Luck Ain’t A Lady And Columbian Hookers Are Not Stay At Home Moms

Ever get the sense that the White House and Obama’s campaign to fool most of the people most of the time is unraveling? On the 100th anniversary (plus 2 days) of the sinking of the Titanic it’s the right question to ask.

Last week was supposed to be the week that the Obama campaign proved it was superior by dint of being quicker to attack and better at response than the Romney campaign. Last week was supposed to be the week that the Obama campaign put Mitt Romney in a deadly crossfire of attacks on ephemera such as the Buffett Rule. Last week was supposed to be the week that the Obama campaign savaged Mitt Romney while Barack Obama flew above the fray and off into the celestial choir realm of summitry.



However, as the War On Women surprise attack on Ann Romney (Happy Birthday Ann Romney!) and stay at home moms tallied Obama Dimocratic casualties and the Jorge Zimmerman case threatened a looming public relations race-baiting fiasco Big Media tried to rescue Barack Obama. The lead EMS team was Politico.

Politico tried to divert from the multiple dogs gnawing at Obama’s scrawny wrinkled ass-cheeks. Politico, on the very anniversary of Titanic hitting the iceberg declared smooth sailing for for the boob at the helm:

“But Obama’s weekend trip to Cartagena, Colombia, for the Summit of the Americas could be the rare election-year sojourn that’s almost all political upside for him and his reelection bid.

Here are five reasons why the whirlwind visit to Latin America could pay off for Obama:

A play for the Latino vote back home [snip]

Soak up Spanish-language media coverage [snip]

Swing-state fever: A bonus stop in Florida [snip]

Plugging the “Buffett Rule” theme [snip]

Maybe focusing on foreign policy isn’t so bad”

But then: Hookers on the port side and the S.S. Obama began to take on water. The great trip that was “all political upside” turned into National Enquirer heaven. Luck was not a lady.



Were drugs or the drug cartels a potential threat? Was it unperformed sexual kinkiness that angered Obama Secret Service agents to not pay the hookers. Wait. What? They didn’t pay the hookers? Yup at least one of the “working girls” did not get paid and she complained to the hotel security and Columbian police. It’s a war on women by not paying hard working sex workers.

The hard working, legal, sex workers of Columbia were not stay at home moms. If only they worked at home the hotel and police might not have gotten involved. They were not Barbra Streisand in For Pete’s Sake. In that film Barbra plays a loving wife who, in order to raise money to help her husband in a business deal becomes a part time stay at home hooker. Unfortunately, Barbra’s clients wind up either injured or dead and Barbra ends up riding cattle through New York City streets.



If only Barack Obama had been so lucky. He would have willingly allowed a bull to mount him if only to avoid the Romney plowing he got last week. As if Hookergate was not bad enough (it’s now up to 20 agents, some military men and no doubt a lot of angry stay working at home/working outside the home wives in D.C.) on Sunday David Axelrod hit the talk shows.

One iceberg hitting the S.S. Obama apparently was not enough. Titanic went down after one hit. S.S. Obama watched on Sunday as Hookers in Columbia became the focus. Then the S.S. Obama screamed, “David Axelrod Makes The Case For Mitt Romney“!:

“A great rapid response effort by the Mitt Romney team on this one … In an interview on Fox News Sunday this morning, David Axelrod said the 2012 election will come down to a choice: Do Americans want “an economy that produces a growing middle class and gives people a chance to get ahead and their kids a chance to get ahead?” Or do they want to continue down “the road we’re on”?



Axelrod was not the only iceberg hitting the Obama dingy on Sunday. There was also Afghanistan and the big attacks by the Taliban [We won’t delve into the North Carolina sex scandal today]. Tax cheat and head of the Internal Revenue Service Tim Geithner also did his part. On the Sunday Big Media slums Geithner crowed about the remarkably successful Obamanomics that might not produce growth this spring.



Not to be outdone in a New York Times interview Patrick Kennedy found hookers in the White House that in 2008 Barack Obama promised get rid of:

Access to the Obama White House is in direct correlation to the amount of money donated to the president’s reelection effort and the Democratic party, the New York Times reports today.

The Times reports: “those who donated the most to Mr. Obama and the Democratic Party since he started running for president were far more likely to visit the White House than others. Among donors who gave $30,000 or less, about 20 percent visited the White House, according to a New York Times analysis that matched names in the visitor logs with donor records. But among those who donated $100,000 or more, the figure rises to about 75 percent. Approximately two-thirds of the president’s top fund-raisers in the 2008 campaign visited the White House at least once, some of them numerous times.”

But the most explosive allegation in the news story comes from former Democratic congressman Patrick Kennedy, son of the late Ted Kenney, who calls what the Obama White House is doing “quid pro quo.”

HOOKERS AHOY! It’s pay to play.

Speaking of HOOKERS, wasn’t it Michelle Obama who said “if you can’t run your own house you can’t run the White House”? Observing the way the White House is run we must guess that that the inverse is true and Michelle and Barack can’t run their private house either.

HOOKERS! But these get paid. Patrick Kennedy is sure the Obama WH has a quid pro quo system for donors:

“The NYT’s Mike McIntyre and Michael Luo report that the Obama White House insists that they don’t take lobbyist money and don’t grant access to lobbyists — at least not directly. However, McIntyre and Luo describe how lobbyists do get into the White House. Call it the Lobbyist Buddy System, as they partner with big-time donors to become plus-ones to the West Wing:

Although Mr. Obama has made a point of not accepting contributions from registered lobbyists, a review of campaign donations and White House visitor logs shows that special interests have had little trouble making themselves heard. Many of the president’s biggest donors, while not lobbyists, took lobbyists with them to the White House, while others performed essentially the same function on their visits.

More broadly, the review showed that those who donated the most to Mr. Obama and the Democratic Party since he started running for president were far more likely to visit the White House than others. [snip]

One can argue that this isn’t all that much different than other Republican and Democratic administrations. The article recalls the infamous Lincoln Bedroom “rentals” of the Clinton administration, for instance. However, Clinton didn’t run for the office by demonizing lobbyists and wealthy donors and insisting that he would provide a New Purity to the Beltway, either. In 2008, that was almost the entire message from Obama, who had no executive, military, or foreign-relations experience before running for the one position that requires expertise in all three areas.”

The working women of the sex industry have more integrity than the Obama White House.

Speaking of hookers Barack Obama had another agenda as comparatively wealthy agents of the American government gypped hard working Columbian sex workers. For Barack Obama it was about another vacation. Yup, V-A-C-A-T-I-O-N:

“Just two days after President Barack Obama gave a sharply edged response to news anchor Larry Conners of KMOV in St. Louis after Conners had asked the president about Americans who “get frustrated and even angered when they see the first family jetting around [to] different vacations and so forth,” Obama told a panel at the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia that part of his job there was to scout out locations for a future vacation with First Lady Michelle Obama.

HOOKERS! The HOOKE$RS are in charge – and we don’t mean the honest working ones that walk the streets. These are Chicago HOOKERS. We have to get rid of the Chicago HOOKERS.

Share

344 thoughts on “Luck Ain’t A Lady And Columbian Hookers Are Not Stay At Home Moms

  1. It’s not going to happen and even if it did we will not vote for Barack Obama. But it is nice to see that no matter where she is planted, Hillary blossoms. More on the war on women, Ann Romney, and Hillary:

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/hill_of_ticket_mPidWRoGlcZPj4SuEzcShJ

    “Hill of a ticket

    It was a serious mistake, the result of a class-warfare strategy followed to a fault by a zealous Democrat. But inadvertently, one Hilary’s blunder could open the door to the other Hillary’s rise.

    We speak of the attack on Ann Romney by Hilary (one L) Rosen. The fallout raises the odds that Hillary (two L’s) Clinton will end up as Barack Obama’s running mate.

    Rosen went way over the line carrying out the White House message that Mitt Romney is waging a “war on women.” Rosen’s accusation that Ann Romney “never worked a day in her life” is the biggest unforced error by Team Obama so far.

    The issue caught fire and with Ann Romney taking the high road by saying she respects those who make different choices than she did and by joking about the mayhem of raising five boys, the incident capped her hubby’s best week.

    Rick Santorum suspended his campaign, meaning the general election has started with an Obama goof. Two polls showed Romney with a slight lead even before Rosen chimed in.

    For the White House, the irony is as thick as the fog of damage control it spewed. In undercutting one of Obama’s biggest advantages — his lead among female voters — Rosen makes it more likely that Clinton, the political Wonder Woman and still a frenemy of Obama, will be tapped to save the day.

    I know — Obama doesn’t want to go there. White House aides insist Vice President Joe Biden is staying on the ticket. I believe them, or at least I believe that’s their plan.

    I also believe the president would dump Biden in a heartbeat if he concludes that’s the only way to win.

    Drafting Clinton, who said she will resign as secretary of state at the end of the term, would be eating crow, but it beats losing.

    With her appeal to women and working-class whites, she could practically guarantee Obama victory.

    If the economy turns south, and if Mitt Romney makes inroads among women, Obama will have to give the switcheroo real consideration.

    The numbers explain why.

    According to data compiled by Rutgers University, the number of women voters has been higher than men in every presidential election since 1964. While a majority of men tend to vote Republican, women usually lean Democratic and with bigger numbers. They went for Obama by a huge margin in 2008.

    Over 70 million women voted, against 60.7 million men, and women gave 56 percent of their votes to Obama and just 43 percent to John McCain. Men split almost evenly.

    By comparison, Democrat John Kerry got 51 percent of a lower turnout among women in 2004 and lost to George W. Bush.

    The 2012 race was shaping up like 2008, with one survey finding Obama enjoying an 18-point margin among women.

    Then Rosen dropped her bombshell on CNN. She has close ties to the White House — she visited more than 30 times — yet adamantly defended herself for nearly 24 hours before finally apologizing as the heat kept building.

    The way the president, First Lady Michelle Obama and the re-election team ran from Rosen showed the seriousness of the error.

    It reinforces the image of elitism among Democrats and gives Romney an opening among working-class women.

    As for Clinton, some in her camp say it’s not clear she would say yes even if Obama came begging.

    They say she doesn’t want to be vice president and doesn’t see how running on his ticket would help her win the Oval Office in 2016.

    Good points — up to a point. But if Obama needs her, she has little choice. If she says no and he loses, she’ll be blamed. If she says no and he wins, he will owe her nothing in 2016.

    All he has to do his beg. The odds are growing he will.

  2. That is the dadgum SWEETEST video that Mitt and the kids put out for Ann’s birthday. Yeah, I know it’s politically calculated, but the inserted voices from the old home videos are real, and the love is obvious. She comes across like a normal mom and grandma.

    Also, Mitt’s voice saying “sweet baby…” over his child at 1:20 does more to humanize him than anything I’ve yet seen or heard. It’s a powerful video.

  3. RCP, Obummer is back in negative territory, -0.4%, with:

    47.4% “fer”
    47.8% “agin”

    And Lord only knows how badly they had to oversample Dems in order to keep it even that close.

  4. She is one hot grandma!
    ————-
    rgb, Hillary replacing Biden on the the ticket..
    ————-
    From the NYPOST article:
    “Good points — up to a point. But if Obama needs her, she has little choice. If she says no and he loses, she’ll be blamed. If she says no and he wins, he will owe her nothing in 2016.”

    These jornolisters are not above blackmailing. But nothing will faze her at this point and she will do what she wants.

  5. Journolisters: Mom?

    Hillary: Yeah. Where are you?

    J: We’re in the parking lot at Whole Foods in the middle of Virginia. I think. The recent past is kind of a blur. There were some styrofoam columns, and fainting….. and then I’m not sure where we went after that. We weren’t really paying attention, to be honest.

    H: And?

    J: See… the thing is, we need a ride home. And money to tow the car. And probably a new transmission.

    H: I see. And didn’t I tell you that crappy car was in no shape to do an 800 mile trip?

    J: Yeah, but….see, we hit this skid patch coming around Route 2010, and next thing we knew Barry had us in the middle of a cornfield, and half the damn undercarriage of the car was gone! And….

    H: And I seem to recall that you are over 21 (as you kept reminding me), and didn’t need your stinkin’ mother to tell you it was a bad idea to go careening off across the country half-drunk on hopenchange with no money in your pockets and a piece of shit vehicle with 3 bald tires.

    J: Well, yeah, Mom, but you HAVE to come pick us up, because there’s some guys hanging around here who don’t look too friendly – I think the ringleader is called Mitt, and he keeps smirking and pointing at our crapped-out car….and we are getting really nervous here, Mom!

    H: Where is the nearest bus station?

    J: It’s…..um….. I think it’s around the intersection of 2012 and High Unemployment St.

    H: Then I suggest you start walking.

    J: But…but….Mo-ooooooom!

    *click*

  6. Even Joe has some lucid moments:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75178.html

    “Comedian Bill Maher’s comments about Ann Romney could be “bad news for Democrats” if handled incorrectly, MSNBC host and former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough said Monday.

    Discussing Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen’s controversial comments about how Ann Romney “never worked a day in her life,” Maher dug a deeper hole for himself. “What she meant to say, I think, was that Ann Romney has never gotten her ass out of the house to work,” Maher said on his HBO show, “Real Time,” on Friday. [snip]

    The White House must know this is bad news for Democrats … if they don’t handle it correctly,” said Scarborough.

    What was remarkable, added Scarborough, was how quickly the White House distanced themselves from Maher’s remarks.

    “This is fascinating, because Bill Maher has said some extraordinarily insensitive things in the past, and the White House has ignored it … Notice how quickly they jumped out and distanced themselves, which tells me that they’re really seeing in the polls that this does matter,” he said.

    Maher has contributed $1 million to the president’s super PAC, which, as the Republican National Committee tweeted Sunday, makes him the largest donor to that organization.

    Former Obama administration domestic policy adviser Melody Barnes criticized Maher’s comments on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday.

    “You know, the language, the sentiment are problematic, and the campaign has — and the president has said, look, the civility is — it matters. The way we talk to each other matters. And they’re going to have to, as you said, make a decision,” said Barnes.

    “Notice how quickly they jumped out and distanced themselves, which tells me that they’re really seeing in the polls that this does matter,” said Scarborough Monday. “It is important for people at home, who look at politics sometimes too much about policy, instead of about symbolism.”

  7. “…if Obama needs her, she has little choice. If she says no and he loses, she’ll be blamed. If she says no and he wins, he will owe her nothing in 2016.”
    ======

    All Bullshit.

    HRC doesn’t care about taking the blame for an Obama loss. Why should she? Who would blame her, anyway? Obama? Fuck Obama. Axelrod? Double-fuck Axelrod, Jarrett, the whole bunch. Let them whine: if HRC is responsible for an Obama loss, she’d be doing the country a favor and that whole crew would be gone gone gone just like W.

    And she doesn’t care about how much Obama owes her, now, in 2016 or ever. If Obama owes somebody something or nothing, that somebody still gets nothing in return except for a ticket under the bus.

  8. @admin, if Obama people wanted the Rosen thing gone and away quickly, it didn’t happen. All those other fools (like Maher and many others) dug their heels deeper and made it worse by defending Rosen again and again and piling on on Ann R. There was a WAPO article I saw that spew much venom on Ann R. while defending Rosen, it didn’t make sense. They were all incensed that Romney would come out swinging in this little war.

  9. Clinton is the real undefeated. If the first female President isn’t Hillary Clinton, whoever she is, she will be standing on Clinton’s shoulders.

    And yes, Hilary Clinton is cool.

    http://johnwsmart.wordpress.com/

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

    Excellent article! And the conclusion is very like what Sarah Palin said in her acceptance speech: Hillary make 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling.

    Hm, I’m trying to remember where I got in trouble for saying Sarah was standing on Hillary’s shoulders.

  10. BTW, Romney has appointed Beth Myers, his chief of staff from MA governor days to head his VP search.

  11. If only Barack Obama had been so lucky. He would have willingly allowed a bull to mount him if only to avoid the Romney plowing he got last week.

    Oh admin! 😆

    BTR

  12. you seem pretty predisposed to think that the police didn’t keep evidence or screwed up. I don’t think we know either way what was kept or wasn’t kept… I think they save that stuff for trial… And as I’m sure you know, sometimes the state doesn’t want a trial, because they don’t think they can win…

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

    Wbboei gave a good defense of the police silence about the evidence. Of course we don’t know. It’s very frustrating, all the speculation while the basic forensics are being withheld.

    It’s just that not collecting or saving the right evidence would fit with a lot of the behavior we do see, so imo it’s a strong possibility worth considering.

  13. ….As for Clinton, some in her camp say it’s not clear she would say yes even if Obama came begging.

    They say she doesn’t want to be vice president and doesn’t see how running on his ticket would help her win the Oval Office in 2016.

    Good points — up to a point. But if Obama needs her, she has little choice. If she says no and he loses, she’ll be blamed. If she says no and he wins, he will owe her nothing in 2016.

    All he has to do his beg. The odds are growing he will.

    ——-
    They are wrong as they can be, Hillary could always come up with some reason to tell him to take his job and shove it, as VP or and other underling job.

    She could also say she has to decline the offer due to health reasons…working for him again would be a real pain in the a$$.

  14. First day of Gallup general election tracking has Mitt 47%, Obama 45%. And that’s registered voters. Anyone want to bet that it’s even worse with likely voters? Who is more energized to GOTV this year?

  15. HillaryForTexas, “H: Where is the nearest bus station?

    J: It’s…..um….. I think it’s around the intersection of 2012 and High Unemployment St.

    H: Then I suggest you start walking.

    J: But…but….Mo-ooooooom!”

    Revenge is best served with a clicking phone.

  16. The way the president, First Lady Michelle Obama and the re-election team ran from Rosen showed the seriousness of the error.

    It reinforces the image of elitism among Democrats and gives Romney an opening among working-class women.

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

    What? Someone says one rich woman who HAS never done a paying job is not qualified to speak for WORKING women — and this gives Romney an opening among “working-class women”.

  17. if Obama needs her, she has little choice. If she says no and he loses, she’ll be blamed.

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

    Thanks for good sense as usual, Jes. Anyway, all she has to say is that being a SAHGM is more important. 😉

  18. Ever get the sense that the White House and Obama’s campaign to fool most of the people most of the time is unraveling? On the 100th anniversary (plus 2 days) of the sinking of the Titanic it’s the right question to ask.
    —————–
    Admin: wonderful article with a wonderful opening sentence (above).

  19. You might like the Goodwin article written in the N.Y. Post the other day, but look what that paper did to Hillary in today’s edition.

    The front page – for all to see!

    ‘Hill knocks back a brew’.

    http://www.nypost.com/archives/covers/

    That’s really not fair. She wasn’t doing anything wrong. She was enjoying herself.

  20. jeswezey
    April 16th, 2012 at 2:02 pm
    ——————
    A big AMEN on your comment. I agree with the admin. Hillary is not going to help the pos, and why should she? There is NO UPSIDE for sticking her neck out for the “once”.

  21. I loved the David Axelrod video. Karma, baby. It’s karma hitting when it’s most effective (and deserved).

  22. Yes, turndownobama. Hilary Rosen is an elitist making big money, but yet spouting off as if she can relate to the average working class female. News flash… if you think it absurd that Ann Romney can relate to females that inhabit the lower rungs of the economic ladder, it’s not much different for Hilary Rosen who should have taken a long look in the mirror before she threw her class warfare grenade. It blew up in her face, and rightly so.

  23. From a comment on LI:

    “Romney said the GOP must offer its own policies to woo Hispanics, including a “Republican DREAM Act,” referring to the legislative proposal favored by Democrats that would offer illegal immigrants a limited path to citizenship, to give Hispanic voters a real choice between parties. ”

    Remember how he attacked Perry and Gingrich for being soft on immigration? Anyway, you can read more about this (with quotes from 2 prior debates) here http://libertarian-neocon.blogspot.com/2012/04/romney-flip-flops-again-this-time-on.html

  24. Great post, admin!
    “Were drugs or the drug cartels a potential threat?”

    Does anyone know if the Secret Service agents sent home early had to go through customs? I can’t think of a better way to smuggle in hundreds of millions of drug dealer cash to launder through Obama’s campaign. The replacement agents could have flown down with no luggage, returned with the actual luggage of the “johns” (who took home the loot). Somehow the official version of a hooker scandal just doesn’t sound plausible.Especially since we have heard through the “insider” of money laundering in the ’08 campaign.

  25. Hilary Rosen is an elitist making big money, but yet spouting off as if she can relate to the average working class female.

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

    Rosen earned her own money, starting from bar-tending to get through college. Ann Romney was born into a well to do family such that she has NEVER had a paycheck job. She now has five houses and two cadillacs.

    As for ‘relate to’, that’s emotionalistic. If you think Rosen said that, pls cite. Anyone can claim to ‘relate to’. Ann admitted she has never had ‘financial struggles’ which even most SAHMs have in feeding their children.

    Rosen was not offering herself as a “touchstone” for Mitt Romney: just saying that Ann was not qualified.

  26. Romney Tells Obama to ‘Start Packing’ in ABC News Exclusive Interview

    In this video clip, Diane Sawyer wrinkles up her nose and sounds a lot like Turndown, she says he is rich, even having a Cadillac (an AMERICAN CAR), and an elevator for his cars and maybe he has a problem ‘relating’ to the average person…Mitt tries to hide a smile from the questions absurdity, and seems to do well turning this spin from Sawyer and talking about Barry’s failures.

    Sawyer is no poor person either, so why can she talk about something as if she if poor like the middle class and Mitt is too rich to understand.

    Also, isn’t it so that poor or most middle class folks can’t win or afford to run for Congress, Governor and especially President? Who would vote for someone little like Joan Q. Public?

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/04/romney-tells-obama-to-start-packing-in-abc-news-exclusive-interview/

  27. Diane Sawyer wrinkles up her nose–a cocaine symptom no doubt. Before Monica, there was Dianne Sawyer in the Nixon White House. Knowing that, it is hard as hell to take her seriously.

  28. BarneyBoy throws his Barry under the bus…is this why Barney decided to ‘retire’? Better to read what he says than have to listen to him mumble though it.

    ——

    Barney Frank: Obama Made ‘Mistake’ With Health Care Push

    Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., said he advised President Obama against taking up health care reform following a special election in 2010 that changed Democrats’ fortunes in the Senate, saying that he should have instead turned his focus to financial reform.

    Frank referenced former President Bill Clinton and his failed health care plan from the 1990s. “Obama made the same mistake Clinton made,” Frank said in a wide-ranging interview with New York magazine. “When you try to extend health care to people who don’t have it, people who have it and are on the whole satisfied with it get nervous.”

    The outgoing representative from Massachusetts added that after Republican Scott Brown won former Sen. Edward M. Kennedy’s seat, breaking Democrats’ filibuster-proof majority, Obama should have backed down: “I think we paid a terrible price for health care. I would not have pushed it as hard. As a matter of fact, after Scott Brown won, I suggested going back. I would have started with financial reform but certainly not health care,” Frank said.

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/barney-frank-obama-made-mistake-with-health-care-push-20120416

  29. Yes, Barney, but you voted for that POS bill anyway, didn’t you? In the middle of the night on Christmas Eve, you bent right over and kissed Obama’s ass, liek a good little soldier. Spare me the “I had my doubts at the time” crap. So did the Captain of the Titanic, I’m sure, as he would assure us today if he was alive.

    I don’t give a flying crap what you THOUGHT in the privacy of your tiny little partisan brain, Barney. I care what you DID. And what you DID, Barney, was pipe right up with a cheery “Aye!” when that vote was called. That’s really all I need to know – so f*ck off.

  30. Betty–this is from Michael Barones’s article of a couple weeks ago. He is a credible source–used to be the author of the Almanac of American Politics:

    It’s been apparent for some time that immigration from Mexico and Latin America fell off sharply during the 2007-09 recession and has not rebounded since. Illegals from Mexico are apparently continuing to self-deport (to use Mitt Romney’s term) and their numbers are not being replenished by illegals from that country. As I have frequently argued that we are probably at a turning point, and will never again see immigration from Mexico at the huge rates that prevailed from 1983 to 2007. Among the reasons: Mexico has been growing more prosperous, its birth rates declined sharply two decades ago and it now has a middle class majority (as former Foreign Minister Jorge Castañeda argues in his 2011 book Mañana Forever?). For some years I feared that Mexico could not achieve higher economic growth than the United States since our economies have been tied so tightly together by NAFTA since 1993. But in the past two years Mexico’s growth rate has been on the order of 5% to 7%. It’s looking like Mexico’s growth rate is tied not to that of the United States but to that of Texas, which has been a growth leader because of its intelligent public policies which have prevented public employee unions from plundering the private sector economy. Anyway, looking ahead, anyone seeking changes in our immigration laws should keep in mind that immigration in the future is not likely to look like immigration in the recent past.

  31. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Wire/2012/0412/Hilary-Rosen-vs.-Ann-Romney-why-the-dust-up-is-fake

    Now, it’s Republicans pretending there’s a big national fight over a subject that most women basically agree on – the decision to work or stay home. Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen unintentionally set off this fake firestorm when she commented on CNN Wednesday night that Ann Romney – whom Mitt Romney has been referring to as his top adviser on women’s issues – has “never worked a day in her life.” Here’s the full quote:

    “What you have is Mitt Romney running around the country, saying, ‘Well, you know, my wife tells me that what women really care about are economic issues, and when I listen to my wife, that’s what I’m hearing.’ Guess what? His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing, in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school, and why do we worry about their future.”

    The Romney campaign pounced, with Ann Romney putting out her first-ever tweet:
    “I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.”

    So why is this a fake fight? Because first of all, we don’t think there’s anybody out there (with kids at least) who doesn’t think raising children is hard work – as Ms. Rosen herself later said. But more to the point, because the debate over women staying home or going to work isn’t really much of a debate anymore – since increasingly, it’s a choice that most women simply don’t get to make. For women who do get to make that choice, that’s great – whatever they decide. But for the vast majority, forgoing a paycheck just isn’t an option these days.

    It’s clear from the context that Rosen wasn’t criticizing Ann Romney for staying home. She was criticizing the Romney campaign for presenting Ann Romney as an expert on the economic concerns of women, when Romney’s own economic circumstances (including the fact that she was able to stay home with all five of her sons) are not those that most women have.

  32. Posted by Repair_Man_Jack (Diary)

    Monday, April 16th at 11:30AM EDT
    26 Comments

    Influence Peddling. A Business That Never Dies.

    More broadly, ….those who donated the most to Mr. Obama and the Democratic Party ….were far more likely to visit the White House than others. Among donors who gave $30,000 or less, about 20 percent visited the White House, according to a New York Times analysis that matched names in the visitor logs with donor records. But among those who donated $100,000 or more, the figure rises to about 75 percent.

    – (HT: The New York Times)

    There is another way America could die soon. It won’t even frighten you unless you see it quietly happening. It won’t even show up onarmageddononline. It happens a bit at a time, as more and more functions of American life are no longer handled by legitimate channels.

    These things get taken care of by The Aristocracy of Pull. Things are always “different” for our current POTUS. The usual rules do not apply. His first executive order as President sealed every known record of his life from public view.

    This was only the beginning. If you want him to hear your particular issue of the day, you need to appear before him at The White House along with your admission ticket. This admission ticket consists of a signed check to Barack Obama’s political operation for $35,800. Former Congressman Patrick J. Kennedy is remarkably unashamed as he describes the process below.

    Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy (D-RI) is unabashed about such dealings, however. He personally signed a $35,800 check to Obama’s re-election fund while looking for administration support for one of his projects. “If you want to call it ‘quid pro quo,’ fine,” he told the Times. “At the end of the day, I want to make sure I do my part.”

    (HT: Big Government)

    If you want to call it “Quid pro quo”, you are probably being entirely too nice. Rampant influence-peddling and shameless and meretricious corruption would more accurately describe the current White House shakedown operation. Barack Obama increasingly runs the Executive Branch of The United States Government the way Vito Corleone ran his fictional crime empire.

    So how is this bad? Why isn’t that “just how DC works?” It becomes an insidious evil when the only way to get heard and the only way to receive justice is to humiliate yourself before His Eminence the way Amerigo Bonasera did in Mario Puzo’s fictional masterpiece.

    Don Corleone was gentle, patient. “Why do you fear to give your first allegiance to me?” he said. “You go to the law courts and wait for months. You spend money on lawyers who know full well you are to be made a fool of. You accept judgment from a judge who sells himself like the worst whore in the streets. Years gone by, when you needed money, you went to the banks and paid ruinous interest, waited hat in hand like a beggar while they sniffed around, poked their noses up your very asshole to make sure you could pay them back.”
    The Don paused, his voice became sterner. “But if you had come to me, my purse would have been yours. If you had come to me for justice those scum who ruined your daughter would be weeping bitter tears this day. If by some misfortune an honest man like yourself made enemies they would become my enemies”– the Don raised his arm, finger pointing at Bonasera– “and then, believe me, they would fear you.”

    The Godfather, Mario Puzo

    But all of this generosity occurred for a price. A simple price of returning the favor whenever and however The Don commanded. The Don could commandeer your life at any point. Than was the deal.

    Amerigo Bonasera translates from Italian to “America Farewell.” This is an accurate description for what happens when a person becomes beholden to The Don for anything. The Don may smile. He may promise you “Hope and Change.” Yet after all is said and done, once you rely on his favors, you are nothing but just another flunkie. America goes bonasera.

  33. ” Diane Sawyer wrinkles up her nose and sounds a lot like Turndown, she says he is rich, even having a Cadillac (an AMERICAN CAR), and an elevator for his cars and maybe he has a problem ‘relating’ to the average person”

    [[ I didn’t say that. I said that a rich person like ANN Romney might learn to understand average persons’ problems if she studied, but Ann gave no evidence of understanding them.

    Btw, last I heard, Ann has TWO Cadillacs, one for each of her East Coast homes. ]]

    “Sawyer is no poor person either, so why can she talk about something as if she if poor like the middle class and Mitt is too rich to understand.”

    [[ SAwyer isn’t running for president. Sawyer isn’t Mr. Romney’s choice for fielding questions about women’s issues. It’s Mr. Romney’s choice of advisor (or of token women to mention) that is being criticized. ]]

  34. It’s not boys, yet…

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/secret-service-prostitutes-colombia/2012/04/16/id/436004

    Investigators probing the Secret Service prostitute scandal are looking into whether any of the girls involved were underage, Ronald Kessler, the journalist who broke the story, tells Newsmax.TV exclusively.

    Kessler warned that more scandalous details of the Colombian cavorting are still to come, including the age of the prostitutes.

    Kessler, Newsmax’s chief Washington correspondent, broke the story of the scandal over the weekend. The details have since been confirmed by the Secret Service, and President Barack Obama has called for an investigation. [snip]

    Kessler, whose reporting partly led to the dismissal of FBI Director William Sessions in 1993, said Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan also needs to be fired, especially as this is the second major scandal he has presided over. He was also in charge when three intruders wormed their way past security to attend a 2009 White House dinner in honor of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

    “These are not just little errors,” Kessler said, adding that consorting with prostitutes could easily lead to blackmail, which could put the president at risk. [snip]

    He said the prostitutes could have blackmailed the men and that could have led to a foreign power such as Russia being able to plant bugging devices in presidential limousines or even the White House.

    “This is the way things work,” said Kessler. “It doesn’t have to be something that is carried out right away. It could be carried out six months later. But that’s why you have requirements that they conduct themselves appropriately and when someone wants top-secret clearance, they never get into a compromised position.”

  35. Morning Jay: Obama’s Troubled Reelection Strategy
    6:00 AM, Apr 13, 2012 • By JAY COST
    Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

    Karl Rove had a spot-on column in the Wall Street Journal yesterday. He wrote, in part:

    Mr. Obama’s speech to the Associated Press last week and two appearances in Florida on Tuesday provide a glimpse of the low road the president and his campaign likely will take.

    He will distort beyond recognition his opponent’s arguments…

    No honest differences are possible with Mr. Obama. He will impugn the motives of any who disagree with him…

    To divert attention from his administration’s many failures, Mr. Obama will also offer poll-tested nuggets that pit the many against the few.

    Exactly. If I had to offer a brief summary of Obama’s campaign strategy this year, it would be this:

    Clearly, this is not an ideal strategy, for any candidate. Typically, successful reelection campaigns – e.g. 1936, 1956, 1972, 1984, and 1996 – have been based on narratives about how the country has turned a corner, thanks to the incumbent’s greatness. Think “Nixon’s The One!” “It’s Morning In America” or “Bridge To The 21st Century.” None of that applies to President Obama, who instead looks to tar Mitt Romney as the evil stepchild of J.P. Morgan and Barry Goldwater.

    The obvious question is: why is he doing this? The answer is simple, and suggests Obama’s lead in the head-to-head polls is quite tenuous. Recall Ronald Reagan’s closing statement in the October 1980 debate:
    Related Stories

    Morning Jay: Obama on Thin Ice
    Romney’s Latest Ad Warns of Obama ‘Attack Machine’
    Santorum Ad: Obama or Romney?
    Morning Jay: A Preview of the April Primaries
    Morning Jay: The Calendar Hurts Romney

    More by Jay Cost

    Morning Jay: Obama on Thin Ice
    Morning Jay: A Sorry Spectacle
    Morning Jay: In Wisconsin, Romney Develops Momentum
    Morning Jay: A Preview of the April Primaries
    Morning Jay: Why Were Liberals So Surprised By the …

    Next Tuesday all of you will go to the polls; you’ll stand there in the polling place and make a decision. I think when you make that decision, it might be well if you would ask yourself, are you better off than you were 4 years ago? Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was 4 years ago? Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was 4 years ago? Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do you feel that our security is as safe, that we’re as strong as we were 4 years ago? And if you answer all of those questions yes, why then, I think your choice is very obvious as to who you’ll vote for. If you don’t agree, if you don’t think that this course that we’ve been on for the last 4 years is what you would like to see us follow for the next 4, then I could suggest another choice that you have.

    This, put simply, is Barack Obama’s problem. If the 2012 election is framed on “are you better off than you were four years ago?,” then he is going to lose. His record on the economy, the deficit, energy policy, and health care are all very unpopular.

    So, Obama’s objective is to get the country to think about other things. In particular, he has of late employed a series of gimmicks to induce the country to conceive of Mitt Romney in the above terms. The whole “war on women” is exactly along those lines, as is the Buffett Rule. Both speak to the core strategy – Romney is a conservative radical and tool of big business who wants to deprive women of birth control and help only the rich get richer.

    In pulling this off, Obama has two very substantial problems.

    First, Mitt Romney will have an opportunity to define himself for the electorate, funded by hundreds of millions of dollars worth of television ads. And he has a compelling story to tell: family man and father of five, started his own company that invested in a lot of visible businesses, saved the Salt Lake City Olympics, and worked with Democrats in Massachusetts of all places. It is going to be easier said than done to stick either the Barry Goldwater or the J.P. Morgan label on him.

    Second, and more importantly, this is not what swing voters want to talk about. Think of the campaign in terms of consumer economics: Customers want Walmart and Target to stock their shelves with certain items at certain prices, and the purchasing power of their dollars forces the two firms to comply. Well, our parties are like Walmart and Target, the voters are their customers, and the campaigns are like the marketplace. In the competition for votes, the two parties invariably end up talking about what the country, and in particular the swing vote, wants to talk about.

    I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that the average swing voter does not want to talk about the “war on women,” the Buffett rule, or whatever else Team Obama is going to throw out there in the weeks and months to come. That voter wants to talk about jobs, the economy, the deficit, gas prices, the health care bill–in other words, all the issues where the president is vulnerable. And the competition of the campaign means that swing voter will get what he wants – Team Romney is more than happy to discuss all those issues, and so Obama will have no choice but to respond.

  36. A couple decades ago, shortly before its demise, the CEO of Boise Cascade lauded a new marketing strategy which he and is Harvard trained MBAs had devised to reposition the company in the marketplace and avert a catastrophe which had been brewing for a few years, thanks again to the Harvard trained MBAs who replaced the prior management team who grew up with the business and knew that they were doing but lacked that essential Harvard sheepskin. A reporter asked him how the program was fairing and he said just fine, only the market has not recognized how wonderful it will be. Sometime later the company filed for bankruptcy. Later, they all took to skinning the sheep. More money in that than timber products under their benighted concept. In Obama’s case, he is already bankrupt, and the filing will occur in November.

  37. Shadowfax
    April 16th, 2012 at 6:29 pm
    —————-
    I just saw that interview on TV. They made the visuals the least flattering. Yeah, my husband watching with me said what kind of questions are these..he does not usually react. Romney’s answers were good.

  38. pm

    Good to know the interview went well, it was difficult to tell when there is only a short snip-it.
    Thanks.

  39. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/16/us-usa-congress-taxes-vote-idUSBRE83F1AC20120416

    Senate Republicans on Monday blocked President Barack Obama’s “Buffett Rule” legislation, which would have put a 30-percent minimum tax on millionaires, in a debate that is likely to resonate through the November elections.

    Democrats, as expected, failed to garner the 60 votes needed in the 100-member Senate to move forward to a full debate and vote on the bill aimed at squeezing more tax revenues out of the wealthy.

    Obama and congressional Republicans are squaring off this week over tax hikes for millionaires and a competing Republican plan to give new tax cuts for businesses.

    Though scant changes to tax policy are expected ahead of the November 6 general election, the skirmishes will give voters a preview of debates they will hear over the next seven months.

    “I do think it is an important message for Washington to send to middle-class Americans,” said Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat sponsoring the legislation. He said Democrats will “keep pushing this issue all year long.”

    Obama and his fellow Democrats are arguing that raising taxes on the rich will help reduce deficits and bring more fairness to the tax code. Congressional Republicans are pushing a much different narrative of tax cuts – even if they add to deficits – as a way of creating jobs.

    As Americans scurry to file tax returns by Tuesday, the Senate on Monday debated the so-called Buffett Rule, which would require households earning more than $1 million to pay at least a 30-percent tax rate.

    Central to Obama’s “tax fairness” re-election campaign theme, the rule is named after billionaire Warren Buffett, who supports it and famously complains that he pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary.

    Republicans argued that raising taxes would hurt the fragile economy. Republican Senator Susan Collins voted for the tax hike on the wealthy, while Democratic Senator Mark Pryor voted against Obama’s initiative.

    A series of pivotal decisions on tax policy are looming at the year-end, when lower tax rates for all individuals – enacted under former President George W. Bush – are set to expire. These include estate, capital gains and dividend tax rates.

    Economists worry that a partisan stalemate after the presidential and congressional elections could stall action on those decisions and several other measures, hobbling the economic recovery.

    “Politicians’ time would be better spent working on an overhaul of the tax system that could actually pass rather than reforms that are likely to go nowhere,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Budget.

  40. She asked him ‘who has better humor, Obama or you?’! ROFL.. He said he does not know what Obama has because he does not know him.

  41. Here they go again, I wonder how many dead people will be registered and if the GOP is watching closely???
    —-

    Obama Camp, Seeing Shift, Bets on Long Shot in Arizona

    PHOENIX — President Obama’s re-election campaign is dispatching workers across Arizona’s college campuses and Latino neighborhoods this spring, registering as many new voters as they can in an organized, three-month effort to determine whether they can put this unlikely state into play for Democrats this November.

    By any measure the obstacles are considerable: Arizona has voted for precisely one Democratic president since Truman was in the White House. Yet Mr. Obama’s aides said in interviews that they thought it was possible they could move the needle of history by winning in 2012 a state that analysts believe is heading Democratic in national elections, but may not be there yet.

    Obama strategists are simply following the same techniques they used in 2008 when putting states like North Carolina and Indiana into play. Then, too, there was much initial skepticism, though both states ended up going for Mr. Obama.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/us/politics/obama-campaign-turns-attention-on-arizona.html?_r=1&ref=politics

  42. Since Witney Houston’s chemical analysis/autopsy came in, I wonder when of if we will find out that Breitbart was murdered, or if it’s just going to swept under the rug?

  43. Alex Machi does the best job outing Hilary Rosen back in a 2008 expose..
    ____________

    Outing Hilary Rosen, why do some Hillary Clinton traitors end up at the Huffington Post? Rosen titled as Editor-at-Large

    I outed Hilary Rosen four years ago on my Hillary-Wins blog for her Huffington Post faux article on why she still was supporting Hillary Clinton even though in her words Clinton no longer had a chance to win. ( full article at link)

    h…w..huffingtonpost.com/hilary-rosen/why-do-we-stick-with-her_b_103861.html

    Hill Buzz had come up with the phrase “concern troll” regarding Obama operatives that would pine for Hillary even though they knew it was impossible for her to win.

    The Huffington post 2008 article written by Hilary Rosen was a classic “concern troll” literary fabrication. Rosen pined for something that she realized was no longer possible (even though her claim that Clinton’s democratic nomination in 2008 a lost cause was actually untruthful) Concern Troll equals “I feel your pain, but now its time to come to reality”.
    ______________

    Rosen’s recent attack against Mitt Romney’s wife, Ann Romney-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FwxaM7TOylo

    smells of the kind of attack that Hillary Clinton was subjected to early on in the 2008 democratic race by Soros, MSNBC and Huffington Post operatives.

    Hillary Clinton was attacked during the 2008 democratic nomination race as having done NOTHING during her time in the white house but direct white house staff to serve crumpets and tea to her tea party guests in between her shredding whitewater documents with her fingernails.

    And once again, we can find the Huffington Post taking the worst shots, witness the Ari Emanuel hit piece on Hillary Clinton. The Emanuel article ridicules Hillary Clinton for claiming to play a role in inspiring Irish women to be catalysts in the Irish peace treaty.

    This was the typical Huffington Post bile that has been regularly heaped at female politicians such as Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, or those connected to politicians such as Ann Romney, or ridiculing Irish Housewives for the insinuation that they had any influence in the Ireland peace treaty, women just don’t matter unless Arianna Huffington decides they matter.

    http://dailypuma.blogspot.com/2012/04/outing-hillary-rosen-why-do-some.html

  44. Angela Corey has some ‘splaining to do for not interviewing relevant witnesses.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/16/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUSBRE83F19Y20120416

    Neighbors of George Zimmerman say he had bandages on his nose and head the day after he shot dead Trayvon Martin, supporting statements by the neighborhood watch volunteer that he was beaten in a confrontation with the black Florida teenager.

    The extent of Zimmerman’s injuries could be crucial to his legal defense under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law, which allows the use of deadly force when someone has the reasonable belief he could face death or great bodily harm.

    Police said Zimmerman, who has been charged with second-degree murder in the racially charged case, was bleeding from the nose and the back of his head and was treated by medics before being taken to Sanford police station after the February 26 shooting. [snip]

    Jorge Rodriguez, Zimmerman’s next-door neighbor, told Reuters that when he saw Zimmerman the day after the incident, “he had two big, butterfly bandages on the back of his head, and another big bandage…on the bridge of his nose.” He was talking to a police detective in his driveway.

    Rodriguez’s wife Audria also said she saw the bandages and a third neighbor, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, agreed with the Rodriguez couple’s account. “I saw two bandages on the back of his head, and his nose was all swollen up,” said the witness, who had watched from a nearby second-floor window. [snip]

    The neighbors said they spoke to Sanford police and the FBI in their investigations but did not recall speaking to the office of special prosecutor Angela Corey, who charged Zimmerman with second-degree murder.

  45. valleyboy
    April 16th, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    Great post, admin!
    “Were drugs or the drug cartels a potential threat?”

    Does anyone know if the Secret Service agents sent home early had to go through customs? I can’t think of a better way to smuggle in hundreds of millions of drug dealer cash to launder through Obama’s campaign. The replacement agents could have flown down with no luggage, returned with the actual luggage of the “johns” (who took home the loot). Somehow the official version of a hooker scandal just doesn’t sound plausible.Especially since we have heard through the “insider” of money laundering in the ‘08 campaign.
    _____________

    Excellent- fresh approach… thanks for helping us smell the flowers. Reminds me of Michelle’s impromptu trip to South Africa with her huge entourage, kids, Nanny Robinson etc.. I suspected at the time, she was carrying contraband funds for Obama’s cash strapped campaign when those “little donations” were drying up… plenty of suitcases went home in that trip… She bought beau-coup clothing for herself and the family while destined for DC. Who was going to check her luggage for contents?

  46. admin
    April 16th, 2012 at 8:02 pm

    Angela Corey has some ’splaining to do for not interviewing relevant witnesses.
    ________________

    I’ve never seen such an overdressed, cheerful, smiley prosecutor?

  47. SAwyer isn’t running for president. Sawyer isn’t Mr. Romney’s choice for fielding questions about women’s issues. It’s Mr. Romney’s choice of advisor (or of token women to mention) that is being criticized.
    _______________________________
    Turndown: I realize that Sawyer is not running for president. But she is trying to influence the election, rather than reporting objectively. Therefore, she has opened the door to factual inquiries about her personal life, her bona fides, and whether she is angling for a White House job if Obama is gifted a second term. We have to make this personal where the press is concerned. In effect, she is testifying in favor of the president, therefore we have a right to look for bias, motive and interest just as we would with any other witness. This is the price they pay for abandoning the role of neutral and embracing the role of a partisan witness. I say head hunt all members of the blowjob media, and let god sort them out.

  48. As for Diane Sawyer with her idiot self, what, she can relate to the everyday man/woman??
    Ace of Spades had an excellent article on this.

    http://minx.cc/?post=328473

    ” Diane Sawyer asks if people can possibly relate to someone who has a car elevator in his garage. She of the $10 million NYC pied-a-terre she bought from Robert Redford (steeply discounted from $15 million).”

  49. Mrs. Smith
    April 16th, 2012 at 8:16 pm
    Reminds me of Michelle’s impromptu trip to South Africa with her huge entourage, kids, Nanny Robinson etc.. I suspected at the time, she was carrying contraband funds for Obama’s cash strapped campaign when those “little donations” were drying up… plenty of suitcases went home in that trip
    ________________

    Was that in ’08? You are right – they would never check her bags. That would be racist.

  50. ADMIN, PLEASE EMBED

    The GOP and Romney have some bang-up ad teams this time around. It helps that Obama is such an easy target. This is a powerful ad:


  51. tim
    April 16th, 2012 at 9:33 pm
    Axelrod is leading the team going after rich guy Romney. What a bunch of hypocrites.

  52. HillaryforTexas
    April 16th, 2012 at 9:37 pm
    ——————

    Yeah, that was great. I don’t think he will take all this very well.

  53. wbboei
    April 16th, 2012 at 8:44 pm

    SAwyer isn’t running for president. Sawyer isn’t Mr. Romney’s choice for fielding questions about women’s issues. It’s Mr. Romney’s choice of advisor (or of token women to mention) that is being criticized.
    _______________________________
    Turndown:
    &&&&&&&&

    Come to think of it, Ann Romney isn’t running for president either.

    She’s close to the hubbub for sure.

    Now Diane Sawyer is too.

    So Diane Sawyer, as a PUBLIC FIGURE who insists on a HIGH PROFILE JOB with a LARGE $ALARY and as a MAJOR TALKING HEAD figure in SHAPING THE PUBLIC’S PERCEPTION in an ELECTION YEAR should take whatever criticism and pointing out of hypocrisy comes her way.

    Turndown, you are just going to keep gnawing away at this bullshit, aren’t you?

  54. In effect, she is testifying in favor of the president, therefore we have a right to look for bias, motive and interest just as we would with any other witness.

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

    However it is not necessary for a witness to be herself qualified as a top rank advisor to the Presdient on a certain subject, in order to criticize his choice of someone else as top ranking advisor.

    You might say that Dr. Sanjay Gupta was not qualified for Surgeon General, without being yourself a medical doctor.

  55. Hillary Clinton was attacked during the 2008 democratic nomination race as having done NOTHING during her time in the white house but direct white house staff to serve crumpets and tea to her tea party guests

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

    I don’t thik Hillary’s response consisted of saying that tea and crumpets are really more important, and that the critics must hate all food. 😉

  56. I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that the average swing voter does not want to talk about the “war on women,” the Buffett rule

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

    Some may want to talk about Lily Ledbetter etc, and the GOP defunding of Planned Parenthood etc which have been called ‘GOP war on women.’

    I doubt if many want to talk about Ann Romney’s waah waah Mommy Wars, though.

  57. Someone has now progressed from foot in mouth to gnawing her own legs off in sheer stubbornness. Whatever – hope she’s having fun.

    Found an interesting article re: Buffet. It seems that he bought the particular railroad in 2009 that will be shipping all that oil that Obama refuses to let flow through the Keystone pipeline. Making a tidy profit from no pipeline, that Mr. Buffet will be. Isn’t that just cozy?

    http://www.westernjournalism.com/warren-buffett-profits-hugely-from-obama-keystone-decision/

  58. Greta is going to cover ‘Hillary’s night out’ in a few minutes. Showing Hillary dancing and having fun…

  59. HillaryforTexas
    April 16th, 2012 at 10:17 pm

    Scroll button is a good tool. 🙂 I don’t read it anymore, just scroll by.

    ZeroHedge I believe has all the details on how Buffett profited massively from the rejection of keystone, Berkshire owns a good amount in CSX.

  60. admin can you embed the video @ 7.58 pm
    ________________

    Mrs. Smith
    April 16th, 2012 at 7:58 pm

    Alex Machi does the best job outing Hilary Rosen back in a 2008 expose..
    ____________

    VB:

    “Was that in ‘08? You are right – they would never check her bags. That would be racist.”
    _______________

    racist bags are TSA invisible-

  61. I loved the RNC ad on ObaMAO! Now that will resonate with voters.

    Thanks, Admin, for another thought provoking article.

  62. I have to post this just because of the new name for Axelrod. This the ONLY way I will refer to him henceforth. ROTFLMAO!

    Pornstache McCombover to plot class warfare from new $1.7 million Gold Coast digs chicagotribune.com/business/break… cc @davidaxelrod—
    David Burge (@iowahawkblog) April 17, 2012

  63. Gallup today (as seen on Althouse) — paging jbstonesfan

    Now, what’s interesting is that both Democrats and Republicans back their own guy 90%. The difference is in the independents, who break 45% for Romney and only 39% for Obama.

    That’s a poll of registered voters, so it’s very important to factor in the likelihood of voting. 80% of Romney voters say they “definitely will vote” and only 76% of Obama voters say that. Independents are also at the 76% likely level. So… tight race? That’s all you can say?

    Of course, Rasmussen has been doing a daily tracking poll of likely voters for a long time. Today’s poll put Romney at 47% and Obama at 44.

  64. http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcsiegel/2012/04/15/obamacares-horseless-chariot/

    Doctors, no fans of health insurance, are openly rooting that Obamacare will be struck down by SCOTUS, as appears to be the direction of things after last month’s oral arguments.

    A recent poll by sermo.com, a physican’s website, revealed that 75 percent of doctors are against the health care law, and a survey by Deloitte, a major health consulting firm, found that 69 percent of physicians are “pessimistic about the future of medicine” because of the law.

    Why? Because we physicians understand what many lawyers and judges don’t, that insurance – no matter what kind – presents a bureaucratic barrier between doctor and patient, between my desire to help you and actually being able to do so. The so-called Affordable Care Act increases the problem by extending it to more people rather than providing solutions. If Obamacare stands, its review boards and committees will make recommendations that are sure to stifle my creativity and interfere with my one-on-one doctoring even as they decide that one medical service is better than another and that I am being paid too much for procedures it has taken me decades to master.

    I am concerned that the machinations of Obamacare will squelch a young person’s desire to become a doctor in the first place. At a time when we need more doctors, not less, the number of medical school applicants is down 3,000 applicants a year since 1996. Today’s graduating medical students are looking down the road into Obamacare’s overregulated poor paying future and are choosing to not become low paying primary care doctors like me. Studies have shown that the ranks of primary care internists have already decreased by a third from 1985 to 2008. That number is sure to double by 2014 unless the law is dismantled.

  65. I like Nile Gardiner when he goes after Obama but he has a stupid post about Hillary dancing.. and getting beaten in the comments.

  66. Watkins is afraid that people will understand if a defendant is acquitted because there is reasonable doubt about his guilt. He faults Fulton precisely because her remarks may help defuse political tensions around the case. Or, as Stranahan puts it, because “of an apparent fear that ‘being honest’ could negatively affect the race-baiting political agenda that Obama allies like Al Sharpton have carefully crafted.”
    —————————————————

    Get Her off the Stage Right Now’
    The perils of politicizing the George Zimmerman case.

    Wall Street Journal

    By JAMES TARANTO

    From Breitbart.com’s Lee Stranahan we learn that “a well-known, mainstream media-vetted college professor named Dr. Boyce Watkins” is urging Al Sharpton to give Sybrina Fulton, mother of Trayvon Martin, the hook. “Get her off the stage right now,” Watkins urges Sharpton in a blog post at NewsOne.com.

    Why? Because on NBC’s “Today” show last week, she said of George Zimmerman, who was charged last week with second-degree murder: “One of the things that I still believe in, a person should apologize when they are actually remorseful for what they’ve done. I believe it was an accident. I believe that it just got out of control and he couldn’t turn the clock back. I would ask him, did he know that that was a minor, that that was a teenager, and that he did not have a weapon?”

    Watkins writes that he “couldn’t believe that Trayvon’s mother would make a statement that was in such stark contradiction to the charges being brought forth by the prosecutor.” Later, Watkins reports, she contradicted herself, telling MSNBC: “George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood.”
    [botwt0416] Associated Press

    Sharpton and Sybrina Fulton

    About Fulton’s “Today” comments, Watkins writes: “God bless Sybrina for being honest (if that is what she meant to say), but there are some things better left unsaid. For the mother of the victim to make a statement in national media that directly contradicts the efforts of the prosecution is nothing short of disastrous.”

    Disastrous how exactly? Fulton was not a witness to the shooting and likely has only third-hand knowledge of the facts of the case. Although her two conclusions cannot both be true, both are plausible interpretations of the publicly known facts. Evidently the prosecutors do not think they have sufficient evidence to convince a jury that the killing was premeditated, as Fulton suggested it was in the MSNBC interview. If they did, they would have charged him with first- rather than second-degree murder.

    If a jury has reasonable doubt that the killing was intentional, as Fulton indicated on “Today” that she does, then it will be obliged to acquit Zimmerman. But that is for the jury to decide after hearing both prosecution and defense make their cases. Notwithstanding her personal stake in the case, Fulton’s opinions are irrelevant to the work of the justice system in reaching a verdict.

    Here’s what bothers Watkins about Fulton’s “Today” comments: “Sybrina’s words have opened the door for millions of people to understand when George Zimmerman is let off the hook with either an acquittal or a plea bargain for a lesser charge.”

    That’s right, Watkins is afraid that people will understand if a defendant is acquitted because there is reasonable doubt about his guilt. He faults Fulton precisely because her remarks may help defuse political tensions around the case. Or, as Stranahan puts it, because “of an apparent fear that ‘being honest’ could negatively affect the race-baiting political agenda that Obama allies like Al Sharpton have carefully crafted.”

    There’s a common assumption on the right, especially around the Breitbart new-media empire, that President Obama is seeking to exploit racial tensions in the service of his re-election effort. No doubt there is some truth to that: As we have noted, the Democratic Party depends on near-unanimous support from black voters and thus must keep alive the idea that America is a racist country and the Republicans are a racist party. The endless yet nearly always baseless claims that Obama opponents are impelled by racial animosity seem designed to fuel black voters’ suspicions and thereby motivate them to go to the polls in November.

    The Obama administration has participated in the politicization of Trayvon Martin’s killing, although we wouldn’t say it has taken a leading role. Last month the president commented that “if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon,” and last week, as the Washington Examiner reports, Attorney General Eric Holder commented on the case at Sharpton’s National Action Network Convention.

    It certainly makes political sense for the administration to offer reassurances to an important voting bloc. Whatever the facts of the Martin shooting, blacks feel threatened, not without reason, by the tendency of police (or pseudo-police like Neighborhood Watch volunteer Zimmerman) to view young black males as dangerous. The Martin shooting works to the Obama campaign’s advantage inasmuch as it taps into this real sense of menace.

    But this can be politically beneficial to Obama only so long as blacks are the only ones who feel menaced. When Watkins worries that people will “understand” if prosecutors fail to convict Zimmerman, it calls to mind another racially charged case: the beating of Rodney King. Twenty years ago this month, four Los Angeles cops were acquitted in a state trial. Many people didn’t understand. Rioting in the streets of L.A. left 53 dead and a much more widespread sense of menace.

    In an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union” yesterday, Bill Cosby quite reasonably played down the racial element of the Zimmerman case: “It doesn’t make any difference if he’s a racist or not racist. If he is scared to death and not a racist, it’s still a confrontational provoking of something.”

    Instead, Cosby focused on firearms: “I’m a person who believes that that gun, the gun, all around this United States, when a person has a gun, sometimes their mind clicks that this thing is–it will win arguments and straighten people out.” Cosby took a fairly moderate antigun position, endorsing the right to have a gun “in your home to protect yourself.” But he said that “when you tell me that you’re going to protect the neighborhood that I live in, I don’t want you to have a gun.”

    Our guess is that Obama agrees with the last point. But he’s unlikely to say so publicly, because it is a polarizing position that would cost him considerably more votes than it would gain him. Gun owners substantially outnumber passionate gun opponents.

    Similarly, nonblacks substantially outnumber blacks. If the politics around the Zimmerman case come to seem menacing to large numbers of whites and Hispanics (Zimmerman’s mother is reportedly of Peruvian origin), it could prove disastrous for Obama, much of whose appeal in 2008 lay in the promise of healing racial divisions.

    Dig Dig Dig Dig Dig
    It seems a lot of liberal commentators and operatives are unfamiliar with Thomas Friedman’s First Rule of Holes. One after another of them has come forward to defend Hilary Rosen’s ill-advised attack on Ann Romney.

    “Hilary Rosen Was Right: Ann Romney Is Out of Touch With Most Women” was the headline on a Time.com piece by Judith Warner, echoed in a Washington Post op-ed by Linda Hirshman headlined “Hilary Rosen Was Right: Ann Romney Doesn’t Speak for Women in the Workforce.” Hirshman is author of the imperiously titled “Get to Work: A Manifesto for Women in the World.”

    Amanda Marcotte, a feminist blogress who once worked for that white knight John Edwards, complains that Mrs. Romney “knows the feminine mystique still runs strong in this country, and that there’s a strong tradition of idiotic platitudes about the greatness of housewives that exist to conceal very real concerns about inequality and female dependency, concerns that were raised in the 60s and haven’t ever been completely killed off despite heavy use of meaningless platitudes.” Very impressive, but can you say that 10 times fast?

    Over at the Daily Beast, Michael Tomasky declares Mrs. Romney “an unrepresentative woman” and opines that “conservatives have no business pretending that she represents anything beyond what she in fact is, which is a woman who was born to fantastic privilege and who married into even more fantastic privilege, and who simply hasn’t had to make the hard choices that many women have to make.” Tomasky’s colleague Wayne Barrett smirks that Mrs. Romney “will be the only First Lady born in the 20th century to have ‘never worked a day’ in her life, as Rosen perhaps clumsily put it.”

    Writing at Politico, Tara McGuinness of the left-wing Center for American Progress actually makes a substantive argument: that most women who work do so out of economic necessity:

    Roughly 73 percent of American moms are now working. It’s not only how our families work, it is how our economy works. Two-thirds of American families rely on women as breadwinners or co-breadwinners. In fact, most American kids’ economic survival depends on a woman in the work force.

    Perhaps that is why the Romney campaign’s latest effort to divide the country into working moms and stay-at-home moms seems as resonant as a casual $10,000 bet.

    But of course she gets it exactly backward. It wasn’t the Romney campaign that tried “to divide the country into working moms and stay-at-home moms,” it was Hilary Rosen who did so by disparaging Mrs. Romney for being one of the latter.

    If the 73% of mothers who work all did so because they believe the feminist propaganda about how empowering it is to have a boss, Rosen’s attack on Mrs. Romney for being a stay-at-home mother might have been effective. It wasn’t, because many women see Mrs. Romney as having realized an ideal rather than betrayed one.

    Low Expectations
    Here’s a great headline from the Associated Press: “For Obama Abroad, Side Issues Tend to Befall Him.” Poor guy, always getting befallen. “Whether it’s allegations of Secret Service personnel consorting with prostitutes, candid moments caught live on microphones or launching bombs over Libya, his foreign trips seem to get overshadowed by distraction,” the AP reports.

    We suppose it’s right to say the Secret Service scandal is beyond Obama’s control, but in the other two examples, Obama was “befallen” by nothing other than his own words or deeds.

    A New York Times editorial on North Korea’s latest misbehavior shows a similarly forgiving attitude:

    Officials in Beijing tried to persuade Pyongyang not to go ahead with the launch but failed–either because they lacked the diplomatic skills or didn’t press hard enough. It raises new doubts about whether China can be a serious international player. . . .

    Critics now say the Obama administration was outmaneuvered by North Korean negotiators and should have gotten a specific written assurance that satellite launches were covered. . . .

    Even if American diplomacy was flawed, North Korea should not have been confused about where Washington stood or about the international community’s objections to a satellite launch.

    Despite denunciations by Mitt Romney and other Republicans, President Obama was right to try to test whether the new leader might be open to constructive dialogue.

    Beijing’s diplomacy fails, and the Times doubts whether China is even “a serious international player.” Washington’s diplomacy fails, and the Times defends Obama against his partisan critics.

    Meanwhile, CNN.com notes an interesting comment from Obama at the Colombia summit:

    “Oftentimes in the press, the attention at summits like this ends up focusing on the controversies,” the president added. “Sometimes those controversies date back to before I was born.”

    Was there a time before Obama was born? Lately it seems as if he’s been around forever.

    Early Adopter
    A few weeks ago, we raised questions about a story New York Times columnist Frank Bruni relayed from an unnamed physician friend who worked at an abortion clinic. Another questionable anecdote appears in yesterday’s Bruni column, an otherwise perfectly reasonable defense of stay-at-home mothers, including his own:

    I indeed remember talking about fiction with her. About science. About current events, too.

    But mostly I remember her at her computer well past 10 p.m., stealing the last hours of the day to do administrative work for some volunteer project she’d been drawn into or for the 60-member competitive swimming club that she and Dad had founded and that she ran largely by herself.

    I wish I knew how to work even half that hard.

    According to Bruni’s bio, he was born Oct. 31, 1964, and finished

  67. Another stupid article in buzzfeed about ‘why Ann stayed home’ because her pastor told them to… a lame attempt at a dig at Mormans

    Has the journolister known about Mitt’s mom and who she was? These are rich, sophisticated people, not some religious hillbillies.

  68. wbboei, I made the graphic smaller and emailed it to you. Share it if you like it. Million Dollar Maher MASTER OF MISOGYNY

  69. I do not think Goodwin is right. Putting Hillary on the ticket as vp would diminish her and would not help him win. He and he alone is the issue. Our foreign policy has been an unmitigated disaster, and I do not want to see her stand up and try to defend his mistakes. It is different with the republicans. A strong vice presidential candidate would definitely help Romney, especially if it turned out to be Rubio or Nickie Hailey.

  70. WBB,

    A little late, but I wanted to reply, yes, my father was in Patton’s Third Army and loved that man till the day he died.

  71. I can think of ten reasons why Hillary should not do this, and there are half a dozen cover stories to excuse her. By the way, Goodwin is an idiot.

  72. WBB,

    A little late, but I wanted to reply, yes, my father was in Patton’s Third Army and loved that man till the day he died.
    ——————-
    What a guy. Patton, your dad and the rest of the soldiers of the Third Army. The Brits had Monte and he was an arrogant plodder. The Krauts had Manstein, Rommel, and Guderian and they were effective. But we had Patton and the Third army, plus ABM 9O, and that was all it took to smash the Seigfried line. He was the best general of the war, and it is all summed up in that quote about a good plan violently implemented now is better than a perfect plan implemented a week from now. I can barely imagine what Patton would say if he saw Obama. Patton did not suffer fools gladly.

  73. wbb,

    My father oftentimes talked about how much he disliked Monte,felt
    his politics caused extensions to the war to accommodate his ego, thus the lives of many. Patton hated Monty. When they clashed in Normandy, competing to break through Rommel’s defences, the very outcome of the war was at stake. Monty’s advance faltered and Patton, leading the breakout, said American troops would ‘save the face of the little monkey’. Monty planned his own strike inland and demanded that men and fuel be transferred from Patton’s army to his own as they raced to be first across the Rhine. Patton had to defer to Monty during Normandy is my understanding Patton called Monty ‘a cocky little Limey’ and claimed he could ‘outfight that little fart anytime’

    In the book, “Masters Of Battle”,Monty, Patton and Rommel at War, an excerpt points out the very idea as the quote you presented.

    “Montgomery, Patton and Rommel were students of war before they were warriors and all three were familiar with Carl von Clausewitz’s The Principles of War first published in 1812 and still the primary text for would-be military leaders when Monty was at the Royal Military College, Sandhurst, Patton at the US Military Academy at West Point, and Rommel at the K?nigliche Kriegsschule (Imperial War School) in Danzig. Patton bought his copy of the book while honeymooning in London in 1910 and may have ignored his new wife to read it, incurring her suggestion that he preferred Clausewitz to her own charms”.

    Clausewitz argued that in every battle situation the military leader must choose between ‘the most audacious’ and ‘the most careful’ action and concluded that ‘no military leader has ever become great without audacity’.

    He might in evidence, had he been able to observe the Second World War, have pointed out Rommel, noting his fingerspitzengefuhl (the instinctive and immediate response to battle situations) and talent for blitzkrieg, and also Patton, the only Allied commander to match Rommel at his own game and whose motto was borrowed from Frederick the Great: L’audace, l’audace, l’audace – tout jour l’audace.’

  74. gonzotx–very impressive. I too am a student of Clausewitz. In book 3 chapter 6 he talks about boldness. Whenever boldness encounters timidity, he said, boldness is likely to be the winner, because timidity implies a loss of equilibrium. Boldness will be at a disadvantage, he said, only when it encounters deliberate caution, which is a form of boldness in its own right. Rosen would be an example of the former, and Ann Romney an example of the latter. . . Timidity will do a thousand times more damage in war than boldness . . . the higher the rank the more intellect is needed. Consequently, boldness which is a quality of temperment will be held in check. This explains why it is so rare in the higher ranks, and why it is all the more admirable when it is found there–as we saw with Patton.

  75. gonzotx–and of course the counter example to Patton was Mark Clark who was the Commander of the Fifth Army, which spearheaded the invasion of Italy. Clark progressed rapidly though the ranks based on his friendship with George Marshall and Dwight Eisenhower, whom McArthur described as the best clerk he ever had. I do not know the exact details but Clark got a lot of Texans killed because he used them for the Anzio invasion. After the war, he was warned to stay out of Texas if he valued his life. He has other missed opportunities, like the failure to follow up after the battle of Montecasino. After the war he was appointed to an ambassadorship, but the Senator from Texas killed it. Eventually, he became Superintendent of The Citadel–a military prep school in South Carolina. Tom Clark was no Patton. Not even close.

  76. turndownobama: “Hm, I’m trying to remember where I got in trouble for saying Sarah was standing on Hillary’s shoulders.”
    =====

    Listen, turndown, you get in trouble no matter what you say; but in this particular instance the trouble may have come from me: I would have objected that Sarah was more like stepping on Hillary’s toes or reaching for her ankles rather than standing on her shoulders! (not that I lack respect for Palin…)

    If it makes you feel any better, thanks for your level-headed defense of Hilary Rosen. When I heard Rosen’s original statement that set off the “fake firestorm”, I didn’t think it was offensive.

    The interesting thing about it all, however, is how it was handled in the media, by the Romney campaign and by the Obama campaign, and thus, in the end, how it was perceived by the American public, namely in terms of the “War on Women” that Obama wants to conduct while pinning it on the other guy.

  77. Shadowfax: 6:29 Also, isn’t it so that poor or most middle class folks can’t win or afford to run for Congress, Governor and especially President? Who would vote for someone little like Joan Q. Public?
    ————————–
    And who would donate to Candice Britton for US House St. Louis District? Candice is for the second time fighting the good fight.
    According to ActBlue just now, the incumbant William Lacy Clay Jr. has raised $16,406 via 3,165 donors. This is definitely the poor district which Candice has depicted. In 2010 Candice garnered 18% of the vote with a campaign chest of approx. $2,000.
    I guess Elite Dems realized how ripe the seat was for the taking because this year there’s a third candidate:
    Russ Carnahan who has raised $520,592 via 1,334 donors.

    And Candice herself?????
    She has raised $2,800 via 8 donors, and one of the donors maxed out for her. She is motivated. She has good plans. Why is no one else donating even $5 or $10 dollars? She is $300 short of being able to do something significant. She has interrupted her life to walk the same walk as in 2010. Willing, but not money. Her situation is so laughable to the ‘haves’ that she is rarely mentioned when candidates for that seat are mentioned.

    http://www.candicebritton.com

  78. wbboei: “A strong vice presidential candidate would definitely help Romney, especially if it turned out to be Rubio or Nickie Hailey.”
    ====

    What do you think of: Ryan, Palin, Christie? Any of the three would fire up the conservative base, and Palin perhaps more than the others…?

  79. White House registrants walking through the front door are documented individuals. The non-registrants with bribes in hand slinking through the back door of the White House looking for access are the unseen in countless numbers. Rosen exemplifies the model used-
    ______________

    White House Allowed Hilary Rosen Back-Door Lobbying Privileges

    Hilary Rosen, the Democratic National Committee consultant who told CNN last week that Ann Romney had “never worked a day in her life,” has used her power with the White House to swing special lobbying privileges for her friends – all without meeting reporting requirements. One senior Democrat told Ben White at Politico:

    Serious Dem operatives are aghast at Hilary Rosen’s misguided attack on Ann Romney’s work history. She and others at PR firm SKD Knickerbocker have represented many clients that have raised hackles with senior White House staff. It’s an open secret in the Dem consultant community that SKD has been signing up clients based on ‘perceived White House access’ tied to prior relationships and employment.

    In other words, SKDKnickerbocker has been using its “ins” at the White House to sign up its biggest clients. As The Nation reports, Kaplan Education hired SKDKnickerbocker to help block Obama’s anti-college companies legislation; Win America, a lobbying campaign, has used SKDKnickerbocker to push for big tax breaks; food manufacturers paid SKDKnickerbocker to battle food regulations. The list goes on and on. Anita Dunn, Hilary Rosen’s partner over at SKDKnickerbocker, even used her access to the White House to sign up big businesses for anti-Buffett Rule lobbying while working as a “paid media” advisor for another PR firm.

    The Nation is fighting mad: SKDK, they allege, is “peddling [client] interests in multiple meetings with White House officials, all without registering any of her employees as lobbyists.”

    But this is how it works at the Obama White House. They’re all about access, so long as they get cash – and toss business to their allies.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/15/White-House-Hilary-Rosen-Lobbying

  80. Oh-NO- This may not play well for Corey’s attaching racist motivation to Zimmerman’s Murder 2 charges-

    I wish there were a rule rebounding overzealous prosecutors forcing them to serve out a sentence that would have been applied in a guilty verdict, when the defendant is found innocent.

    Breitbart- The Anti-MSM and Drudge!
    ________________

    CBS’s Case For Zimmerman’s Racism Cites Zimmerman Standing Up for Black Homeless Man

    Still piling on the accusations in a case where the defendant looks increasingly likely to be acquitted, CBS’ Face the Nation yesterday featured activists Michael Eric Dyson and Touré, along with correspondent Marc Strassmann, accusing George Zimmerman of racial motivations in shooting Trayvon Martin.

    Strassmann is noteworthy because he was the first national television reporter to cover the case, on CBS This Morning, and did not–contrary to the Associated Press, which followed up on the story–mistakenly report Zimmerman’s race as “white.” That error helped create a myth that was subsequently inflamed by Al Sharpton of MSNBC into a national outrage–and Strassmann now seems to buy into it as well.

    Strassmann, Dyson, and Touré, unable to accuse Zimmerman directly of racism, tried to associate him with the broader problem of prejudice in American society–and in Sanford, Florida, where the death occurred:

    MICHAEL ERIC DYSON: Right. And– and let’s look at the predictability of the pattern here. It is not the case that young white men in hoodies have been assaulted or who are dressed of the inappropriate fashion. Don’t forget, Bob, that dress for African-American people has always signified beyond fashion or sartorial splendor. How we dress is an indication of where we stand in society. Remember, right after slavery, black people got dressed in extravagant fashion and that caused great resentment to– for white Americans who believed that black people were being uppity because they were trying to out-dress their status.

    Now it is the case that whatever hoods we wear, sagging pants, those become part of the folklore of American racism because it now signifies to white America that this is a hood, this is a thug, and the suspicion that is cast not only on Trayvon Martin. Look at the President of the United States of America. Here is a guy who do it the right way. He went to Harvard, he’s the President. Look at the– the ready– the– the steady stream of racism and bigotry–

    TOURE: He’s threatening Jan Brewer.

    MICHAEL ERIC DYSON: — the- the– the stereotypes that prevail, right, I’m afraid of him, he’s a– he’s a moron, he’s an orangutan, he’s an animal. Look at all of that.

    TOURE: And we see that– I mean, we see that when George Zimmerman is talking to the 911 operator, he’s threatening, he’s on drugs, he’s got his hand in his pants, ergo, he’s got a gun. So– and we see this constantly that young black men are viewed as threatening, something to be feared, on drugs, they are out of their mind, they are dehumanized quickly. And this is profiling, which– you know, which Angela Corey noted right away. So yes, it is mistaken identity in that you’re mistaking an innocent person for a criminal.

    MICHAEL ERIC DYSON: Absolutely.

    MARK STRASSMANN: The other– that’s America’s history. In Sanford, their history too had been– there have been a lot of suspicion by the minority community in Sanford toward the police department. A couple of years ago, a homeless black man had been beaten up on videotape. For three weeks nobody was arrested and it turned out the assailant was the police lieutenant’s son with the Sanford PD. So there was change at the top of Sanford PD, and now here we got the new chief who is dealing with many of the same issues that the old chief had to deal with– that is these racial tensions that have existed in this town and that is where we are today.

    The problem for Strassmann, Dyson, and Touré is that Strassmann’s handpicked example, the assault on a homeless black man, was one in which Zimmerman had been directly involved–as a member of the public urging local police to discipline the officers responsible, i.e. leading efforts to fight racism in Sanford.

    As the Daily Caller reported on April 4:

    In late 2010 and early 2011 George Zimmerman, the Hispanic Sanford, Fla., man who shot and killed 17-year-old black teen Trayvon Martin, publicly demanded discipline in a race-related beating case for at least two of the police officers who cleared him after the Feb. 26 altercation, according to records obtained by The Daily Caller.

    In a letter to Seminole County NAACP president Turner Clayton, a member of the Zimmerman family wrote that George was one of “very few” in Sanford who publicly condemned the “beating of the black homeless man Sherman Ware on Dec. 4, 2010, by the son of a Sanford police officer,” who is white.

    …[A]according to members of the Zimmerman family, George printed and distributed copies of fliers on bright fluorescent-colored paper demanding that the community “hold accountable” officers responsible for any misconduct. TheDC has obtained a copy of one of those fliers.

    “Do you know the individual that stepped up when no one else in the black community would?” the Zimmerman family member asked in the letter to the NAACP’s Clayton.

    “Do you know who spent tireless hours putting fliers on the cars of persons parked in the churches of the black community? Do you know who waited for the church‐goers to get out of church so that he could hand them fliers in an attempt to organize the black community against this horrible miscarriage of justice? Do you know who helped organize the City Hall meeting on January 8th, 2011 at Sanford City Hall??”

    “That person was GEORGE ZIMMERMAN,” the letter insisted. “Ironic isn’t it?”

    Every Sunday, according to his family, Zimmerman would stroll through Sanford’s black neighborhoods handing out the fliers demanding justice for Sherman Ware, and calling for the police to hold their own officials accountable. Zimmerman would also place the fliers on people’s cars outside churches.

    Strassmann, Dyson, and Touré are so committed to the idea that racism was the problem in the Trayvon Martin case that they are willing to cast Zimmerman as part of the overall problem–even using a case where, in the absence of other information, they would have seen him as part of the solution.

    CBS thus provided a typical example of a pattern noted by Shelby Steele in the exploitation of the Martin case by “the increasingly redundant civil rights establishment” and their mainstream media collaborators–namely, the creation of myths in which “the poetic truth of white racism and black victimization is invoked so that the actual truth becomes dismissible as yet more racism.”

    The truth of Zimmerman’s anti-racism must be crushed to prove his racist motivations–the more so as the legal case against him begins to fall apart.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/04/16/Smear-Fail-CBS-Cites-Zimmerman-Racism-in-Case-When-He-Stood-Up-to-Police

  81. my favorite humor in this post: the S.S. Obama began to take on water
    ——————————
    But today it is all about “au contraire”. POTUS created all those distractions to make oil prices better. and show the Repubs up over Buffett. and ….

    In regard to PA district 17 race, which I’ve not followed carefully, incumbent Tim Holden has been plodding along respectably as a member of the US House (wow – 10 terms). Currently challenged by well-to-do, much-tee vee-exposure lawyer who’s sounding a lot like Obama: http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/cartwright-rips-tea-party-for-damaging-nation-1.1299494 So whom would Sen Casey, Obama’s alter ego here in PA, pick?????????????????

    Holden had a rally Saturday. Sen Casey was due to be there, but canceled due to ‘family consideration’. Casey was replaced at rally by Chris Carney – Blue Dog who lost in 2010 to R Tom Marino. Next day came the pennlive article published every time Casey runs, touting how likeable he is, how bipartisan…even R establisment likes him so will pose no real threat… gag.

    Well the mystery is over. Apparently Casey was at that rally in spirit because today’s news tells me Casey endorsed Holden last Saturday.

  82. Mrs. Smith at 9:21 am
    ——————
    whole trayvon starting up again. Newspapers appealing to unseal court documents just sealed
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/04/16/145337/media-outlets-sue-to-unseal-zimmerman.html
    and WPIX resuming same campaign (w’s pix dot com)including coverage last night on 5 pm news, this morning on am show and at 4 this afternoon on anderson cooper show there.

    tee vee is gonna try this on tee vee no matter what. obama and sharpton stepped back but it goes on.

  83. wbboei: “A strong vice presidential candidate would definitely help Romney, especially if it turned out to be Rubio or Nickie Hailey.”
    ====

    What do you think of: Ryan, Palin, Christie? Any of the three would fire up the conservative base, and Palin perhaps more than the others…?

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

    LOL! Palin wouldn’t take VP again. The RNC would probably buy her special underwear.

  84. If it makes you feel any better, thanks for your level-headed defense of Hilary Rosen. When I heard Rosen’s original statement that set off the “fake firestorm”, I didn’t think it was offensive.

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

    Well, the wording of “never worked a day in her life” was a little dig at Ann Romney herself, but it sure wasn’t aimed at ALL SAHMs or Motherhood itself, as Ann’s tweet and the Romney campaign claimed.

  85. Nazis in the DC Lobby

    Washington D.C. gets its first lobbyist from the American Nazi Party..

    Washington D.C. is famous for its thousands of lobbyists, who yearly flood the halls of government, advocating for every cause under the sun. Some develop a markedly bad reputation.

    On Friday, however, it was reported that a new lobbying group has arrived in Washington whose reputation outdoes even the worst of its predecessors: the American Nazi Party.

    John Taylor Bowles, who ran for president on the Nazi ticket in 2008, said that the antisemitic and white supremacist party had decided to “try out” lobbying Congress “for the first time and see if it flies.”

    Part of this effort is an obvious attempt to make the party’s politics appear as innocent as possible:

    As per the form, [Bowles] registered as a lobbyist in order to promote issues relating to “Political Rights and ballot access laws.” The form also reportedly cites accounting, agriculture, clean air and water, civil rights, health issues, the Constitution, immigration, manufacturing, and retirement as “general lobbying issue areas.”

    Bowles himself also appears to be trying to come off as accomodating and moderate, saying “I won’t approach anybody in Congress unless it’s a very interesting issue or law. I’m going to be very careful about the issues I choose for this.”

    Mr. Bowles’s writings, however, reveal a man consumed by hatred and beset by violent fantasies of “destroying” Jews and other non-white peoples. “Stop wasting white taxpayer dollars on third world countries, no-win wars, and foreign aid to Israel,” he says, “white taxpayer dollars belong in white taxpayers pockets!”

    While on his website:

    “People who spread lies and rumors are no different than the Jew,” he wrote in one entry. “How can we combat such actions? Always get both sides of a story. Never spread something you hear. We must not allow deception and lies to get the better of us, instea (sic) we must question everything. The best Decisions are made after all information has been gathered. This is how we can stay strong and this is how we will destroy the JEW.”

    Mr. Bowles is, of course, unlikely to get much of a hearing on Capitol Hill; but his rantings about support for Israel and foreign policy isolationism may find sympathizers on both the right and left.

    One hopes, in any event, that someone on the Hill will be keeping an eye on him.

  86. Here’s a very sensible observation, though I’m quoting it third-hand:

    Writing at Politico, Tara McGuinness of the left-wing Center for American Progress actually makes a substantive argument: that most women who work do so out of economic necessity:

    Roughly 73 percent of American moms are now working. It’s not only how our families work, it is how our economy works. Two-thirds of American families rely on women as breadwinners or co-breadwinners. In fact, most American kids’ economic survival depends on a woman in the work force.

    Perhaps that is why the Romney campaign’s latest effort to divide the country into working moms and stay-at-home moms seems as resonant as a casual $10,000 bet.

  87. TD
    Well, the wording of “never worked a day in her life” was a little dig at Ann Romney herself, but it sure wasn’t aimed at ALL SAHMs or Motherhood itself, as Ann’s tweet and the Romney campaign claimed.
    ******************************
    Only if their husbands, or themselves, were running against any Dem. Your comment is full of holes and conjuncture. I won’t be responding to your further comments on the subject.

  88. TD
    Well, the wording of “never worked a day in her life” was a little dig at Ann Romney herself, but it sure wasn’t aimed at ALL SAHMs or Motherhood itself, as Ann’s tweet and the Romney campaign claimed.
    ******************************
    Only if their husbands, or themselves, were running against any Dem.

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

    Only if their husbands were using them to deflect questions about payroll workplace laws.

    Still not a criticism of the Holy First SAHM, but of Mitt Romney for hiding behind her skirts. 😉

  89. The RNC would probably buy her special underwear = The RNC would probably buy her SOME special underwear.

  90. holdthemaccountable
    April 17th, 2012 at 9:31 am

    Mrs. Smith at 9:21 am
    ——————
    whole trayvon starting up again. Newspapers appealing to unseal court documents just sealed.
    ___________

    Good find- holdthemaccountable.. VanHorn is gearing up OWS again. This time using the nation’s youth home for the summer and as they say, ‘unoccupied’ during the warm weather.

    Should we be happy they will be getting exercise along with tons of fresh air harassing unsuspecting property owners whose property will be converted into temporary campsites until the snow flies? Will a paycheck filtered down by the Obama/Axelrod campaign machine suffice helping summer job’s transitioning into full time employment for some electing to forego school for ‘the cause’?

    Will the timing of the OWS’ers coincide with the Zimmerman Trial and God forbid, he is found Not Guilty and these young sturgeons will be ripe and fully trained by then adding to the melees and riots promised by the Martin Family encouraged subliminally by the Obama White House just before the Nov elections?

  91. wbboei
    April 17th, 2012 at 3:47 am
    ********************************
    For whatever reason, I have always been fascinated with WW2 and Patton. I am sure it is related to my father and the few stories he was willing to talk about in my youth. It was a period of time the whole world went mad and I was forever grateful for the men and women that, at least temporarily, put it back together. Patton was that larger than life figure that helped save the world from itself, and just consequentially, responsible for my eventual life, as he superior skills brought my father home to meet and marry my mother!

    I found this little tidbit about his Olympic adventure I am sure you will get a kick out of….the lost bullet. I bet he was right!

    “In 1912 he represented the United States at the Stockholm Olympics in the first Modern Pentathlon. Originally open only to military officers, it was considered a rigorous test of the skills a soldier should possess. Twenty-six year old Patton did remarkably well in the multi-event sport, consisting of pistol shooting from 25 meters, sword fencing, a 300 meter free style swim, 800 meters horse back riding and a 4-kilometer cross country run. He placed fifth overall, despite a disappointing development in the shooting portion. While most chose .22 revolvers, Patton felt the event’s military roots garnered a more appropriate weapon, the .38. During the competition Patton was docked for missing the target, though he contended the lost bullet had simply passed through a large opening created by previous rounds from the .38, which left considerably larger’ .

  92. I think we have missed the whole point about what happen with the working/non working Mom thing. NO ONE WOULD HAVE SAID THAT TO A STAY AT HOME DAD.

    Women continue to fall into the trap of dividing themselves. United women will get their issues solved. If they keep tearing each other apart and forming groups, regardless of the issue, they will continue to fail.

    Women should RESPECT each other, and their choices, and be very careful about tearing another women apart for her choice.

  93. NewMexicoFan
    April 17th, 2012 at 10:52 am
    ————–

    very fine observation. if Ann R. was a man and stayed at home, a Rosen would never make that comment. Some how women are fair game and it is always women going after women.

  94. pm317: “if Ann R. was a man and stayed at home, a Rosen would never make that comment.”
    ===

    This is quite a claim! Stay-at-home dads are extremely rare. Are you thinking of Todd Palin? I think he has a job, or at least has had one.

  95. If a tree fell in the forest and no one was around to hear it….

    Likewise, if a poster insists on beating a dead horse and no one responded…

  96. Hey, what is your answer to that tree-falling-in-the forest question?

    It was posed as a philosophical question, or a matter of semantics, but I think you studied philosophy, so just asking…

  97. Jeswezey

    I would say that just because there were no humans around to hear it, there are still animals around that would hear the sound.

    ——

    You want to tackle the chicken and the egg problem 😉

  98. admin
    April 16th, 2012 at 1:13 pm
    ******************************
    Admin, thanks, as always for your kind endorsement and support!

  99. Shadowfax, it doesn’t bother me at all.

    I say let people speak on and on and on and on, so I can let lots and LOTS of voting moms know that Ann is being referred to online as the “Holy First SAHM” and having her religion mocked.

    I hope with all my heart that those bashing her in these ways keep doing it all the way to November. PLEASE keep talking. I’ll just keep letting every single mom I know exactly what’s being said. Works for me. 😀

  100. And now I’m off to meet some swing-voting wimminz for lunch, who will be very interested in hearing all about The (sneer sneer scorn) HOLY First stay-at-home mom, Ann Romney.

    Ta ta all. Have a lovely midday.

  101. About the chicken and egg: Has anyone ever told you it might be the rooster that came first, or do we always assume it must be the hen or the egg?

  102. jeswezey

    About the chicken and egg: Has anyone ever told you it might be the rooster that came first, or do we always assume it must be the hen or the egg?

    —-

    It was probably just a mutated cell of slime in a pond of scum…maybe it did turn into a rooster. 😉

  103. admin, less freebies for Barry or no one cared about buying his children’s book?

    They sure made up for it with all their vacations and PepBoys clothes on our dime.

  104. If it was “a mutated cell of slime in a pond of scum,” it could only be a male.

    It’s like Carlin’s claim that God could not possibly be a woman, because no woman could possibly fuck up the Creation as much as God did. Could only be a man.

  105. Bill McGurn at WSJ—I have posted his stuff before, and he is pretty surgical on how to defeat Obama . . .

    The focus on likability is a mistake. It’s a mistake, first, for Democrats if they believe likability will be enough for Mr. Obama to win re-election come November. It’s even more of a mistake for those Republicans who believe that the only way to defeat the president is to get fellow Americans to dislike him as much as they do.

    At its core, the confusion over likability has to do with an inability to see the world as the other side sees it. Hilary Rosen gave us a perfect example of this phenomenon recently when she suggested that Ann Romney “never worked a day in her life.” The folks at the White House immediately threw Ms. Rosen under the bus: They feared the administration would be tarred with the same unwitting arrogance Ms. Rosen exhibited when she failed to see how her remarks might be viewed by millions of American women who have made the same choice as Mrs. Romney.

    Republicans ought not make this mistake with Mr. Obama. When Americans look at the president, many see a loving father with personal values they admire and an attractive wife and children. The administration understands this, which is why a recent Internet campaign ad asking voters to “help the Obamas stand up for working Americans” did so over a photo of the president, his wife and his two daughters.

    Resurgent Republic, a conservative-leaning public research firm, found the same likability at work in recent focus groups of independents who had voted for Mr. Obama in 2008. The good news for Mr. Obama is that “these Obama Independents still like the president.”

    The bad news for him is that “[w]hen asked what they like most about the president, participants refer almost solely to personal traits like his character and speaking skills. At best, they credit President Obama for trying.”
    That helps explain why the same poll that showed the president more likable than Mr. Romney went on to report that a majority nonetheless thought the former Massachusetts governor would do a better job with the economy
    Mr. Obama ought to be worried. Sixty-four percent also say the country is on the wrong track; 76% say we’re still in recession; and only 25% believe the Supreme Court ought to uphold the entire health-care law. In other words, on the top issue of this election—the economy—a number of Americans who voted for Mr. Obama in 2008 are open to the idea that someone else could do a better job.

    Now, the president’s likability doesn’t mean Mr. Romney shouldn’t go on the offensive. It does mean he ought to attack hardest where Mr. Obama is at his weakest: his failed policies. For all the carping about Mr. Romney, this part he gets. We can see it reflected in both his embrace of the opportunity-oriented Republicanism of Wisconsin’s Paul Ryan—and his repeated refrain that Mr. Obama is simply “in over his head.”

    Mr. Romney is hardly the first Republican presidential aspirant to take that tack against a Democratic incumbent. In 1980, Ronald Reagan zeroed in on Jimmy Carter’s competence. Plenty of Americans thought President Carter was a good and decent man too—but by election day Mr. Reagan had persuaded them that his rival just wasn’t up to the job.
    The day after that election, Mr. Reagan’s pollster, Richard Wirthlin, explained the campaign this way: “We saw the opportunity for a role reversal—that is, by the end of the campaign, I think we came very close to having people look upon Ronald Reagan as more presidential than Jimmy Carter.”

    Mr. Romney now has a similar opportunity. Certainly he can point out that Mr. Obama has no excuses. If ever the stars were in alignment for liberal Democratic policies to shine, it was during the first two years of Mr. Obama’s presidency, after he had handily defeated John McCain and been sent to Washington with huge, veto-proof majorities in Congress.
    Mr. Romney already has the votes of those who dislike Mr. Obama. The votes he needs are there for the asking: folks who like Mr. Obama but have serious doubts about his leadership as president.

  106. “…less freebies for Barry… They sure made up for it with all their vacations and PepBoys clothes on our dime.”

    Who’s got a dime these days? In my day, the expression was “on our nickel”… inflation?

  107. jeswezey
    April 17th, 2012 at 1:15 pm

    If it was “a mutated cell of slime in a pond of scum,” it could only be a male.

    It’s like Carlin’s claim that God could not possibly be a woman, because no woman could possibly fuck up the Creation as much as God did. Could only be a man.

    😆 Yup, and I loved Carlin. Remember his theory that man was created to invent plastic, because it’s something that nature couldn’t make itself?

  108. I’ll just keep letting every single mom I know exactly what’s being said.

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

    How many single moms do you know that can afford to stay home?

  109. And now that the earth has plastic, it doesn’t need man any more: “The earth’s not going anywhere: WE are.”

  110. if Ann R. was a man and stayed at home, a Rosen would never make that comment.

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

    I Googled for “never worked a day in his life” and got 201,000 hits

    I ran it again to eliminate “Obama never worked a day in his life”, and then it got 520,000. Most of those on the first two screens were talking about other politicians etc.

    I was expectng to find examples in discussions about welfare men who didn’t have paying jobs. I might try again later limiting responses to previous to this month. Must go to town soon.

  111. It’s too early to take seriously but must make Romney feel good anyway (we’ll also wait until they start to screen for likely voters, which probably will help Romney even more).

    Romney 48, Obama 43. Gallup.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/150743/Obama-Romney.aspx

    These are the results when registered voters are asked: “Suppose the presidential election were held today. If Barack Obama were the Democratic Party’s candidate and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney were the Republican Party’s candidate, who would you vote for Barack Obama, the Democrat or Mitt Romney, the Republican?” Those who are undecided are further asked if they lean more toward Obama or Romney and their leanings are incorporated into the results.

  112. I do not know what to make of this Florida governor Rick Scott. He defends the second degree murder charge, and claims that the overcharge was not political. He reminds me a little of the prior Florida governor who loved Obama and got his ass kicked by Rubio in the Senate race. Wiki says his net worth is $219 million which means he could buy Poosie ten times over. But it goes on to say that he spend $100 million of his own wealth on the campaign. Politics has become a multi millionaires game, and that aint good. That concern applies to Obama as well as Romney, but Obama is vulgar about the way he flaunts it.

  113. It’s too early to take seriously but must make Romney feel good anyway (we’ll also wait until they start to screen for likely voters, which probably will help Romney even more).

    Romney 48, Obama 43. Gallup.
    —————————

    I saw it too. It supports Romney’s advice to Obama–pack your bags, don’t steal the silverware, and don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. I am sure that advice was well intended and if it messes with Obama’s brain well it can’t be helped. He is what he is–and more’s the pity for that.

  114. Nothing Secret about this service…

    Colombia — ABC News has learned exclusively that the Secret Service officials accused of misconduct in Colombia revealed their identities by boasting at a Cartagena brothel that they worked for President Obama.

    Partying at the “Pley Club”, eleven members of the president’s advance team allegedly bragged “we work for Obama” and “we’re here to protect him.”

    The officials spent the night throwing back expensive whiskey and enlisting the services of the club’s prostitutes, according to a bouncer at the club and a police source.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/04/exclusive-secret-service-bragged-about-protecting-obama-while-partying-at-colombian-brothel/

  115. from: wbboei
    April 17th, 2012 at 1:16 pm
    Bill McGurn at WSJ

    snip…

    Mr. Romney is hardly the first Republican presidential aspirant to take that tack against a Democratic incumbent. In 1980, Ronald Reagan zeroed in on Jimmy Carter’s competence. Plenty of Americans thought President Carter was a good and decent man too—but by election day Mr. Reagan had persuaded them that his rival just wasn’t up to the job.
    The day after that election, Mr. Reagan’s pollster, Richard Wirthlin, explained the campaign this way: “We saw the opportunity for a role reversal—that is, by the end of the campaign, I think we came very close to having people look upon Ronald Reagan as more presidential than Jimmy Carter.”

    Mr. Romney now has a similar opportunity. Certainly he can point out that Mr. Obama has no excuses. If ever the stars were in alignment for liberal Democratic policies to shine, it was during the first two years of Mr. Obama’s presidency, after he had handily defeated John McCain and been sent to Washington with huge, veto-proof majorities in Congress.
    Mr. Romney already has the votes of those who dislike Mr. Obama. The votes he needs are there for the asking: folks who like Mr. Obama but have serious doubts about his leadership as president.

    snip…

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

    Bingo…and again, the juxtaposition of Mitt as the adult, the experienced,successful executive and former governor of blue Mass…the man who saved the Olympics…photos of thankful (international) athletes…and his camera-ready family of Ann, kids, all those grandkids…and the testimonials to follow by people he actually created jobs for…a generous and selfless, do-gooder ‘mormon’ guy…all big advantages for him in the national camp…and for us…

  116. A fundraiser and birthday celebration for Mitt Romney’s wife, Ann, being held Tuesday at the home of Donald and Melania Trump, has raised $600000 for the Romney Campaign, a Trump spokesman told CBS News.

  117. Ulster is talking to the Wall Street Insider.
    WSI sounds like he is not going to live much longer, may not make it to the election, his mind rambles but…

    [snip]

    UM: Can you talk more about what Axelrod said? Please focus on that.

    WSI: Yes…he was speaking on social Darwinism. Accusing Republicans…of the young…Mr. Ryan’s budget of being a tool of that very thing. The words were placed in Obama’s mouth…he spoke them….but he did not originate them.

    ….And it was then tied into the Buffet Rule….that blatant lie being….being spread by the radicals. A higher tax on the wealthy that will somehow help to balance the budget? A few billion dollars raised in the face of….how many TRILLIONS being manufactured by this administration and others around the world? That tax has nothing to do with assisting the budget deficit! It is merely…the platform…the vehicle if you will….for what….the….the protests. That movement again. But this time….the proximity to the election. This time….it will be far-far worse.

    …The unions are orchestrating all of that…much of it….what is coming. The summer months….Axelrod confirmed it for us on that program.

    …Mr. Axelrod did not run away from that term…Social Darwinism. He embraced its use. He then…he added…he came out again with those bellwether terms of “fairness” and…the…his threats to those with disabilities and the old.

    UM: How does – what specifically are you talking about regarding what David Axelrod said that was a signal to others? I am not quite understanding your meaning there.

    WSI: It’s right there! Right there! You don’t see it? The Buffet….that tax raising…it doesn’t raise anything! At least nothing that compares to what the Obama White House is spending. They are openly lying to everyone! To take money from those few wealthy….you could not sustain the federal government for more than…it was told to me it would be approximately twenty minutes. Twenty minutes! So what then….what is the purpose of all of this? Why push for this? It’s about…it ties in with the primary motivation….no…that is not the correct term….the – the…re-election plan. They are….this is so far beyond Barack Obama. He is simply the tool – he is not the hand who now wields that tool! He never…never has been.

    …The Obama administration…their own budget was….it was ignored. By everyone. There is no serious attempt to curb government spending. NONE. Just…it’s just the….the direction is…just the opposite. They are accelerating the deficit. In conjunction with the FED, the false paper….the trillions in false paper now being produced….continues to be produced….while figures such as this Axelrod….this Mr. Axelrod….he lies. Over and over and over again. He fabricates. His propaganda is….it is everywhere now. He is Goebbels. Everything is being promised by this administration. They make promises to the American people. You will get all of this – and pay nothing. Everything is being promised to the Muslim Brotherhood….you will get this – and you pay nothing. Everything is being promised to nations such as Russia…you will get this – and pay nothing. The IMF…World Bank…United Nations…those things are also being promised….to others…by others.

    …And so…that subject….that term….Social Darwinism. It was placed in Barack Obama’s mouth. It was repeated on that program again by David Axelrod. The subject brought up…as requested….and they….they were kind enough to comply. Watch the….that program. Watch it! If you have not done so….if you have….watch it again! He lies. He lies. He lies. The president DID say it would….that the Buffet tax would stabilize the deficit. He said it! And this Axelrod…he lies. Again and again and again. While using that term of Social Darwinism. While once again using fear and division to gain support from the voting public who they are convinced….they believe….that this voting public is so stupid and selfish to believe the lies. These people…these Obama people…all of them…the….the higher ranking ones….they despise the American public. Jarrett….-Name Deleted- spoke of her often, yes? I knew little of her…but I now know plenty. She…her machinations with the Muslim Brotherhood…her vile hatred of Israel….her condemnation of the Prime Minister! She is the snake in the garden who whispers into the ear of this president. A vile, reptilian….that woman….her hatred of the Jews, of White America…of corporations she cannot yet control….of women who choose conservatism over liberalism…

    more… http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/04/17/wall-street-insider-obama-is-pulling-the-mask-away-for-all-the-world-to-see/

  118. Is this the best he can do? What he meant was, don’t worry, we will have the votes changed to the fraud in Spain when the vote counts!
    ********************

    April 17, 2012 3:39pm

    Axelrod: Gallup poll has ‘methodological problems’ byJoel Gehrke Commentary Staff Writer

    Follow on Twitter:
    David Axelrod, President Obama’s top campaign strategist, responded to Gallup polls showing Mitt Romney leading the president by criticizing the pollster.

    “Gallup is saddled with some methodological problems,” Axelrod tweeted today. He also directed Twitterati to a National Journal piece arguing that Gallup polls showing Romney in the lead “has a sample that looks much more like the electorate in 2010 than the voting population that is likely to turn out in 2012.”

    Gallup released a poll this afternoon showing Romney leading Obama 48 percent to 43 percent. Gallup showed Obama leading Romney throughout most of March.

  119. “Gallup is saddled with some methodological problems,”
    ———————-Tweetie bird Axelgrease is also saddled with some methodological problems, and they are right between his ears. Gonzo as you know when Schieffer asked Adolf Axelrod can you prove that Cross Roads is funded with foreign money since that was his allegation, and he responded can you Scheiffer prove they are not, and Scheiffer sneered and asked him is that the best you can do? That ought to be the question to Adolph Axelrod every time he opens his mouth–is that the best you can do? The corollary is never defend an indefensible position.

  120. http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/04/17/secretive-doj-force-watces-trayvon-protests/

    A largely unknown group of Justice Department officials has inserted itself into the local Florida protest movement surrounding the killing of Trayvon Martin, assisting the protestors and attending their meetings and rallies.

    While the officials are tasked with preventing racial violence, it appears that in carrying out their duties, they have provided significant assistance to those protesting the killing of Martin, who black, by George Zimmerman, who is half white and half Hispanic.

  121. I am kind of fed up with Ulterman, because he does not provide any answers, just a non ending whine about how evil Obama and his minions are. I get that part. The question is what are you doing about it?

  122. A largely unknown group of Justice Department officials has inserted itself into the local Florida protest movement surrounding the killing of Trayvon Martin, assisting the protestors and attending their meetings and rallies.
    ————————
    What public interest is being served here? Why should taxpayers pay for this? Who are these justice department officials? The growing consensus is this is not about race. No 1981 action has been filed. They need to answer. If it turns out they are inciting, then congress should issue subpoenas.

  123. CNN’s Keating Holland is a pollster with zero integrity. I first caught on to him during the primary, when he was manipulating polls to favor Obama against Hillary. He is the same whore now that he always was, but more people are catching on to the notorious inaccuracy of CNN polling, and eventually he will become a house hold name of how not to do it.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/04/17/about-that-cnn-poll/

  124. Who’s on first. 🙂

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4262109/Austrian-villagers-to-vote-on-whether-to-change-its-name-from-Fing.html?OTC-RSS&ATTR=News

    FED-UP residents of a picture postcard village called F***ing are voting on whether to change its name.

    The move came after a growing number of calls by pranksters from abroad who ring up locals and ask “Is that F***ing” — before bursting into laughter and hanging up.

    The Austrian village’s street signs are regularly stolen even though they are welded to steel posts set in concrete.

    Mayor Franz Meindl said: “The phone calls are really the final straw.

    “I always wanted the name to stay but it’s just got too much now. The only problem is that we need all of the F***ing residents to agree to the name change. Everyone needs to agree for it to happen.

    “As you can imagine there are heated discussions about the name change.”

    Drivers heading into the village have often spotted naked tourist couples romping in front of the name signs.

    Local entrepreneurs have made the situation worse by flogging F***ing postcards, F***ing Christmas cards and even more recently F***ing Beer.

    Residents voted to keep the name in 1996 despite problems caused by American servicemen from across the border in Germany who drove to the area just to be photographed in front of signs.

    They then sent the snaps back home to their girlfriends and wives.

    Around 100 villagers will this week hold a meeting to decide whether to switch the name to either ‘Fuking’ or ‘Fugging’.

    If the change goes ahead, they will be following in the footsteps of stadium bosses in Switzerland who were forced to change their name because red-faced stars were too embarrassed to play there, in Wankdorf.

  125. Well, we need to see the video, the Fox interview between Axelrod and Chris Wallace. I’ve tried- and I can’t find it anywhere..

    This is the most important post done by Ulsterman to date. It needs to be understood by everyone..

    But again- it won’t happen. The majority of people are easily distracted by inane interests that won’t matter a whit when Obama (steals) wins this next election.

  126. I’ve used every combination of words in the Youtube search engine..I can think of…

    Darwinian Socialism, Axelrod Wallace interview, Fox video Axelrod Wallace, Axelrod Darwinian, Axelrod Socialism ( does not bring up the interview referred to by the WSI)

  127. Then again- the video has probably been scrubbed and no one will ever be able to refer back to it because it is authentic confirmation of the Insider’s prediction.

    He did get that much pieced together coherently…

  128. Mrs. Smith
    April 17th, 2012 at 6:34 pm

    Well, we need to see the video, the Fox interview between Axelrod and Chris Wallace. I’ve tried- and I can’t find it anywhere..

    ——-
    There is one on the Ulsterman post I have up thread, not sure if it captured the ‘social Darwinism’ mention or not…it did get pretty heated between Wallace and Axelgrease.

    I agree that it implies something very sinister is going on behind the curtain…, destroying US economy, leveling the score on racism and making America much less than the giant it now is.

  129. Strange that my older sister isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer, not by any stretch of the imagination, but she didn’t vote for Barry in 2008 and she sees what a disaster he has been to our economy and how worthless he has been as a leader.

    If she can see the truth, why can’t the majority of Dems see how bad he is?

    Actually both of my older sisters voted for Hillary and one is a Repub and the oldest is a lifelong Dem like I was.

  130. I agree with what I could decipher from the conversation between the Insider and Ulsterman.

    OWS is going to be the initial vehicle used by the resurrection of the Nazi sympathizers causing Americans great consternation where they live. That is until the people get wise and start fighting back.. This rule laid down in Florida, the “Stand Your Ground” law put in place by the state seems to be problematic to the Obama operatives. They will want to over turn it relieving citizens of any power whatsoever defending home and hearth and their own personal safety. Then we will be faced with no recourse or remedy when the thugs march into your house after Obama declares a state of emergency because of all the chaos- and announces he wants to protect us from the rampant flash mobs going house to house in home invasions…

    “Never Let A Crisis Go to Waste”- this is a twofer for Obama. The racism aspect will be exploited used as an excuse to implement his recent signing statement controlling the outrage from citizens taking the law into their own hands protecting their lives and property, as WAS their Right under the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment.. Well, that will work until Obama announces, the Constitution is temporarily suspended until the government attains stability within the country..

    This is going to be a BLOODY Joy Ride… for ALL of US..

  131. Shadowfax
    April 17th, 2012 at 6:58 pm

    Mrs. Smith
    April 17th, 2012 at 6:34 pm

    Well, we need to see the video, the Fox interview between Axelrod and Chris Wallace. I’ve tried- and I can’t find it anywhere..

    ——-
    There is one on the Ulsterman post I have up thread, not sure if it captured the ’social Darwinism’ mention or not…it did get pretty heated between Wallace and Axelgrease.

    I agree that it implies something very sinister is going on behind the curtain…, destroying US economy, leveling the score on racism and making America much less than the giant it now is.
    ___________

    I guess I missed it- has it been embedded or are you shut out from having your videos posted too?

    My videos never get posted.. wonder if there is a special code or something that is needed to get it seen.. I dunno-

  132. “I agree that it implies something very sinister is going on behind the curtain…, destroying US economy, leveling the score on racism and making America much less than the giant it now is.”
    ________________

    Yes, sinister is a good word for it.. from what I read, it is about the physical destruction of the country… and the mention comparing Axelrod to Goebbels indicating CAMPS for anyone not going along with the prescribed program..

  133. wbboie, if you still want to reach me at my site — the email line is repaired!
    ————————-
    ani–I sent emails several days ago to the two publicists listed on the site. Either they did not receive them or did not forward them. Let me try again.

  134. I guess I missed it- has it been embedded or are you shut out from having your videos posted too?

    My videos never get posted.. wonder if there is a special code or something that is needed to get it seen.. I dunno-

    ——-
    I listened to most of it in pieces at work, but I think I zoned out on both of these guys and may have missed it too.

  135. I listened to most of it in pieces at work, but I think I zoned out on both of these guys and may have missed it too.
    __________________

    It was a brain drain slogging through Ulsterman’s latest post with the Insider.. He needs to summarize his impressions of what the Insider is saying in plain words… or he may be leaving it up to individuals to read between the lines.. if they have patience and know whats good for them.

    Did you read where the WSI told UM?… “you’re next”? That is some serious stuff.. He mentioned Murdock with all his $$$ is getting out of Dodge. He’s leaving the country for parts unknown and for the most part is going under ground under the radar. This, after his life and that of his family’s lives have been threatened.

  136. Sarkozy agree with WHI.

    French Leader Sarkozy Slams Obama, Warns He Might Be Insane
    Posted by EU Times on Apr 9th, 2010 // 191 Comments

    A new report circulating in the Kremlin today authored by France’s Directorate-General for External Security (DGSE) and recently “obtained” by the FSB shockingly quotes French President Nicolas Sarkozy [photo top right with Obama] as stating that President Barack Obama is “a dangerous[ly] aliéné”, which translates into his, Obama, being a “mad lunatic”, or in the American vernacular, “insane”.

    According to this report, Sarkozy was “appalled” at Obama’s “vision” of what the World should be under his “guidance” and “amazed” at the American Presidents unwillingness to listen to either “reason” or “logic”. Sarkozy’s meeting where these impressions of Obama were formed took place nearly a fortnight ago at the White House in Washington D.C., and upon his leaving he “scolded” Obama and the US for not listening closely enough to what the rest of the World has to say.

    Apparently, as this report details, the animosity between Sarkozy and Obama arose out of how best the West can deal with the growing threat posed by rising Islamic fundamentalism. Both Sarkozy and his European neighbors had previously been supported in their efforts by the United States in forming an alliance to strengthen the integration of Muslim peoples into their societies, and has including France and Belgium moving to ban the wearing of burqa’s.
    European fears over their growing Muslim populations appear to be valid as the growing immigration and birth rates of these Islamic peoples are warned is causing the “Eurabiazation” of the Continent and within a few generations will see them become the majority of nearly all of the EU Nations.

    The greatest threat to these Western Nations posed by the Muslim peoples becoming the majority of their populations lies in their likelihood of destroying the Global Banking System which according to their faith is firmly rooted in “satanic” evil and “must” be replaced by an Islamic one.

    [Note: Islamic banking refers to a system of banking or banking activity that is consistent with the principles of Islamic law (Sharia) and its practical application through the development of Islamic economics. Sharia prohibits the payment or acceptance of interest fees for the lending and accepting of money respectively, (Riba, usury) for specific terms, as well as investing in businesses that provide goods or services considered contrary to its principles (Haraam, forbidden).

    Obama, on the other hand, doesn’t share the views of his European allies and has, instead, embarked upon a course of embracing the Muslim peoples of the World and to the shock of all has overturned the Bush era ban on the radical Swiss born Muslim Cleric Tariq Ramadan from entering the United States, last year ordered the US government bailed out General Electric Capital Corporation to became the first Western multinational to issue an Islamic bond, and this past week commanded that all of his governments security documents eliminate the words “Islamic extremism” and “jihad”.

    Sarkozy in these reports further warns that by Obama’s “unrestrained” and “destabilizing” actions an already tense Global situation is growing ever more catastrophic as America’s once stalwart allies are being cast aside in favor of a New World Order where instead of the United States securing its vital energy future through conquest and war it will now do so by appeasement to some of the most violent and radical regimes on Earth, and as we can see exampled:

    In Egypt…where the 30-year reign of the stalwart US ally President Hosni Mubarak is being allowed by Obama to fall so that this most vital of Middle Eastern countries can be ruled by the former head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, who allowed through his appeasement the Persian Nation of Iran to gain the knowledge, equipment and expertise needed to build an atomic bomb.

    In India…where by Obama’s failing to support the Indians fight against Pakistani backed Muslim terrorists has caused the second most powerful Asian Nation to turn towards Iran rebuffing all Western attempts to isolate them and instead of their participating in Obama’s Global Nuclear Summit have, instead, agreed to attend the Iranians.

    In Pakistan…where just this week Obama gave this vital American ally a “public slap on the wrist” by denying to them the same nuclear deal he had previously given to India thus insuring the Pakistani military will cease their support for American troops in Afghanistan battling the Taliban.

    In Afghanistan…where Obama has engaged in a public war with his ally President Karzai who because so enraged he threatened this past week to change his allegiance from the Americans to the Taliban.

    In Israel…where Obama has so demoralized and demonized their once most reliable ally that Prime Minister Netanyahu has just announced he will not attend Obama’s Global Nuclear Summit because of his fears that the American President will not keep Egypt and Turkey under control thus threatening the Israelis nuclear supremacy over their Middle Eastern enemies who have sworn to destroy them.

    In Brazil…where Obama has ordered his Defense Secretary Robert Gates to sign an historic defense agreement with this South American nuclear power whose President, Lula da Silva, has praised Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, slammed Israel, and has announced his intentions to visit Iran next month.

    To all of these actions (and too many more to mention in this short report) Russian Military Analysts warn that Obama has pushed our world towards total global war more than any single leader since Nazi Germany’s Adolph Hitler, to which Russia and China are, likewise, preparing to confront to stop the Americans.

    Most unfortunately for those Americans living under the Obama regime is that their attempts to stop the radical socialism he has pushed upon them from destroying their once great Nation has failed as new reports from the United States are showing that in under two years Obama and his cohorts have succeeded in making nearly 50% of these people support the other 50% who aren’t working. (And which really should surprise none of them as during his campaign for the Presidency he openly vowed to “redistribute the wealth”, but which history has always shown makes everyone a pauper, except for the elites that is.)

    For any of the few Americans left daring to oppose Obama we had previously warned about the massive death camps he is preparing for them, but which these most strange of peoples continue to deny the existence of in their naïve belief that if they choose not to believe a thing it makes it not true. (If this behavior sounds familiar it is only because Obama and his cohorts have, literally, used the same playbook used by the Nazis against the once free German people.)
    And for those even daring to expose the truth of what is being done to the American people Obama took the unprecedented step this week of authorizing for the first time in American history his secret government intelligence services to assassinate one of their own citizens without benefit of trial leaving every human rights organization in the World in shock, including Tina Foster of the US-based International Justice Network who said, “I am in shock that they would do this. It is shocking that our Government would go to these extremes, even depriving someone of their life without a legal process.”

    Now to if Sarkozy’s grim and dire assessment of Obama is true or not it is not in our knowing, nor do these reports say. But, it is important to note that nearly all of the longstanding allies of the United States Obama has turned his back on are, admittedly, some really bad (to say the least) leaders who no one in their right mind would want to live under.

    And too Obama’s apparent appeasement of Islamic terrorists there is growing evidence of his maybe throwing all his marbles (so to speak) in “one fell swoop”, and as evidenced by the 195 smart, guided, Blu-110 bombs and 192 massive 2000lb Blu-117 bombs he last month authorized Florida based Superior Maritime Services Concord to “immediately” ship from California to the massive US Air Force base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, which is in striking distance of Iran and if all of them were dropped on the Iranians would, literally, destroy them.

    In finding the deliberately hidden clues as to what will happen as The Great Game nears its inevitable climax all caution must be taken, including to whom you might tell your most secret of thoughts, and as evidenced in the United States this past week should NEVER be voiced to your children, and as we can read as reported by the Info Wars News Service:

    “A family in Williamson County, Austin have lost custody of their 7-year-old son as part of a Child Protective Services investigation because the parents taught their children to mistrust the government, an action that deemed them to be “unsuitable parents,” according to charges leveled by police officers in CPS documents.”

    And to those still mocking the truths of these times, who continually fail to see what lies before them, we can only say you’re being the good and obedient lemmings you were brought up to be. So go back to sleep and dream the sweetest dreams you can, because before you know it you’ll be awakening in a living nightmare as those as ignorant as you, throughout all of history, have learned to their peril and loss.

    http://www.eutimes.net/2010/04/french-leader-sarkozy-slams-obama-warns-he-might-be-insane/

  137. I think I am about three quarters the way through Ulsterman’s post with the Insider.. gonna go back and finish it..

    Then I wonder- if everything the WSI has said comes true.. what will we be writing about when that day comes.. cuz for sure everything he’s talking about in that post is going to happen between now and November.. right?

  138. 😳

    I just realized that article is 2 years old, But it is still awfully accurate wouldn’t you say?

    It reconfirms much of what WHI has been talking about but in a premonitory manner.

    Problem is it may be too late to stop the madman.

  139. Ulsterman’s article is fresh, published today.. Basil, is that what you are referring to?

    I just ran through the Axelrod video with Chris Wallace and the part the Insider is referring to that is missing is Axelrod’s reference to Darwinian Socialism is missing from any tapes on the net even the suggested video that pops up at the end of a video.

    I listened to the Buffet Rule video which the Insider said was a LIE spun Big by the Obama Campaign and because it was defeated the other day.. will be the ground work during the campaign for blaming the Republicans for the stifling of the economy..

  140. I just realized that article is 2 years old, But it is still awfully accurate wouldn’t you say?
    ___________

    Oh, OK- you’re referring to the long ass article you just posted about Sarkozy.. Got it…didn’t see it when responding to your last post thought you meant Ulsterman..

  141. foxyladi14
    April 17th, 2012 at 5:02 pm
    Women should RESPECT each other, and their choices, and be very careful about tearing another women apart for her choice.
    AMEN!!!!
    *********************************

    agree…that is essentially what Ann Romney said…and frankly what I used to think “liberal feminists” believed…

    …you know, “I might not agree with your choice, but I will fight for and respect the choice you make”…

    what a big crashing disappointment that was…the women on the left turned out to be worse than the ‘boys’ in sexist elitism and hypocrisy…randi rhodes comes to mind…and stephanie miller right behind her…

  142. And in the interests of clarity.

    the Insider said those two words “Darwinian Socialism” are the trigger words that were paid for ( by sponsorships) as a question to be put to Axelrod by Wallace. This was a deal cut before the interview for convincing the non-believers and the ignorant of just how dangerous things are going to get for us- after Obama is going to be re-elected.

  143. #wbboei
    April 17th, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    I am kind of fed up with Ulterman, because he does not provide any answers, just a non ending whine about how evil Obama and his minions are. I get that part. The question is what are you doing about it?
    ————-

    Yeah, there is a comment to that effect on his site. If things are going to go so bad, what are all these people waiting for? Start your own wikileak or something.

  144. IOW those two words were heard during the LIVE interview between A and W but omitted for the future in a replay video.

  145. But it is interesting that Obama is accusing Ryan of Social Darwinism while instituting such things as ‘death panels’ and ‘red pill and no surgery’ in his Obamacare. There was a wonderful speech by Cuomo the elder where he said something to the effect of ‘survival of the fittest is not for humans.’ Obama should take note. Whenever Obama accuses of his opposition of something, it is a tell. Make sure he is not doing that himself. But things are so egregious, it feels like it is all tinfoil.

  146. The question is what are you doing about it?
    ________________

    Ah, don’t let the ignorant naysayers get you down.. The WSI sounds like an ABM90… sort of in his twilight years.. but knowing the tenacity of ABM90, I bet he would be one of the first ones to stand up to Obama if he had the chance. NQ constantly puts Ulsterman down why he’s jealous of him, I have no idea.. maybe thats why so many posters left Larry’s site or because of his misogynist comments about women.. the turd.

    Ulsterman’s readership grows daily and he’s not into commercializing his site selling pots and pans for profit. His predictive information has been borne out to be true by the watchers, while the hyenas laugh and mock him to their own peril.

  147. omg, go take a look at Drudge headline now.. I guess Romney should feel good having Drudge on his side.

  148. just a side note.. I forgot to mention this… and one of Ulsterman’s astute commentators brought this up… subconsciously, it bothered me while watching his videos..

    ______________

    “However, in watching the Axelrod video, I have to ask a rather crude question.

    Was Axelrod trying to hold back some belches or what was that going on with him? It was also very clear to me Axelrod was stressful during the Chris Wallace interviews. Perhaps, Axelrod’s nerves were merely on edge during the interview and that explains his odd behavior?”

    IT’S THE LIES ! …

  149. I know this is old, but it reinforces the “stinky” Øbamamao image. It’s Glenn Beck so be warned. Admin, I hope that you embed regardless. Øbama… Lord of the Flies. This is weird stuff, imo.


  150. By the way, the Obamamites are now out in force on the different blog’s comment sections berating opponents as “ignorant”, “stupid”, “deranged”, “Republicans” (lol!), “wingnuts”, etc. Their game is now on, and it’s hand to hand combat or is that keyboard to keyboard combat? They try to drown out all others to make it seem like everyone is in agreement with their viewpoint. I hate those fruckers.

  151. In talking with a friend on mine yesterday, he believes that Øbama is doing exactly what he wants to do… destroy the US economy as a means of furthering his goals of which one is making Americans beholden to his administration. The things that have happened, although they appear to be because Øbama is stooopid, are done only to destroy this country in order to set us on the path of one world government. You know, I have to say that I am starting to believe this.

  152. About Valerie Jarrett, my friend told me yesterday of something that I had not heard before. Supposedly in a past interview, she named two people that she admires. One was Mother Teresa (yeah, sure), while the other was Mao Tse Tung. Now that I believe!

  153. Mrs. Smith
    April 17th, 2012 at 8:35 pm
    And in the interests of clarity.

    the Insider said those two words “Darwinian Socialism” are the trigger words that were paid for ( by sponsorships) as a question to be put to Axelrod by Wallace. This was a deal cut before the interview for convincing the non-believers and the ignorant of just how dangerous things are going to get for us- after Obama is going to be re-elected.

    ——
    I took it to be the sort of ‘code’ word to the Democrats that still supported Barry, and didn’t realize how dangerousnhe is, to get them to finally turn against him.

    Since I didn’t hear it on the video, and you think it was only on the live broadcast and not the video….I am pretty confused right now who the code word was said by and who it was intended for, GOP or Dems. I will go back to the comments on his site, and see if a lightbulb goes on, those flolks seem to follow him closely…

  154. nomobama
    April 17th, 2012 at 9:21 pm

    Yep, they are those flies from “Lord of the flies”.

    There’s no war on women, there is however a war on the intelligence of the American people by OTurd and his cronies.

  155. nomobama

    In talking with a friend on mine yesterday, he believes that Øbama is doing exactly what he wants to do… destroy the US economy as a means of furthering his goals of which one is making Americans beholden to his administration. The things that have happened, although they appear to be because Øbama is stooopid, are done only to destroy this country in order to set us on the path of one world government. You know, I have to say that I am starting to believe this.

    ——–
    I wish that I could prove what you say is absolutely wrong….but I can’t!

  156. dangerousnhe

    Only on an iPad’s lameass spell check turned off could I end up with a word like this:
    Dangerous he is …

  157. Mrs. Smith
    April 17th, 2012 at 8:33 am
    ================================

    I didn’t know this. He is behaving like Kerchner in Argentina, or Chavez in Venezuela.

  158. Claire Mcsakcill must be getting mighty desperate for her re-election, she’s for the first time I’ve seen on Greta’s show, talking about how evil the GSA are. I hope this woman is defeated in november.

  159. Holy smokes, they are talking about Social Darwinism over at ulserman’s site and it’s freakin’ frightening….

  160. Shadow:

    “I am pretty confused right now who the code word was said by and who it was intended for, GOP or Dems.”
    ___________

    I haven’t finished reading the entire interview yet.. and the answer to that question was not resolved one way or another in what I had read so far- For now, I took his inference to mean wealthy important people.. not NGO’s but people of Trump’s status. I will finish reading it later on tonight.. after a break- and add to what I’v already said.. if there is some info more definitive..
    ____________________

    nomobama
    April 17th, 2012 at 10:04 pm

    Mrs. Smith
    April 17th, 2012 at 8:33 am
    ================================

    I didn’t know this. He is behaving like Kerchner in Argentina, or Chavez in Venezuela.
    __________

    I agree- and Chavez’ health is not good. Rest assured Soros won’t be wasting any time getting someone of his choice ( his puppet) as his replacement ready for approval. Venezuela=OIL/GAS= the latest signing statement Obama put in place this Monday. Nationalizing GAS resources by the government… even imports..

    The government is going all wobbly confiscating everything!

  161. Mrs. Smith
    April 17th, 2012 at 10:20 pm
    ========================

    Plus giving some ALASKAN islands away to Russia. I don’t understand why that even happened other than my belief that Øbama does not have America’s best interests at heart.

  162. Shadowfax
    April 17th, 2012 at 10:17 pm

    Holy smokes, they are talking about Social Darwinism over at ulserman’s site and it’s freakin’ frightening….
    ____________

    Well then, you’re in the right place.. bring what you learn back for us…

  163. Plus giving some ALASKAN islands away to Russia. I don’t understand why that even happened other than my belief that Øbama does not have America’s best interests at heart.
    _____________

    When a smaller retail store, privately owned is found to be going bankrupt, the employees think nothing of giving away the merchandise for free- Giving the store away.. in this case, the country’s assets..

    A sign of things to come. Liquidity is key…

  164. Shadowfax, ulsterman is not the only one noting this use of phrase ‘social Darwinism’ by Obama. This was discussed on other blogs including Althouse when Obama first mentioned it. That is the way he characterized Ryan’s budget. What is important to note is why Obama would use such a nasty phrase with all its negative historical connotation. He went there and why? Nothing is normal with this guy.

  165. Will do Mrs. S

    One comment that brought up what I have been thinking for awhile:

    ITYS
    April 18, 2012 at 1:28 am
    Notice it as been in excess of 6 weeks and NO report of Breitbart’s death, the same LA county was able to release info on Whitney Houston in a very timely manner. The timeline alone does not add up for a young man entering UCLA MC, due to his age alone they would have had many sophisticated life saving options to try that would have taken more than 45mins from the time of the so-called collapse at 12MN.

    http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/04/17/wall-street-insider-obama-is-pulling-the-mask-away-for-all-the-world-to-see/



  166. ———————————
    Adolf Axelrod looks nervous and defensive in this interview, and he tries to run out the clock through filibustering–which gets him in trouble, because his mouth outruns his mind. If I did not know better, I would say he is running scared. I thought he was evasive, and very disconnected. If you compare his helter skelter comments to the smooth, logical, responsive delivery by Rove, you will see how really bad he was in this interview. I think their internals are worse than the public polling, and the other side understands their tactics, which they did not in 2008–much as spega, and others, including me tried to help them comprehend. Notice how Wallace just sits their and smile while Adolf goes off in all directions. All he needs is a nervous tick.

  167. Another post about the possible link by WSI…

    I believe that WSI had planted a seed and saw it sprout. There are many names for the evil that is totalitarianism — Nazism, Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Social Darwinism — and the one least likely to come up in casual conversation is “Social Darwinism”.

    So, if WSI had “Social Darwinism” plugged into someone’s ear (Soros?) somewhere, and the next thing you know Axelrod is using the term, that would demonstrate a link.

  168. Watch this guy take down Matthews:


    I do not care whether he is defending Bush.

    I just like seeing Matthews get his skull cracked.

    And Ari does it–with humor and finesse.

  169. I don’t want to post any more comments from ulstermans site on social Darwinism…it’t as bad as you think…

  170. There are many names for the evil that is totalitarianism — Nazism, Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Social Darwinism — and the one least likely to come up in casual conversation is “Social Darwinism”.

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

    I haven’t got up to the context yet, but Social Darwinism, bad as it is, is NOT the same as the others. It may soon develop into some form of totalatarianism (as the winning business becomes a monopoly then takes over everything, including the government).

  171. Good for the elder Cuomo. Here it is, and his whole speech is worth reading.

    http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mariocuomo1984dnc.htm
    1984 Democratic National Convention Keynote Address
    [….]
    President Reagan told us from the very beginning that he believed in a kind of social Darwinism. Survival of the fittest. “Government can’t do everything,” we were told, so it should settle for taking care of the strong and hope that economic ambition and charity will do the rest. Make the rich richer, and what falls from the table will be enough for the middle class and those who are trying desperately to work their way into the middle class.

    You know, the Republicans called it “trickle-down” when Hoover tried it. Now they call it “supply side.” But it’s the same shining city for those relative few who are lucky enough to live in its good neighborhoods. But for the people who are excluded, for the people who are locked out, all they can do is stare from a distance at that city’s glimmering towers.

    It’s an old story. It’s as old as our history. The difference between Democrats and Republicans has always been measured in courage and confidence. The Republicans — The Republicans believe that the wagon train will not make it to the frontier unless some of the old, some of the young, some of the weak are left behind by the side of the trail. “The strong” — “The strong,” they tell us, “will inherit the land.”

    We Democrats believe in something else. We democrats believe that we can make it all the way with the whole family intact, and we have more than once. Ever since Franklin Roosevelt lifted himself from his wheelchair to lift this nation from its knees — wagon train after wagon train — to new frontiers of education, housing, peace; the whole family aboard, constantly reaching out to extend and enlarge that family; lifting them up into the wagon on the way; blacks and Hispanics, and people of every ethnic group, and native Americans — all those struggling to build their families and claim some small share of America. For nearly 50 years we carried them all to new levels of comfort, and security, and dignity, even affluence. And remember this, some of us in this room today are here only because this nation had that kind of confidence.

  172. NOW has gone the way of the NAACP, Morris Dees, and so many other liberal interest groups. They make their bones fighting a civil rights battle, win and then mission creep sets in, and by the time mission creep has taken its course the original mandate is long forgotten–or violated. It is like Holmes said I speak of old unhappy far off things–and battles long ago, originally cast as universals to enlarge the scope of their victory.

    By the Almighty, NOW should have been on Hillary’s side, rather than Obama. Not only is Hillary a feminist icon–the essence of what they claim to believe in, but she was 100% devoted to the cause of helping women. The same cannot be said of Obama. I have said this before, in fact I said it in my book The Dynamics of Leadership–she is the most consequential leader of her generation. The following article is from Allahpundit–a conservative site. But as you will see, Morrisey and Ari Fleisher whom I cited above in the dust up with Matthews gets it too.

    The obligatory “Hillary has a beer in Colombia” post
    posted at 9:58 pm on April 16, 2012 by Allahpundit

    The photos are here in case you missed them elsewhere, and here’s the obligatory pun-tastic New York Post cover. Two camps on this one: Team Gardiner, which thinks she’s an embarrassment for cutting loose publicly in a way no other SoS would, and Team Fleischer, which thinks everyone should mellow out about an adult having a drink with staffers after work.

    I’m on Team Fleischer. The problem with the “beneath the dignity of the office” argument, I think, is that, like it or not, she’s not just any Secretary of State. She’s Hillary!, the rare SoS whose political stature exceeds that of the office.

    The public will cut her slack on this that it wouldn’t cut, say, Warren Christopher because they know Christopher only through his official role whereas they’ve known Hillary as First Lady, Senator, presidential candidate, feminist icon, and now chief diplomat for 20 years.

    She’s familiar in a way few apparatchiks are so it’s easier to relate to the human side of her. Frankly, I don’t even think of her as taking official trips when she’s jetting off to see some foreign leader in Europe or the Middle East or South America or wherever.

    She and Bill have known all of those people for years and could get a meeting with them even without the State Department’s imprimatur. Go figure that she thinks she’ll get a little slack for a half hour of light partying in Colombia.
    If you want to feel embarrassed about a diplomatic gaffe — assuming the pathetic Secret Service scandal hasn’t already given you your fill — here’s O trying to talk about the Falklands. Emphasis on “trying”:

    President Obama erred during a speech at the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia, when attempting to call the disputed archipelago by its Spanish name.

    Instead of saying Malvinas, however, Mr Obama referred to the islands as the Maldives, a group of 26 atolls off that lie off the South coast of India…

    Cristina Kirchner, the Argentine president, has renewed her country’s sovereignty claim to the Falklands in the build-up to the 30th anniversary of the Argentine invasion of the islands, which triggered the Falklands War, on April 2…

    “This is something in which we would not typically intervene,” he said, adding that there should be dialogue between the UK and Argentina even though the Coalition refuses to negotiate sovereignty of the Falklands with Mrs Kirchner’s government.
    Never mind the silly error in confusing the names. Why is O encouraging Argentina’s irredentism by using the Argentinian name for the islands and specifying that the U.S. won’t take sides? Isn’t the “special relationship” special once again? What about the basketball game?

  173. She is larger than the office, she is larger than the man she serves under, and anyone who does not get that is a blithering idiot.

  174. Just finished reading (all) 117 comments at Ulsterman. My observation is this- Ulsterman [he] attracts an elite group of thinkers who understand the global political aspects, ramifications and the lessons learned from past World History and can explain using specific analogies relating to the Darwinian Socialism dynamic and our current situation we are trying to relate as to where we are headed…

    I found a few posts that I’ll put down here one at a time that summarize in not too lengthy text where Obama is taking the country and why for a better understanding of it all until we reach a point of saturation where most of us are on the same page in understanding..

    comments are welcome that advance our understanding on this most serious topic.

    …………..

    “Try researching Darwin, not that you should need much research time. Interestingly though, every page with his name and Obama’s on it comes up as “dangerous material.” The only sites that I can pull are the propaganda sites supporting Obama and denouncing Republicans as the Darwinists… like I said, interesting.. (Relative to a hypocritical opponent accusing you of egregious acts that he himself is committing… Oldest trick in the book)

    If you haven’t seen Ben Stein’s movie, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, might I suggest you do… He explains the WSI point of view extremely well. Also, Jonah Goldberg has an excellent article on this very topic:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/author/jonah-goldberg

    If you agree with the theory of Darwinism, then you very likely also agree that humanity, like animals and plants compete in a struggle for existence in which the competition drives social evolution in societies.

    If you weaken the US then you weaken the world. Obama said that during his last campaign when he said that the world needed a fair playing field and that the US was preventing that from happening. Since becoming president, he’s done everything that would promise to ensure that a weaker US becomes reality.

    The US largely invents and creates everything the world has used and depended on to advance their own cultures. Without a doubt, the US is responsible for increasing the wealth of most of the world and her destruction means certain destruction of the world’s economy. But think about it, if you remove the wheel that creates wealth, then you have all you need to reshape the world into a global government with centralized power. To affect this end, the middle class must be destroyed, inarguably, it’s the middle class that is the engine of all economies.

    Here in the US, the middle class has been most brutally harmed by this administration – now the final slam with the “fairness doctrine.” The truly wealthy will not be hurt – but the upper middle class and the rest of us will be irrevocably hurt even permanently destroyed.

    Think about it, the U.S. pursues a path with her economy increasingly ensnared under the growing nexus of government control.

    Resources are redistributed for vote-buying welfare schemes, patronage style earmarks, and graft by unelected bureaucrats, quid pro quo with unions, issue groups and legions of lobbyists. (Nazi lobby just admitted access to Congress posted today upthread)

    It’s hard not to acknowledge that fascism, state capitalism, corporatism – whatever – reflects very leftwing ideology. President Obama’s Fabian policies (Keynesian economics) promise similar ends.

    His proposed infrastructure bank is just the latest gyration of corporatism. First he slams big corporations then signs into law policies that ensure bigger, more powerful corporations that have literally swallowed up their smaller competitors. You got it, he continues to decry continued government controls to keep these giant corporations in check.

    Yes, then this begs the question of why fascists are consistently portrayed as conservatives. In the Thirties, intellectuals smitten by progressivism considered limited, constitutional governance anachronistic. The Great Depression had apparently proven capitalism defunct. The remaining choice had narrowed between Communism and Fascism. Hitler was about an inch to the right of Stalin. Western intellectuals infatuated with Marxism thus associated fascism with the Right.

    Later, Marxists from the Frankfurt School popularized this prevailing sentiment. Theodor Adorno in The Authoritarian Personality devised the “F” scale to demean conservatives as latent fascists. The label “fascist” has subsequently meant anyone liberals seek to ostracize or discredit.

    One fundamental error, under Obama, the “favors” of the world are distributed entirely according to supposed need (collectivism) where a few determine the true needs of the many.

    Social Darwinism means distribution entirely according to merit. Both collectivism and Darwinism ignore sentiment, emotion, and individual self-reliance etc.

    Human intelligence enables the individual to alter their own environment to continually improve personal conditions thus rendering the analogy of “survival of the fittest” or a nature focus in Darwinism pointless just as equally as Collectivism is usurped by the same principles where a select few control and the many are subjected to ones judgment of who deserves favour.

    The pendulum continues to swing and this battle is raged at least every 100 or so years. Kind of like that movie: Generation Zero and it’s descriptions of the “turnings.” This time, however, we are very close to collectivist victory (Socialism).”

  175. OWS is going to be the initial vehicle used by the resurrection of the Nazi sympathizers causing Americans great consternation where they live.

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

    As soon as the Nazis land from their secret base on the far side of them moon.

  176. foxyladi14
    April 17th, 2012 at 5:02 pm

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

    Rosen is the one getting torn apart. As a result of Ann Romney’s misleading tweet.

  177. The problem with health care is this: Health care is enormously important to people. When you tell them that you’re going to extend health care to people who don’t now have it, they don’t see how you can do that without hurting them. So I think he underestimated, as did Clinton, the sensitivity of people to what they see as an effort to make them share the health care with poor people.
    ——————–
    So says Barney Frank.

    Pathetic, mawkish, never let a little thing like the truth stand in the way of a wopper, Barney Frank.

    No Barney that was not a freudian slip.

    He asks us to believe the entire objection to Obama care had nothing to do with its immense cost, death panels, possible loss of personal physician, paying for somebody else’s contraceptives, keeping cheaper Canadian drugs out of the country, and helping the insurance companies raise their premiums. It is just because white people who are straight and have health care do not want poor people to have it.

    At some point you have to step back and say the guy is such a twisted ideologue that there is no point in arguing with him. Like teaching pigs to sing–it is futile and it annoys the pigs. Closing thought: if we had used a portion of the stimulus money to buy them insurance and addressed other issues like portability we could have solved the damned problem. But when the real goal is a government take over of 20% of the economy, that approach holds little or no allure. Simply put, Obama is a communist. When I was writing about him four years ago, I rejected that premise. I thought he was simply a tool of big business. And, I knew he was a sociopath. But now I know there is an ideological component as well. Commie.

  178. turndown, good find that speech. If Reagan told that he believed in ‘a kind of social Darwinism’ (as Cuomo relates), then Obama’s use of it takes on a different perspective.

  179. Axelrod really gave the store away when he said this election is about who can deliver a better economic future for the middle class. Remember McGurn’s comments about not trying to make people who like him not like him, but focusing on the areas where Obama is weakest, namely the economy. And Jay Cost makes the same point–swing state voters care far more about jobs than they do about Sandra Fuke’s contraceptive problems? One would think you, or the media (fat chance) would have to drag him into that arena, but David did it all by his lonesome–in fact he teed up the issue for the Republicans. In some ways, that was an even bigger dimocrat favor to Romney, than the unguided missile fired by Rosen. In ten short days, they have thrown snake eyes twice. Advertising Age may not give the campaign the award they did in 2008, at the rate they are going. And it gets back to what Clausewitz said that boldness tops timidity and caution tops boldness in circumstances like this.

  180. The dims have their great battle plan. Those who have seen it tell me that they will win. The only problem is no battle plan survives the first engagement.

  181. If Reagan told that he believed in ‘a kind of social Darwinism’ (as Cuomo relates), then Obama’s use of it takes on a different perspective.

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

    I don’t think Reagan would have used that term himself, since it is almost always used pejoratively. On a quick reading of elder Cuomo’s speech, I’d say Cuomo and Obama are both using it correctly, to condemn a kind of Repubican economics which both Reagan and Ryan have promoted.

    Many of Reagan’s opponents used the term to describe this sort of policy. See
    https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHMC_enUS396US397&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=reagan+%22Social+Darwinism%22

  182. fascism, state capitalism, corporatism – whatever – reflects very leftwing ideology.

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

    No, those are rightwing. The ‘conservative’ legislators who support them (exception Palin).

  183. Yea sure Reagan believed in social darwinism and never missed an opportunity to expound on the subject. That was all he ever talked about. Friends used to get him aside and say Gipper you gotta stop this stuff, you are starting to annoy the pigs. But it was all quite futile you see. Like Rocky Balboa said–a man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. And then you had Mario that said naye naye naye every living creature deserves . . . to live, and I stand on that as a moral principle, and I would run for president but my Mafia ties prevent me from doing so.

    The structure FDR put in place was the right one, and I would venture to guess Reagan would agree with me. The only exception I can think of what the notch babies born 1916-1922 who got screwed on social security thanks the the deal cut by the Gipper and the Tipster. My dad got caught in that unfortunate culdesak and so did ABM 90. The challenge now is to get the country back to prosperity. Otherwise these safety nets will be lost–and they will be killed by democrats as well as republicans. That is why 4 more years of Obama is not an option.

  184. Well, Barney Frank says maybe we should not have passed Obamacare after all, and there was a small uproar over his act of apostasy. The comments were, how shall I put it, spirited. Some were like getting hit over the head with a ball and chain, others were swift parries and thrusts which vivisected Boston fats, but my favorite was this, prized for its brevity, simplicity, and directness. True wit is nature to advantage dressed–what oft was thought but ne’r so well expressed:

    Hey, Barney! Go straight to hell, you wretched POS!

    Sincerely,
    Former Mass. Resident

  185. Undecided Lean To Insurgent
    By DICK MORRIS
    Published on TheHill.com on April 17, 2012

    Printer-Friendly Version

    With most current presidential polls of likely voters showing 9 percent to 10 percent undecided, the question of where the undecided votes go becomes of paramount importance.

    To answer this question, I compared the final Gallup polls with the actual results in every race in which an incumbent president was opposing an insurgent since 1964. This included the Johnson-Goldwater race of 1964, the Nixon-McGovern race of 1972, the Carter-Ford race of 1976, the Reagan-Carter-Anderson race of 1980, the Reagan-Mondale race of 1984, the Clinton-Bush-Perot race of 1992, the Clinton-Dole race of 1996 and the Bush-Kerry race of 2004.

    In these races, the undecided vote went heavily for the insurgent and the incumbent lost vote share between the final poll and the election, even when the incumbent was winning the contest easily overall. Six of eight presidents seeking reelection performed worse than the final Gallup poll predicted, while one finished the same (Reagan in 1984) and one gained votes (Bush in 2004). Seven of the nine insurgent candidates did better than the final Gallup survey predicted.

    . In 1964, Johnson lost 3 points to Goldwater at the end.

    . In 1972, Nixon lost 1 point to a third-party candidate.

    . In 1976, there was a 4-point swing to Carter.

    . In 1980, there was a 3-point swing to Reagan or Anderson.

    . In 1984, there was no change between the final poll and the results.

    . In 1992, there was a 1-point shift away from Bush. In that contest, there was also a 5-point swing away from Clinton to Perot at the end.

    . In 1996, there was a 5-point swing away from Clinton and to Dole or Perot.

    . Only Bush in 2004 ran better in the result than in the final poll, by ?2 points.

    In other words, of the total of ?19 points that shifted between the final poll and the election results, 17 points or 89 percent went to the challenger.

    The implications of these findings are that the current polls, while seemingly close, portend a strong Republican victory. The RealClearPolitics.com average of the past eight presidential horse race polls shows Obama with a 47-44 lead over Romney. But among likely voters, in the Rasmussen survey (all others were of either registered voters or adults), the president was running behind Romney by 48-44.

    But given the historical fact that the final results are almost always worse for the president and almost never better, we really need to focus on the Obama vote share rather than his lead or lack of one against Romney. If Obama is, indeed, getting 44 percent of the vote, he is likely facing, at least, an 11-point loss. If he is getting 47 percent of the vote, he is looking, at least, at a 6-point defeat. (Given the fact that six of the eight incumbent presidents not only lost the undecided, but finished lower than the pre-election survey predicted, it would be more likely that Obama’s margin of defeat would be greater than even these numbers suggest.)

    There are other indications of a Republican landslide in the offing. Party identification has moved a net of eight points toward the GOP since the last election. In Senate races, there are currently eight Democratic-held seats where Republicans are now leading either the Democratic incumbent or the Democratic candidate for the open seat.

    The predictions of a close election are all based on polling of registered voters — not likely voters — and fail to account for the shift in votes against the incumbent that has been the norm of the past presidential contests.

  186. The Chicago thugs and bros had better be careful they do not reach too far to end our economy and middle class, there are lots of locked and loaded American’s that would not turn the other cheek.

  187. I’m reading an interesting book right now titled “Fallen Angels Among Us – What You Need To Know”. I am only on page 70 of 397, but although the information is mostly foreign to me, it’s keeping my interest. So far, it’s touched on the controversy of the Book of Enoch, the “Watchers”, the Nephilim, Atlantis, Lemuria, Satan, how evil came into the world, karma, the age of Aquarius, the “lightbearers”, the planet Maldek, the “root races”, and so much more that I have not heard about. What’s most intetesting is how the author links the past to what is happening in the present.

  188. The structure FDR put in place was the right one, and I would venture to guess Reagan would agree with me. The only exception I can think of what the notch babies born 1916-1922 who got screwed on social security thanks the the deal cut by the Gipper and the Tipste.
    *****************

    wbb, what is this? Notch babies

  189. These two are shamless…

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

    April 17, 2012 5:45pm

    FLOTUS invokes dad’s MS to attack Romney byJoel Gehrke Commentary Staff Writer

    Follow on Twitter:
    First Lady Michelle Obama recalled her father’s battle with multiple sclerosis (MS) as she explained “what’s at stake” in this election between President Obama and Mitt Romney — whose wife has MS.

    Mrs. Obama recalled her father’s MS during a campaign fundraiser, saying he “had MS, was a blue-collar city worker all his life . . . [and her parents] saved for us, they sacrificed everything for us, why? Because they wanted something more for me and my brother.” The First Lady summarized the anecdote by saying “that’s what’s at stake” — by which she referred to the idea that “if you work hard, you can build a decent life for yourself and an even better life for your kids . . . So believe me, your President knows what it means whan a family struggles,” she added after talking about his life raised by a single mom.

    The implication seemed to be that the president better understands the trials of people with MS, and of working class people like Mrs. Obama’s father. But the First Lady might have forgotten that Ann Romney, Mitt Romney’s wife, also has MS. (Michelle Obama did not mention Romney, but he is the alternative to President Obama in this general election.)

    Ann Romney addressed the issue of her struggles in an interview with The Washington Examiner’s Byron York. “The hardest time in my life was when I was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis,” she told York, who wrote:

    “Her husband was infinitely understanding, she said, telling her she would be alright and that he wouldn’t mind even if she were disabled. “He said, ‘Look, I’ll be fine if you’re in a wheelchair,'” she said. “And he said, ‘And I really don’t care that you can’t cook dinner anymore — I really could eat toast and cereal for the rest of my life.'” With her husband’s encouragement, she said, she turned to riding horses as therapy and eventually returned to an active life.

    Romney and Obama disagree on a lot, but at the minimum, they both have an understanding of MS in a family.

  190. Just had an interesting interlude. Last month I saw elsewhere the sinking of a cruise ship off Italy being called “a real life Titanic.” This week I saw people asking “You mean the Titanic really happened?”

    And tonight I seemed to see people talking about some Bot inventing the phrase “Social Darwinism.” My husband asked what I was laughing at, and I mentioned Herbert Spencer so we looked Spencer up in KIM and fell into the text (after a detour through North Korea).

  191. Afghan schoolgirls poisoned in anti-education attack

    Tue, Apr 17 2012
    Taliban attack Afghanistan in “spring offensive”
    Sun, Apr 15 2012

    By Mohammad Hamid
    KUNDUZ, Afghanistan | Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:44am EDT
    (Reuters) – About 150 Afghan schoolgirls were poisoned on Tuesday after drinking contaminated water at a high school in the country’s north, officials said, blaming it on conservative radicals opposed to female education.

    Since the 2001 toppling of the Taliban, which banned education for women and girls, females have returned to schools, especially in Kabul.

    But periodic attacks still occur against girls, teachers and their school buildings, usually in the more conservative south and east of the country, from where the Taliban insurgency draws most support.

    “We are 100 percent sure that the water they drunk inside their classes was poisoned. This is either the work of those who are against girls’ education or irresponsible armed individuals,” said Jan Mohammad Nabizada, a spokesman for education department in northern Takhar province.

    Some of the 150 girls, who suffered from headaches and vomiting, were in critical condition, while others were able to go home after treatment in hospital, the officials said.

    They said they knew the water had been poisoned because a larger tank used to fill the affected water jugs was not contaminated.

    “This is not a natural illness. It’s an intentional act to poison schoolgirls,” said Haffizullah Safi, head of Takhar’s public health department.

    None of the officials blamed any particular group for the attack, fearing retribution from anyone named.

    The Afghan government said last year that the Taliban, which has been trying to adopt a more moderate face to advance exploratory peace talks, had dropped its opposition to female education.

    But the insurgency has never stated that explicitly and in the past acid has been thrown in the faces of women and girls by hardline Islamists while walking to school.

    Education for women was outlawed by the Taliban government from 1996-2001 as un-Islamic.

    (Reporting by Mohammad Hamid; Writing by Jack Kimball, Editing by Rob Taylor and Sanjeev Miglani)

  192. Poor women, he said, shouldn’t be given a choice, but instead should be required to work outside the home to receive Temporary Assistance for Needy Families benefits. “[E]ven if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work,” Romney said of moms on TANF.

    Recalling his effort as governor to increase the amount of time women on welfare in Massachusetts were required to work, Romney noted that some had considered his proposal “heartless,” but he argued that the women would be better off having “the dignity of work” — a suggestion Ann Romney would likely take issue with.

    “I wanted to increase the work requirement,” said Romney. “I said, for instance, that even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, ‘Well that’s heartless.’ And I said, ‘No, no, I’m willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It’ll cost the state more providing that daycare, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.'”

    Regardless of its level of dignity, for Ann Romney, her work raising her children would not have fulfilled her work requirement had she been on TANF benefits. As HuffPost reported Thursday:

    As far as Uncle Sam is concerned, if you’re poor, deciding to stay at home and rear your children is not an option. Thanks to welfare reform, recipients of federal benefits must prove to a caseworker that they have performed, over the course of a week, a certain number of hours of “work activity.” That number changes from state to state, and each state has discretion as to how narrowly work is defined, but federal law lists 12 broad categories that are covered.
    Raising children is not among them.

    According to a 2006 Congressional Research Service report, the dozen activities that fulfill the work requirement are:

    (1) unsubsidized employment
    (2) subsidized private sector employment
    (3) subsidized public sector employment
    (4) work experience
    (5) on-the-job training
    (6) job search and job readiness assistance
    (7) community services programs
    (8) vocational educational training
    (9) job skills training directly related to employment
    (10) education directly related to employment (for those without a high school degree or equivalent)
    (11) satisfactory attendance at a secondary school
    (12) provision of child care to a participant of a community service program

    The only child-care related activity on the list is the last one, which would allow someone to care for someone else’s child if that person were off volunteering. But it does not apply to married couples in some states. Connecticut, for instance, specifically prevents counting as “work” an instance in which one parent watches a child while the other parent volunteers.

    The federal government does at least implicitly acknowledge the value of child care, though not for married couples. According to a 2012 Urban Institute study, a single mother is required to work 30 hours a week, but the requirement drops to 20 hours if she has a child under 6. A married woman, such as Romney, would not be entitled to such a reduction in the requirement. If a married couple receives federally funded child care, the work requirement increases by 20 hours, from 35 hours to 55 hours between the two of them [….]
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/15/mitt-romney-mothers-welfare-moms_n_1426113.html

  193. turndownobama
    April 18th, 2012 at 12:51 am
    fascism, state capitalism, corporatism – whatever – reflects very leftwing ideology.
    ====================
    No, those are rightwing. The ‘conservative’ legislators who support them (exception Palin).

    No you are mistaken. The merger of extreme left ideology of social engineering/state capitalism and corporatism aka fascism is not right wing. It is the extreme left wing. Many people think socialism is a good term and in its early stages it can be very beneficial but as it progresses it takes on elements of authoritarianism and capitalism for the benefit of only those in power with the benefits to the common people becoming smaller and smaller with civil liberties disappearing. The Nazi’s started with a lot of programs for the public, especially unemployment, which morphed into authoritarian rule and militarism with enormous wealth concentrated into the hands of Hitler’s supporters.

  194. Mrs Smith: “t was a brain drain slogging through Ulsterman’s latest post with the Insider….”
    ====

    It sure was. He just has to take out all the ellipses and elapses. WSI is obviously flagging in health and energy. No need for all the empty spaces and repetitions.

  195. Mrs. Smith: “And in the interests of clarity: the Insider said those two words “Darwinian Socialism” are the trigger words…”
    =====

    I haven’t seen “Darwinian Socialism” anywhere except in your own posts above.

    Social Darwinism exists as a concept, people should know what it means.

    What does Darwinian Socialism mean? I’ve never seen that before… ?

  196. Mormaer: “The merger of extreme left ideology of social engineering/state capitalism and corporatism aka fascism is not right wing. It is the extreme left wing.”
    =====

    Fascism has always been recognized as “right wing”. Your depiction of Nazis doing lots of things for the little guy and then later morphing into authoritarians, i.e. extreme leftists in your view, reverses two realities: (i) the Nazis were authoritarian from the outset, and (ii) authoritarian regimes have always been classified as rightist, almost by definition but definitely by history. That’s the way the labels stand, for whatever they’re worth. In any event, there is no reason to reverse the definition and call authoritarians “leftist”, unless perchance you consider yourself to be on the right of the proverbial spectrum but not authoritarian.

    A more benign post-war example of an authoritarian regime is the Fifth Republic of France, which De Gaulle designed to extend his “full powers” as President in time. With this constitution, De Gaulle was able to do exactly as he pleased and it was the Left in France that complained about the authoritarian aspect of the constitution, especially its (in)famous article 38 that allowed the government to conduct business without the advice or consent of the parliament.

    When Mitterrand was elected, article 38 was modified to read as (i) emergency powers only and (ii) in everyday business, applicable only by consent of the parliament. Mitterrand was (i) socialist and (ii) leftist. He, like those who followed him from the left or right, was in charge of a government that I have often described as “restrained autocracy” and “technocratic”, but no one complains any more about an authoritarian government.

    As one of the world’s most socialist countries, there is a certain amount of what you call “social engineering” and “state capitalism”, but this kind of behavior is typical of regimes of both the left and right and the French call it “economic nationalism”.

    “Corporatism”, which I take to mean “crony capitalism”, is however an arm of the right, such as Sarkozy. It’s one of the reasons so many people want to get rid of him.

  197. Another two articles on Trayvon situation, both dated 4/15. This one published early in the evening:
    Sanford pastors applaud George Zimmerman’s arrest
    7:43 pm 4/15/2012
    SANFORD — The Rev. Valarie Houston lit a candle for Trayvon Martin and praised the arrest of George Zimmerman during the Sunday service at Allen Chapel AME Church in Sanford. “I feel a sense of peace this morning,” she said. “We say, ‘Thank you, God, for justice.’ ” snip AME Presiding Bishop, the Rev. McKinley Young, added his thanks for Zimmerman’s arrest.snip The black church has been one of the churches leading the community response to Martin’s death.

    The church bears the responsibility for what Martin’s legacy will mean to Sanford, Young said, after the celebrity activists who came into town to make “cameo appearances” are long gone. snip
    http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-15/news/os-trayvon-martin-sanford-churches-20120415_1_black-church-sanford-shooting-death

  198. Now for the second article published approx 3 hours later:
    DOJ ‘peacemakers’ helped Sanford stay cool amid rising tensions
    10:52 pm 4/15/2012 snip As national figures and sign-waving protesters grabbed the spotlight after Trayvon’s death, federal workers from a little-known branch of the Department of Justice labored away behind the scenes, quietly brokering deals between the city officials and residents to help prevent violence and lay the groundwork for peace. Even though last week’s arrest of suspected shooter George Zimmerman calmed some tensions, the Community Relations Service will remain in Sanford for an unspecified period of time. “As long as we’re needed,” the agency’s acting director said. The Community Relations Service offers few details about its work.
    City officials, local leaders and residents say these peacekeepers have played a key role in easing tensions during some of the most heated moments after Trayvon’s shooting.
    “They were there for us,” said the Rev. Valarie Houston, pastor of Allen Chapel AME Church, a focal point for the community after the unarmed teen’s death. She met the peacekeepers there for the first time during a March 20 town-hall meeting. “We felt protected,” she said. Houston said the conciliators told her they act as the “eyes and ears of the community” and provided guidance about keeping their message about nonviolence clear. At every rally, community meeting and march, since the shooting, conciliators were there.
    In their Navy blue windbreakers, polo shirts and dark sunglasses, they look like federal agents. Their caps are embroidered with the Justice Department’s seal. They watch and listen silently. But they say little publicly. When reporters try to chat them up, they remain stoic, saying simply they cannot talk to the media.

    The peacekeepers have a specific mandate outlined in the 1964 Civil Rights Act to go into conflict zones within American communities that perceive discrimination or feel wronged because of their particular race, color or national origin.
    http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-15/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-justice-departm-20120415_1_federal-workers-racial-tensions-peacekeepers

    Well, nothing awful did happen in spite of the celebrity activists who came with full knowledge of The President and AG Holder. Shortly thereafter Sharpton & Jackson’s mission was declared accomplished, Holder and Sharpton supped together – think Holder threw a compliment Sharpton’s way.

    All the while the same government overtly protected Sanford with tax dollars. Having it both ways. Cheney had it right. unmitigated. In this case, unmitigated gall.

    [Sincerely, if I’ve become too jaded to see this situation clearly, please advise on your thoughts for I’d like to think otherwise.]

  199. Obama getting a taste of his own medicine on Twitter and the media, Romney not sitting around taking the crap McCain did.

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/04/obama-as-a-boy-ate-dog-meat/

    Much has been made about Mitt Romney, in 1983, putting his family dog Seamus in a kennel on top of his roof and driving from Boston to Canada, with said canine Seamus making his displeasure known in a rather scatological way.

    Democrats have signaled they have every intention of making sure the American people — especially dog-lovers — know the tale. In January, senior Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod tweeted a photo of the president and Bo in a car, with the snide observation: “@davidaxelrod: How loving owners transport their dogs.”

    The Romney campaign signaled tonight that they are not about to cede any ground when it comes to a candidate’s odd past with man’s best friend.

    And the Obama campaign shot back, with a spokesman suggesting the Romney team was attacking a child, since the Obama act in question took place when he was a kid.

    The Daily Caller noted that in President Obama’s best-selling memoir, “Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance,” the president recalls being fed dog meat as a young boy in Indonesia with his stepfather, Lolo Soetoro.

    “With Lolo, I learned how to eat small green chill peppers raw with dinner (plenty of rice), and, away from the dinner table, I was introduced to dog meat (tough), snake meat (tougher), and roasted grasshopper (crunchy),” the president wrote. “Like many Indonesians, Lolo followed a brand of Islam that could make room for the remnants of more ancient animist and Hindu faiths. He explained that a man took on the powers of whatever he ate: One day soon, he promised, he would bring home a piece of tiger meat for us to share.”

    After his mother married Soetoro, Obama lived in Indonesia from 1967 until 1971, from roughly the age of 6 through 10.

    The discovery that the president had eaten dog meat prompted wise-cracks on twitter (hashtag — #ObamaDogRecipes) and this tweet from Romney strategist Eric Fehrstrom, who re-tweeted Axelrod’s original message with a different take on the picture of the president and Bo.

    “@EricFehrn: In hindsight, a chilling photo,” he wrote.

    Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt tweeted in response: “@BenLaBolt What’s the next attack @EricFerhn and the RNC will surface on a 6-10 year old?”

    The Seamus story was discussed again Monday when Ann Romney told Diane Sawyer that “the dog loved” traveling that way. “He would see that crate and, you know, he would, like, go crazy because he was going with us on vacation. It was to me a kinder thing to bring him along than to leave him in the kennel for two weeks.”

    Certainly kinder than eating him.

    …………………….

    Seems Romney has learned to get down into the muck with Obama and the art of “bring a knife and i’ll bring a gun”. Obama is being ripped to shreds on this.

  200. Lol, the jokes are flying fast and furious at Obama’s expense…….Obama has lost this one big style…

    “why did Mitt Romney put his dog on his car?”

    “so Obama wouldn’t eat him”.

  201. Oh the god, the comments on twitter are reaching epidemic on this Obama dog thing….

    George Washington: chopped down cherry tree. Barack Obama: chowed down on bark.

    and check out #Obamadogrecipes

    Chilli con corgi, German Shepherds pie, eggs rover easy…..the list is endless. The obama campaign is about to rue ever bringing up Romneys dog.

  202. The obama campaign is about to rue ever bringing up Romneys dog.
    ———
    kitchen’s getting hot!

  203. Any late night comedian who doesn’t have at least 5 minutes of Obama-eats-dog material ready is guilty of dereliction of duty. They have political comedy goldmine here.

  204. moononpluto, glad to see Romney’s people go after this. Obama campaign thought they had a winning issue in Seamus.

  205. Thing is, most people only listen to headlines and i’m glad Romney has realised this,looks like there is a fighter in there, i’ve already heard gasps from people today when they read “Obama eats dog meat” ranging from “omg, thats sick” to “wtf how can anyone do that”.

  206. “in focus groups, the [Seamus] dog story totally tanks Mitt Romney’s approval rating.” – MSNBC’s Chris Hayes, January………..you aint seen nothing til they get the hold of Obama’s “I ate dog” or will the media try and skid past that one.

  207. Thats why we never see Obama play with his dog, taught never to play with his food…..and the list goes on.

  208. Obama walking by a deli:” How much is that doggie in the window?”

    When Mitt and Ann go grocery shopping they often pick up a pound of ground round; When Michelle and Barack shop they take home a pound of ground hound.

    Obama replaces ‘Hope and Change’ with…”Vote for Me or I Will Eat This Puppy.”

  209. Sorta takes the wind out of the sails of the USS Shock-And-Horror-That-Romney-Put-His-Dog-On-The-Roof-Of-The-Car, doesn’t it?

  210. Thanks nomobama, Tim, pm317 and others for the welcome back. I now need a vacation from my vacation. 7 countries in 10 days! Someone pleases shoot me the nest time I get such a stupid idea.

    OTOH, I saw a LOT of very interesting things and will write about some later including, for example, 20 people applying for every single job opening in Scotland.

    Good to be back. It was hard to go cold turkey om BigPink for two weeks and it’s great to return to old friends.
    Very interesting discussion a bout the “social darwinism” slip.

  211. moononpluto, here is a comment seen on Althouse a while back on Seamus when the Newyorker brought it up:

    I believe the original story the Romney son told about Seamus’s road trip was that Romney bought a pet carrier designed to be mounted on the roof rack of a station wagon but was dissatisfied with the design. Romney thought too many holes faced into the wind and possible rain – so he added a forward windshield to the carrier. A square of plywood.

    Apparantly Seamus was a typical dog. Nothing better in such a dog’s life than a road trip in the wind, thousands of new smells. Dog by his son’s account, aside from one accident, had a marvelous time on that vacation and trips in the same carrier to New Hampshire summer home.

    As Romney himself might have assessed his options:

    Option A – Buy the 49.99 doggie carrier 1st noticed on cars around NH lake two summers ago. Make note to myself that a centralized pet product respository startup could knock price down at least 10-15 dollars – possible investment opportunity..Products need options like Detroit offers on cars. Why one color only? Why wait 3 weeks after ordering carrier in Boston? Why not a snap-on windshield?

    Various B options:
    1. Leave Seamus behind. Kennel the dog. Dogs hate kennels. Wife and sons angry Seamus left behind. Unacceptable.
    2. No room in station wagon with 7 people and gear in it for Seamus. Option to put a son in the pet carrier. Two youngest would like that. Unacceptable.
    3. Take his old commuter car along with Ann’s station wagon. But that would split up family, divide vacation experience. Couldn’t sing inspirational Mormon songs as a whole family all the way. Unacceptable.
    4. Fly Seamus to Ontario, then back to Massachusetts. Cost-benefit option in pre-Romney moneybag days a factor. Too much money. Same with separating family flying two sons to grandparents and putting dog in car. Too much expense.
    5. Ann said no to flying Seamus because she read lots of pets were dying on flights in the 80s. Ann not happy, I’m not happy. Unacceptable.
    3/9/12 1:50 PM

  212. #moononpluto
    April 18th, 2012 at 9:47 am

    Sorta takes the wind out of the sails of the USS Shock-And-Horror-That-Romney-Put-His-Dog-On-The-Roof-Of-The-Car, doesn’t it?

    ————————

    Yes, it does. One cautionary note though — Mitt and Ann have to sharpen their interview skills in talking about these ‘problem’ issues. For instance Mitt could talk about what kind of a crate it was and why the dog was comfortable.

    Check the comments on this for what other dog owners say about this episode and dogs in cars in general:
    http://althouse.blogspot.com/2012/03/romneys-dog.html

  213. moononpluto,

    I read about BO eating dog in Indonesia and immediately underwent coffee spurtitis all over the keyboard.

    Now THAT is a riot.

    Wonder what else is on the list of his past culinary experiences? How about cannabalism?

    Anyone else here read about the couple convicted of killing people and using the dead human flesh to make pastries and pies ala Sweeney Todd? What the heck REALLY happened to poor old granny?

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/6749346/Cannibal-gang-cooked-victims-into-meat-pastries

    OK. I’ll stop. Except for this.

    Revealed: The official fears US and Britain shared about over President Obama’s ‘anti-American’ and ‘anti-white’ father

    In his three years as U.S. president, Barack Obama has been dogged by claims he is not patriotic enough.

    Last year he even had to publish his birth certificate to silence doubters who suggested he was not born an American.

    Now it emerges that similar fears were expressed about his father, who was categorised with others as ‘anti-American and anti-white’ when he moved to the United States in 1959.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2131290/Revealed-Official-fears-U-S-UK-President-Obamas-anti-American-anti-white-father.html

  214. jeswezey
    April 18th, 2012 at 8:12 am

    Mrs. Smith: “And in the interests of clarity: the Insider said those two words “Darwinian Socialism” are the trigger words…”
    =====

    I haven’t seen “Darwinian Socialism” anywhere except in your own posts above.

    Social Darwinism exists as a concept, people should know what it means.

    What does Darwinian Socialism mean? I’ve never seen that before… ?
    __________________

    My impression is the (deliberate) word reversal was done, as said by the WSI, as a code: for the question is waiting and scheduled to be asked. There doesn’t seem to be a replay of the live interview when those words were said or the content and context of the question available anywhere for further analysis. Only the subjective evidence of Obama labeling the Republicans as Social Darwinians. If you run across the video posting it here containing this part of the interview, it would be great to have a crack at it in the interests of more understanding.

  215. Hi- Basil..

    Welcome home stranger! 🙂

    apologies for not saying so last night… got caught up with intense reading last night… Glad you are back safe and sound and will give us a glimpse of your whirlwind trip when you have a chance..

  216. nomobama
    April 18th, 2012 at 1:58 am

    Hi nomobama- I perused that book a while back. I thought you may be interested in where it led me to… this:

    The Rothschild Octopus

    “A nation…cannot survive treason from within…the traitor …wears the face of his victims,…and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation—he works secretly…he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared…….” Cicero, 42 B.C.E.

    The Rothschild Octopus

  217. Moononpluto,

    ‘You are right! The comments are a riot! And those wringing their hands over reporting of what poor widdle barry did when he was only 9 and how it’s just not fair that anyone report it are cracking me up.

    It was BO who brought it up in his own book so he apparently feels there is/was nothing wrong with it. Now, tying your dog to a kennel on top of your car, that’s grounds for imprisonment in the dims sick minds.

    Keep fighting Mitt. Get down in the gutter with the SOB and fight fire with fire or better a knife with a gun.

    A few more gems:

    Obama would never put a dog on top of a car. Dries out the meat

    Once you develop that taste for yellow lab, it’s only a matter of time…

    Michael Vick: “Damn Obama, you is crazy. At least I didn’t eat the dogs after I killed ‘em.”
    Espn.com

    Perhaps the Obama reelection team (who gleefully brought up the car story multiple times) should have stuck with the old adage — those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones (or bones in the present case).

    Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
    Or canine. Whatever.

    Enjoy this one, Team Obama. You’ve earned every tasty morsel.

    When they serve ‘Hot Dogs’ at the White House, you get the real thing! LOL!

    The liberal position on this one is indefensible, and they know it.
    Many other “foreign customs” are followed in foreign countries. Such as stoning women to death.
    Own this one, libs. Again… you’ve earned it.

    Obama is probably wondering how Bo would taste with some flava beans and a nice chianti…

    Since President Obama was lauded as a qualified to conduct the nation’s foreign policy based upon his experience as living in Indonesia as a small child which included eat in dog and he recounted in one of his autobiographies, it is certainly fair to bring it up in response to the President’s campaign staff repeatedly bringing up Romney transporting the family pet in an open dog crate much the same way as people who drive convertibles with their dog or pick up trucks with the dog in the truck bed (only safer). If the Obama campaign wants to run on trivialities they should not complain when it is thrown back at them. President Obama’s supporters are fine with making fun of and denigrating everyone everywhere but really can’t seem to take a joke when it is returned.

    Don’t forget Barry didn’t write the book as a child. He obviously was recalling fond memories as an adult of his canine eating youth. Guarantee you we will find out his dog eating habits extended well into his adulthood.

    That dog Bo should be removed immediately from the White House by protective services!

  218. jeswezey
    April 18th, 2012 at 8:43 am

    Mormaer: “The merger of extreme left ideology of social engineering/state capitalism and corporatism aka fascism is not right wing. It is the extreme left wing.”
    ————————————
    I think I agree with Mormaer on this. At its core, left wing ideology believes in the perfectability of man, whereas right wing ideology accepts at some level the tragic view of man–the idea that there are constraints, and human nature is not so easily melded int an object nearer the heart’s desire. Therefore, if you accept the premise that human beings are perfectable, then social engineering becomes the necessary and proper means to that end. And whether that entails the methods of Hitler, Marx, Skinner, Marcuse or Mahr they all engage in some form of state intervention to create The New Man.

  219. Yeah, let the dog Bo be afraid, very afraid.
    ———————————————-
    Now there is an understatement. Suppose Obama gets dressed up in all that incestral I mean ancestral garb, gets out a bottle of Heinz 57 steak sauce and goes trolling for his favorite delicacy–canine brouche, and, suppose further, the dog sees him coming, does his duty of retreat, but to no avail, therefore as Barack moves in for the kill the hapless hound bites Barack on it touche. White Owner! Racism!! Bounty!!! Arrest him!!!! Put him to sleep or we will!!!! Sharpton, Holder, Jackson, Spike Lee and Shabazz (cousin of Shebang) come flying in like the bats out of Translvania, and they demand justice for The One. Meanwhile 200 NBC, ABC, CNN reporters try mightily to incite a riot–good for Barack and for business. Then they go out and kill 10 dogs to gorge their voracious appetites. And Brian Williams calls this the most significant blow for civil rights since 1964. And 42% of the public is so mentally challenged that they agree with them, according to a CNN pollster.

  220. right wing ideology accepts at some level the tragic view of man–the idea that there are constraints, and human nature is not so easily melded int an object nearer the heart’s desire.

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

    Therefore there is no point in promoting equality or giving freedom to the lower orders, the unfit. They have to be kept down under control, ruled by their betters, for the safety of the betters.

    Your deep philosophical core cuts both ways.

  221. Obama would never put a dog on top of a car. Dries out the meat

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

    Naw, you just hose it down and then drive on with a wet dog at windchill speeds. Freeze-dry.

  222. LOL! Oh, Lordy, I had so much fun on Twitter last night! And the Obots and the media are still howling today, because they missed the whole point. This wasn’t really about Obama, or even his eating that dog, per se. No one was seriously saying he did some awful thing.

    It was about exposing how the media sets the narrative in his favor, drag up inconsequential stuff about those who oppose him and make it a “serious” story. THEY decide which outrageous outrage over “trivia” is appropriate, and which is not.

    This whole thing was a big “F*ck You” to that entire dynamic, a massive jerking of their chains. And they STILL don’t get it.

    MSM today: “WE will decide what nonissues are flogged for outrage! Would you..no…shut up! Stop it! Stop it I say!”

  223. LMAO! So, the Obots are whining that you can dig up trivial crap on Romney from 30 years ago, but not Obama, because…..he was a child!!!

    Sure, okay, we can play by those rules as well. Here ya go:

    You know what? @WoodhouseB has a point. We should stop talking about Obama’s dog eating as a child and move on to his coke habit. #deal?—
    RB (@RBPundit) April 18, 2012

    You are right, pm317. This is not 2008. No one is afraid to go after him anymore.

  224. H4T, big media does not yet know what is coming their way. Did you see the graphic on Drudge last night? He had it for almost the whole day and it is still there on the left. Romney in his own low key way made the point that the media will do Obama’s bidding. This is not 2008. Republicans are getting smart about media bias.

  225. I saw that pm317. Agreed, this is not 2008. And the Proglodytes are freaking out.

    2008
    Progs – “Raaaaacist!!! Hater!!” Opponents – *ok, I’d better tone it down…*

    2012

    Progs: “Raaaaacist!! Hater!!!”

    Opponents: “Pffffffftt!!!!! Screw you. BWAHAHAHA!”

  226. jeswezey
    April 18th, 2012 at 8:43 am
    Churchill was a Tory and recognized Fascism as left wing extremism. He was ridiculed. Many, many dictators start out as leftists and progress to complete authoritarianism. Most leftists do not go that far but if you look at most of histories dictators they start as leftists doing “things” for the common people and progress in authoritarian ideology to maintain their grip on power.

  227. wbboei: Neither left nor right has a patent on the idea of human perfectibility, and the “social engineering” that I referred to does not mean perfecting the human DNA or eliminating whatever strains of humans a dictator may not like.

    At a time when the labels “left” and “right” had clear meanings, it was Hitler, who was no leftist and led a crusade against the extreme left – communists -, who undertook to eliminate bad strains of humans, breed “good” German men and women who met Hitler’s criteria, and conduct research on the human genome to improve the breed. Such things were not done in Russia, which was said to be on the right. They have never been tried – are even illegal – in today’s socialist, i.e. leftist, countries.

    Social engineering is indeed based on the idea that people can live better lives, i.e. humanity is perfectible, but this is done through education, effective health systems and practices, retirement systems, quality leisure activities, effective security (police), scientific progress and progressive taxation to pay for these things. The list could go on, but it does not include such things as “human engineering” as the Nazis did, and it is not imposed by authoritarian governments against the will of the people.

    With all due respect, I think this mix-up of “left” and “right” is done solely with the intention of branding Obama as a socialist, which is an epithet that no noteworthy public figure can assume in the United States.

    It is also completely false. Obama may be playing out the ultimate Marxist dream of class warfare, and may be paving the way for diktat of his proletarians; but I still contend that he is the farthest thing imaginable from a socialist and, as I said the other day, today’s socialists are masters of modern economics and no longer refer to Marx.

  228. “why did Mitt Romney put his dog on his car?”

    “so Obama wouldn’t eat him”.

    😆

    ——-
    I remember when I was a young kid, our family drove from Michigan to California with my best friend, our family dog, a big black lab in a cage at the back of an open trailer being pulled behind our car. Them were the days!! 😉

    Anyway, our family car was pretty packed with three girls in the back seat and parents in the front.

    I complained from the second we left on the trip that the dog belonged in the car with us and I would not shut up about it. My dad was pretty hardcore when it came to changing his mind on his decisions.

    About 100 miles later into the trip, there was some bump in the road that bounced the trailer and the dog and his cage fell into the road.

    After about 20 minutes of high drama, the dog was okay and finally put in the backseat with me…and my older sisters were practically sitting on top of one another, but my dad had to hear that story for the rest of his life.

    I am Hillary’s age now, so men must have been bigger dingbats back then?

  229. Can you imagine how LAME it would have looked if Bill Clinton or George Bush’s official campaign teams made public statements refuting…. fucking jokes being told about them?

    How whiny is that?

  230. After about 20 minutes of high drama, the dog was okay and finally put in the backseat with me…

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

    Now that’s decent crisis management.

  231. Mormaer: “Churchill was a Tory and recognized Fascism as left wing extremism. He was ridiculed.”
    =====

    Ridiculed as he should have been. Churchill was not always right, nor was he always on the same side of the political fence (if I remember correctly, he said he had switched sides five times from Tory to Labour and back). One thing I will accept in this statement is that Fascism was “… extremism”, though not of the left.

    “Many, many dictators start out as leftists and progress to complete authoritarianism.”

    For me, you would have to support that statement with a few examples, which shouldn’t be too hard if there are “many, many” examples.

    Chile’s Pinochet came to power by having the popularly elected leftist, socialist, Allende assassinated. Tens of thousands of Chileans fled the country. Maybe Pinochet did something for the little guy, but in any event he was authoritarian from the get-go. He was installed to get rid of the left, so naturally people thought of him as being on the right.

    Same goes for the military junta’s we installed all over Latin America, and the Greek Colonels too. We installed dictators all over Africa, and some in Asia (South Vietnam) and their purpose was solely to stem the tide of communism. These dictators were at no time “leftists” or we wouldn’t have tolerated them.

    I’ll give you two examples in favor of your thesis: Castro and Ghadhafi. They were both out to help the little guy, but they were also both authoritarian to begin with – rose to power through military achievements.

    The best example you may point to is the Bolsheviks – whom I may place on the left, may I not? – with their idealism but hard-nosed realism and who held onto power for a long time. But the Soviet system was democratic – a definition of “democratic” that is alien to us, but it was conceived to be the ultimate democracy. Now that the Bolsheviks are gone, we can revisit the results of their 75 y reign. I’ve just come back from my nth visit to St Petersburg, where they have a cabaret named the “Soviet Cafe”, very ‘in’ place to go. The Soviets left Russia with the best-educated population on earth. It wasn’t all bad for the little guy.

  232. jeswezey
    April 18th, 2012 at 12:05 pm
    ——————————

    The entire tape linked below is worth its weight in gold, but what Tom says at the 3 minute mark et seq. is what I was referring to. The argument is further explicated in his book The Vision of the Annointed, page 104-111, in case you are interested.


  233. Report: Buffett’s Railroad to Benefit from Obama Keystone Pipeline Rejection
    By Jon E. Dougherty at 24 Jan 2012
    (Newsroom America) — A railroad largely owned by billionaire Warren Buffett stands to benefit financially from a decision by the Obama administration to reject a major oil pipeline project that would have stretched 1,700 miles south from Canada to refineries in Texas.
    Bloomberg News reported Tuesday that Burlington Northern Santa Fe LLC is among U.S. and Canadian railroads that stand to gain from the U.S. State Department’s rejection last week of the Keystone XL pipeline project. Buffett is a long-time political and financial supporter of Obama.
    “Whatever people bring to us, we’re ready to haul,” Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for Burlington Northern, a unit of Buffett’s Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., investment house, told Bloomberg. If the pipeline deal falls through, she added, “we’re here to haul.”
    The State Department rejected TransCanada’s permit to build the pipeline on Jan. 18, saying a congressionally imposed deadline of Feb. 21 to study the project was not enough time.
    TransCanada has said it would reapply for a route that avoids an environmentally sensitive region in Nebraska, but the Canadian government has also said it will consider selling its oil to China as a way to diversity its energy outlets.
    Canadian Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver said relying less on the U.S. would help strengthen the country’s “financial security.”
    The “decision by the Obama administration underlines the importance of diversifying and expanding our markets, including the growing Asian market,” Oliver told reporters last week.
    If completed, the Keystone XL project would transport about 700,000 barrels of oil a day from oil sands regions in Alberta to refineries in Texas.
    Some analysts believe the pipeline project will eventually move forward, Bloomberg reported, noting that pipeline shipping costs less than moving oil by rail. Also, a shortage of transport rail cars could also make the pipeline more attractive.

  234. “I am Hillary’s age now, so men must have been bigger dingbats back then?”
    ====

    Imagine what it was like a century or two ago!

    Nowadays, we’re in the Millennium of the Woman and women have the right to be dingbats too… my ex-wife understood that.

  235. jeswezey

    Mormaer

    Wbb

    I’m glad you guys are hashing the social darwinism left side/right side discussion out, this kind of history never stuck in my head so now I can just sit back and eat popcorn.

  236. When even Mika on Morning Joe is cracking up laughing at you….. you are no longer The Messiah.


  237. Shadowfax, Jake Tapper joined in the fun last night we were having with #Obamadogrecipes, and tweeted: “Great Danish”

    Some of the press are losing their fear of Obama.

  238. “not sure if you are a guy or not, just guessing by your name”

    Hey, I was told by my girlfriend about ten years ago that women are called “guys” now too! Was she wrong, or is that just a New Yorker thing (she’s a native of Manhattan)?

    Glad you’re enjoying the Social Darwinism discussion. Maybe, as spectator, you could say who you think is presenting the best arguments. (Don’t say anything unless you think it’s me!)

  239. H4TX
    Some of the press are losing their fear of Obama.

    —-
    Are they less afraid or is it they have nothing to gain in his second term and they may be tired of trying to cover his corrupt, skinny ass?

    I always thought it had to be money involved with the MSM drinking so much Kool-aid, most people are more motivated by money than anything else (except sex or love)…so what can That One promise after this election?

    He can only hope to be a wilted lame duck that plays golf every day of the week while MO, the PepBoys Princess spends our tax money until the cows come home.

  240. Glad you’re enjoying the Social Darwinism discussion. Maybe, as spectator, you could say who you think is presenting the best arguments. (Don’t say anything unless you think it’s me!)

    😆
    I haven’t finished my popcorn and I am not sure if the Obama camp vs the GOPs are just using it like the ‘race card’. Seems if it isn’t cut and dry on either side, it may not be a big threat by outsiders trying to manipulate BO???

    I dunno…still pondering.

  241. “I always thought it had to be money…”
    ====

    As far as Obama goes, I think you’re right. I think the POTUS gets retirement at full pay, but he and the missus will be losing all the perks – the big jet(s), plenty of vacations on the taxpayers’ nickel, a dedicated kitchen and service staff, a house much bigger than the dinky little thing Rezko helped him buy.

    But there’s the psychological side too – there must be something about the perpetual adulation that is satisfactory to him. And it would be a real downer for him to know he is a one-term president. What a legacy!

    With the adulation dying out and more pressers with hardball questions, there may be less adrenaline flowing in his sociopathic brain. Maybe before the D convention he will finally realize that America isn’t good enough for him and he never did like the POTUS job anyway. As far as jobs go, it sucks. So maybe he’ll decide to go back to writing more books about himself.

    Hope springs eternal.

  242. ABC news is covering this story instead of hiding it…
    —————————-
    What remarkable courage they have. I am really impressed. Did this happen before of after the White House gave the green light–the chilling photo. Nice to see them become so animated after they have been given permission to do this. Since it is damaging to Obama, and they cannot bury it, they opt to make light of it. Yuppies. I sure they have got ratboy–Chuck Todd, other college drop out–like Brian Williams, waiting in the wings, making some variation of the argument when in Rome, and not to do so would show contempt for the local customs. This is as close as they get to redemption–here to the moon.

  243. HFT: I always questioned Stalin’s motives in sending political dissenters and subversives to the Uranium mines to work on their suntans. After seeing this tape I can understand his rationale. I may not agree with it, but now at least I understand it. They are more than an embarrassment. And the roots of it are this vague sense that they have been cheated out of the entitlements that are rightfully theirs, and Walker who is trying to balance the budget without looting taxpayers has become their bete noir. But it is like Learned Hand said, there is no guarantee that the kingdom of god will be at hand when the last king is decapitated, or the last member of the Politiburo is poisoned or strangled–here’s looking at you Beria. Thank God for Breitbart and thank you HFT for posting this video. It restores my confidence in the moral superiority of the Left.

  244. And, of course, #obamadogrecipes are in abundance and now trending:

    From Twitchy. Thanks H4T for the great link. I bookmarked it.

    #ObamaDogRecipes

    Spaniel Bolognese.

    Mango Lassie

    Michael Vick’s Ol’ Fashioned Backyard Jambalaya—

    German Shephard’s Pie

    Chicken Poodle Soup.

    Chinese Chow Chow Mein

    Bichon Fricassee

    Shitzu-shimi—

    Hound cake.

    Shovel Ready Snoopy

    Puppyseed Bagels

    Chili con Corgi

    Totofu

    Dog Collared Greens—

    Labradoodle oodles of noodles.

    Ramen Poodles

    Ol’ Yellerfin Tuna

  245. admin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Please embed h4T’s great find!

    HillaryforTexas
    April 18th, 2012 at 12:49 pm

    When even Mika on Morning Joe is cracking up laughing at you….. you are no longer The Messiah.


  246. DINO Obama is a corporate fascist in socialist clothing (and so is the Obamacare he’s riding out on, give or take a suffix ending or two).

    As Admin said a while back, totalatarianism is the same result regardless of whether it came from ‘rightwing’ or ‘leftwing’ takeover.

    Or by ‘crony capitalism’ takeover.

    Otoh, imo, a ‘mixed economy’ gives the most freedom to individuals.

  247. Romney needs to keep DETAILING and pounding that O has been a poor, very poor, steward of our economy…

    he needs to say ‘remember when O said he was going to go into the budget line by line and cut, cut, cut wasteful spending?’…he needs to keep juxtaposing what O actually did instead…how he escalated the debt…

    …how when his admin was notified of extravagant spending, they did nothing…and now while O keeps proposing new taxes…all his admin is doing is squandering the taxes he already has from our hard work…

    …Romney should keep repeating the BILLIONS O has sqaundered with energy companies, Solyndra and the rest of them…and how billions went to political supporters at the expense of us, the taxpayers footing the bill

    …and then how millions were spent on lavish Las Vegas parties at our expense, the tax payers footing the bill for all the parties…

    …and don’t forget the interns and the extravagant retreat…all at the expense of the taxpyers, us footing the bill…

    Mitt needs to develop this meme and image and keep repeating it…how our hard earned tax payer dollars (with families barely making ends meet) are being squandered and O has the unmigated gall to ask for more taxes…when he cannot be trusted to oversee what he already has…and while he continues to increase the debt, day after day…with another DEBT increase looming in the near future…how many increases is that now during O’s admin?

    …and don’t forget the “shovel ready jobs” that went unshoveled and all that stimulus money down some hole into the abyss…

    Mitt has to pound that there is no end to this misallocation of our money and the unlimited thirst and greed to demand more…

    …and throw in Fast and Furious for good measure…more poor judgement and poor leadership

  248. Was it not LA Times which refused to release tape of Obama with a ME guy 2008-ish? If so, perhaps it’s why this now:
    White House spokesman Jay Carney reacted to the publication of photos in the Los Angeles Times of U.S. soldiers posing with corpses in Afghanistan by saying the Obama administration is “disappointed.. [with] the decision to publish two years after the incident,” according to a pool report.
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/wh-disappointed-la-times-published-photos-two-years-after-incident_640402.html

    Maybe media are feeling as relieved as we.

  249. I hope American Crossroads has a tape in the can with the lead in of Axelrod’s costly gap, caption to read when he retires to the privacy of the voting booth, will Snydley Whiplash vote for Romeny? Only his hairdresser knows for sure. This gaff was a disaster for Obama–only he is too arrogant and stupid to realize it. I can assure you that Grease and Pluff rhymes with Fluff gets it. Bad medicine. I would say every dog has its day, but it would cause Obama to salivate, and that is a visual I do not need to see. I will take him at his word that in addition to throwing supporters under the bus, he has no qualms about devouring man’s best friend, and any objections to his culinary preferences are ipso facto racist, according to Brian Williams, Capus, and Griffin.
    ———————————–

    David Axelrod’s costly Freudian slip

    Share34 posted at 10:10 am on April 17, 2012 by Howard Portnoy
    It seems fitting and appropriate that David Axelrod—a man who was instrumental in constructing the myth of hope and change in 2008—should make a costly and telling gaffe while out promoting a second term for Barack Obama. On FOX News Sunday, the communications director for the re-election campaign was given an opportunity by host Chris Wallace to deliver an interview-closing pitch for his candidate. Axelrod instead presented voters with a Hobson’s choice, saying:

    The choice in this election is between an economy that produces a growing middle class and that gives people a chance to get ahead and their kids a chance to get ahead and an economy that continues down the road we are on.
    For the longest time, the president tirelessly and shamelessly invoked the name of his predecessor, George W. Bush, as the man to blame for the “mess we’re in.” After a full term in office, it will be hard for Obama to argue that “the road we are on” was not paved, for better or worse, by his own policies.

    Considering, moreover, that Team Obama’s 17-minute documentary was titled “The Road We’ve Traveled,” the generally sure-footed Axelrod couldn’t have made a more cataclysmic blunder or delivered a more meaningful gift to his opponent.
    The video of Axelrod’s momentous slip of the tongue is here. I would urge readers to pass it on, though I suspect the Romney campaign and RNC have already begun doing just that.

  250. I have it on good authority that COMCAST has asked Capus point blank whether he has made a serious mistake putting all his eggs in one basket. They have asked him what is your contingency plan for the business if Obama loses. You have taken us so far out on a limb, that is he does lose we will be forced to fire you and your staff–you realize that don’t you. We will have to make some kind of sacrifice to them in that case, and you will be the sacrificial goat–you understand that as well? Capus has acknowledge this but privately he has told friends, why is it that Rupert Murdock can push his organization to the right when a Republican is in power, and get all the access and influence, but when I try to do the same thing when a confirmed leftist like Obama is in the saddle, I get the axe when he leaves. The friend replied, because he owns the company and you sir do not. By the way, Phil Griffin goes too.

  251. BASIL99
    April 18th, 2012 at 1:29 pm
    —————————-
    And, as any good chef will tell you, where dog meat is concerned, you should err on the side of well done, because when it is done rare, or as steak tartare, instead of belching you have this uncontrollable urge to bark. As in “Barkie”.

  252. The other thing he said I forgot is if Obama loses there will be alot of cost cutting at NBC–and the job losses will go deep into the organization. Frankly, I am not surprised.

  253. You know, I am now starting to wonder about all that WAG-yu “beef” that Obama is so fond of in the WH.. 😀

  254. Pretty good RNC ad aimed at the DNC convention in NC throwing BO’s own words back at him.

    Worth a peek.

  255. Polls can drive one nus.

    This from yesterday:

    Gallup daily tracking poll: Romney 48, Obama 43
    posted at 4:51 pm on April 17, 2012 by Tina Korbe

    Yesterday, the Gallup daily tracking poll showed Mitt Romney with a smidgen of a lead over Barack Obama — and a CNN poll showed Barack Obama with a sizable lead over Mitt Romney. Gallup has more good news for Romney, though. The daily tracker shows Romney’s support up by one and Obama’s support down by two, widening Romney’s lead from a mere two points to a full five.

    As Allah pointed out in his comprehensive coverage of yesterday’s two conflicting polls, though, it’s a toss-up as to whether we should cover polls closely at all at this point. The election is a full six months away and so much is bound to change between now and then. Yet, it can’t be entirely insignificant that Romney has led the incumbent two days in a row, according to Gallup.

    Still, relevant qualifications apply: It’ll all come down to the relatively unpredictable independent vote, much of the Romney vote is driven primarily by anti-Obama sentiment and Obama still has a significant edge in likability.

  256. More proof of media matters lies in big news outlets.

    WaPo Author who Tied Romney to KKK Resigns over Plagiarism Scandal

    ________________________________________

    by Tony Lee 17 hours ago 23 post a comment

    When Washington Post journalist Elizabeth Flock wrote a post last year falsely accusing Mitt Romney of using a Ku Klux Klan slogan in his campaign speech, she was not fired or disciplined.
    But when Flock stole from the work of another mainstream organization and did not properly attribute, she abruptly “resigned” from the Washington Post conveniently and coincidentally before another editor’s note went up on her post that described it as having “serious factual errors” and “a significant ethical lapse.”

    Flock told AFP that “she resigned on Friday before the Post published a second editor’s note about her work and that she was not pressured to quit.” A Washington Post spokesman said they would not comment on personnel matters.

    Flock is the latest member of the mainstream media caught plagiarizing, which should be treated with the same shame that doping is in professional sports but is not.
    But the more disturbing question is why she was not fired or disciplined for fabricating a piece about Republicans that showed extreme negligence at best or complete dishonesty and hackery at worst.

    In December 2011, Flock wrote a story wherein she tried everything she could to frame Republicans as racist by falsely writing that Romney stated he wanted to “Keep America American.” Romney really said “Keep America America,” but those were not the words that Flock wanted to hear. She used the misquote to tie Romney to the Ku Klux Klan, which had used the “Keep America American” slogan in the past.

    If Flock had worked for an obscure publication, her article may have been overlooked. But because she wrote it for the Washington Post, numerous other outlets took the story as fact and ran with it.

    MSNBC was the guiltiest of all the networks.

    After airing multiple segments based on Flock’s falsities, MSNBC anchors Thomas Roberts and Chris Matthews had to apologize, with Matthews saying that, “It was irresponsible and incendiary of us to do this, and it showed an appalling lack of judgment. We apologize, we really do, to the Romney campaign.”

    All of this prompted the Washington Post to write an editor’s note at the top of Flock’s article.

    “This posting contains multiple, serious factual errors that undermine its premise,” an editor’s note said then. “Mitt Romney is not using ‘Keep America American,’ which was once a KKK slogan, as a catchphrase in stump speeches, as the posting and headline stated. In a YouTube video that the posting said showed Romney using the phrase, Romney actually used a different phrase, ‘Keep America America.’”

    The editor’s note also stated that the video that the article labelled a “Mitt Romney 2012 Campaign Ad” was not a campaign ad and conceded, “the Post should have contacted the Romney campaign for comment before publication.”

  257. and don’t forget the “shovel ready jobs” that went unshoveled and all that stimulus money down some hole into the abyss…
    *****************

    Actually you can look at the link I posted, the jobs didn’t go in the abyss, they went to the CHINESE!

  258. Someone needs to start a ‘Text Barack about Dogs’ site, similar to the one Hillary had…photos with comments.

    First text

    PETA photo of CEO on the phone: “WTF Barack, you eat man’s best friend?”

    Photo of Barry with a big spaghetti bib on while on the phone: “Yes, it tastes like chicken! I’m thinking of starting a franchise.”

  259. putting my 2 cents in before the Laugh-a-thon is old news. Where Truth is stranger than Fiction!
    _______________

    — Out takes From President Obama’s book Dreams from My Father sage teachings from good ole Lolo:

    “With Lolo, I learned how to eat small green chill peppers raw with dinner (plenty of rice), and, away from the dinner table, I was introduced to dog meat (tough), snake meat (tougher), and roasted grasshopper (crunchy).

    Like many Indonesians, Lolo followed a brand of Islam that could make room for the remnants of more ancient animist and Hindu faiths. He explained that a man took on the powers of whatever he ate: One day soon, he promised, he would bring home a piece of tiger meat for us to share.” (@ his step-father’s knee)

    (even if killing tigers are against the LAW ..)

    Vetting? This man needs a Vet for selecting prime meat!

  260. “There’s little evidence that any president has really moved the country with his rhetoric”. Too bad Obama/ Notice how Real Clear Politics is left to posting crap from the New Yorker magazine to find any positive news on Obama.
    ——————————————————————————————

    Obama’s Problem? His Record
    By Jonah Goldberg

    ‘The choice in this election is between an economy that produces a growing middle class and that gives people a chance to get ahead and their kids a chance to get ahead, and an economy that continues down the road we are on, where a fewer and fewer number of people do very well and everybody else is running faster and faster just to keep pace.”

    That’s Obama adviser David Axelrod on Fox News Sunday, explaining why people should vote for . . . Barack Obama.

    Odds are this was simply poor phrasing. But it might not have been, given how desperately the Obama campaign wants to turn back the clock to 2008, when the choice was between hope and change or continuing “down the road we are on.”

    Regardless of the spin, the simple fact is that Obama is the stay-the-course candidate stuck with a team, a record, and an economy ill-suited for a stay-the-course strategy.

    That’s what gives poignancy to Obama’s recently renewed love affair with Ronald Reagan, whom Obama invokes these days as a model of reasonableness and bipartisanship. He even wants to rename the “Buffett rule” the “Reagan rule.”Even before he got the nomination in 2008, Obama said he wanted to be a “transformative” president like Reagan had been.

    And last year, Time magazine featured a cover story, “Why Obama [Hearts] Reagan,” which in Time’s words gave the true story behind “Obama’s Reagan Bromance.”

    There were two key elements to Obama’s man-crush. The first was the simple hope that history — or at least the business cycle — would repeat itself.

    The White House’s plan was to run for reelection in 2012 with a soaring economy at its back. After an absolutely bruising recession (that was in some ways worse than the one Obama inherited), Reagan got to ride a surging economy to reelection. America enjoyed 6 percent annual growth in 1984: In three of the four quarters before Election Day, GDP quarterly growth was more than 7 percent, while inflation and unemployment plummeted.

    At Obama’s back is a dismayingly anemic recovery, constantly threatening to get worse. He wants credit for “creating” 3 million jobs but insists he be held blameless for millions more workers who’ve left the job market entirely.

    The other reason the White House admired the Reagan White House? According to Time: “Both relied heavily on the power of oratory.” Then– press secretary Robert Gibbs added, “Our hope is the story ends the same way.”

    And there’s the problem for Obama. He’s sticking to his rhetorical guns on the assumption that he’s the great orator his fans have always claimed. It’s admirably Gipperesque, I suppose, but the problem is that Obama has never once significantly moved public opinion on domestic issues with his arguments. If he had that power, not only would “Obamacare” be popular today, it would have been popular when he gave more than 50 addresses and speeches on it during his first year.

    Obama’s out on the stump embracing Obamacare, and also doubling down on green energy, on the need for “investments” in government programs, and for the whole hodgepodge of rationalizations for hiking taxes and “spreading the wealth around.”

    Asking whether Obama is as good a communicator as Reagan is like comparing boxers from different generations; there’s plenty of evidence to form opinions but no way to settle the matter.

    But what must be very troubling for Obama is the mounting evidence that presidential persuasion is vastly overrated. Political scientist Brendan Nyhan has noted that Reagan’s rhetoric had little effect on the polls or his media coverage. Liberal Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein, surveying the academic literature in a recent issue of the New Yorker, found that there’s little evidence that any president has really moved the country with his rhetoric.

    My hunch is that such findings are overdone and leave out some aspects of presidential persuasion.

    Still, what’s undoubtedly true is that results matter far more than words. And despite Axelrod’s assertions, the fact is that Obama has been leading us down the road we are on for more than three years, and that’s what voters will have in mind come Election Day.

  261. Really going to be difficult to look at him the same way, but then I always looked at him with disgust.

    Wonder what other gems are in his book that apparently no one really read!

Comments are closed.