Gossip Galore – A Hillary FaceLift?, Michelle’s Rage, Barack’s Depression, Palin’s Hunt For Black Men

We’re dredging from our comments section for this article. Dorothy Parker is today’s inspiration – “If you don’t have anything nice to say… sit by me.”

This coming week is going to be very busy so consider this a break before the storm. Today is gossip, gossip, gossip, with just a touch of news. Extra credit for those who figure out how these gossip items are linked. Hint: misogyny and fear and depression are a terrible thing to witness. Now the dish:

Let’s start by trashing our own. FoxNews reports Hillary had a facelift:

“Did she or didn’t she? The former First Lady and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was looking awfully “rested” during her meeting with Libyan Transitional Council chairman Mustafa Abdel Jalil earlier this month. This got us wondering, did she have her eyes done? Maybe a little lift? While we doubt she’s had the time, her skin looks much smoother in the photo on the right taken September 1, 2011, as opposed to the photo on the left from 2006. We want to know what you think!”

Having trashed our own, it’s only fair to pick the lint from our favorite Star Wars action figure:

Michelle’s Insults Drive Hillary to Collapse

Hillary Clinton suffered an alarming secret breakdown after a bitter clash with First Lady Michelle Obama, and now Bill’s wife is threatening to quit her Secretary of State post. You can read all about Michelle’s bitter insults that have touched off a firestorm behind White House walls. It’s all in this week’s GLOBE.”

What very famous Hollywood actor said this about the Boob?: “He might be just a little bit too regular to be the president of the United States ’cause he’s a young guy, he likes to play basketball, and I’ve noticed that he has a Chicago walk.”

Sarah Palin shares a major trait with Barack Obama’s mother????? (Which reminds us of another Dorothy Parker quote “That woman speaks eight languages and can’t say “no” in any of them.” But we digress.) As reported by the New York Times, in a new book it is reported that Sarah Palin has a “fetish for black men”. The same book reports Sarah Palin is a racist.

Who is the person who hurts Obama the most when he goes on TV?

Who, according to those that hate this website, is buying “six pantsuits”?

And this final but rather extensive report of a Boob in decline:

“Is President Obama Depressed?

According to Gawker, the New York Times is putting together a piece that suggests President Obama may have depression and no longer finds pleasure in his job. The New York Times is not commenting on the report, but The Five tackled the subject on today’s show.

Greg Gutfeld says that if this story is real, the president’s depression is due to the fact that he was shielded for so long by an adoring media and he didn’t build up an immunity to hard knocks.

Bob Beckel argues the opposite, saying that if depression is the result of being dumped on, then Obama should be in an insane asylum after all of the criticism he’s received.

Finally, Dana Perino acknowledges that while the presidency is a tough job, the press may be presenting this kind of story so that they can later build Obama back up.



Here is the original Gawker story:

“Is Barack Obama Depressed?

Wouldn’t you be? Barack Obama is at the nadir of his political popularity and effectiveness. He has been maneuvered into an economic corner of 9%-plus unemployment by a relentlessly nihilistic Congress. His achievements—killing bin Laden, saving the auto industry at negligible cost—are written off as flukes. Plus all this 9/11 anniversary stuff! We hear the New York Times is looking into whether it’s all starting to get to him—like, clinically.

We’re told by a source inside the Times that the paper is preparing a story arguing that Obama no longer finds joy in the political back-and-forth, has seemed increasingly listless to associates, and is generally exhibiting the litany of signs that late-night cable commercials will tell you add up to depression. Or maybe Low T.

Either way, the investigation was described to us as taking seriously the notion that Obama may be suffering from a depressive episode. Of course, absent a telltale Wellbutrin prescription or testimony from the man himself, it’s really impossible to achieve a reliable diagnosis. And a story like “Obama Appears to Suffer From Depression” can be easily downgraded to “Political Travails Begin to Take Personal Toll on Obama.” So the story in question, if it ever comes out, may not end up supporting the depression thesis. But rest assured: There are people at the Times who, based on the paper’s reporting, believe Obama is depressed—the kind of depression where, if he weren’t the president of the United States, he wouldn’t be getting out of bed in the morning.

* * * * * *

Let’s start with the silly. The answer to the Hollywood question is Morgan Freeman. Morgan Freeman is not aware that even Barack Obama’s walk is fake. When Obama ran against former Black Panther now Congressman Bobby Rush, Rush mocked Obama’s blackness and ever since then Obama has been pulling an okie doke looking for his inner stereotype of being black and a man. Freeman intuits that Obama is simply not a good fit for a job that requires experience and ability. Freeman loves Obama but even Shawshank won’t redeem the Boob from Chicago.

The Hollywood Reporter, clues us in that Freeman is not alone. A lot of Hollywood realizes Obama is a corrupt treacherous Boob:

Disappointed Hollywood Giving Obama Cold Shoulder

As the 2012 election fund-raising cycle heats up, the onetime darling is finding far less enthusiasm from the showbiz donors who tell THR what went wrong.

At this point in the previous presidential election cycle, Barack Obama was a Hollywood heartthrob. The entertainment industry’s ardent Democratic activists couldn’t dig deep enough into their wallets to finance his ambitious run for the Oval Office.

Today, the industry remains with the president, but the disenchantment is increasingly palpable, and even devoted Democrats are approaching his re-election campaign with all the enthusiasm of a studio contractually obligated to finance a dubious sequel.”

Obama 2012 = Ishtar II

Black man chasing, racist, Sarah Palin? Even the New York Times review of the Joe McGinniss trash bin book is denouncing this filth. McGinniss is a creep and no one should defend him. Left Talk losers will enjoy trashing Palin but those are the people who will scream if anything bad is written about evil mass killer Tim McVeigh. Did you hear Sarah Palin is not pretty?

The trash bin political reporter at the Miami Herald was forced to defend himself to beat reporter Armando Salguero over the Palin story:

“Miami Herald Dolphins beat reporter Armando Salguero is unhappy with his paper’s decision to post a story about an alleged 1987 fling between Sarah Palin and former Miami Heat player Glen Rice when he was a college player and Palin a TV sports anchor in Alaska. Salguero told colleagues in an email:

Do we know this story to be TRUE? Are we certain it is TRUE because we’ve done the work or have a reasonable certainty that is TRUE?

Did anyone actually try to confirm this story before giving it Herald front page credibility? Did anyone call Glenn Rice to get independent confirmation? He lives in Miami, you know.

Is it now OK to repeat any “report” from the National Enquirer on the front page of the Herald’s website without actually reporting even one fact independently? The blog calls The Enquirer’s sources “solid.” …

If this Rice story, unconfirmed and unreported by us, can be published on our site, do the alien stories not meet the same standards?

Herald political reporter Marc Caputo responded a short time later:

To answer your question: I don’t think we “know” this story about Palin to be true. We do know it has been reported and it is a topic of political conversation. So we have displayed what we “know” so far. This is common in newsrooms. Even in your department, sports. …

I find it curious you didn’t raise this as a newsroom wide-issue at the time, but I digress somewhat.

I do think this is different from an alien story. Yes, it appears to be from/tied to the Enquirer, which also broke the John Edwards baby-story. I remember at the time that we posted this information as well. Edwards, as you know, is a Democrat.

I find it curious you didn’t raise this as a newsroom wide-issue at the time, but I digress somewhat.

Of course, the Edwards story was buried by Big Media when it mattered – just before the primaries began in 2008 – just like the JournoListers intentionally buried the Jeremiah Wright story during the primaries to help Obama against Hillary. It was only when photographs of Edwards running from photographers and hiding in a toilet that Big Media decided to tell readers the facts.

Maybe the Miami Herald will publish the “Michelle’s bitter insults” story on its front page too. After all, there are a lot of reasons for Michelle Obama to be furious with Hillary. For one, Hillary won’t tell Michelle who her surgeon is. Two, Hillary won’t allow Michelle to pilfer her garage looking for those fashion forward “accessories” Michelle loves to inflict on the public eye.

Speaking of Hillary Clinton, does this look like a woman who needs surgery?:


Hillary Glow

Au contraire Chewbacca. Hillary is positively glowing. Obama is depressed because his flim-flams and corruptions are catching up to him. His “racist” charges against Hillary are no longer believed. The Boob is depressed for very good reasons – he is a boob, and Hillary blossoms wherever she is planted:

“She lost the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, but over a third of Americans said the U.S. would be better off now if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were president, according to a new poll. [snip]

A quarter of respondents held similar wishful thoughts in a July poll.” [snip]

When asked who they would vote for in 2012, 29 percent said they would definitely vote for Obama, 43 percent said they would definitely vote for another candidate and 21 percent said they would consider voting for another candidate.”

Smart Republican/conservative websites see the danger of Hillary nostalgia peaking and the popular Hillary becomes the nominee. If you want to know why all these silly surgery stories and other little carps are now being published, it is because the rise of Hillary Clinton threatens and some are already mobilizing to shut it down. As HotAir writes:

“At least, Barack Obama has to hope it’s peaking, rather than continuing to build. Bloomberg headlines the poll results with an explicit slam at Obama: “Clinton Popularity Prompts Buyer’s Remorse.” So far, the numbers aren’t overwhelming, but they are growing: [snip]

The finding in the latest Bloomberg National Poll shows a higher level of wishful thinking about a Hillary Clinton presidency than when a similar question was asked in July 2010. Then, a quarter of Americans held such a view.

How nostalgic have we gotten for the Clintons? (And doesn’t seeing that in writing seem a little … disturbing?) [snip]

However, this kind of nostalgia could prove a potent political force, especially if Democrats decide that Obama simply cannot win a second term and will do a lot of damage to down-ticket races in 2012. There is no way Hillary will run a primary campaign against Obama, and we’re rapidly running out of time for any Democrat to run a realistic campaign to knock him off of the 2012 general-election ballot. But if Obama surprises people and pulls out on his own — as John Fund speculated yesterday and I speculated last month — a Hillary run ceases being bad news for Obama and starts becoming a Republican nightmare:

But when Hillary nostalgia starts becoming a bigger cultural phenomenon and Obama’s polls keep sliding into Bush territory, those low probabilities might have to get adjusted upward.”

White House paid for polls are already indicating that the probabilities “have to get adjusted upward.” In “Obama must-win Nevada:

“One Nevada Democratic Party insider offered this tip for candidates running for public office in 2012: “Don’t get your picture taken with President Obama,” he said.”

In Chicago, the advice to Obama is “Get Out”:

“For Barack Obama, it’s more like midnight in a coal mine. [snip]

The vultures are starting to circle. Former White House spokesman Bill Burton said that unless Obama can rally the Democratic base, which is disillusioned with him, “it’s going to be impossible for the president to win.” Democratic consultant James Carville had one word of advice for Obama: “Panic.”

But there is good news for the president. I checked the Constitution, and he is under no compulsion to run for re-election. He can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as he’s willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.

That might be the sensible thing to do. It’s hard for a president to win a second term when unemployment is painfully high. If the economy were in full rebound mode, Obama might win anyway. But it isn’t, and it may fall into a second recession — in which case voters will decide his middle name is Hoover, not Hussein. Why not leave of his own volition instead of waiting to get the ax? [snip]

In the event he wins, Obama could find himself with Republicans in control of both houses of Congress. Then he will long for the good old days of 2011. [snip]

He could slake this thirst by stepping aside and taking the blame. Then someone less reviled could replace him at the top of the ticket.

The ideal candidate would be a figure of stature and ability who can’t be blamed for the economy. That person should not be a member of Congress, since it has an even lower approval rating than the president’s.

It would also help to be conspicuously associated with prosperity. Given Obama’s reputation for being too quick to compromise, a reputation for toughness would be an asset.

As it happens, there is someone at hand who fits this description: Hillary Clinton.


Dump Obama or Die
. Where have we heard that before? Consider, this is not Fox News, this is not HotAir, this is not Michelle Malkin, this is not Free Republic and it’s not midnight at the oasis. It’s Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board who says it is time for Obama to withdraw from 2012. Cue HotAir:

“I’ve said repeatedly that I think a withdrawal by Obama is a low-probability event at best, and I still believe it to be a long shot. However, when the home-town papers are starting to make the call for retirement, it’s maybe not quite as much of a long shot as before.”

Ya think??? Consider the tsunami of Hillary Clinton stories recently. From still shilling and lovin’ Obama, Politico:

“As Obama dips, Clinton nostalgia rises

Just as Barack Obama’s approval ratings crater, here come the Clintons: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was just voted the most popular political figure in the country, and Bill Clinton, the never-reticent ex-president, will reclaim the world stage this weekend and dominate the Sunday talk shows. [snip]

Some Democrats believe that Clinton’s emergence makes Obama look even worse at the end of a week in which a Bloomberg News poll found his approval rating on the economy has dropped to 33 percent.

CNN ran the headline “Obama regrets and Clinton fantasies,” during a Friday afternoon segment that covered another Bloomberg poll showing that 81 percent of those surveyed believe the country would be in the same shape or better off if the secretary of state were president. Only 13 percent said the country would be worse off with Hillary Clinton at the helm.”

Consider, all our articles detailing that Obama’s miserable job approval ratings would eventually coincide with his personal approval ratings:

“For the first time, more Americans have an unfavorable opinion of President Obama than have a favorable opinion of him, according to a new CBS News/New York Times poll released late Friday, an indication that dissatisfaction with the president’s job performance and the direction of the country is dragging down how Americans view Obama personally.

Just 39 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of Obama, while 42 percent view him unfavorably. In January of this year, 40 percent had a favorable image of Obama, and 34 percent had an unfavorable opinion. In January 2009, as he was inaugurated, 60 percent of Americans had a favorable opinion of him.

While the president’s approval rating — which is down to 43 percent in the new poll, an all-time low — is an important indicator of his re-election standing, the high regard Americans felt for Obama personally was a sign that Americans hadn’t yet given up on his presidency.”

So does this mean Americans have now finally given up on the Boob? You betcha!

Consider the Bloomberg poll: “Clinton Popularity Prompts Buyer’s Remorse”:

“Looking back, I wonder if she would have been a stronger leader, knowing the games and the politics and all that goes on,” said Susan Dunlop, 50, a homemaker in New Port Richey, Florida. “I don’t think she would have bent as much.”

The poll reports that 44 percent of Tea Party supporters “say the U.S. would be better off with Hillary Clinton as president, even though 59 percent of those respondents have an unfavorable impression of her.”

She’s a more stable person who gets results,” said Joseph Cherney, 67, a retired Republican automotive purchasing worker from Mineral Ridge, Ohio. “The president we have now isn’t much of a president because he really doesn’t do anything. He’s pompous and arrogant.

Consider, Inspector Clouseau lookalike and most recent electoral loser David Weprin has thrown Obama under the bus:

“How bad are things for Obama? Now a hapless loser like David Weprin is taking potshots at him. We’re about to see a full-fledged insurrection in the Democratic Party. Sit back and watch them devour themselves.

Democrat David Weprin said yesterday that President Obama’s sagging popularity among Queens and Brooklyn voters cost him the election for ex-Rep. Anthony Weiner’s congressional seat.

In a stunning upset, Weprin was trounced by Republican Bob Turner, whose campaign had tied him to the president.

“The message of the campaign was ‘Send Obama a message,’ ” said Weprin, a Queens state assemblyman. “I think the problem was that he’s the president and people are frustrated, and it’s just natural to take it out on the top guy — or the top guy’s party.

“As much as I tried to make it about David Weprin or Bob Turner, I don’t think that resonated to voters. I think that voters looked at it as a referendum on the president,’’ Weprin said.”

Translation of Weprin: Dump Obama Or Die.

Consider, Who is the racist now? Well the Congressional Black Caucus says they ‘“probably would be marching on the White House” if Obama were not president. If [former President] Bill Clinton had been in the White House and had failed to address this problem, we probably would be marching on the White House.” Racists bigots. Kick black people to the curb and protect the Boob. Way to destroy yourselves and the black community Black Caucus.

Someone needs to tell the Congressional Black Caucus that the people that love to hate Big Pink have caught Obama buying six pant suits. Cross-dressing won’t help Barack. We can spot a boob no matter what he wears.

As to who other than Barack Obama is the worst person to go on TV and say nice things about Barack Obama? Why it’s none other than Bill Clinton. We’ve written about this before every time Bill says something supposedly nice about the Boob but now it is “a source who worked on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign” quoted by Obama lovin’ Politico:

“Now, the former president is preparing for a round of Sunday talk show interviews and the start of his annual conference, and it will be hard for Obama to avoid contrasts: The current president is even scheduled to speak at the CGI conference during a three-day trip to New York.

“[Bill] Clinton all over TV hurts Obama,” said a source who worked on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. “[It] only reminds people over and over again that Bill Clinton was a master at easing the public’s fears during times of crises — plus the economy was booming under his leadership.

So if that “source who worked on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign” knows that Bill Clinton on TV hurts Barack Obama no matter what Bill says – do you think Bill Clinton knows he hurts Barack Obama when he goes on TV even if he says nice things about the Boob? Think about it? If Bill knows that, why does he go on TV to ostensibly “help” the Boob?

It’s time to report Bill Clinton to AttackWatch and get one of those SS armbands – and we’re not talking Social Security here.


Attack Watch

Share

162 thoughts on “Gossip Galore – A Hillary FaceLift?, Michelle’s Rage, Barack’s Depression, Palin’s Hunt For Black Men

  1. Ok, I will defer to the others with regards to Bill Clinton saying nice things about the bØØb. It may well be that Bill knows that his media interviews hurt the bØØb more than it helps him. I still say, though, that the opponents of Hillary Clinton will try to use any purported positive comments of Bill Clinton’s towards Øbama or his administration to their advantage, and I believe that they may have some success with it, too.

  2. Obama is poll deaf. He still has delusions of being loved and worshipped by millions. Only a scandal big enough to engulf him and several of his Cabinet members and advisers and the threat of impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate will make him see the harsh truth.

  3. ok…I get it…Bill just showing up makes O looker weaker, dumber, and even more inexperienced and clueless…BUT…

    Bill does not have to play the game so well that he says polls showing Hillary as the most popular politician out there “shouldn’t be taken seriously” and then he gives reasons why…Hey Bill…nothing but love for you…BUT…stick to O and accept it…Hillary is the most respected and popular pol out there…as you like to say, you are out of politics…don’t go stepping on her parade…

  4. I think Bill’s playing the game of loyal Democrat. That way, neither he nor Hillary can be accused of backstabbing Obama and alienating black voters.

  5. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/george-will-breaks-down-the-obama-hype-on-this-week-there-is-no-evidence-the-man-has-rhetorical-powers-he-is-relying-on-video/

    “He went to Massachusetts to campaign against Scott Brown; Brown is now a senator. He went to New Jersey to campaign against Chris Christie, who’s now governor. He went to Virginia to campaign against Bob McDonnell, who’s now governor. He campaigned for the health-care plan extensively, it became less popular. He campaigned in 2010 for the Democrats, they were shellacked. He began, in a sense, his presidency flying to Copenhagen to get Chicago the Olympics; Chicago was the first city eliminated. There is no evidence that the man has the rhetorical powers that he is relying on.”

    video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

    Lots of good stuff here. Suggestions that Carville is priming the pump for Hillary and that Bill Clinton is damning with faint praise.

  6. Tony Stark, it’s called “killing with kindness.” It is frustrating to all of us because we would much rather have Bill publish that book he promised about Obama during the campaign. We’re like antsy troops wanting to fire our guns but the commander yells “don’t shoot until you see the whites of their eyes.”

    Meanwhile Frodo is dressed like an Orc as he approaches Mount Doom to drop a ring on Sauron.

  7. “I do not know where James Carville is coming from… EXCEPT if this is the opening salvo of a Draft Hillary Clinton campaign, because if you begin to (inaudible) up discontent among Democrats about the prospect of running with Barack Obama, there’s one out there who is…”

  8. Jeswezey, the “inaudible” is “gin up”. There’s lots of good stuff in that interview. Cokie Roberts does her best to fluff but admits that Obama is too inexperienced. Jonathan Karl says that it is the Obama Dimocrats in the senate that have given up on Obama and “don’t think he knows what he is doing.”

  9. From the previous thread:

    Carol: “I don’t see the US giving land back to Mexico or the Indians nor Europe returning to pre WW1 boundaries. When you start a war and lose, there is a price to pay.”
    **********

    You have a good point in bringing up the Amerincians. It is indeed very similar to what is going on in and around Israel. The Amerindians gave up a long time ago but still got large tracts of useless land where they could do their thing. That’s what Israel would like to do with the Palestinians (except that Gaza is not so useless) – administer them ad infinitum until they just give up and go away.

    Whoever started this middle-east war, though, it is important to remember that it is not over yet. You’re jumping the gun by relegating the Arabs to the losing column.

    Just because the Jews have all the levers of power their hands in Israel and the occupied territories doesn’t mean that the Arabs have given up. There are still some damn Arabs who think they have the same rights as Jews.

  10. Maybe, it’s just me- but did anyone else notice the “O” in Solyndra.. has rays of light coming from it?

    When I noticed it, my first thought was the accent on the O in Solyndra is a marker signifying Obama.

  11. September 19, 2011

    Watergate Times Three

    American Thinker

    By Robert J. Mack

    You think Richard Nixon’s presidency was the worst scandal ever? Well, so far, anyway.

    It all started with a tape holding a door open at the Watergate complex in Washington, D.C., discovered by a security guard 39 years ago on June 17, 1972. That discovery started a sinister chapter in America’s history, fueled by the fervent investigative work of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of The Washington Post and ending with the president, Richard M. Nixon, exiting the White House in disgrace on August 9, 1974.

    A similar Watergate scandal could erupt for Barack Obama. The only difference is that there may be three of them.

    The insane Solyndra loan, the LightSquared cronyism, and the Operation Fast and Furious gun-running debacle have all come into America’s consciousness at the same time. How could the government invest in a solar panel start-up that had no prospects for any kind of success, and to the tune of over 500 billion dollars? Why would a four-star Air Force general say that the White House tried to pressure him to change his testimony before the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee to make it more favorable to a company tied to a large Democratic donor? What were directors at the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, and the ATF thinking when they persuaded gun dealers to allow more than 2,000 firearms to get in the hands of drug lords in Mexico, resulting in over 200 deaths?

    These are questions that demand answers. And the American people are not mesmerized enough by the star power of their president to avoid those answers and where they might lead.

    Are the current body blows to the president’s political stature of these humiliating events, not to mention the legal ramifications, enough to distract voters next year from returning him to the progressive throne? If Obama had provided any explorer’s gold or spices to lard the treasury from the first term, then maybe all might be forgiven, assuming no laws were broken. But with Obama’s poll numbers in the toilet over the economy (and the awkward question of competence in the air), Americans are ticked off. And when the populace gets mad, watch out. Royalty’s crowns get removed unceremoniously when the people revolt. And, so far, Obama, the king of the progressives, has taken a “let ’em eat cake” position about the three scandals.

    “What did the president know and when did he know it?” This was the famous question posed by then Senator Howard Baker during the Watergate hearings. Will this question be raised about Obama? MSNBC will continue, no matter what, to carry the president’s water. But the Washington Post and ABC News have broken stories based on emails leaked to them in the Solyndra scandal, and with more hearings coming, it will be difficult to maintain radio silence on the scandals mushrooming.

    We can expect underlings who will be scapegoated and have to walk the plank, as Bob Haldeman and John Erlichman did in the Watergate saga. As a matter fact, two federal officials have already been reassigned, and a third has resigned in the Operation Fast and Furious scandal. The acting director of the ATF, Kenneth Melson, has been reassigned by Attorney General Eric Holder. Dennis Burke, Arizona’s U.S. Attorney who approved the operation, resigned immediately, and Emory Hurley, a Phoenix U.S. Attorney’s Office prosecutor involved in the operation, has been reassigned to civil cases. But will there be a John Dean who will not willingly go loyally and quietly? Will, for instance, Eric Holder resign in shame over the Fast and Furious disaster but tell all? Considering his ego, he just may be Obama’s John Dean.

    When hubris invades a leader’s mindset, he can do no wrong. And when he can do no wrong, then all those who question his actions are questioning his authority and must be eliminated. This was the fatal flaw of Richard Nixon’s presidency regarding Watergate. His paranoia about those on the left who were out to get him finally did him in. The fact that he used his power to try to destroy people’s lives constituted the criminal element in the tragedy. Fortunately, we did have the Watergate hearings, and Nixon quit before there was a constitutional crisis.

    Obama is no Nixon, locking himself in the White House, getting inebriated, and praying with his secretary of state — at least not yet anyway. And right now that’s a very good thing for him because he has enough to worry about with his ridiculous jobs initiative, his poll numbers, and the failed “Arab spring” turning out Islamic extremists. The smoking guns, if any, are waiting to be discovered, perhaps in the vast data archives the White House must maintain.

    For a guy trying to quit smoking, Barack Obama is facing a lot of stress. Pass the Nicorette.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/watergate_times_three.html

  12. Our Girl Hillary is out in front world-wide.She is tSECRETARY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

    8:35 a.m. Secretary Clinton delivers remarks at the Haiti Key Players Ministerial Meeting, at the Intercontinental Hotel’s Astor Room in New York City.

    10:30 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu, at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City.

    11:30 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a bilateral meeting With Kosovo President Atifete Jahjaga and Prime Minister Hashim Thaci, at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City.

    1:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton hosts a panel discussion, “Women and Agriculture: A Conversation on Improving Global Food Security,” moderated by Nick Kristof, at the Intercontinental Hotel in New York City.

    3:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton delivers remarks at an event hosted by UN Women on Women’s Political Participation, at the United Nations.

    Watch live at http://www.un.org/webcast.

    4:30 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Japanese Foreign Minister Gemba, in New York City.

    PM Secretary Clinton attends meetings with President Obama surrounding the UN General Assembly, in New York City.

    7:30 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City.

    he only person that knows when and where she will announce.She is busy 24/7 while Shinola plays and we pay.Take a look:

  13. Mrs Smith”
    This is my take on the logo SOLYNDRA.

    SOL means SUN in Spanish and the light sprays represent its rays and the taxpayers get burned.Perhaps that is how BO got his tan
    and learned to sing ‘You Are My Sunshine “

  14. ABM90
    September 19th, 2011 at 9:04 am

    “You Are My Sunshine “
    _____________

    Nice to see you in great form, ABM90

  15. jeswezey
    September 19th, 2011 at 6:25 am

    You distort, twist and misconstrue facts with such abandon that it is pointless to try to have a conversation with you.

    I leave you to your bias and anti semitism.

  16. GO, GRETA!! Greta Van Susteren publicly calls out pig Tucker Carlson:

    I really don’t understand my friend Tucker Carlson. He owns the website The Daily Caller and it currently has on its front page the most vile story — referring to a sex act with Governor Sarah Palin as a “womb shifter.” It is even the headline. Do you know what that means? Figure it out It is really vile. It is not just smut…this is violence against women.

    http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2011/09/18/tucker-carlsons-the-daily-callers-disgusting-post/

  17. What a surprise…NOT.

    Abbas: We won’t recognize Israel as Jewish state

    Palestinian leader defiant ahead of UN statehood bid, urges international community to back off; ‘Don’t order us to recognize Jewish state,’ he says. Foreign Minister says world must tell Abbas state cannot come at Israel’s expense

    Elior Levy
    08.28.11,

    Abbas Unmasked: Palestinian Leader Tells U.S., Israel He Won’t Accept Jewish State

    The Palestinian Authority will not be recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas said Saturday, adopting a belligerent tone ahead of his planned statehood bid in September.

    The Palestinian leader also criticized demands made by the International Quartet of his Authority, urging the international community to back off.

    The Palestinian leader also criticized demands made by the International Quartet of his Authority, urging the international community to back off. “Don’t order us to recognize a Jewish state,” Abbas said. “We won’t accept it.”

    Speaking earlier Saturday, Abbas adopted a more moderate tone, saying that the PA’s bid for UN recognition, planned for September, is not meant to isolate Israel or prompt a conflict with the United States.

    The Palestinian president also seemed to present a somewhat more moderate position in his meeting with Foreign Affairs Commissioner Catherine Ashton over the weekend, in Ramallah.

    Chief Palestinian Negotiator Saeb Erekat said that Abbas stressed before Ashton that the UN bid does not negate the continuation of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

    Ashton reportedly told Abbas that while the European Union does not object to the Palestinian’s UN bid per-se, its final position in the matter will be determined according to the bid’s content and phrasing.

    Ashton further said that a real solution to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians can only be achieved through negotiations.

    Lieberman slams PA

    Responding to the Palestinian leader’s defiant message, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said the statement “reveals the true nature of the September motion: A Palestinian state to come in place of a Jewish state.”

    “Countries around the world must make it clear to Abbas that the only way the Palestinians will be able to have a state is by stopping their attempt to destroy the only Jewish state in the world,” Lieberman said.

    The foreign minister has adopted a tough attitude against the PA as of late, most recently blasting Ramallah for what he called its leaders’ empty rhetoric vis-à-vis terror.

    Following the recent terror offensive in southern Israel that left eight people dead, Lieberman said: “The events of recent days prove that the Palestinian rhetoric professing that they have abandoned terror in favor on diplomacy in as removed from reality as Ramallah is from the UN building in New York City.”

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4114446,00.html

  18. September 19, 2011

    Netanyahu Making Serious Concessions in Hopes of Deterring U.N. Vote on Palestinian Statehood

    According to a late-breaking report in Haaretz, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made a series of concessions in a last-ditch attempt to avert a U.N. General Assembly vote on Palestinian statehood.

    Netanyahu apparently made these concessions through the auspices of the Quartet on the Middle East – a coalition of the U.S., the E.U., the U.N., and Russia – which is seeking to bring Israel and the Palestinians back to the negotiating able and thus prevent a showdown at the U.N.

    As a result, the Quartet has made a series of offers, each more generous than the last, to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who has rebuffed them all. According to Haaretz,

    Regarding the proposed borders of a future Palestinian state, Netanyahu reportedly agreed to a vaguer wording concerning the West Bank’s main settlement blocs. One Quartet draft spoke of negotiations based on the 1967 borders, with land swaps, with borders that are not identical to those of 1967 and taking into account “demographic reality on the ground.”

    Netanyahu gave his consent to have a more ambiguous wording to that statement, in order to provide the Americans and Blair more leeway with the Palestinian side.

    On the subject of recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, an older version of the Quartet proclamation offered “two states for two nations, with Israel as a Jewish state and the national home of the Jewish people.”

    Netanyahu agreed to compromise here as well, and allow the statement to speak of two states for two as well as of two national states, without mentioning a “Jewish state.”

    Apparently, the PM made other concessions as well, such as on security arrangements and the timetable for negotiations.

    In rejecting these offers, the Palestinians have apparently acted with astonishing arrogance and duplicity, accusing negotiatiors of being controlled by Israel and using “undiplomatic language.”

    It is currently unclear what, if any, concessions the Palestinians were willing to offer in return, or indeed, if they were even asked to do so.

    http://www.worldjewishdaily.com/backing-down.php

  19. This entire fiasco is to be laid at the feet of Big Media. It has taken 3 years for the American people to discover by themselves what could have been deducted early in the Democratic Primaries, e.g., that Obama is an inexperienced, incompetent, lazy man with mulitple ties to thugs, terrorists, American hating radicals and communists. Instead of doing their damned job, Big Media buried every gaffe, sluffed over the myriad red flags, and beat down anyone who possessed the temerity to even bring these matters up.

    We need a Congressional investigation as to what was going on in the Big Media sweat rooms to form this obviously coordinated conspiracy to hide the truth from the American people.

  20. Sunday, September 18, 2011

    Clinton’s Cause

    At an international conference last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a seminal speech about women’s essential role in the global economy, pronouncing the 21st century a “Participation Age” for women. NEWSWEEK caught up with her.

    -When you became secretary of state, you said your mission was to improve the quality of life for the world’s women. Three years later, what’s your assessment of the progress made so far?

    “No society can thrive when half its people are left behind. We have seen what a difference it makes when women have access to education and health care, when they are free to start their own businesses or make their own decisions. As secretary of state, I have been working hard to integrate women’s rights as a cornerstone of our foreign policy. Women are key to the success of the Obama administration’s major development and economic-growth initiatives—from the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves to Feed the Future to the Global Health Initiative. But without basic protections, women are unable to realize their potential. The U.S. successfully advocated for a special representative to coordinate efforts to end sexual violence in areas affected by conflict. An administration National Action Plan will be released shortly to ensure women’s equal partnership in peace and security building. And in Afghanistan, for example, we have elevated the rights and concerns of women as a top diplomatic priority.”

    -The global economy is teetering. How specifically does this endanger the progress of women?

    “The world needs to think more strategically and creatively about tapping into women’s potential for growth. Studies show that helping women access trade and grow businesses helps create jobs and boost incomes. The State Department and USAID have adopted and advocated for policies and programs—including public-private partnerships—to enable women to overcome barriers that impede their potential and to strengthen women’s entrepreneurship opportunities.”

    -How difficult is it to preach to other nations about empowering women when organizations like the World Economic Forum rank the United States 19th of 134 nations in terms of gender equality?

    “Frankly, acknowledging our continuing efforts at home helps foster my dialogues abroad on how to change policies, implement programs, and mobilize resources to empower women and girls. While there is much more work that needs to be done in the U.S., women have full and equal political and legal rights and the ability to get an education, start a business, and make decisions about their lives. In too many countries around the world, women do not have these rights. They are often discriminated against, even brutally enslaved, or simply not able to contribute to society or realize their potential. We have an obligation to stand up for their rights.”

    -You toured the Middle East just days before the Arab Spring began. Does the U.S. really have any power to demand that women have a place in the region’s power structures?

    “This is a moment of enormous possibility for the people of North Africa and the Middle East. We can’t come in and tell them how to work toward democratic transitions, but we do have a lot of lessons to share on how to empower women and girls. Wherever I go, especially in North Africa and the Middle East, I make a point of meeting not just with my government counterparts, but also with civil society, business leaders, youth—and women. I’m trying to get the word out that when women progress, all of society benefits.”

    -Do you feel that when you leave the State Department, you’ll have more power to improve the lives of the world’s women and girls than you have had as the nation’s top diplomat?

    “Throughout my life and career, I’ve tried to support women and children in whatever position I’ve found myself. As secretary of state, I have been fortunate to be able to lend my energy to this important cause, because empowering women is crucial to the success of our development and diplomacy goals. When I leave this position, I will continue to look for ways to help more women and children realize their God-given potential.”

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/09/18/clinton-s-cause-working-for-the-women-of-the-world.html

  21. Maybe if he had put the Hopium pipe away in 2008/2007 he would not be disappointed now:

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/click/0911/Jon_Stewart_on_his_disappointment_with_Obama.html?showall

    Jon Stewart is frustrated with President Obama. The funnyman has said it before, but he’s saying it again in the current issue of Rolling Stone.

    “He feels like the only president who begins every press conference with a heavy sigh. I think he was already kind of over us by the time he got into office. And now he’s like, ‘What the f–k is wrong with these people?'” “The Daily Show” host told the music mag.

    On his personal disappointment, he expressed surprise at “how much [Obama] deferred to the legislative process.” Elaborating, he said, “He’s accomplished some things, and I’m sure he’s pleased with what he’s done, but I would have preferred to see something a little bit more transformative. They haven’t made the case that government can be effective, or accountable, or agile.

    Stewart is rolling his eyes at Obama, but he wants to see more of Ron Paul. Of the doc, he said, “I don’t understand how a guy with consistent grass-roots support at the level he has is not a part of the conversation. I saw on the news networks, ‘Rick Perry enters the race and immediately jumps in at second place, bumping Michele Bachmann down to fourth.’ But they don’t mention, ‘Hey, guess who’s in third place?’ Ron Paul!”

  22. Obama running late again, this guy is the laziest pig ever, can never get on time, its deliberate for anticipation…look at me.

  23. Carol: “You distort, twist and misconstrue facts with such abandon that it is pointless to try to have a conversation with you.”
    ************

    Yes, well I guess I’ll just go on distorting, twisting and misconstruing because I’m unable to grasp your all-encompassing knowledge of the ‘facts’ or the sincerity and truthfulness of your statements.

    You were the one who first referred to the Amerindians while speaking of the Arab/Jewish conflict; I did no more than agree with you and expand upon your remark. Looking back, I don’t see any distortion of the facts concerning either the Amerindians or the Arabs/Jews.

    As to whether or not the Arabs are in the loser column, I guess it’s your opinion against mine. Bibi, in any case, seems to agree with me that the conflict is not yet decided: he’s doing what he can to prevent his occupied Arabs from gaining world recognition.

    He may win this battle, but next he’s got to face the possibility of the former ally he snubbed – Turkey – breaking through his blockade.

    These are realities that are difficult to construe otherwise – the fight continues.

  24. blowme0bama
    September 19th, 2011 at 10:05 am

    This entire fiasco is to be laid at the feet of Big Media. … Instead of doing their damned job, Big Media buried every gaffe, sluffed over the myriad red flags, and beat down anyone who possessed the temerity to even bring these matters up.

    They were all doing what they were told, they put their Judas pay above their children and grand-children’s future, above their fellow citizens. Maybe they didn’t believe he could be as bad as he is and so thought that compromising their integrity didn’t really matter.
    Course you could ask what could they have gotten away with saying on corporate owned airways? They could have gotten together en-mass, journolister style, and declined to say anything.

    I fear the days are gone when a Congressional investigation means anything – everyone – press, politicians, judges have been captured by international corporate money.

    Right when I write this I think “but not Derril Issa”. Hope springs eternal.

  25. I actually agree with Stewart re: Ron Paul. I think Paul is brilliant in some areas, and a complete loon when he goes off on some of his tangents.

    BUT – he has a lot more support than many of the other R candidates whom the media treats as “serious” candidates. It is completely unfair the way they ignore him. Democracy isn’t about who I like or who you like. If enough people want the man heard, then he ought to be heard, because he is THEIR voice. Neither the media nor the parties nor MYSELF gets to pick who gets heard. That’s up to the People. And if enough people want Ron Paul heard, then he ought to be. Whether I or the elites like what he’s saying has jack all to do with it.

  26. admin: I don’t remember… Was Jon Stewart a hopium addict? I have a hard time seeing any funny man as an addict of anything. Their work consists of stepping back and taking nobody, no tradition, seriously, and looking for the absurd. Maybe he just favored Bambi over McCain? In the campaign, I think McCain (and Palin) opened up more absurdity than the Waffles camp.

    When Waffles Waffled on FISA, for example, what did Jon Stewart say?

  27. admin re ain’t no sunshine, love that song and what an awesome coming out campaign song that would make! hope somebody is paying attention and makes a note of it.

  28. “There shouldn’t be any reason for Congress to drag its feet,” Obama said, one day after Durbin said they’ll probably vote on it next month.

  29. Oh, no, Obama–Not the “go through budget line by line” line again. You’ve had 3 years! Anyone who believes you now is DOING lines….lines of coke.

  30. I need to except GVS from my earlier indictment of the media. I just read what she said about the Tucker Carlson and Daily Caller. I have been wondering why the Daily Caller web site has been “undergoing maintenance” for the last 4 or 5 days.

    Do you suppose Sarah took him down? Gosh I hope so. Maybe the new name of the web site will be “Sarah’s Daily Answer”.

  31. Stewart is rolling his eyes at Obama, but he wants to see more of Ron Paul. Of the doc, he said, “I don’t understand how a guy with consistent grass-roots support at the level he has is not a part of the conversation. I saw on the news networks, ‘Rick Perry enters the race and immediately jumps in at second place, bumping Michele Bachmann down to fourth.’ But they don’t mention, ‘Hey, guess who’s in third place?’ Ron Paul!”

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

    Good for Stewart!

  32. That didnt tell me anything about how to solve the economic deficit, really its like his job plan, a great big rehash of previous rubbish.

  33. so which is it?

    during an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd on August 5, 2009, when asked how raising taxes on anyone helps the economy, President Obama said: “The last thing you want to do is raise taxes in the middle of a recession because that would suck up… take more demand out of the economy and put businesses in a further hole.”

  34. Oh so true.

    Sen. Toomey: “These proposals could not pass a Democrat-controlled Congress in 2009—and they won’t pass in 2011.”

  35. “She’s a more stable person who gets results,” said Joseph Cherney, 67, a retired Republican automotive purchasing worker from Mineral Ridge, Ohio. “The president we have now isn’t much of a president because he really doesn’t do anything. He’s pompous and arrogant.”

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

    …he really doesn’t do anything…

    …that’s it right there…O’s cover is blown…people can see it for themselves…

    I hate to sound redundant…but…O will go down as the first democratic president of the 21st century who was, in effect, The Teleprompter President…the man who chose to READ speeches as the most memorable thing people will remember about him…

    (take away that telli and this guy is sunk…sunk…clueless…the country is depending on a ‘reader’, he may as well be ‘reading’ the news)

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

    btw…I happened to be in an office last week and there was a young, married Iraq/Afghanastan vet in there who was streaming the Marine medal of honor ceremony at the White House last week…

    …and he told me that the military knows O choose to this as a photo op…and the most obvious thing that came across was that O could not even talk from the heart at that ceremony…if you look at it, O spends most of his time with his eyes down reading from notes…no emotion, just more robotic gestures from the man who READS his way through his presidency…

    …what a wasted opportunity…and to think the CBC makes even more excuses for O’s incompetence because of color…O has used his “color” to get special treatment…while the country suffers…

  36. My biggest problem with raising taxes isn’t the principle of the thing (I agree with that), nor is it the legitimate concerns that productive investment may flee to other shores.

    My biggest problem is that I see no indication whatsoever that increasing revenue is going to do any good. If you give them more money, they will simply blow more money, and come back in 4 years or less, asking for more. I have yet in my adult lifetime (other than under Clinton) seen my government exercise any fiscal discipline whatsoever, or do a damn thing other than spend more, then ask for more to fix it, then spend more, then ask for more (in order to balance the budget, we pinky promise), then spend more……

    So at this point I’m in a rather stubborn mood. I find it galling that in the midst of an administration blowing stimulus dollars like monopoly money, they have come crying for more with no guarantee whatsoever that the profligacy will be reined in.

    I agree with the principle that the rich could pay more to get our debt under control. But I have NO confidence whatsoever that that’s what will happen with the money. It will be: “Hey, new pot of money!! Yeeee Haw! Now I can do all the useless crap that I couldn’t get funded before, and John Q. Donor can get appointed to a newly created board with 50 staffers!”

    Until my government can demonstrate to me that they have a fiscal brain in their heads, I’m not keen on giving them more money. Show me some responsibility, and some serious steps toward solvency FIRST. Once you do that consistently, and still can’t close the gap, then if you come back for more money I might be all in favor.

    But at this point I feel like any increase will just be thrown down the same black hole, and likely in the pockets of lobbyists and Goldmann Sachs and turtle crossings and bankrupt ventures.

  37. HillaryforTexas
    September 19th, 2011 at 1:12 pm
    If you give them more money, they will simply blow more money, and come back in 4 years or less, asking for more. I have yet in my adult lifetime (other than under Clinton) seen my government exercise any fiscal discipline whatsoever, or do a damn thing other than spend more, then ask for more to fix it, then spend more, then ask for more (in order to balance the budget, we pinky promise), then spend more……
    _________________________________________________________________________________

    Agree. I would not have a problem paying an increaase in taxes for a limited time, say 3-5 years IF the damned government was significantly downsizing, and by significant, i mean cut the damned thing in half and get a balanced budget amendment.

  38. blowme, it’s like the kid who gives you the sob story that he needs money to pay down his credit cards, or he’s gonna be SUNK and homeless!! So you give it to him, and he doesn’t pay jack down, but instead goes on a spending spree. Then he comes back with the same sob story, and you do it again, because this time he really really really is going to pay some stuff down. Then you find out he opened a NEW credit line and bought a lot of blow and a new car.

    After several runs of that, cries of “But…but…..I’m gonna go bankrupt and be starving on the street if you don’t help!” start to fall on deaf ears.

    Show me some fucking responsibility with what you HAVE before you ask for more.

  39. Obama calls for raising employee contributions to retirement plans

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/obama-calls-for-raising-employee-contributions-to-retirement-plans/2011/04/15/gIQANYZNfK_blog.html

    President Obama called Monday for raising the employee contribution to federal worker retirement plans to help pay for his job creation package.

    Under the plan announced Monday morning, the employee contribution would increase by 1.2 percentage points over three years beginning in 2013, generating $21 billion in savings over 10 years, the White House said.

    That’s half of the $42.5 billion in savings that Obama is seeking by making changes to benefit programs for civilian employees and military personnel.

    The American Federation of Government Employees quickly called the Obama plan unfair. For an employee with an annual salary of $47,500, AFGE said, the plan amounts to a $570 annual pay cut.

    “Asking federal employees to accept additional cuts to their take-home pay is unfair, especially at a time when citizens are demanding more services from their government,” said AFGE President John Gage. “This is a double whammy for federal employees, who are facing the same economic hardships as most other Americans. Enough is enough.”

    Federal employees already are under a two-year pay freeze, which was imposed in January.

    Obama also called for capping payments to individual contractors at the annual pay level of the senior-most federal civil servants, which is now $200,000.

    “Setting the cap at this level would result in estimated savings of at least $300 million annually, and would bring greater parity between federal and contractor executives’ compensation,” the White House said.

    Administration officials said they don’t expect the measure to charge employees more for retirement benefits would make it harder for the government to attract talent.

    Obama also called for a commission on federal public service reform, which could lead to significant changes in the nation’s Civil Service system.

    ………………….

    Funny he never said much about that little number today.

  40. Oh my.
    Liberals vow to challenge Obama in Democratic primaries
    … We need to put strong Democratic pressure on President Obama in the name of poor and working people,” said Cornel West, author and professor at Princeton University who has been highly critical of Mr. Obama’s tenure since helping him get elected in 2008. “His administration has tilted too much toward Wall Street, we need policies that empower Main Street.” Mr. Nader and Mr. West are joined by Christ Townsend, of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, and Brent Blackwelder, president emeritus of Friends of the Earth.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/19/liberals-vow-challenge-obama-democratic-primaries/

  41. More oh my, and [snark] could admin be moonlighting at Fox?

    Democrats Balk At Obama Tax Plan |
    … His explicit threat is that while the economy may not be getting better, voters will know it’s the Republicans’ fault. It was a strategy that initially thrilled the president’s supporters – the kind of in-your-face, confrontational style that they have long urged Obama to adopt. The problem, though, has been that the president’s stimulus plan has mostly received a bipartisan shrug in Congress. When the best Obama can get as an answer to “pass this bill today” from Sen. Dick Durbin, the number two Senate Democrat, and longtime friend and home state senator is, “sometime next month” one gets the sense that the blue team is not feeling the fierce urgency of now. Part is the fact that Obama served up mostly a rehash of his first, February 2009 stimulus package. The White House thought that would make it harder for Republicans to say no since the ideas aren’t controversial. But not only have Republicans been able to repeat “more failed stimulus” until they are hoarse, but Obama has not been able to win the support of key moderate Democrats.
    Even the payroll tax cut extension and expansion, assumed to be the least controversial parts of the president’s plan, have been kind of a fizzle. Conservatives said such temporary measures don’t work since businesses crave predictability and many Democrats dislike the fact that taxes being lowered are the ones that finance Social Security. snip
    the congressional Democrats on whom Obama is relying to keep Republicans pinned down have so far not joined the president at the barricades. Part of that has been that liberals aren’t happy that the president has proposed stimulus lite, but mostly because Democrats don’t currently see Obama as a good friend to have these days. Since Obama began his fall campaign effort, the administration has been beset by scandal (Fast and Furious, Solyndra and LightSquared) and Democrats have lost two special elections in which Obama himself was the central issue. The president has obtained no job-approval bounce from his latest publicity blitz. The administration is pushing back with vigor against a new book by Ron Suskind which shows a dysfunctional White House and a president who compares his own management style with that of Jimmy Carter. Looking at all this, moderate Democrats are not eager to join the president in yet another violent clash with House Republicans. If Obama can’t rally them to his cause soon, his 2012 strategy will be a bust even before 2011 is over.
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/19/democrats-balk-at-obama-tax-plan/

  42. Secret recordings raise new questions in ATF ‘Gunwalker’ operation

    Updated 5:09 pm, Sept. 19, 2011 with comment from the Office of the Inspector General

    WASHINGTON – CBS News has obtained secretly recorded conversations that raise questions as to whether some evidence is being withheld in the murder of a Border Patrol agent.

    (Scroll down to listen to the audio)

    The tapes were recorded approximately mid-March 2011 by the primary gun dealer cooperating with ATF in its “Fast and Furious” operation: Andre Howard, owner of Lone Wolf Trading Company in Glendale, Arizona. He’s talking with the lead case ATF case agent Hope MacAllister.

    The tapes have been turned over to Congressional investigators and the Inspector General.

    As CBS News first reported last February, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives allegedly allowed thousands of weapons to “walk” onto the streets without interdiction into the hands of suspected traffickers for Mexican drug cartels in its operation “Fast and Furious.”

    The conversations refer to a third weapon recovered at the murder scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

    Agent: I was ordered to let guns into Mexico

    Court records have previously only mentioned two weapons: Romanian WASR “AK-47 type” assault rifles. Both were allegedly sold to suspects who were under ATF’s watch as part of Fast and Furious.

    Also, a ballistics report turned over to Congressional investigators only mentions the two WASR rifles. The ballistics report says it’s inconclusive as to whether either of the WASR rifles fired the bullet that killed Terry.

    Law enforcement sources and others close to the Congressional investigation say the Justice Department’s Inspector General obtained the audio tapes several months ago as part of its investigation into Fast and Furious.

    Then, the sources say for some reason the Inspector General passed the tapes along to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona: a subject in the investigation. It’s unclear why the Inspector General, who is supposed to investigate independently, would turn over evidence to an entity that is itself under investigation.

    A spokesman from the Office of the Inspector General today said, “The OIG officially provided the United States Attorney’s Office with a copy of the recordings in question so that the USAO could consider them in connection with the government’s disclosure obligations in the pending criminal prosecutions of the gun traffickers. Prior to receiving the tapes, the OIG made clear that we would have to provide a copy of the recordings to the United States Attorney’s Office because they would need to review them to satisfy any legal disclosure obligations.”

    In the audiotapes, ATF Agent MacAllister tells Howard that a third weapon recovered at the Brian Terry murder scene last December is an SKS assault rifle. Agent MacAllister claims to know that the SKS “had nothing to do with” the Brian Terry murder and, unlike the WASR’s, did not trace back to the Lone Wolf gun store.

    It’s unclear why a weapon would be, in essence, missing from the evidence disclosed at the crime scene under FBI jurisdiction.

    Agent MacAllister and Howard (the gun dealer) also discuss various Republicans and Democrats in Congress who are investigating Fast and Furious. They express concern that whistleblower ATF special agent John Dodson has further evidence that could be damaging to the government.

    Transcript of the audio below:

    Agent: Well there was two.

    Dealer: There’s three weapons.

    Agent: There’s three weapons.

    Dealer: I know that.

    Agent: And yes, there’s serial numbers for all three.

    Dealer: That’s correct.

    Agent: Two of them came from this store.

    Dealer: I understand that.

    Agent: There’s an SKS that I don’t think came from…. Dallas or Texas or something like that.

    Dealer: I know. talking about the AK’s

    Agent: The two AK’s came from this store.

    Dealer: I know that.

    Agent: Ok.

    Dealer: I did the Goddamned trace

    Agent: Third weapon is the SKS has nothing to do with it.

    Dealer: That didn’t come from me.

    Agent: No and there is that’s my knowledge. and I spoke to someone who would know those are the only ones they have. So this is the agent who’s working the case, all I can go by is what she told me.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20108240-10391695.html

  43. You gotta love him……

    “Giving the federal government more money would be like giving a cocaine addict more cocaine.” — Boehner.

  44. KNIGHT: Obama tears up the Constitution

    The scope of his lawless disregard expands by the day

    The Constitution of the United States, whose adoption we celebrate every Sept. 17, clearly lists the powers of each branch of the national government. Let’s take a look at what Barack Obama, like any president, is empowered to do and see if it squares with his actions. In Article II, Section 1, he is sworn to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Section 2 names the president as commander in chief of the armed forces, grants him the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate and to appoint ambassadors, federal judges, Cabinet officials and other federal officers. Section 3 says the president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

    In his two years and nine months in office, President Obama has compiled a spectacular record of noncompliance with the Constitution. Here are just some of the ways his administration has failed to execute the laws while using raw, unauthorized power:

    The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA): On Feb. 23, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced that under Mr. Obama’s direction, the Justice Department would no longer defend DOMA, which is under attack in several federal courts. DOMA, which was passed by overwhelming majorities in Congress and signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, defines marriage for all federal purposes as the union of a man and a woman and allows states under the full-faith-and-credit clause not to be forced to recognize unions from other states that do not comport with their state marriage laws. Forty-five states have moved to strengthen their marriage laws, with 30 enacting constitutional amendments. Mr. Obama, who has played coy with the marriage issue while aggressively promoting the homosexual agenda, is violating his oath of office to appease the gay lobby.

    The 15th Amendment: Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department has effectively become a race-based enforcement unit. After New Black Panther Party members were caught on tape intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place in 2008, the Justice Department declined to defend the convictions and thus sent the message that baton-wielding thuggishness on Election Day is no big deal. Former Justice Department attorney J. Christian Adams, who laid out the case before the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, described the administration’s dismissal of charges as “lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law.”

    Illegal Immigration: The Obama administration has ignored the illegal actions of “sanctuary cities” and sued the state of Arizona in July 2010 for enforcing federal law. Then, last month, the administration announced a new policy that, in effect, ends enforcement of illegal immigration, providing the illegal alien meets the requirements of the Dream Act, a bill Congress failed to pass. So, Mr. Obama is ignoring current federal law while creating rules based on a law that never passed.

    “Cap and trade”: In 2010, the Senate rejected a sweeping environmental bill that would have created a massive federal carbon regulation system. Despite this, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would treat carbon dioxide (the air we breathe out) as a pollutant and begin cracking down on America’s businesses and power plants. The EPA has become a law unto itself. The Obama administration also has ignored a federal judge’s ruling that it acted illegally in prohibiting new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

    Obscenity laws: The Obama administration, like the George W. Bush administration before it, has ignored federal laws against selling obscene materials, prosecuting only a handful of cases. Even though the law is clear and courts routinely hand down convictions, U.S. attorneys don’t bother to enforce the law anymore, given the direction from the top. The result is that the Internet is awash in illegal obscenity and even mainstream hotels peddle obscene materials via pay TV.

    The Fifth Amendment: The Constitution guarantees that no one is deprived of his or her property without “due process of law” or “just compensation.” The National Labor Relations Board’s absurd order to the Boeing Co. not to open a newly built $750-million Dreamliner facility in right-to-work South Carolina, because unions in Boeing’s home state of Washington object, violates that guarantee. Even liberal New York Times columnist Joseph Nocera commented, “Seriously, when has a government agency ever tried to dictate where a company makes its products? I can’t ever remember it happening.”

    The First Amendment: The NLRB struck again this year, declaring two Catholic universities – St. Xavier University in Chicago and Manhattan College in New York – not sufficiently “religious.” If the holdings stand, the schools may see the NLRB assert jurisdiction and rope the faculty and employees into a union election.

    While ignoring laws that he is obligated to enforce, Mr. Obama has added other duties that would leave America’s Founders scratching their heads. As columnist Don Feder notes, “Right out of the gate, there was his salaam to the Saudi king and his declaration in the course of a 2009 speech at Cairo University that ‘I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.’ That’s in the Presidential-Responsibility-To-Fight-Negative-Stereotypes-Of-Islam section of the Constitution.”

    More frightening is Mr. Obama’s heavy-handed seizure of the nation’s health care system and Obamacare’s unconstitutional mandate for everyone to purchase health insurance. Nowhere, not even in the much-abused commerce clause, does the Constitution give the government the right to force citizens to engage in commerce. If Obamacare is upheld, government bureaucrats can pretty much order us to do anything they want.

    This list, which could be longer, should include Mr. Obama’s failure as commander in chief to lead our armed forces with honor. Can you imagine George Washington’s or Gen. George S. Patton’s response to the Obama administration’s doctoring of results of a troop survey, leaking misleading “findings” to the press, ignoring strong opposition by combat troops and ramming through a policy of homosexualizing the armed forces? This violates 235 years of tradition in the world’s finest military.

    Paraphrasing Ted Koppel’s comment about the Ten Commandments, the Constitution is not a set of suggestions. The Constitution’s enumerated powers and limitations ensure maximum liberty in a free republic. When the chief enforcer shows such profound contempt for the Constitution, he needs to be reminded that no one is above the law. Not even The One.

    Robert Knight is senior fellow for the American Civil Rights Union and a columnist for The Washington Times.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/16/obama-tears-up-the-constitution/

  45. Big Pink high fives to you admin for this post. !!!!!

    Hillary’s photo right there, and the contents make me feel happy, first time in a long time…

    Thank you.

  46. Obama Proposes New Czar – Hidden away in the jobs bill.

    http://townhall.com/columnists/luritadoan/2011/09/19/obama_proposes_new_czar

    As the Obama agenda proves increasingly impotent, Americans have witnessed Obama’s czars crash and burn or run for cover over the past thirty months. From Van Jones to Kevin Jennings to Nancy-Ann DeParle to Todd Stern to Ron Bloom, Obama’s style of management–bypassing the senate-confirmed agency heads–has failed to yield the results promised to the American people. You would think Obama would give up on the failed idea of using a curious collection of White House czars to manage complex economic and regulatory issues. No way.

    Instead, in the American Jobs Act, Obama is proposing a new group of czars as a part of his “jobs” act– the American Infrastructure Financing Authority (AIFA) czars. President Obama’s newest czars will be given the authority to manage over a trillion dollars of federal funding for roads, bridges, buildings, waterways, dams and other infrastructure.

    Here we go again. No doubt, Obama hopes that few legislators or American citizens will read the deadly details buried within the 199 pages of his proposed American Jobs Act that will establish this latest czar-ship, nor understand just how expensive AIFA is going to be.

    As with Obama’s other czars, the AIFA czar comes with infrastructure requirements of his own: staff, office space and technology needed to perform the job. Managing what is in reality a trillion dollar budget is going to require a huge new staff that will, essentially represent an entire new federal agency. Of course, nowhere does President Obama tell us why a new czar is required to manage infrastructure projects. More importantly, Obama does not explain why the vast federal bureaucracy now responsible for these activities must be bypassed and a new, redundant agency is built.

    Make no mistake: the AIFA Czar position is redundant. All of the infrastructure projects and tasks identified to be performed by Obama’s new Czar are already the responsibilities of the Senate-confirmed heads of Department of Transportation, the U.S. General Services Administration and the Department of Energy.

  47. admin
    September 19th, 2011 at 3:16 am

    Tony Stark, it’s called “killing with kindness.” It is frustrating to all of us because we would much rather have Bill publish that book he promised about Obama during the campaign. We’re like antsy troops wanting to fire our guns but the commander yells “don’t shoot until you see the whites of their eyes.”

    Meanwhile Frodo is dressed like an Orc as he approaches Mount Doom to drop a ring on Sauron.

    ——-
    Bill may compliment Gollum, but a rose called by any other name is still…

  48. Admin, I am a tabloid junkie–I just checked my stack of magazines but I have already tossed the Hillary issue.

    From what I remember I think the story talked about Michelle being disgusted about Hillary looking overweight and frumpy-Michelle made statements to her that were negative and supposedly this drove Hillary to tears.

    There was a little more but I don’t remember it all. Frankly it was so far fetched in nature that I just dismissed it as a smear job by someone…

  49. Forgot to add..the Globe article also said that the insults had Hillary considering leaving her post as Sec. of State…

  50. Michelle being disgusted about Hillary looking overweight and frumpy-Michelle made statements to her that were negative and supposedly this drove Hillary to tears.

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

    I’m sure it hurt her feelings but she’ll try to go on.

    ROTLF!

  51. No gossip here: Clinton Fever hits New York this week….

    http://adugan-billclintonblog.blogspot.com/

    Friday, September 16, 2011
    RSVP to ask Chelsea Clinton questions during CGI
    The 2011 CGI Annual Meeting begins next week. During the event Randi Zuckerberg will be hosting a series of live webcast chats with notable CGI members, with questions coming from YOU via Facebook & Twitter.

    Ask questions to Muhammad Yunus, Chelsea Clinton, Mandy Moore, and others.

    RSVP to join the conversation.
    http://www.facebook.com/billclinton?ref=ts#!/event.php?eid=165607603520922
    Posted by adugan at 7:02 PM

    ———————————————–

    Saturday, September 17, 2011
    Announcing: a conversation with Sec. Hillary Clinton & Chelsea Clinton
    Clinton Global Initiative 2011 kicks off Tuesday. To see updates and RSVP to see webcasts go here http://www.clintonglobalinitiative.org/
    for latest info http://twitter.com/#!/ClintonGlobal
    Posted by adugan at 9:44 AM

    ———————————————–

    Monday, September 19, 2011
    Chelsea Clinton joins Facebook
    Chelsea Clinton has joined Facebook. Follow her as she describes her experience at the CGI Annual Meeting. On Thursday you can watch a live stream of her moderating a panel from the “Girls & Women Lunch Breakout Session: Technology for Economic Empowerment.”

    http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000417200451#!/pages/Chelsea-Clinton/103551633078066
    Posted by adugan at 11:43 AM

    ———————————————–

    Monday, September 19, 2011
    Tuesday Bill Clinton to be on CNN & Rachael Ray show
    On Tuesday Bill Clinton will be on CNN with Wolf Blitzer at 7 pm ET
    and also on the Rachel Ray show http://www.rachaelrayshow.com/show/view/1357/

    check your local listings

  52. Thanks AmericanGal for the tabloid rundown. We can’t imagine Michelle mocking Hillary’s body – not with Michelle’s body problems. No doubt Barack envies Michelle’s arms but let’s remember Barack is Lebron James (via Joe Scarborough):

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/63848.html

    I’m LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game.”

    — Barack Obama on his political skills in 2004

    It’s not wise for a politician to compare himself with an athlete nicknamed “The King.” But that’s exactly what President Barack Obama did at the Democratic National Convention in 2004, when he aligned himself with basketball superstar LeBron James.

    Seven years later, it seems the president’s immodest assessment of himself turned out to be right.

    Barack Obama is LeBron James. [snip]

    Obama, like James, moved ruthlessly through suitors, dumping loyal supporters along the way when it served his larger purpose: to get into the big game.

    For the Democratic nominee, that chance came when Wall Street spun out of control in September 2008. He got elected, but not before turning his back on many of the same people who made his rise possible — including the man who officiated his marriage and baptized his children.

    Like Obama, LeBron was also willing to turn his back on a franchise and a city that also happened to be his hometown.

    Obama entered the big leagues with faux Greek columns lining his stage while King James made his grand entrance on a glamorous South Beach riser adorned with lasers, smoke bombs and roaring crowds.

    Obama used his grand moment to declare that future generations would look back to his elevation as “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”

    LeBron used his moment in the sun to strut before screaming Miami fans while proclaiming that he would bring “five, six, seven” championships to the Heat.

    Despite both men’s abundance of promise and surplus of confidence, they are now bound — not by greatness — but by their own collapse when the klieg lights burned at their brightest.

    As Grantland’s Bill Simmons wrote last spring, “LeBron James melted down in Dallas, disappeared and extended his “Wait a second, what the hell just happened???” streak to two straight years. Why isn’t LeBron shooting? Why isn’t he driving to the basket? Does he realize this game is being televised? You can’t call it a meltdown or a breakdown; that would belittle what happened. Call it a LeBrondown.”

    Or if you’re a Democrat, an “Obamadown.” [snip]

    But like James disappearing in plain sight while the entire sports world watched in stunned disbelief, Obama always slips to the side of the court when his teammates need him the most.

    Supporters of Obama find this character trait the most frustrating, while historians consider it his most defining.

    Over the past two years, I have asked numerous presidential historians whether any Oval Office occupant ever deferred so much to lowly congressmen and senators. Their answer is always “no.”

    So his supporters are left asking how to explain a president who claims in his first presidential press conference that the U.S. economy will never recover if a stimulus bill is not passed — despite the fact that president allowed Nancy Pelosi (see also Dwyane Wade) to carry the entire load?

    How do you explain a president who allows his agenda to be dominated for 18 months by a health care debate in which he refuses to tell his own Democratic leaders his stance on the most important issues of that debate — including whether he supported the public option?

    How do you explain the president’s continued failure to produce a plan to save Social Security and Medicare?

    How do you explain the president’s refusal to adopt any of his own debt commission’s recommendations?

    How do you explain the president’s refusal to draft a working budget?

    How do you explain to frustrated Democrats that every time they want their president to stand up and fight, he instead disappears into the woodwork?

    There’s only one answer.

    He’s LeBron, baby.

    Update: After this column was posted, a reader pointed out to me that the National Review’s Neil Minkoff has previously explored this topic. Here is the link to his column.”

    http://www.nationalreview.com/right-field/275917/president-isn-t-tiger-he-s-lebron-neil-minkoff#

    We expect the president to face adversity by taking action against his problems, since they are our problems. We expect him to drive through traffic and get to the rim. Reagan played above the rim. Clinton drove the lane, knowing he would get to the rim or score from the line. Even if you dislike the guy, you know W. owned his presidency. He played to win. The failure of the presidency of Barack Obama is not just that he does not play to win. It is that he plays for any loss to not be his fault.

  53. Translation? No gossip here either:

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.ae64262d1dcb6895c6f8b9cb03b1b8f3.ab1&show_article=1

    Prominent female politicians including US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff joined voices Monday to demand a greater global political role for women.

    “Despite notable progress, gender inequality persists,” Rousseff, who became Brazil’s first female president earlier this year, said at a high-level event held at the United Nations ahead of this week’s UN General Assembly.

    Women are still the ones who suffer the most from extreme poverty, illiteracy, poor healthcare systems, conflicts and sexual violence.

    Rousseff noted that on Wednesday she would become the first woman in the history of the United Nations to open debate at the UN General Assembly.

    “As someone who tried to be a president, it’s very encouraging to see those who actually ended up as a president,” Clinton joked at Monday’s event, in a reference to her unsuccessful presidential campaign in 2008. [snip]

    Women make up less than 10 percent of world leaders, and globally less than one in five members of parliament is a woman, according to UN Women.

    Increasing gender equality and putting more women in leadership roles will promote economic development, said Michelle Bachelet, the head of UN Women and a former president of Chile.

    “We now have data to show that countries with greater gender equality have higher gross national product per capita and that women’s leadership in the corporate sector results in improved business performance,” she said.

    The participation of women in this year’s wave of popular uprisings in the Middle East demonstrated that women are “determined to fight for democracy”, Bachelet added.

    “The message is loud and clear: There is no turning back,” she said.

  54. ADMIN, you have to get the video for the first part of Greta’s show tonight. She had Tucker Carlson on, and she flat out ripped him a new one. It was a sight to see.

  55. Hillaryfor Texas, I did see Greta go after ol’ Tucker and it was fantastic. I well remember how Tucker said the nastiest things about Hillary in the most woman hating ways back when. And before that how vile he was about Bill Clinton.

    Carlson deserved everything Greta threw at him and so much more.

    You go, Greta!!

  56. CGI’s- annual event is coming up- Bill has been sending AIDS medications to Third World countries for years… It would be a nice surprise if these gamers who broke the complex code were recognized at the Annual CGI conference.
    ___________________

    Online gamers crack AIDS enzyme puzzle

    By AFP

    Online gamers have achieved a feat beyond the realm of Second Life or Dungeons and Dragons: they have deciphered the structure of an enzyme of an AIDS-like virus that had thwarted scientists for a decade.

    The exploit is published on Sunday in the journal Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, where — exceptionally in scientific publishing — both gamers and researchers are honoured as co-authors.

    Their target was a monomeric protease enzyme, a cutting agent in the complex molecular tailoring of retroviruses, a family that includes HIV.

    Figuring out the structure of proteins is vital for understanding the causes of many diseases and developing drugs to block them.

    But a microscope gives only a flat image of what to the outsider looks like a plate of one-dimensional scrunched-up spaghetti. Pharmacologists, though, need a 3-D picture that “unfolds” the molecule and rotates it in order to reveal potential targets for drugs.

    This is where Foldit comes in.

    Developed in 2008 by the University of Washington, it is a fun-for-purpose video game in which gamers, divided into competing groups, compete to unfold chains of amino acids — the building blocks of proteins — using a set of online tools.

    To the astonishment of the scientists, the gamers produced an accurate model of the enzyme in just three weeks.

    Cracking the enzyme “provides new insights for the design of antiretroviral drugs,” says the study, referring to the lifeline medication against the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

    It is believed to be the first time that gamers have resolved a long-standing scientific problem.

    “We wanted to see if human intuition could succeed where automated methods had failed,” Firas Khatib of the university’s biochemistry lab said in a press release. “The ingenuity of game players is a formidable force that, if properly directed, can be used to solve a wide range of scientific problems.”

    One of Foldit’s creators, Seth Cooper, explained why gamers had succeeded where computers had failed.

    “People have spatial reasoning skills, something computers are not yet good at,” he said.

    “Games provide a framework for bringing together the strengths of computers and humans. The results in this week’s paper show that gaming, science and computation can be combined to make advances that were not possible before.”

    http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged-in/online-gamers-crack-aids-enzyme-puzzle-161920724.html

  57. The President is apparently a big liar.

    David Brooks: Obama told me “shovel-ready” was a crock…a year ago

    http://michellemalkin.com/2010/10/16/david-brooks-obama-told-me-shovel-ready-was-a-crock-a-year-ago/

    How much of a tool is New York Times columnist David Brooks?

    This much: On the PBS NewsHour last night, Brooks admitted that President Obama told him a year ago that he knew that the “shovel-ready project” propaganda he employed to pass the massive porkulus bill was a steaming load of bullcrap.

    Brooks’ New York Times colleague Peter Baker reported the newsworthy admission in an upcoming Sunday magazine piece. It’s an admission that received much deserved attention here in the blogosphere this week and that invited much deserved derision from Republican critics of the stimulus boondoggle.

    Why didn’t Brooks report Obama’s damning admission sooner? In another serving of steaming bullcrap, he claims it’s because Baker was more skilled at getting Obama to talk on the record. Seems to me the real reason Brooks didn’t report it is because he had his nose so far up his bromance love object’s you-know-what that he didn’t see the scoop dropped right in his lap.

    Transcript:

    JIM LEHRER: Speaking of President Obama, there is this big piece in your newspaper’s Sunday magazine that’s already been read by everybody, at least anybody who has got an advanced company and who is interested in politics, about President Obama.

    What do you think of piece?

    …MARK SHIELDS: He didn’t have to do this. What he is doing, a retrospective before the election.

    I mean, we have gone from perhaps the least introspective president to the most introspective president. I mean, he sits there and talks about what it means to him and all this. For goodness’ sakes, he’s got a responsibility to his party.

    How would you like to be a Democratic member of the House fighting for your life right now, getting hit over the head for having voted for the stimulus bill, and have the president say in The New York Times Sunday magazine, there’s no such thing as a shovel-ready project?

    JIM LEHRER: Yes. That was — that’s the piece that’s been — that particular quote has really been drawing the flies — the fleas, has it not?

    DAVID BROOKS: Yes. Well, I shouldn’t have confessed this. He said this to me off the record about a year ago. But it hasn’t…

    JIM LEHRER: Off the record? So, then you can’t talk about it.

    (LAUGHTER)

    DAVID BROOKS: Yes, because Peter Baker is a better than I am, because I couldn’t get him to go on the record with that thing.

    (LAUGHTER)

    JIM LEHRER: He said this to you a year ago?

    DAVID BROOKS: It was obvious. I mean, you are trying to build a stimulus package. And when they were trying to build it, believe me, they would have loved to have filled it with infrastructure jobs. But the projects just didn’t exist. They couldn’t do it. They couldn’t find them.

    Here’s the video if you have the stomach to watch these yammering chuckleheads make excuses for themselves and for Obama on taxpayer-funded public television:

  58. He really has lost them…….Cheif cheerleaders Koolaid has wore off.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/opinion/brooks-obama-rejects-obamaism.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

    Obama Rejects Obamaism

    I’m a sap, a specific kind of sap. I’m an Obama Sap.

    When the president said the unemployed couldn’t wait 14 more months for help and we had to do something right away, I believed him. When administration officials called around saying that the possibility of a double-dip recession was horrifyingly real and that it would be irresponsible not to come up with a package that could pass right away, I believed them.

    I liked Obama’s payroll tax cut ideas and urged Republicans to play along. But of course I’m a sap. When the president unveiled the second half of his stimulus it became clear that this package has nothing to do with helping people right away or averting a double dip. This is a campaign marker, not a jobs bill.

    It recycles ideas that couldn’t get passed even when Democrats controlled Congress. In his remarks Monday the president didn’t try to win Republicans to even some parts of his measures. He repeated the populist cries that fire up liberals but are designed to enrage moderates and conservatives.

    He claimed we can afford future Medicare costs if we raise taxes on the rich. He repeated the old half-truth about millionaires not paying as much in taxes as their secretaries. (In reality, the top 10 percent of earners pay nearly 70 percent of all income taxes, according to the I.R.S. People in the richest 1 percent pay 31 percent of their income to the federal government while the average worker pays less than 14 percent, according to the Congressional Budget Office.)

    This wasn’t a speech to get something done. This was the sort of speech that sounded better when Ted Kennedy was delivering it. The result is that we will get neither short-term stimulus nor long-term debt reduction anytime soon, and I’m a sap for thinking it was possible.

    Yes, I’m a sap. I believed Obama when he said he wanted to move beyond the stale ideological debates that have paralyzed this country. I always believe that Obama is on the verge of breaking out of the conventional categories and embracing one of the many bipartisan reform packages that are floating around.

    But remember, I’m a sap. The White House has clearly decided that in a town of intransigent Republicans and mean ideologues, it has to be mean and intransigent too. The president was stung by the liberal charge that he was outmaneuvered during the debt-ceiling fight. So the White House has moved away from the Reasonable Man approach or the centrist Clinton approach.

    It has gone back, as an appreciative Ezra Klein of The Washington Post conceded, to politics as usual. The president is sounding like the Al Gore for President campaign, but without the earth tones. Tax increases for the rich! Protect entitlements! People versus the powerful! I was hoping the president would give a cynical nation something unconventional, but, as you know, I’m a sap.

    Being a sap, I still believe that the president’s soul would like to do something about the country’s structural problems. I keep thinking he’s a few weeks away from proposing serious tax reform and entitlement reform. But each time he gets close, he rips the football away. He whispered about seriously reforming Medicare but then opted for changes that are worthy but small. He talks about fundamental tax reform, but I keep forgetting that he has promised never to raise taxes on people in the bottom 98 percent of the income scale.

    That means when he talks about raising revenue, which he is right to do, he can’t really talk about anything substantive. He can’t tax gasoline. He can’t tax consumption. He can’t do a comprehensive tax reform. He has to restrict his tax policy changes to the top 2 percent, and to get any real revenue he’s got to hit them in every which way. We’re not going to simplify the tax code, but by God Obama’s going to raise taxes on rich people who give to charity! We’ve got to do something to reduce the awful philanthropy surplus plaguing this country!

    The president believes the press corps imposes a false equivalency on American politics. We assign equal blame to both parties for the dysfunctional politics when in reality the Republicans are more rigid and extreme. There’s a lot of truth to that, but at least Republicans respect Americans enough to tell us what they really think. The White House gives moderates little morsels of hope, and then rips them from our mouths. To be an Obama admirer is to toggle from being uplifted to feeling used.

    The White House has decided to wage the campaign as fighting liberals. I guess I understand the choice, but I still believe in the governing style Obama talked about in 2008. I may be the last one. I’m a sap.

  59. Obama Unveils Deficit Plan Containing $1.5T in Tax Hikes, GOP Cringes

    September 19, 2011

    WASHINGTON – President Obama, drawing immediate condemnation from congressional Republicans, unveiled a new deficit reduction plan Monday anchored by $1.5 trillion in new taxes, including an end to Bush-era rates for upper income earners making $250,000 or more and additional taxes on millionaires.

    Keying in on a populist message that millionaires and billionaires should pay more in taxes than their secretaries, the president announced a plan in the Rose Garden that includes more than $2 trillion total in entitlement cuts and tax increases over the next decade.

    Together with spending cuts enacted last month and projected savings from interest payments, the savings in the president’s plan total more than $3 trillion. The Obama administration is also adding on another $1 trillion in savings over 10 years from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, though that kind of accounting has been dismissed in past debates as a gimmick.

    The $4 trillion effort is tied to his American Jobs Act, aimed at putting nearly 14 million unemployed back to work. Critics have stated that targeting job creators — the top 1 percent pays 38 percent of the tax burden, according to 2008 estimates — won’t help the jobless find employment.

    House Speaker John Boehner last week warned that tax hikes should be off the table as a newly formed bipartisan committee meets to extract long-term deficit savings.

    “That’s not smart. It’s not right,” Obama said of the GOP stance.

    In a combative set of remarks, the president vowed to veto any package that cuts into Medicare without raising “serious revenues” from wealthy Americans and corporations. He effectively dared Republicans to follow through on their no-tax-hike pledge as the deficit committee works under a strict timeline to find at least $1.2 trillion in deficit savings by Thanksgiving.

    We can’t just cut our way out of this hole. It’s going to take a balanced approach,” Obama said. “It’s only right that we ask everyone to pay their fair share.”

    The most controversial part of the plan was already shaping up to be the proposed tax increases.

    “Pitting one group of Americans against another is not leadership,” Boehner said Monday. “The Joint Select Committee is engaged in serious work to tackle a serious problem: the debt crisis that is making it harder to get our economy growing and create more American jobs. Unfortunately, the president has not made a serious contribution to its work today. This administration’s insistence on raising taxes on job creators and its reluctance to take the steps necessary to strengthen our entitlement programs are the reasons the president and I were not able to reach an agreement previously, and it is evident today that these barriers remain.”

    In total, the new tax revenue Obama is seeking is nearly double the $800 billion that Boehner had been willing to consider in July, before the so-called “grand bargain” fizzled.

    Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., a Tea Party-aligned senator and member of the bipartisan deficit committee, said the panel does not have “time to waste on political games” and economy-harming tax increases.

    “I am concerned that his deficit reduction strategy sometimes seems more defined by political posturing, such as recycling tax hikes that even lawmakers in his own party have publicly opposed,” he said in a statement.

    Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said the joint deficit committee was taking its task “far more seriously” than the White House.

    “Veto threats, a massive tax hike, phantom savings, and punting on entitlement reform is not a recipe for economic or job growth — or even meaningful deficit reduction,” McConnell said.

    Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner disputed claims that the plan would hurt the economy, describing the tax changes as “modest” and fair. “I am very confident that the modest changes we’re suggesting in terms of revenues would make the economy stronger in the long term,” he said.

    The plan includes the tax hikes Obama previously proposed to pay for his $447 billion jobs plan — those proposals ranged from limits on deductions for wealthy filers to an end to certain corporate loopholes and subsidies for oil and gas companies. And it includes about $800 billion over 10 years from letting the Bush tax cuts expire for families making more than $250,000 a year.

    In addition, the plan includes the so-called “Buffett Rule,” named after billionaire Warren Buffett who complained he was paying a lower tax rate than his secretary. The provision would set a new tax rate for those making more than $1 million a year. Geithner suggested the administration would leave it up to Congress to work out the particulars.

    Based on early details of the plan over the weekend, Republicans on Sunday accused the president of playing “class warfare.”

    But Obama rejected the claim. “This is not class warfare. It’s math,” he said.

    He said eliminating loopholes and making other changes would also allow lawmakers to simplify the tax code and ultimately lower the corporate tax rate, among the highest in the world.

    One administration official acknowledged that the plan represented the president’s “vision,” and not a “legislative compromise.”

    The plan includes $580 billion in cuts to mandatory benefit programs, including $248 billion from Medicare and $72 billion from Medicaid and other health programs. Obama said it would also target farm subsidies.

    It includes no changes in Social Security and no increase in the Medicare eligibility age, which the president had been willing to accept this summer.

    Administration officials said 90 percent of the $248 billion in 10-year Medicare cuts would be squeezed from service providers. The plan does shift some additional costs to beneficiaries, but those changes would not start until 2017.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/19/obama-to-present-balanced-plan-to-tackle-deficit/

  60. http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/277721/anita-dunn-not-merely-liar-foolish-one

    It is not terribly surprising to find that the former White House communications director, Anita Dunn, lied when confronted with her past comments that put the Obama White House in a deeply unflattering light. It is a bit surprising that she lied so foolishly, either forgetting or not realizing that her on-the-record interview with a reporter was recorded.

    In the Washington Post today:

    One of the most striking quotes in the book came from former White House communications director Anita Dunn , who was quoted as saying that, “this place would be in court for a hostile workplace. . . . Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.”

    Dunn says she was quoted out of context and told The Post on Friday that she told Suskind “point blank” that the White House was not a hostile work environment.

    On Monday, Suskind allowed a Post reporter to review a recorded excerpt of the original interview, which took place over the telephone in April. In that conversation, Dunn is heard telling Suskind about a conversation she had with Jarrett.

    “I remember once I told Valerie that, I said if it weren’t for the president, this place would be in court for a hostile workplace,” Dunn is heard telling Suskind. “Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.”

    You remember Anita Dunn, don’t you? The fan of Mao?

    …………………………………………………

    Guess she got sent the horse’s head in her bed.

  61. Boehenr killing Obama with his own words.

    http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?postid=260724

    In remarks at the White House yesterday, President Obama said “it’s hard to argue against” his plan for a $1.5 trillion tax hike on American families and small businesses – but he sure did a pretty good job of it in the past! Less than a year ago, President Obama warned that – if Congress failed to prevent tax hikes – Americans would “see it in smaller paychecks” and “fewer jobs.” At that time, President Obama was “absolutely convinced” that preventing tax hikes would “strengthen our entire economy” – a striking contrast to the tax hike touting he did yesterday. Here’s a quick refresher for President Obama on the devastating impact tax hikes will have on jobs and the economy, courtesy of President Obama:

    Higher Taxes “Will Have the Effect of Fewer Jobs.” “US President Barack Obama on Thursday urged Congress to pass the tax deal he brokered with Republican foes, saying rejecting the compromise would hurt the economy and cost US jobs. … ‘[I]f this framework fails, the reverse is true. Americans will see it in smaller paychecks that will have the effect of fewer jobs,’ he said.” (AFP, 12/9/10)

    President Obama Said He Was “Absolutely Convinced” That Preventing Tax Hikes Would Grow the Economy and Create Jobs. President Obama: “I am absolutely convinced that this tax cut plan, while not perfect, will help grow our economy and create jobs in the private sector. … I urge members of Congress to pass these tax cuts as swiftly as possible. Getting that done is an essential ingredient in spurring economic growth over the short run.” (Remarks, 12/15/10)

    President Obama Argues for Tax Relief, Not Tax Hikes: “By a wide bipartisan margin, both houses of Congress have now passed a package of tax relief that will protect the middle class, that will grow our economy and will create jobs for the American people.” (Remarks, 12/17/10)

    President Obama Said Preventing Tax Hikes Would “Spur Hiring” and “Strengthen Our Entire Economy.” President Obama: “All told, this will not only directly help families and businesses. By putting more money in people’s pockets, and helping companies grow, we’re going to see people being able to spend a little more, we’re going to spur hiring – we’re going to strengthen our entire economy.” (Weekly Address, 12/11/10)

    President Obama Says “[Y]ou don’t raise taxes in a recession…” (MSNBC, 8/5/09)

    Yesterday, Politico reported that the President’s proposals would be “more a political document than anything likely to become law.” That much is clear. The President’s plan is centered on job-crushing tax hikes that have already been rejected by himself and members of his own party, and it fails to address the major drivers of our nation’s debt problem. As House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said yesterday, “pitting one group of Americans against another is not leadership,” and it will not help put Americans back to work.

    The new House majority has put forth real solutions to address our nation’s debt crisis (see: Path to Prosperity Budget) and remove the barriers to private-sector job growth – including the threat of tax hikes – that have America’s job creators on strike (see: Plan for America’s Job Creators). Republicans will continue seeking common ground with President Obama on proposals that will remove government barriers to job growth, but imposing a $1.5 trillion tax hike on the very people we are counting on to put Americans back to work is a non-starter.

  62. Anita was probably sent that horsehead by her own hubby Bob Bauer. Bob Bauer of the lawfirm Perkins Coie, whom has defended BO on all of the eligibility lawsuits, and outright threatened plaintiffs who filed suit and every judge involved. Of course for that he was promoted to White House Council for two years. You betcha he shut her up, fast.

  63. The following is nothing new or particularly insightful, but I thought it would be interesting considering the source (an indpendent investor at “The Street”):
    *********

    Jury’s Out: Hillary Clinton Is Better Than Obama

    By Kathleen Brush

    The following commentary comes from an independent investor or market observer as part of TheStreet’s guest contributor program, which is separate from the company’s news coverage.

    NEW YORK (TheStreet) — According to a new Bloomberg poll, Hillary Clinton is the most popular politician in America. She trounced the President by 14 percentage points. What took the nation so long to figure out that she was the better candidate?

    When the Democrats were selecting their candidate in 2008, a resume-to-resume review would have said — no contest; Clinton was superior. She isn’t the first person to find that superior credentials can be easily outdone by superior marketing.

    Obama’s marketing message and better-funded marketing machine were exceptional. Team Obama mastered the Internet to connect and reconnect their message of hope and change with the voters. This was especially successful with the young digital natives where Obama trounced Clinton 3:1. Unbridled optimism is a youth hallmark and Obama was its embodiment.

    Obama’s hot button issues resonated with young and old alike: gridlock between the Democrats and Republicans, politicians that appeal to special interests, the economy slipping, rising unemployment, unaffordable health care, the falling dollar and unjustified wars.
    Hope and change was a powerful message. African-American voters preferred Obama nearly 6:1. In Clinton’s shoo-in category, women, Obama ran close to even. Why didn’t smart, experienced Clinton carry the female vote? Did American women know that political inequality gave her no chance? It’s possible. In 2007, the U.S. ranked 69th on female political empowerment, below the Muslim-majority United Arab Emirates and the failed state of Zimbabwe.

    On election day, the fresh face promising hope and change had captivated the nation tallying the highest popular vote in history. Obama carried the majority of males, females, African Americans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans, those making over $200,000, the most educated, the least educated, and those under 30.
    In 2008, Clinton had been on the national stage for 16 years to Obama’s three. When Bloomberg took its recent poll, the public had three more years to examine the record of Mr. Yes-We-Can. The response: oh crap he can’t.

    What’s in the record that’s persuading public opinion? Team Obama’s hope for employment to stay under 8% was misplaced, particularly among Obama’s grandest advocates. Youth unemployment is the highest in recorded history (1948). From July 2008 to July 2011, youth unemployment rose from 14% to 18%. Hardest hit are young African and Latino Americans.

    Health care reform isn’t really playing out like the pitch either. In 2008, 14.8% of the nation lacked health care coverage. Today it’s 16.8% and those that have coverage aren’t happy about paying more. Some of health reforms’ big benefits sounded good, particularly for at-risk populations, until people saw the increases in premiums, co-pays and deductibles.

    For some, it doesn’t have that affordable feel. For others, it feels like income redistribution between healthy and unhealthy populations.
    Middle class Americans, Obama’s undisputed favorite class, aren’t feeling warm and fuzzy about the President’s unwavering support. That’s because it hasn’t translated into jobs. Even the jobs plan with its specifically enumerated jobs seems empty for the 91% of private sector workers who are non-unionized. The big push for building infrastructure caters to unionized workers. In combination with the push to increase teachers and first responders, it feels like hope for the special interests of organized labor.
    Even those middle-classers with jobs are angry that the economy is stuck in first gear with few signs of hope or change for their stagnant income that gas is gobbling up. The day before the President took office, regular gas on average cost $1.85. Last week, the average was $3.59.

    The economy is stuck because Congress is stuck and people are wondering why their chosen leader who promised to reduce gridlock has failed miserably to tame the congressional flock. The credit downgrade, an ancillary outcome of the gridlock, has made the whole thing humiliating — for all Americans.
    Americans have been waxing nostalgic for the Clinton era. Surely, Hillary would have followed in Bill’s footsteps and worked tirelessly to get Democrats to move right on economic matters and Republicans to the left on social measures. Like Bill, she never would have forgotten that above all, it’s the economy, stupid. And Hillary would never be accused of throwing in the towel.

    Obama’s relative unpopularity is in part zeitgeist that his win over Clinton may have inspired. He broke the mold on the white man monopoly on the presidency. Since he won the nomination, there has been a meteoric rise in the acceptance of women in office. The U.S. has moved up 29 spots in the global rankings.

    The President’s fall from grace though was inevitable. Before he took one step into the White House, he was being worshipped as the hero of hope and change that his marketing machine portrayed. Maintaining a hero status requires superhuman feats. Alas, Obama is a mere inexperienced mortal politician who was oversold. Worse, he had the misfortune of stepping into America’s top spot when experience matters more than unbridled optimism.

  64. My oh My it justs get murkier and murkier.

    White House offered “guidance” to second witness in LightSquared inquiry

    http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/20/white-house-offered-guidance-to-second-witness-in-lightsquared-inquiry/

    [T]he White House’s Office of Management and Budget urged federal officials testifying before two House oversight hearings in the last month to say they hoped testing for GPS and LightSquared interference would take only 90 days, according to interviews.

    The Daily Beast obtained the paragraph the OMB asked government witnesses to insert into their recent congressional testimony, which says in part, “We hope that testing can be complete within 90 days.”

    The issue of LightSquared and the OMB’s interest in testimony came to light last week when The Daily Beast reported that Gen. William Shelton, the four-star general in charge of the Air Force Space Command, told House lawmakers in a classified briefing that he felt pressured by the White House to change his testimony on LightSquared. Shelton ultimately rejected the White House suggestions and delivered his own testimony last week.

    On Monday, a second witness, Anthony Russo, director of the National Coordination Office for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing, told The Daily Beast that he too was asked by the OMB to insert the 90-day timeframe into his testimony before the House Science Committee, but he refused. The hearing originally was scheduled for Aug. 3, then rescheduled for Sept. 8.

    ………………………

    We’re looking at a master clusterfuck here.

  65. For all you Bibi worshipers, this is from Israel’s Ha’aretz. It shows how much support Hillary can expect from Bibi, who is the source of the problem (according to Haaretz, and I agree). I repeat: Bibi is Israel’s Dubya.
    ********

    Clinton urges Turkey to ‘keep door open’ for ties with Israel

    Deterioration in diplomatic ties began when an IDF on Gaza-bound flotilla in 2010 left nine Turkish citizens dead. Israel refused the Turkish request to apologize for the deaths and pay compensation to the families of those killed.

    By Reuters

    U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged Turkey to “keep the door open” to better ties with Israel, a U.S. official said on Monday, seeking to prevent relations between two U.S. allies from getting worse.
    “She encouraged Turkey to keep the door open,” a senior U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity told reporters after Clinton met Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu for nearly an hour.

    “We want to see them repair their relationship, so she encouraged them to avoid any steps that would close that door and, on the contrary, to actively seek ways that they can repair (their) important relationship with Israel,” he added.

    “The secretary made clear that this is not a time when we need more tension, more volatility in the region,” said a second official, apparently referring to deteriorating Israeli ties with Egypt and Jordan and tensions with the Palestinians.

    The United States has watched with dismay as Turkish-Israeli ties began to unravel in late 2008, after Israel outraged Turkey by launching an offensive against the Gaza Strip, ruled by the Palestinian Islamist Hamas group.

    Turkey reacted angrily this month to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s refusal to apologize for an Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla that killed nine Turkish citizens in May 2010.

    After the release of a U.N. report on the flotilla, which aimed to break Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza, Erdogan’s government expelled Israel’s envoy, froze military cooperation and said the Turkish navy could escort future aid flotillas.

    The senior U.S. officials declined to say whether Clinton had specifically warned Davutoglu against such military escorts, which raise the prospect of military confrontation between NATO-member Turkey and the Jewish state.

  66. For those of us who sympathize with Hillary’s plight in this matter, it should be apparent that she is working from a very weak argument here, that “the two-state solution is only possible by negotiation between the two sides.” Negotiation with the occupier is obviously not the only possible solution for the Palestinians, since Israel declared itself a state without negotiating with the British occupier and without even asking the UN either.

    The only other “argument” Hillary is putting forward is that the US will veto the bid in the Security Council.
    ***********

    U.S. in “intensive diplomacy” to block Palestinians’ statehood bid: Clinton

    NEW YORK, Sept. 19 (Xinhua) — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said here on Monday that her country is still engaged in ” extremely intensive diplomacy” to block the Palestinians’ unilateral bid for statehood at the United Nations.

    Earlier on Monday, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas informed UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon of his intention to submit an application for membership on Friday at the world body.

    “We are engaged in extremely intensive ongoing diplomacy, reaching out not only to the parties, but also to those involved and who are here for the UN General Assembly,” Clinton told reporters as she began talks with Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba.

    “We continue to believe and are pressing the point that the only way to a two-state solution, which is what we support and want to see happen, is through negotiations,” the top U.S. envoy added. “No matter what does or doesn’t happen this week, it will not produce the kind of result that everyone is hoping for.”

    The process of achieving statehood begins with Abbas submitting an application to the secretary-general, which the UN chief will review and submit to the Security Council, should it meet technical requirements.

    If their bid fails at the Security Council, where the Obama administration has vowed to use its veto power, the Palestinians could bring their case to the General Assembly where there is no veto and they have widespread support.

    The Palestinians would only be able to be elevated to the status of non-member observer state from current permanent observer at the General Assembly, but would have access to UN bodies and have more leverage in future dealings with Israel.

    The threatened veto on the part of the United States risks alienating the Arab world at a time when the region is witnessing turmoil and anti-Israel sentiment is running high.

    Last September, the Obama administration brokered direct talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians in Washington, which broke down only weeks later due to Israel’s refusal to extend a freeze on settlement building in the West Bank.

    President Barack Obama is scheduled to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the sidelines of the General Assembly, while the latter called on Monday for a meeting with Abbas in New York to restart “direct negotiations.”

  67. Again, nothing new but another confirmation. The Townhall article linked suggests James Carville as coalescing a draft-Hillary movement.
    **********

    The Spokesman-Review

    The “pipe-dream” that may not be full of smoke:

    Hillary Clinton in 2012?

    I remember when I first blogged on the possibility of Hillary Clinton resigning her position as Sec of State in order to run against President Obama.

    Folks responded with a variety-on-the-same-theme: “What are you smokin’?”

    After years of working with ex-addicts and ex-inmates, I laughed…sort of.

    “You don’t have to be high, to see illusions”, I remember telling a friend. “Obama’s strength is an illusion. That’s where the pipe-dream is.”

    Barack Obama, the President, is not who the Democrats voted for when they chose him as Barack Obama, The Nominee. His Presidency has thus far proceeded via a set of illusions, all of which having to do with competing against economic realities, pretending not to see the “invisible hand of the the market place” and attempting to over-regulate our economy. Saying so, does not make it happen. Well delivered speeches do not reverse natural occurrences.

    His “creative future ideas” turn out to be anchored to a thick, hard-pan soil of statism. Americans see it, they smell it and they know that it does not work. Even Democrat Americans see it – rich and unemployed Democrat Americans, all of whom have a voice in the Democratic Party.

    The President has the unusual problem of being disliked by a large percentage of Americans – Democrats as well as Republicans.

    I’ve stayed the course in my analysis over these many months, believing that the economy will once again be the issue; and that political operatives (like James Carville), who are well practiced in the art of stating “it’s the economy, stupid”….may revisit that mantra on behalf of Hillary Clinton.

    And it may be in the Democratic Primary races that they do this.

    Town Hall’s article of today mentions this possibility as a “dream” and near the end of the article, the author “wakes up”.

    Cute writing style, but what if there’s a historical precedent of a sitting US President who IS running for office opposed by fellow party members, goes to his first Primary (barely wins in New Hampshire) and is sure to lose as the additional Democratic Primaries face him. So he drops out.

    What happens if that sitting President was a Democrat?
    Like today, the sitting President’s strength at THAT time was a pipe-dream.

    The President? Lyndon Johnson. The year? 1968. The Opponent? US Sen. Eugene McCarthy. The theme? “Keep a firm hand on the reigns. LBJ 1968.”

    Hillary Clinton is NOT the Eugene McCarthy figure today.

    But she may be the Robert Kennedy figure – for after McCarthy did the initial damage, and LBJ showed his weakness, RFK arrived on the scene. His 82 day race for the Presidency may well remain one of the “last best races” for that office.

    LBJ had a well-funded 1968 Re-Election Campaign well under way and ALMOST lost NH – and the key leaders of the Democratic Party saw he WOULD lose other states – so pressure was put on him. He withdrew, in short order. If you think Obama has an ego greater than LBJ’s, then you do not know your history, my friend.

    Obama wasn’t elected because he was black and Democrats realize that he won’t be defeated because he is black. The hopelessness of so may American’s lives today stand in stark contrast to the “hope” that was offered in his 2008 race. An ancient Jewish saying puts it this way: “Hope deffered makes the heart sick.”
    And America’s heart is sick today.

    The leaders of the Democratic Party know this. History knows this, because it’s been seen before.
    Watch and see…. more articles may begin surfacing from many more bloggers.

    Is it Guru time? We’ll see.

    Den

    PS: Even his home town paper printed a columnist entitled, “Why Obama should withdraw” by Steve Chapman suggesting that Obama withdraw from the race.
    HMMM…….

  68. The true occupiers of Judea are the so-called and misnamed “Palestinian” arabs. Calling Israel, the state of the Jews, the occupier of the land that was and is their’s as far back as history can recall, is just Arab propaganda. Arabs from the Arabian peninsula are the interlopers in the Middle East, and North Africa. They are the civilization that conquered these areas, and annihilated the pre-Arab cultures within these areas.

  69. Is’nt this illegal.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/07/us/politics/07obama.html?pagewanted=print

    Less than two months after ascending to the United States Senate, Barack Obama bought more than $50,000 worth of stock in two speculative companies whose major investors included some of his biggest political donors.

    One of the companies was a biotech concern that was starting to develop a drug to treat avian flu. In March 2005, two weeks after buying about $5,000 of its shares, Mr. Obama took the lead in a legislative push for more federal spending to battle the disease.

    The most recent financial disclosure form for Mr. Obama, an Illinois Democrat, also shows that he bought more than $50,000 in stock in a satellite communications business whose principal backers include four friends and donors who had raised more than $150,000 for his political committees.

    A spokesman for Mr. Obama, who is seeking his party’s presidential nomination in 2008, said yesterday that the senator did not know that he had invested in either company until fall 2005, when he learned of it and decided to sell the stocks. He sold them at a net loss of $13,000.

    The spokesman, Bill Burton, said Mr. Obama’s broker bought the stocks without consulting the senator, under the terms of a blind trust that was being set up for the senator at that time but was not finalized until several months after the investments were made.

    “He went about this process to avoid an actual or apparent conflict of interest, and he had no knowledge of the stocks he owned,” Mr. Burton said. “And when he realized that he didn’t have the level of blindness that he expected, he moved to terminate the trust.”

    Mr. Obama has made ethics a signature issue, and his quest for the presidency has benefited from the perception that he is unlike politicians who blend public and private interests. There is no evidence that any of his actions ended up benefiting either company during the roughly eight months that he owned the stocks.

    Even so, the stock purchases raise questions about how he could unwittingly come to invest in two relatively obscure companies, whose backers happen to include generous contributors to his political committees. Among those donors was Jared Abbruzzese, a New York businessman now at the center of an F.B.I. inquiry into public corruption in Albany, who had also contributed to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group that sought to undermine John Kerry’s Democratic presidential campaign in 2004.

    Mr. Obama, who declined to be interviewed about the stock deals, has already had to contend with a controversy that arose out of his reliance on a major campaign contributor in Chicago to help him in a personal financial transaction. In that earlier case, he acknowledged last year that it had been a mistake to involve the contributor, a developer who has since been indicted in an unrelated political scandal, in deals related to the Obamas’ purchase of a home.

    Senate ethics rules do not prohibit lawmakers from owning stocks — even in companies that do business with the federal government or could benefit from legislation they advance — and indeed other members of Congress have investments in government contractors. The rules say only that lawmakers should not take legislative actions whose primary purpose is to benefit themselves.

    Mr. Obama’s sale of his shares in the two companies ended what appears to have been a brief foray into highly speculative investing that stood out amid an otherwise conservative portfolio of mutual funds and cash accounts, a review of his Senate disclosure statements shows. He earned $2,000 on the biotech company, AVI BioPharma, and lost $15,000 on the satellite communications concern, Skyterra, according to Mr. Burton of the Obama campaign.

    Mr. Burton said the trust was different from qualified blind trusts that other senators commonly used, because it was intended to allow him greater flexibility to address any accusations of conflicts that might arise from its assets. He said Mr. Obama had decided to sell the stocks after receiving a communication that made him concerned about how the trust was set up.

    The investments came at a time when Mr. Obama was enjoying sudden financial success, following his victory at the polls in November 2004. He had signed a $1.9 million book deal, and his ethics disclosure reports show that he received $1.2 million of book money in 2005.

    His wife, Michelle, a hospital vice president in Chicago, received a promotion that March, nearly tripling her salary to $317,000, and they bought a $1.6 million house in June. The house sat on a large property that was subdivided to make it more affordable, and one of Mr. Obama’s political donors bought the adjacent lot.

    The disclosure forms show that the Obamas also placed several hundred thousand dollars in a new private-client account at JPMorgan Chase, a bond fund and a checking account at a Chicago bank.

    But he put $50,000 to $100,000 into an account at UBS, which his aides say was recommended to him by a wealthy friend, George W. Haywood, who was also a major investor in both Skyterra and AVI BioPharma, public securities filings show.

    Mr. Haywood and his wife, Cheryl, have contributed close to $50,000 to Mr. Obama’s campaigns and to his political action committee, the Hopefund. Mr. Haywood declined to comment.

    Within two weeks of his purchase of the biotech stock that Feb. 22, Mr. Obama initiated what he has called “one of my top priorities since arriving in the Senate,” a push to increase federal financing to fight avian flu.

    Several dozen people had already died from the disease in Southeast Asia, and experts were warning that a worldwide pandemic could kill tens of millions of people. Mr. Obama was one of the first political leaders to call for more money to head off the danger, which he described as an urgent public health threat.

    His first step came on March 4, 2005, when the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved his request for $25 million to help contain the disease in Asia; the full Senate later approved that measure. And in April 2005, he introduced a bill calling for more research on avian flu drugs and urging the government to increase its stockpiles of antiviral medicines.

    Mr. Obama repeated this call in a letter that Aug. 9 to Michael O. Levitt, the health and human services secretary. And in September 2005, Mr. Obama and Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, succeeded in amending another bill to provide $3.8 billion for battling the flu.

    Meanwhile, the drug company in which he invested, AVI BioPharma, had been working to develop its own medicine to treat avian flu victims. In a conference call with Wall Street analysts on March 8, 2005, the company’s chairman, Denis R. Burger, said the firm was “aggressively going forward” with its avian flu research and hoped to work with federal agencies on it.

    The company, which is also developing medicines in a number of other areas, provided several updates on its avian flu research in 2005, including one on Oct. 21 saying the company was likely to develop a treatment for avian flu “in a relatively short time.”

    Mr. Obama sold what appears to have been about 2,000 shares of the company’s stock a week later, when it traded at about $3.50 a share, or about $1 a share more than when he bought it. Company officials said they never talked to the senator about his work on avian flu. And while the company has received millions of dollars in federal money to develop drugs for treating ebola and other serious diseases, it still has not received any federal money for its avian flu research.

    The company’s stock briefly surged to nearly $9 a share in January 2006 when it announced promising research findings on the flu drug. But the company still has not applied for federal approvals to test and market the drug.

    Unlike his investment in AVI, which yielded a small profit, Mr. Obama’s stake in Skyterra Communications went in the opposite direction, despite a promising start.

    He bought his Skyterra shares the same day the Federal Communications Commission ruled in favor of the company’s effort to create a nationwide wireless network by combining satellites and land-based communications systems. Immediately after that morning ruling, Tejas Securities, a regional brokerage in Texas that handled investment banking for Skyterra, issued a research report speculating that Skyterra stock could triple in value.

    Tejas and people associated with it were major donors to Mr. Obama’s political committees, having raised more than $150,000 since 2004. The company’s chairman, John J. Gorman, has held fund-raisers for the senator in Austin, Tex., and arranged for him to use a private plane for several political events in 2005. Mr. Gorman declined to comment.

    In May 2005, Mr. Abbruzzese, who was vice chairman of Tejas and a principal investor in Skyterra, contributed $10,000 along with his wife to Mr. Obama’s political action committee — a departure from his almost exclusive support of Republicans. Eight months earlier, for instance, he had contributed $5,000 to the Swift Boat group, and he has given $100,000 to the Republican National Committee since 2004.

    Last year, Mr. Abbruzzese, a major investor in several high-tech companies in New York and elsewhere, emerged as a central figure in the federal investigation of the New York State Senate majority leader, Joseph L. Bruno. The inquiry is examining Mr. Bruno’s personal business dealings, including whether he accepted money from Mr. Abbruzzese in return for Senate approval of grants for one of Mr. Abbruzzese’s companies. Both men have denied any wrongdoing. Mr. Abbruzzese did not return phone calls seeking comment.

    Skyterra’s share price was lifted into the $40 range for a time on the strength of the F.C.C. ruling, but eventually drifted down into the low 30s, and was at $31 when Mr. Obama sold his shares for a $15,000 loss on Nov. 1, 2005. A few months later, it plunged into the $20 range, and today trades below $10 a share. A spokesman for Skyterra said the company’s top officials had not been aware of Mr. Obama’s investment.

  70. That man is sooo busy.

    Issa to launch probe of Obama actions on Solyndra, LightSquared

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/182553-issa-to-investigate-government-loan-programs

    Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said Tuesday that his committee plans to investigate government loan programs to private corporations in light of allegations of improper dealings between the White House and failed energy company Solyndra and wireless startup LightSquared.

    “I want to see when the president and his cronies are picking winners and losers… it wasn’t because there were large contributions given to them,” the chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee said Tuesday morning on CSPAN.

  71. “Hillary Clinton is NOT the Eugene McCarthy figure today.

    But she may be the Robert Kennedy figure –for after McCarthy did the initial damage, and LBJ showed his weakness, RFK arrived on the scene. His 82 day race for the Presidency may well remain one of the “last best races” for that office.”

    —————-
    Good comparison.

  72. One more rat leaving the sinking ship.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/63918.html

    White House Deputy Communications Director Jennifer Psaki, one of the longest-serving members of Team Obama, will leave the White House on Thursday to head the Washington office of the public affairs and research firm Global Strategy Group.

    The CEO of New-York-based Global Strategy Group is Jon Silvan, and the president is Jefrey Pollock.

  73. moon, what obvious JournOLister shill wrote that pillow fluffer coverup? OMFGoddess. Coffee out the nose on this sins-of-ommission sentence alone: “The house sat on a large property that was subdivided to make it more affordable, and one of Mr. Obama’s political donors bought the adjacent lot.”

    Rita Rezko bought it, didn’t she. Amazing the writer completely *forgot* to actually use the names REZKO at all.
    Quite a few important damaging details were left out about the whole stinking affair surrounding Barack/Michelle’s blind trust & mansion purchase. And they certainly didn’t mention that a private investigator ran across some fishy tax records in IL on the property, and strangely involving two pin numbers. The second pin belonging to Harrison J. Bounel (new alias?), using a SSN# that also comes up for… Barack Obama. Tax fraud and more Social Security fraud. The private investigator soon documented and reported the usual furious database scrubbing that always seems to surround Obama.

    But man, all the same, the sharks are circling and adorning the blood in the water like xmas scarves.

  74. Southern Born
    September 19th, 2011 at 11:07 pm

    Hillaryfor Texas, I did see Greta go after ol’ Tucker and it was fantastic. I well remember how Tucker said the nastiest things about Hillary in the most woman hating ways back when. And before that how vile he was about Bill Clinton.

    Carlson deserved everything Greta threw at him and so much more.

    —————————

    Well that didn’t go well …
    by Greta Van Susteren

    Sep 19 2011 – 10:48 PM ET

    I had hoped that Tucker and I would have a strong debate about violence against women and how women are treated by some in the media and it just deteriorated to the two of us yelling at each other. This was not about Gov Sarah Palin but rather repeating filth to demean women…any women. You could replace Palin’s name in the debate with other womens’ names. She was just the “poster child” of the debate since the filth was written about her – I had hoped to discuss that journalists should challenge women on issues rather than repeat vile filth that denigrates and even makes light of violence against women. I have defended women on both sides of the aisle and even in the middle. I agree, it is not very productive to yell at each other – which we did to each other. On the bright side, perhaps our unhappiness with each other will provoke discussion about the more important issue.

    884 Comments

    http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2011/09/19/well-that-didnt-go-well/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnewsinsider%2Fgretawire+%28Gretawire%29

    Tucker Carlson’s twitter, 13 hours ago –
    Had a nice debate with Greta tonight. I genuinely enjoyed it.

  75. Obama approval sinks to 39%, a new low for Marist poll…

    The latest McClatchy-Marist Poll finds President Obama’s approval rating at 39% among registered voters nationally, an all-time low for Mr. Obama. For the first time a majority — 52% — disapproves of the job he is doing in office.

    Said pollster Lee Miringoff: “Although numbers like these typically spell doom for an incumbent’s re-election prospects, the Republicans in Congress and eventually his GOP opponent could still provide Obama with running room.”

    http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/09/20/obama_approval_hits_another_low.html

  76. Chicago Tribune a big BO supporter has stated that of all the congressmen should be rejected and Hillary is the best and only person that should be considered to be POTUS.

    Now take a look at Hillarys schedule .

    Public Schedule
    Washington, DC

    September 20, 2011

    *For more information about media access to events at the United Nations, call the UN Office of Media Accreditation (212) 963-6934 or click here.

    *The Department of State’s Office of Press Relations during UNGA will be based out of the Waldorf-Astoria’s Suite 24M. The phone number is: (212) 845-0812.

    SECRETARY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON:
    10:15 a.m. Secretary Clinton joins President Obama’s meeting with Libyan Transitional National Council (TNC) Chairman Mustafa Abdel Jalil, at the United Nations.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY WHITE HOUSE)

    10:30 a.m. Secretary Clinton accompanies President Obama to a Libya Contact Group Meeting, at the United Nations.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY UN)

    11:45 a.m. Secretary Clinton joins President Obama’s bilateral meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY WHITE HOUSE)

    1:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton participates in the UN High Level Meeting on Nutrition, at the United Nations.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY UN)

    1:55 p.m. Secretary Clinton joins President Obama’s bilateral meeting with President Dilma Rousseff of Brazil, at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY WHITE HOUSE)

    2:15 p.m. Secretary Clinton accompanies President Obama to the Open Government Partnership Event, at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY WHITE HOUSE)

    3:30 p.m. Secretary Clinton attends the G8 Deauville Partnership Meeting, at the InterContinental Hotel in New York City.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)

    4:30 p.m. Secretary Clinton joins President Obama’s bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY WHITE HOUSE)

    6:30 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal, at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)

  77. Chelsea Clinton is on Facebook since yesterday ; she’s going to have a live conversation with Hillary this Thursday Sep 22 in the morning, I think we can get our message to Hillary through her, she’s receiving a lot of great comments on Hillary for 2012!If you can please go there and let Hillary hear from us this Th.!

  78. He repeated the old half-truth about millionaires not paying as much in taxes as their secretaries. (In reality, the top 10 percent of earners pay nearly 70 percent of all income taxes, according to the I.R.S. People in the richest 1 percent pay 31 percent of their income to the federal government while the average worker pays less than 14 percent,

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

    BS! That’s spinning the measuring stick. “The average worker” would include people making less than minimum wage. For incomes over a million or so, 31% is way too low.

    And for those who can hire great accountants and lobbyists, most of their money never gets counted as taxable “income” at all.

  79. Buffett’s math is a bit off

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/buffett_math_is_bit_off_7mGzoYiwPfsJcnWaIoptFJ

    WASHINGTON — Billionaire investor Warren Buffett isn’t as undertaxed as he and President Obama seem to think.

    Buffett recently said that he paid only $6.9 million in taxes last year — just 17.4 percent of his earnings, compared to an income tax rate of about 36 percent paid by his employees.

    “My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice,” Buffett wrote last month in the New York Times.

    Such grousing was enough to convince Obama to name his latest tax-the-rich scheme the “Buffett rule.” But it doesn’t tell the whole story.
    see more videos

    And yesterday, Obama invoked Buffett’s name again in his case for imposing higher taxes on the wealthy, when he said: “Middle-class families shouldn’t pay higher taxes than millionaires and billionaires.’’

    “It’s hard to argue against that. Warren Buffett’s secretary shouldn’t pay a higher tax rate than Warren Buffett. There is no justification for it,’’ Obama said.

    Buffett actually was taxed twice on his investment income.

    First, Buffett had to make the money he invested. Those earnings were taxed as corporate income, at about a 35-percent rate.

    Then, Uncle Sam took another cut when Buffett invested the money and earned a profit. That’s when Buffett paid the 15 percent capital-gains tax rate.

    All told, after combining corporate taxes and capital gains taxes, Buffett forked over about 45 percent of his earnings.

  80. Clinton still atop the political scene.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/september_2011/59_view_hillary_clinton_favorably

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has her hands full with the ongoing unrest in the Middle East, but she remains the most popular member of President Obama’s Cabinet.

    A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely Voters have at least a somewhat favorable impression of Clinton, while 36% view her unfavorably. These figures include 25% who have a Very Favorable opinion of the former New York senator and 16% who view her Very Unfavorably. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

    Since Clinton was named secretary of state in January 2009, her favorable rating has remained in the narrow range of 53% to 60%, consistently making her the most popular Cabinet member. In that same period, her unfavorables have ranged from 35% to 43%.

    Seventy-four percent (74%) of the Political Class have a favorable impression of Clinton, as do 53% of Mainstream voters.

    Former Vice President Dick Cheney said recently that Clinton is the most competent member of the Obama administration and would be a better president candidate for Democrats in 2012 than Obama.

    Clinton earns favorable marks from 63% of women and 54% of men. Voters under the age of 40 have a slightly more favorable opinion of her than their elders.

    Among union members, 77% see the former first lady in a favorable light. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of non-union members share that opinion.

    Clinton is viewed favorably by 85% of Democrats, 58% of voters not affiliated with either political party and 33% of Republicans.

  81. On election day, the fresh face promising hope and change had captivated the nation tallying the highest popular vote in history.

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

    Not the highest percentage of victory, though.

    And as I keep remining people, exit polls showed Hillary would have won by a higher margin. (O’s was 7%, HIllary’s would have been 12%.)

  82. Transportation & Energy Dept records show Solyndra received more Stimulus $ than 35 states for Highways, Roads, Bridges.

  83. there has been a meteoric rise in the acceptance of women in office. The U.S. has moved up 29 spots in the global rankings.

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

    Rankings might mean that other countries have got worse, not that the US has got better. How does our percent now compare with our percent then?

    And how many of those new women in office were put there by angry PUMAs? And how many are Republicans?

  84. admin
    September 19th, 2011 at 7:11 pm

    The cover of the Globe story can be seen here:

    http://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/2011/globe-michelle-obamas-insults-drive-hillary-clinton-to-collapse/

    Has anyone read what the Globe has to say about Michelle attacking Hillary?
    ——–
    I am behind on the posts so don’t know if anyone else has already answered this yet or not.

    I did post a couple of days ago that I bought the paper and some of it sounded very possible. No one asked what it said before so I just let it go.

    So admin, here is what I remember. MO was making fun of Hillary’s weight, saying things behind her back like Michelle wanting Hillary to stay out of the WhiteHouse because she hated seeing her “waddle around’.
    The story said that comments like this have gotten back to Hillary, that she was sad from gaining weight, always away from home and these attacks have made her job almost unbearable.
    The article seemed plausible to some degree, knowing how much MO hates Hillary’s competence and how many people love her. That being said, it also said the Big Dawg wants her to lose weight and he also wants her to run for President again.

    Some of the way the story was written was sympathetic to Hillary and a little bit nippy of the Big Dawg, saying he was demanding she lose weight for the Democratic Party (Bullshit meter is sounding off) and that HE wants to be back in the WhiteHouse so he is pushing her to run.

    Those are the highlights, it was not a story defending MO at all.

  85. the senator did not know that he had invested in either company until fall 2005

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

    I can believe that!

  86. Any piece that uses language like this is dishonest or rage-baiting or both.

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

    latest tax-the-rich scheme

    Uncle Sam took another cut

    Buffett forked over

  87. Former Vice President Dick Cheney said recently that Clinton is the most competent member of the Obama administration and would be a better president candidate for Democrats in 2012 than Obama.

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

    Woops. Sure it’s true, but why would Cheney say it? He might like a primary fight to weaken Obama2012, but he’d rather not have to run against Hillary2012.

  88. Shez ZK
    Thanks for posting the link

    I did watch Geta tear Tucker to shreds last night, I have never seen her so livid. He was trying to seem like a choirboy and she wouldn’t have it.

    She has Tucker on her show a lot, so this was really a surprise to me. Go Greta, go!

    Greta is fair to women of both parties, I really like her.

  89. As a small business owner who employs close to 30 people at my firm, I can assure you when my taxes go even higher, I will let people go rather than make less money. Why should I be penalized for working hard and achieving some success? I am tired of paying for those who bleed the system dry .The class warefare that Obama is attempting to impose will only result in further economic problems for the middle class. People at my firm who make 50-75k would be the one’s I would have to let go to make up for the additional taxes his plan will impose. What companies like mine need are significant reductions in taxes so we can add jobs, rather than terminate them.

  90. What companies like mine need are significant reductions in taxes so we can add jobs, rather than terminate them.

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

    If government fires their workers, who will buy your products?

  91. jbstonesfan, you get more revenue from increasing the number of taxpayers than you do from raising taxes. That’s if more revenue is actually your real goal. If you need money, are you better off if 10 people give you $100, or if 1000 people give you $10? You get a LOT more revenue with ten bucks from more people than a hundred bucks from a few. Get people employed by reducing burdens on business, and making expanding and hiring attractive, and the revenue will come.

    I agree that the fact that a few multi-billionaires pay little to no taxes is ridiculous, but that’s a result of loopholes and subsidies and exceptions written to the tax code for favored groups, not the rates themselves.

  92. turndown, if a larger number of govt workers is automatically a good thing, and it makes no difference to the economy if most workers are public or private sector, why don’t we just give everyone in the country a govt job? Problem solved, right?

    Yes, in the short term govt workers spend money and contribute to demand. But every dollar they spend (and then some) was first pulled out of the private sector. And the private sector is what drives a healthy economy. If that were not true, then all we need to do is make everyone an employee of the govt, and POOF! full employment and a robust economy!

    And no, I am not anti-govt workers. I realize there is a need for a minimal amount of them. But as to your question as to who would buy the products – the people with the newly created private sector jobs would buy them.

  93. jbstonesfan
    September 20th, 2011 at 1:59 pm

    As a small business owner who employs close to 30 people at my firm, I can assure you when my taxes go even higher, I will let people go rather than make less money. Why should I be penalized for working hard and achieving some success? I am tired of paying for those who bleed the system dry .The class warefare that Obama is attempting to impose will only result in further economic problems for the middle class. People at my firm who make 50-75k would be the one’s I would have to let go to make up for the additional taxes his plan will impose. What companies like mine need are significant reductions in taxes so we can add jobs, rather than terminate them.
    ———
    I am not defending Barry, God knows…but why are the people at the bottom just a trade off for profit?

    If small employeers always cut from the bottom because they want to make just as much profit in bad times, but not pay taxes like those that don’t own their own business have to…where is the equity in that?
    I don’t feel sorry for everyone having to pay something on a sliding scale, and just because someone owns a business doesn’t mean they get all the tax breaks.
    I would love to say, I want to keep the little money I have working for a big business, I want to keep my taxes as my own profit so my live style doesn’t suck even more…but I don’t get that tax break.

    If the business owners needed no taxes to hire, then with an extension of the Bush tax cuts, the economy would be back to normal…and it isn’t. Businesses are holding on to their money and not hiring.

    We all want tax breaks but only the have’s get them.

  94. In “Confidence Men, Obama squashes pro-stimulus Romer: “Enough! … We can’t go back to Congress again. We just can’t!”

    ………………………

  95. Small businesses can be made or broke on tax rates, sorry but a business is not in there for the welfare of its employess, its there to provide a service and make a profit. If it can’t make a profit then they are all out of a job.

  96. the people with the newly created private sector jobs would buy them

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

    Supply side vs demand side.

    When govt workers are fired AND SS/Med benefits are cut AND unemployment insurance runs out AND etc etc, more and more customers are lost. No matter how low taxes are, an employer isn’t going to hire more people to serve fewer customers. He’ll put his money overseas or buy cigars.

    The cycle needs to be kick-started at the right point.

    Solaydra at least TRIED to do something here.

  97. all we need to do is make everyone an employee of the govt, and POOF! full employment and a robust economy!

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

    Worked for FDR. And we got some bridges and stuff.

    (Then along came WWII, which of course was run and funded all by the private sector, no government money at all, no deficit spending…. NOT.)

  98. In “Confidence Men,” by late 2009, Team Obama already talking about the need for another $700b stimulus

    Obama was tilting toward massive bank restructuring plan — until Rahmbo and Geithner killed it stone dead.

    Rahmbo replied: “Everybody shut the f–k up. … Taking down the banking system in a program that could cost $700b is a fantasy”

  99. H4T – ignore TDO. As demonstrated by his/her last comment, S/he either can’t, or doesn’t want to, grasp basic economic reality.

  100. Right order their asses down there.

    Solyndra execs will decline to testify at Congressional hearing Friday, according to letters from their attorneys obtained by @Reuters

    Unacceptable arrogance!

  101. ooh what gives……

    Wasserman Schultz resigns from House Judiciary Committee

    Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida Democrat, submitted her resignation as a member of the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. According to the floor of the House:

    The House received a communication from the Honorable Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Ms. Wasserman Schultz submitted her resignation from the Committee on the Judiciary. The resignation was accepted without objection.

    Rep. Wasserman Schultz still serves as a member of the House Budget Committee, Chief Deputy Whip for the minority, as well as Chair to the Democratic National Committee.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/sep/20/picket-wasserman-schultz-resigns-house-judiciary-c/
    ……………….

    Has she done something? They dont resign from committees without being ripped from their cold dead hands.

  102. Solyndra LLC’s chief executive and chief financial officer will invoke their Fifth Amendment rights and decline to answer any questions put to them at a Congressional hearing on Friday, according to letters from their attorneys obtained by Reuters.

    In the letters sent to the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, attorneys for Solyndra CEO Brian Harrison and CFO W. G. Stover said they advised their clients not to provide testimony during the hearings.

    The bankrupt company’s $535 million federal loan guarantee is being investigated by the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

    Harrison is represented by Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe and Stover is represented by Keker & Van Nest.

    Solyndra’s offices were raided by the FBI two days after the company filed for bankruptcy, although the FBI did not say what prompted the raid.

    …………..

    So what have they got to be scared of revealing?

  103. New Marist poll out is dismal for the boob:

    You know, call me crazy, but it sure doesn’t appear that President Obama’s jobs bill did much for his popularity. A new poll from Marist conducted a few days after Obama’s big joint-session jobs speech/NFL pregame show has Obama’s job-approval rating at its lowest ever in the Marist series at 39% (via William Amos):

    President Barack Obama faces a litany of bad news. The president’s job approval rating, his favorability, and his rating on the economy have hit all-time lows. To compound matters, three in four Americans still believe the nation is in a recession and the proportion who thinks the country is moving in the wrong direction is at its highest point in more than a decade.

    Other than that, though, things are just groovy.

    According to this McClatchy-Marist Poll, the president’s approval rating is at 39% among registered voters nationally, an all-time low for Mr. Obama. For the first time a majority — 52% — disapproves of the job he is doing in office, and 9% are unsure.

    “President Obama needs to reboot his presidency,” says Dr. Lee M. Miringoff, Director of The Marist College Institute for Public Opinion. “Although numbers like these typically spell doom for an incumbent’s re-election prospects, the Republicans in Congress and eventually his GOP opponent could still provide Obama with running room.”

    The jobs-bill speech was supposed to be the reboot. Obama wanted the grandest possible venue in order to lay out his vision of economic stimulus, and Obama got exactly what he wanted. Four days after the event, Obama got his answer, which makes a dead-cat bounce look pretty darned good now.

    The news actually gets worse. Obama gets an abysmal 32/57 job approval rating among independent voters, down from 38% the month before. He’s down to 71% among Democrats now, which isn’t exactly a robust vote of confidence. Obama’s numbers on the economy continue to sour as well, only getting 33/61 approval on this issue, with disapproval among indies up to 69% now. That’s down from 37/59 in June.

    But the favorability numbers are more telling. He’s now underwater on personal favorability for the first time at 46/48. He lost ten points on this measure among independents in the last month, falling from 50% to 40%. His personal favorability has been his Teflon, but it’s eroding fast now.

    And the piece de resistance? The sample used by Marist gives Democrats an eight-point advantage, 34/26/39. That undersamples Republicans by a significant amount — Obama won the popular vote in 2008 by seven points in a political environment much more friendly to Democrats than now. Imagine what job-approval rating a realistic sample would produce.

    The republicans despise him and cannot wait to vote him out, the Dems are lukewarm, and the independents are disgusted with him.

  104. Cue Friday for lots of squirming for the WH when Solyndra execs plead the 5th to every question asked of them in congress, this will probably look very bad on television and frankly contemptable since we are talking a hell of a lot of tax payer money that seems to be missing.

  105. Seriously……

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/over-760000-stimulus-funds-go-interactive-visual-dance

    As President Barack Obama is proposing another $447 billion stimulus plan, some of the money from the previous $800 billion plus stimulus plan is dancing away.

    According to Recovery.gov, the website that tracks the money spent under the Recovery Act, The University Of North Carolina is receiving a $762,372 grant for it’s ‘Dance.Draw’ project.

    The website grant summary explains the project, “The Dance.Draw system will enable dancers’ motions, tracked via small RF transmitters worn in satin cuffs, to act as input streams that can be flexibly applied as control parameters for interactive visualizations. The system will log dancers’ motions and will be able to composite video of the dancers with different visualizations, enabling post-hoc analysis of the choreography and exploration of prospective mappings between the motion and the projected media.”

    The “interactive visualizations” are shown in a Dance.Draw pilot video as a series of projected shapes that move along with the dancers.

    Among the objectives listed for the project is to “allow choreographers to explore interactive dance without always having a full cast of dancers present.”

    The program may diminish the amount of dancers needed onstage to “explore interactive dance”, but it is creating jobs. The latest report on the Recovery.gov website shows 2.06, reported as three part-time jobs for students, that have been created with the funds.

  106. Solaydra at least TRIED to do something here.

    ROTFLMAO!!!!! That’s just funny.

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

    Truth is. Sad, but funny.

    Money wasted here is wasted here. Not banked in Switzerland. Or buying land here and hoarding it. Or buying up smaller banks here.

    Solandrya’s jobs were short-lived, but they were jobs and they were here. Their paychecks supported some local businesses.

    And some new useful bits of information about making solar panels are now on file, somewhere.

  107. Obama Fundraiser Boasts of Cashing In on Stimulus Package

    A key unanswered question in the Solyndra loan investigation concerns the role George Kaiser, the Oklahoma billionaire and major Obama fundraiser whose Family Foundation owned a large stake in the failed solar-panel company. Kaiser made multiple visits to the White House in the week before the Department of Energy approved a $535 billion guaranteed loan to Solyndra on March 20, 2009, and helped arrange 16 separate meetings between top White House officials and Solyndra executives around that time. Yet Kaiser maintains that he “did not participate in any discussions with the U.S. government regarding the loan.”

    But as the following video clip reveals, when it comes to steering government funds his way, Kaiser knew exactly what he was doing. Indeed, here he is July 2009 openly boasting about his ability to get his hands on stimulus funding. “There’s never been more money shoved out of the government’s door in world history, and probably never will be again, than in the last few months and in the next 18 months,” he says. “And our selfish parochial goal is to get as much as it for Tulsa and Oklahoma as we possibly can.”

    Kaiser cites his “multiple trips to Washington” and his ability to secure meetings with “all the key players in the West Wing of the White House.” He also touts his “almost unique advantage,” through his foundation, of being able to match public dollars with private funding. That way, Kaiser says, the Obama administration will know “we’ll watch over it because we don’t want to be embarrassed with the way our money is spent and so we won’t make you be embarrassed with the way your money is spent either.” Sure, what could possibly go wrong?

    While Solyndra’s failure is an embarrassment for both parties, Kaiser’s foundation still stands to recoup a large chunk of its investment in the company, whereas taxpayers will recoup very little, if any, of the $535 million investment the White House made on our behalf. That’s because once Solyndra’s financial troubles became too obvious to ignore, the DOE negotiated a loan restructuring that gave priority status to private investors over taxpayers with respect to the first $75 million recovered in the event of Solyndra’s collapse. As Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations pointed out last week, this appears to be a blatant contravention of federal law.

    Obama may take issue with the fact that “millionaires and billionaires” like Kaiser make too much money, but he obviously has no qualms about showering them with taxpayer dollars.

    Video at link

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/277793/obama-fundraiser-boasts-cashing-stimulus-package-andrew-stiles

    ………………………

    I think thats commonly called dropping yourself in it.

  108. Obama’s corporate masters have decided that he has out lived his usefulness. When the WaPOO, NYT, and NBC start running negative stories about their shill, then it’s all over. Another one from MessNBC:

    “WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama says he backs immigration reform, announcing last month an initiative to ease deportation policies, but he has sent home more than 1 million illegal immigrants in 2 1/2 years — on pace to deport more in one term than George W. Bush did in two.

    The Obama administration had deported about 1.06 million as of Sept. 12, against 1.57 million in Bush’s two full presidential terms.”
    (snip)

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44599016/ns/politics-more_politics/

  109. Obama’s corporate masters have decided that he has out lived his usefulness. When the WaPOO, NYT, and NBC start running negative stories about their shill, then it’s all over.

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

    If so, what is their next plan? Somehow, I doubt it’s to back Hillary.

    And aren’t they starting a little too early for the actual election Nov 2012? More likely, they’re jerking his chain about something immediate.

  110. Shadowfax
    September 20th, 2011 at 1:46 pm
    Shez ZK
    Thanks for posting the link

    I did watch Geta tear Tucker to shreds last night, I have never seen her so livid. He was trying to seem like a choirboy and she wouldn’t have it.

    She has Tucker on her show a lot, so this was really a surprise to me. Go Greta, go!

    Greta is fair to women of both parties, I really like her.

    Greta is wrong! Tucker was right that these comments should be publicized so that Tyson should be held accountable for his words.

  111. Ricky, here’s Jacobson’s take:

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/09/can-the-daily-caller-survive/

    The controversy is not that a convicted rapist would make such statements, but that The Daily Caller would run the clip with a bold traffic-grabbing headline and keep it there without so much as any commentary (which was not added until later).

    I can’t say it was the worst trashing of Palin I’ve ever seen, but it definitely was the worst I’d ever seen at a supposedly conservative website and one which has a high profile. While the post quoted Tyson, it was pure traffic-baiting using sexual violence against Palin as the tease.

    There is a huge difference between an article discussing despicable comments about conservative women, and quoting the language in the context of analysis, and what The Daily Caller did. [snip]

    Carlson tried to call it mere news reporting, but it was pure traffic baiting. Greta saw it for what it was, and Carlson just kept digging.

    The damage to The Daily Caller is enormous. It now is the subject of widespread mockery, such as this “Hitler” video from Three Bears Later blog.

    This is a disaster compounded by the folks at The Daily Caller digging while in a hole, and digging even harder when people called them out on it, and doubling down on the digging as it went viral.

    Can The Daily Caller survive? …

Comments are closed.