Archives:

Categories:

Presidential Seal

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

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

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

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

Donate To Hillary Is 44 below:





Suscribe To Our RSS Feed

The Funnies

See Our Funnies Archive.

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

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

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

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

7 Personally thank all of her illegal campaign donors

6 Three words: stylish Indonesian pantsuits

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

4 Get drunk with that Japanese finance minister guy

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

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

1 Pick up carton of duty-free smokes for Obama

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

10 "Sup?"

9 "I see Madonna's still a slut"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8 "Smoke break!"

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

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

5 "Another smoke break!"

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

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

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

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

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

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

9 Quit politics and become a fat, lovable mall cop

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

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

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

5 Change his name to Barod Obamavich

4 Safely land an Airbus on the Hudson River

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

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

1 Uhhh...resign?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2 Sweating like Bill Clinton when Hillary comes home early

1 He demanded a recount

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

10 Encourage tourists to throw spare change in the Grand Canyon

9 End our dependence on foreign owls

8 Sell New Mexico to Mexico

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

6 Rent out the moon for weddings and Bar Mitzvahs

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

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

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

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

1 Stop talkin' and start Obama-natin'!

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

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

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

8 "Laura! More Mountain Dew!"

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

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

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

4 "Kissey kissey"

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

2 "Did you ever see a monkey sneezing?"

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

Recent Articles Calendar

January 2014
M T W T F S S
« Dec   Feb »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Networked Blogs

Follow me on Twitter

Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow

Update: Bad show ol’ sport! Republican(?) Senator Jeff Flake lives up to his name. Flake thinks Bob Gates’ new book giving Obama the ol’ Backpfeifengesicht is “Extraordinarily bad timing, and form”. Really??? It’s no surprise that the White House disputes Gates memoir claims but even those dolts have not yet called it “bad form”. Soon though, Gates will be called a racist by someone allied to the Obama occupied White House. The Gates of Hell are open.

———————————————————————————————————-

For us, today’s Big Article is about tomorrow and written by pollster Andrew Kohut. Our regular readers won’t be surprised by Kohut because they read our version of the article some time back. This is wisdom we wrote in April of last year:

“We are sure Hillary Clinton will make a decision on seeking the presidency in 2016 after the 2014 elections which will be a referendum on ObamaCares’ corruptions. After November 2014 it will be time to decide on 2016 for the tribes on all sides.

Over the years even some Hillary Clinton supporters from 2008 are too angry with the corruptions of Barack Obama to support Hillary Clinton now. When they look at Hillary, they see Barack. And it is a maddening sight. [snip]

In 2016 the greatest threat to Hillary Clinton is once again Barack Obama – and his legacy of weakness and profligacy. Tie Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama and she loses. [snip]

What will matter in 2016 is the “center”. If Hillary stays in the center she wins. Hillary spent four years as far from Barack Obama as air travel made possible so she still can make it a convincing argument. If the Republican candidate seizes the center, he or she wins. In either case what matters is that the country win.”

Today, in Politico, Kohut writes:

Will Obama Drag Down Hillary Clinton in 2016?

There’s no question that Hillary Clinton would make a formidable presidential candidate. She routinely polls as America’s most admired figure, and voters gave her high marks during her tenure as the country’s top diplomat. But Hillary Clinton has a potential problem. His name is Barack Obama.

While she had to contend with “Clinton fatigue” in 2008, “Obama fatigue” is her potential stumbling block this time. Should dissatisfaction with the state of the nation and disapproval of Obama persist as 2016 approaches, the former secretary of state may well struggle to position herself as an agent of change.

Hillary Clinton, candidate of change, is exactly what we prescribed later in the year:

“Domestically, Barack Obama is a big stink too. The Obama stink will get worse as failure takes hold and will not turn to perfume by 2016.

Hillary Clinton should position herself as the candidate of “CHANGE!”. Repeat the positions taken in 2008 and note how wise that course would have been. Declare it is “time for a change” to effective leadership and unite the white working class with her campaign for change. Let Joe Biden be the “stay the course” candidate aboard the Titanic. Hillary Clinton 2016 could easily be the lot less scary candidate of “time for a change” which is the default on every Republican 2016 bumper sticker. But cutesie-wutsie won’t get the gold. Yet that muddled message mess is the course Hillary Clinton 2016 is on.”

Here is more Kohut on change, Hillary Clinton 2016 and why some Hillary Clinton 2016 strategists think we are wrong when we suggest Hillary rebuild her 2008 coalition and dump the Obama coalition:

“If Obama’s polling troubles persist as 2016 approaches, Clinton might have a problem with voters who want change. Other presidential candidates have had hard going when voters were dissatisfied with the times and/or their bosses. [snip]

More importantly for 2016, Clinton is especially popular among those who will pick the next nominee. Among Democrats and Independents who lean Democratic, fully 82 percent of the base holds a favorable view of her, and as many as 38 percent say they have a very favorable view of the former first lady. She is best regarded by women, liberals, older people and more affluent Democrats—the same constituencies that nearly won her the nomination in 2008.

Here’s the potential problem: Demographics notwithstanding, views of Clinton among Democrats correlate strongly with views of Obama. No fewer than 71 percent of Democrats who hold a highly favorable view of Obama feel the same way about Clinton. And the converse is true: Democrats who are unenthusiastic about the president are also unenthusiastic about Clinton—just 29 percent rate her very favorably.

And Clinton faces another potential challenge: the desire for change that divides the Democratic base between populists and centrists, given that she was married to one centrist Democratic president and worked for another. The appeal of populism among Democrats in 2016 cannot be discounted. Sixty percent of Democrats continue to say their finances are not in good shape, even as many of them see the stock market and real estate values having recovered. Little wonder that a September Pew survey found 62 percent of Democrats saying that regulation of financial organizations has not gone far enough, compared with just 32 percent of Republicans who hold that view.”

That math is what paralyzes Hillary Clinton 2016. The fear is that telling the truth and slamming Barack Obama will turn off Barack Obama supporters she will need for the nomination fight. This fear leads to the quicksand bog that drowns candidates. How else to explain the strong Clinton presence at the Bill DeBlasio inauguration?

At first the idea of the Clintons attending the DeBlasio inauguration made sense. After all why not throw the DailyKooks a bone and appear with DeBlasio? At first the idea of being seen with DeBlasio as a Kook sedative and lead them to at least accept the idea of Hillary Clinton 2016 and not fight it seems sensible. But they are not DailyKooks for nothing. At some point the DailyKooks and allies will agitate and then attack to “force Hillary to the left”. The DailyKooks and other assorted nuts have already begun pounding the drums in the deep which will eventually lead to all out attacks against Hillary.

Once the idea of the Clintons attending the DeBlasio inauguration is fully considered however it was not a smart thing to do. Already Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York is leading the charge to lower taxes in New York State while now Mayor DeBlasio is leading a nationwide coalition to raise taxes in New York City. Because the city of New York requires the state of New York to approve higher taxes the battle of Cuomo versus DeBlasio will soon be joined. What will the Clintons do then? Anyone recall the mess Hillary Clinton talked herself into during the 2008 debates when she tried to politically protect Governor Andrew Cuomo on driver licenses for illegal aliens?

Late last year we began to write a lot tougher critiques of Hillary Clinton 2016. We wrote this on November 11:

“Because of the ongoing internal debate at Hillary Clinton 2016 we have been advised to hit harder, tougher. We’ve been told the time is now to lambaste Hillary Clinton 2016 with critiques of what must be done and not to be too polite or too kind. There are many in the Hillary Clinton 2016 discussions who agree with us and they need ammunition and our voices as the informal strategy deliberations continue.”

The next day there was a strategy session at the Parker Meridian in New York for Hillary Clinton 2016. Yesterday, Politico reported on the Hillary Clinton 2016 “shadow campaign”. In the “shadow campaign” there are many warnings that neither Hillary Clinton nor America are the concerns of those coming in from the Obama campaign to “help”:

“Chief among those in the “no” camp is Clinton’s chief of staff at the State Department, Cheryl Mills, according to several people familiar with her thinking. Another close Clinton confidante, Maggie Williams, who took the helm of the 2008 campaign after a staff shake-up, is also said to have reservations for the same reason — the DNA-altering experience of a modern presidential campaign in which nothing is guaranteed.

The people cheerleading Clinton on the most are often less close to her. Their focus is primarily on winning ­ — they know Republicans probably won’t put up a candidate as weak as Romney next time and see Clinton as far and away their best shot. [snip]

Beyond potential health concerns, an unforeseen event could make running more complicated. Democrats could struggle mightily in the midterms, and Obama could have another difficult year. Another foreign policy headache could emerge, posing a fresh challenge for the former secretary.”

What is clear to us is that there are many given jobs by Barack Obama who want to keep those jobs and the potential rivers of money flowing to those in power. These people are not interested in Hillary Clinton nor what is good for America. They are “pimping” Hillary Clinton for self-interests (yes Donna, we are also talking about you). So what should Hillary Clinton do?

What Hillary Clinton should do is decide on who her friends are and who has the best interests of America in heart and mind. Those Obama apparatchiks now jumping on the Hillary Clinton 2016 team should be squeezed dry of whatever benefits can be extracted from them. But at some point (the clock started ticking the moment ObamaCare registration for January 1 coverage ended) Hillary Clinton has to choose between the Obama coalition and the Hillary Clinton coalition.

Hillary Clinton can win by bringing back senior voters and the white working class voters that have dumped the Democratic Party they once gave allegiance to. This will enrage the DailyKooks and Obama apparatchiks. But it is the only way for Hillary Clinton to win.

Barack Obama apparatchiks that have infiltrated Hillary Clinton 2016 are terrified that Hillary Clinton will succumb to logic and reality and become the candidate of change from Barack Obama. These Obama loving parasites in Hillary Clinton 2016 know if Hillary tells the truth about Barack Obama their lame duck will be a dead duck.

Today more shots fired at the lame duck wounding Barack Obama further. The shots came from Bill Bob Gates:

“Robert Gates: Obama White House ‘offended’ Hillary Clinton

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saw the Obama administration as deeply “controlling” on national security issues, Defense Secretary Bob Gates wrote Tuesday in an essay published adapted from his forthcoming book.

“The controlling nature of the Obama White House, and its determination to take credit for every good thing that happened while giving none to the career folks in the trenches who had actually done the work, offended Secretary Clinton as much as it did me,” Gates writes in an piece published by the Wall Street Journal.

His new book, “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary of War,” is set for publication on January 14. According to an early writeup of the book by Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, Gates at times writes reverentially about Clinton, who is expected to decide later this year whether to pursue a presidential bid.

I found her smart, idealistic but pragmatic, tough-minded, indefatigable, funny, a very valuable colleague, and a superb representative of the United States all over the world,” Gates wrote.”

Obama lovin’ Veep Biden does not get a seal of approval from Gates: “I think he has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”

While some, many, will focus on the now shocking Casablanca revelation asserted by Gates that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both confessed their opposition to the Iraq “surge” in 2007 was “political” the problem for Hillary Clinton 2016 is that the respected Robert Gates – a good friend and ally of Hillary Clinton – lobs some serious ordinance at Obama and Hillary Clinton will at some point be forced to choose between treacherous boob Barack and smart good guy Bob Gates.

We believe the allegations of Bob Gates: Obama kept the war in Afghanistan going despite having lost faith in his strategy years ago

“Actual quote from Gates’s new book, writing about a meeting with O in March 2011: “As I sat there, I thought: The president doesn’t trust his commander, can’t stand Karzai, doesn’t believe in his own strategy and doesn’t consider the war to be his… For him, it’s all about getting out.” Nearly three years later, we’re still not out despite O’s alleged disbelief. I’m caught between astonishment that any president would send troops to die for a cause he apparently thought was lost and reminding myself that … we already knew this. Right? The Democratic commitment to Afghanistan was always chiefly a function of their opposition to Iraq. They wanted out of the latter but were afraid that the left’s anti-war brand would frighten centrist voters in 2008 who wanted something more muscular in the post-9/11 age. Ramping up in Afghanistan was the answer.”

Barack Obama foreign policy is a disaster. Bob Gates insulates Hillary by noting that the disasters were run from the White House and that the total control by the White House “offended” Hillary. Barack Obama domestic policy is a disaster as well.

The Obama apparatchiks will try to deflect from the foreign and domestic disasters birthed by Barack Obama with all sorts of distracting silliness. The man who vacationed for weeks in Hawaii and whose spousal mooch (and Valerie Jarret and Gayle King) will cost taxpayers millions more for her extended vacation will try to flim flam the voters with rubbish about inequality they don’t believe in nor practice.

In this series, Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow, we’ll discuss why Barack Obama’s attempted distractions will not work. The issue in 2014, as in 2010, will be ObamaCare and the treacherous boob destroying America.

Of course there will be additional disasters authored by Barack Obama, both foreign and domestic, which will grab the spotlight intermittently but the crown jewel of Barack Obama incompetence and treachery is ObamaCare and that will be the issue in 2014. Those thinking about tomorrow better get ahead of events and fight the future fights that matter.

Be Sociable, Share!

170 comments to Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow

  • admin

    More on the Bob Gates book:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/robert-gates-former-defense-secretary-offers-harsh-critique-of-obamas-leadership-in-duty/2014/01/07/6a6915b2-77cb-11e3-b1c5-739e63e9c9a7_print.html

    Robert Gates, former defense secretary, offers harsh critique of Obama’s leadership in ‘Duty’

    In a new memoir, former defense secretary Robert Gates unleashes harsh judgments about President Obama’s leadership and his commitment to the Afghanistan war, writing that by early 2010 he had concluded the president “doesn’t believe in his own strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his. For him, it’s all about getting out.”

    Leveling one of the more serious charges that a defense secretary could make against a commander in chief sending forces into combat, Gates asserts that Obama had more than doubts about the course he had charted in Afghanistan. The president was “skeptical if not outright convinced it would fail,” Gates writes in “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War.”

    Obama, after months of contentious discussion with Gates and other top advisers, deployed 30,000 more troops in a final push to stabilize Afghanistan before a phased withdrawal beginning in mid-2011. “I never doubted Obama’s support for the troops, only his support for their mission,” Gates writes. [snip]

    In Gates’s highly emotional account, Obama remains uncomfortable with the inherited wars and distrustful of the military that is providing him options. Their different worldviews produced a rift that, at least for Gates, became personally wounding and impossible to repair. [snip]

    It is rare for a former Cabinet member, let alone a defense secretary occupying a central position in the chain of command, to publish such an antagonistic portrait of a sitting president. [snip]

    The sometimes bitter tone in Gates’s 594-page account contrasts sharply with the even-tempered image that he cultivated during his many years of government service, including stints at the CIA and National Security Council. That image endured through his nearly five years in the Pentagon’s top job, beginning in President George W. Bush’s second term and continuing after Obama asked him to remain in the post. In “Duty,” Gates describes his outwardly calm demeanor as a facade. Underneath, he writes, he was frequently “seething” and “running out of patience on multiple fronts.” [snip]

    Gates, a Republican, writes about Obama with an ambivalence that he does not resolve, praising him as “a man of personal integrity” even as he faults his leadership. Though the book simmers with disappointment in Obama, it reflects outright contempt for Vice President Biden and many of Obama’s top aides.

    Biden is accused of “poisoning the well” against the military leadership. Thomas Donilon, initially Obama’s deputy national security adviser, and then-Lt. Gen. Douglas E. Lute, the White House coordinator for the wars, are described as regularly engaged in “aggressive, suspicious, and sometimes condescending and insulting questioning of our military leaders.” [snip]

    In “Duty,” Gates complains repeatedly that confidence and trust were what he felt was lacking in his dealings with Obama and his team. “Why did I feel I was constantly at war with everybody, as I have detailed in these pages?” he writes. “Why was I so often angry? Why did I so dislike being back in government and in Washington?”  [snip]

    “All too early in the [Obama] administration,” he writes, “suspicion and distrust of senior military officers by senior White House officials — including the president and vice president — became a big problem for me as I tried to manage the relationship between the commander in chief and his military leaders.”

    Gates offers a catalogue of various meetings, based in part on notes that he and his aides made at the time, including an exchange between Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that he calls “remarkable.”

    He writes: “Hillary told the president that her opposition to the [2007] surge in Iraq had been political because she was facing him in the Iowa primary. . . . The president conceded vaguely that opposition to the Iraq surge had been political. To hear the two of them making these admissions, and in front of me, was as surprising as it was dismaying.”

    Earlier in the book, he describes Hillary Clinton in the sort of glowing terms that might be used in a political endorsement. “I found her smart, idealistic but pragmatic, tough-minded, indefatigable, funny, a very valuable colleague, and a superb representative of the United States all over the world,” he wrote. [snip]

    ‘Breaches of faith’

    Lack of trust is a major thread in Gates’s account, along with his unsparing criticism of Obama’s aides. At times, the two threads intertwine. For example, after the devastating 2010 Haitian earthquake that had left tens of thousands dead, Gates met with Obama and Donilon, the deputy national security adviser, about disaster relief.

    Donilon was “complaining about how long we were taking,” Gates writes. “Then he went too far, questioning in front of the president and a roomful of people whether General [Douglas] Fraser [head of the U.S. Southern Command] was competent to lead this effort. I’ve rarely been angrier in the Oval Office than I was at that moment. . . . My initial instinct was to storm out, telling the president on the way that he didn’t need two secretaries of defense. It took every bit of my self-discipline to stay seated on the sofa.”

    Gates confirms a previously reported statement in which he told Obama’s first national security adviser, retired Marine Gen. James Jones, that he thought Donilon would be a “disaster” if he succeeded Jones (as Donilon did in late 2010). Gates writes that Obama quizzed him about this characterization; a one-on-one meeting with Donilon followed, and that “cleared the air,” according to Gates.

    His second year with Obama proved as tough as the first. “For me, 2010 was a year of continued conflict and a couple of important White House breaches of faith,” he writes. [snip]

    It got so bad during internal debates over whether to intervene in Libya in 2011 that Gates says he felt compelled to deliver a “rant” because the White House staff was “talking about military options with the president without Defense being involved.”

    Gates says his instructions to the Pentagon were: “Don’t give the White House staff and [national security staff] too much information on the military options. They don’t understand it, and ‘experts’ like Samantha Power will decide when we should move militarily.” Power, then on the national security staff and now U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, has been a strong advocate for humanitarian intervention.

    Another time, after Donilon and Biden tried to pass orders to Gates, he told the two, “The last time I checked, neither of you are in the chain of command,” and said he expected to get orders directly from Obama.

  • jbstonesfan

    Just saw the headline on Drudge. Mostly bad for Obama, but Hillary will , as you noted above, need to make some very difficult choices.

  • wbboei

    Admin.

    VERY IMPRESSIVE ANALYSIS.

    Gates is a fine judge of character and competence.

    The accolades he gives Hillary are coin of the realm.

    If Hillary decided to run, she must separate herself from Obama and his fellow travelers.

    It is acceptable to suck information out of them, but when the time comes they must walk the plank.

    Their opportunistic attempt by these parasites to infect a new administration must be rebuffed.

    I am not keen on Messina. Trust me he is a thug.

    Hillary has served this nation ably in many roles.

    If she decides to run, she must separate herself from Obama, Obamacare, and rebuild the 2008 coalition.

    If she does that, she will beat whoever the Republicans put up.

  • Shadowfax

    OMG, just got home and logged on and see a post with this title. Haven’t read it yet, have to fix dinner, but I hope, hope, hope it is some good news about our girl.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3JA1nWPFqM

  • Shadowfax

    Rats, I suck at embedding on my PC but it works on my Mac (I hated saying that)

  • gonzotx

    That math is what paralyzes Hillary Clinton 2016. The fear is that telling the truth and slamming Barack Obama will turn off Barack Obama supporters she will need for the nomination fight. This fear leads to the quicksand bog that drowns candidates. How else to explain the strong Clinton presence at the Bill DeBlasio inauguration?
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    as I asked last thread

  • gonzotx

    Hillary may very well oversmart herself again. Will the real Hillary please stand up…

  • admin

    http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/ready-for-hillary-clinton-super-pac-101878.html?hp=r1

    Ready for Hillary, a super PAC that supports a possible Hillary Clinton presidential run, announced Tuesday that it raked in more than $4 million in 2013 from more than 33,000 donors.

    The grassroots-focused group saw activity pick up significantly in the latter part of 2013, with more than 25,000 new contributors chipping in during the second half of the year.

  • Shadowfax

    Admin

    “Because of the ongoing internal debate at Hillary Clinton 2016 we have been advised to hit harder, tougher. We’ve been told the time is now to lambaste Hillary Clinton 2016 with critiques of what must be done and not to be too polite or too kind.

    …The next day there was a strategy session at the Parker Meridian in New York for Hillary Clinton 2016.

    ——
    I know you won’t answer my question, but I have to ask you anyway:

    Who are you Admin??????

    Breadcrumbs…

  • Shadowfax

    Thanks Admin.

    Still reading your post while cooking.

  • Shadowfax

    What is clear to us is that there are many given jobs by Barack Obama who want to keep those jobs and the potential rivers of money flowing to those in power. These people are not interested in Hillary Clinton nor what is good for America. They are “pimping” Hillary Clinton for self-interests (yes Donna, we are also talking about you). So what should Hillary Clinton do?

    100% agree with you, Admin.

  • admin

    In answer to your question – “A voice crying out in the wilderness” Shadowfax.

  • Shadowfax

    Admin
    Hillary Clinton can win by bringing back senior voters and the white working class voters that have dumped the Democratic Party they once gave allegiance to. This will enrage the DailyKooks and Obama apparatchiks. But it is the only way for Hillary Clinton to win.


    Probably true as can be, but it will also split the party.

    Young against old, or dumb against wise…

    White against non-whites

    Working class against, non-working class.

    She has the ability to also pull in the Independents if she goes to the center.

  • Shadowfax

    Today more shots fired at the lame duck wounding Barack Obama further. The shots came from Bill Gates:

    Bill Gates or the other Gates? ;-)

  • admin

    Shadowfax, you focus on a key point. But as we see it what we propose won’t “also split the party” instead it will reconstruct the party of FDR and Bill Clinton. Hillary can keep the majority of blacks, the overwhelming majority of Latinos, bring back seniors, bring back the white working class, keep women, keep independents, centrists, liberals, moderates too. What will be lost is the Kooks and the most they can do is not vote, attack Hillary, or vote Green.

    And thanks for the edit. Bill is now Bob.

  • gonzotx

    Hillary will need to come clean on Benghazi, it’s not going away, nor should it. She did herself no favors with last outing. I am not sure how she does it, but telling the truth would be a start.

  • wbboei

    When I speak about an elite class who has no class, and is destroying the nation, these are the people I am referring to. These are the hypocrites who have given us the sewer culture, and moribund economy, while conveniently exempting themselves from the consequences of their treachery. Why do they love Obama? Simple. He is one of them, and because he is one of them, he will deplore inequality, protect them, and bury the middle class. There is no hope for anyone until the country comes to terms with who the elites are and what they are doing to destroy our nation. They are nothing but well heeled scavengers who like the banks seek to privatize the gains and publicize the losses.
    ————————-
    Victor Davis Hanson @ PJ Media:

    Once the liberal vision of legal equality of opportunity was mostly achieved, the melodrama of ensuring an equality of result entailed.

    Wealthy liberals, however, were not quite up to their own rhetoric, in the sense of living the life of egalitarianism, diversity, and conspicuously reduced consumption. I don’t remember any Silicon Valley grandees offering space for a few non-running Winnebagos to be parked out behind their six-car garages. (I can offer blueprints of how it is done by sending a few pictures from six or seven of my neighbors.) There are few Kias on Malibu streets. Or less dramatically, Google execs do not put their kids in Redwood City elementary schools to learn of hard-knocks from the Other. Kanye West’s house has unused room for lots of homeless people. MSNBC radicals do not take the subway home to inner Harlem. Tenured Stanford faculty do not live in East Palo Alto.

    The result of cosmic disappointment in the ability of progressive politics to correct human disparities has given birth to the modern psychological disorder of elite liberalism, which is mostly about squaring the circle of maintaining privilege while deploring inequality. Say America is unfair ten times a day, and the BMW in the garage and the new putter are no longer sins.

    Barack Obama cannot finish a sentence without lamenting unfairness; but he proves to be no Jimmy Carter in scouting out the most exclusive of golf courses, and the richest of fat cats to putt with. Elizabeth Warren talks of oppressed minorities, but then invents a pseudo-Native-American identity to get a leg up on the elite competition in order to land at Harvard. The fact is that the elite who champion the poor and the poor themselves are not the players of the 1930s; the former usually make about the same amount of money and enjoy the same privileges as those they damn, while the latter have access to appurtenances and privileges denied the royalty of old.

    The wealthier and more secluded an Oprah, the most desperately she searches for evidence of bias and inequality, finally reduced to the caricature of whining about racially driven poor service over a $38,000 crocodile handbag. If most in California don’t care what people do in their bedrooms, or if gays have on average higher incomes than non-gays, or if gay marriage is now de rigeur, the search for cosmic equality continues at an even brisker pace, resulting in transgendered bathrooms in the public schools (crede mihi: the ten-year-old daughters of the Yahoo elite will not encounter transgendered fifteen-year-old boys in the female Menlo School restrooms).

    It is not perverse, but logical that Obamacare architects don’t want Obamacare coverage. It is understandable that Washington young-gun liberals know exactly where DuPont Circle or Georgetown gets iffy. Modern liberalism provides the necessary mental mechanisms to ensure the enjoyment of privilege.

    Where Does This All Lead?

    I don’t know, but the Republicans have not been able to explain to the country either the illiberal nature of liberalism or its hypocrisies.

    To win the presidency after eight years of liberal acculturation, the Republicans are going to have to nominate a man of the people, in the Reagan fashion of the wood-chopper who talks incessantly from first-hand knowledge about the common man.

    An entire array of issues is going to have to be reformulated. Take illegal immigration. It is a gift for wealthy employers and La Raza elites, but an anathema for entry-level laborers of all races whose wages are destroyed by off-the-books illegals. Strapped taxpayers, not big business, pay for the impact on schools, infrastructure, and the legal system when eleven million cross the border illegally.

    More gun control is an elite musing: it does nothing to rid us of illegal weaponry, but much to aggravate the middle-class hunter and homeowner, while exempting well-armed security of the elite class.

    Zero interest rates have made banks flush with cash that they pay no interest on, while hardly reducing credit card interest rates and ensuring that play-by-the-rules middle class passbook savers lose money.

    Quantitative easing and the Federal Reserve have ensured a rush to the stock market that booms while unemployment remains high. The world of Larry Summers, Jack Lew, or Peter Orszag benefits — not the retired teacher with his life savings earning nothing. The farm bill is still a giveaway to wealthy agribusiness at a time of record farm prices, predicated on the quid-pro-quo notion that 70% of the legislation’s funds will go to food stamps. But again, why let the progressive mind feed on the carcass of the old, easily caricatured Republican wealthy?

    It is past time to forge a new populist approach without the theatrics of shutting down the government or playing on the same keyboards as Pajama Boy Obamacare spivs. The liberal elite runs the culture, from universities and entertainment to government bureaucracies and the media, but it nonetheless is predicated on loudly condemning in the abstract the very creed that they embrace in the concrete.

    In response, we need to expose their hypocrisies and start worrying about a shrinking middle class that has been damaged by Obama-era elites. Almost every issue from fracking, gun control, illegal immigration and quantitative easing to Obamacare and cap and trade invites a populist critique. Yet so far the Republican establishment seems uninterested in making the case that the Democratic hierarchy is of, by, and for the elite. Liberals are funded and represented by the privileged in Wall Street, universities, entertainment, the media, politics, foundations, the arts, and government, and the inherited wealthy. They all have set the agenda for the nation, called it progressive, and then sought exemption by seeking more taxpayer money for entitlements to ensure the fealty of the poor.
    Liberalism is not progressivism, but instead pull-up-the-ladder-after-me regressivism — and someone with some imagination and worldly experience needs to say that.

  • wbboei

    What the liberal elites of today are is poseurs. Strictly poseurs. The word has historical legal relevance. It was the word that the famous barrister Edward Carson used to destroy Oscar Wilde in the most famous trial and cross examination of the late Victorian era. The liberal elites talk the talk, but do not walk the walk. They wreak of hypocrisy and begs us to heed what they say (when they are not under oath) and not what they do.

  • Shadowfax

    admin
    January 7, 2014 at 11:33 pm
    In answer to your question


    I think you are being to modest Admin, and we stand with you in that vast wasteland, never giving up.

  • wbboei

    In early 2008 Paddy4Hill laid out everything we are seeing now in one blog here on this site. Writing from China she identified the neo-lib as a major threat to this nation and predicted accurately how they would turn on the middle class. Her comments were so brilliant that I save them for the last five years.
    ———————–
    Globalization resulted in vast amounts of wealth moving to the United States. This wealth though was not distributed evenly among the general population, but instead enriched a new group of younger, well educated, liberal minded, high tech savvy, entrepreneurs and highly paid professionals, now often described as middle-class millionaires. They made their fortunes using new asset classes of investment such as hedge funds, private equity and venture capital, most out of the reach of the average investor. This group of new rich left stood in stark contrast with old money that had long identified with the conservative faction of the Republican Party. The new class, who described themselves as progressives, was for the most part well-heeled political clones of the radical student protesters. Hence they were very internationalist in focus, taking extreme positions on the environment, human rights, global working conditions, and a collection of various causes such as Tibetan independence, organic farming, fair trade, and opposition to international organizations such as the World Bank and IMF. There was then a marriage of convenience between the two. Sharing similar goals as to what the world should look like, the new rich left differed from their radical student soul-mates in that they had money and lots of it to achieve their political goals. On the other hand their student ideological allies would be the ones that would supply the manpower. As the old saying goes, “if you’ve got the money honey, I’ve got the time.”

    Its was this convergence of what was left of the Greens, the radicalized youth and the new rich left, that gave birth to what I am calling the neo-libs. This name was chosen deliberately to draw on the similarities between the neo-libs and the neo-cons who occupy the opposite end of the political spectrum. Both hold views that are not at this point part of mainstream American politics, both are by themselves small factions within the two major parties, both are more concerned about international than domestic affairs, both advocate interventionism, including the use of force if necessary, to obtain their political objectives, both pose a grave danger to world peace and security.
    But major distinctions exist between the neo-libs and neo-cons. The neo-libs actively seek to dominate the newest and fastest growing form of information, the internet, through the use of coercion and e-violence. The student wing because their comfortable life styles and affluence allows them the time and finances, is employed to contain opposition to their movement. A variety of intimidation tactics ranging from the use of gross profanity on anti-neo-lib blog entries, posting crude and rude comments on sites running unfavorable news articles, conducting web searches on active opposition bloggers in order to find personal information that can be used on-line in ugly ways, and even death threats on the web against political opponents, are becoming commonplace. The majority of political blog sites are controlled by the neo-libs and most use strict censorship to screen out entries they consider unfriendly.

    Political intimidation tactics are not confined to the internet. Polling organizations have close connections to the neo-libs and many poll results are obvious attempts to mislead the public to disguise real voter sentiment. During the Democratic caucuses, it was common place for neo-lib student radicals to intimidate voters into voting for their candidate Senator Obama. The censorship of anti-Obama stories in the media and their near worshiping of his holiness has been so obvious that a famous late-night comedy program started a series of skits poking fun if it. Such a wide range of political intimidation and information control has not been seen in western developed countries since the early days of the National Socialist movement in Germany. This kind of worshiping of a political leader by followers and media alike is also too reminiscent of the National Socialist Adolf Hitler to be comfortable. While the neo-cons were able to take advantage of the weak Bush conservative administration to give us such things as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the neo-libs promise to give us much worse if they ever come to power.

    The neo-libs are no lovers of freedom.

    But globalization had not only created the new rich left, but also one of the widest gaps between the haves and haves not in American history. The pain resulting from the global economic restructuring was creating great difficulties for the middle classes. In a final act of desperation for one last chance at gaining the White House in alliance with the neo-libs, the ageing-liberals, once their champions, deserted the middle class. As for the neo-libs, they have little sympathy for the average working American

  • admin

    GonzoTx, maybe in the general election Benghazi will be a political problem but it won’t be a bother in the primaries.

    We do think Hillary should get all the information out on Benghazi as soon as possible once she makes a decision on running or not. Hillary’s Benghazi problems are different from what is perceived to be her problem. We think her Benghazi problem is “bureaucratic”.

    By “bureaucratic” we mean that there are a lot of people in several departments and at any time some new piece of information will come out that she won’t have control over. For instance, what if Bob Gates knows something that has not been released already on Benghazi and he releases that information at an inopportune time? The CIA, the military, NSA, intelligence operatives, Kerry’s State Department, Barack Obama thugs, all these are interest centers that could release information in a drip drip manner.

    Benghazi is not the silver bullet many imagine. There is no silver bullet because as we now know the CIA and others used the compound disguised as a diplomatic facility. Outside of the bureaucratic problem there is really only one question that Hillary will be hurt by unless she has a good answer (which will involve the CIA and what Chris Stevens was up to). That question is “why was the Benghazi facility not ready for an attack on September 11?” Hillary opponents should concentrate on that one simple question instead of all the other froufra.

  • Shadowfax

    Admin
    But as we see it what we propose won’t “also split the party” instead it will reconstruct the party of FDR and Bill Clinton

    —-I see your point, Obama 2016 is not the dreamboat imagined in 2008.
    I was thinking that the blacks will raise him to MLK status and hate Hillary if she casts a word against him, but maybe many of them will finally see they were hoodwinked, lied to, and come out to vote for Hillary. Hopefully more obots will see the light by then.

    I agree, either Hillary sets herself apart from the corruption of Obama, his failed ‘health’ act, his false promises and uses the experience she has gained to run her OWN campaign, or decide to not run at all.

    It will be a fine dance, but if anyone can do it, it’s Hillary. She can also talk about how she is going to fix problems, like getting American’s back to work…without calling Barry the lazyAss, do-nothing-president altogether.

  • wbboei

    Flake was a HUGE mistake for Arizona Republicans. He had the backing of the farm lobby, and a ranching background. But he is known to be weak, stupid and a man who does what his lobbyist tell him to do. The welfare of this nation is the very least of his concerns. Yes. He lives up to his name, as I have pointed out on numerous prior occasions.

  • S

    Admin…

    bottom line…I share your concerns…after reading that ‘Shadow Campaign’ article I must admit it gave me a quesy feeling…way too incestous…

    Jim Messina…I don’t know…I do not have a good feeling about this at all…if the O people are running her show things will really need to be re-evaluated…

    we will have to see…

  • admin

    Don’t miss this interview with Brian Schweitzer. Read it. Some very interesting things here especially how he attacks Obama – without fear and in a mocking tone. He repeats much of what we have written about ObamaCare. He is running for president and already attacking Hillary. His foreign policy on Iran is delusional and Israel won’t be safe with him, but on why we should not have attacked Iraq he echoes what we have always written. He is a DailyKook favorite. We recall his last convention speech which was loved by the DailyKooks. We thought he was drunk and buffoonish. Like Barack Obama the initial letters to his name tell the tale. Here’s interview excerpts which show BS intends to run on CHANGE and maybe even HOPE:

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/01/brian_schweitzer_interview_the_former_montana_governor_is_the_most_likely.single.html

    “An interview with former Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer, the Democrat most likely to challenge Hillary Clinton in 2016.

    David Weigel: You start off every morning at 4 a.m. or so, reading national news, so I assume you read the New York Times editorial calling for clemency for Edward Snowden. Do you agree with the Times? Would you grant clemency?

    Brian Schweitzer: If Edward Snowden is a criminal, then so are a lot of people that are working within the CIA and the NSA who have been spying illegally on American citizens. They ought to grant Snowden clemency. Now, let me say this: Shame on us if we had a person working for a private contractor, without a high school diploma, who was in possession of our most delicate secrets. We look like Keystone Kops! But I don’t have any problem with the NSA and their mission of collecting information on foreign leaders. They spy on us; we spy on them. I’ve got a real big problem with American neighbors spying on American neighbors. [snip]

    DW: Last month, when you went to Iowa and talked to Democrats, you criticized the Democrats who voted for the Iraq War. There’s one Democrat in particular who really fits that profile right now [Hillary Clinton], but putting that aside: Are you any more satisfied with the policies of the last six months or so? The Iran deal? The deal that prevented airstrikes on Syria?

    BS: The Iranian deal makes sense. We linked up with the Saudis before and after World War II. Look, unlike virtually every member of Congress, I have a pretty good firsthand knowledge of the Middle East. The day after I got out of graduate school, after I defended my thesis, I went straight to Libya. I was there for a year; I was in Saudi Arabia for seven. I learned to speak Arabic. I can explain to you, in a way that almost no one else in the country can, the difference between a Sunni and a Shia. I can explain to you who and what the Wahhabis are in Saudi Arabia. I can talk to you about why we, the United States, initially got involved with the Saudi royal family, what we got out of the deal. I can explain to you why we knew Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. We knew, because we supplied chemical weapons to him so he could poison the Iranians. The Iranians are Persian, not Arab; they haven’t got along for several thousand years.

    So we’ve had a bad history with Iran because of what we did in 1953, replacing an elected official with a dictator. If we can build a relationship that’s a little more even-handed, if we can get them to back away from their nuclear ambition—let’s face it, their neighbors don’t even like that—if we were to step up and said we’re no longer just going to take the Saudis’ position all the time, you don’t have to worry about us attacking you from Afghanistan or Iraq, if you agree to back away from your nuclear ambitions, we’ll be neutral.

    DW: Does that explain why you always opposed getting into the war in Iraq?

    BS: What did we do in Iraq? We up and attack Iraq, create a vacuum, and allow Iran to broaden their shoulders. Of course, in Afghanistan it made sense for the first six months. That’s where Osama Bin Laden, who, while I lived in Saudi Arabia, was called the Mujahedeen, was. The Americans and Saudis were pouring money his way, giving him arms, because he was fighting the Russians. After the Russians left, we started calling them al-Qaida. He didn’t like us, but he didn’t like the Russians. So we went in to stamp out al-Qaida. Six months after we arrived in Afghanistan, al-Qaida was gone. They’d left. So now, in the longest war in the history of the United States, we’re fighting someone called the Taliban—never attacked us, never tried to attack us. They live in the Stone Age. I’ve been there. Even if they wanted to attack us, they wouldn’t find a way. [snip]

    DW: You mentioned poppies, which is as good of a segue I can think of to what’s happening in Colorado. Do you think that state’s made the right move in legalizing marijuana? Should the rest of the country go that way?

    BS: Well, here’s what I can say. Each society has to make choices about what’s against the law. You have a large percentage of the population that’s already using this. The war on drugs is another war that appears to have been lost. This experiment with prohibition of marijuana doesn’t seem have to been working. Colorado might have it more right than the rest of us.

    DW: One reason I ask is that when you ran in 2004, when you won the governor’s race, there were gay marriage and marijuana issues on the ballot, and Republicans thought they’d set “family values” traps for you.

    BS: Oh, yeah, name these Republicans. The ones cheating on their third wives while they’re talking about traditional family values? Those ones?

    DW: Do you think the Affordable Care Act can be made to work?

    BS: I will give you not just how this thing should have been written, but what it will get to be, because what we have right now will not work. No. 1: You pass national health insurance laws that say you can’t discriminate against women, charge them higher premiums than men of the same age, you can’t discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions, you can’t have annual caps. Then you allow insurance companies to compete wherever they want, in any state. Boom. The second thing is, you say to every citizen in the United States, now you have the option to buy into Medicare.

    We just need to act like capitalists, not socialists. We need to negotiate to buy medicine. Now, what’s interesting is that the detractors hear that and say—this is like socialized medicine. No! Are you kidding me? France, the United Kingdom: They negotiate like capitalists to buy their medicine. The United States? We say to the pharmaceutical companies, how much would you like this for? We continue to pay them three times what they sell the same medicines for all over the world. Right after the bill was passed, big pharma was running ads for all the Democrats who voted for this thing. Even in Montana. What’d they get out of it? They now have a lot more money. [snip]

    DW: Between the Department of Education and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, there’s actually been some work done on student loan reform. I mean, they’re not where they want to be, but it’s one of the crusades that progressives in Washington seem more optimistic about.

    BS: It’s only been five years of this administration, so maybe by the eighth year they’ll get something done. Congratulations. Thanks for playing.

    DW: Did you read anything into the Clintons showing up for Bill de Blasio’s inauguration in New York?

    BS: Oh, they’ve got a home there, and she was a senator from New York. De Blasio helped her and her campaign. Yeah, I’ve read articles about how Hillary’s sending a message to the left, how she’s saying, “I’m not the Goldman Sachs candidate.” Well, how about this? How about they’re being nice to a friend?

    DW: Is she trying to prove she’s not a corporatist, as you’ve called her?

    BS: No, no, I called the president a corporatist. He seems to be OK transferring taxpayer dollars into pharmaceutical companies’ pockets. He’s certainly OK transferring them into the military-industrial complex’s pockets. He’s not unlike Woodrow Wilson, who was the last really big Democratic corporatist.

    DW: Where do you think he actually ranks in the last 50–100 years of Democratic presidents?

    BS: In part what a president is able to do is elevate, through rhetoric, issues that need to be elevated. I’d give him an A in that area. His ability to communicate, to deliver the message about the values that set us aside as Americans, is very good. I just don’t think his administration has been very good at doing things, about organizing things. It’s not just about the rollout of the Affordable Care Act. As governor I had four years to work with the Bush administration and four years to work with the Obama administration, and they’re just not good at getting things done.

    DW: And how did Bill Clinton rank? Do you have any worries about the economic team than ran the place at the end of the ’90s, for example—about them coming back?

    BS: Clinton had a very good run. It was eight years of peace and prosperity. But do you recall what the music was, blaring, after they were elected?

    DW: It was “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow.”

    BS: Right. Fleetwood Mac, “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow.” So what do we play next time? The Beatles, “Yesterday”? In England, a baby’s born and they know he’ll grow up to be king someday. We’re not England. We’re America.

    His initials say it all.

  • Shadowfax

    His initials say it all.

    I was thinking the same thing.

  • Leanora

    Obama taking on the poor nuns. Boy, is he ever looking like a bully.
    ===

    Obama’s Supreme Court foe: Nuns who care for the elderly poor

    For an administration seeking to win a skeptical public over to ObamaCare, the Justice Department could not have picked a more sympathetic foe for a Supreme Court fight than The Little Sisters of the Poor.

    The administration is fighting back against a lawsuit filed by the non-profit, which does not meet ObamaCare’s classification of a “religious employer” because it hires and tends to people of all religious and ethnic backgrounds.

    Supporters say The Little Sisters of the Poor epitomize service by caring for the elderly poor and those deemed “worthless” by society. In the United States, it runs 30 homes where hundreds of its employees provide nursing and end of life care.

    “You know there’s a lot of good Catholic organizations out there – the soup kitchens and the like,” says Bill Donahue, president of the Catholic League, “But let’s face it, when it comes right down to it in terms of one-on-one personal care, the work that the Little Sisters of the Poor are doing has no parallel.”

    Because it does not meet ObamaCare’s definition of a “religious employer,” lawyers for the Little Sisters of the Poor say the organization is not exempt from the contraceptive mandate in the health care law. That means it must provide the abortion pill to its employees – something that is strictly against its religious doctrine.

    It is suing the administration to change that.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/08/obama-supreme-court-foe-nuns-who-care-for-elderly-poor/

  • Leanora

    Corruption comes to NYC. And it only took a week!
    ====

    Could This Be the Real Reason the New NYC Mayor Vowed to Ban Horse Carriages in NYC?

    When New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced recently that he’d make banning the city’s horse-drawn carriages his first priority, a lot of people were left asking, “Really?”

    Indeed, for all the problems de Blasio claims the city has, it would seem like horse-drawn carriages would register low on his list of priorities. But he’s pursuing the ban.

    And there may be a reason why: A major de Blasio campaign donor and real-estate executive may be tied up in the drive to banish the iconic carriages, according to The American Spectator.

    “It’s got everything a scandal could ever want,” Eva Hughes, vice-president of the Horse and Carriage Association of New York City, said in the report.

    Hughes, who has spent years driving horse-drawn carriages around New York City, said the fight against de Blasio and his allies has taken on “David and Goliath” proportions.

    The carriage drivers claim Steve Nislick, chief executive officer Edison Properties, is a driving force behind the ban.

    Edison Properties “employs legions of lobbyists to influence city decisions on real estate and zoning in its favor,” journalist Michael Gross reported in a 2009 article, adding that two of the company’s businesses “have multiple locations in the same Far West Midtown neighborhood as the stables where the Central Park horses are housed.”

    That property is worth a lot of cash.

    And here’s something interesting from an anti-carriage brochure circulated in 2008: “Currently, the stables consist of 64,000 square feet of valuable real estate on lots that could accomodate [sic] up to 150,000 square feet of development. These lots could be sold for new development.”

    So where does that leave us?

    More @ http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/01/07/could-this-be-the-real-reason-the-new-nyc-mayor-vowed-to-ban-horse-carriages-in-nyc/

  • jeswezey

    Great post, admin: I love it when you get back to Hillary, and you have spot-on advice for 2016 here.

    One necessary edit: Hillary’s 2007 goof-up about drivers’ licenses in NY was under governor Eliot Spitzer, not Andrew Cuomo.

    I’m also very mistrustful of Prioties USA versus Ready for Hillary. Priorities is being given too much sway (all the big donors) and is too connected to Obama. I see some handwriting on the wall – HRC is going to have a hard time extracting herself from the Obama cesspool, especially since the Repugs are already trying to tie her in with Obamacare even though she had even less to do with it than Obama.

    The Gates book looks like a must-read. I’m placing an order for it now, to make sure I get one. I also recommend Vali Nasr’s book as I did yesterday: The Dispensable National: American Foreign Policy in Retreat. Nasr also has great respect for HRC and comes down like a hammer on Obama (and Biden).

  • jeswezey

    wbboei January 7, 2014 at 5:25 pm

    “… The left has not changed much since the days of the French Revolution. Our country was founded on a different kind of revolution which was based on Enlightenment Thinking….”

    The French Revolution was also based on Enlightenment thinking. France was in fact the origin and center of the Enlightenment, and its intellectuals were the leaders of the Revolution. But Enlightenment intellectuals were the “left” of the time – that is, indeed, the origin of the term “left” versus “right” – the seating of the deputies in the Assembly.

    Which necessarily implies that there was opposition to the Revolution – the aristocratic right – and to the Republic. There was a lot of yelling going on in the Assembly (and remember it’s the ‘yelling at each other’ we are talking about here). There was an aisle between the left and right, the origin also of “working across the aisle”, and anybody who tried to work across the aisle got their heads chopped off.

    The difference in America was not at the level of ideas, which were quite similar, but in the level of yelling and discord. America was a rural country at the time – everyone was a kind of country squire more or less equal to everyone else. Our next-door neighbors were an average of 20 miles away from us. And everyone was educated and “wealthy” pretty much to the same extent.

    In such a context, you can’t yell at your neighbors and have no interest in doing so. And there was a lot of working across the aisle and compromising – to cite just one instance, we had the acceptance of slave-owning by the slave-free northerners, even though that was a major apple of discord at the time.

    Result: The Enlightenment was betrayed in France because there were a lot of people who didn’t cotton to the actual enactment of Enlightenment ideas, and the Enlightenment was betrayed in France because there were a lot of people who picked cotton and weren’t part of the Enlightenment republic.

    In France, the yelling went on and on, with several other revolutions intervening (1848 and such) until the French finally got their Republic nearly 80 years later (1872). In the US, the yelling started when the Abolitionists wouldn’t put up with slavery any more.

    Can we call the abolitionists the “left”? I guess so. Can we call the French republicans the “left”? I guess so too. In both cases, there was a lot of yelling going on, and eventually a lot of bloodshed; but the ultimate result of both was greater freedom, greater adherence to principles we hold dear in modern society, and the building of stronger, healthier social institutions. I would describe both as “movements”, not “conspiracies”.

    Just as Hillary has dropped her cry of a ‘vast right-wing conspiracy’, I wouldn’t pin all the yelling on the backs of a ‘vast left-wing conspiracy’.

  • Leanora

    Learning a little more about this man. Until 1983 his name was Warren Wilhem, aka known as “Billy”. Then he had it changed to Warren de Blasio-Wilhelm. He has since dropped the Wilhelm He sometimes thinks he is a preacher and ends his speeches with ‘Amen”. The most distressing thing I learned was that only 24% of eligible voters came out to vote in the mayoral election. They will soon see what they have done. :-(
    ====

    De Blasio Adviser Says He’s Driven By “His Fundamental Beliefs About Liberation Theology”…

    NEW YORK (RNS) ­ From its historic black churches to large Jewish enclaves to landmark Catholic and Protestant churches, New York City is the ultimate religious melting pot. And now, overseeing it all is a new mayor whose only religious identity seems to be “spiritual but not religious.”

    Mayor Bill de Blasio is now perhaps the nation’s most visible “none,” an icon of one of the nation’s fastest-growing religious groups ­ those without any formal religious identification.

    His election could reflect a new kind of American politician ­ one who is shaped by religion and religious values but is not expected to talk about or bow to religion as in years past, said Jennifer Jones Austin, co-chairwoman of de Blasio’s transition team and the daughter of a pastor.

    “What drives him are his fundamental beliefs about liberation theology when it comes to social justice, our responsibility to care for all who are on this earth,” Jones Austin said. “I heard him on several occasions say ‘Amen’ when he felt very strongly about something.”

    http://weaselzippers.us/?p=167005

  • jeswezey

    Me on Nasr’s book: “… the US could have ‘won’ a little something in Afghanistan while spending a pittance of money there and simply withdrawing…. Hillary has to take a hit here because she wanted more than anything else to leave Afghanistan a better place for women.”

    Shadowfax January 7, 2014 at 2:42 pm

    Hillary has been working all her life to help women and their children, especially the oppressed. This was not prolonging the ‘war’, it was while American presence was pulling out….

    I’m not against all wars, but I am against using them under false pretenses and just throwing millions of our children against the wall and seeing how many stick.

    Pardon me, but this last sentence sounds like something Obama would say. Which wars do you think have not been conducted in just that way? In my view, only WWII holds water. Certainly not the Civil War.

    I’m not so sure about fighting in Afghanistan for the sake of civil society and the women there. I’m a feminist; but as in all things, I limit my endeavors to my own sphere of influence – i.e., the US and Europe, maybe Japan and China, places where I can promote my ridiculous theories without getting drawn and quartered. Afghanistan is not such a place.

    Bush and Obama are good examples of how a wonderful country can go to Hell in less than a decade. The next President had better be top notch, or we will continue to unravel and there will be a lot more screaming from the masses.

    I fully agree with you here, which is why I insist we need a woman in the Oval Office. Women are better at listening. I say that from experience.

    And listening is the best route to bringing down the level of decibels and reaching agreement. Not to blow my own horn, but I say that also from experience.

    Again in the Nasr book, and probably in the Gates book as well, you will also find evidence of this: Neither Holbrooke nor Gates had much effect on Obama; but Hillary often won battles with Obama that neither of her two male colleagues could.

  • jeswezey

    Correction to me at 5:58:

    “…the Enlightenment was betrayed in America because there were a lot of people who picked cotton and weren’t part of the Enlightenment republic….”

  • jeswezey

    Here’s somebody who’s betting that Hillary will run on repealing Obamacare and separating herself entirely from Obama:

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/60270#.Us1AXqVgxhE

    Unfortunately, the author is a jerk. The article sucks.

  • jeswezey

    Shadowfax January 7, 2014 at 2:42 pm

    … let me say, I am no history or war buff – I don’t even pretend to be….

    Don’t be so modest. I remember you said you majored in philosophy (see? I do listen…) but you make little show of it here.

    Instead, you let quibbling assholes like me draw big philosophical mumbo-jumbo from scant historical facts. I repeat: don’t be so modest! I’d actually like to get slapped down by a philosopher… rather than people who pretend to know a lot about history.

    As for “war buff”, not to worry, I think, because it’s best to know simply that war is hell. It’s when whole nations or parts of nations can’t yell any louder, so they resort to deadlier weapons than vibrations in the air (slap me down on that one if you will).

    Which brings us back to the yelling….

  • jeswezey

    Here’s an informative assessment of the challenges facing the GOP regarding a Clinton candidacy.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/01/07/what-the-hillary-clinton-campaign-in-waiting-means-for-republicans/

    It concludes with “a Clinton candidacy is viewed by Republicans as largely inevitable but not a cause for panic. At least not yet.”

    There are some interesting comments from GOP strategists before coming to that conclusion. One says: “I think the concern for Republicans is if she has a year to talk directly to general election voters while they’re [the Republican hopefuls] beating each other up in a primary”

    Another says, “the upcoming 2016 primary is widely viewed within the party as the best chance to decide ongoing internal debate over what the party will be in the future. “I think the GOP challenge is much less about who the Democrats nominate and much more about whether or not our party will have the courage to do the things it has to do on policy to make our brand less hopelessly toxic among presidential year swing voters,”

    This latter statement is evidence that the GOP realizes that its brand is “toxic” and perhaps as toxic as the Obama brand is for Hillary.

  • Hammer nail Boom!!!
    If I was building a house I would want Admin as my Chief Carpenter. :)

  • jeswezey

    I’ve finally completed my listening tour of friends and relatives in the States, for season’s greetings and a sound-out about their healthcare situation. This included:

    11 = New Jersey
    6 = NYC & Long Island
    3 = Connecticut
    1 = Massachusetts
    2 = Rhode Island
    2 = Wash DC
    5 = Illinois
    3 = Michigan
    1 = Florida
    3 = California

    Making 37 people in all, whom I was able to survey in 7 phone calls.

    Notice first of all that all the states mentioned are cooperating in the Obamacare process with Medicaid expansion, the federal website and so forth.

    Two in NJ are on Medicaid and two on Medicare Advantage. The one in MA has of course been on “Obamacare” for about ten years already.

    The 2 in DC are a Federal Employee and her child, under the FEHBP.

    The 5 in Illinois are a male nurse’s family and have adequate coverage through the employer.

    The Michigan contingent is a professor’s family with employer coverage. The 4th family member is the young man in Florida who has apparently gotten coverage.

    There were only about 7 people in all (I’m not sure of the numbers) who were on the individual market, only 3 of these being under age 40. I’m not sure of the fate of these three “young” people (except the guy in Florida) because I was talking to their elders.

    Nobody’s policy’s were cancelled. Policy cancellations seem to be a “man bites dog” story. (That was their reaction, and a direct quote.)

    Everyone was subjected to rate increases except people who were under Blue Cross Blue Shield, which seems to be the mammoth insurer among the 1600 available in the US.

    Just about everyone complained about high premiums and bad coverage, but when I suggested coverage would be better under the PPACA, their reaction was, “We’ll see about that….”

    They were also surprised when I pointed out that there was a 20% cap on overhead/profit for insurers. Again, “We’ll see about that….”

    When I brought up the subject of deductibles, my people generally said that deductibles were normal in insurance contracts. “Not in healthcare insurance,” I countered, and that started a long debate each time, coming necessarily around to the health insurance system in France and the coverage of my illness last year. The general conclusion seemed to be that I was lucky to be in France; but only one person was willing to take that one extra step and learn a few lessons from a “socialist” system.

    That word “socialist” kept coming back at me, as if it was enough to know that something was socialist to know that it would be un-American and bad, “government’s already big enough” and so forth.”

    I also queried the people about their politics – in particular, had they voted for Obama. To understand the replies, you have to realize that my friends and family are generally Republican. They all said they had been skeptical since the beginning, didn’t vote for him. “He always had a credibility problem.” They said they would have voted for Hillary in 2008, but don’t think they will in 2016.

    Incidentally, my Jewish relatives in NJ are an exception to the “Republican rule”. They vote systematically Democratic. They voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 and are generally “disappointed” with him but think his Israel policy is just fine. They have one son living in Israel, and a daughter living in Sweden. I should point out that Israel and Sweden are the two most socialist countries in the world.

  • wbboei

    the Enlightenment was betrayed in America because there were a lot of people who picked cotton and weren’t part of the Enlightenment republic….”
    ———————-
    If that were true we would still have slavery. Concerning the French revolution, and the French in general, Edmund Burke’s wisdom holds true: “The French are so concerned about THE RIGHTS OF MAN that they have TOTALLY FORGOTTEN HIS NATURE. The serial brutality of the French toward races they considered inferior (which is everybody but the french) is well documented, especially in Southeast Asia. The concept of the Enlightenment, as reflected in the works of Madison, but even more so Jefferson, and the conscious rejection of the soft tyranny implied by socialism is clear and unambiguous.

  • wbboei

    If I were to bring it all down to one sentence I would say that until now, the American experience sought to vindicate the rights of the individual against the collect whose service is perfect freedom. The collect is the natural environment for ants (and arrogant elitist pajama boys in Hollywood, the Hamptons and Silicon Valley—the flotsam and jestsom of modern society who found an unproductive niche).

  • freespirit

    Great post, admin. I hope your advice will be heeded. The Dems who were not really against Hillary, but who voted for O because of influence by the media hype and party spin about Obama may be likely to support her regardless. The Dailykooks, DU crowd, and other limo-libs will, as you have emphatically opined in previous articles, not support Hillary – period. If she swerves hard left to pick them up, she’ll run over true Clinton Dems and others who would otherwise be inclined to support her.

    As wbb and the rest of us have repeatedly acknowledged, media has been a vehicle of the progressives. I hope Hillary will resist the temptation to alter her stance in order to garner the good will of these hacks. They’re loyal to Obama and his peeps.

    As we know Hillary won move votes in the 2008 Dem Primary than any other candidate has ever won in a primary election. She did not lose the primary. The DNC, aided by media, stole it from her. You have to wonder how much this reality is influencing Hillary’s strategy and her actions. Regardless of whom the voters choose, the super delegates can presumably, as they did in 2008, deny the party its candidate of choice, and support the candidate preferred by party leaders.

    As Admin’s brilliantly articulated post says, Hillary needs to start cutting Obama and his camp loose. Kick them to the curb. But, she needs to do it delicately. She needs to be fully aware of fact that not everyone professing support for her is sincere.

    Maintaining support will be a balancing act for Hill. But, as Admin said:
    __________

    It will be a fine dance, but if anyone can do it, it’s Hillary. She can also talk about how she is going to fix problems, like getting American’s back to work…without calling Barry the lazyAss, do-nothing-president altogether.

  • jeswezey

    wbboei January 8, 2014 at 11:40 am

    Edmund Burke’s wisdom holds true: “The French are so concerned about THE RIGHTS OF MAN that they have TOTALLY FORGOTTEN HIS NATURE.

    Burke is a good source of criticism of the Revolution, as is Charles James Fox, but less so, to the contrary.

    The Brits have always had lots of good quips about the French, and what you say of the Imperial Republic (“serial brutality of the French toward races they considered inferior”) is true too.

    Fortunately, neither the Brits nor we have ever exhibited brutality toward races we consider inferior. This allows us to quip and perorate at length about how bad the French have been throughout history, without our being hypocritical about it.

    Suffice it to say, in my book, that the Revolution was only the beginning of a very long process that was really only completed with the end of the Imperial Republic and creation of the Fifth Republic 170 years later. And the process still goes on today, with the creation of Europe (which has been a French idea all along, and one that the UK brakes at every occasion, not to say the US°.

    In short, I don’t give a fuck what the Brits have or had to say about the Revolution or Napoleon. All they ever wanted to do was to get France for themselves.

  • jeswezey

    wbboei January 8, 2014 at 11:47 am

    “If I were to bring it all down to one sentence… the American experience sought to vindicate the rights of the individual against the collect whose service is perfect freedom.”

    Sorry, but that one sentence is too cryptic. You’d have to expand upon it.

    Based on what I understand of the sentence, I would say that individual, or rather minority, rights must be respected and, to be respected, they must be clearly defined. Then, as long as those rights are respected, it is the greatest interest of the collect that must prevail. That is the basic principle of democracy and the rationale of eminent domain.

  • S

    FYI…

    happened to see this in SunSentinel http://jdchfoundation.org/american-icon

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

    also for those who have an interest…

    American Horror Story returns tonight at 10 pm est on FX…

    …tonight is the Stevie Nicks cameo…expect the unexpected…

  • wbboei

    Locke was the British manifestation of enlightenment thinking and he held three rights to be sacrosanct under natural law: life liberty property. Those rights inure to the individual, not the minority group and not to government. Jefferson was a disciple of Locke, and he incorporated those words into the constitution, except he changed the word property to the pursuit of happiness, which was understood to include that term. He went on to say that governments were instituted among men to protect those rights, not to abolish them.

    Many people over the years have pointed out the obvious: that the constitution as originally formulated denied rights to blacks and to women. But the Constitution left open to avenues to vindicate those rights–one being the courts, the other being the Amendment process. And those processes did, over time, extend the franchise and rights of the Enlightenment to those previously excluded groups.

    To suggest that the Constitution was not based on enlightenment thinking because certain groups were not accorded the same rights who were present at the creation, is to engage in the tactics of Alinsky:

    RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

    And you say this is conspiracy theory? I say it is conspiracy practice.

  • Leanora

    Wow! I haven’t heard this much hatred directed against the Catholic Church since reading about the 1850s. Catholics aren’t trying to impose their beliefs on anybody. Nothing in the ruling prohibits women from receiving birth control pills or abortions. It means that the Church does not have to pay for it. May the Little Sisters and the 200 other Christian institutions objecting to obama´s destruction of the First Amendment succeed. God knows that we need more people like them.
    ===

    The Catholic Supreme Court’s War on Women

    Et tu, Justice Sonia Sotomayor? Really, we can’t trust you on women’s health and human rights? The lady from the Bronx just dropped the ball on American women and girls as surely as she did the sparkling ball at midnight on New Year’s Eve in Times Square. Or maybe she’s just a good Catholic girl.

    The Supreme Court is now best understood as the Extreme Court. One big reason why is that six out of nine Justices are Catholic. Let’s be forthright about that. (The other three are Jewish.) Sotomayor, appointed by President Obama, is a Catholic who put her religion ahead of her jurisprudence. What a surprise, but that is no small thing.

    In a stay order applying to an appeal by a Colorado nunnery, the Little Sisters of the Poor, Justice Sotomayor undermined the new Affordable Care Act’s sensible policy on contraception. She blocked the most simple of rules – lenient rules – that required the Little Sisters to affirm their religious beliefs against making contraception available to its members. They objected to filling out a one-page form. What could be easier than nuns claiming they don’t believe in contraception?

    Sotomayor’s blow brings us to confront an uncomfortable reality. More than WASPS, Methodists, Jews, Quakers or Baptists, Catholics often try to impose their beliefs on you, me, public discourse and institutions. Especially if “you” are female. This is not true of all Catholics – just look at House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi. But right now, the climate is so cold when it comes to defending our settled legal ground that Sotomayor’s stay is tantamount to selling out the sisterhood. And sisterhood is not as powerful as it used to be, ladies.

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/Jamie-Stiehm/2014/01/07/the-catholic-supreme-courts-war-on-women

  • wbboei

    my error: my hero Madison wrote the Constitution. Jefferson was in France when that document was drafted and signed. Sensing that it did not go far enough, he drafted the Bill of Rights, which again protect the individual. Jefferson drafted the Declaration of Independence where those words–life liberty and the pursuit of happiness appear.

  • wbboei

    Steim is an Obama loving HuffPo nutcase.

    Check out THIS headine of hers:

    Harry Reid and Harry Truman Had the Right Jobs at the Right Time

    Nuff said.

    To this progressive wack job, George Washington was a terrorist.

  • jeswezey

    wbboei January 8, 2014 at 1:29 pm

    … To suggest that the Constitution was not based on enlightenment thinking…

    No, no, no, I never suggested that. In fact, I said the contrary. I agreed with you and still do.

    Our whole debate thus far has been about people yelling at each other and why, and not about Constitutional Principles or whether the French Revolution was hunky dory or not. I will not be diverted from that debate.

    Your thesis has been that all the noise in today’s America is due to a breakdown of social institutions intentionally perpetrated by a conspiracy of left-wing elites. I dispute that, although I admit I don’t have a cute all-encompassing alternative.

    I simplify prefer to follow Shardowfax’ approach to this same question of yelling at each other, i.e., that people are facing some severe issues and the government isn’t listening or doing anything about those issues.

    She points to illegal immigration. I could also point to wars, deficits and debt, Obamacare problems, lying in the highest places of power, joblessness… a long list of things that are unnerving everyone but are not the result of an intentional leftist plot.

  • moononpluto

    Turkey pursuing Nuclear weapons of its own……Yup Erdogan is nuts, will kill int’l relations.

    http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/ankara-adds-uranium-clause-in-nuclear-deal-with-tokyo.aspx?pageID=238&nID=60729&NewsCatID=348

    Ankara demanded allowance for uranium enrichment and plutonium extraction in a nuclear export deal inked with Tokyo, a Japanese daily quoted as a Japanese Foreign Ministry official as saying.

    A clause, which was added in the nuclear agreement signed by the two nations, upon Turkey’s demand prompted concerns over a possible proliferation of nuclear weapons.

    The clause at issue allows Turkey to enrich uranium and extract plutonium, potentially creating nuclear material for weapons, Japanese daily Asahi Shimbun reported on Jan. 8.

    A senior Japanese Foreign Ministry official claimed the clause was added at the request of Turkey, the daily also reported.

    A joint venture involving Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has won an order to construct Turkey’s second nuclear plant in the Black Sea province of Sinop.

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who was in Japan since Jan. 5, and his Japanese counterpart, Shinzo Abe, had signed a $22 billion deal on the nuclear plant project.

    Safety issues

    The pact paves the way for exporting Japan’s enrichment and spent nuclear fuel reprocessing technologies and is expected to be discussed at the Japanese Parliament soon before voting on its approval.

    The deal was on the agenda during a meeting between the Turkish and Japanese prime ministers on Jan. 7 in Tokyo, as they have agreed to accelerate the process.

    Japanese exports and anti-nuclear opposition members voice concerns over Japan’s first nuclear export after the Fukushima disaster, claiming allowing Turkey’s enrichment and extraction activities would contradict Japan’s stance against nuclear weapons.

    Moreover, Turkey’s earthquake-prone geographical condition stirs safety debates in the country that became over-sensitive about the issue after experiencing the Fukushima disaster of 2011 that killed around 20,000 people.

    Yuki Tanabe of the Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society, a nonprofit organization, pointed out a seismic risk in Turkey, where more than 17,000 people died in a major earthquake in 1999, the daily reported. “Even if Japanese nuclear reactors are highly resistant to earthquakes, an accident could occur when facilities around them are damaged,” Tanabe told Asahi Shimbun.

  • Michelle Obama’s visit to Oprah’s Hawaii compound has crippled the neighborhood around O’s home … and some neighbors are pissed.

    Some of the residents and business people around Oprah’s palatial 12-bedroom Maui estate — where Michelle recently retreated to spend the last few days of her 40s — are all telling the same story … Michelle’s visit is making day-to-day life almost impossible.

    The owner of nearby Goble’s Flower Farm tells us … security checkpoints have been set up on the roads … blocking customers from shopping there.

    Other business owners complain they can’t stock their shelves because road closures have screwed up their deliveries.

    A worker at Grandma’s Maui Coffee tells us, employees are arriving VERY late to work.

    And fun is also affected. Recreational areas (like hiking trails) have also been shut down.

    Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2014/01/08/michelle-obama-oprah-hawaii-neighbors/#ixzz2pq2YUYGd

  • gonzotx

    admin
    January 8, 2014 at 12:31 am
    GonzoTx, maybe in the general election Benghazi will be a political problem but it won’t be a bother in the primaries.
    *******************************

    Agreed. No Dem wants to give this issue any legs. The media, being the Dems Whore, will avoid any real depth journalism in regards to Benghazi…they haven’t yet, no reason to believe that will change unless the word comes from “above”.

    This however will be a talking point of the Republicans. We will see how much traction they can get out of it.

    But I need to know. I need to know she herself never got requests for additional security for Stevens and co. That the requests never made it to her desk or ears. That she wouldn’t leave her own defenseless on the eve of 9/11 in a volital Middle Eastern country.

    Her lock step in promoting the theme of a movie causing the murder of our Americans. Why were they abandoned to their fate?

    We don’t leave our troops behind, that is our covenant, it always has been, till obama.

    I think she has handled it poorly up to this point.

    She has handled like a politician, not a leader.

  • gonzotx

    admin
    January 8, 2014 at 12:31 am
    GonzoTx, maybe in the general election Benghazi will be a political problem but it won’t be a bother in the primaries.
    *******************************

    Agreed. No Dem wants to give this issue any legs. The media, being the Dems Whore, will avoid any real depth journalism in regards to Benghazi…they haven’t yet, no reason to believe that will change unless the word comes from “above”.

    This however will be a talking point of the Republicans. We will see how much traction they can get out of it.

    But I need to know. I need to know she herself never got requests for additional security for Stevens and co. That the requests never made it to her desk or ears. That she wouldn’t leave her own defenseless on the eve of 9/11 in a volital Middle Eastern country.

    Her lock step in promoting the theme of a movie causing the murder of our Americans. Why were they abandoned to their fate?

    We don’t leave our troops behind, that is our covenant, it always has been, till obama.

    I think she has handled it poorly up to this point.

    She has handled like a politician, not a leader.

  • wbboei

    When Dug out Douglas MacArthur was asked what kind of president Ike would make, mindful of his recent disagreement with his bespoke tailor Harry Truman, he said Ike will make a fine president. He was the best clerk I ever had.

    Mindful of that statement, I resent the flack that is being aimed at our illustrious Ambassador without papers Dennis Rodman. If Obama is the standard, then I would say he will make a fine president.

    And he knows the right way to handle big media.

    And unlike Barry when it comes to basketball, he can do more than talk about it. He can play the game. Of course, the does have a slight height advantage over his willy friend and adversary Kim Joe Ill.

    No, not Biden–he is Ill Joe Kim.

  • wbboei

    Can you imagine being a White House maggot, and one day the door swings open and a tape is thrown on your desk anonymously, you play it and it says, your job, should you choose to accept it is to defend that buffoon for all seasons Joe Biden, against the charges set forth in Bob Gates’s book, that Joe has been wrong on ever foreign policy decision over the last forty years. This assessment from the man who Obama has endorsed as a great leader, a great American and a truth teller. Well, those are after all pathological liars, but this assignment would surely test their mettle.

    These are not the kind of useless bastards we need in the next administration. They must be terminated with extreme prejudice. Including Messina, whose face looks like Dr.Frankenstein’s first take at creating a monster.

  • OkieAtty

    I’ve thought about the whole 2016 Dem coalition issue. My response is: why worry about Obama voters? Seriously.

    His numbers are down. His disapproval ratings are on the rise. Government confidence stats are down, too.

    Attack the system. If :evil: is collateral damage, so what? His “historic” voter turnout will not happen again. Why? Because there will not be a black candidate who energizes inner city voters and the young who want to be hip. A female candidate will never enjoy that kind of false success.

    For Hillary to win, she needs to proceed with a pragmatic, Reaganesque populist message of “government can only do so much and the rest of the time it should get out of the way. Go long on social freedom, sidestep abortion, stiff arm government regulation, and encourage entrepreneurship. Microloans are a good option to address. The green/power grid argument for algae energy plants was a good one in 2008. Bring it back out and polish it up. Good jobs, green energy, more secure power grid is a win-win.

    But Hillary isn’t black and those voters and young voters are disillusioned. They aren’t voting again anytime soon. Play to the dependable voter’s mind. Don’t bring out gimmicks.

    Gore lost because he did not want Bill’s success because Bill angered people for lying about a blowjob. That was his biggest mistake. He lost any bump and incumbent would’ve had. Hillary doesn’t have to worry about that because :evil: is a miserable failure and a huge disappointment. He has accomplished nothing at all. Not a single things has yielded successful results.

  • wbboei

    1. You can keep your insurance if you want to

    2. You can keep your doctor if you want to

    3. Obamacare will reduce family premium by $2500 per year

    4. Joe Biden aka seldom right by never in doubt is one of the great statesmen of our time.

    Big media: true on all counts/

    St. Albans/Harvard College/King College/WashPo foreign policy guru David Iganatius: when it comes to foreign policy Joe Biden is right up there with Karl Metternick, Grotius, Atcheson, Hamersholt, and Kissinger.

    The American People: ya sure youbetcha. Biden is a loon, Obama is a proven liar, nuff said.

  • Leanora

    New plan to erase Obamacare

    Dozens of lawsuits have been filed over Obamacare, including those pending now at the Court. Nuns have refused on religious grounds to participate in abortifacient distribution, as have Christian colleges. Millions of health care policies have been canceled, with tens of millions of additional cancellations expected in 2014. But Obamacare continues on.

    So Missouri state Sen. John Lamping is taking a more direct approach.

    His legislation, SB 546 simply states that “no law or rule shall compel, directly or indirectly, any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in any health care system.”

    And it provides a disincentive for health insurance carriers to cooperate with Washington’s grandiose plans for coverage, premiums, penalties and taxes. It requires the suspension of the license on any carrier that “accepts any remuneration that may result in the imposition of penalties contrary to the public policy set forth in this section.”

    And to give the law some teeth, it adds, “The attorney general shall take such action as is provided in this subsection in the defense or prosecution of rights protected under section 1.330 and this section. It is the duty of the attorney general to seek injunctive and any other appropriate relief as expeditiously as possible to preserve the rights and property of the residents of the state of Missouri …”

    Missouri is not the first state to consider just punching the switch on an Obamacare lights-out plan.

    In South Carolina, a plan has been put forward to exempt citizens and businesses from Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

    It would prohibit state agencies and officers from implementing any portion of the federal mandate, outlaw state insurance exchanges and direct the state attorney general to sue over selective enforcement of the Affordable Health Care Act.

    Supporters of the bill contend it aligns with a Founding Father’s solution for states confronted by an unwarranted federal law.

    House Bill 3101, called the South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act, already has passed the House 65-34 and soon heads to the Senate.

    The bill’s chief sponsor, state Sen. Tom Davis, said there are several components which “in my judgment are legal, effective and within the state’s power to do.”

    Now Missouri is joining the movement.

    At the New American, Joe Wolverton II explained it “takes the teeth out of the Obama administration’s ability under Obamacare to impose penalties on employers who take … federal subsidies.”

    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/new-plan-to-erase-obamacare/#IgspJPhvLUSd7eHo.99

  • wbboei

    ERICK ERICKSON
    FRONT PAGE WRITERS
    FEATURES
    E-LETTERS
    COFFEE & MARKETS
    REDSTATE EVENTS
    FRIENDS

    « BACK | PRINT
    RS
    EDITOR OF REDSTATE
    The Politics of A–holes

    By: Erick Erickson (Diary) | January 8th, 2014 at 01:10 PM | 59

    RESIZE: AAA

    Chris Christie

    The media that built up Chris Christie as the salvation of the GOP is turning on him in the lead up to Hillary Clinton’s Presidential campaign announcement. It is what it is. The media does this routinely.

    The story of the day is Chris Christie’s staff behaving badly, possibly at his direction, to hurt elected officials who did not back Christie.

    Private messages between Governor’s Christie’s deputy chief of staff and two of his top executives at the Port Authority reveal a vindictive effort to create “traffic problems in Fort Lee” by shutting lanes to the George Washington Bridge and apparent pleasure at the resulting gridlock.

    Frankly, this is routine hardball politics that Republicans and Democrats alike engage in at the local level. Heck, the former mayor of Philadelphia once stopped paving sidewalks in front of people’s houses if they did not support him. In other areas, trash collection mysteriously stops. As a formerly elected municipal official, I can tell you first hand that local politics is far dirtier than national politics. This is just a taste of it.

    The only difference is that Christie’s staff put it in emails, which was not smart.

    But there’s more here and it is going to be the problem that haunts Chris Christie. I’m ambivalent on his run for the Presidency. But I don’t see him getting that far for the very reasons underlying this issue — he and his staff operate as divas.

    I have had Congressmen, Governors, and the staffers of Congressmen and Governors tell me horror stories about dealing with Christie’s people. All of them seem to dread it.

    One congressman told me he wanted to talk to Christie about a matter and the staff would not put him through and would not even give him the Chief of Staff to talk to.

    A Governor told me that Christie’s staff treats incumbent governors as if they are low level staffers there to serve as Chris Christie’s advance team.

    A Chief of Staff of a Governor once told me that Christie’s staff began lecturing the Chief of Staff’s Governor about the set up of an event and what that Governor needed to say. Both the Chief of Staff and Governor were rather hacked off by the arrogant tone.

    Another senior staffer told me that after dealing with Christie for an event, they decided they’d rather focus on drawing celebrities for instate functions because the riders and demands of celebrities tend to be much easier to deal with.

    This was always going to be Christie’s problem. People want a winner. And they want an a**hole. But they want the person to be their a**hole, not an a**hole who tries to make everyone else his whipping boy.

  • Shadowfax

    jeswezey
    January 8, 2014 at 11:22 am

    ——
    I love the research on your people’s health care and their political views.

    – “They said they would have voted for Hillary in 2008, but don’t think they will in 2016.”

    So they voted Republican in the primary, but would have voted for Hillary over Mitt. Do you know why they didn’t like the man from their party?

    But they would probably not vote for Hillary in 2016, because of what?

    - They hope for a more conservative Republican to run against her?

    - They never liked Hillary that much, but thought she would be a better President than Mitt?

    - They think she is too much like Obama, if so, if she ran to the center would they vote for her over a conservative, any conservative or just a certain kind of Repub?

    I am just hoping for your opinion on these questions, not asking you to make long distance calls again ;-)

  • admin

    OkieAtty, in short what you are saying and what we are prescribing is for Hillary to do what Bill Clinton did. Bill fought the Kooks of his time (think Sista Souljah) took the party to the rational center, put people first, didn’t stop thinking about tomorrow, and acted constantly knowing that good policy is good politics. That is what Hillary needs to do. Hillary has to be the candidate of change.

    The next president has to burn to the ground what Obama has done and get the country back on track to a better tomorrow.

  • Shadowfax

    JesW

    I started a whole long explanation of my reply to your comment below, and somehow, due to work ‘eyes’, I accidentally lost the website. This will be the shorter version of what I was saying…and I am not going to use pink boxes, so you will just have to visually try an follow along.


    (You)
    Shadowfax January 7, 2014 at 2:42 pm

    Hillary has been working all her life to help women and their children, especially the oppressed. This was not prolonging the ‘war’, it was while American presence was pulling out….

    I’m not against all wars, but I am against using them under false pretenses and just throwing millions of our children against the wall and seeing how many stick.

    — (Me)

    My point was that Hillary was working to help better the lives of the women in Afg. (something she did there and in many other countries), but her work there was not part of nor prolonging the war itself. She was taking an active part in the rebuilding, especially when it came to the lives of women who were prevented from working and getting an education.

    (You)

    Pardon me, but this last sentence sounds like something Obama would say.

    (Me) I am not angry, but if you ever compare me to Obama in any way again, the slappin’ will commence.

    The reason I put that comment in about not being against all wars was to let people like you know that sometimes violence is the only way to stop an attack on my country (not 911 that Bush used to demolish two counties, then spend a wad of our money to rebuild them, he should have just used Special Forces, but what do I know about wars?); to defend one of our allies, like if Iran bombed the Hell out of Israel, to take out a devil like Hitler, or to stop Japan after bombing Pearl Harbor…although a nuke was going to far in my opinion. I would have liked for America to stop the massacre in Darfu too.

    (You)
    Which wars do you think have not been conducted in just that way?

    In my view, only WWII holds water. Certainly not the Civil War.

    (Me)
    Most answered above, WWII – agree. Revolutionary War – yes.

    (You)
    I’m not so sure about fighting in Afghanistan for the sake of civil society and the women there. I’m a feminist; but as in all things, I limit my endeavors to my own sphere of influence – i.e., the US and Europe, maybe Japan and China, places where I can promote my ridiculous theories without getting drawn and quartered. Afghanistan is not such a place.

    (Me)
    Like I said, I don’t know much about history, at least enough to make an informed decision on wars outside of my knowledge. I also have an innate distrust of human beings in their decision process – filtering out greed, power, resources and ego is rare.

  • “Happy Birthday Elvis!!! He is Singing in the Choir. :)

  • Shadowfax

    JesW

    Shadowfax January 7, 2014 at 2:42 pm

    … let me say, I am no history or war buff – I don’t even pretend to be….

    Don’t be so modest. I remember you said you majored in philosophy (see? I do listen…) but you make little show of it here.

    Instead, you let quibbling assholes like me draw big philosophical mumbo-jumbo from scant historical facts. I repeat: don’t be so modest! I’d actually like to get slapped down by a philosopher… rather than people who pretend to know a lot about history.

    You have a good memory, yes philosophy was my major and is part of my thinking process, but I pick my duels, mainly about things that hold my interest. History in and of itself seems so dead to me that I have trouble staying alert during the discussion. I tend to wander off….I just don’t get excited about past mistakes or random men in power. ;-)

  • wbboei

    I will say one thing (positive)

    For big media darling Obama.

    He’s got rhythm . . .

    As in . . .

  • wbboei

    I suppose a third term is out of the question . . .

    But maybe not, if big media gets its way.

    He is not the real clown . . . they are.

    He is just a mini clown.

  • Shadowfax

    jeswezey

    I simplify prefer to follow Shardowfax’ approach to this same question of yelling at each other, i.e., that people are facing some severe issues and the government isn’t listening or doing anything about those issues.

    She points to illegal immigration. I could also point to wars, deficits and debt, Obamacare problems, lying in the highest places of power, joblessness… a long list of things that are unnerving everyone but are not the result of an intentional leftist plot.

    —-

    How could I disagree with a pretty accurate assessment of what I said above, and I also agree with your expansion concerning wars, debt, Obamacare, etc.

    I wonder if going back too far in history to see how things may have started really enlightens us on how to cope with problems of today.

    Yes, the elites have usually had the money and/or power to make decisions in government, but the country is not made up of elites. It’s made up of all the people that create the country in the first place, and when these people are shackled to earning a living and giving away more and more of their earnings to support their government, they should get pist as Hell when they are left out of the decision making process of starting a war, making a military draft, changing their health care, and exploited while their earnings are squandered by the people they elected that lied about their competency and intentions.

    It doesn’t matter what party they are from, or if they plot and scheme behind closed doors, the people have the right and duty to protest to stop the corruption that doesn’t follow our constitution.

    One of the worst crimes is the stealing of votes. Think about it, in our country, each of us only has ONE vote. As long as no votes are stolen or duplicated, we all have equal rights, anything less takes away our voice.

    The elites are the ones that scam our voting rights, their lies get crooks elected, their election ‘rules’ keep them in office.

    I say, fight for your rights without violence. Protest with other citizens that are standing up for our constitution, no matter what party they are in. Protest and forget being polite when your country is in danger.

  • Shadowfax

    wbboei
    January 8, 2014 at 6:25 pm

    I will say one thing (positive)

    For big media darling Obama.

    —–Loved it Wbb.

  • Shadowfax

    Foxy

    And fun is also affected. Recreational areas (like hiking trails) have also been shut down.

    ——
    They should STFU, most Hawaiian’s voted for her husband and are hiding his real birth certificate!

    I lived in and love Hawaii, but they deserve some Karma.

  • Shadowfax

    OkieAtty
    January 8, 2014 at 4:08 pm


    Good points and I agree with most of your plan.

  • moononpluto

    BREAKING: This just got very serious…CNN revealing emails which claim emergency crews were delayed by Gov Christie

    Christie is screwed.

  • wbboei

    moononpluto
    January 8, 2014 at 7:10 pm
    —————
    Gosh, what a surprise.

    It is what I have been saying consistently about Chistie

    But NOBODY can be heard over the shrill voice of big media.

    They were all set to give him the McCain/Romney treatment–

    Which consists of supporting the RINO in the primary (to crush the people’s voice)

    And then turning on him like a rattle snake in the general election.

    This information however came out, and they had to torch him earlier, before he could serve their purpose.

    What a bitter disappointment this must be for the fat man.

    Lest we forget, he was the one who won re-election and boasted:

    Let this be a lesson to the Republicans in Washington how one brave governor gets it done.

    What we he do for an encore.

    Hey, I’ve got an idea. How about streaking across the Hudson river in the great altogether.

    After they arrested him for indecent exposure, he could call a press conference and blame the tea party.

  • admin

    MoonOnPluto, the emails thus far are very bad and very ugly. This could be a disaster for Christie or an opportunity. Christie has to fire everyone associated with that lane closing retribution and he will be OK. If he doesn’t mass fire staff he will have a drip drip mess for years that will destroy his image as a good manager.

    Christie has already pleaded ignorance and remorse. He has to do more. When we say this is an opportunity it could be an opportunity as big as Christie’s after Thanksgiving belt. A lot of the anger Americans have against the government is the arrogance and master/slave mentality that many government officials have. Government officials often think they are the masters and not the servants. Government also is used to brutalize the people (witness the sequester closings). If Christie would employ his famous temper and anger to attack his own aides and defend the people they mocked Christie could turn this into a set piece wherein he is the effective leader who punishes his own staff in defense of the people.

  • wbboei

    Hillary (not Obama) deserves the credit for getting Obama. He did not want to go after him, but she (and Gates) made him do it. We knew this from Ulsterman. And now it has been confirmed by Gates, and Larry . . . .
    ————————————————————-
    Bob Gates Blasts Obama

    By Larry Johnsongravatar

    on January 7, 2014 at 9:44 PM in Current Affairs

    Can’t wait to see how the Obama faithful try to polish this turd. Obama’s former Secretary of Defense is coming out with a book that portrays Obama, correctly so, as a pathetic, incompetent, craven commander-in-chief:

    In a new memoir, former defense secretary Robert Gates unleashes harsh judgments about President Obama’s leadership and his commitment to the Afghanistan war, writing that by early 2010 he had concluded the president “doesn’t believe in his own strategy, and doesn’t consider the war to be his. For him, it’s all about getting out.”

    Leveling one of the more serious charges that a defense secretary could make against a commander in chief sending forces into combat, Gates asserts that Obama had more than doubts about the course he had charted in Afghanistan. The president was “skeptical if not outright convinced it would fail,” Gates writes in “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War.”

    Obama, after months of contentious discussion with Gates and other top advisers, deployed 30,000 more troops in a final push to stabilize Afghanistan before a phased withdrawal beginning in mid-2011. “I never doubted Obama’s support for the troops, only his support for their mission,” Gates writes.

    As a candidate, Obama had made plain his opposition to the 2003 Iraq invasion while embracing the Afghanistan war as a necessary response to the 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, requiring even more military resources to succeed. In Gates’s highly emotional account, Obama remains uncomfortable with the inherited wars and distrustful of the military that is providing him options. Their different worldviews produced a rift that, at least for Gates, became personally wounding and impossible to repair.

    It is rare for a former Cabinet member, let alone a defense secretary occupying a central position in the chain of command, to publish such an antagonistic portrait of a sitting president.

    Gates’s severe criticism is even more surprising — some might say contradictory — because toward the end of “Duty,” he says of Obama’s chief Afghanistan policies, “I believe Obama was right in each of these decisions.” That particular view is not a universal one; like much of the debate about the best path to take in Afghanistan, there is disagreement on how well the surge strategy worked, including among military officials.

    Obama’s ability to push his lies on America is being repeatedly challenged. What do you folks think about Gates blowing the whistle on him? Should Gates have resigned when he realized he was serving a political hack?

    As I reported in the aftermath of the Bin Laden raid, Gates, along with Hillary, confronted Obama with a veiled threat–Congress would be informed that the CIA had actionable intelligence on Bin Laden unless Obama gave the green light for the raid. Obama folded and Bin Laden became a part of history and the food chain.

    We are seeing that Obama’s faulty, inept, waffling leadership extends to his domestic agenda as well. I think Gates’ book will do some major damage

  • wbboei

    Correction: I meant Hillary deserves the credit for Osama, rather than Obama.

    Then again . . .

    Osama . . .

    Obama . . .

    what’s the difference?

  • wbboei

    Christie is screwed.
    ———————
    Yes Moon. He is screwed. He is a bully and all in it for himself. The article by Erickson tells the story on him. Eric knows staffers of Chistie and those of other governors. Christie has the same Caesar mentality as Obama, with a streak of the thug in him. Women will not vote for Christie. I discussed this possibility with the Cuban banker a couple years ago and he was emphatic on the point. This may be acceptable practice among politicos, as in alls fair in love and war. But this is not someone the public at large will trust with their future. And he has already thrown down the gauntlet with the Tea Party. He is a distraction now, and big media may try to pump life into him, for the reasons mentioned above. But he is too bloated from head to toe to go the distance. He is not cool. He is not nice. He is not easy on the eyes. And now this . . . Some donors may push him, wall street et al. But money cannot buy love, happiness or the presidency when the candidate is fatally flawed at first blush.

  • wbboei

    Christie’s appeal in New Jersey was idiosyncratic. It was based on his role in dealing with the storm crisis, knocking heads on the budget, and a democratic challenger whom the Obama people decided not to support. This does not translate nation wide. He is another Tom Dewey, without the charm. And he will not get as far as Dewey.

  • wbboei

    But I thought it was all about a film?
    ————–
    No no. That was just a little white lie he told to win the election. Move on. Nothing to see here. Just ask big media.

  • Shadowfax

    wbboei
    January 8, 2014 at 8:37 pm
    Correction: I meant Hillary deserves the credit for Osama, rather than Obama.


    I had a ‘does not compute’ moment on that, and later realized what you meant.

    We can only hope Hillary is as successful taking down Obama as she was taking down Osama.

    OBama, OSama….the only difference is BS :)

  • Shadowfax

    Once Christie stopped screaming about Obama, I stopped liking him.

    That big bro-hug, did me in.

  • admin

    For Coven watchers (it’s on tonight): scratch one baby. :)

  • freespirit

    OkieAtty
    January 8, 2014 at 4:08 pm

    I’ve thought about the whole 2016 Dem coalition issue. My response is: why worry about Obama voters? Seriously.

    His numbers are down. His disapproval ratings are on the rise. Government confidence stats are down, too.
    ___________

    Okie, this appears to be sound logic. One should be able to assume that Ocare will be the wooden stake that finally takes down the blood sucker. Hopefully, it will. But, in spite of the appearance that some members of MSM have recovered from their Obama obsession, most will still do their best to protect him. It’s not safe to assume that come 2016 O and the Obamacrats will still appear to be the inept, corrupt liars they are, and will always be. Much can happen before 2016. Many transgressions covered. Shit can and will be spun into sugar.

    Regardless – it’s the primary voters and the super delegates who will select the nominee. The progressives will not be enthusiastic about supporting Hillary, period. They may not support her if she does not move to the left. If she does so, she reduces her chances with moderate Dems and if the nominee, in the general election. I still feel her best chance is to follow Admin’s advice and kick O and his policies to the curb.

  • wbboei

    The first thing the next president needs is a good press agent. I do not buy the cynical observation that press agents are nothing more than paid liars. Even though that is pretty much what we saw with Robert Gibbs, and even more so with his understudy and successor Jay Carney.

    (Note: the term carney is short for carnival grifter and it has a negative connotation. Mindful of this, Carney has taken on a new look with handsome set of lamb chops which call to mind of that paragon of military prowess General Ambrose Burnside, from whom cometh the term side burns.

    This is all grand, but what Carney fails to realize is that Burnside was the most inept general of the Civil War. But for Carney, history did not begin until January 20, 2009, so he can plead ignorance to this lesson of history, just as he does with every question that comes before him, that he cannot make up a good lie about.)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambrose_Burnside

  • Southern Born

    As for Christie, he had to be taken down at some point to make room for Jeb Bush and you can bet Rove has it all mapped out.

  • Southern Born

    Do you suppose Rove and Brazille will conspire to get Jeb elected? You know the old…I helped you get rid of Hillary last time so your candidate BO could win therefore you help me get rid of her again so Jeb can be president this time around?

  • wbboei

    One of the things that worked against Hillary in the primary was Mark Penn. Another was the inability of her team to agree on strategy, which the press made great moment of. I did not know these people personally, but from what I could see there were a few of them who you could safely ride the river with and one of them is Maggie Williams. I was on one conference call with high donors and Maggie spoke. She was very wise and effective. The observation is quite true that there are others who are not in the inner circle who are very enthusiastic, there is Soros who owns the democratic party according to people I trust, and there are Obama enablers and apartnacheks who want the long cocktail line they have been a part of these last several years to continue, whose true commitment to Hillary is open to question. The decision by Bill to vouch for the communist mayor of New York seems to signal an outreach to the hard left of the party. In my view, she can win the primary without them, and lose the general election with them, and even if she wins with them they can never be trusted. They will be spies for OFA and the next progressive candidate they find.

  • wbboei

    Anyone who worked for Obama on the campaign is presumptively a mole. No more Patty Solis Doyles, please. The damage they can do is real and palpable.

  • wbboei

    The first rule of marketing is what?

    Sell the sizzle not the steak.

    Bush may have the money behind him.

    But his name is toxic, he has no sizzle, and the most he evokes from anyone is a yawn.

    I think he is a complete non starter.

    Erickson, by the way, disagrees.

    He has been begging Jeb to run.

    Bad idea.

    As for Rove, he did not exactly get it right on election night, did he.

    And fat Donna? Just another enabler.

  • VotingHillary

    Anyone else a bit suspect of the irony that both parties’ front runners got massively smacked today?

    Gates did a slam job on Hillary and the Christie emails get released on the same day.

    I guess the powers that be aren’t happy with the peoples’ choice.

    I can’t help but wonder who they are actually going to fund (ie: shove down our throats) for 2016.

  • VotingHillary

    Anyone else a bit suspect of the irony that both parties’ front runners got massively smacked today?

    Gates did a slam job on Hillary and the Christie emails get released on the same day.

    I guess the powers that be aren’t happy with the peoples’ choice.

    I can’t help but wonder who they are actually going to fund (ie: shove down our throats) for 2016.

  • Shadowfax

    Coven watchers…

    Admin

    Did you hear the lines from Myrtle, or what ever the frizzy red haired witch said?

    Something like, “Living in Fiona’s shadow is a challenge. What are your options when your mother is Hillary Clinton? No matter how hard I worked on it, I never felt special”.

    Is she claiming to be Chelsea or using Hillary as a metaphor?

    Blew me away to hear her talk about Hillary. ;)

  • S

    Admin…

    …best line ‘what are your options when your mother is Hillary Clinton…I almost fell off the chair when i heard that…

    also the ‘Papa, grim reaper, devil incarnate’ looked like Dennis Rodman to me in full evil makeup complete with skull hat…

    Jessica never ceases to amaze me…she can say and do so much with just one side look…the cast is phenomenal- Sarah, Angela, Kathy, Patti, Francis, Lily and the ingenues…that Jamie Brewer, who plays Nan was terrific, hope she comes back from the dead…very impressive…

    …would have like to see a little more development with Stevie…

    …lastly, on my wish list…i want that crystal chandelier that is in the main entrance to their house…

    ok, that’s it…

  • S

    Hey Shadow…glad to see you tuned in…we are on the same wavelength

  • henry

    admin
    Hillary diss on Coven tonight. Confess I was only half paying attention but was she compared to Fiona? Ouch. She is fun to watch. Soulless. Nicks was a treat.

  • henry

    Jinx you owe me a soda

  • Shadowfax

    S and Henry, hope the show doesn’t make me have bad dreams. I have been working though a few Dr. Who shows lately, and they are not even frightening, more laughable. My dream last night was about my ex husband possibly having a stroke and turning into a small lizard, go figure. :-)

    I went back and listened to what that witch said about Hillary several times, not sure because I only marathon watched the show over Christmas vacation, but I think she was more talking about how accomplished Hillary is, not necessarily that she is bad. I could be wrong though.

  • Shadowfax

    Nicks was great, her voice has aged…as do we all, but I wanted to hear more.

  • Shadowfax

    Henry, are you aware of how many times I post that song about Hillary for you on the blog? Good to see you around.

  • henry

    Shadowfax
    Doesn’t matter if it was a slight. Ryan Murphy is a big Obama supporter but the episode was likely written a year ago. Admin does a post featuring a song from Stevie Nicks’ former band and then the white witch herself is on an episode that mentions Clinton. Distracted while watching as being technically challenged I was absorbed in the discovery that I could use my Kindle as a cable remote.

  • S

    the actress is Francis Conroy who plays Myrtle, the red headed witch…she was definitely complementing Hillary as it relates to her accomplishments and her ‘larger than life persona’…it was a ‘shout out’ recognition…(could imagine Jessica or one of the ‘girls’ improvising the line in rehearsals)

    very clever writing…

    they even threw in Bernanke tonight…

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

    Shadow…that was quite a dream…did not get into ‘Dr Who’ but did get hooked on ‘Orphan Black’ on BBC which I think came on after it…and the other must see that i am waiting for return was ‘Bates Motel’…also very well done

    …i mentioned this earlier…but if you want to really be scared…then watch Season Two of ‘American Horror Story/Asylum’…I just stumbled across it last year and alot of the same cast is in it with a few others and that might give you nightmares…shocking…not humourous like this year…

  • henry

    Shadowfax
    Still read all the time but rarely post and my desktop acts up when there are a lot of comments. New computer but it happened with the last one as well so I often just check to see if there’s a new one.
    Great to see you as well. Off to bed.

  • admin

    Some notes on tonight’s Coven. We watched the reruns of tonight’s episode and the repeat of the last show with closed caption on to catch all the deliciously evil lines. S and Shadowfax have the quote about Hillary exactly correct. The line indeed is “What are your options when your mother is Hillary Clinton?” We slipped off the silk upholstered fainting couch after than one, just like S. The line is a play on Thomas Mann’s cruelly honest reply to his unappreciated offspring “No one remembers Shakespeare’s children.” In the scene the over dramatic Theremin playing Myrtle is mocking the whines of Cordelia who realizes that she can never live up to the standards of her mother (played by Jessica Lange with cigarette and scotch filled glass). Myrtle is telling Cordelia (a Shakespearean name from King Lear that is most appropriate to this role) that she can never live up to such a faboo mom and to get over it. If anyone is insulted by this exchange it is Chelsea, but certainly not Hillary (for herself at least).

    The cast remains the best women’s ensemble on TV. Lange of course is hysterically funny. Bassett’s look when she told the baby “shut up” was a tickler. The few men with one or two lines intrigued in the exchange wherein the head of the investment firm (Renard) tells his assistant to call their guys for help and naming Ben Bernanke specifically as a fixer.

    Misty had a bad day. “Rattler viper sperm incense” smells bad according to Fiona.

    We’ve never mentioned the fantastic role played by Tony award winner singer Patti LuPone who ends up gargling tonight.

    This is not a show for Mother’s Day. The mothers either slap their daughters, incest their sons or pillow them. The children of characters played by Bassett and Bates don’t do well either.

    One item we missed from last season’s closer was the name of the guard dog Fiona (Lange) gets to protect the house. The dogs name was “Endora”. Bewitched fans take note.

    As to Stevie Nicks tonight it was good to hear her hit song played with piano accompaniment only. We never knew much about Nicks or Fleetwood Mac. We had heard some of the big hits (such as the title to our article) but did not know much about them or Nicks. After Coven we read up on the White Witch business and her rejection, until tonight, of that title. Such was our ignorance that we did not really know about the twirling routine with her shawl. Learning about the shawl and the twirling added to our appreciation of the earlier show when Misty dances to the song of the White Witch. We found this concert video that highlights the similarities between Misty and the White Witch:



  • S

    Admin…what a wonderful, enlightening recap…’you’ still always amaze me…

    signing off for tonight (3:25 am)…

  • wbboei

    Any pol (like Christie) who would abuse his power for such petty, egotistical reasons, lie about it repeatedly, and then actually step down in disgrace isn’t going to be considered for the most powerful job in the world. Especially when a big chunk of his own party’s base already disdains him.
    ———————————
    But if he is already president, refuses to step down and was installed via the lies and deceptions of big media, well then it is a wrong without a remedy. Big media has such an incestuous relationship with Obama, that they refused to hold him accountable for that failure in leadership, buried it prior to the election, and are willing to tie Hillary to it, or as Tapper says force her to answer questions on her role, but not their patron saint Obama. Big media is the most corrupt organization in politics, and the tragedy is they get the full protection for their lies from the first amendment. They have no regard for the truth. The only thing that matters to them is their agenda, which ignores the common welfare and is only interested in advancing their power, influence and pocket book.

  • holdthemaccountable

    For me, Christie’s predicament has Obama or Obama sympathizers’ prints all over it and media is only too happy to help take him down. I believe Cory Booker has to run again this year for US Senate. Incredible efforts / crimes were carried out in order to get Cory to the Senate for the last bit of Lautenberg’s term. There were the several years of Mayor Booker good guy rescuing women, feeling SNAP pain, and so much else. Then 2 months before special election, Cory has speech at Lincoln Memorial to stir up blacks. It was the opening of the days’ long MLK 50th celebration. It was an international event.

    Two days before the election, a GOTV tape from Obama himself was revealed by FoxNews and I personally verified it found its way to CoryBooker dot com home page where it was the only subject of the page. That was 10/14/13. As I recall, POTUS said I want you to vote for Cory. It is a special election on a special day. Make a plan for that day. Call friends and plan to go with them. Plan what time you are going…. Two days later, the day of the election, WPIX had a reporter outside Cory’s polling place during the 4 AM hour. She announced the time Cory would be there to vote and invited “folks” down to shake his hand. [and of course you might get to be on tv]

    To recap, nothing was too much over the top to get Cory in. Christie, despite what we here think, had a huge approval number then. In the meantime, and it may have had no influence at all, I have seen to it that all members of Congress received an undeniable documentation of the WH GOTV boost for Cory. I think what is happening now is the basis to get The Governor out of the way for Cory in 2014, and all things beyond. He was going to be a lot of trouble.

  • holdthemaccountable

    He was going to be a lot of trouble.
    ————————–
    Correction: he could have made a lot of trouble. Admittedly he seemed to develop a personality change. I am now wondering how much of it was media-generated.

  • wbboei

    I never had much respect for the President of Iran. I guess I know too much about him. What Putin and he did to flummox Obama was entirely predictable. And now he is telling the world that he humiliated Obama, when he rebuffed their five urgent pleas to meet with Obama, so he could claim that this was on a par with the moon landing–a great step forward for humanity. As PT Barnum was fond of saying, never give a sucker an even break. Thus, I find his comments on point . . . rather commendable. He may be bad, but he is pragmatic in his assessment of the messiah, which is more than, lets see what is it today on the Rasmussen poll,

    Wednesday, January 08, 2014

    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 48% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Obama’s job performance.

    . . . more than you can say about 48% of the likely voters, aka sheeple or better yet dumb fucks. Their sheer stupidity is absolutely, positively, more impenetrable than lead.

    This is why Larry’s sense that the Gates book will do damage to Obama, and his serial lies are now being challenged by big media, is overly optimistic. You can’t fix stupid.

  • wbboei

    The thing that should have registered with the sheeple was that Obama rattled the sabre on Syria, got nowhere, drew the line in the sand and got nowhere, wanted to go to war for the sake of his politics–to show that his red lines do mean something, then lost his nerve, went to congress after he said he would not go to congress, got rebuffed, and as he sat there with his thumb up his ass not knowing what to do, Putin threw him a get out of jail card which marginalized Obama, so he met with Putin and made a speech to act like he was supporting a bi partisan solution, which turned out to be on Iran and Russia’s terms, allowed Putin to exercise the whip hand against him, and hoping to salvage a political victory despite his abdication of leadership and squandering of US power, he wanted a photo op with the Iranian president, and did not get one. Five time he asked and five times they did not do what he wanted. So big media, which was keen to hide this failure, decided to change the subject.

  • Leanora

    Solidarity with the nuns ­ a tipping point moment?

    Remember back in 1980 when something happened in Poland that seemed little but had enormous consequences? That was the year that Lech Walesa started to lead the Gdansk shipyard workers. Their trade union eventually led in a straight line to the Soviet Union’s downfall. From a trade union, those shipyard workers morphed into an enormous, non-violent protest against the Polish government (a Soviet proxy).

    When the Polish government blinked, people throughout the former Soviet Empire realized that the Communist monster was weakening and could be challenged. Aided by Reagan’s, Thatcher’s, and Pope John Paul II’s moral support, as well as political and financial aid from Western countries fighting in the Cold War, communist bloc citizens suddenly had real hope ­ not the phony stuff Obama and his media acolytes socialists have always peddled, but real hope that the decades they’d spent imprisoned in their own countries were finally ending.

    Let’s call the Solidarity movement a tipping point.

    For reasons best known to itself, the Obama administration has seen fit to wage war against these ladies:

    These gals, of course, are the Little Sisters of the Poor. For more than 150 years, this order has been serving the elderly poor. And when I say “serving,” I mean that. They aren’t just conduits for funds. They go out every day and work amongst the elderly poor, especially the ones who are sick and alone. As you can see from the picture above, the little sisters are mostly elderly themselves. They are grandmotherly types whose deep and abiding faith carries them to places most people don’t even think about. And to the extent they do think about them, they cut a check to charity or, when they’re paying their taxes, try to minimize the pain by saying, “I guess it helps fund Medicaid.”

    Being good Catholics, the Little Sisters were in the forefront of groups refusing to abide by the Obamacare mandate that they provide insurance for their employees that includes contraceptives and abortifacients. Aside from the fact that the nuns don’t need either contraceptives or abortifacients, to the extent that they might hire a receptionist or accountant, they weren’t about to condemn their immoral souls by providing those services for her either.

    The Obama administration, recognizing that this was a fight it couldn’t win, came up with an illusory compromise: Religious institutions can sign a slip of paper saying that they won’t buy those “benefits” for their employees. However, their insurance company must still provide those same benefits for employees. In that way, said the administration, the nuns weren’t violating their consciences.

    Nuns, however, are not as stupid as the Obama administration seems to think they are. They understand that, if their insurance company must provide those benefits, someone needs to pay for them ­ and that’s going to be the insured. In other words, even though the nuns will no longer directly pay for contraceptives and abortifacients, they will still indirectly pay as the insurance company hikes their fees to pay for unidentified “sundries.” Whether the nuns pay directly, or the insurance company pays on their behalf, the nuns are still paying.

    MORE: http://www.bookwormroom.com/2014/01/07/solidarity-with-the-nuns-a-tipping-point-moment/

  • wbboei

    holdthemaccountable
    January 9, 2014 at 5:40 am
    ————–
    Not sure how taking down Christie benefits Booker. Booker does not aspire to be governor. Christie does not aspire to be senator. And Christie is not a party building sort of politician. Of course, you could hypothesize that they both are potential presidential contenders, but that argument does not hold water where Booker is concerned. The election process is controlled by the money interests, and their goal is to install people in the presidency who will march to their drum. In order to do so, they rely on branding, i.e. the Marlboro Man (Bush), Obama (Colors of Benneto, hip, risque, black) and the Year of the Woman (Hillary). Then, there comes a point with the brand no longer works, and a new one must be invented to seduce the masses–and give them the false impression that their vote matters. The Obama brand is about spent. Booker, Devon Patrick are the same brand. In my opinion, that brand is spent. And so is the compassionate conservative brand of Poppy Bush, and his thousand points of light acid trip, which leaves Jebb with precious little to work with, other than his Hollywood good looks. Looking at Hollywood today and see what I mean. He has got zippo, other than the Bush name, and that is toxic.

  • holdthemaccountable

    Now US Chamber is employing semantics.

    Chamber vows to aid ‘pro-business’ candidates over tea party
    Snip “We’re determined to make 2014 the year that immigration reform is finally enacted,” he said. “The chamber will pull out all of the stops — through grass-roots lobbying, communications, politics, and partnerships with our friends in unions and faith-based organizations and law enforcement groups and others — to get this job done.”
    snip
    His comments drew a frustrated response from some tea party groups which the chamber could find itself pitted against in coming elections, signaling the growing divide on the political right.
    The chamber’s “disconnect” with other Republican groups is its “pro-big-business agenda,” said Dan Holler, a spokesman for Heritage Action for America, a nonprofit advocating for smaller government and affiliated with the Heritage Foundation think tank led by former U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.
    “If they just wanted to let the private sector thrive, the chamber would have no better friends than conservatives and tea party folks,” DeMint said. “If they’re instead content to see business as usual in Washington, that’s where they will run into a ton of resistance not only from conservatives but also independents.”
    http://www.telegram.com/article/20140109/NEWS/301099937/-1/NEWS07

  • jeswezey

    Shadowfax January 8, 2014 at 4:32 pm

    … the research on your people’s… political views….
    So they voted Republican in the primary, but would have voted for Hillary over Mitt. Do you know why they didn’t like the man from their party?

    No, I didn’t say 2012. I said:

    “They said they would have voted for Hillary in 2008, but don’t think they will in 2016.”

    In 2008, their man was not Mitt but McCain, and Hillary’s presence on the campaign was not in the general but in a face-off with Obama in the primaries. That’s where they saw her as presidential timber, compared to Obama who “had credibility problems” and no resume.

    Actually, I don’t know if anyone voted in the primaries, R or D; but Hillary was front and center and well-supported in NJ, which she won hands down.

    Apparently, she left a good enough impression in 2008 that they would have voted for her over McCain if that duel had ever occurred. I didn’t dig into that any further… I had my own problems voting McCain (bellicosity), so it seemed obvious to me.

    In 2012, Hillary wasn’t on the scene, so I didn’t even ask about that. I assume they voted Mitt (except my Jewish cousins in NJ).

    “But they would probably not vote for Hillary in 2016, because of what?”

    One mentioned Benghazi, but all said “They think she is too much like Obama,” as you put it, or something to that effect. Her fate is tied in with Obama and that doesn’t sit well.

    “If she ran to the center would they vote for her over a conservative, any conservative or just a certain kind of Repub?”

    I didn’t go into it in detail and my questioning was different with each person. I’m no pollster. Also, I only spoke to 7 people who were reporting what they knew about the other 30, a few of whom are not even voters. So anything I say would be a gross extrapolation.

    However, from knowing them, I can say that they are not rabid conservatives and surmise that they would consider voting for Hillary if she stood firmly in the center. I can’t see any of them voting for the likes of right-wing nut jobs like Rubio, Paul or Cruz.

    Christie, however, would stand a chance of getting their votes – for the same reason as Hillary – because he now has a reputation of working across the aisle. Also, he’s the governor of NJ where a plurality of my people live.

    But I know NJ pretty well. It’s something like NY: Republicans get elected from time to time to statewide office but the state is dependably blue and people in NJ feel submissive toward New York (inferiority complex?). New York is primarily independent but also winds up being dependably blue statewide. If Hillary ran against Christie, I have a hunch she would beat Christie in his own state.

    That is, I did ask my NJ people about Christie because they elected him in November. They’re not as enthusiastic about him as his 60% majority would make you think.

  • jeswezey

    henry January 9, 2014 at 2:45 am

    Still read all the time but rarely post… Off to bed.

    I for one miss your thoughtful posts. Please do chime in more often.

    Strange story about your computer… virus? Get a Macintosh.

  • holdthemaccountable

    Not sure how taking down Christie benefits Booker.
    ——————————-
    If this sticks and there is certainly determination to make it do so, Christie opinions on anything will no longer be effective. Evidently Booker required a lot of favors to get his Senate seat the first time; Christie might have been able to tamp Booker down during the upcoming election if he was so inclined. Now he’s likely under the bus.

    He’s been charged with such a silly premise. I felt the same about John Edward’s haircut. Yet that ploy worked.

    All of a sudden, journalistas become investigative and turn up a ridiculous “crime” which had to have been aired on tv for days, and which was given an equally ridiculous motive. IMO.

    *And what of Booker’s opponent? Sad. Probably will never recover. He was too bull-headed to hear me when I tweeted that it was time to sweeten up. /snark. He ended badly for that and overspent. I’ve had four long/strong pleas from him to help retire his debt. Evidently they borrowed $100,000 on their home. Perhaps he would not have guarded our tax money as well as his tea party label suggested.

    This happened to Sharron Angle, who came close to knocking Reid out. And life would have been so much better. I sympathized with her. Wound up giving more than I intended during the campaign and then some afterward too.
    Now I give what I intend to give up front, kick in little amounts later when it seems a morale boost might help. That’s it.

  • holdthemaccountable

    I guess I missed your whole point wbb. I’ll reread and think some more. TY for your opinion.

  • Leanora

    Letter questions whether Boehner was briefed on Benghazi ops

    A letter from three relatives of the Benghazi attack victims is renewing questions over whether House Speaker John Boehner was briefed on covert operations in Libya and whether a proposed “Select Committee” might reveal politically damaging details.

    At the same time, new reports and documents, reviewed by Fox News, are providing a broader picture of complex weapons-collection efforts in Libya – months after concerns were first raised that the U.S. was facilitating the movement of weapons, from Libya via Turkey, to Syrian rebels.

    “Some analysts believe your inaction and passivity towards getting to the truth concerning Benghazi is because you were briefed on the intelligence and special operations activities in Libya,” the letter to Boehner said. It was signed by the father of former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods, the mother and uncle of Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith, and 70 others including retired generals.

    “You may possess ‘guilty knowledge,’” the letter alleges, before drawing a comparison to Nancy Pelosi’s conflict several years ago regarding the CIA’s interrogation program.

    ”We recall how then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi developed a form of ‘amnesia’ concerning a documented briefing she received on so-called ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ – later termed ‘torture’ for political purposes. Are you in the same position as your predecessor? Are you dodging a legitimate, thorough, coordinated investigation of Benghazi because it will damage your political position as Speaker?”

    The letter questions why Boehner is resisting calls for an independent investigative committee – similar to the type of panel that investigated Watergate — when nearly 80 percent of House Republicans support it. Boehner last year indicated he was privy to classified information about U.S. operations in Libya.

    MORE: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/08/letter-questions-whether-boehner-was-briefed-on-benghazi-ops/

  • holdthemaccountable

    Ex-Ramsey GOP chief Bridget Kelly tangled in furor over GWB lane closures.Thursday January 9, 2014
    A local Republican official in Ramsey who rose swiftly to become a key member of Governor Christie’s inner circle now finds herself at the center of the ongoing George Washington Bridge lane controversy, leaving many to question how she became involved in the furor that now threatens Christie’s presidential ambitions.
    Bridget Anne Kelly, Christie’s deputy chief of staff for legislative and intergovernmental affairs, sent an email in August saying it was “time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee.”
    That email, included in documents obtained by The Record on Wednesday, is at the heart of the ongoing legislative investigation into lane closures initially billed as a traffic study that now seem to have more vindictive motives.
    Photos: Cast of characters in the GWB controversy
    “Talented,” “pleasant” and “a good egg” were some of the ways Trenton insiders described Kelly on Wednesday.
    “She always steered clear of controversy and has flown under the radar,” said one GOP operative.

    Kelly started out as Christie’s liaison to the state Legislature, winning praise from some Democratic legislators for her professionalism, leaving many to wonder Wednesday where the streak of hardball politics expressed in a string of emails published by The Record came from, and if she could have been put up to it by someone else. snip
    http://www.northjersey.com/fortlee/Bridget_Kelly.html

  • jeswezey

    Shadowfax January 8, 2014 at 5:46 pm

    I pick my duels, mainly about things that hold my interest. History in and of itself seems so dead to me that I have trouble staying alert during the discussion. I tend to wander off….I just don’t get excited about past mistakes or random men in power.

    (1) “random men in power” – “random” shocks me. People have never got into power randomly, even though the Greeks did try it for a while – they would literally pick their tyrant’s name out of a hat (or if not a hat, I guess it was an urn), with disastrous results and tyrannical power.

    Aside from that experiment, you might also view a hereditary monarchy as random, since no one is intentionally the first born of a monarch…. Or of a poor family, rich family or whatever – “there but for the Grace of God go I”.

    But powerful monarchs no longer exist. They’re all figureheads now, and the people in power are either elected or fight – in the literal military sense – their way into power.

    Al Qaeda outright states that they want to take power militarily and do away with democracy because democracy is the rule of the majority and “the majority is not always right”, and you have to admit that they have a point.

    In any event, if perchance you are looking for the best way to choose leaders or, for that matter, the type of polity you prefer, you have to look at the historical evidence with those things in mind. Viewing men’s rise to power as “random” is a cop-out.

    (2) “excited about past mistakes” – yes, I remember often thinking, while reading history, “Dammit, why didn’t they do it this other way?” “Why didn’t they think of that?” “Couldn’t anybody show them how selfish they were?” “How did people know and then forget that the earth is round?” and so on and on, because of my moralizing upbringing as a pastor’s grandson who wanted so much to be a good peace-loving boy in a world of perfect science.

    So, I got “excited about past mistakes” in a negative way.

    But first of all, there is the adage that “he who does not know his history is condemned to repeat it”; and secondly, if you ever want to get into the power struggle yourself and actually do something to improve the world (as I did when I was studying history), then you damn well better take that adage to heart, because otherwise you’re going to fuck things up worse.

    Example: Bush in Iraq. It was Vietnam all over again. Bush was a drunkard during Vietnam, drew no lessons from it. Same for Afghanistan: Vietnam squared.

    As it was and has been, I never did get into politics; so I dropped out of history without fearing to repeat it. But the adage stayed with me and has served me well. Why? Because history is the mother of all sciences and is thus our fundamental database. How can we judge anything else, make any decisions, without looking to history to support our philosophy and avoid pitfalls in our strategies?

    It’s not because today’s article is titled “Don’t stop thinking about tomorrow” with the line “Yesterday is gone” that we should forget the “Should old acquaintance be forgot?” that we were singing just a few days ago. No, we can’t relive yesterday or undo our past mistakes, we can only work for a better tomorrow; but it is a deadly proposition to forget yesterday: If we forget yesterday, tomorrow will be worse.

    (3) “History in and of itself seems so dead to me” – Yes, “in and of itself” it is indeed dead. The thing is, you have to realize that it is not all by itself, it is related to everything else; and in particular it is related very really to what we are today.

    For example, while my moralistic self was complaining about how the people of such and such times were not thinking straight, I suddenly realized that, if I myself had lived at that time in their culture and without knowing how things would turn out, I could very possibly have made the same mistakes they did.

    Then I realized that I am the product of those people, their cultural if not biological descendant, and what they did, however failed it was, provided the groundwork for what I am today. And whatever I do today will be the groundwork for coming generations.

    (4) “I pick my duels” – Yeah, I do too; I guess everyone does. Difference is, I get into more duels than you do, and they usually turn into squabbles with people here. That doesn’t happen to you. I think it’s a matter of messaging or language. What do you think?

    Shadowfax January 8, 2014 at 5:29 pm

    I also have an innate distrust of human beings in their decision process – filtering out greed, power, resources and ego is rare.

    Your whole expression here is very attractive to me. I find it to be both a philosopher’s and historian’s arm’s-length viewpoint, and also distinctly feminine: Ego is a male disease, and greed stems directly from it. Power is acquired and exercised differently by men and women.

    On the other hand, dunno what you mean by “filtering out resources.”

  • wbboei

    Alright Donohue, Rove and the rest of you RINO assholes. You don’t need the Republican rank and file. Okay fine. Then we will stay home. And all you business republicans can win the election without us. Sound impossible? Not really. You have got the money. What else could you possibly need? Votes? That is an antiquated notion for scumbags like you. And by the way, stop befouling our country with pollution, illegals, and shipping your jobs abroad. You do not give a dam about this country do you Donohue?

  • moononpluto

    Why would anyone be surprised……

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/01/09/Democrat-Senator-Asked-State-to-Cook-Books-On-Obamacare

    Democrat Senator Udall Asked State to Cook Books on Obamacare Numbers

    CompleteColorado.com reports that emails show U.S. Senator Mark Udall’s (D-CO) office pressured the Colorado Division of Insurance to downplay the number of insurance cancellations caused by the rollout of ObamaCare. A full 249,199 Colorado citizens were victimized by ObamaCare’s cancellations. According to the emails, Udall’s office hoped to change the definition of a “cancellation” as a way to lower the number. All of this occurred late last year as the storm around cancellations was engulfing Democrats and the president.

    From an email inside the Colorado Division of Insurance (DOI), Director of External Affairs Jo Donlin bluntly stated to her colleagues:

    Sen. Udall says our numbers were wrong. They are not wrong. Cancellation notices affected 249,199 people. They want to trash our numbers. I’m holding strong while we get more details. Many have already done early renewals. Regardless, they received cancellation notices.

    Donlin’s email was sent November 14.

    Udall won his Senate seat with only 53% of the vote in 2008, a wave year for Democrats. The Senator is up for what many believe will be a tough re-election bid in 2014, and in a purple state that everyday feels more red than blue.

    A poll released just a few days after the November 14 email showed that Udall is well under 50% against his likely Republican opponents and only a couple of points ahead in a head-to-head match-up.

    Moreover a plurality of 47% do not believe Udall deserves reelection.

    While the national media is likely to either ignore or push back against today’s revelations, there is little doubt the emails will have an impact on Udall’s reelection bid. At the very least the emails show that Udall’s office was pouring their energies into spinning bad news instead of using that energy to bring some relief to hundreds of thousands of constituents victimized by the ObamaCare boondoggle Udall voted for.

    READ THE REST AT COMPLETECOLORADO.COM.

  • wbboei

    Q & A of Walter Conkite shortly before his death:

    Q-1: is there an elite who controls our political system?

    A-1: I afraid so.

    Q-2: who are they?

    A-2: they are the leaders of finance and commerce.

    Q-3: how do they do it?

    A-3: they so manipulate democracy that they control democracy.

    Summary and Implications: there is plenty of evidence that Cronkite was right about this. Justice Frankfurter alluded to it during his lifetime. More recently, it shows up in the speeches of Chris Hedges, an honest man of the left. And it is laid bare in the teachings of Professor Sheldon Wolin.

    By his lights, our political system is governed by two factors: i) “inverted totalitarianism”: whereby business controls our political “leaders” as opposed to normal totalitarianism where the state is supreme; and, ii) “managed democracy” whereby big media, and organizations like the Chamber of Commerce weeds out candidates who represent the American People in favor of insiders.

    As a result we get RINOS, DINOS and a continuing assault against the Constitution and the American People, who have few representatives. To pick one example, the blacks selected Obama almost unanimously. Yet he has done nothing for them, except given them a symbol, albeit a corrupt one. He has, on other hand, chosen black radicals for government positions in number far in excess of their presence in the labor market. Most of them have been losers, who are bitter toward this nation. The most recent example is the selection by Obama of a defender of a Black Panther cop killer to be an assistant attorney general. But he pales in comparison to his uber corrupt boss, Holder.

  • freespirit

    (4) “I pick my duels” – Yeah, I do too; I guess everyone does. Difference is, I get into more duels than you do, and they usually turn into squabbles with people here. That doesn’t happen to you. I think it’s a matter of messaging or language. What do you think?
    _____________

    jesw, no disrespect intended, as I try to refrain from dissing a fellow feminist, but condescension oozes from from some of your comments. Dissecting and challenging each and every word and/or phrase of another person’s posts must be time consuming for you and quite honestly, it’s not helpful. I think it may be a major reason your “duels” sometimes turn to “squabbles”.

    You often raise interesting points. And, you clearly love words, and enjoy wielding them about. As someone who enjoys reading creatively arranged language, I can definitely that appreciate your talent. I just think that sometimes it’s hard to get past the attitude implied in your writing, and focus on the point you’re making.

    No dis intended here. Just sayin’

  • No he doesn’t Wbboei. :mad:

  • I agree Moon.
    Christie is screwed. :shock:

  • Leanora

    I’m sure Sen Durbin wouldn’t be able to understand one of her books even if he tried!
    =====

    Dick Durbin Tells Republicans To “Put Down Those Ayn Rand Books”…

    Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) asked Republicans to stop reading Ayn Rand books and help Democrats pass legislation aimed to give struggling Americans a hand.

    “I say to my conservative friends, put down those Ayn Rand books for a minute and take a look at the real world,” Durbin said on the Senate floor Wednesday. “If we can’t stand behind those who are struggling in life, who are we; what are we?”

    Durbin was marking the 50th anniversary of President Lyndon Johnson’s war on poverty speech.

    Durbin said the first step Republicans could take in showing they want to help the public would be to vote with Democrats to temporarily extend unemployment insurance for the 1.3 million people who lost their benefits on Dec. 28.

    http://weaselzippers.us/?p=167136

  • jeswezey

    VotingHillary January 9, 2014 at 1:50 am

    Gates did a slam job on Hillary…

    ??? What? I didn’t see that, quite the contrary! What are you talking about?

  • holdthemaccountable

    If Christie chooses to fight / investigate, it could get interesting. :)

  • Shadowfax

    S

    Shadow…that was quite a dream…did not get into ‘Dr Who’ but did get hooked on ‘Orphan Black’ on BBC which I think came on after it…and the other must see that i am waiting for return was ‘Bates Motel’…also very well done

    …i mentioned this earlier…but if you want to really be scared…then watch Season Two of ‘American Horror Story/Asylum’…I just stumbled across it last year and alot of the same cast is in it with a few others and that might give you nightmares…shocking…not humourous like this year…

    —–
    As I mentioned above, I did a marathon – watching the show, from the first episode to the current, also on the Duck boys, during Christmas break, after Admins post about both of them. I watch them on my computer while I do some artwork. Some of the AHS, Coven scared the crap out of me, but so far, no bad dreams. I am smart in my older age and look away from frightening things…the visuals always get to me.

    Dr. Who was only something I watched a few times after watching Torchwood. Dr. Who sucked compared to Captain Jack Harkness…yummy, too bad he’s gay. ;-)

  • Shadowfax

    Admin

    The line indeed is “What are your options when your mother is Hillary Clinton?” We slipped off the silk upholstered fainting couch after than one, just like S

    —-

    Good visual Admin ;)

    Excellent recap.

  • OkieAtty

    Wbboei,

    Thank you for referencing my favorite SCOTUS justice- Frankfurter was an amazing, articulate, pragmatic, and conscientious juror. I’d give my left leg to be a fly on the wall when he and Black went round and round. Did you ever read “The Antagonists?”

  • wbboei

    Leanora
    January 9, 2014 at 10:19 am

    Dick Durbin?

    Dickhead Durbin??

    Scion of the Illinois Combine???

    That, Dick Durbin???

    Surely you are not suggesting there are two of them?

    Then for purposes of identification I give you Tricky Dick Durbin.

    Are you satisfied?

    Yes, its true, in a prior life he was a circus clown.

    That deadpan smirk of his is a dead give away.

    Therefore, in the opinion of the Combine, he is qualified to represent the citizens of Illinois.

    While Lincoln turns over in his grave.

    The only thing he lacks is an education, for failing to read Ayn Rand.

    And hardly a day goes by when he does not show his ignorance and leave them in stitches.

    The world waits with baited breath when he stands up to speak wondering what dumb thing he will say next.

    His only real competition is Broadway Joe Biden, who tells paraplegics to stand up and be recognized.

    And being a foreign policy expert who manages to be on the wrong side of every issue in the last 40 years.

    Hell, even a trained ape flipping a coin would be right 50% of the time.

    But not Joe.

    So as you can see, Durbin has some stiff competition for the biggest idiot in politics award.

    But watching the cut of his jib, I think he is capable of surpassing Biden, someday.

    That is not to say that there is no other competition.

    Jeff Flake is making a reputation for stupidity as well.

    So Dick and Joe had best be on their toes.

  • jeswezey

    freespirit January 9, 2014 at 9:43 am

    “… condescension oozes from some of your comments….”

    Yikes!! That’s a jaw-dropper! I really didn’t expect that reaction at all: since I was really young, people have told me they think of me as the most ‘democratic’ person they know, both in conversation and in writing and in my actions too. Condescension is the diametrical opposite of that.

    But thank you for saying that – no need to apologize, quite the contrary, it gives me food for thought.

    “Dissecting and challenging each and every word and/or phrase of another person’s posts… time consuming… not helpful.”

    Well, you’re exaggerating a bit here. I don’t challenge every word of other people’s posts. In fact, the words in other people’s posts are unimportant: I do read the posts carefully to glean the ideas, and if I pick a debate, or “duel” to use Shadowfax’ expression, it is the idea, not the words, that I object to or want to develop.

    That’s the input side.

    On the output side, I guess I should thank you for saying I use “creatively arranged language” – I am indeed a perfectionist about what I say or write and I guess it shows. However, the reason for this intensive editing again has nothing to do with the words. Rather, the reason is to express my ideas unambiguously so as not to generate any unnecessary misunderstandings or enemies.

    But the enemies are forthcoming anyway, which brings me back to your original remark about “condescension”.

    The only explanation I can find for “condescension” is that it must be a matter of style.

    The French definition for condescension is “the offer of a favor in a manner that allows the recipient to feel that it would be better if he refused.”

    In English, the definition is: “showing a patronizing descent from dignity or superiority, prompting resentment in others.”

    freespirit, I have to say that I can’t see myself or my expression fitting either of these definitions and I would be much obliged if you would point out a few examples from time to time, just to remind me. You say this condescension “oozes” from my remarks… kind of hard to get my head around an oozing object.

    “…it’s hard to get past the attitude implied in your writing, and focus on the point you’re making.”

    I’ll be damned… I spend all my time honing a point and all people get out of it is an attitude that I don’t have and can’t detect.

    NO, WAIT A MINUTE – I’ve got an idea:

    There is this friend of mine in New Jersey whom I’ve known for 45 years and with whom I’ve communicated over the past decade or so by email – by email only, not by phone or visit. She knows me now by my writing and only in writing.

    I called her last week for New Year’s and my healthcare check. It was the first voice contact between us in almost 20 years, and the very first thing she said to me after “Hello” was “You’ve got an accent.”

    I said, “No, Faye, I don’t have an accent” (I don’t) and we got into a scrap over it. I pointed out that she said I had an accent from “Hello”? Sorry, but there’s no way you can say “hello” with an accent. Continental Europeans all use “Allo”, which is very different.

    Eventually, we reached an agreement: The ‘accent’ she had detected was in my purified form of writing, which indeed is the result of all the writing I’ve done over the past 40 years in various languages, especially including English for non-English speakers.

    I propose that this terse, ‘purified’ form of writing comes across as somewhat stilted, and thus condescending. Do you think I’m right about that? It’s a matter of style?

  • wbboei

    OkieAtty
    January 9, 2014 at 11:55 am
    ——————-
    Yes, he was all the things you say. He was one of my favorites as well. One of the rare instances when a law professor, in his case, a Columbia professor of labor law, if memory serves, went on the court and became a great justice. I suppose Posner would be another–I have several of his books, Reflections on Judging being the latest. Of course he will never make it to the Supreme Court, but neither did Learned Hand, who Frankfurter hoped would make it. In his case, it was Hand’s old affiliation with the Bull Moose Party as a young man that killed it. The two parties do not like third parties, and they hold grudges. Frankfurter and my other hero, John Marshall Harlan, were often in the dissent during the wild and wooly days of the Warren Court when progressive doctrine controlled the court. They were what conservatism in its best sense endeavors to be: the sober second judgement. Change is inevitable, but throwing out the baby with the bath water is a self destructive affair. I graduated from law school in 1975 and who should show up for our commencement by Tom Clarke. His efforts in the Miranda and Escobedo cases suggested he did not know what he was doing. Truman appointed Tom to the Court, and told his friends he is a nice guy but a dumb son of a bitch. I thought of that when Tom delivered his commencement speech which was mostly unintelligible. No I have not read the piece you mentioned, but it sounds like I need to.

  • jeswezey

    Leanora January 9, 2014 at 10:19 am
    wbboei January 9, 2014 at 11:56 am

    Dickhead Durbin?? Scion of the Illinois Combine???

    ROTFLMAO !

    But more seriously, even if Durbin has never read or couldn’t understand Ayn Rand, he’s got a point about Republicans and their robber baron icons. Ayn Rand construed selfishness as a virtue. That’s not the way to go.

  • Shadowfax

    1) “random men in power” – “random” shocks me. People have never got into power randomly, even though the Greeks did try it for a while – they would literally pick their tyrant’s name out of a hat (or if not a hat, I guess it was an urn), with disastrous results and tyrannical power.


    Random men in power, other than a few Queens, the people in history have always been men. Most of history is about men. Successful ‘people’ in history have mainly been men.

    Maybe from a guys point of view, history doesn’t seem so lopsided, to me, woman hear me roar, it is about random men in history…their success and power.

    I won’t go off in the weeds about the Greeks in power, how they did it…

  • holdthemaccountable

    “I come out here to apologize to the people of New Jersey,” he said. “I am embarrassed and humiliated.” The governor added: “I am stunned by the abject stupidity that was shown here.”
    The governor is trying to get a handle on the scandal, which could threaten the potential 2016 presidential candidate’s political aspirations. Christie stressed Thursday that he was not involved and that while his political style is tough, “I am not a bully.” He said repeatedly that he was betrayed by his staff. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/09/christie-faces-political-traffic-jam-as-confidant-set-to-testify-on-lane/

  • Shadowfax

    JesW

    but it is a deadly proposition to forget yesterday: If we forget yesterday, tomorrow will be worse.

    —–
    You’ve gone off on another history lesson and ended up thinking that means that worse things are going to happen because I want to forget history.

    Twisting my words here.

    The discussion was about American’s and how they express their dissatisfaction since you moved away from the US. Then I think you seemed to disagree with some of Wbb’s ideas of the elites on the left and how they have used their power to breakdown the family values, conspiracy, etc. Then you guys got pulled up history to prove your point of view.

    I jumped into the conversation from a different point of view. I am expressing what I have observed in life, though the years, and currently. You haven’t lived here in how many years? Maybe hearing what is going on in the US since you left might have some value?

    I said my piece about the original conversation of yours and Wbb, I don’t want to beat a dead horse by belaboring this subject.

  • jeswezey

    Shadowfax January 9, 2014 at 1:18 pm

    Sure, I get what you’re saying about “men in power”, it’s almost always men (but the best are always women!).

    Maybe there’s a meaning of the word “random” I don’t get. Do you mean like “Hell, it’s just another man!”?

    The best monarchs: Cleopatra, Roxanne, Mary, Elizabeth I & II, Victoria, Wilhelmina & Juliana. The Netherlands seems to be addicted to queens. There is a Danish Queen, and sometimes a queen who is more powerful than her king. Some Agrican tribes have queens.

    Kings pretty much suck big time. In fact, monarchs suck.

    We’re into the age of prime ministers and presidents, that’s the power nexus now, and there are more and more women.

    Then there are ministers and lawmakers too, and judges.

  • jeswezey

    Shadowfax January 9, 2014 at 1:43 pm

    “You’ve gone off on another history lesson…”

    Yes, sorry. But I didn’t mean to twist any of your words or ideas – I was sermonizing about the value of studying history, even for the hell of it, and the matter of Americans yelling at each other was settled between us, as far as I was concerned because you “jumped into the conversation from a different point of view” that I agreed with.

    The duel with wbboei over historical questions was, as you say, to prove or rather disprove this idea of a vast left-wing conspiracy. Had nothing to do with you.

    You don’t want to beat a dead horse, and I say OK. But you do ask me two questions:

    (1) “You haven’t lived here in how many years?”

    I left in 1972 and returned for one-month visits several times in the 70s. Once in the 80s. Not in the 90s. Then from 2003 to 2005 (2 1/2 years in Florida), and one month in 2008. Not since.

    (2) “Maybe hearing what is going on in the US since you left might have some value?”

    Of course it would have some value. A lot of value. I’m all ears, fire away.

  • Shadowfax

    JesW

    (4) “I pick my duels” – Yeah, I do too; I guess everyone does. Difference is, I get into more duels than you do, and they usually turn into squabbles with people here. That doesn’t happen to you. I think it’s a matter of messaging or language. What do you think?

    —-

    Just taking this question and applying it to how I feel right now, I would say that you need to realize that having a philosophical argument is much different than having a passionate argument.

    First, keep in mind that all of us on the blog do not know each other like we know the people in our outside lives.

    We know each other though words only, and written words alone are easily misinterpreted by others.

    We aren’t able to read each others body language to see little signs like the twinkle in their eye, that they are kidding. We can only rely on our life experience to try and understand their meaning.

    We all only know something about each others political viewpoint, not in it’s entirety, but mainly surrounding Hillary Clinton and the current administration.

    So my point here is that we have to remember that what we say on the blog, is all others know of us.

    If we feel offended or think that our words have been twisted, it’s easy to just go on the attack or ignore that person. I sometimes have to pull out of a conversation to reassess before I blow a fuse.

    Sometimes the amount of effort it takes to break though with someone just isn’t worth the effort. Other times I just have little in common with someone’s views, so I try to tread lightly.

    I think I mentioned before that I struggle with this almost every time I write something. Trying to keep my emotions out of a discussion and keep it to more of a ‘philosophical’ argument, keeping to the facts to get my point across.

    Other times, I just go into full on rant against Obama, and it is mainly emotional, I feel safe in this environment to kick him around the block.

    Often our political beliefs are very passionate, personal and sometimes exciting, but the other side of the coin is the more passionate we get, the more we are apt to piss of someone with the opposing view.

    It is a fine dance my friend, try not to offend while keeping it sincere.

  • Shadowfax

    JesW
    “I also have an innate distrust of human beings in their decision process – filtering out greed, power, resources and ego is rare.”

    Your whole expression here is very attractive to me. I find it to be both a philosopher’s and historian’s arm’s-length viewpoint, and also distinctly feminine: Ego is a male disease, and greed stems directly from it. Power is acquired and exercised differently by men and women.

    On the other hand, dunno what you mean by “filtering out resources.”

    —-

    Well put, and your interpretation of what I was thinking is very accurate, and your understanding of ‘ego’ and ‘power’.

    “Filtering out resources”, wasn’t explained enough by me, what I was thinking was all the times country’s fight over resources, whether they are natural resources or prime real estate on the planet.

  • Shadowfax

    JesW

    When calling a friend after 20 years, be delighted, save all spars for the second call ;-)

    You are a great writer.

  • Shadowfax

    Maybe there’s a meaning of the word “random” I don’t get. Do you mean like “Hell, it’s just another man!”?

    YUP

    A few women of power in history are a drop in a very big bucket. We aren’t talking about a minority in society, we are talking about an equal half of the entire population of the planet.

  • Shadowfax

    I’m all ears, fire away.

    —–
    I did already. ;)

  • moononpluto

    US State Department has finally opened its mouth today re corruption case in Turkey: In a message to the AKP and PM Erdogan “Nobody is above the law.” “Everybody should be tried legally.”

    Washingtons patience is said to be wearing very thin with Erdogan after his constant attacks on the US and claimed foreign conspiracy and comments on the US ambassador.

  • Shadowfax

    Correction to below sentence, the more passionate my thoughts, the more typos I produce.

    Often our political beliefs are very passionate, personal and sometimes exciting, but the other side of the coin is the more passionate we get, the more we are apt to piss OFF someone with the opposing view.

    ;-)

  • wbboei

    the more passionate my thoughts, the more typos I produce
    ——————
    Me too shadow.

    The further problem: I never proof read before I post.

    I proof read it afterwards, and say well now that doesn’t make any sense.

  • gonzotx

    did you see the size of Christies podium?

  • wbboei

    Let’s parse the Christie’s words closely and identify the subtext.

    I come here to APOLOGIZE to the people of New Jersey (for getting caught).

    I am EMBARRASSED and HUMILIATED (for getting caught).

    I am STUNNED by the abject stupidity that was shown here (which allowed people to see that I am not the sweet bi-partisan guy I pretend to be)

    I am tough but I am NOT A BULLY (any more than Nixon was not a crook. I just happen to have a sadistic streak which makes me torment adversaries anonymously–no harm in that surely.

    I was BETRAYED BY STAFF(whom I hired and supervised–and all I ever said was who will rid me of that meddlesome democrat) (Note: it has been pointed out that the offending staff member has a clean record, and for her to have acted this way on her own is highly unlikely.)

    COMMENT: Christie delivered a bofo performance, worthy of Guissepe Verdi.

    Three curtain calls and a bouquet of roses to the plucky tener.

    Now what if he is lying?

    Will he still run for president?

    Will his donors dry up?

    All this and more is an imponderable.

  • wbboei

    All kidding aside however, this does point to a problem.

    Run away staff.

    And runaway agencies.

    Which no mortal can control.

    The worst example of this is of course Mr. Obama.

    His management skills are non -existent.

    And when a leader cannot control the people who work for him

    Then what we have is a situation Justice Cardozo described as delegation run riot.

    I do not have much admiration for staff people in government.

    Too often they betray the country, if not the candidate.

    If Christie is telling the truth, then perhaps he will learn something from this experience.

  • wbboei

    gonzotx
    January 9, 2014 at 5:07 pm

    did you see the size of Christies podium?
    ——————-
    I have it on good authority that it was a converted Boston whaler.

  • Leanora

    Forget about Ayn Rand. Look what else people are reading these days. I find this unbelievable! Who can be buying these books?
    ===

    E-book versions of Hitler’s opus are rising in the rankings on Amazon and iTunes. What gives?

    You won’t see Adolf Hitler peering back at you from the featured display tables at Barnes & Noble any time soon. But browse the most popular e-book stores these days and Der Führer’s mug is seemingly unavoidable. For a year now, his magnum manifesto has loomed large over current best-sellers on iTunes, where at the time of this writing two different digital versions of Mein Kampf rank 12th and 15th on the Politics & Current Events chart alongside books by modern conservative powerhouses like Sarah Palin, Charles Krauthammer and Glenn Beck.

    In fact, all seven of Beck’s books trail Herr Hitler’s nearly century-old tell-all, which consistently holds its own against new e-blockbusters like Game Change by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, This Town by Mark Leibovich, and Nate Silver’s The Signal and the Noise.

    Mein Kampf hasn’t made The New York Times nonfiction chart since its U.S. release in 1939, the same year Germany invaded Poland, and its print sales have fallen steadily ever since. But with a flood of new e-book editions, Hitler’s notorious memoir just clocked a banner digital year. One 2012 English-language version is currently the number one Propaganda & Political Psychology book on Amazon. Another digital selection is a player in the Globalization category.

    Or to put it another way: On Amazon, there are more than 100 versions of Mein Kampf for sale in every conceivable print and audio format, from antique hardbacks to brand-new paperbacks. Of those 100 iterations, just six are e-books­yet all six of them rank among the 10 best-selling versions overall. And those are just the ones people are paying for.

    http://www.vocativ.com/01-2014/kindle-fuhrer-hitlers-e-book-gold-mein/

  • Shadowfax

    wbboei
    January 9, 2014 at 4:47 pm

    the more passionate my thoughts, the more typos I produce
    ——————
    Me too shadow.

    The further problem: I never proof read before I post.

    I proof read it afterwards, and say well now that doesn’t make any sense.

    —–
    That makes me feel so good Wbb, I don’t see mistakes until I hit the submit button. It’s like I am blinded by my own thought, even if I read it over once.

    I think you are also a great writer, and if you can make a typo, then maybe my errors aren’t so sinful. ;-)

  • gonzotx

    I actually liked season 2 of American Horror more than 3, but it is growing on me. Season 2 did somewhat fall apart at the end however, whereas season 3 is getting better as it goes along.

    I actually liked Fleetwood Mac better before Stevie Nick, more edge, but like them with her on a different level.

    Speaking of entertainment, saw American Hustle today. Unbelievable. A must see.

  • gonzotx

    I think Christie did well today, he will beat this…

  • Shadowfax

    Three curtain calls and a bouquet of roses to the plucky tener.


    Christie knows what words people want to hear, just like the huggabugs he gave his buddy Barry, but words are cheap. Does he walk the walk?

    He is more entertaining than most repubs, not necessary more honest.

    He’s bigger than life to watch (pun intended), unlike some dillbert like Sweaters or slow thinker McCain. Most Republicans either bore me to tears or push my buttons.

  • Shadowfax

    saw American Hustle today. Unbelievable. A must see.

    - What’s it like?

  • Shadowfax

    did you see the size of Christies podium?
    ——————-
    I have it on good authority that it was a converted Boston whaler.

    :lol:

  • Shadowfax

    The size of Christies podium looks more like a jury box, with one member filling all the seats.

    Maybe the bigger the podium, the more they think it will look like he lost weight?

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-chris-christie-bridge-scandal-20140108,0,4169085.story

  • wbboei

    File this one under the enemy of my enemy does not make him my friend. Case in point, the slow, mournful, dull witted, poster boy for an ex lax commercial, Howard Fineman, commenting on the Christie crisis. (Note: this vainglorious lout refused to perform any due diligence on Obama, which tends to impeach his credibility for me, ab initio)
    ——————-

    Chris Christie Is No Nixon, And That’s Not Necessarily A Compliment

    NEW YORK — The meme of the moment is that “Bridgegate” has turned Gov. Chris Christie into the New Jersey equivalent of Richard Nixon.

    On one level, it is an insult to Christie. After all, the Republican governor directly, repeatedly and vehemently professed his innocence in front of the whole world and the New Jersey press corps on Thursday.

    Why would he lie openly when he knows that a pack of investigators with subpoena power and Democratic Party leanings are on his trail? By that logic, he must be telling the truth, and his ballsy decision to take it head on will vindicate him and might save his 2016 presidential chances, however damaged the goods.

    Or he is trimming the truth, at least a little, doing what they called back in the Nixon days a “modified limited hangout”? If that is what he’s up to, then the comparison to Nixon is an insult — to Nixon.

    The late president never would have done what Christie just did, which was to jettison top aides — who almost certainly know enough to ruin him — and then hold a two-hour press conference full of loose ends, contradictions and miles of rope for his enemies.

    There was a certain fiendish grandeur to Nixon’s nearly two-year-long, and initially successful, effort to stonewall the Watergate scandal. By the end, voters hated him with a Shakespearean fury. He left a desperate criminal, but of large dimension and consequence.

    He made you want to cry for America. Christie makes you want to laugh at New Jersey.

    In two hours of phony self-flagellation, mock remorse and ludicrous declarations of his lack of knowledge of the goings-on inside his own administration, Christie managed to shrink himself from a larger-than-life populist bully to a nattering pleader for mercy who had suddenly decided to play the earnest seeker of truth. He came off as a two-bit pol leading a gang that couldn’t shoot straight on a fast ride across the George Washington Bridge to oblivion.

    Maybe Christie did not know in advance that the bogus “traffic study” in Fort Lee was designed by his aides as a childish, but dangerous, act of retribution against the town’s Democratic mayor. Former New Jersey Gov. Tom Kean, a Republican but no friend of the incumbent, vouched Thursday for Christie’s basic honesty, though he questioned the culture of almost comically petty retribution that Christie had created in his camp.

    But a long line of maliciously political moves undercuts the governor’s claim that he was shocked and saddened by the tone of the “traffic study” emails among various officials and the actions they describe.

    As Thursday’s press conference wore on, Christie began to get tangled in his own contradictions. He managed to be both woebegone and a blowhard.

    For all he knew, there might actually be a legitimate “traffic study,” he said — a notion completely rebutted by the emails he said had shocked him.

    He knew nothing about the “screw Fort Lee” plan until Tuesday morning — but he never wondered why two of his top allies in December quit the agency that ran the “traffic study,” which by then was controversial and much covered in the local press.

    He was sad but not angry — though he might get angry at any moment, he said. But he didn’t describe what else he thought he might learn that would then make him go off like a hand grenade, as he is wont to do.

    He said that he wanted to join with various investigations (at last count, there were three: state, regional and federal) to find out the whole story. But he also said that he hadn’t talked in recent days with the aide who he implied was most responsible for the Fort Lee caper.

    They should all “answer questions” from investigators, he said. But everyone in the press room and watching on TV knew that didn’t mean they should answer all questions about Christie’s Trenton.

    He uttered more lame, tweetable lines than a posse of “Daily Show” writers could concoct: that he wasn’t a bully or a micro-manager, that he was blindsided, that he was humiliated, that he had stayed up late worrying, that he was “out of the traffic study business,” that he had “absolutely nothing to hide,” that of course as a former prosecutor he would never tamper with a witness.

    Good to know.

    Of course, he would never have held this press conference had not those emails been leaked.

    Many Democrats in New Jersey — and most of the national media, let’s face it — have been laying down for Christie for months, if not years. Now they’ve been embarrassed into outrage, or they’re free to express the outrage they always had but had stifled out of fear. Now a U.S. attorney in New Jersey with close ties to a Democrat whom Christie’s crew had humiliated (the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg) has launched a Bridgegate investigation that he had been leery of initiating.

    Christie came this close to dodging the whole thing and taking the next step on the national stage unencumbered. He is the 2014 chair of the Republican Governors Association and was planning to install at the RGA one of the aides he just fired.

    The administration of the former prosecutor is about to be infested with prosecutors.

    So maybe Christie knew nothing. Maybe none of the aides he has dumped told him anything about Fort Lee or any other similar acts of retribution. Maybe Christie really does want to get to the bottom of everything and let the chips fall where they may. Maybe he really is deeply remorseful and genuinely ashamed of it all.

    But even if he is no Nixon, there is one element of the Old Man’s saga that Christie needs to study: It’s not the crime, if there even was one; it’s the cover-up that reaches all the way to the top of the chain.

    If there is not a cover-up, Christie survives to run for president in 2016. But if there is, he’ll be off the national stage faster than you can say, “I am not a crook.”

  • wbboei

    When I was in law school, there were a couple defense lawyers who guilty people of means went to when they were indicted and facing the prospect of jail. One of them was Percy Foreman and the other was Race Horse Haynes. This was before Gerry Spense was in the public limelight. In one instance a Texas billionaire murdered a relative, was arrested and reached out for good old Percy–just a country lawyer. Shortly after the introductions, the sensitive issue of the fee came up. How much will it cost for you to defend me, Mr. Foreman, he innocently asked. To which Foreman replied everything you own. Well the price of such representation has like everything else been adjusted in a southerly direction. The other day, I was watching an attorney who is the premier criminal defense lawyer in Manhattan explain his techniques, which were impressive to say the least. Someone who knew him told me that he charges $350,000 retainer–and for those who have that kind of money I would say he is worth every penny of it. There is a lawyer I know in New Jersey who is a former US Attorney and US District Judge who taught me whatever I have learned over the years in trial practice who is cut from the same cloth. A trial lawyer who broke the mob and political corruption in that state. And someone who has given much of himself back to the profession. Awhile back I noticed that he is supporting Christie. If so, then come what may, Gonzo is right. He will weather this storm. I rather suspect that he had a hand in what Christie said, although being a former prosecutor himself is no babe in the woods in such matters.

  • admin

    NEW ARTICLE IS UP.

  • wbboei

    This is a major political problem for the Republican Party–make no mistake about that. Until now they had relatively clean hands. They could say, with little fear of contradiction, that Obama and his fellow travelers are malum in se, because they use the power of government to punish not only their political adversaries, but the American People, as we saw so clearly in the IRS case. They could point their finger at the other party and say J’accuse. But now, the other party can say you are in pare delicto–just look at what your leading presidential candidate and his people are doing, and tell me they are any better. Big media will pick up that line as well. And then there is a further complication. The Christie people who did this were also involved with the Republican Governors Association, which is why Niki Haley and one other Republican governor came out so quickly to defend Christie. This is really a case of pride goeth before a fall. And for big media this is another thrilla in manila, which allows them to ignore the serial failures of Obama. In that sense, it provides just the distraction they were hoping for to redeem a reputation which suffers grieviously from so many self inflicted wounds. They are the least trustworthy people in the world, with the obvious exception of FOX.