Archives:

Categories:

Presidential Seal

Get a Hillary Is 44 button! Here's How:

Please Send a Donation to us at Hillary Is 44 So We Can Continue Our Work. Donate $10.00 or more and we will send you a pink Hillary Is 44 button.

Get a Hillary Is 44 T-Shirt! Here's How:

Donate $100.00 or more and we will send you a pink Hillary Is 44 T-shirt as well as a button.

Donate To Hillary Is 44 below:





Suscribe To Our RSS Feed

The Funnies

See Our Funnies Archive.

February 17, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Hillary Clinton Wants To Accomplish On Her Trip Overseas

10 Exchange U.S. dollars for currency that's worth something

9 Win respect defeating Japan's top-ranked sumo wrestler

8 Shift world's perception of America from "hated" to "extremely disliked"

7 Personally thank all of her illegal campaign donors

6 Three words: stylish Indonesian pantsuits

5 Visit burial site of revered Chinese military leader, General Tso

4 Get drunk with that Japanese finance minister guy

3 Convince China to switch from lead-tainted products to mercury-tainted products

2 Catch Chinese screening of Benjamin Button entitled "The Strange Adventures of Freaky Grandpa Baby"

1 Pick up carton of duty-free smokes for Obama

February 16, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Abraham lincoln Would Say If He Were Alive Today

10 "Sup?"

9 "I see Madonna's still a slut"

8 "Who's that handsome sumbitch on the five?"

7 "Is that free Grand Slam deal still going on at Denny's?"

6 "I just changed my Facebook status update to, Tthe 'ol rail splitter is chillaxing'"

5 "How do I get on 'Dancing with the Stars'?"

4 "Okay, Obama, you're from Illinois, too. We get it!"

3 "Hey Phelps, don't Bogart the weed!"

2 "What's the deal with Joaquin Phoenix?"

1 "A Broadway play? Uhhh, no thanks. I'm good."

January 28, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Overheard at the Meeting Between Barack Obama and the Republicans

10 "I miss the Clinton administration when we'd meet at Hooters"

9 "Can we wrap this up? I've got tickets to the 4:30 'Paul Blart: Mall Cop"

8 "Smoke break!"

7 "You fellas really need to take it easy on the Old Spice"

6 "Mr. President: don't misunderestimate the Republicans"

5 "Another smoke break!"

4 "What was the deal with Aretha Franklin's hat?"

3 "About that tax the rich stuff -- you were joking, right?"

2 "Sir, it's refreshing to have a Chief Executive who speaks in complete sentences"

1 "Senator Craig's offering his stimulus package in the men's room"

January 27, 2009 - David Letterman - Top Ten Ways Rod Blagojevich Can Improve His Image

10 Star in new television series, "America's Funniest Haircuts"

9 Quit politics and become a fat, lovable mall cop

8 Start pronouncing last name with Jerry Lewis-like "BLAGOOOYYYJEVICH"

7 Offer a senate seat with no money down, zero percent interest

6 Team up with John Malkovich and Erin Brockovich for hot Malkovich-Brockovich-Blagojevich sex tape

5 Change his name to Barod Obamavich

4 Safely land an Airbus on the Hudson River

3 I don't know...how about showing up for his impeachment trial?

2 Wear sexy dresses, high heels and say, "You Betcha!"

1 Uhhh...resign?

January 16, 2000 - David Letterman - Top Ten Signs Obama's Getting Nervious

10 New slogan: "Yes we can... or maybe not, it's hard to say"

9 In moment of confusion, requested a $300 billion bailout from the bailout industry

8 He's up to not smoking three packs a day

7 Friends say he's looking frail, shaky and...no, that's McCain

6 He's so stressed, doctors say he's developing a Sanjay in his Gupta

5 Been walking around muttering, "What the hell have I gotten myself into?"

4 Offered Governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, $100,000 to buy his old Senate seat back

3 Standing on White House roof screaming, "Save us, Superman!"

2 Sweating like Bill Clinton when Hillary comes home early

1 He demanded a recount

January 8, 2000 - David Letterman - Top Ten Barack Obama Plans To Fix The Economy

10 Encourage tourists to throw spare change in the Grand Canyon

9 End our dependence on foreign owls

8 Sell New Mexico to Mexico

7 Put a little of that bailout money on the Ravens plus 3 at Tennessee. Come on! It's a mortal lock!

6 Rent out the moon for weddings and Bar Mitzvahs

5 Lotto our way out of this son-of-a-bitch

4 Appear on "Deal or No Deal" and hope to choose the right briefcase

3 Bail out the adult film industry -- not sure how it helps, but it can't hurt

2 Release O.J. from prison, have him steal America's money from China

1 Stop talkin' and start Obama-natin'!

January 7, 2000 - David Letterman - Top Ten Things Overheard At The Presidents' Lunch

10 "Sorry, you're not on the list, Mr. Gore"

9 "If Hillary calls, I've been here since Monday"

8 "Laura! More Mountain Dew!"

7 "You guys wanna see, 'Paul Blart: Mall Cop'?"

6 "Call the nurse -- George swallowed a napkin ring!"

5 "Hey Barack, wanna go with us to Cabo in March? Oh that's right, you have to work!"

4 "Kissey kissey"

3 "Obama? I think he's downstairs smoking a butt"

2 "Did you ever see a monkey sneezing?"

1 "I hope Clinton's unbuckling his belt because he's full"

Recent Articles Calendar

March 2012
M T W T F S S
« Feb   Apr »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Networked Blogs

Follow me on Twitter

Treachery Followed By Bamboozlement: Barack Obama Against Israel

It’s really easy to understand Barack Obama. First comes the river of flowery words and promises. Then comes the treachery. Once the treachery is recognized by those he duped – comes the river of flowery words designed to bamboozle. Lies – Treachery – Deceit.

That last stage, bamboozlement, is the state Americans, and especially supporters of Israel, find Obama wriggling in right now. After years of engaging in his anti-Israel treachery Barack Obama finds many Americans support Israel and that it is an election year:

“The large majority of Americans continue to view Israel favorably, while far fewer say they view the Palestinian Authority or Iran very or mostly favorably.

These data are from Gallup’s annual World Affairs survey, conducted each February since 2001. The Feb. 2-5, 2012, survey asked Americans to rate a list of more than 20 countries. Iran ranked at the very bottom, the Palestinian Authority was several spots higher up, and Israel was much closer to the top of the list.

President Obama is to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Monday at the White House, where the two leaders will likely focus most of their discussion on their nations’ respective stances toward Iran. Obama made strong statements on the issue in an interview this week with The Atlantic magazine, telling the publication that the United States “has Israel’s back.” Both leaders are scheduled to address the upcoming American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference in Washington D.C., which will also be highly focused on Iran. The three leading Republican presidential candidates are also set to speak at the pro-Israel lobbying organization’s annual gathering — each seeking to position himself as best equipped to support Israel. [snip]

On that front, most Americans also continue to say their sympathies are more with the Israelis than with the Palestinians.

Americans have consistently been more sympathetic to the Israelis than the Palestinians since Gallup started asking the question in 1988. Since the mid-2000s, Americans have become increasingly sympathetic to the Israelis, while the percentage sympathetic to the Palestinians has stayed the same. The percentage volunteering a neutral position or no opinion has declined in recent years.”

That Gallup poll demonstrates why Barack Obama is trying to cover up his years of anti-Israel treacheries with the current bamboozlement tour. Barack Obama snubbed Israel when he went to the Middle East. Barack Obama has refused to visit Israel. Barack Obama distorted Middle East history to paint Israel as the villain when he gave a speech to the “Muslim World” in Cairo (the same trip in which for the first time an American President in the Middle East refused to go to Israel choosing instead to visit Arab Muslim capitals and bow humbly to the Saudi King). Barack Obama in essence demanded the destruction of Israel with his “return to the 1967 borders” speech. Barack Obama displayed his contempt for the Israeli Prime Minister repeatedly in ways that no Arab/Muslim leader could fail to notice or act on. Barack Obama has done more to postpone an Israeli strike against Iran than to stop an Iranian bomb. Barack Obama because of his treacheries and policies has made it more likely, not less, that Israel will eventually have to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.



Obama is attempting this election year bamboozlement but some are standing up to his lies:

“We believe that that the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines,” Obama is shown saying, a reference to his May, 2011 speech, where he for the first time explicitly defined U.S. policy as supporting the 1967 borders with agreed swaps as the basis for Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.

“He didn’t quite have a full grasp of what the full region looks like,” conservative journalist Lee Smith is shown saying in the video. “This is not how you treat an ally.” [snip]

The video was produced by the group the Emergency Committee for Israel, which has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on its pre-AIPAC publicity campaign, including posters and billboards all over Washington that question Obama’s commitment to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

“He says a nuclear Iran is unacceptable. Do you believe him?” the posters read. Then, next to a picture of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini and President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, it says, “Do they?” [snip]

“We hope he means what he says, but the recent statements from his administration, his contentious relationship with the Israeli government, and his consistent efforts to weaken congressional sanctions don’t inspire confidence.” [snip]

Pollak also said that the video, billboards, and ads happen to refute a pre-AIPAC interview Obama gave to The Atlantic, in which Obama expressed frustration with the attacks coming from conservative lawmakers and groups like ECI that claim he is not pro-Israel.

“Every single commitment I have made to the state of Israel and its security, I have kept,” Obama said. “Why is it that despite me never failing to support Israel on every single problem that they’ve had over the last three years, that there are still questions about that?”

“Obama said today he doesn’t understand why there are questions about his record of support for Israel,” Pollak said. “We think this movie will set the record straight, and remind pro-Israel Americans of the facts of this administration’s failure to stand with Israel at some critical moments.”

Barack Obama has repeatedly signaled Arab/Muslim leaders that he is anti-Israel. Those leaders know they have a friend in the White House. Those leaders know Israel has an enemy in the White House.

As to the State Department, we have repeatedly defended and continue to defend Hillary Clinton as a strong supporter of Israel holding back a treacherous Barack Obama. We believe we are correct in defending Hillary Clinton. But on the off chance that we are wrong (and have no doubt we are absolutely correct on this matter) or that some will seek to shield Barack Obama with Hillary Clinton let’s make this point clear: the American alliance with Israel is much more important than the fate of any one leader no matter how much we admire her and no matter how much a resurrection of a functioning and fair Democratic Party hinges on her political viability. We stand with Israel. America must stand with Israel.

Many smart Israeli’s will not be bamboozled by Barack Obama’s treachery coverup tour and his speech today before AIPAC. Few believe Barack Obama:

“Obama’s words are tough but his actions aren’t… He talked about Teddy Roosevelt holding a big stick. Right now we are seeing big words but a very, very small stick.”



Obama’s repeated lies about support for Israel at AIPAC today have been proven to be lies.

In 2007/2008 Hillary Clinton told America that Barack Obama was not ready to be president. It was a powerful message encapsulated in an television ad that Obama supporters loathed. The ad told the truth. An updated version of the ad tells the truth about the abyss we face:

“Here Comes Obama’s 3 AM Phone Call

In the next 60 days Obama’s presidential career will finally meet that concrete wall of reality. He will either fail or survive. Trouble is, he might take many innocent people with him if he fails.

So far, the most hyped-up and unqualified president in US history has shown no capacity at all to act, in the face of a do-or-die challenge. [snip]

On or about April 1 of 2012, that 3 AM phone call will reach the White House. We know what it will be — which is itself a sign of stunning incompetence in this White House. None of this information should ever be public. Ever.

But this administration has chosen its Secretary of Defense to publicly leak the most closely guarded secret of Israel’s back-against-the-wall defense against Iranian nuclear weapons. [snip]

Obama thrives on crisis and chaos. He is a gambler and a con artist who follows Napoleon’s slogan of “audacity, audacity, always audacity.” But Napoleon met his Moscow winter and his Waterloo. The only question is when Obama will crash into his own brick wall of reality.

April Fool’s Day would be a very suitable target date for the coming Iranian nuclear crisis. [snip]

Around April 1, the biggest fool of the 21st century will stand revealed to the world.

After that, the American people will have to decide.

It’s 3 a.m. and the Prime Minister of Israel is Calling.”

We have heard from sources that Barack Obama wants to make it difficult for Israel to attack Iran in spring of this year because Barack Obama wants to have American forces attack Iran – in September/October. The reasons for this are supposedly because this attack will be timed for the election. With Americans overwhelmingly in support of Israel and against Iranian nuclear weapons Obama reasons, we have heard, that he will then be a popular war leader and be elected. Obama is more than willing to betray those phony “anti-war” hypocrites that have gone silent since he became president.

But we have also heard that the stall until September/October might be all the time that Iran needs to get a nuclear weapon. It’s a confusing situation because with Barack Obama treachery hides behind treachery.



This year more than ever it is important to remember what we have written repeatedly year after year:

“Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.”

Be Sociable, Share!

145 comments to Treachery Followed By Bamboozlement: Barack Obama Against Israel

  • admin

    Breitbart’s last column:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/04/obama-alinsky-love-song

    The Vetting, Part I: Barack’s Love Song To Alinsky

    Prior to his passing, Andrew Breitbart said that the mission of the Breitbart empire was to exemplify the free and fearless press that our Constitution protects–but which, increasingly, the mainstream media denies us.

    “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” – “Who guards the guardians?” Andrew saw himself in that role—as a guardian protecting Americans from the left’s “objective” loyal scribes.

    Andrew wanted to do what the mainstream media would not. First and foremost: Andrew pledged to vet President Barack H. Obama.”

    That’s the introduction to the article.

  • admin

    Breitbart’s last column (excerpts):

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/04/obama-alinsky-love-song

    In The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama claims that he worried after 9/11 that his name, so similar to that of Osama bin Laden, might harm his political career.

    But Obama was not always so worried about misspellings and radical resemblances. He may even have cultivated them as he cast himself as Chicago’s radical champion.

    In 1998, a small Chicago theater company staged a play titled The Love Song of Saul Alinsky, dedicated to the life and politics of the radical community organizer whose methods Obama had practiced and taught on Chicago’s South Side.

    Obama was not only in the audience, but also took the stage after one performance, participating in a panel discussion that was advertised in the poster for the play. [snip]

    The play finishes with Alinsky announcing he’d rather go to Hell than Heaven. Why? “More comfortable there. You see, all my life I’ve been with the Have-Nots: here you’re a Have-Not if you’re short of money, there you’re a Have-Not if you’re short of virtue. I’d be asking more questions, organizing them. They’re my kind of people – Hell would be Heaven for me.”

    That’s The Love Song of Saul Alinsky. It’s radical leftist stuff, and it revels in its radical leftism.

    And that’s Barack Obama, our president, on the poster.

    This is who Barack Obama was. This was before Barack Obama ran for Congress in 2000—challenging former Black Panther Bobby L. Rush from the left in a daring but unsuccessful bid.

    This was also the period just before Barack Obama served with Bill Ayers, from 1999 through 2002 on the board of the Woods Foundation. They gave capital to support the Midwest Academy, a leftist training institute steeped in the doctrines of – you guessed it! — Saul Alinsky, and whose alumni now dominate the Obama administration and its top political allies inside and out of Congress.

    Stanley Kurtz, author of Radical-in-Chief, described the Midwest Academy as a “crypto-socialist organization.” Yet almost no one has heard of Midwest Academy, because the media does want you to know that the president is a radical’s radical whose presidency itself is a love song to a socialist “community organizer.”

    The reason Newt Gingrich surged in the Republican primary contest in January is that he was attempting to do the press’s job by finding out who the current occupant of the White House actually is. Millions also want to know, but the mainstream media is clearly not planning to vet the President anytime soon. Quite the opposite. [snip]

    The reason that Obama’s Alinskyite past, and his many appearances in political photography and video from the 1990s, are conspicuously missing from the national dialogue is that State Senator Barack Obama’s reinvention as a reasonable and moderate Democratic politician could not withstand scrutiny of his political life.

    Because the mainstream media did not explore his roots, the American public remains largely ignorant of the degree to which Obama’s work with ACORN and his love of Alinsky were symbolic of his true political will.

    If any of the candidates can resist the media, and parlay Newt’s strategy into a nomination, we’ll have the choice between an imperfect but well-known Republican and the real “Baraka” Obama, not the manufactured one the media prefers.

  • Betty

    I was so happy to see a new article up. Thank you!

  • NewMexicoFan

    Sure is going to be hard for the media to ignore 4 years of experience, or really non-experience (however you want to look at it). However, I did not think that they would be successful before, and look what happened.

    I will look forward to the next 60 days, but I will not hold my breath.

  • tim

    Great article Admin.

    “the American alliance with Israel is much more important than the fate of any one leader no matter how much we admire her and no matter how much a resurrection of a functioning and fair Democratic Party hinges on her political viability. We stand with Israel. America must stand with Israel. ”

    In complete agreement with this statement.

    ““Obama’s words are tough but his actions aren’t… He talked about Teddy Roosevelt holding a big stick. Right now we are seeing big words but a very, very small stick.”

    Oh, I wouldn’t say he even has a “very small stick”, its barely a twig.

  • tim

    Just wanted to pass this along, very interesting interview.
    “UK’s Nigel Farage: We’ve got to fight back against entrapment of global government ”




  • nomobama

    -the American alliance with Israel is much more important than the fate of any one leader no matter how much we admire her and no matter how much a resurrection of a functioning and fair Democratic Party hinges on her political viability. We stand with Israel. America must stand with Israel-
    ————-
    It’s declarations like this that reinforce my respect for the admin. I am just a little bit confused, though. I know that you have repeatedly stated that Hillary is Israel’s friend in this administration, yet I am concerned because you left the door open to being wrong on her commitment to Israel. Is it that you believe that Hillary is or will be overruled with regards to a pro-Israel stance? Or is it that you feel there is a chance, however slight it may be, that Hillary is in synch with Obama’s Middle East agenda? Or, is it that I am reading something into this that was not intended?

    I read that Obama said that “I got Israel’s back”. Too bad he’s also got two knives pointed at it. He is such a deceitful crock of bull.

  • admin

    NoMoBama, in the section in which Hillary Clinton is discussed we have posted links to stories we have written about Hillary versus Obama in the Middle East. We believe those stories are accurate and that Barack Obama has tried repeatedly (sometimes successfully) to undermine Hillary’s smart foreign policy. In some of the articles we posted evidence and actual quotes (particularly during the Egyptian crisis) of Obama and henchmen specifically plotting against Hillary (for example John Kerry being sent by Obama to Meet The Press in order to specifically contradict statements made by Hillary). We’ve named names (Donahue, Donilon) and provided specific examples (the Munich Security conference among many).

    Hillary Clinton has been successful in some measure to counteract Obama’s boobery and treachery in the Middle East but not entirely or even mostly. For example: Obama did appoint an ambassador to Syria, forced Hillary to accept an Obama clod as the #2 at the State Department (Hillary eventually sidelined and got rid of that drone), messed up terribly in Egypt, and there are plenty of other examples such as Iran and Libya.

    Hillary Clinton is navigating treacherous waters and sometimes she can only ameliorate the damage being done. Towards this end Hillary sometimes has to say supportive statements about Obama for purposes only she has full knowledge of. In many instances it is a balance test. Hillary Clinton has managed to preserve the State Department budget at a time when every other budget is getting cut and she must have paid a price for that (she also outmaneuvered Obama with that infamous letter which Ryan Lizza discussed).

    We thought it was important to underline our priorities. We have many readers who are not Hillary fans or who are not fully knowledgeable about Obama’s behind the scenes attacks on Hillary. We have many other readers who are Hillary fans. For both it was necessary to make clear our position that when it comes to individuals versus principles – principles come first. This is a lesson the Obama Hopium guzzlers find very hard to process.

  • ShortTermer

    Oh, but Admin, the Hopium guzzlers have that ‘politics of personal destruction’ down pat and they are sharpening their knives for 2012.

  • jeswezey

    “no matter how much we admire her and no matter how much a resurrection of a functioning and fair Democratic Party hinges on her political viability. We stand with Israel. America must stand with Israel.”
    ====

    This does not hold for me. I will continue to support HRC’s action as Secretary of State and will continue to support any future run she may make for the presidency regardless of what happens to Israel. I refuse to take the US for an unthinking, subservient ally to any other nation to whom some think we owe an unending stream of financial, physical and, in the end, human resources. HRC is not a negotiable pawn in Israel’s problems. Not for me, at least.

  • jeswezey

    admin, principles do come first; but blind support to one other nation is not a principle for me.

    Israel is suffering from problems of its own making. I would be willing to debate the history of the region on this point, but my ultimate point is that the US cannot base its own foreign policy on the options individually chosen by some foreign leader.

    Do principles override individuals when it comes to Israel’s own actions? or are you saying that everything that Netanyahu says and does must be followed slavishly by the US? That’s putting one person’s fate – that of Netanyahu – above the fate of both Israel and the US.

  • jeswezey

    Tim: Thank you for the Nigel Farage interview, very interesting indeed. I had never heard of him.

    It’s interesting to think of the EU idea as a successor to the Soviet Union. It’s true that the fundamental arm of the EU, which is the European Commission, is non-democratic. It’s an assembly of technocrats beholden only to the various heads of state, who are not all elected. They issue “directives” that are all agreed upon unanimously and which are expected to be applied to national laws.

    Mind you, I’m not a big fan of democracy. When leaders are elected, you would think that puts the people in the driver’s seat and that the resulting government will be of, by and for the people, i.e. governing in the people’s best interest. But that’s not the way it has turned out in the past, nor in the present. Just look at what we have now in the US: the band of incompetent corrupt politicians who run the country have all been bought by the special interests and elected by the people.

    In light of which, I still think the EU is a good idea even though the Euro might be a bad one. There are people in Europe who now prone a fallback on the Euro as a common currency rather than a single currency. That would mean having Euromarks, Eurofrancs, Eurodrachmas and so forth, all of which would be directly negotiable with each other and regulated on a monthly or weekly basis, but would allow countries such as Greece to print out more Eurodrachmas and thereby improve their trade balance. The Brits might even join in on such a currency system with a Europound.

    Aside from monetary policy, I think European federalism is on a good route. The unanimity required in the EC prevents any violation of human rights or of the interests of a single country. Quite the contrary, the rules, regulations and standards adopted by the EC are making free enterprise possible in a free market that is not ruled by the big money concentrations. Can we say that is true in the US? I say no…

  • Mrs. Smith

    Does my heart GOOD seeing Breitbart supported Newt Gingrich all the way. The fruitless debate here on the value of Newt’s tenacity speaking Truth to Power and his unwavering support of Israel as our ONLY ally in the Middle East reinforces the notion we were right and on the right track. The 2012 election isn’t a beauty contest it’s one of conviction bringing America back to the bedrock of it original creation. Gingrich is the only candidate that understands the principles on which this country was founded and willing to fight for her… TG for him!
    _________________

    Asked About Rush, Newt Turns Tables On ‘Elite Media’ (Breitbart video)

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/04/Asked%20About%20Rush%20Newt%20Turns%20Tables%20On%20Elite%20Media

  • Leanora

    On Thursday, March 1, the major provisions of the unconstitutional NDAA went into legal effect. With a stroke of his pen, Obama implemented a set of regulations granting himself immense powers. Thus, he and all the rest of us have crossed into uncharted territory.

    This author compares it to when Julius Caesar signaled the end of the Roman Republic over 2,000 years ago.

    http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/11075-obama-sets-ndaa-detention-guidelines

    Even if he is defeated – which I consider unlikely – does anyone think we will ever get back the freedoms he has stolen from us?

  • jeswezey

    Anyone thinking of congratulating Putin on his landslide election? Not a big pal of Israel’s…

  • jeswezey

    Mrs Smith: “…Israel as our ONLY ally in the Middle East…”
    ====

    Once again, Israel is not OUR ally, it is the reverse: we are Israel’s only ally in the Middle East. If the surrounding countries, such as Turkey, are having problems with us now, it is because Israel does whatever the hell it pleases and be damned any other countries who might be allied with us.

  • jeswezey

    Leanora: NDAA makes you think about how a democracy and its fundamental rules can be overthrown by the people elected by the people. It’s like I was saying above: Government for the people, yes; but government by and of the people is not all it’s cracked up to be. We have let this thing get out of hand and now we have it: everything the Founding Fathers feared has come to pass.

  • Leanora

    jeswezey I agree.

    Democracy is no more than mob rule. The Founders realized that and for that reason set up America as a Republic.

    “What did you give us, Mr. Franklin?” asked a bystander following the convention.
    “A Republic, if you can keep it” replied Benjamin Franklin.

    Well, we could not.

  • Mrs. Smith

    jeswezey
    March 5th, 2012 at 7:37 am

    Once again, Israel is not OUR ally, it is the reverse: we are Israel’s only ally in the Middle East. If the surrounding countries, such as Turkey, are having problems with us now, it is because Israel does whatever the hell it pleases and be damned any other countries who might be allied with us.
    ______________

    Israel IS our only ally in the ME and DENIAL is NOT a river in Egypt. Since when does Israel need permission from anyone for taking care of it’s business relations and that of the security of her people?

    The large oil and gas field, and the opportunities of joint exploitation between Israel and Cyprus, have opened a new source of frictions between both countries and Turkey. Noble Energy, a US company, is also involved in the Leviathan field and this may lead to US government involvement in the gas fields dispute.

    The discovery of oil fields in the Mediterranean allowed Turkey Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to continue his diplomatic confrontation on two fronts: one with Israel, and one with Cyprus.

    Hillary chose her words carefully when asked by PBS Newshour Executive Editor Jim Lehrer at an event on economic innovation whether Gingrich’s comment about the Palestinians being an “invented people” was helpful, Clinton replied: “No.”

    “I think he recognized that, from what I read,” she added, speaking at an event on Innovation and the Global Marketplace. “I think he realized that was, you know, one of those innovative moments that happen.”

    Huh? Does she mean that the invention of the Palestinian nationality was an “innovative moment”?

    Sounds like Hillary agrees with Gingrich because his statement is historically correct.

  • Mrs. Smith

    Georgia: Gingrich 47, Romney 24, Santorum 19, Paul 8. chance Newt could even hit 50…

    PPP Polling

    March 04, 2012

    Newt at 53% with those who have already voted in Georgia (16% of electorate) Irrelevant (for now) but interesting: GA if Newt wasn’t in race is Romney 38, Santorum 37. Mitt may do better in South than expected Santorum definitely the loser in tonight’s 3 polls. Good news for both Romney (in OH and TN) and Gingrich (in TN and GA)

  • jeswezey

    “Since when does Israel need permission from anyone for taking care of it’s business relations and that of the security of her people?”
    ====

    That is exactly my point! Israel does not need permission to act on its own, and does so. But after the fact, and sometimes before the fact, there are people here who think the US has to back up everything Israel does.

    Concerning the “invented people” of Palestine, which is another point entirely, I respectfully disagree with Gingrich. The name “Palestinian” may be invented if you wish, but the people are not invented at all. They are real flesh and blood, and in my opinion they have a right to live where they and their ancestors have lived for millennia. They also have a right to equal standing with the Jews in the region. The Jews invented Israel, and the Arabs can just as well invent Palestine.

  • Betty

    I read that Obama said that “I got Israel’s back”.

    I am so offended by this statement, who does he think he is? His ego is astounding and he really does think he is the all powerful dictator.

  • moononpluto

    Chalk up another one…..

    The Man who offended Obama by impersonating him dies at 48 without warning, suddenly at the weekend…….anyone else see a pattern here.

    You may remember Steve Bridges as the man who imitated George Bush on the Jay Leno Show. He has now started imitating President Barack Obama, and he does it really well. The act though, has not gone down well with the President. The US Administration has tried to put a stop to his act as Obama has made it known that he is deeply offended.

    http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/the-man-who-offended-obama/223663

  • moononpluto

    http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/320661

    Los Angeles – Steve Bridges made a name for himself by honing a spot on impersonation of former President George W. Bush. Sadly, he passed away last week at the age of 48.
    CNN reports that Bridges’ manager made a statement Sunday announcing the actor’s death. In the statement, the manager stated that Bridges had recently returned from performing in Hong Kong feeling “super jet lagged.”
    A message for Bridges was left unanswered on Friday, and his body was found Saturday morning. The cause of death is currently unknown.
    Foul play is not suspected, and an autopsy is scheduled, according to the L.A. Times.
    Bridges was born in 1963 in Dallas. He made a name for himself as a Bush impersonator when he appeared at the 2006 White House Correspondence Association dinner, sharing the stage with George W. himself. He made several appearances on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, and also did impressions of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Barack Obama, and Bill Clinton.

    ………………………..

    Whoever seems to cross Obama seems to wind up young, dead, sudden and unexpected.

  • Mrs. Smith

    “The Jews invented Israel, and the Arabs can just as well invent Palestine.”
    ___________

    jeswesy, I don’t know what you’re smokin’… I think you should reconsider getting behind the wheel any time soon until your delusional thinking disappears after a big breakfast or substantial lunch.. depending on whatever time zone you’re in-

    The Jews didn’t invent Israel. They were given the land when the British left the ME. In fact they were given the smaller portion of land divided between them and Jordan.

    The Israeli Declaration of Independence made on 14 May 1948, the day before the British Mandate was due to expire, was the announcement by David Ben-Gurion, the Executive Head of the World Zionist Organization and chairman of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, that the new Jewish state named the State of Israel had been formally established in parts of what was known as the British Mandate of Palestine and on land where, in antiquity, the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah had once been.

  • Mrs. Smith

    “The cause of death is currently unknown.”
    ____________

    If he satirized Obama in Hong Kong with biting dark humor- who knows how aggressively the Obama Cult is pursuing anyone impacting Obama’s image with negative comments. A good yard stick measuring their involvement may be if the coroner’s report comes back with- “he died of natural causes.” Then theres a good possibility the cultists are of the frame of mine… death to ridiculers and non-believers.

  • Mrs. Smith

    mine=mind

  • ABM90

    It distresses me to see so many Hillary supporters that are so impatient and expect her to make her next move. she is doing just what her SOS job requires of her.This country is in a spiral of emerging troubles and uncertaties created by the worst POTUS we have ever put into office by the race card full of wild devious and shameful promises
    that Obama used to entice his fllowers to drop the Clintons their best friends and begin an atmosphere of restitution retribution redistribution and revolution and the food stamps would come rolling in from his stash.” The First Lady of The World”
    knows when the time is ripe for her to make her move
    and the old adage “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer”

    Public Schedule for March 5, 2012

    Public Schedule
    Washington, DC

    March 5, 2012

    SECRETARY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

    9:15 a.m. Secretary Clinton meets with the assistant secretaries, at the Department of State.
    (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    12:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton joins President Obama’s bilateral meeting with Prime Minister of Israel Binyamin Netanyahu, at the White House.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY WHITE HOUSE)

  • jeswezey

    “The Jews didn’t invent Israel. They were given the land when the British left the ME.”
    ====

    The land did not belong to the British. The British had a mandate, accorded to them by the League of Nations. That mandate was the result of the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which was in fact a promise made by British Foreign Secretary James Balfour to Lord Rothschild, for delivery to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland, and it was not free of charge: The Rothschilds had promised they could bring the US into the war to pull victory from the jaws of defeat, in return for which the British would “favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.” Thus “Palestine”, which was the name of the eventual British mandate, preceded the name “Israel” which appeared, as you say, only in 1948.

    Going back farther than 1917, “Palestine” was invented by the Romans. You can point out that “Israel” was invented by the Hebrews in about 1300 BC. But before Israel, the Egyptian word for the area was “Canaan”, which can also be found in the Bible. So much for the names and who invented them.

    The very brief Balfour Declaration also says, “…it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” In the interbellum period, the Zionists who settled in the British mandate lived with this understanding that “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities”, and the Arab and Jewish communities lived peacefully together. It was only when Israel declared its independence in May 1948 that all this changed. Israel was for Jews only, and that’s when the trouble began. The Zionists began to push the Arabs out, even though a large portion of the Jewish population did not (and still does not) think that their god gave them sole rights and privileges over the land that was not theirs to take, nor was it up to the British to give it out.

  • jeswezey

    ABM90: “…she is doing just what her SOS job requires of her.”
    ====

    Bravo, ABM, I agree with you fully.

  • jeswezey

    The Rothschild in question was Lord Lionel Rothschild, and Balfour specifically asked in the Declaration itself, that Rothschild forward to the declaration to the Zionist Federation of which Rothschild was the head.

    It has been estimated that 80% of the land of Israel is now owned by the Rothschild family.

  • jeswezey

    Another sequel to World War I: The treaty that so many people decry as setting the stage for WWII was negotiated behind closed doors at the Verseailles Palace owned by Edmond Rothschild, where the negotiators were Rothschild agent Paul Warburg for the US and his brother Max Warburg as a German delegate. The enormous ‘guilt’ debt that the Germans had to pay never changed hands, in fact.

  • holdthemaccountable

    rasmussen presidential trckng today is minus 18.

  • S

    FYI…a bit long…

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/elections/fl-jewish-vote-florida-20120303,0,1946651.story

    South Florida Jewish vote a key for Obama

    By Anthony Man, Sun Sentinel

    March 3, 2012
    The decades-long allegiance of Jewish voters to the Democratic Party is under unprecedented stress, threatened by a combination of changing demographics and the concerted Republican effort to depict President Barack Obama as unfriendly to Israel.

    Nowhere are the stakes higher than South Florida, home to 490,000 Jews who make up a voting bloc powerful enough to influence national elections. Though a small percentage of the overall population, Jews vote at a higher rate than virtually every other slice of the electorate.

    More than three-quarters of Jewish voters went for Obama in 2008. If Republicans are even moderately successful in eroding that support and Democrats can’t staunch the leakage, it could help push the state’s 29 electoral votes — more than 10 percent of the 270 needed to win the presidency — away from Obama and into the Republican column this year.

    Leading local Republicans say capturing a bigger chunk than ever of the Florida’s Jewish vote is within their reach. “Obama’s lost a lot of the Jewish support,” said Jeff Rubinoff, president of the Davie-Cooper City Republican Club. “A lot more people are starting to come over. They’re beginning to recognize Obama’s anti-Israel stance.”

    Even some Democrats concede that support for the president has softened among the state’s Jews, perhaps to a critical degree.

    “Florida is up for grabs right now. The Jewish population is not overly enthused by Obama,” said Andre Fladell, a longtime Jewish Democratic activist in Delray Beach. “If that vote becomes unenthusiastic, the election goes the other way.”

    Kleig lights will shine on the parties’ competing efforts to court American Jewish voters starting Sunday in Washington when Obama speaks to the big-pro Israel lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears at AIPAC on Monday.

    On Tuesday, the mic at AIPAC goes to rival Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich.

    Also scheduled this week: a White House sit-down between Obama and Netanyahu, which will be sliced and diced by both political parties as a barometer of the state of U.S.-Israeli relations under Obama.

    Republicans and Democrats are already active on numerous other fronts:

    Seeking to inoculate the president from Republican attacks, the Democratic Party distributed an Internet video last week that included a clip of Netanyahu praising Obama’s commitment to Israel’s security, a key concern for many American Jews in light of Iran’s ongoing nuclear program.

    In Florida and beyond, U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, has been visiting Jewish communities, penning articles in Jewish publications and taking to Twitter to diffuse Republican claims that the president, as the Republican catchphrase goes, has “thrown Israel under the bus.” As chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, the 45-year-old Jewish South Floridian is one of Obama’s top emissaries to the Jewish community.

    The Obama campaign also has been distributing campaign literature touting the president’s commitment to Israel and has created a “Jewish Americans for Obama” web page.

    On the other side, the Republican Jewish Coalition issued its own video two weeks ago highlighting “the disconnect between President Obama’s rhetoric about his support for Israel’s security and his actions.”

    And eminent Florida Jewish Republicans like Sid Dinerstein are out in force. Chairman of the Palm Beach County Republican Party, Dinerstein speaks to Jewish voters whenever he can. One of his key tactical goals: setting up beachheads in the retiree-heavy condominium communities in the county’s western suburbs where many Jewish seniors live. In early February, he helped gin up support at the new Ronald Reagan Club at Valencia Palms west of Delray Beach.

    Dinerstein’s Republican counterparts in Broward are doing the same, and launched a Jewish outreach effort last year. There’s an active Republican club at Wynmoor Village, the retiree-heavy condominium community in Coconut Creek that’s home to many Jewish residents.

    The No 1. argument between Jewish Republicans and Democrats is about Israel, especially what kind of security guarantees for the Jewish state should come as part of any regional Mideast peace negotiations, and the potential threat from Iran’s suspected efforts to develop a nuclear bomb. Republicans claim the president hasn’t done enough to support and protect America’s only friend in the Middle East.

    “I don’t like the way Obama is treating Israel,” said Beverly Asnien, a retired teacher from Wellington who said she feels no loyalty to either party. “I’m not that satisfied with the Republicans, but I would vote for Romney in lieu of Obama. And I don’t think I’m the only one who feels this way.”

    Lenore Wachtel, 72, a Boca Raton Democrat, backs Obama, but says she understands why some of her friends don’t anymore.

    “Obama has made several statements that have led some Jewish people to believe that he is not supportive of Israel, that he has more sympathy for the Palestinians than the Israelis, and that has made them question, or look at the Republicans,” she said.

    “I’m not thrilled with him. I’m not thrilled with the way the administration, the Democrats are treating Israel,” said Stan Cohen, 78, a Sunrise Republican.

    Minerva Fishman, 93, of Coconut Creek, said that’s wrong. “President Obama is doing as good a job as he possibly can with all the opposition he faces from the Republican Party. I’m going to vote for him,” she said. “I hope most of our Jewish people recognize the fact that he happens to be very good for Israel as well.”

    Democrat Joy Feingold, 80, of Pembroke Pines, said she too will vote for the president. But, she said, she’s on the receiving end of missives from her cousin that suggest Obama has betrayed Israel. “I don’t answer his emails,” she said.

    Former U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler, a Democrat who represented a Broward-Palm Beach county district with more Jewish constituents than any other in the U.S. House for 13 years until he became president of the Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace in 2010, blames the growing doubts among some Jewish voters on a “massive misinformation campaign regarding President Obama’s excellent record involving Israel.”

    Wexler, who was Obama’s most prominent early national Jewish supporter before the 2008 election, said the American-Israeli security relationship is better now than under previous presidents of both parties.

    “It’s not just Democrats who are saying that, it’s Israel’s highest defense and security officials who are saying it,” Wexler said.

    Whatever truth there is in the criticisms of Obama, there’s little doubt that Jewish voter support for the Democrats has waned since his arrival at the White House.

    The Pew Research Center reported that 65 percent of American Jews identified themselves as Democrats or said they leaned toward the Democratic Party in 2011. Republicans got 29 percent.

    Though Democrats still enjoy more than a 2-to-1 advantage, those figures still represent a significant shift by Jewish Americans toward the Republicans. Pew found the Democratic advantage among Jews is now 36 percentage points — down from 52 points four years ago.

    Wexler said there is no disputing that Israel is a vital issue for Jewish voters, but that it’s a mistake to assume that it’s the only one that will sway them. If the U.S. economy continues to improve, Wexler said, the president’s standing will improve among all Americans, including Jews.

    On one issue, Jewish leaders in both parties appear to agree: the current emphasis on often divisive social issues like abortion or contraception in the Republican primary campaign is good for Democrats.

    “The focus on the social conservative agenda does not sit well in the Jewish community,” Wexler said. Dinerstein acknowledged that “centrist Jews are uncomfortable” with candidates playing too much to conservative Christians on social issues.

    Looking beyond the horizon of this year’s presidential election, the broader trends among American Jews may ultimately favor the Republicans. The generation whose political views were shaped in the mid-20th Century has a virtually unbreakable bond with the Democratic Party, said Terri Fine, a political scientist at the University of Central Florida, who has researched and written on Judaism and politics.

    “My grandmother and people who were FDR Democrats grew up as Democrats, always voted Democrat. They didn’t know anything else.” said Jay Siegel, of Coral Springs, former vice president of northwest Broward’s Republican Business Network. But, said Siegel, “the demographics are changing as the older people pass away.”

    Younger people no longer feel the same allegiance to the Democratic Party as their parents, and especially their grandparents. “We see emerging Republicanism among younger Jews,” Fine said

    What’s more, religiously conservative Jews are more inclined to vote Republican, said Margi Helschien, of Boca Raton, vice chairwoman of the Palm Beach County Republican Party. And the Orthodox — the small but fastest-growing branch of the American and South Florida Jewish communities — are more Republican than are the Conservative and Reform Judaism branches.

    But while Republicans emphasize that cheery long view of the Jewish community’s political evolution, most Democrats discount it. During each of the past three presidential campaigns, Wexler noted, Republicans also proclaimed they were on the verge of making big inroads among Jewish voters, but it didn’t happen.

    Obama won an estimated 78 percent of the Jewish vote in 2008 and Republican leaders concede he will win most of Florida’s Jewish voters again this November. Their mission is to gnaw away at that margin of support as best they can.

    “No one’s pretending that all of a sudden the Republican nominee will get a substantial majority of Jewish votes. But the small percentages are always important in swing states,” said Steven Abrams, a Palm Beach County commissioner.

    And Florida is the biggest state that could go for either party in 2012. Demographers estimate about 3.5 percent of Florida’s population is Jewish, but CNN exit polls showed they accounted for 4 to 6 percent of the vote in recent presidential elections.

    In a state where the margin of victory can be slender — Obama won Florida with 51 percent of the vote four years ago — a small but politically active constituency can push a candidate over the top. So it’s little wonder that South Florida Jewish voters like Joe Weisman are coveted by both the president and his adversaries.

    Weisman, 47, a Tamarac Democrat, voted for Obama in 2008, but is concerned about the president’s policies toward Israel and hasn’t made up his mind about this year’s election.

    “I’m on the fence right now. The Republicans need to come up with a viable candidate, and they haven’t. There’s nobody on the Republican ticket that I’m ready to vote for,” he said. “It’s still early. The election is a long way off.”

    Watch dueling videos about Obama and Israel from Democrats and Republicans and read an interview with former U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler at SunSentinel.com/BrowardPolitics.

  • lil ole grape

    I’m reading a stimulating and informative book called “How Civilizations Die (and Why Islam Is Dying, Too) by David Goldman. You can find David Goldman’s columns on Asia Times and PJMedia. He writes on Asia Times as “Spengler.” The book is available at the Kindle store – iPad or PC.

  • S

    Newt will win GA that is a no brainer, however he may not even get all the delegates in his home state…

    for those that are real supporters of NG as opposed to strategically wanting to support him to beat O…a little background reading…there are tons of it elsewhere (besides HP) to illustrate the true character of this man…

    reports from people who actually worked with NG

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/02/newt-gingrich-2012-nonprofits-debts-bankruptcies_n_1311858.html

    Newt Gingrich Leaves 30-Year Trail Of Debts, Lawsuits And Bankruptcies In His Wake
    Posted: 03/02/12 08:53 AM ET

    WASHINGTON — Newt Gingrich holds himself up as a model of fiscal discipline. “If the U.S. government was as debt-free as I am, everybody in America would be celebrating,” he told reporters last year.

    What may be true for Gingrich personally, however, has rarely been the case for organizations he runs. Gingrich’s presidential campaign is basically broke. The latest financial disclosure reports show that his campaign closed out the month of January with $1.73 million in debt and a scant $1.79 million in cash on hand, just enough to cover expenses that included private jets and unusually large personal reimbursements. The highly publicized injection of more than $11 million from casino magnate Sheldon Adelson into a super PAC backing Gingrich’s campaign has fueled the perception that Gingrich is flush, but Adelson’s money won’t keep the lights on at campaign headquarters.

    Instead of withdrawing from the race, as candidates typically do when they run out of money, Gingrich has barreled ahead. In the past month, he has hired additional staff, made costly trips to California and Arizona, and scheduled a week’s worth of campaign appearances in Tennessee and his home state of Georgia ahead of the March 6 Super Tuesday primaries.

    Gingrich, who did not respond to questions from The Huffington Post, is by no means the first presidential candidate to run up dangerously high debts on the campaign trail. Where the former House speaker is concerned, however, this combination of mounting bills, shrinking prospects and questionable expenses has three decades of precedent behind it.

    Interviews with Gingrich’s former colleagues and a review of thousands of official documents by The Huffington Post reveal a previously unexplored side of his career: a striking pattern of financial mismanagement at the political and nonprofit groups that Gingrich has created, steered and abandoned over the past 30 years. While the high-profile ethics investigations of the 1990s focused on the narrow legality of Gingrich’s individual schemes, their disastrous record as a whole has been largely overlooked.

    Since 1984, Gingrich has launched 12 politically oriented organizations and initiatives based in Washington. Of those, five have been investigated by the Internal Revenue Service and the House Ethics Committee, another five closed down with debts totaling more than $500,000, and two were subject to legal action.

    According to former colleagues and subordinates, Gingrich burns through money by repeatedly expanding his plans and ignoring warnings from staff about the finances of his projects. Now, the same pattern is threatening his presidential campaign.

    “The best way to say it is that Newt has no brakes and no rear view mirror,” observed one former adviser who still speaks highly of Gingrich, but who requested anonymity because he is forbidden from speaking to the media in his current job.

    “So he never pulls back, and he never learns from the past.”

    That criticism may be missing the point, however. “Part of the reason Gingrich employs nonprofits and 527s [political advocacy groups] so liberally is that the debts from these groups never attach to him personally, because they’re incorporated,” said Bill Allison, editorial director at the Sunlight Foundation, a nonprofit political watchdog group. “That’s the beauty of sticking to all these groups — it’s that they don’t stick to Gingrich.”

    ‘WHEN I SEE SOMETHING ISN’T WORKING, I CUT MY LOSSES’

    According to a veteran adviser, Gingrich’s first deadbeat operation was a 501(c)3 nonprofit called the American Opportunity Foundation (AOF), which he created with a group of political consultants in 1984, during his third term as a Republican congressman from Georgia’s 6th District. (A 501(c)4 group, American Opportunity Inc., was created at the same time, but never utilized.)

    The mission of AOF was to conduct nonpartisan research, according to its IRS incorporation papers. The group’s research topics, however, were rife with political buzzwords, such as how to lessen “the burdens of government.”

    The conflict between AOF’s stated purpose and its real activities came to a head less than a month before the 1984 election, when reports surfaced that AOF had staged events on college campuses hailing President Ronald Reagan’s achievements. The law expressly forbids 501(c)3 nonprofits from participating in political campaigns to the benefit of one candidate or another.

    The bad press resulted in questions about AOF’s legitimacy. Gingrich quickly stepped down as AOF’s chairman and severed his ties to the group.

    The campus events had cost approximately $15,000, equivalent to $33,900 today, and Gingrich left the bill for his two lead consultants, business partners Ladonna Lee and Henry “Eddie” Mahe. Mahe and Lee expected Gingrich to bring in donations to pay for the events, according to a source close to AOF.

    “Eddie and Ladonna were screwed by him,” said the source. “I remember Ladonna telling Eddie, ‘If you get involved with Newt again, I’m dissolving our partnership.’”

    Today, Mahe and Lee are employed by the law firm Foley & Lardner, where Lee is vice chair of the government and public policy practice and Mahe is a strategic communications consultant. Mahe declined to comment for this story, but Lee said she could not recall specifically how AOF ended or whether there were any leftover debts.

    “I fully appreciate the role of nonprofits and their success ratio,” she said, adding that she had voted for Gingrich in the Colorado Republican primary earlier this year.

    When asked whether AOF had fulfilled its mission, Lee paused. “I don’t know that it lived out its mission,” she said, “but I do know that Newt was never part of the business dealings of any of these entities, and I never saw Newt in a meeting about business.”

    Although Lee may have intended her comment to absolve Gingrich of responsibility for the debt left at AOF, other longtime Gingrich associates say that it is precisely this lack of financial involvement, coupled with his willingness to abandon initiatives abruptly, that lies at the core of his management problems.

    Lee herself described Gingrich’s pattern of abandonment in a 1995 Vanity Fair interview, saying, “Gingrich would always get people started on a project or a vision, and we’re all slugging up the mountain to accomplish it. Newt’s nowhere to be found. … He’s gone on to the next mountaintop.”

    A consultant who worked with Gingrich in the 1980s said, “I heard a staffer question Newt about a cost that was over budget once, and instead of telling the kid what to do next, Newt just said, ‘When I see that something isn’t working, I cut my losses.’”

    Following the demise of AOF, Gingrich turned his energies to the American Campaign Academy (ACA), a group founded in 1986. The academy was funded by the National Republican Congressional Committee, and it ran a 10-week, nuts-and-bolts course on campaign management. Gingrich taught part of the course during his fourth term in Congress, and a number of his associates and staffers served on the academy’s board.

    Like AOF before it, ACA hoped to receive 501(c)3 nonprofit status so its donors could deduct contributions to the group from their income taxes. ACA’s application for tax-exempt status touched off an unexpected, high-profile battle with the IRS, however, that ended when a federal court decided that ACA’s purpose was more political than purely charitable and that it had misrepresented its real intent in its application. The IRS, the court ruled, was correct in denying ACA tax-exempt status.

    After three years of operating with money from the NRCC while the IRS case wound its way through the courts, ACA dissolved in 1990, less than 12 months after the final decision was handed down.

    ‘NEWT WANTED TO SEND THEM NEWT’

    Gingrich wrote in his 1998 memoir, “Lessons Learned the Hard Way,” that by the time ACA closed, he knew that the Republican Party “needed alternative means of communication than just the mainstream media” to broadcast its political agenda.

    snip…

    PFF ultimately paid off the $250,000 of debt for Gingrich’s course, according to IRS records, and the group operated independently of Gingrich until 2010.

    “Newt leaves all of his colleagues with bags of dead cats,” said a former Gingrich colleague when asked about the end of RAC. “Not just one dead cat,” he said. “Bags of dead cats.”

    snip…

    In addition to Gingrich’s people, CNAL also took over more than $100,000 in leftover funds from Friends of Newt Gingrich, which shut down in early 2000, according to a Federal Election Commission report.

    Like other Gingrich projects, after a sputter of new websites and lofty goals, CNAL soon disappeared. Its homepage shut down in late 2000. Tyler declined to comment on CNAL’s operations except to say that it was dissolved without debts.

    For the next six years, Gingrich abandoned his revolving cast of political groups in favor of the private sector, where he made millions as a public speaker, author, consultant and all-around Washington power broker, trading on his experience in Congress. Financially speaking, it was a period of relative calm for Gingrich, who established a nonprofit family foundation during that time but otherwise avoided the temptations of 501(c)3 formation.

    In Gingrich’s profitable web of private-sector enterprises, all of which seemed to thrive in a way that contrasts sharply with his history of “dot-orgs,” Tyler increasingly played an integral role. In 2009, Tyler founded the 501(c)3 nonprofit Renewing American Leadership (ReAL), a group whose mission, according to IRS forms, was “to preserve America’s Judeo-Christian heritage.” From an address at the Gingrich Group offices in Washington D.C., ReAL in 2010 raised more than $3 million off direct mail appeals, most of which were printed on “Newt Gingrich” letterhead and signed with Gingrich’s signature.

    Gingrich himself had no official title at ReAL — the group actually had no full-time employees — but it did offer him two tangible benefits as he prepared to launch his 2012 presidential bid.

    First, it let Gingrich reach potential voters with a pro-Christian message that would eventually dovetail with his campaign. Second, it provided him with the names and addresses of everyone who responded to the donation requests that went out over his signature — a highly valuable commodity for someone about to appeal for campaign donations.

    “For the kinds of people who are responding to direct mail, those are individuals who are going to give because it’s Newt Gingrich,” said Sunlight’s Allison, “and they’ll give to anything, whether it’s a 527 focused on solutions, a presidential campaign committee or a 501(c)3 focused on leadership. It’s about Gingrich. And for Gingrich, the challenge is to find those people.”

    By the end of 2010, ReAL had a mere $3,404 left of the $3 million. In March 2011, shortly before the group was audited by the state of West Virginia, Tyler left to join Gingrich’s presidential campaign.

    ‘IT WAS A SUCCESSFUL VENTURE WHEN GINGRICH WAS HERE’

    For his own part, Gingrich founded the 527 political group American Solutions for Winning the Future in 2006 to finance his political comeback. American Solutions raised $50 million in a mere four years, for travel, public speaking engagements, mailings and other expenses, with more than $8 million coming from Adelson, the casino magnate, and his family. Like GOPAC and CNAL, the group was managed by Gaylord.

    After Gingrich announced his candidacy for president last year, however, he left the group and took his fundraising prowess with him. Unlike PFF, which survived his departure, American Solutions quickly went bankrupt, having spent $500,000 more in the first half of the year than it took in.

    Following the model of so many Gingrich projects before it, American Solutions is now defunct and in legal trouble. This time, however, it’s not with the IRS but with the landlord, who sued the group this fall for $19,130 in delinquent rent for office space on Washington’s K Street. No one appeared in court on behalf of American Solutions.

    According to D.C. Superior Court records, the U.S. Marshals Service was directed to evict American Solutions from the office in late December, but it’s unclear whether the order has been carried out.

    When asked about the matter, Gingrich’s campaign spokesman, R.C.Hammond, said Gingrich had severed all ties with American Solutions in May 2011, so he had nothing to do with its current situation. “It was a successful venture when Gingrich was there,” Hammond said. “We are very disappointed that it’s no longer successful.”

    Gingrich still leases space in the building for his other ventures, however, and the willingness of Gingrich and his staff to stand by while an organization he founded and led until last year is hauled into court and evicted for back rent is striking, to say the least.

    A spokesman for the landlord, B.G.W. Limited Partnership, declined to comment on the case, as did its attorney. Spokespeople for the U.S. Marshals Service and D.C. Superior Court also declined to comment on the status of the eviction.

    Meanwhile, Gingrich’s presidential campaign has staggered, soared and plummeted. His win in the South Carolina Republican primary in January was a vindication for the former House speaker, who has dismissed any and all pundits and naysayers who count him out.

    That confidence — however misplaced — is classic Gingrich and has carried him past all the failed projects that have marked his career, from the fiasco at ALOF in the 1980s through the ethics debacle at GOPAC in the 1990s to the crumbling of American Solutions last year. Despite plunging poll numbers in recent weeks, there are few signs that Gingrich plans to abandon his presidential bid, the latest iteration of his three-decade battle against what he perceives as “the establishment.”

    Yet bravado alone is unlikely to carry Gingrich all the way to the White House. Even his mega-supporter, Sheldon Adelson, has signaled that he may back another candidate if and when Gingrich no longer seems like a good investment. With expenses mounting, Gingrich’s own campaign is poised to become his latest victim.

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

    this egotical, arrongant O clone is exactly what we do not need in the next president…no way we can put what is left in the US treasury under this man’s reign and trust…the point is, this kind of fiscal mismanangement along with all his personal baggage and exploits are indicative of why he can only win the hard core south with hard core conservatives…that is his threshold…

  • Leanora

    A national popular vote will mean the end of what’s left of our great country:

    http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2012/02/09/national-popular-vote-goodbye-sweet-america/

  • turndownobama

    Btw, I just ran across this at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/july-dec11/clinton_12-14.html

    JIM LEHRER: Madam Secretary. While you put on your mic, I – there’s some discussion earlier about – one of the participants said if there were more women involved in business and all these other things, that there would be more innovation and all of that. And it occurred to me that three out of the last four secretaries of state have been women. Now, that’s gender diversity at its peak, is it not – at the very – yeah?

    SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON: Well, I think it’s a good start. (Laughter, applause.)

    JIM LEHRER: Touché. (Chuckles.) Touché.

  • turndownobama

    As to what Hillary said about Gingrich’s “invented people”, here are links to videos and excerpts.

    google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHMC_enUS396US397&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=PBS+Newshour+Executive+Editor+Jim+Lehrer+Gingrich%E2%80%99s+Palestinians+%E2%80%9Cinvented+people%E2%80%9D+Clinton+replied%3A+%E2%80%9CNo.%E2%80%9D

    abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/secy-clinton-says-gingrichs-comments-on-palestinians-are-unhelpful/

    Politico put semi-quotes around ‘innovative’ and called it a jab at Gingrich. That would make sense in context of the rest of the story, at Politico and elsewhere.
    politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2011/12/hillary-on-newt-invented-palestinians-comment-not-107475.html

  • holdthemaccountable

    It looks like Vice President Biden may be a keeper.
    Biden’s name has taken new prominence on the Obama 2012 campaign website, suggesting there’s now little chance that President Obama will dump him in favor of a more appealing running mate, like Hillary Clinton.
    The top of the website now gives Biden nearly equal billing with The One, reading “Obama Biden,” with Obama’s personal symbol separating the two names.
    And Biden is now on the bumper sticker, which for some reason features the flag of Luxembourg.
    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/03/05/biden-bumper-sticker/

  • S

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73600.html

    By JOHN BRESNAHAN | 3/5/12 4:52 AM EST
    President Barack Obama has a bleak message for House and Senate Democrats this year when it comes to campaign cash: You’re on your own.

    Democratic congressional leaders, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, have privately sought as much as $30 million combined from Obama for America and the Democratic National Committee — a replay of the financial help they received from Obama in 2008 and 2010.

    But that’s not going to happen, top Obama aides Jim Messina and David Plouffe told Reid and Pelosi in back-to-back meetings on Capitol Hill on Thursday, according to sources familiar with the high-level talks. It was a stark admission from a presidential campaign once expected to rake in as much as $1 billion of just how closely it is watching its own bottom line.

    Messina and Plouffe told the two Hill leaders that there would be no cash transfers to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee from OFA or the DNC, at least not before Election Day, the sources said.

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

    …just like Newt…O to his party “You are on your own”…

  • Shadowfax

    Great post admin.

  • turndownobama

    Here’s more indication — in the text, picture, and comments — of what Weaselzippers thinks of Hillary.

    http://weaselzippers.us/2011/12/14/pant-suits-slams-gingrich-for-calling-palestinians-an-invented-people/

  • jeswezey

    “Biden is now on the bumper sticker, which for some reason features the flag of Luxembourg.”
    ====

    Too funny!! But beware of the import of this apotheosis of Biden. Nobody ever really doubted the aptness of Biden as VP choice, in 2008 or since, which is why no one is really supporting the Hillary-Joe switch for VP.

    However, the downside is that if Obama does pull an LBJ and withdraw from the race for some reason, the Dims will nominate Biden and not HRC. That would make a configuration worth considering once again: Romney versus Biden? I think I’d go for Joe.

  • admin

    NBC has a poll out today touted by Hopium Guzzlers as great news for Obama. It’s great news for Obama if you have no depth to your analysis.

    Those who want intelligent analysis, not regurgitation, can check out HotAir’s right on laughter:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/05/the-useless-nbcwsj-poll/

    Why is this laughable? The poll was taken among 800 adults, not registered voters or likely voters, the usual and more predictive models for political surveys. In the case of Republicans, the sample data states that they needed an “oversample” of 185 voters (additional interviews above the 800 conducted in the main polling) in order to get to 400 interviews with GOP primary voters. That would put the original sample at about 27% Republican, which is a fairly significant undersample.

    But we don’t need forensic math to determine that. Question Qf1b/c asks respondents whether they voted for Obama or McCain in the 2008 election. The split from that question is 43/31 Obama, with 18% who didn’t vote at all (Obama won the national popular vote by seven points in 2008). The next question on midterm election voting has 32% not voting at all in 2010.

    Clearly, this is skewed toward Democrats and useless as a predictive model for voting in 2012. One has to wonder why they bothered to publish the results. [snip]

    So the D/R/I in this poll of adults is 27/20/49, which is even more risible. If you include leaners, it’s 43/35/18. Either way, it’s nonsense.

  • turndownobama

    Obama cannot be trusted — even when he phones someone in ‘support’.

    http://zunguzungu.wordpress.com/2012/03/03/the-deep-resentment-of-having-to-think-about-it-rush-limbaugh-and-sandra-fluke/
    “[Obama] who still has not given a single address dedicated to the issue of reproductive rights, who failed to mention reproductive rights in his State of the Union address, and who cannot even bring himself to include reproductive rights in his Women’s History Month proclamation, instead calls Sandra Fluke to thank her ”for speaking out about the concerns of American women,” because he evidently has not considered the many ways in which treating the feminist/womanist fight for reproductive rights as “woman’s work” is some fucked-up irony.”

    Limbaugh’s attacks might be personally damaging and personal in their invective, but this issue is not personal to Sandra Fluke. Indeed, since making it personal is precisely Limbaugh’s objective, the fact that the President is content that it remain an issue personal to her is precisely the opposite of what an ally would do. For while the president might have reached out to Fluke, what has he done for the nameless friend that Sandra Fluke was actually advocating for, or for the many women whose health is actually at risk?

  • NewMexicoFan

    He creates a mystic that he is doing an exceptional job, he is standing behind women (way behind). When in actuality he is not out front charging like a leader. Yet, many women still look at him and melt.

    Go figure.

  • NewMexicoFan

    I have a Democratic women friend who is willing to admit his performance as been less than steller. However, she is histerical about putting a Republican in. She is brain washed into thinking the world will collapse. Many feel that way.

  • Shadowfax

    jeswezey
    March 5th, 2012 at 3:43 am

    “no matter how much we admire her and no matter how much a resurrection of a functioning and fair Democratic Party hinges on her political viability. We stand with Israel. America must stand with Israel.”
    ====

    This does not hold for me. I will continue to support HRC’s action as Secretary of State and will continue to support any future run she may make for the presidency regardless of what happens to Israel. I refuse to take the US for an unthinking, subservient ally to any other nation to whom some think we owe an unending stream of financial, physical and, in the end, human resources. HRC is not a negotiable pawn in Israel’s problems. Not for me, at least.

    ———
    I agree 100% with you on this: HRC is not a negotiable pawn in Israel’s problems. Not for me, at least.

  • Shadowfax

    Where is our little lady from Canada?
    JanH, I hope you are okay, I miss you.

  • Shadowfax

    Anyone thinking of congratulating Putin on his landslide election?

    ……………………crickets……..

  • Shadowfax

    moononpluto
    March 5th, 2012 at 8:45 am

    Chalk up another one…..

    The Man who offended Obama by impersonating him dies at 48 without warning, suddenly at the weekend…….anyone else see a pattern here.

    You may remember Steve Bridges

    ——-This guy was great, is he the same guy that plays Barry on the Huckleberry show?

    This guy dies at 48…OMG, more ‘natural causes’?

  • nomobama

    I don’t see where the admin indicated that Hillary was some kind of pawn in Israel’s problems. I am not sure how one would infer that, so it would be nice to read some clarification of that comment. Hillary recognizes the importance of a stable Middle East with Israel’s right to exist within it. On the other hand, Obama would just love to see Israel on its own (since his words are, and always have been “just words”) among a sea of enemies tha surround it. One tiny sliver of land in the Middle East cast as some kind of pariah state by actual pariah states that surround it.

    When I was younger, I used to view Israel as being too forceful. Now I understand that they are justifiably so. The problems in the Middle East are mainly problems derived by the all encompassing sociopolitical force represented by the religion of Islam.

  • Shadowfax

    NMF
    I have a Democratic women friend who is willing to admit his performance as been less than steller. However, she is histerical about putting a Republican in. She is brain washed into thinking the world will collapse. Many feel that way.

    ——–
    Yup, pretty much the same as I have found with every Dem…women and men that I have been hammering on for almost 4 years.

    I have turned a few, but generally, the most I can hope for is that they won’t go vote. Mitt has a little chance with them, some of the young ones could vote for Ron Paul, and some are hoping Trump will jump in.

  • nomobama

    I thought that the comment about congratulating Putin was strange.

  • nomobama

    Thank you, admin for responding to my comment early this morning. I read a lot of what you write, but there are times when I do not visit the site, or times in which I may not access a link within your comments. I did read the links that you had provided, and actually remember reading one of the links in the past. I think Hillary is pro-Israel, but I was getting the impression that she is being diminished somewhat when it comes to Israel. I wonder about what goes on behind the scenes at the State Departmet. Perhaps some day in the future, a book will let us all know.

  • Shadowfax

    Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul exchange civil words

    If you are tired of the gaseous bigotry of Rush Limbaugh and the verbose inability of Mitt Romney (the “weather vane”) to directly criticize Limbaugh, check out the hearing about the State Department budget from Feb. 29. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) exchanged civil and respectful words about President Obama’s recent apology regarding Afghanistan. This exchange suggests why Ron Paul runs better against Obama than most other Republicans, why Hillary Clinton towers above all other national political figures in popularity, and why other Republicans could learn a lot from Ron Paul about how they could avoid the landslide defeat that might be approaching them.

    While I have recently been critical of Paul, he does bring a civility, respect and good faith to our political discussion. The anger and derision wing of the Republican Party would profit from Paul’s example. It is interesting that at the moment Hillary Clinton would obliterate all Republican opponents for president in epic landslides, Ron Paul runs stronger than most of them against President Obama, and Obama now crushes Republicans in most general-election polls, though this may (or may not) change. (…I don’t think Barry could CRUSH anyone except Sweaters.>

    I agree with the president and Clinton about the apology and deplore the fanatical hyper-partisan Republicans who are driving the GOP on what I have called a death march. I applaud the ability of Ron Paul to avoid demagoguery about the apology, conduct a mutually respectful discussion with Secretary of State Clinton and use the moment to advance a serious debate about foreign policy.

    In this case, three cheers for both Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul for conducting the kind of civil discourse that voters deserve.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/lawmaker-news/214087-hillary-clinton-and-ron-paul-exchange-civil-words

  • Shadowfax

    Hillary Clinton Edges Nancy Reagan as Best Recent First Lady in U.S.

    A majority of Americans continue to hold positive views on current first lady Michelle Obama.

    Hillary Rodham Clinton is the top-ranked recent United States first lady, a new Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found.

    In the online survey of a representative national sample of 1,016 American adults, 21 per cent of respondents think Clinton has been the first lady of the U.S. since 1974, followed closely by Nancy Reagan with 19 per cent.

    Michelle Obama is third on the list with 15 per cent, followed by Laura Bush with 12 per cent. Betty Ford, Barbara Bush and Rosalynn Carter are all in single digits.

    Nancy Reagan is the top choice for men (22%) and respondents aged 35-to-54 (23%), while Clinton gets the best marks with women (23%) and respondents over the age of 55 (19%). Independent voters place Reagan ahead of Clinton (24% to 21%).

    http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/44421/hillary-clinton-edges-nancy-reagan-as-best-recent-first-lady-in-u-s/

    Hillary didn’t win this because she was just a First Lady baking cookies and redecorating the WhiteHouse.

  • ShortTermer

    Bears repeating:
    Mrs. Smith
    March 5th, 2012 at 7:00 am
    Does my heart GOOD seeing Breitbart supported Newt Gingrich all the way. The fruitless debate here on the value of Newt’s tenacity speaking Truth to Power and his unwavering support of Israel as our ONLY ally in the Middle East reinforces the notion we were right and on the right track. The 2012 election isn’t a beauty contest it’s one of conviction bringing America back to the bedrock of it original creation. Gingrich is the only candidate that understands the principles on which this country was founded and willing to fight for her… TG for him!
    _________________

    Asked About Rush, Newt Turns Tables On ‘Elite Media’ (Breitbart video)

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/04/Asked%20About%20Rush%20Newt%20Turns%20Tables%20On%20Elite%20Media
    _______________________________________________________________

    For those attempting to dinigrate Gingrich, at least use crdible sources. Huff n Puff is a Soros backed uber left liberal progressive loon bin that was created to blow smoke up His a$$; the truth is not their friend.

    I posted a question about Romney on the previous thread: if Romney is so great, why can he not seal the deal? He has not gotten the majority vote in any contest. That tells most people that the majority of Republicans DO NOT WANT him for President. Does that mean nothing?

    The under 30 set that I keep in touch with are saying unequivocally that they WILL not support Romney; they see him as a full fledged component of the one percent. They think the ‘grown ups’ are out of their ever loving minds to even think about Romney. When asked who would they vote for, the mix was undecided, so I urged them to look at Gingrich.

  • turndownobama

    However, she is histerical about putting a Republican in. She is brain washed into thinking the world will collapse.

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

    The world collapsing is a pretty good description of what happened when Bush Jr got in. He funbled security which let the 911 attack succeed, then fumbled or finagled us into two crazy wars, the Patriot Act, etc. All this was unimaginable in 2000.

    I voted for McPalin and plan to vote third party in November — but your friend’s concern is not hysterical, imo.

  • turndownobama

    I have turned a few [Democrats], but generally, the most I can hope for is that they won’t go vote. Mitt has a little chance with them, some of the young ones could vote for Ron Paul, and some are hoping Trump will jump in.

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

    In the meantime, you might tell them about Obama’s primary challeger, see http://www.darcy2012.com

  • Shadowfax

    Maybe I have watched too many CSI type of shows, but if Breitbart died of a heart attack, wouldn’t it be physically obvious during an autopsy? I guess waiting for toxicology reports would be important anyway, to find out if something entered his body could cause that heart attack…if he had a heart attack at all…

    ————–

    The Los Angeles County coroner’s office said it is awaiting the results of toxicology tests before releasing an official cause of death for conservative author and activist Andrew Breitbart, who died unexpectedly Thursday at age 43.

    A source familiar with the investigation told The Times the tests are routine in a death of someone so young.

    An autopsy was completed Friday, and the tests are expected to take several weeks.

    “It’s standard procedure,” coroner’s spokesman Craig Harvey told Reuters. “We have a very young man who died suddenly and unexpectedly, so we want to make sure we cover all the bases.”

    The source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the case was still under investigation, said officials are working on the assumption that Breitbart died of natural causes. A witness saw him collapse while walking near his home and said that he had no external injuries, the source said. Paramedics rushed Breitbart to Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, where doctors pronounced him dead.

    “It looks like a heart attack, but no one knows until “an autopsy is done, Breitbart’s father-in-law, actor Orson Bean, told The Times.

    “He was walking near the house somewhere…. He was taken by paramedics to UCLA, and they couldn’t revive him,” Bean said. “We’re devastated. I loved him like a son.”

    Breitbart is survived by his wife, Susannah; four children; his parents; and a sister. The family has not announced memorial arrangements.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/03/andrew-breitbart-coroner-wants-to-cover-all-bases-in-death-probe.html

  • Shadowfax

    Santorum: I’ll beat Romney if Gingrich drops out…

    http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/santorum-ill-beat-romney-if-gingrich-drops-out/409156

    ——–
    Sweaters must be really ticking Newt off.

  • Shadowfax

    As Obama pledges to have Israel’s back, Netanyahu says it will be ‘master of its fate’

    (Good for Israel, don’t trust Obama to have your back.)

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/05/obama-expected-to-urge-israeli-prime-minister-against-strike-on-iran-at-meeting/

  • ABM90

    ve been closely watching BO when he mixes in with his women idolaters while fund raising.I noticed hugs and squeezes black women.It is quite different when it is a white woman.Hugs and kisses them much more often.Makes this old timer wonder and remember when women were rarely seen at political events let alone show such raw emotions with any political male figure.It is no wonder MO scowls at all public events.

  • turndownobama

    at least use crdible sources. Huff n Puff is a Soros backed uber left liberal progressive loon bin that was created to blow smoke up His a$$

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

    Iirc, RFK jr and Hillary have both posted in HuffPo. We can’t dismiss everything that appears there. Especially not when many posts cite anti-Hillary sources such as Weaselzippers, and dubious Rightwing sites such as AtlasShrugged, Ace
    … and Breitbart’s.

  • Mrs. Smith

    Gingrich: Obama’s Secret Goal is $9 Gas

    04 Mar 2012

    Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich slammed the Obama administration’s handling of rapidly escalating gas prices, saying that he believes the president’s ultimate goal may be to use $9 a gallon gas to revamp the economy along European lines

    “This president and his secretary of anti-energy, Dr. Chu, have as a goal getting us to pay European-level prices of $8 or $9. Dr. Chu was clear about that before he became secretary. He wants us to get to be a European-level
    price structure of $8 or $9 a gallon,” Gingrich told “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos.

    “He said this week, in testifying in the House, he has ‘no intention of trying to lower the price of oil or the price of gasoline,’” Gingrich added. “The American people on the other hand would much rather pay $2.50 and be independent of Saudi Arabia than be where we are today. ”

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/gingrich-gas-chu-economy/2012/03/04/id/431339?s=al

  • wbboei

    As Obama pledges to have Israel’s back
    —————————–
    Typographical error. Should read “stab” your back (when you are not looking).

  • jbstonesfan

    Very disappointed to watch my fellow Jews kow tow to Obama at his disgraceful, disrespectful, lecturing speech today. Unfortunately, Jews like my Mom will always vote democratic as they think FDR is still running, but to see Jews my age (49) and younger supporting the most virulently anti-Israeli President in history was painful. Shame on us!!!!

  • nomobama

    Although I agree with turndownobama about some (very few imo) articles on Huffington Post being credible, we part ways on the rest of her comment. Breitbatt had more sense, and honesty than HP. Just because you do not agree with the overall politics of Breitbart’s websites doesn’t mean that his websites are “dubious” to me. Some of us find sites like Huffington Post to be dubious because of known lies dispensed there and pandering to Obama. Even Arianna had something nice to say about Andrew, albeit he worked with her on that site before she lost her senses.

  • nomobama

    Breitbart

  • TRANSMOGRIFY THE ELITE MEDIA MEME: How to redirect the narrative back to the issues of real importance to regular Americans, such as Obama’s piss-poor treatment of our ally Israel. Andrew Breitbart was the master of how to do it. Newt did it quite admirably this weekend: We all need to learn how to do it.

  • Mrs. Smith

    nomobama
    March 5th, 2012 at 3:24 pm

    Although I agree with turndownobama about some (very few imo) articles on Huffington Post being credible, we part ways on the rest of her comment.
    ________________

    Even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and again-

  • Mrs. Smith

    From Sunday’s MTP interview:

    Newt Gingrich Educates David Gregory Over Contraception Debate

  • turndownobama

    Just because you do not agree with the overall politics of Breitbart’s websites doesn’t mean that his websites are “dubious” to me.

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

    Nor should we reject quotes from Left websites, such as Salon, TPM, ThinkProgress, etc. Or NYT, WP etc, who do have a history of checking their facts. We accept quotes from Newsmax, Wash Times, Natonal Review, Wash Examiner, Fox ; these Rightwing sites have been vicious enemies of the Clintons for a long time.

  • nomobama

    Voting third party is like voting Obama. Hey, you’re entitled to vote for whomever, but you have just enabled me to ignore anything you have to say from this point forward. Surely, you must realize that it will take every vote possible to overcome the brain dead Obama zombies and their adolation of the “Once”. I suppose you’ll feel all good about your vote when Obama wins another 4 years. That scenario should make you shudder. I have contempt for those who bitch about something and then won’t do what is necessary to make the change happen that is required in this upcoming election.. Yes, you won’t be voting for Obama, but voting for someone else who has zero chance of winning is just massaging you own ego with your vote based on your misguided principles, while helping put the rest of us in peril. I’ll be damned if I am going to cast a vote for anyone who doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning.

  • nomobama

    I can make up my own mind as to what is vicious or mean-spirited, or what is probably a lie. As I have written once before, even when I voted Democrat, I still watched FOX news. I got the perspective from both sides. Now, there really is not much faith in leftwing media because they have been co-opted by the Obama regime for the most part. They deserve derision, not accolades.

  • ShortTermer

    Re: ABM90
    March 5th, 2012 at 2:51 pm

    I had often wondered if anyone else noticed the hug dispenser. There is something very creepy about it.

  • Betty

    I just listened to a great speech by Newt Gingrich here:

    http://www.markamerica.com/

    Newt has such a grasp of our history and a way to communicate it that always inspires.

  • turndownobama

    Voting third party is like voting Obama.

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

    As was discussed in 2008, staying home or voting third party hurt Obama only half as much as voting for McPalin, but half is not the same as none. It also depends on what state you live in, whether the contest is close enough for a few half-votes to matter. In any case a third party vote shows WHY you are voting against Obama.

  • turndownobama

    I had often wondered if anyone else noticed the hug dispenser. There is something very creepy about it.

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

    It’s manipulative and controlling. And if you resist, then you’re ‘raaaacist’.

  • turndownobama

    even when I voted Democrat, I still watched FOX news. I got the perspective from both sides. Now, there really is not much faith in leftwing media because they have been co-opted by the Obama regime for the most part.

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

    And Fox and other rightwing sites have been co-opted by the Rightwing all along. We shouldn’t have faith in any media, but shouldn’t shut out the Left while accepting the Right.

  • Mrs. Smith

    ShortTermer
    March 5th, 2012 at 4:59 pm

    Re: ABM90
    March 5th, 2012 at 2:51 pm

    I had often wondered if anyone else noticed the hug dispenser. There is something very creepy about it.
    _____________

    Glad you singled AMB90′s comment out- I made a mental note to respond as well, then got busy running an errand.
    __________

    ABM90
    March 5th, 2012 at 2:51 pm

    Ive been closely watching BO when he mixes in with his women idolaters while fund raising.I noticed hugs and squeezes black women.It is quite different when it is a white woman.Hugs and kisses them much more often.Makes this old timer wonder and remember when women were rarely seen at political events let alone show such raw emotions with any political male figure.It is no wonder MO scowls at all public events.
    ______________

    Here’s my take on that situation- Obama loves white woman and believes his power of charisma can overwhelm just about any (wh) woman he’s genuinely attracted to- I’ve seen his (and her) behavior with D. Wasserman)

  • Shadowfax

    Voting third party for the primary is okay, it’s the General Election that matters.

  • Mrs. Smith

    In addition to what I’ve written above…

    I believe deep down Obama suffers from deep seated feelings of self-loathing because he is considered by mainstream to be (all) black. In him, there are feelings of ambivalence. If his biological father had been wh, his life growing up and his acceptance into society could have been a genuine feeling of living a privileged life. He doesn’t feel that way about himself, even though from what we know about him, he’s had a very easy life even using wh standards.

    Taking a crude, hypocritical very blk woman for a wife was his way of dealing with his lack of color reaffirming his commitment to the blk culture. No doubt, she was one of a few candidates selected for him before hand giving him a choice deciding who would be the woman he could most easily live without. If, as he knew long before, the plans for his presidency never materialized.

    BO would have married a wh woman in a heart-beat had his destiny not been fulfilled. In the future, he still may divorce the FL and marry someone else after he completes the bargain made with the Devil and is free to do as he pleases.

    ST- this is why BO gives you the creeps. You unconsciously feel it when seeing his reaction greeting wh woman.

  • Shadowfax

    Not that polls account for much from one week to another, but this graph shows the mountains and valleys for all three candidates, with poor Ron Paul as sand dunes on the bottom.

    Romney Advances Lead Over Santorum
    Romney now has an eight-percentage-point lead among conservatives

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/153107/Romney-Advances-Lead-Santorum.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=All%20Gallup%20Headlines%20-%20Politics

  • turndownobama

    ST- this is why BO gives you the creeps. You unconsciously feel it when seeing his reaction greeting wh woman.

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

    He touches too much with men, too. Not sexually, but controlling, monopolizing their attention, distracting them.

  • tim

    The whole Fluke? situation is so amusing to me, its so obvious what the dems are doing. My wife just received a call from PP asking for a donation using Rush’s comments — she has not given them a penny since 2008 & what they did to Hillary. My wife loathes Rush, caanot stand him, but she is even more mad at the dems for their plain hypocracy and double standards. I wonder if the dems think women are stupid enough to not see through what they’re doing. It seems to be having the opposite effect of what they are anticipating, at least for some pro-choice women, she’s more pissed at the dems at this point than at Rush.

  • Mrs. Smith

    THIS- imo- is a disgraceful announcement by the US AG

    (if we consider him and the current admin domestic terrorists, what then?)
    ____________________

    Holder: US can legally kill Americans in terror groups

    authored by the dufus: Pete Williams

    http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/05/10585197-holder-us-can-legally-kill-americans-in-terror-groups

  • lisa100

    If Ron Paul is not our next president, then we must prepare for the deteriorating economy and individual rights. If the media gave him some real coverage, he would win. If election fraud was not rampant in every state of our country now, he would have would win. We should all vote for him and get everyone we know to vote for him. He is the only candidate promising true change, leading to Peace, Prosperity, and Freedom. However, if he does not make it, we must prepare for the eventual loss of individual liberties, the economic demise, and more wars that kill innocent civilians and our active-duty military. Tough times are definitely coming even though the media pretends that we are going through a recovery. We are going to become like Greece, with a bigger police state, while using taxpayer money on more wars and killings. If you can still vote, vote for Ron. Be a warrior. This is the land of the brave and home of the free, after all. Be strong. Be smart.

  • Mrs. Smith

    Another cockamamie diversion influencing Obama’s psyche as a child growing up in Indonesia.
    _________

    http://news.yahoo.com/photos/obama-s-transgender-ex-nanny-outcast-in-homeland-slideshow/

    In this Friday, Jan. 27, 2012 photo, Evie, also known as Turdi, the former nanny of U.S. President Barack Obama, shows a picture of herself, left, dressed as a woman with an unidentified friend in a pageant, in Jakarta, Indonesia. Evie, who was born a man but believes she is really a woman, has endured a lifetime of taunts and beatings because of her identity. Nobody knows how many transgenders live in the sprawling archipelagic nation of 240 million, but activists estimate 7 million. However, societal disdain still runs deep – when transgenders act in TV comedies, they are invariably the brunt of the joke. (AP Photo/Dita Alangkara)

  • Shadowfax

    Bibi is about to give speech on Fox…long standing o

  • Mrs. Smith

    Netanyahu to Obama: Israel ‘reserves the right’ to strike

    Netanyahu: ‘MY SUPREME RESPONSIBILITY AS PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL IS TO ENSURE THAT ISRAEL REMAINS THE MASTER OF ITS FATE’

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told President Obama that Israel would decide for itself whether to strike Iran.

    “My supreme responsibility as prime minister of Israel is to ensure that Israel remains the master of its fate,” Netanyahu told Obama.

    In a sit-down earlier today with the president in the Oval Office, Netanyahu pushed back against the administration’s repeated attempts to dissuade Israel from attacking Iran. “Israel must reserve the right to defend itself and after all, that’s the very purpose of the Jewish state to, restore to the Jewish people control of our destiny,” said Netanyahu, who is meeting with the president in advance of his speech later today before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s annual policy conference.

    Israel reserves the right to strike Iran if need be, Netanyahu said.

    Obama, in a speech to AIPAC on Sunday morning, chastised those engaged in “loose talk of war” with Iran and urged for a policy of diplomacy towards Iran, which continues to enrich uranium and is suspected of clandestinely building a nuclear weapon.

    The administration has also been pressuring Israel to hold off on an attack against Iran’s nuclear sites, arguing that economic sanctions require time to take hold.

    AIPAC Executive Howard Kohr flatly rejected this assumption earlier today, when he told conference delegates that the U.S. “must increase the pressures on the mullahs to the point where they fear failure to comply will lead to their downfall.”

    In advance of today’s meeting with Netanyahu, Obama has faced renewed criticism from pro-Israel groups over his handling of the U.S.-Israel relationship, including the release of Daylight a documentary produced by the Emergency Committee for Israel highlighting his administration’s strained ties with the closest U.S. ally in the Middle East.



    __________

    He Lies!

  • Shadowfax

    Bibi talks like a real leader…while we are putting a poor slacker at the wheel driving us into the ditch!

  • Shadowfax

    My view on Bibi’s speech, he will not take orders from the slacker.

    Go Bibi, go!

  • ABM90

    It must be very gratifying for diplomatic envoys for our allies to have Hillary ever present to deal with in negotiations after putting up with a phoney amateur POTUS with the empty suit.

    Public Schedule: Public Schedule for March 6, 2012
    03/05/2012 07:47 PM EST

    Public Schedule for March 6, 2012

    Public Schedule
    Washington, DC

    March 6, 2012

    SECRETARY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

    9:00 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister of Israel Binyamin Netanyahu, at Blair House.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY THE ISRAELI EMBASSY)

    12:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton meets with Secretary Panetta and National Security Advisor Donilon, at the White House.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY WHITE HOUSE)

    3:30 p.m. Secretary Clinton meets with former South African President F. W. De Klerk, at the Department of State.
    (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    5:15 p.m. Secretary Clinton attends a meeting at the White House.
    (MEDIA DETERMINED BY WHITE HOUSE)

  • jbstonesfan

    Good speech by Bibi. Basically saying he will not tell Obama Israel can’t base it’s survival on Obama “having Israel’s back”.
    ———-
    On a disappointing note, a story reporting Bill will appear at several joint
    fundraisers with Obama.

  • wbboei

    On a disappointing note, a story reporting Bill will appear at several joint
    fundraisers with Obama.
    ———————–
    irrelevant I think. The issue is Obama not Bill. If you want to worry about something, worry about what Mike Devine said about voters in Ohio–that Romney does not connect with average voters. And worry about what Tom Sowell said, namely that Gingrich is the ONLY one who can beat Obama, because Gingrich is the only one who can pierce through that congenial nice guy facade which masks the warped policies and corrupt tactics that will destroy this country. That is a hell of a lot more important than what Bill does to kiss the ass of a man who called him a racist.

  • ShortTermer

    Re: wbboei
    March 5th, 2012 at 11:48 pm

    Exactly.
    _____________________________________

    Re: Bibi the way I saw it…

    Oh, now Obamer responded Bibi, don’t go all wobbly on me now;and the camera caught him ‘brushing’ Obamer off his shoulders while the music played, “I’ve got 99 problems, but a B!tch ain’t one.”
    _____________________________________

    Mike Malloy ridicules those who were affected by the recent tornadoes…does this man have no soul?

  • ShortTermer

    Re: wbboei
    March 5th, 2012 at 11:48 pm

    Exactly.
    _____________________________________

    Re: Bibi the way I saw it…

    Oh, now Obamer responded Bibi, don’t go all wobbly on me now;and the camera caught him ‘brushing’ Obamer off his shoulders while the music played, “I’ve got 99 problems, but a B!tch ain’t one.”
    _____________________________________

    Mike Malloy ridicules those who were affected by the recent tornadoes…does this man have no soul?

  • ShortTermer

    Do not know why I posted a double post. Sorry.

  • turndownobama

    And worry about what Tom Sowell said, namely that Gingrich is the ONLY one who can beat Obama, because Gingrich is the only one who can pierce through that congenial nice guy facade which masks the warped policies and corrupt tactics that will destroy this country. That is a hell of a lot more important than what Bill does to kiss the ass of a man who called him a racist.

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

    Maybe Bill thinks being impeached was worse.

  • Mrs. Smith

    If you get a chance, watch the video at link- BO’s face resembles a Halloween mask-
    __________________

    DUPLICITY

    At AIPAC conference, Obama boasts of his support for Israel while effectively ruling out military action on Iran

    It may well have been one of the most shamelessly duplicitous speeches in American presidential history.

    Standing before the delegates of the 2012 AIPAC Policy Conference on Sunday, the largest annual gathering of pro-Israel activists in America, U.S. President Barack Obama delivered a speech filled with praise of himself and his commitment to Israel’s security. In that same speech, however he effectively ruled out any American or American-assisted military action against Israel’s most pressing security problem: the Iranian nuclear program.

    The rebuke was long expected by observers and Israeli officials, and indicated by recent press reports. So, of course, was Obama’s rhetorical attempt to paint himself as Israel’s best friend in the world ever.

    “You don’t just have to count on my words,” the president said, “You can look at my deeds. At every crucial juncture – at every fork in the road – we have been there for Israel. Every single time.”

    The president hoped, apparently, that his listeners had forgotten his first year in office, when he treated PM Netanyahu like a pariah and was “there for” the Palestinians in a way no other American president has ever been.

    Nonetheless, Obama gave his audience the solemn declaration that “Israel’s place as a Jewish and democratic state must be protected,” a sentiment that he promptly undermined in the only really important part of his speech.

    “No Israeli government can tolerate a nuclear weapon in the hands of a regime that denies the Holocaust,” he said of the Iranian regime,

    threatens to wipe Israel off the map, and sponsors terrorist groups committed to Israel’s destruction. It is also counter to the national security interests of the United States. Indeed, the entire world has an interest in preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

    If there was a moment to endorse, or at least not openly oppose military action, it would have been at this juncture; but it was precisely then that Obama hit Israel square in the face with his refusal to do either.

    I firmly believe that an opportunity remains for diplomacy – backed by pressure – to succeed. The United States and Israel both assess that Iran does not yet have a nuclear weapon, and we are exceedingly vigilant in monitoring their program. Now, the international community has a responsibility to use the time and space that exists. Sanctions are continuing to increase, and this July – thanks to our diplomatic coordination – a European ban on Iranian oil imports will take hold…. Both Israel and the United States have an interest in seeing this challenge resolved diplomatically. After all, the only way to truly solve this problem is for the Iranian government to make a decision to forsake nuclear weapons. That’s what history tells us.

    “History,” needless to say, tells us no such thing. In fact, practicaly the only circumstances in which a regime has willfully given up such weapons has been under credible military threat, attack, or when the regime itself collapses.

    More important, however, is Obama’s obvious intention to put off any military action on Iran to the non-existent future. He already knows that Israeli officials believe there is no time for delays, and that Israel, or the U.S., or both must attack Iran’s nuclear program soon if it is to prevent the program from passing the point of no return. Obama’s statement, in other words, is both a refusal to commit America to Israel’s aid against Iran, and very possibly a red light on an unassisted Israeli attack.

    As if to drive the point home, Obama explicitly ruled out the possibility of military action except in the vague sense of leaving “all options on the table.”

    As President and Commander-in-Chief, I have a deeply-held preference for peace over war…. Already, there is too much loose talk of war. Over the last few weeks, such talk has only benefited the Iranian government, by driving up the price of oil, which they depend upon to fund their nuclear program. For the sake of Israel’s security, America’s security, and the peace and security of the world, now is not the time for bluster; now is the time to let our increased pressure sink in, and to sustain the broad international coalition that we have built. Now is the time to heed that timeless advice from Teddy Roosevelt: speak softly, but carry a big stick. As we do, rest assured that the Iranian government will know our resolve, and that our coordination with Israel will continue.

    Over 2,000 years ago, on the eve of another war, the Spartan leader Sthenelaides listened to a representative of the Athenian empire give a lengthy speech setting forth his city’s case in its dispute with Sparta. Then Sthenelaides rose and said,

    The long speech of the Athenians I do not pretend to understand. They said a good deal in praise of themselves, but nowhere denied that they are injuring our allies and the Peloponnesians. And yet if they behaved well against the Persians then, but ill towards us now, they deserve double punishment for having ceased to be good and for having become bad. We meanwhile are the same then and now, and shall not, if we are wise, disregard the wrongs of our allies, or put off till to-morrow the duty of assisting those who must suffer today.

    One hopes that Israel’s leaders, in the face of an administration with so much praise for itself and so little good behavior to match it, will find within themselves a similar stoic courage.

    http://www.worldjewishdaily.com/obama-aipac-speech.php

  • Mrs. Smith

    If you have a chance, watch the video at the link. Notice Obama’s face. Looks as if he is wearing a Halloween Mask.
    _____________________

    DUPLICITY

    At AIPAC conference, Obama boasts of his support for Israel while effectively ruling out military action on Iran

    It may well have been one of the most shamelessly duplicitous speeches in American presidential history.

    Standing before the delegates of the 2012 AIPAC Policy Conference on Sunday, the largest annual gathering of pro-Israel activists in America, U.S. President Barack Obama delivered a speech filled with praise of himself and his commitment to Israel’s security. In that same speech, however he effectively ruled out any American or American-assisted military action against Israel’s most pressing security problem: the Iranian nuclear program.

    The rebuke was long expected by observers and Israeli officials, and indicated by recent press reports. So, of course, was Obama’s rhetorical attempt to paint himself as Israel’s best friend in the world ever.

    “You don’t just have to count on my words,” the president said, “You can look at my deeds. At every crucial juncture – at every fork in the road – we have been there for Israel. Every single time.”

    The president hoped, apparently, that his listeners had forgotten his first year in office, when he treated PM Netanyahu like a pariah and was “there for” the Palestinians in a way no other American president has ever been.

    Nonetheless, Obama gave his audience the solemn declaration that “Israel’s place as a Jewish and democratic state must be protected,” a sentiment that he promptly undermined in the only really important part of his speech.

    “No Israeli government can tolerate a nuclear weapon in the hands of a regime that denies the Holocaust,” he said of the Iranian regime,

    threatens to wipe Israel off the map, and sponsors terrorist groups committed to Israel’s destruction. It is also counter to the national security interests of the United States. Indeed, the entire world has an interest in preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

    If there was a moment to endorse, or at least not openly oppose military action, it would have been at this juncture; but it was precisely then that Obama hit Israel square in the face with his refusal to do either.

    I firmly believe that an opportunity remains for diplomacy – backed by pressure – to succeed. The United States and Israel both assess that Iran does not yet have a nuclear weapon, and we are exceedingly vigilant in monitoring their program. Now, the international community has a responsibility to use the time and space that exists. Sanctions are continuing to increase, and this July – thanks to our diplomatic coordination – a European ban on Iranian oil imports will take hold…. Both Israel and the United States have an interest in seeing this challenge resolved diplomatically. After all, the only way to truly solve this problem is for the Iranian government to make a decision to forsake nuclear weapons. That’s what history tells us.

    “History,” needless to say, tells us no such thing. In fact, practicaly the only circumstances in which a regime has willfully given up such weapons has been under credible military threat, attack, or when the regime itself collapses.

    More important, however, is Obama’s obvious intention to put off any military action on Iran to the non-existent future. He already knows that Israeli officials believe there is no time for delays, and that Israel, or the U.S., or both must attack Iran’s nuclear program soon if it is to prevent the program from passing the point of no return. Obama’s statement, in other words, is both a refusal to commit America to Israel’s aid against Iran, and very possibly a red light on an unassisted Israeli attack.

    As if to drive the point home, Obama explicitly ruled out the possibility of military action except in the vague sense of leaving “all options on the table.”

    As President and Commander-in-Chief, I have a deeply-held preference for peace over war…. Already, there is too much loose talk of war. Over the last few weeks, such talk has only benefited the Iranian government, by driving up the price of oil, which they depend upon to fund their nuclear program. For the sake of Israel’s security, America’s security, and the peace and security of the world, now is not the time for bluster; now is the time to let our increased pressure sink in, and to sustain the broad international coalition that we have built. Now is the time to heed that timeless advice from Teddy Roosevelt: speak softly, but carry a big stick. As we do, rest assured that the Iranian government will know our resolve, and that our coordination with Israel will continue.

    Over 2,000 years ago, on the eve of another war, the Spartan leader Sthenelaides listened to a representative of the Athenian empire give a lengthy speech setting forth his city’s case in its dispute with Sparta. Then Sthenelaides rose and said,

    The long speech of the Athenians I do not pretend to understand. They said a good deal in praise of themselves, but nowhere denied that they are injuring our allies and the Peloponnesians. And yet if they behaved well against the Persians then, but ill towards us now, they deserve double punishment for having ceased to be good and for having become bad. We meanwhile are the same then and now, and shall not, if we are wise, disregard the wrongs of our allies, or put off till to-morrow the duty of assisting those who must suffer today.

    One hopes that Israel’s leaders, in the face of an administration with so much praise for itself and so little good behavior to match it, will find within themselves a similar stoic courage.

    http://www.worldjewishdaily.com/obama-aipac-speech.php

  • Mrs. Smith

    Duplicate posts disappearing- admin, please ck Mr Spammy…

  • Mrs. Smith

    Gingrich: Romney Is “Rich Enough” Not To Worry About Gas Prices (video)

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/03/05/gingrich_romney_is_rich_enough_not_to_worry_about_gas_prices.html

    “Well look, if you’re Mitt Romney and you’re rich enough, maybe you don’t get it,” Newt Gingrich said in response to Mitt Romney not taking his proposal for $2.50 gas seriously.

  • holdthemaccountable

    The world may little note and barely remember, but it happened:

    ‘Third Jihad’ Narrator Defends NYPD’s Kelly At Police HQ – WPIX
    …”When you look at terrorism arrests, of the last 200 arrests, over 80 percent have been from Muslims, yet we’re only 1 ½ percent of the population,” Dr. Zuhdi Jasser pointed out, in a press conference outside Police Headquarters in downtown Manhattan. “If we can’t speak up as Americans, I might as well live in Syria.”
    Jasser appeared with other Muslim-American organizations to rally in support of Commissioner Kelly, who’s been criticized in recent months for surveillance of Muslim-owned businesses in New York and, it turns out, in New Jersey. Kelly has received broad support from Republican Congressman, Peter King, of Long Island–Chair of the Homeland Security Committee in the House of Representatives….
    Governor Christie was upset about the NYPD monitoring a Muslim Student Association at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, but one of the Muslim activists today insisted the associations can be a breeding ground for terror plots. Tarek Fatah, who’s with a group called the Muslim Canadian Congress, said, “The ‘Toronto 18′ terrorists all came from a background of Muslim Student Associations.”
    And Jasser, the “Third Jihad” narrator, pointed out that American-raised Al Qaeda leader, Anwar al-Awlaki–who was killed by a CIA drone last fall in Yemen–was also a product of a Muslim Student Association. Jasser said the surveillance programs are about national security. “This is not about spying,” he insisted.
    http://www.wpix.com/news/wpix-third-jihad-creator-supports-nypd,0,6372483.story

  • Mrs. Smith

    Talk about gas prices- I purchased a VW diesel last year. Diesel petrol just hit $4.11 here in the Ocean state. TG I can work from home if it comes to that. The thing is whether you stay home or not, you feel the pinch in food prices. That is where the fuel surge hits everyone.

  • Mrs. Smith

    Netanyahu to Obama: Israel ‘reserves the right’ to strike

    Netanyahu: ‘MY SUPREME RESPONSIBILITY AS PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL IS TO ENSURE THAT ISRAEL REMAINS THE MASTER OF ITS FATE’

    http://freebeacon.com/netanyahu-to-obama-israel-reserves-the-right-to-strike/

    I believe the Jewish version is tucked away in Pink’s spam filter…

  • Mrs. Smith

    Getting nervous, is he? Sounds like fear he’ll be Breitbarted if the G-8 held in the Windy City.
    _______________

    Obama shifts location of G-8 summit from hometown of Chicago to his Camp David retreat

    WASHINGTON — The White House abruptly announced Monday that it had scuttled plans to hold the upcoming G-8 economic summit in Chicago, and would instead host world leaders at the presidential retreat at Camp David in Maryland. ….snip….. The White House said the G-8 summit would take place May 18-19. The White House announced plans last summer to hold both summits back-to-back in Chicago, giving the president a high-profile opportunity to tout his foreign policy and diplomatic credentials on his home turf in an election year. The idea of moving the G-8 to Camp David was raised to the president a few weeks ago, a senior administration official said, adding that the president was intrigued by the novelty of the idea and asked staff whether they could pull off the change.

    The official who spoke on condition of…

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-shifts-location-of-g-8-summit-from-hometown-of-chicago-to-camp-david/2012/03/05/gIQAsm9CtR_story.html

  • holdthemaccountable

    Mrs. Smith – G-8. Interesting. May I point out the modifier “his” as in “his Camp David retreat.” Everything is his.
    ————————
    I’ve submitted some of the following article because it intrigued me for it seemed obviously an OWS gig, but no one said so. Even in this piece you have to plough through a bunch to see it. And they you find that it’s LEADERLESS. With free pizza lined up outside and their activities streamed over the net it is LEADERLESS not.
    Leaderless???

    Dozens arrested at California Capitol protests as thousands decry high cost of education – Education – The Sacramento Bee

    …but at times the leaderless Occupy movement supporters discussed issuing demands on a range of issues, from the repeal of Proposition 13 to being allowed to use Capitol restrooms during their sit-in.
    Their supporters outside also sought permission to deliver pizzas to their colleagues inside, but the CHP declined to stand aside for delivery of the pies….
    More than 350 demonstrators poured into the Capitol and had lengthy discussions about whether to stay and face arrest, with their conversations beamed worldwide via live streaming on the Internet. By the time the building closed, most had filtered out, leaving the 68 diehards inside who discussed the proper techniques to use when being taken into custody….
    Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/06/4314253/dozens-arrested-at-california.html#storylink=cpy
    http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/06/4314253/dozens-arrested-at-california.html

  • holdthemaccountable

    hope u can make sense of the above. going back to bed.

  • moononpluto

    Typical, The state Obama mis-represented as Senator is collapsing and he really couldnt give a shit.

    IL Gov. Pat Quinn: State “on brink of collapse,” has a “rendezvous with reality”

  • moononpluto

    Ooops…this is gonna be fun to explain…as we thought.

    WIKILEAKED: BIN LADEN BODY NOT BURIED AT SEA.

    So where is it?

  • Mrs. Smith

    NBC sux- Where is the NEWS? They’ve cut down reporting on important issues from the first 7 min at the beginning of the show to 3 min- Blink or walk to the kitchen and its over…Next up for discussion: “Do Men suffer from post-partum depression after the birth of a new baby?” Really!

  • moononpluto

    Is Bin Ladens Body actually in the US..?

    Leaked emails suggest Bin Ladens body was flown to the US….’Body bound for Dover, DE on CIA plane’.

  • Mrs. Smith

    Defiant against court rulings, what is the point of having judges anyway? Theater- men in black dresses?
    ________________

    White House Says It Will Implement ObamaCare Despite Judge’s Declaration that His Ruling Against It Is ‘Equivalent of Injunction’

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/white-house-says-it-will-implement-obamacare-despite-judges-declaration-his-ruling

  • Mrs. Smith

    Please explain how Muslim imperialism, Sharia Law, is any different from the Third Reich and a Neo-Nazi takeover?
    ___________________

    Whitewashing Muslim Imperialism

    Because it is now almost axiomatic for American school textbooks to whitewash all things Islamic (see here for example), it may be instructive to examine one of those aspects that are regularly distorted: the Muslim conquests.

    Few events of history are so well documented and attested to as are these conquests, which commenced soon after the death of the Muslim prophet Muhammad (632) and tapered off circa 750. Large swathes of the Old World—from the India in the east, to Spain in the west—were conquered and consolidated by the sword of Islam during this time, with more after (e.g., the Ottoman conquests).

    By the standards of history, the reality of these conquests is unassailable, for history proper concerns itself with primary sources; and the Islamic conquests are thoroughly documented. More importantly, the overwhelming majority of primary source materials we rely on do not come from non-Muslims, who might be accused of bias. Rather, the foremost historians bequeathing to posterity thousands of pages of source materials documenting the Islamic conquests were not only Muslims themselves; they were—and still are—regarded by today’s Muslims as pious and trustworthy scholars (generically, the ulema).

    Among the most authoritative books devoted to recounting the conquests are: Ibn Ishaq’s (d. 767) Sira (“Life of Muhammad”), the oldest biography of Muhammad; Waqidi’s (d. circa. 820) Maghazi (“Military Campaigns [of the Prophet]“); Baladhuri’s (d. 892) Futuh al-Buldan (“Conquests of the Nations”); and Tabari’s (d.923) multi-volumeTarikh al-Rusul wa al-Muluk, (“History of Prophets and Kings”), which is 40 volumes in the English translation.

    Taken together, these accounts (which are primarily based on older accounts—oral and written—tracing back to Muhammad and his successors) provide what was once, and in the Muslim world still is, a famous story: that Allah had perfected religion (Islam) for all humanity; that he commanded his final prophet (Muhammad) and community (Muslims) to spread Islam to the world; and that the latter was/is to accept it either willingly or unwillingly (jihad).

    It should be noted that contemporary non-Muslim accounts further validate the facts of the conquests. The writings of the Christian bishop of Jerusalem Sophronius (d.638), for instance, or the chronicles of the Byzantine historian Theophanes (d.758), to name a couple, make clear that Muslims conquered much of what is today called the “Muslim world.”

    According to the Muslim historical tradition, the majority of non-Muslim peoples of the Old World, not desiring to submit to Islam or its laws (Sharia), fought back, though most were eventually defeated and subsumed.

    The first major conquest, renowned for its brutality, occurred in Arabia itself, immediately after Muhammad’s death in 632. Many tribes which had only nominally accepted Islam’s authority, upon Muhammad’s death, figured they could break away; however, Muhammad’s successor and first caliph, or successor, Abu Bakr, would have none of that, and proclaimed a jihad against these apostates, known in Arabic as the “Ridda Wars” (or Apostasy Wars). According to the aforementioned historians, tens of thousands of Arabs were put to the sword until their tribes re-submitted to Islam.

    The Ridda Wars ended around 634. To keep the Arab Muslims from quarreling, the next caliph, Omar, launched the Muslim conquests: Syria was conquered around 636, Egypt 641, Mesopotamia and the Persian Empire, 650. By the early 8th century, all of north Africa and Spain to the west, and the lands of central Asia and India to the east, were also brought under Islamic suzerainty.

    The colorful accounts contained in the Muslim tradition are typified by constant warfare, which normally goes as follows: Muslims go to a new region and offer the inhabitants three choices: 1) submit (i.e., convert) to Islam; 2) live as second-class citizens, or “dhimmis,” paying special taxes and accepting several social debilitations; 3) fight to the death.

    Centuries later, and partially due to trade, Islam came to be accepted by a few periphery peoples, mostly polytheists and animists, who followed no major religion (e.g., in Indonesia, Somalia), and who currently form the outer fringes of the Islamic world.

    Ironically, these exceptions are now portrayed as the rule in America’s classrooms: many textbooks suggest or at least imply that most people who converted to Islam did so under no duress, but rather through peaceful contacts with merchants and traders; that they eagerly opted to convert to Islam for the religion’s intrinsic appeal, without noting the many debilitations conquered non-Muslims avoided—extra taxes, second-rate social status, enforced humiliation, etc.—by converting to Islam. In fact, in the first century, and due to these debilitations, many conquered peoples sought to convert to Islam only to be rebuffed by the caliphate, which preferred to keep them as subdued—and heavily taxed—subjects, not as Muslim equals.

    Meanwhile, as U.S. textbooks equivocate about the Muslim conquests, in the schoolrooms of the Muslim world, the conquests are not only taught as a matter of course, but are glorified: their rapidity and decisiveness are regularly portrayed as evidence that Allah was in fact on the side of the Muslims (and will be again, so long as Muslims uphold their communal duty of waging jihad).

    The dissimulation of how Islam was spread in the early centuries contained in Western textbook’s mirrors the way the word jihad, once inextricable to the conquests, has also been recast. Whereas the word jihad has throughout the centuries simply meant armed warfare on behalf of Islam, in recent years, American students have been taught the Sufi interpretation of jihad—Sufis make up perhaps one percent of the Islamic world and are often seen as heretics with aberrant interpretations—which portrays jihad as a “spiritual-struggle” against one’s vices.

    Contrast this definition of jihad with that of an early edition of the venerable Encyclopaedia of Islam. Its opening sentence simply states, “The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general.… Jihad must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam.… Islam must completely be made over before the doctrine of jihad [warfare to spread Islam] can be eliminated.” Muslim legal manuals written in Arabic are even more explicit.

    Likewise, the Islamic conquests narrated in the Muslim histories often mirror the doctrinal obligations laid out in Islam’s theological texts—the Koran and Hadith. Muslim historians often justify the actions of the early Islamic invaders by juxtaposing the jihad injunctions found in Islamic scriptures.

    It should also be noted that, to Muslims, the Islamic conquests are seen as acts of altruism: they are referred to as futuh, which literally means “openings”—that is, the countries conquered were “opened” for the light of Islam to enter and guide its infidel inhabitants. Thus to Muslims, there is nothing to regret or apologize for concerning the conquests; they are seen as for the good of those who were conquered (i.e., the ancestors of today’s Muslims).

    In closing, the fact of the Muslim conquests, by all standards of history, is indisputable. Accordingly, just as less than impressive aspects of Western and Christian history, such as the Inquisition or conquest of the Americas, are regularly taught in U.S. textbooks, so too should the Muslim conquests be taught, without apology or fear of being politically incorrect. This is especially so because it concerns history—which has a way of repeating itself when ignored, or worse, whitewashed.

    http://frontpagemag.com/2012/03/06/whitewashing-muslim-imperialism/

  • moononpluto

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/11092-leaked-emails-suggest-bin-laden-not-buried-at-sea

    According to the official version of events promulgated by the Obama administration, after U.S. forces killed Osama bin Laden, his body was flown to Afghanistan for identification and then buried in the Arabian Sea about 12 hours after his death, supposedly in keeping with Islamic ritual. However, internal e-mails from intelligence service Stratfor, obtained by the hacker group Anonymous and posted to the Internet by WikiLeaks, cast doubt on that story.

    Austin, Texas-based Stratfor is a very well-connected organization described by WikiLeaks as “a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal’s Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Marines and the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency.” The company’s vice president for intelligence, Fred Burton, a highly experienced counterterrorism expert with many contacts in the U.S. government, was the originator of most of the e-mails concerning the disposition of bin Laden’s body in the hours after his death.

    Bin Laden was allegedly killed near Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 2, 2011, just after 1:00 a.m. local time. President Barack Obama announced bin Laden’s assassination on May 1 at 11:35 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (May 2 had not yet arrived in the United States).

    At 5:26 a.m. Central Daylight Time on May 2, Burton sent out an e-mail with the subject “OBL” (Osama bin Laden) stating: “Reportedly, we took the body with us. Thank goodness.”

    Twenty-five minutes later he sent one with the subject “Body bound for Dover, DE on CIA plane.” The text read: “Than [sic] onward to the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology in Bethesda.” (“Technically this would have meant the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, since the AFIP operations were folded into Walter Reed as part of a consolidation plan,” explained Jason Ditz of Antiwar.com, adding that if confirmed, “it would add yet more intrigue to Dover Air Force Base, already under enormous scrutiny for its mishandling of corpses and disposal of remains at a Virginia landfill.”)

    At 6:26 a.m. Burton stated that he “doubt[ed]” that bin Laden’s body had been “dumped at sea,” adding, “We would want to photograph, DNA, fingerprint, etc.” “His body is a crime scene,” he continued, “and I don’t see the FBI nor DOJ letting that happen.” He suggested that burying the body at sea would be reminiscent of the cremation of Nazi Adolf Eichmann’s body following his capture, trial, and execution, the purpose of which was to prevent anyone from building a memorial to him.

    Stratfor CEO George Friedman agreed but noted that “Eichmann was seen alive for many months on trial before being sentenced to death and executed,” then cremated. “No comparison with suddenly burying him at sea without any chance to view him which i [sic] doubt happened,” he added.

    Obviously neither of these highly connected men with plenty of inside sources had yet bought into the idea that bin Laden had been sent to Davy Jones’ locker. Indeed, at 1:36 p.m. Burton was still of the opinion that bin Laden’s body was being taken to the United States, writing: “Body is Dover bound, should be here by now.”

    By 3:11 p.m., however, he appears to have changed his mind, e-mailing: “Down & dirty done, He already sleeps with the fish.” But he noted the difficulties that this course of action would create, saying, “It seems to me that by dropping the corpse in the ocean, the body will come back to haunt us.”

  • moononpluto

    Maths Trumps….Santorum has no path to the nomination unless he wins every single state from now on and be over 50% in all of them……

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/super-tuesday-preview-math-trumps-momentum-the-note/

    No matter what happens tonight, one thing is clear, it is all but impossible for Santorum to catch Romney in the delegate race. The proportional allocation of the delegates, Santorum’s weakness in the primary contests thus far, and Santorum’s own inability to qualify for many of these delegates put him behind with no real ability to catch up.

    Math was never our strong suit, which is why we asked Josh Putnam, a professor of politics at Davidson College and author of the Frontloading HQ blog to crunch the numbers for us. His analysis: Unless Santorum gets over 50 percent across all of the states on Super Tuesday, it is essentially over.

    Santorum’s only hope to reaching 1144 delegates – the magic number needed to win the nomination, is to win every single one of the remaining 44 contests — including Romney strongholds like Utah and New Jersey — and win them with at least 50 percent of the vote statewide and in every single congressional district. That is, of course, impossible.

  • jeswezey

    This is another article from the Pakistani outlet “The Nation”, written by a former ambassador. The subject is once again the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline that Pakistan seems to need badly enough to forego pleasing the US in our drive for sanctions against Iran. The approach is factual and level-headed, and arrives at conclusions that are difficult to dismiss concerning Iran and Israel. Sorry if its too long for you, but I feel that we need some level-headed reasoning about Iran vs Israel, and a dose of some foreign analysis: Pakistan is much closer to Iran than we are, and closer than Israel too! Besides, this concerns Hilary.
    =====

    Politics of Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline
    By: Javid Husain | March 06, 2012 | 1

    The US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, was quite explicit in her warning before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations last week that the implementation of the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project would trigger the US sanctions under the Iran Sanctions Act. This Act imposes certain specified sanctions against any foreign (non-US) company, which invests more than $20 million in the oil and gas sector in Iran. This warning must be seen in the context of the current animosity between Iran and the US, and Washington’s growing pressure on Tehran because of its nuclear programme. The root causes of the current tensions between the US and Iran can be traced to a number of factors.

    First and foremost, Washington views Iran as a major obstacle, indeed a threat, to the realisation of its strategic objectives in the Middle East, especially the Persian Gulf region. The control over the oil and gas resources of the Persian Gulf region is a major US strategic objective, the other being the security of Israel as an ally and an outpost of the West in the region. Obviously, the US wants pliant states in the Persian Gulf region for safeguarding its interests. The attitude of defiance exhibited by Iran towards the US, since the advent of the Islamic Revolution, set in motion a process that has resulted in the prevailing enmity between the two countries. The Islamic Republic of Iran’s steadfast support to the Palestinian cause and its opposition to Israel are seen by Washington and Tel Aviv as serious threats to the Jewish state’s existence. In essence, Washington considers the Islamic Revolution as a threat to the US-friendly order in the Middle East. Therefore, it has imposed unilateral sanctions and taken a number of other steps to contain Iran and to bring about a change of regime in the country.

    The US-Iran tensions have been aggravated by the serious differences between them on Iran’s nuclear programme. The US and other Western countries have essentially demanded of Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment programme because they consider it as a precursor to the development of nuclear weapons. Iran, while insisting on its right to carry out uranium enrichment under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to which it is a party, has categorically stated that its nuclear programme is peaceful in character and that it has no intention of developing nuclear weapons. However, these declarations have not satisfied the Western countries. Consequently, the UN Security Council with the Western backing has imposed a number of sanctions on Iran which were weakened considerably thanks to the efforts of Russia and China.

    Additionally, the US has imposed its own sanctions because of its concerns over Iran’s nuclear programme, the latest ones barring financial dealings with the Central Bank of Iran to curtail Tehran’s oil and gas exports. It is the US hope that these economic sanctions would persuade Iran to reconsider its nuclear programme to bring it in line with the Western demands. But the US and Israel have not ruled out the possibility of air strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities to prevent it from the acquisition of nuclear weapons.

    As a demonstration of the US seriousness on the subject, President Barack Obama stated categorically on March 4 in a meeting of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that he would not hesitate to use force to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. However, despite the Israeli pressure for an early air strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, the US believes that diplomacy backed by sanctions still has a chance to overcome the current impasse on the Iranian nuclear issue. It is also cognisant of the dangerous strategic, political and economic consequences of air strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities, especially in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Persian Gulf and Palestine. The US economy that is registering a fragile recovery may relapse into a severe recession or even a depression if the oil prices shoot up as a result of the air strikes on Iran. Therefore, Obama in his speech at the meeting of AIPAC also cautioned against “loose talk of war” with Iran. The Economist magazine in its issue of February 25-March 2 concluded that just now the change in Iran’s nuclear programme “is more likely to come about through sanctions and diplomacy than war.” It is also interesting to note that despite the concerns of the Arab countries about Iran’s nuclear programme, the Jordanian Prime Minister has warned that any military action against Iran because of its nuclear activities would be “disastrous” for the whole of the Middle East. Earlier, the Russian Foreign Minister had voiced similar views.

    The US pressure on Pakistan to forego the Iran-Pakistan (IP) gas pipeline project must be viewed in the context of the foregoing. Its real purpose is to ratchet up pressure on Iran more than anything else. But if we concede the US demand, it would have serious negative consequences for Pakistan, which is facing a virtual energy crisis because of electricity and gas shortages. The alternative project that would bring gas through pipeline from Turkmenistan (TAPI) would not be feasible in the near future because of the continuing armed conflict in Afghanistan.

    Pakistan and Iran signed the Gas Sale and Purchase Agreement (GSPA) in June 2009. The Government of Pakistan has already determined that the imported natural gas from Iran would provide the cheapest and most suitable fuel for power generation. It has been estimated that 750 mmcfd gas would help generate around 4,000MW of electricity, besides providing job opportunities in the backward areas of Balochistan and Sindh. Iran has already laid the 56-inch diameter pipeline for a distance of 900 km from Assaluyeh to Iran Shehr. The remaining 200 km to bring the pipeline to the Pakistani border are likely to be completed in the next two years. Pakistan, on its part, is planning to complete its segment of the pipeline by the end of 2014.

    From the economic point of view, it makes eminent sense for Pakistan to complete the Iran-Pakistan pipeline project as early as possible to meet its fast-growing energy requirements. The government’s decision to stand firm on this project despite the US pressure is commendable and must be welcomed. While we must make a sincere effort to reconcile our differences with the US on different issues with a view to developing friendly relations with it, we cannot allow Washington to dictate to us, especially on issues of vital strategic and economic importance. The Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline project is too important for us strategically, politically and economically to be discarded at the behest of the US. We must, therefore, use different diplomatic channels to convey our point of view on the issue appropriately to the US. It is ironical that while the US is pushing us to strengthen our economic and commercial links with India, it should be pressurising us to distance ourselves from our important neighbour to the west for the sake of its own perceived interests!

    Pakistan’s long-term interests lie in strengthening its friendly ties and cooperation with Iran rather than otherwise. In view of the past US practice of subjecting us to sanctions and pressures for its own designs, it would be prudent on our part to reduce our economic and military dependence on it. The situation also calls for intensified efforts on our part to enhance self-reliance and strengthen relations with China and Russia both of which may be interested in financing the IP gas pipeline.

    The writer is a retired ambassador.
    Email: javid.husain@gamil.com

  • jeswezey

    moononpluto: “According to the official version…”
    ====

    The policy should be, never ever believe anything the government tells you. Nada. Zilch.

    In December 2001, Chinese, Japanese and Indian news all reported that OBL had been killed by US forces in Afghanistan and buried in an unmarked grave by his own men. Only a few people in the US were aware of these reports, which fully corroborated each other. Then came the videos of OBL joking around with his henchmen or making dire announcements and nobody realized that those videos could very well be faked. It is plausible that nobody – either the US or Al Qaeda – wanted to lose the symbolic value of OBL.

    Just saying this because it’s one more reason why we didn’t want to bring OBL to the US, even dead, because the body wasn’t his!

  • rrnusa

    http://www.superchooseday.com Hillary Clinton is the only name that ANY and ALL polls show that she would win in the 2012 Presidential election. She is a moderate who has proven in every job she has taken that she knows how to get things done. She knows the meaning of words like: hard work, public service, strong middle class means strong USA economic health, leadership. You put Hillary Clinton and Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins on as a Presidential ticket and you will have your first non-party President! You will forever break the strangle hold of the elitist partist posing as a two party system. Never again just Democrats or Republican sameness! http://www.AmericansElect.org

  • moononpluto

    Why the hell did he decide to get back in, he’s get slaughtered if this is anything to go by.

    Election 2012: Nebraska Senate
    Nebraska Senate: Bruning (R) 55%, Kerrey (D) 33%

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_senate_elections/nebraska/election_2012_nebraska_senate

  • gonzotx

    All I can say is I have no doubt she was a plant from the get go.

    *******************************
    http://mrctv.org/blog/sandra-fluke-gender-reassignment-and-health-insurance

  • NewMexicoFan

    Presidential News Conference NOW

  • moononpluto

    NMF, i cant bear it, He’s just as slimy as he could ever be, i need a hazmat suit to watch this.

  • moononpluto

    Obama “Israel, i have your back”…..has anyone checked the WH kitchen for missing knives, if ones missing, check Israel’s back.

  • Shadowfax

    Netanyahu vs Obama – Who Would You Trust To Lead A Nation?

    Great photo, Bibi and Berry.

    by Ulsterman

    Received this photo today and found it to be the perfect contradiction of two men in their youth – one the future Prime Minister of Israel, the other the future President of the United States.

    http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/03/03/netanyahu-vs-obama-who-would-you-trust-to-lead-a-nation/

  • NewMexicoFan

    The interesting thing is, when you call him out for doing a 180 on something, he almost makes you feel stupid for thinking he was going to keep that promise.

    If you cannot trust their word, while they campaign, you cannot trust them in office. In addition, he has been in office, and done a lot of 180s, so how could you possible be turned on to vote for him by what he says. Shame on you, if you do?

    one big billboard would be nice. HE LIED TO YOU LAST TIME, WHAT MAKES YOU THINK IT WILL BE ANY DIFFERENT THIS TIME. SHAME ON YOU.

  • Mrs. Smith

    Obama: I care ‘deeply’ about Israeli security
    President says he sees a “window of opportunity” to use diplomacy instead of military force. (3.5 yrs of diplomacy and nada?)

    http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/06/10593133-obama-accuses-gop-critics-of-beating-the-drums-of-war-in-mideast
    ___________

    Remember when body language profilers were used ascertaining whether politicians were telling the Truth or Not? All died suspicious deaths from prevarication overload from this president. Dump the prevaricator in chief-

  • wbboei

    jbstonesfan: I thought of you when I read this one from today’s WSJ. It may provide some useful ammunition in your battle:

    The ‘Jewish’ President
    Don’t believe Obama when he says he has Israel’s back.
    • By BRET STEPHENS

    Should Israelis and pro-Israel Americans take President Obama at his word when he says—as he did at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee policy conference in Washington, D.C., on Sunday—”I have Israel’s back”?
    No.
    Here is a president who fought tooth-and-nail against the very sanctions on Iran for which he now seeks to reap political credit. He inherited from the Bush administration the security assistance to Israel he now advertises as proof of his “unprecedented” commitment to the Jewish state. His defense secretary has repeatedly cast doubt on the efficacy of a U.S. military option against Iran even as the president insists it remains “on the table.” His top national security advisers keep warning Israel not to attack Iran even as he claims not to “presume to tell [Israeli leaders] what is best for them.”
    Oh, and his secretary of state answers a question from a Tunisian student about U.S. politicians courting the “Zionist lobbies” by saying that “a lot of things are said in political campaigns that should not bear a lot of attention.” It seems it didn’t occur to her to challenge the premise of the question.
    Still, if you’re looking for evidence of Mr. Obama’s disingenuousness when it comes to Israel, it’s worth referring to what his supporters say about him.
    Consider Peter Beinart, the one-time Iraq War advocate who has reinvented himself as a liberal scourge of present-day Israel and mainstream Zionism. Mr. Beinart has a book coming out next month called “The Crisis of Zionism.” Chapter five, on “The Jewish President,” fully justifies the cover price.
    Mr. Beinart’s case is that Mr. Obama came to his views about Israel not so much from people like his friend Rashid Khalidi or his pastor Jeremiah Wright. Instead, says Mr. Beinart, Mr. Obama got his education about Israel from a coterie of far-left Chicago Jews who “bred in Obama a specific, and subversive, vision of American Jewish identity and of the Jewish state.”
    At the center of this coterie, Mr. Beinart explains, was a Chicago rabbi named Arnold Jacob Wolf. In 1969, Wolf staged a synagogue protest in favor of Black Panther Bobby Seale. In the early 1970s, he founded an organization that met with Yasser Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organization—this being some 20 years before Arafat officially renounced terrorism. In the early 1990s, Wolf denounced the construction of the Holocaust Museum in Washington.
    And, in 1996, the rabbi “was one of [Mr. Obama's] earliest and most prominent supporters” when he ran for the Illinois state Senate. Wolf later described Mr. Obama’s views on Israel as “on the line of Peace Now”—an organization with a long history of blaming Israel for the Arab-Israeli conflict.
    Enlarge Image

    AFP/Getty Images
    President Obama with AIPAC President Lee Rosenberg at the AIPAC conference in Washington, D.C., on Sunday.
    Mr. Obama had other Jewish mentors, too, according to Mr. Beinart. One was Bettylu Saltzman, whose father, developer Philip Klutznick, had joined Wolf in “his break with the Israeli government in the 1970s.” Ms. Saltzman, writes Mr. Beinart, “still seethes with hostility toward the mainstream Jewish groups” and later became active in left-wing Jewish political groups like J Street. Among other things, it was she who “organized the rally against the Iraq War where Obama proclaimed his opposition to an American invasion.”
    Ms. Saltzman also introduced Mr. Obama to David Axelrod, himself a longtime donor to a group called the New Israel Fund. For a flavor of the NIF’s world view, a WikiLeaks cable from 2010 noted that an NIF associate director told U.S. embassy officials in Tel Aviv that “the disappearance of a Jewish state would not be the tragedy that Israelis fear since it would become more democratic.”
    Other things that we learn about Mr. Obama’s intellectual pedigree from Mr. Beinart: As a student at Columbia, he honed his interests in colonialism by studying with the late pro-Palestinian agit-Prof. Edward Said. In 2004, Mr. Obama “criticized the barrier built to separate Israel and its major settlements from the rest of the West Bank”—the “barrier” meaning the security fence that all-but eliminated the wave of suicide bombings that took 1,000 lives in Israel.
    We also learn that, according to one of Mr. Beinart’s sources, longtime diplomat Dennis Ross was brought aboard the Obama campaign as part of what Mr. Beinart calls “Obama’s inoculation strategy” to mollify Jewish voters apprehensive about the sincerity of his commitments to Israel. Not surprisingly, Mr. Ross was a marginal figure in the administration before leaving last year.
    In Mr. Beinart’s telling, all this is evidence that Mr. Obama is in tune with the authentic views of the American Jewish community when it comes to Israel, but that he’s out of step with Jewish organizational leadership. Maybe. Still, one wonders why organizations more in tune with those “real” views rarely seem to find much of a base.
    But the important question here isn’t about American-Jewish attitudes toward Israel. It’s about the president’s honesty. Is he being truthful when he represents himself as a mainstream friend of Israel—or is he just holding his tongue and biding his time? On the evidence of Mr. Beinart’s sympathetic book, Mr. Obama’s speech at Aipac was one long exercise in political cynicism.
    Write to bstephens@wsj.com

  • jbstonesfan

    Thanks for the article wbboei!!! This part was particularly disturbing:
    ==========================================================
    Oh, and his secretary of state answers a question from a Tunisian student about U.S. politicians courting the “Zionist lobbies” by saying that “a lot of things are said in political campaigns that should not bear a lot of attention.” It seems it didn’t occur to her to challenge the premise of the question.

  • moononpluto

    Its Super Tuesday time….will it all be over by tomorrow morning.

  • moononpluto

    Where the heck is everyone?

  • Shadowfax

    Moon
    I was wondering what was up too.
    Here is the big day that will make or break some of the GOP candidates and…………..crickets………

    I understand most of us are just waiting to see the drama while eating popcorn, but where is all the action? ;-)

  • moononpluto

    Yes Shadow,….. hello bored posters here? We need some others so we dont have to talk to ourselves.

  • moononpluto

    Vermont closes in 1 minute, will they call it immediately.

  • [...] Treachery Followed By Bamboozlement: Barack Obama Against Israel »  Home  [...]

  • admin

    NEW ARTICLE IS UP.

  • moononpluto

    Georgia already called for Gingrich.

  • yheitman

    YOU’VE GOT TO SEE THIS FUNNY VIDEO PARODY OF THE CHEVY VOLT. It had 367,000 hits and it was removed from YouTube.

    Watch it. It’s really funny.

    http://vimeo.com/37540767

  • WAR!: In “Dangerous Liaisons”, the Glenn Close character is being bullied into sexual submission by the one played by John Malkovitch. She DOES NOT roll over and take it. She DOES NOT compromise. A three-prong battle strategy to counter the elite media and Obama’s minions is provided at the link. We are in TOTAL WAR.