Bitter Barack Obama In Sweet Hillary Clinton Country

We laugh a Hillary Clinton style laugh every time. Our “cackle”, as the haters would have it, is a “cackle” that can lay several dozen Grade A eggs. Every time we read Hillary Clinton supporters are irrelevant, or Hillary Clinton supporters are now happy with treacherous boob Barack Obama, or that we here at Big Pink are “dead ender” Japanese soldiers fighting a war that has long been lost, or that we are irrelevant, or that the Democratic Party civil war of 2007/2008 is over and has been over – we laugh a laugh heard in Heaven above.

It’s a laugh only matched by our groan when we hear the whine of “Why oh why is Hillary saying nice things about Obama? Why oh why is Bill saying nice things about Obama? They’re dead to me for saying nice things about horrible Barack. Dead I tell you! Why oh why don’t they just shut up? Why? Why? Why?” We’ve answered these plaints before and we’re not going to beat this dead horse again. But consider – you don’t bait a trap with vinegar. You use honey, Honey.

A while back we promised a series of articles on Hillary and 2012 for September. We didn’t publish those articles, yet. We haven’t forgotten. We’ll explain some of why we haven’t published those articles, as much as we can, soon enough. For now, munch on this appetizer from the New York Times as you join with us in a good giggle (as you read ask yourself how irrelevant Hillary Clinton supporters are) Obama Is Facing a Replay of ’08 Hurdles in ‘Hillary Country,’ Pa.“:

“I’m heavily Democratic,” Mr. Harrity said. “But if the right Republican came along, I would be open to voting for him.”

This is a common refrain here in what is still called “Hillary Country,” where Mrs. Clinton’s family roots run deep and 75 percent of Democratic primary voters backed her failed bid for the Democratic nomination in 2008.

It is also a sign of why recent polls show Mr. Obama in trouble here in northeast Pennsylvania and across the state. He is visiting here Wednesday, his first trip to Scranton since he became president.

The northeast is a swing, bellwether region in a state that suddenly seems in play. White, working-class voters, here and elsewhere, have been especially hard hit by the economic downturn. They have little loyalty to Mr. Obama and feel he has not lived up to his promise.

Polls show that fewer than half the voters in Pennsylvania view Mr. Obama favorably and that he is losing support among independents and union households. It is too early for such polls to have much meaning, particularly before there is even a Republican nominee. But Mr. Obama’s challenge in Pennsylvania, which has voted Democratic for president in the last five elections, is indicative of what he faces in states across the Rust Belt and could help determine the outcome of the presidential campaign.”

A great many rank and file Hillary voting Democrats voted for Obama in the 2008 general election. This leads many Republican idiots to conclude that chasing these voters is a waste of time. But those Hillary Democrats that put aside their common sense in 2008 and voted against McCain as a reaction against the Bush years and in fear of the financial collapse at the end of 2008 are in many ways listening and waiting for someone who will talk to them about how Obama, the treacherous boob, should and must be rejected in 2012. A lot of these Hillary Clinton Democrats are ready to reject their inherited party affiliation and throw the boob out because Obama made it worse:

“His flagging poll numbers suggest how much has changed from 2008. Mr. Obama won the state over Mr. McCain by 10 percentage points; here in Lackawanna County, where Scranton is the county seat, he beat Mr. McCain by 26 percentage points.

Pennsylvania’s unemployment rate for October was 8.1 percent, lower than the national average of 9 percent. But here, in this old coal mining region, the rate was 9.7 percent; the Scranton area has the highest unemployment in the state. The city is on the verge of losing 300 postal service jobs. The regional food bank served a record number of meals on Thanksgiving and has had a 25 percent increase in demand over the last year.

Local budgets are so squeezed that Mayor Christopher A. Doherty of Scranton, a Democrat and early Clinton supporter, has proposed raising property taxes by 29 percent. The county is proposing a tax increase of 38 percent.

People are afraid,” Mr. Doherty said. “I remember when Ronald Reagan was president, unemployment was high and interest rates were through the roof. But we always thought things were going to get better. Today, we don’t think things will get better.” [snip]

“Four years ago it was about hope,” the mayor said. “Now it’s about his record.

Yup, Obama’s record of making things worse. Obama race-baited Hillary Clinton supporters – both the black and the white, and attacked the White Working Class and small town America:

“Mr. Obama may have got off on the wrong foot with them when he suggested in 2008 that voters in small towns were bitter about the world passing them by and would “cling to guns or religion.” He lost this state’s white, working-class voters, those without a college degree, first to Mrs. Clinton in the primary and then to Mr. McCain.

Treacherous Boob Barack Obama will be in Scranton, Pennsylvania today “at the high school — where Mrs. Clinton opened her primary campaign.” We know that is disgusting and so very obvious it makes us retch. Yet, we hope and expect that everyone at that publicity stunt is polite to the treacherous boob. While many would laugh out loud if bags of tomatoes and arugula were hurled at the treacherous boob we advise honey over vinegar. The vinegar should be kept in reserve for the election day 2012 celebration salad.

Did we mention the treacherous boob is not popular in Pennsylvania?:

“Although Pennsylvania has one million more registered Democrats than Republicans, the Republicans swept the state in the 2010 elections. They now hold the governor’s office, both houses of the legislature and two-thirds of the Congressional seats, and they control 54 of the 67 counties. This gives them an infrastructure they lacked in 2008.

“I’m feeling pretty good about where we sit,” Robert Gleason, chairman of the state Republican Party, said in an interview. [snip]

The Obama team is also planning to deploy Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who has roots in Scranton. Where Mr. Obama may be restrained, Mr. Biden relishes playing to the bleachers and is likely to assume the traditional vice-presidential role of attack dog.

Any feistiness at all will be welcome here by voters like Brian Evans, 74, a retired bus driver.

“Obama doesn’t have the moxie to tell Congress to go to hell,” said Mr. Evans, originally a Clinton supporter. As for 2012, Mr. Evans said he was looking at Republicans.”

Joe Biden for the save? Joe wasn’t exactly much of a help in the 2010 elections when he and the Obama OAFs did everything they could to win – but lost. As we recall, there was only one Democrat that year who helped to elect an anti-Obama Democrat to Congress from Pennsylvania. That helpful Democrat’s name? His name is Clinton.

As we wrote years ago and confirmed in November 2010, the 2010 elections and redistricting will keep the Republicans in control of the House for at least ten years. And as we mentioned in November 2010, even The Hill newspaper confessed “Hillary Clinton voters deserted the party in droves.

It’s not just Hillary Clinton supporters anymore. According to the polls, Obama is tanking with independents too.

After Scranton’s publicity stunt to tell the clinging lazy bitter Pennsylvania stage props some TOTUS nonsense, Barack Obama will head to Hillary Clinton’s former senate constituents. The goal in New York City is to get more money and presumably to laugh at the bitter clinging people of Pennsylvania and small town America. Donald Trump will not be giving money to the boob but rather poking the selfish treacherous boob:

You tell him Donald! Donald Trump continues to say what needs to be said as Republican wimps keep their mouths shut. We understand that the candidates running for the nomination might have their own “honey not vinegar” strategy. But why are Republican bloggers worried about what would happen if Obama won in 2012?

As we have written, if Obama won he would bow and scrape to the Republican House and Senate if only to get applause from them every time he signs their legislation. What the Obama coalition, which snubs the White Working Class, means is that Obama Dimocrats cannot govern because their coalition is designed only to help Obama not any core principle or party.

For those who having read this article but think we are blowing smoke, that we are irrelevant, that we are fighting a battle lost years ago – please note that we are not the ones who wrote today’s New York Times report. We are not the only ones who continue to note the lasting repercussions of the 2007/2008 election cycle and the Democratic Civil War. We are not the ones who snubbed the White Working Class. We are not the ones who made the economy worse.

We are also not the ones who are going to lose in 2012.


Death By Obama Coalition: Bye Bye Barney

Love him or hate him, Barney Frank exits the stage next year. Yup. Blue state Barney Frank is not running for reelection in 2012. Frank is afraid he will lose in true blue Massachusetts or be diminished in Washington 2012. This is yet another example of poisonous death by Obama and the Obama coalition (which we have since 2007 called the Obama “situation comedy coalition”).

Obama worshiping apologists will scream that there is nothing to be learned from Frank’s flee from Washington. But really, does anyone think that if there was a chance for Obama Dimocrats to take back the House of Representatives that Barney Frank would be headed to the green pastures of Harvard University?

There is, and there will be, much talk of how Obama Dimocrats will keep the U.S. Senate and recapture the House of Representatives in 2012. Most of that talk will come from fools who are paid to spread manure or from bovine believers in buffoonery who eat the manure covered grass. Those in the know, like Barney Frank, know the gig is up while Obama is on top of the ticket:

“Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) is the 17th House Democrat to announce a retirement this cycle compared to seven Republicans.

And all of those Republicans are trying to win higher office.”

Less than half of those Dimocrats are running for other offices. But they all know that the House of Representatives in 2012 will be retained by the Republicans. As to the Senate, the only question is how very big a majority the Republicans will grab.

At his press conference today, the usually not retiring Barney Frank explained why 2012 – presumably when Mess-iah runs for reelection – does not get him all fired up and ready to go back:

“To my disappointment, the leverage you have within the government has substantially diminished.”

Frank also told reporters that his newly drawn district would have been an uphill battle for him.

It would have been a tough campaign,” Frank said. “I would have a hard time justifying to myself to do it.” [snip]

Frank’s decision comes as a shock to the Massachusetts political world and to Washington – few thought Frank was a likely retiree.

In early February, Frank released a statement from his congressional office announcing he would seek reelection.”

By ” substantially diminished” “leverage” Frank means he is in the powerless minority on Capitol Hill. That he had previously announced he was running for office in 2012 means that Frank now has “No Hope” left of Obama Dimocrats coming back to power in the House or anywhere else. Whatever HOPE Frank had in February has been Obama-ized in NOvember.

All the talk about redistricting as the main reason for calling it quits? That’s rubbish. Frank remembers that in 2010 he had a tough fight for reelection against Sean Bielat and Frank further remembers that Scott Brown, Republican, is a Senator from Massachusetts. Frank’s calculus was why bother fighting a tough fight only to either lose the election or return in exhaustion to minority status in a Washington run by Republicans.

Barney Frank also understood that in a Washington run by Republicans – even if a political miracle happened and Barack Obama hooked and crooked himself to reelection – it would not matter at all. Barney Frank must know that Barack Obama is an incompetent corrupt boob comfortable in treachery. An Obama second term would only mean – at best – Republican legislation signed into law by a grinning jackass Obama.

The Barney Frank retirement has two other implications for the Obamination Dimocratic Party (via the Professor at Legal Insurrection):

“As more and more senior Democrats retire, the realization is sinking in that there is no next generation of Democrats.

The younger generation of Democrats in Congress was wiped out in 2010 (along with some senior Democrats as well). On the eve of the 2010 elections I wrote:

The Democrats face a political decapitation tomorrow.

Dozens of senior Democratic Party leaders in the House and Senate, and in Statehouses around the country, are likely to lose. Unlike Republicans in 2008, there is no next generation of Democratic leaders.

Who are the Democratic Party equivalents of Marco Rubio, Mitch Daniels, John Thune, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan or Eric Cantor?

The Republican Party has numerous rising stars. I cannot think of a single Democratic Party rising star.

Can you?

The Democratic congressional problem remains the same. Democrats in Congress have lost both their past and their future.”

None of this is news to regular readers of Big Pink. Barney Frank is but the latest example of the death spiral. Obama killed the once great Democratic Party and now Obama is finishing off the abomination of his own creation – the Obama Dimocratic Party. Thanks Barack!

Remember when Obama “Asked how he was going to prevent a midterm disaster on the scale of 1994, Obama replied, “Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.” It wasn’t a promise, it was a death threat now fulfilled.

The other, most important lesson, from the Barney Frank retirement is one we have discussed so many, many times before. Yup. We’re talking about the great “Mistake In ’08” versus the powerful Hillary Clinton coalition.

We have written about that Obama coalition mess as the preferred demographics for a situation comedy on TV but not for a political party. Now, years later, the New York Times has decided to discuss The Future Of The Obama Coalition:

“For decades, Democrats have suffered continuous and increasingly severe losses among white voters. But preparations by Democratic operatives for the 2012 election make it clear for the first time that the party will explicitly abandon the white working class.

All pretense of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment — professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists — and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic.”

We have noted so many times that the Republican victories of 2010 are directly attributable to the Obama situation comedy coalition. Senior citizens are not part of Obama’s clown posse situation comedy but seniors vote in great numbers in off year elections. The result in 2010 for Obama Dimocrats was destruction – or as the Professor states, a younger generation of Dimocrats decimated – Death By Obama Coalition.

These destructive acts were not an accident. This was deliberate policy. Donna Brazile (who was furious at us and Blackberried Hillary Clinton to shut us down) and David Axelrod let the sludge out of the bag. It was a deliberate policy of getting rid of the FDR/Bill Clinton/Hillary Clinton coalition in favor of the “creative class” occupying the situation comedy.

The Obama Coalition is designed only to help Barack Obama but it means death for any party associated with him.

Ruy Teixeira and “creative class” creeps like Chris Bowers demanded years ago that the FDR/ Clinton coalition be dumped in favor of the Obama abomination. We argued that the reason why the White Working Class has to be the foundation of the Democratic Party, or any party of the left or center was because the White Working Class keeps the party focused on economic issues that when addressed help the other members of the coalition as well. The New York Times catches up with us:

“The 2012 approach treats white voters without college degrees as an unattainable cohort. The Democratic goal with these voters is to keep Republican winning margins to manageable levels, in the 12 to 15 percent range, as opposed to the 30-point margin of 2010 — a level at which even solid wins among minorities and other constituencies are not enough to produce Democratic victories. [snip]

In the United States, Teixeira noted, “the Republican Party has become the party of the white working class,” while in Europe, many working-class voters who had been the core of Social Democratic parties have moved over to far right parties, especially those with anti-immigration platforms.

Teixeira, writing with John Halpin, argues in “The Path to 270: Demographics versus Economics in the 2012 Presidential Election,” that in order to be re-elected, President Obama must keep his losses among white college graduates to the 4-point margin of 2008 (47-51). Why? Otherwise he will not be able to survive a repetition of 2010, when white working-class voters supported Republican House candidates by a record-setting margin of 63-33. [snip]

Will the president hold sufficient support among communities of color, educated whites, Millennials, single women, and seculars and avoid a catastrophic meltdown among white working-class voters?

As long as the White Working Class sees its future with the Republican Party the winning Democratic Party can never be resurrected (unless a plucky blond lady makes a move). Snub the White Working Class and the White Working Class will snub you. For that matter, snub senior citizens and senior citizens will snub you too. Snubbing the White Working Class also harvests economic incoherence. The Obama abomination machine is snubbing majority swaths of the country:

“As a practical matter, the Obama campaign and, for the present, the Democratic Party, have laid to rest all consideration of reviving the coalition nurtured and cultivated by Franklin D. Roosevelt. The New Deal Coalition — which included unions, city machines, blue-collar workers, farmers, blacks, people on relief, and generally non-affluent progressive intellectuals — had the advantage of economic coherence. It received support across the board from voters of all races and religions in the bottom half of the income distribution, the very coherence the current Democratic coalition lacks.

What these “creative class” dummies who presume themselves to be “intellectuals” miss is that even if such a slapdash coalition can win the occasional election IT CANNOT GOVERN.

But governing is not the game these corrupt creeps are playing. What they want is power to benefit themselves in tawdry ways. Yes, they get bigger offices, there will be more lobbying job slots open to them, Big Media will invite them to gabfests. But by cobbling together these crazy quilt coalitions they cannot govern.

But they don’t care about governing, they only care about themselves. That is the real Obama coalition – selfish narcissists who imagine they are smart and snub their betters.


Thanks For Nothing

Sometimes, if you are alert, you can catch a glimpse of the truth.

Politico‘s “The Arena” suggests that Jeff Greenfield’s book, “Then Everything Changed” might be the best book of 2011. We are informed that the New York Times called the book a ‘riveting’ narrative. Former Congressman Artur Davis thinks the book is real good. Buried in his praise of the book at Politico is an unintended glimpse of the fearsome truth:

“The book is built on three novellas, each supposing that a particular historical fact happened an inch differently. [snip]

The last revolves not around tragedy, but blind luck, and how the seventies would have been altered if Gerald Ford avoided a still inexplicable gaffe on foreign policy during his 1976 race with Jimmy Carter, and ended up passing Carter to win a narrow electoral college victory. It is Ford who governs during the stagflation and drift of the late seventies, and when Ronald Reagan emerges as the nominee in 1980, he bears the burden of a decade of failed Republican rule.

These fantasy books are about as productive, and less satisfying, than pimple scarred teenagers or tweens dreaming of dates with Justin Bieber or cast members of the Twilight vampire film series. Don’t waste your money on these ‘what if?’ fictions. Fact is John and Bobby got killed in ’63 and ’68 respectively and Ford “liberated” the Eastern Block prison states during that foreign policy debate in ’76.

What is worthwhile discussing, because it is a window into the truth which haunts Obama Dimocrats, is ex-Congressman Davis’ comment about the consequences of a bad economy for political parties and candidates. What Davis, and presumably Greenfield, are admitting is that Obama is the burden for Dimocrats we have repeatedly stated he is.

Davis premises that if Ford would have been reelected it would have been Ford, not Carter, the public blamed for the “stagflation and drift” of a decade (no thought is given to the possibility that Jimmy Carter made some enormous economic blunders which extended the economic malaise of that decade). Ronald Reagan, according to this fiction would have had to bear “the burden of a decade of failed Republican rule” when he ran for election in 1980. Could’a, would’a, should’a.

In 2008 John McCain had to pay the price for the American public’s disgust with George W. Bush. Barack Obama profited from that disgust with Bush and the economic collapse just before the election. Now the shoe is on the other boob.

Gerald Ford was not a successful president either. Ford was however the most “personally” popular president ever since his election. People liked him but judged Ford to be a failure and wisely threw him out of office. For the Obama worship crowd the “American people like B.O.” defense should ring hollow if they look at “personally” popular Ford on election day.

By the time Ronald Reagan came up for election in 1980 the American people were sick of Jimmy Carter. Reagan won, and George Bush followed. This time it will be worse. That’s essentially what Davis and Greenfield are saying.

What a lot of Obama Dimocrats (of course this includes Big Media) fear and will not state nor admit to themselves is that Obama is the harbinger of decades of death for the corruption which is their party. But if you are alert, you can occasionally catch a glimpse into that unspoken and un-admitted fear, in the unlikeliest of places – like fantasy book reviews.

A glimpse of the truth can also be had by counting, not necessarily reading, the proliferation of “Save Us Hillary” articles which appear daily. There’s a reason so many articles appear with regularity. The fantasy is that there is anything or anyone that can save Obama from his disastrous record:

“You’ve heard the rumors before, and they remain rumors, but they are starting to take on a different tone. Once whispered among political junkies as one would discuss who should start this week in a fantasy football league – purely speculative and engaged in mostly for entertainment.

Today, however, the tone has changed. Democrats now talk of the outcome of replacing Biden on the ticket in 2012 as though it’s a proscribed therapy that they must undergo. Republicans, when they talk about it, often qualify the possibility as remote if only to reassure themselves that this doomsday event is still unlikely.”

False HOPE of 2008 has given way to brutal reality of 2012:

“The early exuberance after President Obama’s election led some to speculate that a generation of Democratic governance was ahead. That enthusiasm soon gave way to cautious optimism that the “expanded map” of 2008 was likely to hold in 2012. Today, all those predictions have been exposed for the folly that they were at the time. Not only will the “expanded map” contract significantly in 2008 but the battle has expanded out from traditional swing states to Democratic Strongholds like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

Alec MacGillis outlines the president’s troubles in the Keystone State perfectly in a recent piece for The New Republic. The president lost white, working class voters in Pennsylvania by 15 points in 2008 – a year with all the fundamentals running in his favor. The causes for this are manifold, according to MacGillis, owing primarily to the long and damaging primary battle that was fought here between Obama and Clinton in 2008.

Vice President Biden was chose to join Obama on the ticket for a number of reasons, but primarily for his ability to lend gravitas to a ticket bereft of experience in weighty matters like foreign affairs. Biden would also help reassure Rust Belt Democrats about Obama’s presidency and their fears that his urban and progressive background would not impede him from representing their fears and concerns while in the Oval Office.”

The only CHANGE wanted by Americans now, is to be rid of Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton can do a lot of things but saving Barack Obama is not one of them. Although it is amusing to see what effect all these “Save Us Hillary” articles must be having on Barack Obama and his lantern jawed Michelle:

“Obama cannot win the presidency without Pennsylvania or Michigan. Full stop.

On Friday, Pete du Pont writes in the editorial page about the myriad qualifications and benefits that Hilary brings to the top of the ticket – electorally it is a no brainer. For the Obama administration, it is a double edged sword; win the presidency and secure a legacy but abandon all the hard fought victories over the Clinton machine in 2008. Indeed, reanimate the necrotic corpse of the Clinton’s Washington establishment.

The lame duck Obama presidency would be dominated by the story of Hillary’s ascendency to the presidency. There would not be enough media oxygen for both personalities in D.C. That is a hard pill to swallow but, given the likelihood that Republicans will retake control of the Senate and retain control of the House after 2012, putting Hillary on the ticket may be the only thing standing between Obama and the complete Republican dominance of Washington in 2013.”

We will not vote for Barack Obama no matter what or who. We don’t even like to read these ‘Hillary for V.P.” stories. But it does give us a chuckle to hear the sleeves-a-yanking every time Michelle gets the paper from the butler. Black Friday must have been brutal on the muscular Michelle and even worse for any stray sleeves coming into her view:

“The main challenge President Obama faces is persuading voters to re-elect him in spite of the disastrous results of his economic policies. [snip]

The Obama economy is the worst America has seen in four decades, with payroll employment today 5% lower than it was 41 months ago. Over the past three years, federal spending as a percentage of gross domestic product has been higher than at any time since World War II, adding $4 trillion to our national debt.”

That’s not a fantasy. The Obama economy is the stuff of nightmares. The Obama economy is cruel reality. Enter Hillary:

“Democratic pollsters Patrick Caddell and Douglas Schoen have urged the president to forgo re-election for the good of his party and the nation. But those don’t seem like factors that would necessarily influence this president. Instead we might see him decide to switch to a vice presidential candidate who will be stronger, better, and change the thinking of a majority of the Democrats–namely, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Last December a USA Today/Gallup poll found Mrs. Clinton to be the most admired woman in politics. A poll in March found that 66% viewed Mrs. Clinton favorably and just 31% unfavorably. Mr. Obama’s numbers, which have since declined, were 54% and 43%; Vice President Joe Biden’s, 46% to 41%. An October Time poll of last October pitted Mrs. Clinton against Republican candidates. She led Mitt Romney by 17%, Rick Perry by 26% and Herman Cain by 22%. Mr. Obama’s leads in the same poll were 3%, 12% and 12%, respectively.

Paul Starr, co-editor of The American Prospect, a liberal-left magazine, has observed that 45 percent of the people who disapprove of Mr. Obama’s performance view Mrs. Clinton favorably. It is fair to say that Mrs. Clinton’s addition to the ticket would be a substantial gain for President Obama that he badly needs next November, since she is, as Mr. Starr notes, a member of the part of his administration that has the highest approval rating, and more important she has not at all been a part of the disastrous economic policies that have caused the Obama drop in popularity. Even better for Election Day, she would gain support among older white voters, who did not support Mr. Obama very much in 2008. Mr. Starr also cites a Suffolk University Florida poll that shows that Mrs. Clinton on the Obama ticket would win Florida for the two of them, even if Sen. Marco Rubio is the Republican’s vice presidential candidate.”

We were denounced as living in a fantasy world when we wrote, starting in 2007/2008, what is now viewed as the most conventional of conventional wisdom. We have never been in fantasy land – FutureLand maybe, but never fantasy land. We knew a boob is a boob. We knew a corrupt boob will always be a corrupt boob. We knew a corrupt boob was also likely to be a treacherous boob. We documented the corrupt treacherous boob and predicted the Republican Party would adapt and prosper. Now it is all conventional wisdom:

“Add in that the Washington Democrats already see a political disaster coming: the Senate as well as the House is likely to have a Republican majority. Only two Republican Senate incumbents are vulnerable: the appointed Dean Heller in Nevada and elected Scott Brown of Massachusetts. By contrast, of the 23 Democrat-held seats up for re-election, political forecaster Larry Sabato sees six as safe for the Democrats, and two as likely GOP pickups. That will mean that Republicans need only to win one to four of the remaining 15 to take control of the Senate along with its House majority.

So will President Obama make the vice presidential switch? While it is not unprecedented, it is certainly unusual, and it would likely be seen in some quarters as a desperate act of a weakened president.

In less than a year Americans will tell Barack Obama and the corruption we call the Obama Dimocratic Party – “Thanks For Nothing, now get out, it’s time for a change.” In less than a year we suspect that in a last ditch effort to get reelected, if not renominated, Barack Obama will come on bended knee to Hillary Clinton.

When Obama comes to Hillary Clinton and begs “Save Me Hillary” we hope she says “Thanks for Nothing. Now get out, and stay out.” That’s fantasy meeting reality.


Foreign Policy Republican Debate Night

The economy is in tatters.

The logic of getting rid of Barack Obama and begging Hillary Clinton to rescue the corruption known as the Obama Dimocratic Party is increasingly apparent even to the dimmest minds. For too many, the fate of the country is an afterthought.

Egypt, Iran, Syria, the entire Middle East is on the brink of holy hell. The United States, the world, can’t take much more of Barack Obama. Obama has got to go – the sooner the better.

So it is time for another Republican debate. This one is to discuss foreign policy and national security. The Heritage Foundation/AEI foreign policy debate will be broadcast on CNN at 8:00 p.m. ET.


The Age Of Fake: ‘Occupy Wall Street’ The Gateway Drug to Hopium

Update IV: We’ve got the funniest moment from today.

The class warfare we noted (hint: Jon Stewart) in our last update developed into another kind of class warfare: the OWS mob chants “follow those kids” at children trying to go to school near Wall Street. Yeah, at children. That’s a strange way to influence public opinion to your side.

About 300 arrests thus far and at least two cops in the hospital. A strange way to influence public opinion indeed – even your own supporters are repelled:

Uppity Women are not amused.


Update III: Think we are kidding or lying when we write Occupy Wall Street is run from 60 Wall Street? If you do think we are wrong in our article (see below, after the updates), check out this Jon Stewart video and you will actually see 60 Wall Street:

It’s all a fake.


Update II: It’s a fizzle in the drizzle. OWS is retreating to Zoo-cottie Park after failing to do anything other than walk around in circles.

Don’t be distracted by this Obama protection scheme in lower Manhattan. Crony capitalism Solyndra hearings are on C-SPAN Here.


Update I: Our comments section has livestream video of a CBS helicopter view of the ruckus around Wall Street. We also posted the OWS street view livestream. We also posted what we think is the song of the day.

There is lots of taunting of the police going on. The police also had to step in and push and arrest protestors who tried to block people from getting to their destination (including a woman with a baby in a carriage and a small child beside her).

The OWS livestream is saying that the opening bell at the stock market has been delayed by them. That is a doubtful bit of information. The tactic by OWS Day of Action to disguise themselves in business suits has not worked. We’ll soon see as the markets are set to open in 15 minutes.


There is no grass that has ever grown on the tree covered concrete and granite block of Manhattan called Zuccotti Park. There is however a lot of fake grassroots astroturf flourishing there.

Astroturf. How else to describe this Obama protection scheme? The real autocratic leaders of Occupy Wall Street make their decisions from the high towers of Wall Street itself, 60 Wall Street to be precise. Yet, there are dupes in Zoo-cotti Park who desperately HOPE they belong to something big, new and shiny. But these dupes are helping something small, old and dirty.

* * * * * *

Tomorrow the cultist dupes of OWS will hold a day of action well designed to annoy and alienate New Yorkers and the nation by potential disruptions of the Brooklyn Bridge and the subways. The Obama allied union bosses will force thousands of their subjects to join the OWS street harassments.

SEIU of Michigan is “planning a Bridge Action Day”. The leaflets proudly distributed state “Support President Obama’s American Jobs Act.” When is a clue a clue?

OWS dupes have long denied that OWS is an Obama protection scheme. But note that the propaganda is not just for “jobs”, or a “jobs plan” but rather a “Support President Obama’s” job plan. Why do this left-handed support of Barack Obama? The New York Times yesterday published an article detailing the lost enthusiasm among students for Barack Obama.:

“I don’t think I could do it anymore,” she said. “That campaign was an amazing experience. But I don’t think I’m in the same mind-set anymore. He hasn’t really addressed the young people, and we helped him to get elected.” [snip]

Mr. Obama’s advisers, while acknowledging the shift, said they were confident that the loss of these workers would be negated by an influx of new students who have turned of voting age since 2008. [snip]

Yet even Mr. Obama’s supporters say it seems unlikely that the president — given the difficulties of these past three years and the mood of the electorate of all ages — will ever be able to replicate the youthful energy that became such a defining hallmark of his campaign.”

The Obama campaign and allies know they cannot survive such damp or nonexistent enthusiasm. How to get more fodder for the machine? How about an astroturf movement as a gateway drug to the eventual Hopium Obama campaign? That’s the ticket.

The distraction of OWS is designed to… distract. Don’t give the rubes and dupes time to discuss the looting of the economy and the stunning silence from the complicit White House on the bonuses at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

Stunning silence is the goal. Distraction. If Occupy Wall Street was real wouldn’t they protest the White House? If Occupy Wall Street was real wouldn’t there be rage on the street protesting how Wall Street profits are made as top members of congress like Pelosi are trading stock on inside information?

The Stock Act??? You won’t hear about governmental Wall Street corruption at Occupy Wall Street. Occupy Wall Street is a distraction agit prop ploy designed to dupe the willing dupes and protect the crooks and crony capitalists.

You won’t hear protests at Occupy Wall Street as Solyndra looted hundreds of millions from the American taxpayer with the help of Barack Obama. You won’t hear protests at Occupy Wall Street about the new White House emails in which Solyndra executives thought Obama’s energy department cared more about appearances that sound business decisions. Crony capitalism will not be discussed at Occupy Wall Street when the crony capitalists are cronies of corrupt Barack Obama.

You won’t hear about the crony capitalists crooks at Occupy Wall Street. Occupy Wall Street will be busy creeping out New Yorkers and sensible Americans:

“The march on Wall Street is slated to start at 7 a.m.

Other events scheduled for the day include “Occupy the Subways” in all five boroughs at 3 p.m., a takeover of Foley Square at 5 p.m. and another march across the Brooklyn Bridge.”

The mob threats will alienate New Yorkers and sensible Americans but it will be the “gateway drug” to support for Obama next year as the scheme develops. For now, threats and thuggery are on the march:

“Already angry over their eviction from Zuccotti Park, the protesters are planning breakfast, lunch, and dinner protests on Thursday:

The breakfast plan is to “shut down” Wall Street. It’s all expected to start with a rally in Liberty Square starting at 7 a.m. to “put an end to Wall Street’s reign of terror.”

The lunch menu will feature protesters looking to “occupy” the subways in all five boroughs. They plan on gathering at 16 subways stations to take their message to the trains.

And dinner is set up as a takeover of Foley Square, followed by a march to the Brooklyn Bridge. [snip]

While the official movement is planning its day of action, other individuals seem to be making plans of their own.

In a video posted on YouTube after protesters were evicted from Zuccotti Park, a demonstrator in the crowd says “On the 17th, we’re going to burn New York City to the ground.”

Later in the video, he then goes on to say “No more talking. They’ve got guns, we’ve got bottles. They’ve got bricks, we’ve got rocks…in a few days you’re going to see what a Molotov cocktail can do to Macy’s.”

No surprise then that the mobs of Occupy Wall Street are losing their support (and much less popular than the Tea Party) much like their inspiration Barack Obama:

“Surprisingly, after two months of Occupiers defiling public spaces across America, voters are suddenly more fond of tea partiers than of occupiers. Even better, Tea Party favorables are up ten points from a month ago among independent voters.

The Occupy Wall Street movement is not wearing well with voters across the country. Only 33% now say that they are supportive of its goals, compared to 45% who say they oppose them. That represents an 11 point shift in the wrong direction for the movement’s support compared to a month ago when 35% of voters said they supported it and 36% were opposed. Most notably independents have gone from supporting Occupy Wall Street’s goals 39/34, to opposing them 34/42.

Wait for the new numbers after tomorrow’s mob tactics take to the subways and bridges of the country. Even at the DailyKooks Hopium den the racist, violent and disgusting Tea Party OWS is turning heads.

Occupy Wall Street is a fake in the Obama Age of Fake. We must not let Occupy Wall Street succeed in its aim of distraction and protection of corrupt Chicago crony Barack Obama. But these fakes have to be called out when necessary.

Occupy Wall Street is a fake located not on in Zoo-cottie Park but in the tower numbered #60 Wall Street:

“On Sunday, October 23, a meeting was held at 60 Wall Street. Six leaders discussed what to do with the half-million dollars that had been donated to their organization, since, in their estimation, the organization was incapable of making sound financial decisions. The proposed solution was not to spend the money educating their co-workers or stimulating more active participation by improving the organization’s structures and tactics. Instead, those present discussed how they could commandeer the $500,000 for their new, more exclusive organization. No, this was not the meeting of any traditional influence on Wall Street. These were six of the leaders of Occupy Wall Street (OWS).

Leaders? We were propagandized that their were no leaders. Apparently inside the Orwellian Machinations of Occupy Wall Street there are indeed leaders looking down from 60 Wall Street at their dupes at Zoo-cottie Park.

The fake narrative of the fake “leaderless movement” is a fake narrative. It’s all one big fake designed to ensnare dupes and those who crave desperately to be part of a movement that fulfills their fantasies and HOPES for CHANGE. It is all a fake.

The leader who attended the meeting at 60 Wall Street clues everyone in but the clueless will remain willing dupes:

“According to Marisa Holmes, one of the most outspoken and influential leaders of OWS, the NYC-GA started receiving donations from around the world when OWS began on September 17. Because the NYC-GA was not an official organization, and therefore could not legally receive thousands of dollars in donations, the nonprofit Alliance for Global Justice helped OWS create Friends of Liberty Plaza, which receives tax-free donations for OWS. Since then, Friends of Liberty Plaza has received over $500,000. Until October 28, anybody who wanted to receive more than $100 from Friends of Liberty Plaza had to go through the often arduous modified consensus process (90% majority) of the NYC-GA—which, despite its well-documented inefficiencies, granted $25,740 to the Media WG for live-stream equipment on October 12, and $1,400 to the Food and Medical WGs for herbal tonics on October 18.

At the teach-in, Ms. Holmes maintained that while the NYC-GA is the “de facto” mechanism for distributing funds, it has no right to do so, even though she acknowledged that most donors were likely under the impression that the NYC-GA was the only organization with access to these funds. Two other leaders of the teach-in, Daniel and Adash, concurred with Holmes.

Ms. Holmes also stated at the teach-in that five people in the Finance WG have access to the $500,000 raised by Friends of Liberty Plaza. When Suresh Fernando, the man taking notes, asked who these people are, the leaders of the Structure WG nervously laughed and said that it was hard to keep track of the “constantly fluctuating” heads of the Finance WG. Mr. Fernando made at least four increasingly explicit requests for the names. Each request was turned down by the giggling, equivocating leaders.

Who gets all that donor money received with fake assurances that it was money for the people at Zoo-cottie Park?:

“The leaders of the Structure WG eventually regained control of the teach-in. They said that they too were unhappy with the Finance WG’s monopoly over OWS’s funds, which is why they wanted to create the Spokes Council. What upset them more, however, was the inefficient and fickle General Assembly. A major point of the discussion was whether the Spokes Council and the NYC-GA should have access to the funds, or just the Spokes Council.

Daniel, a tall, red-bearded, white twenty-something—one of the six leaders of the teach-in—said that the NYC-GA needed to be completely defunded because those with “no stake” in the Occupy Wall Street movement shouldn’t have a say in how the money was spent. When I asked him whether everybody in the 99% had a stake in the movement, he said that only those occupying or working in Zuccotti Park did. I pointed out that since the General Assembly took place in Zuccotti Park, everybody who participated was an occupier. He responded with a long rant about how Zuccotti Park is filled with “tourists,” “free-loaders” and “crackheads” and suggested a solution that the even NYPD has not yet attempted: Daniel said that he’d like to take a fire-hose and clear out the entire encampment, adding hopefully that only the “real” activists would come back.

The main obstacle to the creation of the Spokes Council was that the NYC-GA had already voted against it four times. One audience member observed that no organization would vote to relinquish its power. Some of the strongest proponents of the Spokes Council responded that they had taken this into account, and were planning on creating the Spokes Council regardless of whether the NYC-GA accepted the proposal. They claimed that, in the interests of non-hierarchy, neither the Spokes Council nor the General Assembly should have power over the other.

In the minutes of the teach-in on Saturday the 22nd, the leaders recognize that usurping power from the NYC-GA might make people uncomfortable.

It’s all a fake. The pretend democracy is a fake propaganda ploy by the real leaders of Occupy Wall Street. As the former leader of Occupy Wall Street writes “I felt like I was watching a local production of Animal Farm.”

It’s all a fake. It’s a fake directed from 60 Wall Street. It’s a fake devoted to protection of Barack Obama. It’s a fake and a protector of crony capitalist #1. It’s a fake. A fake. Anyone who defends Occupy Wall Street is defending a fake.

Anyone who defends Occupy Wall Street has to explain 60 Wall Street and explain why it is not a fake. But it is a fake. A total fake armed with dupes who want to believe the unbelievable and the indefensible.


SCOTUS Focus On POTUS Hocus Pocus

Update: Recusal is a red herring indeed. Neither Thomas nor Kagen are going to recuse themselves from this case. This fight will be fought by all sides without restraint.

Obama Dimocrats are biting dirty fingernails:

“Democrats on Capitol Hill are worried that the Supreme Court will rule against President Obama’s healthcare reform law.

Over the last couple weeks, congressional Democrats have told The Hill that the law faces danger in the hands of the Supreme Court, which The New York Times editorial page recently labeled the most conservative high court since the 1950s.

While the lawmakers are not second-guessing the administration’s legal strategy, some are clearly bracing for defeat.”

Four more wasted years when this health scam turkey gets shot down by the high court. We have been proven right when we declared Obama a colossal Mistake In ’08.


Have you ever witnessed such treacherous boobery hit the brick wall of Karma with such a bang?

In 2007 and 2008 treacherous boob Barack Obama attacked Hillary Clinton on the issue of mandates. Hillary Clinton made a case on the need for a health care mandate. Hillary Clinton’s health care plan was based on actually improving health care, expanding accessibility, and bringing down the cost of health care. Barack Obama savaged Hillary.

Enter reality. No sooner was the monumental boob in the White House than he incompetently flipped – and flopped. Obama embraced a boobish and likely unconstitutional mandate plan, grabbed hundreds of millions in ad money from Big PhaRma while trading away any possibility of lower health costs via bulk purchasing power of drugs, as well as a fake accessibility plan too expensive and useless for many to afford.

Barack Obama embraced a health scam that Hillary Clinton rejected decades ago. Obama thought passing his health scam would ensure his place in the history books for doing something no other president was able to do. Enter Karma.

Obama’s health scam is hated by majorities of Americans. Now the Supreme Court will rule on the Obama health scam several months from the November general election. Obama will enter the history books as the treacherous boob he is.

None of this really had to happen if there was a president with half a brain and at least one functioning testicle or a big batch of ovaries. As Hillary Clinton pointed out to the boob when she was attacked on the mandates, the entire Commerce Clause constitutional issues could be mooted with point of contact registration for health care and her proposed regional health boards.

Republicans were honest and open as to how they would attack the Obama health plan. Left Talkers laughed and said that argument would not work. We warned that the argument Republicans made was a potent one and that the Supreme Court could upend the entire silly project.

Whatever happens next year at the Supreme Court, Obama will come out a bloody boob. We’ve made that case before, others have made the case before, and today the Professor at Legal Insurrection makes the case again (we provide the emphasis):

“From a purely political viewpoint, it is more important that the Supreme Court hear and decide the case prior to the 2012 election than it is which way the Court rules.

While of course throwing the mandate out is my strong (overwhelming) preference, politically for Republicans I don’t think it makes a huge difference which way the Court decides the case, as long as it decides the case prior to the 2012 election.

If the Supreme Court finds the mandate to be unconstitutional, it will deflate Obama’s presidency. In one fell swoop, the entirety of Obama’s agenda will come crashing down. It will be a political and personal humiliation.

If the Supreme Court upholds the mandate, Obama will be able to crow a little, but such a decision will leave the majority of people who hate the law with but one alternative: Throw Obama and Senate Democrats out in November 2012.

If the Supreme Court puts a pillow to the face of the Obama health scam it will mean that Obama boobishly wasted years in passing this stink, ignored the voters’ message when Scott Brown was elected in Massachusetts, and ignored the need to focus on the economy and JOBS, JOBS, JOBS.

If the Supreme Court upholds the Obamination health scam Americans who hate the plan will realize that the only way to get rid of the scam is to get rid of the scammer and his party enablers. The few Senate and House Obama Dimocrats not yet imperiled will be run out.

But… if Republicans nominate Willard Mitt Romney Obama will attempt to muddy the waters and say that Romney gave birth to Obama’s health scam. Some Republicans know this and that is why Newt Gingrich in a PPP Poll leads Romney and is only two point behind Romney in a CNN poll. We don’t think Newt Gingrich is the solution for Republicans for reasons we have discussed before but the reason polls show Romney and Newt at least tied for the lead is because Romney endangers Republicans on the 1a issue of 2012 – the economy, jobs and the impact of Obama’s health scam.

If Scott Brown’s election in Massachusetts was not enough empirical evidence in the political argument of who benefits and who loses when it comes to health care, does anyone remember this November’s election results in Ohio? Anyone?

Obama’s health scam has already caused a lot of troubles for the Obama enablers in the Obama Dimocratic Party:

“House Democrats face their first test of unity over a key provision of their healthcare reform law next week when legislation to repeal the long-term care CLASS Act comes up for a vote.

Republicans are trying to capitalize on the program’s demise after the Obama administration announced last month that it could not find a way to make it work. The House will get that ball rolling on Tuesday when the Energy and Commerce health subcommittee marks up repeal legislation. [snip]

Democrats face a potential lose-lose situation: vote for repeal and implicitly acknowledge that their health law contained a fatally flawed program; vote against, and open up to criticism that they’re in denial.

“It puts the Democrats in a very difficult position,” Rep. Charles Boustany (R-La.), the bill’s sponsor, told The Hill recently. “They have to decide whether they’re going to do the fiscally responsible thing and repeal the program or support something that is fiscally irresponsible.”

The White House is formally opposed to repeal. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has said that the department cannot find a way forward “at this time,” and Congress’ nonpartisan budget scorekeeper has eliminated projected savings from the program as a result.”

No CLASS for the boob means more losses in 2012 for the boob enablers. In 2012 the Obama health scam will be as popular as Sandusky at a Justin Bieber concert.

But what about the constitutional issues? We said the constitutional issues against Obama’s health scam are potent. We scorched the Obama lies of “it’s not a tax.” The New York Times used to mock the legal case from foes of Obama’s scam but now the Times is backtracking and provides a decent overview of the constitutional issues:

“If the federal government can require people to purchase health insurance, what else can it force them to do? More to the point, what can’t the government compel citizens to do? [snip]

“Let’s go right to what is your most difficult problem,” Judge Laurence H. Silberman, who later voted to uphold the law, told a lawyer at an argument in September before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. “What limiting principle do you articulate?” If Congress may require people to purchase health insurance, he asked, what else can it force them to buy? Where do you draw the line?

Would it be unconstitutional, he asked, to require people to buy broccoli? [snip]

Could people making more than $500,000 be required to buy cars from General Motors to keep it in business? [snip]

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, who ended up in dissent, then jumped in. “How about mandatory retirement accounts replacing Social Security?” he asked.

“It would depend,” Ms. Brinkmann replied.”

Maybe we will all be forced to eat arugula – buy and hang pictures of Obama and Michelle (“made exclusively for Michelle Obama“) in our living rooms along with requisite incense – all in the service of Commerce Clause jurisprudence. Will Roberts turn to Rehnquist?:

“In 1995, when the court struck down a federal law that prohibited people from carrying firearms in school zones, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote that “we pause to consider the implications of the government’s arguments” in defending the law — that stopping activities that could lead to violent crime relates to interstate commerce because it affects “national productivity.”

Under that reasoning, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote, “It is difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power,” adding that “if we were to accept the government’s arguments, we are hard pressed to posit any activity by an individual that Congress is without power to regulate.”

Chief Justice Rehnquist died in 2005, but three of the justices who joined his majority opinion — Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy and Clarence Thomas — are still on the court.”

A recent “victory” in the courts might prove as illusory as this November’s elections for Obama Dimocrats. That “victory” might be as costly as Obama’s slap at the Supreme Court at the State of the Union speech:

“The government’s position amounts to an argument that the mere fact of an individual’s existence substantially affects interstate commerce, and therefore Congress may regulate them at every point of their life,” Chief Judge Joel F. Dubina and Judge Frank M. Hull wrote.

On Tuesday, on the other hand, a three-judge panel of the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the law. Judge Silberman, who had grilled Ms. Brinkmann so aggressively, wrote the majority opinion, and his discussion of the limits of Congressional power may have handed the administration a bigger victory than it wanted, because it presumably did not want to win on the grounds that Congress could do anything at all. [snip]

“That a direct requirement for most Americans to purchase any product or services seems an intrusive exercise of legislative power,” Judge Silberman wrote, “surely explains why Congress has not used this authority before — but that seems to us a political judgment rather than a recognition of constitutional limitations.”

Judge Silberman said there were Supreme Court decisions on issues like regulating the use of medical marijuana that had endorsed broad Congressional power to legislate in the name of commerce.

It certainly is an encroachment on individual liberty,” he wrote of the health care law, “but it is no more so than a command that restaurants or hotels are obliged to serve all customers regardless of race, that gravely ill individuals cannot use a substance their doctors described as the only effective palliative for excruciating pain, or that a farmer cannot grow enough wheat to support his own family.”

In dissent, Judge Kavanaugh praised the majority for its honesty in describing what followed from its ruling.

“The majority opinion here is quite candid — and accurate,” he wrote, adding: “The majority opinion’s holding means, for example, that a law replacing Social Security with a system of mandatory private retirement accounts would be constitutional. So would a law mandating that parents purchase private college savings accounts.”

Within hours of the decision on Tuesday, opponents of the health care law were issuing statements, and their theme was predictable. “Like the government,” said Randy E. Barnett, a law professor at Georgetown, “the majority could identify no limit to an unprecedented power of Congress.”

The Supreme Court will focus on the Obama health scam this coming March. Americans too will focus on the Obama health scam and how to defeat it.

As Americans focus, along with SCOTUS on Obama’s Hocus Pocus health scam, it is Obama, not a rabbit from a top hat, that will disappear.


Saturday Night Republican Debate On Foreign Policy

Tonight at 8:00 p.m ET CBS News (with partner National Journal) will broadcast a Republican debate from Wofford College in Spartanburg, South Carolina. The topic is foreign policy.

So low has foreign policy fallen as an issue in this election that CBS will only broadcast the debate for an hour and a half. To see the entire debate viewers will have to go elsewhere ( or National Journal).

Foreign policy is an important test for president, or at least it used to be. Indeed, there is a foreign policy expert (and domestic policy expert) who catches the eyes of Americans these days. Republican/conservative HotAir notes that she is the key to the keystone state (among other states). Her name is…:

Thursday, Quinnipiac released a series of “swing state” polls that showed how much danger Barack Obama faced in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida, even with the Republican Party fighting through its primary season.  Obama has lost the independents he assiduously courted in 2008, and the voters that at one time were called Reagan Democrats are fleeing the ticket.

So what could bring them back? A little change in the bottom of the ticket. [snip]

The swing is significant in both models when adding Hillary to the ticket. Survey USA explains one reason why: [snip]

Don’t forget that Obama added Joe Biden to the ticket in the first place to help in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio, as well as to fill a foreign-policy gap that got highlighted in the Russian invasion of Georgia just before the conventions in 2008. [snip]

It’s not just a gender gap, either.  An Obama/Hillary ticket, rather than one including Biden, wins back two age demographics over a Romney/Gingrich ticket: 50-64YOs go from 43/47 to 49/45, and seniors go from 43/49 to 47/46.  There is a narrow shift among both black (76/18 to 82/14) and white (43/47 to 46/45) voters as well.  There is even a shift among self-identified Tea Party supporters, from 18/76 to 24/69.”

Interesting huh? Completely unsurprising too. We won’t support any ticket that includes Obama the treacherous boob.

HotAir has a little more that brings a smile:

“Even with the tickets as shown, Republicans have not yet united behind a candidate, and the numbers for Obama as an incumbent in a state with an overwhelming Democratic registration advantage are not impressive.  Also, the sheer novelty of replacing a sitting VP on a re-elect ticket (it hasn’t been done since FDR booted Henry Wallace in 1944 to distance himself from Wallace’s shift towards neo-Stalinism) could damage Obama everywhere else by making him look weak and desperate.

But those caveats don’t erase the impact that a running-mate switch might have in traditional Democratic interior states for an incumbent with no other real story to tell.  While these changes don’t look overwhelming, they would be enough to push Pennsylvania back into the Democratic column in a close election.  And if it came down to rescuing Pennsylvania with no appreciable downside of a Biden retirement, Democrats might want to draft Hillary to rescue Pennsylvania — and perhaps a few other faltering Democratic strongholds as well, like Michigan.”

A draft for the top of the ticket is a good idea. But NObama forever and in every circumstance.

Aside from Hillary, there are some issues to watch for tonight. Will Fast and Furious be mentioned as a peripheral foreign policy issue. Whoever mentions it first tonight gets a gold star from us.

CBC news, in preparation for tonight’s debate prepared a poll on foreign policy. Tonight it is time for the Republican candidates to weigh in on foreign policy – Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China (maybe a smart candidate can work in Solyndra to China policy), Mexico, Iran, etc.

For all that, the reason many will watch tonight’s debate is to see if Perry has another brain freeze and to see if Herman Cain is able to navigate foreign policy without his own stumbles and mumbles. The battle between well versed but organizationally bereft Newt Gingrich and Willard Mitt Romney might also be an attraction.

On to the debate.


Yesterday And Today: Republicans Secretly Smile About Election Results – Herman Cain Accusers In Trouble

Update: Republican debate is tonight at 8:00 p.m. ET. It will be on CNBC. The debate is 90 minutes long and will be held in Michigan. The debate is supposed to be about jobs and the economy. Between such lofty discussion we suspect there will be a CAIN court-martial, er, questions.

At tonight’s debate some Republicans/conservatives will be taking a second look at Gingrich. Very few Republicans/conservatives want Romney even as polls show many are crying that Willard is increasingly viewed as “inevitable”.


Tonight is Republican debate night. We’ll cover the debate spun and spin.

As to yesterday’s elections, the spin today is that Republicans (especially Ohio Governor John Kasich) lost big. We have a contrary view.

But first Herman Cain – who really needs to learn how to do these things with a bit more efficiency.


“At least two liens have been filed against Bialek, according to records from the Cook County recorder of deeds. [snip]

Court records also show creditors took legal action against her during the past decade, including at least one lawsuit filed in Cook County.

Bialek’s fiance, however, denied she had any current money problems. Harwood, a corporate executive in the medical equipment industry, said he supports her financially so she can stay at home with her 13-year-old son from a previous relationship.

Bialek has not had a job outside the home in about two years, according to her attorney, Gloria Allred.”


“As newly reviewed records pointed to deeper financial problems for the Chicago-area woman accusing Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain of sexual harassment, he wasted no time Tuesday in suggesting she is motivated by monetary gain.

Sharon Bialek’s fiance — who said he is her primary source of financial support — is unemployed and preparing to file for bankruptcy, according to Lake County court documents reviewed Tuesday by the Tribune. And in Cook County, lawsuits show she has been targeted by creditors who claimed she owed them thousands in unpaid rent, personal loans and credit card bills.

In a round of TV interviews, Bialek, 50, said she had no financial reasons for coming forward and had not been promised a job in exchange for accusing Cain of groping her in a parked car 14 years ago. She sought to downplay past financial problems.”

See Herman, that’s how it’s done. Sharon and hubby have lied. They do need money desperately. Cain should have had investigators on the job months ago. Cain has an opportunity at tonight’s debate to make his case in a nationwide broadcast – but he also needs to get better staff quickly.

Cain has to stop relying on silly reasons such as this: “I can’t respond any further than that, but from a common sense standpoint, one would have to ask if that might not have been a motivation for her being subjected to this.” Common sense has nothing to do with it sweetie darling. This is a Chicago gangland war and it’s kill or be killed.

Court records show Bialek’s financial problems include many of recent vintage and the Cain campaign better memorialize these events and publicly distribute them far and wide.

Hint: note that Bialek and her husband have made public claims that they do not need money and money is not the motivation for their actions – then show that hubby indeed does need money and that hubby and Sharon have been lying to the public in a most grotesque way. See, it’s simple. (Oh, and she has repeatedly lied about her finances “She gave differing accounts of her income, saying she was making about $90,000 a year in one court filing but about $64,000 a year in another.”)

Today Mark Levin has more about an interview with CBS anchorman Bill Kurtis (Bialek is a former CBS worker!) who strongly suggests she is not a sweet little Bambie lost in the woods:

Kurtis says there is a lot more to this than Sharon Bialek says. Kurtis says that with Bialek’s record it is more likely that if something happened in the car the aggressor was Sharon Bialek! The DailyMail has more on what a friend calls “a golddigger.”

Today there is also more news about another Cain accuser:

“A woman who settled a sexual harassment complaint against GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain in 1999 complained three years later at her next job about unfair treatment, saying she should be allowed to work from home after a serious car accident and accusing a manager of circulating a sexually charged email, The Associated Press has learned. [snip]

To settle the complaint at the immigration service, Kraushaar initially demanded thousands of dollars in payment, a reinstatement of leave she used after the accident earlier in 2002, promotion on the federal pay scale and a one-year fellowship to Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, according to a former supervisor familiar with the complaint. The promotion itself would have increased her annual salary between $12,000 and $16,000, according to salary tables in 2002 from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. [snip]

“The concern was that there may have been discrimination on the job and that I was being treated unfairly,” Kraushaar said.

Kraushaar said Tuesday she did not remember details about the complaint and did not remember asking for a payment, a promotion or a Harvard fellowship. Bennett, her lawyer, declined to discuss the case with the AP, saying he considered it confidential.”

Now Kraushaar and Bennett can’t remember or refuse to comment because it is “confidential”!!!! Not anymore sweetie pie. It’s kill or be killed time.

As with racism, sexual harassment and discrimination against women can be a harrowing fact of workplace life. But apparently Kraushaar’s complaint was a lame email joke about how men and women are like computers (men need to be turned on, women record mistakes in long-term memory for later retrieval). False allegations of racism and sexism for personal profit make a mockery of genuine cases of racism and sexism. As with Obama campaign race-baiting, the Herman Cain accusers appear to be in it for the money. We’re willing and wanting to hear all the evidence.

Herman Cain has a problem for sure. The problem is that much of this could have been avoided. First blaming Perry then the Cain campaign blaming Josh Kraushaar is stupid shadowboxing. It’s Obama that’s doing this Herman. Herman Cain has to not only prove he is ready for prime time but also that his campaign is ready for prime time. Rehearsal time is almost over. You can’t have a campaign that stumbles when attacked by Obama’s drive-by shooters.

Why is all this happening to Herman Cain? David Gregory of sexist/racist NBC/MSNBC says there is no (Ku Klux Klan????) “grand wizard to force out Cain.[See how easy it is to race-bait David?] We answered yesterday as to who is behind all this. The “why?” is even easier to answer. We are now less than one year away from NObama Nirvana. One year from NObama Nirvana things don’t look good for the treacherous boob:

Does Obama deserve second term? One year out, half say no.

Half of Americans say Obama does not deserve to be reelected, versus 40 percent who say he does, finds a new Monitor/TIPP poll. Independents, in particular, have lost faith.

It’s fear and smear from Chicago, baby – and Herman Cain you are the “it” boy for today, Mitt to follow.

Yup, Mitt Romney to follow. And yesterday’s elections should clue Republicans as to what a disaster Willard Mitt Romney will be.

Yesterday there was a very bright spot for Republicans in Ohio. That was that a lot of Ohio voters voted against Obama’s health scam even as they were voting against the collective bargaining bill. As we have repeatedly warned (HERE with a bonus as to why Newt is a disaster too), Republicans will throw away the health care issue – which is so very potent against Obama – if they choose Willard. Consider this yet another warning.

As to the loss for Republicans on the collective bargaining bill – is it really a loss? The unions would have been utterly destroyed if the bill was approved and so they fought with everything they had. But it is not as if they advanced their agenda any.

On election night a lot of people were wondering about why the Republicans/conservatives did not put up much of a fight in Ohio. HotAir cited this from “progressive” Mother Jones magazine:

“After Republicans passed Walker’s budget repair bill, Wisconsinites triggered recall elections targeting nine state senators—three GOPers who backed the bill and three Democratic state senators who fled the state to block the measure. When the dust settled, spending in the nine elections reached a staggering $43.9 million, according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which tracks money in state politics. Left-leaning groups outspent their right-leaning rivals $23.4 million to $20.5 million. That advantage was enough to oust two Republicans, but not enough to flip the state Senate majority back to Democrats.

Ohio is a different story. Here, labor unions have outmuscled pro-SB 5 groups in the money game. Labor-backed We Are Ohio raised $30.5 million and spent nearly $20 million of that through October 20. Building a Better Ohio, the flagship pro-SB 5 group, raised just $7.6 million and spent around $6 million over the same period.”

What passes for the left these days was completely fired up. Ed Shultz spent a week, or weeks, in Ohio and talking about Ohio. MSNBC devoted itself to the Ohio bill. Obama websites focused every day on the Ohio election. Every Obama supporter was focused on the Ohio election knowing a loss there would be Armageddon.

Republicans barely paid attention to Ohio. It was rare to find an article discussing Issue 2 on right leaning websites. Sean Hannity went to Ohio for one night. Fox News rarely if ever discussed Issue 2. It was an odd silence. Our contacts in Ohio kept telling us there was nothing happening in Ohio outside the ordinary to report just that the labor unions and Dimocrats were hosting many events, sending out a stream of emails, and raising money – but that the Republican effort was nary to be found.

So what happened? Did Republicans fumble or is there something else at play? A knowledgeable commenter at HotAir has the answer:

“I have a bit of skin in this Ohio game. One of my kids is running for office locally. First time at bat.

Have seen a number of flyers and ads about Prop 2 and how if passed thousands of Ohio public sector workers will be paid only minimum wage or that entire police departments will be shuttered or that every other house on the street will burn to the ground because there are no firefighters, and thousands of teachers will be laid off immediately.


Hogwash all bought and paid for by unions who spend more money on political action these days than they spend on actually helping members in need.

Funny thing, though. If SB5 goes down in defeat, it can be re-written and passed again, but more to the point is that if SB5 is defeated a lot of municipalities all across Ohio are looking at major budget deficits over the next several years or longer as they try to pay for the benefits packages average citizens can only dream about. There will be layoffs. Some municipal governments will cease to exist. (A few in Ohio already have this year.)

And then what?”

The “and then what” is that Ohio unions and Wisconsin unions and allies across the country have spent tens of millions for pretty much nothing other than survival. In Wisconsin the Republican victory was obvious. In Ohio the game is much more subtle.

Republicans in Ohio forced labor unions to spend tens of millions to fight for their very lives just to get back what they lost. That’s calling running to stay in place.

As we wrote at the beginning of the Wisconsin fight the Republican goal is the neutering of labor unions and thereby the castration of what once was the Democratic Party. The means to accomplish this is the cutoff of government collection of paycheck union dues on behalf of the unions. Force the unions to collect their own dues and allow workers the option of paying or not paying union dues and the Republicans win their goal.

As that HotAir writer states, the Republican legislature and the Republican governor can and will pass what they want, when they want. The unions may continue to bleed their coffers dry.

More importantly however is the claim that Republican Governor John Kasich is cooked. Kasich’s Ohio budget is not going to be hurt in any way by what happened yesterday. That is something that a lot of people do not understand. Yesterday’s election results do not injure Kasich’s budget which is balanced and has already been passed. John Kasich now can sit back and wait.

The Kasich strategy is simple: local governments now have to balance their budgets and their clamor for budgetary relief from the state government will be denied. It will be local governments that will have to cut back union benefits or raise taxes, not Kasich.

Kasich is not the only Republican that is secretly smiling. The Republican “losses” of last night are something to celebrate, not mourn. That badly worded ‘life begins at conception’ measure even had its supporters squirming. Mississippi governor Haley Barbour said he voted for it but we should be forgiven if we think he is lying.

Barbour noted that the measure could have many unintended consequences every time he was interviewed. The hefty Barbour was having his cake and eating it too. On this issue the Republicans won by losing and not having to defend this mess of a measure.

Also in Mississippi the Republicans gained full control of government as the House went to the Republicans as well. That’s another state run totally by Republicans in the wake of the Obama disaster of 2008.

In Virginia, the Republicans have likely won the state house and complete control of government there. Karen Tumulty wailed that Obama is in trouble:

“Tuesday’s legislative elections in Virginia appeared likely to add more evidence — as if national Democrats needed it — that the terrain of the political map will be significantly more rugged for President Obama next year. [snip]

“The enthusiasm gap has been completely reversed in the state. Republicans have it. Democrats don’t,” said political scientist Bob Holsworth, a former professor at Virginia Commonwealth University who now runs a Web site called Virginia Tomorrow. [snip]

“Independents specifically have rejected the Obama agenda, and they are fully supportive of the McDonnell agenda,” said Phil Cox, who managed the governor’s campaign and is now executive director of the Republican Governors Association.

Meanwhile, the energy of the tea party movement has ginned up Republican enthusiasm in Virginia, as have conservative outside groups.”

Republicans won victories that advance their agenda, reach and control of more state governments. Obama Dimocrats spent millions to stay in the frying pan and not fall into the volcanic hell fires. That’s a “victory” only in Hopium dens.


Lessons From Bill Clinton: It’s Cain And Rezko Election Day

Today is election day across the nation and especially in Virginia and Ohio. Lots of races, lots of issues. But we await next year’s presidential election.

Today, as Herman Cain experiences a batch of “bimbo eruptions” it is amusing to watch Republicans/conservatives clutch their Clenis teddy bears. “Clenis” is a portmanteau word derived from “Clinton” and “penis” and increasingly – instead of learning from Bill Clinton – Republicans/conservatives are reheating, re-litigating and regurgitating outrages from their “Clenis” youth.

We’ve discussed this “E over I” Republican/conservative mentality before. Our inner Yoda advises “I over E”.

It does not occur to these Republicans/conservatives that Bill Clinton, a man with a randy and “complicated” history, still managed to beat back campaign-killing issues (in those days especially). Bill Clinton left the presidency with his approval ratings in the 60s having overcome and defeated attacks against him which would ordinarily kill an elephant – which included pot smoking, marital infidelity, alleged murders, alleged drug airports, alleged rapes, cigars, alleged black babies, and an appetite for more than just McDonalds.

Still Republicans/conservatives cannot but beat the Clenis like a rented elephant. It’s sad really.

The resurrected outrage du jour (you can almost see the bulging neck veins bursting) these days in defense of Herman Cain is the Juanita Broadderick “rape”. Instead of screaming in outrage and making fools of themselves, Republicans (this means you Herman Cain) should get off the cross and examine how Bill Clinton managed to almost easily overcome this entirely trumped up, but potentially damaging, Juanita Broderick fake “rape” bulls*it (hopefully this link we provide will persuade the “rape” screamers).

The “Clenis” worshipers will scream and argue themselves hoarse that no comparison can be made and no lessons learned because “Bill Clinton is a liarrrrrrrrr and Herman Cain is an innocent telling the truuuuuuuuth.” But darlings, none of that matters if you stop and think about it (cue the screams about how we don’t care about the truth and Clinton is evil and this is proof of how immoral and corrupt we are). The bottom line is that most of these cases are a matter of he said she said and a bungled defense and falling poll numbers won’t be helped by genuine innocence.

The Bill Clinton “rape” nonsense and the Herman Cain allegations are striking in that both have the same solution and the same lesson. The lesson? Simple: Shadowboxing is a loser’s game. You will never outbox a shadow.

A lot of people forget that Bill Clinton was boxing shadows around the time that a certain intern became famous. The Clinton White House was confused and dazed and Bill Clinton was in danger of being forced to resign. Then a Republican/conservative operative “hit man” by the name of David Brock had a change of heart and tutored the Clintons on the forces that were bringing them down.

Brock clued the Clintons in on the federal judge and the Republican/conservative activists that acted behind the scenes. The “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” was born and the Clintons had something other than shadoows to box and attack. [Brock eventually wrote “Blinded By The Right” and his friend Joe Conosen wrote “The Hunting of the President” and those who want to relive those days may do so by a little research.]

Hillary Clinton in 2008 also boxed shadows. It was only after Hillary Clinton realized that her campaign (especially Iowa) was sabotaged from the inside, that public supporters like Chuck Schumer were privately advising Obama to hit her with a 2×4, and that Ted Kennedy and Tom Daschle along with many in the Democratic establishment were actively undermining her in secret.

It was only after Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton stopped boxing shadows and targeting their real opponents that they succeeded. Hillary Clinton learned far too late that it was Barzini Kennedy (and Big Media) who was her real opponent. Once Hillary discarded her delusions about what was really behind the Obama circus she beat Obama even as she was outspent in state after state and the Democratic Party establishment demanded her withdrawal.

Don’t shadowbox. Bill Clinton destroyed the fake “rape” allegations by telling the truth and noting that the woman in question repeatedly sought him out and did not act in the way a “rape” victim would act. To the contrary, the woman in question had an agenda.

As soon as the allegations against Herman Cain emerged we asked who was behind the allegations. We suggested it was either the Romney campaign or the Obama campaign. Cain made the mistake of disagreeing with us and suggesting it was the Perry campaign. Cain regretted blaming Perry.

Cain better stop shadowboxing and realize who is behind these allegations. It’s probably the Obama campaign. Connect the dots.

Sharon Bialek, lives in Chicago, in the same building as David Axelrod. Um…. Gloria Allred is not exactly a Republican operative. While Allred has spoken out against people like Anthony Weiner, Weiner was dead meat at the time Allred came forth. Allred was instrumental in bringing down Republican Meg Whitman in California. The initial allegations by anonymous accusers was leaked to Politico, the Obama lovin’ organ of choice in matters of public opinion. Connect the dots.

The answers are out there in the sex files. The sex files are an Axelrod specialty. The fourth accuser has spoken out in a very strong manner but her financial history suggests she might have financial motives at the very least for speaking out publicly:

“The emerging portrait of Herman Cain’s most recent accuser shows a suburban homemaker with a history of financial and legal troubles, but one who supporters say has the guts to do the right thing. [snip]

Bialek said she shared her allegations with her then-boyfriend and another male friend shortly after her meeting with Cain. However, the man she is now engaged to said she did not tell him about her history with the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO until Friday night, when she told him she was going to New York for the news conference. [snip]

Records show she twice has filed for personal bankruptcy, first in 1991 and then again in 2001. In the latter case, she claimed $5,700 in assets and more than $36,000 in liabilities. Among the creditors seeking payment was a management firm demanding back rent of $4,500, four credit card companies and a lawyer asking for his legal fees.

After the case was discharged, she accused a former boyfriend of harassing her for repayment of a loan, court records in the bankruptcy case show. Bialek borrowed $4,500 from William Concha, though Concha now believes she had no intention of paying him back, according to his brother, Mario. [snip]

Her father, Chester Bialek, said he did not know about his daughter’s allegation until Monday. Reached at his home in Arizona, he said he was surprised by the revelation but supported her decision to come forward.

“I’m very proud of my daughter, that’s all I can tell you,” he said.

As TV trucks pulled up in front of her Mundelein home and reporters rang the doorbell, Harwood said his fiancee does not plan any legal action against Cain and does not intend to stand in the political spotlight for very long.

“We’re in it together,” he said. “My only concern is that it not become some type of media circus.”

The Juanita Broaddrick moment for Herman Cain is the very strange encounter Sharon Bialek had recently with Herman Cain:

“The Cain Encounter …

They hugged each other backstage in a full embrace like old friends.

She grabbed his arm and whispered in his left ear.

She kept talking as he bent to listen, and he kept saying “Uh, huh. Uh, huh.”


“I don’t know if what she was giving him was a sucker punch, but he didn’t put his arm down while she was talking to him,” said the Sneed source.

◆The “he”… is GOP presidential contender Herman Cain, who has been accused of sexual harassment by several women.

◆The “she”… is Chicagoan Sharon Bialek, who held a news conference Tuesday as the only woman to PUBLICLY accuse Cain of sexual harassment.

◆The Sneed source … is WIND radio co-host Amy Jacobson, who tells Sneed she witnessed the Cain/Bialek encounter a month ago while backstage at the AM 560 WIND sponsored TeaCon meeting in Schaumburg Sept. 30-Oct. 1 at the Renaissance Hotel and Convention Center.

◆Quoth Jacobson: “I had turned on TV to find out who was Cain’s accuser, and I almost fell over when I saw it was Sharon Bialek accusing Cain of groping her genitals.”

“I was waiting for Herman Cain’s ‘Accuser No. 4’ to surface — and up pops Sharon!”

I couldn’t believe it. I was shocked.”

“I recall Sharon was hell bent on going backstage at the TeaCon convention — where she cornered him,” said Jacobson.

“I was surprised to hear she claims she did not know Cain was going to be there. Cain was expected and was late.”

Bialek told the media on Monday: “I went up to him and asked him if he remembered me. I wanted to see if he would be man enough to own up to what he had done 14 years ago.”

◆The encounter: “It looked sort of flirtatious,” said Jacobson. “I mean they were hugging. But she could have been giving him the kiss of death for all I know. I had no idea what they were talking about, but she was inches from his ear.”

◆The introduction: “It all began when I took a convention break and joined my pals at the hotel bar. Sharon was drinking Mimosas with them. She said she was a Republican, a Tea Party member, had once dated [White Sox sports announcer’ Steve Stone] and had worked at WGN radio.”

◆The rendezvous: Sharon also said she was anxious to meet Cain again and had once gone to an afterparty with him and her boyfriend years ago. But she never mentioned he had sexually harassed her.”

Drinking Mimosas then hugging someone who grabbed your crotch and dragged your head to his genitals is not exactly behavior which conforms with the allegations made as Gloria Allred stood next to her.

As to the previous “she doesn’t say, he says” allegations, we still don’t know what the anonymous accusers allege so it is difficult to refute. But one is a federal employee at a relatively high level who has chosen to remain silent although clearly many around her are trying to blow smoke.

Today at the Herman Cain press conference held late in the afternoon the usual “he said” refutations were heard. Herman Cain made a strong case for himself. Meanwhile Glenn Beck has helped undermine the significance of the Sharon Bialek Herman Cain hug.

The lesson for Herman Cain is not to shadowbox. The lesson for all the other Republican candidates is: you’re next.

* * * * * *

While Herman Cain gets a rectal exam type vetting an old familiar name in the annals of Obama corrupt pals reemerged today.

Indicted slumlord Antoin Rezko with long-time friend and financial investment Barack Obama

You remember our pal
Rezko. Don’t you?

Donald Trump, a real estate expert, agrees with us that the entire Obama Rezko House deal stinks like a Chicago stockyard. Yet JournoListers protected their love, Barack Obama, from Rezko’s taint. Obama said he was “bone-headed” and JournoListers swooned.

Antoin “Tony” Rezko, pal and investor in Barack Obama, is about to be sentenced (November 22).

According to documents filed with the court Obama pal Rezko was as much of a lowlife as many wrote. According to the Government:

“Rezko argues that he should receive a sentence of time served because he is similarly situated to others who cooperated with the government and received sentences less than 45 months. No government cooperator or other defendant Rezko mentions, however, approaches the level of criminal conduct in which Rezko engaged in except one – Stuart Levine. [snip]

From the very beginning of Blagojevich’s regime, Rezko had been actively plotting with Blagojevich, Kelly, and Monk, literally sitting in a room with the Governor of Illinois criminally scheming how they could make millions of dollars together. Rezko had access and influence in a way that Levine could only dream about, and Rezko abused that access and influence on a scale that surpassed even what Levine planned to do at the Planning Board and TRS. [snip]

Rezko has neither testified, been subject to invasive cross-examination on the totality and minutia of his criminal conduct, nor agreed to forgo the protections in his proffer with the government. [snip]

Rezko compounded this perjury by writing a letter to the Court which he tried to win his release from jail by falsely claiming 1) that he had done nothing wrong with Blagojevich; and 2) that the prosecution was putting pressure on him to lie about Blagojevich. Not only was this a false statement to a judge; it was a false statement exculpating one of the key people against whom Rezko might have cooperated…”

That’s Obama’s long-time pal and money-bags. All the corruption of planning boards (hey Michelle doesn’t that bring back good memories?) and subverting government for private gain – but little investigation. Big Media is busy sniffing crotches and panties.

Chicago Clown

The Chicago Corruption continues. The drive-by shootings have just begun.


The Innocent Charles Manson

By today’s standards Charles Manson is an innocent. After all, Charlie did not ever plunge a knife, over and over and over and over, into the nine months pregnant Sharon Tate. Charlie, by Politico standards, is innocent and various crimes are not linked.

JournoLister Ben Smith demonstrates how to wash blood off the knife:

“But as the president’s reelection team begins in earnest to attack Mitt Romney, Obama faces one of the most difficult tests of his political career: to tear down Romney without getting a single smudge of dirt on his own shirtfront — a trick he has performed deftly in previous races.”

A candidate for public office does not have to perform “deftly” when Big Media is in the bag and protects the slimy candidate. What Ben Smith has scrubbed from his analysis is the complicit protection of Barack Obama by Big Media.

Make no mistake, Ben Smith and Big Media writers know better. In his finest moment – a moment being the smallest measure of time – Smith in June of 2007 bothered to ask why Obama hired so many opposition researchers and leaked anonymous dirt against Bill and Hillary Clinton.

The moment passed and Ben Smith and his fellow JournoListers now pretend they have clean hands. Smith marvels at how Obama splashes dirt yet keeps his shirts clean:

“The early salvos are also familiar moves in a strategy that has worked in each of the four federal campaigns Obama has run: disqualifying character attacks from aides or outsiders, executed brutally as Obama himself floats above the fray.

“It’s a lot like his foreign policy — leading from behind but with a high body count,” said a Republican who held a top position in the 2008 presidential race. “Rarely is Obama himself the tip of the spear in an attack. He’s much more likely to let liberal allies and the media initiate the attack and keep it alive.”

That’s what Charles Manson did. Charlie didn’t kill anybody. Charlie kept his shirts blood free. According to a jury however, Manson had blood on his hands.

With Ben Smith and the JournoListers on the jury acting as defense counsel and blood bleaching agents there will be no evidence that can be believed, no conviction to be had. All the evidence in the world will not convict Charles Manson as long as Big Media is in the bag:

“The former Illinois senator’s career is littered with the husks of fallen candidates, and at the core of every major race he’s won is a personal contrast — though his aides protest, more credibly in some cases than others, that they had little to do with it. His primary and general election campaigns in 2004 featured candidates undone by divorce filings. His 2008 primary campaign against Hillary Clinton was one long, high-concept assault on her credibility, under a brilliant banner that contained an unstated contrast: “Change You Can Believe In.” In the general election, a barrage of negative advertising added to aides’ — but never Obama’s — jabs at an “erratic” John McCain.

And while George Washington may be the last successful American politician to win the White House without going sharply negative, few have managed to to attack with the stealth Obama has displayed, leaving in his wake bitter rivals who felt their complaints of foul play were falling on deaf ears as Obama moved forward not just as victor, but as avatar of a new politics of hope.”

With such paragraphs it is difficult to determine who is the bigger liar, the more innocent Charles Manson – JournoLister Ben Smith or Barack Obama? In few words Smith acknowledges that Obama has always run on the politics of personal destruction but if anyone questioned Obama’s character Smith and the JournoListers closed ranks and protected Obama.

The JournoListers knew that there was a concerted effort to protect Obama among fellow JournoListers and derail any discussion about Obama ties to Jeremiah Wright because they were reading the emails sent to them but somehow we are supposed to believe that Barack Obama is a genius at murder without high laundry bills:

‘“David Axelrod has always been skillful at creeping into your room in the middle of the night and slicing out your heart, somehow without leaving behind a single fingerprint or drop of blood that ties him or his candidate to the crime,” said Obama biographer David Mendell of Obama’s top political aide.

Axelrod and other Obama aides have made no secret that they expect the 2012 contest to be, as the consultant likes to say, “an MRI of the soul,” and a deeply personal contrast of character. Their powerful method of politics melds issues and records into an argument about character. They hope to paint Romney as a hollow man and to cast Obama’s steadfastness on domestic policy and — in particular — his foreign policy victories in a stark contrast to the Republican’s shifting positions on key issues.”

Ben Smith knows that the politics of personal destruction will once again be the Barack Obama strategy in 2012. The JournoListers are already in amazement mode as they watch Obama pour mud yet the crease on his pants remains sharp and the shirts stay bright white spotless.

It was years before Ben Smith acknowledged our report that it was the Obama campaign that leaked the John Edwards $400 haircut story.

Now, in November of 2011 Ben Smith validates our analysis of Barack Obama’s Dirty Mud Politics (which Tim Russert was so angered by). Four years too late, Ben Smith acknowledges a small part of the Obama mud:

“Perhaps the most difficult challenge will be whether Obama can avoid paying a price for those attacks as successfully as he did in his legendary early races, when one 2004 challenger imploded when unsealed filings revealed abuse allegations and another met his political doom when similar records revealed seedy sexual claims.

Axelrod, Mendell and others have reported, had asked about divorce records of a wealthy Democratic candidate, Blair Hull, when he considered working for Hull, and been rebuffed. The Chicago Tribune, his old newspaper, sued to unseal the records of Hull, who was Obama’s Democratic primary opponent, and later to unseal Republican Jack Ryan’s. Ryan, the 2004 GOP nominee in the Illinois Senate contest, ended up having to quit the race.

Axelrod denied to POLITICO, as he has many times before, that he suggested either approach to the paper. “I and we have zero to do with it,” he said. (Suggesting such a line of inquiry, incidentally, would hardly have been out of bounds in an ordinary political campaign, but to keep the move fingerprint-free would have reflected a certain dexterity.)

“Axelrod and the Obama Senate campaign played no public role in unsealing the Hull or Ryan divorce records. But the behind-the-scenes machinations were more complicated,” said Mendell, who broke the Hull story for the Tribune in 2004, in an email, adding; “You really have to connect the dots to pin things on Axelrod.”

While Obama’s role, if any, in torpedoing those two campaigns will always be a matter for political lore and debate, the race against Hillary Clinton was, arguably, equally personal, though it took an utterly different form. Obama’s slogan and much of his campaign was aimed at a question Democrats had about both Clintons: whether they could be trusted. Obama’s assault on her was at its fiercest on questions of credibility, as when Clinton overstated her danger on a visit to the former Yugoslavia. And as the candidates’ views on issues like the Iraq war converged, the clearest contrast was one of character.

“I think Sen. Obama’s entire campaign against Sen. Clinton is negative. I think he has run against her as the status quo. He has essentially called her divisive. He has called her untruthful. He has questioned her credibility. He has said she will do or say anything to get elected,” said one of her top aides director, Howard Wolfson, in February of 2008. “ If that’s not negative, I don’t know what is.

Any question raised about Obama was and still is viewed as “racist”. Big Media Charles Mansons protected the man who denies sticking in the knives, the other Charles Manson.

Charlie Ben Smith even admits that “her former campaign aides retain some sore feelings” and know that Obama is as dirty as dirty can be:

‘“They achieved the rare distinction of running a negative campaign without being called to account for it,” said a former top Clinton aide. “Will they be able to pull that off again? A lot less likely.”

Obama’s aides protest that there’s nothing personal if the MRI of Romney’s soul reveals that he doesn’t have one.”

Not having a soul ordinarily would be seen as a potential attack on Romney’s religion but that does not occur to the JournoList left. It certainly does not occur to the JournoListers at Politico who were busy writing 90 stories about the Herman Cain “scandal” in five days.

Now, after being smeared for five days by Politico and supporters of other candidates we are told that the Herman Cain accuser has nothing to say even though she has been released from the confidentiality agreement she once signed in good faith.

The Politico spin on her silence is a “most misleading headline.” The New York Times likewise misled its readers.

Anyone who thinks the 2012 elections will be any less corrupted by Big Media than the 2008 primary elections and general elections is a fool. Big Media will do everything to protect Barack Obama.

Big Media will do everything to destroy Barack Obama opponents. Charles Manson is free to walk the streets.