The Politics Of Decline: Marco Rubio’s Maiden Speech Versus Barack Obama’s Puerto Rico Flim-Flam

Forget last night’s Republican debate. Today’s long distance debate between Barack Obama and Marco Rubio is the issue to be decided in 2012.

Marco Rubio gave his first speech from the floor of the United States Senate today. It was a thunderous attack against the proponents of American decline:

“One of my favorite speeches is one that talks about our role in the world. It was the speech President Kennedy was set to give, had he lived just one more day. It would have closed with these words:

“We in this country, in this generation, are- by destiny rather than by choice- the watchmen on the walls of world freedom. We ask, therefore, that we may be worthy of our power and responsibility, that we may exercise our strength with wisdom and restraint, and that we may achieve in our time and for all time the ancient vision of ‘peace on earth, good will toward men.’ That must always be our goal, and the righteousness of our cause must always underlie our strength. For as was written long ago “except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.”

Almost half a century later America is still the only watchman on that wall of world freedom. And there is still no one else to take our place.

What will the world look like if America declines? Well, today all over the world, people are being forced to accept a familiar lie, that the price for their security is their liberty.

If America declines, who will serve as living proof that liberty, security and prosperity are all possible together? Today, radical political Islam abuses and oppresses women, has no tolerance for other faiths and seeks to impose its views on the whole world. If America declines, who will lead the fight to confront and defeat them?

Today, children are used as soldiers and trafficked as slaves. Dissidents are routinely imprisoned without trial, and subjected to torture, forced confessions and forced labor.

If America declines, who will take these causes as their own? What will the world look like if America declines? Well, who will create the innovations of the 21st century? Who will stretch the limits of human potential and explore the new frontiers?

If America declines, who will do all this, and ask for nothing in return?

Motivated solely by the desire to make the world a better place?

The answer is no one will. There is still no nation or institution in the world willing or able to do what we have done.

Ronald Reagan described America as a shining city on a hill. Now, some say that we can no longer afford the price we must pay to keep America’s light shining. Others say that there are new shining cities that will soon replace us. I say they are both wrong. Yes, the price we will pay to keep America’s light shining is high, but the price we will pay if it stops shining will be even higher.

Yes, there are new nations now emerging with prosperity and influence. And that is what we always wanted. America never wanted to be the only shining city. We wanted our example to inspire the people of the world to build one of their own. You see, these nations, these new shining cities, they can join us, but they can never replace us. Because the light coming from them is but a reflection of our own. It is the light of an American century that now spreads throughout the world. A world that still needs America. A world that still needs our light. A world that still needs another American century.”



The salience of Marco Rubio’s speech is one we wrote about in mid-April of this year. We quoted from an article by Ryan Lizza in The New Yorker magazine:

“One of his advisers described the President’s actions in Libya as “leading from behind.” That’s not a slogan designed for signs at the 2012 Democratic Convention, but it does accurately describe the balance that Obama now seems to be finding. It’s a different definition of leadership than America is known for, and it comes from two unspoken beliefs: that the relative power of the U.S. is declining, as rivals like China rise, and that the U.S. is reviled in many parts of the world. Pursuing our interests and spreading our ideals thus requires stealth and modesty as well as military strength. “It’s so at odds with the John Wayne expectation for what America is in the world,” the adviser said. “But it’s necessary for shepherding us through this phase.”

Barack Obama is “shepherding us through this” decline of his own making. Marco Rubio is arguing against that perceived decline. In the article we wrote we also quoted from Market Watch which listed the horrific economic statistics and stated the consequences of America’s decline:

This is more than a statistical story. It is the end of the Age of America.

And both those countries live under very similar rules of constitutional government, respect for civil liberties and the rights of property. China has none of those. The Age of China will feel very different.”

Marco Rubio made a detailed case against American decline today. Last night Tim Pawlenty said “The President is a declinist.” It was Charles Krauthammer who in October 2009 began the discussion on American decline:

“The weathervanes of conventional wisdom are engaged in another round of angst about America in decline. New theories, old slogans: Imperial overstretch. The Asian awakening. The post-American world. Inexorable forces beyond our control bringing the inevitable humbling of the world hegemon. [snip]

The question of whether America is in decline cannot be answered yes or no. There is no yes or no. Both answers are wrong, because the assumption that somehow there exists some predetermined inevitable trajectory, the result of uncontrollable external forces, is wrong. Nothing is inevitable. Nothing is written. For America today, decline is not a condition. Decline is a choice. Two decades into the unipolar world that came about with the fall of the Soviet Union, America is in the position of deciding whether to abdicate or retain its dominance. Decline–or continued ascendancy–is in our hands.

Krauthammer’s article is essential reading because, along with its economic component, the issue of 2012 is whether America chooses the road to ruin or the road to another American century.

David Brooks, who debased himself in 2008 when he praised Barack Obama as a future president because of the sharp crease in Obama’s pants, today writes about American decline as well:

This election is about how to avert national decline. All other issues flow from that anxiety.

The election is happening during a downturn in the economic cycle, but the core issue is the accumulation of deeper structural problems that this recession has exposed — unsustainable levels of debt, an inability to generate middle-class incomes, a dysfunctional political system, the steady growth of special-interest sinecures and the gradual loss of national vitality.

The number of business start-ups per capita has been falling steadily for the past three decades. Workers’ share of national income has been declining since 1983. Male wages have been stagnant for about 40 years. The American working class — those without a college degree — is being decimated, economically and socially. In 1960, for example, 83 percent of those in the working class were married. Now only 48 percent are.

Voters are certainly aware of the scope of the challenges before them. Their pessimism and anxiety does not just reflect the ebb and flow of the business cycle, but is deeper and more pervasive. Trust in institutions is at historic lows. Large majorities think the country is on the wrong track, and have for years. Large pluralities believe their children will have fewer opportunities than they do.”

Lizza, MarketWatch, Pawlenty, Brooks, Krauthammer – thin reeds all when compared to Marco Rubio. Rubio, the son of immigrants, a new Senator, takes on Obama’s decline and fall of America with a particular kind of electoral force. That particular electoral force is why Barack Obama traveled with the Chicago circus to Puerto Rico:

“The roughly 4 million residents of the U.S. Caribbean territory are American citizens but can’t vote for president, while the almost 5 million Puerto Ricans living in the 50 U.S. states have full voting rights, and Obama needs strong support in 2012 from what traditionally has been a largely Democratic constituency.

In particular, an influx of Puerto Ricans has come in recent years to central Florida, a key swing state in Obama’s re-election campaign.”

Shameless Barack Obama advertised his trip to the island as the first presidential visit since John F. Kennedy in 1961. Obama mentioned Kennedy the minute he arrived and the streets were festooned with posters of Obama 2011 and Kennedy 1961. The problem with this flim-flam is that President Gerald Ford visited Puerto Rico in 1976 for an economic summit.

Barack Obama used island Puerto Ricans as props to prop himself up:

“To some Puerto Ricans, Obama’s trip was too short to merit significance.

“I think it’s a public relations visit. I say it as a Democrat. This visit does not satisfy me,” said Sen. Cirilo Tirado of the island’s Popular Democratic Party.

Luis Guillermo Febus, a public employee, called Obama’s visit “too fast,” adding: “It seems to me that there will not be time for us to talk about serious things and the problems that this country has.”

Barack Obama went to Puerto Rico, not for serious talk and action, but to try to bamboozle the Latino vote. Recently Obama “strategists” declared that they were targeting the state of Georgia for an Obama victory because Georgia has a Latino population of 10%. Because states such as Ohio are all but lost Obama “strategists” have also declared that they will target Latino rich Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado and even Texas!

We’ve mocked this Latino based reelection strategy repeatedly. Recently American Conservative Union Chairman Al Cardenas made many of our points:

“There are going to be from 10-15 key states [in 2012] and in 40% of them, the Hispanic vote will be decisive, Cardenas said. “When you look at the swing states and you look at the growing Hispanic population, you have to ask, ‘Would a Marco Rubio or a Jeb Bush almost guarantee us a victory in those six states and win us the presidency?’ Probably,” he said. Cardenas, a former Florida State GOP Chairman who is close to Rubio, said he thought Rubio would likely join the ticket if — as widely expected — he’s asked.

“If you asked him today he’d say no,” said Cardenas. “A year or 14 months from now is a different situation. If he’s asked, I don’t know how you say no.”

Marco Rubio will be on the Republican ticket in 2012. The issue will be American decline.

Last night Barack Obama spoke at a half empty fundraiser. The low dollar donors of 2008 either do not have the money or the desire to give Obama money. Their fortunes are in decline. Obama’s fortunes are in decline. America is in decline.

To stop the decline of America Barack Obama must be defeated in 2012. Marco Rubio knows that.

Share

361 thoughts on “The Politics Of Decline: Marco Rubio’s Maiden Speech Versus Barack Obama’s Puerto Rico Flim-Flam

  1. Trump is really getting annoying, now May 2012 is the new deadline. He had a choice, get in now or just blast Waffles from the sidelines and don’t threaten a 3rd party run, which will 100% ensure Waffles wins by default.

  2. Legal Insurrection has good coverage of the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling on the collective bargaining law. The Wisconsin Supreme Court took the circuit judge to the woodshed.

    http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2011/06/wisconsin-supreme-court-overturns-judge.html

    ¶6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all orders and judgments of the Dane County Circuit Court in Case No. 2011CV1244 are vacated and declared to be void ab initio. State ex rel. Nader v. Circuit Court for Dane Cnty., No. 2004AP2559-W, unpublished order (Wis. S. Ct. Sept. 30, 2004) (wherein this court vacated the prior orders of the circuit court in the same case).

    ¶7 This court has granted the petition for an original action because one of the courts that we are charged with supervising has usurped the legislative power which the Wisconsin Constitution grants exclusively to the legislature….

    ¶9 Although all orders that preceded the circuit court’s judgment in Case No. 2011CV1244 may be characterized as moot in some respects, the court addresses whether a court can enjoin publication of a bill. The court does so because whether a court can enjoin a bill is a matter of great public importance and also because it appears necessary to confirm that Goodland remains the law that all courts must follow. State v. Cramer, 98 Wis. 2d 416, 420, 296 N.W.2d 921 (1980) (noting that we consider questions that have become moot “where the question is one of great public importance . . . or of public interest,” or “where the problem is likely to recur and is of sufficient importance to warrant a holding which will guide trial courts in similar circumstances”). Accordingly, because the circuit court did not follow the court’s directive in Goodland, it exceeded its jurisdiction, invaded the legislature’s constitutional powers under Article IV, Section 1 and Section 17 of the Wisconsin Constitution, and erred in enjoining the publication and further implementation of the Act.

    ¶10 Article IV, Section 17 of the Wisconsin Constitution vests the legislature with the constitutional power to “provide by law” for publication. The legislature has set the requirements for publication. However, the Secretary of State has not yet fulfilled his statutory duty to publish a notice of publication of the Act in the official state newspaper, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 14.38(10)(c). Due to the vacation of the circuit court’s orders, there remain no impediments to the Secretary of State fulfilling his obligations under § 14.38(10)(c).

    ¶11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that we have concluded that in enacting the Act, the legislature did not employ a process that violated Article IV, Section 10 of the Wisconsin Constitution, which provides in relevant part: “The doors of each house shall be kept open except when the public welfare shall require secrecy.” The doors of the senate and assembly were kept open to the press and members of the public during the enactment of the Act. The doors of the senate parlor, where the joint committee on conference met, were open to the press and members of the public. WisconsinEye broadcast the proceedings live. Access was not denied.[1] There is no constitutional requirement that the legislature provide access to as many members of the public as wish to attend meetings of the legislature or meetings of legislative committees.

    The Court adopted the argument I had made here many times, that the Courts had no business questioning the legislature’s interpretation of its own rules:

    ¶13 It also is argued that the Act is invalid because the legislature did not follow certain notice provisions of the Open Meetings Law for the March 9, 2011 meeting of the joint committee on conference. It is argued that Wis. Stat. § 19.84(3) required 24 hours notice of that meeting and such notice was not given. It is undisputed that the legislature posted notices of the March 9, 2011 meeting of the joint committee on conference on three bulletin boards, approximately 1 hour and 50 minutes before the start of the meeting. In the posting of notice that was done, the legislature relied on its interpretation of its own rules of proceeding. The court declines to review the validity of the procedure used to give notice of the joint committee on conference….

  3. Real request–
    I read all of you just about every day and I’d really love to hear some gut responses. I will ask one more time with a gun to your head(meaning you have to choose) who is it. I think we can all learn a lot when someone says I would “vote” for a over b.

  4. henry
    June 14th, 2011 at 9:44 pm

    Granted, I’d vote for a soda can over Waffles; given that, I was very impressed with Michelle Bachman yesterday, I still need to hear more from the others, I like Palin as well, but if she is planning on waiting and then coming in later and burst in, its a bad idea, these candidates are out there now, getting questions from an Obot LSM, they are answering direct questions, Palin isn’t.
    So, as of now Bachmann impressed me from yesterday’s debate, I honestly didn’t think much of her. But I’m still now sure who to vote for when I register as a repub, who can beat Waffles is going to be a very important consideration.

  5. I am glad Trump is still speaking out and I hope he will get into the race.

    I don’t care if he didn’t decide to run when he knew the Republican party was going to not back him.

    No one else in the Rethug party has a clue as to how to save our economy, they just want to take away Medicare and SS.

    Rubio quoted John F. Kennedy and Raygun. Two dead presidents. I would like it if he acknowledged someone that works like a dog and loves this country…Hillary.

  6. I think Hannity really wants Trump to run…he went to Trump Tower to get this interview.

    I think Donald is right, the Republican’s could easily lose the House. Even Tea Party people don’t want Medicare or SS to be screwed with.

  7. I now hope neither trump or Palin runs.
    MSM was beyond pathetic trying to minimalize palin, Who cares what they say she is going to speak. I just find msm profoundly banal. Stupid eould be giving the dad sacs credit

  8. tim
    If Palin opts not to run we are in for the ride of our lives– because she is not going to shut up. Lames stream media dismissing her generates more press than any other, I am a gay man I disagree with sarah on many things but I have zero respect for a pandering manipulating butt plug

  9. henry
    June 14th, 2011 at 10:35 pm

    I agree with you, I hope neither of them stays quiet, I also agree with you that I don’t think either should run; I so hope for the sake of this country Waffles is kicked out next year. Then I hope Palin and Trump still don’t shut up when the repubs are in charge and start messing up, both parties have to held accountable.

  10. Santorim annoys me. I am one of seven. My dad was a deacon. Grew up very Catholic. I am gay and I love a lot of people who cannot accept me, That does not mean I don’t love thrm or they I, sanctorum has an absolute dismissive way of being a conservative and i can tell you he is a turn off to my family that believes I may be wrongbut they find him offensive. I might add that this is suburbs of Pittsburgh.

  11. If you are not black or Hispanic in the USA does your vote count much these days?

    Women do not seem to have a “voting block”. If you are just a plain old Irish, English, German or Italian ancestry citizen whose family has been in the USA since the 1700 or 1800’s apparently you do not have a “block” for politicans to “court”.

    I don’t know who I will vote for or even lean toward, Henry, however, I do know this.

    I will NOT vote skin. I will NOT vote rock star. I will NOT vote for the coolest dude in the race and I will NOT vote for a woman just because she is a woman.

    I keep looking for the most qualified, experienced, really smart, work horse candidate who truly loves America and puts the people first. I want a president who would not just be a corporate or Soros puppet and one who is truly ready to lead from day one. And I might add if they play goff incestantly…forget it.

    I only know ONE…ONE possible candidate who fits that bill, however, the MSM, elitist, party insiders, Soros, Rove among others will not allow it.

  12. Marco Rubio will be on the Republican ticket in 2012. The issue will be American decline.
    ———————–
    I hope this are right. What I am hearing from many people is that the 2012 election will be a watershed event. It will determine many things, among them whether we will continue to be a sovereign nation, whether the Constitution will remain our governing document, whether the American People will be free men and women or vassals to the elite class, whether we remain in the words of John Quincy Adams-a nation to be reckoned with, whether we have a depression and whether the middle class survives. Every election is important but this one is megapolitical– and determinative of our future. For that reason, the Republican Party cannot wait for 2016 to tap Rubio. If he is not on the ticket they will lose the Hispanic vote in key states. And he alone has the ability to inspire this country, none of the others do, as shown by last night’s debate. The hostility of big media to this country, the party and the middle class is a given. The support of left wing billionaires like Soros to Obama is also a given. The lack of critical thinking skills by many Americans is a given. The willingness of the African American community to stand behind Obama on the mistaken assumption that he is a positive symbol for them when in fact the reverse is true–all of these are givens. However, the kalidescope is changing fast– faster than anyone realized and the lack of economic solutions, indeed the elevation of cheap partisan politics by the democratic leadership over the United States is obvious to anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear. So we shall see what happens to Rubio now that he has made that Reaganesque speech.

  13. Did you notice that Rubio made it a point to reiterate that he was born in the United States. Some Obama supporters whether in big media or the campaign I cannot recall which have intimated that he was not.

  14. 1.9 Million Fewer Americans Have Jobs Today Than When Obama Signed Stimulus

    Twenty-eight months after Congress passed President Obama’s signature economic stimulus law, and nearly one year after he declared the summer of 2010 to be “Recovery Summer,” 1.9 million fewer people are employed.

    In February 2009, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported that 141.7 million people were employed. By the end of May 2011 – the last month for which data are available – that number had fallen to 139.8 million, a difference of 1.9 million.

    While the number of people with jobs has increased slightly from its low point during the recession – 137.9 million in December 2009 – those 1.9 million jobs have been lost despite $800 billion in stimulus spending.

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/after-28-months-stimulus-spending-19-mil

  15. US Housing Crisis Is Now Worse Than Great Depression

    It’s official: The housing crisis that began in 2006 and has recently entered a double dip is now worse than the Great Depression.

    Prices have fallen some 33 percent since the market began its collapse, greater than the 31 percent fall that began in the late 1920s and culminated in the early 1930s, according to Case-Shiller data.

    The news comes as the Federal Reserve considers whether the economy has regained enough strength to stand on its own and as unemployment remains at a still-elevated 9.1 percent, throwing into question whether the recovery is real.

    “The sharp fall in house prices in the first quarter provided further confirmation that this housing crash has been larger and faster than the one during the Great Depression,” Paul Dales, senior economist at Capital Economics in Toronto, wrote in research for clients.

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/43395857

  16. Remember how when he was running and people pointed out he never talked specifics, or never really had a plan. No one listened. He really did not have a plan, but what is more important, he does not understand that a plan has to be implemented, and then watched with changes as needed.

    This man has never done this in his life, and once more, he does not like to plan. All of that was done for him for the last few years, and now he is in a position where he is highly visible, and people can now see that he is not all that organized. In addition the people that got him there, are off doing other things, so who is doing his planning. Heaven for bid, it seems now obvious he is, NOT!

    Romney’s point was so well taken, if you take someone else idea, the least you can do is find out how it was really working, and correct the stuff that does not work so well. In addition, by those actions, he would have gained bi-partisan support for the plan, as the Reps would have felt includes. Heaven for bid that our legislative bodies should do anything together, and they be caught being bi-partisen.

    But then these things are planned out, and as we noted above O is not really a planner.

  17. Rubio quoted John F. Kennedy and Raygun. Two dead presidents.
    —————————-
    And big media missed their que. That was the time they were supposed to accuse Marco of hoping that someone would assassinate the Messiah, spill his spoonful of brains as Westbrook Peglar said and then work themselves up into a state of high pitched depravity over it. Useless fucks.

  18. Darrell Issa, Department of Justice feud heats up

    The Obama administration and Rep. Darrell Issa seem to be headed for their biggest showdown yet as the House oversight committee chief prepares for a Wednesday hearing into an undercover, federal gunrunning investigation that lost track of weapons later found at the scene of a Border Patrol agent’s murder in Arizona.

    Issa, a California Republican, contends the administration has stonewalled his requests for records about a deeply flawed investigation, known as “Operation Fast and Furious,” that may have allowed hundreds of weapons from U.S. gun dealers to flow across the border to Mexican drug gangs. Issa also says congressional Democrats are “obstructing” his inquiry into what he calls “reckless and inappropriate decisions by top Justice Department officials.

    Justice Department officials say handing over sensitive documents to Congress could imperil pending prosecutions, including the case involving the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and the prosecution of 20 people as a result of the gunrunning probe.

    Administration aides fear the dispute could escalate to produce a rare House vote to cite Justice officials for contempt. That, in turn, would likely trigger a court battle testing Congress’s rights to delve into ongoing criminal investigations.

    Administration officials also charge that Issa and Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) released highly confidential information about the identity of a former target of the probe and his dealings with an informant working with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

    Issa insisted that the fault for any mistakes lies with the Justice Department because it has moved slowly and handed over few records since he served the agency with a subpoena on March 31.

    “If the administration started cooperating then, the errors that may occur would not occur,” Issa told POLITICO in an interview Monday. “As long as they don’t cooperate, any errors we make are on them, not on us.”

    “We do not have a dialogue — they’ve asked for permission to redact what we have, but in fact they won’t give us that same information. If they would deliver all the information full and complete with the suggested redactions, we could probably agree to virtually all or all of the redactions,” Issa said. The Justice Department handed over hundreds of documents Monday evening, but a Republican committee aide said the panel wants more.

    Democrats, led by Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the top Democrat on the committee, don’t object to investigating the controversial ATF operation — in fact, many say they support the congressional probe. But Cummings, a lawyer from Baltimore, says he wants to proceed with hearings after the federal government completes its prosecutions.

    Read pgs 2-3

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56995.html

  19. Heaven for bid that our legislative bodies should do anything together, and they be caught being bi-partisen.
    ———————————–
    The only time they came close to that line was in demanding that Tony walk away. If Boehner had half a brain he would have left that one alone and said it is a Pelosi problem ergo far be it from me to interfere. I pray they reach a resolution, but I have more important things to worry about (like the skeletons in my own closet).

  20. Justice Department officials say handing over sensitive documents to Congress could imperil pending prosecutions,
    ——————————-
    So view them in camera.

  21. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) released highly confidential information about the identity of a former target of the probe and his dealings with an informant working with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
    ————————-
    Grassley is an idiot.

  22. Southern-
    I will NOT vote skin. I will NOT vote rock star. I will NOT vote for the coolest dude in the race and I will NOT vote for a woman just because she is a woman.

    I keep looking for the most qualified, experienced, really smart, work horse candidate who truly loves America and puts the people first. I want a president who would not just be a corporate or Soros puppet and one who is truly ready to lead from day one. And I might add if they play goff incestantly…forget it.

    I only know ONE…ONE possible candidate who fits that bill, however, the MSM,
    elitist, party insiders, Soros, Rove among others will not allow it.

    ———

    I totally agree with you!
    I won’t vote for skin, gender, race, rockstar nor fancy words.
    Sincerity, experience, intelligence and their stance on issues is what I look at.
    Maybe I am a fool, but I refuse to give up hoping Hillary will run again in the future. Her party has not been destroyed yet, so she may have to wait until 2016.

    Run Hillary, run!!!!!!!!!

  23. Greta interviewed Rubio tonight, he told her he is not interested in being the VP. He just started his job and wants to stay there. Time will tell.

  24. Well . . . I hate to rain on the parade of Obama, Soros and Chairman Mo–but first there were those leaked emails and now mother nature is stirring up trouble. You realize what this means–no carbon exchange for this corrupt cartel any time soon. Yea, I know Soros, life’s a bitch and then you die. So go ahead Soros show the rest of us how it is done. And don’t invite me to the wake.
    —————————————
    A Mini Ice Age?
    Moe Lane
    Red State

    What may be the science story of the century is breaking this evening, as heavyweight US solar physicists announce that the Sun appears to be headed into a lengthy spell of low activity, which could mean that the Earth – far from facing a global warming problem – is actually headed into a mini Ice Age.

    The Sun normally follows an 11-year cycle of activity. The current cycle, Cycle 24, is now supposed to be ramping up towards maximum strength. Increased numbers of sunspots and other indications ought to be happening: but in fact results so far are most disappointing. Scientists at the NSO now suspect, based on data showing decades-long trends leading to this point, that Cycle 25 may not happen at all.

    The magic phrase ‘Maunder Minimum’ was used – which suggests that we might be looking at another Little Ice Age. Which, depending on who you ask, either: caused a bunch of wars; made a bunch of wars much worse than they would have been otherwise; or is not to be mentioned in polite company. Personally, I was hoping that we’d avoid this: after all, cold is death and heat is life. Better to be warm and wet, than cold and dry. But then, I have kids, and I worry that the current short-sighted, willful denial of science by our self-appointed elites may be condemning my children – and everybody else’s – to a future of poverty and dearth.

  25. Greta interviewed Rubio tonight, he told her he is not interested in being the VP. He just started his job and wants to stay there. Time will tell.
    ———————
    If nominated I will not run. If elected I will not serve. Still, you need to keep an open mind, and realize that if you really believe in the America you described so eloquently while standing in the Senate chamber then surely you realize that 2012 may be the last chance to save it. In that case are you still not interested, Marco?

  26. Marco Rubio. Rubio, the son of immigrants,

    How can he be VP if he is not constitutionally eligible to be president?

    Are we just not making eye contact with the constitution?

    If you build it, they will come – maybe.
    If you ignore it, it will go away – for sure.

  27. No Fly Zone Over Fort Calhoun, NC Nuclear Plant Due to “Hazards”

    June 14, 2011

    The Federal Aviation Administration issued a temporary flight restriction over the Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant until further notice due to “Hazards”. This would normally be a precautionary measure after an electrical fire disabled cooling for the spent fuel rod pool as outlined below.

    The question is why is this still in effect?

    As reported previously, this facility is surrounded by sand bags as the Missouri River rises. David DeGerolamo Electrical Fire Knocks Out Spent Fuel Cooling at Nebraska Nuclear Plant Afire in an electrical switch room on Tuesday briefly knocked out cooling for a pool holding spent nuclear fuel at the Fort Calhoun nuclear plant outside Omaha, Neb., plant officials said.

    The safety of deep pools used to store used radioactive fuel at nuclear plants has been an issue since the accident at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant in March. If the cooling water a pool is lost, the used nuclear fuel could catch fire and release radiation.

    Must watch video… Hi-Alert!

    *High Alert* – Fire -Fort Calhoun Nuclear Plant near Omaha Nebraska- Flooding Missouri River

  28. What are the social implications of economic collapse?

    June 14, 2011
    New York City

    For the last few days, we’ve been having an important discussion about the magnitude of the economic challenges in the west; if you didn’t read yesterday’s letter, I really encourage you to do so before proceeding because it’s important to understand why the west has truly passed the point of no return.

    Simply put, the United States and much of Europe are borrowing an extraordinary amount of money now just to pay interest on the money they’ve already borrowed. They cannot even self-fund their mandatory entitlement programs without going into the hole, and their options are limited:

    Option 1: Continue borrowing, keep the party going.

    As long as the government CAN do this, they WILL do this. Regardless of their intentions, though, more debt only worsens the situation, creating higher borrowing costs in the long run, and even more debt. As this happens, the pool of buyers begins to dry up, especially from overseas.

    Option 2: Inflation

    The more buyers stop purchasing Treasury securities, the more the Federal Reserve will mop up the excess liquidity. In doing so, the Fed essentially conjures up money and loans it to the government.

    No matter what the government monkey statistics say, this is inflationary, plain and simple. The more money they print, the greater the level of inflation in the long-term. Meanwhile, as foreigners simultaneously reduce their US dollar holdings, this inflation will become more acutely felt in the US.

    Option 3: Austerity

    There’s going to come a time when the US government is forced to face its economic reality and make some incredibly deep cuts that would be felt across society, from Wall Street and the military industrial complex to project housing on the other side of the tracks.

    Option 4: Default

    Eventually, the debt burden is simply going to be too much, and the most obvious solution will be to default. Politicians will make China out to be the enemy and they will probably invent a war just to have an excuse to default on Chinese owned debt. Americans will will wave the flag and celebrate defaulting on their enemies.

    Option 5: Economic Cannibalism

    In the best traditions of Atlas Shrugged, the government will continue its persecution of the productive class– professionals, investors, entrepreneurs, and skilled workers. Existing taxes will rise, new taxes will be created, trade barriers will be enacted, and a maze of cost prohibitive regulations will be passed.

    The first option (keeping the party going) is what has been happening for years. Politicians make small concessions to show they’re “serious” about fiscal discipline, cutting laughably small programs while dumping hundreds of billions of dollars into wars and Foreign Aide and entitlement programs.

    The worse the debt situation becomes, though, the higher the borrowing costs become, and the worse the debt situation becomes. It’s not an enviable position. Existing lenders will continue backing away from the US Treasury market, giving option 1 a half-life measured in months at best.

    In the longer term, only options 2-5 remain: inflation, austerity, default, and cannibalism. Each of these remaining options will shake the financial system to its core. More importantly, each of these has the power to create widespread social upheaval.

    When inflation eats away at a family’s already meager standard of living, when austerity eliminates the benefits to which recipients have grown accustomed, when default vanquishes a retiree’s savings, when high taxes make workers feel like they’re just government serfs– this is when the real turmoil will begin:

    * Rising crime: devoid of a job or means to support their families, people will turn to crime out of desperation

    * Class warfare: with dividing lines drawn between have’s vs. have-not’s, it will become unpopular and even dangerous to be successful

    * Corruption: low-level public service officials will look to supplement their income through bribery and kickbacks

    * Black economy: An underground, cash-only (probably gold or foreign currency) economy will emerge with people getting paid in envelopes

    * Censorship: Of course they’ll blame it on national security, but the idea will be to prevent public disparaging of government policy

    * War: The government will need another major event to distract people from the real problems

    * Protests/Riots: This is when things turn bloody

    * Police state conditions: The government will close ranks and send the cops out to show all the little people who’s really in charge

    There are a number of other manifestations, and many are already showing signs of emergence. The US and European police states are alive and well. Crime is on the rise.

    In Europe, cops are doing battle in the streets with their citizens. Think it can’t happen in the US? Remember tanks in the streets during the LA riots? Remember New Orleans? Remember any number of G8/G20 protests?

    Here’s the bottom line: all you have to do is glance at the headlines to see what happens when you strip people of their livelihood, of their ability to put food on the table for their families.

    The US has been able to kick the can down the road with the most blunt social implications simply because the country benefits so much from a US-oriented financial system. This is coming to an end very, very quickly.

    As a rule of thumb, the greater the economic distortion, the harder the collapse. The US economy has been in a fantasy world for so long, and when its dominant primacy is yanked away, the collapse will be at freefall speed.

    Listen… I’m not talking about the end of the world here, I’m talking about difficult times ahead, and the things that go beyond economics. It’s time to face facts and look at how society will change (and has already changed).

    Tomorrow, I’d like to write more about what we can do now. Meanwhile, please tell me what you think about this– how do you see society changing from this reset of the financial system?

    http://www.sovereignman.com/expat/what-are-the-social-implications-of-economic-collapse

  29. Obama assured us early on that he was, among other things, an economist. Big media took that statement at face value, and never bothered to inquire what kind of economist–Marx, Keynes, or Adam Smith. Well . . . now we know:
    ————————
    The ATM Stole My Job
    Red State Blog

    Yesterday, Barack Obama gave away the game. Without actually using the words, Barack Obama admitted he is completely and utterly ignorant about job creation and economics. In an interview with the Today Show, Barack Obama declared that the unemployment rate remains so high because of ATMS.

    Sadly, many people will agree with him because they lack the vision to see the whole picture. They see less bank tellers and more ATMs — much as Barack Obama does — and presume this must mean higher unemployment. This myth, and it is a myth, is older than even the great lament that cars put blacksmiths on the unemployment line by getting rid of the need for horse shoes.

    This left-wing populist thinking does not create jobs and often leads to dangerous policies that stifle the innovation that create the jobs that spring forth from the ATM’s replacing the bank tellers. Barack Obama sees less tellers at the banks because of ATM’s. But he does not see new IT workers at the bank to manage the ATM — higher paid than the tellers. He does not see the computer programmers. He does not see the manufacturers of the machines and their component parts.

    Barack Obama should read Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson. The book was written in 1945 and debunks Obama’s myth succinctly. K. E. Campbell links to the relevant portion:

    Among the most viable of all economic delusions is the belief that machines on net balance create unemployment. Destroyed a thousand times, it has risen a thousand times out of its own ashes as hardy and vigorous as ever. Whenever there is a long-continued mass unemployment, machines get the blame anew. This fallacy is still the basis of many labor union practices…
    The belief that machines cause unemployment…leads to preposterous conclusions. Not only must we be causing unemployment with every technological improvement we make today, but primitive man must have started causing it with the first efforts he made to save himself from needless toil and sweat…

    For starters, this Obama comment really is odd when he wants the government to subsidize the production of electric cars, which would destroy whole sectors of the economy centered around gas fueled cars. If he believes ATM’s destroy jobs, why does he want to subsidize government innovation in green jobs, which would destroy other jobs? Of course, the answer to that is that he wants to destroy the other sectors.

    There, in fact, is the most important and revelatory bit of this whole statement. Barack Obama premises his world view that innovation kills jobs. But, Barack Obama wants to innovate and advance technology in certain areas of the economy, e.g. government and green jobs. Therefore, we can conclude based on his own presuppositions about innovation that Barack Obama is intending to kill off sectors of the economy by forcing government to fund innovation in other areas of the economy.

    It all makes sense now, even though it is an ignorant and wrong presupposition.

    Machines do not cause unemployment. They just move employment elsewhere — from the bank teller line to the IT line to the manufacturing line, etc.

    What’s more troubling about Barack Obama’s statement though — and the White House doubling down on it — is that it leads to one of two conclusions, both of which are horribly wrong.

    The first conclusion is that we should get rid of technology, declaring a veritable Butlerian Jihad. Doing so would cause companies to allocate resources more inefficiently, which might increase the labor pool in one sector of the economy, but assuredly wipe it out in another.

    The second conclusion is that we must settle for this. It is arguable that we are in a period of stagnation with regard to innovation, invention, and technological progress. But settling for this as fact will most likely lead the government to take public policy steps to strengthen and expand the social safety net to compensate for lost jobs than to get government out of the way and fire up the private sector to move beyond the stagnation and innovation plateau.

    We can see already that Barack Obama has decided to go with the second option — to accept a decline and prepare for the decay caused by the decline instead of taking proactive steps to get the economy firing up again.

    Barack Obama shows himself to be clearly ignorant of the way a free market economy works and innovates. Consequently, his economy policy is founded on that ignorance, accepts as gospel the decline of the United States, and, until he is replaced, we’re screwed

  30. So, who do we vote for?

    The Republicans are well aware of the problems we’re facing, yet they do nothing but bellow and crow- STOP the SPENDING- CUT PROGRAMS! The cost cutting helps but why haven’t the Republicans put forth sound economic programs that create jobs and stimulate the economy.

    They continue supporting Obama new Tax Programs while cutting others Americans depend on- adding fuel to the fire that is helping BURN down America-

    So, I say again- Who do we vote for? Knowing full well Republicans are playing ball with Obama because in Truth they want what Obama wants- eliminating the Middle Class permanently, just like he is doing…

    George W. Bush said it “ALL” when he was guest of honor at the Correspondents Dinner roasting him. He looked around the room and said:

    “This is an impressive crowd, the HAVEs- and the HAVE MORES. Some people call you the ELITES, I call you my BASE”

  31. Shadowfax
    June 15th, 2011 at 1:53 am
    Greta interviewed Rubio tonight, he told her he is not interested in being the VP. He just started his job and wants to stay there.
    ***********

    This is the right way. Remember the left thought the savior was the fraud. I may like what this guy says, but he has no experience either.

    And is he constitutionally qualified?

  32. And is he constitutionally qualified?..
    ***********
    I had the same question several months ago…with superficial research it seems that both parents are naturalized US citizens and Sen. Rubio was born in the US. So a tentative yes…

  33. Betty
    June 15th, 2011 at 6:44 am
    Marco Rubio. Rubio, the son of immigrants,

    How can he be VP if he is not constitutionally eligible to be president?

    Are we just not making eye contact with the constitution?

    If you build it, they will come – maybe.
    If you ignore it, it will go away – for sure.
    ______________

    I agree with you there. You should be up in arms with your government doing a round-about with the Constitution. They tried in Canada to revamp our provincial arrangement and we forced a referendum and voted against it. If your Constitution stands for nothing, your government stands for nothing as far as I am concerned. If they want to change the “natural born” clause, it should be established what it means by the Supreme Court and the Constitution should be amended to clarify the phrase. I am not a lawyer and may not have the terminology correct, but I would not want my government playing foot loose and fancy free with our Constitution.

  34. Shades of Katrina- How many horror stories have we heard from LA’s flooded out victims. FEMA pulls the same BS on Homeowners, victims of Alabama’s tornadoes.
    __________________________

    Citing ‘insufficient damage,’ FEMA rejects aid claims on homes battered by tornados.

    06/14/2011

    When that tornado ripped through Alabama in late April, it turned Jonathan Stewart’s house into a pile of rubble.

    Soon afterward, an inspector from the Federal Emergency Management Agency came to the house–or what remained of it, anyway–in Pleasant Grove, near Birmingham, where Stewart, his wife Lisa, and their two kids live. The inspector took pictures and notes, as part of a process to allow the Stewarts to get help from the disaster relief agency.

    But a few days later, Stewart received a letter from FEMA. FEMA wrote:

    “Based on your FEMA inspection, we have determined that the disaster has not caused your home to be unsafe to live in,” the letter said. It informed Stewart that he didn’t qualify for a FEMA grant–in part because his home had suffered “insufficient damage.”

    “Lisa and I looked at the letter and laughed,” Stewart told the Birmingham News.

    The Stewarts weren’t alone. The home of Lashunta Tabb, who lives in a town nearby, had half its roof blown off and three damaged walls, and its siding stripped off. She said it’s uninhabitable. But FEMA also turned her claim down, citing the same reason: INSUFFICIENT DAMAGE.

    “Although the disaster may have caused some minor damage, it is reasonable to expect you or your landlord to make these repairs,” the letters received by both Tabb and the Stewarts said. “At this time you are not eligible for FEMA housing assistance.”

    FEMA has said that people who think they were incorrectly turned down for aid should appeal the decision. But it said that less than 1 percent of those declared ineligible had done so.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110614/ts_yblog_thelookout/citing-insufficient-damage-fema-rejects-aid-claims-on-homes-battered-by-tornado

  35. This looks like an absolute clusterfuck. Seriously go read all of this, someone needs arrest warrants urgently for Holder and his gang.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-0615-gunrunner,0,4428106.story

    Report describes gun agents’ ‘state of panic’
    Federal gun agents, concerned about weapons sales to Mexican drug suspects, begged to make arrests but were rebuffed, according to a congressional report on a controversial investigation.

    Seattle—
    Federal gun agents in Arizona — convinced that “someone was going to die” when their agency allowed weapons sales to suspected Mexican drug traffickers — made anguished pleas to be permitted to make arrests but were rebuffed, according to a new congressional report on the controversial law enforcement probe.

    Agents from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told congressional investigators that there was “a state of panic” that the guns used in the shooting of U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in January and two U.S. agents in Mexico a month later might have been sold under the U.S. surveillance operation.

  36. I’m watching this guys testimony on “Gunwalker” with my jaw dropped, it really is a disgrace as to what they were doing, they basically got these people killed as sure as pulling the trigger themselves.

  37. If you are born in the US, you are a US citizen, regardless of our parents citizenship.

    Both of Richardson’s parent were from Mexico, and his mother came across the boarder to have him in LA.

    Do I agree with that? I guess that is up for debate, but that is the rule right now.

  38. Obama’s got trouble.Big trouble.

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/15/breaking-congressional-members-to-file-lawsuit-over-libya/

    A bipartisan group of members of Congress will file a lawsuit Wednesday challenging U.S. participation in the Libya military mission.

    Meanwhile, President Barack Obama is set to defend U.S. military involvement in Libya to Congress, according to the White House.
    _________________________

    Good, I’m starting to get a headache around the same time every morning from all the BAD news NO matter where you look, it’s ALL BAD-

  39. No wonder Obama is dropping hints of 1 term, i’d want to be heading for the door with the crap thats coming his way.

  40. Looks like Issa has the goods.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2011/06/15/document-drop-more-project-gunrunner-fit-hits-the-shan/

    Document drop: More Project Gunrunner shit hits the fan

    First, new documents. Just in from Issa’s office:

    Moments ago in his opening statement at today’s hearing, Operation Fast and Furious: Reckless Decisions, Tragic Outcomes, Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) released three e-mails detailing the intimate involvement of ATF Acting Director Kenneth Melson and Acting Deputy Director Bill Hoover in Operation Fast and Furious:

    * The first e-mail from March 10, 2010, to Operation Fast and Furious Group VII Leader David Voth indicates that the two most senior leaders in ATF, Acting Director Kenneth Melson, and Deputy Director Billy Hoover, were “being briefed weekly on” Operation Fast and Furious. The document shows that both Melson and Hoover were “keenly interested in case updates.”
    * A second e-mail from March 12, 2010, shows that Deputy Assistant Director for Field Operations William McMahon was so excited about Fast and Furious that he received a special briefing on the program in Phoenix – scheduled for a mere 45 minutes after his plane landed.
    * A third – and perhaps the most disturbing – e-mail from April 12, 2010, indicates that Acting Director Melson was very much in the weeds with Operation Fast and Furious. After a detailed briefing of the program by the ATF Phoenix Field Division, Acting Director Melson had a plethora of follow-up questions that required additional research to answer. As the document indicates, Mr. Melson was interested in the IP Address for hidden cameras located inside cooperating gun shops. With this information, Acting Director Melson was able to sit at his desk in Washington and – himself – watch a live feed of the straw buyers entering the gun stores to purchase dozens of AK-47 variants.

    Here are the e-mails:

    read on.

  41. Rubio is an American citizen so he can SERVE as vp. Don’t know if/when his parents became “Americans” but nothing precludes him from holding the office of vp as long as he is a citizen. Should something happen to the president while he was second in command he would not be eligible and it would just go to the next in line.

  42. Yes, not quite like Neighborhood organizer where someone gave you a job, while they prepare your way with white lilies to walk on while you go for the Presidency, where immediately you start walking on hot embers. They forgot to tell him about that part.

  43. admin at the top wrote:

    Marco Rubio will be on the Republican ticket in 2012. The issue will be American decline.
    &&&&&&&

    Isn’t there some concern about his “eligibility” (that is, his Natural Born Citizen status)?

  44. Hello Hill friends…I lost my best buddie, my magical cat, two weeks ago and my heart has been broken…his best girl, my little persian cutie and I are adjusting to his sudden loss and the big void…we buried him in our angel garden…love is a wonderful thing but it has such power to hurt deeply…

    …I have still been here every day and in spirit keeping up with you all…just have not felt like posting…

    *******************************************************************************

    …thought this might interest and inspire…

    Obamamania is over… (It’s not cool to be an Obama supporter…)

    WASHINGTON — As he weighed a presidential run back in 2006, President Barack Obama displayed a realistic sense of self-awareness: All the adulation he was receiving, he conceded then, was because he was a blank slate on which people could attach their aspirations.

    As he seeks re-election, his self-awareness is on display again, with a new conclusion.

    “It’s not as cool to be an Obama supporter as it was in 2008, with the posters and all of that stuff,” he acknowledged to an intimate gathering of donors in Miami this week.

    It’s a line he delivered with a chuckle, a variation on a theme that he is using with his base of supporters. But it holds an important truth for the Obama campaign: Obama is now a known quantity and he will not inspire voters this election the same way he did in the previous one.

    Complicating things for Obama is what the Pew Research Center calls an “intensity gap” between Obama’s conservative opponents and the liberals who would be most likely to support him. A recent Pew survey found that 84 percent of staunch conservatives strongly disapprove of the president, but only 64 percent of solid liberals strongly approve of him.

    Intensity, or enthusiasm, is an important factor in driving voters to the polls. Obama benefited greatly from it in 2008 with a record-shattering turnout. But conservative intensity played a significant role in the 2010 midterm elections that put Republicans in control of the House.

    For the president, crafting his message for 2012 is a balancing act.

    He must re-energize his base, the voters moved by his 2008 mantra of hope and change. But he also must reassure moderate and independent voters that he is still focused on righting the economy and that he is not the radical, ineffective agent portrayed by the Republican field of presidential candidates.

    Obama bridges the two with a line meant to be both a defense of his first two years in office and a rationale for his re-election: “Big changes don’t happen overnight.”

    Still, Obama this week was reminded of the results many of his supporters have come to expect from him, no matter how unrealistic. While speaking to more than 900 supporters Monday at Miami’s Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts, one man in the audience stood and shouted, “Keep your promise, stop AIDS now!” before the crowd drowned him out with cheers of “Obama, Obama!”

    Obama also faces the full force of the Republican presidential field. The GOP debate in New Hampshire on Monday night displayed how a central feature of the Republican candidates’ pitches was that they were the antithesis of Obama, variously denouncing his health care plan as “Obamacare,” his time in the presidency as the “Obama depression” and his policies as anti-job and anti-business.

    While Republicans know whom they are running against, Obama does not.

    Obama political adviser David Axelrod maintains that Obama voters will regain their intensity once they have a flesh and blood candidate to compare with Obama.

    But that is still months away and Obama needs enthusiasm from his supporters now to build a grass-roots base and to raise money.

    In his speeches to donors these days, Obama recalls the euphoria displayed by his backers during his election night acceptance speech in Chicago’s Grant Park.

    “Now, two and a half years have passed since that night in Grant Park, and I’ve got a lot more gray hair,” he said at the Arsht Center, where supporters paid from $44 to $2,500 to hear him. “And what seemed so fresh and new, now – `we’ve seen Obama so many times on TV, and we know all his quirks and all his tics and he’s been poked apart.'”

    He knows what his liberal critics say, and he asks for their forbearance. To be sure, they have a litany of complaints. Many Democrats wanted him to push for a public option in health care, a government alternative to private insurance providers. Others wanted an immigration overhaul or a quicker end to wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    “I know the conversation you guys are having,” he said to laughter. “I understand that. There have been frustrations, and I’ve got some dings to show for it over the last two and half years.”
    ___

    EDITOR’S NOTE – Jim Kuhnhenn covers the White House for The Associated Press.

    *****************************************************

    repeat:

    “Now, two and a half years have passed since that night in Grant Park, and I’ve got a lot more gray hair,” he said at the Arsht Center, where supporters paid from $44 to $2,500 to hear him. “And what seemed so fresh and new, now – `we’ve seen Obama so many times on TV, and we know all his quirks and all his tics and he’s been poked apart.'”

    *********************************************

    Mr. O “quit while you are ahead…as you said, “one term would be enough”…

  45. moononpluto
    June 15th, 2011 at 11:31 am

    Looks like Issa has the goods.
    ____________________

    Yup, it’s a start. Little fish lead to the “Great (wannabe) White Shark” sitting behind the Resolution desk. The one that cracks a little everytime he rests his stinky feet on furniture crafted from his ancestors slave ship’s lumber, that won’t soon forget his disrespect of the suffering they endured in the past.

  46. Report: Four ATF Agents Working on Controversial Operation ‘Fast and Furious’ Tell their Story.

    Agents say DOJ still being untruthful about efforts to let guns ‘walk’ into hands of drug cartels

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) today released a report, “The Department of Justice’s Operation Fast and Furious: Accounts of ATF Agents.” The report includes testimony from four Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) agents offering firsthand accounts about the controversial Operation Fast and Furious that allowed suspects to walk away with illegally purchased guns. Two of the approximately 2,000 guns that ATF let criminals walk away with were found at the murder scene of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in December 2010.

    “ATF agents have shared chilling accounts of being ordered to stand down as criminals in Arizona walked away with guns headed for Mexican drug cartels,” said Rep. Issa. “With the clinical precision of a lab experiment, the Justice Department kept records of weapons they let walk and the crime scenes where they next appeared. To agents’ shock, preventing loss of life was not the primary concern.”

    “These agents have risked their lives working for the ATF and they’ve risked their careers by coming forward to speak the truth about a dangerous strategy that was doomed from the start,” Sen. Grassley said. “The report shows the street agents’ perspective on this risky policy to let guns walk. It should help people who are wondering what really happened during Operation Fast and Furious understand why we are continuing to investigate.”

    Highlights of the report include:

    * The supervisor of Operation Fast and Furious was “jovial, if not, not giddy but just delighted about” walked guns showing up at crime scenes in Mexico according to an ATF agent. (p. 37)

    * Another ATF agent told the committee about a prediction he made a year ago that “someone was going to die” and that the gunwalking operation would be the subject of a Congressional investigation. (p. 24)

    * The shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords created a “state of panic” within the group conducting the operation as they initially feared a “walked” gun might have been used. (p. 38)

    * One Operation Fast and Furious Agent: “I cannot see anyone who has one iota of concern for human life being okay with this …” (p. 27)

    * An ATF agent predicted to committee investigators that more deaths will occur as a result of Operation Fast and Furious. (p.39)

    * Multiple agents told the committee that continued assertions by Department of Justice Officials that guns were not knowingly “walked” and that DOJ tried to stop their transport to Mexico are clearly untruthful. (p. 45-50)

    http://oversight.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1341:report-four-atf-agents-working-on-controversial-operation-fast-and-furious-tell-their-story&catid=22:releasesstatements

  47. No wonder Obama is dropping hints of 1 term, i’d want to be heading for the door with the crap thats coming his way.

    ———

    May every bag of crap that he was part of rain down on his head before he is forced to step down and his lifetime of Presidential perks stripped away.

    Karma has a lot of slapping to do.

    Obama will no longer have a ‘clean’ historical slate.

  48. henry
    June 15th, 2011 at 11:35 am
    Rubio is an American citizen so he can SERVE as vp. Don’t know if/when his parents became “Americans” but nothing precludes him from holding the office of vp as long as he is a citizen. Should something happen to the president while he was second in command he would not be eligible and it would just go to the next in line.
    ______________

    I thought you had to be natural born – child born in the US with two US parents.

  49. George Soros and the Plot to Take Judicial Selections Away from Voters

    By Ken Braun | June 12, 2011

    Billionaire political financier George Soros is behind a $45 million campaign to strip American citizens of their right to select state court judges and thereby put the legal system in the hands of Left-wing jurists, according to Dan Pero, president of the American Justice Partnership. AJP produced a comprehensive report about the plan and Soros’ financial stake in it. AJP says the movement is using the reformist-sounding name “merit selection” for its plan and that it seeks to end the popular election of state judges and replace the decision of voters with a system that puts political insiders and lawyers themselves in charge of filtering and selecting who is appointed to the courts where they practice.

    Merit selection will be the subject of a forum at Wayne State University on Tuesday. Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor will be presenting in favor of merit selection. Former Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice Cliff Taylor will present in support of keeping voters directly in charge of who runs their courts.

    The price of admission is $10. Those interested in attending the Judicial Selection Task Force Forum on Tuesday at 9:30 am in Detroit should contact the League of Women Voters.

    Justice Taylor points to Missouri as the birthplace of merit selection and a classic example of its dangers. He notes that the Missouri Appellate Judicial Nominating Commission – though in theory “non-partisan” – has trial lawyers representing three of its seven seats and other special interests locking up others. The commission alone has the power to submit Missouri Supreme Court candidates to the state’s governor. If the governor does not select one of the three candidates offered up by the commission, Taylor says the power to select a judge reverts to the chair of the commission itself.

    Taylor argues that this effectively guts the power of the citizens – through their elected governor – to challenge the authority of the commission and guide the direction of the courts. He points to the recent case of Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt who won election in 2007 on the basis of a promise to put the brakes on a runaway judiciary. Afterward, the commission sent him what Taylor calls three “business as usual” options to choose from for a Missouri Supreme Court vacancy, knowing that the chair of the commission would get to select one of the “bad choices” if the governor did not.

    “When the cry went up that this was just politics masquerading as merit selection,” said Taylor in a Sept. 2009 speech, “the panelists denied it and scolded the critics by informing them that they were just, well, doing their best and picking on merit.”

    Arizona, the home of Justice O’Connor, has a similar system, using a bi-partisan panel. The Hill newsletter’s blog explains how it works:

    “In Arizona, merit selection is a way of choosing judges that uses nonpartisan commissions to investigate and evaluate applicants for judgeships. Each commission is composed of 10 public members and five attorney members, and is chaired by the chief justice of the Arizona Supreme Court. After two years of judicial service, those judges nominated by the commission and appointed by the governor are evaluated by the voters in a retention election.”

    Merit selection is mostly an inversion of the federal system for appointing judges, wherein the President nominates a candidate which the Senate may either confirm or reject. Neither the President nor Congress has the power to force a decision on the other, meaning judgeships from U.S. District Court on up to the U.S. Supreme Court can theoretically remain vacant until the elected officials agree on an appointment.

    O’Connor believes that using money and elections to pick judges at the state level is corrupting to judicial elections in a way that selecting politicians using the same method is not corrupting to legislatures, Congress, governors and the Presidency. She campaigned in favor of a failed attempt to shift the Nevada judiciary over to merit selection last year. She has told other news outlets that she finds it “shocking” that states such as Nevada and Michigan allow citizens to elect judges.

    Just before it was defeated by Nevada voters, in an essay entitled “Soros Bets on Nevada,” the Wall Street Journal editorialized that the Nevada merit selection campaign was the “test drive” for the Soros effort to bring merit selection to the 20 states that do not yet have it.

    “States using this so-called merit selection method have had their judicial selections manipulated by lawyers and bar associations that nominate guild favorites. In most cases this has pushed courts to the activist left,” wrote the Journal. “That’s a nifty outcome for liberal groups who see the state courts as the next frontier for moving political agendas.”

    Pat Wright, director of the Mackinac Center Legal Foundation, stated that while every nominating system has flaws, judicial elections give voters the most ability to shape the direction of their judiciary, which can be a useful tool when judges impose their policy preferences instead of adhering to the law.

    http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/15215

  50. S
    June 15th, 2011 at 11:59 am

    ——————-

    I am so sorry for your loss. Pets become so much a part of our families that it is so hard to lose them.

    Take care.

  51. henry
    June 14th, 2011 at 9:44 pm
    ====================================

    To answer your question, if I understand correctly what you are asking, is that I WILL VOTE FOR Øbama’s opponent… period. It does not matter to me one bit who his opponent is. That opponent will be getting my vote. The Democratic party has not changed in a positive way since 2007. If they think that they can behave in the manner that they have behaved, and then take my vote for granted, then frig them. I don’t differentiate any longer between “good” and “bad” democrats. They are all rats on a sinking ship as far as I am concerned. The so-called “good” Democrats have been letting the bad Democrats get away with their engineered decline of this country. George Bush initiated the beginning of a decline that the Democrats should have, since they had control of Congress at the time, reversed or at least stymied. Instead, once they had the presidency and Congress in their complete control, they went full force in the direction of further decline. I view this, as is alluded to in the admin’s article above, as something that was done on purpose because the Democrats just can’t seem to wrap their little heads around the notion that it’s best for American, and for most of the world, if America continues to lead instead of follow. Blame this on the left, because they have been abdicating America’s leadership role in the world for way too many years.

  52. Oh, and the only Democrats that I can think of who would get any vote from me at this time is Bill or Hillary Clinton. That’s it! I can’t think of any others because as far as I am concerned, they have failed us with their march to Øbama’s orders. I would vote for Bill because he was good for this country in the 1990’s, which were the best of times for me as far as I am concerned. I would vote for Hillary because I believe her to be in the mold of Bill. That is not meant to be sexist. I would Hillary to have her own way of doing things, but I suspect that she would be very similar to Bill, and honestly, that is why I supported her in 2008, and still look to her as something good in 2011.

  53. JanH
    June 15th, 2011 at 1:14 pm
    S
    June 15th, 2011 at 11:59 am

    ——————-

    I am so sorry for your loss. Pets become so much a part of our families that it is so hard to lose them.
    &&&&&&&

    The pets we take into our lives can bring much joy, and when they go, they can leave a big hole. My condolences.

  54. There are some real jems in this interview of nearly 3 years ago. i will post the link. Besides his comment about being a one term President if the economy does not improve, he talks about closing Gitmo, “because it’s the rught thing to do” and oh yes, See how the world is looking at America now. Oh hell yes!

    *******

    MATT LAUER: At some point will you say, “Wait a minute, we’ve spent this amount of money. We’re not seeing the results. We’ve got to change course dramatically?”
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Look, I’m at the start of my administration. One nice thing about — the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable. You know, I’ve got four years. And —
    MATT LAUER: You’re gonna know quickly how people feel —
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: — and — and —
    MATT LAUER: — about what —
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: that’s exactly right. And — and, you know, a year from now I think people — are gonna see that — we’re starting to make some progress. But there’s still gonna be some pain out there. If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s gonna be a one-term proposition.

    **********
    MATT LAUER: — center at Guantanamo within a year. So the clock is ticking. And already you’ve heard the criticism that you don’t know what you’re gonna do with the 245 prisoners being held there.
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: It’s the right thing to do. It ultimately will make us safer. You’ve already seen in the reaction around the world — a different sense of America by us taking this action.
    MATT LAUER: Some of these people may be released, the ones that seem —
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah.
    MATT LAUER: — to be less of a threat. But if one of those people that’s released goes back and takes part in the planning of or carrying out of an attack against U.S. interests, you’re gonna have a Willie Horton times 100 situation on your hands. How are you gonna deal with that?
    PRESIDENT OBAMA: Of course I’m worried about it. Look, the — you know, I have to make the very best judgments I can make in terms of what’s gonna keep the American people safe and is what — what’s gonna uphold our Constitution and our traditions of due process … If we don’t uphold our Constitution and our values, that over time that will make us less safe. And that will be a recruitment tool for organizations like al-Qaida. That’s what I’ve gotta keep my eye on.

    http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/28975726/ns/today-today_people/t/obama-were-suffering-massive-hangover/

  55. S
    June 15th, 2011 at 11:59 am
    =================================

    I am so sorry to read about your cat. My condolences to you. We pet lovers know how much it hurts. You’ve probably seen this in the past, yet I find it comforting, and I hope that you do, too.

    Rainbow Bridge

    Just this side of heaven is a place called Rainbow Bridge.

    When an animal dies that has been especially close to someone here, that pet goes to Rainbow Bridge.
    There are meadows and hills for all of our special friends so they can run and play together.
    There is plenty of food, water and sunshine, and our friends are warm and comfortable.

    All the animals who had been ill and old are restored to health and vigor; those who were hurt or maimed are made whole and strong again, just as we remember them in our dreams of days and times gone by.
    The animals are happy and content, except for one small thing; they each miss someone very special to them, who had to be left behind.

    They all run and play together, but the day comes when one suddenly stops and looks into the distance. His bright eyes are intent; His eager body quivers. Suddenly he begins to run from the group, flying over the green grass, his legs carrying him faster and faster.

    You have been spotted, and when you and your special friend finally meet, you cling together in joyous reunion, never to be parted again. The happy kisses rain upon your face; your hands again caress the beloved head, and you look once more into the trusting eyes of your pet, so long gone from your life but never absent from your heart.

    Then you cross Rainbow Bridge together….

    Author unknown…

    Also, here is one link of many with regards to the question of “if pet’s go to heaven”. Honestly, I had this question when all of my dogs had passed away. I don’t if you people in God or Heaven, so if you don’t, please disregard this link…

    http://www.ourchurch.com/member/w/w_lasalle/

  56. Definitely screwed now

    Former porn star says Representative Weiner asked her to lie

    A porn star said on Wednesday she had an e-mail relationship with embattled Representative Anthony Weiner and that he urged her to lie about their exchanges in the hope that a scandal surrounding him would die down.

    Ginger Lee, flanked by her celebrity attorney Gloria Allred, told a news conference in New York, that Weiner “asked me to lie” about their interchanges which included about 100 emails as well as messages over Twitter.

    Lee, a stripper, said her relationship began with the Democratic lawmaker from New York over political issues such as a woman’s right to choose abortion, and health care, but that Weiner kept trying to turn the conversation sexual.

    She said she never reciprocated his lewd messages, which were often about “his package.”

    “I think that Anthony Weiner should resign because he lied. He lied to the public and the press for more than a week,” she said. “If he lied about this, I can’t have much faith in him about anything else.”

    A chorus of bipartisan calls for Weiner to resign is growing, while the congressman said he would instead seek treatment and a leave of absence after being snared in the scandal over lewd photographs and messages he sent to women over Twitter.

    “I knew I couldn’t lie for him but I did not want to be the one who kicked him under the bus,” she said.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/15/us-usa-politics-weiner-pornstar-idUSTRE75E3N820110615

  57. Mrs. Smith
    June 15th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
    ======================================

    I LOVED THAT!

    Honestly, I am still laughing. Sarah needs that on Sarahpac!

  58. Think the Euro and possibly EU in big crisis, collapse soon.

    Dow off over 170 points in expectation of Greek default. Could be about to unravel. Euro tumbling. Scary.

  59. Sorry, S.

    I know how you feel.

    I have lost a half dozen pets over the past few years and I have decided I will bring no more into my home. It’s me and the 4 parrots, now.

    I just can’t stand going through the horrible pain of losing a dear little furry or feathered creature again.

    Selfish of me, I guess.

  60. moononpluto
    June 15th, 2011 at 1:56 pm
    ===============================

    I hope not. I am hoping that things do not get any worse than they already are. I know that any further deterioration will affect me, and probably at least half of my siblings in ways that will recall the Great Depression.

  61. nomobama, Grrek PM, is offering to resign, Greek Govt on point of collapse and the huge riots there today aint helped. the Greece situation is far worse than they are letting on.

  62. moononpluto
    June 15th, 2011 at 2:02 pm
    ===============================

    I haven’t read anything about the riots. The Greeks have been lying about their finances for quite some time, trying to make things look better than they are. For such a small nation, they sure are causing some big problems. Seriously, in more modern times, what has Greece contributed to the world? This is not snark, but just wondering here. I never read anything positive coming from there. It’s always riots, or some type of political mayhem.

  63. Desperado………..

    Friend — (I am not your friend, go to Hell!)

    I’ve set aside time for four supporters like you to join me for dinner.

    Most campaigns fill their dinner guest lists primarily with Washington lobbyists and special interests.

    We didn’t get here doing that, and we’re not going to start now. We’re running a different kind of campaign. We don’t take money from Washington lobbyists or special-interest PACs — we never have, and we never will.

    We rely on everyday Americans giving whatever they can afford — and I want to spend time with a few of you.

    So if you make a donation today, you’ll be automatically entered for a chance to be one of the four supporters to sit down with me for dinner. Please donate $5 or more today:

    https://donate.barackobama.com/Dinner-with-Barack

    We’ll pay for your flight and the dinner — all you need to bring is your story and your ideas about how we can continue to make this a better country for all Americans.

    This won’t be a formal affair. It’s the kind of casual meal among friends that I don’t get to have as often as I’d like anymore, so I hope you’ll consider joining me.

    But I’m not asking you to donate today just so you’ll be entered for a chance to meet me. I’m asking you to say you believe in the kind of politics that gives people like you a seat at the table — whether it’s the dinner table with me or the table where decisions are made about what kind of country we want to be.

    It starts with a gift of whatever you can afford.

    Please make a donation of $5 or more today, and we’ll throw your name in the hat for the upcoming dinner:

    https://donate.barackobama.com/Dinner-with-Barack

    I’ve said before that I want people like you to shape this campaign from the very beginning — and this is a chance for four people to share their ideas directly with me.

    Hope to see you soon,

    Barack

  64. Talk about desperation that they have to bribe people to donate now.

    “It starts with a gift of whatever you can afford.”

    Ridiculous, how about you giving them a gift so they can afford to put fucking food on the table for their kids you muppet.

  65. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Stocks-slump-as-Greek-crisis-apf-149471394.html;_ylt=As9vcgYzhZkaK3YWmBQ.HxG7YWsA;_ylu=X3oDMTE1ODgxMzdlBHBvcwMzBHNlYwN0b3BTdG9yaWVzBHNsawNzdG9ja3NwbHVtbWU-?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

    LONDON (AP) — A violent protest against the Greek government’s latest austerity package hit stocks hard Wednesday and sent the euro sliding over a percent against the dollar.

    With hundreds of protesters clashing with riot police and tear gas blanketing Athens’ main Syntagma Square, investors are fretful that Greece’s debt crisis is spiraling out of control. Reports that the Socialist government, which is led by George Papandreou, has launched power-sharing talks with the main opposition conservatives has only added to the uncertainty.

    “Eurozone ministers continue to debate the details of a multi-billion euro bailout package amid a backdrop of protests, police clashes and a general strike,” said Will Hedden, a sales trader at IG Index.

    In Europe, the FTSE 100 index of leading British shares was down 0.8 percent at 5,758 while Germany’s DAX fell 1.1 percent to 7,126. The CAC-40 in France was 1.3 percent lower at 3,816.

    In the U.S., the Dow Jones industrial average was down 0.6 percent at 12,007 while the broader Standard & Poor’s 500 index fell a similar rate to 1,280.

    Unsurprisingly, Greek shares took an even bigger battering, closing 1.9 percent lower at 1,243.

    The euro was suffering badly, too. The fear is that the austerity measures won’t get passed in Parliament, meaning that the country will struggle to get the next tranche of its current bailout facility, without which it will probably default. They’re also necessary for the country to get a second bailout.

    However, there are some concerns that the measures may fail to get through and that could potentially result in early elections.

    Meanwhile, eurozone finance ministers have so far failed to come up with a united approach on how to get the private sector involved in helping the country — a prerequisite for a second bailout.

    “Increasingly it looks hard for the Europeans to agree a deal before July,” said James Nixon, an analyst at Societe Generale. “The problem is that time just makes it ever more apparent that Greece is failing to implement and achieve its targets under the current program.”

    By late afternoon London time, the euro was down 0.9 percent at $1.43.

  66. She just sank the Dems. Talk about giving your opponent a repeat attack ad.

    Debbie Wasserman Schultz: ‘We own the economy’

    Democrats are ready to take responsibility for the state of the economy and they deserve credit for putting it on the right track, the party’s chairwoman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, said on Wednesday.

    “We own the economy. We own the beginning of the turnaround and we want to make sure that we continue that pace of recovery, not go back to the policies of the past under the Bush administration that put us in the ditch in the first place,” Wasserman Schultz told Mike Allen at a breakfast hosted by POLITICO’s Playbook.

    The economy, she said, “has turned around” since President Obama took office, with steady job growth evident even if the pace leaves something to be desired.

    Republicans have ridiculed Democrats’ claims of economic success in the wake of disappointing jobs numbers and an uptick in the unemployment rate.

    Wasserman Schultz said Democrats aren’t in need of a new story to tell about the economy because they’ve put the right policies in place. “I don’t think it’s about what we say, it’s about what we do.”

    She said Democrats’ actions demonstrate their commitment to the middle class while Republicans’ do not. Though she commended several individual Republicans by name — including her home state colleague, Rep. Daniel Webster — Wasserman Schultz said the party’s leadership in the house is beholden to an extreme faction.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57025.html

  67. The US can not lead but nothing can happen without the US….
    *****************

    Please respect FT.com’s ts&cs and copyright policy which allow you to: share links; copy content for personal use; & redistribute limited extracts. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights or use this link to reference the article – http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/710032ee-96ae-11e0-baca-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1PN0REYcV

    The global order fractures as American power declines

    By Alan Beattie in Washington
    Published: June 14 2011 19:21 | Last updated: June 14 2011 19:21
    Harold Macmillan, the prime minister who watched US power rise as the British empire crumbled, used to say that Britain would play ancient Greece to America’s Rome.

    These days it looks as if Rome is declining too. The US finds it increasingly hard to drive forward its vision of international trade and economics over the objections of big emerging-market countries.

    EDITOR’S CHOICE
    Debt ceiling impasse pushes benchmark loan rate near zero – Jun-14

    US banks to cut Treasuries use – Jun-12

    Analysis: The Fed flood slows to a trickle – Jun-12

    Clive Crook: US prefers fiscal idiocy – Jun-12

    Gavyn Davies: World economy needs new leader – Jun-10

    Lex: World Bank and IMF – Jun-10

    The Visigoths and the Vandals who sacked Rome and undermined its empire, though far more cultured and sophisticated than their popular reputation, were unable to replicate the Pax Romana order it had established. European territories previously under Roman rule fractured into an unstable array of weak kingdoms and embattled city-states. Similarly, the vacuum created today by the erosion of US hegemony and the turmoil in the eurozone is resulting in stasis rather than a new direction.

    Even those trade officials most hermetically sealed in bureaucratic bubbles are finally accepting that the so-called “Doha round” of trade negotiations, which the US pushed to the launch pad 10 years ago, is expiring. New Delhi and Beijing have shown they are perfectly willing to collapse the talks rather than accede to demands from Washington.

    China, with covering fire from other governments, has repulsed much of the US’s charge to force Beijing to liberalise its currency. Assuming that Christine Lagarde, the French finance minister, takes over the managing directorship of the International Monetary Fund, she will inherit a process of mutual economic assessment at the behest of the G20 to encourage global economic rebalancing. But recent history suggests it will do little to make China hasten the rise of the renminbi.

    The potential influence of emerging markets is underlined by the sight of Ms Lagarde beetling round the developing world asking for votes. But those countries either collectively or individually have yet to give a coherent view of what they want in return.

    Politically, they remain divided. Agustín Carstens, Ms Lagarde’s only challenger, has failed to unite the developing world behind him and seems resigned to setting down a marker for the future.

    Emerging markets talk in general terms of increasing their power in the fund. Yet votes and executive board seats are already being shifted – admittedly painfully slowly – away from Europe towards middle-income countries. Many emerging markets would prefer to remove the US’s veto power over important decisions by cutting its share of the vote to below 15 per cent but no credible voting formula has been or will be devised to achieve that. China’s diplomatic efforts within the IMF in recent years have largely been negative, trying to get it to pipe down about the renminbi. Doha is dying but the emerging markets at the centre of the talks – India, China and Brazil – have not sketched a replacement.

    True, the emerging markets will supply more top management in the international financial institutions: Justin Lin, the World Bank’s chief economist, and Zhu Min, adviser to the IMF managing director, are both Chinese. But that does not guarantee a change in policy direction. It is the realities of the world economy, rather than the nationality of management, that drives the ideology and purpose of such organisations.

    This is evident over the road from the IMF at the World Bank. The US has long had a lock on the bank’s presidency, the counterpart of the traditional European claim on the IMF managing directorship. Back in the 1980s, when the US economy was more dominant and the bank was often the most significant source of finance for many low-income countries, the Reagan administration used it to export an aggressively deregulatory view of economic development.

    These days, with developing countries able to tap a range of sources of money, particularly China, the bank’s discourse has shifted towards inclusiveness and policy eclecticism rather than privatising anything that moves. It is not clear what the US now gets out of running the World Bank.

    As one G20 official says of the governance of global trade: “At the moment, the US cannot lead but nothing can happen without the US.” The age of Pax Americana is gradually passing but as yet there is no organised power rising to supplant it.

  68. They dont care how blatant they are anymore.

    Carney: Being An Obama Bundler Doesn’t Disqualify You From An Administration Job

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/15/obama-donor-jobs_n_877563.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000008

    WASHINGTON — White House Press Secretary Jay Carney forcefully defended the administration’s hiring of top-contributors for important government posts, trotting out what most good-government groups would deem an innovative explanation.

    The president, Carney said, does not discriminate against people who have raised money on his behalf.

    “Being a supporter does not qualify you for a job,” said Carney at Wednesday’s daily press briefing. “But it also does not disqualify you.”

    Earlier in the day, the Center for Public Integrity put out a report noting that nearly 200 of the president’s biggest donors “have landed plum government jobs and advisory posts, won federal contracts worth millions of dollars for their business interests or attended numerous elite White House meetings and social events.”

  69. Jan, Mrs. Smith, rgb44hrc, gonzotx, noobama and basil99…

    …thanks so much for you empathy…your words had already brought tears to my eyes and then i read the beautiful story that noobama linked to…

    …every now and then a really magical pet comes along…one that is so loyal and talks to you and has that sixth,kind of psychic sense…that was this big guy with the biggest blue eyes…I was lucky to have him…

    …thanks again…

  70. NewMexicoFan
    June 15th, 2011 at 11:14 am
    If you are born in the US, you are a US citizen, regardless of our parents citizenship.

    Both of Richardsons parent were from Mexico, and his mother came across the boarder to have him in LA.

    Do I agree with that? I guess that is up for debate, but that is the rule right now.
    &&&&&

    Yes, but I believe “US Citizen” is different from “Natural Born Citizen”, where the latter is the status one needs to be in order to be eligible to become President. And to be NBC, both parents need to be US citizens, and be born in the US.

    In McCain’s case, both parents were US citizens, but he was born in the Panama Canal. However, at the time, the Panama Canal was a US territory, which was later turned over to Panama by Jimmy Carter. The Congress passed a bill in 2008 the explicitly addressed this issue, the McCain was eligible because he was born in a US territory to two US citizen parents.

    In Obama’s case, we are

    a) unsure about him being born in Hawaii, due to his paltry efforts to provide hard documentation (not a web site, and even the long form on the White House web site has some woeful signs that it is forgery cobbled together from various sources;

    b) even Obama himself says his father was Kenyan. Did he lie about this in his own book????

    So back to Rubio, we’d need to know a) where he was born b) know the status of his parents’ citizenship.

  71. So where is the Official definition of natural born citizen, and if it was of concern, why was it not brought up in 2008 in reference to Richardson?

  72. For starters, this Obama comment really is odd when he wants the government to subsidize the production of electric cars, which would destroy whole sectors of the economy centered around gas fueled cars. If he believes ATM’s destroy jobs, why does he want to subsidize government innovation in green jobs, which would destroy other jobs?

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

    Dunno about Obama, but what most of us Greenies want is (per the same article above) to MOVE jobs from the oil rigs to the wind and solar farms and green research labs. More power from the same man-hours, no pollution, etc.

  73. Debbie Wasserman Schultz: ‘We own the economy’


    It would make a great bumper sticker, if the general public knew who she was.

  74. Trump: GOP Field Better Shape Up, or I’ll Run

    Billionaire Donald Trump’s continues to pressure the Republican Party to find a great candidate to challenge President Barack Obama — with the threat that he will jump back in the race as an independent next year if he finds the GOP nominee lacking.

    Trump repeated that warning during an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity Tuesday, although he gave kudos to Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachman for her showing in the GOP presidential debate in New Hampshire Monday.

    “Well, I’d love for the Republicans to choose somebody who is great — so far, I’m not seeing it, I have to be honest with you, Sean,” the real estate mogul said. “But I would love for them to choose somebody who is great . . . because it is totally vital to get [Obama] out of office — he’s a terrible president, he’s doing a terrible job — and I don’t think he has any concept [of] what he’s doing.

    “If the Republicans put in somebody that I think won’t win — and is not going to be very good, based on my feeling — and also, if the economy continues to do badly, which I think it will continue to do badly, because our people in Washington have no idea, they don’t have a clue what is going on,” he said. “So, if the economy is bad and the Republicans put in a person that I think is wrong, I will run as an independent.”

    Trump said he would wait until May 2012 to decide, and by then it would be too late to seek the GOP nomination again, so he would take the independent route. Hannity wondered whether Trump is concerned that he might split the anti-Obama vote.

    “I think two things would happen: I would win or Obama would win — I don’t think the Republican could win,” Trump said.

    http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/DonaldTrump-BarackObama-president-2012/2011/06/15/id/400087

  75. In his speeches to donors these days, Obama recalls the euphoria displayed by his backers during his election night acceptance speech in Chicago’s Grant Park.

    “Now, two and a half years have passed since that night in Grant Park, and I’ve got a lot more gray hair,” he said at the Arsht Center, where supporters paid from $44 to $2,500 to hear him.

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

    Did he ever pay Chicago for use and clean-up of that park? Last I heard, they couldn’t collect.

  76. ONE TERMER

    I took Obama’s statement about being a one-termer as a possible indicator that too much sh*t is about to hit the fan. Birth certificate? SSN? States about to pass more stringent laws about eligibility?

    And aside from those, there are the realities of the eletoral map. So, let’s look at more bad news for Obama and his thugs:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/148046/Obama-Approval-Rally-Largely.aspx

    June 15, 2011
    Obama Approval Rally Largely Over
    ========================

    Averaged 46% last week after averaging 50% for much of May
    by Jeffrey M. Jones

    PRINCETON, NJ — President Obama’s job approval rating averaged 46% for the week ending June 12, a significant decline from his weekly averages for most of May and nearly back to the level before Osama bin Laden’s death on May 1.

    Thus, it appears the sustained rally in support for the president after the death of the Sept. 11 terror mastermind is largely over. The drop in Obama’s approval rating coincides with an increase in Americans’ pessimism about the economy. Economic confidence also increased after bin Laden’s death but began to decline early this month, perhaps due to reports of anemic job growth and concerns about the slow pace of economic recovery.

    Gallup polling in mid-May found that the rally in support for Obama extended to his approval ratings for handling terrorism and foreign affairs but not his economic approval ratings.

    Independents’ Ratings Down Most

    Among partisan groups, independents’ approval rating of Obama dropped the most in the past week, from 47% to 42%, with a smaller decline among Democrats. Republicans’ approval of Obama spiked to 21% during the first week after bin Laden’s death from 10% in late April, before falling back to the 15% range, where it has held since.

    Even though Obama’s approval rally is largely over, some subgroups do give the president slightly higher ratings now than immediately before bin Laden’s death. Republicans are one such group. Two others are Americans younger than 30 (46% then versus 53% now) and aged 30 to 49 (45% versus 51%). In contrast, senior citizens’ approval rating of Obama, now at 37%, is lower than it was before the recent rally began.

    Implications

    Obama’s approval rating has averaged below the majority level for most of the time since early 2010. The 50% approval mark is important because presidents with approval ratings above that level have always won re-election. Obama’s approval rating generally held around the 50% mark in May, but that period of higher support seems over now.

    There is still much time left for Obama to recover, with Election Day 17 months away. Indeed, at comparable points in their presidencies, Richard Nixon (48%), Ronald Reagan (45%), and Bill Clinton (47%) — all of whom were re-elected — had approval ratings similar to Obama’s current 46%.

  77. thought you had to be natural born – child born in the US with two US parents.
    ——————–
    Jbjd did the research on this. The bottom line is the natural born criterion has not been defined by the Supreme Court and is not a bar to Rubio seeking the presidency or the vice presidency. If Rubio and the rest of them are smart, they will do a rope a dope on big media. How do big media do their typical character assassination against Republicans when there are all these different ducks in the water. A 12 guage won’t even do it. They are the ones who are now in trouble.

  78. I would vote for Bill because he was good for this country in the 1990’s, which were the best of times for me as far as I am concerned. I would vote for Hillary because I believe her to be in the mold of Bill.

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

    Same mold. But I bet she shaped the mold in the first place.

  79. Obama rewards big bundlers with jobs, commissions, stimulus money, government contracts, and more

    By Fred Schulte, John Aloysius Farrell, and Jeremy Borden

    Telecom executive Donald H. Gips raised a big bundle of cash to help finance his friend Barack Obama’s run for the presidency. Gips, a vice president of Colorado-based Level 3 Communications LLC, delivered more than $500,000 in contributions for the Obama war chest, while two fellow senior company executives collected at least $150,000 more.

    After the election, Gips was put in charge of hiring in the Obama White House, helping to place loyalists and fundraisers in many key positions. Then in mid-2009, the new president named him ambassador to South Africa. Level 3 Communications, in which Gips retained stock, meanwhile received millions of dollars of government stimulus contracts for broadband projects in six states—though Gips said he was “completely unaware” of the stimulus money.

    More than two years after President Obama took office vowing to banish “special interests” from his administration, nearly 200 of his biggest donors have landed plum government jobs and advisory posts, won federal contracts worth millions of dollars for their business interests or attended numerous elite White House meetings and social events, an investigation by iWatch News has found.

    These “bundlers” raised at least $50,000 and sometimes more than $500,000 in campaign donations for Obama’s campaign. Many of those in the “Class of 2008” are now being asked to bundle contributions for Obama’s re-election, an effort that could cost $1 billion.

    As a candidate, Obama spoke passionately about diminishing the clout of moneyed interests and making the White House more accessible to everyday Americans. In kicking off his presidential run on Feb. 10, 2007, he blasted “the cynics, the lobbyists, the special interests,” who he said had “turned our government into a game only they can afford to play.” “They write the checks and you get stuck with the bill, they get the access while you get to write a letter, they think they own this government, but we’re here today to take it back,” he said.

    But just like other presidential aspirants, Obama relied heavily on mega-donors to propel his campaign across the finish line and many fundraisers have shared in the spoils of victory. Some took jobs in pivotal federal agencies such as the Department of Justice, Department of Energy and the Federal Communications Commission, while others have served on influential advisory commissions and boards that meet periodically to help formulate policy. Two dozen have been appointed ambassadors to foreign countries.

    The White House said its appointees were highly qualified. “In filling these posts, the administration looks for the most qualified candidates who represent Americans from all walks of life,” White House spokesman Eric Schultz said. “Being a donor does not get you a job in this administration, nor does it preclude you from getting one.”

    The iWatch News investigation found:

    • Overall, 184 of 556, or about one-third, of Obama bundlers or their spouses joined the administration in some role. But the percentages are much higher for the big-dollar bundlers. Nearly 80 percent of those who collected more than $500,000 for Obama took “key administration posts,” as defined by the White House. More than half the ambassador nominees who were bundlers raised more than half a million.

    • The big bundlers had broad access to the White House for meetings with top administration officials and glitzy social events. In all, campaign bundlers and their family members account for more than 3,000 White House meetings and visits. Half of them raised $200,000 or more.

    • Some Obama bundlers have ties to companies that stand to gain financially from the president’s policy agenda, particularly in clean energy and telecommunications, and some already have done so. Level 3 Communications, for instance, snared $13.8 million in stimulus money. At least 18 other bundlers have ties to businesses poised to profit from government spending to promote clean energy, telecommunications and other key administration priorities.

    Some bundlers trade on their campaign largesse for Obama to further career aspirations or business plans. Others, already successful, simply enjoy the exclusive stature bestowed by ties to the White House. Lena L. Kennedy, for instance, papers her Southern California consulting website with photographs of herself with Obama. She put out a press release announcing a June 13 fundraiser featuring Michelle Obama in Los Angeles; ticket prices ran from $1,000 to $10,000, the latter “allowing a photo opportunity and private time with the First Lady.” She declined to comment for this article.

    “Some people just crave attention and some people just like getting the notoriety or attention of being a big player,” said Thomas M. McInerney, a San Francisco lawyer who bundled at least $100,000 for Obama. He said he didn’t ask for or get anything in return, though he knew others who did. “There was so much money this time, and there were so many people involved in raising the money, the number of people looking for something was exponentially more.”

    Rewarding the donors

    While the Obama administration tightened restrictions on hiring lobbyists, the deference it has shown major donors contradicts its claims to have changed business as usual in Washington, critics said.
    Others said Obama strains credulity in claiming to bring reform to Washington while carrying on the patronage practices of past administrations. They added that many big donors aren’t shy about asking for specific favors, which gives candidates of both parties little choice but to keep patronage alive.

    “Any president who says he’s going to change this is either hopelessly naïve or polishing the reality to promise something other than can be delivered,” said Paul Light, a New York University professor and expert on presidential transitions. “At best it’s naïve and a little bit of a shell game.”

    Many of the Obama bundlers said they did not seek or expect anything for themselves. “I just want to see somebody do a good job,” said Stewart Bainum, a Chevy Chase, Md., hotel chain CEO who with his wife, Sandy, raised $500,000 for Obama in 2008. He is listed in White House logs as a guest at a St. Patrick’s Day party last year. “The dividend is decent government and a strong leader with values similar to your own,” Bainum said.

    Sacramento jeweler Jon Merksamer, a first-time bundler who collected more than $200,000 for the Obama campaign, said some fundraisers are “people with various political agendas,” and “having access to power is part of their agenda. That was never part of mine.” Some bundlers “make it clear what they are looking for,” said Merksamer.

    Chicago CPA Harvey S. Wineberg, who raised at least $100,000 and is Obama’s personal accountant, said his fundraising had “nothing to do” with his appointment to the President’s Advisory Council on Financial Capability in December 2010. Wineberg said he called a White House staffer, who he declined to name, to ask about serving on the council. “I thought I’d be good,” he said. He has since resigned.

    Bundling is controversial because it permits campaigns to skirt individual contribution limits of $2,500 in federal elections. Bundlers pool donations from fundraising networks and as a result “play an enormous role in determining the success of political campaigns,” according to Public Citizen. The group has tracked bundlers on a website http://www.whitehouseforsale.org in the belief that they are “apt to receive preferential treatment if their candidate wins.”

    Under pressure from watchdog groups, Obama disclosed the names of hundreds of bundlers during the 2008 campaign, listing them by ranges starting with at least $50,000, then $100,000, $200,000 and more than $500,000. The campaign identified the bundlers by name, state of residence, and in some cases, their employers.

    When the new administration set up shop in the White House on Jan. 20, 2009, the money raisers quickly followed. White House visitor logs show about 800 bundler visits during the formative early months of the administration, and overall the top-tier bundlers tended to show up far more often than those at the bottom rung. Bundlers have been guests at concerts, state dinners and informal parties, such as the first family’s Super Bowl parties, or in a few cases to bowling outings and other special events to which they brought along spouses and family members.

    Some are longtime friends of the first family, such as Chicagoans Cindy Moelis and her husband Robert Rivkin, who as a couple bundled at least $200,000. Obama appointed Moelis in April 2009 to direct the Presidential Commission on White House Fellows. Her husband was appointed general counsel of the Department of Transportation and special adviser to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. Rivkin once served as general counsel to the Chicago Transit Authority. The couple and their children were among the guests at the Obamas’ 101-guest Super Bowl party in early February 2010. Moelis told iWatch News that she and her husband were “highly qualified” for their jobs and that they “took pay cuts and made considerable sacrifice” to enter public service. “We truly believe in it,” she said.

    While open government advocates have criticized the White House visitors’ logs for leaving out the names of many people who enter the complex, as well as the reasons for the visits, the logs consistently list bundler visits. The bundlers often arrived to see David C. Jacobson, then a special assistant for presidential personnel in the White House. The Chicago lawyer, himself an Obama bundler, served as the 2008 campaign deputy finance director. Jacobson, who departed in September 2009 to become ambassador to Canada, scheduled about 90 meetings with bundlers, according to an iWatch News analysis. Two-thirds of them had each raised at least $200,000.

    Gips, who served as White House director of presidential personnel before taking the post in South Africa, saw more than a dozen bundlers. Other inner-circle White House officials, such as presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett, also a bundler, met with more than 50 bundlers, mostly the heavy hitters.

    Obama met with at least two dozen bundlers either privately or with another person, according to the visitor logs.

    Getting a position

    Ambassadorships have been the classic payoff for big bundlers. But it’s not just the posts in foreign capitals that are attractive. Light, the NYU expert on presidential transitions, said that in recent years many have sought jobs with deep reach into the federal bureaucracy — and found a receptive ear in the White House. “When they get a resume from a bundler, that is a real signal of seriousness,” Light said. “It’s also a thinly veiled quid pro quo,” and it “goes without saying they will get considered.” Bringing in a lot of cash to the campaign, Light added, “seems to be well established as a signaling device for getting into key jobs running the government. It’s become more significant and nobody seems to have much outrage about it.”

    Public Citizen in 2008 found that George W. Bush had appointed about 200 bundlers to administration posts over his eight years in office. That is roughly the same number Obama has appointed in little more than two years, the iWatch News analysis showed. Some bundlers said in interviews that they called the White House to ask for a position, while others said they were called and asked to serve.

    Ted Hosp, an Alabama lawyer who delivered more than $200,000 for Obama, said he had no expectation of a job when he signed on to the campaign finance committee. But he did ask to be considered and said he met with then-White House Counsel Gregory Craig, also a bundler, to discuss a position at the Justice Department. “I was interested in exploring [a job],” Hosp said. “I would have been interested in helping him [Obama] if the right opportunity arose.”

    The cluster of appointments among top bundlers suggests that the size of the donation may have been a factor at least in getting a foot in the door. Less than one in five at the $50,000 level got an administration position. Half of $200,000 bundlers were picked for some post; 80 percent of the $500,000 bundlers were appointed. (Some have since left the administration while others remain in their posts.)

    Michael Caplin, a Virginia consultant who assists nonprofit businesses, raised $200,000 for Obama and was appointed to the Commission on Presidential Scholars, a board that selects and honors promising high school students. He said he was contacted by a White House staffer asking him if he wanted to serve, though he saw plenty of other big donors angling for jobs and positions. “Clearly if someone raised a million dollars for your campaign, you tend to get a phone call returned,” Caplin said. But he also believes that many big donors who took positions were well qualified. “If that person is truly excellent, but also raised money for your campaign, should that disallow you to serve? … I didn’t feel like they were putting coin collectors in charge of Homeland Security. I haven’t seen one appointment yet where I thought, ‘Man this is embarrassing.’”

    Seeding the departments with bundlers

    The appointment of George Washington University law professor Spencer Overton illustrates how the administration has quietly rewarded many top fundraisers. Overton wrote in 2003 that the influence big donors wield in elections means that an “overwhelming majority of citizens are effectively excluded from an important stage of the political process.” Yet Overton bundled at least $500,000 for Obama. He was named to the Obama transition team and in February 2009 was appointed principal deputy attorney general in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy. The office helps select nominees for federal judgeships and acts as the Justice Department’s “think tank” by helping “to shape the terms of national debate on a wide range of forthcoming legal policy questions,” according to its website.

    Overton visited the White House more than 80 times from January 2009 through the end of last year for events ranging from small meetings with high-level staffers to social and entertainment events, sometimes with his wife, records show. Overton resigned the $180,000-a-year job in July 2010. He declined to comment. Overton is one of seven campaign bundlers who took jobs at Justice, including Attorney General Eric Holder, who was a $50,000 bundler.

    Two others are Thomas J. Perrelli, a Harvard law school chum of Obama’s who holds the No. 3 policy job there, and Karol Mason, a bond lawyer from Georgia formerly with the politically active law firm of Alston and Bird. She is a deputy associate attorney general. Asked about the number of bundlers at Justice, spokesman Matt Miller said, “I don’t think we have any comment on that.”

    At the Department of Energy, four bundlers who together raised a minimum of $1.6 million have held staff jobs or advisory posts. Steven J. Spinner, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur and venture capital adviser, took over responsibility at Energy for parceling out more than $100 billion worth of stimulus grants and other energy-related loans. Spinner also has been a frequent White House guest, listed more than 40 times for events ranging from bowling to holiday receptions. The White House logs don’t give an explanation for most of the visits.

    Several other bundlers appointed to federal government jobs also have been frequent White House visitors. In March 2009, Obama appointed $500,000 bundler and law school pal Julius Genachowski to chair the FCC, an independent agency. He served as chief counsel at the FCC in the 1990s. Two other bundlers at the FCC are chief of staff Edward Lazarus, a former federal prosecutor, and William T. Lake, chief of the media bureau. FCC chair Genachowski has turned up so often at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that Republicans in Congress in March demanded an accounting of who he has met with and what was discussed.
    White House logs list Genachowski and his wife, filmmaker Rachel Goslins, whom Obama appointed in August 2009 to serve as executive director of the President’s Committee on Arts and Humanities, for more than 100 visits from early 2009 through March of this year.

    Bundlers get coveted ambassadorships

    Some of the biggest fundraisers end up serving in foreign capitals. Obama made a nod to this long practice in a pre-inauguration news conference, saying, “It would be disingenuous for me to suggest that there are not going to be some excellent public servants but who haven’t come through the ranks of the civil service.” About a third of Obama’s ambassadors have been political appointments as opposed to career foreign service officers—about the same as recent presidents. However, Obama has nominated 24 bundlers to ambassadorships to date. Of those, 14 each raised at least a half million dollars. Six others raised $200,000 or more. Jacobson, now the ambassador to Canada, is the only one listed at the $50,000 minimum and he played a pivotal finance role in the campaign.

    The Obama record has disappointed the American Foreign Service Association, which believes these appointments should go mostly to career diplomats. The organization cites the 1980 Foreign Service Act, which states that appointees should have a “useful knowledge of the language … and understanding of the history, the culture, the economic and political institutions and the interests of that country.”

    How many political appointees fit the bill is debatable. Gips, for instance, testified during his Senate confirmation hearing of his extensive private sector and government experience. He said he had “visited South Africa over a decade ago,” adding, “I fell in love with its people, its story, and its beauty.”

    The 1980 federal law also states that political contributions “should not be a factor” in picking ambassadors, though presidents of both parties have all but ignored that. Passing over career diplomats in favor of mega-donors amounts to “selling ambassadorships,” said Susan Johnson, president of the American Foreign Service Association. She said it runs contrary to the law and is unethical, yet, “That hasn’t stopped anybody.”

    Thomas Pickering, who served as ambassador to Russia and several other countries during a diplomatic career spanning four decades, said turning to bundlers adds a “new dimension” to what he termed “buying offices” through aggressive fundraising. “An individual can multiply their chances by going out and soliciting
    a lot of contributions other than just their own,” said Pickering, who chairs the American Academy of Diplomacy. The White House pointed out that some ambassadorships went to non-civil service people who did not bundle for Obama but were uniquely qualified for the posts. One example is former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, a Republican.

    Gips evolution from telecom exec to ambassador

    Few stories illustrate how friendship, fundraising, business and politics can intertwine at the White House more vividly than that of Gips, Obama’s choice for ambassador to South Africa. In 1998, Gips left government work, where he had supervised wireless spectrum issues for the FCC and served as Vice President Al Gore’s chief domestic policy adviser. He joined a budding telecom company — Level 3 Communications in Colorado — which has obtained more than $100 million in federal contracts over the past decade.

    At a 2004 fundraiser, he met Obama, who was then running in Illinois for the U.S. Senate. The two grew close — Obama asked Gips to help edit his campaign book, The Audacity of Hope — and Obama acknowledged his friend’s counsel in the book. Gips collected more than $500,000 for Obama. James Crowe, chairman of the Level 3 board, was an Obama bundler, too, raising at least $100,000. So was the firm’s vice chairman, Charles Miller III, who bundled more than $50,000. At the White House, Gips was a powerful force to decide who got coveted jobs. Obama appointed Level 3 executive Crowe in October 2010 to chair the presidential advisory committee on telecommunications and wireless issues.

    And Level 3 was awarded some $13.8 million in federal stimulus contracts, to extend broadband connections in rural areas of states where it had networks. In an email sent to iWatch News through the White House, Gips said that he had not been involved in “any matter involving Level 3” since joining the administration. Gips also said he didn’t know the company had received stimulus contracts and played no role in Crowe’s selection to the telecommunications panel.

    The i Watch News investigation confirmed that at least 18 other bundlers have ties to businesses poised to profit from the president’s political agenda, through stimulus money, government contracts, or other spending to promote clean energy technology or green development. Oklahoma billionaire investor George Kaiser is one. A longtime Democratic donor, he is a big financial backer of a company that in March of 2009 won a $535 million loan guarantee from DOE for a solar plant in Silicon Valley. He had multiple visits to the White House in the months before he was awarded the contract. Kaiser has not responded to interview requests from iWatch News.

    Steven Westly, a green energy entrepreneur who raised at least $500,000 for Obama, has seen four companies in his venture firm’s portfolio receive more than a half billion dollars in loans, grants or stimulus money from the Obama Energy Department, iWatch News and ABC reported in March.

    Bundlers win commission posts across government

    Some bundlers limit their role in the administration to serving on commissions to support their pet causes and hobnob with celebrities.
    Obama has appointed 22 bundlers to the President’s Committee on Arts and the Humanities or to the board of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

    Four of the nine members of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council appointed by Obama in September 2010 were bundlers, including its chairman Tom Bernstein. He is a New York City developer and sports entrepreneur who raised at least $200,000 for the Obama presidential campaign.

    This is Bernstein’s second appointment to the Holocaust Memorial Council. Bush appointed him to the same board in 2002 after Bernstein raised at least $100,000 for the 2000 Bush campaign. A former Yale classmate of Bush and fellow owner of the Texas Rangers baseball team, Bernstein switched allegiances to bundle for the Obama campaign.

    Others have served on advisory groups which make recommendations to the president on critical matters ranging from the economic stimulus to policies to spur job growth. Hyatt hotels heiress Penny Pritzker, Wall Street titan Robert Wolf and financier Mark Gallogly, for instance, all served on the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Commission. Though the commission was headed by former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, Pritzker at least twice emerged from the White House and faced media cameras on days the commission met.

    In late February, in creating a new commission to take on the task of creating jobs, Obama again appointed the three businesspeople. Transcripts of the recovery board meetings show that commission members are free to press for an agenda that could significantly benefit their business interests.

    Pritzker, one of America’s richest women and a key fundraiser and adviser in the early days of the Obama campaign, has logged more than 50 visits to the White House, either alone or with family members. Obama also appointed Pritzker to the Kennedy Center board and her husband, Chicago ophthalmologist Bryan Traubert, to the President’s Commission on White House Fellowships. Pritzker suggested she had clout in a May 2009 CNBC television interview [22] on the White House lawn, saying: “I have no trouble having a spirited dialogue with the president, and that’s something that we do on a regular basis.”

    When the reporter asked, “Do you get anywhere?” Pritzker replied: “Absolutely. The president is extremely open to hearing what people on his economic board have to say. And I think it’s absolutely informing some of his decisions.”

    Schultz, the White House spokesman, said the administration recruited job candidates from all walks of life. “The people mentioned in this article have sterling academic credentials, years of public service and private sector experience that make them eminently qualified for the positions to which they were appointed.”

    The bundling merry-go-round is cranking up for its second act: Obama’s re-election campaign. Bainum, the Maryland businessman, said he expects it to be rougher going than in 2008. The campaign will be more expensive, and top bundlers are being asked to bring in $350,000 for the president’s campaign and another $350,000 for the DNC. “These amounts seem to go up every year faster than rate of inflation,” he said. “I haven’t tested the waters yet.”

    With an eye toward the re-election campaign, the White House peppered the guest list for the June 7 state dinner honoring German Chancellor Angela Merkel with bundlers. Among the 200 guests at the Rose Garden event were a dozen bundlers, most with their spouses, including the Bainums.

    http://www.iwatchnews.org/2011/06/15/4880/obama-rewards-big-bundlers-jobs-commissions-stimulus-money-government-contracts-and

  80. NAIVE AND OUT OF TOUCH

    This quote sums up Campaigner-in-Chief:

    “Therefore, it is not surprising that Obama (a) continues to say some rather strange things that seem naive and out of touch with the lives of average Americans to the point of absurdity, and (b) seems miffed that anyone might for the first time in his life dare to scrutinize his record, and collate what he said in 2008 and early 2009 with the reality of what has actually transpired by mid-2011.”

    Here’s the link:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/269687/curious-insularity-victor-davis-hanson

    and the whole piece:

    A Curious Insularity
    ================

    June 15, 2011 1:49 P.M.
    By Victor Davis Hanson

    In the world of Barack Obama, inflating tires and “tuning up” modern car engines precludes off-shore drilling. Four-dollar-a-gallon gas prices can be ameliorated by having the average consumer trade in his 8-mpg clunker. Medical bills soar because doctors unnecessarily rip out tonsils and lop off limbs. “Skyrocketing” power bills and bankrupt coal companies are abstractions, and do not involve personal tragedies. One third of the border fenced means that the fence is “basically” completed. Nine percent unemployment is due in part to automation like ATMs, which apparently first came on the scene during the Obama administration to eliminate jobs. Shovel-ready jobs were not so shovel-ready. Criticism is dismissed as “enemies” deserving “punishment” or opponents relegated to the “back seat” or adversaries caricatured with “moats and alligators.” And so on.

    Two themes predominate: a cluelessness about how things work outside the Ivy League–Chicago–D.C. political nexus, and a sense that nothing is ever Barack Obama’s fault. In that regard, he has two legitimate mea culpas: One, Obama has never run a business, spent any considerable time off the public payroll or outside of politics, or spent any time with those who were once characterized as “clingers,” and thus cannot be expected to know much about how cars work, doctors are paid, illegal immigrants cross the border, or the basics of economics. Intelligence and achievement are instead measured solely in terms of what universities or the elite media decide. Second, at no point in his past soaring cursus honorum (Occidental, Columbia, Harvard Law Review, Chicago Law School, Chicago politics and organizing, the U.S. Senate) did anyone hold him to account, as in saying, “First, let us see exactly what you achieved that might justify yet another honor or promotion” — as in a stellar GPA, high LSAT score, brilliant law-review essay, a seminal tenure-winning book on the law, an award-winning law course, a landmark new community-organizing program, or a hallmark piece of senatorial legislation.

    Therefore, it is not surprising that Obama (a) continues to say some rather strange things that seem naive and out of touch with the lives of average Americans to the point of absurdity, and (b) seems miffed that anyone might for the first time in his life dare to scrutinize his record, and collate what he said in 2008 and early 2009 with the reality of what has actually transpired by mid-2011.

    I think a majority of Americans have now come to the above conclusions (as evidenced in the 2010 midterm election), and those in business, from the small entrepreneur to the captain of industry, have decided that it is wisest to sit out what is left of this administration, and wait to hire, buy, invest, and expand until someone at the top shows a basic knowledge of finance and economics, and some sympathy concerning what those in the private sector must contend with.

  81. A porn star said on Wednesday she had an e-mail relationship with embattled Representative Anthony Weiner and that he urged her to lie about their exchanges in the hope that a scandal surrounding him would die down.
    Ginger Lee, flanked by her celebrity attorney Gloria Allred

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

    So is Whitney’s maid better off after Allred made a spectacle of her? This porn star can always use the publicity.

    So when does Paula Jones come out?

  82. Debbie Wasserman Schultz: ‘We own the economy’


    It would make a great bumper sticker, if the general public knew who she was.

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

    [[ Obama’s DNC Head: “We own the economy.” ]]

  83. Just found this in google…not sure about the source:

    UPDATE 27 May 2011: PDF copy of the Sep 1975 Petition for Naturalization for Mario Rubio, father of Senator Marco Rubio who was born in May 1971, more than 4 years before his father elected to become a U.S. Citizen and renounce his Cuban citizenship:

    Senator Marco Rubio’s father was not a naturalized citizen when Marco was born in May 1971 per National Archives data. His father applied for naturalization in Sep 1975. Marco Rubio not constitutionally eligible to run for President or VP.

    http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2011/05/27/senator-marco-rubios-lack-of-natural-born-citizenship-update-27-may-2011-see-pdf-copy-of-the-sep-1975-petition-for-naturalization-for-mario-rubio-father-of-senator-marco-rubio-who-was-born-in-may/

    ———
    If this is true, it might be why Rubio says he is not interested in being a VP.

  84. Rubio: “I was blessed to be BORN HERE in the United States of America” (Video above @ 0036).

    This issue is a red herring.

  85. The author of that piece saying that Rubio is not eligible under because he was not natural born is a HuffPo blogger. He is not a lawyer. He is a research professor. His area of expertise is not constitutional law. It is educational reform. He is from Chicago and received his PHD at Northwestern. For these and other reasons, I would be loathe to trust his judgment on whether Rubio is eligible.

  86. wbboei
    June 15th, 2011 at 4:04 pm
    Rubio: “I was blessed to be BORN HERE in the United States of America” (Video above @ 0036).

    This issue is a red herring.
    ________________

    I thought there was a difference between born and natural born.

  87. wbboei
    June 15th, 2011 at 3:44 pm
    thought you had to be natural born – child born in the US with two US parents.
    ——————–
    Jbjd did the research on this. The bottom line is the natural born criterion has not been defined by the Supreme Court and is not a bar to Rubio seeking the presidency or the vice presidency. If Rubio and the rest of them are smart, they will do a rope a dope on big media. How do big media do their typical character assassination against Republicans when there are all these different ducks in the water. A 12 guage won’t even do it. They are the ones who are now in trouble.
    ____________

    I thought the idea of natural born (according to the founding fathers) was that if you are not born of two US parents you may have dual citizenship and therefore your loyalties may not be 100% American. All the blogs I read indicate that you cannot be a dual citizen and president. I don’t know, but I think until the US Supreme Court defines “natural born” I would stick to what was always considered natural born – born in the USA with USA citizens as parents.

  88. wbboei
    June 15th, 2011 at 4:26 pm

    The author of that piece saying that Rubio is not eligible under because he was not natural born is a HuffPo blogger. He is not a lawyer. He is a research professor. His area of expertise is not constitutional law. It is educational reform. He is from Chicago and received his PHD at Northwestern. For these and other reasons, I would be loathe to trust his judgment on whether Rubio is eligible.
    ——–
    I take your word for this, and it makes sense that an obot would be trying to bring Rubio down, but did you look at the pdf. of what he is talking about, WHEN Rubio’s dad did become naturalized? It looks authentic to me…please look and let me know what you think.

    Just because an obot says something against a Republican, doesn’t necessarily make it untrue.

  89. NewMexicoFan
    June 15th, 2011 at 3:24 pm
    So where is the Official definition of natural born citizen, and if it was of concern, why was it not brought up in 2008 in reference to Richardson?
    ____________

    Do you tink anyone in their right mind ever thought that Richardson stood a chance of being elected as VP? Maybe if hey thought he was credible they would have brought it up. The press would not bring it up – don’t expect them to do their jobs.

  90. I loathe all the AP hitjobs on Bachmann, i’ve seen today, they are running with “not much experience” and “gaffe prone”…..hello, did any of them say that about Obama, who frankly hadnt run a fish stall before running for Pres and Biden, did’nt stop him being gaffe prone, but i suppose if she’s a strong woman, anything goes in ridiculing.

  91. moononpluto
    June 15th, 2011 at 5:30 pm
    ———————-
    Is it a full lunar eclipse? We can’t see it here..it is still too bright.

  92. nomobama
    June 15th, 2011 at 1:55 pm

    Mrs. Smith
    June 15th, 2011 at 1:48 pm
    _________________

    Feel free to post it at Sarapac… 🙂

  93. Just because an obot says something against a Republican, doesn’t necessarily make it untrue.
    —————————-
    It usually does.

    I take no position on the facts he has offered. I neither confirm them or deny them. My issue goes to the legal interpretation. The reason I am familiar with this issue at all, is because people at No Quarter were trying to make the same argument against the fraud–that even if he was born in Hawaii, he did not meet the test of natural born citizen. Jbjd did the research and devastated the argument. The bottom line it is unclear what the term natural born citizen really means, because the Supreme Court has not spoken to the issue. There is a lot of crap at Wiki, but the issue is still open. The controlling fact is that he was born in the United States to parents who were either citizens themselves at the time or became citizens. My friend the Cuban banker is in the exact same category. By no stretch of the imagination did the framers intend that Marco Rubio or someone like him be precluded from becoming President. My recollection is that much of that language was inserted to prevent Hamilton who was a bastard and was born in the West Indies from becoming president. People have tried to bootstrap that in later years into more than it was ever intended to mean.

  94. Do you tink anyone in their right mind ever thought that Richardson stood a chance of being elected as VP?
    ——————————–
    If I recall correctly, he was born in Mexico City.

  95. wbb
    So by your statement I guess anyone that is born in this country, could run for VP or President – no matter the story about that person’s parents?

  96. I thought the idea of natural born (according to the founding fathers) was that if you are not born of two US parents you may have dual citizenship and therefore your loyalties may not be 100% American. All the blogs I read indicate that you cannot be a dual citizen and president. I don’t know, but I think until the US Supreme Court defines “natural born” I would stick to what was always considered natural born – born in the USA with USA citizens as parents.
    —————————————-
    I think the issue is moot. I will defend to the death the right of this left wing professor to pick the fly shit out of the pepper on the meaning of natural born. But to me, three factors seem dispostive:

    1. first, the Supreme Court has not spoken directly to the issue.

    2. second, the public does not have standing to raise the issue.

    3. third, the party who might otherwise object to Rubio’s candidacy for president–the Democratic party is estopped from doing so.

    Why? Because when the issue arose with respect to Obama, from Speaker Reid, to Carl Levin, to my friend Jay Inslee, each and every one of them conflated natural born with born in the United States. The form of the argument was Obama has provided proof that he was born in the United States, therefore he is a natural born citizen. (See below, especially Levin)

    That was why Marco made a point of saying that he was born in the United States.
    ——————————————————-
    From jbjd and citizen wells:

    “Some time after the general election on November 4, 2008 but before the Electoral College vote on December 15, constituents contacted their U.S. Senators and Representatives with concerns as to whether Barack Obama is eligible for POTUS under Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, is he a natural born citizen? Here is just a sample of the responses they received from these federal elected officials. (Special thanks to Citizen Wells.)

    U.S. Senator Harry Reid, Democrat Majority Leader from Nevada:

    Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from you.

    According to Article I, Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution, any person
    serving in the United States House of Representatives must have reached
    the age of twenty-five and must have been a citizen of the United States
    for at least seven years, and any person serving in the United States
    Senate must have reached the age of thirty and must have been a citizen
    of the United States for at least nine years. In addition, Article II,
    Section 1 mandates that a person must have reached the age of thirty-five
    and be a natural born citizen in order to serve as President of the
    United States.

    As you mentioned, some reports have surfaced that my former colleague,
    President-Elect Barack Obama, is not a natural-born American citizen.
    These reports are false. Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961, in
    Honolulu, Hawai’i. His birth certificate is a matter of public record
    of the State of Hawai’i and is available online through various news
    sources, as well as on the Web site for the nonpartisan, nonprofit
    Annenberg Political Fact Check: http://www.factcheck.org. I hope you
    find this information useful.

    Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me.
    For more information about my work for Nevada, my role in the United
    States Senate Leadership, or to subscribe to regular e-mail updates on
    the issues that interest you, please visit my Web site at
    http://reid.senate.gov. I look forward to hearing from you in the near
    future.

    U.S. Representative Jay Inslee, Democrat from Washington:

    Thank you for contacting me about claims about President-Elect Obama’s
    status as a natural-born citizen, as required for admittance to U.S.
    Presidential office by the Constitution. As always, I appreciate hearing
    from you.

    As you know, President-Elect Obama has indeed provided his actual paper
    Certification of Live Birth to several media organizations, as well as
    the Annenberg Foundation’s non-partisan “Factcheck.org” website and the
    conservative news website World Net Daily, which reported that a “WND
    investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts
    also found the document to be authentic.” In fact, all of these groups
    have recognized that the President Elect’s actual birth certificate
    document is real and genuine.

    U.S. Senator Herb Kohl, Democrat from Wisconsin:

    Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from
    you and welcome this opportunity to respond.

    As you may know, Hawaii became a state on August 21st,
    1959. President-elect Barack Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961,
    making him a United States citizen at birth under the first section
    of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. President-elect
    Obama’s birth certificate has been made public, and is widely
    available online. This document has been authenticated by a
    variety of sources, including…the Annenberg Public Policy Center.

    U.S. Representative Tammy Baldwin, Democrat from Wisconsin:

    Thank you for contacting me regarding President-elect Obama’s
    citizenship. It is always good to hear from you. As you know, some have suggested that President-elect Barack Obama may have been born outside the U.S. and is not a “natural born citizen” eligible for the presidency. During the presidential campaign,
    President-elect Obama voluntarily posted his birth certificate on his
    campaign website indicating he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii in 1961.

    U.S. Senator Carl Levin, Democrat from Michigan:

    From: senator_levin@levin.senate.gov senator_levin@levin.senate.gov
    Subject: Re: Your Concerns
    To: xxxxxxxxx.com
    Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 12:53 PM

    Dear xxxxxxxxxx:

    Thank you for contacting me regarding the false rumors surrounding
    President-elect Obama’s citizenship status. I appreciate you
    sharing your thoughts with me.

    As you may know, Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution
    states that, “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen
    of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this
    Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”
    President-elect Obama was born in Hawaii as documented by his
    official birth certificate. He is, therefore, a natural born citizen
    of the United States. Thank you again for writing.

    U.S. Representative John Tanner, Democrat from Tennessee:

    Thank you for contacting our office regarding the allegations that
    President-Elect Barack Obama was not born in the United States. I
    appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me on this
    issue.

    There are claims that President-Elect Obama was born in Africa and not
    in the United States which would make him ineligible to become
    president. The Obama campaign released a scanned copy of his birth
    certificate in June 2008, but many people believe it was a forgery.
    The non-partisan organization Political Fact Check (this group monitors
    the factual accuracy of political information) has examined Mr. Obama’s
    birth certificate and they report that it is valid and he is a U.S.
    citizen. I have included a link to a Newsweek article that was written
    on this subject and includes links to pictures of the birth certificate
    (http://www.newsweek.com/id/154599).

    (Note from jbjd: Newsweek credits that article to a member of FactCheck.org staff. )

    Again, thank you for sharing your views with me and I hope you will feel
    free to contact our office with any issues of concern to you in the
    future.

    U.S. Senator Barbara Mikulski, Democrat from Maryland:

    Thank you for getting in touch with me. It’s nice to hear from you.

    I appreciate knowing of your concern over a rumor that President-elect Obama is ineligible to serve as President because he is not a U.S. citizen.

    The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Since President-elect Obama was born in Hawaii two years after it was admitted as the 50th state, he is a natural-born citizen. He has released a copy of his birth certificate and it has been authenticated by experts.

  97. wbb
    So by your statement I guess anyone that is born in this country, could run for VP or President – no matter the story about that person’s parents?
    —————–
    I am saying the term natural born was originally intended to deal with someone who was not born in the United States–Hamilton, and to the extent it has any further meaning the Supreme Court has not confirmed it and the Democratic Party has conflated it with born in the United States, and no citizen has standing to raise the issue. This will not stand in the way of a Rubio candidacy if that is what the elites want. Have we not seen that before, on March 31, 2008?

  98. wbb
    So by your statement I guess anyone that is born in this country, could run for VP or President – no matter the story about that person’s parents?
    ——————
    Obama’s father was a British subject at the time of his birth. This raised a priori the concern over dual loyalties. A case was filed, it was decided in favor of Obama, it was appealed to the Supreme Court, Justice Thomas accepted it, but the Court as a whole failed to decide. What is good for Obama is also good for Rubio. And unlike Barack Sr. Rubio’s parents became US citizens. In sum, I think what I said above is the bottom line. That is why I called this issue a red herring.

  99. “Obama’s father was a British subject at the time of his birth. This raised a priori the concern over dual loyalties. A case was filed, it was decided in favor of Obama, it was appealed to the Supreme Court,”
    _________________________

    Can you provide links to your statement?

  100. Can you provide links to your statement?
    —————————————
    You will need to go find the case. It is in their brief.

  101. oei
    June 15th, 2011 at 7:23 pm
    wbb
    So by your statement I guess anyone that is born in this country, could run for VP or President – no matter the story about that person’s parents?
    —————–
    I am saying the term natural born was originally intended to deal with someone who was not born in the United States–Hamilton, and to the extent it has any further meaning the Supreme Court has not confirmed it and the Democratic Party has conflated it with born in the United States, and no citizen has standing to raise the issue. This will not stand in the way of a Rubio candidacy if that is what the elites want. Have we not seen that before, on March 31, 2008?
    _____________________

    I am not an American, but I would find it offensive if I were an American. He works for you people and if the people of the United States don’t have standing, who the hell should have it?
    I feel that all your courts have created a sham.

  102. I am not an American, but I would find it offensive if I were an American. He works for you people and if the people of the United States don’t have standing, who the hell should have it?
    I feel that all your courts have created a sham.
    ———————————————–
    Yes, I agree. But the contrary view would be that we are not a democracy, but a republic. Under our system, the right and indeed the duty to investigate and determine the qualifications of candidates for President and Vice President is vested not in the courts (meaning private citizens filing lawsuits), but in the political parties and the electoral college.

    it is another instance where the American People have been disenfrachised. However the responsibility for determining candidate qualifications is vested in the parties and the electoral college.

  103. it is another instance where the American People have been disenfrachised. However the responsibility for determining candidate qualifications is vested in the parties and the electoral college.

    Ah, which is why jbjd’s argument was to go after the secretaries(I think she was talking about Texas in particular) who signed off..

  104. I’m not the person making the statement as fact, wbb- Another thing, I’ve never heard of a case decided in Obama’s favor. That is news to me. Obama’s citizenship issue, i.e. any cases brought before the court, I believe the number is 18 cases, have so far been dismissed for lack of standing.

    The recent case brought by Orly Taitz challenging Obama’s duel Social Security numbers is the only one I know of that has been allowed to proceed and been granted discovery by the Judge-

    here:

    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/04/27/orly-taitz-raises-a-new-issue-obamas-social-security-number/

  105. f I recall correctly, he was born in Mexico City.

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

    Iirc, early in 2008 when Richardson was running for the nomination, he said he was born in the US but raised elsewhere. He compared himself to Obama in this respect.

  106. Iirc, early in 2008 when Richardson was running for the nomination, he said he was born in the US but raised elsewhere. He compared himself to Obama in this respect.
    ——————————
    Its murky . . .

    Bill Richardson was born in Pasadena, California.[6][7] His father, William Blaine Richardson Jr. (died in 1972), of New England Yankee and Mexican descent, was an American Citibank executive[6][7] who grew up in Boston, Massachusetts[6] and lived and worked in Mexico City.[7] His mother, María Luisa López-Collada Márquez[7] is the Mexican daughter of a Spanish father from Villaviciosa, Asturias, Spain and a Mexican mother[6][8][9][10] and was his father’s secretary.[7][9] Richardson’s father was born in Nicaragua.[7] Just before Richardson was born, his father sent his mother to California to give birth because, as Richardson explained, “My father had a complex about not having been born in the United States.”[7] Richardson, a U.S. citizen by birthright, was raised during his childhood in Mexico City.[7][9]

    Then I must be confused. Is it possible that he was born here and then grew up in Mexico–he has some connection to Mexico city.

  107. “Under our system, the right and indeed the duty to investigate and determine the qualifications of candidates for President and Vice President is vested not in the courts (meaning private citizens filing lawsuits), but in the political parties and the electoral college.”
    _____________________

    I don’t know who told you that but that is NOT True. I did the research myself in 08′ when Berg had filed his suit. I researched all the way back to the First Continental Congress when it was formed for the creation of the Constitution. There are NO existing guidelines you can point to or a particular person, group or the electoral college that has the responsibility for determining if a candidate is a Natural Born Citizen- NONE-

    An affidavit is handed to the prospective candidate to sign when s/he declares themselves as a candidate for the US presidency asking are you a Natural Born Citizen. When Obama
    stated “yes” in the blank- he was also asked could he prove he is a citizen if necessary, again he either stated it orally or filled in the question with a yes… There is NO body or person charged with the responsibility to verify birth status of a candidate when they declare they are running for president currently existing in the political system.

  108. Mrs. Smith
    June 15th, 2011 at 7:44 pm
    “Obama’s father was a British subject at the time of his birth. This raised a priori the concern over dual loyalties. A case was filed, it was decided in favor of Obama, it was appealed to the Supreme Court,”
    _________________________

    Can you provide links to your statement?
    _______________

    I don’t know, but I read over and over again that when Obama was running for President in ’08 it was on his campaign website that he was a dual citizen (father being a British subject because Kenya was a colony at the time Obama Sr. was born).

  109. Mrs. Smith, when I say the court decided the case in Obama’s favor, I meant it refused to hear the plaintiff’s case against Obama on the merits and thus preserved the status quo ante which was favorable to Obama. I do not mean to imply that the court entered an affirmative finding that Obama is qualified to be president–if that is what you mean. On the contrary, the Court has assiduously avoided the issue, on the premise that it is not their role to determine his qualifications–rather that call is up to the parties and the electoral college. I think that was clear from my prior comments.

  110. I think the Founding Fathers deliberately left out the responsibility for determining someone’s birth status (as to their eligibility) for the presidency because they feared whatever commission, personage, bureaucracy they assigned to this task would inevitably at some point in time be corrupt and a dual citizen or a non-American would be slipped in from another nation.

    They left it up to the people to do their homework. When the 1st Constitutional Congress met, they all knew each other. They knew who was eligible and who was not. When I was searching in depth- their only concern was the candidate be of good character- thats it.

  111. Have you seen the new anti Obama ad. Maybe hell has frozen over, but the man with the anti Obama script looks an awful like David Gregory.
    Amazing–big media is having a harder time keeping a lid on this–or else they are trying to steal the Republicans thunder. Watch:

  112. No rabbit hole wbb- Now don’t be attacking the messager when you can’t supply links backing up your post:

    Here is your post:

    “Obama’s father was a British subject at the time of his birth. This raised a priori the concern over dual loyalties. A case was filed, it was decided in favor of Obama, it was appealed to the Supreme Court, Justice Thomas accepted it, but the Court as a whole failed to decide.”
    ________________________

    You need to provide a cite for that paragraph.

  113. Maybe I am selling Debbie Downer short. All she said was Obama was able to turn this economy around. And that is quite true–he has turned it around from bad to worse. He inherited a recession and has turned it into a depression. Cudas to Debbie Downer. She is right for a change.

  114. F U Google. I stopped using Google in 2008 when I saw how blatant they were… search.yahoo.com is much better.

    Google tries to backpeddle that they are giving Waffles special deals.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57084.html

    ““It certainly raises some red flags that the Obama campaign appears to have been given special access to a new online advertising product,” said NRSC communications director Brian Walsh in response to an inquiry from POLITICO.

    But Google spokesman Jake Parrilo denied strenuously that the Obama campaign had been granted special access to the pilot program, and chalked the email up to inaccurate “puffery” by the sales representative. The ad that appeared on RealClearPolitics, he said, was not a Google ad at all.

    “This is an experiment and while we generally do not comment on those experiments we can tell you that we have not sold a single CPL [cost-per-lead] ad unit to any political candidates or committees,” said Parrillo.

    And Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt seconded the company’s account that the campaign had not purchased any ads or enrolled in the Google pilot program.

    Google, whose chairman and former CEO Eric Schmidt was an informal adviser and support of Obama and sits on the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology, has been accused in the past of favoring the White House. The Federal Trade Commission dropped an investigation into the company after a major privacy breach, leading some Republican groups to cry for an investigation.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57084.html#ixzz1POh7mjRU

  115. F U Google. I stopped using Google in 2008 when I saw how blatant they were… search . yahoo . com is much better.

    Google tries to backpeddle that they are giving Waffles special deals.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57084.html

    ““It certainly raises some red flags that the Obama campaign appears to have been given special access to a new online advertising product,” said NRSC communications director Brian Walsh in response to an inquiry from POLITICO.

    But Google spokesman Jake Parrilo denied strenuously that the Obama campaign had been granted special access to the pilot program, and chalked the email up to inaccurate “puffery” by the sales representative. The ad that appeared on RealClearPolitics, he said, was not a Google ad at all.

    “This is an experiment and while we generally do not comment on those experiments we can tell you that we have not sold a single CPL [cost-per-lead] ad unit to any political candidates or committees,” said Parrillo.

    And Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt seconded the company’s account that the campaign had not purchased any ads or enrolled in the Google pilot program.

    Google, whose chairman and former CEO Eric Schmidt was an informal adviser and support of Obama and sits on the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology, has been accused in the past of favoring the White House. The Federal Trade Commission dropped an investigation into the company after a major privacy breach, leading some Republican groups to cry for an investigation.

  116. Well Rubio is young, hadsome and Latino and seems a nice family man but has anyone checked his political positions lately. Last I checked, he has some traditional Republican ideas…..ideas that have not worked well in this country. And isn’t he against a woman’s right to choose? Although I consider myself now independent ( I must take the time to do the paperwork to leave the D party) I was a strong Hillary supporter primarily because of the things she believed in and the political positions she took.
    This strong interest in Rubio clearly reminds me of the superficial reasons BO was elected…nice looking and black.

    What stupid reasons to support a candidate.

    I do believe this country is in decline and has been for awhile. An alarming percentage of our best and brightest go to college to do drugs, get laid and steal papers off the internet. They take their freedom, their education, their security all for granted. Not so in Israel or in India or countries where students truly value their university educations or face life and death issues daily.

    Sadly, the US seems a victim of its own success. It reminds me of the time of Sodom and Gemorrah. Don’t people have anything better to do than obsess about other people’s sex lives or their perversions. I agree that Weiner is a jerk, but I think his problems were really his and his wife’s to deal with. The intense media is making it impossible for him to do his job. I am not defending him. However, he sexting…which is not in any way equal to an adulterous affair producing children IMHO….is getting more attention than Obama’s corruption, Barney Frank’s oorruption or the fact that tornado victims are being denied federal aid. And Rubio seems to suggest that we must keep up an international giving program that we can not afford. I think that all issues pertaining to the job one does and whether that job is done well and honestly, is a lot more important than everyone’s sexcapades.

    In earlier times, a person’s sex life was considered private and it was considered indecent to have the kind of discussions everyone is engaging in now. Maybe we should back to that and concentrate on something truly important.

  117. So Pelosi’s wealth from 2009-2010 went up 62%, now at around 40 million. Wow. Nice to know how the DC elites are “suffering” while they ram more crap laden legislation down on America.

  118. Carol

    Not a Rubio fan here – for oh so many reasons, I am just wondering if he is even qualified (Natural Born Citizen) or not.

  119. #
    Shadowfax
    June 15th, 2011 at 9:22 pm

    Watching from the bottom of the rabbit hole…

    Somethin’ stinks in Denmark.
    ______________________

    I devoted quite a bit of time researching the Constitution’s presidential requirements. I commemorated my research as solid, even speaking w/ Phil Berg on the telephone suggesting a few places to look for more information. The Philadelphia Court House’s archives in PA. seeing it was convenient for him near his residence.

    I have no idea what wbb is talking about in his post.. and why I requested more information with a link to his assertion.

  120. Carol 9:24. YES, INDEED.

    “This strong interest in Rubio clearly reminds me of superficial reasons BO was elected…nice looking and black.”

    Hopefully people have awakened this time around and will look at the candidate’s positions, history, experience, and qualifications and will not vote for young, handsome SKIN and pin all their hopes for a better America on them as they did with BO. And how’s that working for them and us?

  121. Mrs. Smith
    Did you recommend the Philly courthouse because that’s where it all began, and do you know if Berg found anything useful on the subject there.

  122. Rubio is Hispanic and that equals a voting bloc, so unfortunately the interest in him is the same thing as Obama supported by the AA voters.

  123. #
    BigCatLover
    June 15th, 2011 at 9:44 pm

    Mrs. Smith
    Did you recommend the Philly courthouse because that’s where it all began, and do you know if Berg found anything useful on the subject there.
    ___________________

    I recommended the Philly Court House because that is where important papers could be found in the archives. As far as I can remember the first meeting was held at Carpenter’s Hall in Philly. I don’t think Berg ever did go into the Courthouse archives, maybe he has since. That I don’t know-

  124. In earlier times, a person’s sex life was considered private and it was considered indecent to have the kind of discussions everyone is engaging in now. Maybe we should back to that and concentrate on something truly important.

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

    Right.

  125. In earlier times, a person’s sex life was considered private and it was considered indecent to have the kind of discussions everyone is engaging in now. Maybe we should back to that and concentrate on something truly important.

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

    Right.

  126. Sadly the tail may wag the dog AGAIN in 2012 just as it did in 2008 and look what we got.

  127. At that time Berg was deluged with every publication asking for an interview. Reporters begging to see his lawsuit, could he fax over a copy. You could barely speak to Berg for more than 10 sec without the interruption of a phone beep. The poor guy was getting hit from every direction 24/7. Eventually, it was Webster Tarpley who accompanied Berg to the district court to file his suit.

    If I lived in Philly- I would have spent a week digging in the archives… I would have been thrilled to find notes written in the margins on their initial drafts…

  128. tim
    June 15th, 2011 at 10:12 pm

    Gene Simmons: “I Take Back Vote for Obama”
    ————
    Well, that’s ONE…now we just need about 9 million plus more. 😉

  129. S, I haven’t been home long and am just now reading up thread. I’m SO sorry to hear about your beloved cat. Some pets are just extra special.

    We have three wonderful, much loved cats presently but have lost some over the years. It hurts so badly.

    You are in my thoughts.

  130. tim
    June 15th, 2011 at 9:29 pm
    So Pelosi’s wealth from 2009-2010 went up 62%, now at around 40 million. Wow. Nice to know how the DC elites are “suffering” while they ram more crap laden legislation down on America.
    ______________

    You wouldn’t mind all the talk about how they don’t have the money for medicare, etc., and when people question it they say on Fox, “Well, would you rather not take action and wind up with something rather than nothing?” I find that so insulting because while those bastards, along with the Congress and Senate, were playing footsie with the money lenders, mortgage people and bankers they were becoming so wealthy. I think Congress and the Senate are just as complicit as big business for the financial state your country is in right now. They are all thieves, pure and simple. Yet no one paid the price but the little people.

  131. I liked the Simmons show ‘Family Jewels’.

    Simmons and Shannon have been making the rounds lately setting the stage for their premiere show this season.

    Supposedly, he and Shannon aren’t getting along- because she thinks he is cheating… She is pretending to be angry at him and he at this point is keeping a tight lip on the drama..

    Simmons did say, Nick graduated from college on the Dean’s list- and Sophie is entering college in the fall.. He’s a good Dad and she is a good Mom…at least it appears so…

  132. #
    andyp
    June 15th, 2011 at 8:38 pm

    Mrs. Smith
    June 15th, 2011 at 7:44 pm
    “Obama’s father was a British subject at the time of his birth. This raised a priori the concern over dual loyalties. A case was filed, it was decided in favor of Obama, it was appealed to the Supreme Court,”
    _________________________

    Can you provide links to your statement?
    _______________

    I don’t know, but I read over and over again that when Obama was running for President in ‘08 it was on his campaign website that he was a dual citizen (father being a British subject because Kenya was a colony at the time Obama Sr. was born).
    _____________________________

    Sorry, andy-

    I briefly scanned your post and got sidetracked onto something else. I’ve never read Obama’s website in depth enough to say that I remember he posted he was a dual citizen because his Father was a British subject at the time of his birth. My recollection of hearing about something to that effect was Obama declared it in his book, ‘Dreams of My Father’. (I’ve never read either of his books.. so the info I mentioned is second hand)

  133. andyp
    June 15th, 2011 at 10:38 pm

    You should research how rich Pelosi’s husband is — and more importantly how he earned it, he’s a real estate/mortage investment banker. I had no idea until I went to a Tea Party event and someone told me, I looked it up, and yep, he’s a very very rich real estate and mortage investment banker. The hypocracy of these people has no bounds.

  134. OMG- Family Jewels is on right now- on the A&E network..

    Gene Simmons is hilarious. He we are discussing the real thing every day… and he’s upset because he claims Shannon packed up and left..

  135. tim
    June 15th, 2011 at 11:02 pm
    andyp
    June 15th, 2011 at 10:38 pm

    You should research how rich Pelosi’s husband is — and more importantly how he earned it, he’s a real estate/mortage investment banker. I had no idea until I went to a Tea Party event and someone told me, I looked it up, and yep, he’s a very very rich real estate and mortage investment banker. The hypocracy of these people has no bounds.
    ________________

    My sentiments exactly. They are all crooks and their coffers filled while the treasury went empty. You should be very vigilant in the future. I forget who the founding father was who was asked by a press person if they had formed a government and what kind. The man said, “A republic” and he paused and said, “If you can keep it.” I would watch those rascals.

  136. Sorry, andy-

    I briefly scanned your post and got sidetracked onto something else. I’ve never read Obama’s website in depth enough to say that I remember he posted he was a dual citizen because his Father was a British subject at the time of his birth. My recollection of hearing about something to that effect was Obama declared it in his book, ‘Dreams of My Father’. (I’ve never read either of his books.. so the info I mentioned is second hand)
    _____________

    Yes, and I read so many blog entries that said it was also posted on Obama for America or whatever the campaign site was called. My friend told me. I wouldn’t go on the site. I won’t read the books either. Maybe I should though because it would give insight.

  137. “The hypocracy of these people has no bounds.”
    ______________________

    Tim-

    Carpenters have been at my home all day long putting in new replacement windows. I couldn’t leave the house unattended for a minute..meaning I was couped up in my BR for the day. I came across the movie ‘Braveheart’, which I hadn’t watched in years. The similarities of the problems facing William Wallace are no different than the problems we are facing today.

    The wealthy nobles granted castles land ownership and titles from the King..and our politicians becoming millionaires *quid pro quo* selling their vote and support of the President.

    It’s all history repeating itself over and over again until the people are fed up enough to revolt against the (government’s/president’s) status quo.

  138. I should have added:

    The wealthy nobles granted castles land ownership and titles by the King in effect was buying their loyalty to the crown. Additionally, having a title enabled the nobles keeping the peasants in check. Peasants were not allowed to own land or think about betterment for themselves and their families.

    Peasants wanted to believe as Wallace did in Freedom and why he took a stand to eliminate the dictatorship of a monarchy that was preventing them from a better life.

    I think it’s fair to say, we are teetering on the edge of a monarchical type dictatorship with Obama. He has become very handy at writing X-ecutive orders (dictates) quite regularly ..when he cannot get his wishes (usually another tax related issue) passed by Congress.

  139. jeleanoro
    June 15th, 2011 at 11:20 pm
    __________________

    Got it- I checked on the date… Dec 08′ when the article was written. Bad timing… for reading. At that time the airwaves were filled with news about Obama’s Inauguration plans. I’m going back to read it now.

    Thanks for posting the related site which is what I needed to reference wbb’s post…

  140. jeleanoro
    June 15th, 2011 at 11:20 pm

    As a point of information from jeleanoro link:

    “Just to be nonpartisan about it, Donofrio also contended that Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and Socialist Workers candidate Roger Calero also were not natural-born citizens and should have been kept off the ballot.

    The case had little chance at the high court, but became the subject of a tremendous amount of speculation and debate on ideological political blogs.

    Right-wing blogs were outraged when Justice David H. Souter denied Donofrio’s petition for an injunction, and left-wing blogs smelled trouble when Justice Clarence Thomas referred the matter to the full court for consideration.

    In fact, both were routine procedures, as the court’s action today shows. There were no recorded dissents to the decision dismissing the case.

    This hardly means the lawsuits are over. There are two other cases at the Supreme Court, neither of which has been scheduled for consideration. The most celebrated is filed by Philip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pa. There are others still at lower court levels.

    Berg argues that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii as Obama has said and Hawaii officials confirm. Alternately, Berg argues that Obama may have renounced his citizenship as a boy in Indonesia, where he lived for a time with his mother and stepfather.

    Those supporting Berg do not believe a birth certificate Obama’s campaign has produced.
    __________________

    It appears the dual citizenship issue seems to point more towards Berg’s assertions as the example than Donofrio’s filing of an injunction to prevent Obama’s Inauguration from going forward.
    ___________________

    “Factcheck.org has done an independent investigation of the controversy.

    “FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate,” the group writes. “We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship…. Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.”
    _____________________

    Yes, good old Fact Check… until we became aware the once reliable Fact Check was now in Obama’s pocket I believe somehow absorbed by the Annenberg Trust Foundation also in concert with Bill Ayers/Acorn.

  141. GOP’S 2012 PECKING ORDER

    By DICK MORRIS

    Published on TheHill.com on June 14, 2011

    Printer-Friendly Version

    Here’s how the Republican nominating process will work:

    Mitt Romney, who would have faced strong competition from the likes of Donald Trump or Mitch Daniels, will get a first-round bye unless Rick Perry, the Texas governor, gets into the race.

    Romney showed that Tim Pawlenty will be no serious obstacle in the New Hampshire debate on Monday. Romney looked like the adult and Pawlenty the teenager as the former Minnesota governor failed to measure up. At times, it seemed that he was almost looking up to see Romney towering over him. Political consultant Bob Squier once likened the first debate to the first day at a new school. “Out in the schoolyard, at recess,” he said, “everybody learns who can beat who up. A pecking order is established that lasts all year.”

    And so it was between Romney and Pawlenty. These guys aren’t even in same league. Jon Huntsman, in effect, just dropped out of the race by announcing that he won’t compete in Iowa or New Hampshire and by failing to show up on Monday. The Rudy Giuliani strategy didn’t work in ’08 and won’t in 12. So Romney will make it into the second round with no trouble.

    Viewed geographically, this means that he need not win Iowa but must win New Hampshire.

    Iowa will resolve the remaining question: Who will oppose Mitt? The first question is whether Newt Gingrich can survive. His debate performance was stunning. He showed an intellectual breadth and depth that the others did not have. Only Michele Bachmann could rival his real-time knowledge about what was happening in Congress. And the creativity of his thinking was evident to all. But politics is pragmatic. Someday the Internet will replace television and we won’t have to buy TV ads and fundraising will no longer be the deciding factor. But we aren’t there yet. And Newt cannot hope to prevail without grinding it out. You wonder if he’s got it in him.

    Rick Santorum probably will not have the grassroots enthusiasm surrounding a Herman Cain or a Bachmann candidacy, and Romney will foreclose his ability to raise big money. Santorum is not going anywhere.

    So it will be between Cain and Bachmann for the nod to oppose Romney down the stretch. In the debate, Bachmann showed how strong she is rhetorically and substantively. She has Palin’s zest and instinct for a killer zinger but Newt’s knowledge of substance. She combines a flair for the dramatic with some pretty sound political judgment. Cain has the soaring eloquence of a platform speaker and the originality of an outsider. Both are able to cut through the conventional assumptions and speak to the base. Both will be able to build a huge Internet fundraising base, and Obama showed us what that can do.

    Between Cain and Bachmann, the question will be who can best keep their feet on the ground and out of their mouths. Cain got off to a poor start with his answer about not appointing a Muslim to his Cabinet. So did Bachmann when she defended a state’s right to define marriage but then called for a constitutional amendment which would pre-empt it. You know that the well-oiled, rehearsed and controlled Romney will not make a mistake, but in the heady atmosphere of a wildly cheering Tea Party rally, they might.

    So it might be Romney versus either Cain or Bachmann. That’s how it looks today.

  142. Earlier, I read Anthony is in deep do-doo because he asked a porn queen to LIE for him? Anybody know, are the accusations True?

    Also, the queen has Gloria Alred for an attorney?..

    I hope it isn’t true- everyone here has been really good about giving him the benefit of the doubt until we knew more. Is this it for Anthony?

  143. “Romney versus either Cain or Bachmann”
    ________________

    We had said, Romney for Pres and Bachmann VP made a good looking pair.

    Someone remarked elsewhere the two together look like the latest in new hires as news anchors… 🙂

  144. Here’s how the Republican nominating process will work:

    Mitt Romney, who would have faced strong competition from the likes of Donald Trump or Mitch Daniels,

    ————–
    Now Morris says that Trump would have been a strong contender, up against Mitt. Wasn’t Morris putting Trump in the ‘crazies’ box before he decided not to run as a Rethug or was that just Rove and most of the talking heads at Fox?

  145. Earlier, I read Anthony is in deep do-doo because he asked a porn queen to LIE for him? Anybody know, are the accusations True?

    Also, the queen has Gloria Alred for an attorney?..

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

    Allred is her attorney. However ‘asking her to lie’ seems unlikely. There seems nothing to lie about. Allred said there were 100 emails but the worst thing she could find in them was some references to his ‘package’. No pictures. Looks to me like the queen and Allred just want some publicity.

  146. Earlier, I read Anthony is in deep do-doo because he asked a porn queen to LIE for him? Anybody know, are the accusations True?

    Also, the queen has Gloria Alred for an attorney?..

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

    Allred is her attorney. However ‘asking her to lie’ seems unlikely. There seems nothing to lie about. Allred said there were 100 emails but the worst thing she could find in them was some references to his ‘package’. No pictures. Looks to me like the queen and Allred just want some publicity.

  147. From the Reuter’s story at http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/15/us-usa-politics-weiner-pornstar-idUSTRE75E3N820110615
    Allred said Lee had about 100 e-mails that she had exchanged with Weiner since March, when he initially contacted her on Twitter after she posted a supportive blog about him.

    Allred said that while most of the e-mails were not sexual, Weiner had referred to his “package” in some exchanges, such as “I have wardrobe demands too, I need to highlight my package” and “You aren’t giving my package due credit.”

    LEE SAID NO PHOTOS WERE EXCHANGED.

    When the scandal broke, she sought Weiner’s advice on how to deal with the media. The pair continued to communicate and on June 2 he phoned her, advising that if they both stayed quiet the scandal would die down.

  148. TMZ claims Weiner said:
    “The key is to have a short, thought out statement that tackles the top line questions and then refer back to it … Like so many others, I follow Rep Weiner on Twitter …”

    ===========

    ?This is a lie?

  149. Summary from memory.

    Sfaik, no one has admitted receiving a dirty photo except Cordova, which seems to have been some sort of accident. The 17 year old got nothing inappropriate, according to herself, her family lawyer, and the police.

    Out of six women he allegedly had sexy conversations with over three years, the porn queen says she got no photos, just some references to his ‘package.’ Istr two others also saying no dirty pictures. That leaves three not heard from.

    If they have anything, they’d better hurry, before the tabloids lose interest.

  150. “Romney versus either Cain or Bachmann”

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

    I read that as

    “Romney versus either Cain or Batman”

    I’m going to bed.

  151. Amazing stuff from lovely Diane ABC Sawyer last night. Go to this link
    http://abcnews.go.com/wn
    and select “Obama gave special treatment to donors” to hear 2:28 minutes of semi-hard criticism of teh one. It’s about bundlers gaining positions. Some are named/amounts given. The Center for Public Integrity claims 1/3 of the bundlers have become official members of the Obamaville team. ABC went so far as to air a video of Candidate Obama in February 2007 preaching against the practice by stating that it’s not fair for those who are wealthy to have access while the rest of you can only write letters … and I’m going to change that. The piece ends by stating that Obama in 2 years has managed to reward as many as GWB rewarded in 4 years.

  152. holdthemaccountable
    June 16th, 2011 at 6:18 am
    —————

    That is amazing coming from Diane Sawyer and Tapper. Well, that is the end of state dinner invitations for her.

  153. “Factcheck.org has done an independent investigation of the controversy.

    “FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate,” the group writes. “We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship…. Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.”
    _____________________

    So why don’t they post their Photo?

  154. What has happened to Washington Insider? Did’t he say something big was going to break last wee?

  155. Thanks for the update on the ‘adult’ star and her attorney.

    There is just no end to the aggressiveness by House Democrats wanting to end Weiner’s career. If the Dems utilized half the belligerency towards Obama as they are doing for Weiner it could result in a modicum of respect for them appearing to do their jobs for Americans.

    I still don’t understand why the full court press confrontation of Republicans-Democrats and anyone willing to say negative things about Anthony. They seem to be the distraction claimed by Obama more than the accusations against Weiner.

    I will say one thing, Anthony has to be more forthcoming with all he is hiding if there is anything else left to say that hasn’t been already said to Huma. It’s seems to be part of his adolescent makeup to hide things he knows to be embarrassing and refuses to reveal to his own detriment.

    My kids grew up knowing I expected the whole Truth if they got themselves into ‘troubling kid stuff’ because lying to me accomplishes nothing and it will come back to bite you after the Truth eventually comes out.

    I live in a residential neighborhood where everyone either knows or knows of the neighbors here. When the policeman came to the door asking if he could speak to one of my kids.. and I asked him what for- He said, I need to to speak to ‘x’ about the life-size plastic statues of the Nativity, ( incl camels donkeys and sheep ) that got put into the street scaring people coming home at night. Neighbors complaining it almost made them crash their cars.

    I kid you not- the three kids involved incl mine were headlines the next day in the side column of the local newspaper as ‘The Grinches that Stole Christmas’..names not mentioned of course, being underage. (but the next day, the whole school knew about it)

    All I can say is- it was a cheap lesson that followed him through life. I never worried about not hearing the Truth
    again.

    I don’t know if 47 yrs old is too old to learn that lesson. I guess it’s up to Huma-

  156. So they got him to quit…there must be something else…

    Do you all remember Vitter…he was having actual affairs…..and he did not step down…but Weiner who by all accounts had phone sex….is stepping down…but then he went against Obama on several issues….you can’t talk back to the boy king and get away with it…

  157. This is not a Shiny Thing

    Truth be told, food stocks are dangerously low, and harvest projections are grim; but these are not the worst of the problem. No. Commodity speculation is the Obama-Wall Street policy. They are subsidizing it.

    The Federal Reserve lends the chosen few money at extremely low interest rates, and these financial houses put this money where they can get the highest rate of return. With the home mortgage game dead, the stock market flat, and bond yields low due to the Fed’s low-interest-rate regime, one of the places the banks have been putting this money is in the markets for food, oil, and other commodities—things which people continue to need, even in an economic meltdown. This flood of money into these exchanges and gambling opportunities has caused a sharp run-up in prices.

    It is estimated that in 2003, the commodity futures markets held some $13 billion in bets. But since then, and especially since 2008, when the mortgage bubble popped, money has flowed into commodities. During the first two months of 2008, $55 billion was pumped in; by July that year, $318 billion worth of outstanding futures contract bets existed.

    Among the primary mechanisms involved in this speculation, are the various commodity funds set up by Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, AIG, Barclays and others—to gamble their own and their clients’ funds in the commodities casino. These finance houses have no interest at all in buying food or oil—the last thing they want is to actually take delivery of physical product. This is simply derivatives speculation, but moving it from the mortgage sector to the commodities sector.

    For example, on the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) at present, 90% of wheat futures contracts and derivatives traded “long” (i.e., buying into inflation), are being bought and sold by speculators with no connection to agriculture or food production or distribution. Under Obama, and the Dodd-Frank dudd law, the CFTC just looks on and winks.

    Take futures trading in corn—for which the United States accounts for 45% of the world harvest: On June 9, within minutes of the issuance by the Agriculture Department of their monthly World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates report (WASDE-495) by the World Agricultural Outlook Board, saying that that the U.S. corn crop would be down, because of the weather impact, and end-of-season corn stocks would fall to historic lows this year, an orgy of speculation broke out in Chicago.

    Still more, the owner of the Chicago Board of Trade, the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange) Group—a longtime, London-serving outfit—last month applied to the CFTC for the right to better “accommodate” current corn futures price volatility in view of grain shortages, by raising the daily trading limit up to 40 or 50 cents!

    Such paper trading now dominates the market. It is putting the cost of food out of the reach of millions of people around the world (not you guys, for whom food is a *much* smaller percent of monthly expenses. It is putting the cost of producing food—fertilizer, fuel, chemicals, animal feed—out of the reach of farmers.

    Price Controls
    Declaring controls on food prices stops this cold. It reasserts sovereignty over national economic activity, in particular, the government responsibility for the general welfare. Done in the same mobilization as to reinstate Glass-Steagall to restore banking for economic recovery, measures can be taken to defend against the current wave of weather and other natural disasters, and to build up agriculture, including creating food reserves for emergencies.

    In fact, over the last 30 years, as food and derivatives speculation grew, at the same time as the campaign for “world markets” finally succeeded in establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995, the globalization principle was enforced, that no nation would be allowed, under WTO “free” trade rules, to even possess, or attempt to create, food reserves! National food reserves were denounced by the free-trader financial networks as “distorting” free trade and price-determination on commodity markets.

    Price controls must be put on foodstuffs and commodities immediately. Without this intervention, there will be farm/food breakdown resulting from the processes now underway from the combined impact of weather extremes, out-of-control speculation, and non-action from Washington, D.C.

    No one dare claim we should just accept the situation of farm commodity shortages, and accept the lie that prices must rise as an inevitable consequence.

  158. Under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in implementation of the Preamble to the Constitution to support the general welfare by providing for a stable, sufficient food supply…

    Leaders of the United States took action to control prices of food and all critical commodities, at the same time keeping a parity price for farmers and increasing output and production capacity.

    On Jan. 16, 1942, within weeks after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the War Production Board was established, including participation of the Secretary of Agriculture.

    On Jan. 30, 1942, the Emergency Price Control Act went into force, giving power to the Office of Price Administration to put controls on commodities, and to ration as well. Goods such as sugar, meat, coffee, processed foods, as well as fuel oil, tires, and even farm machinery—all were ultimately rationed. The law also gave power to provide subsidies for production, and permitted sanctions—including fines and imprisonment—for violations of the rules.

    During the war years, government price controls, along with the full spectrum of pro-production economic policies—parity-pricing for farm commodities, backing for adequate food processing, etc. led to a huge increase in foodstuffs, improvements in domestic consumption, and provisioning for the military, and for Lend-Lease aid to allies.

    Total U.S. farm output during the period 1939-44 was twice the output of the period of 1919-23 to 1935-39. 50 million hogs in 1939, 84 million in 1944. Poultry production increased by over 35% during same period. Milk per cow went up by 15%. 4,100 pounds per cow in 1935, 4,800 pounds in 1945. Spectacular acreage increase in oil-seed crops— Production of soybeans in 1942-44 was 338% of the production in 1935-39.

    Food price controls, credits, and a production mobilization today can have even more spectacular results.

  159. America began from a powerful truth – that our rights do not come from our government. Our rights, they come from God. Government’s job, is to protect our God-given rights. And here this Republic has done that better than any other government ever. America is not perfect. It took a bloody civil war to free over 4 million African Americans who lived enslaved. And it would take another hundred years after that before they found true equality under the law.

    But since her earliest days, America has inspired people all over the world. It gave them hope that one day their own countries would be a place like this. But many decided they could not wait. And from everywhere, they came here to pursue their dreams and work to leave their children better off than themselves. The result was the American miracle.

    Where a 16-year-old boy from Sweden, who spoke no English and had only five dollars in his pocket, was able to save and open a shoe store. Today, that store, Nordstrom is a multi-billion dollar global retail giant.

    Where a young couple with no money and no business experience decided to start a toy business out of the garage of their home. Today, that company, Mattel, is one of the world’s largest toy manufacturers.

    Where the French-born son of Iranian parents created a website called AuctionWeb in the living room of his home. Today, that website now called eBay stands as a testament to the familiar phrase, “Only in America”.

    These are but three examples of Americans whose extraordinary success began with nothing but an idea.

    But the American dream was never just about how much money you made. It is also about something that typifies my home state of Florida: the desire of every parent to leave their children with a better life.

    It is a dream lived by countless people whose stories will never be told. Americans that never made a million dollars, never owned a yacht, a plane or even a second home. And yet, they too lived the American dream – because their hard work opened doors for their children that had been closed to them.

    It is the story of the people who cleaned our office last night. They work hard, so they can send their kids to college.

    It is the story of the people who served your lunch today. They work hard so that one day their children will have the chance to own a business.

    It is the story of a bartender and a maid in Florida, whose son now serves here in this Senate, and who proudly gives his testimony as a firsthand witness of the greatness of this land.

    Becoming a world power was never America’s plan. But that is exactly what the American economic miracle made her. Most great powers have used their strength to conquer other nations. But America is different. For us, power also came with a sense that to those that much is given, much is expected. A sense that with the blessings God bestowed upon our land, came the responsibility to make the world a better place.

    In the 20th century, that is exactly what America did. Politically, it led in two world wars so that others could be free. And it led in a Cold War to stop the spread of communism, and ultimately to defeat it. While our military and foreign policy contributions helped to save the world, it was our economic and cultural innovations that have transformed it. The fruits of the American miracle can be found in the daily lives of people everywhere.

    Anywhere in the world, when someone uses a mobile phone, email, the Internet, or GPS they are enjoying the benefits of the American miracle. Anywhere in the world, when a bone marrow, lung or heart transplant saves a life, you see the value of the American miracle.
    And on one night in July of 1969, all mankind witnessed the American miracle in one historic and unforgettable moment. For on that day an American walked on the surface of the moon, and it became clear that Americans…..they could do anything!

    America’s rise was not free of adversity.

    We faced a civil rights struggle that saw Governors defy Presidents, police dogs attack peaceful protesters, and bombs that killed little children in churches. We faced two oil crises, Watergate and American hostages in Iran. I grew up in the 1980s, a time when it was morning in America. Yet even then, we faced a war on drugs, we lost Marines in Beirut and Astronauts on the Challenger. We faced a devastating oil spill in Alaska and a terrifying new disease called AIDS.

    Through challenges and triumphs, the 20th century was the American century. A century where American political, economic and cultural exceptionalism made the world a more prosperous and peaceful place.

    THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY

    Now we find ourselves in a new century. And there is a growing sense that for America, things will never be the same. That maybe, this new century will belong to someone else. Indeed, we do stand now at a turning point in our history. One where there are only two ways forward for us. We will either bring on another American century, or we are doomed to witness America’s decline. A new American century is within our reach.

    There is nothing wrong with our people. Americans haven’t forgotten how to start a business. They haven’t run out of good ideas.

    We Americans are as great as we have ever been. But our government is broken. And it is keeping us from doing what we have done better than anyone in the world for over a century: Create jobs.

    If we here in Washington could just find agreement on a plan to start getting our debt under control, if we could just make our tax code simpler and more predictable, and if we could just get the government to ease up on some of these onerous regulations, the American people will take care of the rest.

    If this government will do its part, this generation of Americans is ready to theirs. They will give us a prosperous, upwardly mobile economy. One where our children will invent, build and sell things to a world where more people than ever before can afford to buy them.

    If we can give America a government that lives within its means, the American economy will give us a government whose means are considerable. A government that can afford to pay for the things a government should do, because it does not waste money on things it should not do.

    If we can deliver on a few simple but important things, we have the chance to achieve something that is hard to imagine is even possible. An America whose future will be greater than its past.

    WE ARE HEADED IN WRONG DIRECTION

    But sadly, right now, that is not where we are headed.

    We have had no progress on the issues of our time because we have too many people, in both parties, that have decided that the next election is more important than the next generation.

    And our lack of progress on these issues has led to something even more troubling. A growing fear that maybe these problems we have are just too big for us. Too big, even for America.

    NOW IS NO TIME FOR FEAR

    There is no reason to be afraid.

    Our story, the story of America, is not the story of a nation that’s never had problems. It is the story of a nation that faced its challenges and solved them. Our story, the story of the American people, is not the story of a people who always got it right. It is the story of a people who, in the end, got it right. Let us never forget who we Americans are.

    Every single one of us is the descendant of a go-getter. Of dreamers and believers. Of men and women who took risk and made sacrifices because they wanted to leave their children better off than themselves.

    Whether they came here on the Mayflower, a slave ship, or on an airplane from Havana, we are all the descendants of the men and women who built the nation that changed the world.

    We are still the great American people. And the only thing standing in the way of solving our problems is our willingness to do so.

    AMERICA’S FATE MATTERS TO THE WORLD

    Whether we do so or not is of great consequence. And not just to us, but also to the whole world. I know, that some say that because times are tough here at home, we can no longer worry about these things going on abroad. That when it comes to world events, America needs to mind its own business.

    But whether we like it or not, there is virtually no aspect of our daily lives here in America that is not directly influenced by the world that lives around us. We can choose to ignore global problems, but those problems will not ignore us. One of my favorite speeches is one that talks about our role in the world. It was the speech President Kennedy was set to give, had he lived just one more day. It would have closed with these words:

    “We in this country, in this generation, are- by destiny rather than by choice- the watchmen on the walls of world freedom. We ask, therefore, that we may be worthy of our power and responsibility, that we may exercise our strength with wisdom and restraint, and that we may achieve in our time and for all time the ancient vision of ‘peace on earth, good will toward men.’ That must always be our goal, and the righteousness of our cause must always underlie our strength. For as was written long ago “except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.”

    Almost half a century later America is still the only watchman on that wall of world freedom. And there is still no one else to take our place.
    What will the world look like if America declines? Well, today all over the world, people are being forced to accept a familiar lie, that the price for their security is their liberty.

    If America declines, who will serve as living proof that liberty, security and prosperity are all possible together? Today, radical political Islam abuses and oppresses women, has no tolerance for other faiths and seeks to impose its views on the whole world. If America declines, who will lead the fight to confront and defeat them?

    Today, children are used as soldiers and trafficked as slaves. Dissidents are routinely imprisoned without trial, and subjected to torture, forced confessions and forced labor.

    If America declines, who will take these causes as their own? What will the world look like if America declines? Well, who will create the innovations of the 21st century? Who will stretch the limits of human potential and explore the new frontiers?

    If America declines, who will do all this, and ask for nothing in return?

    Motivated solely by the desire to make the world a better place?

    The answer is no one will. There is still no nation or institution in the world willing or able to do what we have done.

    THE WORLD STILL NEEDS AMERICA

    Ronald Reagan described America as a shining city on a hill. Now, some say that we can no longer afford the price we must pay to keep America’s light shining. Others say that there are new shining cities that will soon replace us. I say they are both wrong. Yes, the price we will pay to keep America’s light shining is high, but the price we will pay if it stops shining will be even higher.

    Yes, there are new nations now emerging with prosperity and influence. And that is what we always wanted. America never wanted to be the only shining city. We wanted our example to inspire the people of the world to build one of their own. You see, these nations, these new shining cities, they can join us, but they can never replace us. Because the light coming from them is but a reflection of our own. It is the light of an American century that now spreads throughout the world. A world that still needs America. A world that still needs our light. A world that still needs another American century.

    I pray that with God’s help, that will be our legacy to our children and to the world. Mr./Madame President, I yield the floor. – Marco Rubio

    ——–

    I wonder how many of the fat-assed pig Senators listened to that, or read it?

  160. “Factcheck.org has done an independent investigation of the controversy.

    “FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate,” the group writes. “We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship…. Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.”
    _____________________

    FactCheck is part of the Annenberg School of Journalism at U Penn which is affiliated with the Annenberg Foundation, therefore I propose to strip away the corporate veil and treat them as a single entity, i.e. the Annenberg cartel their bona fides.

    The Annenberg cartel is involved in higher education, media, public broadcasting and charitable enterprises. They have board members in common. Together they comprise part of the left wing cabal of universities, trusts, foundations and other elitists who are part of the dimocratic governing coalition.

    Thus, it is hardly surprising that on the question of citizenship they have weighed in for Obama early and often–and they were over the top. But as the following excerpt reveal, i) first, they are highly partisan, ii) second, they do not authenticate the sources they use nd iii) third, they do not check facts–they propagandize, etc.

    Consequently, mere fact that the Annenberg group says the photoshopped document is conclusive does not mean that it is so. On the contray, this is to be expected from an organization which behaves in this manner. They are serving partisan objectives and defending the position they have taken–as partisans typically do. They are unwilling to discuss why he did not produce this document up front.

    That is not to say this has no value however. For if it is true, independent of what Annenberg says, then it serves to define the single accomplishment of the Obama presidency: after four years, and two million dollars he has finally established to the satisfaction of the Annenberg who was on board initially that he was born in the United States.

    Now there is a legacy to be proud of–but it is not enough to offset the damage he has done to the country and the future of ordinary Americans.

    If you want proof of the neutrality and bona fides of FactCheck here it is courtesy of jbjd.
    —————————————

    1. FactCheck demonstrates clear partisanship:

    At what Annenberg Political Fact Check wrote on their web site, referencing those Birthers who would throw out even the image they posted of a “contemporaneous” newspaper birth announcement to discredit his HI birth:

    “Of course, it’s distantly possible that Obama’s grandparents may have planted the announcement just in case their grandson needed to prove his U.S. citizenship in order to run for president someday. We suggest that those who choose to go down that path should first equip themselves with a high-quality TIN FOIL HAT. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

    2. FactCheck relies on non authenticated evidence supplied by anonomous Obama bloggers in reaching its conclusions:

    My investigation revealed, that image of the ‘newspaper announcement’ APFC had been touting as proof of BO’s HI birth had been boosted from another blog, posted there by an anonymous blogger. APFC posted the phantom image on their blog and then, without authenticating that image any further, claimed this “contemperaneous birth announcement” meant the “evidence is clear” BO was born in the U.S.

    2. FactCheck does not check facts:

    I also demonstrated that in January 2009, BO finessed APFC’s reference to that phantom announcement to try to trick the federal court in Hollister to take “notice” he was an American citizen! And backtracking from those admissions in BO’s written pleadings to the judge, I established that, Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the 2008 DNC Convention, had no documentary proof Barack Obama is as a Natural Born Citizen when she Certified to state elections officials 4 (four) months earlier, he was Constitutionally eligible for the job of President. (See on this blog, “RUMORS, LIES, AND UNSUBSTANTIATED ‘FACTS’; and “IF DROWNING OUT OPPOSING FACTS IS un-AMERICAN THEN IGNORING UNPLEASANT FACTS MUST BE un-AMERICAN, TOO.”)

    Indeed, as I explained in my posts, that photocopy of the COLB BO put on his FTS web site in June 2008 must have been the best evidence he produced to prove he is a NBC at the time NP signed those Certifications in August 2008, which went to state elections officials so they would print his name on the general election ballot. Because that’s the same ‘evidence’ he later used to try to authenticate himself (as a U.S. citizen), before a federal court judge. (Of course, the best evidence he could have submitted to the court in January 2009 to prove his Constitutional eligibility for POTUS would have been NP’s August 2008 Certification.)

  161. #
    confloyd
    June 16th, 2011 at 9:59 am

    So they got him to quit…there must be something else…

    Do you all remember Vitter…he was having actual affairs…..and he did not step down…but Weiner who by all accounts had phone sex….is stepping down…but then he went against Obama on several issues….you can’t talk back to the boy king and get away with it…
    _________________________

    Yeah they got him to quit- Really and truly, his mental health should be their first priority. Afterward they get that under control, if he can- perhaps contemplating going back to school. It seems when you go into public life, a law degree is your best friend.

  162. I have always thought highly of Lanny Davis, who fought for Hillary ever step of the way, including in Florida, when the ground was moving, and he did not get the word. He was always loyal, and he is wise. This article is one of many examples.

    In it, he notes in passing the work that Hillary and Newt did together to address the problems of this country.

    The tragedy for me is neither one of them is likely at this point to gain the Oval Office, which would have saved this country at this time of crisis.

    By contrast, Marco gives pretty speeches–but so did Obama. The test is whether they can deliver. Unfortunately, that meant nothing to the majority of the American People, much less big media.

    Now we are entering into the vortex of crisis and from what I can tell an every man for himself ethic has emerged. No one seems to care about the people who are unemployed and Obama has stifled the business growth which might have put food on their table.

    Then again, perhaps I am wrong and Lanny is right. Perhaps both Hillary and Newt will emerge in 2012. I certainly hope so.
    ————————————————–
    Four Reasons Why You Can’t Count Newt Gingrich Out Yet In 2012 Presidential Race
    By Lanny Davis

    Published June 16, 2011

    FILE – Republican presidential hopeful, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich gestures while speaking during a Town Hall style meeting at the Derry Medical Center in Derry, N.H., in this May 25, 2011 file photo. The entire top echelon of Newt Gingrich’s presidential campaign resigned on Thursday, June 9, 2011 a stunning mass exodus that left his bid for the Republican nomination in tatters. But the former House speaker vowed defiantly to remain a candidate.

    It was the summer before the presidential year to come, more than seven months before the New Hampshire primary. All of the Republican presidential candidate’s top campaign staff had quit; he was virtually out of money. All the pundit class declared him politically dead, mocking his campaign.

    “It is about as close to terminal as you can get without actually dying,” Republican strategist Alex Vogel said about the candidate’s chance to win the Republican nomination.

    I am sure you get the joke by now.

    Now, the same pundit class that was certain of the demise of Arizona Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) presidential campaign in July of 2007 is just as certain about the death of the Newt Gingrich campaign after the mass resignation last week of his senior campaign staff.

    In fact, I think Gingrich has just as good, if not better, a chance as John McCain to make a similar comeback, for several reasons.

    But for starters, let me make one thing perfectly clear, as Richard Nixon used to famously say: I strongly disagree with Newt Gingrich on most issues; he is far too conservative, and I would never vote for him.

    OK, Newt. You can relax: This complimentary column won’t truly kill your chances for the Republican nomination.

    I see three reasons why it’s premature to count Newt out:

    1. He has demonstrated political and substantive leadership capabilities superior to all his rivals

    Lest we forget, after Gingrich in 1995 led the Republican “revolution” and takeover of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years, he was named Time magazine’s Person of the Year.

    Time explained: “Leaders make things possible. Exceptional leaders make them inevitable. Newt Gingrich belongs in the category of the exceptional.”

    2. Even his critics must admit that Gingrich is a man of brilliant intellect brimming with ideas

    Related Links
    Weiner Family Turns to Clintons in Wake of Sexting Confession
    The Way Forward for Republicans On Health Care
    Sure, some of them are over-the-top. That goes with the territory of such a creative intellect. Check out his presidential campaign website and you will see hundreds of links to ideas, position papers, op-eds, books, etc.

    This man’s mind is a running idea machine — I imagine, even when he sleeps.

    3. Loyalty to his wife

    Since Gingrich was recently mocked by New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd for wanting to be with his wife on a Greek cruise in early June rather than in D.C. raising money, that must mean he is doing something right. It was that decision to go on the cruise that was described, anonymously of course, by the “senior campaign staff” as one of the main reasons for resigning.

    Question: Is it really hard to understand why a rational presidential candidate would prefer to be on a cruise with his wife, with time to write and think, than raising money to pay for this kind of campaign staff?

    4. Ability to work with Democrats

    Despite his unfortunate history as the ultimate polarizer who hypocritically led the illegitimate partisan effort to impeach Bill Clinton (the bad Newt), in fact, Gingrich has also demonstrated an ability to reach across the aisle to work with Democrats and liberals on real solutions to real problems (the good Newt).

    “Part of what I think Newt and I are doing, and it’s a little bit of a shock, or a Rorschach, if you will, we are trying to get people to really think differently, because we have come to some of the same conclusions on independent paths,” a certain senator said.

    The senator? Then-New York junior Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D), speaking in May 2005.

    The subject? Health care — a bipartisan bill sponsored by Sen. Clinton and Newt Gingrich, as well as dozens of liberal Democratic and conservative Republican members of Congress, that would support expanded sharing of data and health information technology to reduce healthcare costs and save lives.

    A man who is thus able, sometimes, to rise above partisanship has important appeal to independent voters, who are often the key to winning the New Hampshire primary.

    Just ask McCain.

    Such a man cannot be counted out yet to be elected president. And for sure, such a man cannot be counted out to win the Republican nomination.

    Just ask Republican strategist Alex Vogel.

    Lanny Davis is a Fox News contributor. He is the principal in the Washington D.C. law firm of Lanny J. Davis & Associates, which specializes in strategic crisis management and is a partner with Josh Block in the strategic communications and public affairs company Davis-Block. He served as President Clinton’s Special Counsel in 1996-98 and as a member of President Bush’s Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board in 2006-2007. He is the author of “Scandal: How ‘Gotcha’ Politics Is Destroying America” (Palgrave Macmillan, 2006). He can be found on Facebook and Twitter @LannyDavis.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/06/16/fours-reasons-why-cant-count-newt-gingrich-out-yet-in-2012-presidential-race/#ixzz1PS4a3GOI

  163. holdthemaccountable
    June 16th, 2011 at 6:18 am
    —————

    That is amazing coming from Diane Sawyer and Tapper. Well, that is the end of state dinner invitations for her
    ————
    I give them no credit for this whatsoever. For the past four years big media has told us who they are. This is not a sea change. Rather, this disclosure is nothing more than a tactical ploy to blunt a future republican attack. These people are not truth tellers–they are bitter partisans. By analogy, if you are an advocate in court, and you have some bad facts to deal with in your own case, you incorporate them into your legal theory, and present them up front rather than waiting for your adversary to do so that when your adversary presents them the jury says to itself, yea I know all about that already no big deal. That is what they are doing to the Republicans and you will see more of it. It is just a ploy.

  164. Obama’s Ludicrous Proposal to Israel Unpacked

    June 14, 2011
    By Barry Rubin

    Could President Barack Obama’s strategy possibly be more obvious to Israel? Not for the mass media, of course, but for Israel. Here’s a summary: Due to the Obama Administration’s ineptness, the Palestinian Authority (PA) is planning to ask the UN to give it unilateral independence in September. But rather than use its leverage against the PA–including pointing out that what it’s doing is contrary to every U.S.-guaranteed agreement that the PA signed with Israel during the last 18 years–the Obama Administration wants to use its leverage on Israel to force it to save Obama.

    You see, Obama will find it hard to escape vetoing the PA’s bid in the Security Council before it ever gets to the General Assembly. This will not make Obama or the United States more popular with Muslims or Arabs. So Obama wants Israel to pay the price in exchange for…nothing.

    To avoid the PA declaring unilateral independence without making any concessions, Obama wants Israel to accept what amounts to the PA getting independence without making any concessions! But it won’t be unilateral, right? Obama’s plan is for Israel to negotiate, turn over the all of the West Bank to the PA as soon as possible and then negotiate on all the issues with a PA-led state. Of course, that means Israel would give up all of its bargaining chips at the beginning of the negotiation rather than get something for them at the end in exchange for Palestinian concessions.

    And, of course, Obama wants Israel to depend on his promises and support, not exactly reliable, right?

    What’s really going on is that Obama wants Israel to take enormous risks and give up a huge amount of political capital, thus endangering its citizens and future in order to spare Obama from vetoing the PA’s initiative. And since Obama takes no strong action against the Fatah-Hamas coalition, he’s asking Israel to give these concessions to an interocutor that includes genocidal-minded antisemitic terrorists working with Iran, Syria, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

    The argument the Obama administration and its supporters is using–despite being taken seriously in the mass media–is absurd. Namely, Israel must make big concessions to give the PA a state as fast as possible because otherwise the Europeans will support unilateral Palestinian independence at the UN.

    But wait a minute! First, if the U.S. government would use real leverage, leadership, and even some arm-twisting, this European action wouldn’t happen. Second, Britain, France, Germany, and Italy have already said they won’t back the PA’s move. So what’s Israel going to do, turn over the West Bank real fast to avoid having Spain and Sweden vote against Israel at the UN? Third, the U.S. government can just veto the plan. Problem over.

    If Obama didn’t want to have to veto unilateral independence he should have been pressuring the PA to back down, the UN not to cooperate with this campaign, and his allies not to vote for it. Instead, Obama is seeking the easy way out: have Israel give the PA so much that it gives up the idea voluntarily. Why demand what the United States has already given to you?

    And it doesn’t take a genius to understand that the kind of signal Obama is giving the PA is disastrous in other situations. Go against U.S. wishes, sabotage its policies, attack its allies, don’t fulfill your commitments, align with terrorist groups, threaten to do something outrageous…and then the Obama Administration will give in and force your enemies (it’s own allies) to surrender.

    Thus, what Obama is doing is ludicrous, trying to get Israel to pay for his mistakes and his refusal to press the PA on anything in exchange for Israel getting nothing and betting its future on a belief that Obama will protect it.

    Sounds a bit different from the way the mass media presents things, right? And not bloody likely to happen.

    http://www.worldjewishdaily.com/toolbar.html?4t=extlink&4u=http://pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/06/14/obamas-ludicrous-proposal-to-israel-unpacked/?singlepage=true

  165. The worst lies are those you tell yourself about yourself and Mort Zuckerman is a case in point. In the primary he was a huge Obama supporter and media supporter. Now he is a critic and acts as though it never happened. I suppose the same can be said of Wynn. What these people need to come to terms with is they are in pare delicto for the terrible problems the country faces as a result of Obama. When a thief gets caught we should not accept a defense crime is bad, and I am opposed to it. The point is in the moment of decision, he did the wrong thing and that is all that matters.
    ———————————-
    http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/993453466001/mort-zuckerman-on-obamas-handling-of-the-economy/?playlist_id=87022

  166. Hillary Clinton Inherits Iraq

    by Susan Johnson
    President, American Foreign Service Association
    Jun 16 2011

    The U.S. State Department will soon take control in Iraq. What that means is anyone’s guess.

    The U.S. military is scheduled to pull out of Iraq by year’s end, and responsibility for the U.S.’s operations there will shift from the Pentagon to the State Department. Is this a sign of a renewed focus on diplomacy, rather than warfare, in U.S. foreign policy? Or will it be business as usual, but under new management?

    THE MARK: From your perspective, how has the State Department changed under Hillary Clinton?

    SUSAN JOHNSON: Each secretary of state has his or her own style, set of issues, and moment to deal with, in reality. But I think Hillary Clinton has been, and remains, a very popular and well-respected secretary of state with the rank and file. Foreign-service officers and foreign-service personnel feel fortunate to have a secretary of state of her political stature and weight, because that rubs off on the agency – the institution itself.

    I think there is generally a feeling that diplomacy and development have been marginalized in the last two decades, and our investment in defence has certainly dwarfed the investment we’ve made in diplomacy and development. One of the great things that Secretary of State Clinton is doing is drawing attention to the important roles that diplomacy and development play as instruments of national power, and joining forces with Secretary of Defence Robert M. Gates to advocate for reinvestment in them.

    THE MARK: Is there a joint effort between Secretary Clinton and Secretary Gates to move from military efforts to diplomatic operations in foreign policy?

    JOHNSON: I think there is. I think some of the biggest advocates and defenders of rebuilding the capacity of, and strengthening, our diplomatic and development services have been not only Secretary Gates, but also Admiral Mike Mullen, Gen. David Petraeus, and many other top military leaders who, through their own experiences in the last decade in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, have come to realize the importance of having strong civilian agencies and strong diplomatic and development services.

    We began to get more resources under former U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, but the really significant upswing came after Clinton took office, because she launched what she called Diplomacy 3.0, which we called 3D – defence, diplomacy, development. That whole push was to raise the profile of diplomacy and development and lay a foundation for the case with Congress that we needed to invest more significantly in diplomacy and development. It led to a big upswing in our budget allocations in 2009-2010, and led Congress to agree to fund an increase of 25 per cent in the State Department’s staff, and 50 per cent in the United States Agency for International Development’s (USAID) staff.

    The midterm elections in November 2010 changed that, because the House of Representatives came to be controlled by the Republicans, and we moved into the framework of reducing the deficit. From our position at the American Foreign Service Association, we support the president’s budget request and the full implementation of Diplomacy 3.0, but right now it looks as though it’s going to slow down, and maybe even stop where it’s at right now, which is at about 16 per cent of the 25 per cent increase.

    THE MARK: What do you think brought Washington to the conclusion that it’s time to put more emphasis on diplomacy and the State Department?

    JOHNSON: The obvious thing that brought that to the fore had to be our military’s experience in Iraq, and then in Afghanistan, and the realization that, in order to get out, there had to be stabilization and reconstruction of those countries. Those were tasks that the military decided were not really part of its mission. After so many years of involvement, the military was stretched rather thin, and it probably didn’t want to deploy more people to do it. It also likely realized that it didn’t have enough people with the right skill sets.

    I think the military was very surprised to realize that the State Department and USAID are so small; they’re both tiny compared to the military. We often say there are more people in our military bands than there are in the State Department.

    THE MARK: How many people are there in the State Department?

    JOHNSON: There are roughly 12,000. That includes officers, staff, and diplomatic security. About 3,000 of those are diplomatic security. If you look at how many people we have today versus how many we had in 1970, it’s roughly the same if you take out the security. And, of course, there’s been a huge rise in the demand for diplomatic security.

    THE MARK: On Oct. 1, the State Department will take over responsibility for Iraq. What does this mean for the State Department?

    JOHNSON: The plan is to have the State Department expand the size of our operation there, and take over the management of the security side of things ¬– though it’s not entirely clear just what that will involve.

    THE MARK: Do you feel that the State Department is getting the resources it needs to take over in Iraq?

    JOHNSON: The Obama administration’s budget request for the international figures for fiscal year 2012 was US$47.5 billion for the State Department and USAID core budget. The administration then created a separate category called Overseas Contingency Operations, or OCO. That was the part of the budget that was supposed to fund missions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other, hopefully short-term, ad hoc things. The request there was $8.6 billion.

    The budget that emerged from Congress would fully fund the $8.6 billion (although $1 billion of that will come from Pentagon funds, and will be managed by the Pentagon). However, of the $47.5 billion that was supposed to fund everything else, we were given only $39.5 billion.

    THE MARK: That’s a 20 per cent decrease in the budget.

    JOHNSON: It’s pretty serious. What impact it’s going to have, and where it’s going to come from … those are things we don’t know yet.

    Clearly, we’re going to be under renewed pressure to cut back. This kind of yo-yo business is very difficult. We get cut back, we get rebuilt, we get cut back. [Laughs] Two steps forward, one or three steps back, depending.

    THE MARK: According to The Wall Street Journal, 17,000 people will work for the State Department in Iraq, with 5,000 to 6,000 working as security personnel. Are we going to see a scenario where the Iraq mission is larger than the rest of the State Department?

    JOHNSON: I’ve read those figures as well. I can’t confirm them, but I have seen them in the press. I’ve also seen the figure of 8,000, in terms of people doing development work, reconstruction, and rebuilding. Is all that realistic? Is the absorptive capacity in Iraq up to it?

    The term “right-sizing” has been tossed around a lot since 2004. There would be a lot of hiring of contractors, or there would be limited career appointments, or a lot of civil-service people would be sent over – and that would add to the numbers. There’s no question that, at this level, Iraq and Afghanistan absorb an enormous amount of our resources. If you step back and look at our global set of interests, we’re spending an enormous amount of resources – in terms of people and money – on Iraq. Is it worth it? Does it make sense?

    THE MARK: It sounds like the major thing to take away is that there’s a lot of uncertainty.

    JOHNSON: Yes, there are still many unanswered questions.

    http://www.themarknews.com/articles/5633-hillary-clinton-inherits-iraq

  167. The Most “Transparency” And “Change” Money Can Buy
    No Quarter
    By Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy on June 15, 2011 at 11:30 PM

    Now, I know that many of us – members of the “reality based community” – did not believe for one skinny second that Barack Obama was ever going to be transparent or bring real change to the White House. Frankly, it is ludicrous on its face to refer to someone as “transparent” who refused to allow any of his transcripts or medical records to see the light of day, or any of his papers, not even a date book, from his time as an IL Senator. Anyone who ever believed that he was going to have a more transparent government was just fooling themselves.

    Naturally, Obama’s Administration has continued the trend of Obama the Candidate. It has taken a major step back in that whole transparency thing, according to the AP. Even when he wins awards for being transparent, he has to do so in a closed ceremony – how much more hypocritical can one be?

    Well, there is one bit of transparency that is now coming forth about Obama. And that is how he pays off his big campaign donors. Of course, it is not unusual for a president to give a plum position to a big contributor, but Obama has done so for about 200 – that is two hundred – of his supporters in government positions in just two years. By comparison, George W. Bush hired about 200 contributors over EIGHT years. Uh, yeah.

    So much for that “change” in Washington from “special interests,” huh? I know, I know, I am not surprised, either, but I didn’t drink the Kool Aide and vote for the man who made this claim:

    [snip] As a candidate, Obama spoke passionately about diminishing the clout of moneyed interests. Kicking off his presidential run on Feb. 10, 2007, he blasted “the cynics, the lobbyists, the special interests,” who had “turned our government into a game only they can afford to play.”
    “We’re here today to take it back,” he said.[snip]

    Ahahahahaha – I know, I know, it is hilarious. Or it would be if so many people hadn’t bought this total BS.

    And in direct contradiction to what the candidate said, here are some particulars of Obama the president’s sycophants:

    Telecom executive Donald H. Gips raised a big bundle of cash to help finance his friend Barack Obama’s run for the presidency.
    Gips, a vice president of Colorado-based Level 3 Communications, delivered more than $500,000 in contributions for the Obama war chest, while two other company executives collected at least $150,000 more.

    After the election, Gips was put in charge of hiring in the Obama White House, helping to place loyalists and fundraisers in many key positions. Then, in mid-2009, Obama named him ambassador to South Africa. Meanwhile, Level 3 Communications, in which Gips retained stock, received millions of dollars of government stimulus contracts for broadband projects in six states — though Gips said he had been “completely unaware” that the company had received the contracts.

    […]

    • Overall, 184 of 556, or about one-third of Obama bundlers or their spouses joined the administration in some role. But the percentages are much higher for the big-dollar bundlers. Nearly 80 percent of those who collected more than $500,000 for Obama took “key administration posts,” as defined by the White House. More than half the 24 ambassador nominees who were bundlers raised $500,000.

    • The big bundlers had broad access to the White House for meetings with top administration officials and glitzy social events. In all, campaign bundlers and their family members account for more than 3,000 White House meetings and visits. Half of them raised $200,000 or more.

    • Some Obama bundlers have ties to companies that stand to gain financially from the president’s policy agenda, particularly in clean energy and telecommunications, and some already have done so. Level 3 Communications, for instance, snared $13.8 million in stimulus money.[snip]

    The last one is particularly troublesome to me. I thought the nation generally frowned upon companies having inside tracks to getting our hard earned, tax paying dollars. I dunno about you, but for Level 3 to get that kind of cold, hard cash from the stimulus sounds like payback to me. (You know, the $3 Trillion stimulus that Obama thought was a joking matter the other day? When he flippantly, arrogantly, joked there weren’t as many shovel ready jobs as they thought, that one? What a piece of work. It is not a laughing matter to most of us, President Obama.)

    Oh, but wait – there is more:

    [snip] The appointment of George Washington University law professor Spencer Overton illustrates how the administration has rewarded many top fundraisers.
    Overton wrote in 2003 that the influence big donors wield in elections means that an “overwhelming majority of citizens are effectively excluded from an important stage of the political process.” Yet Overton bundled at least $500,000 for Obama. He was named to the Obama transition team and in February 2009 was appointed principal deputy attorney general in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy. Overton visited the White House more than 80 times from January 2009 through the end of 2010 for events ranging from small meetings with high-level staffers to social and entertainment events, sometimes with his wife, records show. Overton resigned the $180,000-a-year job in July 2010. He declined to comment for this story.

    Overton is one of seven campaign bundlers who took jobs at Justice, including Attorney General Eric Holder, who was a $50,000 bundler. Holder had been deputy attorney general in the administration of President Bill Clinton. [snip]

    Just to be clear, here is the problem with “bundling” contributions:

    [snip] Bundling is controversial because it permits campaigns to skirt individual contribution limits of $2,500 in federal elections. Bundlers pool donations from fundraising networks and, as a result, “play an enormous role in determining the success of political campaigns,” according to government watchdog Public Citizen. [snip]
    Yes, that would be a bit of a problem. And it also helps explain how someone who has made such a mess of the DOJ got his position. Of course, I am referring to Eric Holder, who has been just a disaster in upholding federal law (the examples are too numerous to mention here, but the dismissal of the clear cut voter intimidation by the New Black Panthers case is the tip of the iceberg).

    There is so much more to this story I cannot possibly recount it all here, so I urge you to read it all. It goes into more detail about those who got these positions, but I have to leave you with one more example:

    [snip] In March 2009, Obama appointed $500,000 bundler and law school pal Julius Genachowski to chair the Federal Communications Commission, an independent agency. Two other bundlers at the FCC are chief of staff Edward Lazarus, a litigator and former federal prosecutor, and William T. Lake, a lawyer specializing in communications and e-commerce issues who serves as chief of the media bureau.
    Genachowski had previously served as chief counsel to the FCC chairman in the 1990s, but his close ties to Obama have raised eyebrows. He has turned up so often at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. that in March, congressional Republicans demanded an accounting of whom he has met with and what was discussed. [snip] (Click here to read the rest.)

    You know someone is spending a lot of time at the White House when US Representatives are demanding to know just what the hell they are doing there all of the time.

    Ah, yes – the only thing transparent about Obama is how much “change” he is getting from his bundlers. I mean, members of his Administration. Heaven knows, they siphoned a whole boatload of it into his coffers. He is returning the favor with OUR change.

    That is the kind of change I can do without.

  168. Southern Born
    June 15th, 2011 at 10:35 pm
    S, I haven’t been home long and am just now reading up thread. I’m SO sorry to hear about your beloved cat. Some pets are just extra special.

    We have three wonderful, much loved cats presently but have lost some over the years. It hurts so badly.

    You are in my thoughts
    ***************************************************

    Thank you Southern Born…i feel so bad for my other one…she is looking all over for her best friend…they were always together…almost as if in unison…so cute…

  169. On WND

    Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, the chief of Stand Up America, a national security expert and Fox News contributor, says the “Certificate of Live Birth” released in April by the White House as “proof positive” of President Obama’s Hawaiian birth is a forgery, but the FBI is covering the fraud and no one in Congress is willing to tackle the situation because of fears of a “black backlash” if the failings of the nation’s first black president are revealed.

    In an interview today with Greg Corombos for WND, Vallely, who previously has expressed concerns about whether the Obama administration is in violation of the U.S. Constitution, said, “His actual birth certificate has never been found in Hawaii nor released from Hawaii hospital there, Kapiolani hospital there, if it in fact did exist.”

    “We’ve had three CIA agents, retired, and some of their analytical associates look at it, and all came to the same conclusion, that even the long-form was a forged document,” Vallely said.

    “No members of Congress will take this on. The word I get out of Washington is that they don’t want to challenge this because it would be in fact a felony offense and in some cases may be even treasonous and [they are] afraid of a black backlash from some of the urban areas,” Vallely said.

    Read more: Ex-CIA: ‘Forged document’ released as birth certificate http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=311433#ixzz1PSaGA8f1

  170. holdthemaccountable
    June 16th, 2011 at 6:18 am
    ________________

    One thing I loved about that video hta- is the Ben and Jerry’s commercial- 🙂

    It’s unfortunate Diane Sawyer is lumped in with Jake Tapper in that article. It would take looking at them through a jaundiced eye as to their usual content motivations and their individual styles of reporting as seeing anything about them together as symmetry.

    I can see Sawyer’s attraction to that article reporting the facts where she is basically reporting statistical findings making the comparison to Ford.

    Tapper’s presence in the article on the other hand seems to be revelatory in that his customary job has been as a spin master for the Obama administration, explaining away Obama’s missteps.

    But in this case, the use of Tapper’s video is a breath of fresh air. A welcome departure from his usual mo of plying cover for Obama’s mistakes.

    Tapper’s video is a short clip demonstrating Obama’s inability to adhere to a vision he painted for his audience when he declared his candidacy on the court house steps in Springfield, Illinois.

    (This should help jog people’s memory when they were listening to Obama’s original platform of rosy promises and asking for their help and support for accomplishing this task and of course their financial support.)

    As we have since realized, Obama was never bashful about using Lincolnesqe props as the backdrop for his proposed leadership transforming the country from the corrupt business as usual in DC. to a homogenized Lincoln like setting where all people are viewed as equals in this country. Going on promising everyone in attendance, his priority as president would be cleaning up a corrupt Washington establishment transforming it to a government not for the special interests but for the benefit of the people.

    The full video is even more enlightening illustrating how far Obama has fallen away from the America he promised to deliver.

    full video if you dare:

  171. “but the FBI is covering the fraud and no one in Congress is willing to tackle the situation because of fears of a “black backlash” if the failings of the nation’s first black president are revealed.”
    _________________

    Lieberman said the same thing to Gore when the Bush v Gore case went to court and the court found in Bushes favor. Lieberman said: “Al if you appeal this, there will be blood in the streets!”– and of course, Gore is not an attorney and didn’t want blood on his hands. He gave up!

    How long are Americans going to tolerate being ruled by fear?

  172. Mrs. S –
    How long are Americans going to tolerate being ruled by fear?

    ——–
    What a travesty if this is true. People that are privy to this must be getting something on the down low to keep quiet, or they are afraid of what may happen to them?

    Where the Hell is the Insider with more news????????

  173. Gov. Brown vetoes Democratic budget bill, restarting negotiations over Calif. tax increases.

  174. Now right wing blogs are saying why is Weiner being removed from office by the Dems for sexting, but Clinton who had oral sex in the WH was defended by the Dems.

    Pathetic, both the Repubs and today’s Democrats.

  175. yes JanH…and why is it not being covered as a “racist” statement which is the case anytime Israel is mentioned?

  176. S just went through in the last year or two. Lost a twenty year old cat. Then a friend lot one of a pair, but was afraid of bring a young one in. So we took the old cat, and she got two kitties. That worked fine. Then I found a 2 month old kitty in the park and took him home. He has rejuvenated the older cat and is alittle dickens. However, they decided they will live together.

    I feel sorry for the older cat, but he has lost a little weight, which I think is good for him. Plus having someone of his specie around, I would hope they can communicate. I of course can only guess at what is going on.

  177. I wonder what Washington,Lincoln and Jefferson think about what is going on. As I like to remind people, over half of those that signed the constitution, ended up suffering a lot for it. Those mention did not die with any more money than they had, and Jefferson had to sell his library to the libray of congresss to keep going.

    That we would be upset about what people think, defies me. Our Forefathers gave almost everything they had, which also resulted in riots in the streets, to give us a Democracy. However, we are afraid of enforcing a Democracy. Our Politics fail us every time. I have lost all respect for them.

    I really think we need to vote in people that understand about telling the truth, even when it hurts, but we don’t seem to care about that. To me, you cannot base a Democracy on anything but Truth.

    This group would not know the truth if it smacked them in the face, Unfortunately. That they are afraid of telling the truth, because of the consequences, just seems really undemocratic. But then we lot our Democracy in 2000.

    But you are right we have become a Democracy that is afraid to enforce the Democracy.

  178. moononpluto
    June 16th, 2011 at 1:42 pm

    Gov. Brown vetoes Democratic budget bill, restarting negotiations over Calif. tax increases.
    ——
    Good to know, thanks Moon.
    They passed the budget, on time…….because they would not get paid while it was delayed. So they just passed anything and signed it…just like Nasty, Reid and Barry did.

  179. In the 20th century, that is exactly what America did. Politically, it led in two world wars so that others could be free.

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

    LOL! Led? It took Pearl Harbor to get us into WWII, and we were also late getting into WWI.

    Leading from behind is an old US tradition.

  180. Oops…perhaps Weiner really shouldn’t have given props to his father and mother who gave him the values that took him this far.

    Poor parents.

  181. [Weiner] went against Obama on several issues….you can’t talk back to the boy king and get away with it…

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

    And he’s an ally of Hillary. Can’t have that.

  182. Anyway time to draw a mark under it, Weiner paid the price for his stupidity, lets leave him alone now to make his amends with his wife and family, if he can. He has to handle and take responsibility for his actions now.

  183. I hope Jerry Brown keeps on this track…

    California Gov. Jerry Brown has vetoed the budget package passed Wednesday by Democratic legislators, sources say, which creates a potential rift within his own party.

    [Updated at 10:42 a.m., June 16: Brown announced the veto in a press release Thursday. “Unfortunately, the budget I have received is not a balanced solution,” his statement said. “It continues big deficits for years to come and adds billions of dollars of new debt. It also contains legally questionable maneuvers, costly borrowing and unrealistic savings. Finally, it is not financeable and therefore will not allow us to meet our obligations as they occur.”

    The plan contains higher taxes, billions of dollars in delayed payments to schools, and various accounting maneuvers to balance the books. Brown had previously warned that he would not sign a budget containing such accounting gimmicks.

    Democratic leaders in the Assembly and Senate said the plan they passed Wednesday was crafted without input from the administration.

    It is unclear whether state lawmakers will receive their paychecks in the wake of the veto. Under a law passed by voters last year, legislators lose pay if they fail to send the governor a budget by June 15. Lawmakers said Wednesday they believe the budget they passed meets that test, but Controller John Chiang, California’s chief financial officer, will decide whether to issue their paychecks.

    Senate Republicans had been negotiating with Brown on his preferred plan, which would include a fall election on higher taxes. They want pension changes and a limit on future state spending in return for their support, and Brown has said he is willing to go along. But the Republicans say they have not met with the governor for more than a week.

  184. Shadow, not been keeping up with it but what sort of mess is Cali in at the moment, is it mega?

  185. moononpluto
    June 16th, 2011 at 2:48 pm

    Anyway time to draw a mark under it, Weiner paid the price for his stupidity, lets leave him alone now to make his amends with his wife and family, if he can. He has to handle and take responsibility for his actions now.

    ——-
    Yup.
    He has a child on the way and a successful wife, time to get his $hit together.

  186. Shadowfax
    June 16th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
    On WND

    “We’ve had three CIA agents, retired, and some of their analytical associates look at it, and all came to the same conclusion, that even the long-form was a forged document,” Vallely said.

    “No members of Congress will take this on. The word I get out of Washington is that they don’t want to challenge this because it would be in fact a felony offense and in some cases may be even treasonous and [they are] afraid of a black backlash from some of the urban areas,” Vallely said.
    &&&&&&&&

    So the Constitution can be held hostage by a group that threatens violence?

    Or just the threat that a group might start riots and mayhem is reason to appease them?

    What kind of precidence does this set?

  187. moononpluto
    June 16th, 2011 at 2:50 pm

    Shadow, not been keeping up with it but what sort of mess is Cali in at the moment, is it mega?
    ——-
    Yea, it’s been a financial problem for awhile, starting with Raygun. (Comes to mind he saved money by closing a lot of mental facilities, so all these folks live on the streets. He butchered public education…etc.)

    I think one of the problems is the desire to live in a clean environment, (Think of Los Angeles smog…really bad in the seventies and forward), and putting so many restrictions on industry for clean air that it drove out a lot of manufacturing jobs. Bad economy, the high tech jobs are okay, Apple, Google, etc. are thriving…

    Meg Whitman wanted to end that, make it more like Texas for industry, but folks…including me, want to keep the natural and healthy beauty where we live and raise our kids.

    Then you have all the crackpot progressives, think of Nasty’s followers, that want to save every rat, beetle and endangered critter that goes off the rails of reality.

    Then you also have the a-holes in CA congress that love to spend tax payer money like it’s theirs.

    Then you have the housing crisis…

    Along with all the crap Barry has done has made it worse.

    I still have my job…waiting for another axe to fall, duck and cover. Work hard, never give up.

    I could move out, taxes are one of the highest, but I have to admit, I would rather live in an apartment in California or Hawaii (I went to college there) then any other state in the country, even if I could have home of my own.

    I think a lot of Californian’s feel this way. We love the beauty of our state, that’s why we live here.

    Are we practical enough…nope. That’s why we have to cut more and I am glad Brown is trying.

  188. HECKUVA JOB, OBAMBI

    Another example of “leading from behind”???

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/are-we-stumbling-into-another-recession/2011/06/15/AGPIX3VH_blog.html

    Posted at 12:01 PM ET, 06/15/2011
    Are we stumbling into another recession?
    ===============================

    By Robert J. Samuelson

    It’s not just history buffs who now study the 1937-38 recession. The question is: Are we stumbling into a similar downturn?

    Called “the Roosevelt Recession,” the 1937-38 slump interrupted recovery from the Great Depression. It was “a depression within a depression,” writes Stanford University historian David Kennedy in his Pulitzer Prize-winning “Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945.” Unemployment rose from a monthly low of 11 percent in 1937 to 20 percent. The economy’s output (gross national product) fell 18 percent; industrial production dropped 32 percent.

    There are eerie parallels between now and then. Then as now, commodity prices (grains, minerals) were rising rapidly; fears of inflation grew. Then as now, the federal budget deficit was criticized as too large. Then as now, the president was widely perceived as being anti-business.

    What caused the recession? President Franklin Roosevelt blamed a “capital strike” by monopolistic companies determined to weaken him. As Kennedy notes, “net new private investment in the mid-1930s was running at only about one-third of its rate of a decade earlier.” Roosevelt responded by creating a presidential task force to investigate monopoly power.

    For their part, business leaders blamed Roosevelt for poisoning the economic climate. Said one: “Uncertainty rules the tax situation, the labor situation, the monetary situation, and practically every legal condition under which industry must operate.”

    In reality, the recession’s main causes transcended the bad blood between Roosevelt and business. In late 1936 and 1937, both monetary policy (credit conditions, managed by the Federal Reserve) and fiscal policy (the federal budget, managed by the White House and Congress) were tightened.

    First: monetary policy. Since 1934, gold inflows from abroad had boosted money and credit. Gold was converted into dollars supplied by the Treasury. In late 1936, the Fed and the Treasury — worried that higher commodity prices signaled general inflation — decided to “sterilize” the gold inflows through the sale of Treasury securities, which would soak up the extra dollars. The Fed also doubled required bank reserves (the money banks had to keep on hand) between August 1936 and May 1937. Both moves restricted money and credit. Bank lending fell 7.5 percent in the year ending June 1938.

    Second: fiscal policy. In 1936, Congress approved, over Roosevelt’s veto, a bonus for World War I veterans, and the federal deficit ballooned to $4.3 billion. In a then-$79 billion economy, that was historically huge. The situation reversed dramatically the next year. Social Security payroll taxes started, but not benefits; meanwhile, Roosevelt — always a supporter of balanced budgets — endorsed spending cuts and a tax on undistributed corporate profits. By 1938, the deficit had virtually disappeared.

    So government blundered into recession. Could it happen again? Economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has argued (in a June 2 column) that, in part, it already has. Concern over the deficit, he contended, made the 2009 “stimulus” package too small. Any new deficit-reduction efforts “will put a further drag on an already weak economy.”

    But there are also big differences between now and then. The most obvious is that the policy reversals in 1937-38 dwarfed anything now being contemplated. From 1936 to 1938, the federal deficit fell from 5.5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) to 0.1 percent — a huge swing especially when the economy was tanking. By contrast, today’s budget deficits are much larger as a share of GDP, and prospective reductions are much smaller.

    Here are the Congressional Budget Office’s latest deficit estimates for the Obama budget: 8.9 percent of GDP in 2010, 9.5 percent in 2011 and 7.4 percent in 2012. Moreover, some of the 2012 drop assumes an improving economy, which raises tax revenues and reduces spending on unemployment benefits, food stamps and the like.

    Similar caveats apply to Fed policy. Nothing like the 1936-37 doubling of reserve requirements is in the works. True, the Fed’s so-called QE2 (the purchase of $600 billion in Treasury bonds) is ending. But Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has repeatedly said that he expects low interest rates to continue for many, many months. Moreover, he has — so far — dismissed high prices for oil and other commodities as either temporary or the result of supply-demand imbalances. He doesn’t expect them to lead to higher, general inflation warranting tighter money.

    Still, the parallels are unsettling, because government officials then didn’t intend to trigger a slump. As their errors became clear, policies changed. The sterilization of gold inflows ended. Despite favoring balanced budgets, Roosevelt pragmatically shifted to higher spending and repealed the profits tax. By 1939, the budget deficit exceeded 3 percent of GDP. The investigation of monopolistic companies did not corroborate Roosevelt’s theory of a “capital strike,” historian Kennedy notes. And World War II ended the Depression for good.

  189. rgb44hrc

    So the Constitution can be held hostage by a group that threatens violence?

    Or just the threat that a group might start riots and mayhem is reason to appease them?

    What kind of precidence does this set?
    ——–

    Didn’t they use this same threat as to why there should be no roll call for Hillary on the floor of the convention?
    The natives would get restless and burn down the country?

    Wasn’t this a similar situation in Germany when some of the people found out what Hiltler was going to do/ was doing? At least their threat was REAL.

    I am glad there are so many people trying to do something about this…it is a travesty.

  190. ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) – 5.2 Powerful earthquake jolts Alaska’s largest city; no immediate reports of damage, injuries

  191. moononpluto
    June 16th, 2011 at 3:12 pm

    Thanks Shadow, sounds like a real big mix of differences about what people want.
    ———-
    Yup, like herding cats. 😉

  192. This is from the Los Angeles Ubama Times:

    —–

    A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll is the latest to show that the boost President Obama received following the death of Osama bin Laden was short-lived, and that both Democrats and Republicans have reason to be anxious about the 2012 campaign.

    The survey, conducted from June 9 through Monday, shows that Obama’s approval rating now stands at 49%, down from 52% since last month and even with where he tested before Bin Laden was killed.

    That rating is actually rather strong considering that only 29% of respondents feel that the nation is heading in the right direction, and 62% say it’s on the wrong track. Obama does get a poorer grade for his handling of the economy: Just 41% approve. That figure actually improved since May, but it’s still his second-lowest showing on that question.

    Looking ahead to the 2012 campaign, the survey asked all respondents if they would vote for Obama or a Republican candidate. Forty-five percent said they’d probably vote for the president — unchanged since May — while 40% said they’d probably vote for the Republican, a 10-point jump.

    For Republicans, there is still uncertainty about their field of candidates. Forty-five percent say they are satisfied with the announced candidates, with just as many dissatisfied. Four years ago nearly three in four Republicans were happy with the roster of candidates.

    That sentiment is reflected in the national horse race of Republican candidates. Two of the top four Republicans — Sarah Palin and Rick Perry — have not taken any formal steps toward running.

    Romney is the clear front-runner with 30% support among registered Republican voters, followed by Palin at 14% and Herman Cain at 12%. Ron Paul (7%), Newt Gingrich (6%), Tim Pawlenty (4%), Rick Santorum (4%) and Michele Bachmann (3%) round out the field.

    With Palin, Perry and Cain removed from the list of choices, Romney’s lead jumps to 43%, followed by Paul and Bachmann at 11%.

    In a hypothetical Obama-Romney matchup, Obama leads 49-43. Obama would lead Pawlenty 50-37.

    Generally, an incumbent who is below 50% in either approval rating or in head-to-head matchups is considered vulnerable — meaning Obama is just barely treading water at this point.

  193. ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) – 5.2 Powerful earthquake jolts Alaska’s largest city; no immediate reports of damage, injuries

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

    Must be Palin’s fault.

  194. turndownobama
    June 16th, 2011 at 3:41 pm
    ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) – 5.2 Powerful earthquake jolts Alaska’s largest city; no immediate reports of damage, injuries

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

    Must be Palin’s fault.
    &&&&&&&&

    Obviously. Whatta bee-otch!

    The only reason that it wasn’t worse was because of the Savior in the White House!

  195. THE VULTURES ARE CIRCLING…

    Looking at Real Clear Politics, sheesh, even the Bots are starting to get glum about Ubama’s re-election chances.

    http://www.gq.com/news-politics/politics/201107/mark-penn-interview-gq-july-2011?printable=true

    Yes! You! Can! (Defeat Obama, That Is)
    ==================================
    Seven ways he could still blow this
    by Lisa DePaulo

    If there’s anyone who knows that nothing is a slam dunk in politics, it’s Mark Penn. (Remember President Hillary Clinton?) The chief adviser to Hillary and Bill understands a thing or two about winning, losing, and Obama. Here he explains to GQ’s Lisa DePaulo how Obama could still end up out of a job next fall.

    ···

    1. He Takes Another Big Risk—and Flops
    “Obviously, he took the biggest risk of his presidency with the Osama operation. He took a huge risk and it completely paid off. He was right. But watch out now for the over-confidence that comes with success. Don’t try this again with Mullah Omar, the head of the Taliban. It’s a common thing for presidents to do, particularly on the basis of a risky success. They think, “Well, that went great, let’s try something like that again.” The next risky mission could end up being a disaster that will be very difficult for his presidency to recover from. I sometimes think Bush got into Iraq because the original Afghanistan mission seemed to go so easily. It was won in two weeks, with very few troops involved. I think that led to a notion that he could have equally quick success in Iraq. Instead he wound up with something that defined the rest of his presidency. See, presidents often have two modes. One is: ‘Hunker down, we gotta be careful.’ And the other is: ‘Things are great, don’t worry about it.’ It’s when they get in that second mode that mistakes happen.”

    2. He Thumps His Chest Too Much About Bin Laden
    “He’s already mentioning it in speeches, and he has to stop. Never ever put the Osama mission in political terms. People are going to want him to put this in ads. Don’t. Everybody knows he did a great job! This was a different kind of thing for sure, but after impeachment was over, Joe Lockhart had this great phrase: ‘We’re in a gloat-free zone.’ The president’s gotta stay in a gloat-free zone.”

    3. He Makes a Bush 41 Blunder on the Economy
    “Obama no longer has national security as a deficit. He’s answered the 3 a.m. call. But health care is still a vulnerability. The deficit is a huge vulnerability. Unemployment is a huge vulnerability. The whole economy is a huge vulnerability. If he doesn’t get re-elected, it will be because someone really taps into one or more of those four vulnerabilities. And there are still questions about how in touch he is with people out in the heartland. After the Gulf War, I don’t think Bush 41 got cocky. He just wasn’t mindful of the economy, and then he had the moment with the supermarket scanner. You always watch out for that moment that symbolizes what might be a negative in the back of everyone’s brain. So for Obama, this is not the time for another Broadway date. And the period between now and the election is a Martha’s Vineyard–free zone.”

    4. He Ignores a Big Chunk of His Constituency
    “Obama has more support from those making over $200,000 than any Democrat in history. So when he makes the fight about the Bush tax cuts for upper income voters, well, he has nearly as many upper income voters as the Republicans! Which is one of the reasons why, when he didn’t agree to the tax-cut deal, the congressional elections turned out so badly. Then, after the election, when he agreed to the deal, his numbers soared. Now he is saying, once again, that one of his priorities is to raise taxes on “that group.” “That group” is his voters! Believe it or not, those are his people. It used to be that upper income voters were 3-to-1 or 4-to-1 for the Republicans. Obama does best with people who make the least and people who make the most. So if he returns to the class warfare rhetoric of the budget fight, he is going to be recreating the midterms. And that kind of election is a loser for him.”

    5. He Acts Like a Presidential Candidate Instead of a President
    “Which he’s doing already, and that’s a mistake. In the beginning of his presidency, he got overexposed. The tendency was—and still is—to throw him out there, for an intensive series of interviews. And I think he got overexposed. He does not want to be overexposed now. He has to be careful. One of the big pitfalls that’s already happening here is that he’s now making himself a presidential candidate again instead of a president.”

    6. Shit Happens
    “Five-dollar-a-gallon gas. Continually plunging real estate prices. More bank defaults. If any of these things happen, it’d be seen as Obama not handling it. He owns all of this now.”

    7. A Sex Scandal
    “I certainly doubt it with this president. But hey, even Al Gore wound up in one.”

  196. Re info I provided earlier today (6:18 am), the in-depth enhancement provided by wbboei & Mrs. Smith is valuable and appreciated. Thank you. I accepted the dare to watch Obama’s Presidential announcement, but stayed with it just 3 minutes. Upon further reflection, I believe that video should be required viewing for anyone planning to vote for him this time around. 🙂

  197. Wed Jun 15, 1:41 pm ET
    Daniel Ellsberg, other whistleblowers want Obama’s ‘transparency award’ rescinded
    By Dylan Stablefo

    A large group of noted whistleblowers–including Daniel Ellsberg, the leaker of the Pentagon Papers–has written an open letter asking that the “transparency award” given to President Obama by five open government organizations in March be rescinded.

    In the letter, published in the UK Guardian, the group of 50 individuals and watchdog organizations called the Obama administration’s record on secrecy and surveillance “a disgrace.”

    The group claims that petitioners have filed more Freedom of Information Act requests made during Obama’s first term–with fewer responses–than have been logged in previous years; that the administration has squashed “legal inquiries into secret illegalities more often than any predecessor” and “amassed the worst record in U.S. history for persecuting, prosecuting and jailing government whistleblowers and truth-tellers,” including WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning. The letter also notes that the White House has refused to make its visitor logs public, while overseeing a 15 percent spike last year in budgetary outlays for classifying secrets. The Obama administration has spent $10 billion in enforcing secrecy protocols, the letter notes–the first time any White House has eclipsed that mark.”Obama’s department of justice is twisting the 1917 Espionage Act to press criminal charges in five alleged instances of national security leaks,” the letter reads, “more such prosecutions than have occurred in all previous administrations combined.”

    The president “has set a powerful and chilling example for potential whistleblowers through the abuse and torture of Bradley Manning.”

    And:

    President Obama has initiated a secret assassination programme, has publicly announced that he has given himself the power to include Americans on the list of people to be assassinated, and has attempted to assassinate at least one, Anwar al-Awlaki.

    President Obama has maintained the power to secretly kidnap, imprison, rendition, or torture, and he has formalised the power to lawlessly imprison in an executive order. This also means the power to secretly imprison. There are some 1,700 prisoners outside the rule of law in Bagram alone.

    The Obama administration is also busy going after reporters to discover their sources and convening grand juries in order to target journalists and news publishers.

    One such case—the subpoena of author and former New York Times reporter James Risen involving a CIA leak—is still pending.

    “Ironically—and quite likely in response to growing public criticism regarding the Obama administration’s lack of transparency—heads of the five organizations gave their award to Obama in a closed, undisclosed meeting at the White House,” the letter adds. “If the ceremony had been open to the press, it is likely that reporters would have questioned the organizations’ proffered justification for the award, in contrast to the current reality.”

  198. I think this has already been posted by JanH, but there is a beautiful photo of Hillary on this page:
    —–
    Hillary Clinton Inherits Iraq

    The U.S. State Department will soon take control in Iraq. What that means is anyone’s guess.

    The U.S. military is scheduled to pull out of Iraq by year’s end, and responsibility for the U.S.’s operations there will shift from the Pentagon to the State Department. Is this a sign of a renewed focus on diplomacy, rather than warfare, in U.S. foreign policy? Or will it be business as usual, but under new management?

    THE MARK: From your perspective, how has the State Department changed under Hillary Clinton?

    http://www.themarknews.com/articles/5633-hillary-clinton-inherits-iraq

  199. rgb44hrc@4:04 PM

    The obvious number 8:

    8. On election day, loses swing states won in 2008, already showing high disapproval due to economy and, ultimately, the electoral college vote.

    That’s the way he WILL blow it; the rest is fluff stuff. Out-of-workers don’t care about OBL or Mullah Omar.

  200. SECY CLINTON WARNS AFRICA & FINALLY SOMEONE REALIZES ITS HILLARY BRINGING CHANGE TO THE MIDDLE EAST

  201. Well I can’t believe Weenie quit….no guts…no glory!

    Well maybe it was affecting Huma’s pregnancy…in that case I’ll give him a break….but I like Hillary’s stance…you never quit….you regroup and hit from behind….LOL!

    Hillary is the best!

  202. Confloyd

    Huma has been with Hillary in Africa and I am sure she had gotten advice from Hillary. Weiner called and talked to the Big Dawg.

    My guess is after Weiner talked to his wife that had just returned from traveling, the advice he got from the Clinton’s may have been to not go down kicking and screaming. To try and bow out gracefully, seek some professional help and later to enter public service again in the future…maybe in a different capacity.

    Bill did not retire on his ranch after his second term.
    Hillary did not retire after being stabbed in the back by her party.

  203. I am so glad Huma didn’t stand beside her husband for the press conference….I mean that is so humiliating…and of coarse all those rethugs make their wives do it….

    He got himself into the mess…why should she stand by him while he quits…

    I sure the Clinton’s will find something for him to do..wonder if there’s a divorce on the horizon??

  204. Weiner has now resigned. Unless under further scrutiny it shows that he misused his legislative privileges to a further degree than already revealed, then as far as I am concerned whatever takes place between him and his family is their business alone.

    I hope he gets the help he needs and I wish the family well and as much privacy as they can get.

    The media needs to back off and shut up. Just once maybe they can do the right thing and report the nation’s business that is relevant.

  205. Hey, confloyd:

    “My Name is Earl.” (Shhh)

    Isn’t that a tv show?
    _____________________

    Shadow-

    Look what I found:

    The Ulsterman Report: ” a Colossal Failure of Leadership”

    Second Project Gunrunner hearing condemns Barack Obama’s Department of Justice, high ranking ATF officials, and demands “all those involved in Project Gunrunner that facilitated the death of Brian Terry be prosecuted.” Contempt charges against Obama officials possibly soon to follow.

    Border agent Brian Terry died upon the dirt of the U.S. Mexican border, fatally wounded by weapons knowingly allowed by the American government to enter into the hands of drug cartel criminals. On Wednesday, June 15th, the story of Brian Terry was told by his fellow border agents and family members to members of Congress. The testimony was both stunning in its emotion, and damning in its condemnation of an ill-conceived government program and failure of an Obama Department of Justice that put border agents and citizens in direct danger on both sides of the border.

    The testimony of Agent Peter Forcelli was particularly damaging to ATF supervisors and the Obama Department of Justice. With determined directness, Agent Forcelli created a clear depiction of a government-sponsored Gunrunner plan gone horribly wrong, proving ultimately fatal to those whose duty it is to protectthe American border. It was no accident then when Democratic Party participants of the Congressional hearing directed the brunt of their own questions againstAgent Forcelli. Agent Forcelli in turn remained resolute in his determination to lay blame where it belonged – with ATF and Obama Department of Justice officials. Agent Terry and others repeatedly expressed confusion and outrage over a plan that allowed guns to be sent to known criminals – a plan that ignored the concerns of borderagents and state law enforcement officials. A plan that, according to ATF agent Olinda Casa, required agents to “stand down” and not arrest known criminals purchasing weapons. A plan that saw agents who raised concerns over law enforcement officials and citizens being put at direct risk due to those allowed gun sales being disciplined for doing so. A plan that saw little interest in oversight by theDepartment of Justice. A plan that even as border agents and private citizens were murdered, saw little significant and related legal prosecution. And now a plan that continues to receive defense by Democratic Party members such as Representative Elijah Cummings, who worried that open discussion of the failures of Project Gunrunner might somehow endanger future prosecutions involved in the case. Congressman Cummings persisted in this defense of a continued cover-up even as the borderagents’ testimony made clear that the Obama Department of Justice had shown little interest in attempting to prosecute anyone involved in the operation.

    Agent Peter Focelli perhaps summed up the Gunrunner scandal by describing the failed policy as “A colossal failure of leadership.” This failure of leadership directly led to the death of border agent Brian Terry, and hundreds more across the Mexican border. Roberty Heyer, who is both the cousin of Brian Terry, as well as a current member of the Secret Service, pleaded with members of Congress to help ensure that “all those involved in Project Gunrunner that facilitated the death of Brian Terry be prosecuted.” Agent Heyer had also earlier indicated his concern that FBI officials appeared “hesitant” to involve themselves in the still ongoing Gunrunner investigation.

    Ronald Weich, Assistant Attorney General at the Obama Department of Justice, was the final witness at Wednesday’s hearing. Weich represents at present the strongest link between the Gunrunner scandal and the Obama administration. In his introduction, Weich indicated the DOJ was in fact cooperating with the Congressional committee, while simultaneously indicating the DOJ would be unable to fully cooperate with the Congressional committee, a statement that clearly left Congressman Issa and others both perplexed and angry. Representative Issa ripped into Assistant Attorney General Weich, admonishing Mr. Weich for his declaration of cooperation. Issa went on to accuse both Mr. Weich and “the executive branch” of dismissing repeated Congressional requests for information – as well as wanting to know how high up the authorization for Project Gunrunner went. Several times Congressman Issa demanded of Mr. Weich – “Who knew?” Assistant Attorney General Weich refused to answer, indicating an “ongoing” internal investigation was underway. It is interesting to note that the response by Mr. Weich is an updated version of executive privilege utilized by the Nixon administration during Watergate. Upon questioning by Republican Congressman James Lankfield, Assistant Attorney General Weich was then caught in a clear contradiction of earlier statements where he indicated no illegal guns were knowingly crossing into Mexico. The testimony of border agents that same morning made clear such gun crossing was both known and happening to such an extent it represented thousands of such weapons -weapons used to murder border agents and citizens.

    Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz then aggressively challenged Mr. Weich on whether or not Attorney General Eric Holder was aware of the Gunrunner Project – and later more involved in an apparent cover-up. Congressman Chaffetz also indicated potential involvement of President Barack Obama himself when declaring, “The administration knew” while also questioning “has someone willfully and knowingly lied to Congress?” Congresswoman Ann Marie Buerkle later indicated to Mr. Weich regarding the Obama Justice Department’s unwillingness to fully cooperate with the Congressional investigation of Project Gunrunner, “We have been stonewalled.”

    In an interview with FOX News earlier Wednesday morning, Republican Senator Charles Grassley, speaking to the Fast and Furious/Gunrunner scandal, remarked with certainty, “Heads need to roll.” Senator Grassley’s comments mirrored those of Congressman Issa, who himself declared the Project Gunrunner scandal as “felony stupid“.

    Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz raised the stakes for the Obama White House even further, hinting during an interview a short time after the Congressional hearing concluded that contempt charges against the ObamaDepartment of Justice and high ranking ATF officials were possible. Chaffetz described the Gunrunner scandal as, “…the most serious investigation I’ve ever seen.”

    http://newsflavor.com/opinions/the-ulsterman-report-a-colossal-failure-of-leadership/

  206. Why was he trying to get cash out of a 97 yr old woman?

    John Edwards Sought Millions From Heiress as Feds Closed In – ABC News Exclusive

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/john-edwards-sought-millions-heiress-rachel-bunny-mellon/story?id=13861284

    Just weeks before federal prosecutors charged John Edwards in a six-count felony indictment, ABC News has been told, the two-time Democratic presidential candidate requested millions of dollars from Rachel “Bunny” Mellon, the banking heiress whose financial support of Edwards is at the center of the criminal case.

    One person with knowledge of the request confirmed the amount was in the millions of dollars but was unwilling to discuss why Edwards was seeking the money.

    William Taylor, an attorney for Mellon, declined to address questions from ABC News. A spokesman for Edwards’ legal defense team also refused to comment.

    Edwards’ ongoing relationship with the reclusive Mellon, who will turn 101 years old in August, was being closely monitored by federal authorities as the investigation into alleged violations of campaign finance laws was wrapping up.

    Their concerns were heightened in late April when Mellon dispatched her private jet to a small North Carolina airport to pick up the former senator and members of his legal team. As ABC station WTVD’s helicopter hovered above the airport to capture video of the boarding passengers, Mellon’s pilot paced around the tarmac before eventually taking off again with no one else aboard.

    But a month later, as Edwards’ attorneys were engaged in last-minute negotiations with the Justice Department, ABC News learned, Edwards was visiting Mellon for a private luncheon at her sprawling Virginia estate.

    Taylor, who said he was present for that meeting on May 26, described it to ABC News as a “personal and social” visit and told the Associated Press that “[t]here was no discussion of anything related to [Edwards’] situation” at the luncheon.

    Rachel Mellon was an early supporter of Edwards’ bid for the 2008 Democratic nomination, pouring more than $4 million into political groups and non-profit organizations connected to the Edwards campaign.

    But the government alleges that Mellon also was the principal source of money that enabled Edwards to conceal his affair.

    Identified in the criminal indictment against Edwards only as “Person C,” Mellon provided more than $700,000 that the government alleges were unlawful contributions that went to pay the living and medical expenses of Rielle Hunter while Edwards continued his pursuit of the nomination.

    Another attorney for Mellon, Alex Forger, has said previously that Mellon was unaware of how her money was being used.

    Edwards’ defense team is expected to argue that the money from Mellon was a gift and has blasted the government’s case as “wrong on the facts and wrong on the law.”

    ABC News has been unable to determine if Mellon provided the money allegedly requested recently by Edwards. And since the campaign is now long over, even if such a gift were made, it would not be illegal.

    At a brief appearance in federal court in Winston-Salem earlier this month, Edwards indicated his intent to plead not guilty to all the charges. A trial date has not yet been set.

    One of the conditions of his release from custody was that he have no further direct or indirect contact with Rachel Mellon.

  207. Yes, I saw the Weiner press conference, it was difficult enough for him to resign in a graceful manner, let alone keep his cool while some d!ck yelled out, “…is it really 7 inches?”. Wadda jerk.

  208. Shadowfax
    June 16th, 2011 at 5:56 pm

    Confloyd

    Huma has been with Hillary in Africa and I am sure she had gotten advice from Hillary. Weiner called and talked to the Big Dawg.

    My guess is after Weiner talked to his wife that had just returned from traveling, the advice he got from the Clinton’s may have been to not go down kicking and screaming. To try and bow out gracefully, seek some professional help and later to enter public service again in the future…maybe in a different capacity.
    ______________________

    I agree- now that he resigned there will be peace for Huma, at least publicly..

  209. Idiots must be running Cedar Falls…..no way am i leaving my keys anywhere but with me. Yeah ,lets just leave our keys outside……..

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004119/Iowa-city-tries-force-residents-leave-keys-outside-emergencies.html

    A city in Iowa is asking for a copy of its residents’ keys in case of emergency – and it could soon become a crime not to hand them over.

    A controversial vote to expand a 2004 ordinance in Cedar Falls has sparked outrage among residents, who say it could make them easy targets for crime.

    The new mandate, which can become law with a signature by Mayor Jon Crews, demands master keys be placed outside to apartment complexes with over three units. Opponents say it breaches constitutional rights.

    The earlier mandate demanded apartment complexes with six or more units have safe-like boxes located on the outside of buildings with a master key so fire officials could gain entry during emergencies.

  210. So while this Weiner thing has been sucking up every inch of air in the room, I haven’t seen much coverage of Obama’s looming problem with the gun runner scandal.

  211. Bristol rents out her five-bedroom Arizona home for $1,400-a-month

    By Rachel Quigley

    Want to live in the home of a possible presidential candidate’s daughter and probably the most well-known teenage mother in the U.S.?

    Well for just $1,400-a-month you can.

    Bristol Palin is leaving Arizona for the bright lights of Los Angeles and is renting out her newly purchased Maricopa home.

    you can read more gossip at link:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004101/Bristol-Palin-rents-5-bed-Arizona-home-1-400-month.html

  212. Funny how that works…when Obama is in big trouble someone gets their whole life spread across the pages of the tabloids and on the evening news….funny how that works….

  213. Huh- This news just became available on the wire 2 min ago- Iran Contra 2?
    ______________________

    Holdergate Headway

    “You’ve got people who are dead, you have weapons that are missing and you have an administration that doesn’t seem to want to take any accountability for it.”

    When does a screw-up become a cover-up? As the details concerning operation Fast and Furious unfold, we see sickening similarities with the most infamous of 20th century scandals. Lesser crimes have brought down presidents. The current White House occupant may be plunging in the same direction.

    The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (which sounds like the entertainment committee for a Detroit Democrat fund raiser) launched a spectacularly stupid program to send guns to Mexican drug gangs. The professed purpose was to trace trafficking routes and better understand if and how civilian firearms from America end up in Mexico (despite most drug cartel armament coming from Latin American Cold War surplus). BATFE agents encouraged traffickers to buy firearms at American gun stores, the gun stores were told to allow these suspicious sales, and then the guns flowed over the Rio Grande. Even if this were an intelligent project, the execution left everything to be desired:

    * The Customs department, which regulates exports, was not informed.
    * The Mexican government wasn’t informed.
    * BATFE agents working with Mexican officials were not informed.
    * There were no ground resources in Mexico to track the 2,500 smuggled guns.

    Testimony from whistleblowers within the BATFE indicate that the people who incubated this intrigue knew there would be loss of human life – that the firearms would transfer from the criminals known as smugglers into the hands of criminals known as drug cartel enforcers. BATFE leadership wanted the guns to end up in cartel hands and were “jovial, if not giddy” when the guns were later recovered in Mexico.

    It is unclear if they were equally giddy when a U.S. Border Patrol officer was killed with one.

    Agent Brian Terry died between the cacti in Arizona’s Peck Canyon. He didn’t stand much of a chance, firing bean bags at people he thought were involved with illegal immigrants. Two of the guns recovered at the site of Terry’s termination ended up in criminal hands courtesy of the BATFE project. There is no body count for the number of Mexicans who have been killed with the other 2,499 firearms that were encouraged to emigrate.

    Troubling as this is, the ongoing cover-up is worse.

    The BATFE is within the Justice Department; an inappropriately named agency given its current helmsman Eric Holder. Despite numerous requests for documents related to the BATFE smuggling operation, Holder and his subordinates held out. As with Watergate, Holdergate started with stonewalling, which is obstruction of justice (and if the irony of the Justice Department obstructing justice doesn’t drive you to drink, then you are too sober to even be a judge). Whereas Nixon sought the resignation of people attempting to investigate, Holder is reassigning the staff responsible for executing the ill-conceived idiocy.

    So much for the most transparent administration in American history.

    So, when does a screw-up become a cover-up? Holdergate has already entered that state with delaying tactics. As more whistleblower testimony emerges, the clarity of complicity does as well. Already, both Holder and his boss Obama claim ignorance of the project, just as Nixon originally claimed ignorance about who conducted the Watergate break-in.

    Suspicions are aroused because none of the process makes sense.

    We know from a broad set of data that American guns entering Mexico are not a major factor in drug cartel violence. Yet American and Mexican presidents, as well as a criminally insane senator have gone on record claiming that they do. If there is a perceived problem concerning guns traveling south, then American law enforcement would naturally stop them from crossing the border.

    Which happened in the same way as Obama’s spending stimulated the economy.

    Supervisors in the BATFE ordered multiple agents to “stand down” when they complained about the program (in advance of Brian Terry’s death). Instead of stopping the export and arresting the smugglers in the United States, guns gravitated without any pre-planned means for tracking them and keeping them out of dangerous hands. In the absence of a proactive intervention plan (the MO for most law enforcement) and given obstruction of field agent requests to bust gun smugglers, a different set of priorities appears to be at play. Cynical people suspect that the Obama administration needed to “prove” guns were getting into Mexico because statistics showed otherwise.

    Cynics. Realists. The difference is vague.

    Holder’s ham-handed refusal to proffer information raised even more suspicions. Thus we are going through the maturations of investigation, much as we did during Watergate. Since aiding and abetting criminal activity is a crime all its own, the supervisors who banned busting gun runners and knowingly allowed multiple criminal activities to occur may be guilty of several felonies. Once those decision makers are identified, they will likely be prosecuted, by an independent council if necessary. Since no cop (or what the BATFE purports to be police) wants to be in the same prison as the people they arrested, these supervisors will buckle and drop dimes on everyone above who ordered the inane program. If anyone pegs Holder or Obama as instigators, the outcome will make Watergate look like a youthful indiscretion.

    Nobody died during the break-in at the Watergate hotel.

    Brian Terry wasn’t as lucky.

    http://www.guysmith.org/blog/2011/06/15/holdergate-headway/

  214. Mrs. Smith
    June 16th, 2011 at 6:52 pm

    re: Ulstermann article you posted…

    ******************************************************

    every single republican candidate should be making this information known every chance they get…screaming it from the tallest trees…

    *********

    what a bunch of corrupt and stupid dummies running the ever distracted O admin…
    wonder how much money they got for those guns and just where that money ended up…

    this is essentially treasonus…

  215. S,
    I, too, am saddened by your loss of your kitty. I know how important cats are in one’s life as I have three, and have lost many throughout the years. It is never easy. Take care of yourself during this time.

  216. S
    June 16th, 2011 at 7:58 pm
    _______________

    My first instinct is… this is Obama’s fall back position for his lacklustre campaign fundraising of late. He is sending this money to Chicago to one of his trusted allys, (Axelrod) so it can never be proven it has touched his filthy hands. It has to be in the Millions to make it worth his while. Like my mother’s Indian doctor told me- “In India $20 can buy you influence. Here, the price tag is in the Millions.”

  217. too funny… 🙂

    Revenge of the Machines? Obama Mocked for Blaming Slow Recovery on ATMs

    Published June 16, 2011

    Merciless mocking from Republicans hasn’t put President Obama off his focus on the economy, as the White House insisted Thursday that the president is taking “enormously seriously” the hardships Americans are enduring.

    “It’s patently obvious that the president is focused on the economy, that he takes enormously seriously the hardship that Americans continue to endure,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said.

    Earlier in the week, at a jobs council meeting, the president was called out for saying that “shovel-ready projects’ weren’t quite as shovel-ready as he thought. Then later, in an interview with NBC News, Obama suggested that innovation and technology — like job-stealing ATMs — were reasons why the employment rate was not rebounding as quickly as he had hoped.

    “There’s some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers,” Obama said after being asked about a report that shows businesses were spending 2 percent more on employees since the recession officially ended, but 26 percent more on equipment .

    “You see it when you go to a bank and … you use an ATM, you don’t go to a bank teller. Or you go to the airport, and you’re using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate,” the president said.

    Republicans, who are ratcheting up pressure on Democrats this week by highlighting the first anniversary of what was once dubbed “recovery summer,” roasted the president for the comment.

    “I didn’t do it,” read a “guest blog” posted on House Speaker John Boehner’s site. The blog was signed by “the Automated Teller Machine (ATM) in your favorite convenience store near the Slurpee Machine.”

    In the satirical post, the ATM author blamed high taxes, burdensome regulation and excessive spending for the slow jobs report. “ATMs and airport kiosks (and even teleprompters) are tools that help make life a little easier.”

    On Thursday, Boehner joined Republican lawmakers to scold Democrats for their “failure” to stimulate job growth and called on them to work with Republicans on a new jobs plan.

    Republicans are drawing attention to the administration’s “recovery summer” campaign last June, launched at the time to highlight stimulus-linked projects. Following that campaign, the 9.5 percent unemployment rate continued to rise for the rest of the year, and as of May has edged down to 9.1 percent.

    That’s not progress, Republicans say.

    “Here we are on the anniversary of his administration’s recovery summer … and Americans are still asking the question, ‘Where are the jobs?'” Boehner said. “The American people deserve some answers, but when it comes to this administration, it’s clear that they don’t have many.”

    Boehner also questioned the economy’s strength after Democratic Party Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said at a forum Wednesday that Democrats “own the economy” and “own the beginning of the turnaround.”

    “Taxpayers are footing the bills for more bureaucrats while small businesses are afraid to hire. Washington Democrats say they own the economy, and this is what their economy looks like,” he said.

    The Obama administration has staunchly defended the performance of the stimulus.

    An internal report from last fall said the stimulus program had met its goal of having 70 percent of its funding “outlayed and delivered in tax relief” by the end of September. Further, the report said the program “met every spending deadline Congress set” for obligating stimulus dollars.

    The latest administration statistics show that as of early June, 75 percent of contracts, grants and loans through the stimulus have been paid out.

    House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi on Thursday put the onus on Republicans to help jump-start the economy, accusing them of economic inaction after nearly six months in power in the House.

    “Instead, the Republicans have put forth a budget that ends Medicare, making seniors pay more to get less,” Pelosi said. “Democrats are focused on creating jobs, strengthening the middle class.”

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/16/revenge-machines-obama-mocked-for-blaming-slow-recovery-on-atms/?test=latestnews

  218. JanH-

    How is your sister doing. Has she begun to heal?

    How are you doing under the circumstances?

  219. Why the guns to Mexico?

    It was an attempt by policymakers at the highest levels of the Obama administration to subvert the Second Amendment/tighten up on American gun owners, gun stores and gun shows. They wanted more carnage in Mexico to use as propaganda towards that end. It’s that simple.

  220. ohanson
    June 16th, 2011 at 8:36 pm

    Simple? When has Obama ever done anything for FREE?

    Obama has never met a kick back he doesn’t like.

  221. Mrs. Smith,

    My sister is coping better than we all thought she would. She may go back to work next week.

    I’ve been taking a few long weekends away from work just to catch up on sleep and stuff.

    Thank you so much for caring.

  222. Thank God I am not alone….

    Greta and Weiner,s ex, Kirstan Powers were just talking about how he was preying on women, yes they said even the stripper did not like where he was trying to take the conversation….and it being sexual harrasment….

    I totally agree and wonder why so many defend him.

    Greta will announce a new job offer to him shortly.

  223. Mrs. Smith
    June 16th, 2011 at 8:08 pm
    President Obama Confident Anthony Weiner Will ‘Bounce Back’

    Bloody hypocrite!

    ——————-

    I hope Berry gives as humble of a resignation speech when HE is booted out of office. Just another bump in the road….besides, Barry has done sooooooo much worse!

  224. NYSmike, on June 16, 2011 at 4:40 PM said:
    Pot, Kettle and all that stuff. Weiner gets heckled by of all crapola someone from The Howard Stern Show. Ugh!

    ————-

    That doesn’t surprise me BigCat, the heckler was really crude.

  225. This may have been posted before, but for those who haven’t seen it, this YouTube video debunks the OCR theory about Obama’s BC pdf file.

  226. JanH
    June 16th, 2011 at 9:38 pm

    I bet you’ve been spending lots of time with her keeping her mind occupied and busy.. you are a priceless jewel, Jan.

    {{hugs}}

  227. #
    Shadowfax
    June 16th, 2011 at 10:32 pm

    “Greta will announce a new job offer to him shortly.”
    _____________________

    What a Brilliant surprise.

    Lemonade from Lemons!

  228. Here is some good news.. for me anyway and for you too if you own bio-fuel stock.. My bio-fuel stock is anorexic circling the rim. My car purchase was a diesel. Can be easily and cheaply converted to bio-fuel which is America’s best bet for oil independence.
    ______________________

    $5 billion-a-year ethanol subsidy nearing its end?

    73-27 vote in Senate sends strong signal to reluctant White House

    WASHINGTON — How to remove $5 billion from the federal deficit in one fell swoop? Eliminate the $5 billion-a-year subsidy given to oil refiners for blending ethanol into gasoline.

    The Senate voted Thursday to do just that, and even though the amendment is attached to a bill that probably won’t pass, the 73-27 vote sends a message that many Democrats and Republicans are behind an idea supported by an odd coalition that ranges from Tea Partyers to the Sierra Club.

    Thirty-three Republicans joined 40 Democrats in voting to eliminate the subsidy.

    Provided in the form of tax credits, the subsidy gives 45 cents a gallon to refiners who use ethanol, a renewable fuel additive that comes mainly from corn in the U.S.

    These tax breaks long have been supported as a way to reduce oil imports by politicians in both parties — emphatically so for many who run for president and look to woo the farm vote.

    But a new emphasis on deficit reduction, particularly among Republicans aligned with Tea Party activists, has contributed to a shift in the political landscape.

    Environmental groups like the Sierra Club argue that corn-based ethanol isn’t any cleaner than gasoline because of all the fossil fuel used to farm corn. They instead want to see more renewable energy like solar and wind.

    The measure will now be added to a bill renewing a federal economic development program. The prospects for the overall bill are uncertain, but Thursday’s vote clearly endangers the ethanol tax credit, which would expire at the end of the year anyway, unless Congress renews it. The measure passed Thursday would end the tax credit immediately.

    “The best way for ethanol to survive is to stand on its own two feet, without spending something we don’t have to get something we’re going to have anyway,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.

    The White House issued a statement saying it was against a full repeal of ethanol subsidies, indicating it could use its veto power if the amendment continued to advance in Congress.

    “We need reforms and a smarter biofuels program, but simply cutting off support for the industry isn’t the right approach,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43431407/ns/politics/

  229. Ethanol is a waste of money- It’s costs more than the price of a gallon of gas to make it and could cause potential damage to gasoline engines. The available feedstocks for bio-fuel is unlimited from weeds along the roadside to algae farms cultivated as an easily renewable energy resource.

  230. confloyd
    June 16th, 2011 at 11:56 pm
    What’s the job offer??? Did she announce it or was it a joke???
    ___________________

    She said Larry Flint wants to hire him.

  231. Co Floyd…Larry Flinn said he would pay him 20% more than he was making. Not a good offer, but I am sure he will get a job soon, lots of his constituents like him.

  232. Mrs. Smith
    June 16th, 2011 at 11:31 pm
    Ethanol is a waste of money- It’s costs more than the price of a gallon of gas to make it and could cause potential damage to gasoline engines. The available feedstocks for bio-fuel is unlimited from weeds along the roadside to algae farms cultivated as an easily renewable energy resource.
    ———–
    True for things like corn…but doesn’t Brazil use sugarcane….and it has helped their economy greatly.

    My son said that some country came up with air compression, which works. He can’t remember where he read it months ago.

  233. “True for things like corn…but doesn’t Brazil use sugarcane….and it has helped their economy greatly.’
    ________________________

    Yes, and Brazil hasn’t used gasoline for cars in years. It is a country completely independent from gasoline/oil. So the science and technology is out there but it is the Trust babies like Rockyfella and the old family elites that keep us enslaved to OIL.

  234. Yes, and Brazil hasn’t used gasoline for cars in years. It is a country completely independent from gasoline/oil.

    ===========

    That would be great, but seems unlikely.

  235. Post went off too soon.

    Maybe someone said Brazil is independent of FOREIGN oil, meaning they don’t import any, but produce it all inside Brazil.

  236. Mrs. Smith
    June 17th, 2011 at 12:31 am
    She said Larry Flint wants to hire him.
    __________________

    Greta said that? So this is a joke?
    __________________

    According to her Larry offered him a 15% higher salary. She said he sent a letter. Don’t know if she was joking or not. Flint is probably just trying to capitalize on the publicity, if true.

  237. There was a news story done on How Brazil got independant of Oil. I might have been one of the evening news programs or one of the TV Magazines. What I want to know is how is Brazil’s economy doing?

    For some reason, in the back of my mind, I think they are doing OK. If this is wrong, perhaps some of you computer geeks can find that article, which hopefully will tell how that economy is doing.

    I have always felt that being independent as a country was better that this world shix, where each country does what they do best. It just does not work, and makes countries venerable to being strong armed by a country that has something they vitally needed, case in point oil. Also, what happens if we have a war larger than we are fighting now. We could very well be forced to pull back to this country areas of manufacturing that are vital to our existance. However, many of the great leaders don’t want to discuss that.

    Look waht happen with the catisrophic earthquake, sunamie, atomic plant crumbling in Japan.

  238. There was a news story done on How Brazil got independant of Oil. I might have been one of the evening news programs or one of the TV Magazines. What I want to know is how is Brazil’s economy doing?

    For some reason, in the back of my mind, I think they are doing OK. If this is wrong, perhaps some of you computer geeks can find that article, which hopefully will tell how that economy is doing.

    I have always felt that being independent as a country was better that this world shix, where each country does what they do best. It just does not work, and makes countries venerable to being strong armed by a country that has something they vitally needed, case in point oil. Also, what happens if we have a war larger than we are fighting now. We could very well be forced to pull back to this country areas of manufacturing that are vital to our existance. However, many of the great leaders don’t want to discuss that.

    Look waht happen with the catisrophic earthquake, sunamie, atomic plant crumbling in Japan.

  239. Here are some articles on Brazil’s energy use and production:

    http://www.eia.gov/cabs/brazil/Full.html

    All gasoline in Brazil contains ethanol, with blending levels varying from 20-25 percent. Additionally, over half of all cars in the country are of the flex-fuel variety, meaning that they can run on 100 percent ethanol or an ethanol-gasoline mixture.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil

    The Brazilian car manufacturing industry developed flexible-fuel vehicles that can run on any proportion of gasoline (E20-E25 blend) and hydrous ethanol (E100).[19] Introduced in the market in 2003, flex vehicles became a commercial success,[20] reaching a record 92.3% share of all new cars and light vehicle sales for 2009.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/import_brazils_oil_policy_not.html

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/20/brazilian-oil-fuels-debate-on-us-policy/

  240. Here are some articles on Brazil’s energy use and production:

    http://www.eia.gov/cabs/brazil/Full.html

    All gasoline in Brazil contains ethanol, with blending levels varying from 20-25 percent. Additionally, over half of all cars in the country are of the flex-fuel variety, meaning that they can run on 100 percent ethanol or an ethanol-gasoline mixture.

  241. Here are some articles on Brazil’s energy use and production:

    http://www.eia.gov/cabs/brazil/Full.html

    All gasoline in Brazil contains ethanol, with blending levels varying from 20-25 percent. Additionally, over half of all cars in the country are of the flex-fuel variety, meaning that they can run on 100 percent ethanol or an ethanol-gasoline mixture.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil

    The Brazilian car manufacturing industry developed flexible-fuel vehicles that can run on any proportion of gasoline (E20-E25 blend) and hydrous ethanol (E100).[19] Introduced in the market in 2003, flex vehicles became a commercial success,[20] reaching a record 92.3% share of all new cars and light vehicle sales for 2009.

  242. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil

    The Brazilian car manufacturing industry developed flexible-fuel vehicles that can run on any proportion of gasoline (E20-E25 blend) and hydrous ethanol (E100).[19] Introduced in the market in 2003, flex vehicles became a commercial success,[20] reaching a record 92.3% share of all new cars and light vehicle sales for 2009.

  243. So when is David Vitter stepping down? Will Republicans also ask for his resignation? Will Vitter leave wearing diapers?

  244. Mrs. Smith June 16th, 2011 at 8:08 pm
    President Obama Confident Anthony Weiner Will ‘Bounce Back’
    ——————–
    This is the same Obama who refused to believe Ted Kennedy was mortally ill.

    ABC’s World News Now had an interesting piece overnight. It began stating that Romney had committed a gaffe … which had Obamaville accusing Mittens of being [gasp] insensitive … then ends with revealing a poll which indicates that ANY Republican will beat Obama by 5 points: Generic Republican vs Obama 44 – 39. Not certain what their point was. Guess they were covering all bases.

  245. This item has been in the news for 48? hours with little coverage. Here is what Yahoo News had to say:

    10 congressmen sue Obama over strikes in Libya
    By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Nedra Pickler, Associated Press – Wed Jun 15, 1:39 pm ET
    WASHINGTON – A bipartisan group of 10 lawmakers is suing President Barack Obama for taking military action against Libya without war authorization from Congress. The lawmakers say Obama violated the Constitution in bypassing Congress and using international organizations like the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to authorize military force. The lawmakers want a judge to issue an order suspending military operations without congressional approval. They said they were filing their lawsuit Wednesday against Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
    The plaintiffs are Democratic Reps. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, John Conyers of Michigan and Michael Capuano of Massachusetts and Republican Reps. Walter Jones and Howard Coble of North Carolina, Tim Johnson of Illinois, Dan Burton of Indiana, Jimmy Duncan of Tennessee, Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland and Ron Paul of Texas.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110615/ap_on_re_us/libya_lawsuit_2

    I find the 10 CongressCritters to be an interesting coalition … the lack of detail about legal details equally interesting.

  246. NewMexicoFan
    June 17th, 2011 at 12:41 am

    There was a news story done on How Brazil got independant of Oil. I might have been one of the evening news programs or one of the TV Magazines. What I want to know is how is Brazil’s economy doing?
    __________________

    Yup, that is where my information came from. However, I knew my recollection wasn’t recent and I didn’t look it up before I posted. When I did look it up, it was 5 yrs ago when Brazil was fazing out oil consumption for fuel replacing it with sugar cane ethanol. There is a world of difference between sugar cane ethanol and corn sourced ethanol. It’s all covered in the link below.

    Here is the link:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/10/world/americas/10brazil.html

    Then on the other hand, I’ve written about it more than once here. When Obama took office, the first thing he did was appropriate $2B to go to George Soros’ new oil venture for off shore drilling in “BRAZIL” to his Petrobas Oil company.

    h… w… exim.gov/brazil/petrobasfacts.cfm

    and is still planning on going to invest in more of Brazil’s off shore drilling. (Tell me he’s not a partner in that oil venture)

    Here is the kicker though- When the clean up for the Gulf was taking so long because the leaking well hadn’t been capped- he reinstated a moratorium on off shore drilling sending the idle oil drilling rigs… guess where? To Soros in Brazil.

  247. gonzotx:
    “Harold Macmillan, the prime minister who watched US power rise as the British empire crumbled, used to say that Britain would play ancient Greece to America’s Rome.

    These days it looks as if Rome is declining too.”
    ****

    MacMillan hit the nail on the head; and yes, America is declining, as did Rome.

    However, as Rubio says, nothing is written in advance. It is still possible to reverse our fortunes. But if that situation is not reversed by 2016 when China overtakes the US economically, then things are going to get a lot tougher to remain on top: Even ‘leadership from behind’ is then no longer possible.

    Going back to the historical example, it can be said that the Roman Empire peaked under Augustus (around the year zero) and began its decline thereafter. It was still 3 more centuries before Rome fell, and another millenium before Constantinople fell.

    During those 1400 years of Decline and Fall, or at least the last 1000 years of it, the Roman Empire was no more than an idea, really. The idea was unity and peace.

    If America does continue its decline as Rome did, there is still a chance that the coexistence of peace, prosperity and freedom will remain an achievable ideal in the collective human mind over the coming millenium.

    When Raygun issued his ‘shining city’ remarks, however, the seeds of decline were already sown. Since then, we have placed the handles of prosperity in the grips of the selfish and greedy; we have engaged in micro-military actions and ignored the disgust of the rest of the world; and we have attacked our own freedoms for the sake of elusive security against our perceived enemies.

  248. #
    confloyd
    June 17th, 2011 at 2:06 am

    Mrs. Smith,
    Check your email…I have news about that movie….Earl….LOL!
    _________________________

    Yes, I ckd it out late last night- Alrighty then- I’ll write something back to you later on this morning.

  249. holdthemaccountable:
    “A bipartisan group of 10 lawmakers is suing President Barack Obama for taking military action against Libya without war authorization from Congress.”
    *************

    Just wondering if they’re going to sue him for sending the SEALs into Pakistan… just wondering

  250. #
    Fifth Dimension
    June 17th, 2011 at 2:18 am

    So when is David Vitter stepping down? Will Republicans also ask for his resignation? Will Vitter leave wearing diapers?
    __________________

    If it’s a Republican involved in a sex scandal, very seldom do they step down or apologize for their actions From what I’ve heard, Vitter has since graduated from diapers into “pull-ups” a mother’s aide for house breaking babies. 🙂

  251. This proves it, the man is just too damned lazy.

    Pres. Obama is the only president ever to use a robotic device to sign a bill into law. The Constitution makes no provision for anyone to sign a bill into law but the President – certainly not a machine. The White House maintains there is no need for Pres Obama to re-sign the Patriot Act measure by hand – citing the legal counsel opinion. WH defends use of the Autopen to sign bills into law based on 2005 opinion from Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel. In letter, 21 House Republicans urge Pres Obama to re-sign the Patriot Act measure by hand to end doubts about its constitutional validity. Pres Obama authorized use of an autopen to sign Patriot Act extension bill into law May 26 because he was 3700 miles away in France. (never heard of a plane or waiting or actually being around to sign something instead of holidaying, golfing and prancing around).

  252. Ironic Obama using legal basis from Bush’s WH counsel for using autopen….could not make it up.

  253. #
    holdthemaccountable
    June 17th, 2011 at 6:06 am

    Mrs. Smith June 16th, 2011 at 8:08 pm
    President Obama Confident Anthony Weiner Will ‘Bounce Back’
    ——————–
    This is the same Obama who refused to believe Ted Kennedy was mortally ill.
    ________________________

    As if we can belive Obama wasn’t instrumental in rallying democrats to oust Weiner.
    ______________________

    ABC’s World News Now had an interesting piece overnight. It began stating that Romney had committed a gaffe … which had Obamaville accusing Mittens of being [gasp] insensitive … then ends with revealing a poll which indicates that ANY Republican will beat Obama by 5 points: Generic Republican vs Obama 44 – 39. Not certain what their point was. Guess they were covering all bases.
    __________________

    Romney’s quip is front page news on media tv this morning. I listened to Romny’s words… He said something to the effect, “he’s unemployed too, and laughed.” Obama never let’s a crisis go to waste.

    Well, there you go, proof positive Dick Morris is a jinx to any politician running for election. In his latest article he said: “Don’t worry about Romney. Romney won’t stumble.”

  254. A new Public Policy Polling survey finds John Edwards just misses out to Rod Blagojevich as the most unpopular person in the pollster’s history.

    Key findings: Just 9% of North Carolina voters have a favorable opinion of Edwards as compared to 81% with a negative one. That net -72 favorability spread is slightly better than the -75 that Blagojevich had in Illinois last year, 8% to 83%.

    …………………….

    I’m still baffled that 9% of North Carolinans are that morally ignorant. Should be ZERO.

  255. Mrs. Smith: He said something to the effect, “he’s unemployed too, and laughed.”
    ————–
    With the clip I saw, the audience laughed with him & it appeared to be genuine laughter. Wonder if it’s been ‘doctored’.

  256. #
    moononpluto
    June 17th, 2011 at 7:18 am

    Ironic Obama using legal basis from Bush’s WH counsel for using autopen….could not make it up.
    ___________________

    If the R’s are worried about the validity of using auto-pen for signing the extension of the Patriot Act which was set to expire May 25/11, it is because they know the Pat’s Act is at risk of being expired and no longer in force. This could turn out to be a gift in disguise for us delivered by a robotic pen in the interests of our Constitutional FREEDOM.

  257. White House Defends Continuing U.S. Role in Libya Operation

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/16/us/politics/16powers.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1

    WASHINGTON — The White House, pushing hard against criticism in Congress over the deepening air war in Libya, asserted Wednesday that President Obama had the authority to continue the military campaign without Congressional approval because American involvement fell short of full-blown hostilities.

    In a 38-page report sent to lawmakers describing and defending the NATO-led operation, the White House said the mission was prying loose Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi’s grip on power.

    In contending that the limited American role did not oblige the administration to ask for authorization under the War Powers Resolution, the report asserted that “U.S. operations do not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve U.S. ground troops.” Still, the White House acknowledged, the operation has cost the Pentagon $716 million in its first two months and will have cost $1.1 billion by September at the current scale of operations.

    The report came one day after the House Speaker, John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, had sent a letter to Mr. Obama warning him that he appeared to be out of time under the Vietnam-era law that says presidents must terminate a mission 60 or 90 days after notifying Congress that troops have been deployed into hostilities, unless lawmakers authorize the operation to continue.

    Mr. Boehner had demanded that Mr. Obama explain his legal justification for passing the deadline. On Wednesday, Brendan Buck, a spokesman for Mr. Boehner, said he was still reviewing the documents, adding that “the creative arguments made by the White House raise a number of questions that must be further explored.”

    The escalating confrontation with Congress reflects the radically altered political landscape in Washington: a Democratic president asserting sweeping executive powers to deploy American forces overseas, while Republicans call for stricter oversight and voice fears about executive-branch power getting the United States bogged down in a foreign war.

    “We are acting lawfully,” said Harold H. Koh, the State Department legal adviser, who expanded on the administration’s reasoning in a joint interview with the White House counsel, Robert Bauer.

    The two senior administration lawyers contended that American forces had not been in “hostilities” at least since early April, when NATO took over the responsibility for the no-fly zone and the United States shifted to primarily a supporting role — providing refueling and surveillance to allied warplanes, although remotely piloted drones operated by the United States periodically fire missiles, too.

    They argued that United States forces are at little risk because there are no troops on the ground and Libyan forces are unable to exchange fire with them meaningfully. And they said the military mission was constrained by a United Nations Security Council resolution, which authorized air power for the purpose of defending civilians.

    “We are not saying the president can take the country into war on his own,” said Mr. Koh, a former Yale Law School dean and outspoken critic of the Bush administration’s expansive theories of executive power. “We are not saying the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional or should be scrapped or that we can refuse to consult Congress. We are saying the limited nature of this particular mission is not the kind of ‘hostilities’ envisioned by the War Powers Resolution.”

    Jack L. Goldsmith, who led the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel during the Bush administration, said the Obama theory would set a precedent expanding future presidents’ unauthorized war-making powers, especially given the rise of remote-controlled combat technology.

    “The administration’s theory implies that the president can wage war with drones and all manner of offshore missiles without having to bother with the War Powers Resolution’s time limits,” Mr. Goldsmith said.

    It remains to be seen whether majorities in Congress will acquiesce to the administration’s argument, defusing the confrontation, or if the theory will fuel greater criticism. Either way, because the statute does not define hostilities and the Supreme Court has never ruled on the issue, the debate is likely to be resolved politically, said Richard H. Pildes, a New York University law professor.

    Also on Wednesday, 10 lawmakers — led by Representative Dennis J. Kucinich, Democrat of Ohio, and Representative Walter B. Jones, Republican of North Carolina — filed a lawsuit asking a judge to order Mr. Obama to pull out of the Libya operation because Congress did not authorize it. That lawsuit faces steep challenges, however, because courts in the past have dismissed similar cases on technical grounds.

    The administration had earlier argued that Mr. Obama could initiate the intervention on his own authority as commander in chief because its anticipated nature, scope and duration fell short of a “war” in the constitutional sense. Since then, the conflict has dragged on for longer than expected, and the goal of the NATO allies has all but openly shifted from merely defending civilians to forcing the Libyan leader, Colonel Qaddafi, from power. But Mr. Koh and Mr. Bauer said that while regime change in Libya might be a diplomatic goal, the military’s mission was separate and remained limited to protecting civilians.
    Multimedia
    Document
    White House Report on U.S. Actions in Libya
    Photographs
    Battle for Libya
    SLIDE SHOW: Battle for Libya | June 15, 2011
    Related

    *
    Times Topic: Libya — Protests and Revolt (2011)

    Related in Opinion

    *
    Editorial: Libya and the War Powers Act (June 17, 2011)

    Blogs
    The Caucus

    The latest on President Obama, the new Congress and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.

    * FiveThirtyEight: Nate Silver’s Political Calculus
    * More Politics News

    Readers’ Comments

    Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

    * Read All Comments (591) »

    While many presidents have challenged the constitutionality of other aspects of the War Powers Resolution — which Congress enacted over President Richard M. Nixon’s veto — no administration has declared that the section imposing the 60-day clock is unconstitutional, and in 1980, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded that it was within Congress’s power to enact such a limit.

    Mr. Bauer and Mr. Koh said that the 1980 memorandum remained in force, but that their legal argument was not invoking any constitutional challenge to bolster their interpretation of hostilities.

    It was not clear whether the Justice Department had endorsed the White House’s interpretation of hostilities. Mr. Bauer declined to say whether it had signed off on the theory, saying he would not discuss interagency deliberations. In his letter on Tuesday, Mr. Boehner demanded to know whether there was internal dissent about the administration’s legal stance.

    Mr. Koh noted that there had been disputes about whether the 60-day clock of the War Powers Resolution (a deadline that can be extended for 30 days under some circumstances) applied to deployments in which — unlike in Libya — there were troops on the ground and American casualties.

    Still, such previous cases involved peacekeeping missions in which the United States had been invited in, and there were only infrequent outbreaks of violence — as in Lebanon, Somalia and Bosnia. The Libyan operation, by contrast, is an offensive mission involving sustained bombardments of a government’s forces.

  258. hta:

    “Wonder if it’s been ‘doctored’.”
    _______________________

    I don’t think so- but Obama using the word “insensitive” with Romey’s quote could be a lead in to Romney’s ‘insensitivity’ to animals. Claiming Romney, as a millionaire, is out of touch with ordinary people.

    Remember when Romney was Governor of MA. The episode of Romney tying the dog to the roof of the car then driving all the way to Canada? The Griswolds on Vacation? 🙂

  259. Just wondering what’s going on…

    1 person in custody in investigation at Pentagon -35 mins ago

    ARLINGTON, Va. – One person was taken into custody early Friday in connection with an investigation into a suspicious vehicle near the Pentagon, authorities said.

    In addition, Pentagon police spokesman Chris Layman said one or two other people may have been involved. The car was in bushes near the Pentagon’s north parking lot, Layman said.

    Police were investigating a suspicious package in the vehicle, said a U.S. official familiar with the investigation who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation was still underway. The official said police found a suspicious person near Arlington National Cemetery and the person led them to the vehicle, off the road between the Pentagon and the cemetery.

    In another incident earlier this week, a motorist found with a gun and what appeared to be a suspicious package near the Pentagon was taken into custody.

  260. back to business as usual.

    Rasmussen : Obama: Strongly Approve: 22%… Strongly Disapprove 41%… Approval Index: -19… Total Approval: 46%

  261. 16 June 2011

    The US secretary of state has said she is troubled by reports that Libyan government forces are raping civilians.

    Hillary Clinton said she was was “deeply concerned” that Muammar Gaddafi’s troops were participating in widescale rape in Libya.

    The International Criminal Court says it believes that there were orders given to rape and drugs were provided.

    In other parts of the Middle East and North Africa, Mrs Clinton said, there were even reports of “virginity tests”.

    She said that there were reports that governments across the Middle East and North Africa were using sexual violence to punish protesters and said such acts violate “basic human dignity”.

    “Rape, physical intimidation, sexual harassment, and even so-called ‘virginity tests’ have taken place in countries throughout the region,” she said in a statement.

    The ICC’s recent report suggesting an official policy of rape encouraged by Col Gaddafi, and Mrs Clinton said a thorough investigation was needed “to bring perpetrators to justice”.

    She praised the courage of Iman al-Obeidi, whose accusations of rape against soldiers loyal to Col Gaddafi drew worldwide attention when she stormed into a Tripoli hotel in Tripoli and shouted her experience to a group of journalists.

    “Since Iman al-Obeidi bravely burst into a hotel in Tripoli on 26 March to reveal that Gaddafi’s security forces raped her, other brave women have come forward to tell of the horrible brutality they have experienced,” she said.

    She said such violence was an “affront” to people “yearning to live in a society free from violence with respect for basic human rights”.

    One major in the Libyan army who has now deserted has told the BBC that reports of shipments of Viagra were widely known about, but said they were given to foreign mercenaries rather than the regular army.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-13803556

  262. Secretary of State Clinton’s Travel to Guatemala and Jamaica

    June 16, 2011

    On June 22, 2011, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will travel to Guatemala City to participate in the International Conference of Support for the Central American Security Strategy. Central American heads of state and international partners will attend the conference. The Secretary’s participation in the Conference of Support, following the President’s visit to El Salvador in March, is a clear indication of the United States’ firm commitment to partner with Central American governments and the international community to address the underlying root causes of crime and citizen insecurity and to enhance the impact and effectiveness of our collective efforts in the region.

    Secretary Clinton will also visit Montego Bay, Jamaica, to meet with her Caribbean counterparts. Building on the June 2010 Caribbean Ministerial Meeting in Barbados, the Secretary will reaffirm the U.S. commitment to the region, and underscore our joint partnerships in enhancing citizen and regional security; promoting clean energy and combating climate change; promoting economic development; and strengthening democratic institutions.

    http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2011/06/166357.htm

  263. lol. sorry i had to laugh it is funny.

    The resigning Congressman from NY-9 could run for prez in 2016 with the current U.S. AG as his running mate. Yes, the Weiner-Holder ticket.

  264. Romney with the dog on top of the car is true, though I’ve forgotten when or where. Dog in carrier with a ‘windbreak’. The dog got diahrrea so they stopped and HOSED HIM OFF. Then continued driving at highway speeds.

    What’s worst of all, instead of covering up the story, his family bragged about it as an example of good decision!

  265. Interesting…..this WH is at internal war.

    Daley can’t defend Obama’s ‘indefensible’ economic policies

    White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley took heat from business executives Thursday for the Obama administration’s regulatory expansions. Daley also said he didn’t have any good answers for some of what President Obama is doing and expressed frustration about the “bureaucratic stuff that’s hard to defend.”

    “Sometimes you can’t defend the indefensible,” Daley said at a National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) meeting.

    Daley couldn’t answer basic questions and continually faced criticism from the executives in the room. The business leaders even applauded each other’s criticism of the administration. “At one point, the room erupted in applause when Massachusetts utility executive Doug Starrett, his voice shaking with emotion, accused the administration of blocking construction on one of his facilities to protect fish, saying government ‘throws sand into the gears of progress,’” wrote Peter Wallsten and Jia Lynn Yang in the Washington Post.

    Americans for Limited Government Communications Director and former Labor Department Public Affairs Chief of Staff Rick Manning told The Daily Caller that Daley’s inability to defend Obama’s regulations is an indication that the administration’s plans aren’t working. Manning also points out that Daley’s meeting may have large political implications.

    “Business community to William Daley, your Jedi tricks don’t work on us,” Manning said in an email. “The chickens are coming home to roost from the wholesale assault by Obama on the free enterprise system and the private job creators who make it run. The meeting itself is incredible in that it demonstrates just how vulnerable Obama feels in 2012.”

    (As goes the economy, so goes Ohio?)

    The Workforce Fairness Institute’s Fred Wszolek told The Daily Caller that Daley’s lackluster performance is even more questionable when comes to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and its campaign against the Boeing Company. The NLRB has gone after the Boeing Company for opening a new plant in South Carolina. Boeing’s new plant is an addition to its already-existing production lines in Washington state. The NLRB’s case hinges on whether Boeing made the decision to open the new plant as “retaliation” against machinist unions in Washington, even though no jobs were lost there. In fact, Boeing has added thousands of new jobs in Washington.

    As a former Boeing board member before taking on his White House job, Daley voted in favor of opening the new South Carolina plant. Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham has challenged Daley to come out and defend his vote in the face of the NLRB’s case, but he hasn’t yet done so.

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/17/daley-can%E2%80%99t-defend-obama%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%98indefensible%E2%80%99-economic-policies/

    …………………………..

    Obama’s own Chief of Staff admitting Obama’s policies are “indefensible”? Jesus, its worse than i thought.

  266. Bad news of a lighter kind … I don’t know how/why, but Oprah is back on broadcast TV weekday afternoons with rebroadcasts during the wee hours. Just when I thought it was safe to channel hop at o dark thirty.

  267. EVEN PRO-BAMA BOTS RAISE QUESTIONS ABOUT HIS LEADER-NESS

    http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20110617/BASU/106170330/Basu-No-breaks-for-Obama-a-socialist-and-a-shill-for-business-

    This whole piece is written to make excuses for Obama, but this one paragraph details how he is a deer caught in the headlights:

    “One reason Obama can’t seem to win with any side may be because he’s trying to please all sides. Compromise is one thing, but if people are confused on where he stands, maybe it’s because he doesn’t push back enough.”

  268. EVEN DEMS ARE GETTING PISSED OFF AT UBAMA’S INACTION

    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/lautenberg-criticizes-obama-on-guns/

    June 15, 2011, 3:07 pm
    Lautenberg Criticizes Obama on Guns
    By JENNIFER STEINHAUER
    Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey, has written a letter to President Obama rebuking him for not pressing Congress to create some restrictions on guns and gun ownership.

    Mr. Lautenberg has filed three amendments on gun issues. One seeks to reinstate a ban on high-capacity gun magazines; another would close the so-called gun show loophole, which permits some people who buy guns at gun shows to avoid background checks otherwise required by federal law; the last would close gaps in the law that prevent the government from stopping suspected terrorists from buying firearms or explosives.

    “Your administration has yet to join us on these proposals and has not shown the leadership to combat gun violence,” the senator’s letter says.

    Mr. Lautenberg cites a video featuring Adam Gadahn, an American-born member of Al Qaeda, urging terrorists to carry out attacks. In the video, Mr. Gadahn says: “America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely, without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?”

    In his letter, Mr. Lautenberg criticizes Mr. Obama for not taking a stronger role on gun issues, especially since the shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords and others in Arizona earlier this year and generally since he became president.

    “It was nearly two years before a nominee for the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (A.T.F.) position was chosen,” the letter says. “Earlier this year, the administration convened a working group to examine strengthening our gun laws, but no findings or recommendations have been released. While the gun lobby is always opposed to legislation to curb gun violence, the White House cannot avoid its obligations to protect our people.”

  269. Moon

    …………………………..

    Obama’s own Chief of Staff admitting Obama’s policies are “indefensible”? Jesus, its worse than i thought.

    ———
    Looks like Dailey is doing the job of a real Dem mole, and not covering Barry’s inadequacies like HE is used to having done. Then again, anyone with a brain that is not corrupt would say the same thing.

  270. Shadowfax
    June 17th, 2011 at 3:45 pm
    Drip by drip, the Obots are starting to FINALLY turn against Ubama.
    &&&&&&

    My guess is that they’ve felt this way for quite some time now, but it’s the straw that broke the bot’s back. When one rat sees the other jumping off the ship, they know it’s time…

  271. shadowfax and rgb44hrc…

    can you imagine if when we get into the actual national race and all that hoopola and fanfare for O is dissapatied and subdued and/or gone…and he continues with half full rallies and people sniping about him…lackluster money donations…poor O…he will have no energy to motivate him…it will be the final, ultimate karma clobbering from the whole O mess we got dragged into and the assault on Hillary and Hill supporters…

    tip of the iceberg and very early but O is already losing to generic republican…

    Huntsman would definitely have the embarrassment factor…

  272. S
    June 17th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
    &&&&&&&&

    I think Obummer’s starting to sense that. People don’t want to join the administration, people who are in it are leaving, lots of empty positions.

    Bummer for O.

    The “excited crowds” of 2008 are no longer excited, and they are fewer, and they come with a list of broken promises.

    Bummer for O.

    And the media who were desperate for access so they could write books and cash in have written their Historical Presidency books and cashed. Now, in order to be “with it” and “relevant”, they have to revisit their approach, and many have decided that taking the Prez to task for his broken promises or his lack of leadership or his lack of effectiveness is the route to journalistic success.

    Bummer for O.

  273. What I really dread is if Ubama keeps falling in the polls, then the Rethugs pick another candidate that can’t getterdone, and they stay home like they did with McPalin, and Barry pulls off the ‘win’ again…takes another 4 years to pull his bullshit on us.

  274. agree, rgb44hrc … even O said the past week that it is no longer ‘cool to be for O’

    shadowfax…so far trends are moving in a good direction…and hopefully the other side has learned from their past…also the time around the variables are different…

  275. S
    Sorry, but I don’t think the Rethug candidates are strong or good at this point, and I have no confidence that any of the political dirty tricks have ended.

  276. Obama admin to end health care waivers

    By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration says it will end a controversial health care waiver program in September.

    Officials announced Friday that all applications for new waivers and renewals of existing ones have to be in by Sept. 22.

    That would remove a potential political distraction in the 2012 elections.

    The waivers deal with a part of the new health care law that restricts annual dollar limits on coverage. They won’t be needed when the law goes into full effect in 2014, because taxpayer-subsidized insurance will be broadly available.

    Congressional Republicans had charged favoritism, claiming that waivers were being funneled to unions. But an outside review by the Government Accountability Office found that the administration was using objective standards to make its decisions.

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_CARE_WAIVERS_?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-06-17-16-45-59

  277. Biden said he might be interested in running for President…………………………………
    ………………………….
    ………..in 2016.

    He would be 73, so there is still plenty of time for Hillary to toss her scarf in the ring.

Comments are closed.