While Obama has dithered the unstated policy from the White House boob shop has been “hurry up and wait”. The smart policy makers were forced to declare that things were stable in Egypt while Obama played “eeny meeny miny mo” to try and figure out what to do.
The boobery from Obama has been ceaseless. From the first Obama pandered to Arabs and Muslims and snubbed Israel. Obama thought that if he strapped on a ukulele and sang “Tip Toe Through The Tulips With Me” the gangs governments of the Middle East would sing along. But these governments have interests and strategies that will not be swayed by Obama’s flood of words, backed up by more words and yet more words. Weakness is not respected in the Middle East and Barack Obama is weak and foolish.
Barack Obama first snubbed Israel and then tried to force Israel to listen to his sophomoric opinions on the “settlements issue” and relations with Palestinians. Israel slapped Obama in the face and pulled his ears.
Obama then bowed and scraped before Arab potentates and governments – begged them to listen to his pleas on bended knees. The Arab governments and Muslim leaders proceeded to do what they wanted and grab countries and positions – laughing all the way at Barack Obama.
Hillary Clinton, appearing on most of the Sunday morning news shows began to show the way out of the mess created by Barack Obama weakness.
At this very late hour what should the United States do and say? The first thing to do is to take a quick glimpse of regional developments:
Lebanon has (thanks Obama) been absorbed by Syria. After the 2005 assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri there was an uprising in the streets, a new Hope, as the Lebanese people demanded Syria leave their country. Today, Syrian terrorist proxy Hezbollah will form a new government with Prime Minister-designate Najib Mikati in charge. A total fail for Hope over reality, the people lost.
In the Gaza Strip, due to elections, Hamas and Hezbollah are in control. An Israeli-Egyptian blockade keeps the situation there bottled up and as yet unexploded.
After a 1979 revolution of the people which replaced the tyrannical Shah, Iran is in the grip of Islamic theocracy and headed towards acquisition of nuclear bombs. Recently the people of Iran tried to stage another revolution but the revolutionaries of old are the establishment of the present. The street calls for change, the hopes for change quickly turn to autocratic silence. The people lost again.
In most if not all instances, the revolution in the streets, hailed in the West as steps forward, ended in theocracy and authoritarianism. The people are tools to establish dictatorships. The hopes that start with calls from the street for democracy – end in small groups of men who seize power and throttle the voice of the people.
The United States policy should be: Egypt For The Egyptians. The United States now cannot determine much of what will happen within Egypt but we can declare that we will block states such as Iran from overtly or covertly turning Egypt into a Lebanon.
American policy should be aimed at making sure that Egypt moves towards a modern society which provides economic opportunity for its people. What is most important is that American policy must be aimed at protecting Egypt from takeover by Islamic extremists. American policy must be particularly aimed at preventing Iran from winning what many understand to be a “proxy war” between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Evil choice, meet Evil choice.
Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State spoke strongly today and appeared to move in the right direction and away from Obama’s dithering. We hope that Hillary Clinton is the lead force determining American foreign policy at this moment but we fear the worst – that Obama persists in bumbling his way into the conversation. Barack Obama is having a Jimmy Carter moment – Obama’s Iran is Egypt.
We saw Egyptians stand up to Muslim extremists. We saw Egyptians stand up with courage and become “human shields” at Coptic Christian Christmas services. We saw Egyptian Muslims “flock to Coptic churches across the country to attend Coptic Christmas Eve mass, to show solidarity with the nation’s Coptic minority, but also to serve as “human shields” against possible attacks by Islamist militants.” If Egypt leads the Arab/Muslim world into such enlightened modernity then the turmoil in Egyptian streets today is indeed a moment of great opportunity and historic hope and glory.
The Iron Veil threatens to fall. Some of the Obama Oblivious on the left prefer to hope against reality and history that people rising in the streets against dictators is something to cheer in every instance. But as we learned in the 1930s and later on in Iran that is not always the case. These Obama Oblivious think that wishing will make it so. But the dangers are real. The cheering on must be muted with thinking.
“Democracy, human rights and economic reform are in the best interests of the Egyptian people,” she told ABC News.
“Any government that does not try to move in that direction cannot meet the legitimate interest of the people.” [snip]
“We want to see an orderly transition so that no-one fills a void, that there not be a void, that there be a well thought-out plan that will bring about a democratic participatory government,” Mrs Clinton told the “Fox News Sunday” programme.”
“She warned that the U.S. would not accept two alternatives as potential ends to the current crisis: “democracy of six months or a year and then evolving essentially into a military dictatorship” or – a scarier specter for American policymakers –what she described on NBC’s “Meet The Press” as “faux democacy like the elections we saw in Iran…where you have one election 30 years ago and the people stay in power and become less and less responsive to their people.” [snip]
“We want to see free and fair elections and we expect that that will be one of the outcomes of what is going on in Egypt right now,” Clinton said.”
“Clinton, on CBS’s “Face The Nation,” addressed the issue of an Islamic regime following Mubarak. “Well, first I’m not speculating about who goes or who stays. And I’m not prepared to comment on what kind of democratic process the Egyptian people can construct for themselves. But we obviously want to see people who are truly committed to democracy — not to imposing any ideology on Egyptians.”
“We do not want to see a change or a regime that would actually continue to foment violence or chaos — either because it didn’t exist or because it had a different view in which in which to pose on the Egyptian people,” she said.
“Barack Obama was not, and is not qualified to be President of the United States. Put aside Obama’s flim-flam history, the thugs he surrounds himself with, his treacheries, his total lack of accomplishments other than self-advancement, his risible résumé, his stinky body odor, the secretiveness of his past, the lack of documentation about earlier periods of his life, drug use, the self-admitted inability to keep a paper in front of him for 2 seconds before losing it, the lies about lost documents from his Chicago legislative office, the grabbing of credit for work others have done, the race-baiting, the woman-hating, the profitable alliances with criminals which even got him a house, the lack of interest in his constituents, the obvious lies when he denies positions he has even affixed his signature to on questionnaires, his lies about being a reformer when he swims in the swamps of Chicago corruption, the ugly church mentor of 20 plus years, his smearing of opponents with sexual or racial slurs, the gay-bashing, the secret deals, the incompetence, the long list of corruptions and boobery… – put all this history we have documented aside. Barack Obama is not qualified to be President because he does not have a world-view which is congruent with reality.”
During the general election campaign of 2008 we argued Obama had no idea what to do when a 3:00 a.m. phone call came. Hillary had earlier made that argument and it was denounced as “racist”. During the general election campaign John McCain acted quickly when Russia invaded Georgia. Obama boobed about with generic statements and waited on sidelines. We quoted Roger Simon:
“McCain just pounded away on his central argument: Obama just didn’t “understand” how to deal with Pakistan; how dangerous it is to meet with foreign leaders without preconditions; how serious the Russian invasion of Georgia was; the price of failure in Iraq.
“He doesn’t understand, he doesn’t get it,” McCain said of Obama, also saying, “There is a little bit of naiveté here.”[snip]
“I don’t need any on-the-job training,” McCain said. “I am ready to go at it right now.”
Foreign leaders saw the boobery at the top and laughed knowing they could take advantage of the simpleton American president. “Sucker” they said.
World populations at first celebrated the boob-in-chief. But after the betrayal of the nascent grassroots Iranian revolution world populations understood that Obama could not be trusted. They also learned what we have repeatedly written “if you elect a boob, expect boobery”.
During the Iranian uprising Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tried her best to ameliorate the Obama weakness. Hillary Clinton understands “The Danger Of Obama Weakness“. Hillary tried to help the situation in Egypt today. She warned the Egyptian government to listen to the people and condemned the shutdown of the Internet. But the rebellion in Egyptian streets is not the same as the turmoil in Iran.
Egypt is the ballgame. Since time immemorial the way to regional stability has been a strong Egypt. When the Persians (modern day Iran) rose up the counterweight was Egypt. Whether it was ancient Assyria or ancient Babylon the counterweight was always Egypt. The realpolitik way to modern day peace has always been an Egyptian and Israeli alliance beyond the peace treaty signed by the two countries and imposition of peace in the region.
The revolution in the Egyptian streets is strong and growing stronger. It is doubtful the current government will survive. While we hope that this Egyptian revolution demonstrates Arab and Muslim population are sick and tired of the tyrannies they are oppressed by – and while change is desperately needed in the Arab/Muslim world and therefore the revolutionaries should be cheered on – we know that Hope is not a strategy and Change is not always for the best.
“To be an American president means having a world view. Hillary Clinton has a world-view. Hillary Clinton mocked Obama in her insightful “celestial choirs” speech. Hillary Clinton mocked Obama about his foolish “no preconditions, in the first year, anywhere, anytime” meetings with America’s enemies. Hillary Clinton mocked Obama as “naive”. Hillary Clinton was saying that Obama did not know or understand how the world works. Hillary Clinton was saying that Obama’s world view was not congruent with reality. Hillary Clinton has been proved right.
Today, Leslie Gelb begins a very polite and gentle narrative, saying pretty much that Obama better get a reality based world-view, quickly or we all face continued disaster with a boob in charge. Writes Gelb, “If the president wants to be more than a one-term wonder, he needs to have a vision.”[snip]
A world view is not a set of positions, it is a deep understanding which is in the bones of atavistic history. [snip]
Jimmy Carter was a man conflicted. He wanted to be Pope but settled for president. He reacted to events because he did not have a world-view from the outset which comported with reality. Wanting to be an honest man and a peacemaking leader he instead was forced to react to evil in the world and bumbled and stumbled badly. Iran is a great part of his sad legacy. [snip]
Obama is the problem. Obama is not qualified to be president.It’s like asking a chicken to soar with the eagle. It’s like asking Obama to be Hillary Clinton with her lifetime of experience. It’s like asking Obama to be Hillary Clinton with her lifetime fighting to make the world a better place even if she makes enemies while making things better. [snip]
Obama is the problem. Rahm Emanuel was successful in the Clinton White House because Hillary demoted him when he needed to be demoted, disciplined him when he needed to be disciplined, smacked him on the head when he needed to be smacked. All the Clinton era appointees in the world will not help Obama because the problem is Obama. Obama is not qualified to be president. Obama can’t be trusted by friend nor foe. Obama can’t be trusted.”
The United States is not helpless nor without great power. But that great power requires someone who knows how to wield it. It would not help if Barack Obama had as his top advisors all Republicans. It would not help if Robert Gibbs was not an advisor. It would not help if Barack Obama had all neocons as his top advisors. It would not help if Ralph Nader and Dennis Kucinich were Obama’s top advisors. It would not help if Henry Kissinger, Albright, Baker, Schultz, McNamara, Dulles were Obama advisors. It does not help that Hillary Clinton is supposed to be a top advisor. THE PROBLEM IS BARACK OBAMA.
None of this is to say that the United States nor the American President is solely to blame for the turmoil in the world generally and in Egypt particularly. There is opportunity in every crisis. But the opportunity has to have as the goal a better and stronger United States. Barack Obama however only looks for opportunity as a vehicle for personal celebrity and applause.
The United States is not the problem. The advisors are not the problem. The problem is Barack Obama. The problem is that the 3:00 a.m. calls continue to ring in the office of a man who is not qualified to respond or is either on vacation or at the golf course.
Trying to count the lies in an Obama speech is like trying to count feathers in a windy hen-house. You’re bound to miss more than a few feathers in the count.
Mickey Kaus buried the lede in his analysis of last night’s bamboozlepalooza but at least he grabbed the one must-be-counted feather. Kaus quoted Obama: “In the coming months, my administration will develop a proposal to merge, consolidate, and reorganize the federal government in a way that best serves the goal of a more competitive America. I will submit that proposal to Congress for a vote – and we will push to get it passed.” Kaus then exposed the purpose of last night’s sewage overflow of words:
“Here is a sponge that can soak up Washington’s excess legislative energy while the Administration in effect marks time as it waits for the employment rate to rise and the health care law to take effect. It seems like stall tactic—hard to believe the Obama White House really cares about reorganization. But it’s a peculiar kind of stall tactic, since it’s also what we Californians call a “juice bill,” highly effective at squeezing campaign donations from every corporation or interest group that might be threatened if its pet agency gets reorganized. And that’s a lot of interest groups. Maybe contributing to Obama’s reelection campaign—or not contributing to one of the Republicans’ new independent expenditure campaigns—will encourage the Obamans to look after you! In short, this seems like Kabuki legislation for a post-Citizens United world, in which Democrats need to deter and intimidate the businesses who otherwise might spend money opposing them. It doesn’t really matter if the reorganization bill will pass—and Obama’s last line (“we will push”) suggests it won’t. The threat is what will get the juice flowing, and employ half of K-Street. Then Obama is happy and the lobbyists are happy. Win-win. But maybe I’m too cynical.”
“Why won’t the Dimocrats do what they have been saying they would do for decades? Because the fundraising must go on. The money must flow. The promises must be broken.
Dimocrats also understand that accomplishments must meet expectations and that trying sometimes means failure – which could cost them at the ballot box.
Dimocrats also understand that fulfilling a promise to a constituency means that constituency might become satisfied and walk away to other pursuits and other fundraisers.
Dimocrats also understand that fulfilling a promise to one constituency often means angering another constituency. Money might then flow to opponents.
Dimocrats also understand that they didn’t really mean all that stuff they said – that was only meant for the gullible.“
It is all a big scam. Instead of improved health care, there is merely access to unaffordable and useless insurance from Big Insurance; instead of real cost cutting there was a deal with Big PhaRma – all intended to prevent money from flowing to the opposition. It was a scam designed to get money and cut the flow of money to the opposition.
“We’ll put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges. We’ll make sure this is fully paid for, attract private investment, and pick projects based [on] what’s best for the economy, not politicians. [snip]
All these investments — in innovation, education, and infrastructure — will make America a better place to do business and create jobs. But to help our companies compete, we also have to knock down barriers that stand in the way of their success.
For example, over the years, a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries. Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and it has to change. (Applause.)
So tonight, I’m asking Democrats and Republicans to simplify the system. Get rid of the loopholes. Level the playing field. And use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years — without adding to our deficit. It can be done. (Applause.)”
Translation: it’s all about what is best for politicians up for reelection and how to raise a billion dollars. “Yes, We Can Flim-Flam Again and Again.”
The “review of government regulations” is a ploy to gin up campaign contributions and bundling efforts. Nothing will be done, but money will be raised. It’s “How To Succeed In Business Politics Without Really Trying”. The more dead on arrival proposals proposed, the more lobbyists will contribute. It’s a slush fund by another name. “Deficit reduction” to Obama is an R.S.V.P. invitation for lobbyists to an Obama contribution party.
Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.
“President Obama promised during his campaign that lobbyists “won’t find a job in my White House.”
So far, though, at least a dozen former lobbyists have found top jobs in his administration, according to an analysis done by Republican sources and corroborated by Politico.
Obama aides did not challenge the the list of lobbyists appointed to administration jobs, but they stressed that former lobbyists comprise a fraction of the more than 8,000 employees who will be hired by the new administration. And they pointed out that before Obama made his campaign-trail promise, he issued a more complete – and more nuanced – policy on former lobbyists.
Formalized in a recent presidential executive order, it forbids executive branch employees from working in an agency, or on a program, for which they have lobbied in the last two years.
Yet in the past few days, a number of exceptions have been granted, with the administration conceding at least two waivers and that a handful of other appointees will recuse themselves from dealing with matters on which they lobbied within the two-year window.”
Among the lobbyists Obama appointed: Eric Holder (Global Crossing), Tom Vilsack (NEA), William Lynn (Raytheon), William Corr (Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids), David Hayes (San Diego Gas & Electric), Mark Patterson (Goldman Sachs), Ron Klain (Coalition for Asbestos Resolution, U.S. Airways, Airborne Express and drug-maker ImClone), Mona Sutphen (Angliss International), Melody Barnes (American Civil Liberties Union, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the American Constitution Society and the Center for Reproductive Rights), Cecilia Munoz (National Council of La Raza), Patrick Gaspard (SEIU), Michael Strautmanis (American Association of Justice). Lobbyists are not necessarily “evil” and many work for worthwhile causes – but when Hillary Clinton said this Obama and his thugs jumped up and down and attacked.
Likewise, Hillary Clinton was attacked by Obama thugs and Big Media JournoListers for her (to our eyes exemplary) work with Wal-Mart. Now Michelle Obama chortles because she has worked a deal with Wal-Mart on a project she likes. Now Michelle Obama brags that so powerful is Wal-Mart that it will exert a monopoly style effect on pricing schemes of other retailers. The hypocrisy is staggering.
“Candidate Barack Obama repeatedly pledged on the campaign trail that working in his administration would not be “about serving your former employer, your future employer or your bank account.”
But with his administration at its midpoint, a traditional time for personnel turnover, it’s clear that despite Obama’s avowals, a longtime truism of Washington life — that a prestigious-sounding administration post can be a lucrative career enhancer — remains unchanged.
In recent months, officials have quietly left the White House, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Highway Administration and the Departments of the Treasury, Commerce and Homeland Security for high-paying gigs on K Street and Wall Street, for top PR firms including the Glover Park Group and VOX Global and to work or lobby for powerful media and telecom companies including Facebook, Comcast, Bloomberg L.P., DirecTV, Sprint Nextel and T-Mobile.”
“On his first day in the White House, Obama announced that all his appointees would be required to sign an ethics pledge barring those who become lobbyists from “lobby[ing] my administration for as long as I am president” and — more broadly, for all former employees, not just lobbyists — “from any attempt to influence your former government colleagues for two years after you leave.”
The pledge, he boasted, “represents a clean break from business as usual” and will “help restore that faith in government” by “clos[ing] the revolving door that lets lobbyists come into government freely and lets them use their time in public service as a way to promote their own interests over the interests of the American people when they leave.” [snip]
The pledge doesn’t bar outgoing Obama aides from lobbying Congress or from helping employers or clients influence the administration by charting strategy or even supervising lobbyists. [snip]
Feinberg, whose husband is White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer, joined Bloomberg in June, charged with boosting the company’s Washington profile. She wouldn’t comment on her salary.
Colin Crowell, who in June stepped aside as a top aide to Obama FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, entertained offers with salaries as high as $1 million a year from leading telecommunications companies and lobbying firms seeking to tap the connections and expertise he developed at the FCC and, before that, in 21 years as a congressional staffer.
Though Crowell turned down those offers and, instead, started his own consulting and lobbying shop, he’s still likely to earn substantially more money than he did in his years in government, while leaning on the expertise he developed there.
Since December, he’s registered to lobby for T-Mobile, Cablevision, DirecTV, Earthlink, the Consumer Electronics Association and modem-maker Zoom Telephonics. [snip]
Early last year, for example, Damon Munchus left his post as one of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s top liaisons to Congress and in March joined the Cypress Group, a financial services lobbying and consulting firm, as an executive. [snip]
At Cypress, he registered to lobby Congress on behalf of firms affected by the financial regulatory overhaul on which he worked at Treasury. Lobbying disclosure forms show he’s been part of teams paid at least $470,000 to lobby the Treasury, the White House, Congress and the Securities and Exchange Commission by clients including Citigroup, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Advantage Capital Partners, offshore credit derivative company Primus Guaranty Ltd. and the International Swaps and Derivatives Association. [snip]
No former official’s new job has generated as much controversy as former Office of Management and Budget Director Orszag’s move to Citigroup, which The New York Times Dealbook reported could pay him as much as $3 million a year to “draw on his deep knowledge of public-sector financial issues and his experience overseeing the federal budget to counsel Citi’s clients on various policy actions” and “be something of a corporate rainmaker.” [snip]
When lobbyist Kevin Joseph in September hired Chani Wiggins, formerly Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s top liaison to Congress, he declared that Wiggins’s “experience as head of congressional affairs at one of the largest departments in the federal government has given her the breadth and depth that few in Washington ever achieve.”
“Then there are others who left prominent jobs in the Obama administration for big-time consulting, public relations or law firms that advise clients on how to navigate Washington and its press corps, without necessarily directly lobbying the government on their behalf.
Corey Ealons and Christina Reynolds, longtime Democratic strategists who handled communications both on the Obama campaign and in the White House, left last year for executive positions with PR firms VOX Global and Glover Park Group (which also lobbies), respectively.
Cliff Rothenstein, a veteran government environmental staffer who took over as the Federal Highway Administration’s top congressional liaison in the early days of the Obama administration, stepped down in October to become a “government affairs adviser” focusing on environmental issues at the massive K & L Gates law and lobbying firm.
Mark Seifert, who last year was a senior adviser at the Department of Commerce, in November left to become a partner in the Washington office of the consulting firm Brunswick Group.[snip]
But Seifert, who was detailed to Commerce from the FCC, crafted the Obama administration’s plan for dispensing $4.7 billion in stimulus money for broadband projects across the country, and he advises Brunswick’s clients on telecomm issues, including broadband.[snip]
“We’re Democrats. We don’t have as many places to go,” quipped Richardson, who stepped down late last year as director of public affairs at the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy and accepted an executive post at R&R Partners, a lobbying and public relations firm.”
President Obama has publicly introduced General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt as his new top economic adviser. Immelt will head the newly formed President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, which takes the place of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board led by Paul Volcker. On Friday, Obama said Immelt would drive the administration’s stated goal of creating jobs.
President Obama: “Our job is to do everything we can to ensure that businesses can take root and folks can find good jobs and America is leading the global competition that will determine our success in the 21st century. And so now, to help fulfill this new mission, I’m assembling a new group of business leaders and outside advisers. And I am so proud and pleased that Jeff has agreed to chair this panel, my Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, because we think GE has something to teach businesses all across America.”
Immelt’s appointment has come under scrutiny on multiple fronts. He’ll retain his position at the helm of GE, creating a potential conflict of interest. As one of the nation’s largest corporations, GE has a variety of business and issues before the federal government, including media mergers, military sales, environmental cleanup, and a $16.1 billion bailout in 2008. And while Obama has touted Immelt’s mission to create jobs, the United Electrical Workers Union says GE has closed 29 plants in the United States in the past two years, laying off around 3,000 workers.”
Immelt will be working to benefit GE, himself, and Barack Obama – not the American people. But Obama does not care – he wants the money that Immelt will squeeze out for the fundraising effort to come. It’s all about the money.
It’s all about proposing ideas that will not happen but will squeeze the juice Obama loves to lap up. It’s all about the “juice” and the guys Obama wants “juice” from.
The only reason to watch tonight’s publicity stunt State Of The Union speech is to see if the “prom night” seating arrangement backfires. Now that they will not be divided by an aisle but rather sitting at close proximity it would “up” the entertainment value if Obama Dimocrats and Republicans start punching or biting each other when they disagree. We’ll watch and comment tonight, for this unlikely reason alone, fingers crossed.
Other than that potential for World Wrestling type entertainment there is not much reason to watch or listen tonight. We know that Michelle Obama will be told to leave the cocktail dress in the hamper and dress in something sensible that most Americans will not recoil at seeing.
The “no cocktail dress” strategy will be the big concession to political independents and the visually unimpaired. Michelle Obama will be forced to do her part to appear “middle of the road”. As part of that great reach out to sensible Americans we can almost guarantee that Michelle Obama will have one of her Cinderellas sew sleeves onto whatever frock is forced on her.
Seated next to M.O., expect someone like Congresswoman Gifford’s husband as an example of how “in touch” Michelle Obama and Barack Obama are. We will not be surprised if there is an additional “surprise” guest (maybe Daniel Hernandez the Gifford’s intern – he’s gay and Latino and young – a threefer publicity stunt plum).
As to Barack Obama, the big issue is whether or not he will wash the gray hairs away, once again, in order to appear young and vigorous – a la Justin Beiber – to his drifting away Obama Cult. Having been caught more than once with Miss Clairol the betting is that he will not try to ban the gray hairs in such a major public appearance. If he does go anti-gray, this will be an indication that Obama and his White House thugs believe Big Media will still protect him from even such low level scrutiny. If we do see gray, it is an indication that Obama believes Big Media is off the reservation and will indeed remark if the gray suddenly vanishes.
Our bet on this most “gray” issue is that Obama will vote “present”. Expect enough of a cover up that Big Media will feel able to ignore the lessened gray but enough gray will be covered up so that Obama’s head will not appear to be a moldy strawberry.
Another big concern for tonight will be whether to wear a red or a blue necktie. We’re betting he will wear blue in order to make the verbiage more palatable to Obama Dimocrats. However, the history of Obama’s neck-wear is that he will go with red because it makes him feel more manly.
The above sums up the totality of substance we can expect from tonight’s publicity stunt.
Big Media will concentrate on the silly and unimportant tonight. Big Media will count how much applause there is even though these days the applause count is settled on before the publicity stunt speech. Back in the days of JFK and before, the amount of applause was not carefully choreographed and itemized so it had some meaning. No longer. Ignore the applause counts.
While all State of the Union speeches are publicity stunts this one is particularly meaningless. Barack Obama will do or say whatever is good for himself at the moment and the filth which now passes as the American left will inject Hopium and cheer.
Republicans will pretend to listen but their strategy, along with goalposts, is set. Republican have to just not be scary in public thereby giving Obama an opening to shout “scary racists” and they will achieve their strategic aims.
“As the president touts spending austerity, deficit reduction and extension of the Bush-era tax cuts, some Democrats worry Obama will pivot too hard away from the party’s core principles and concede too much to the new House GOP majority that campaigned on destroying his agenda. [snip]
A labor official, who asked not to be identified in order to speak more candidly about the president’s political situation, noted that “the midterm elections freed” Obama to work independently and without regard to his party’s left.
“The left understands that the choice in 2012 will be Obama or somebody far worse,” the official said. “They will have no choice, no matter what Obama says in the State of the Union address. No matter how much we complain, he knows that at the end of the day, we will be supporting him in 2012 — and that affects what he can do now. The choice for us will be an administration that disappointed us or a Republican administration that will be out to destroy us.”’
Barack Obama has no strategy, such as Bill Clinton did, based on advancement of core Democratic values. For Barack Obama it is all about Barack Obama. The filth that pretends to be the American left is now only a cheering squad for Obama and not much else. The filthy left will ignore the old and no longer “operative” Obama promises on Guantanamo, FISA, lobbyists, rendition, transparency, etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Someday the American left, a needed counterpoint to the needed voice of the American right will return as a chastened, honest, force. But that day will not be today. Today is a day for a big publicity stunt drenched with treachery and cowardice.
Last night the Abbott and Costello of the Hyde Park set hosted a dinner for Chinese Prime Minister Hu Jintao. A good time was had by those, with closed eyes, and in attendance. For most Americans however, the night was more Halloween than stately dinner.
After a long day of tricks there were few treats for downtrodden Americans. Regular Americans cannot help but feel like they are second best to the interests of clowns and ghouls who now control our government.
To begin with, the lantern-jawed, muscular member of the Abbott and Costello Obama duo “stunned”, and not in a good way. She performed in a Cirque Du Soleil red dragon costume. For a second, diners might have thought they stumbled into auditions for Chicago’s Medusa. Either that or the fabric for the costume was a loaned backdrop from the intestines scene in the filmFantastic Voyage. The bony husband was the perfect complement to the eye-popping display of obliviousness. He appeared to be pulled from Lurch-like heights by gravity or some great force to bow. We hear he resisted the impulse. We could not watch. It was a night of visual horror.
“The Chinese side won this test of wills and power for two reasons. First, they had the easier bargaining position: All they had to do was hold the line, while Washington had to gain concessions. Second, Hu was in a far stronger position overall because China’s economy continues to grow in double digits, while the American economy remains troubled. [snip]
Last weekend, some members of the Obama team even considered taking desperate measures. Specifically, they were contemplating either simply dropping the joint communiqué at the end of the summit or canceling the state dinner, according to administration officials. Their thinking was that Hu couldn’t possibly afford to let the whole summit fail, while Obama’s toughness would look good politically. Fortunately, they dropped both ideas.
For Obama, it was precisely the right time to start undoing Beijing’s grossly unfair economic practices. But all the Obama team managed to extract from the visitors was about $45 billion in new contracts to buy American goods and services, particularly civilian airliners from Boeing. Most of these deals had been in the pipeline well before the summit. On the really key economic issues, Hu essentially avoided showdowns and compromises and sounded reassuring. These make-or-break items included China’s unfair currency manipulation to gain price advantages on exports, its stealing U.S. intellectual property to make U.S. goods without paying for them, and its placing high and illegal hurdles in the path of American companies trying to do business in the Middle Kingdom.”
“Sometimes criticism comes in the unlikeliest of places.
On Friday’s “Inside Washington,” Newsweek columnist Evan Thomas, once an editor at the magazine with a long track record of having liberal positions (even once having likened President Barack Obama to a deity), noted the modest improvement in the unemployment number reported on Friday. However, nearly a year after Obamacare was passed and signed into law, he admitted Republicans were right for voicing their opposition of it.
“It ain’t because of Congress,” Thomas said. “The unemployment will go down a little bit but the game in Washington will still be this unreal game. Health care though – I got to say, is one place where I think where Republicans are right.”
Back in November 2009, Thomas admitted the health care reform bill had flaws, but still voiced his support for it. Now he has proclaimed it a failure.
“The health care bill is a disaster,” Thomas continued. “We’re sort of slowly learning – it’s not working. It’s interesting – they’re implementing it and it’s not working out at all as people anticipated. There’s all sorts of wildly wrong projections. As it’s being practiced – it’s failed.”
It is likely the Republicans will be able to rid us of this scam, not now but bit by bit and completely after 2012. But if not, they have set up some great publicity stunts for the rest of the year and into 2012. And there are the courts where now 26 states want the scam repealed.
As publicity stunts go we prefer repeal to an invitation for dinner with Abbot and Costello Obama. Who needs dinner with those two?
The big winner of yesterday possibly agrees with us. Who is yesterday’s big winner? Hu. Madame Hu that is. She stayed home in China.
What a great lesson the Republicans gave the opposition party on Friday. Faced with an incompetent leader the Republicans dumped Michael Steele.
Steele had gambled that his skin color guaranteed him the top job at the RNC. In the wake of the 2008 election Republicans gambled that Steele’s skin color would help them fight the “racist” charge. That gamble paid off.
However, Steele’s subsequent multi-faceted nincompoopery and blue state pedigree combined to turn the Republican gamble into an overall loss (especially of donors and money and consequently additional 2010 election victories). Steele gambled his skin color would continue to protect him. But with the increase in African-American Republican elected officials, the increased and very visible diversity of the Republican ranks, the Republican National Committee voters realized they did not need Steele’s protection from the “racist” charge anymore. Furthermore Obama is so weakened at this point, the “racist” charge so flaccid from overuse, Republicans gave the heave-ho to the blunt Steele.
Obama Dimocrats by contrast relected Nancy Pelousy to be their leader, created an extra position for James Clyburn even as Steny Hoyer kept his post. Tim Kaine and Harry Reid have nothing to fear.
Digest that. The Republicans won victories not seen in generations and they (despite protests and controversy over the new leader) dumped their leader because they wanted to prepare for 2012 and the future. The Obama Dimocrats were slapped nationwide with defeats but the motto remains “stay the course – together we thrive”. Which team would a sensible person hire to run their business?
“Saturday’s shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, in which six people were killed, could not have been prevented, 40 percent of American voters say in a Quinnipiac University national poll released today. Another 23 percent blame the mental health system, while 15 percent say it was due to heated political rhetoric and 9 percent attribute the tragedy to lax gun control.
American voters say 52 – 41 percent that “heated political rhetoric drives unstable people to commit violence,” the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds. Liberals rather than conservatives are more responsible for such rhetoric, voters say 36 – 32 percent. [snip]
“Americans seem to be rejecting the blame game for the Arizona shooting. By far, the largest number thinks this tragedy could not have been prevented,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. “Although a bare majority of voters say political rhetoric might drive unstable people to violence, less than one in seven blame it for the Arizona incident.”
Big Media tried to assist Barack Obama and his Hopium Guzzlers in their various attempts to smear and fear those not responsible for the acts of Jared LONER. Some eggheads tried to explain why “fair-minded journalists allowed their judgment to become so clouded?” They examined the question of “why did the press go so far astray this week?” with false charges against Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. The answer is that Big Media is not composed of the “fair-minded” but is an a partner of the Obama White House.
As we wrote at the time, the minute the picture of Jared LONER with his smirk and wild eyes appeared, the DailyKooks had lost the argument and the backlash commenced. Soon after the picture appeared the Christian Science Monitor noted “As portrait of Jared Loughner sharpens, ‘vitriol’ blame fades”:
“The wave of national soul-searching about the level of political vitriol and how it might have played a part in Saturday’s shootings in Tucson, Ariz., now appears to be ebbing. [snip]
But emerging information about primary suspect Jared Loughner suggests that he was motivated not by a climate of hate but rather by his own troubled mind and a personal vendetta against Congresswoman Giffords, who was injured in the attack. The investigation has not concluded, and more information could come to light. But for now, a majority of Americans are dismissing the notion that the shooter was set off by a Sarah Palin political map, tea party anger, or talk about “second amendment remedies.” [snip]
Indeed, one piece of evidence collected so far is a 2007 letter from Giffords’s office to Mr. Loughner, thanking him for attending a meet-and-greet event. On it is scrawled a death threat to Giffords. In 2007, Sarah Palin was a little-known Alaska governor and the tea party movement did not exist.
At this point, then, the left’s initial eagerness to link the shooting to political anger on the right could backfire, says Charles Franklin, a pollster and political scientist at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.”
It will backfire. The smear attempts will be paid for in full. As more and more information emerges of the White House’s role in stoking the smears, the damage to Obama and his DailyKooks will be as apparent and costly as the “Mission Accomplished” publicity stunt turned out for George W. Bush and the Republicans. The DailyKooks and their Clown from Chicago will eventually have to pay for this latest gamble with smears:
“It was the immediate connection from the left of this shooting to political rhetoric from the right that polarized this, and here we have a case where there’s a rush to blame Palin [and other conservatives] with no direct connection to her at all,” he says. “And the more we learn about this guy, it seems there isn’t any political motivation in a broader sense.”
“To be sure, Sheriff Dupnik put the issue on the national plate with his comments, and given that that the shooting appears to be a political assassination attempt in a politically rancorous border district, the debate on political tone was, in many ways, inevitable.
But critics point out that the nation largely refrained from linking Maj. Nidal Malik Hassan – the suspect in the 2009 Fort Hood shootings – with terrorism.
In Loughner’s case, no reported evidence so far suggests any connection to the ideology or ideologues of the right. A Loughner friend, Zach Osler, told ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Wednesday that Loughner “did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn’t listen to political radio. He didn’t take sides. He wasn’t on the left. He wasn’t on the right.”
That doesn’t mean the issue of political rancor is unimportant, and some commentators are simply using this moment to argue that – regardless of the facts of the current case – political anger can have outsized effects on troubled minds.
“Among elite circles there is a sharp debate going on about [connections to campaign rhetoric],” says Mr. Franklin. “So we’re seeing some people who deny that political rhetoric had any connection to the shooting, but who nonetheless are speaking out about the question of civility and the level of rhetoric, and they’re coming from both the left and the right.”
Like Hillary Clinton, civility is something we would love as the dominant form of discourse here and abroad (the need for civil discourse in other countries is a particular cause of Hillary’s remarks this week which the Hillary haters chose not to think about). However, we recall when we were called “racists” by Obama Hopium Guzzlers. They opened the door. We wish Sarah Palin had not employed the term “blood libel” with all the historical ramifications that term brings. But we were not the ones attacked as murder accessories like Palin was.
We will not have civility or a “civil public discourse” until Barack Obama and his thugs confess and apologize for their libels against us and against people like Sarah Palin. When it comes to thugs like Barack Obama and his henchmen the only response can be to fight back with the very weapons they wield.
The uncivil thugs cannot demand civility. It is thug Barack Obama and his henchmen who are responsible for the uncivil discourse. Kirsten Powers makes the argument:
Obama mostly chose to be vague on this point, “For the truth is that none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack. None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped those shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind.”
He did add to his prepared remarks that incivility did not cause this tragedy, but he stopped short of a full rebuke of the complete irresponsibility of those who have been stoking anger at conservatives who—as far as we know—had nothing to do with this.
When the president did lay blame, it was on Americans in general. Among the many odd assertions he made: suggesting that “what a tragedy like this requires” is that “we align our values with our actions.” We were told to “expand our moral imaginations.”
A mentally ill gunman opened fire at a Safeway. A lack of “aligning” or “imagination” really wasn’t the problem. Obama chided Americans to “be better,” as if we somehow caused this shooting to happen. He said, “We may not be able to stop all evil in the world, but I know that how we treat one another is entirely up to us.”
Now if Obama isn’t talking about political discourse here, I don’t know what he’s talking about. Certainly he can’t be suggesting that how you treat the mailman or your mother is at issue.
Let’s be clear: How we “treat each other” also is not what caused this shooting. Mental illness combined with a gun and a 33-round high-capacity magazine collided to produce a tragedy. This may not have been the venue to discuss this in such pointed terms, but it also should not have been used as an opportunity to push further into the media bloodstream the lie that hostile rhetoric or incivility even played a role in this, let alone caused it.
Multiple polls have shown that Americans reject the assertion that political speech incited the shooter. Nothing has come up in the investigation to suggest it played a role. In fact, it’s been reported that a friend of gunman Jared Lee Loughner flatly rejected heated rhetoric as an issue, telling Good Morning America, “He did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn’t listen to political radio. He didn’t take sides. He wasn’t on the left. He wasn’t on the right.”
The friend hadn’t seen Loughner in two years, so perhaps in that intervening time he turned on the radio or television. However, police have yet to turn up such evidence. To my liberal friends: The existence of heated political rhetoric does not prove that it played a role in this shooting, unless new evidence emerges. Don’t confuse coincidence with causation. Sadly, facts don’t seem to be enough to dislodge this insidious and distracting media meme. Wednesday night brought us no closer to moving on from that.”
Having provoked and (as usual with Obama thuggery done behind the scenes) stoked the hatred and blood libel, Barack Obama called for civility because it increasingly became clear that the gamble was not going to go well. The bluff did not work. The American people rejected the blood libel. The American people are getting to know how these Chicago thugs work.
The backlash is a comin’. Even Obama blowhard Charles Blow at the New York Times knows it:
“Immediately after the news broke, the air became thick with conjecture, speculation and innuendo. There was a giddy, almost punch-drunk excitement on the left. The prophecy had been fulfilled: “words have consequences.” And now, the right’s rhetorical chickens had finally come home to roost.
The dots were too close and the temptation to connect them too strong. The target was a Democratic congresswoman. There was the map of her district in the cross hairs. There were her own prescient worries about overheated rhetoric.
Within hours of the shooting, there was a full-fledged witch hunt to link the shooter to the right. [snip]
The only problem is that there was no evidence then, and even now, that overheated rhetoric from the right had anything to do with the shooting. (In fact, a couple of people who said they knew him have described him as either apolitical or “quite liberal.”) The picture emerging is of a sad and lonely soul slowly, and publicly, slipping into insanity. [snip]
But I also know that potential, possibility and even plausibility are not proof.
The American people know it, too. [snip]
So the left overreacts and overreaches and it only accomplishes two things: fostering sympathy for its opponents and nurturing a false equivalence within the body politic. Well done, Democrats.”
We can teach our children that here in America, we embrace each other, and support each other, in times of crisis. And we can help them do that in their own small way – whether it’s by sending a letter, or saying a prayer, or just keeping the victims and their families in their thoughts.
We can teach them the value of tolerance – the practice of assuming the best, rather than the worst, about those around us. We can teach them to give others the benefit of the doubt, particularly those with whom they disagree.
Perhaps her sweaters are too tight. But this is stupidity. Isn’t the lesson from this entire episode quite the contrary to what idiot Michelle Obama is saying? Isn’t the lesson that you should not be tolerant? Isn’t the lesson that prejudice has it’s value? Indeed the fellow students of Jared LONER who sat near doors thinking that he might have a gun were smart to fear and run away from him. The professor who feared and wanted Jared LONER as far away as possible was smart. So where does idiot Michelle Obama come off telling us that we should “give others the benefit of the doubt”? It’s a stupid platitude from a stupid person at best.
“Shouldn’t we learn to be perceptive, analytical, and aware that some of the individuals among us are, in fact, mentally sick and need something other than tolerance and wishful thinking about how good they might be? So why is the First Lady telling us to teach kids the opposite?”
Obama and his Hopium addled advisors and Big Blog Boys thought the Arizona shootings would help them. They thought they could pull a Bill Clinton Oklahoma City speech. But they could not because Obama is not half the man Bill Clinton is and there is not one biological cell in Obama as presidential as Bill Clinton.
But there can be no denying that we have seen a dead cat bounce in the past few weeks. Is this good news for Obama or simply a consequence of Obama not being visible when he vacationed? Or is there a deeper meaning and Obama is on the way up? Howard Kurtz provides some answers:
“Amid the glowing reviews for Barack Obama’s memorial speech in Tucson—with even conservatives dishing out praise—some prognosticators see a political resurrection for the embattled president.
That’s not how the White House views it. [snip]
In the sharp-edged world of Beltway scorekeeping, the Obama oration probably won’t lead to legislative progress, or even a better working relationship with Republicans trying to repeal his health-care law.”
“The 111th Congress was extremely divisive, and the political process over the last two years has basically separated the country into two groups; by Election Day, those opposed to the president outnumbered those in support by 2-4 points. Yet over the last two months, the over-heated rhetoric has noticeably cooled, the country has not really discussed the big issues that divide it, and in general there’s just been a break in the partisan action. This has given the president an opportunity to elevate his image, and his success in that regard is showing up in the polls.”
Throw in another vacation and we get the “absence makes the heart grow fonder” effect. But has anything changed to give Hope to the Hopium dealers? Nah!:
“I don’t really think any of the fundamentals have changed in the few months since the election, so I have my doubts that this uptick is fundamentally similar to Clinton’s improvement when he battled the GOP on the budget. That fight re-framed the national conversation with Clinton on the popular side — for the first time, really, since the start of his presidency. Similarly, I don’t think this is like the rebound in Reagan’s job approval numbers in 1983, as the economy was on the good side of the “V-shaped” recession of the early 80s.
In the long term, I think voters are generally going to evaluate President Obama on three big issues: jobs, the deficit, and health care. In that order. Nothing I have seen in the last few weeks suggests that the needle has moved substantially on any of these items — and, in fact, looking at the AP/GfK poll’s internals, you’ll see that his approval on these items trails his overall approval. There might be up-ticks and down-ticks depending on the news climate, but I think that those three issues have set the basic parameters of opinions on the president, and they will continue to do so.”
It had all the dignity of a Filene’s Basement bridal gown sale. It was as uniting as a Westboro Church rally. It was as inspirational as the golden arches of a McDonald’s fast food franchise. It was Obama’s “Let’s Make A Deal” moment.
Many Republican/conservative writers today reacted not with revulsion but with applause for Obama’s remarks. Why shouldn’t they applaud? Obama and his thugs tried all week to sell the notion that Sarah Palin and the Tea Party were to blame for the Arizona shootings. The Big Blog Boys collaborated with the Obama White House to perpetuate the smear. Last night Obama waved a surrender flag on that carefully calculated ploy.
“For the truth is none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack. None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped these shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind. Yes, we have to examine all the facts behind this tragedy. We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of such violence in the future. (Applause.) But what we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other. (Applause.) That we cannot do. (Applause.) That we cannot do.”
How stupid is what passes for the left these days? They have not yet noticed how Obama pushed them under the bus in this latest publicity stunt. Consider: The left has been denouncing Obama’s “moves to the center” since December’s surrender/acceptance of the Bush tax cuts. The left has been denouncing Obama’s lack of fight for two years now. Yet what passes for the left these days is so stupid that it is unable to even see that Obama’s “unity” speech of last night is one further move into the land of surrender.
For Obama not fighting makes a great deal of political sense because it is the right move for a careerist interested only in what advances himself. For the left Obama’s “go along to get along” strategy is a disaster. Call it the politics of the wet noodle. Most people don’t like fighting and name calling and it makes public figures popular when they are seen as uniters not dividers.
For the politically ambitious without principle the saying is “go along to get along.” The trick as Hillary Clinton has put it is to know when to stand your ground and when to reach for common ground. Barney Frank articulated it best when he made the point that the best way to avoid a fight is to surrender to the opposition.
No fighting makes sense for Obama politically. Obama not fighting makes even more sense for Republicans. No wonder wily Republicans thought the Obama speech good. “I surrender” is always sweet to hear across the aisle.
That is not to say that last night should have been a place for Obama to declare war and be obnoxious. But why is the left smiling and declaring victory when last night was their Appomattox Courthouse? The “blame Palin, blame Tea Party” DailyKooks got slapped down with another major Obama capitulation and they are still too dumb to realize once again Obama sold them out to advance himself.
Last night was a time to remember those killed, pray for or encourage the families of those fighting for their lives in hospitals, and in a dignified manner remind the nation that what unites us is greater than what divides us. We did not get that either.
“This morning on “Good Morning America,” ABC’s Ashleigh Banfield sat down with Zach Osler, a high school friend of Jared Loughner, the suspect in the Tucson massacre.
Osler says his friend wasn’t shooting at people, “he was shooting at the world.” Regarding the high-pitched talk radio and cable news political rhetoric, Osler says his friend didn’t even watch the news.
He did not watch TV. He disliked the news. He didn’t listen to political radio. He didn’t take sides. He wasn’t on the left. He wasn’t on the right.“
The testimony from Zack Osler goes directly to the point made by many of us – what is the evidence that Jared LONER was acting politically at the behest of Sarah Palin or the Tea Party or for that matter Republicans/conservatives? Steve Kornacki, as liberal and pro-Obama a journalist as anyone in Big Media, does the honors:
“CBS News is out with a new poll today that finds Americans strongly rejecting the notion that the political climate played a role in Saturday’s attempted assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. [snip]
This is somewhat heartening, given that so many commentators on the left — including, I must say, some of mycolleagues here — have since Saturday been playing up the extreme rhetoric that Sarah Palin and other Tea Party favorites have spouted these past few years, claiming that it all somehow created a climate conducive to Jared Loughner’s shooting rampage.
As I wrote on Sunday night, I find this to be a very slippery argument. We know that no connection between Loughner and Tea Party politics has been established, and what we have learned about him strongly suggests that he lacked a recognizable political identity. He looks to be a deranged young man and it’s unclear if he was even aware of the political debate/conversation that the rest of us follow every day. There’s just no evidence of any connection between Loughner and Palin, the Tea Party and conservative movement.”
That’s exactly right. Where is the reality based community? Where is the bias on the side of logic and evidence? Obama Dimocrats and the Big Blog Boys have a form of political syphilis that leads them to demented arguments and ugly boils of political whoring.
Zack Osley testifies that his friend LONER was not “on the left”, was not “on the right.” Kornacki asks “where’s the evidence?” There is none. This entire narrative “blood libel” is a ploy to prop up Barack Obama. As we argued from the very first, this is a dangerous narrative for the Obama left and the Dimwit Dimocrats. Kornacki calls it a “slippery argument”. Indeed this latest ploy from the demented Obama left will cause a further rejection of their claims and eventually will lead to a fiery backlash that will burn. More Kornacki:
“Thus, the “climate of violence” argument feels to me like a backdoor way for some on the left to attach blame to Palin and the Tea Party anyway. I might be more sympathetic to it if someone could explain how, precisely, it worked in this case: What specific evidence is there that the “climate” was relevant to Loughner’s thinking? When was the moment that the tone set by Palin and the Tea Party kicked in and turned his obsession with grammar, literacy and “currency” into something lethal? Where’s the evidence that he was even aware of the “climate” in the same way that those of us who watch cable news and read blogs all day are? All I’ve heard so far is evidence-free, non-quantifiable speculation.”
Hausfrau “experts” are not concerned with evidence. Big Blog Boys cannot produce a timeline nor a set of data points that lead from Palin/Tea Party “into something lethal.” According to friend Zack, the question raised by Kornacki “Where’s the evidence that he [LONER] was even aware of the “climate?”‘ has been answered with a big fat ZERO.
“The same congresswoman whose district Palin’s website once framed in cross hairs has now been shot in the head! But there’s absolutely no proof that this is anything more than a horrible coincidence. Political scientist Brendan Nyhanput it best on his blog yesterday:
People have been having a hard time holding two ideas in their head at the same time:
2. Contrary to his suggestion, there is no evidence that such rhetoric caused Saturday’s events. Even if such evidence is later found, it would not justify the evidence-free claims that have been made in the last 48 hours.“
“To try and untangle the influences that might lead one lone gunman to fire his Glock at a political rally, we turned to Dr. E. Fuller Torrey, respected psychiatrist and one of the foremost experts on paranoid schizophrenics. Torrey has written several books on the mental illness, including the bestselling classic “Surviving Schizophrenia.” He is founder of the Treatment Advocacy Center in Virginia, a national nonprofit for the mentally ill.
Quite early in the news cycle, the media more or less diagnosed Jared Loughner as paranoid schizophrenic. Do you think that’s accurate?
He’s a textbook case. Most psychiatrists will tell you they need to examine a patient before diagnosing him, but this guy has all of the symptoms. He has the right age of onset. He has a deteriorating social course, as they say in the [DSM], social and occupational dysfunction. He has delusions, and they’re pretty strange. It’s common for schizophrenics to think people are trying to control their mind, but thinking the government is trying to control your grammar — I’ve never heard that before. The real tip-off is the markedly disorganized speech, which you see in the rambling videos. This is the kind of disorganized speech that you virtually never get in any other condition. It’s what we call pathognomonic of schizophrenia. That is, when you hear that symptom, it’s “schizophrenia until proven otherwise.” He’s also got the affective flattening of emotion, which you see in that mug shot.
Let’s talk about that mug shot, because it’s pretty striking. This guy is getting booked on six murders. Why is he smiling?
That’s pretty bizarre, and that’s something a person with schizophrenia will do, because their emotions are disconnected from what’s going on. When you tell a schizophrenic your mother died, they might smile instead of cry.”
Frankly, we’re not at all impressed by this doctor who deplores a long distance diagnosis while providing a long distance diagnosis. We excerpt from this interview because Obama Hopium Guzzlers are so impressed with credentials and are very much in need of intervention (in this case with a healthy heaping dose of reality) before they do more damage to themselves, their tattered reputations, and their tenuous links to reality. Like Jared LONER these Obama Dimocrats, desperate to save their clay clown from Chicago, are constructing their own reality in which Obama is something other than a clod who has flim-flammed them.
[A short digression prompted by Hillary Clinton comments on the Arizona shootings which require some clarification because they are being attacked in a crazy way by people who should know better but prefer to sooth themselves with their usual Hillary hate. What Hillary said was not an attack on Sarah Palin nor the Tea Party. Furthermore Hillary Clinton acknowledges that Jared LONER was motivated by “animus toward the congresswoman”. Hillary condemns violence “from the right, the left, from al Qaeda, from anarchists, whoever it is.” Hillary’s “extremism” comment is about “political views” which she describes as “however bizarre and poorly thought through“. And in her remarks Hillary Clinton is correct – especially when we consider the countries and viewpoints she is trying to reach out to (many of which define bizarre). The Arizona gunman might have some “political” views if we stretch the meaning of “political” to the breaking point.
The full crazy that mental health professionals are labeling as “schizophrenic” indeed has a “political” component – but one which is extremely tenuous. Those who want to explore this aspect of the news story may conduct a search for “David Wynn Miller“. Some of these “political” views are very odd and difficult to describe or understand even as they have been used as defenses by a very few tax resisters. None of this crazy is related to Sarah Palin or the Tea Party or any stream of mainline conservatism or Republican Party ideology.
These theories which have some similarities to writings by the Arizona killer involve Bill Clinton and the Supreme Court as students of David Wynn Miller. Other crazy in this theory is the use of math and grammar. David Wynn Miller denies and contact with Jared Loughner and there is no evidence that Jared Loughner knew of David Wynn Miller and it is possible that Loughner thought up this crazy on his own. You may check out this bizarre world view HERE. For a direct dose of David Wynn Miller check out his website and see if you can figure him out (see HERE). For an interview with “grammar conspiracy theorist David Wynn Miller” go HERE. If you want to try to decipher Jared LONER’s videos check out the above links – this is a trip we do not recommend. ]
“The charge: The Tucson massacre is a consequence of the “climate of hate” created by Sarah Palin, the Tea Party, Glenn Beck, Obamacare opponents and sundry other liberal betes noires.
The verdict: Rarely in American political discourse has there been a charge so reckless, so scurrilous and so unsupported by evidence.
As killers go, Jared Loughner is not reticent. Yet among all his writings, postings, videos and other ravings – and in all the testimony from all the people who knew him – there is not a single reference to any of these supposed accessories to murder.
Not only is there no evidence that Loughner was impelled to violence by any of those upon whom Paul Krugman, Keith Olbermann, the New York Times, the Tucson sheriff and other rabid partisans are fixated. There is no evidence that he was responding to anything, political or otherwise, outside of his own head.
A climate of hate? This man lived within his very own private climate. “His thoughts were unrelated to anything in our world,” said the teacher of Loughner’s philosophy class at Pima Community College. “He was very disconnected from reality,” said classmate Lydian Ali. “You know how it is when you talk to someone who’s mentally ill and they’re just not there?” said neighbor Jason Johnson. “It was like he was in his own world.”
His ravings, said one high school classmate, were interspersed with “unnerving, long stupors of silence” during which he would “stare fixedly at his buddies,” reported the Wall Street Journal. His own writings are confused, incoherent, punctuated with private numerology and inscrutable taxonomy. He warns of government brainwashing and thought control through “grammar.” He was obsessed with “conscious dreaming,” a fairly good synonym for hallucinations.
This is not political behavior. These are the signs of a clinical thought disorder – ideas disconnected from each other, incoherent, delusional, detached from reality.”
Krauthammer declares LONER a “paranoid schizophrenic. And a dangerous one.” Krauthhammer provides further testimony from LONER’s classmates on the “terrifyingly mentally disturbed” LONER. Like us, Krauthammer notes that
“Furthermore, the available evidence dates Loughner’s fixation on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords to at least 2007, when he attended a town hall of hers and felt slighted by her response. In 2007, no one had heard of Sarah Palin. Glenn Beck was still toiling on Headline News. There was no Tea Party or health-care reform. The only climate of hate was the pervasive post-Iraq campaign of vilification of George W. Bush, nicely captured by a New Republic editor who had begun an article thus: “I hate President George W. Bush. There, I said it.”‘
As to the militaristic language of politics (“battleground states”) Krauthammer echoes Jack Shafer (“fighting and warfare are the most routine of political metaphors.”) It was also Democrat Joe Machin who “dispensed with metaphor and simply fired a bullet through the cap-and-trade bill – while intoning, “I’ll take dead aim at [it]”‘.
Sarah Palin expressed sympathy for the Arizona victims and had tough words for those trying to pin the blame on her:
“But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.
There are those who claim political rhetoric is to blame for the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal. And they claim political debate has somehow gotten more heated just recently. But when was it less heated? Back in those “calm days” when political figures literally settled their differences with dueling pistols? In an ideal world all discourse would be civil and all disagreements cordial. But our Founding Fathers knew they weren’t designing a system for perfect men and women. If men and women were angels, there would be no need for government. Our Founders’ genius was to design a system that helped settle the inevitable conflicts caused by our imperfect passions in civil ways. So, we must condemn violence if our Republic is to endure.
As I said while campaigning for others last March in Arizona during a very heated primary race, “We know violence isn’t the answer. When we ‘take up our arms’, we’re talking about our vote.” Yes, our debates are full of passion, but we settle our political differences respectfully at the ballot box – as we did just two months ago, and as our Republic enables us to do again in the next election, and the next. That’s who we are as Americans and how we were meant to be. Public discourse and debate isn’t a sign of crisis, but of our enduring strength. It is part of why America is exceptional.”
Hillary Clinton supporters recall all too well how threats of race riots in Denver were used to squelch a legitimate open vote. Hillary Clinton supporters recall all too well how an historical reference to Robert Kennedy’s death in 1968 resulted in blood libel with Obama supporters declaring that to be a call for assassination.
“Most Americans reject the idea that inflammatory political language by conservatives should be part of the debate about the forces behind the Arizona shooting that left six people dead and a congresswoman in critical condition, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds.
A 53% majority of those surveyed call that analysis mostly an attempt to use the tragedy to make conservatives look bad. About a third, 35%, say it is a legitimate point about how dangerous language can be.
And there is little sense that stricter gun control laws in Arizona might have averted the tragedy. Only one in five say they would have prevented the shooting; 72% say tighter controls wouldn’t have prevented it.”
“TUCSON — “I have a Glock 9 millimeter, and I’m a pretty good shot.”
The quip, by Representative Gabrielle Giffords, was made in an interview last year with The New York Times, when tensions were running high in her district. It speaks not only to her ability to defend herself but also to the passionate gun culture in Arizona, which crosses political lines and is notable for its fierceness, even in the West.
Indeed, the federal judge who was killed on Saturday in the shootings here, John M. Roll, had his wife and many people who worked with him take lessons at the Marksman Pistol Institute, an indoor range downtown. One of the doctors who operated on Ms. Giffords after the shooting rampage was a member of the Pima Pistol Club, an outdoor range where federal and local law enforcement personnel were practicing on Monday.”
“Gore, whose 1985 testimony before a Senate panel was countered by musicians Frank Zappa and Dee Snyder of the group Twisted Sister, says she wasn’t out to censor the objectionable material. “I’m a strong believer in the First Amendment,” she says. Instead, Gore continues to advocate “consumer information in the marketplace.”
“Sure, why not? If we’re going to start blaming cultural influences, let’s go nuts. (So to speak.) Weed, heavy metal, Sarah Palin — was there no dangerous stimulus to which this delicate mind wasn’t subjected?
In particular, a pounding metal song used as the soundtrack for the lone video Loughner marked as a favorite on YouTube — one in which an American flag is burned by a hooded man — contains lyrics that reference bodies hitting a floor. The video for the song itself — a 2001 release from the band Drowning Pool titled “Bodies” — features one of the band’s members screaming instructions to what appears to be a mental patient housed in an insane asylum.
“You’re never sure what caused an individual to commit a specific act,” Brad Bushman, a communications and psychology professor at Ohio State University, told the Washington Post’s J. Freedom du Lac. “But I’ve been doing research on violent media for 20 years, and the evidence is that it leads to aggressive behavior. It’s not the only factor that leads to violence, but it’s one of them.”…
The band reiterated that stance when it issued a statement about the controversy surrounding the song and Loughner on its website on Monday.
“We were devastated this weekend to learn of the tragic events that occurred in Arizona and that our music has been misinterpreted, again,” the statement reads. ” ‘Bodies’ was written about the brotherhood of the mosh pit and the respect people have for each other in the pit. If you push others down, you have to pick them back up. It was never about violence. It’s about a certain amount of respect and a code.”
Perhaps Jared LONER read The Catcher In The Rye. That evil book incited the killer of John Lennon so perhaps it is time to ban it.
There was a murder at Altamont when the Rolling Stones played songs like Sympathy For The Devil (based on the Russian novel The Master And Margarita – ban the book.) Ban the music of the Rolling Stones.
There is a concerted attempt by Barack Obama and his Hopium Guzzling Big Blog Boy allies to politically prop up Barack Obama using 6 corpses from Arizona. As we wrote previously this ploy is bound to fail.
As part of the White House organized attempt to help Obama finally appear presidential, the Obama thugs are smearing Sarah Palin and the Tea Party movement. This ploy too is bound to fail.
‘“It’s funny, isn’t it? Men run the world, own almost everything in it, hold almost every position of power, and yet these two women [Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton] —each the first in her party to become a serious contender for presidential office—are somehow responsible for everything bad. Somehow they’re in charge, somehow they’re the worst, somehow they are the fount of evil.“
Sarah Palin in her latest book unfairly, in an uninformed manner, and very stupidly attacked Hillary. Because of that stupid attack by Sarah Palin we are hesitant to waste any further space defending her – but defend her in this instance we must. Our generosity will not be endless if Sarah Palin persists in failing to understand that the same tactics and hatred directed at her were smelted and honed in the anti-Hillary pits of Hopium dens. But we digress.
In the January 9 article called “The Good Guys?” PUMA PAC cites an article by Vast Left at Corrente. What Vast Left did was perform a search for the terms Sarah Palin and the word C*nt. The results of that search demonstrate that our brothers and sisters of the left are not “The Good Guys”. When Republicans/conservatives published sexist and misogynist crap such as this it has always been considered to be proof of them as mouth breathing neanderthals. The current band of Obama Dimocrats on the left are much worse than the worse Republicans/conservatives. Our leftist brethren are prideful of their good educations and high principles but they are now Obama Dimocrats and the lowest of the low.
These Obama Dimocrats exhausted themselves for months and years attacking Blue Dog Democrats and wishing them political (and occasionally physical) death (DailyKooks put a “bulls-eye” on Gabrielle Giffords back in 2008). Now they are besides themselves bemoaning the shooting of a Blue Dog Democrat. Even worse, these Obama Dimocrat dolts are praising the wisdom of Sheriff Clarence Dupnik. Wait until they learn a bit about the good Sheriff:
“In 1981, Dupnik sent a message to all residents: Arm yourselves. Police couldn’t adequately protect the populace, he said, because they didn’t have sufficient manpower: “Not only are things not good, they are going to get worse. For those who are so inclined, it’s time to start protecting yourselves.” [snip]
In 2007, Dupnik raised the hackles of immigration activists when he proposed to have federal agents work alongside his own border crimes unit. [snip]
Dupnik provoked the Hispanic community again in April 2009 by suggesting that public schools should check students’ immigration status when they enroll, even though the Supreme Court ruled in 1982 that denying enrollment to the children of illegal immigrants is unconstitutional. “It’s wrong for the taxpayers in this country to spend the millions and millions and millions of dollars that we do catering to illegals,” Dupnik said, including providing free education to their children.”
After certain “profiling” provisions were removed from S.B. 1070 the Sheriff supported the Arizona law against illegal immigration. But as with Barack Obama the clods who now worship the Sheriff don’t know much about him. Today, in an editorial the Arizona Republic tells the Sheriff to shut up:
“. . . enough. Enough attacks, sheriff. Enough vitriol. It is well past time for the sheriff of Pima County to get a grip on his emotions and remember his duty.
With each passing hour, we learn more about the 22-year-old suspect. And everything we learn adds to the profile of a deeply troubled young man detached from reality. There is nothing to date that suggests any partisan motivation for his crimes, whether right-wing or left.”
* * * * * *
Speaking of clods, let’s look at why Barack Obama’s publicity stunt tomorrow is doomed to failure. Let’s start with this quote from an Obama “advisor” which is found in Obama lover Jonathan Alter’s book The Promise:
“the most unsentimental man I’ve ever met.”
Regular readers of Big Pink will not be surprised. After all, as Michelle said, he is the boy “raised by wolves”.At the White House the deluded plotters want to portray the opportunistic schemer as some sort of “feel your pain” Bill Clinton. This is a risible assumption.
Bill Clinton was a genuine “feel your pain” type of guy. He still is. Bill Clinton grew up in a family that required him to be a conciliator and an empathetic figure. His mom had many “gentlemen friends” for a while and eventually married an abusive man. Bill Clinton genuinely loved his mom and dealt with his life situation by at once being a caring man and a sexual rogue. These are contradictory attributes but humans are nothing if not loaded with contradictions.
Barack Obama on the other hand had a mom who trolled the world looking for men of color and dumped little Barry on his grandparents. Once little Barry finally met “daddy” his pop saw enough and walked away, again. Barry became Barack and everything became about race. Barack dealt with his life situation by becoming a back slapping flim-flam man who utilized white gentry guilt and a “blank slate” personality/principles to advance himself.
“The shootings and the resulting debate over the climate of incivility play to his strengths as a calm and rational leader. Just as Bill Clinton’s response to the 1995 Oklahoma City bombings helped him recover from his defeat in the 1994 midterms, so this episode may help Obama change—at least in the short term–the trajectory of American politics.
Clinton did more than just speak movingly after Oklahoma City and pull the country together as griever-in-chief. He was able to use the event to discredit the militia movement and tamp down hate speech on talk radio enough that it wasn’t much of a factor in his 1996 reelection. The Oklahoma City bombings were later seen by historians and Clinton-era officials as the turning point in his political comeback. [snip]
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” Rahm Emanuel famously said in 2008. The same goes for a shooting spree that gravely wounds a beloved congresswoman. Congress won’t enact gun control, as it did in the wake of the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, but perhaps something positive can come from this.
The State of the Union will almost certainly begin with heart-wrenching symbolism. Ever since Ronald Reagan put a “citizen hero,” Lenny Skutnik, in the balcony of the House chamber after he rescued passengers from the wreck of an Air Florida jet that crashed in the freezing Potomac River in 1982, American presidents have all used their State of the Unions speeches to honor their own “Skutniks,” as they’ve come to be called in Washington. This year will be no different. At least one or two people connected to the horrific incident (The 20-year-old office intern who heroically applied triage to Gabrielle Giffords? A relative of slain federal judge John Roll?) will undoubtedly sit with Michelle Obama at the speech. And it’s hard to imagine that the poignant birth date of 9-year-old Christina Taylor Greene, September 11, 2001, will escape mention.”
“Angels and Ministers of Grace defend us” – from another Obama speech. Obama’s best moment ever came yesterday when for 1 single solitary minute he shut up. What a blessed minute. Now Alter wants to have innocent Americans punished with more verbiage from the mouth of Barack Obama. Please no, dear God! Will it be considered biological terrorism if we pray for Obama to be struck with chronic laryngitis?
“For as long as I’ve been alive, crosshairs and bull’s-eyes have been an accepted part of the graphical lexicon when it comes to political debates. Such “inflammatory” words as targeting, attacking, destroying, blasting, crushing, burying, knee-capping, and others have similarly guided political thought and action. Not once have the use of these images or words tempted me or anybody else I know to kill. I’ve listened to, read—and even written!—vicious attacks on government without reaching for my gun. I’ve even gotten angry, for goodness’ sake, without coming close to assassinating a politician or a judge.
From what I can tell, I’m not an outlier. Only the tiniest handful of people—most of whom are already behind bars, in psychiatric institutions, or on psycho-meds—can be driven to kill by political whispers or shouts. Asking us to forever hold our tongues lest we awake their deeper demons infantilizes and neuters us and makes politicians no safer.”
“Almost 60 percent of the public believes that heated political rhetoric has nothing to do with an Arizona shooting spree that gravely wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D) and killed a federal judge.
Fifty-seven percent of respondents in a new CBS News poll said rhetoric is unrelated to the shooting, while 32 percent said they believe the two are connected…
… Republicans who responded to the poll do not believe the shooting was related to rhetoric at a greater rate than Democrats. Sixty-nine percent of Republicans said rhetoric was not a factor, compared to 19 percent who said it was connected.
A narrow plurality of Democrats believe there is no relationship — 49 percent to 42. Fifty-six percent of independents believe rhetoric is unrelated to the shooting, and 33 percent think it was.”
Into this common sense reaction the White House sends wolf-boy Barack Obama to further make a fool of himself and convince Americans (with flaccid words written by misogynist Favreau and splayed on a TelePromTer) that Jared LONER is not a nut but somehow a product of Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. To believe this nonsense one must ignore the mounting evidence that LONER targeted Gabrielle Giffords back in 2007.
It’s not Oklahoma City but the Reichstag Fire. The goal is to create a crisis event for political purpose. In 1995 Bill Clinton spoke to the nation about a politically motivated bombing that destroyed a federal courthouse and killed many. Bill Clinton profited politically from the situation because he was able to emotionally connect with the American people and present the evidence that the bombing was indeed a political act that had to be repudiated.
In Arizona the murderous work was the product of a LONER nutjob who began to fulminate against the congresswomen in 2007 and it appears that totally by happenstance killed a Republican federal district court judge. In Arizona the attempt by Obama Dimocrats is to manufacture a motive and utilize the murders of innocents by a deranged man to political purpose.
In the Arizona shootings the only political motivation is coming from Obama Dimocrats, Obama loving Big Blog Boys and Big Media.
“If you want to see heartbreaking grace and tremendous courage in the face of unspeakable tragedy, you don’t want to miss this segment from the Today show this morning with John Green, the father of the 9-year-old victim of the shooting in Tucson, Arizona. Christina Green was born on 9/11 and died in another act of nationally-covered violence, which her father says are “bookends” to her joyful life. Instead of lashing out, which would be entirely understandable for a heartbroken father, John instead offers us an amazing example of poise and perspective that puts many to shame:
We recall how in 2008 Hillary Clinton was attacked by Barack Obama goons because she would not get out of the political contest – and in one interview discussed the vagaries of elections and politics and dropped in a reference to the assassination of Robert Kennedy in 1968. Obama thugs immediately declared that Hillary Clinton was calling for the assassination of Barack Obama and demanded that she get out of the race. That episode was a rehearsal for this latest Obama goon attack on Sarah Palin.
We recall the appropriate outrage by Democrats when it appeared the George W. Bush White House was trying to shut down political discourse and debate to demonize opponents (“watch what you say”). We recall when we Democrats attacked the free speech throttling Patriot Act, not passed it without discussion.
That was then. Now many of those that defended free speech and deplored any attempt to start Reichstag fires have abandoned our principled positions and hold the matches and act like political arsonists. The Obama Dimocrats shouting “racist FIRE” are the ones holding the torches.
It’s not a novel by Dickens. We do however have a gunman with the Dickensian tag name of Loughner (think LONER). We have a murdered federal district court judge. We have a bullet in-through-out of the brain of a congressional representative. And yet some people thought the shootings in Arizona would not be politicized? That’s nuts.
Yesterday just about the time we published a bit of questioning drollery called “What Becomes Of The Broken-Hearted?, we received an answer to our question: into madness and delusion. In “What Becomes Of The Broken-Hearted?” we asked what the Big Blog Boys and Big Media Obama sycophants would do now that they, according to Politico, are finally aware that Barack just ain’t into them.
As soon as we published our article the news of the dead and injured in Arizona drowned all the news broadcasts and discussions. It was and is still All Arizona All The Time. As the details of the shootings and the shooter began to emerge there was sadness at the loss of life as well as mounting evidence that the shooter was not the most articulate nor rational of personalities. Just as immediately, what passes for the American left these days (we call them “PINOs” – Progressives In Name Only and have nothing to do with them) indulged in madness and delusion. We were not surprised by this. What does surprise is in what reality do these Kooks think this is a political plus for them?
We suppose that the goal was to establish the narrative that the Tea Party (remember how before the November 2010 elections the assorted DailyKooks used the term “teabaggers” to denigrate the potent political force?) was responsible and to somehow try to intimidate the Tea Party activists. We doubt the Tea Party movement will in any way stifle itself in order to please the DailyKooks.
Perhaps the goal was to somehow make the Tea Party anathema to the all important political independents. If this is the strategy, we doubt it will work. We doubt it will work because the shooter, the gunman has a history of mental instability. The Washington Post published a story about how the gunman, Jared Loughner, was expelled from college because the instructor feared for his own life:
“Ben McGahee, a third-year instructor at Pima Community College, taught Loughner in an elementary algebra class last summer. McGahee said that while Loughner never threatened him directly, he was concerned by his behavior.
“I always felt, you know, somewhat paranoid,” McGahee said. “When I turned my back to write on the board, I would always turn back quickly–to see if he had a gun.”‘
LONER Loughner has some odd fixations on grammar and math. On one exam Loughner answered a math question with “Eat+Sleep+Brush Teeth=Math.” A student in the class said “I kept saying to people, ‘I’m afraid he’s going to come into the class with a gun.'” There was other odd and disturbing behavior by Jared Loughner none of which could be termed political. But that did not stop the DailyKooks from turning a Kook into a tin foil for their Kookiness. The Kooks latched onto the Kook.
The DailyKooks demonstrated their Kookiness by blaming Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. The DailyKooks were not alone. Lots of Kooks came out of the Hopium dens to create theories about how the Kook shot because of Sarah Palin. Howard Kurtz published some sanity:
“One of the first to be dragged into this sickening ritual of guilt by association: Sarah Palin. Last March, the former Alaska governor posted a map on her Facebook page with crosshair targets representing 20 Democratic lawmakers she was singling out for defeat after they voted for President Obama’s health care plan. One of them was Giffords. Palin, who touts her caribou-hunting heritage, also tweeted, “Don’t retreat, RELOAD!”
This kind of rhetoric is highly unfortunate. The use of the crosshairs was dumb. But it’s a long stretch from such excessive language and symbols to holding a public official accountable for a murderer who opens fire on a political gathering and kills a half-dozen people, including a 9-year-old girl.[snip]
This isn’t about a nearly year-old Sarah Palin map; it’s about a lone nutjob who doesn’t value human life. [snip]
Let’s be honest: Journalists often use military terminology in describing campaigns. We talk about the air war, the bombshells, targeting politicians, knocking them off, candidates returning fire or being out of ammunition. So we shouldn’t act shocked when politicians do the same thing. Obviously, Palin should have used dots or asterisks on her map. But does anyone seriously believe she was trying to incite violence?”
Kurtz points out that Sarah Palin also said “Gear up! In the battle, set your sights on next season’s targets! From the shot across the bow—the first second’s tip-off—your leaders will be in the enemy’s crosshairs, so you must execute strong defensive tactics.” Palin was referring to basketball and the Final Four.
An Obama Dimocrat, Representative Raul Grijalva joined the Kooks and blamed Palin. Keith Olbermann who during the 2008 primaries wanted Hillary Clinton to be taken into a back room and not allowed to emerge demanded Sarah Palin “… repudiate her own part in amplifying violence and violent imagery in politics, she must be dismissed from politics.” KO continues to prove he is a KOOK.
Kurtz does attempt to link Bill Clinton to the Arizona shootings. Writes Kurtz:
“The act of transforming tragedy into political fodder has deep roots in American history. After the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, President Bill Clinton attacked “the purveyors of hatred and division” for “reckless speech,” saying the nation’s airwaves were too often used “to keep some people as paranoid as possible and the rest of us all torn up and upset with each other. They spread hate, they leave the impression that, by their very words, that violence is acceptable.”
“The first and most serious is the sickness living in Loughner’s head. Evidence in the form of farewell videos, internet postings, and the recollections of people who knew him reveal a profoundly disturbed person who had veered far into a paranoid world. Loughner’s complaints about government mind control and other rants were not “anti-government” in any political sense, but anti-government or anarchist in the Ted Kazynski-deranged sense. We do not know Loughner’s motives, but those motives whatever they were were the byproduct of Loughner’s clearly delusional view of the world.[snip]
Within minutes of the shooting being made known, two of the highest profile left-wing bloggers, Markos Moulitsas of DailyKos and Matthew Yglesias of Think Progress, pulled out a 10-month-old electoral map used at a Sarah Palin website showing almost two dozen congressional districts being targeted, including Giffords’ district. The map was similar to one used by the Democratic Leadership Committee to target Republicans in the prior election cycle, and as Howard Kurtz points out, simply typical of campaign rhetoric using military-themed language.
Markos explicitly accused Palin of having blood on her hands and Yglesias did so implicitly. Through retweets of this message and the map, the left-blogosphere (with some exceptions who took a wait-and-see attitude) took up the cudgel of turning this shooting to their political advantage. Think Progress ran updates with details on the Palin map and also an advertisement several months ago by Giffords’ congressional campaign opponent also using military terminology. But clearly, Palin has been the focus, with a larger attack on “right wing vitriol.”
Not surprisingly, Keith Olbermann — one of the most hateful television personalities who names a nightly “Worst Person In The World” — joined the chorus. Even The New York Times joined the fray, reporting on the Palin map in its initial coverage, and running a Paul Krugman blog post blaming right-wing rhetoric. [snip]
Yet not a single person pushing the blame-Palin line has offered a shred of evidence that Loughner ever saw Palin’s electoral map, was motivated by it, was right-wing (anectodally it appears Loughner was quite left-wing as of a few years ago), was motivated by right-wing radio, or did any of the things being assumed by the left-blogosphere, the mainstream media and some Democratic politicians.”
Eventually there will be a trial of Jared Loughner. We’ll discover what, if any, politically motivated Loner, er, Loughner soon enough. But when all is said and done we are most sure that the results will be a four letter word: KOOK.
** Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.” ** Obama to democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”
After all the arguments are made, after all the evidence is produced, after all the stories are heard, the DailyKooks and the assorted Kook friends and Hopium Guzzlers will scratch their heads and wonder why things went so wrong.
The KOOKs will wonder why they failed so spectacularly to soil their enemies. They will eventually say “What were we thinking?” They will in the court of public opinion, like the LONER KOOK in federal court, plead insanity.