default judgment, but the administration last year moved to dismiss the charges after getting one of the New Black Panther members to agree to not carry a “deadly weapon” near a polling place until 2012.

    Coates dismissed as weak the department’s rationale for abandoning the case, saying the department let one of the Black Panther members off the hook because a local police officer had determined he was a Democratic Party poll watcher. Coates called it “extraordinarily strange” for the department to rely on this and urged the commission to consider the legal backlash had the Panthers been members of the Ku Klux Klan instead.

    “To understand the rationale of these articulated reasons for gutting this case … one only has to state the facts in the racial reverse,” he said. Coates said that with the United States becoming increasingly diverse, it is “absolutely essential” that the law be enforced equally.

    “As important as the mandate in the Voting Rights Act is to protect minority voters, white voters also have an interest in being able to go to the polls without having race-haters such as Black Panther King Samir Shabazz whose public rhetoric includes such statements as ‘kill cracker babies’ … standing at the entrance of the polling place with a billy club in his hand hurling racial slurs at voters,” he said. “Given this outrageous conduct, it was a travesty of justice for the Department of Justice not to allow attorneys in the voting section to obtain nationwide injunctive relief against” the defendants.

    Coates has since last year been transferred to the U.S. attorney’s office in South Carolina. Coates said Friday that the Justice Department told him not to testify before the commission after he was first subpoenaed in December 2009 — in testifying Friday, Coates claimed protection from retaliation under “whistleblower” laws.

    Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., also wrote a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder warning the department not to punish Coates in any way for his testimony.

    The Justice Department has denied the allegations over its handling of the Black Panther case.

    The department said in July that the case was dismissed “based on the merits, not the race, gender or ethnicity of any party involved.”

  129. I forgot to mention race baiter Wright, who was a major force in the development of Obama’s character. Same with communist Franklin Marshall. These were Barack role models and their influence is deeply buried in his psyche.

  130. NFL Stars: Sarah Palin Would Do “More Damage” In White House Than In Playboy

    http://www.sportsgrid.com/nfl/ochocinco-owens-palin-video/

    Cincinnati Bengals receivers Chad Ochocinco and Terrell Owens would rather see Sarah Palin in the White House than in Playboy, according to an interview the two did with Versus’ “Daily Line.”

    “There is nothing really about Sarah Palin… that is Plaboyish,” said Owens.

    Ochocinco agreed, saying that she doesn’t really fit the description of someone you’d see in the magazine. However, he conceded that her “little glasses” make her cute.

    “She’s like a soccer mom,” he said.

    The two said that Palin would “do more damage” in the White House than in the nudie magazine.

    So, what would have been more incendiary? These comments, or if the two had said, “Yes, we want to see Sarah Palin in Playboy! She belongs in Playboy!” I’d say the latter.

  131. Coates: Obama appointee told me to stop pursuing race-neutral enforcement of Voting Rights Act

    PJTV is broadcasting the testimony of Christopher Coates to the Civil Rights Commission live this morning, but they already have his opening statement available in PDF format at Pajamas Media. It contains at least one bombshell, which is that Obama appointee Loretta King ordered Coates to stop asking applicants whether they supported race-neutral enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The question became necessary because of resistance in the Civil Rights division from career attorneys to enforce the law when it resulted in African-American defendants rather than victims, an attitude that Coates first encountered in the Bush era:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/09/24/coates-obama-appointee-told-me-to-stop-pursuing-race-neutral-enforcement-of-voting-rights-act/

  132. This is going to get a whole lot nastier…………….

    Prosecutor: DoJ bias against whites

    A Justice Department prosecutor, defying his superiors by testifying at a U.S. Civil Rights Commission hearing Friday into the department’s handling of a voter-intimidation case against a fringe African American militant group, blasted “senior political appointees” at Justice for “gutting” the case.

    In his opening testimony, prosecutor Christopher Coates also suggested he was working against a dominant Justice Department culture which discouraged enforcement of civil rights laws in a “race-neutral” way that would protect whites as well as blacks.

    Coates, a 13-year veteran of the civil rights division who was chief of its voting section until early this year, charged that his supervisors systematically downgraded the case against the New Black Panthers, which was accused of trying to intimidate white voters at the polls in Philadelphia during the 2008 general election. When he objected to his supervisors, Coates said, the Justice Department’s attempt to silence him was part of what he called “the hostile atmosphere that has existed within [Justice’s Civil Rights] Division for a long time against race-neutral enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.”

    “I did not lightly decide to comply with your subpoena in contradiction to the DOJ’s directives not to testify,” Coates said. “If incorrect representations are going to successfully thwart inquiry into the systemic problems regarding race-neutral enforcement of the Voting Rights Act by the Civil Rights Division, problems that were manifested….in the New Black Panther Party case that end is not going to be furthered or accomplished by my sitting idly or silently by at the direction of my supervisors while incorrect information is provided. I do not believe that I am professionally, ethically, legally, or morally bound to allow such a result to occur.”

    http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=443B995E-A9C4-06C7-E25B87014EB135C3

  133. admin
    September 24th, 2010 at 12:06 am

    The Hillbuzz boys think this is a great ad.

    http://hillbuzz.org/2010/09/23/great-merciful-zeus-carly-fiorina-lets-barbara-call-me-senator-boxer-have-it/

    We don’t think it is good at all.

    Putting aside the Fiorina/Boxer fight and who you support – is this a good ad?

    ———
    I think the ad is petty and therefore, so must be the person using it to win an important election for Senator of California.

    The ad sucks!!!!

    Why doesn’t Carly talk about the criticisms based on her career – to set it straight with voters, like the massive outsourcing of jobs overseas under her direction at HP?

    Why would she spend a boat load of money to produce a picture perfect ad with such little content of value?

  134. I want to see couric fired. Still not sure about Palin but I was offended by that interview. Like most people I believed what the news said at 6 pm every night. They had me. Then along came 08 and I’ve looked back and what I feel is betrayed. What newspapers do you read? Egad. I wish she had answered with something like none which report the drivel the way you do.

  135. I also think the ad is stupid…I use to think Fiorina was good, but after hair comment and now this….I think she must not want to win.

    henry, I agree, I can’t stand Katy Couric…after her interview of Hillary during the primary….I truly hope she gets fired.

  136. Anybody who renames himself ochocinco is an idiot. Anybody who renames himself (LEGALLY) ochocinco thinking it means 85 is a HUGE IDIOT.

    and thank you 49er’s for getting rid of Terrell Owens A LONG TIME AGO.

  137. Which Malik Shabazz Visited White House in July 2009, Mr. President?

    http://biggovernment.com/sright/2010/09/24/which-malik-shabazz-visited-white-house-in-july-2009-mr-president/

    In May 2009, the Obama/Holder Justice Department dropped charges in a voter intimidation case against Malik Shabazz, a leader of the New Black Panther Party, despite having already won a summary judgment against him, and his New Black Panther Party callegues King Samir Shabazz and Jerry Jackson who were video-taped outside polling place in Philadelphia intimidating voters as they arrived on election day, 2008. In July 2009, when Congress began looking into the matter, someone named Malik Shabazz visited the private residence at the White House.

    ……………..hmm interesting.

  138. Moon, Now that is interesting….we all know this mandate to not go forward with this black panther case came from Obama.

    I heard today them saying that the voting rights act was enacted to protect only black voters….so they feel they can just let these charges go down the toilet.

    They certainly did not try to stop this intimidation of Hillary supporters.

  139. Check out what mop had to say @ 12:01 and add it to this:
    David Westin is resigning from his position as president of ABC News, which he’s held since 1997, apparently because of a “long-running conflict… over the financial standing of the news division.”
    h t t p://gawker.com/5631358/abc-news-chief-david-westin-resigns
    Pretty certain I heard Diane Sawyer say so recently during an evening news broadcast, but the link given is not as tight as I would have preferred.

  140. Maybe they are afraid that when Obama gets exposed, Big Media will also get exposed for the part they played in getting him elected!

  141. Rolling Stones Take Over The United Nations
    ==================================================
    Former U.S. President BILL CLINTON turned the United Nations headquarters into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame on Thursday (23Sep10) when he invited ROLLING STONES stars MICK JAGGER and RONNIE WOOD to a meeting of his Global Initiative.
    Some of the world’s most powerful individuals gave speeches at the annual gathering, including current U.S. President Barack Obama, his wife Michelle and Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates.
    And Clinton made a little extra room for two special guests – Jagger, who is currently based in New York, and Wood, who is in the Big Apple promoting his new solo album Feel Like Playing.
    Clinton, who spent time with Jagger in South Africa this summer (10) watching World Cup soccer games, took the opportunity to reconnect with Wood, with whom he shares a love of art.
    The former politician has bought a number of the rocker’s paintings and Wood promised to send him more from his latest collection.
    Speaking to WENN after his audience with Clinton, the Rolling Stone revealed, “It was a last-minute thing. I had no idea I was going. It was a bit like being at a lecture, but I got to hang out with Bill afterwards, which was cool.
    “He gave me a hug and said ‘I want your new album’ and then he said ‘I’ve got your paintings up in my house, in my office.’ and I told him, ‘You’ve got some more coming.’
    “I really like him. He’s a really down-to-earth guy and I think he’s the best president they’ve had since Kennedy. He’s the most popular at least.”

  142. Weird, why are they all going now, NBC,CNN and ABC bosses all out on their asses. Whats up?
    ————————————————————–
    If it was only one boss, there could be many possible explanations. But when they all go en masse, these so called competitors, it suggest a common reason. I think it could be this: they i)conspired with each other to put an incompetent man in the white house, ii) have promoted the big lie to protect him, iii) have turned against the truth and the American People in the process, iv) have lost their ratings sponsors, are taking their organizations down a blind alley where politicians may no longer accept them as the gatekeepers and v) jointly and severally have tarnished the image of the organizations they work for, created shareholder dissent, and ceded market share to FOX.

    IF that is the explanation, then their day of reckoning is at hand. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY81jg-iAwQ

  143. If you look at this from the standpoint of competitive strategy these big media bosses are morons. They are the modern day equivalent of Mow Larry and Curley. You cannot suffer morons in multi billion dollar empires gladly.

  144. Waterloo: Obama’s approval at 42%, down eight points in three weeks

    Gruesome. Wall to wall, probably the single worst poll for him that we’ve seen since he took office. Until the next poll, that is.

    As Ace points out, this isn’t even among registered or likely voters, both of whom one would think are more politically attuned and therefore angrier right now than the general population. This is among adults.

    The president’s approval rating now stands at 42 percent – an all time low in CNN polling and 8 points lower than where Obama was only three weeks ago. Moreover, 56 percent of all Americans think the president has fallen short of their expectations…

    In even worse news for congressional Democrats, likely voters say they are considerably more likely to vote for a candidate the president opposes than one he supports. On the other hand, 50 percent of voters said they would be more likely to vote for a Tea Party-backed candidate while a third of Americans said Tea Party support would dissuade their vote for a candidate.

    Fully/only 56 percent take the Jon Stewart line that Obama has fallen short of expectations, which helps explain why the GOP is out to a nine-point lead on the generic ballot taken in the same poll. And mind you, these numbers come on the same day that Baghdad Bob-ish House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is crowing that House Democrats are “clamoring” for Obama to come to their districts to campaign for them.

    Just one question: Is this an outlier or the start of a trend? Gallup’s had The One as far down as 41 percent last month, but recent polls have shown him up anywhere between 44 and 49. (The latest Rasmussen poll of likely voters has him at 47 percent.) It doesn’t matter all that much what the precise number is — as long as it’s below 50 percent, he’s staring at an average loss of 36 House seats in the midterms — but I wonder if the fact that it’s a poll of adults instead of voters is messing with the data. It could be that my assumption up above is wrong and that adults are actually less likely than registered/likely voters to support Obama because non-voters are reacting mainly to the horrible economy whereas voters include dedicated liberals who are motivated by ideology, specific policies, etc. If I’m right then his polling is probably a bit better than it looks here, albeit still gruesome.

    Exit question: If it’s not an outlier, what explains the big downturn over the past three weeks? Tea-party fever? One too many Slurpee jokes? Nothing’s been going on policy-wise, really.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/09/24/waterloo-obama%E2%80%99s-approval-at-42-down-eight-points-in-three-weeks/

  145. “Exit question: If it’s not an outlier, what explains the big downturn over the past three weeks?”

    He’s been on TeeVee almost every day.

  146. Too Bad, So Sad…..More from the Age of Fake:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews_excl/ynews_excl_pl3712

    The Fake Artist who stole a picture to make a Fake Poster of a Fake Poseur is sad….

    “Obama was the delivery device in theory. Now, I realize that he maybe is not the correct delivery device…”

    “To be sure, Fairey still supports Obama, and he says he would use his talents to assist the president’s re-election efforts in 2012. But he said that he couldn’t design the same Hope poster today, because the spirit of the Obama campaign hasn’t carried over to the Obama presidency. ”

    “Maybe it was inevitable that Hope would fade.”

    “…They wanted somebody who was going to fight against the status quo, and I don’t think that Obama has done that.”

    +++++++++++++++

    A Faker Call a Fake a Fake.

  147. #
    moononpluto
    September 24th, 2010 at 2:14 pm

    Weird, why are they all going now, NBC,CNN and ABC bosses all out on their asses. Whats up?
    _____________________________

    Clearing the way for HIllary- A new broom sweeps clean. I had this discussion a few months ago with a fellow Hillary supporter. At the time we discussed how the hammer would come down on Tweety, Olberman, Williams, Scarborough, Brzezinski getting rid of the Hillary haters clearing a new path for her for the presidential run. It didn’t occur to us the very top of the administrative echelon would go first. However, it does make sense. They were the arbiters of the Hillary hate generated during the 08′ Primary. They delivered the scripts to the anchors who more than happily delivered the insults, dismemberment and discussion of female parts (remember the flap about Hillary’s cleavage?). Openly attempting to deeply humiliate and wound her feelings in the hope of arousing anger. During the debates, Russert was the exemplary wizard.. His insults to Hillary were an affront implies open disrespect or offense shown, as it were, to the face

    This may be Step #1 before Tweety and his ilk are assigned to new up and coming furtive news stations about to get their first tv transmission…. whispers designating Borneo as the new destination. The pygmies will enjoy watching the ‘funny’ looking white man swatting mosquitoes off his forehead while interviewing local tribal Chiefs up for re-election. Major networks agreeing to provide interpretors for the interviews however, adequate security was unavailable. Rumors of cannibalism were found to be just that, rumors. The last recorded incident was May of 86′. Bub-bye and Best of Luck.. y’all!

Comments are closed.