The “favorite” is a non-threatening horse that has been around this track before. If you bet on this horse odds are you will win but the payout from your bet won’t be particularly high or exciting because so many people are betting on this nag – who won’t win “stud of the year”.
The “long shot” is a horse with an erratic record in other tracks but if this horse wins and you bet on him – you win big.
In political terms this translates to: with Romney the likelihood of a victory in November is greater but the satisfaction of the win won’t be so glorious; with Newt the likelihood of a victory is lessened but if you win you get everything Republicans/conservatives have pined for for a long long time in economics and in social policy.
We don’t care. We want Obama gone. Obama enablers gone. We want the return of a Democratic Party that cares about the working class – white, black, yellow, green, red, blue. We want a Democratic Party that does not race bait. We want a Democratic Party that does not wallow or excuse misogyny and sexism.
The Republicans/conservative can do what they want. It won’t matter to us. To us what matters is NoBama. The rest is just details.
Barack Obama will attack the nation tonight with a rising sea of useless words. We have fortified ourselves for the past few weeks with various potions designed to fight nausea in preparation for tonight. Yup, it’s State of the Union night and we will watch and laugh.
What will we be watching for? Anyone who watches Obama give a speech and takes it seriously is not, well… serious. The man is a clod always at the ready to back slap, bamboozle and bore. There are things to watch for that are important though.
Rather than pay attention to guests or words we think a wiser investment of time will be to watch what they wear. We written this before and it always proves to be a valuable lesson.
First up, watch to see what tie Obama wears. Obama’s choice of clothes is limited unless he becomes a fashion maverick and chooses a Kilt or a Muumuu. Obama wants to project an air of vigor, manliness, virility, engagement, and strength. But to do that Obama will have to have put on more makeup than a French trollop hooking for clients.
Obama will choose a suitable tie to get him to look young and happening. Grey hairs, which he used to dye, will make him look more frail than Ron Paul after a long jog. But Obama does want to look young to fool the young ones into thinking he is one of them so he will darken the follicles just a touch.
“Another big concern for tonight will be whether to wear a red or a blue necktie. We’re betting he will wear blue in order to make the verbiage more palatable to Obama Dimocrats. However, the history of Obama’s neck-wear is that he will go with red because it makes him feel more manly.”
Michelle Obama of course will be the one to watch. In fact this State of the Union will for her be more about the state of her union, or lack thereof, with her “stinky” hubby. The book The Obamas has Mary Todd and her Abe on edge. What to do? What to do?
In the book The Obamas much of our reporting is confirmed yet again. The life “high on the hog” is what Michelle wants. Her extravagant trips to Marbella, Spain, her Lanvin sneakers to homeless events, her anger, Robert Gibbs telling her to “f*ck” off, all contribute to the likelihood that Michelle Obama will stun the nation and wear something sensible with long sleeves.
Michelle Obama must wear sensible clothes appropriate to the event and to the weather because hubby needs her to appear human. If Michelle wears one of her usual outré and garish horrors, then bolt the door – she is telling Barack and his campaign to “f*ck off.”
If Michelle does wear a reasonable outfit then it means she has locked her lantern jaw and is ready to do what it takes to help “stinky.”
That’s about all you are going to get tonight. The rest will be TelePrompTer hogwash. Sound and fury, signifying nothing.
We do have to compliment the Republicans for one thing tonight. Republicans released an ad on the State of the Union and Barack the Boob and Bill Clinton is frequently heard:
Every time we declare that Barack Obama and Michelle Obama must be attacked at every level, policy-wise AND PERSONALLY, the governesses emerge to hit us over our pink heads with etiquette books.
Speaking of books, don’t you think it delicious irony that Barack Obama who throughout 2007/2008 declared he wanted to “turn the page” from, to him, dreary fights over such, to him, minor fluff like civil rights, women’s rights, war and peace – now might get to experience Newt Gingrich in the raw?
“In 2006, Obama published a mild polemic, “The Audacity of Hope,” which became a blueprint for his 2008 Presidential campaign. He described politics as a system seized by two extremes. “Depending on your tastes, our condition is the natural result of radical conservatism or perverse liberalism,” he wrote. “Tom DeLay or Nancy Pelosi, big oil or greedy trial lawyers, religious zealots or gay activists, Fox News or the New York Times.” He repeated the theme later, while describing the fights between Bill Clinton and the Newt Gingrich-led House, in the nineteen-nineties: “In the back-and-forth between Clinton and Gingrich, and in the elections of 2000 and 2004, I sometimes felt as if I were watching the psychodrama of the Baby Boom generation—a tale rooted in old grudges and revenge plots hatched on a handful of college campuses long ago—played out on the national stage.” Washington, as he saw it, was self-defeatingly partisan. He believed that “any attempt by Democrats to pursue a more sharply partisan and ideological strategy misapprehends the moment we’re in.”
If there was a single unifying argument that defined Obamaism from his earliest days in politics to his Presidential campaign, it was the idea of post-partisanship. He was proposing himself as a transformative figure, the man who would spring the lock. In an essay published in The Atlantic, Andrew Sullivan, a self-proclaimed conservative, reflected on Obama’s heady appeal: “Unlike any of the other candidates, he could take America—finally—past the debilitating, self-perpetuating family quarrel of the Baby Boom generation that has long engulfed all of us.”
Obama thought he was the Messiah that would deliver us from discussion of major issues that divided parties and ideological world views. Presumably all that time not invested in arguing over issues of life and death, war and peace, would be turned into time at the temple burning incense to the new divinity from Chicago and his lantern-jawed sack of corruption wife.
Yes, it will be delicious irony if Barack Obama gets to battle with the man Bill Clinton crushed. Republicans can rejoice because Barack Obama is no Bill Clinton.
Also delicious is the very fact of what is in the Ryan Lizza article – secret Obama memoranda never before published. Delicious because someone is leaking in an election year and it’s someone who knows where the bodies are buried. Which brings us to Hillary Clinton and why Obama and sleeveless Mary Todd need to be attacked on a personal level.
Ryan Lizza’s article published today will not surprise anyone who has been reading Big Pink. In June 2007 Tim Russert attacked this site on Meet the Press immediately after we published “Obama’s Dirty Mud Politics.” We outlined David Axelrod’s dirty history and Obama’s dirty history of mud politics in that article. Weasel Zippers succinctly wraps the Ryan Lizza’s theme that Republicans better understand:
“Memo Written By Axelrod Shows Obama Agreed To Character Assassination Tactics Against Hillary In 2008 Dem Primary Despite Campaign Promises…
Even his ”Change We Can Believe In” slogan was meant as a slur against her.“
“But let me just say, very clearly, it was the Obama campaign that first bought up the race question. It was the Obama people who smeared the Clintons as racists, Bill and Hillary Clinton. They made the case to reporters off-the-record, including me, that the Clintons were racists. They started this“.
People are voting and cheering on Newt Gingrich because he is saying what must be said. Most importantly Newt Gingrich understands that he must attack Barack Obama before Barack Obama does worse to him. It’s eat or be eaten.
Romney might win over independents more easily than Newt. But Bill Clinton has words of wisdom that Republicans must learn from: “It’s better to be strong and wrong, than weak and right.”
We can already hear the protestations that “we are better than this”. No we are not honey. That is the world were are in. Newt and the Republicans began the politics of personal destruction. Bill Clinton knocked Newt down.
It pays to fight. That is lesson of Newt Gingrich’s rise, fall, rise, fall, now rise. It’s a lesson Mitt Romney, or whoever the eventual GOP nominee is will need to learn and etch into his/her bones.
Romney supporters might be angry or upset or worried today, but they should be grateful. If not for Newt’s never-give-up-fight-to-the-death attitude Romney would be coasting to the nomination and eventual defeat by Barack Obama. That must not happen. Barack Obama must be defeated.
Mockery aside, what is most interesting about Newt and Mitt is that they are mirror images of each other. Where Romney is organized, patrician, modest in bearing, controlled, deliberative and a step-by-step process guy, Newt is disorganized, rowdy, overbearing, out of control, shoot from the hip, and a self-contained rabble rousing fighter.
In short, Romney’s best chances for the nomination is the well-funded organization he has created. Newt’s strength is that he is a go-for-the-jugular fighter. Newt has a lot to learn from Mitt and Mitt has a lot to learn from Newt. Which brings us to Hillary Clinton.
“But Newt, why don’t you and other Republicans mention how Big Media savaged Hillary Clinton? Including Hillary Clinton when you point out that McCain and you and Romney and anyone who opposes Obama will get mugged by Big Media can only make your case stronger and help you with independent swing voters. Understand?”
“The political tag team of Bill and Hillary Clinton felt secure about the South Carolina black vote because of President Clinton’s persistent high approval ratings among African-Americans, but they were about to get their first real taste of Sen. Obama’s Chicago-style political game. Sen. Obama and his team were able to take a couple of innocuous statements by the Clintons and twist them into a race related controversy.“
Obama and his thugs race-baited the Clintons. The Clintons. The Clintons who had dedicated a great deal of their lives to helping African-Americans were race-baited. It wasn’t long before Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton became “racists” in the eyes of African-Americans and the corruption which is now the left in America. If they did it to Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton imagine what will happen when Mormon Romney, who reminds Clyburn of Rosa Parks era racists, gets the nomination. Or imagine the field day of opportunity when Newt Gingrich, already a “Juan” hating “racist” and black child labor janitor Simon Legree, gets the nod.
Republicans think they know what is about to happen to them but they have no idea. They think it is going to be bad, but they don’t know what bad is. Some think they will be able to fight the race-baiting and win the presidency with the organizational prowess of Mitt Romney. Some think they will beat the race-baiters with the pugalist style of Newt Gingrich. But they are wrong. It will require the organizational might of an organization man but it will also require the ferocity in the organization that only a ferocious man/woman can instill.
In 2008, the Obama thug organization race-baited the Clintons on innocuous comments about how the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was made law. Big Media race-baited along:
“January 9, 2008 the New York Times editorial board set the race-baiting table. [snip]
A few days later, here’s Bob Herbert bringing the dessert, writing in his The New York Time column;
I could also sense how hard the Clinton camp was working to undermine Senator Obama’s main theme, that a campaign based on hope and healing could unify, rather than further polarize, the country.
So there was the former president chastising the press for the way it was covering the Obama campaign and saying of Mr. Obama’s effort: “The whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”
But – it wasn’t true. Watch Bill Clinton’s entire remarks and it’s 100% clear as to what he’s referring to as “the biggest fairy tale” and it’s not Obama’s candidacy. Nor is it the notion, as Herbert claims, that “a campaign based on hope and healing could unify.” No, the “fairy tale” is the idea that Obama was consistently opposed to the war in Iraq. Clinton points out speeches that Obama made and votes he cast as a Senator. His comments strike me as neither bizarre nor rambling, as the Times had claimed.
No matter. When Hillary Clinton appeared on Meet the Press just prior to the South Carolina primary, the late Tim Russert led with the race card attack against Clinton, including the quote from Herbert’s New York Times piece. Russert even plays a selectively edited clip of Clinton’s comments, where he cuts out every single part of what Clinton says leaving only ‘this whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”
Russert follows this butchered video clip with the quote from South Carolina Senator and Congressional Black Caucus member James Clyburn that had also appeared in the Times; “To call that dream a fairytale, which Bill Clinton seem to be doing, could very well be insulting to some of us.” Hillary Clinton tries to point out that Russert is not playing the entire clip, but he shuts her down and plays a quote from Donna Brazil expressing disappointment in Bill Clinton and his “tone.” Russert continues to filibuster relentlessly for a couple of minutes, quoting the New York Times.”
We’ll have more on Donna Brazille in our next installment of Draft Hillary Or Die. It will sicken you.
We’ll end our excerpts of the Big Government article with this:
“If that’s how the Obama campaign treated a fellow Democrat and “the first black president,” just imagine the GOP candidate — and the American people — are in store for come this fall.
Republicans better realize that Mitt Romney as currently constituted will have a very tough time beating Obama. Republicans better realize that Newt Gingrich as currently constituted will have a tough time beating Obama.
We think Sarah Palin was very smart with her advice to South Carolina voters. The best results for Republicans today will be that Newt Gingrich win in South Carolina. As bad as it is for Republicans to continue to waste time and money fighting each other, what would be worse is to enter the final battlefield against Obama insufficiently prepared or delusional about how tough they will have to fight.
Remember, Hillary Clinton said she WOULD NOT run, DID NOT campaign, and never appeared in New Hampshire. Wow.”
We’ll report on the inside story of Draft Hillary in New Hampshire when we discuss the sickening Donna Brazille. What caught our eye was not so much the results but what could have happened.
We know Obama lovin’ Big Media did not want to discuss this story. The possibility that their golden calf lost votes to Hillary Clinton was not something their love lorn hearts could bear to repeat. No surprise to anyone. Did anyone hear from Big Media about the “fierce protests” outside the Apollo Theater when Barack Obama was crooning for dollars inside? No it’s protect Obama time in Big Media world.
With 83% of votes counted, only 82% of Democrat voters chose Obama in New Hampshire even though he was running unopposed. 10% of democrats wrote in someone else. The total of all write-in votes was the second-most popular choice on the ballot.“
“I tell you, Hillary Clinton supporters do not give up. Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has assured members of the media that Obama won’t swap Joe Biden for Hillary Clinton on his reelection ticket. So, what do Hillary supporters do? They target Obama’s half of the ticket. Featherbrained or brilliant? Let’s say it’s a little of both.
Taking inspiration from Eugene McCarthy’s surprising New Hampshire haul of the protest vote in 1968, which subsequently led to incumbent Lyndon B. Johnson’s withdrawal from the race, staunch Hillary Clinton supporter Steve Rosinski has urged discontented voters in New Hampshire to write the current Secretary of State’s name on the ballot. Rosinski, who created a petition to draft Hillary for 2012, says he has talked to numerous voters on the ground in New Hampshire — and they’re not satisfied with either Obama or the GOP candidates. Not only are they disappointed with the overall performance of the economy under Obama’s watch, but they’re also upset with White House scandals like Solyndra and Fast and Furious, Rosinski said.
It’s doubtful that Hillary will receive 42 percent of the Democratic vote in New Hampshire, as McCarthy did in 1968 — but it surely can’t be comforting to Obama to know folks this dedicated to his demise are out there. As Neil Cavuto put it at the end of the segment, something must be behind Obama’s recent base-shoring efforts. In just the past week, he’s announced “new” summer jobs for would-be Obama Zombies, created an easier path to citizenship for illegal immigrants and praised Environmental Protection Agency personnel for their hard work as a symbolic way to appease angry environmentalists.
Worried about your reelection much, Mr. Obama?”
A few Republican/conservative websites broke the Big Media blockade. These were the I/E Republican/conservatives not the E/I Republican/conservatives (hint: “Intelligence Over Emotion”). When Big Media was forced to write about Draft Hillary because of robo-calls or a Fox News appearance where it was discussed, Big Media either poked fun or worked to discourage a write in vote by making sure everyone knew Hillary Clinton is NOT running. … And still… 10%.
We were attacked as a Republican “ratf*cker” operation by the cannon fodder left for writing about Draft Hillary and stating it was a good idea. Anything, from metaphorical spitballs to metaphorical B-52s attacking Obama to us was a good idea.
We knew the attacks on us were meant to discourage. But we like to fight. Are we worried that it’s us and some Republican/conservative websites breaking the blockade? No. Do we wonder what would happen if there were more I/E Republicans and “liberal” political websites breaking the blockade? You betcha!
What could happen if the blockade gets broken and more and more voters learn to write in the candidate of their choice? What could happen if the blockade gets broken and more and more voters learn to write in Hillary Clinton? Obama won’t be smiling. Even Fantasy Land in Disney World shakes when there’s an earthquake. Lame ducks fall when the earth shakes.
Update: Newt Gingrich supporters are happy today. Newt smacked Big Media last night and showed again he is a fighter. But Newt, why don’t you and other Republicans mention how Big Media savaged Hillary Clinton? Including Hillary Clinton when you point out that McCain and you and Romney and anyone who opposes Obama will get mugged by Big Media can only make your case stronger and help you with independent swing voters. Understand?
What a day this has been. Obama went home to what he thinks is a reality based community – Fantasyland. Rick Perry quit and is headed after a good debate earlier this week back home to Texas.
Mitt Romney was supposed to be the story of the day when his Caymen Islands money came to light and his 15% tax rate was revealed. But then Newt Gingrich’s ex-mistress/then wife gave an interview on ABC to complain about Newt’s current ex-mistress/now wife.
To top the crazy off Barack Obama released an campaign ad that he will spend millions to broadcast that is straight out of the Disney Land fantasy factory.
What a day. We don’t want to add to all the news or detract from what will be tonight’s four man debate and so we will not go into detail on Draft Hillary. We’ll do Draft Hillary and the New Hampshire results in our next post – promise. It’s not too late to discuss the New Hampshire debates – after all today was the day that we think we found out that Rick Santorum might have, or might not have, won the Iowa caucuses.
But as a taste to Draft Hillary Results from New Hampshire it’s time for us to give Willard Romney an apology and a bit of respect. We’ve mocked Willard Mitt Romney for a long time. We’ve noted his many weaknesses well before others started to write about them. We’ve warned that Republicans would surrender many issues (such as Obamacare) to Obama if Romney is their nominee.
But thus far Willard has outwitted evangelical voters in Iowa, and done very well in New Hampshire by outfoxing his opponents and moving them into indefensible valleys. As much as Willard reminds us of a greasy rat we have to admire how he continues to do what others fail to do. Case in point, Mitt Romney and the DRAFT HILLARY OR DIE efforts in New Hampshire.
Mitt Romney was the only one of the Republican candidates that made a statement mocking Barack Obama for the results. At least ten percent of the Democratic voters of New Hampshire wrote in a candidate name and refused to vote for Barack Obama. Hillary was the write in candidate. Romney was smart to mention that. It divides the opposition. It reminds Hillary voters of 2008 that they don’t like Obama and why.
Everything old is new again. The Obama campaign race-baiting against Hillary Clinton which crested during the South Carolina primary has been repeated big time against Republicans this year. Big Media is preparing to do its utmost to protect and preserve Barack Obama’s occupation of the White House. The dumb-asses at Occupy Wall Street prove once again that there is no fool like a left fool.
Everything old is new again. Hillary Hating race-baiter Andrew Sullivan was not alone in this weeks race baiting festival. James Clyburn would have us believe that Rosa Parks was a total wimp and loser if we are to believe him that Mitt Romney (the totally non-threatening bowl of oatmeal Mitt Romney!) is reminiscent of racists who kept Rosa Parks in the back of the bus.
If Rosa Parks’ racist enemies were like Mitt Romney then that whole civil rights struggle is a joke. Rosa Parks was a courageous woman who dared to do something dramatic against great odds. James Clyburn demeans Rosa Parks in order to glorify Barack Obama. Race-baiting James Clyburn will use the same race-baiting tactics deployed against Bill and Hillary Clinton, to race-bait all Obama opponents:
“That use of the name ‘Juan,’ the way he did it. You can’t argue these things. You either see them or you don’t. It’s just the way he did that. I sensed a little applause when he said ‘Let me help you’ when he answered the Juan question. It’s in the eye of the beholder. And, by the way, calling someone a racist is the worst way to get them to stop being racist because everyone gets defensive. … So it’s stupid to say it but, honestly, if you notice it, you sort of ought to blow the whistle. Because there is a dog whistle going on here.”
“They urged African-Americans to re-elect President Barack Obama, and condemned voter identification laws they warned are meant to suppress black voter turnout in November.
At Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, where King preached from 1960 until his death in 1968, the Rev. Raphael G. Warnock accused GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich of using racial stereotypes to fire up Republican voters. On the campaign trail, Gingrich has referred to President Barack Obama as “the food stamp president” and earlier this month suggested that African-Americans seek paychecks instead of public assistance.
Warnock called Gingrich’s comments “sickening and insulting.”
Everything old is new again. Yesterday the nearly defunct, certainly moribund Occupy Wall Street circus held it’s Winter festival called “Occupy Congress.” This long planned occupation was a total flop. Thousands upon thousands were expected and planned for. A few motley hundreds showed up.
But the numbers are not why we condemn and mock these Occupy Wall Street clowns. From the beginning we stated that as long as Occupy Wall Street did not protest Barack Obama directly and in a focused manner we could not take them seriously and indeed we denounce them as a phony front group created to assist Obama’s election.
“And so it came to be that the party of “the 99 percent,” whose newest rock star is class warrior Elizabeth Warren, is holding O’s big speech in a stadium named after a bank so that they can milk their rich donors for a few more luxury dollars. Says Guy Benson, noting that BofA is also the same bank that nearly ended up imposing a debit-card fee to cope with new Democratic regulations, “The irony, hypocrisy, and off-the-charts self regard couldn’t be any more evident.” And it ain’t just Republicans who think so
This hypocrisy has to be denounced by Elizabeth Warren or else Scott Brown is going to have a well deserved field day painting her as a hypocrite. Of course Warren is just another victim of Obama’s needs. But why oh why Bank of America Stadium. Is it to mock Occupy Wall Street? Is it to proudly march in the 1% parade? Is it to come out of the closet as a dupe of Wall Street and a toady of Big Banks? It’s about Barack Obama and Barack Obama’s priorities:
“On the final night of this fall’s Democratic National Convention, President Barack Obama will deliver his acceptance speech at Bank of America stadium, party sources told the Observer on Monday night.
Convention officials are expected to announce the venue this morning at a news conference at the stadium. Two party sources say the decision to use the stadium was made months ago. [snip]
Quoting sources involved in convention fundraising, Bloomberg said the move would allow officials, struggling to raise money, to sell skyboxes to donors. [snip]
Officials are trying to raise nearly $37 million under new Democratic Party rules that bar corporate or lobbyists’ contributions or donations over $100,000.
They’ve been offering packages with different levels of incentives, including VIP passes and choice hotel rooms. The stadium could offer more options. The sources said organizers began considering the stadium in early 2011, before fundraising began. [snip]
However, the choice of Bank of America stadium for the speech may give ammunition to critics of the bank, which received a federal bailout after the 2008 financial crisis and also angered consumers with a proposed, though later dropped, $5 monthly debit-card transaction fee.”
Occupy Wall Street/Occupy Congress was too busy masturbating, or whatever it is they do, to squeak anything about Obama at Bank of America Stadium.
“The Democratic Party’s decision to move President Obama’s acceptance speech to the Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte has surprised some party activists — and stirred criticism — over the use of a venue named for a company that has been at the center of the financial crisis.
“God almighty, I can’t believe it.” said one top Democratic fundraiser when he learned of the decision to move the speech to Bank of America stadium, where the NFL Carolina Panthers play their football games. “This is an amateur’s mistake.” [snip]
But party officials privately confirmed that the move can help with fundraising despite what one called “an obvious optics” problem. And the use of a stadium — whose naming rights belong to a bank that has been engulfed in controversies over foreclosures, bank fees and bailouts — was denounced by some watchdog groups.
“It’s a surprising and disappointing choice,” said Mary Boyle, vice president of Common Cause. “Bank of America is the poster child for corporate greed and corporations out-of-control. The president would be better served by choosing a large public space with no corporate logo attached to it.”
Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, a group that lobbies against corporate influence, added: “Speaking at a stadium named for one of the financial firms that plunged our country into deep recession, we can only hope that Barack Obama will counter the optics by laying out a meaningful plan to control the Wall Street giants.” . [snip]
Suzi Emmerling, a spokeswoman for the host committee, confirmed a Bloomberg report that those deals — presented to Washington lobbyists last month — include an escalating menu of packages starting with the $1 million “presidential” level. Those who buy in will receive a “premier uptown hotel room,” a “platinum events package and “concierge services.” Another $500,000 “Gold Rush” level includes hotel room, credentials and a “premiere events package.”
Democratic officials have emphasized for months that this year’s convention won’t accept money from lobbyists and corporations. [snip]
But those seemingly strict rules appear to have some loopholes. While the convention committee itself won’t accept cash donations from corporations, it is taking “in kind” contributions from corporations, such as food, beverages, and equipment — costs that can often add up into the millions.
A separate convention “Hospitality” committee — operating under the name New American City Foundation — is also directly accepting corporate and lobbyists’ money to pay for the parties and other events that are often attended en masse by delegates, members of Congress and reporters.
In addition, the host committee itself is still accepting big donations of up to $100,000 a piece. “Nobody gets to rent a skybox for a million dollars,” said Emmerling.”
Occupy Wall Street was in Washington but their heads are in the sand. Instead of protesting Bank of Obama, they were playing drums and smoking from bongs.
“Top White House officials are warning liberal and labor leaders to brace themselves for President Obama’s budget proposal.”
Again, silence from Occupy Wall Street Obama fans. Everything old is new again.
Bank of Obama, a budget warning released on Occupy Congress’s event-less day, and Nancy’s final insult to Occupy Wall Street’s manipulated and used dupes – Pelosi: Actually, we don’t have much of a connection to Occupy Wall Street. Bank of America and Pelosi – the perfect bookends to a day filling with nothing, from the phony left that will suffer every insult from its golden calf, Barack Obama.
“What are you hunting Jack?” Thus begins the interrogation of “Jack Hunter” by Serafina Delle Rose in Tennessee Williams’ The Rose Tattoo (portrayed on film by the magnificent Anna Magnani).
Republican voters are like Serafina/Anna these days as they interrogate their candidates for the presidential nomination. They are bewildered by the chewed over chocolates in the box they have been presented with. They’re confused, angry, but determined to defeat treacherous corrupt boob Barack Obama. They’ll eventually make a decision. But first they want answers and vetting.
From Jon Huntsman the answer to the question “What are you hunting Jon?” is now “a plane ticket home.” He’s out and has endorsed Mitt Romney.
Where oh where can anyone possibly get the idea that lantern jawed Michelle Obama is a nasty piece of work?
How can anyone think that Michelle Obama is low class trash that attacks her betters?
Can’t run your own house or the White House can you Scowly? Don’t think for a second we have forgotten or forgiven.
Lantern jawed Michelle Obama and her goofball Lurch of a husband have been protected, and they continue to be protected, by Big Media.
Obama Hopium guzzlers will dispute what we write. “Look at that book about “The Obamas” that just came out” they will say. “Look at all the other critical books that have come out” they weep. Rubbish. Barack Obama and his scowling wife have been and continue to be protected by Big Media.
After the presidential election of 2008, on November 8, 2008 we wrote “After The Lovin‘” and included these videos:
“The L.A. Times buried their revealing Obama story but Newsweek throughout the campaign protected and pushed Obama and trashed Hillary and McCain. Now Newsweek’s Jon Meacham and Evan Thomas reveal Obama is “creepy” and “deeply manipulative“.
Shameful Rush Limbaugh, a Hillary Hater, who bears some responsibility for Obama getting gifted the Democratic nomination has some relevant comments on Newsweek and its lovin’ of Obama [transcript]:
Limbaugh asks the same question about Tom Brokaw. Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw of the Obama lovin’ NBC admit they don’t know who or what Obama is or represents:
Only now, when it’s too late for the American voter, only now, after the lovin’, do Newsweak’s Jon and Evan tell us Obama is “creepy”. Brokaw adds a hapless ‘Obama who?’ after years of NBC shilling for Obama.
Have a cigarette Barack – you made it past the lovin’ – now give Jon and Tom and Evan ten dollars each and kick them out the door.”
One video has been deleted but you can get a taste from this video and a partial transcript HERE:
“The other night I dreamt of Barack Obama. He was taking a shower right when I needed to get into the bathroom to shave my legs, and then he was being yelled at by my husband, Max, for smoking in the house.”
It gets much worse and much creepier as we practically read Warner unwrap the dildo and grease it up. Of course the dildo was so far up in Andrew Sullivan even Warner plunging her arm up to her pits could not find it.
“She was angry at his selfishness and careerism; he thought she was cold and ungrateful.”
How come none of this came out when brawny Michelle was talking trash against Hillary and running your own house and the White House? Ordinarily we would defend women from personal attacks. But Michelle Obama deserves every bit of payback she is getting. We recall when Michelle Bachmann was assaulted for losing her chief of staff. But not much was said as Michelle Obama lost staff on a regular basis and everyone knew it was because lantern jawed Michelle Obama was a nasty piece of trash.
Let’s look at another book that recently published, The Operators. The book was written by Michael Hastings of Rolling Stone magazine. The book is a follow-up to the article Hastings wrote that destroyed the career of General McChrystal.
Hastings writes that when Barack Obama as a candidate for president went to Iraq Barack Obama complained about having to take pictures with American soldiers and diplomats. Americans should have known that fact. Americans did not know it because Big Media protected Barack Obama.
The weak case can be made that Hastings squirreled away that hurtful to Obama story for his book. The weak case can be made that this is not “bros before hos” but more “profits before people”. But then where oh where were the rest of Big Media journalists and personalities? Why didn’t they report this important story? They were JournoListing, protecting Barack Obama.
Michael Hastings is not to be complimented but condemned. Where were you Hastings with information that mattered when it mattered? Hastings will act the high class journalist but he is more low class hooker servicing the Obamas.
Marbella, Spain where “Michelle Obama paraded her cheap Chicago self through the streets of Marbella, Spain, in her Dolce Vita John Paul Gaultier Halloween Eurotrash outfit in her movie-stars-wear-these sunglasses she was telling economically distressed Americans “I don’t care and I don’t care that you know that I don’t care.” Now Jodi Kantor admits that yes, Michelle Obama used state trips paid for by the tax payer to hide her extravagant vacations and that thug Gibbs tried to stop it or rather hide it.
“Then-White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel offered his resignation to President Barack Obama in the winter of 2010 after a series of columns appeared depicting him as the lone element keeping the Obama presidency intact. According to then senior adviser David Axelrod, Emanuel understood that the stories “were an embarrassment” to the president. The president, already suffering from a setback to his health care reform effort, declined Emanuel’s offer to resign, despite being convinced that his chief of staff was the main source for the columns. [snip]
The dramatics that surrounded the passage of health care reform — culminating in Emanuel’s near-resignation — reflect the type of high-pitched struggle that routinely erupted between Emanuel and the first lady during the first two years of the Obama administration. The two jockeyed for influence over the president even before he formally took office. [snip]
Emanuel, in turn, had been opposed to bringing Valerie Jarrett, the Obamas’ longtime mentor, into the White House as a senior adviser.
Once the administration began, the frictions only escalated. Emanuel rejected Michelle Obama’s efforts to be part of his 7:30 a.m. staff meeting. The administration did not outfit her with a speechwriter for some time. And the first lady’s office grew so isolated from the rest of the presidential orbit that aides there began, as Kantor writes, “referring to the East Wing as ‘Guam’ — pleasant but powerless.”
“Michelle and Rahm Emanuel had almost no bond; their relationship was distant and awkward from the beginning. She had been skeptical of him when he was selected, and now he returned the favor; he was uneasy about first ladies in general, several aides close to him said, based on clashes with Hillary Clinton in the 1990s that became so severe that she had tried to fire him from her husband’s administration,” writes Kantor.”
We’ve written about how Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton had to demote Emanuel to the basement until he learned to behave and improved his performance. We’ve written repeatedly that hiring all the former Clinton administration officials in the world would never help because BARACK OBAMA IS THE PROBLEM. Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton knew how to deal with slime like Emanuel and to keep him in his cage. But Barack Obama and Michelle Obama could not run their own house, let alone the White House. Snap.
Recall that “flawless” transition that we exposed as a mess. Recall that brilliant “team of rivals” nonsense we derided. And that “smooth running operation” myths perpetrated by the Halperns and Heilemans? Big Media made that all up. It was always a mess from the very beginning and it’s only now that some of the disgruntled former workers are beginning to tell the truth about the Mistake in ’08:
“The tug of war between Michelle Obama and Rahm Emanuel for the president’s spiritual or political soul contributed to a White House that was far more disorganized and friction-filled than the public perception holds. Kantor reports that then-White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was often deployed to push back against the first lady, informing her that she couldn’t take a private vacation on a state visit, spend large amounts on White House redecoration, or buy expensive clothes.
Michelle Obama, who came to politics skeptically but saw her husband as someone capable of lofty achievements, lashed out against her isolation. She sent emails to Jarrett when she had complaints about news coverage, which Jarrett would forward to others after removing the first lady’s name from them. When she couldn’t wedge herself into her husband’s schedule, she would send her missives to Alyssa Mastromonaco, the president’s director of scheduling. The emails, Kantor writes, “were so stern that Mastromonaco showed them around to colleagues, unsure of how to respond to her boss’s wife’s displeasure.”
Notice how Kantor weasels. We’re finally informed that the Obama White House was a mess. Kantor weasels that fact as contrary to what “the public perception holds.” And who is responsible for that “public perception”? It was Big Media and Kantor and her pals like Warner at the New York Times.
Those of us that noted the ugliness of recession America forced to pay for Michelle Obama’s Mary Todd crazy spending were attacked. But we were right. We have been right. It’s only now that Big Media accepts what we write but will not publish it in order to protect Barack Obama and fellow corrupt treacherous clown Michelle Obama, the patient dumper from Chicago.
On immigration we were right that Obama was not doing anything purposefully. Jodi Kantor paints Michelle Obama with sympathy as a helpless Wookie frustrated and flailing and furious. But Michelle Obama the patient dumper and nasty Chicago grabber of goods deserves all she is getting and much much more.
“When the whole enterprise seemed to have fallen apart, following the election of Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown, a Republican, the first lady was furious. Instead of letting her husband down easy, which top staff hoped she would do, she lit into him.
“She feels as if our rudder isn’t set right,” the president told his aides. “They had the sense that was not the actual language she had used.” [snip]
When the House of Representatives managed to pass the bill, the president and members of his team celebrated in his residence. It was the first time many of them had been there, as the first family had tried to separate it as much as possible from the office of the president.
The first lady, however, wasn’t there to cheer the achievement. She was in New York City watching television coverage “alone in her suite at the Waldorf Astoria, according to an aide, as her daughters slept.”
Pathetic, nasty Wookie.
At the New York Times – conflict. Confusion whether as to continue to protect Barack Obama by attacking their own reporter or help their reporter? The answer by the Times is not to ask why Jodi Kantor did not report these anecdotes in a timely manner and to pretend that the book is not in any way harmful to The Obamas:
“Michelle Obama was privately fuming, not only at the president’s team, but also at her husband. [snip]
The first lady never confronted the advisers directly — that was not her way — but they found out about her displeasure from the president. “She feels as if our rudder isn’t set right,” Mr. Obama confided, according to aides.
Rahm Emanuel, then chief of staff, repeated the first lady’s criticisms to colleagues with indignation, according to three of them. Mr. Emanuel, in a brief interview, denied that he had grown frustrated with Mrs. Obama, but other advisers described a grim situation: a president whose agenda had hit the rocks, a first lady who disapproved of the turn the White House had taken, and a chief of staff who chafed against her influence.
The Michelle Obama of January 2012 is an expert motivator and charmer, a champion of safe causes like helping military families and ending childhood obesity, an increasingly canny political player eager to pour her popularity into her husband’s re-election campaign. But interviews with more than 30 current and former aides, as well as some of the first couple’s closest friends, conducted for “The Obamas,” a new book, show that she has been an unrecognized force in her husband’s administration and that her story has been one first of struggle, then turnaround and greater fulfillment.”
The New York Times wants to have it’s Marie Antoinette cake and eat it too. Michelle Obama was “furious” and nasty – but we are informed that is all in the past. Does anyone believe that rot? A Wookie doesn’t change its fur.
“Mrs. Obama’s difficulties illuminate some of the president’s central challenges in the White House, including how the Obamas’ freshness to political life, a selling point in 2008, became a liability in office. Her worries about his staff point to a chief executive with little management experience who clung to an inner circle less united than it appeared. (Mr. Emanuel’s relationship with the president grew so strained that the chief of staff secretly offered to resign in early 2010; Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, had a tense relationship with Mrs. Obama and with Valerie Jarrett, another adviser). She shared the president’s ambivalence about political chores and the back-patting and schmoozing that can help get things done in Washington. [snip]
She ultimately decided to go to Washington immediately, not because of the obligations of office, but because of “wanting her family to be together,” Ms. Jarrett said. [snip]
A Harvard-trained lawyer, she had given up her career for what initially seemed to her a shapeless post, and she tried to wriggle out of some ceremonial events that she saw as not having much purpose, including the annual luncheon for Congressional spouses held by the first lady since 1912. She tried to limit her public exposure, saying she would work only two days a week; inside the White House, the difficulty of getting Mrs. Obama to agree to doing an event became a running joke.“
It’s all me, me, me. We wrote back in 2008 about how Michelle didn’t want to do any work for the campaign unless she was compensated. Chicago pols don’t work for nothing. In the White House, there was no pay, no play.
“Mrs. Obama often found herself caught in an internal debate about how the Obamas should look and live, travel and entertain. As the first African-American first lady, she wanted everything to be flawless and sophisticated; she felt “everyone was waiting for a black woman to make a mistake,” a former aide said.
But her husband’s advisers — in particular, Mr. Gibbs — were worried that the White House might appear oblivious to public anger about joblessness, banker bailouts and bonuses. The result was constant, anxious give-and-take between the East and West Wings about vacations, décor, entertainment, even matters as small as whether to announce the hiring of a new florist.
“We all have watched what happens when people get caricatured,” Mr. Gibbs said in an interview, explaining why he policed such personal matters. With a mistake like John Edwards’s $400 haircut in 2007, “there’s no way to correct that.” Other aides said there was a reason Mr. Gibbs became the main enforcer of the rules of political life: because Mr. Obama, all too aware that his wife never wanted that life, would not.”
So Barack was to chicken to tell his wife to cut off the Mary Todd nonsense. Gibbs who was the one to leak news about the John Edwards $400 haircut (our original reporting which took Big Media years to finally admit) feared a haircut type story. What goes around comes around.
“Her reluctance to campaign left Mr. Emanuel incredulous, according to two aides: The elections were already looking like a potential bloodbath, and the White House was going to face them without the president’s popular spouse?”
“She had little appetite or expertise for policy detail, and she knew the history of first ladies —like Nancy Reagan and Mrs. Clinton — who had been deemed meddlers, unelected figures who wielded unearned power. [snip]
In September 2010, after a summer of infighting throughout the West Wing, things finally exploded.
Early on Sept. 16, Robert Gibbs was scanning the news when a story stopped him short: according to a new French book, Michelle Obama had told Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, the French first lady, that living in the White House was “hell.” It was a potential disaster — the equivalent of the $400 haircut, Mr. Gibbs feared, coming just weeks before election day and on the heels of a vacation in Spain that had drawn accusations of lavish spending.
Mr. Gibbs asked her aides to find out if she had said anything even close (no, the answer came back), and then fought the story back for hours, having the book translated and convincing the Élysée Palace to issue a denial. By noon the potential crisis had been averted.
But at Mr. Emanuel’s 7:30 a.m. staff meeting the next day, Ms. Jarrett announced that the first lady had concerns about the White House’s response to the book, according to several people present. All eyes turned to Mr. Gibbs, who started to steam.
“Don’t go there, Robert, don’t do it,” Mr. Emanuel warned.
“That’s not right, I’ve been killing myself on this, where’s this coming from?” Mr. Gibbs yelled, adding expletives. He interrogated Ms. Jarrett, whose calm only seemed to frustrate him more. The two went back and forth, Ms. Jarrett unruffled, Mr. Gibbs shaking with rage. Finally, several staff members said, Mr. Gibbs cursed the first lady — colleagues stared down at the table, shocked — and stormed out.
Mr. Gibbs later acknowledged the outburst but said he had misdirected his rage and accused Ms. Jarrett of making up the complaint. After the book incident, he “stopped taking her at all seriously as an adviser to the president,” Mr. Gibbs said, adding, “Her viewpoint in advising the president is that she has to be up and the rest of the White House has to be down.”
If you wonder why the White House is horrified by the tame book, The Obamas, consider this meeting before the 2010 midterm elections which went so badly for The Obamas:
“The location was the president’s domain, but the meeting was held to appease the first lady, who was finally agreeing to campaign for the midterm elections. One by one, members of the political team came before the Obamas, laying out arguments, details, statistics about how the first lady could help capture votes. In an interview the year before, the first couple had rejected the idea that they were using their marriage for political gain. (Most photos of them are “ somebody else’s images,” the first lady had said.) Now they absorbed polling data that showed that Democratic voters loved seeing them together, according to several participants at the meeting. [snip]
Still, Mrs. Obama agreed to only eight campaign stops, fewer than the political team had wanted. “She basically agreed to do nothing,” one aide said.”
Michelle Obama and Barack Obama don’t do anything unless they get a majority of the benefit. Now they are in push back mode against “The Obamas” because the narrative hurts them in a most personal way and eventually in a most political way.
“Good morning, Mainstream Media. How are things under the Obama bus? Please tell Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers we say hello. You remember them. You helped Obama hide them there.
Frequently, I refer to the mainstream media as Obama’s Palace Guards. But maybe “secret service” would be a better term today, because this time the MSM has apparently decided to take a public relations bullet for Their Precious One.
The story goes a little something like this. Over Halloween in 2009, during the depths of the Great Recession, the White House threw a lavish party for children from all walks of life, including local DC kids, military families, and friends of the President’s two young daughters, Malia and Sasha. The theme was “Alice In Wonderland” and director Tim Burton, whose film based on the classic story was about to be released in theatres, attended, as did his star, Johnny Depp, who reportedly greeted guests in character and costume as the Mad Hatter.”
It was Malice in Wonderland as Michelle and Barack partied while the peasants revolted. The White House tried to keep this story hidden and Big Media cooperated:
“But the most important thing we now know is that the White House is claiming they hid nothing from the media and in response the media is… saying… nothing… in… their… defense…
For instance, nowhere in that Politico report does Politico clarify what they knew and when they knew it. If Politico did know about the party, why was there no reporting? If Politico didn’t know about the party, why not report that fact?
And so we are now left to ponder the following: did the MSM know about the party at the time and choose not to cover it in order to protect Obama? Or is the White House statement about the MSM knowing about the party untrue but in order to protect Obama the MSM isn’t reporting that it’s untrue?”
“Michelle Obama said depictions of friction in a new book, “The Obamas,” between her and former top aides to her husband, President Obama, aren’t true.
In a wide-ranging interview with “CBS This Morning” co-host Gayle King, the first lady also said that some have tried to portray her as an “angry black woman” since Mr. Obama first announced he was seeking the presidency.
More from the interview: Michelle Obama on how she’s changed
” … I guess it’s more interesting to imagine this conflicted situation here and a strong woman and– you know? But that’s been an image that people have tried to paint of me since the day Barack announced, that I’m some angry black woman.” [snip]
“You know, I just try to be me. And my hope is that over time people get to know me. And they get to judge me for me.”
Isn’t that the problem, the more we see of The Obamas, the uglier they appear. And Gayle King? Really? The best friend of Barack Obama supporters Oprah? Why not have CBS hire Axelrod and have him conduct the interview?
What Michelle Obama does in these Gayle King massages is prove herself to be uglier by the second. No one has accused Michelle Obama of being a Tyler Perry style “angry black woman”. She’s just a nasty scowling creep from Chicago.
What Michelle Obama is engaged in with these Gayle King sessions is race-baiting. Jodi Kantor tried today to appease the White House Wookie by denying the “angry black woman” charge. But sorry Jodi, you are now officially a racist for not saying something that Michelle Obama said you said but didn’t say. Racist rat bastard!
“Appearing on Fox News’ Hannity, Sarah Palin reacted in disgust to a clip from Gayle King‘s interview with First Lady Michelle Obama, where she said Americans were “confused” about how much had been accomplished by the President. “Oh, Lord. Oh, Lord — what are we just a bunch of numbskulls out here in the heartland of America?” Palin exclaimed incredulously. “Just a bunch of numbskulls who can’t read the unemployment numbers and see that 5 trillion dollars in new debt later under her husband, President Obama? 5 trillion dollars more! And we have fewer jobs today than we had before we took over, but, no, we’re numbskulls out here and we don’t know what the numbers actually represent!”
You go girl!
The Obamas are fighting back against “The Obamas” because they don’t want Americans to see them as they really are (and don’t buy any Big Media excuse that The Obamas have changed). The Obamas versus “The Obamas”. Phony books with made up stories helped Obama. Now a real book about the phony Obamas threatens Obama. It’s enough to make Michelle go the way of Mary Todd.
Finally, the sane voters of New Hampshire get to speak. They mostly voted intelligently and responsibly four years ago in contrast to Iowa. We think Republicans will do well tonight no matter what the results in their primary for reasons we’ll note below.
Republicans are fighting like roosters over worms these days saying the most improbable things. Who would have thought class warfare on behalf of the middle class and the working class would be heard thunderously in a Republican nomination fight? But that is where we are and where Republicans find themselves – and they should be happy.
Whaaaaaaaaat? They should be happy? Yup, they should be happy – for two reasons. Reason #1 is that the Republican Party is now the party of the working class because the Obama Dimocrats hate the working class if the skin lacks sufficient pigmentation. Obama Dimocrats snub the white working class and now the white working class is firmly in the Republican column. So Republicans are going to have to discuss in a very tough way the fight of Wall Street against Main Street.
The second reason for happiness is that Willard Romney, who looks very strong right now has to be toughened up and be able to answer questions about Bain. That’s how Obama and his thugs will go after Romney – Bain. Why do you think Occupy Wall Street was created? To sit in parks?
Romney needs to be vetted and toughened up if he is to be the nominee. We have a third reason for Republican happiness. If Romney is to be the nominee the best thing for the Republicans is that he be toughened up and that he get the nomination as quickly as possible.
So be of cheer Republicans. Tonight is your night.