Sequester Saturday Solution: Leave It To Bieber!

What joy! Joy worthy of an ode to joy! To think we finally got a Twitter account and reactivated our Facebook (a company founded on sexism and misogyny) account on such a day! Joy! Joy! Joy! Just as we establish our accounts we hear Justin Bieber, King of FaceBook and Twitter, is joining the fight for economic responsibility! Justin Bieber will save us all from the booberies of Barack Obama. Hooray for Bieber!

Here’s the Bieberific news on this Sequester Saturday:

“Bieber-Endorsed Prepaid Card Aims to Teach Kids About Responsible Spending

Teen hearthrob latest celebrity to endorse prepaid debit card

This month, Justin Bieber begins marketing a prepaid card designed to promote responsible teen spending to his millions of fans. He’ll take to social media to spread his message about the SpendSmart MasterCard from a company called BillMyParents, Inc.

“There’s probably no single individual out there that can send this message, that can turn a brighter spotlight on this message, then Justin Bieber,” said Mike McCoy, chief executive officer of BillMyParents, Inc.

Bieber, who turned 19 Friday, began his career as a YouTube sensation. Now he has more than 51 million Facebook friends and 30 million Twitter followers, making him a perfect and powerful front man for any product. He’s joining the ranks of celebrities who have used their star power to promote plastic. [snip]

Mark said he is skeptical whether any prepaid card is the best way to teach teens about financial responsibility, namely, he said, because prepaid cards can be riddled with fees.

“If you’re depositing $50 and you’re paying a buck-50 every time you deposit $50 into an account. That’s horribly inefficient and not cost effective,” Mark said.

Prepaid cards may charge consumers to load money on the card, withdraw cash and check their balance. There are monthly fees as well. For the A-Rod-endorsed Dynasty prepaid Visa RushCard, the monthly fee is up to $9.95 a month. Magic Johnson’s prepaid MasterCard Magic Card has a monthly fee of $4.95. Suze Orman’s Approved Card charges $3 a month. The SpendSmart MasterCard that Bieber will endorse has a monthly fee of $3.95.

“Every time a teen swipes the card both the parent and teen receive an immediate text that tells them how much was spent, where it was spent and what the balance is on the card,” McCoy said.

Parents can lock and unlock the card if it’s lost or if a parent wants the child to stop using it for any reason. And it’s blocked from use at certain places.”

We can already feel the hate from the Haters against Bieber and this pre-paid card scheme! But the Beliebers will help us out. Stop the Hate!

How many who know about such matters will mock and hate on the Bieber? But we are here to defend Justin and his historic inspirational work to teach financial responsibility especially as Barack Obama ravages the country this Sequester Saturday.

Consider what Bieber is doing and what Barack is doing. Bieber is working for a company called “Bill My Parents”. Barack Obama is working for a corruption that says “Bill the Kids”. Who has the slightly higher moral high ground, huh, haters? ‘Bill My Parents’ versus ‘Bill the kids.’

The Bieber haters will correctly point out that the only one making quick big money off this deal is Justin Bieber. The Bieber haters are right when they note that most if not all of these prepaid debit/credit cards are scams that loot the population that buys them. That’s all true haters. But lets be fair on this and compare and contrast.

We didn’t hear complaints from the haters when Barack Obama donor Russell Simmons made hundreds of millions from his fleecing of the poor and the stupid with his financial card schemes. The haters did not speak up when Russell Simmons (yeah the guy who wrote Super Rich: A Guide To Having It All) went to Occupy Wall Street even as he fleeced the flock.

On this Sequester Saturday when supposed adults like Obama and his henchmen cannot pay the bills we wonder if Obama’s spending addictions are due to Barack’s sperm donor father being too busy donating his sperm to other witless women to teach fat little Barack responsibility in spending. Justin Bieber is not so irresponsible!

Consider this from Bieber’s spending scheme:

“One more important point:

One benefit, according to Cole, there’s no overdraft protection. If Morris tries to spend money he doesn’t have in the account, the purchase is denied.

Morris said that’s happened before.

“It’s extremely embarrassing,” Morris said.

But Cole said it’s teaching him a valuable lesson about money.

He’s run up against the real world of budgeting,” she said, adding that it provides freedom while teaching him about the world of plastic purchasing power.”

Isn’t the above Sequester Saturday in a nutshell? The only quibble we have is that the “real world of budgeting” is not the world Barack Obama lives in. It’s not the real world in Washington D.C.

“Financial responsibility”, what a concept. Hey, if as we are warning about, Hillary Clinton 2016 is attacked to the point of destruction by Barack Obama’s army of thugs, henchmen, and haters, why not Bieber for President? Bieber for President! Beliebers Unite! Haters get back!

Justin Bieber certainly won’t do as badly as Barack. At least Bieber knows what it takes to work hard and has the experience to run big organizations. Bieber is a Canadian, not a natural born citizen of the United States, but after Big Media protected Barack Obama so much that not even questions or requests for documentation could be made, who is going to become a Bieber “birther”?

Yeah, Bieber is not of constitutional age, but according to the Obama Hopium Guzzlers the Constitution is so old it is old hat. So why not Bieber? Bieber for President!

With Barack Obama you get janitors scared by lies. With Barack Obama you get lies on top of lies smothered with a syrup of fear-mongering and more lies:

“The White House says its hands are tied by the $85 billion sequester, but budget experts counter that it will have some flexibility to choose what to cut and what to save.

The wiggle-room is inviting accusations from Congress that President Obama is mismanaging the cuts.

Critics also say the flexibility could allow the administration to make the cuts more painful, in order to pressure congressional Republicans to raise taxes as part of a sequester-replacement. Some of these critics point to the decision to not deploy an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf.”

With Bieber you get music. Ya gotta Belieb!

Barack Obama does not know what he is doing. Obama’s Now Added $6 Trillion to the National Debt. He’s a boob. Barack Obama proposed the sequester, threatened vetoes to protect the sequester, said the sequester would never happen, and now according to Politico does not what the next “sequester step” will be. And it is only going to get worse as we hit more boob bumps like the one on March 27 when money runs out for the government.

Bieber would not let this happen, would he? Let’s get rid of Barack Obama and leave it to Bieber.

94 thoughts on “Sequester Saturday Solution: Leave It To Bieber!

  1. What we suggested Republicans should do, they might do:

    House Republicans, among them the head of a key oversight panel, threatened Friday to call Cabinet secretaries and other executive agency managers before congressional hearings on how furloughs are applied in the wake of forced spending cuts.

    The lawmakers warned President Barack Obama against choosing political gain over public safety in deciding which federal employees are assigned the periods of unpaid leave as a result of $85 billion in automatic cuts that began Friday.

    “If they’re laying off TSA agents and air-traffic controllers, and yet (Transportation Secretary) Ray LaHood’s office is still getting cleaned each night, come on,” said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chairman of the regulatory subcommittee of the House Oversight Committee. [snip]

    Jordan said he and other leaders of oversight panels in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives may hold hearings to ask how the furloughs are applied if the lawmakers believe essential workers are being sent home before more peripheral employees. [snip]

    Republicans have accused Obama and Democratic congressional allies of trying to gain political advantage by painting doomsday scenarios about the immediate impact of the forced spending cuts, which the Republicans say amount to only 2.2 percent of this year’s projected $3.8 trillion federal budget. [snip]

    Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., disputed Obama’s claim. He pointed to recent guidance from the Office of Personnel Management, the human resources arm of the executive branch, that he said gives agency directors leeway to decide which employees get furloughed based on the importance of their work.

    A 35-page document titled “Guidance for Administrative Furloughs” says in part:

    “Agencies are responsible for indentifying the employees affected by administrative furloughs based on budget conditions, funding sources, mission priorities (including the need to perform emergency work involving the safety of human life or protection of property) and other factors.”

    A reporter asked Obama on Friday to respond to criticism from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an independent who endorsed the president’s re-election but who suggested this week that the administration is exaggerating the spending cuts’ impact. [snip]

    From where many Republican lawmakers sit, Obama was hawking unduly bad news to get Americans on his side in the larger budget battles that have stymied Washington.

    “On the non-defense side, the overall spending level this year is 12 percent higher than when Barack Obama came into office four years ago, so even after the cuts, these agencies will be spending more than they did then, even on an inflation-adjusted basis,” said Rep. John Campbell, R-Calif.

  2. Admin: another superb post by you. Thank you for your insights and your sanity in these insane times.

  3. Barry needs one of those Beaver cards, (yea, I know he isn’t ‘The Beave’) every time he tries to overspend on the budget, all American’s get an email letting them know he tried to steal our tax money. Then, every time he checks his balance, uses the card, money is taking out of Michelle’s spending money…so she can thump him over the head.

  4. admin
    March 2, 2013 at 8:10 pm
    What we suggested Republicans should do, they might do:

    now that’s what we’re talking about…hold O to the fire…get out the floodlights…lights, camera(s) ACTION…

    and do not let up…keep building the momentum towards the next crisis…and debt ceiling…chip away at his credibility…

    and expose all the ongoing taxpayer money that is being wasted…stories like $50 hammers, billions to study the sex lifes of bees, etc…get headlines and get the interest of the voters…even the low interest voters, in fact, it might be the only way to get their attention in this reality tv world we live in…the more absurd the exposed outrage the better…

  5. From today’s WSJ–Iran will soon have the bomb, an arms race will ensue, and Obama??? What does he say, and what does he do about this? He does nothing. He says nothing except waxing about a world free of nuclear weapons. This is obviously what the American People want, because they elected him.

    Iran cheated on that agreement and terminated its implementation after two years, so it doesn’t inspire much confidence. If a grand—and honest—bargain can’t be struck, and Iran is recognized as a de facto or overt nuclear power, then what? Will the Middle East see a nuclear-arms race as rival nations try to catch up?

    “Yes, it might, but not overnight,” Mr. Heinonen says. Saudi Arabia, Egypt and others would need five to 10 years to build a bomb “even in a crash course.”

    Yet that is only if the countries are “starting from zero,” he notes. Saudi Arabia may already be on the move.

    In 2011, the kingdom announced plans to build 16 nuclear power reactors by 2030. “That’s actually a funny number,” Mr. Heinonen says—just what a country would need to justify developing domestic fuel-cycle capabilities that could have both civilian and military uses. “If you want to maintain your own uranium enrichment, that’s the right number. . . . It’s a perfect match.” He adds: “Remember, there was no one military program which took place without civilian. It’s always under the civilian umbrella.”

    For now, Mr. Heinonen is most concerned about Pakistan. The country is unstable, its nuclear arsenal huge, and “they are building these tactical nuclear weapons, which means that they need to move them around. . . . So how do you maintain the control?”

    Any warehouse or convoy poses a proliferation risk. “Look at what happened with A.Q. Khan,” he says, referring to the godfather of the Pakistani bomb who sold nuclear secrets to Iran, North Korea and Libya. “Either the military was entirely incompetent, or they knew what Khan was doing. . . . I think they all knew about it, and some of them got their own kickbacks.”

    An afternoon with Mr. Heinonen provides a sobering counterpoint to happy talk from the Obama administration about “a world without nuclear weapons.” Mr. Heinonen, in his engineer’s uniform of tie and short-sleeve button-down shirt, maintains a certain equanimity about world affairs. Yet the parade of horribles rolls on.

  6. As far as I am concerned anyone who voted for Obama is partially responsible for what he does. That is my view.

  7. Why the ‘threat’ on Bob Woodward matters

    Text Size

    By Kathleen Parker,

    Published: March 1

    To the world beyond the Beltway, it might not mean much that Bob Woodward of the famed Watergate duo went public with his recent White House run-in.

    This would be an oversight.



    Weigh In

    Personal Post

    Kathleen Parker

    Parker writes a twice-weekly column on politics and culture.



    You may also like…

    Michael Gerson

    Debt deniers lack moral capital

    Jennifer Rubin

    Sequester buffoonery on display


    It also may not mean much that the White House press corps got teed off when they weren’t allowed access to President Obama as he played golf with Tiger Woods. This, too, would be an oversight.

    Though not comparable — one appeared to be a veiled threat aimed at one of the nation’s most respected journalists and the other a minor blip in the scheme of things — both are part of a pattern of behavior by the Obama administration that suggests not just thin skin but a disregard for the role of the press and a gradual slide toward a state media.

    This is where oversight can become dangerous.

    Understandably, everyday Americans may find this discussion too inside baseball to pay much mind. Why can’t the president play a little golf without a press gaggle watching? As for Woodward, it’s not as though the White House was threatening to bust his kneecaps.

    Add to these likely sentiments the fact that Americans increasingly dislike the so-called mainstream media, sometimes for good reason. Distrust of media, encouraged by alternative media seeking to enhance their own standing, has become a tool useful to the very powers the Fourth Estate was constitutionally endowed to monitor. When the president can bypass reporters to reach the public, it is not far-fetched to imagine a time — perhaps now? — when the state controls the message.

    To recap: Woodward recently wrote a commentary for The Post that placed the sequester debacle on Obama’s desk and accused the president of “moving the goal posts” by asking for more tax increases.

    Before his piece was published, Woodward called the White House to tell officials it was coming. A shouting match ensued between Woodward and Gene Sperling, Obama’s economic adviser, followed by an e-mail in which Sperling said that Woodward “will regret staking out that claim.”

    Though the tone was conciliatory and Sperling apologized for raising his voice, the message nonetheless caused Woodward to bristle.

    Again, Woodward’s kneecaps are probably safe, but the challenge to his facts, and therefore to his character, was unusual, given Woodward’s stature. And, how, by the way, might Woodward come to regret it? Sperling’s words, though measured, could be read as: “You’ll never set foot in this White House again.”

    When reporters lose access to the White House, it isn’t about being invited to the annual holiday party. It’s about having access to the most powerful people on the planet as they execute the nation’s business.

    Inarguably, Woodward has had greater access to the White House than any other journalist in town. Also inarguably, he would survive without it. He has filled a library shelf with books about the inner workings of this and other administrations, the fact of which makes current events so remarkable.

    Woodward, almost 70, is Washington’s Reporter Emeritus. His facts stand up to scrutiny. His motivations withstand the test of objectivity. Sperling obviously assumed that Woodward wouldn’t take offense at the suggestion that he not only was wrong but was also endangering his valuable proximity to power.

    He assumed, in other words, that Woodward would not do his job. This was an oversight.

    This is no tempest in a teapot but rather the leak in the dike. Drip by drip, the Obama administration has demonstrated its intolerance for dissent and its contempt for any who stray from the White House script. Yes, all administrations are sensitive to criticism, and all push back when such criticism is deemed unfair or inaccurate. But no president since Richard Nixon has demonstrated such overt contempt for the messenger. And, thanks to technological advances in social media, Obama has been able to bypass traditional watchdogs as no other president has.

    More to the point, the Obama White House is, to put it politely, fudging as it tries to place the onus of the sequester on Congress. And, as has become customary, officials are using the Woodward spat to distract attention. As Woodward put it: “This is the old trick . . . of making the press . . . the issue, rather than what the White House has done here.”

    Killing the messenger is a time-honored method of controlling the message, but we have already spilled that blood. And the First Amendment’s protection of a free press, the purpose of which is to check power and constrain government’s ability to dictate the lives of private citizens, was no accident.

  8. Just came across a poll asking people who they wanted to see run for potus in 2016 and not supplying any possible names, just “who comes to mind?”

    With no names supplied, there were 53% “Don’t know” responses, which is a measure, I think, of voter low-information and presumably not likely to vote.

    The respondents named HRC (first with 22%), Rubio tied with Christie for 2nd-3rd at 3%, and Biden tied with Ron Paul for 4th-5th at 2%.

    The breakdown for Hillary is telling: She gets 6% vote from Republicans (compared with 9% for Rubio) and 20% votes from independents (3% for Rubio). Rubio gets nothing from Democrats.

    As for Democrats, it’s a 38%/4% split between Hillary and Biden.

  9. And here’s another poll:

    Poll: Hillary Clinton would beat Scott Walker and Paul Ryan for prez on their home turf

    It’s been less than four months since the 2012 presidential election, which of course means it’s long past time for politicos to start obsessing about the 2016 election.

    In that vein, the Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling firm, which polled Wisconsinites last week on Russ Feingold’s favorability ratings, also asked some questions in that poll about hypothetical matchups for the presidential race. And the results might surprise some Wisconsin Republicans expecting some rising GOP stars to get a home-state bounce.

    The poll says that Hillary Clinton would handily beat both Gov. Scott Walker and U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan in Wisconsin in a general election. Clinton would beat Ryan by a 51-43 margin and thump Walker by a 54-41 margin, according to the poll. She claims double-digit leads against both Republicans with voters identifying themselves as independents.

    Not surprisingly given those numbers, Clinton is the candidate that half of polled Wisconsin Democrats most want to run, with Feingold the first choice of 25 percent of Democrats.

    In a Republican primary, the poll suggests both Ryan and Walker would win handily, although U.S. Sen Marco Rubio of Florida makes a strong second-place showing in both matchups, losing to Ryan 35-22 and Walker 33-27. (New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie pulls in 10 percent in both hypothetical primaries, and no other candidate gets out of single digits.)

    The poll surveyed 1,799 Wisconsin voters, including 679 typical Republican primary voters, between Feb. 21 and 24. The margin of error for questions of all respondents was 2.3 percent, while the margin of error for Republican primary voters was 3.8 percent.

    Also, the election is almost four years away.

  10. holdthemaccountable

    March 3, 2013 at 9:22 am

    Will Big-Drama Obama Backfire? by Keith Koffler on March 3, 2013, 8:35 am
    …Because when Saturday Night Live opens its show satirizing The One, you know there’s a problem in paradise.
    From last last night:
    (NBC Video)
    I do not think it means a damn thing that Saturday Night Live mocks Obama over his chicken little routine. Recall they did mock Russert et al for his one sided interrogations of Hillary vs Obama, and nothing came of it. I would much rather they did a skit on the White House intimidating journalists, because that is no laughing matter. And I would really like that skit to show those who claim it is no big deal while receiving gratuitites from the WH. There are too many people out there who say that is just politics, to excuse damned near anything.

  11. NBC Tonight Show host Jay Leno presented a great interpretation of the sequester negotiations Wednesday.

    In a mock video, many of our political leaders sang their views as if characters in the hit musical “Les Miserables.”
    – See more at:

    Read more:

  12. I would much rather they did a skit on the White House intimidating journalists
    Yes. Much more to the point of integrity totally absent. Maybe the newly-unveiled His44 Twitter account could get a tweet-a-thon going to that effect.

  13. Madness!!! 😯

    Josh Welch, a second-grader at Park Elementary School in Baltimore, Maryland, was suspended for two days because his teacher thought he shaped the strawberry, pre-baked toaster pastry into something resembling a gun. WBFF, the FOX affiliate in Baltimore, broke the story.

    Welch, an arty kid who has reportedly been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, said his goal was to turn it into a mountain, but that didn’t really materialize, reports Fox News.

  14. Bibi cannot act without US help, so unfortunately Wbboei Iran may
    very well go nuclear. I hope Bibi has the courage to attempt to slow down
    Iran’s nuclear program with an air strike, but it does not look good.

  15. 😆

    We here at SooperMexy Headquarters were afeared for our lives when it was leaked that Obama had approved the unconstitutional drone strike program for Americans!! Especially after Robert ChubbyCheeks Gibbs admitted that he lied to the White House press corps about the entire program!

    However, we, at the SooperMexy Headquarters are completely reassured by the video posted by the White House to give Americans guidelines on how not to become a target for drone bombing!! We think you will too!

  16. What we knew they didn’t. Another realization that comes too late:

    Ann Romney: ‘I’m Happy to Blame the Media’

    Mitt Romney’s wife, Ann Romney, said this morning that the media is at least in part to blame for husband’s lose in the last presidential election:

    “I’m happy to blame the media,” said Ann Romney on Fox.

    Host Chris Wallace asked, “Do you think the media was in the tank for Barack Obama?”

    “I think that any time you are running for office you always think that you are being portrayed unfairly, and, you know, we — of course, on our side believe there is more bias in favor of the other side,” said Ann Romney. “I think that, you know, that is a pretty universal — universally felt opinion.”

    She still doesn’t get the difference between a media that writes tough articles against a candidate and Big Media as an activist player to destroy one candidate in order to defend the Journolister choice.

  17. The Reps will never succeed as long as they have assholes like Billy Kristol. I hope he’s really happy with the Reps role in helping BO get elected.

    How painful it was to see a caring, qualified man who could have made a difference for the America he loves like Romney and the classy Anne Romney compared to what we have in the WH now.

    (Not my foul language)

    I don’t think TICKED OFF really covers it!!!!

    Posted in 2012, but still rings true:

    “Alan Simpson, Republican Senator from Wyoming and co-chair of President Obama’s deficit commission, calls senior citizens the “Greediest Generation” as he compared Social Security to a Milk Cow with 310 million teats.

    Here’s a response in a letter from Patty Myers, a career school teacher in Montana … I think she is a little ticked off! She also tells it like it is!”


  19. I would doubt that Romney is clueless about the cheating of Obama. The elephant in the room with the Romney interview seemed to be that many people totally voted SKIN but no one on the panel wanted to say that nor did Romney.

    If Ann or Mitt had called the media out, their message would have been drowned out by shouts from the media of sour grapes, poor loser, bitter. Even many from his own party would not stand with Mitt or call out the media so why would we expect Romney to climb way out on that limb and have even Reps saw it off.

    I don’t fault Romney for not calling out BO or the media at this point. It would do no good for him and would only play into the WH’s hands…great distracton for BO. The Reps could take a page from BO’s playbook. tar and feather Romney. claim innocence and go back to helping BO take down the USA.

  20. I found this gem of a link at UppityWomans: Michelle Obama Cuts Ties with Controversial Wal-Mart Supplier Pub: 22 May 2007

    Best two paragraphs:
    …In an exclusive interview Tuesday morning on “Good Morning America,” before her resignation, Michelle Obama responded to ABC News’ Robin Roberts who questioned whether her position was a conflict of interest.

    “Barack is gonna say what needs to be said, and it’s not going to, you know, necessarily matter … what I’m doing if it’s not the right thing,” she said. “He’s going to do what’s right for … the country. He’s going to speak out. And he’s going to, you know, implement his views as he sees fit. … I see no conflict in that….”

  21. Michelle: I see no conflict in that….”
    Early sign of complete lack of scruples.

  22. HoldThemAccountable, in 2008 the DailyKooks attacked Hillary for her decades ago work on the Board of Directors of WalMart. On Michelle they remained silent for her current connections. Now this will elicit silence too from those creeps:

    President Barack Obama has tapped Wal-Mart’s Sylvia Mathews Burwell as his next budget chief, thrusting her into the center of Washington’s heated partisan budget battles, and is filling vacancies at the Energy Department and Environmental Protection Agency, an official says.

    A White House official said Obama will announce Burwell’s nomination to lead the Office of Management and Budget during a White House ceremony Monday morning, a White House official said. If confirmed by the Senate, Burwell would bring more diversity to Obama’s second term Cabinet following criticism that many top jobs were going to white men.

  23. Thanks admin; I should have refreshed page first. Did not know about Hillary attack re Walmart. Two different sets of rules of course. But it is more than two sets of rules, isn’t it? It’s flipping the bird over and over and over.

    I had an interesting afternoon yesterday at Shirley’s house. I took her printouts of articles about current OFA goings on, illegal immigrant releases, etc. Things she has not seen in the newspaper she gets or on tee vee she watches. Early on in the visit I realized she was hooked to FoxNews but she did not know it. So I watched Fox while she read the pages I’d printed out. She’d make comments and several times Fox was covering the very topic she was on. So she would stop and listen. Watching Fox was a treat for me because I will not pay price to get the bundle it is in.

    When we were done, she handed me back the printout I’d brought. I’d hoped she’d read again or share with family, but she stated it was too disheartening to go over again. She gave high compliments to our ranks for sticking with it. She is 85 and has a pacemaker. In my book she gets high marks too.

  24. This really stinks, and there’s so much crap that it is not possible to keep up with it, really.
    Republicans around the country railed against President Obama’s health-care law for four years, but in recent weeks, GOP governors and state legislators have embraced some of the bill’s provisions.
    How did Republicans learn to stop worrying and love Obamacare?
    In a word: industry.
    Hospitals, insurers and drug companies have lobbied in state capital after state capital, leaning on Republicans until they agreed to create insurance exchanges or expand Medicaid as Obamacare prescribed

  25. Barack’s Brother!!! 😯

    On the broiling shores of Lake Victoria, a man in Islamic garb is making a politician’s sales pitch to a group of baffled villagers and the resident witch doctor — a wild-eyed character with green and pink parrot feathers in his hair. He is pontificating on an oddly familiar theme: a time for change.

    Yet the man on the election stump in this remote part of Africa perhaps has more right than most to appropriate the message that helped Barack Obama become America’s first black president. For the tall, paunchy figure trying to win over the villagers is 55-year-old Roy Abong’o Malik

    Read more:
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  26. OMG – what gall! What nerve! What arrogance! Who does he think he is?


    JERUSALEM ­ U.S. President Barack Obama has demanded a timetable for an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank.

    Israeli sources said Obama, scheduled to arrive in Israel on March 20, wants a detailed Israeli withdrawal plan from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the president’s visit. The sources said the Israeli plan would be considered in what could be an imminent U.S. initiative to establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank in 2014.

  27. Obama Administration Unleashes Foreign Criminals on the People of the United States

    At what point do we declare ourselves apart from the delusion and admit that we are under an invasion and that our power structure is infiltrated at every level? This is an undisputable fact, emphasized in the filing of the lawsuit by ICE Agents against the Obama Administration for not allowing the agents to do their jobs in enforcing United States law, which again, is what we the people charge the Executive Branch of government with doing. Any act in the contrary being absolutely void of the consent of we the people who are the authority.

    Thousands more foreign criminals are scheduled for release this week onto the streets of America. This is yet a furtherance of an act of treason with a total disregard for the US nationals it will affect. We might as well face it, either we the people drive these insurgents out of our country, or our future will be not but slavery.

  28. Just when you think you’ve heard it all along comes another bizarre story:

    “A county court in central China has sentenced four men to prison for digging up and selling corpses on the black market to enable “ghost marriages”, a millennia-old custom of burying deceased bachelors alongside newly deceased wives so that they will not grow lonely in the afterlife.”


  29. Shadowfax, teens have been leaving FB in droves over the past few years since more parents & adults in general started using that social media. The youngins have gravitated toward twitter and text messaging, and most recently, to Instagram (which is now owned by Zuckerberg (FB), I believe).

  30. “How did Republicans learn to stop worrying and love Obamacare?”
    If I were cynical, I might think that this was part of the “big Picture” when the behind the scenes deals for Obamacare were being negotiated. It’s “amazing” the Dims and Rethugs in my state are all happy with this new Medicaid expansion. It will likely cost 30% more because the Insurance co’s need to cover their 24-30% “overhead”. (IIRC, “overhead is limited to 18% under Obamacare but the insurance industry had pre-planned and services such as nurse help lines that were once counted as “overhead” are now moved to the patient care column. It’s same 30% overhead but the accounted is changed to make it look like 18% on their spreadsheet. No real shock, it’s basically the same scam as Bush’s part D Medicare and now most “social programs”; laundering US tax dollars to the big corps.

  31. Democrats and the media have accused Tea Party favorite Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) of “McCarthyism” merely for posing tough questions to and about Chuck Hagel during the latter’s confirmation as Secretary of Defense. Yet a recent column by former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich reveals who the real McCarthyites are in U.S. politics today, as Reich likens the Tea Party to a conspiracy “to undermine the government of the United States.”

  32. Yup admin, partly the reason I never liked Facebook in the first place and also because young kids that post personal info and later get hurt by it…makes it a harmful program. Sort of like having a diary for the entire world of pervs to read.

  33. admin March 4, 2013 at 9:00 am
    Thanks for the links about Hillary and Walmart. Boggles my mind how dishonestly organized media was that far back.

    Today 3/4/13 was a bad day for hope 🙁

  34. Now books and articles are coming out showing that the fit between Hillary’s State Dept and the White House was not as seamless as it was made out to be at the time. The first is about the aborted Israel-Palestinian peace process and should clear up some of the debate we’ve been having here about the US-Israeli relationship over the last 4 years, and who is responsible for what.

    Hillary Clinton Book [by BBC correspondent Kim Ghattas] Reveals The Inside Story Of How Administration Mangled Mideast Peace Initiative

    Like so many of his predecessors, the new American president made a key mistake in his bid to achieve Mideast peace.
    Flush with confidence from his historic election victory and eager to capitalize on his mandate, Barack Obama sought to bring Israeli and Palestinian leaders to the negotiating table as one of his first steps soon after taking office in 2009. But the new president was frustrated by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hardline attitude — so his top aides advised him to take a tough approach, and pressure “Bibi” to freeze settlements in the West Bank in order to encourage Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to agree to negotiate directly with the Israelis.

    Then-White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who had served in Israel’s armed forces, “advised Obama to be tough on Netanyahu and show him, immediately, who the superpower was … and he actively pushed for the freeze to top the agenda,” writes BBC correspondent Kim Ghattas in her new book, “The Secretary: A Journey With Hillary Clinton From Beirut to the Heart of American Power.”

    Obama took the advice. When Netanyahu arrived for his first meeting at the White House, the president emphasized, “Settlements have to be stopped in order for us to move forward.”

    The administration’s hard line, “taken as a sign that the administration was ready to go to the mat with Bibi,” encouraged Palestinian activists. The move was not unprecedented, either: Previous American leaders like Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush had stood their ground with Israeli prime ministers. But the reaction in Jerusalem was as furious as it was quick. “The Israelis were livid. Bibi didn’t like to be told what to do, especially not in public. He wasn’t going to let an American administration push him around again. He was convinced that Hillary and Rahm wanted to throw him under the bus and had turned Obama against him,” writes Ghattas.

    A few days after that meeting, Obama went on his historic trip to Cairo, and raised expectations across the Middle East with the lofty promise to work hard for peace. “There was only one way to go from there: down. But it was a question of how hard and fast the fall would be and how damaging to American interests.”

    Ghattas recounts the downward spiral of Obama’s Mideast hopes and dreams in a 350-page book profiling Clinton’s term as secretary of state, which ended in February. Ghattas, a longtime reporter and a native of Lebanon, praises Clinton for doing much to repair America’s image and restore its leadership around the world after the Bush years. But the quagmire of the Mideast proved to be as sticky as ever, repeatedly frustrating the administration’s best intentions.

    Netanyahu only agreed to a partial freeze on settlement construction. And, despite Clinton’s best efforts in direct discussions, Abbas couldn’t agree to start negotiations. In a last-ditch meeting with Netanyahu, Clinton urged him, “We need something to hold Abbas’s hand and bring him to the table.

    “The risk of not doing anything is greater than the risk involved in compromising,” said the secretary. But Bibi didn’t budge. The failure of the tough-on-Israel tactic led the Obama administration to wait out Bibi’s term in office. “Bibi thinks he can just stick to his position and outlast us, but we’re here for four years,” one administration official told Ghattas. “And then we’ll likely be here for another four years.”

    The strategy was doomed from the start, writes Ghattas, and Clinton, who “was unconvinced by her own tough words about the settlements,” knew it. She also knew that it didn’t make sense to make a freeze the focus. But the White House was blinded by its insistence on that strategy — “there was no plan B if Netanyahu said no.” But Clinton, still trying to prove her loyalty to Obama, her former rival during the Democratic primary, “picked up on the combative mood inside the White House and combined it with her own forceful speaking to overdeliver for her boss in public with a maximalist position.”

    When Obama looked for an opening elsewhere, he turned to Saudi Arabia, traveling to meet with King Abdullah. Over dinner at the king’s farm in early June 2009, he asked the monarch to allow Israel’s national airline, El Al, to fly over Saudi Arabia and for the country to start receiving Israeli trade delegations. The king’s response was blunt and swollen with disappointment: “Whoever advised you to ask me this wants to destroy the Saudi-American relationship.”

    By the middle of the term, amid foreign policy frustrations and the Republicans recapturing the House of Representatives, spirits were way down at the State Department over the failure on the peace issue, as well as other global crises. “We’re holding things together with chewing gum and rubber bands,” a high-level official told Ghattas. “It’s bad, really bad.”

    Now, on the verge of his first-ever visit to Israel, which begins in two weeks, the re-elected American president is taking a different tack. Rather than pushing the Israeli-Palestinian issue, Obama is focusing his energy on Iran and Syria. Effectively, he is leaving things in the hands of new Secretary of State John Kerry, who is reportedly obsessed with the issue and hopes to broker a peace agreement by the end of his, and Obama’s, term in 2016, according to Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

  35. 1st paragraphs of link jbstonesfan cited at 9:39 pm:

    The insider-account of the damaging divisions between the White House and the State Department comes as diplomats around the world wait to see if John Kerry, the new US secretary of state, can persuade Mr Obama to greater engagement on Syria, Egypt and the wider Middle East.
    Vali Nasr, a university professor who was seconded in 2009 to work with Richard Holbrooke, Mr Obama’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, records his profound disillusion at how a “Berlin Wall” of domestic-focused advisers was erected to protect Mr Obama.
    “The president had a truly disturbing habit of funnelling major foreign policy decisions through a small cabal of relatively inexperienced White House advisers whose turf was strictly politics,” Mr Nasr writes in The Dispensable Nation: America Foreign policy in Retreat.
    The book sets out in detail how Mr Holbrooke, appointed with great fanfare in 2009, was systematically cut out of decision making as both he and Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state, tried to argue the merits of engaging with the Taliban and the dangers caused by the overuse of drones.

  36. 1st paragraphs of link jbstonesfan cited at 9:39 pm:
    Forgot to mention at this time 6:32 AM 3/5, that link has been tweeted >15K times.

  37. Here are selected “grabs” of a NYPost read:

    Beat the press
    Reporters reveal how the Obama administration threatens and controls the media

    …While Woodward spent a lot of the week on cable news going back and forth on whether that was a threat, few reporters, if any, asked why a high-level administration official spent so much time — Sperling admittedly shouted at Woodward during a 30-minute phone call, followed by that e-mail — attempting to control an opinion expressed in a newspaper….
    Finally, this week, reporters are pushing back. Even Jonathan Alter — who frequently appears on the Obama-friendly MSNBC — came forward to say he, too, had been treated horribly by the administration for writing something they didn’t like.
    “There is a kind of threatening tone that, from time to time — not all the time — comes out of these guys,” Alter said this week. During the 2008 campaign swing through Berlin, Alter said that future White House press secretary Robert Gibbs disinvited him from a dinner between Obama and the press corps over it.
    “I was told ‘Don’t come,’ in a fairly abusive e-mail,” he said. “[It] made what Gene Sperling wrote [to Woodward] look like patty-cake.”
    “I had a young reporter asking tough, important questions of an Obama Cabinet secretary,” says one DC veteran. “She was doing her job, and they were trying to bully her. In an e-mail, they called her the vilest names — bitch, c–t, a–hole.” He complained and was told the matter would be investigated: “They were hemming and hawing, saying, ‘We’ll look into it.’ Nothing happened.”

  38. A reason I appreciate Facebook. It allows me via the status feature to establish a key point which I seem to do daily; then I use a comment line for each additional thought I decide to include. My audience is not necessarily willing. It consists mostly of family and friends of my daughters’ whom I knew well at one time. The organization of comment lines below a status allows me to add on things without puncturing their posted thoughts throughout the day. I think some of them check it. At one time there were polite grumblings. I told them I had to do what I was doing, then encouraged them to do what they had to do.

    I may be scrolled by, or hidden. However I am rarely ‘liked’ but have not been ‘unfriended’ by any.

    Gak. I am sounding so much like a Heloise hint. 🙁

  39. We have always noted the warfare between Hillary against Obama as well as State Department against White House. Nice to see a Big Media documentation.

    BTW, we’ve been offered a reviewers copy of the Kim Ghattas book and might take them up on it and review the book.

  40. Bob Woodward, who broke the story of Nixon’s Watergate, has long been a journalist that was highly respected by the media….that is until he called out the Obama Admin on their thuggish tactics in an attempt to control the narrative from the media. They immediately smeared this once revered journalist as a senile, old man. He has since essentially retracted his story after being berated, badgered, and belittled.

    Now, more journalists have stepped up to talk about their experience with Obama’s thuggish bully tactics. This type of behavior is beneath the Office of the Presidency and should not be tolerated!

  41. admin
    March 5, 2013 at 9:09 am

    We have always noted the warfare between Hillary against Obama as well as State Department against White House. Nice to see a Big Media documentation.

    BTW, we’ve been offered a reviewers copy of the Kim Ghattas book and might take them up on it and review the book.

    Please do Admin. 🙂

  42. The next Hillary vs Obama work I would cite is a book titled “The Inside Story of How the White House Let Diplomacy Fail in Afghanistan” by Vali Nasr, the Dean of Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and member of the State Dept’s Foreign Affairs Policy Board. If anyone can write an “inside story” of State Dept-White House functioning, he’s your man. A quote from the book:

    “But my time in the Obama administration turned out to be a deeply disillusioning experience. The truth is that his administration made it extremely difficult for its own foreign-policy experts to be heard. Both Clinton and Holbrooke, two incredibly dedicated and talented people, had to fight to have their voices count on major foreign-policy initiatives.

    Holbrooke never succeeded. Clinton did — but it was often a battle. It usually happened only when it finally became clear to a White House that jealously guarded all foreign policymaking — and then relied heavily on the military and intelligence agencies to guide its decisions — that these agencies’ solutions were no substitute for the type of patient, credible diplomacy that garners the respect and support of allies. Time and again, when things seemed to be falling apart, the administration finally turned to Clinton because it knew she was the only person who could save the situation.

    One could argue that in most administrations, an inevitable imbalance exists between the military-intelligence complex, with its offerings of swift, dynamic, camera-ready action, and the foreign-policy establishment, with its seemingly ponderous, deliberative style. But this administration advertised itself as something different. On the campaign trail, Obama repeatedly stressed that he wanted to get things right in the broader Middle East, reversing the damage that had resulted from the previous administration’s reliance on faulty intelligence and its willingness to apply military solutions to problems it barely understood.

    Not only did that not happen, but the president had a truly disturbing habit of funneling major foreign-policy decisions through a small cabal of relatively inexperienced White House advisors whose turf was strictly politics. Their primary concern was how any action in Afghanistan or the Middle East would play on the nightly news, or which talking point it would give the Republicans.”

    In the face of such damning and detailed evidence of the “Berlin Wall of staffers” who shielded Obama from stronger emphasis on diplomacy and the ideas set forth by Holbrooke and Clinton, right-wing hack journalist Daniel Greenfield of “” claims that:

    “Hillary Clinton Already Shifting Blame to Obama for Afghanistan Disaster”, pouting that “Hillary Clinton and Richard Holbrooke…, another Clinton man, are the heoes and the White House and the Obama are the villains.”

    “The Clinton Gang were right on every single issue, from opposing the Afghanistan surge to opposing an Afghanistan deadline, to supporting negotiations with the Taliban at the right and not at the wrong time and supporting the takedown of Bin Laden… while Obama’s people were always wrong.

    The purpose here is to disengage Hillary Clinton from the upcoming disaster in Afghanistan in preparation for her 2016 run. As in Benghazi, the theme is that it isn’t her fault. It’s Obama’s fault. It’s the fault of the military, the CIA and the White House.

    Once you keep in mind that this is basically a preemptive bid for freeing Hillary from responsibility while sabotaging the careers of Obama loyalist rivals, there are some interesting things here.

    It was to court public opinion that Obama first embraced the war in Afghanistan. And when public opinion changed, he was quick to declare victory and call the troops back home. His actions from start to finish were guided by politics, and they played well at home.

    This concedes what I and many conservative analysts have said about Obama’s pivot to Afghanistan all along. It was cynical, political and incompetent.

    The White House, however, did not want to try anything as audacious as diplomacy. It was an art lost on America’s top decision-makers. They had no experience with it and were daunted by the idea of it.

    While running for president, Obama had promised a new chapter in U.S. foreign policy: America would move away from Bush’s militarized foreign policy and take engagement seriously. When it came down to brass tacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan, however, Clinton was the lonely voice making the case for diplomacy.

    From the leaks we’ve heard, it sounds like Obama tried a lot of diplomacy, but castigating Obama as Mr. Drone who always listened to Brennan and Petraeus instead of Hillary should play well among the liberal base.

    During the 2009 strategic review, Clinton had supported the additional troops but was not on board with the deadline Obama imposed on the surge, nor did she support hasty troop withdrawals. Clinton thought those decisions looked a lot like cut-and-run and would damage America’s standing in the world.

    So Hillary was conveniently on both right sides of every issue, even when she’s for it before she was against it… etc. Again this is an attempt at distancing her from Obama’s disaster. This is the narrative being set now, which means Clinton and Co. do expect disaster in Term 2.

    “…. Turf battles are a staple of every administration, but the Obama White House has been particularly ravenous. Add to this the campaign hangover: Those in Obama’s inner circle, veterans of his election campaign, were suspicious of Clinton. Even after Clinton proved she was a team player, they remained concerned about her popularity and feared that she could overshadow the president.
    That part is probably true, but essays like this [i.e. Nasr’s] prove that Clinton was a decided backstabber and that they had reason to be suspicious of her.

    Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff until September 2011, told me Clinton “did a great job pushing her agenda, but it is incredible how little support she got from the White House. They want to control everything.”

    So what job is Mike looking for in the Clinton Administration 2.0?”
    So this Daniel Greenberg seems to be a “vast right wing conspiracy” hack out to stir the embers of Hillary hate. For my part, I would take Nsar’s account at face value.

  43. The “small cabal of relatively inexperienced White House advisors whose turf was strictly politics” should be understood to mean Axelgrease and the acting president, Jarrett. Too bad Nasr doesn’t name names.

  44. Gabby ramping up the discord
    Gabrielle Giffords’ advocacy group to air TV ad targeting Republican senators
    Former congresswoman’s gun control group seeks to increase support for universal background checks in pro-gun states

    I’m surprised Rep Carolyn Maloney does not have a louder voice in this. Do believe it was her husband killed, her son injured on LI train that propelled her into politics. I should check before commenting but will not. Tell me how I did.
    Missing Ed Koch right now.

  45. That was Carolyn McCarthy. Her husband was murdered on the LIRR on his way home from work and her son was seriously injured. It was following that incident that she decided to run for congress. Actually, she was talked into it by democrats who thought she would win the seat easily. She did and she is still there.

    Ms. McCarthy ran on the issue of gun control. I recall getting very aggravated when I heard that. I always thought – and I still do believe – that if only one passenger on that train had a gun, her husband, son and all the other victims would have been spared. She should be advocating conceal- carry laws instead.

  46. jeswezey

    The link to the Greenberg nonsense is

    This guy seems full of half truths, and it boils down to the same thing Barry is going though…they are scared to death of Hillary Clinton.

    She isn’t a person that supports all that is left, like the exCommunity organizer…she is a centrist that knows her stuff like no one but her Big Dawg.

  47. Will Dennis save the world through Basket Ball? 🙂

    He has a better chance of making his body a pincushion with all those piercings and nose rings.

  48. Not exactly what I would call mopping the floor with Barry…

    Tag-teaming Obama

    Don’t tell the Tea Party, but the tag team of John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are currently mopping the floor with Barack Obama.

    The president convincingly won a second term in November, but since that time, the congressional Republican leadership has outfoxed, outmaneuvered and plain out-strategized him on just about every issue.

  49. The FAA is investigating a report that a drone was flying near New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport, spotted by the pilot of an Alitalia flight.

Comments are closed.