Bill Clinton Day, Post Wisconsin Day Disasters For Obama

Update: It’s Bill Clinton day everywhere. Charles Krauthammer is a guest of honor at the festivities. The top of the charts quote from Krauthammer: Let’s face it, Bill Clinton’s a double agent for the GOP, is playing on all the jukeboxes.

For those asking “What is ‘Obama supporter’ Bill Clinton up to?” you’re kinda late to the party. This war party has been going on for a long time, you’ve just been too blind to see. We’ve been on the job for years now with the answer (see below) to the question of the day for newbies.

——————————————————————————————

Summarize. Bill Clinton’s candidates badly beat up Obama’s candidates last night in the primaries. Bill Clinton in the past week declared he “liked” Donald Trump (you know the guy who beats up on Obama and regularly calls Obama a Kenyan), trumpeted Mitt Romney’s “sterling” business record, demanded the election discourse be a Bain-free zone, and put down a marker for Obama to state specifically what he has done and what he will do if reelected.

Bill Clinton is no dope and Bill Clinton has been running campaigns since the George McGovern days. Bill Clinton knows more than anyone about campaign messaging and Bill Clinton knows that what he has done is take an ax to the Obama campaign message.

Obama wanted to smear Mitt Romney during five months left of the campaign with Bain distractions – soon ads quoting Bill Clinton will inoculate Romney. Obama wanted to distract attention from his record (and dubious history, as well as missing history) and pump up his dim witted supporters with jibber-jabber about Donald Trump and how unfair the world is to poor Bam-Bam – Bill Clinton swamped that with “I like him [The Donald].”

Obama wanted to run a campaign of distractions and whining (aided and abetted by Big Media), because he is afraid as a vampire is of a cross when it comes to his record in the White House. Bill Clinton said “no” discuss your record and what you intend to do in a second term. Bill Clinton knows Obama cannot survive this November if the election is a referendum on his record.

Bill Clinton, master campaign strategist has, with Barack Obama at his side grinning helplessly, systematically demolished Barack Obama’s campaign messaging and narrative. Ah, but wait! There is one narrative that Bill Clinton did not destroy. Well, not entirely…. true.

Bill Clinton did say, with grinning idiot Obama forced to listen at a fundraiser ostensibly held to help Obama, that Bill himself balanced the budget for four years. Bill Clinton repeated the fact and we can only imagine that Obama died inside knowing that Bill Clinton was openly taunting his trillion dollar budget deficits. Poor Bam-Bam.

Barack Obama might be an idiot but Obama knows when he is threatened. Barack Obama knows that Bill Clinton is goading and slapping him publicly without shame or restraint. But Obama is as helpless as George Zimmerman flat on the street while Trayvon Martin beat him. What can Bam-Bam do? Fire Bill? Fire Hillary? As if.

Barack Obama knows that Bill Clinton knows that Barack Obama knows that Bill Clinton knows that Barack Obama needs Bill Clinton to try to reach all those white working class “folks” that Obama snubbed and mocked for years now. Barack Obama knows that Bill Clinton knows that Barack Obama knows that Bill Clinton knows that Barack Obama needs Bill Clinton to try to raise money now that the Hopium Guzzlers are penniless in this Obama economy and Hillary supporters refuse to donate money to a boob.

Barack Obama can’t do a damn thing about Bill Clinton. Obama has to grin and bear it.

* * * * * *

We did say that there was one Obama narrative that Bill Clinton did not destroy, aside from that verbal assault on deficit budgets. Well, that was before yesterday.

Yesterday Bill Clinton knocked out the last remaining leg of the Obama message/narrative.

Barack Obama having made a wreck of the American economy knows the best he can do is say “the economic trends are going in the right direction”. Last month’s economic data prove Barack Obama is at best wrong, probably lying. But economic data are not charismatic and don’t give interviews. But Bill Clinton….

Bill Clinton flatly contradicted Barack Obama on the nonsense that the nation is on the “right track” economically. Bill Clinton made it clear yesterday, of all days, that the United States is headed in the “wrong” direction. Bill Clinton flatly and authoritatively shouted out: WE’RE IN A RECESSION!:

“Former President Bill Clinton told CNBC Tuesday that the US economy already is in a recession and urged Congress to extend all the tax cuts due to expire at the end of the year. [snip]

“What I think we need to do is find some way to avoid the fiscal cliff, to avoid doing anything that would contract the economy now, and then deal with what’s necessary in the long term debt-reduction plans as soon as they can, which presumably would be after the election,” Clinton said.

“They will probably have to put everything off until early next year,” he added. “That’s probably the best thing to do right now. But the Republicans don’t want to do that unless he agrees to extend the tax cuts permanently, including for upper income people, and I don’t think the president should do that.”

A RECESSION???? How can that be???? Bush is out of office and the great source of light and intelligence is gracing us with his mastery of the world shining like a beacon of hope since he was ten years old in Indonesia.

A RECESSION???? How can that be???? Barack Obama keeps telling us that we’re on the “right” track and things are trending in the right direction. Bill!!!!!! You mean Obama is not telling us what we need to hear???? Bill, you are the guy that balanced four budgets (you reminded us all a few days ago of that fact) and surely you know what you are talking about. Are you saying that Obama is an AMATEUR, a boob, out of his element, in over his grey head??????

Shocking.



Yeah, we know, the response to the above is that Bill was saying only “temporarily” extend the Bush tax cuts. But that is not the big news. The big news from this interview is Bill Clinton authoritatively and flatly stating that the American economy is in recession and that is completely contrary to the Obama campaign message/narrative. Wait till the ad comes out from the Romney campaign.


Who let the Dawg out indeed?



Granted we have been writing for years that Bill Clinton (and Hillary Clinton, who must be laughing her sass off) cannot tolerate Barack Obama, hates what he is doing to the country, despises how Barack has destroyed the Democratic Party and has been waging a defensive/offensive war versus Obama in private. But now the war has gone public and even the dolts are beginning to catch up to what are readers have known for years. We certainly are no longer alone. Charles Krauthammer, certainly NOT a dolt had this to say:

“I think he’s really is now a bull in a china shop, there is a lot of crockery being destroyed. It’s very clear when he said the thing about the sterling business record, that was extremely undermining because, of course, it contradicted the whole roll-out strategy of the Obama campaign, which was to portray Romney as vulture capitalist. So it undoes that.”

“But I think it has broader implications. I think what was overlooked was the fact that Romney met the threshold for the presidency. That is extremely important in a re-election campaign. A re-election campaign is a referendum on the president, unless they are questions about the challenger,” Krauthammer said.

A loose cannon? He’s a double agent,” Krauthammer said. “What’s the message? Bill Clinton said elect Obama because at the end of his second term you might begin to be getting out of recession, I wouldn’t run on that.



Bill Clinton went public war against Obama just as the bad economic numbers burped out last week. Yesterday as Obama destroyed the Wisconsin Dimocratic Party and Wisconsin Big Labor, Bill Clinton struck again. Hit ’em when they’re down. Keep your enemies close – until it is time to strike them down. Bill knows all the tricks and Barack is only now realizing he is outmatched in his Chicago thuggery by corn-pone Ozark L’il Abner style backwoods fighting.



* * * * * *

Barack Obama and his Hopium Guzzlers will indulge themselves in fantasies and treacheries. The #1 fantasy today is that the Wisconsin exit polls foretell an Obama victory in November. But the exit polls had the Wisconsin recall race as 50/50, too close to call. The exit polls proved to be wrong as Walker easily walked over the finish line. The Wisconsin exit polls are equally wrong in the Romney vs. Obama race. The only argument left is to say, something, anything, “hey, it really didn’t matter, we lied to you to “pump you up”, to fool you”. But we remember. Do you recall?:



Governor Scott Walker shared some advice that Obama will never understand.
Walker: If you make the tough choices, voters will stick with you
. Some voters did not agree with Walker but still voted for him. Some voters were upset with the ceaseless recall attempts and they voted for Walker. Most importantly some voters likely stuck with Walker because indeed he made tough choices.



Barack Obama will not make the tough choices. Barack Obama just wants to spend more and more money as the printing presses churn out green inflationary paper.

Obama treachery? Big Labor has a knife in the back and pockets picked by a treacherous Chicago thug:

“As Charles Krauthammer said last night on Fox News, “In Wisconsin, Obama literally mailed it in.” Actually, Obama tweeted it in. Though public sector unions throughout the country broke their backs and piggy banks to win him the presidency in 2008, ever the calculating politician willing to throw his supporters under that over-crowded bus, Obama refused to show up and rally for the Wisconsin rank-and-file for fear a loss might give him a bad news cycle or two.”

If Big Labor has any pride or fight Big Labor would tell Obama, “Not one cent more. Not one cent from our workers for your Bank of America stadium coronation. Not one cent from our workers for your treacheries. You are the one and on your own. Go to Hell.” But battered wife Big Labor will fork over the cash and light incense in worship at Bank of America stadium. And they wonder why they are losing. And dying.

Share

338 thoughts on “Bill Clinton Day, Post Wisconsin Day Disasters For Obama

  1. Ever since I met Bill Clinton on a campaign stop in 1992, I have trusted him. He knows exactly what he is doing and I love it. He is a sheer joy to watch. Revenge could not be sweeter. You know the other Clinton laughing out loud is Chelsea. She did not appreciate the way her mom was treated by these thugs. Revenge is a joy to behold. Thank you Bill.

  2. Cornpone, sweet potato pie, and shut my mouth……….I love that Big Dawg from the SOUTH! Bless The One’s little pea picking heart…he should eat some, a lot of peas.

    Who let the DAWG out? Hillary. Even Obama Girl is kicking at the dogs in vain.


  3. I haven’t finished reading admins great toast/post to our Big Dawg.
    Before I go back to it, this came in my email box as a Hillary Google alert.

    Needless to say, this guy has his own agenda or oh’Bama’s agenda and if this is to correct the record on his last editorial in the minds of Hillary’s army, he failed on a mega level.

    —-
    Pro-choice for Hillary Clinton
    By Jonathan Capehart

    So, it has come to my attention that more than a few people misinterpreted the last line of my post pleading with everyone to “let Hillary Clinton be.” I wrote, “While Clinton has a right to change her mind, I would have even more respect for her if she didn’t.” This one line somehow negated the 397 words that preceded it.

    Clinton loyalists thought I was not-so-subtly telling the 2008 presidential aspirant to stay out of the 2016 race. Far from it. If the secretary of state — with a 66 percent approval rating — decides to run, great! But I want it to be her choice, done on her timetable with her best interests at heart. And right now, Clinton has made it crystal clear that at the end of this term she wants to go off to do her own thing after 20 years under the hot lights of American politics. If that’s what Hillary wants why can’t folks accept that — for now?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/pro-choice-for-hillary-clinton/2012/06/06/gJQAhJ40IV_blog.html

  4. Admin, that link to Freedom Foundation and posts so obviously did not work, please delete it. Thanks.

  5. Admin> Krauthammer and others have compared the failure of the union component of the Democratic coalition to the loss of the battle of Armageddon for the union movement.

    If the union leadership perceives it the same way, and realize that Bill was in there to protect them and Obama was not, then conceivably that could cause a substantial portion of the union component to shift its allegiances from Obama to Hillary for the number one spot.

    AFSME supported Hillary in the primary, Obama in the General Election. They took this hardest on the chin, but frankly the damage has spread to all corners of the labor movement and called into serious question the efficacy of Richard Trumpka as head of the AFL-CIO.

  6. Correction: in capital letters

    Admin> Krauthammer and others have compared the failure of the union component of the Democratic coalition LAST NIGHT IN WISCONSIN to the loss of the battle of Armageddon for the union movement.

    If the union leadership perceives it the same way, and realize that Bill was in there to protect them and Obama was not, then conceivably that could cause a substantial portion of the union component OF THE DEMOCRAT COALITION to shift its allegiances from Obama to Hillary for the number one spot AND ASK HER TO RUN IN 2012.

    AFSME supported Hillary in the primary, Obama in the General Election. They took this hardest on the chin, but frankly the damage has spread to all corners of the labor movement and called into serious question the efficacy of Richard Trumpka as head of the AFL-CIO.

  7. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/06/06/the_boys_of_pointe_du_hoc_96877.html

    The Boys of Pointe du Hoc
    By Ronald Reagan

    (Note: The following are remarks delivered by President Ronald Reagan on June 6, 1984 commemorating the 40th Anniversary of the Invastion of Normandy.)

    We’re here to mark that day in history when the Allied armies joined in battle to reclaim this continent to liberty. For four long years, much of Europe had been under a terrible shadow. Free nations had fallen, Jews cried out in the camps, millions cried out for liberation. Europe was enslaved and the world prayed for its rescue. Here, in Normandy, the rescue began. Here, the Allies stood and fought against tyranny, in a giant undertaking unparalleled in human history.

    We stand on a lonely, windswept point on the northern shore of France. The air is soft, but forty years ago at this moment, the air was dense with smoke and the cries of men, and the air was filled with the crack of rifle fire and the roar of cannon. At dawn, on the morning of the 6th of June, 1944, two hundred and twenty-five Rangers jumped off the British landing craft and ran to the bottom of these cliffs.

    Their mission was one of the most difficult and daring of the invasion: to climb these sheer and desolate cliffs and take out the enemy guns. The Allies had been told that some of the mightiest of these guns were here, and they would be trained on the beaches to stop the Allied advance.

    The Rangers looked up and saw the enemy soldiers at the edge of the cliffs, shooting down at them with machine guns and throwing grenades. And the American Rangers began to climb. They shot rope ladders over the face of these cliffs and began to pull themselves up. When one Ranger fell, another would take his place. When one rope was cut, a Ranger would grab another and begin his climb again. They climbed, shot back, and held their footing. Soon, one by one, the Rangers pulled themselves over the top, and in seizing the firm land at the top of these cliffs, they began to seize back the continent of Europe. Two hundred and twenty-five came here. After two days of fighting, only ninety could still bear arms.

    And behind me is a memorial that symbolizes the Ranger daggers that were thrust into the top of these cliffs. And before me are the men who put them there. These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. And these are the heroes who helped end a war. Gentlemen, I look at you and I think of the words of Stephen Spender’s poem. You are men who in your “lives fought for life and left the vivid air signed with your honor.”

    I think I know what you may be thinking right now — thinking “we were just part of a bigger effort; everyone was brave that day.” Well everyone was. Do you remember the story of Bill Millin of the 51st Highlanders? Forty years ago today, British troops were pinned down near a bridge, waiting desperately for help. Suddenly, they heard the sound of bagpipes, and some thought they were dreaming. Well, they weren’t. They looked up and saw Bill Millin with his bagpipes, leading the reinforcements and ignoring the smack of the bullets into the ground around him.

    Lord Lovat was with him — Lord Lovat of Scotland, who calmly announced when he got to the bridge, “Sorry, I’m a few minutes late,” as if he’d been delayed by a traffic jam, when in truth he’d just come from the bloody fighting on Sword Beach, which he and his men had just taken.

    There was the impossible valor of the Poles, who threw themselves between the enemy and the rest of Europe as the invasion took hold; and the unsurpassed courage of the Canadians who had already seen the horrors of war on this coast. They knew what awaited them there, but they would not be deterred. And once they hit Juno Beach, they never looked back.

    All of these men were part of a roll call of honor with names that spoke of a pride as bright as the colors they bore; The Royal Winnipeg Rifles, Poland’s 24th Lancers, the Royal Scots’ Fusiliers, the Screaming Eagles, the Yeomen of England’s armored divisions, the forces of Free France, the Coast Guard’s “Matchbox Fleet,” and you, the American Rangers.

    Forty summers have passed since the battle that you fought here. You were young the day you took these cliffs; some of you were hardly more than boys, with the deepest joys of life before you. Yet you risked everything here. Why? Why did you do it? What impelled you to put aside the instinct for self-preservation and risk your lives to take these cliffs? What inspired all the men of the armies that met here? We look at you, and somehow we know the answer. It was faith and belief. It was loyalty and love.

    The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead, or on the next. It was the deep knowledge — and pray God we have not lost it — that there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest. You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause. And you were right not to doubt.

    You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One’s country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it’s the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. All of you loved liberty. All of you were willing to fight tyranny, and you knew the people of your countries were behind you.

    The Americans who fought here that morning knew word of the invasion was spreading through the darkness back home. They fought — or felt in their hearts, though they couldn’t know in fact, that in Georgia they were filling the churches at 4:00 am. In Kansas they were kneeling on their porches and praying. And in Philadelphia they were ringing the Liberty Bell.

    Something else helped the men of D-day; their rock-hard belief that Providence would have a great hand in the events that would unfold here; that God was an ally in this great cause. And so, the night before the invasion, when Colonel Wolverton asked his parachute troops to kneel with him in prayer, he told them: “Do not bow your heads, but look up so you can see God and ask His blessing in what we’re about to do.” Also, that night, General Matthew Ridgway on his cot, listening in the darkness for the promise God made to Joshua: “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee.”

    These are the things that impelled them; these are the things that shaped the unity of the Allies.

    When the war was over, there were lives to be rebuilt and governments to be returned to the people. There were nations to be reborn. Above all, there was a new peace to be assured. These were huge and daunting tasks. But the Allies summoned strength from the faith, belief, loyalty, and love of those who fell here. They rebuilt a new Europe together. There was first a great reconciliation among those who had been enemies, all of whom had suffered so greatly. The United States did its part, creating the Marshall Plan to help rebuild our allies and our former enemies. The Marshall Plan led to the Atlantic alliance — a great alliance that serves to this day as our shield for freedom, for prosperity, and for peace.

    In spite of our great efforts and successes, not all that followed the end of the war was happy or planned. Some liberated countries were lost. The great sadness of this loss echoes down to our own time in the streets of Warsaw, Prague, and East Berlin. The Soviet troops that came to the center of this continent did not leave when peace came. They’re still there, uninvited, unwanted, unyielding, almost forty years after the war. Because of this, allied forces still stand on this continent. Today, as forty years ago, our armies are here for only one purpose: to protect and defend democracy. The only territories we hold are memorials like this one and graveyards where our heroes rest.

    We in America have learned bitter lessons from two world wars. It is better to be here ready to protect the peace, than to take blind shelter across the sea, rushing to respond only after freedom is lost. We’ve learned that isolationism never was and never will be an acceptable response to tyrannical governments with an expansionist intent. But we try always to be prepared for peace, prepared to deter aggression, prepared to negotiate the reduction of arms, and yes, prepared to reach out again in the spirit of reconciliation. In truth, there is no reconciliation we would welcome more than a reconciliation with the Soviet Union, so, together, we can lessen the risks of war, now and forever.

    It’s fitting to remember here the great losses also suffered by the Russian people during World War II. Twenty million perished, a terrible price that testifies to all the world the necessity of ending war. I tell you from my heart that we in the United States do not want war. We want to wipe from the face of the earth the terrible weapons that man now has in his hands. And I tell you, we are ready to seize that beachhead. We look for some sign from the Soviet Union that they are willing to move forward, that they share our desire and love for peace, and that they will give up the ways of conquest. There must be a changing there that will allow us to turn our hope into action.

    We will pray forever that someday that changing will come. But for now, particularly today, it is good and fitting to renew our commitment to each other, to our freedom, and to the alliance that protects it.

    We’re bound today by what bound us 40 years ago, the same loyalties, traditions, and beliefs. We’re bound by reality. The strength of America’s allies is vital to the United States, and the American security guarantee is essential to the continued freedom of Europe’s democracies. We were with you then; we’re with you now. Your hopes are our hopes, and your destiny is our destiny.

    Here, in this place where the West held together, let us make a vow to our dead. Let us show them by our actions that we understand what they died for. Let our actions say to them the words for which Matthew Ridgway listened: “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee.”

    Strengthened by their courage and heartened by their value [valor] and borne by their memory, let us continue to stand for the ideals for which they lived and died.

    Thank you very much, and God bless you all.

  8. I, too, have just begun to read the article. But, oh, Administrator, I’m LOVING it. GO! Bill. Keep serving up a great, big, ol’ heaping super sized cup of ice cold, frosty revenge to little Barry.

  9. Wonderful post admin and a big fat kiss to Bill for destroying Barry’s campaign.

    High fives all around.

    Ahhhh, what a difference a day makes…24 little hours.

  10. admin:

    Thanks for posting the Krauthammer video-

    Onward and upward.. your quote:

    “Obama refused to show up and rally for the Wisconsin rank-and-file for fear a loss might give him a bad news cycle or two.”

    Yep, Obama did what he’s always done..

    VOTED PRESENT.. in this case even more simplified,
    TWEETED PRESENT!

  11. Mail came. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has me TARGETED, or is it her? She had a contribution form marked URGENT!!! She says she listens to and hear what I want, and that she faces SEVEN opponents and lists some things others have called her and labelled her; she sites Col Allen West who called her ‘vile, unprofessionaland despicable”

    What to do with request for funds with a return envelope? I will have to give it some thought, but am thinking about writing: Debbie does Obama and yet wants my money? Col Allen West is right; and you should wear a studded dog collar for the real dog you are!

  12. Glory, glory hallelujah!!!!! The truth IS marching on.
    —————————————
    I’m on coverage of this visit [below] like white on rice (that’s a well-used statement from my working days in Corey Booker’s town and had no racial tones of any sort when used back then; if that has changed, Al Sharpton will be quick to let me know). This channel Philly 6ABC continues to not mention the late-afternoon fund raiser detailed elsewhere. Note the lack of objectivity in concluding paragraph.

    Michelle Obama in Philly for campaign event | 6abc.com
    Action News
    CENTER CITY – June 6, 2012 (WPVI) — First lady Michelle Obama is in Philadelphia for a campaign event at the National Constitution Center. The first lady will be speaking to supporters and volunteers at the center Wednesday afternoon. The campaign says she will be reminding them what’s at stake in the November election and encouraging voter registration. Tickets were given out at campaign field offices starting on Monday. Obama last visited Pennsylvania in April, when she spoke at the 911th Air Wing base outside Pittsburgh to recognize veterans and military families.
    President Barack Obama handily won Pennsylvania in 2008 in the contest against Republican John McCain, and the state has supported Democrats in the most recent five presidential elections. This year, Republican candidate Mitt Romney is pushing to take the state away from Obama.
    http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=8691292

  13. I don’t think Bill is through destroying Obama campaign, at least not yet- we have almost six months to go before the election, too much time between the cup and the lip for Obama to manufacture
    a crisis he didn’t like.

    Bill can’t let him up for air- He has to hammer him like an oak board that won’t take a nail easily… you have to drill it first..

    Keep drillin’ Bill, we’re behind you all the way!

  14. Bill Clinton did say, with grinning idiot Obama forced to listen at a fundraiser ostensibly held to help Obama, that Bill himself balanced the budget for four years. Bill Clinton repeated the fact and we can only imagine that Obama died inside knowing that Bill Clinton was openly taunting his trillion dollar budget deficits. Poor Bam-Bam.
    —————————–
    Obama is keen on roasting people when they cannot answer. Remember when he chastised the Supreme Court at the State of The Union a couple years ago knowing that they could not answer his false charges? Remember how he invited Trump to the National Press Club and proceeded to humiliate him from the podium, (while Tapper behaved like a teenage girl texting message about they were going to roast Trump when he got them, teee hee hee giggle–like a stand-up guy. Well, now the tables are turned and he sees what it is like to have the rug pulled out from under him time and again, by someone he needs on the campaign trail because who else has he got? And besides, to the casual observer Bill is just trying to be helpful and did not realize he was wading into troubled waters–so who can blame the guy for being honest. The problem is Obama is dishonest, and the campaign wants everyone on their side to be equally dishonest. If they succumb they will have to live with it long after the vaudville hook has removed Obama from the stage.

  15. Mrs. Smith
    June 6th, 2012 at 3:40 pm
    ———————
    Very very true. As an old detective in Media PA told me one time, when you have a bad guy on the ropes, never let him up. He was their interrogation expert.

  16. ShortTermer
    June 6th, 2012 at 3:36 pm
    ——————-
    If you have material from a Republican, send that back in WS’s envelope. I’ve been giving to selected Repubs. Sometimes I make copy of the check I’ve written to them and put the copy in the envelope going to the Dem.

  17. Crude but funny…

    MSNBC Fu@king Delusional

    By Larry Johnson

    I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but I just turned over to watch MSNBC and see how they were reacting to the ass whooping in Wisconsin. Lawrence O’Donnell starts off the show by claiming these results are, and I’m quoting here, “THE REALLY BIG WINNER IN TONIGHT’S ELECTION IS BARACK OBAMA.”

    Are you $hitting me?

    Have at it gals and guys. What do you think?

    NoQuarter

  18. Bill would appear to be taking his revenge. A well deserved revenge. Bill is implementing a deliberate plan to destroy Obama. I for one am totally thrilled.

    I always thought that in 2008 the Clinton’s were physically threatened – perhaps a threat to their daughter! If they were threatened then what is different now?

  19. Anyone know how BO did in California? The CA newspapers like the LA Times are staying quiet about it.

  20. Shine on me sunshine, wake up with me world, it is a skippty do da day. Good morning Sunshine……….even if it is just one day:


  21. The willingness of Bill to tell the truth here when everyone else in the Democrat Party and Big Media are promulating THE BIG LIE which is the tool of every totalitarian regime is an act of true patriotism. His willingness to do so makes it that much harder for the Obama campaign and the left wing media to lie through their teeth to the American Public about issues critical to our national survival. Bill is an example of one man who has to courage to speak truth to power and is an object lesson to all those who care about the country.

  22. Bill would appear to be taking his revenge. A well deserved revenge. Bill is implementing a deliberate plan to destroy Obama. I for one am totally thrilled.
    ———–
    I am too. However I believe it is far more than just that. He has reportedly told conservatives that they have six months to get this thing turned around. Just six months. If that is true, then we force Obama and big media to start telling the truth about our economic situation. If we let them go on lying we will go off the financial cliff. As a patriot, he does not want that to happen because millions will be hurt. Big media and the Obama campaign are one in the same, so we must hold both of their feet to the fire.

  23. Tony Stark

    Anyone know how BO did in California? The CA newspapers like the LA Times are staying quiet about it.

    ——-
    Last tv said the turnout was REALLY bad. When I heard it, they said 35%.
    BO was only on on the Dem ticket, so I guess they didn’t think they needed to tell us about Hillary write-ins.

    Romney 80% of R vote, 9% Ron Paul…last I looked.

  24. Kay

    Bill would appear to be taking his revenge. A well deserved revenge. Bill is implementing a deliberate plan to destroy Obama. I for one am totally thrilled.

    I always thought that in 2008 the Clinton’s were physically threatened – perhaps a threat to their daughter! If they were threatened then what is different now?
    —-

    Possible reasons

    – Bill is just sick and tired of pretending he approves and supports Barry and he is seeing the Democratic party destroyed by him, and has to make big moves to clean house so Hillary can run…again.

    – Possibly other big Dems are with him and there is safety in numbers (Diane Feinstein and others)

    – Hillary’s SOS job is almost finished, she has #1 ratings and has proved her loyalty, smarts and grit

    – The consequences of not acting to stop Barry are far worse than any Chicago threat, and maybe he has taken care to secure his family

  25. They are running scared and think $$$ will help them.

    I keep getting these stupid spam emails no matter how nasty my replies are too them.

    Dear MoveOn member,

    Think Obama’s a shoo-in?

    Think again. Romney is ahead in a whole series of recent polls.1 And super PACs are poised to spend huge amounts of money to sway the race—just like they did yesterday in Wisconsin.

    😆

  26. Drudge

    The overflow crowd of women at a pricey campaign fundraiser hosted by First Lady Michelle Obama in New York City Thursday spilled into the men’s bathroom

    I hope MO checked the urinals for low-carb cakes.

    😆 😆

  27. FYI: The next topic on The Five is “What is Pres. Clinton up to?”

    Shadowfax @ 4:26: I like your second point: “other Dems are with him.” Notice the prevalence of Ed Rendell speaking up (another Hillary Dem), just as one example? I have noticed a trend.

  28. The tide is turning at the DimBot Underground-

    How do I know? Some are beginning to defend Bill!

    Here’s the skinny:

    Is Bill Clinton Deliberately Sabotaging Barack Obama? no- who said that? nah, never…

    WASHINGTON – Is Bill Clinton deliberately sabotaging U.S. President Barack Obama?

    That was the big question in the U.S. capital on Wednesday, the day after the former president once again parted ways with the Obama campaign on a crucial election issue — the extension of the George W. Bush-era tax cuts.

    Clinton, who’s been campaigning for Obama ahead of the November election, told CNBC that those tax cuts should be extended temporarily at the end of the year, even for the wealthiest Americans.

    That’s in direct opposition to the Obama administration’s approach to slashing the country’s mammoth US$15.7 trillion national debt. The White House wants those tax cuts to expire for Americans earning more than $250,000 a year, saying the country’s richest people must contribute to efforts to rein in ballooning federal deficits.

    more:

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/125143619

    you can see the tide has turned in the comments at the link.

  29. ShortTermer
    June 6th, 2012 at 3:36 pm
    Mail came. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has me TARGETED, or is it her? She had a contribution form marked URGENT!!! …

    What to do with request for funds with a return envelope?

    ____________________________________________–
    Tape it to a brick and let her pay the extra postage.

  30. TexasDarlin
    just as one example? I have noticed a trend.

    ——-
    I agree with you, there are more than just one…I just plopped down Diane Feinstein because she has been on my mind lately and the others would take too much thinking. 😉


  31. Update:
    It’s Bill Clinton day everywhere. Charles Krauthammer is a guest of honor at the festivities. The top of the charts quote from Krauthammer: Let’s face it, Bill Clinton’s a double agent for the GOP, is playing on all the jukeboxes.

    For those asking “What is ‘Obama supporter’ Bill Clinton up to?” you’re kinda late to the party. This war party has been going on for a long time, you’ve just been to blind to see. We’ve been on the job for years now with the answer (see below) to the question of the day for newbies.

    ——————————————————————————————

  32. At first I almost thought the LA BamaLovin’ Times had started to turn a corner, on the road to reality, then,

    oops,

    nope,

    they started making excuses and spun the bull$hit like it was a day on planet utopia.

    ——-

    Lessons from the Wisconsin recall vote

    Here are what the results of Tuesday night’s Wisconsin recall election mean for four key political players.

    Gov. Scott Walker already had become a national hero to conservatives for his willingness to take on his state’s powerful public employee unions. His victory – making him the only governor in U.S. history to survive a recall – will increase his stature even further. Two other governors had faced recalls and lost, including California’s Gray Davis in 2003. Walker carried 60 of Wisconsin’s 72 counties and expanded the vote he received when first elected in 2010. Already, speculation has started about a place for Walker on a future Republican presidential ticket.

    Labor unions, by contrast, suffered a serious blow to their already-waning political clout. The recall made the third election in the space of a year in which labor failed to defeat Walker or a Walker proxy. The unions lost a fight to oust a Republican state Supreme Court justice and fell short of recalling enough GOP state senators last summer to put Democrats in control of the chamber. And now this.

    President Obama took considerable heat from Wisconsin Democrats for not venturing into the state to campaign against Walker, as former President Clinton did. If Walker had won by only 1 or 2 percentage points over Democratic candidate Tom Barrett, many fingers would be pointing in Obama’s direction. But with Walker winning by 7 percentage points, the argument that Obama would have made a difference becomes a lot harder to make.

    The bigger question for Obama is whether Walker’s victory means that Wisconsin – a state Democrats have been counting in their column – is seriously in doubt in the fall. That brings us to Obama’s opponent.

    Overall turnout in the state was roughly 2.5 million voters – a significant increase from 2010, when Walker was first elected, although still short of the number in a presidential election. Barrett actually won more votes Tuesday night than he had in 2010 in the two biggest Democratic counties, Milwaukee and Dane (Madison). The problem for the Democrat was that Walker swamped him almost everywhere else in the state. That’s more evidence for Democrats that they have yet to solve the problem which hurt them so badly in 2010 – a Republican shift among white, working class and middle class voters outside the major cities.

    Mitt Romney and his advisors have a decision to make: Is Wisconsin a state to seriously contest? Wisconsin Republicans will argue that the recall proved that their voter-turnout operation works splendidly and that a consistent, tough conservative can win this quintessential purple state. But many Republican strategists still wonder whether “consistent, tough conservative” really fits as a label for Romney.

    One problem for Romney is that Walker won in part because he, and groups supporting him, outspent Barrett and his allies by at least 3 to 1. Romney is not likely to have that luxury….

    And it goes down hill even further

    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-lessons-from-the-wisconsin-recall-vote-20120605,0,2374217.story

  33. looks like bill clinton’s sabotage strategy pretty much squashes all the “Hillary VP” rumours. thank god!!

  34. alcina

    looks like bill clinton’s sabotage strategy pretty much squashes all the “Hillary VP” rumours. thank god!!

    ——-
    Heh, good one. I didn’t think of that bonus.

  35. Great post, admin.

    Here’s a fun clip by the Repub Gov Assoc.

    Great Moments in Liberal Punditry.

    Doesn’t include some of the gems from last night (like Schultz’s hysterics and Blitzer’s dour-faced announcement of Walker’s victory) but it’s still pretty good.


  36. Even Buffet distancing himself from the POS.

    Warren Buffett: ‘I’m Not a Card-Carrying Democrat’

    (CNSNews.com) – Billionaire investor Warren Buffett distanced himself from being called a liberal on Tuesday, telling an audience that he was “not a card-carrying Democrat,” and also said that having a tax – the “Buffett Rule” – named after him was only slightly better than having a disease named after him.

    He also said he is supporting some Repubs.

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/warren-buffett-i-m-not-card-carrying-democrat

  37. Barney Frank joins the rank of the disillusioned.

    Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) slammed unions and liberal activists for pushing to recall Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R).

    “I think the people on the Democratic side made a big mistake and the funding thing was a big deal,” Frank told The Hill Wednesday afternoon, alluding to Republicans’ big cash advantage in the race. “My side picked a fight they shouldn’t have picked. The recall was upsetting to people, the rerun of the election with [Democratic Milwaukee Mayor] Tom Barrett — it’s not a fight I would have picked.”

    WZ

  38. Maybe Bill is making it easier for Big Dems to walk away from Barry.

    Is it starting to be COOL to be anti-obama? If so, we have been cool for 5 years.

  39. Maybe the LA Times is embarassed to say that the Golden One did not get 100% of the vote even though he ran unopposed.

  40. I am still working with the hypothesis that Bill is the point man for Hillary and others who believe that Obama has gone over the edge and is now bat shit crazy.

  41. Warren Buffett: ‘I’m Not a Card-Carrying Democrat’
    ——————————-
    No of course not. You are the Oracle of Omaha. You just show up at all the Democratic political events, have your picture taken with prominent democrats and furnished one of the key dim talking points in the campaign. Moreover, your partner of forty years Charlie Munger is just kidding when he says that he is a republican and you are a democrat in your shop. How then could you possibly be a card carrying democrat? Or are you merely saying you left your card at home, like Mr Magoo.

  42. I am still working with the hypothesis that Bill is the point man for Hillary and others who believe that Obama has gone over the edge and is now bat shit crazy.
    ———————
    There is plenty of evidence of that alright. But there may be another factor at work here. Bill is concerned about our financial situation, and it has been reported that he told some prominent conservatives in confidence that they have six months to get this thing turned around. If the situation is that dire then a moral imperative exists for him to do precisely what he is doing to make sure that Obama is not re-elected as big media is intent on doing. Notice some of the most strenuous objections to what Bill has said come directly from big media.

  43. Zero, it seems , sealed his primary results too.

    No news paper nor TV station reported CA results

    Google search does not turn up any

  44. Basil: those pundits are not even human. They are extra terrestials who have assumed a human appearance so they can destroy the planet.

  45. If you want to be misinformed watch MSNBC. Watch and be embarrassed for all the MSNBC dolts, particularly Mr. Ed who says Barrett will not concede then breaks away to watch Barrett concede:

  46. wbboei

    Warren Buffett: ‘I’m Not a Card-Carrying Democrat’
    ——————————-
    No of course not. You are the Oracle of Omaha.

    —-
    That’s darn funny…guess you have to be at a wise enough age. 😉
    to appreciate it.

  47. Shadowfax
    June 6th, 2012 at 6:46 pm
    A song for our Big Dawg

    Secret Agent Man
    *************************

    loved it…

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

    MSNBC is in its own alternate universe…of lies and delusion

  48. If Obama is batshit crazy then you may wonder what exactly he promised Putin he would do AFTER he wins the election. I will give him this much. He was right when he told Dimitri this will be his last election. But Putin had better not hold his breath that Obama will be there to deliver whatever he promised when he said he would be “more flexible”.

  49. On my way home there were middle-aged white 99% folks in my middleclass neighborhood by the local BofA, holding signs and waiting for anyone to honk their horn in agreement.

    As I drove by, I yelled out my window at them that they backed the wrong horse. A few of them yelled out, “Corporate greed!”

    I told them if they had voted for Hillary, they wouldn’t be in this mess right now. Their yaws dropped and none of them spoke a word, just deer in the headlights…let them stew on that awhile.

    As I drove away I wonder if they saw my Hillary 2008 and 2012 bumperstickers…

  50. Congrats to Bill Clinton. He won big yesterday.
    Both the candidates supported by him, Sherman in CA and Pascrell l in NJ won big.

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

    But the race that lost in Wisconsin, unions and Barrett, was what Bill had supported most passionately.

  51. But the race that lost in Wisconsin, unions and Barrett, was what Bill had supported most passionately.

    ____________________________________________

    That is not true. Every body including Bill and Obama knew that Wisconsin is a lost cause. That is the reason Obama abandoned Wisconsin.

    More over Barrett is an Obot and he supported Obama and not Hillary.
    Knowing that Barrett will not win, Bill being a true democrat unlike Obama did his best to help Barrett.

  52. But the race that lost in Wisconsin, unions and Barrett, was what Bill had supported most passionately.

    Nope. Bill went to Wisconsin to show up Barry. (and NO I don’t have a citation lol)

  53. But the race that lost in Wisconsin, unions and Barrett, was what Bill had supported most passionately.

    ——
    Maybe admin can explain this to you since most of the rest of us don’t have the patience. Then again, admin has explained this time after time in her/his many posts.

    Maybe you can re-read this post for a start, read it slowly and keep your mind open, then maybe it will make sense to you.

    If not, there’s nothing we can do to explain it any better.

  54. Admin: they must be reading your posts:

    Cruel June for Obama, Dems _ and could get worse

    By DONNA CASSATA
    Associated Press
    AP Photo
    AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster
    Politics Video
    Buy AP Photo Reprints
    Multimedia
    Absentee ballots add political uncertainty
    2010 political races
    Vermont inmates prepare to vote
    Evolution of political memorabilia
    Election News
    Cruel June for Obama, Dems _ and could get worse

    Grassley says US Senate colleagues helped grandson

    THE RACE: Key Democrats blur signals on economy

    A look through Wis. Gov. Scott Walker’s tenure

    Romney’s (non) military record faces new scrutiny

    Obama a socialist? Many scoff, but claim persists

    Few November clues to be found in Wisconsin recall

    Michigan congressman ends write-in campaign

    Clinton urges Democrats to vote out Wis. governor

    What next for Romney? Undercut Obama, raise money

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Just one week old, June already is proving a cruel month for President Barack Obama and the Democrats – and it could get a lot worse.

    The political blows from Tuesday’s bitter loss in Wisconsin’s gubernatorial recall and from last week’s abysmal unemployment numbers, bad as they were, could multiply before the month is out.

    The Supreme Court will pass judgment shortly on the president’s signature legislative achievement – the 2010 law overhauling the nation’s health care system – and also will decide on his administration’s challenge to Arizona’s tough immigration law. If Chief Justice John Roberts and the court strike down all or part of the health care law, it could demoralize Democrats who invested more than a year – and quite a few political careers – to secure the bill’s passage.

    And in Arizona, aside from the big immigration case, the Democrats are fighting to hold onto the House seat of Gabrielle Giffords, who resigned in January to focus on recovering from her gunshot wound. In next Tuesday’s special election, former Giffords aide Ron Barber is locked in a close race with Republican Jesse Kelly, who lost to her in 2010 by just 4,156 votes.

    Facing an election-year summer fraught with political peril, the Democrats are struggling to revive supporters’ spirits and counteract developments that could energize Republicans and solidify public opinion that the country is on the wrong track and in need of new leadership.

    In a video pep talk to supporters this week, Obama campaign manager Jim Messina acknowledged the challenge. “We need to stay focused, work hard and ignore the ups and downs,” he said.

    Even before the votes were counted in Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s win over Democrat Tom Barrett Tuesday night, there was hand-wringing and second-guessing among Democrats on Capitol Hill.

    – The jobs numbers have them worried that they’ll be running on a weak economy, with the White House – and them – getting the blame.

    – Wisconsin’s implications for the general election and for organized labor in general have some asking why Obama didn’t get more involved than an 11th-hour tweet.

    – The looming Supreme Court decision on the health care law has some Democrats insisting the White House and the party did a terrible job selling the overhaul to the American people.

    In Wisconsin, millions of dollars spent on Walker’s behalf trumped labor’s get-out-the-vote effort in a swing state that suddenly moves up on the battleground list in the presidential race. Republicans also have set their sights on the seat of retiring Wisconsin Sen. Herb Kohl in a race that probably will pit Democratic Rep. Tammy Baldwin against the winner of the Aug. 14 GOP primary. Tommy Thompson, a former governor who was secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services under President George W. Bush, faces former Rep. Mark Neumann, state Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald and millionaire hedge fund manager Eric Hovde.

    Eager to see a broad upside for the recall result, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said voters in Wisconsin “recognize we just can’t keep going down the same path that we’re on. It ends up in calamity. … I’m convinced that the American people recognize, or they will by the time the election comes, that we’ve got a very stark choice, two very different paths.”

    There’s no shortage of Democratic advice on how Obama should frame the message for voters in the next five months.

    Hours before Walker’s win, Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., said Obama should have gone to Wisconsin to help Barrett.

    “I don’t understand what he stood to lose in Wisconsin. I can’t make that make sense,” Hastings said in an interview. He wondered if Obama had been overly worried about alienating the “3 or 4 percent Republicans that may have voted for him the last time,” and added, “Nobody, nobody knows what so-called independents are going to do.” In 2008, Obama won the state, 56-42 percent.

    Labor is a core Democratic constituency, and Hastings fears that Walker’s win will provide cover for efforts to undermine collective bargaining rights for unions.

    On Wednesday, House Republicans emerging from their weekly closed-door meeting said the mood was clearly upbeat after the Wisconsin win and the task ahead will be keeping high political expectations in check.

    Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, cast the message in economic terms and oft-repeated GOP arguments.

    “The American people have had it with big government, high taxes and a regulatory system that knows no bounds, and they want elected officials to take control of the situation so the American job creators can go back to doing what they do best, creating jobs,” Boehner told reporters.

    The economy trumps all issues, and the worse-than-expected 69,000 jobs created in May and an uptick in the unemployment rate to 8.2 percent worry Democrats.

    “That’s a bad number so there’s concern,” said Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt. “We can defend the Obama record. We’ve created jobs. The legacy of the Bush collapse is real. But what affects the mood, traditionally it’s been the economy as perceived by voters about six months out. …. All of us are obviously hoping for better job numbers.”

    Welch said if the public perception is of an economy getting better, as it was until May, “then it’s much more favorable to the election being a choice between Obama and Romney. My view, Obama wins that easily. If it becomes just a referendum on Obama, i.e., the economy, then we’re playing more defense than we want to.”

    The next batch of jobs numbers comes out July 6.

    The upcoming Supreme Court decision on health care is a painful reminder to Democrats that Americans favor some elements of the massive law aimed at extending medical insurance to more than 30 million Americans but the far-reaching overhaul has never gained broad approval.

    “I’m amazed at the high negatives,” said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif. “Republicans have done a good job demonizing the bill, and evidently we haven’t done a good enough job explaining it or people haven’t paid enough attention because it’s a complicated piece of legislation.”

    Democrats point to the more popular provisions – the law’s banning denial of coverage for people with pre-existing medical conditions, allowing children to stay on their parents’ insurance until age 26 and reducing Americans’ Medicare prescription drug costs by closing the “donut hole.”

    The main issue for the court is the constitutionality of the individual insurance requirement. Opponents argue that Congress lacked the authority under the Constitution to force Americans to buy insurance.

    If the court strikes down the law, many of the more popular elements are gone, said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb. Asked if Americans are aware of that, he said, “Probably not, but they will be.”

    Former Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., said the administration and the party’s congressional leaders should have focused on a pared-back but bipartisan health care bill with the more popular elements.

    “That would have been a game-changer,” said Taylor, who lost in the Republican wave in 2010. “Just leave it simple like that, something you could explain to the public. But they missed that opportunity.”

    Obama’s ambitious approach on health care turned the summer of 2009 into a cacophony of angry town hall meetings in which voters confronted lawmakers. In the summer of 2010, Obama struggled with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Last summer, the president was mired in negotiations with Congress over increasing the nation’s borrowing authority that pushed the country to the brink of default and provided fodder to critics who argued that Obama was weak.

    Former Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Texas, said Obama and Democrats need to put the economic outlook in context – gone are the recession days of losing 700,000 jobs per month and a nation on the verge of a second Great Depression. The country is moving forward, he said.

    He was reminded of something former President Bill Clinton once said: “Sometimes the problem with Democrats is that we don’t know the difference between an issue and a message.” Edwards said Democrats can’t just debate the issue, they need to debate the broad message.

  55. Pingback: Winners and Losers
  56. Warren Buffett […] said that having a tax – the “Buffett Rule” – named after him was only slightly better than having a disease named after him.

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

    I hope the tax, if any, doesn’t take Buffet’s name in vain, like the ‘Lily Ledbetter’ bill took hers.

  57. Shadowfax
    June 6th, 2012 at 9:02 pm

    On my way home there were middle-aged white 99% folks in my middleclass neighborhood by the local BofA, holding signs and waiting for anyone to honk their horn in agreement.

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

    Shadowfax, I recall you said you are in California…are you in LA?

    after reading your post i got this image of your driving down Wilshire in westwood by the Veterans Admin building where all the protestors always are…and you yelling out the window at them and reminding them of Hillary…

    …maybe I was projecting what I would want to do if i were there right now… : )

  58. Well, I knew BO would do something in retaliation for the walloping he took in WI and start acting out- we will have to see what comes of this- will it go viral… stay tuned!
    ______________________

    BREAKING: Anarchists Take To Streets In Milwaukee

    Unhappy with the results of last night’s peaceful, orderly exercise of democracy, the anarchists associated with the occupy movement took to the streets of Milwaukee tonight for an impromptu march. Exclusive video from Breitbart News’ Jeremy Segal shows the march in its inception. As of 7:05 ET, there was one arrest reported. Developing…

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/06/06/Anarchists-Take-To-Streets-In-Milwaukee

  59. BINGO! Now Bill is happy seeing the fruits of his labor come to pass- So, if Obama let this happen, it goes to my theory, he doesn’t care about the election… He’s got Spain in his pocket, a sure thing, in November… (so far-)
    _____________________

    Rift Builds Between Obama and Unions

    As Charles Krauthammer said last night on Fox News, “In Wisconsin, Obama literally mailed it in.” Actually, Obama tweeted it in. Though public sector unions throughout the country broke their backs and piggy banks to win him the presidency in 2008, ever the calculating politician willing to throw his supporters under that over-crowded bus, Obama refused to show up and rally for the Wisconsin rank-and-file for fear a loss might give him a bad news cycle or two.

    Judging by Michael Moore’s re-Tweet below (and common sense), we’re likely seeing the beginning of bad blood. Unions aren’t happy about this, nor should they be:

    Even though the corrupt MSM changed their tune after polls showed a likely Scott Walker blow out, that didn’t change the fact that last night’s recall election was the last stand for Public Sector Unions. Wisconsin is a liberal state Obama won by 14 points and if unions can’t win there, they’re unlikely to prevail almost everywhere else.

    Granted, it’s unlikely any in-state rallies headed by Obama might have made a difference in last night’s outcome. Walker trounced his Democrat challenger, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, by a full seven points. But here’s where Obama might have helped his union supporters save quite a bit of face…

    Last night, Walker beat Barrett by a wider margin than when the two men first squared off in 2010. To lose by a wider margin is the most devastating of all rebukes to public unions — their Waterloo. What Obama could’ve done by doing what he does best — simply showing up and voting present — would’ve been to shrink Walker’s margin.

    At the very least, had Barrett managed to narrow the margin over the 2010 results, Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) would’ve had a talking point that said Walker’s reforms had cost him support.

    That, at least, is something.

    If anything, just knowing the President had their back and was in the trenches fighting for them as hard as they fought for him, would’ve at least bolstered the morale of union members. Instead, he very publicly and cynically abandoned them.

    What should be especially galling to public union members is that over this last crucial weekend, Obama was but a two-hour drive away from Wisconsin as he gorged on a record fundraising binge with the Top 1%. But the President. couldn’t be bothered to make even a single stop. Rather than risk even temporary political capital, Obama assumed his favorite position, looked out for himself, and left his union supporters swinging in the wind. But…

    If the era of the public union is over, he no longer needs them.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/06/Obama-Abandons-Wisconsin-unions

  60. S
    I used to live in S. Ca and know the area. I am in the Bay Area and have said similar things to obots everywhere I go. Leaving my Hillary bumperstickers on my car start many conversations.

  61. If the union leadership […] realize that Bill was in there to protect them and Obama was not, then conceivably that could cause a substantial portion of the union component to shift its allegiances from Obama to Hillary for the number one spot.

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

    That could be one reason why Bill spoke passionately in defense of unions instead of just talking about Obama’s failures with the economy in general, as he has at other events.

  62. patooey!
    ______________

    Obama will not extend tax cuts, W.H. says

    The White House is sticking by its opposition to an extension of the Bush tax cuts for wealthy Americans despite the increasing number of Democrats voicing support for it, including former President Bill Clinton.

    Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters aboard Air Force One on Wednesday that President Obama will not sign an extension.

    “He will not. Could I be more clear?” Carney said, according to the Associated Press.

    http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/06/obama-will-not-extend-tax-cuts-wh-says-125441.html

  63. Everyone noticing it is Junemaggedon:

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEMOCRATS_TOUGH_MONTH?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-06-06-16-55-13

    Cruel June for Obama, Dems _ and could get worse

    Just one week old, June already is proving a cruel month for President Barack Obama and the Democrats – and it could get a lot worse.

    The political blows from Tuesday’s bitter loss in Wisconsin’s gubernatorial recall and from last week’s abysmal unemployment numbers, bad as they were, could multiply before the month is out.

    The Supreme Court will pass judgment shortly on the president’s signature legislative achievement – the 2010 law overhauling the nation’s health care system – and also will decide on his administration’s challenge to Arizona’s tough immigration law. If Chief Justice John Roberts and the court strike down all or part of the health care law, it could demoralize Democrats who invested more than a year – and quite a few political careers – to secure the bill’s passage.

    And in Arizona, aside from the big immigration case, the Democrats are fighting to hold onto the House seat of Gabrielle Giffords, who resigned in January to focus on recovering from her gunshot wound. In next Tuesday’s special election, former Giffords aide Ron Barber is locked in a close race with Republican Jesse Kelly, who lost to her in 2010 by just 4,156 votes.

    Facing an election-year summer fraught with political peril, the Democrats are struggling to revive supporters’ spirits and counteract developments that could energize Republicans and solidify public opinion that the country is on the wrong track and in need of new leadership. [snip]

    – The jobs numbers have them worried that they’ll be running on a weak economy, with the White House – and them – getting the blame.

    – Wisconsin’s implications for the general election and for organized labor in general have some asking why Obama didn’t get more involved than an 11th-hour tweet.

    – The looming Supreme Court decision on the health care law has some Democrats insisting the White House and the party did a terrible job selling the overhaul to the American people.

    In Wisconsin, millions of dollars spent on Walker’s behalf trumped labor’s get-out-the-vote effort in a swing state that suddenly moves up on the battleground list in the presidential race. Republicans also have set their sights on the seat of retiring Wisconsin Sen. Herb Kohl in a race that probably will pit Democratic Rep. Tammy Baldwin against the winner of the Aug. 14 GOP primary. [snip]

    Hours before Walker’s win, Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., said Obama should have gone to Wisconsin to help Barrett.

    “I don’t understand what he stood to lose in Wisconsin. I can’t make that make sense,” Hastings said in an interview. [snip]

    The economy trumps all issues, and the worse-than-expected 69,000 jobs created in May and an uptick in the unemployment rate to 8.2 percent worry Democrats.

    That’s a bad number so there’s concern,” said Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt. [snip]

    The next batch of jobs numbers comes out July 6.

    The upcoming Supreme Court decision on health care is a painful reminder to Democrats that Americans favor some elements of the massive law aimed at extending medical insurance to more than 30 million Americans but the far-reaching overhaul has never gained broad approval.

    I’m amazed at the high negatives,” said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif. “Republicans have done a good job demonizing the bill, and evidently we haven’t done a good enough job explaining it or people haven’t paid enough attention because it’s a complicated piece of legislation.“[snip]

    Former Rep. Gene Taylor, D-Miss., said the administration and the party’s congressional leaders should have focused on a pared-back but bipartisan health care bill with the more popular elements.

    “That would have been a game-changer,” said Taylor, who lost in the Republican wave in 2010. “Just leave it simple like that, something you could explain to the public. But they missed that opportunity.”

    Obama’s ambitious approach on health care turned the summer of 2009 into a cacophony of angry town hall meetings in which voters confronted lawmakers. In the summer of 2010, Obama struggled with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Last summer, the president was mired in negotiations with Congress over increasing the nation’s borrowing authority that pushed the country to the brink of default and provided fodder to critics who argued that Obama was weak.

  64. Obama will not extend tax cuts, W.H. says

    The White House is sticking by its opposition to an extension of the Bush tax cuts for wealthy Americans despite the increasing number of Democrats voicing support for it, including former President Bill Clinton.

    Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters aboard Air Force One on Wednesday that President Obama will not sign an extension.

    “He will not. Could I be more clear?” Carney said, according to the Associated Press.
    ————————
    More false brinksmanship. They will address the issue after the election. After Obama loses he may enter full act out, and Biden may have to step up to the plate. That would be most reassuring. I am tired of this Obama bullshit. It means absolutely nothing. Just another campaign ploy.

  65. Obama will not extend tax cuts, W.H. says

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

    Maybe he’ll re-label them as non-combatants.

  66. Bill went to Wisconsin to show up Barry.

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

    Elsewhere Bill was talking about Barry’s failures, but not in his Wisconsin speech. It was all pro-union, pro-Barrett, and anti-GOP:
    ““You need a budget from the next governor that deals with whatever the realities are but where there is shared responsibility and shared sacrifice, not winner take all,” Clinton told the rally. “If you believe in a state budget that preserves investments in education and jobs and you want somebody that has actually created jobs…the only way it works, show up for Tom Barrett.
    [….]
    If you believe in an economy of shared prosperity when times are good, and shared sacrifice when they’re not, then you don’t want to break the unions. You want them at the negotiating table. And you trust them to know that arithmetic rules. Show up for Tom Barrett on Tuesday! If you want Wisconsin once again to be seen by all of America as a place of diversity, of difference of opinion, of vigorous debate, where in the end people’s objectives are to come to an agreement that will take us all forward together, youhave to show up for Tom Barrett on Tuesday!…
    I can just hear it now, on Wednesday. All those people that poured all this money into Wisconsin, if you don’t show up and vote, will say, `see, we got them now. We’re finally going to break every union in America. We’re gonna break every government in America. We’re gonna stop worrying about the middle class. We don’t give a riff whether poor people get to work their way into it. We got our way now. We got it all. Divide and conquer works.’”

    http://www.examiner.com/article/bill-clinton-fires-em-up-for-barrett-at-a-get-out-the-vote-rally-milwaukee

  67. Another view on the Wisconsin vote: anti-gun-control.

    About an hour in, the network I was calling said that while urban and suburban turnout were high, what drove the astronomical turnout percentage was that rural Wisconsin voters turned out to vote in all-time record numbers. And that instantly reminded me of something, so I asked, “Hey, wait, that sounds like a gun control vote. What’s Tom Barrett’s record on gun control?” Quick Google search on my phone confirms what few of the national media had pointed out: voted for the assault weapon ban, founding member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns.
    [….]
    And there is no excuse, in 2012, for a Democratic politician or voter in Wisconsin not to know that the only, only, only reliable way to get about 10%, maybe 20% of rural registered voters to bother to vote is to threaten to take away their guns.

  68. Sunshine, Lollipops, Rainbows and a brick tied to Debbie Wasserman Shultz………yep, a skippity do da day.

  69. WoW!

    Romney destroys BO’s healthcare obsession in this clip, says BO KNEW it would slow down the recovery but people would forget about that by the 2012 election once the economy picked up, which, of course, it didn’t.

    Romney references a book by Noam Shriver. (sp?)


  70. Michelle’s fundraising activities yesterday (6/6/2012). From FreeBeacon, some details I thought you might want to know regarding her first [and I guess, only] of the day (NYC):
    The vast majority of the crowd were women. This apparently resulted in a long line for the women’s restroom. One group solved this by commandeering the men’s room.“We’re using the men’s room right now, we’re taking it over. We have a long line for the women’s room,” one of them said. The starting price for tickets to the fundraiser at the swanky Hotel Pierre was $250. Caroline Kennedy introduced the nation’s number one lady, who was preceded by a political panel featuring policy wiz Heather McGhee, the vice president for policy and outreach at the far-left New York think tank Demos. President Obama once sat on the board of Demos, a nonprofit, Soros-funded think tank that does not disclose all of its donors.“Are there any men here today?” Michelle Obama said, according to reports.
    The trickle of men in the audience responded.“All right, a few good men,” the first lady said. “Stand proud.”

    Then came her trip to Philly. I think she was late getting to that event and I can find nothing about a fundraiser after her campaign stop at National Constitution Center. I’ll include a snip to document her schedule: The first lady addressed hundreds of supporters at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, hours after holding a fundraising event at The Pierre hotel in New York City.
    http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=8691292

    What was so notable about coverage was the number of times a Franklin Marshall poll which has Obama up 12 over Romney, was mentioned. Every time a tease for their coverage of her was mentioned, this poll was mentioned too. Seems the same was true at Philly CBS. where other bits of info are available. [I do not receive that channel.]

    Let me end by saying I think Obamas are hitting Pennsylvania very hard. He will give fundraiser at Franklin Institute in Philly on Tues June 11. CBS stated that PA currently has 22 OFA offices. Romney has 1. Please mention this to your contacts.

  71. I guess you won’t be surprised to learn that many O’Minions reported yesterday market results without qualification, as the biggest stock gains of the year….

  72. Re: holdthemaccountable
    June 7th, 2012 at 9:06 am

    It was all the big wins in WI that caused the market to soar!!!! lol

  73. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/302031/obamas-third-party-history-stanley-kurtz#

    Documents prove Obama was signed up member and candidate for the “New Party”

    On the evening of January 11, 1996, while Mitt Romney was in the final years of his run as the head of Bain Capital, Barack Obama formally joined the New Party, which was deeply hostile to the mainstream of the Democratic party and even to American capitalism. In 2008, candidate Obama deceived the American public about his potentially damaging tie to this third party. The issue remains as fresh as today’s headlines, as Romney argues that Obama is trying to move the United States toward European-style social democracy, which was precisely the New Party’s goal.

    In late October 2008, when I wrote here at National Review Online that Obama had been a member of the New Party, his campaign sharply denied it, calling my claim a “crackpot smear.” Fight the Smears, an official Obama-campaign website, staunchly maintained that “Barack has been a member of only one political party, the Democratic Party.” I rebutted this, but the debate was never taken up by the mainstream press.

    Recently obtained evidence from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society now definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party. He also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.

    Minutes of the meeting on January 11, 1996, of the New Party’s Chicago chapter read as follows:

    Barack Obama, candidate for State Senate in the 13th Legislative District, gave a statement to the membership and answered questions. He signed the New Party “Candidate Contract” and requested an endorsement from the New Party. He also joined the New Party.

    Consistent with this, a roster of the Chicago chapter of the New Party from early 1997 lists Obama as a member, with January 11, 1996, indicated as the date he joined.

    Knowing that Obama disguised his New Party membership helps make sense of his questionable handling of the 2008 controversy over his ties to ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). During his third debate with John McCain, Obama said that the “only” involvement he’d had with ACORN was to represent the group in a lawsuit seeking to compel Illinois to implement the National Voter Registration Act, or motor-voter law. The records of Illinois ACORN and its associated union clearly contradict that assertion, as I show in my political biography of the president, Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism.

    Why did Obama deny his ties to ACORN? The group was notorious in 2008 for thug tactics, fraudulent voter registrations, and its role in popularizing risky subprime lending. Admitting that he had helped to fund ACORN’s voter-registration efforts and train some of their organizers would doubtless have been an embarrassment but not likely a crippling blow to his campaign. So why not simply confess the tie and make light of it? The problem for Obama was ACORN’s political arm, the New Party.

    read on…..

  74. WOW! from politico left me kinda of speechless.

    President Obama, in Los Angeles for a fundraiser, offered this observation on his wife’s exercise routine, via the pool report:

    “Michelle outdoes me in pushups as well,” he said, after saying that she’s taken some criticism on her technique “because she doesn’t go all the way down” – a line that he let hang, naughtily, provoking laughter from the crowd.

  75. So now he’s been reduced to making double entendre about his wife…. what next, slapstick comedy.

  76. This is long but a very Presidential address by a very qualifide and respected world leader in waiting.Meanwhile the chief US money grubber is out raising racial dollars 24/7.

    Opening Remarks at the Global Counterterrorism Forum

    Remarks
    Hillary Rodham Clinton
    Secretary of StateConrad Hotel

    Istanbul, Turkey

    June 7, 2012

    Thank you very much, Ahmet, and once again, thank you for hosting us in this beautiful city and for being a steadfast champion of this forum. I want to recognize all of our colleagues around the table. It is often easier to focus on the concerns and crises of the moment, but the long-term partnership we are building through this forum, we believe, will pay off for years to come.
    In recent years, the international community has made important strides in the fight against violent extremism in all its forms. We’ve worked together to disrupt terrorist financing; pass new and more effective counterterrorism laws; tighten border, aviation and maritime security; and improve international coordination. Over the past decade, more than 120,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested around the world, and more than 35,000 have been convicted. Usama bin Ladin is dead, al-Qaida’s core leadership ranks have been devastated, and many of its affiliates have lost key operatives. Our citizens are safer because of the work we have done together.
    But despite this progress, the danger from terrorism remains urgent and undeniable. The core of al-Qaida that carried out the 9/11 attacks and other attacks in countries represented here today may be on the path to defeat, but the threat has spread, becoming more geographically diverse as groups associated with al-Qaida expand their operations. Terrorists now hold territory in Mali, Somalia, and Yemen. They are carrying out frequent and destabilizing attacks in Nigeria and the Maghreb. Here in Turkey, the PKK continues its long campaign of terror and violence, which has claimed tens of thousands of lives. The United States stands strongly with Turkey in its fight against the PKK. And groups are now actively encouraging lone wolf terrorists like those responsible for recent killing sprees in Europe.
    That’s why this forum and the international cooperation it represents are so vital. Just as the threat we face crosses borders and oceans, so must our response. We need a strategic, comprehensive approach to counterterrorism that integrates both military and civilian power that uses intelligence, law enforcement, diplomacy, development, humanitarian assistance, and every possible partner and asset.
    Because we have learned that to defeat a terrorist network, we need to do more than remove terrorists from the battlefield. We need to attack finances, recruitment, and safe havens. We need to take on ideology and diminish its appeal, particularly to young people. We need to improve conditions for women, because their security is a bellwether for societies’ security, and we need to help build the capacities of nations that have the political will to take on this fight.
    The Global Counterterrorism Forum emphasizes strengthening civilian institutions as a critical part of our strategy. And we’re already taking important steps to put this into practice, building new partnerships with the United Nations and other multilateral bodies, and knitting together far-flung counterterrorism efforts that need better focus and organization.
    Let me just highlight two areas where it is essential we continue to make progress.
    First, we have to continue working together to defeat extremist ideology, blunt the spread of radicalization, and slow the flow of recruits to terrorist networks. Last summer, the UAE took an important step when it announced it would host the first-ever international center developed to combat extremism and develop those best practices that will do so. I am pleased to announce that the United States will support this effort with both funding and expertise, and that the center, I’m told, will open its doors in Abu Dhabi later this fall, although it already has its own brochure, which is a good step to demonstrate the concreteness of the work that will be done at the center.
    Think of what the center can do: Bring together experts on communications who understand how to undermine terrorist propaganda; the smartest minds on law enforcement, who can help governments and communities learn to ward off extremism and expose intruders; scholars of education, who can devise curricula free of hatred and give teachers the tools to protect at-risk children from recruitment by extremists.
    The second area I want to mention is the rule of law. Experience tells us that democracies are better equipped than autocracies to stand up against terrorism. They offer constructive outlets for political grievances, they create opportunities for mobility and prosperity that provide alternatives to violent extremism, and they tend to have more effective governing institutions.
    The protests of the Arab Awakening struck a devastating blow to the extremists’ ideology. Citizens in the Middle East and North Africa claiming their universal rights, demanding more accountable governments, seeking broader economic opportunities, all without the rhetoric of hate and destruction that al-Qaida claimed was the only way to achieve change. Now the transitions underway have the potential to transform and improve counterterrorism efforts across the region. This forum is helping make that happen.
    Last year as a group, we pledged more than $90 million to provide rule of law training for police, prosecutors, judges, and prison officials in countries seeking to turn their backs on more repressive approaches to counterterrorism. I am pleased that today this forum will adopt two sets of sound practices – one for the criminal justice sector, the other on rehabilitation and reintegration of violent extremist offenders in prison. These will advance our work, and I am proud to announce the United States is contributing $15 million to support training initiatives in these areas, and to launch new partnerships with the UN and others to make sure our assistance gets to those officials on the front lines who need it most.
    And I am here today also to underscore that the United States will work with all of you to combat terrorists within the framework of the rule of law. Now some believe that when it comes to counterterrorism, the end always justifies the means; that torture, abuse, the suspension of civil liberties – no measure is too extreme in the name of keeping our citizens safe.
    But unfortunately, this view is short-sighted and wrong. When nations violate human rights and undermine the rule of law, even in the pursuit of terrorists, it feeds radicalization, gives propaganda tools to the extremists, and ultimately undermines our efforts. The international community cannot turn our eyes away from the effects of these tactics because they are part of the problem.
    I know that the United States has not always had a perfect record, and we can and must do a better job of addressing the mistaken belief that these tactics are ever permissible. That is why President Obama has made our standards very clear. We will always maintain our right to use force against groups such as al-Qaida that have attacked us and still threaten us with imminent attack. And in doing so, we will comply with the applicable law, including the laws of war, and go to extraordinary lengths to ensure precision and avoid the loss of innocent life.
    We view this forum as a key vehicle for galvanizing action on these fronts and for driving a comprehensive, strategic approach to counterterrorism. And I’m very pleased that in this short period of time, as Ahmet said, the forum is already living up to its promise to emphasize results, not rhetoric, and to spark the innovation that is essential for keeping up with an ever-changing, dynamic threat.
    And so I thank the members of the forum for taking on the changing methods that terrorists use to fund their efforts. For example, because of our coordinated pressure, terrorists are increasingly abandoning the formal financial system and funding their operations through criminal activities. Kidnapping for ransom has emerged as a favored tactic; it’s most acute in the Sahel, has long been a concern in Latin America, and is now spreading worldwide. We need to intensify our international cooperation to deal with this issue by finalizing this fall the guidelines discussed at the meeting in Algiers earlier this spring so countries have the best tools available for dealing with hostage-taking and extortion.
    The work we need to do, whether on stopping kidnapping for ransom, countering violent extremism, or strengthening rule of law, require focus and tenacity. Now those of us around the table are here for a few hours, but the experts who are working with us work day in and day out. And it is a true honor to have this venue for policymakers and practitioners, because after all, we’re here because we face implacable foes who are determined to kill civilians, disrupt societies, and spread their ideology of hate. And we cannot afford to work at cross-purposes or to pursue policies that obstruct cooperation or fuel radicalization. All of us share a commitment to take on this challenge, and the United States is very proud to continue working with you to further our common efforts.
    Thank you very much.

  77. Conyers is basically reading off what the WH has written for him, i don’t think he’s all there mentally.

  78. I have never read this book. I’m going to pick it up at the library, hopefully today. Amazing.
    Fahrenheit 451
    Ray Bradbury

    Plot Overview
    Guy Montag is a fireman who burns books in a futuristic American city. In Montag’s world, firemen start fires rather than putting them out. The people in this society do not read books, enjoy nature, spend time by themselves, think independently, or have meaningful conversations. Instead, they drive very fast, watch excessive amounts of television on wall-size sets, and listen to the radio on “Seashell Radio” sets attached to their ears.
    *************************************************************

    When Montag fails to show up for work, his fire chief, Beatty, pays a visit to his house. Beatty explains that it’s normal for a fireman to go through a phase of wondering what books have to offer, and he delivers a dizzying monologue explaining how books came to be banned in the first place.

    According to Beatty, special-interest groups and other “minorities” objected to books that offended them. Soon, books all began to look the same, as writers tried to avoid offending anybody. This was not enough, however, and society as a whole decided to simply burn books rather than permit conflicting opinions. Beatty tells Montag to take twenty-four hours or so to see if his stolen books contain anything worthwhile and then turn them in for incineration.
    Montag begins a long and frenzied night of reading.
    **********************************************************

    Montag goes to Faber’s house, where he learns that a new Hound has been put on his trail, along with several helicopters and a television crew. Faber tells Montag that he is leaving for St. Louis to see a retired printer who may be able to help them. Montag gives Faber some money and tells him how to remove Montag’s scent from his house so the Hound will not enter it. Montag then takes some of Faber’s old clothes and runs off toward the river. The whole city watches as the chase unfolds on TV, but Montag manages to escape in the river and change into Faber’s clothes to disguise his scent.

    He drifts downstream into the country and follows a set of abandoned railroad tracks until he finds a group of renegade intellectuals (“the Book People”), led by a man named Granger, who welcome him. They are a part of a nationwide network of book lovers who have memorized many great works of literature and philosophy. They hope that they may be of some help to mankind in the aftermath of the war that has just been declared. Montag’s role is to memorize the Book of Ecclesiastes. Enemy jets appear in the sky and completely obliterate the city with bombs. Montag and his new friends move on to search for survivors and rebuild civilization.

  79. “Michelle outdoes me in pushups as well,” he said, after saying that she’s taken some criticism on her technique “because she doesn’t go all the way down” – a line that he let hang, naughtily, provoking laughter from the crowd.
    ——————
    Fantasy Island. Yes? Nero, step aside. You have got competition. Introducing The Delusional Messiah. But that is not all. We now learn that salivating Andrew Sullivan has filed a formal request under the Freedom of Information Act to know whether Bambi wears briefs or Boxers, what size, what brand, and how often does he change. If you think that is ridiculous you ain’t seen nothing. Just tune into MSNCBC.

  80. Jesus, worlds gone mad…..

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2155816/Is-Cloud-Nine-zombie-apocalypse-Police-issue-warning-new-drug-TWO-cannibal-attacks.html

    Is new drug behind America’s ‘zombie apocalypse’? Police issue warning about Cloud Nine after TWO more horrifying cannibal attacks

    Mind altering drug available over the counter in the U.S., but banned in Britain
    Police link the drug to previous horrific cannibal attack when a man ate another man’s face
    Users experience heart palpitations, nausea, hallucinations, paranoia and erratic behavior

  81. Re: moononpluto
    June 7th, 2012 at 10:13 am

    Just one example of how to win friends and influence people. His wife, the articulate Mrs. Conyers in a Detroit city council meeting:


  82. Wow would you believe it……

    Romney/RNC outraise Obama/DNC by almost $17 million in May.

    …………………….

    Obama is going to be worried now, when was the last time he got outraised.

  83. If the Dems don’t want to go down in flames handcuffed hand and foot to the unions, then they need to recognize and admit that gross abuses exist, and occur, and get busy reeling in those abuses.

    Because the taxpayers are fed the fuck up. And the Dems, rather than acknowledging that and working on it, continue to stick their fingers in their ears and sing lalalalalala – insisting that public unions are sacred cows as pure as the driven snow and can do no wrong.

    The City of Phoenix has been locked into some crippling contracts with various public worker unions for longer than anyone can remember. Such a sweet deal had been cut for the unions – and let’s be clear here… it’s for the unions and their officers, not the workers – that the city was laying out millions of dollars for “release time” where union officials would receive pay for doing “union work.” This included officials who were payed full time wages – including mandatory overtime – for doing zero work for the public in their supposed regular jobs, instead working full time on union activities.

    Many times that “union work” includes GOTV efforts, etc. Sorry, but employees should not be paid out of taxpayer funds for things that have nothing to do with their jobs, and are exclusively union activities. That should come out of UNION funds, not my damn pocket.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/06/07/the-other-union-story-from-tuesday/#comments

  84. May 2012

    Romney/RNC raised $77 million.

    Obama/Dnc $60 million.

    Guess you ain’t the golden calf after all

  85. Another example of how the Dems are completely behind the curve, and do not recognize that today is not 1967, or 1992, or 2008. The American public is not static, and the Dems are remaining deliberately clueless as to how the ground is shifting under their feet.

    They persist in fighting the battles of the past, secure in the knowledge that old tropes like “The GOP consists of fat old white dude Rotarians and pinch-faced puritans” and “High turnout favors Democrats” are and will forever remain written in stone.

    Nope. The ground is shifting, and they REFUSE to adapt to or even recognize that it is. From Ace of Spades:

    TURNOUT! screamed the left.
    TURNOUT! screamed the pundits.
    If you did a twitter search of that phrase your blackberry would have melted yesterday.

    EVERYBODY was crazy about turnout.
    Here are the figures, to show who turned out (though we already know):

    STATEWIDE: 57% unofficially per the GAB.
    MILWAUKEE: 65%(est)
    DANE: 80%
    WAUKESHA: 83%
    WASHINGTON: 86%
    OZAUKEE: 82%

    The Democrats are fighting the battles of yesterday, armed with yesterday’s assurances. If they spent 10 minutes investigating the “new conservative” movement, they would recognize that the force and energy on the right these days is younger, hipper, leans more libertarian, swears like a sailor, has a great sense of humor, and is chock full of kick-ass women and a heavy sprinkling of blacks and latinos who openly sneer at the “Democratic Plantation”.

    The left sits in their little echo-chambers and snickers at the hapless Right that they imagine exists, a bunch of tube-topped losers screaming about Jaysus, or fat rich men, listening to Lawrence Welk and counting their piles of money. Meanwhile, a growing vanguard of young professionals, moms, and and tatooed blue-collar revolutionaries are cranking out The Ramones and figuring out how to kick their asses.

    Just from a political and sociological standpoint, it’s fascinating to observe the monumental stupid.

  86. Here is Jay Cost’s take on the Walker Victory in Wisconsin: http://www.redstate.com/tex_whitley/2012/06/07/jay-cost-on-the-fallout-from-walkers-win-in-wisconsin/

    He believes the victory is significant on the merits and is exportable to November.

    The question in Wisconsin, and the question in November are fundamentally the same:

    In a struggling economy, where people are losing their jobs at a rate not seen since the Great Depression, will we continue to protect Democrat client groups (like organized labor, environmentalists, etc.) at the expense of the general welfare?

    The other point is the 6 point victory (53 vs 47) coupled with the demographic (34 democrat, 34 republican and 31 independent) on the national scale, suggest that indie are the deciding factor in the November election, and in Wisconsin, they broke 60-40 for the Republicans.

    If you have 10 minutes to spare, the above is worth listening to. It will give you accurate insights, compared to the materially misleading narratives we get from msm, such as we see in their blind reliance on exit polls which are notoriously inaccurate.

  87. will we continue to protect Democrat client groups (like organized labor, environmentalists, etc.) at the expense of the general welfare?

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

    Because clean air and good education have nothing to do with the general welfare. /sarc

  88. Today, Darrell Issa will cross examine Holder about Fast and Furious what he knew, when he knew it, and who else in the Administration knew it. Unless Issa has some smoking gun memo in his arsenal with which to impeach Holder’s credibility, all we will get is more denials, I don’t recalls etc. Holder is a classic example of an evasive witness, and they need to hang him for that. They can make political hay over this by showing the funeral for the agent, the admissions which have been adduced to date, the subpoena requests which have not been complied with, and finally the evasive testimony of Holder which wreaks cover-up, featuring close-ups including sweat on the brow if there is such. American Cross Roads should be up to the task. Absent some new disclosure, I doubt it will be productive to continue along this path. I would tailor the questions in such a way to do maximum damage to the Obama Administration, and conclude by saying that it has become obvious if we sit here with you in the witness box until hell freezes over you will never give us the truth. Perry Mason breakdowns on the witness stand are rare in real life and it is highly unlikely we will get that in this case. So shift gears and show the world was an evasive witness the man who was ultimately in charge is, and let that be his epitaph.

  89. HillaryforTexas
    June 7th, 2012 at 11:13 am
    ———–
    To your point. At the CPAC convention Sarah Palin keynoted in April? There were young men wearing Tee shirts “We aren’t your Grandma’s Tea Party.”

  90. Because clean air and good education have nothing to do with the general welfare. /sarc
    ——————–
    Yea, sure. Solyndra and its progeny have given us a ton of clean air and the teachers unions have given us a level of education which is the envy of the world even though we are 47th. There is such a difference between rhetoric and results that anyone who forsakes one for the other will be sadly disappointed. We cannot build a just functional society on illusion. And what the dims are giving us is an empire of illusion, if you examine the actual results. Read The Vision of The Annointed by Thomas Sowell and you will see what kind of con game they are running and as the actual results come in more people are waking up.

  91. ‘“Michelle outdoes me in pushups as well,” he said, after saying that she’s taken some criticism on her technique “because she doesn’t go all the way down” – a line that he let hang, naughtily, provoking laughter from the crowd.”‘

    OMG! How disgusting! I’ve been critical of MO in the past, but this “joke” from her own hubby is beyond the pale. Is the kind of image he wants people to have of his wife and mother of his children? No wonder she can’t stand to be in the WH with him.

  92. wbboei @ 11:58

    You refer to the huge blind spot and disconnect of the Dims and the mindless Left. That the only thing that matters is intent, not results.

    Therefore, if the intended purpose of any govt undertaking is “good”, then it matters not that they are corrupt, abjectly failing at achieving their goal, or aggressively going far beyond what their purpose originally was.

    “It’s for the chilrun” becomes the get-out-of-being-held-accountable-free card. If you question the validity of an agency whose stated intent is better education, you are a cretin. The fact that the agency in question has done absolutely bupkus to actually improve education is beside the point and irrelevant. Attacking it is tantamount to attacking education itself.

    It’s the same old bullshit, and people are getting wise to it.

  93. the teachers unions have given us a level of education
    ———————
    Very interesting to see how New Jersey Teachers’ Association tee vee ads have changed. Before Christie their message was “we are wonderful.” During Christies’ overhaul they were “tell that teacher-hating Christie you’re not going to take it”. Now although carefully expressed, their ads acknowledge the existence of teachers who need to go.
    They do always have money for ads. But in NJ they’ve put down their weapons.

  94. And BTW, I am all in favor of getting rid of the Dept of Education entirely on the federal level. The few necessary functions it performs (like consistent nationwide score standards) are easily handled under the purview of a much smaller entity.

    It did not exist until 1980, and did not really get rolling until the late 80’s. It now consumes fifty BILLION dollars a year, and our schools have gotten worse, not better. Children in this country received a BETTER education prior to 1980, with schools under local and state control. The federalization of schools is an experiment that has FAILED in spectacular fashion.

    This is the problem with the expansion of federal govt power. There is a good-sounding idea, the public goes along, and when it fails, NO ONE is willing to undo the mistake. It becomes an entrenched sacred cow, sucking up our tax dollars, and you are an evil evil horrible person if you want to touch it.

    You know, the public might be more willing to allow the govt to “try out” more solutions to problems if we weren’t sick to death of every “try out” becoming a God-given entitlement that must never ever be undone, even when it fails in spectacular fashion.

  95. I am sorry, but I do not believe any more that the Democratic Party under Obama represents the general welfare–and that is not an endorsement of the Republican Party. Special interests run that party, and the American People are left sucking hind tit. The paradigmatic example? Obamacare. The greatest civil rights victory since 1964 according to the NYT, even though it will double the health care costs of the average American and enrich the drug companies that Obama wants to steal from the Reublicans. And this month the smart bet is that it will be struck down as unconstitutional in whole or in part.

    Nunc pro tunc–then as now, the main issue in this country is not health care, its jobs. And now we learn from an insider (quoted by Romney in the above clip–which is cited in a book called How Obama Blew The Recovery) that the Obama people KNEW that this great white elephant prolong our economic downturn and thus inhibit job creation, but they intuited that somehow we would forget about that and how much we hate it in the fulsomeness of time.

    The worst of it though, is it pre empted single payer–which is what this country needs–and that was its biggest sin. The entire dimocratic platform now is an empire of illusion. If you think clean air or comprehensive health care is important, don’t look to Obama to save you. He has other mouths to feed. And they take priority.

  96. The EPA is another example. We absolutely needed to clean up our air, our rivers, etc in the 70’s. The problem is, we largely succeeded in doing that. Give the EPA props: that one worked, and did a good job. Yay us!

    So, once the agency largely accomplished its goal, did it then downsize and become mostly a monitoring and continued enforcement entity? Nope. In order to justify its continued expansion, and its continued increasing budgets, it had to go hunting and pushing for more and more stuff to “regulate”. To the point that it is now an out-of-control behemoth sucking up FIVE HUNDRED BILLION dollars annually.

    It’s bullshit. We do not have such an overwhelming and horrible pollution problem in this country that it requires 500 billion annually to combat it.

    How many other good and useful and needed things could we be doing with that money? Why is it that we can’t (mostly) solve one problem, and then turn that money and attention to the next challenge? It’s because the stupid left insists on any govt problem-solving entity becoming a permanent, ever-growing bureaucracy that is sacrosanct. So if we want to do anything else, we are going to have to find even more money, and squeeze some more from the taxpayers.

    I’m all for govt doing good and useful things. But it is impossible to do that if every single undertaking inevitably becomes a permanent and ever-expanding part of the budget.

    I don’t dislike our overwhelming bureacracies because I don’t want to help the country or accomplish good things. I dislike them because they unnecessarily suck up funds that could be used to meet the next challenge.

  97. HillaryforTexas
    June 7th, 2012 at 12:20 pm
    ——————-
    Yes. The rhetoric is that children are our future and government is best equipped to marshal the resources necessary to optimize that experience for our children. The reality is a lumbering politically driven beaucracy which enriches he bureaucrats–I have seen their mansions outside Washington, which never achieves the mission but constantly demands more resources. And when you say it aint working they say then you are against children, and that is the message we get from big media rather than the truth. In the real world, we judge value by results, and take rhetoric with a grain of salt. But half the country does not live in the real world.

  98. Both Romney and RNC are burning up phone wires for donations today. I heard from each of them within an hour. Can only think that they are taking good advantage of the Wisconsin fever they generated. I like it. However I always manage to mention that I’m a Clinton Democrat who is with them at this moment in time.

  99. wbboei, the Washington, DC area is the richest place, per capita, in the entire country. It is working out very well for the machine and its hangers-on.

  100. HillaryforTexas
    June 7th, 2012 at 12:33 pm
    ———————-
    It is called mission creep. Once the initial goal of the organization is achieved it should sunset. Instead what happens is the members of that organization, thinking of their own job security, expand the mission to things not originally intended by the founders or their charter. NAACP, NOW, Morris Dees organization–and countless others plus government agencies do this, ally themselves with the dimocratic party, and continue to suck resources out of society.

  101. HillaryforTexas
    June 7th, 2012 at 12:47 pm
    ————————–
    Yes. And that is what this empire of illusion is really about. Protecting their own nest at the expense of the country. Wittingly or not, that is what Jake Tapper for example really stands for. The objection is not that Tapper and his ilk are pursuing their own enlightened self interest. It is, rather, that they are using the powers they have under the Federal Communication Act, which grants entities like ABC New the ability to lead the public discussion, and the First Amendment accords them protection when they lie, to advance their personal interest over those of the rest of society, and depriving the American People of what they need to know in order to protect their interests and their right to be informed voters.

  102. Here’s the other thing: I really want actual liberals to be doing all this, creating a lean, efficient, effective govt that helps us all.

    You know what my choices are? A Dem party that wants to continue and even enlarge upon the insanity, or an R party that wants to do a lot of what I would like, and a lot of what I would hate.

    Those are my choices. Think about it.

  103. wbboei

    Today, Darrell Issa will cross examine Holder about Fast and Furious what he knew, when he knew it, and who else in the Administration knew it.

    —-
    Greta was hammering Issa’s sidekick on her show, again last night. He kept say that Holder was dragging his feet, bla, bla, bla.
    Greta kept saying in her strongest voice, this has been going on for a year and a half, when are you guys going to do something about and show some teeth!

  104. wbboei
    June 7th, 2012 at 11:52 am

    Perry Mason breakdowns on the witness stand are rare in real life and it is highly unlikely we will get that in this case.

    ______________________________________________________________________________________

    I still run into clients who, with no impeaching witnesses or docs in our possession, exclaim, “but he’s lying!”. I give em the same line you provide above: “Perry Mason isn’t going to show up – its your word against his, unless you have something to corroborate your version”.

  105. wbboei, we are on the same page. I’m sick of it always being boiled down to “whose side are you on – choose yer bandwagon!”

    I am on no one’s side permanently, other than my country’s. All of my alliances, right or left, are of the moment and strategic.

  106. HillaryforTexas
    June 7th, 2012 at 12:33 pm
    —————-
    I will credit Romeny and/or his handlers for this line: when I become president, I will look at what every government agency is doing and ask is it worth borrowing from China (and by inference posterity) to continue funding this (or should we opt for slash and burn). In the private sector, government too, your biggest cost center is employees, so when it becomes necessary for the survival of the organization–as it does in any salvage operation, you have to start there. The fat that has grown up around Washington is strangling the country, and if it could be set alight it could provide more energy for the nation than all the oil which lies under the public lands in Alaska, i.e. 10 billion gallons–roughly equivalent to what Saudi Arabia produces for us over a period of 30 years.

  107. I am on no one’s side permanently, other than my country’s
    ——————-
    Me too. If George Bernard Shaw was right when he said every profession is a conspiracy against the laeity, then by extension, both political parties are a conspiracy against the American People. That is the essential point that true believers miss. I was young once, and offered my services to one of the movers and shaker of the democratic party. He asked me why and I said because I believe in its principles. He told me in a nice way that I was a fool and encouraged me to first decide what I wanted to get out of it personally. The next day, and if I am lying I am dying, this individual along with a couple state democrat party were indicted for being a bag man for contractor who wanted to rebuild the West Seattle Bridge. Six month after that I saw him on television, tears streaming down his face, confessing his sins and apologizing to his family. Politics is an ugly business, and if you can see past your own interests to those of the country, because in the final analysis were are all in this boat together, then you must reject both parties, and try to find leaders with integrity and vision. Even then, they can fool you, but it is a far better bet than hitching your wagon to a party. As that man told me forty years ago, that is a suckers bet.

  108. “The worst of it though, is it pre empted single payer–which is what this country needs–and that was its biggest sin.”
    ********
    That was/is the primary purpose of Obamacare. Very early in the process, Sec. Sebelius said on an NPR program that the President would make sure that “health care reform” legislation would be written so that it could never evolve into “single payer”. The health reform “czar”, Nancy Ann Deparle was there to make sure that Obama stayed bought.

    Nancy Ann Deparle
    ***
    “DeParle has drawn criticism for her lucrative service on corporate boards after her tenure in the Clinton administration. Msnbc.com reported that she was paid more than $6 million, and served as a director of half a dozen companies that faced federal investigations, whistleblower lawsuits and other regulatory actions. Many of these companies have a stake in the health care reform that she led.[10]

    She served as a director of Accredo Health Inc., Boston Scientific, Cerner Corp., DaVita, Guidant, Medco Health Solutions, Speciality Laboratories, and Triad Hospitals. She was a managing director of CCMP Capital.[11]

  109. Chris Rock can’t decide what animal he wants to portray? How about a racist maggot Obama clone. He is right out of central casting. He also made a vile racist comment about Hillary. Yet NBC promotes him and encourages parents to take their children to his movies. There again, we bump into the executives who run that network. On the one hand they bend over backwards where any minority is involved, but like the Obama Justice Department they go after white people. How about we go after them, since in most cases they are white. How about we find new ways to hold those people accountable. Exposure and tying them in to this kind of polarizing dialogue would be one way to do that.

  110. What really went down in Wisconsin
    [Jennifer Stefano is a wife, mother and Tea Party Activist. She is the Pennsylvania state director for Americans for Prosperity and has been in Wisconsin from June 1 through June 6 talking about fiscal reforms.]

    What happened in Wisconsin Tuesday night was not about an election or a politician. It wasn’t about collective bargaining or budget deficits. It was about something far more important and far more intangible. It was about who and what we are as Americans. The people of Wisconsin had a choice. Would they, and in turn the rest of America, whose eyes were riveted on this small northern state, be a people with their hand constantly extended to the public trough shouting “give me, give me, give me”? Or, as the Tea Party has tried to exemplify, would we become the people pushing the plough, demanding, “give me liberty,” whatever the cost. It was about Barack Obama’s view of America versus the Tea Party’s. And once again, the Tea Party emerged victorious. Those of us that came into Wisconsin over these past days and weeks joined with other activists in the state to deliver that view of America.In the last five days, we reached over 125,000 people through door belling and phone banking efforts. We talked not about elections, but about facts. We remained loyal to principles and not parties or politicians. It’s why when we pointed out that the budget measures were not as great a cost as the anti-reform union bosses would have liked America to believe, people listen.

    People, of all political persuasions, saw this to be true especially in light of a world view that includes a decimated Greece and collapsing global economy. And, far from being draconian changes, people in Wisconsin understood that state workers were asked to pay just under six percent of their salaries towards benefits, a little over twelve percent to their premiums. They saw those same employees could still collectively bargain for their wages but not for pensions and benefits, which had nearly bankrupted the state….
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/06/what-really-went-down-in-wisconsin/

  111. For the first time in three years, I opened an e-mail from the Nation Magazine..re-Obama and the “Kill list”…Bottom line, Kill List=bad and Obama’s psychopathic behavior is Bush’s fault.

    “The “war on terror”(Bush/Cheney) has its own corrupting logic, leading otherwise morally responsible leaders to do unspeakable things. Such is the case with the Obama administration’s descent into the world of kill lists and drone assassinations.”

    http://www.thenation.com/article/168271/obamas-kill-list

    “leading otherwise morally responsible leaders to do unspeakable things”

    Give me a fucking break!!!

  112. How is Chris Rock different from Mel Gibson? His comments are of the same tenor, and they are not broadcast over national television. Yet big media will not tolerate anti-semitism, or racism against non-whites, but somehow whites are fair game. Not only that but they promote the childern’s movies featuring a self declared black racist. And by the way, another part of the maturation process is judgment which is able to differentiate between a genial aw shuts style and a dog whistle racist message. Unfortunately, maturity is not common in the general population.

  113. What I am banking on with the current R’s is that they will go at it with the intent of dismantling, and in reality end up with some kind of shrinkage compromise. I have a problem with where some of them want to end up. But given the inertia of govt, I probably won’t mind where they likely will end up in reality.

    So the “overshooting” doesn’t give me palpitations, because it probably won’t happen. It’s all strategic for me.

  114. The “war on terror”(Bush/Cheney) has its own corrupting logic, leading otherwise morally responsible leaders to do unspeakable things.
    ——————-
    “otherwise morally responsible leaders” ??????????

    What evidence do we have that Obama is a morally responsible leader? The fact that he preaches about such things. I do not give a rat’s ass about what he preaches–talk is cheap–especially among politicians. The true test of moral responsibility is actions. When they get all that preaching out of their system what do they actually do. This blanket defense of Obama is laughable. But worse, it ignores the fact that he seems to be enjoying himself doing what what he described as an atrocity when Bush was doing it. The Nation, which in its founding days was supportive of both the Bolshevik Revoulution and admired Stalin has not interest in dealing with the moral dimension of this. To see the far left violate every tenet of their professed world view to exonerate this guy is a truly pathetic sight to behold. Fortunately, we have honest men of the left like Chris Hedges who are neither seduced nor complicit in this grand exercise in self delusion.

  115. I have a problem with where some of them want to end up. But given the inertia of govt, I probably won’t mind where they likely will end up in reality.

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

    A good principle, applying to both sides.

  116. What I am banking on with the current R’s is that they will go at it with the intent of dismantling, and in reality end up with some kind of shrinkage compromise.
    ——————-
    More specifically, what you are banking on is that a top Republican leader who is a stranger to neither demon rum and young dollies can be prevented from caving in to Obama based on Axelrod’s blackmail. It is good to see that Eric Erickson and others are doing their level best to prevent him from caving, and so are tea party people. You have some very good Republicans who are tired of the old ways and will hold the line.

  117. The EPA is another example. We absolutely needed to clean up our air, our rivers, etc in the 70’s. The problem is, we largely succeeded in doing that.

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

    You’re fine with continuing mountaintop removal, oil spills, etc?

    Not to get into dull facts like deaths caused by remaining pollutants.

  118. One area where I do think Mitt’s expertise in turning around bankrupt companies will help is in streamlining govt. No, govt is not exactly the same as a business. But the skill involved in taking a cold hard look at what works, what doesn’t, and jettisoning divisions and practices that are dragging the company down are absolutely transferable to a govt venue. I’m not saying that experience will make the job easy or a cake walk. But will it be helpful? Yes.

  119. And then you have the other guy who would sell his gandmother if he could just be senate majority leader. The frustration with him is huge.

  120. HillaryforTexas
    June 7th, 2012 at 2:18 pm
    ———————–
    A friend of mine who voted for Obama over my stenuous objection and feels remorseful about it, asked me the other day what will Romney do to turn this thing around? I told him that the first thing he will do is throw out the professors and poitical operatives who run this administration and bring in business people. I know there are differences between running government and running business (Romney has done both), but the truth is government must be run more like a business than a piggy bank for the Democrat coalition.

  121. To continue:

    When Bush was president, we had the opposite problem. Government was de-funded and the functions government should be tasked to do in a complex society were neglected or given to back benchers. That is a disaster too. Privatization tends to reward the few at the expense of the many.

  122. Oh, You’re screwed….why not, the media has been giving a blowjob to the Obama administration for years, why not actually make the next step and do it for real.

    http://freebeacon.com/leaked-emails-endanger-obama-nominee/

    Leaked Emails Endanger Obama Nominee
    Brett McGurk, Obama nominee to Iraq Ambassador post, engaged in extramarital affair with WSJ reporter

    President Obama’s ambassadorial nominee to Iraq appears to have conducted a lascivious extramarital affair with a Wall Street Journal reporter while the duo were stationed in Iraq according to a collection of often-explicit emails posted on the website Cryptome earlier this week. The emails raise questions about whether the administration official traded access to sensitive information for sexual favors and his fitness for the ambassadorship.

    The 2008 emails between Wall Street Journal reporter Gina Chon and former National Security Council member Brett McGurk, Obama’s nominee to be the next U.S. ambassador to Iraq, expose a torrid love affair that unfolded over a period of several months. Neither Chon nor the State Department responded to request for comment.

    One source with knowledge of the nomination said the State Department had acknowledged that the emails came from their system.

    The explicit details contained in the missives indicate that McGurk, who was married at the time, dangled unprecedented access and information before Chon in return for a series of increasingly intimate sexual encounters. McGurk is now married to Chon.

    McGurk was nominated by Obama in March to be the next U.S. envoy to Iraq. He served as an adviser to the last three U.S. ambassadors to Iraq, and later played the role of chief negotiator in the 2008 agreement that permitted U.S. troops to remain in Iraq. In 2011, he led failed talks aimed at prolonging the U.S. troop presence.

    The recently unearthed emails reveal that McGurk’s extramarital relationship with Chon began during the arduous 2008 negotiations over the U.S.-Iraq security agreement, the sensitive details of which McGurk often hinted at over his unclassified exchanges with Chon.

    Strikingly, McGurk expressed pride in the clandestine relationship more than four months after the fact, when he resends to Chon the series of sexually charged emails and brags about his prowess.

    ……………………

    seriously, why do men put themselves in this sort security compromised situation, do they just think with that thing between their legs 24/7.

  123. The Obama campaign reminds me of the Wehrmacht after the allied invasion–still fighting but retreating prior to a collapse. Slowly, surely, the picture big media pretends does not exist is starting to fill in. Firewalls are starting to crack and will eventually collapse. Rove’s analysis here is telling.
    —————————————

    Wall Street Journal
    By Karl Rove
    June 7, 2012
    Print
    Wisconsin and the GOP Ground Game
    Scott Walker’s big victory bodes well for Republican prospects in November.

    We’ll be talking about Tuesday’s Wisconsin recall election for a long time to come.

    The results were a historic setback for organized labor, which failed to oust Gov. Scott Walker in a citadel of modern progressivism. And how it must have stung that 38% of union households voted for Mr. Walker, up a point from 2010 when he was first elected.

    The election has implications for November. The Badger State now looks more like it did in 2000 and 2004, when Democrats narrowly carried it by margins of 5,708 votes and 11,384 votes, respectively. President Obama’s campaign now admits Wisconsin is a tossup. That isn’t an encouraging trend in a state he won by 414,818 votes.

    The recall contest was expected to be close. A Democratic pollster had the race at three points just a few days out. GOP tracking surveys showed the contest tightening as well. Yet Mr. Walker won by 172,739 votes, up from his 2010 margin of 124,638 votes.

    It wasn’t supposed to be this way. Team Obama, after all, has bragged about how strong its ground game is at registering, persuading and turning out the vote.

    Last month, Obama campaign manager Jim Messina told congressional Democrats in a closed-door meeting (reported by Politico) that “we’re building the best grass-roots campaign in modern American political history . . . that will help all Democrats up and down the ticket.” Democratic Party Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz also boasted on CNN in May that the Wisconsin recall would be the “dry run we need of our massive, significant dynamic grass-roots presidential campaign.”

    There are two possible answers why the “best grass-roots campaign in modern American political history” failed to deliver victory. First, Team Obama’s vaunted get-out-the-vote effort was simply a facade. That’s not likely, since Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, the Democratic candidate, did receive 158,482 more votes than he did in losing to Mr. Walker in 2010.

    The other possibility is the Democrats were out-hustled by the Republicans.

    Given the intense focus on the ground game by the Walker campaign, the Republican Governors Association, and Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus (who was Badger State GOP chairman before winning his current post), that’s probably a big reason Mr. Walker won with 205,509 more votes than he received 18 months ago.

    Before Tuesday’s vote in Wisconsin there was already evidence that Democrats nationally didn’t have quite the ground game they brag about. Witness the fact that they are so far losing the voter-registration war in the eight battleground or “swing” states (as recognized by the media and the two campaigns) that enroll voters by party.

    In Florida and Iowa, Democratic registrations are down from their 2010 levels while Republican numbers are up. For example, nearly 29,000 Democrats have disappeared from the Iowa registration rolls since January 2011, while about 10,000 Republicans have been added.

    In Arizona (which Team Obama keeps saying it intends to make a battleground) and Pennsylvania, both parties have lost ground—but Democrats have lost more. In Arizona, Democrats are down 58,000 since the end of 2010; the Republicans are down 9,500. And there are now 176,000 fewer Democrats registered in Pennsylvania than in November 2010, while GOP registrations have dropped by 62,000.

    In Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and North Carolina, both parties increased registrations—but Republicans added more. For example, in North Carolina, there are 17,500 new Democrats registered since January 2011 versus 49,500 more Republicans. This in a state Mr. Obama won by just 14,177 votes in 2008. (All registration numbers come from state websites.)

    If Democrats weren’t winning the registration war while Republicans were distracted with an ugly presidential primary—and then couldn’t bury the GOP in Wisconsin—it appears the Democratic ground game is not the “bigger, faster, stronger” force that Mr. Messina told USA Today it was in February.

    If the Wisconsin results are cause for concern among Democrats, they provide a call to action for Republicans, especially in battleground states. To beat Mr. Obama, Republicans must duplicate the ground game deployed by the GOP in Wisconsin that registered, persuaded and produced a massive turnout.

    This won’t be easy. But Republicans are fortunate to have outstanding leadership at the Republican National Committee in Mr. Priebus and also at Romney headquarters in Boston. Their challenge will be to gather the necessary resources and generate the passionate commitment to the ground game at the grass-roots level that was so evident in Wisconsin.

    I’m betting they will.

  124. Rendell imagines President Hillary Clinton

    Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell mused in an interview with CBS’s Charlie Rose this morning that Hillary Clinton would have been more assertive in dealing with Congress than President Obama has been, in a set of comments Republicans are trumpeting as the latest off-message comment by a major Democrat.

    In truth, Rendell has been praising the Clintons for years in ways that could seem to diminish Obama by comparison. But in his appearance on “This Morning,” he also gave a more general critique of Obama’s approach to handling the presidency.

    “I think she would have come in with a lot more executive experience. I think the president was hurt by being a legislator only,” Rendell said, mentioning health care reform and the stimulus. “Too much of it was left up to the Congress. He sort of said, ‘Here’s my concept, you guys flesh it out.’ I think Hillary Clinton would have sent them a bill and said, ‘Here’s what I want.’

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/06/rendell-imagines-president-hillary-clinton-125541.html

  125. Krauthammer On Wisconsin: “Smaller Government Is Still Alive And Well”
    “It’s clear that this was about the most energized electorate; there were no undecideds,” FOX News contributor and syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer said on Wednesday. “If you look at the polls, everyone decided. Just about 86% decided a month ago. If you were undecided, you weren’t paying attention. And it was extremely polarized; the issues were black and white….”
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/06/06/krauthammer_on_wisconsin_smaller_government_is_still_alive_and_well.html

  126. I can not believe this sh!t: a poster that someone posted on FB with a doctored photo of Scott Walker and a big headline that says “Koch Whore” and I am not even going to read the small print. Walker has two black eyes. Next thing you know,these idiots will be eating flesh.

  127. I think the president was hurt by being a legislator only,”
    ——————-
    A legislator who carried the water for special interests, and voted present on anything that involved risk. Rendell gives Obama too much credit. He is pussy footing around. Obama is neither an executive or legislative. He is a bag man for special interests/

  128. That New Republic Article helps me realize what a terrible man Bush was. Not only did he launch these unnecessary wars, but along the way he managed to corrupt his successor, Black Jesus. And it is so bad now, that informed sources tell me that this business of wiping out presumed enemies who happen to be (white) Americans with drones, is the only part of the Presidential job that Mr. Obama actually enjoys.

  129. ShortTermer
    June 7th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
    ———————
    we must not get too agitated against the obots for being petty vinctive and delusional. The more they do this the more they relegate themselves to the margins and undermine their cause. The Czar paid agent povocateurs working under cover to do this exact same thing. Here however they do it on their own nickel, which is even better for us.

  130. We warned this was a disaster. For those that thought the Egyptian events were to be cheered:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47717050/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/#.T9Co_rWwUo4

    In ‘new Egypt’, mobs sexually assault women with impunity
    Reports of assaults on women in Tahrir Square, the epicenter of the uprising that forced Hosni Mubarak to step down last year, have been on the rise

    CAIRO — Her screams were not drowned out by the clamor of the crazed mob of nearly 200 men around her. An endless number of hands reached toward the woman in the red shirt in an assault scene that lasted less than 15 minutes but felt more like an hour.

    She was pushed by the sea of men for about a block into a side street from Tahrir Square. Many of the men were trying to break up the frenzy, but it was impossible to tell who was helping and who was assaulting. Pushed against the wall, the unknown woman’s head finally disappeared. Her screams grew fainter, then stopped. Her slender tall frame had clearly given way. She apparently had passed out.

    The helping hands finally splashed the attackers with bottles of water to chase them away.

    The assault late Tuesday was witnessed by an Associated Press reporter who was almost overwhelmed by the crowd herself and had to be pulled to safety by men who ferried her out of the melee in an open Jeep.

    Reports of assaults on women in Tahrir, the epicenter of the uprising that forced Hosni Mubarak to step down last year, have been on the rise with a new round of mass protests to denounce a mixed verdict against the ousted leader and his sons in a trial last week.

  131. Go Eddy Rendell. When Hillary came to northeast Philly in April of 2008, the Mayfair Diner, Ed was there too. Man, that guy is tall.

    Chelsea signed my t-shirt: “Go Hillary!”.

  132. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/06/07/jon-stewart-slams-msnbcs-coverage-walker-recall-election-msnb-sad

    How bad was MSNBC’s coverage of Republican Governor Scott Walker winning his recall election in Wisconsin Tuesday?

    Well, the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart on Wednesday renamed the network “MSNB-Sad” saying that it “passed through all the stages of grief last night” (video follows with transcript and commentary, serious vulgarity warning):

    JON STEWART, HOST: If Fox was high, MSNBC must be MSNB-Sad.

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC: To say that I’m shocked and stunned is pretty much an understatement.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    STEWART: “Shocked and stunned is an understatement. No, it feels tonight more like my heart was f—ked by the devil.

    (Laughter) No, wait, that’s an overstatement. Tonight I feel somewhere between shocked, stunned and devil heart f–ked. (Laughter) This is Ed Schultz.”

    Indeed, MSNBC passed through all the stages of grief last night. Stage one, denial.

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    SCHULTZ: You know, NBC is calling it for Walker. Okay, I think it’s awful close and there’s a lot of absentee ballots yet that are still out.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    STEWART: Yeah, no. (Laughter) Stage two, denial.

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    JOHN NICHOLS, NATION MAGAZINE: This will not be a massive win for Scott Walker.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    STEWART: Yeah. (Laughter) Finally, stage three, just really massive amounts of industrial-grade denial.

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    LAWRENCE O’DONNELL, MSNBC: Tonight, the really big winner of the Wisconsin recall election is President Obama.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    (Laughter)

    STEWART: Yep, just like Obama drew it up on the chalk board. “Hey, guys, I got an idea. What if we could figure out a way to have the core of what we believe soundly rejected by voters in a swing state just five months before the national election? It might just be the boost we need.”

    Actually, in this instance, there were four stages of grief with the last one being not understanding that if the exit polls were wrong in predicting who won the recall, they would likewise be off in how Wisconsinites view the upcoming presidential election.

    Unfortunately, MSNBC anchors and commentators despite the obvious flaws in Tuesday’s exit polls continued to cite them to claim President Obama has a seven point lead over Mitt Romney in Wisconsin.

    Maybe Stewart will spoof that hysterical stupidity Thursday.

  133. I also think there was more to Rendell’s words then merely pointing out Barry’s lack of experience and incompetence.

    First, Hillary is the person that worked her buns off to come up with a health care plan that was Universal Health Care, not this monstrosity thrown together with the kitchen sink, pork and blank checks to Big Pharma and the insurance companies. No cost savings, no way to pay for it…

    Second, pointing out Obama’s desire to just pass a bill vs Hillary’s knowledge and LEADERship in being specific on what was needed and how to do it. I have always thought Barry didn’t give a hoot about health care for the poor or middle class or anyone, he just wanted to pass ANY health care bill to outshine Hillary’s running into roadblocks by the Reps back in the 90’s. He wanted to prove he was the big man and he had coconuts…but alas, the Supremes might neuter his bill altogether.

  134. RARE SHOW OF BIPARTISAN UNITY: OBAMA’S LEAKS FOR POLITICAL GAIN COMPROMISE NATIONAL SECURITY.

    Front page NY Times article today reveals Obama’s hypocrisy, and that he’s worse than Bush! Key quotes:

    “Prompted in part by recent articles in The New York Times on the use of drones to carry out targeted killings and the deployment of the Stuxnet computer worm against the Iranian nuclear program, the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate intelligence committees issued a joint statement on Wednesday urging the administration “to fully, fairly and impartially investigate” the recent disclosures and vowing new legislation to crack down on leaks.”

    “Each disclosure puts American lives at risk, makes it more difficult to recruit assets, strains the trust of our partners and threatens imminent and irreparable damage to our national security,” said the statement, a rare show of unity.

    “Senator John McCain of Arizona told reporters on Tuesday that administration officials were “intentionally leaking information to enhance President Obama’s image as a tough guy for the elections” — while at the same time prosecuting low-level officials for disclosures.”

    “Now those programs are at the heart of a bipartisan dispute over secrecy, with Congressional Republicans accusing the Obama administration of leaking classified information for political advantage and Democrats lodging their own protests about high-level disclosures.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/world/americas/drones-and-cyberattacks-renew-debate-over-security.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

    Here’s the whole deal:

    U.S. Attacks, Online and From the Air, Fuel Secrecy Debate
    ==================================

    By SCOTT SHANE
    Published: June 6, 2012

    WASHINGTON — In recent years, the United States has pioneered the use of two innovative weapons, drones and cyberattacks, that by many accounts have devastated Al Qaeda and set back Iran’s nuclear effort.

    Now those programs are at the heart of a bipartisan dispute over secrecy, with Congressional Republicans accusing the Obama administration of leaking classified information for political advantage and Democrats lodging their own protests about high-level disclosures.

    Prompted in part by recent articles in The New York Times on the use of drones to carry out targeted killings and the deployment of the Stuxnet computer worm against the Iranian nuclear program, the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House and Senate intelligence committees issued a joint statement on Wednesday urging the administration “to fully, fairly and impartially investigate” the recent disclosures and vowing new legislation to crack down on leaks.

    “Each disclosure puts American lives at risk, makes it more difficult to recruit assets, strains the trust of our partners and threatens imminent and irreparable damage to our national security,” said the statement, a rare show of unity.

    The protest focused on the dangers of leaks that the Congressional leaders said would alert adversaries to American military and intelligence tactics. But secrecy, too, has a cost — one that is particularly striking in the case of drones and cyberattacks. Both weapons raise pressing legal, moral and strategic questions of the kind that, in a democracy, appear to deserve serious public scrutiny. Because of classification rules, however, neither has been the subject of open debate in Congress, even as the Obama administration has moved aggressively ahead with both programs.

    “The U.S. is embarked on ambitious and consequential moves that will shape the security environment for years to come, whether they succeed or fail,” said Steven Aftergood, who studies government secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. “Secrecy cloaks not only the operations, but their justification and rationale, which are legitimate subjects of public interest.”

    Mr. Aftergood said drones and cyberattacks were “extreme examples of programs that are widely known and yet officially classified.” That, he said, has prevented informed public discussion of some critical questions. Should the United States be inaugurating a new era of cyberattacks? What are the actual levels of civilian casualties caused by the drone attacks, and what are the implications for national sovereignty?

    “Keeping these programs secret may have a value,” said Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard law professor and Bush administration Justice Department official who writes about national security and the press. “But there’s another value that has to be considered, too — the benefit of transparency, accountability and public discussion.”

    Leaks, and the policy dilemmas and political squabbles they inspire, are as old as the country. In 1778, a disclosure by Thomas Paine that the French were secretly supporting the American revolutionaries became the subject of an investigation led by the future first chief justice, John Jay.

    Nor has any party held a monopoly on the complications of managing secrecy. During the Bush administration, a leak investigation led to a perjury conviction for a top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, an outspoken defender of government secrets.

    Even so, contradictory behavior on the secrecy front has been especially striking under the Obama administration.

    Mr. Obama campaigned for the presidency in 2008 by denouncing his predecessor’s secret prisons and brutal interrogations, which were public knowledge only because of leaks of classified information to the news media. He began his term by pledging the most transparent administration in history.

    In office, however, he has outdone all previous presidents in mounting criminal prosecutions over such leaks, overseeing six such cases to date, compared with three under all previous administrations combined.

    Senator John McCain of Arizona, Mr. Obama’s opponent in 2008, told reporters on Tuesday that administration officials were “intentionally leaking information to enhance President Obama’s image as a tough guy for the elections” — while at the same time prosecuting low-level officials for disclosures. On Wednesday, Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, called that charge “grossly irresponsible.”

    The administration’s inconsistency, however, has been particularly evident on the drone program. Officials routinely give reporters limited information on strikes, usually on the condition of anonymity. Mr. Obama spoke explicitly about the strikes in Pakistan in an online appearance in January, arguing that they were precisely aimed at Al Qaeda.
    Yet the drone attacks in Pakistan are part of a C.I.A. covert action program designed to be “deniable” by American leaders; by law they are in the most carefully protected category of secrets that the government keeps. In court, the administration has taken the position that it can neither confirm nor deny the existence of such operations.

    Yet the drone attacks in Pakistan are part of a C.I.A. covert action program designed to be “deniable” by American leaders; by law they are in the most carefully protected category of secrets that the government keeps. In court, the administration has taken the position that it can neither confirm nor deny the existence of such operations.

    Yet the drone attacks in Pakistan are part of a C.I.A. covert action program designed to be “deniable” by American leaders; by law they are in the most carefully protected category of secrets that the government keeps. In court, the administration has taken the position that it can neither confirm nor deny the existence of such operations.

    “There’s something wrong with aggressive leaking and winking and nodding about the drone program, but saying in response to Freedom of Information requests that they can’t comment because the program is covert,” Mr. Goldsmith said.

    Recently, responding to Freedom of Information Act lawsuits filed by The Times and the American Civil Liberties Union, Justice Department lawyers sought a delay, saying that secrecy rules about targeted killings were under discussion “at the highest level” of government. The government must say by June 20 what it will make public.

    Behind closed doors, administration officials have long discussed the disadvantages of official secrecy for a program that by definition is no secret from its Al Qaeda targets. Colleagues say that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has often complained that secrecy rules make it hard to rebut exaggerated claims of civilian casualties from drone attacks in Pakistan. Mr. Obama has authorized a series of speeches by his counterterrorism adviser, John O. Brennan; the attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr.; and other officials, offering a limited account of the legal justification and goals of the strikes.

    In a speech on April 30, Mr. Brennan kept the intelligence striptease going, acknowledging that “the United States is the first nation to regularly conduct strikes using remotely piloted aircraft in an armed conflict.”

    More significantly, Mr. Brennan elaborated on the administration’s argument that it was using the new weapon with extraordinary care, and mentioned a particular reason: with drones, as with cyberattacks, which he did not discuss, the United States is setting an example for the rest of the world.

    “President Obama and those of us on his national security team are very mindful that as our nation uses this technology, we are establishing precedents that other nations may follow,” he said.

    The same might be said of the administration’s decisions about what to reveal about its pathbreaking programs and what to keep secret.

  135. Shadowfax
    June 6th, 2012 at 7:18 pm

    Maybe Bill is making it easier for Big Dems to walk away from Barry.

    Is it starting to be COOL to be anti-obama? If so, we have been cool for 5 years.
    lol we were cool before cool was cool.lol 🙂

  136. Meanwhile, Michael Goodwin of the NY Post beat the NY Times by four days. He outs the Times as “state mouthpieces”:

    “The articles revealed details of top-level meetings and quoted the president’s comments. They were so gushingly favorable to him that it’s clear they were based on authorized leaks by the White House designed to make Obama look tough against terror. Flattery was part of the bargain.”

    Here’s the whole piece:

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/bam_bo_shoots_off_his_mouth_0L8alyVlNcNhNu0dVnIR2I

    Bam-bo shoots off his mouth
    =======================

    by Michael Goodwin
    June 3, 2012

    Panic is never pretty. When it involves a politician scrambling desperately to stay afloat, it is ugly. When it involves a president of the United States trading national-security secrets for political gain, it is obscene.

    Twice last week, The New York Times published insider accounts of Obama-administration decisions. One involved “kill lists” of terrorists targeted by drones. The other described cyberwarfare attacks against Iran.

    The articles revealed details of top-level meetings and quoted the president’s comments. They were so gushingly favorable to him that it’s clear they were based on authorized leaks by the White House designed to make Obama look tough against terror. Flattery was part of the bargain.

    So we learned the president insists on giving final approval to each target, a “grim debating society” that tests his “principles.” We learned he “is a student of writings on war by Augustine and Thomas Aquinas” and follows the “just war theories of Christian philosophers.” Adviser John Brennan, described as a “grizzled” son of Irish immigrants, is compared “to a priest whose blessing has become indispensable” to Obama.

    Naturally, campaign guru David Axelrod attends these “Terror Tuesday” meetings. Not that politics is involved, of course.

    This is more than an unseemly spiking of the football. This is reckless politicking that reflects an his “anything goes” approach to November: Nothing is sacred except four more years.

    The Times also outed Israel as our partner in launching the Stuxnet virus against Iran’s nuclear computers. While the United States and Israel were long suspected, the article shredded any deniability.

    The Allies broke German military codes in World War II, but it remained secret until the 1970s. Now our president leaks secrets in real time.

    The Times says the virus program, code named Olympic Games, started under President George W. Bush and was an effort to stop Iran from getting the bomb. While Bush “had little credibility,” the Times says, Obama “concluded that when it came to stopping Iran, the United States had no other choice.”

    See, when Bush does it, it’s bad; when Obama does it, it’s good. Give the Times a gold star for its campaign contribution.

    The paper also hinted that one or more Iranian technicians helped introduce the virus into the computers.

    I asked Rep. Pete King, the GOP chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, if he saw anything wrong with the leaks. King had plenty to say:

    “It’s a pattern that goes back two years, starting with the Times Square bomber, where somebody in the federal government, probably the FBI, leaked his name before he was captured. That’s why he tried to leave the country — he knew they were on to him.

    “They did it with the movie about Osama bin Laden, leaking all kinds of operational details that are supposed to remain secret and setting up the producer with a member of the SEALs. They mentioned we had DNA, which is how the Pakistanis focused on the doctor they arrested.

    “And now this. It’s like two press releases coming from the Oval Office. It’s unheard of. It puts our people at risk and gives information to the enemy. And it gives our allies a reason not to work with us because what they do might show up on the front page of The New York Times.”

    King said it was “amateur hour” in the White House, and it surely is. But this is more than inexperience.

    These authorized leaks go to the heart of integrity and presidential character. With the economy stuck in stall and with even leading Democrats bucking their attacks on Mitt Romney, Obama and Axelrod appear ready to abandon all principles in a frenetic quest for victory.

    It is shocking, and it is June. One can only imagine the outrages they will unleash in the coming months to preserve their hold on power.

  137. foxyladi14
    – we were cool before cool was cool.lol 🙂

    —-
    Yup and that would make admin practically – born cool.

  138. Admin at the top wrote:

    Summarize. Bill Clinton’s candidates badly beat up Obama’s candidates last night in the primaries
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&

    in NJ, Pascrell did indeed crush Obama-lover Rothman’s nuts, 2-1 ratio. The Democratic infrastructure was livid with Rothman, who passed up fighting a strong Republican Scott Garrett, and actually moved out of his district (he lived in Fair Lawn NJ, where I grew up!) to fight long time Dem stalwart Bill Pascrell.

    yesterday, NY Times had this:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/nyregion/bill-pascrell-defeats-steve-rothman-in-new-jersey.html

    Pascrell Wins Duel of House Democrats in New Jersey
    ======================

    By KATE ZERNIKE
    Published: June 5, 2012

    PATERSON, N.J. — In a hard-fought race that pitted two Democrats and onetime friends against each other, Representative Bill Pascrell Jr. won the primary in the Ninth Congressional District on Tuesday.

    With 90 percent of precincts reporting, Mr. Pascrell had 64 percent of the vote, beating Representative Steve Rothman, with 36 percent, according to The Associated Press.

    The Ninth District, in northern New Jersey, is one of a handful of newly shaped Congressional districts across the country with Democrats facing each other because of election maps redrawn after the 2010 census.

    The race was exceptional in that one of the candidates, Mr. Rothman, moved in order to challenge a fellow Democrat. And not just any Democrat, but one with whom he had shared dinners and commutes to Washington over 16 years together in Congress.

    A result was the kind of bitter campaign usually seen between two parties, with negative advertising, furious accusations of betrayal and voter suppression, and visits from prominent surrogates. Mr. Pascrell had a rally on Friday with former President Bill Clinton. And Mr. Rothman, the first in New Jersey’s delegation to endorse Barack Obama in 2008, campaigned with the president’s chief political adviser, David Axelrod.

    Taking the gymnasium stage to the theme song from “Rocky” at Passaic County Community College, Mr. Pascrell, 75, began simply, “We did it!” and then theatrically rolled up the sleeves of his white dress shirt.

    “My parents always told me not to start fights, but to know how to end them,” he said. “Tonight, we did just that.”

    In the nearby 10th District, which includes Newark, Donald M. Payne Jr. won a six-way race for the seat left open by the death of his father in March. His closest contenders were Nia Gill, a state senator who asked voters to make her the only woman in the state’s Congressional delegation, and Ron Rice Jr., who serves on the Newark Municipal Council, of which Mr. Payne is president.

    In November, Mr. Pascrell will face the winner of the Republican primary on Tuesday, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, the author of “Kosher Sex” and a memoir of his time as spiritual adviser to Michael Jackson. Rabbi Boteach won a three-way race.

    But the district heavily favors the Democrat in the general election, and the party’s primary had become the state’s most closely watched campaign.

    Mr. Pascrell’s victory was a triumph of assiduous retail politicking and an aggressive get-out-the-vote effort, particularly in his hometown, Paterson, the state’s third largest city.

    The demographics of the newly configured district favored Mr. Rothman. Just over half its residents had been in the district he represented before the lines were redrawn.

    In Bergen County, where most voters in the reshaped Ninth District live, Mr. Rothman had the so-called line, the party blessing that translates into a favorable ballot position, with his name alongside President Obama’s as the official Democratic candidate.

    But analysts warned all along against counting out Mr. Pascrell and his love for a street fight. His campaign pinned its hopes on increasing turnout in Paterson, a largely poor, immigrant city where he had been mayor. The campaign said it had registered 10,000 new Democrats there.

    That strategy appeared to have worked, with campaign operatives reporting high turnout in the city and relatively low turnout in Englewood, where Mr. Rothman was once mayor.

    The two men, both elected to Congress in 1996, began their battle after New Jersey’s redistricting commission, faced with eliminating one of the state’s 13 districts, moved Mr. Rothman’s home in Fair Lawn into the Fifth District, which has slightly favored Republicans. It is now represented by Scott Garrett, who is almost invariably labeled “a Tea Party darling” in local papers and blog posts.

    Mr. Pascrell, who has extensive political connections in the state — his former chief of staff was on the redistricting commission — was given the Ninth, a heavily Democratic district.

    Rather than run against Mr. Garrett, Mr. Rothman, 59, opted to move and run against Mr. Pascrell. This caused consternation for New Jersey Democrats who thought both men had served the state well in Congress, and for national Democrats, who were trying to win 25 House seats needed to retake the majority.

    The party’s Congressional leaders beseeched Mr. Rothman to challenge Mr. Garrett instead of one of his own, arguing that even if he lost, he would be a hero to the party should he decide to run for the United States Senate, as he has said he would like to.

    Mr. Pascrell relentlessly accused Mr. Rothman of being too weak to take on the real fight, against a conservative Republican. Mr. Rothman argued that much of the Ninth District included his former constituents — even if his house and district offices were in the Fifth.

    He argued he was “the Democrats’ Democrat,” trying to paint Mr. Pascrell as aligned with Republicans on health care, abortion and taxes.

    But the two largest newspapers in the district, The Star-Ledger of Newark and The Record of Hackensack, both endorsed Mr. Pascrell. They criticized Mr. Rothman for fighting against a fellow Democrat rather than a Republican, and for running misleading ads that edited footage to suggest Mr. Pascrell had supported Republican positions on taxes.

  139. The obliogatory BO blow-job joke clip.


    Honestly, this guy is a friggin PERV! Anyone else remember the 2008 campaign clip when he was aboard a plane with a gaggle of giggling journo-babes standing with his right leg raised on an empty seat and displaying his puny jewels?

    He is a sick fothermucker. Notice LSM spinning furiously to convince people BO was not aware of the double entendre?

    Yeah, the guy who confesses to having been a pot head and a cokehead, the guy who wrote obscene poetry about the brown stain on pops underwear, the guy with the perpetual middle finger in the air dissing HRC during the campaign, the guy who played the song “I got 99 problems but a bytch ain’t one of them” had no idea of the crude meaning behind his words?

    Gimmeabreak.

    We now have a mad drone crazy perv in the WH. Thanks dims.

  140. the first thing he will do is throw out the professors and poitical operatives who run this administration and bring in business people.

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

    Sounds like a choice between two revolving doors. The professors will go out with grants for academe, the business people will go out with favors for their own cronies.

  141. “The worst of it though, is it pre empted single payer–which is what this country needs–and that was its biggest sin.”
    ********
    That was/is the primary purpose of Obamacare.

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

    And the primary purpose of nominating Obama, was to keep Hillary out.

  142. I will credit Romeny and/or his handlers for this line: when I become president, I will look at what every government agency is doing and ask is it worth borrowing from China (and by inference posterity) to continue funding this (or should we opt for slash and burn). In the private sector, government too, your biggest cost center is employees, so when it becomes necessary for the survival of the organization–as it does in any salvage operation, you have to start there.

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

    When done at state and local levels by GOP elected recently, this put a great many women out of work (most government employees cut were women) — which the GOP then blamed on ‘Obama’s war on women’.

  143. How many other good and useful and needed things could we be doing with that money? Why is it that we can’t (mostly) solve one problem, and then turn that money and attention to the next challenge? It’s because the stupid left insists on any govt problem-solving entity becoming a permanent, ever-growing bureaucracy that is sacrosanct. So if we want to do anything else, we are going to have to find even more money, and squeeze some more from the taxpayers.

    I’m all for govt doing good and useful things. But it is impossible to do that if every single undertaking inevitably becomes a permanent and ever-expanding part of the budget.

    I don’t dislike our overwhelming bureacracies because I don’t want to help the country or accomplish good things. I dislike them because they unnecessarily suck up funds that could be used to meet the next challenge.

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

    Apparently by ‘we’ you mean the government. Romney’s ‘slash and burn’ consists of firing all the employees (mostly secretaries) of the agencies he dislikes. Send them out to unemployment, then decide what ‘next challenge’ or ‘good and useful and needed thing’ would be worth re-hiring them for?

    Somehow I doubt that’s what Hillary did when she took over the State Dept.

  144. Shadowfax,

    I couldn’t pull it up on C-Soan and then went out so I didn’t catch it. Probably another stonewalling stalling show with Issa doing nothing.

    I did read that Holder has been powowing with Axelrod and the WH PR people to get his message right.

  145. Enjoy dessert, via Obama protecting Mark Halperin:

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2116715-1,00.html

    With five months until Election Day, Barack Obama faces a grim new reality: Republicans now believe Mitt Romney can win, and Democrats believe Obama can lose … Last week’s anemic job-creation and economic-growth data was sandwiched between two Bill Clinton specials: in one television interview, the 42nd President lauded Romney’s business record as “sterling”; in another, he veered from the Obama line on the extension of Bush-era tax cuts … The failure to unseat Wisconsin’s Republican governor Scott Walker in a recall election was another bad sign for Democrats since it will rev up conservatives nationwide, including the kind of millionaires who gave big bucks to Walker’s effort … Veteran Democratic strategists from previous presidential bids and on Capitol Hill now wonder if the Obama re-election crew is working with the right message … The White House remains on a rough political trajectory, with a potentially adverse Supreme Court decision on the Obama health care law looming, additional bad economic news from Europe coming and more worrisome polling pending … Another danger for the President: the media freak show. Stalking that circus’ center ring is Matt Drudge, whose caustic website continues to help drive the news cycle with an emphasis on negative, mocking items about Obama and Vice President Joe Biden and their wives. The latest sign of Drudge’s potency: Ed Klein, the author of the virulently anti-Obama book The Amateur, was barred from major TV appearances and mostly ignored by the mainstream media, but the book’s prominence on Drudge’s website propelled it to the No. 1 slot on the New York Times nonfiction list.

  146. The Amateur, was barred from major TV appearances and mostly ignored by the mainstream media, but the book’s prominence on Drudge’s website propelled it to the No. 1 slot on the New York Times nonfiction list.
    ——————-
    Children who believe in monsters shut their eyes and the monster goes away. How child-like our mainstream media is. Even self censorship no longer works. I suppose I could be whimsical about it and say try the truth for a change, but I know that is beyond their capacity. They are not interested in the truth, they are solely interested in protecting their power and lifestyle. But even that is problematic now because since 2008 they have been living a lie, and are learning to their dismay that because of that they are no longer trusted. That is the price they pay for their faustian pact, and the more they double down on that lie the more their emanations become a tale told by an idiot signifying nothing.

  147. “He is pussy footing around.”
    *******
    BAR doesn’t pussy foot:

    “Conclusion: “Our president is a totally amoral psychopath, and the revelation of his condition has not hurt his popularity.”
    ——————
    The pussyfooter I was referring to was Rendell. Mincing words. Whatever Obama does, he does with specific intent and malice aforethought. This assumes of course that he meets the McNaughton test for sanity, and I am not sure he does.

  148. “Koch Whore”
    ——————-
    How bad is that? Surely they are not anti American to the core like Soros. And, NB they do employ Americans which is more than I can say for Obama’s mentor. The goal of the Obama campaign is to make Romney a vulture capitalist to make people believe that he destroys the jobs of successful companies. The weight of the evidence, however, suggests the opposite which is that he started a major company–Staples which has given employment to thousands of Americans, and he has saved companies and jobs which would have gone under had he not intervened. In salvage operations you save what you can, but depending on the how bad the situation is, there are parts that cannot be saved. In my youth I was part of a team that saved a burning processing vessel, i.e. The Yardarm Knot, which took the life of one young man. We had to destroy parts of the ship to save the whole. The alternative under consideration was to haul the vessel out beyond the three mile limit and scuttle her.

  149. It is a lifetime exercise in futility to cross examine someone like Holder at length UNLESS you have impeachment material. You can go the other direction and try to prove that his explanations are not plausible, but I am not sure in this instance what that gets you. That is why I suggested above that the questions be tailored in such a way as not to elicit truth from a man who steadfastly refuses to avoid it, but to recount for a two minute video all his past evasions, nauances and failure to cooperate with Congress, and use it for campaign purposes. Evidently, Boehner is unwilling to issue a subpoena, for what I assume are the reasons I suggested above.

  150. wbb

    Isn’t there any way Issa can force Holder to give up the info he has either blacked out or withheld?

    Would he have to slap him with a contempt order or something like that, and why would Boner tell them not to do it? (I am not a lawyer so I don’t know the right terms.)

    Could Issa go over Boner’s head?

    This seems like a stalemate situation if Issa has no power.

  151. The following movie reminds me of the current moment in history. We are beset by a false messiah, an uber corrupt elite class, a perverse media and an army of blind ignorant bots amid the ruins of civilization. At times like this you begin to realize that while normally art imitates life, there are also times when it operates in the reverse.


  152. “However I believe it is far more than just that. He has reportedly told conservatives that they have six months to get this thing turned around. Just six months. If that is true, then we force Obama and big media to start telling the truth about our economic situation. If we let them go on lying we will go off the financial cliff. As a patriot, he does not want that to happen because millions will be hurt. Big media and the Obama campaign are one in the same, so we must hold both of their feet to the fire.”
    *********
    I think that you have the correct analysis of Bill’s recent behavior. I suspect that he is getting the real opinions of both Repubs and Dems about where the economy is headed and the few who aren’t blinded by ideology are shitting their underwear.
    ****
    “Nearly half (49.1 percent) of the American population lives in households that received some form of government benefit in the first quarter of 2011, the Wall Street Journal reported last month, citing US Census data.

    This number has grown steadily since 1983, when it was 30 percent, and has jumped drastically since the start of the recession in 2008, rising 5 percentage points in only three years.”
    **
    Demand for food stamps has grown dramatically as a result of the economic crisis. The Congressional Budget office said in April that 45 million people received food stamps in 2011, a 70 percent increase since 2007.
    ****
    Barack Obama already has the dubious distinction of being the only president in postwar history to reduce government jobs during a recession, an achievement about which he has boasted. But that is just the beginning.

    Obama and the Republicans have already agreed to $1.2 trillion in federal budget cuts starting next year. The Congressional Budget Office warned in May that these cuts, together with the scheduled expiration of Bush-era tax cuts, are likely to cause the US economy to contract by 1.3 percent in the first half of 2013.

    etc. etc.

    The “oh so clever people” who are pushing back at WJC with “he’s 65 and not in good health, blah, blah, so you have to excuse his crazy rambling, etc. when he say we are in a recession, etc.”

    I suspect that Bill has been given the talk on 1.3% or worse contraction of the economy and he is not going to continue the good team player role that was assigned to him.

  153. Shadowfax,

    Here are some highlights from the F&F hearing.

    Holder, Conyers, Lee and the entire AA contingent are shucking and jiving trying to spin, prolong and conceal Holder’s guilt. Check the last clip. What a shameful display.

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/06/07/watch_highlights_of_fast_and_furious_questions_to_holder

    BTW, anyone else notice how strange and alien looking the POS’s inner circle are from Jarrett to Holder, Mooch to Axeldouche, Messina to Wasserman-Shultz?

  154. jtjames
    June 7th, 2012 at 9:39 am
    WOW! from politico left me kinda of speechless.

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

    either he is a colossal p_g or karma is really out to get him…

  155. Reports of assaults on women in Tahrir, the epicenter of the uprising that forced Hosni Mubarak to step down last year, have been on the rise with a new round of mass protests to denounce a mixed verdict against the ousted leader and his sons in a trial last week.
    ****

    Is it just me, or is the article posted above trying to connect protests in support of Murark to the increase of violence on women and NOT the Islamic zealots who took office?

  156. Get a load of this article, pay attention to the bottom, asking for donations!
    **********
    CNSNews

    Holder Claims Emails Using Words ‘Fast and Furious’ Don’t Refer to Operation Fast and Furious
    By Matt Cover
    June 7, 2012

    Attorney General Eric Holder. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

    (CNSNews.com) – Attorney General Eric Holder claimed during congressional testimony today that internal Justice Department emails that use the phrase “Fast and Furious” do not refer to the controversial gun-walking operation Fast and Furious.

    Under questioning from Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who read excerpts of the emails at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Justice Department oversight, Holder claimed that the phrase “Fast and Furious” did not refer to Fast and Furious but instead referred to another gun-walking operation known as “Wide Receiver.”

    However, the emails refer to both programs — “Fast and Furious” and the “Tucson case,” from where Wide Receiver was launched — and reveal Justice Department officials discussing how to handle media scrutiny when both operations become public.

    Among three of the emails (see Jason Weinstein Email Fast, Furious.pdf), the second, dated “October 17, 2010 11:07 PM,” was sent by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein to James Trusty and it states: “Do you think we should have Lanny participate in press when Fast and Furious and Laura’s Tucson case [Wide Receiver] are unsealed? It’s a tricky case, given the number of guns that have walked, but it is a significant set of prosecutions.”

    In the third email, dated Oct. 18, 2010, James Trusty writes back to Weinstein: “I think so, but the timing will be tricky, too. Looks like we’ll be able to unseal the Tucson case sooner than the Fast and Furious (although this may be just the difference between Nov. and Dec).”

    “It’s not clear how much we’re involved in the main F and F [Fast and Furious] case,” reads the email, “but we have Tucson [Wide Receiver] and now a new unrelated case with [redacted] targets. It’s not any big surprise that a bunch of US guns are being used in MX [Mexico], so I’m not sure how much grief we get for ‘guns walking.’ It may be more like ‘Finally, they’re going after people who sent guns down there.’” (See Jason Weinstein Email Fast, Furious.pdf)

    Operation Wide Receiver was run out of Tucson, Ariz., between 2006 and 2007 by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), a division of the Justice Department.

    In his testimony, Holder said that the emails only referred to Operation Wide Receiver.

    Holder told the committee: “That refers to Wide Receiver, not to Fast and Furious. The e-mail that you [Rep. Chaffetz] just read [between Trusty and Weinstein] – now this is important – that email referred to Wide Receiver, it did not refer to Fast and Furious. That has to be noted for the record.”

    Chaffetz, after a long pause, said, “No, it doesn’t. It says Fast and Furious. ‘Do you think we should have Lanny participate in press when Fast and Furious and Laura’s Tucson case [Wide Receiver] are unsealed?’ It’s specific to Fast and Furious. That is not true, Mr. Attorney General. I’m happy to share it with you.”

    U.S. Border Agent Brian A. Terry, shot and killed on Dec. 14, 2010, near Rio Rico, Arizona, while trying to catch bandits who target illegal immigrants. (AP Photo)

    Operation Fast and Furious was carried out by the ATF. It began in the fall of 2009 and continued into early 2011, during which time the federal government purposefully allowed known or suspected gun smugglers to purchase guns at federally licensed firearms dealers in Arizona. The government did not seek to abort these gun purchases, intercept the smugglers after the purchases, or recover the guns they had purchased.

    In some cases, as the government expected they would, the smugglers delivered the guns to Mexican drug trafficking organizations. Two rifles sold to a smuggler in the course of Operation Fast and Furious in January 2010 ended up at the scene of the murder of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in December 2010.

    CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like NPR. CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like PBS.

    CNSNews.com relies on individuals like you to help us report the news the liberal media distort and ignore. Please make a tax-deductible gift to CNSNews.com today. Your continued support will ensure that CNSNews.com is here reporting THE TRUTH, for a long time to come. It’s fast, easy and secure.

  157. The comments on this AoS thread are a MUST read. It’s about the gall of the Obots trying to call Bill Clinton sorta senile. It’s a very conservative site, so they have no love for Bill, but they understand what is going on better than the Dims do.

    Yeah, there’s a smattering of insults, but the comments are a freaking scream. Mostly along the lines of “Those know-nothing scuzbags done fucked with the wrong Democrat. Dawg’s gonna rip off their heads and shit down their neck. With a smile.”

    GO READ THE COMMENTS. I’m laughing my ass off. 😀

    http://minx.cc/?post=329944

  158. SHV
    June 7th, 2012 at 7:28 pm
    ——————
    The introduction of drone aircraft over US soil and the monitoring of our communications system, which were originally intended to deal with a potential terrorist attack, could also be adopted to the urban warfare that could erupt in the event of a collapse in our financial system. They tend to support the hypothesis as well. I would rather be delusional on this one than right. I will let you in on a little secret. If McCain had won the campaign there was talk that Sarah would drop out and he would ask Hillary to be his vice president. There was some legal research done in case that happen in the aftermath of the October 2008 collapse. Party differences fade into thin air when the survival of this nation is at stake–a fact that blind ideologues of the left and right cannot get their brains around. But faced with such a contingency the best leaders are tapped regardless of party affiliation. Warren Bennis at USC graduate school wrote a book entitled “Organizing Genius” and in it he makes the point that when the chips are down all the things that seem to matter get put aside, the focus on the problem becomes lazer like, and when those conditions are in place those teams can make a dent in the universe.

  159. “This is more than an unseemly spiking of the football. This is reckless politicking that reflects an his “anything goes” approach to November: Nothing is sacred except four more years.”
    _______________

    Very odd, the long leash given Obama and Holder- silence from the realm, giving Hollywood celebs access to strategic National Security areas, leaking classified information pertaining to Seal strategies used in covert operations, allowing a classified US made Drone landing unscathed in enemy territory, bending federal law, protecting illegal aliens from prosecution and deportation against sovereign state law, Fast and Furious gun running.. and on and on and on… Solyndra and 2 or 3 other solar companies gone into bankruptcy after funding with TaxPayer dollars. (add your own seditious activities undermining US security committed by the Obama Sole Train here)

    The continued silence of the Issa investigation tells me they will eventually bundle up all of the treasonous activities some of which I am positive have never aired through a news cycle or been made public committed by Obama and his co-conspirators namely Holder et al; borrowing for a moment Thor’s Hammer imagine wielding it it through the air under the RICO ACT, taking these criminal scum off the street, out of the public view, sequestering them under arrest until Trial.

    There can be no other reason for Issa dragging his feet except his desire for specific timing exploiting the full effect of the news event that will follow after the announcement of an indictment. Hopefully taking them all down in one felt swoop in an iron clad well organized case bursting at the seams with criminal activity.

    Oh- Happy Day! If, after all this time, Issa folds like a cheap suit and doesn’t follow through with something that will put these criminals behind bars- then he should be run out of town on a rail.

  160. And by the garbage I mean Obama, but much more than him. The people who selected him at the top level must be put in a cage, where they cannot do anything more to destroy this country. I would like to see Soros extradited back to Hungary and held to answer for his actions during World War II, and then wisked off to Britain to answer for his actions in breaking the British pound in 1992, and then to Singapore to answer for his actions in generating the Asian crisis in 1997, then to Russia to answer for his actions there, then to France where he has already been convicted of financial crimes, and then back to that Manhattan court room where he is held to answer for his breach of the covenant to marry and god knows what else. I would like to be her agent and arrange a book deal. But it isnt just him either–it is people like Wolf, Dimon, Goldman etc. They are part of the problem, not the solution.

  161. Bravo Mrs. Smith. A criminal enterprise with innumerable predicate acts. I know we can get past sovereign immunity. It is the lying NYT that may present the biggest hurdle. We must make sure owner young Arthur Occs Shaltzberg finds a new distraction in his life. Caroline Kennedy is gone. His present girlfriend has been around 2 months and that is a world record. Then we can open a portal to the truth. Maybe.

  162. The people who put him in there need to get him out. All contributing to Obama should stop. Get his ass off the campaign trail and back to Washington and deal with this looming crisis.

  163. Anyone know the breakdown of the vote in WI?
    How many independents voted for Walker, women, blue collar whites, etc?

    I don’t see the darn breakdown of the votes in my own state!

    Who’s monkeying with the darn election results? That must mean Barry stinks to high heaven except with the most intellectually challenged of voters.

  164. It’s the Repub leadership that won’t let Issa indict Holder. I think they believe the public would not react kindly and would turn and vote for the fraud in protest. Greta w really pushing Issa for an answer on it and he was dancing pretty fast. He seemed to say so much, that he had additional hearings that would explain it to the public so that they would understand.

    We know the MM are not covering this but for FOX.

  165. I heard about this proof on Hannity, found this on ACE…

    *******************
    Shock:

    Contrary To His Campaign’s Claims (and Credulous Reportage By Friendly Journalists), Barack Obama Did Indeed Join the Socialist “New Party”
    —Ace

    I’m sure you’re as surprised as I am that the press missed a few things in 2008.

    Stanley Kurtz got the minutes of the meeting.

    In late October 2008, when I wrote here at National Review Online that Obama had been a member of the New Party, his campaign sharply denied it, calling my claim a “crackpot smear.” Fight the Smears, an official Obama-campaign website, staunchly maintained that “Barack has been a member of only one political party, the Democratic Party.” I rebutted this, but the debate was never taken up by the mainstream press.
    Recently obtained evidence from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society now definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party. He also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.

    Advertisement
    Minutes of the meeting on January 11, 1996, of the New Party’s Chicago chapter read as follows:

    Barack Obama, candidate for State Senate in the 13th Legislative District, gave a statement to the membership and answered questions. He signed the New Party “Candidate Contract” and requested an endorsement from the New Party. He also joined the New Party.
    Consistent with this, a roster of the Chicago chapter of the New Party from early 1997 lists Obama as a member, with January 11, 1996, indicated as the date he joined.

    Breitbart’s piece castigates Ben Smith for believing the campaign’s apparent lies, and for dismissing it as another right-wing smear.

    I’m willing to give him a break on that. Sometimes, people are simply misled.

    But now that there are records from the New Party itself, will Ben Smith correct the record?

  166. Thanks Gonzotx.
    Greta did try to nail Issa down and he blamed the stall on Boner.
    Either Boner is a chicken or maybe he is trying to make the timeline closer to the election.

    My guess goes with the chicken theory.

  167. I beg your indulgence while I imagine what I would say to those who installed Obama–not Soros, not Oprah, they are a closed society, and would never recant. I am taking about those who have a commitment to this country and wish to preserve their good name. That would include that grandson of Roosevelt who presided over the RBC, some money men and some in political leadership and some in the media. That would be may audience, I speak to each of them privately, and here is approximately what I would say.

    I would begin by commending them for their service to the country and their loyalty to the party, noting any and all relevant examples.

    I would then say in the spirit of that loyalty I need to speak to you about a crisis which is imminent and cannot wait for the election.

    I would describe it as a crisis in two parts: first the ship of state is heading into a typhoon, and second we have no captain at the helm, in the wheel house or even on the boat. He is MIA.

    I would remind each of those individuals that he is partly responsible for the selection of Mr. Obama, over Hillary who had the experience and tenacity that he obviously lacks.

    I would then say that because they were instrumental in installing him, they have a special obligation to approach him now and tell him that a second term is not in the cards.

    I would pause and let them respond. Their initial instinct will be to say it is not his fault and it is up to the voters to decide the issue. I would tell them that we cannot wait for the voters, and we need to engineer a soft landing.

    I would remind them that the markets have already given a vote of no confidence in Mr. Obama, and they are about to do it again, with a second downgrade. I would ask them to imagine how that will impact our entire society, undermine consumer confidence and increase the risk of default.

    If they continued to resist then I would tell them that up to this point, they have enjoyed the benefits of anonymity, but if the system does collapse between now and whenever, and they did not act to remove him, then the public would know that they not only installed him, but refused to remove him when to avert the ensuing crisis.

    That in turn would not be good for them, their companies or their families. On the contrary, their name would be mud.

  168. “And by the garbage I mean Obama, but much more than him. The people who selected him at the top level must be put in a cage, where they cannot do anything more to destroy this country”
    ********
    All choices are bad. Barry is the symptom of the underlying rot in the former Democratic Party. If Obama doesn’t have a Philip Queeg moment during the next five months, I think that the cabal that selected a sociopathic fraud to be President will remain in place.

  169. wbboei
    June 7th, 2012 at 11:24 pm

    I beg your indulgence while I imagine what I would say to those who installed Obama

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

    Excellent.

  170. Stanley Kurtz got the minutes of the meeting.

    In late October 2008, when I wrote here at National Review Online that Obama had been a member of the New Party, his campaign sharply denied it, calling my claim a “crackpot smear.”

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

    Assuming this is legitimate — we’d have more credibility with this realistic charge if we hadn’t been crying wolf by pushing the really far out conspiracy theories.

  171. BAHAHAHA! From a commenter at Althouse:

    Thank You Letter to the Left
    Posted on June 7, 2012 by The Dubuque Town Crier

    To all leftists, occupiers, unionistas and malcontents, Thank you!

    What an election! We couldn’t have done it without you. Without your tantrums, outbursts and boorish behavior we might have stayed home for this election. Without your filthy, pot smoking hemp -headed minions occupying and violating the Capitol we might have been complacent. Without your obnoxious protests, boycotts and other actions from your union playbook, we might have sat this one out.

    But you couldn’t hold back. You couldn’t restrain yourselves and behave like adults. You couldn’t accept the 2010 election results. We sat and watched as you erupted in a juvenile hissy fit that embarrassed Wisconsin. The spectacle you created is what motivated us. And thanks to your ill-mannered behavior, we won. We turned out. Big time! And now we are organized and energized. Committed. “All in”. And we aren’t going away. We now have our own organizations (no dues required), an army of volunteers and the means to communicate. And countless new sources of funding, including a donor base from all 50 states. And we have “iverifythe recall” to ferret out your infiltrators in our future local elections.

    So thank you Mike Tate, Graeme Zielinski, Fred “Loonie” Levenhagen, Ismael Ozanne, Maryanne Sumi, Noble Ray, Charles Tubbs, Joanne Kloppenberg, Segway Boy, John Chisolm, public employee union members, UW TA’s, WEAC, SEIU, MTI, AFSCME Council 24 in Union Grove and WI prison guards,. Thanks for the death threats, the intimidation, the bullying, belligerence, thuggery and goonish behavior.

    The lack of ethics and the failure to enforce rules and laws.

    Thank you for putting your selfish, greedy motives on display for all taxpayers to see.

    Your antics might have made you feel good but they didn’t make you look good.

    They sickened the rest of us.

    Thank you Shirley Abrahamson and Ann Walsh Bradley. Your petty politics woke us up.

    Thanks you Miles Kristan for dumping the beer on Robin Vos’s head.

    Thank you University doctors for writing the phony excuses; Madison teachers for calling in sick or dragging your students to the protests without permission.

    Thank you Katherine Windels for making death threats against the Governor.

    The noontime capitol singers who taunted Sheboygan high school students.

    Thank you WEA Trust for raping Wisconsin taxpayers.

    Thank you Gwen Moore for your embarrassing minstrel show.

    And thanks all of you for harassing the Walker family at their private home.

    You have all been exposed.

    Your tactics have been rejected.

    Your bad behavior has been forever captured on You Tube.

    Thank you Peter Barca and fellow Assembly members for donning your foolish orange T-shirts and screaming “shame” at legislators just doing their jobs.

    Thank you Mark Miller and all 14 senators for fleeing the state and making fools of yourselves in the process. Illinois need a few more village idiots.

    Thanks for showing us what democracy doesn’t look like.

    And Mayor Barrett. How grateful we are that you chose one low road after another in your issue-less campaign against the Governor. This was your strike three. You are out. Take a seat on the bench and stay there. I have a hunch this was your final at-bat.

    All of you helped turn Wisconsin permanently red.

    Your Governor, Scott Walker, will not just complete his first term, he is all but assured as many future terms as he seeks. He will be your governor for a long, long time. Get used to it. And his national “rock star” status just might lead him to be your President some day.

    Just think, it couldn’t have happened without you!

    So to all of you blue fisters, thank you from the bottom of my happy, red heart.

    Sincerely,

    A Wisconsin taxpayer

  172. I would expect some of these Obama lovers to get all huffy and say you have no right to threaten me.

    I would tell them this is not a threat, it is an opportunity for you to get off the hook here.

    I did not put you on this hook. I did not encourage you to install the most unqualified man in the universe at the worst possible time. That you did all by your lonesome.

    If I meant you any harm, I would wait until after things imploded and then blame you. Instead, I am giving you an opportunity to redeem yourself, and more important than that, to save the country.

  173. Shadowfax
    June 7th, 2012 at 7:06 pm
    ——————-
    Shadow, the fix on this thing was in 6 months ago. I learned about it on a conservative site. And I posted something about it here. The fact that the Republican leadership decided not to pursue this matter six months ago, when many of them had written off the possibility of beating Obama suggest that the reason for this refusal to move forward must lie elsewhere. As indicated, I strongly suspect that they are blackmailing Boehner. Part of the reason I say that is because a couple years ago, when he started to get tough there were rumors that Vanity Fair, which is one of the hit men for Obama would be doing a piece on John which would not be flattering and after that he backed off. That magazine did the same thing to Bill to force Hillary out. The hitman is that hairlip Tod Purdam who is married to Deede Myers, ironically enough. To your question of what recourse does a committe chairman have to go over Boehner’s head. He could go to the leadership conference but unless they were ready to boot him and wanted to use that as a pretext they would back him. That is why I made the suggestion that I did above.

  174. In my opinion, Darryl Issa is a stand-up guy. If he had the green light he would take Holder down. I am certain that he is tough enough.

  175. I know Insider respects Holder. I do not. I have more respect for his relatives. Indeed the family resemblance is so strong that you can be sure they brought the right baby polecat home from the hospital.

    ww.google.com/search?q=skunks&hl=en&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=DILRT4v5CceJ6QGsvvn4Ag&sqi=2&ved=0CIABELAE&biw=993&bih=619

  176. BASIL99
    June 7th, 2012 at 7:44 pm
    ———————–
    I keep telling you they are extraterrestrials yet you refuse to leeesen.

  177. All choices are bad. Barry is the symptom of the underlying rot in the former Democratic Party. If Obama doesn’t have a Philip Queeg moment during the next five months, I think that the cabal that selected a sociopathic fraud to be President will remain in place.
    ————————-
    I would agree unless someone with stature forces the issue, and introduces some personal risk into the equation for them. The thought of barbarians at the gate and the loss of reputation could be a catalyst.

  178. I said upthread the Tom Purdam is an ngsob, married to Deede Myers, and wrote a libelous article about Bill on behalf of the Obama campaign as part of the overall effort to force her to concede. He is wired to Axlerod. Turns out my recollection was accurate:
    ——————————————-
    From Wiki

    For the July 2008 issue of Vanity Fair, Purdum wrote a scathing article about former President of the United States Bill Clinton entitled “The Comeback Id.” The article analyzes Clinton’s post-presidency business dealings, behavior, and possible personal indiscretions, citing several anonymous current and former Clinton aides.[1]

    When asked about the article by Huffington Post writer Mayhill Fowler, Clinton said (in reference to Purdum): “He’s a really dishonest reporter…and I haven’t read (the article). There’s just five or six blatant lies in there. But he’s a real slimy guy.” When Fowler reminded Clinton that Purdum is married to his former press secretary, he responded: “That’s all right – he’s still a scumbag” and later added “He’s just a dishonest guy – can’t help it.”

    Well, just so you know I was not making it up.

    I went back to us after reading that turgid tendentious piece of crap Purdum wrote recently which fails to mention Hillary as one of the superstar of the cabinet and calls Janet–the system worked Neopolitiano super competent. He goes on to talk in some depth about how the modern presidency has evolved. One thing they do do right in a court room is lay the foundation for testimony. Laying the foundation means asking some questions to qualify the witness to the jury so they know he or she is someone who is knowledegable concerning the matter at issue. The SOB is a Princeton Graduate and worked for the NYT. Does that qualify him as an expert on the presidency? Not in my book. The fact that he is married to Deede Myers may give him some vicarious insight into the press secretary’s job, but not on the presidency itself. He is just another one of these opinionated high faleutin greeks like my new pal Westin who had no experience as a journalist but was picked to manage the ABC News organization. We do not need these unqualified elitists who have little grasp of the world outside the beltway and look down on the rest of us except when they are trying to peddle their books about how exciting it is to be part of big media.

  179. Not all book tours are bad however. Basil was asking about Ray Bradbury and I came across an article about him in Pajama Media by Roger L. Simon. He is good Roger. Bad Roger is Roger Simon without the L who is an Obama loving scumbag at Obama-loving Politico. East is east, west is west and ner the twain shall meet.
    ———————-
    Death Is A Lonely Business–My Recollections of Ray Bradbury

    By Roger L Simon

    Now that the dust is settling on the many Ray Bradbury encomiums and obituaries, let me share my memory of Ray, my first one anyway. I met the sci-fi master a few times over the years.

    To start, however, I must share something most of us authors know but don’t readily acknowledge. Book signings are an embarrassment. Most of the time you’re lucky to get twenty people. Sometimes you don’t even get two and end up signing books by yourself off in a corner.

    After one or two books’ worth of this kind of humiliation, the glamour of signings is gone and most authors see them as a chore for which you have to grit your teeth. I know I did.

    AdvertisementSo that was how I felt on December 1, 1985, when I drove reluctantly down to the Scene of the Crime, a now defunct mystery bookstore on Ventura Boulevard in Sherman Oaks in the Valley known as San Fernando — I’ll explain why I know the exact date in a minute — to sign my (then) latest Moses Wine detective novel, California Roll.

    But as I pulled up in my…. (can’t remember the car, but I do remember the date)… I noticed a line of people coming out of the bookstore. It was extraordinarily long and went round the block and up the other side. What was this? A Creedence Clearwater Revival concert? Magic Johnson signing basketballs? (Actually, I could hear a jazz band playing.)

    No, it was my book signing. But there was another author, to my surprise, signing with me – you guessed it, Ray Bradbury. I could see a giant photo of him plastered all over the store window next to a tiny snapshot of me.

    Ray had just written his first mystery – a yarn called Death Is a Lonely Business, set, as I learned, in Venice, California, 1949. It was also Ray’s first novel in many years, since Something Wicked This Way Comes.

    I slid past the line, explaining to the perplexed fans that I was also an author, and found the empty seat at the front next to Ray. I introduced myself – I wasn’t sure if he knew who I was or not – and stared at the stack of books in front of me. I had never seen one as tall of my own books, certainly at a signing. It was clear I had lucked out by signing with Ray.

    I felt a little intimidated, but he treated me like a brother and colleague, urging his many fans to buy my book as well as his. He was the rock star but he was generous to me then, even asked me questions as the “experienced” mystery author, referring the fans to me as the expert in the genre, such as I was. After all, I was on my fourth mystery.

    I sold more books that day, several hundred in my memory, than I ever have at any signing before or since (or am ever likely to).

    At the end, the woman who owned the store looked pretty satisfied. It was her idea to team up. Ray turned to me and suggested we sign books for each other to commemorate the event. I signed California Roll to him and my copy of Death Is a Lonely Business stands open at the computer as I type this. It is inscribed “FOR ROGER SIMON! WITH FRIENDLY WISHES FROM Ray Bradbury, Dec. 1, 1985.” The inscription is in block letters as I have typed them and the word “friendly” is underlined. Ray Bradbury is signed in cursive.

    After our work was done, Ray looked at me and said, “Would you mind driving me home?”

    I was taken aback at first, but held my tongue, long enough to learn what many others already knew.

    AdvertisementRay Bradbury, the great master of science fiction and the future, didn’t have a driver’s license. And, yes, he was a longtime resident of the city of the car, Los Angeles. (I found out subsequently that he wasn’t the only famous L.A. resident who didn’t drive. Among others were Mae West and Erich von Stroheim. Jack Kerouac, author of On the Road, also didn’t drive. But he lived in Massachusetts.)

    So I drove Ray home. I did that on a couple of other occasions, as I recall, when our paths crossed at writers’ events. A number of other literary-types I knew were similarly drafted. We would joke about it.

    Anyway, that’s my Ray Bradbury story. Now, in his honor, I am going to crawl into bed with a book – Death Is a Lonely Business.

    True enough.

  180. It is unclear to me why Darryl went on Gretas show. She is a terrific journalist, and I think she and her husband are sterling people. But Darryl should know that she would go after him on this, as well she should and inasmuch as Boener tied his hands there is no percentage in going on her show and dodging the question. I don’t get it. The guy that should go on their and answer those questions is the man himself Speaker Boehner.

  181. Jay Cost, Erickson and others have commented on the risk adverse nature of the Party Leadership–meaning John in the House and Mitch in the Senate. Conservative hate them both because they fold under pressure. If you listened to that audio I posted then you know that one of the lessons he deduced from the Walker victory is if the cause–and the survival of his state or this nation is surely that, then boldness rather than timidity is required. The Father of Modern Warfare, Clauswitz spoke directly to this issue in a chapter entitled boldness, in his seminal book Vom Kreig (On War):

    “Given the same amount of intelligence, timidity will do a thousand times more damage in war than audacity.”

  182. HillaryforTexas
    June 8th, 2012 at 1:15 am

    ADMIN, VodkaPundit has been reading Big Pink:
    ————————
    Admin is the best.

    But I have got to tell you that Greene is pretty good too. He is already starting to look at the electoral maps, which means he is thinking ahead. And as you say, he must be reading Big Pink because what he says squares with what Admin was saying before he wrote that piece.

    Apart from Bill Clinton’s genius and his love for this country which transcends politics, there is another asset which most people are unaware of. It is the art which conceals the art. It is a form of finesse which is akin to running between the blades of an electric fan without getting sliced. It is the ability to push all the right buttons and then say who? me? I never intended to do that! It is a variation on that show on BBC where Prime Minister Francis Urquart (FU for short), orchestrates a Machiavellian scheme and when the people he sets up comes running to him and complain he says “you may think that, but I really couldn’t comment.”

  183. Greene: It’s no secret that Clinton isn’t exactly a big fan of President Obama’s. Clinton might be the master of making other people mad, but he himself was red-faced pissed off after Team Obama accused him of racism during the 2008 primary fight. And for good reason, too. My personal take is, THAT WAS TEH MOMENT THE RACE CARD LOST ITS TRUMP. Playing it on Clinton, our “first black president”? Dumb move, Barack. (Emphasis added)
    ———————
    That is an important point that was totally lost on the Obama campaign, the dimocrat party and the media. They continued to play the race card against republicans (howard dean–they are the white peoples party), the tea party (CNN quest to find a racist in the tea party groups and their unsubstantiated claim that someone spit on the black caucus members when they crowded their informational picket line), white people (the Cambridge cop), and Tim Kaine (DNC)and Chris Van Holen (DNCC) continued to press that false charge up to the disastrous 2010 mid-term election) not realizing that is was alienating one of their core constituencies and destroying the democrat brand in the eyes of millions of voters. Obama–the post racial president has been an unmitigated disaster for the party to say nothing of the nation. I can honestly say that most people today do not fear being called a racist to the extent they once did, because most people understand that the gate swings both ways, and more often than not it is spurious. But the unintended consequence of the indiscriminate use of the term is to deplete the good will which once existed for black people and to consider that with the election of Obama the account owed them has been paid in full.

  184. I tend to agree with Greenes conclusion that Hillary will not run in 2016. The quid pro quo they are offering her is run as vp in 2012 and we will support you in 2016. She is very conscious of her personal appearance, and her lack of attention to that detail is not accidental. I think it is part of her answer to their entreaties. When she suspended her campaign, she asked her supporters what they thought she should do. During that time period she was depressed about what happened and told a friend I do not know whom I can trust anymore. Certainly that was true of Schumer and no doubt others, as the book Game Change makes clear. The job of president is rocky to begin with. The other party and media will tear you down. But when you cannot rely on people you regarded as friends to support you and fulfill their promises and instead they betray you, you have to wonder whether it is all worth it.

  185. Test your reading comprehensive skills here- Is Axelrod telling the Truth? Or is this another Axelrod tall tale after throwing a penny into the wishing well… wishing it was Republicans who had complained because Bill Clinton supported extending Bush Tax Cuts?
    __________________

    Bill Clinton apologizes for Bush tax cuts comments

    …snip…

    “Clinton also denied he is undermining Obama – as some Republicans have claimed – and said he supports the president’s reelection.”

    …snip…

    Wouldn’t Republicans jump for joy, but instead they complain about Clinton’s comment? Who are these complaining Republicans?

    oh, I see- it’s David Axelrod doing double duty as the self-appointed spokesman for Republicans giving us a history lesson.

    With this statement:

    …snip…

    “After Clinton’s interview was aired, top Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod appeared on CNN and said, “I’m not asking for an apology from Bill Clinton. I have deep admiration for Bill Clinton.”

    “Bill Clinton was the president in the early 90s when he said ‘we have to do something about these deficits, and it’s going to mean the wealthy have to pay a little more.’ Not one Republican in Congress supported him,” Axelrod said.

    Axelrod also sidestepped a question from Blitzer about conversations between the Obama and Clinton camps after Clinton’s off-message comments this week, as POLITICO reported.

    “Here’s what I know,” said the strategist, changing the subject. “Bill Clinton understands what it takes to grow this economy.”

    (Then Romney’s spokesman came out and defended Bill Clinton from his own party’s attempt by David Axelrod to publicly take Clinton to the woodshed!…) here:

    Romney senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom also appeared on CNN to respond to Clinton’s interview, telling Blitzer that “when the president [Bill Clinton] came out and said that Mitt Romney’s business career was sterling, I think he was speaking from the heart.”

    Last week, Clinton praised Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s record as “sterling” – a comment that was followed with an appearance on CNBC in which he claimed the economy was “in recession” and that delaying changes in the Bush tax cuts was “probably the best thing to do right now.”

    The president has said that he would veto any extension of the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $200,000 annually.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77178.html

  186. Leonara – thanks for the AL link.
    #######
    tee vee is talking about the leaks, but absolutely silent about Issa/Holder hearing yesterday.

    The follow WaPo is not news to us and I doubt “conservatives” were as principled as this woman claims. I place it here merely in celebration of its existence:

    Obama is killing the Democratic Party – Right Turn – The Washington Post
    …Rather than spin endless excuses and blame it all on money, liberal elites might want to reconsider tying themselves too tightly to Obama’s mast. They have already become quite whiny and sacrificed a good deal of intellectual rigor in trying to defend every misstep as brilliant and every loss as a win.
    They should take a page from the conservative playbook from the second Bush term. Then, conservatives stuck by their principles, criticized him where appropriate and maintained their integrity. That was a wise choice. Presidents, especially inept ones, come and go, but parties, journalists and political movements need to endure more than four years.
    By Jennifer Rubin | 08:45 AM ET, 06/07/2012
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/obama-is-killing-the-democratic-party/2012/06/06/gJQAGCVlJV_blog.html

    BTW The smears which the Tea Party is receiving these days draw a stunning parallel to those thrown at the John Birch Society decades ago. I as a newly-wed was horrified when Mr. HTA joined that Society. He began putting patriotic bumper stickers on car, writing letters to the editor with signature stating proudly that he was a member of JBS (I tried to keep it quiet lol). Meetings were in a rural place 90 minutes away, 1 a month. I met hosting family and they were ordinary people. Still I worried. On meeting night, he left before dark and returned after I’d gone to bed. Nonetheless there were never any bombings or other terrorism happenings on those nights. When his daughters were old enough, he brought home McGuffy readers such as Laura Ingalls might have used.
    I never was really happy about his association with JBS, but it was really just about being a proud patriot and sticking with the Constitution. Recenty I’ve come to consider that all such organizations promoting limited government are feared by those in power and are smeared to diminish their influence. I’m hoping this Tea Party effect will have a more enduring and positive influence than JBS did.

  187. And see, THIS is why Americans have become so stubborn on the issue of tax increases on anyone. They want the debt and budget dealt with, and “tax increases on the wealthy” are always sold as being a way to do that (even if it’s only a drop in the bucket.)

    But we know they won’t be used for that. They NEVER are. The minute you give DC a nice little pot of extra money, they refuse to pay down the credit card, but instead find something new to spend it on.

    Obama’s new ad admits it. The Buffet Rule, sold to the public as a debt-reducer, suddenly needs to be passed so Obama can spend it on a “jobs” stimulus. If every time I gave someone a check to go pay the mortgage they instead came home with a new stereo, eventually I’d reach the point where I’M NOT HANDING YOU ANY MORE FUCKING CHECKS. And DO NOT then whine to me that I’m the one who doesn’t care about the mortgage. Because you are full of shit.

    http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/06/08/the-president-tells-the-truth-about-taxing-the-wealthy/

  188. Addendum to the above: I’m really tired of being continually told by a repeatedly untrustworthy entity that the fact that I don’t trust them is my failing and there is something wrong with me. Fuck you.

  189. Seen on a comment, no link:

    Dirty little secret. In San Francisco’s district, there were over 94,000 Democratic ballots cast in the primary. There were only approx 44,000 votes for Obama. Yes, he got almost 100% of what D vote participated on the presidential portion.

    But the dirty secret is that almost half the D’s who voted, voted for the other stuff but declined to check his name, even though he was the only one on the ballot.

    I think that while not a lot of D’s will switch to Mitt, a BUTTLOAD of D’s arre going to decline to vote for The Once.

  190. I think a lot of people wouldn’t mind a small tax increase, if it meant that we were really going to pay down the debt, and also cut spending.

    But they’ve played the bait-and-switch on the public so many times now, that voters don’t care, and don’t believe them.

    The Hot New Voter Category in the US of A? The Honey Badger Vote. Honey Badger don’t care. Honey Badger don’t give a shit.


  191. Mrs. Smith
    June 6th, 2012 at 3:40 pm
    I don’t think Bill is through destroying Obama campaign, at least not yet- we have almost six months to go before the election,
    &&&&&&

    Nov. 7, 2012: Bill Clinton: “I don’t know how Obama lost…Look at all the ‘help’ I gave him…”

  192. Hey, what happened to Obama’s strategy, of “Even if I am a terrible president, and a lousy candidate, I can just turn on the charm magnets and the money spigots will spew forth endless amounts of cash”???

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/us/politics/romney-campaign-raised-more-than-obamas-in-may.html?_r=1&ref=politics

    Romney Raised More Than Obama in May
    ===========================

    Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign shot past President Obama’s in fund-raising in May, collecting more than $76.8 million, nearly $17 million more than his Democratic rival.

    The Republican success suggests that Mr. Romney is the beneficiary of the usual cash rush from donors who are eager to back the presumptive nominee now that the party has united behind him. The amount raised for Mr. Romney and his party was nearly double what they collected the prior month, and it was disclosed just hours after Mr. Obama’s campaign announced Thursday that its joint fund-raising operation with the Democratic National Committee had raised $60 million.

    The fund-raising announcements came on a day of dueling speeches from Mr. Romney and Mr. Obama.

    Campaigning in St. Louis, Mr. Romney accused the president of not believing in or understanding America’s free enterprise system.

    “There is something fundamentally wrong when there are over 23 million Americans who are unemployed, underemployed, or have stopped looking for work, and yet the president tells us he’s doing a great job,” Mr. Romney said. “I will not be that president of deception and doubt.”

    Mr. Obama told students at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, that Congress was holding up the economic recovery by blocking bills like one to keep student loans affordable.

    “They haven’t acted fast enough,” Mr. Obama said of the lawmakers. “We can’t afford to have Congress take five months off.” He added that Congress should act quickly, saying: “Get it done. This is not complicated.”

    “Making college affordable — that’s one of the best things we can do for the economy,” the president said.

    The surge in fund-raising for Mr. Romney in May came as he clinched the delegates necessary to become the Republican nominee — a green light for Republican donors who might have been on the sidelines throughout the primary process. It also paved the way for the Republican National Committee to link its operations and fund-raising efforts with the Romney campaign.

    It is not uncommon for presidential candidates to see a huge spike in contributions after a contentious nominating fight. Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts raised twice as much money as President George W. Bush in April 2004 after securing the Democratic nomination.

    A statement from Mr. Romney’s campaign said the Republican campaign ended May with $107 million in cash.

    “It is clear that people aren’t willing to buy into ‘hope and change’ again,” said Spencer Zwick, Mr. Romney’s national finance chairman. “Voters are making an investment because they believe that it will benefit the country.”

    By contrast, Mr. Obama has been raising money from his donor base for the better part of a year. That means that his most enthusiastic donors have probably already given as much as the law allows.

    Aides to Mr. Obama said they were not especially worried because they had expected Mr. Romney to have a good fund-raising month. An e-mail from Jim Messina, the campaign manager, to supporters had the subject line: “We got beat.”

    “We knew this moment would come when Romney secured the nomination,” Mr. Messina wrote. “More people giving a little bit is the only way to compete with a few people giving a lot.”

    But the financial comparisons underscore the concern that Mr. Obama’s campaign has expressed to supporters over the last several months about the need for stepped-up financial contributions.

    Democrats have warned that despite the president’s fund-raising prowess, he could be outspent during the coming months as Mr. Romney’s spending is supplemented by historic levels of fund-raising by outside political groups, including “super PACs.”

    Mr. Obama’s campaign announced his total on Twitter, saying that the average donation was just over $50. The $60 million fund-raising total includes money raised directly by his campaign and by the Democratic National Committee.

    “The campaign raised more than $60 million across committees in May,” the president said. “Thanks to everyone who chipped in.”

    The campaign and the Democratic committee raised $43.6 million in April, about the same amount as Mitt Romney raised that month.

    The announcements by Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney came two days after Republicans succeeded in beating back the recall of Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin, who had a big lead over his opponent in campaign cash.

    Mr. Obama held a fund-raiser with Hollywood celebrities, including George Clooney, in early May, just after he announced his support for same-sex marriage. The event reportedly raised $15 million.

    Democrats had worried whether Mr. Obama’s public support for the issue would cost him support in important swing states like Virginia and North Carolina. But the decision was hailed by supporters of Mr. Obama in the gay rights movement, and it appears to have bolstered fund-raising for the president among wealthy members of that group.

  193. If this happens on election day…..i think we can also safely see McCaskill out the door.

    Missouri : Romney 49% Obama 42%

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/missouri/election_2012_missouri_president

    Mitt Romney’s support continues to hover around the 50% mark in Missouri.

    The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows that 49% of Likely Missouri Voters prefer Romney, while 42% support the president. Six percent (6%) favor some other candidate, and three percent (3%) are undecided.

  194. The NY Times is deluding themselves. They can’t figure out how suddenly Bill Clinton got lousy at politics…How dumb.

    Telling quotes:

    But at that same event, Mr. Clinton himself acknowledged, “I’m a little rusty at politics.”

    “So it was that his effusive praise for Mr. Obama at the three Manhattan fund-raisers on Monday, and his thorough dissection of the presumptive Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, was all but lost amid the attention to Mr. Clinton’s off-message words in separate television interviews — one before Monday’s events, the other a day later.”

    In this one, realists are termed “Clinton conspiracy theorists”:

    Some Clinton conspiracy theorists, not in the White House or the Obama campaign, instantly theorized that Mr. Clinton was intentionally rocking the boat for the man who blocked his wife from reclaiming 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for the couple in 2008, particularly since an Obama defeat in November would fuel persistent speculation about Mrs. Clinton’s own plans to make another presidential run.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/08/us/politics/with-bill-clinton-on-the-stump-obama-campaign-suffers-risks-and-reaps-rewards.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fpolitics%2Findex.jsonp

    How Do You Like Bill Clinton in Your Corner?
    =====================================

    WASHINGTON — As President Obama seeks re-election, he has one advantage that Bill Clinton did not have as president in 1996: a popular Democratic predecessor to vouch for him — Mr. Clinton. The former president had only Jimmy Carter, who remained a political pariah.

    Yet in recent days Mr. Obama has learned — as Hillary Rodham Clinton did during her race against Mr. Obama for the 2008 Democratic nomination — that having Bill Clinton as your surrogate carries risks as well as rewards.

    The man considered by Democrats and Republicans as the most skillful politician of his era proudly acts as his own speechwriter and strategist. And when Mr. Clinton is on his game, he is — as Mr. Obama said during their joint appearance at a Broadway fund-raiser on Monday — “as good at breaking down what’s at stake at any given moment” as anyone.

    But at that same event, Mr. Clinton himself acknowledged, “I’m a little rusty at politics.” And when he hits a wrong note, it is amplified by a 24-7 cable-and-blogosphere megaphone unlike anything Mr. Clinton had to deal with in the 1990s, often drowning out his intended message.

    So it was that his effusive praise for Mr. Obama at the three Manhattan fund-raisers on Monday, and his thorough dissection of the presumptive Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, was all but lost amid the attention to Mr. Clinton’s off-message words in separate television interviews — one before Monday’s events, the other a day later.

    First was Mr. Clinton’s comment last week that Mr. Romney had “a sterling business career” as a private equity executive, handing the Romney campaign an enduring rebuttal to Mr. Obama’s criticism of that career for Mr. Romney’s pursuit of investor profits over workers’ jobs.

    Then on Tuesday Mr. Clinton called for temporarily extending all the tax cuts set to expire at year’s end, including the Bush-era rates, if Democrats and Republicans cannot agree on a long-term budget compromise to avert the tax increases and automatic spending cuts that otherwise will result, jolting the economy.

    The media made much of Mr. Clinton’s apparent break with Mr. Obama, who has vowed, as his press secretary, Jay Carney, reiterated on Wednesday, not to support extending the Bush tax cuts for the richest taxpayers again.

    Mr. Clinton’s spokesman, Matt McKenna, said later that Mr. Clinton “does not believe the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans should be extended again,” and on Thursday Mr. Clinton told CNN he was “very sorry” for the remarks. Still, Republicans pounced, characterizing Mr. Clinton’s statement as an endorsement of their own position.

    The Republican National Committee rushed out a news release under the headline “Bubba Axes Obama … Again.”

    Some Clinton conspiracy theorists, not in the White House or the Obama campaign, instantly theorized that Mr. Clinton was intentionally rocking the boat for the man who blocked his wife from reclaiming 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for the couple in 2008, particularly since an Obama defeat in November would fuel persistent speculation about Mrs. Clinton’s own plans to make another presidential run.

    Yet Mr. Clinton’s unscripted comments in 2008 hurt his wife so badly that an Obama strategist, David Plouffe, in his book on the election, wrote that at one point, “We needed divine intervention. It arrived in the form of Bill Clinton.” (Mr. Plouffe also wrote that Mr. Clinton sometimes got “a raw deal” in the media back then.)

    But between the comments on Mr. Romney’s career and George W. Bush’s tax cuts, Mr. Clinton’s performance at the Obama fund-raisers on Monday argued for the value he can bring the president.

    Having arrived in office after a recession and exited with an economic boom and balanced budgets — battling Congressional Republicans throughout — Mr. Clinton can validate Mr. Obama’s record in a way the president cannot, Democrats say. He remains broadly popular among independents. And he opens wallets among longtime Clinton supporters that otherwise would stay closed.

    At one stop in New York, Mr. Clinton told donors: “Remember me? I’m the only guy that gave you four surplus budgets out of the eight I sent.”

    When the applause died, he added, “So I hope what I say to you will have some weight, because I want you to say it to everybody you see between now and November: I don’t think it’s important to re-elect the president; I think it is essential to re-elect the president.”

    Mr. Romney’s plan, Mr. Clinton said, “is to go back to the Bush program, except on steroids,” a line that Mr. Obama has added to his stump speech, always crediting Mr. Clinton.

    At a “Broadway for Barack” fund-raiser, Mr. Clinton perhaps better than Mr. Obama accounted for the economy’s lingering weakness in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis: “If you look at history, those things take five or 10 years to get over, and if there’s a housing collapse along with it, closer to 10 years. He’s on schedule to beat that record.”

    And regarding Mr. Obama’s health care law, Mr. Clinton offered what one White House aide called a helpful “first-person testimonial” of his own experience with Republicans. Mr. Clinton recalled that in his own, failed effort to overhaul health insurance, Republicans proposed instead to mandate that all individuals get coverage, not that employers provide it as Mr. Clinton proposed — the very individual mandate at the core of the Obama law, and one Republicans have challenged to the Supreme Court.

    “Governor Romney’s finest act as governor was to sign a bill with the individual mandate in it,” Mr. Clinton said.

    And as Mr. Obama himself suggested on Monday, Mr. Clinton conveys something that Mr. Obama often lacks. “Whatever the subject,” Mr. Obama said, when the men speak he is reminded “just how incredibly passionate” Mr. Clinton is.

    “And,” Mr. Obama added, “it’s that passion and connection that he has to the American people that is infectious.” At least Mr. Obama hopes so.

  195. MORE RUH-ROHS FOR TEAM OBUMMER:

    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/senate-will-investigate-national-security-leaks-about-terrorism-kill-list/?src=recg

    June 5, 2012, 8:12 pm
    Senate Will Investigate National Security Leaks About Terrorism ‘Kill List’
    By MICHAEL D. SHEAR
    The Senate will investigate recent national security leaks to the news media in the wake of articles in The New York Times about a “kill list” for terrorists and the use of cyberweapons against Iran, a Senate official said on Tuesday.

    Tara Andringa, a spokeswoman for Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the Democratic chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said the committee would hold hearings “pertaining to recent public reports of classified information.”

    Ms. Andringa’s comments came after Republican senators John McCain of Arizona and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, both called for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate the leaks.

    “Such disclosures can only undermine similar ongoing or future operations and, in this sense, compromise national security,” Mr. McCain said on the Senate floor. “For this reason, regardless of how politically useful these leaks may be to the president, they have to stop.”

    Mr. McCain referred to the articles in The Times, which detailed Mr. Obama as being personally engaged in the decisions of which terrorists to target, and said he personally directed the cyber efforts against Iran.

    Mr. McCain told reporters afterward that he believes the leaks have been designed “to enhance President Obama’s image as a tough guy for the elections.” Mr. McCain is the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee.

    The statement from the committee’s chairman, Mr. Levin, said of the hearing that “any discussion of classified information by the committee or committees would necessarily be closed.”

  196. Obama blames Bush & Europe in first 30 seconds…..what a shock. This is getting fucking old.

  197. Obama: “The fact is job growth in this recovery has been stronger than it was in the last recession a decade ago.”

    WTF…seriously thats what he thinks out of this. How stupid.

  198. Half assed dumbass quote from this conf….

    Obama: “there is work to be done, there are workers to do it”

    OMFG, and they elected this asshole to the WH. He’s making Bush look masterful.

  199. So Obama says it’s a problem for Greeks to be spending more than you’re taking in? Good to know!

    You don’t say…..

  200. OMG, he’s trying to explain the entire world to us with astonishing insight and you what…epic fail, he knows sweet fuck all.

  201. moononpluto
    June 8th, 2012 at 10:45 am
    10:48 am 10:51 am
    —————-

    O was never a detail oriented person. He works off of a teleprompter, and never questions anyone or thing, let alone ask for the data supporting that statement. We knew that in the Primary, and any statements of that sort were immediately challenged as RACISTS.

  202. “Mr. Clinton himself acknowledged, “I’m a little rusty at politics.”
    —————————————–
    HIlarious!! My biggest laugh of the month!!!!

  203. This is plain old making the journalists commit suicide at the conference, it is a borefest of epic recycling proportions.

  204. Obama: “the notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive”

    we KNOW you did.

  205. You all gonna love this…McCaskill down by 12 in latest senate poll.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_senate_elections/missouri/election_2012_missouri_senate

    Missouri Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill’s three leading Republican challengers all now earn 50% or more of the vote in matchups with her.

    The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Missouri Voters shows former State Treasurer Sarah Steelman with the widest lead. She’s ahead of McCaskill by 12 points, 51% to 39%.

    …………………..

    Bye Bye you miserable saggy faced old cow. (Can you taste my distain for her, her from the “convent of our lady on our knees” as she was described yesterday)

  206. Bye Bye you miserable saggy faced old cow. (Can you taste my distain for her, her from the “convent of our lady on our knees” as she was described yesterday)
    ——————–
    Another fitting epitaph for that spawn of the love scene in deliverance–Claire McCaskill. She will be missed–like a malignant tumor. Who can forget her hubby who committed suicide, after being married to her. He was a lucky lawyer. And then that moment on the airplane when she surprised everyone and tried to cop a feel of the Messiah, whereupon the Messiah in a rare exercise of goo judgment removed her arm rather unceremoniously. In this twisted mind it was bad enough to be sexually assaulted by a woman, much worse a white woman, and infinitely worse, a white woman who did auditioned for the title role in the remake of the movie Godzilla, only to be beat out by Donna Brazille who was judged to be even more fitting for the role, and was the apple of the eye of Roly Poly Martin, who roly polied with fat Donna on a saw dust floor in Denver together. I sent him an email comparing this to two pigs making bacon and he sent back immediately an email which I assume was livid, but I will never know because I decided it best not to even open it.

  207. Obama’s Presidency a house of cards – Peggy Noonan

    Obama is running for president.

    But why? He could be president now if he wanted to be.

    It just all increasingly looks like a house of cards. Bill Clinton—that ol’ hound dog, that gifted pol who truly loves politics, who always loved figuring out exactly where the people were and then going to exactly that spot and claiming it—Bill Clinton is showing all the signs of someone who is, let us say, essentially unimpressed by the incumbent. He defended Mitt Romney as a businessman—”a sterling record”—said he doesn’t like personal attacks in politics, then fulsomely supported the president, and then said that the Bush tax cuts should be extended.

    His friends say he can’t help himself, that he’s getting old and a little more compulsively loquacious. Maybe. But maybe Bubba’s looking at the president and seeing what far more than half of Washington sees: a man who is limited, who thinks himself clever, and who doesn’t know that clever right now won’t cut it.

    Because Bill Clinton loves politics, he hates losers. Maybe he just can’t resist sticking it to them a little, when he gets a chance.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303753904577452793597495290.html?mod=WSJ_article_comments#articleTabs%3Darticle

  208. Obama: “there is work to be done,
    ————–
    Mere precatory words. But well spoken for a man who has never worked a day in his life. Isn’t this the sum total of his knowledge about the economy. There are workers, therefore it is incumbent on the invisible hand of god to create jobs for them. Meanwhile, I am free to pass legislation which inhibits job creation, including Obamacare knowing that it will delay economic recovery, as the recent book freely admits.

  209. Planned Demolition? by John Smart

    Are we seeing the start of the implosion of the Obama administration? I use the cheap question mark route because I can honestly say I don’t know. But I do watch. And news from around the horn is not good for BHO.

    ….
    – The parade of Democrats doing everything but cutting and delivering attacks ads for the GOP now includes Booker, Ford, Rendell, and Bill Clinton. Forget the backtracking. Clinton knows full well what he said initially is what will be in GOP ads this Fall. There’s no missing the subtext of all of this: A substantial segment of Democratic power players are not happy with Obama.

    – Tuesday’s Battle of Wisconsin can’t honestly be seen as anything but VERY BAD NEWS for Obama. The template for a general election themed on competence has been drawn up voted on, and approved. And the Obama Democrats don’t even understand what happened. The topper being that Obama flew over the state twice, rather like W flying over Katrina wreckage, but couldn’t be bothered to touch down. Then, as if one middle finger wasn’t enough, he tweeted support for Barrett in the waning hours. Resentment among union leaders must be through the roof. Romney’s not dumb enough to stand too close to Walker. He is smart enough to choose a softer version of Walker as VEEP. Portman? Daniels? Rubio?
    I do not know if we’re seeing a planned demolition or not. But don’t think for a second there’s no such thing as well thought out, planned demolitions in politics. They happen all the time. The defeat of Hillary Clinton was years in the making. What we are seeing from Obama’s antagonists recently has all the hallmarks of a planned demolition.

    http://johnwsmart.net/2012/06/07/planned-demolition/#more-6417

  210. rgb44hrc
    June 8th, 2012 at 10:02 am

    Mrs. Smith
    June 6th, 2012 at 3:40 pm
    I don’t think Bill is through destroying Obama campaign, at least not yet- we have almost six months to go before the election,
    &&&&&&

    Nov. 7, 2012: Bill Clinton: “I don’t know how Obama lost…Look at all the ‘help’ I gave him…”
    ____________

    Perusing google this morning for a few more OP relating to Bill’s seemingly anti-BO’s policy suggestions- I was surprised to read BO’s bloggers in the comment sections are busily tweeting comments indicating BC is going senile..

    Well, Bill, what can you do- you try to help the guy by supporting him using your gravitas and stellar record giving BO tips on how he should consider straightening out the economy after Bush1 drove us off the cliff leaving the country in a huge deficit- you throw him a lifeline and because you are not standing behind what would be considered a cumulative mistake; you are attacked with vile comments by Obama’s surrogates typing insulting comments not only attacking your strategy and economic solutions but they have the nerve to diagnose you with a medical condition as responsible for your honest assessment of the economy and what needs to be done to improve it!

    A “Big-No-Thanks” should be the order of the day, the next time Obama asks you for your help digging him out of the hole he’s dug for himself.

    All you have to say is: buy my book, Back to Work: Why We Need Smart Government for a Strong Economy”> it’s all in there- If you already have it, Sit Down and Read It!”

  211. A great article democrat 1, but if I may say so, Noonan undersells Bill. Anyone who thinks this is just politics, he hates losers, and it is payback for South Carolina, has not taken full measure of the man. Noonan falls in that category, and her assessment of Hillary, her failure to recognize her greatness, and that 2008 was the classic example of the man, the moment and the message which produces a great leader, fatally flaws any analysis she might offer. And the suggestion that today 2/3 of Washington sees his limitations is utterly irrelevant. I do suspect there came a point where 2/3 of Berliners turned cold on the Bohemian corporal after Stalingrad, but they dared not speak of it. The tragedy of it all is the people in Washington who engineered and hued to this destructive leader will be insulated from th consequences, unless we put the proposition above squarely before them, and give them an incentive to act, namely their own personal reputation and potentially their survival. How else can we shock them out of a sense of complacency, or passing the buck to the voters, rather than manning up. Time is of the essence. It is a long time until January 21 and much more can go wrong if their opposition is confined to tsk tsk whispers. More than any other group they control the levers of power, and with that comes a moral imperative to act, and to make him step down.

  212. Senator Carl Levin of Michigan
    ———————
    A useless piece of shit, if there ever was one. He was one of the cabalists who installed Obama. Just go back and look at his behavior at the RBC hearing in May 2008. He is one of the people who needs to approached with the speech outlined above. And what is the use of appointing a special counsel if the offending leader, Obama, remains in place? Let us cure the disease rather than just the symptoms.

  213. wbb

    blackmailing Boehner. Part of the reason I say that is because a couple years ago, when he started to get tough there were rumors that Vanity Fair, which is one of the hit men for Obama would be doing a piece on John which would not be flattering and after that he backed off. That magazine did the same thing to Bill to force Hillary out. The hitman is that hairlip Tod Purdam who is married to Deede Myers, ironically enough. To your question of what recourse does a committe chairman have to go over Boehner’s head. He could go to the leadership conference but unless they were ready to boot him and wanted to use that as a pretext they would back him.

    ===
    I guess this is another clash of what can be done legally, and what will be done through party channels. Toss in possible threats and there you have a rotten salad of worms and cockroaches.

    If they fold like a cheap suit on this F&F investigation, or settle for some lame ‘sorry’ or ‘we will try harder in the DOJ in the future’, I will be livid.
    Obama and gang can’t become the new era of Al Capone without a fight from the American public.

  214. I was surprised to read BO’s bloggers in the comment sections are busily tweeting comments indicating BC is going senile..
    —————–
    Evidently, they will tell any lie to defend the Big Lie. They have much in common with holocaust deniers. If I understand the medical analysis these people are the co-dependents who are captivated and enthralled by Obama’s narcissitic personality of Obama–the all powerful mask, because it responds to something missing in their lives. Theirs is a child like obsession, as in you say there is no Santa Clause? The how do you explain these gifts under the Christmas tree?

  215. Politico is a puss pocket of evil. Dissemblers. A ship of fools. When Romney wins he should make it his first order of business to have nothing to do with them. They are completely in the tank and the overtures they will make to him when Obama is defeated should be politely but firmly rejected. If he succumbs they will twist anything he says. They give the word whore a very bad connotation.

  216. Hillary4TX, I just had to post the article you linked to. It is a perfect compliment to admins post:

    “When your enemy is angry, irritate him.”
    -Sun Tzu

    There are differing versions, even different attributions, of that dictum, probably because of its timeless truth. An angry enemy makes mistakes. An annoyed and angry enemy will flip out. And nobody was better at annoying the angry than Bill Clinton — even if he had to first make them angry himself. While president, Clinton thrived on making conservatives and Republicans angry. Red-faced, spittle-covered mad. Clinton, written off for dead at the end of ’94, coasted to reelection just two years later, thanks in no small part to his ability to irritate the Right.

    I watched him do it to the GOP — to me! — almost daily for eight years. I knew exactly what he was doing, and why. And yet I still fell for it. Every time. Almost all of us did. You gotta bow to the master.
    Advertisement

    You can imagine then that the West Wing must be reeling this week, after a series of irritating little shivs Clinton slid into their backs over the last few days.

    It’s no secret that Clinton isn’t exactly a big fan of President Obama’s. Clinton might be the master of making other people mad, but he himself was red-faced pissed off after Team Obama accused him of racism during the 2008 primary fight. And for good reason, too. My personal take is, that was the moment the Race Card lost its trump. Playing it on Clinton, our “first black president”? Dumb move, Barack.

    And now comes the payback.

    Obama attacked Mitt Romney’s record at Bain. Clinton said his record there was “sterling.” Oh, Clinton said it ostensibly in the course of explaining why Romney shouldn’t become president — but the real message was heard loud and clear.

    Obama wants us to believe that the economy is improving, that we’re on track, that we must move “forward.” So Clinton said we’re already back in a recession.

    Obama wants the Bush tax rates for the wealthy to expire. Clinton wants to extend all the Bush rates for a year. He later “clarified” and explained he only wanted to keep the Bush tax rates for everyone but the wealthy — but the clarification never carries as much weight as the original statement. And Bill Clinton doesn’t make a whole lot of misstatements during an election fight.

    After all that, Clinton is brash enough to claim ignorance. About that “sterling” comment, he had the chutzpah to tell Judy Woodruff, “I didn’t have any idea, when I was giving that answer, that I was wading into some controversy in the campaign, because I haven’t seen the ads, and I’m not following it, and I’m not really part of it.” The man who rivals Michael Barone for the breadth and depth of his up-to-the-minute knowledge of politics and policy doesn’t know of Obama’s main line of attack?

    Puh-lease.

    In the space of less than a week, Clinton deftly undercut Obama on Bain, the economy, and taxes. All he has to do now is question the timing of the end of the Afghanistan surge or point out the billions taxpayers lost on GM, and then all Obama will have left is, “I killed bin Laden with my bare hands. Gutsy call, I know.”

    But what can Obama do? Call Clinton out? Ol’ Billy Boy is still a team player, dutifully campaigning in Wisconsin where even Obama dared not tread. [He forgot to mention that Bill campaigned for Hillary supporters, not Obama supporters]The president needs Clinton’s fundraising prowess going into the fall, too. And then there’s that little issue where Mrs. Clinton still serves as Obama’s own secretary of state. Clinton is a thorn in Obama’s side and there’s no way to pluck him out.

    Since I brought her up, let’s speak a little more about Hillary. She says her days in politics are over, and I believe her. But that might not be the fate Bill has in mind for her. So, let’s assume that Bill is setting up Hillary for another run at the White House in 2016. Would she make a better follow-up act to another failed Obama term? Or would she fare better against Romney, who could end up presiding over an economy not much better than Obama’s?

    Marital conspiracy theories aside, I think Clinton understands the damage Obama has done — is doing — to the Democrat brand. Another four years of this SCoaMF behind the Resolute desk, and it might be a generation before the Donks are trusted by the voters again with anything more complicated than a shoe horn.

    Clinton is the master of irritating his enemies. It just so happens that right now Clinton’s main enemy is Barack Obama. Romney could win the White House for the Republicans for four or eight years, sure. But Obama has already pissed away “the permanent Democratic majority.” He’s caused millions of voters to stop identifying themselves as Democrats. His hard-left policies have led to big Republican gains in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New York and many other bedrock Democrat constituencies. There’s no telling how much more damage Obama could do, given four more years. I was only half-joking back in 2009, when I called Obama “the Manchurian President.” Even people on the Left agree.

    Don’t look for Obama’s irritation to go away any time before November, because that’s just Clinton doing what he thinks is best for his party. And don’t forget to point and laugh every time that irritation flares up and turns red.

  217. I guess this is another clash of what can be done legally, and what will be done through party channels. Toss in possible threats and there you have a rotten salad of worms and cockroaches.

    If they fold like a cheap suit on this F&F investigation, or settle for some lame ’sorry’ or ‘we will try harder in the DOJ in the future’, I will be livid.
    Obama and gang can’t become the new era of Al Capone without a fight from the American public.
    ————————-
    Your reaction to this is identical to the one that conservatives had when this was leaked to them. It is the common reaction of the American People to the I’ll scratch your back and you scratch mine which is appropriate in some areas, and highly inappropriate in others.

  218. wbboei
    June 8th, 2012 at 2:18 am

    It is unclear to me why Darryl went on Gretas show. She is a terrific journalist, and I think she and her husband are sterling people. But Darryl should know that she would go after him on this, as well she should and inasmuch as Boener tied his hands there is no percentage in going on her show and dodging the question. I don’t get it. The guy that should go on their and answer those questions is the man himself Speaker Boehner.

    ——–
    Issa has been on Greta’s show about this investigation many times, from the start and so has his sidekick.

    Greta is an attorney, and she has been in court with Holder as the judge…so in my opinion, she is more than a journalist.
    I personally trust Greta more than anyone else in the news business these days.

  219. It seems to me that political events are proceeding along a path to a denoument which everyone will agree after the fact was inevitable. The important part is getting an advance handle on why Obama lost, and conservatives have the advantage at this point because left wingers are stuck with defending him based on the hope that the forces of inertia can be overcome. Getting there firstest with the mostest on why Obama lost is key to controlling the dialogue. The last thing I am interested in is giving those who put him there a safe harbor, or the right to write history.

  220. Claire McCaskill. She will be missed–like a malignant tumor. Who can forget her hubby who committed suicide, after being married to her. He was a lucky lawyer. And then that moment on the airplane when she surprised everyone and tried to cop a feel of the Messiah, whereupon the Messiah in a rare exercise of goo judgment removed her arm rather unceremoniously. In this twisted mind it was bad enough to be sexually assaulted by a woman, much worse a white woman, and infinitely worse, a white woman who did auditioned for the title role in the remake of the movie Godzilla,

    ———
    Is this true, she wanted to touch the Baracko?????
    How did I miss this story?

  221. Similar to what I have been saying . . .

    The Media Does Not Understand State Races (when they say Obama retains a commanding lead in Pennsylvania)

    By Jay Cost

    This write-up from the Hill on a recent Pennsylvania poll is pretty similar to many others these days:

    President Obama is retaining his commanding lead over Mitt Romney in Pennsylvania, topping the Republican presidential nominee by 12 points in a poll released Wednesday by Franklin & Marshall College. Obama would win the favor of 48 percent of Keystone State voters, versus just 36 percent for Romney, according to the poll.

    And polls like these are producing frames like these, from Charles Babington of the AP:

    …Republican presidential nominees have lost (Pennsylvania) five straight times despite substantial efforts. Some independent analysts say the same result is likely this year, even if few expect Obama to repeat his double-digit victory.

    This is the wrong frame of reference to look at the 2012 election. Obama is not enjoying a “commanding lead” in Pennsylvania – not in any meaningful sense of the term. Nor is he necessarily favored to win it.

    These articles illustrate how the media is making major mistakes in its analysis of the campaign in the 50 states. Here are four huge problems with its approach.

    1. The president is under 50 percent in most swing state polling averages. It’s not an ironclad rule that Obama cannot rise in the polls, but common sense suggests that it will be tough. He’s been the president for three years – if you’re not inclined to vote for him now, what will five months of a campaign do?
    Related Stories

    It’s worth noting as well that most of these polls show the president getting roughly his job approval, which is all we should expect him to receive in the general election (maybe a little less). And his job approval rating has consistently been under 50 percent for two-and-a-half years.

    2. Most polls are of registered voters. This matters because the actual electorate will only be a subset of registered voters, and will probably be more inclined to vote for the GOP. So, these polls probably overstate Obama’s “lead,” such as it is.

    The two major exceptions to this are Rasmussen, which is already using a likely voter screen, and PPP, which uses an idiosyncratic screen of “voters” (basically surveying people who voted in previous elections). Nobody else uses this screen; PPP switches to “likely voters” later in the cycle and until then its polls should be taken with a grain of salt.

    To appreciate just how important the use of registered voters is, consider that the aforementioned Franklin & Marshall College poll in Pennsylvania found 50 percent of its sample identifying as Democratic. In 2008 – the best year for Democrats in over a decade – only 44 percent of the Pennsylvania electorate called itself Democratic.

    And combine this point with the last point to consider that, in a poll that is 50 percent Democratic, Obama is only pulling in 48 percent! Is it really fair to say that he’s “leading” in the Keystone state?

    3. There is no “blue wall.” This is a common point pundits will make – the list of states that have not voted Republican since 1988 amounts to a “blue wall” for the president. Nonsense. It’s better to say that these states have Democratic tilts, some of them pretty minimal.

    Take Pennsylvania, for instance. The Keystone State usually votes about 3 points more Democratic than the rest of the country. So, if Romney wins the nationwide vote by 3 points, then he will stand a very good chance of winning Pennsylvania. This is why the frame from the Babington article is wrong. Yes, the GOP has lost Pennsylvania every time since 1988, but it has not won a national presidential election by 3 points since then. That is a distinct possibility this year, meaning that Pennsylvania is up for grabs.

    In fact, when we look at the electoral map from the perspective of each state’s partisan tilt, we see that the “blue wall” is simply insufficient. The states with a Republican tilt of at least 1 point total up to 253 electoral votes, based on the 2008 results. The states with a Democratic tilt of at least 1 percent total up to 257 electoral votes.

    In other words, it’s a wash.

  222. In the WSJ article, Noonan say’s more than meets the eye. She makes a strategic point about the media, plainly saying the following that is above and beyond simply spinning an event favoring the spinners that is worth a careful observation..
    ……..

    “Political professionals now lay down lines even before a story happens. They used to wait to do the honest, desperate, last-minute spin of yesteryear. Now it’s strategized in advance, which makes things tidier but less raggedly fun. The line laid down by the Democrats weeks before the vote was that it’s all about money: The Walker forces outspent the unions so they won, end of story.

    Money is important, as all but children know. But the line wasn’t very flattering to Wisconsin’s voters, implying that they were automatons drooling in front of the TV waiting to be told who to back. It was also demonstrably incorrect. Most voters, according to surveys, had made up their minds well before the heavy spending of the closing weeks.

    Mr. Walker didn’t win because of his charm—he’s not charming. It wasn’t because he is compelling on the campaign trail—he’s not, especially. Even his victory speech on that epic night was, except for its opening sentence—”First of all, I want to thank God for his abundant grace,” which, amazingly enough, seemed to be wholly sincere—meandering, unable to name and put forward what had really happened.

    But on the big question—getting control of the budget by taking actions resisted by public unions—he was essentially right, and he won.”

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303753904577452793597495290.html?mod=WSJ_article_comments#articleTabs%3Darticle
    ___________

    Good article democrat1- thanks for posting it-

    We learn something new everyday. The Obama White House now presumes spinning the news casting Obama in a favorable light, down playing a president and DOJ in trouble surrounded in investigative controversy is not good enough for public consumption..

    Now the Obama WH presumes to reports the facts of an event weeks before they take place…

    This is really a mind trip, taking the integrity of the government running our country to a whole new level of corruption. This is sick in so many ways, it’s indescribable and needs to be addressed by adjudication.

    As the Irish would say: “We’re Livin’ a LIE.” If we continue on this front and do nothing about it; we have no one to blame but ourselves for the consequences.

  223. I hope the Cost article gets to Stoddard, who by the way is an interesting character, with a pretty balanced view of the political process. But her publication, the Hill, which also employs Mort Kondrake, is missing the boat on its analysis of state races.
    —————————–
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._B._Stoddard

  224. “Political professionals now lay down lines even before a story happens. They used to wait to do the honest, desperate, last-minute spin of yesteryear. Now it’s strategized in advance, which makes things tidier but less raggedly fun. The line laid down by the Democrats weeks before the vote was that it’s all about money: The Walker forces outspent the unions so they won, end of story.
    ———————
    Good point democrat 1 and Mrs. Smith. The funny part of that is when they write the story before the fact they are apt to find that supervening factors occur which change the happy ending they envisioned, and make them look like idiots. This is the bi product of economics, a widget factory business model, and sheer stupidity. It is like trying to draw into an inside straight. But the worst of it is when they have already written the story, they have a perverse incentive to intervene in the process in order to produce the pre-ordained result, and that is what these Sunday morning programs are really all about.

  225. About as sincere as, “I didn’t have sex with that woman.”
    _________________

    On a flight to the US in 1998, Tony Blair explained Bill’s thinking on that statement. Blair quoted the Bible to his wife Cherie, saying the Bible’s definition of sex is “intercourse” and what Bill was saying is what he believed to be true. Bill never did have sex with Lewinski… afaik- a BJ and intercourse are two different acts… using his sincerity then which was truly sincere as an analogy to the Bush Tax Cuts doesn’t exactly ring true. He didn’t have sex with Lewinski and even though he couched the words carefully, most people assumed he was lying.

    That wasn’t what the Impeachment was about anyway… he was Impeached, just like Martha Stewart was, for lying to investigators, where he wasn’t forthcoming with the entire story because he was trying to protect the shame of it from his family.

  226. This is the way journalism used to be done. You never knew whether Cronkite was a democrat or a republican until after he retired. He was too objective for that. So many of these so called journalists now wear their party affiliation on the sleeve, and are no longer reporters by advocates.
    —————–

    Is AB Stoddard a Republican or Democrat?
    In: Politics and Government [Edit categories]
    Answer:

    I would have to say that with regards to her reporting on the cable news stations, she is very even tempered, measured in her statements about politicans and issues. I never see her dogging out republicans or democrats but she will usually just report the facts and offer good analysis. So from this observation, it is very hard to discern if she is republican or democrat. But from her personal video blog on thehill, I have heard her make statements in adoration of bill clinton. There is no way that any reporter who has republican, or even conservative leanings would ever praise bill clinton

    Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_AB_Stoddard_a_Republican_or_Democrat#ixzz1xDs6nJ8E

  227. But the worst of it is when they have already written the story, they have a perverse incentive to intervene in the process in order to produce the pre-ordained result, and that is what these Sunday morning programs are really all about.
    ____________

    Yes, and you could call that predictive “steering” to a preordained outcome… A scary thought when a government starts orchestrating the outcome of events. Like the outcome of a US election where the results are (pre) determined in advance in a foreign county, namely Spain- the ability for an exercising an election recount or the examination of voter eligibility is a lost cause for American voters.

  228. On a flight to the US in 1998, Tony Blair explained Bill’s thinking on that statement. Blair quoted the Bible to his wife Cherie, saying the Bible’s definition of sex is “intercourse” and what Bill was saying is what he believed to be true. Bill never did have sex with Lewinski… afaik- a BJ and intercourse are two different acts…

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

    Correct. Actually Monica was already on record in a deposition saying they did not “have sex” and the GOP was threatening her with prison for ‘perjury’. According to an article in Journal of American Medicine written at least two years BEFORE the impeachment, a survey of college students found them making the same distinction in their use of the words. For example, “We’ve done blojobs but we haven’t had sex yet.”

    Reasonably in both college and the Bible, imo, “have sex” meant do something that could get you pregnant.

  229. wbboei
    June 8th, 2012 at 12:34 pm
    I would call what Bill is doing to Obama the rope a dope tactic. And it is working.

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

    Pls remind me again what ‘rope a dope’ means?

  230. Ol’ Billy Boy is still a team player, dutifully campaigning in Wisconsin where even Obama dared not tread. [He forgot to mention that Bill campaigned for Hillary supporters, not Obama supporters]

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

    Bill campaigned passionately for Barrett. Was Barrett a Hillary supporter?

  231. Suddenly Fort Hood massacre is back in news. Video at link states military families so disgusted at how long this is taking. Also widely reported last night was suicide of our active military way up. So another thing Bambi had been dragging his feet on is biting his a$$. Articles on the suicide situation are many. Here is the video announcing trial is moving ahead:
    Fort Hood shooter in court for pre-trial hearing | Video | Fox News
    Jun 8 2012 Former JAG Jeffery King breaks down case
    http://video.foxnews.com/v/1679962178001/
    Related Stories
    • Army sends notice indicating it plans to seek death against Fort Hood suspect, attorney says
    • Army to Seek Death Penalty Against Fort Hood Shooter

  232. Barack is whining again. He is pleading poverty. He asks his supporter for contributions, and as a token of reassurance that they have got his back. The question these numbskulls should be asking themselves at this point is has Obama got your back and if you think so, show me the evidence.

    ———————
    Obama Campaign: We Got Beat

    22

    1

    171

    ——————————————————————————–

    Email Article
    Print ArticleSend a Tip

    by Ben Shapiro5 hours ago159post a comment

    Last night, Jim Messina, Barack Obama’s campaign manager, sent out a mass email to the millions-strong support list. The header: “We got beat.” Here’s the text:

    Benjamin —

    For the first time in this campaign, we got beat in fundraising.

    The Romney campaign and the Republican Party raised more than $76 million last month, compared to our $60 million.

    We knew this moment would come when Romney secured the nomination.

    What happens next is up to you.

    Help close the gap right now — make a donation of $3 or more.

    I want to be clear: We’ll always have more people pitching in.

    We know that only 15 percent of Romney’s May totals came from people giving less than $250, compared to 98 percent in that category for us.

    We don’t have the special-interest and high-dollar donor advantage that Romney has. Barack Obama has you, and we are bound and determined to fight back on behalf of a country where everyone gets a fair shot and a fair shake.

    From the beginning we’ve built this campaign together, from the bottom up. More people giving a little bit is the only way to compete with a few people giving a lot.

    So let’s fight like hell and win this thing:

    https://donate.barackobama.com/May-Numbers

    More coming soon,

    Messina

    Jim Messina

    Campaign Manager

    Obama for America

    P.S. — Together, our team raised more than $60 million in May — even more impressive when you hear that the average donation was about $55. Check out the rest of our numbers.

    This is a bizarre email, to say the least. Obama’s greatest edge in his re-election campaign is his aura of inevitability. For months, we’ve been hearing about Obama’s phenomenal fundraising machine, his invincible on-the-ground team. And this week, that aura took a pounding. In Wisconsin, a self-proclaimed “dry run” for the Democratic National Committee and its union allies, Scott Walker pulled out a landslide victory (at least, landslide by the media’s normal standards – Walker won by the same percentage as President Obama did in 2008). And Mitt Romney did indeed outraise Obama by a significant margin.

    And so the Obama campaign is playing the victim. This seems to be their comfort zone – hence all their campaign materials calling for supporters to “get Barack’s back,” as though voters are Secret Service agents and opponents are John Malkovich types looking for a clean shot. Hence Obama’s self-pitying statements about how Congress simply hasn’t cooperated with him.

    Now, they’re crying poverty, despite the fact that independent union expenditures will undoubtedly shape up to hundreds of millions of dollars in support of Obama’s re-election. The notion that your $3 is all that stands between Obama and the plutocracy, represented by Mitt Romney, ignores reality.

    The facts are these: Obama is an incumbent. He has significantly higher name recognition and star power than Mitt Romney. He will raise in excess of $1 billion for this campaign. His online systems are extraordinarily well-prepared. His grassroots efforts are solid. The media is firmly in his corner. For him to portray himself as a victim isn’t just false, it’s bad politics.

  233. “Mr. Clinton himself acknowledged, “I’m a little rusty at politics.”
    —————————————–
    HIlarious!! My biggest laugh of the month!!!!

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

    LOL! And this puts !What Clinton said that bugged Obama! at the top of another news cycle.

    Senile like a fox.

  234. Though he heads the CBS news division, Moonves said, “ultimately journalism has changed … partisanship is very much a part of journalism now.”

    Okay, fine. But then we need to find a new term for it because it is no longer journalism. If it were principled then we could call it advocacy, but because it is unprincipled and festooned with lies, let us call it what it really is–propaganda, and dispense with these Orwellian euphemisms. And let us cut to the chase and be clear on what it really is: an effort by the east coast establishment to maintain its power, perks and control over the political process, and let the rest of the country sink. The proof here is clear cogent and convincing. No honest observer could look at what Obama has done to the country and say he is worth re electing. Moonves has been a problem for some time, but in this case, he made a freudian slip. How inconvenient. This confirms what we have all been saying, and gives us the perfect excuse to treat whatever they say with grave skepticism. Meanwhile it is nice to see how the 1% lives–with events like this.
    ——————————————

    Last night in Los Angeles as our economy burned, President Barack Obama continued along his record-setting fundraising pace (events, not cash raised) with a stop among the glittery Top 1% at a LGBT fundraiser that included Ellen Degeneres, Cher, Chaz Bono, and CBS Corp. CEO and chairman Les Moonves. Part of what Moonves does is oversee the CBS News division, which makes the fact that he attended a political fundraiser fascinating, but not as fascinating as what he told The Los Angeles Times:

    CBS chief Les Moonves and his wife, Julie Chen, waited patiently for their wristbands. Obama, Moonves said, “has shown great leadership” on the issue of gay marriage.

    Though he heads a news division, Moonves said, “ultimately journalism has changed … partisanship is very much a part of journalism now.”

    He hastened to add that despite his presence, “I run a news division. I’ve given no money to any candidate.”

    It’s plausible Moonves could’ve attended this bigtime fundraiser as a guest, meaning someone else paid for his ticket so he could maintain that he has “given no money to any candidate.” But what’s the head of a major news division doing at this kind of partisan event to begin with? He certainly wasn’t there to cover it for CBS. And what’s he thinking publicly gushing over Obama’s “great leadership” on the divisive issue of same-sex marriage?

    Anyway, his statement about how “partisanship is very much a part of journalism now” is not only interesting considering he said it at a Obama fundraiser, but it’s also a falsehood.

    Partisanship has always been a part of journalism, especially at CBS News. It’s just that the network always has and always will hide its partisanship behind a phony shield of objectivity and nonsense loopholes such as, “I’m at this bigtime fundraiser but have never given money to any candidate.”

    But what Moonves is doing here is finally (and probably by accident) admitting that the media is partisan. It’s also interesting that he’s outing journalism in general, not just the openly partisan media that has blossomed online or on talk radio.

    He’s calling “journalism” partisan — and indeed it is.

    So the only surprise is that someone with Moonves’s status is finally admitting it.

  235. I think a lot of people wouldn’t mind a small tax increase, if it meant that we were really going to pay down the debt, and also cut spending.

    But they’ve played the bait-and-switch on the public so many times now, that voters don’t care, and don’t believe them.

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

    It may depend on who is “they”. The GOP always does a bait and switch, promising to cut spending but instead running up the deficit total.

  236. But the dirty secret is that almost half the D’s who voted, voted for the other stuff but declined to check his name, even though he was the only one on the ballot.

    I think that while not a lot of D’s will switch to Mitt, a BUTTLOAD of D’s arre going to decline to vote for The Once.

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

    Voting third party will show WHY someone declines to vote for Obama.

  237. Way off the track here. No triple crown this year racing fans:

    http://www.nesn.com/2012/06/ill-have-another-wont-run-in-belmont-stakes-erases-hopes-of-first-triple-crown-since-1978.html

    Horse racing was dealt a devastating blow on Friday morning. Trainer Doug O’Neill confirmed that his horse, I’ll Have Another, won’t run in the Belmont Stakes on Saturday afternoon. O’Neill confirmed that news on The Dan Patrick Show. O’Neill cited injury as the reason the horse won’t run in the race. “It’s his left front leg,” O’Neill told the show. “This morning, he looked perfect. I took him and did a little something with him and after training, the swelling came back.” O’Neill also said that the horse looked like it was suffering from tendinitis. I’ll Have Another was looking to win the first Triple Crown since Affirmed took home all three of horse racing’s biggest races in 1978. “We ain’t taking any chances,” he said. “There are people who are going to want to slap me around, but I have to do what’s best for the horse.”

  238. Apologies to the Big Dawg, the sincerity of his statement wasn’t intended to hurt him nor Hillary…

  239. admin
    June 8th, 2012 at 2:13 pm
    Way off the track here. No triple crown this year racing fans:

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

    very disappointing…was really looking forward to him racing…will still watch…is bodemeister running?

  240. wbboei
    June 8th, 2012 at 12:44 am

    BASIL99
    June 7th, 2012 at 7:44 pm
    ———————–
    I keep telling you they are extraterrestrials yet you refuse to leeesen.

    Just saw this. LMAO.

  241. it seems to me that obama is collapsing and we could see him not run if this effect snowballs.

    for those of you who came from or read TM her last 2 posts are definitely antiobama as she finally realizes she has been had.

    “What Has Labor Done for Democrats Lately, the Obama Edition
    by Taylor Marsh on 08 JUNE 2012
    With five months until Election Day, Barack Obama faces a grim new reality: Republicans now believe Mitt Romney can win, and Democrats believe Obama can lose… – Mark Halperin

    IT’S IRONIC, which you’ll understand in a moment, but it was almost a year ago that Mark Halperin called Pres. Obama a “d*@!” on “Morning Joe.” I disagree with Halperin most of the time and he is a total Washington insider with a mind that only thinks in conventional wisdom fits and starts, but as the week ends I’ve got to give him this one. So, to honor the columnist who let slip the gaffe of all gaffes and got suspended for the rude disrespect, we’ll now use his remark and name it after him so I don’t have to use weird characters. It’s a family joint for the most part around here.

    I’m a liberal, so I’ll never root for Mitt Romney, but the general hideousness of this week earned special notice for Pres. Obama.
    Stiffing unions in Wisconsin was a d*@! Halperin move.
    Pres. Obama proved this week to be an expert at Halperin moves through the Wisconsin recall drama.

    It takes a real Halperin for a Democratic president to choose to let labor flop around in a state, not even sending cash, deciding to employ only your thumbs, and let them get beat up and fail miserably, especially after all organized labor has done for the Democratic Party, including Barack Obama, through money and GOTV.

    Politicians are rarely loyal, but Pres. Obama showed a new low on that scale this week.

    “snip”

    The President deserves to lose in November.

    But the outcome in November is up to you.
    I’ve come to the conclusion that it doesn’t much matter this year who’s elected. Whether it’s Obama or Romney, entitlements will be on the table for tinkering, the Pentagon and homeland security toys and tactics will remain the sweet spot of budgetary largess, while the middle class continues to get screwed by everyone in both parties, because the right is crazy and the left is too lazy to hold Pres. Obama accountable.”

    hehe been waiting for this for a while now.
    it can only continue to get worse for the fraud as those singing his praises and covering his ass… realize he is a disaster happening to this country every day.

  242. TM her last 2 posts are definitely antiobama as she finally realizes she has been had.

    —-
    It only took her five years to figure this out, I guess better very late than never.

  243. democrat1
    June 8th, 2012 at 11:45 am

    Planned Demolition? by John Smart

    Very interesting article.

  244. I guess the health of the horse trumps a possible TC run.

    Personally, I couldn’t stand the news of another TC disaster with horses falling or injuring themselves and having to be put down like the heroic Eight Belles in 2008.

  245. admin
    June 8th, 2012 at 2:13 pm

    Way off the track here. No triple crown this year racing fans:
    ____________________

    That trainer is a moron. His license should be suspended for sending that horse out for a gallop on the track this morning. A tendon filling is the first sign of danger that the tendon is in danger of bowing… what a jerk!

  246. Shadowfax
    June 8th, 2012 at 2:18 pm

    I don’t think he would take it that way Shadow-
    You brought it up and I used the opportunity to have it clearly explained for others reading here. I can tell you one thing though-

    “I did NOT need affirmation from that ‘woman’ to have my statement verified.” 😉

  247. Mrs. S,

    I know you are the resident “horse whisperer.”

    Why are horses put down so quickly when they break a leg when dogs, cats and other mammals often recover from such injuries and, in fact, many three-legged pets survive as well?

    Probably a dumb question and I could google but thought you might have a better explanation.

  248. Forgot to add, I realize the expense of caring for a horse is much higher than for smaller animals.

    Also, I’m just curious. I live with birds and it’s difficult to nurse those small creatures back from most injuries but beak injuries are the worst and most birds can’t survive that unless it’s a minor crack, chip or break. Birds depend on their beaks for eating and without use of their beaks the human has to hand feed them up to six times a day. Problem is, with a cracked beak, the ingestion of food is also affected and the birds can literally drown while trying to swallow liquids from an eye dropper.

    They suffer so much most vets recommend the bird be spared the suffering. A beak injury takes more than a month to heal, if it heals at all.

    In any case, I’m glad that at least I’ll Have Another seems headed for a happy retirement.

  249. holdthemaccountable
    June 8th, 2012 at 3:44 pm

    Hehehehehe. That’s what I thought. And MR has already responded.

    Mitt Romney blasted President Obama for comments during a press conference Friday where the president suggested the private sector was “doing fine.”

    “He said the private sector is doing fine. Is he really that out of touch?” Romney said at an event in Council Bluffs, Ia. “I think he’s defining what it means to be out of touch with the American people.”

    In the president’s remarks Friday morning, he repeatedly said hiring at private industries was “fine” and occurring at “a solid pace,” arguing instead for additional funds for state and local governments to hire teachers and emergency personnel. But Republicans quickly pounced on his remarks in light of May’s disappointing job numbers, and Romney said the comments could have historic implications.

    “For the president of the United States to stand up and say the private sector is doing fine is going to go down in history as an extraordinary miscalculation,” Romney told the crowd.

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/06/08/romney-continues-to-tee-off-on-obamas-doing-fine-comment-will-go-down-in-history-as-extraordinary-miscalculation/

  250. BASIL99
    June 8th, 2012 at 3:33 pm

    Mrs. S,

    I know you are the resident “horse whisperer.”

    Why are horses put down so quickly when they break a leg when dogs, cats and other mammals often recover from such injuries and, in fact, many three-legged pets survive as well?

    Probably a dumb question and I could google but thought you might have a better explanation.
    ____________

    Horses are put down asap when they break a leg because their chance of survival during the healing process are 1000 to one-

    God created them to stand on all 4 legs. Those 4 little hooves have to distribute their weight evenly at all times. When you see a horse not standing up square redistributing his weight unevenly i.e. left front and left rear 6 inches forward with the right front and right rear 6″ back.. or square in front resting a hind leg, you have to figure out where he is hurting-

    Did he bump his hip coming out of his stall- did he slam his leg into something while turned out?
    Horses have to be examined first thing in the morning while being groomed and the last thing in the pm before getting their dinner.

    You would be surprised how fast things turn deadly if that routine is not followed.

    As to “I’ll have another”- I never felt he was Triple Crown material. If you notice in the first two TC races, he never won by lengthy margins.. His victories were just by a head, a head and a neck… he never exhibited supremacy over the rest of the field as did horses like the great Secretariat… when he came around the club house turn.. all his jockey did was tell him “now boy-go now”… Secretariat looked as if he was shot out of a cannon- leaving the rest of the field of horses in the dust winning each race by 17/18 lengths.. That is the mark of Super Star-

    “I’ll have another” wasn’t born with that quality. He has a Big Heart and did what he was told to do. His jockey applied the whip and he responded to keep going to get over the finish line first (just barely.) I would say the horse pushed himself over his limit to win the Preakness. That strained tendon has been lurking there from 2 weeks ago… the horse should have been pulled from the Belmont after his run for The Preakness and put on 100% stall rest with a slight daily 15 min walk in hand.. and a diet of just hay and water to bring him down off of his hi-energy oat feed that will have him bonkers in a few days if they don’t do it as well as putting the horse in danger of foundering taking in all that hi-protien food and unable to expend the energy.

    The trainer didn’t do that- He tried wishing it away… until it was obvious, the horse was going lame from continued training. The trainer did more damage to that horse galloping him this morning, than if he would have manned up and said: “Call the Vet, I think we’re in trouble. We need an ultra-sound of his tendon right away- if it’s as bad as I think it is… he’s out of contention.”

    That is what a good horseman would have done. To do otherwise…(like sending the horse out this morning for a gallop) this Jackass is unqualified to be around horses and should be suspended and have his license revoked. grrr- imo- of course!

  251. admin
    June 8th, 2012 at 2:52 pm
    ______________________
    This is exactly the line of attack that will work against Obama, both on the political level, and the psychological level. The man is mentally unstable, and politically vulnerable. The economy is doing fine. Really. To make that kind of statement in the face of a mountain of contrary evidence is to deny reality. It is the essence of magic thinking and it is the prelude to the appearance of the tyrannical god which even the lying big media cannot keep a lid on. What a pleasure it will be to see all of those bastards twist in the wind. They all deserve to swing for what they have done to this country.

  252. I figured out a long time ago why we haven’t had a Triple Crown winner in decades. When I traveled to Ireland, I looked up the pedigree of their brood mares and realized what had happened. The Irish bought all of the Gr.1 black type Stakes Winning brood mares from the breeding farms/owners had to offer. Shipped them to Ireland for breeding stock to their own TB stallions/horses for racing and Steeple Chasing. The primary reason there has been such a TC drought for so long now- Sad but true.. And that is a fact-

  253. moononpluto
    June 8th, 2012 at 11:09 am
    Obama: “the notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive”

    “MY” White House”? the guy is so full of himself. I cannot wait to see his scrawny ass dragged kicking and screaming to give his concession speech November 6th!

  254. turndownobama
    June 8th, 2012 at 1:28 pm
    wbboei
    June 8th, 2012 at 12:34 pm
    I would call what Bill is doing to Obama the rope a dope tactic. And it is working.

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

    Pls remind me again what ‘rope a dope’ means?
    &&&&&&&&&&

    Muhammad Ali used this tactic. He’d lay on the ropes, completely cover his face and body, and let the other guy throw endless amount of punches with not much getting through. After the guy tired out, Ali would come back at his weakened opponent.

  255. I should have added in the US to complete this sentence

    “The Irish bought all of the Gr.1 black type Stakes Winning brood mares from the breeding farms/owners had to offer in the US…”

  256. turndownobama
    June 8th, 2012 at 1:43 pm

    “Mr. Clinton himself acknowledged, “I’m a little rusty at politics.”
    —————————————–
    HIlarious!! My biggest laugh of the month!!!!

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

    LOL! And this puts !What Clinton said that bugged Obama! at the top of another news cycle.

    Senile like a fox.
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
    You cannot unring a Bell.Ir a Bill in this case. 😆

  257. UNITER??? REALLY DUDE?

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/06/07/the_real_war_on_women_114399.html

    June 7, 2012
    Obama Has Always Been a Divider
    By Thomas Sowell

    Among the people who are disappointed with President Obama, none has more reason to be disappointed than those who thought he was going to be “a uniter, rather than a divider” and that he would “bring us all together.”

    It was a noble hope, but one with no factual foundation. Barack Obama had been a divider all his adult life, especially as a community organizer, and he had repeatedly sought out and allied himself with other dividers, the most blatant of whom was the man whose church he attend for 20 years, Jeremiah Wright.

    Now, with his presidency on the line and the polls looking dicey, President Obama’s re-election campaign has become more openly divisive than ever.

    He has embraced the strident “Occupy Wall Street” movement, with its ridiculous claim of representing the 99 percent against the 1 percent. Obama’s Department of Justice has been spreading the hysteria that states requiring photo identification for voting are trying to keep minorities from voting, and using the prevention of voter fraud as a pretext.

    But anyone who doubts the existence of voter fraud should read John Fund’s book “Stealing Elections” or J. Christian Adams’s book, “Injustice,” which deals specifically with the Obama Justice Department’s overlooking voter fraud when those involved are black Democrats.

    Not content with dividing classes and races, the Obama campaign is now seeking to divide the sexes by declaring that women are being paid less than men, as part of a “war on women” conducted by villains, from whom Obama and company will protect the women — and, not incidentally, expect to receive their votes this November.

    The old — and repeatedly discredited — game of citing women’s incomes as some percentage of men’s incomes is being played once again, as part of the “war on women” theme.

    Since women average fewer hours of work per year, and fewer years of consecutive full-time employment than men, among other differences, comparisons of male and female annual earnings are comparisons of apples and oranges, as various female economists have pointed out. Read Diana Furchtgott-Roth of the Hudson Institute or Professor Claudia Goldin of Harvard, for example.

    When you compare women and men in the same occupations with the same skills, education, hours of work, and many other factors that go into determining pay, the differences in incomes shrink to the vanishing point — and, in some cases, the women earn more than comparable men.

    But why let mere facts spoil the emotional rhetoric or the political ploys to drum up hysteria and collect votes?

    The farcical nature of these ploys came out after House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi declared that Congress needed to pass the Fair Pay Act, because women average 23 percent lower incomes than men.

    A reporter from The Daily Caller then pointed out that the women on Nancy Pelosi’s own staff average 27 percent lower incomes than the men on her staff. Does that show that Pelosi herself is guilty of discrimination against women? Or does it show that such simple-minded statistics are grossly misleading?

    The so-called Fair Pay Act has nothing to do with fairness and everything to do with election-year politics. No one in his right mind expects that bill to become law. It will be lucky to pass the Senate, and has no chance whatever of getting passed in the House of Representatives.

    The whole point of this political exercise is to get Republicans on record voting against “fairness” for women, as part of the Democrats’ campaign strategy to claim that there is a “war on women.”

    If you are looking for a real war on women, you might look at the practice of aborting girl babies after an ultrasound picture shows that they are girls. These abortions are the most basic kind of discrimination, and their consequences have already been demonstrated in countries like China and India, where sexually discriminatory abortions and female infanticide have produced an imbalance in the number of adult males and females.

    A bill to outlaw sexually and racially discriminatory abortions has been opposed and defeated by House Democrats.

  258. wbboei
    June 8th, 2012 at 11:32 am
    Another fitting epitaph for that spawn of the love scene in deliverance–Claire McCaskill.

    too freakin’funny!! that is a classic, wbboei!

  259. Basil.. you are the Bird Whisperer. Birds are a real specialty and I can say without a whimper and the first to admit I don’t know the first thing about them. But I do appreciate you sharing your knowledge and experience with us..
    ______________

    wbboei
    June 8th, 2012 at 4:35 pm

    admin
    June 8th, 2012 at 2:52 pm

    I agree 100%…

  260. I’ve always wondered about this too:

    Why are horses put down so quickly when they break a leg..

    Mrs. S- Thanks.
    Sad that horses are so delicate in this situation. I always thought they could put in a big sling and mend.

    My blog name is from a horse, but I don’t like riding them. I am one of those folks that sit on a horse, don’t like to kick them and just let them mull around eating flowers.

    Yea, I am a dog person and horses are beautiful but they are too high off the ground for my liking.

  261. On the Alhabama vote about Agenda 21. I has been known for decades that private property rights and thereby the capacity to raise capital are a primary pre-condition for economic growth in free countries. Locking up the land is a disaster. But then again the UN is dominated by under-developed nations

  262. I am one of those folks that sit on a horse, don’t like to kick them and just let them mull around eating flowers.

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

    Me too. I’m on a mountain trail to enjoy the scenery, so let the horse enjoy the flowers in her own way. 😉

  263. Great explanation Mrs. S. I had no idea that only in in 1000 horses can survive a broken leg. For all their weight and strength in some ways they are just as delicate as birds.

    Amazing but sad.

    Interesting historical info about the Irish taking the great breeding stock and appalling that I’ll Have Another’s trainers may have been responsible for the horse’s injuries.

  264. Shadowfax-

    Barbaro is the perfect example of trying to heal a horse with a fractured leg- and why the odds are always against them the story will have a happy ending. He fractured a hind leg. A death knell for a stallion to be used for breeding. The TB Assn only allow LIVE covers… no artificial insemination allowed.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbaro

    Of course we try to save them depending on the seriousness of the injury and the future use of the horse- but most times, it’s only prolonging the inevitable heart ache lingering overhead in their future.

    The story of Barbaro gives the reader a truthful synopsis of why it is so difficult to save them.

  265. Oh no he ddnt:

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/don-rickles-president-obama-shirley-maclaine-335308

    Don Rickles Shocks Hollywood Crowd With Racial Obama Joke

    The 86-year-old comic brought his shtick to the AFI’s Shirley MacLaine tribute; likened the president to a janitor.

    Don Rickles nearly hijacked the American Film Institute’s tribute to Shirley MacLaine on Thursday night at Sony Pictures Studios, unleashing a trademark barrage of insults that took aim at President Obama, Warren Beatty, Jack Nicholson and the honoree herself.

    “I shouldn’t make fun of the blacks,” Rickles said, and then proceeded to do just that: “President Obama is a personal friend of mine. He was over to the house yesterday, but the mop broke.”

    The black-tie crowd, gathered to celebrate MacLaine, the 40th recipient of the AFI’s Life Achievement Award, alternately gasped at the 86-year-old comic’s put-downs and then found themselves laughing and applauding.

    “Shirley,” Rickles, living up to his moniker as Mr. Warmth, began as he rose to his feet from a table near the center of the room. “I never read your books, and I don’t plan to.”

    Turning to MacLaine’s brother Beatty, he continued, “I know your brother very well, and I never liked him.”

    Shifting his focus to Nicholson, who also was present, Rickles cracked, “He’s not here tonight – he’s with the Lakers, oiling their jocks.”

    Taking aim at Jennifer Aniston, one of the actresses who shared the main table with MacLaine, Rickles claimed she “took my table at the Tower Restaurant one night because she was in heat with some guy.”

    Surveying the celebrity-packed room, Rickles wondered where all the stars were, saying, “If Sidney Poitier hadn’t shown up, they’d be nobody.” Spotting Dennis Haysbert, on whose series The Unit Rickles had appeared, he shouted, “Oh, there’s the black guy from The Unit,” adding, “now he works for Allstate.”

    Before he sat down, though, Rickles mellowed. Recalling how he and MacLaine’s friendship dates back to the days of the old Sahara Hotel in Las Vegas, where she hung out with the Rat Pack, Rickles finally testified: “You have a charm and a warmth and class. I’ve known a lot of people in showbiz, but I’m so proud that you asked me to be here tonight.”

  266. story in Time mag about Romney and his mother, however you need a subscription to read…

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2115636,00.html

    Dreams from His Mother
    By Barton Gellman Monday, June 04, 2012

    On the campaign trail during his mother’s Senate bid, Mitt and Lenore strategize in a hotel room

    Square jaw set, white mane swept back, George Romney stormed into the Lansing Civic Center one day in November 1970, spoiling for a fight. His wife Lenore had just lost an ill-advised campaign for the U.S. Senate. Her husband blamed disloyal Republicans–Michigan Governor William Milliken most of all. George said privately that Milliken had “weaseled and, frankly, destroyed my wife as a candidate.” Now he grabbed a microphone and denounced the room at large, where GOP leaders had gathered in Milliken’s honor.

    Silence fell. George set his eyes on Joyce Braithwaite, a 30-something party activist and an intimate of Lenore’s. He…

    **********************.

    if anyone can post the rest, it would be interesting..

  267. Rendell still off the reservation.

    Former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell told CNN’s Jessica Yellin today that, in 2008, he thought the Obama campaign was far too serious to make it to November, and he’s still “not sure” the President will win this go around. In an interview on John King USA today, Rendell confessed that, while the President “should” win, he wasn’t sure it would happen.

    “Do they take themselves too seriously?” CNN’s Yellin asked, to which Rendell said yes, and told an anecdote about how he made a joke about President Obama’s flag pin on television once that earned him a stern phone call from David Axelrod. “They never got a sense of humor, but they made it till November,” he noted, smiling, though later adding that he was concerned. “I’m not sure he’s going to win — he should win,” he told Yellin. “He inherited the worse set of problems of any president in my lifetime,” he asserted, but Rendell advised the President to not run so much on his record but, rather, “shift to stressing the future.”

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/06/08/former-dem-gov-ed-rendell-obama-takes-himself-too-seriously-not-sure-if-he-will-win-reelection/

  268. Mrs. Smith,
    Thank you for the info on horses in response to Basil’s question. Very interesting.

  269. The NYT has yet another article about Mormonism out. Because, ya know, they are so concerned about the “fact” that evangelicals hates them some Mormons. Even though the evangelicals, with one or two rare exceptions, have not had any problem whatsoever with Romney’s faith. But the NYT just has to tell us what they imagine to be in the heads of those evil evil bigots on the right. As a public service of concern, you see. A commenter on Althouse nailed it:

    Saint Croix said…
    Oh my God the New York Times is annoying. So passive-aggressive, so dishonest, so fucking liberal. Yet again they are talking about how Mitt Romney is a Mormon. They are raising the Mormon question. But the New York Times knows this is evil, in the New York Times’ lizard brain, so they deny what they are doing while doing it.

    “You’re so Mormon. You know how Mormon you are? Other people are attacking you because you’re a Mormon. The right is attacking you. The left is attacking you. But we’re not attacking you. We’re the New York Times! Although you are a Mormon. You’re definitely a Mormon. Not saying that’s a problem. Just want to talk about the Mormon church and the Mormons and you’re such a Mormon. You Mormon.”

  270. Mrs. Smith, all equine enthusiasts, and those who appreciate life in general
    ———————
    The focus of tee vee coverage for “I’ll have another” is almost exclusively devoted to reporting the monetary, attendance, and betting angles.

Comments are closed.